EVE Search - Devs - about Bombers...

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Devs - about Bombers...

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Varituru	Posted - 2008.11.30 20:03:00 - [241] Originally by: Norath84 Some idea's i had How about making them go 5-10k ms when cloaked and/or make it impossible to De cloak them until they turn it off them selfs That doesnt solve the problems everyone is talking about... Which are laughable survivability, no role to fill that any other ship cant already, big lack of dps.
Zyck KDS Navy	Posted - 2008.12.01 02:24:00 - [242] Some ideas I was kicking around with a few corpmates on an idea for bombers: - Get rid of all missile launcher slots - Give bombers one slot for a bomb launcher - Change bombs to a single target weapon. I know they were originally meant for anti-blob warfare, but that obviously isn't working anyway. - Make bombs explode on contact with the target similar to missiles, but keep their speeds very small- IE 500 m/s for the fastest, perhaps even slower. - Give bombs a medium range (40-50km maybe?) - Make bombs targetable and destroyable with small turret shots or defender missiles. - Give bomb launchers a huge Rate of Fire - Allow bombers to cloak or warp off and their bombs remain active, but after launching they can not recloak for X seconds - Bombers should still melt if a small fire is started in their immediate vicinity - Introduce a new "capital" sized bomb, with a size so that a bomber can only carry one or two. These should be extremely slow, and as their suggests, only really effective against capital ships. Expensive as well. So why do you ask? Isn't this imbalanced? Well, maybe, but here's my reasoning at any rate: - Bombers are now useful, but only when used right. If you're a bomber working without support or stupidly, your bombs will be shot down and wasted, and your ship will still blow up really, really fast. - Bombs are effective only against slow, unsupported large ships or in the middle of chaotic battles. - Encourages mixed fleets, as frigates with a dedicated role as "bomb hunters" now becomes available - Bombers are now actually bombers and not cruise-missile frigates, and bad ones at that. - Adds a new element of depth to fleet battles, encourages wider use of small ships in big fleets, and makes a new way to kill capitals without spamming your own capitals - Defender missiles suck slightly less now - Will give your bomber and frigate pilots freespace 2 flashbacks as they go to making bombing runs or try to intercept enemy bombers/bombs. I think I covered most of what we came up. -Zyck
Varituru	Posted - 2008.12.01 02:32:00 - [243] Originally by: Zyck Some ideas I was kicking around with a few corpmates on an idea for bombers: - Get rid of all missile launcher slots - Give bombers one slot for a bomb launcher - Change bombs to a single target weapon. I know they were originally meant for anti-blob warfare, but that obviously isn't working anyway. - Make bombs explode on contact with the target similar to missiles, but keep their speeds very small- IE 500 m/s for the fastest, perhaps even slower. - Give bombs a medium range (40-50km maybe?) - Make bombs targetable and destroyable with small turret shots or defender missiles. - Give bomb launchers a huge Rate of Fire - Allow bombers to cloak or warp off and their bombs remain active, but after launching they can not recloak for X seconds - Bombers should still melt if a small fire is started in their immediate vicinity - Introduce a new "capital" sized bomb, with a size so that a bomber can only carry one or two. These should be extremely slow, and as their suggests, only really effective against capital ships. Expensive as well. So why do you ask? Isn't this imbalanced? Well, maybe, but here's my reasoning at any rate: - Bombers are now useful, but only when used right. If you're a bomber working without support or stupidly, your bombs will be shot down and wasted, and your ship will still blow up really, really fast. - Bombs are effective only against slow, unsupported large ships or in the middle of chaotic battles. - Encourages mixed fleets, as frigates with a dedicated role as "bomb hunters" now becomes available - Bombers are now actually bombers and not cruise-missile frigates, and bad ones at that. - Adds a new element of depth to fleet battles, encourages wider use of small ships in big fleets, and makes a new way to kill capitals without spamming your own capitals - Defender missiles suck slightly less now - Will give your bomber and frigate pilots freespace 2 flashbacks as they go to making bombing runs or try to intercept enemy bombers/bombs. I think I covered most of what we came up. I absolutely agree and support this idea (I would support it even if I didn't help come up with/refine it ) And to those concerned about not being able to cloak and solo... My response to that is to just go get an Arazu, its better suited for that gameplay style. The 50k range (max) gives the bomber at least a chance at surviving a bombing run. The interceptors will at least have to MWD to the SBer in this case.
Tac Ginaz Gallente Coalition of Nations	Posted - 2008.12.01 19:21:00 - [244] Since bomber cannot use the warp drive cloaked it should be able to travel very fast when cloaked. The current 500ms max (Hound) at top skills is useless as in most cases you must fly over 200km to reach a target in a fleet engagement or in a roaming gang hunt. By the time you get there, its over. Moreover, a recon cruiser which has zero speed bonus cloaked, can simply bookmark a reference point near the target they want to be close to, warp out to a nav point and warp back to their BM and voila! From 200+ km to a mere 10km if they do the BM right. The bomber should fly at 1200ms when cloaked (hound..others would be between 800ms-1000ms) bomb launcher should not require a missile slot. Bombs are useless vs frigates and cruisers and of mediocre use vs battleships (8k damage bomb (racial damage bonus) tests show frigates without AB or MWD fly out of range before bomb detonates, show that t1 cruisers with NO MODULES installed and sitting still only take ~1000 damage which in most cruisers means a little shield damage.. and battleships take 4000 damage which agains, means just some shield damage). The stealth bomber should be able to load the 3 missiles and 1 bomb launcher plus the cloaking device. Now, something that would make the bomber REALLY useful would be: - Add a bomber-only launcher (can use any slot so its not limited to missile launcher slots) that accepts the following ammo types: Heavy Missiles, Cruise Missile, Siege Torpedo, Citadel Torpedo, Bomb and FOF heavy/cruise. This launcher has small ammo capacity so only 1 citadel,1 bomb, 2 siege torps, 4 cruise, 8 heavy missiles can be loaded per launcher note: bombs would consume heavy amount of capacitor to fire hence a bomber would only be able to fire 1 bomb. -change bonuses to bomber to say : 'XX reduction of (newlaunchername) CPU/PG' 'XX reduction in Explosion Radius per Warhead Upgrades level' 'XX increase in Explosion Velocity per Guided Missile Precision level' 'XX damage increase to heavy,cruise, FOF,siege,citadel torpedo per (racial frigate) level' (damage type bonus) '20% reduction in targeting delay after decloaking per Cloaking level' (box 5= 100% reduction) 'XX damage increase to heavy,cruise,FOF, siege per covert ops level' 'XXX% increase to speed when cloaked' per advanced spaceship command skill (hound= 1200ms, slowest racial frig= 800ms) ...and allow the bomber to change ammo type when cloaked. Its really silly that it cannot. The premise of this would be a bomber that can attack ships of cruiser size and above with a heavy alpha damage strike by using a missile that is one step above the target's ship class size striking it for full+bonused damage. The low ammo capacity prevents the bomber from being used to replace missile cruisers and tier1 battleships. The multiple skills required 'scale' the bomber's effectiveness to the pilot's skill level. ------------------------------------------------- Re-Design Stealth Bomber Weapons!
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.01 19:25:00 - [245] Edited by: maralt on 01/12/2008 19:25:32 Mwd while cloaked would solve it and the new cap penalty mwd's get would keep the ship from being overpowered....and it would keep the cov-ops a viable ship in the game as the bomber still could not warp cloaked.
Varituru	Posted - 2008.12.05 00:40:00 - [246] Originally by: maralt Edited by: maralt on 01/12/2008 19:27:26 Allowing the bomber to mwd while cloaked would solve a lot of the problems and the new cap penalty mwd's get would keep the ship from being overpowered....and it would keep the cov-ops a viable ship in the game as the bomber still could not warp cloaked. Thats real nice if the SB never uncloaks..... Still leaves the issue of damage potential and survivability once combat is initiated...
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 11:49:00 - [247] Originally by: Varituru Originally by: maralt Allowing the bomber to mwd while cloaked would solve a lot of the problems and the new cap penalty mwd's get would keep the ship from being overpowered....and it would keep the cov-ops a viable ship in the game as the bomber still could not warp cloaked. Thats real nice if the SB never uncloaks..... Still leaves the issue of damage potential and survivability once combat is initiated... Maybe but a mwding cloaked stealth bomber with damps would be the bane of every falcon and long range fitted ship in eve.
Crellion Art of War Exalted.	Posted - 2008.12.05 15:11:00 - [248] Originally by: maralt Originally by: Varituru Originally by: maralt Allowing the bomber to mwd while cloaked would solve a lot of the problems and the new cap penalty mwd's get would keep the ship from being overpowered....and it would keep the cov-ops a viable ship in the game as the bomber still could not warp cloaked. Thats real nice if the SB never uncloaks..... Still leaves the issue of damage potential and survivability once combat is initiated... Maybe but a mwding cloaked stealth bomber with damps would be the bane of every falcon and long range fitted ship in eve. Actually an mwding cloaked ANYTHING would accomplish that even if it had no guns or tackle of any sort... Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim.
Ginko Joukai	Posted - 2008.12.07 01:37:00 - [249] You know, given the insane amount of stealth bomber threads before and after the patch you'd think CCP would do something about it. Years and nothing. We get missile nerfed even. Wow. CCP just put ONE dev update on the damn stealth bomber issue. WORK on the damn thing. I give a rat's ass about T3 ships or idiotic new graphics nobody has time to pay attention to because watching local and overview is more important. FIX THE BOMBER.
Adaera	Posted - 2008.12.07 10:26:00 - [250] Originally by: Ginko Joukai You know, given the insane amount of stealth bomber threads before and after the patch you'd think CCP would do something about it. Years and nothing. We get missile nerfed even. Wow. CCP just put ONE dev update on the damn stealth bomber issue. WORK on the damn thing. I give a rat's ass about T3 ships or idiotic new graphics nobody has time to pay attention to because watching local and overview is more important. FIX THE BOMBER. Couldn't have put it better myself
Terra Mikael Private Nuisance	Posted - 2008.12.07 20:35:00 - [251] Originally by: Ginko Joukai You know, given the insane amount of stealth bomber threads before and after the patch you'd think CCP would do something about it. Years and nothing. We get missile nerfed even. Wow. CCP just put ONE dev update on the damn stealth bomber issue. WORK on the damn thing. I give a rat's ass about T3 ships or idiotic new graphics nobody has time to pay attention to because watching local and overview is more important. FIX THE BOMBER. This. Its so frustrating that while everyone else is getting balanced, we get ignored. For example, Nohz just fixed the phoenix's problem with smart bombs destroying all their missiles after reviewing their thread. After he reviwed our thread he suggested giving us torps someday, but probably not until what, march? And there's several fold more people that use bombers than phoenixes. Makes me sad. ________________________________ Originally by: Korovyov You WIN! And by win, I mean suck horse manure.
Varituru	Posted - 2008.12.08 08:20:00 - [252] Still waiting on CCP to at the very least give us a response, and if they want to impress us: Make progress with the bomber.
Braldye Sinma	Posted - 2008.12.08 10:39:00 - [253] CCP most likely wont do anything about the nerff turning bombers back in to a normal useless frig in empire. They were pretty junky as a tech II ship before and now there complete crap compared to all the other tech II frigs. All the bomber pilots out there are pretty ****ed im sure and as for bombers getting a boost is highly unlikely since CCP thinks there is no point since they going to nerff the rest of eve down to where bombers are useful again then start from the top and start nerffing again. If I had to guess ccp is probably trying to reduce the amount of players in the game so they can finally shut it down and retire with a fat wallet. Ok hands down I will be honest. Bombers suck. They are built like paper so once they are locked they are dead. sniper boats love preying on them and if a ship cant get away from a bomber then it will kill the bomber. bombs are cool but pricey. cant use bombs in empire and flying a bomber around in 0.0 isn't going to give u a damn thing for a strategic advantage. CCP needed to give the bombers a boost long long ago and im sure most of the bombers pilots agree since bombers took a kick in the nuts after this nerf.
Siigari Kitawa Gallente The Aduro Protocol Doctrine.	Posted - 2008.12.08 11:30:00 - [254] Edited by: Siigari Kitawa on 08/12/2008 11:31:15 I just got in my very first stealth bomber today! (and lost it in approximately 1 minute to a hostile outside my station). After sizzling for a bit, I ran to empire and purchased a new one. I have to say it is quite a gem, however: 1) It sucks for ratting because the missles all get defedererdd and it makes me sad :( 2) The damage is not what I was thinking it would be around: ~1000 volley every 10-12 seconds leaves gaping holes for rep (anyone with a frigate-sized rep can repair up ALL that damage) 3) Their limitations in terms of speed bring the ship to need little "micro-warps" or use of a MWD in the proper sense in order for it to be useful. I believe that giving this ship the ability to actually WARP 50km would be of ENORMOUS benefit to the platform. (For example, a bonus could be Role Bonus: -50% minimum warp distance required to initiate warp) 4) Being paper thin, they HAVE GOT to be able to move super-ultra fast. A ship with a scant amount of plating means that it should scream across the grid in no time (spaceships-online!) Anyway, my thoughts. I can't wait till I start launching bombs in 12 days, which will be quite invigorating :D www.siigarikitawa.com ò www.quafeultra.com
Bazman Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2008.12.08 11:39:00 - [255] Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Anyway, my thoughts. I can't wait till I start launching bombs in 12 days, which will be quite invigorating :D Don't bother unless you plan to use void bombs (requires bomb launcher 4) Bombs are affected by sig radius just like missiles. So the only thing that will die to them are industrials, or T1 frigates with an active microwarpdrive that are sitting stationary. Assuming they don't see the bomb coming, even an indy can warp out before the bomb goes off.
Delichon The First Foundation SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2008.12.09 15:37:00 - [256] One of our guys reports getting the following message on Sisi: "To bring Bomb Launcher I online requires 93750.0 cpu units, but only 325.0 of the 325.0 units that your computer produces are still available." I don't have the appropriate skills to replicate this bug myself in order to properly report it so can some one please verify if there is a problem with bombs on Sisi and if there is - petition it. ------------------------------------------ "Russian is an unusual language if you're not used to it. It is like speaking to angry aliens from the planet of Murder or something" Nick Breckon
Smelts	Posted - 2008.12.10 02:00:00 - [257] He probably was loading 2 bomb launchers. The first bomb launcher gets the cpu reduction. The 2nd one that is loaded does not hence he will get that message. That or he had his CPU already exhausted and would not fit the bomb launcher even with the cpu reduction. Bombers need more damage, first-and-only-strike ability, mobility and stealth. Mobility via high speed while cloaked is excellent. Make them the stealth interceptor sort of ship. 2k m/s when cloaked and the ship could become a real good ambush vessel. First-and-only strike ability (alpha) ... Only thing I can think of is CCP increasing cruise missile damage by about 200% and giving bomber bonuses which completely eliminate signature/explosion radius and target speed/explosion speed mitigation. Missiles from bombers should apply the full, enchanced damage no matter what. give them a refire penalty so it does not replace or outperform a raven in non-alphastrike pvp / pve. Stealth. Currently the bomber's stealth is pointless. You are seen on local, you are seen on overview, you are even HEARD decloaking in open friggin' space. At times I wonder why bombers bother cloaking to begin with. True stealth can be accomplished by: 1. Removing the de-cloak sound from other player's computers. 2. Giving the bomber a special bonus: 10 second delay after de-cloaking in which it does not show up on other's overview display (but can be seen in space with a bracket). There you'd have paper-thin ship with a big alpha damage output and the capability to quickly deploy to a target's location to fire.
Siigari Kitawa Gallente The Aduro Protocol Doctrine.	Posted - 2008.12.10 08:14:00 - [258] Edited by: Siigari Kitawa on 10/12/2008 08:16:07 Originally by: Bazman Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Anyway, my thoughts. I can't wait till I start launching bombs in 12 days, which will be quite invigorating :D Don't bother unless you plan to use void bombs (requires bomb launcher 4) Bombs are affected by sig radius just like missiles. So the only thing that will die to them are industrials, or T1 frigates with an active microwarpdrive that are sitting stationary. Assuming they don't see the bomb coming, even an indy can warp out before the bomb goes off. Yeah. We bought a Void Bomb BPO and are currently working on them. They sound fun! Can you explain a little more in detail since you seem to have some experience how they work? (all bombs in general). You broke my post. www.siigarikitawa.com ò www.quafeultra.com
Varituru	Posted - 2008.12.11 19:46:00 - [259] Waitin on you CCP
Bazman Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2008.12.11 21:26:00 - [260] Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Edited by: Siigari Kitawa on 10/12/2008 08:16:07 Originally by: Bazman Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Anyway, my thoughts. I can't wait till I start launching bombs in 12 days, which will be quite invigorating :D Don't bother unless you plan to use void bombs (requires bomb launcher 4) Bombs are affected by sig radius just like missiles. So the only thing that will die to them are industrials, or T1 frigates with an active microwarpdrive that are sitting stationary. Assuming they don't see the bomb coming, even an indy can warp out before the bomb goes off. Yeah. We bought a Void Bomb BPO and are currently working on them. They sound fun! Can you explain a little more in detail since you seem to have some experience how they work? (all bombs in general). You broke my post. Well, I recently bombed a bunch of T2 cruisers using a shrapnel bomb, a deimos got it directly and it only took 600 damage. Go figure. The basic gist of it is if you want to kill anything, you need 6 bombers using their racial bomb type. The co-ordination required to trap a gang, launch all bombs and have them explode in on the enemy gang means that you would probably be better off getting those 6 guys in interceptors and actually going on a roam to stuff instead. Also because the bombs are subject to explosion velocity, if that gang starts afterburning or MWDing away before you land the bombs on them, they won't take full damage anyway and its likely, even if you land 6 successful bombs on them, that you won't do enough damage to kill them anyway. -----
Varituru	Posted - 2008.12.14 10:34:00 - [261] Originally by: Bazman Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Edited by: Siigari Kitawa on 10/12/2008 08:16:07 Originally by: Bazman Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Anyway, my thoughts. I can't wait till I start launching bombs in 12 days, which will be quite invigorating :D Don't bother unless you plan to use void bombs (requires bomb launcher 4) Bombs are affected by sig radius just like missiles. So the only thing that will die to them are industrials, or T1 frigates with an active microwarpdrive that are sitting stationary. Assuming they don't see the bomb coming, even an indy can warp out before the bomb goes off. Yeah. We bought a Void Bomb BPO and are currently working on them. They sound fun! Can you explain a little more in detail since you seem to have some experience how they work? (all bombs in general). You broke my post. Well, I recently bombed a bunch of T2 cruisers using a shrapnel bomb, a deimos got it directly and it only took 600 damage. Go figure. The basic gist of it is if you want to kill anything, you need 6 bombers using their racial bomb type. The co-ordination required to trap a gang, launch all bombs and have them explode in on the enemy gang means that you would probably be better off getting those 6 guys in interceptors and actually going on a roam to stuff instead. Also because the bombs are subject to explosion velocity, if that gang starts afterburning or MWDing away before you land the bombs on them, they won't take full damage anyway and its likely, even if you land 6 successful bombs on them, that you won't do enough damage to kill them anyway. Yup bombs suck ass, along with cruise missiles, along with tank. Still waitin on you CCP.
Xanos Blackpaw Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2008.12.14 14:35:00 - [262] i used to love my bomber. now it just suck. anyway...that said...i like the idea to be able to fire citadel torps. maybe give us some bonus so we hit battleships(400+?) for full damage? in that case a taskforce from a few AFs and a few bombers could take down a soloing carrier. AFs tackle and take out drones and fighters while the bombers run bombing runns...move in close while cloaked and fire your 3 cit torps. then cloak and reload while you move away before moving in for another bombing run. this is what i think AFs and bombers should be used for!! Playing minmatar is "like going down a flight of stairs in a office chair firing an Uzi".
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.14 14:49:00 - [263] Originally by: Xanos Blackpaw i used to love my bomber. now it just suck. anyway...that said...i like the idea to be able to fire citadel torps. maybe give us some bonus so we hit battleships(400+?) for full damage? in that case a taskforce from a few AFs and a few bombers could take down a soloing carrier. AFs tackle and take out drones and fighters while the bombers run bombing runns...move in close while cloaked and fire your 3 cit torps. then cloak and reload while you move away before moving in for another bombing run. this is what i think AFs and bombers should be used for!! Anti-BS/capital frigs?......
Rchard Rahl	Posted - 2008.12.14 20:40:00 - [264] what i think needs to be done is that the sb should have very high alpha but pitifull dps. this could be done by allowing it to use torps with some apropriate bonuses to make them deal similar or more alpha as the pre qr sb but limit the launches to one or two torps only. this way you have a high alpha but because you have to reloud every or everyother shot your dps is pitiful. this will allow small groups of bombers to alpha larger ships but wont replace the battleship because the dps will be very small. "in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king"-Desiderius Erasmus
Xanos Blackpaw Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2008.12.14 22:56:00 - [265] Originally by: maralt Anti-BS/capital frigs[:shock: ?...... well if you look at it like this. what are bombers and assault ships used for in scfi movies? to take out frigs or bigger ships? its a bomber as a way to bring massive payload to kill bigger ships without needing to use big capital ships? i think a gang of 4 AFs and 8 or so bombers should be able to take out a solo carrier...maybe not that fast...but they would be able to do it. say 20 min of shooting? Playing minmatar is "like going down a flight of stairs in a office chair firing an Uzi".
Shaka Quatuic	Posted - 2008.12.15 04:31:00 - [266] Edited by: Shaka Quatuic on 15/12/2008 04:34:40 I hate to say it, but bombers need a sig radius reduction along the same lines as interceptors... perhaps more. the idea is that they really shouldnt HAVE to use a cloak, as any ship without a scanres of more than 1000mm should take forever and a day to lock them. unless they are using a module that explodes their sigrad like a MWD, it should take no less than 60 seconds for a typical ship with a scanres of 200mm to lock. I say this because the very term STEALTH bomber implies passive stealth capability. perhaps even better would be an effect similar to sensor damps, in that every level of skill in covops the pilot has effectively cuts the targeting range of a hostile attempting to lockon by a certain percentage, in much the same way as a sensor dampener, but passively. but then this all goes to how CCP handles physics within eve... much of what is ingame is entirely backwards from what it should be.
Varituru	Posted - 2008.12.16 11:33:00 - [267] It amazes me how long CCP goes without actually addressing issues. Should we start making bets here? I say 6 more months of ****ty bombers until the devs even mention them. Then we will be faced with 6 more months of being ignored.
Terra Mikael Private Nuisance	Posted - 2008.12.16 13:41:00 - [268] Originally by: Varituru It amazes me how long CCP goes without actually addressing issues. Should we start making bets here? I say 6 more months of **ty bombers until the devs even mention them. Then we will be faced with 6 more months of being ignored. Great idea. I could start a pot, and people could bet dates when the bomber would receive some lovin. Person who is closest wins all. ________________________________ Originally by:** Korovyov You WIN! And by win, I mean suck horse manure.
Ignition SemperFi Private Nuisance	Posted - 2008.12.16 13:51:00 - [269] use cribba and i wouldnt doubt you would get some ppl toss some money into those bets ;-p ---- People Say Im paranoid because I have a gun, I say I dont have to be paranoid because I have a gun. Quote: They already did introduce a counter to missiles, it's called Quantum Rise
Straight Chillen Gallente Solar Wind	Posted - 2008.12.16 17:26:00 - [270] well when you have 50 people all coming up with ideas way outta left field, it can take a while to find the best course of action. Personally to be quite honest i hope they ignore the majority of these comments and ideas. The bomber can be "fixed" by just tweaking its current bonuses. The reason i say "fixed" is because im not really to sure that its even broken in the first place. Ive had no problem what so ever using my bomber since QR. Sure my tactics and fittings have changed as well as my target selection. But thats called adapting. So what my bomber cant alpha strike every frigate now, big whoop. I still do more damage with my cruise missiles to small targets then my AF's take from heavy missiles. Thats pretty bad ass no? Last night my ishkur was takin 7-12 damage per heavy missile. My nemesis deals 150+ per missiles to that same ishkur. And quite frankly to a ship with 5khp, 150+ dmg per hit is quite a considerable ammount of damage. I really just dont get what peoples beef is, i've been having plenty of fun decimating hac's and recons. So i will reitterate what i said several pages ago. Anyone who is unhappy with thier bombers performance, can feel free to contract them to me at market price. Just no manti's Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.