These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Heavy stealth bombers
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
supernova ranger
The End of Eternity
#1 - 2013-09-20 17:15:05 UTC
Destroyer sized bombers
2 citadel torpedo launcher slots
2 bomb launcher slots
1 covert ops cloak slot


same slots and grid as stealth bombers (doesn't get an advantage in tank over size)

Role bonus
- 50% bomb launcher power grid and cpu requirements
+ 7% sig radius per fitted citadel launcher
- 20% cpu requirements for citadel launchers
- 99.9908125% reduction in Citadel launcher requirements or (-100% reduction per citadel launcher and -18.375 grid on hull)
Aakkonen
Rift Watch
#2 - 2013-09-20 17:48:05 UTC
So was the Capital Nerf in mind?
"Enemy deploys capital fleet"
"Ookies, let us Deploy blob of HSB's they wont stand a chance."

This is bad idea, seriously

Bad Jokes since -09.... Fly Safe! o7
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2013-09-20 17:51:32 UTC
Aakkonen wrote:
So was the Capital Nerf in mind?
"Enemy deploys capital fleet"
"Ookies, let us Deploy blob of HSB's they wont stand a chance."

This is bad idea, seriously

As long as capitals can sig tank citadel missiles, not so much...

Okay, that wasn't serious. But I still wouldn't support suggestions such as these before we see what caps and supers will become after eventual rebalancing and revamping.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Grunnax Aurelius
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-09-22 13:01:35 UTC
Firstly, the concept is not a bad idea, but the problem is that you could fly a destroyer down a citadel missile silo, so on that part no. If anything it should be no launchers, and a bombing platform only, two bomb launchers with a bonus to allow simultaneous launch. But in short, this ship is not required, stealth bombers are fine as is.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=342042&find=unread
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#5 - 2013-09-22 13:11:43 UTC
correct me if I'm wrong but aren't citadel launchers described as being the size of a cruiser? How can you possibly mount a cruiser to a destroyer?

I think rebalancing the capitals themselves needs to be done first before crazy ideas like this are proposed. Definitely no support from me.
Ben Houssa
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2013-09-22 13:27:09 UTC
supernova ranger wrote:
Destroyer sized bombers
2 citadel torpedo launcher slots
2 bomb launcher slots


Then get a couple to high-sec and start deccing and popping POSes. Mmm-NOT.

Crystal damage information in cargohold Increased contrast on Ice Planets
Azrael Dinn
Imperial Mechanics
#7 - 2013-09-23 07:16:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Azrael Dinn
I'm going to say to yes to every specialized cloaked ship if CCP adds something that can counter cloaks. Until that happens no to any addition of ships that makes "afk cloaking" easier.

And in general the idea is interesting but the anticapital almost everyone can see the "anti-capital ship" between the lines. Im not sure is a ship like that needed and why destroyer hulls. Is the idea realy that simple that you want a fast moving ships that can orbit capitals and kill them with one or two ships?

So in general interesting idea but badly presented. If we go with cruiser sized hulls and make them slow then mayby this could be something that I could think about.

After centuries of debating and justifying... Break Cloaks tm
Siobhan MacLeary
Doomheim
#8 - 2013-09-23 07:53:09 UTC
Azrael Dinn wrote:
I'm going to say to yes to every specialized cloaked ship if CCP adds something that can counter cloaks. Until that happens no to any addition of ships that makes "afk cloaking" easier.

And in general the idea is interesting but the anticapital almost everyone can see the "anti-capital ship" between the lines. Im not sure is a ship like that needed and why destroyer hulls. Is the idea realy that simple that you want a fast moving ships that can orbit capitals and kill them with one or two ships?

So in general interesting idea but badly presented. If we go with cruiser sized hulls and make them slow then mayby this could be something that I could think about.


I think this is the thread you're looking for.

As for this idea - I like the concept of a heavy bomber, but this implementation of it is shoddy. Citadel launchers cannot possibly fit onto a destroyer hull, though I could see a cramming a torpedo launcher or two onto a Catalyst. That said, a heavy bomber would be a very powerful ship and would need to be carefully balanced - though I can't imagine what role they could possibly fill that the current stealth bombers cannot.

“Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.” - CCP Soundwave
Aakkonen
Rift Watch
#9 - 2013-09-23 12:01:44 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
correct me if I'm wrong but aren't citadel launchers described as being the size of a cruiser? How can you possibly mount a cruiser to a destroyer?

I think rebalancing the capitals themselves needs to be done first before crazy ideas like this are proposed. Definitely no support from me.



Yeah about and Citadel torpedo is 93 meters long, soo.... that might be problem comparing to dessy..

Bad Jokes since -09.... Fly Safe! o7
Electrique Wizard
Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals
#10 - 2013-09-24 08:54:36 UTC
could be interesting if it was cruiser/bc sized, had crap EHP and 1 or 2 low/med slots and unbonused launchers...

I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack.
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#11 - 2013-09-24 09:38:01 UTC
Ignore the Citadel launchers for a moment. We already have exceedingly effective small fleets of stealth bombers running around ruining large fleets. Imagine if they could suddenly get into a ship that did everything the current stealth bombers do but doubles the damage output of the bombs on them.

These would be used instead of the current stealth bombers purely due to the fact that they double the damage.

Now lets look at the Citadel launchers. As someone else has already pointed out, they would be used to do structure bashing in high sec.

So, if one of the bomb modules was removed so that it wasn't better at bombing than the current bomber and they weren't allowed in high sec I'd say yes to this. In it's currently proposed state, no. Hell no!
Stan Smith
State War Academy
Caldari State
#12 - 2013-09-24 22:40:57 UTC
what if this idea was ran with, give destroyer or cruiser sized ships bonuses to torpedoes, but have no stealth capabilities

☻/ /▌ / \ This is Bob, post him into your forum sig and help him conquer the forums.
Vince Mctavern
Anara Sol
#13 - 2013-09-24 23:42:57 UTC
OP, Citadel Torpedoes aren't as powerful as you seem to think. The only reason they hurt at all on Dreadnoughts is because of the siege module buffs, and even then they only really apply a decent amount of damage against stationary or huge sig capitals (like triage carriers or supers) and structures. Two Citadel Torps, even bonused, would realistically apply a tiny amount of their potential damage, even regular torpedoes would be a better choice against anything that wasn't huge and immobile.

Two bombs sounds like a fun idea to use, but honestly bombs are so strong in an organised gang that having two each is (IMO) very overpowered. The idea of using the destroyer hull for something like a stealth hit and run operation is an interesting one though, but honestly capital weaponry isn't the answer.
Oswaldos
The Upside Down
#14 - 2013-09-24 23:43:04 UTC
I guess the question is wait are we trying to do with heavy destroyers . If its an anticapital ship perhaps we could run with 1 bomb launchers with the following bonuses. 10x Sig radius to bomb 10x bonus to damage of bomb . Would make a single bomb do 60k volley to capitals but almost nothing to subcaps. You could change the flight times of the bombs to allow for evasion of caps on a bombing run.. you could also mount torp 7 torp launchers with a 5x Sig radius bonus to and a hefty dps ship bonus. Essentially creating an anti capital / structure ship without stepping on stealth bombers feet

My 2 Cents
Oswaldos
The Upside Down
#15 - 2013-09-24 23:43:33 UTC
I guess the question is wait are we trying to do with heavy destroyers . If its an anticapital ship perhaps we could run with 1 bomb launchers with the following bonuses. 10x Sig radius to bomb 10x bonus to damage of bomb . Would make a single bomb do 60k volley to capitals but almost nothing to subcaps. You could change the flight times of the bombs to allow for evasion of caps on a bombing run.. you could also mount torp 7 torp launchers with a 5x Sig radius bonus to and a hefty dps ship bonus. Essentially creating an anti capital / structure ship without stepping on stealth bombers feet
Corvald Tyrska
Valknetra
#16 - 2013-09-24 23:44:41 UTC
I agree the twin bomb launchers is way too much power on a destroyer hull.

Make it a cruiser, remove the covert ops cloak and give it citadel torps and twin bomb launchers. Remove the cloak targeting delay. Maybe three highs with two launchers so it is a choice between torps or bombs. this makes it pack a seriously heavy punch but not have the covert cloak to run around with. It can use a normal cloak and ambush but you will see it warping around so it becomes a lot more tactical to use it. Not sure if it should be allowed to travel on a BLOPS bridge, that may give it a bit too much projection.

Alternately, this could be an option for a second line of BLOPS. Citadel torps and dual bombs with standard cloak and the ability to jump but not bridge.