These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

bomb skills
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Chilywakker
Porcus Volans
#1 - 2014-09-07 21:58:06 UTC
Hi all. I was wondering why there is not a "Bomb Specialization" skill? There is a specialization skill book for EVERY weapon platform out there EXCEPT bombs. Ok, so I decided to give a suggestion.

5% reduction in explosion radius per level.
5% increase in bomb armor hitpoints per level.

Whether people agree or disagree, I definitely think a specialization skill needs added for bombs, just to be like EVERY other weapon system.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#2 - 2014-09-07 21:59:52 UTC
Chilywakker wrote:
EVERY other weapon system.


Smartbombs.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Vyl Vit
#3 - 2014-09-07 22:18:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Vyl Vit
Try: Engineering/Energy Pulse Weapons -5% pulse duration per level studied. It gives you a higher rate of speed, as it were. That in turn gives you more damage per...minute. Smartbombs...which ARE bombs, right?

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#4 - 2014-09-07 22:52:04 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Chilywakker wrote:
EVERY other weapon system.


Smartbombs.


Capital weapons.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2014-09-07 23:47:03 UTC
Domanique Altares wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Chilywakker wrote:
EVERY other weapon system.


Smartbombs.


Capital weapons.

Ive wondered, why is that?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2014-09-08 00:28:00 UTC
Chilywakker wrote:
5% reduction in explosion radius per level.
5% increase in bomb armor hitpoints per level.

Bombs are already ridiculously powerful. -25% explosion radius and +25% HP would be ******* absurd. You could pretty much wipe out any subcapital fleet with those.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2014-09-08 00:58:54 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Chilywakker wrote:
5% reduction in explosion radius per level.
5% increase in bomb armor hitpoints per level.

Bombs are already ridiculously powerful. -25% explosion radius and +25% HP would be ******* absurd. You could pretty much wipe out any subcapital fleet with those.

I like the idea of bombs with smaller radius
Would mean more are needed to hit the same fleet, but they become more tactical
It also makes for the excellent choice of bigger salvo for massive damage with more salvos to cover the same area
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#8 - 2014-09-08 01:10:31 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
Try: Engineering/Energy Pulse Weapons -5% pulse duration per level studied. It gives you a higher rate of speed, as it were. That in turn gives you more damage per...minute. Smartbombs...which ARE bombs, right?



That's analogous to Bomb Deployment

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#9 - 2014-09-08 01:15:02 UTC
Chilywakker wrote:
Hi all. I was wondering why there is not a "Bomb Specialization" skill? There is a specialization skill book for EVERY weapon platform out there EXCEPT bombs. Ok, so I decided to give a suggestion.

5% reduction in explosion radius per level.
5% increase in bomb armor hitpoints per level.

Whether people agree or disagree, I definitely think a specialization skill needs added for bombs, just to be like EVERY other weapon system.


Yeah lets make them even more OP. While you're at it you should suggest specialization skills for capital weapons, smartbombs & DD's because despite being pretty well balanced right now, the only important thing is that you 'think'.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2014-09-08 23:31:00 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
NEONOVUS wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Chilywakker wrote:
5% reduction in explosion radius per level.
5% increase in bomb armor hitpoints per level.

Bombs are already ridiculously powerful. -25% explosion radius and +25% HP would be ******* absurd. You could pretty much wipe out any subcapital fleet with those.

I like the idea of bombs with smaller radius
Would mean more are needed to hit the same fleet, but they become more tactical
It also makes for the excellent choice of bigger salvo for massive damage with more salvos to cover the same area

You're confusing explosion radius with area of effect radius.
The reduction in explosion radius proposed by OP means an increase in damage application against smaller targets. At level 5 of the proposed skill, bombs would have an explosion radius of 300m instead of 400m, making cruisers and frigates take proportionally more damage from each bomb. The reduction of bomb armor hitpoints means that in each run you can have two more bombs for even more damage.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#11 - 2014-09-09 00:02:19 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Tbh, I think eve could use some more diverse AoE mechanics. N+1 is a problem today in eve that contributes much to the bipolar stagnation with which we are all familiar. People don't enjoy loosing, so they clump up in larger and larger groups until you're left with 2 enormous groups and little content.

Mechanics such as bombs, and smartbombs ("pipe bombing") discourage this, to a limited extent.

Older mechanics, like the old AoE DD discouraged it to a much greater extent. Here's an unpopular opinion: I don't think the old AoE DD was the primary problem. I think the problem with the old AoE DD was exclusivity rather than the actual effect. One side had it and the other did not. Imagine what would have happened in the old wars with bob if both sides had plenty of AoE DD.

If AoE DD was not a titan module, but say a module fitted to a new T2 BC hull (with a bit less raw damage) that destroyed the hull upon a single use of the "DD", that might be a neat thing. Random sh*tty idea for the day, at any rate.
Experiment 32423
Doomheim
#12 - 2014-09-09 00:39:57 UTC
Anything that increases bomb damage would be a little too good to be true, bomb travel speed however, I could see happening.
Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#13 - 2014-09-09 04:31:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiwha
NEONOVUS wrote:
Domanique Altares wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Chilywakker wrote:
EVERY other weapon system.


Smartbombs.


Capital weapons.

Ive wondered, why is that?




Because cap weapons don't NEED to be any more powerful.




AS for bomb damage, bombs are fine.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Darth Bladius
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#14 - 2014-09-09 04:53:54 UTC
What sense would make decreasing explosion radius?

Bombs are "static" projectiles - they move forward where is the nose of your ship pointing - and they explode when they reach target or reach their flight amplitude. Bomb´s explosion radius is completely static and hence it has no explosion velocity.

Decreasing explosion radius (diameter 30 km) would nerf bombs a lot (instead of buffing).

If´ I´m not wrong...
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#15 - 2014-09-09 06:36:21 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Tbh, I think eve could use some more diverse AoE mechanics. N+1 is a problem today in eve that contributes much to the bipolar stagnation with which we are all familiar. People don't enjoy loosing, so they clump up in larger and larger groups until you're left with 2 enormous groups and little content.

Mechanics such as bombs, and smartbombs ("pipe bombing") discourage this, to a limited extent.

Older mechanics, like the old AoE DD discouraged it to a much greater extent. Here's an unpopular opinion: I don't think the old AoE DD was the primary problem. I think the problem with the old AoE DD was exclusivity rather than the actual effect. One side had it and the other did not. Imagine what would have happened in the old wars with bob if both sides had plenty of AoE DD.

If AoE DD was not a titan module, but say a module fitted to a new T2 BC hull (with a bit less raw damage) that destroyed the hull upon a single use of the "DD", that might be a neat thing. Random sh*tty idea for the day, at any rate.


The old AoE DD was shown to be a problem when it started being used in salvos to clear capital fleets. In other words, the problem got noticed when it became *less* exclusive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q1lrH_B-VI


Similar to the problems that occurred when CCP ooopsed Bombs damaging each other.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIyuqLl4O54

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#16 - 2014-09-09 07:07:02 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
RubyPorto wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Tbh, I think eve could use some more diverse AoE mechanics. N+1 is a problem today in eve that contributes much to the bipolar stagnation with which we are all familiar. People don't enjoy loosing, so they clump up in larger and larger groups until you're left with 2 enormous groups and little content.

Mechanics such as bombs, and smartbombs ("pipe bombing") discourage this, to a limited extent.

Older mechanics, like the old AoE DD discouraged it to a much greater extent. Here's an unpopular opinion: I don't think the old AoE DD was the primary problem. I think the problem with the old AoE DD was exclusivity rather than the actual effect. One side had it and the other did not. Imagine what would have happened in the old wars with bob if both sides had plenty of AoE DD.

If AoE DD was not a titan module, but say a module fitted to a new T2 BC hull (with a bit less raw damage) that destroyed the hull upon a single use of the "DD", that might be a neat thing. Random sh*tty idea for the day, at any rate.


The old AoE DD was shown to be a problem when it started being used in salvos to clear capital fleets. In other words, the problem got noticed when it became *less* exclusive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q1lrH_B-VI

So...27 titans from the same organization blow up a single carrier.....that's exactly the type of exclusivity I was describing. The titans were exclusive to a particular entity. If DD's were available on a cheaper subcapital platform (obviously with some significant alterations - lower damage, destroying the dd activating ship, etc.), things would have been very different.


RubyPorto wrote:

Similar to the problems that occurred when CCP ooopsed Bombs damaging each other.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIyuqLl4O54

I don't see any problems here. All I see is a thing of beauty.

I'm just saying that I think eve could use more variety in weapon types, particularly of the AoE sort. Variety is the spice of life, and N+1 dudes focusing down a single target repeatedly leads to a rather stagnant game.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2014-09-09 08:09:28 UTC
Darth Bladius wrote:
What sense would make decreasing explosion radius?

Bombs are "static" projectiles - they move forward where is the nose of your ship pointing - and they explode when they reach target or reach their flight amplitude. Bomb´s explosion radius is completely static and hence it has no explosion velocity.

Decreasing explosion radius (diameter 30 km) would nerf bombs a lot (instead of buffing).

If´ I´m not wrong...

You are wrong. See my last post above, you're making the same mistake NEONOVUS was.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2014-09-09 08:11:42 UTC
And as for decreasing the actual effect radius, EVE players have demonstrated repeatedly in the past that they will not train skills that have negative effects along with their positive effects, unless they have to for prerequisites.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Sorao Soreen
Profit to burn
#19 - 2014-09-09 08:56:11 UTC
Hows about a skill to speed up travel time?

or and ability to detonate early

IE launch bomb to its target at 30km

target bruns forward to 25 bomb goes passed and mises



with new skill you watch the bomb as it reaches its target you press the launcher button again and it will remote detonate the bomb. this would add a hole new dimention to it. the ability to use a bomb at short range in a o God iam gona die launch detonate suicide kind of way.

with a minimum distance the bomb has to travel before you can remote detonate it.say 10km
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#20 - 2014-09-09 08:56:20 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
So...27 titans from the same organization blow up a single carrier.....that's exactly the type of exclusivity I was describing. The titans were exclusive to a particular entity. If DD's were available on a cheaper subcapital platform (obviously with some significant alterations - lower damage, destroying the dd activating ship, etc.), things would have been very different.


Yes, they blew up a single carrier. That time. In that example set up specifically to record. Remember, the Titan's AOE did the same damage to the whole grid. In other words, any fleet of 27+ Titans could not be tackled, attacked, or inconvenienced by anything sub-supercapital.

Cost is not a balancing factor. Firing a DD costs quite a bit of ISK in fuel, no different than blowing up a ship fielding it. Less damage just encourages N+1 behavior.


Quote:

I don't see any problems here. All I see is a thing of beauty.

I'm just saying that I think eve could use more variety in weapon types, particularly of the AoE sort. Variety is the spice of life, and N+1 dudes focusing down a single target repeatedly leads to a rather stagnant game.


You don't see anything wrong with small (by fleet standards; ~200 man fleets are not the best "stop N+1 behavior" rallying calls) fleets of cheap, invisible, nigh-invulnerable ships alphaing off everything sub-supercapital after bridging in? Also consider cynobombing with no bomb-bomb damage.

So you want to replace it with N+1 dudes focusing down all the targets repeatedly? I don't see how that improves anything.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon