These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Bombers and how to balance them in my opinion

Author
Zalmea Brannvall
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-07-19 02:12:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Zalmea Brannvall
Hello !
New idea bringed up by : Daichi Yamato and Drake Barski

so buff the radius to 20 km and increase the damage slightly to 10000 damage
So if the bombs had a 5 % reduction per KM away from the center it would be

1km 9500
2km 9000
3km 8500
4km 8000
5km 7500
6km 7000
7km 6500
8km 6000
9km 5500
10km 5000
and etc

Would make it easier to take out specfic targets and harder to wipe the whole fleets , bring abit more tactics into bombing














old idea
So i have been flying in big fleets 50 + fleets . A couple of times we got wiped by a squad of bombers , In my opinion a couple of people should not be able to wipe a 50 man fleets , It's not fun .


So my idea is change how the bombs works .

So let's say that a bomb do 7000 damage , instead of doing 7000 damage to everyone it hits , The damage should be splited .
If a bomb hits a 10 man fleet it should only do 700 damage to each person instead of the current 7000 damage .


What do you think about my idea ?

Bombers need a change



/Zalmea
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#2 - 2014-07-19 02:17:47 UTC
Warfare asymmetry is good. If a larger group always prevailed we'd... well, we'd be even worse off than we are now where it only usually prevails.
Zalmea Brannvall
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2014-07-19 02:21:41 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Warfare asymmetry is good. If a larger group always prevailed we'd... well, we'd be even worse off than we are now where it only usually prevails.

i completly understand and support that , But still a 5 man fleet should not be able to wipe a 50 man fleet .

Another idea , For each target the bomb hits reduce the damage by 5 % or something like that =)
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#4 - 2014-07-19 02:27:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
nope.
its a great anti-blob weapon on a great platform.
5 man gangs should wipe out fleets a thousand strong if that fleet flies low tank ships, anchors on one guy and turns on their MWD's.

Edit-
which by the looks of things, is exactly what uve been doing.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Drake Barski
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-07-19 02:30:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Drake Barski
I would say that it would make sense that the bomb does the most damage at its epicenter - where the actual explosion occurs, then dissipates as it goes out, doing less and less damage depending how far away from the center you are - if a bomb had a blast radius of 10km for example, then it would do 7,000 damage if you are within 999k, then 6,500 within 1,000 to 1,999k, and so on until at 9,501k to 9,999k it only does 250 damage. This would make them more realistic and true to actual real-life physics.

In addition, one could argue that a ship's defenses are better equipped to negate or counterbalance the bomb damage depending on how much defense it has left. A ship with max shields would be able to absorb and/or dissipate a higher percentage of the incoming damage than a ship that was already into its armor, which would absorb/dissipate more than a ship that only had hull HP left.

These changes together would add more need for strategy and timing when bombing - fire too soon and the target(s) tank the damage and live, too late and they are out of range or at least farther away, and thus taking less damage.

This is my off-the-cuff, spitballing opinion. What do YOU think?
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#6 - 2014-07-19 02:33:11 UTC
You have plenty of options to avoid, negate, or reduce it's effects. Sounds like either very skilled bomber gang or bad luck on your part.

It's very balanced as is.
Drake Barski
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2014-07-19 02:35:41 UTC
Rowells wrote:
You have plenty of options to avoid, negate, or reduce it's effects. Sounds like either very skilled bomber gang or bad luck on your part.

It's very balanced as is.


*its.

P.S.: You're welcome.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#8 - 2014-07-19 02:39:01 UTC
Drake Barski wrote:


In addition, one could argue that a ship's defenses are better equipped to negate or counterbalance the bomb damage depending on how much defense it has left. A ship with max shields would be able to absorb and/or dissipate a higher percentage of the incoming damage than a ship that was already into its armor, which would absorb/dissipate more than a ship that only had hull HP left.

This is my off-the-cuff, spitballing opinion. What do YOU think?


I think ur describing explosive damage.

But what about EM, Thermal and Gravitational bombs?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Zalmea Brannvall
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2014-07-19 02:43:12 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Drake Barski wrote:


In addition, one could argue that a ship's defenses are better equipped to negate or counterbalance the bomb damage depending on how much defense it has left. A ship with max shields would be able to absorb and/or dissipate a higher percentage of the incoming damage than a ship that was already into its armor, which would absorb/dissipate more than a ship that only had hull HP left.

This is my off-the-cuff, spitballing opinion. What do YOU think?


I think ur describing explosive damage.

But what about EM, Thermal and Gravitational bombs?



Makes sence with EM, Thermal and Gravitational bombs aswell , Since its still a bomb , electric magnetic fields get weaker the futher away it travels , Thermal also gets weaker , and so is the case with Gravity
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#10 - 2014-07-19 02:44:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
thats not the part i quoted though.

if bombs did have the diminished damage by range then i'd hope they get a damage and an AOE range buff to boot, cause right now there are pretty sweet.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Drake Barski
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-07-19 02:46:53 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
thats not the part i quoted though


EVERY bomb explodes - you're arguing the semantics of a bomb's type - Zalmea brings up a good point: the source of heat is felt less the farther from it you are, gravity has less of an effect if you are farther from the source, et cetera...
Zalmea Brannvall
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2014-07-19 02:48:13 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
thats not the part i quoted though.

if bombs did have the diminished damage by range then i'd hope they get a damage and an AOE range buff to boot, cause right now there are pretty sweet.

sorry didnt read the quote =)

And i totally agree with your idea , Since it would benefit both sides , If you fly in big fleets you dont want to stack up so that makes a counter against the bombers
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#13 - 2014-07-19 02:50:42 UTC
what?

u said bomb damage should be absorbed by shields more than armour, and then again more by armour than structure.

thats what explosive damage does.
However, with EM bombs and EM damage, shields should absorb less and armour should absorb more.

And of course its a little different again for thermal and kin damage.

i quoted the part of the post i was replying to...its not semantics, u two are confused.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Zalmea Brannvall
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2014-07-19 02:57:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Zalmea Brannvall
so buff the radius to 20 km and increase the damage slightly to 10000 damage
So if the bombs had a 5 % reduction per KM away from the center it would be

1km 9500
2km 9000
3km 8500
4km 8000
5km 7500
6km 7000
7km 6500
8km 6000
9km 5500
10km 5000
and etc

Would make it easier to take out specfic targets and harder to wipe the whole fleets , bring abit more tactics into bombing
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#15 - 2014-07-19 02:58:26 UTC
Maybe that would increase their application against cap ships. could be fun.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#16 - 2014-07-19 03:00:52 UTC
That is an awful idea.

Unbelievably bad.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#17 - 2014-07-19 03:09:47 UTC
Zalmea Brannvall wrote:


Would make it easier to take out specfic targets and harder to wipe the whole fleets , bring abit more tactics into bombing

No. No. No. The bolded part is kinda the whole point of bombs. They bring a bit more tactics into a game of blobbing. You can't just toss a thousand ishtars into a single ball and win.

Most of eve is decided by N+1. What eve needs is to bring a bit more tactics into fleeting, not just "bring a thousand more sentry ishtars" or a thousand more archons or w/e the current retardation happens to be. Bombs are a tiny part of a solution to a much, much bigger problem.
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2014-07-19 03:20:32 UTC
While the idea itself is rather terrible, I seem to recall a csm note that many prominent bloc level FC's were in favor of balancing bombers in some way because the threat of bombing waves prevented any group from bringing any ships between frigates and BS's to sov fights (exculding hit and run nado's, and sig tanking HAC's) because it was so easy to wipe out an entire fleet of cruisers, BC, or dessies with even a few bombers.

TLDR: Bomber aoe strength naturally guides timer based combat to ships capable of withistanding that sort of abuse without instapopping, leading to quite a few ship classes being entirely obsolete for sov level warefare.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#19 - 2014-07-19 03:29:31 UTC
If thats true then im surprised ishtars are popular for sov fights.

Ppl defending the ishtar in 'the ishtar is OP' threads say that ishtars are paper thin in tank and gallente arent known for their small sigs.

There cant be many a more perfect target for bombs than ishtar blobs, but they are still widely used.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#20 - 2014-07-19 03:45:44 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
If thats true then im surprised ishtars are popular for sov fights.

Ppl defending the ishtar in 'the ishtar is OP' threads say that ishtars are paper thin in tank and gallente arent known for their small sigs.

There cant be many a more perfect target for bombs than ishtar blobs, but they are still widely used.

What about the people not defending the ishtar in 'the ishtar is OP' threads

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

12Next page