These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Phoebe] Stealth Bombers

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
TAckermassacker
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#621 - 2014-10-20 12:30:28 UTC
can you just attach the signature + 16m to the bomb launcher module and leave the bomber hull itself unchanged in signaure radius?
This would buff people who actually to torpedo pvp without bomb spamming and have the same effect as intended to bomberwings.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#622 - 2014-10-20 12:37:22 UTC
Oxide Ammar wrote:
Aside from the stupid nerf to cloaky ships, has anyone run the numbers if the 4 bombers will be able to run 3x tech II torp launchers + tech II bomb launcher with out sacrificing arm and leg of your fit ? because if not that means clearly Fozzie have zero knowledge about bombers.


They cannot do this now - nor should they be able to. The extra fitting room will be nice, but the extra signature radius will be a horrible addition.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#623 - 2014-10-20 12:40:14 UTC
TAckermassacker wrote:
can you just attach the signature + 16m to the bomb launcher module and leave the bomber hull itself unchanged in signaure radius?
This would buff people who actually to torpedo pvp without bomb spamming and have the same effect as intended to bomberwings.


I really like this idea. Make it apply even if the bomb launcher is offline.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#624 - 2014-10-20 12:43:27 UTC
Just posting to further echo the sentiment of the decloak change being rubbish. It's going to impact all ships that fit cloaks. As others have said, bringing this back intentionally without having some way of seeing where your fleetmates are is really poor.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#625 - 2014-10-20 13:20:59 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
TAckermassacker wrote:
can you just attach the signature + 16m to the bomb launcher module and leave the bomber hull itself unchanged in signaure radius?
This would buff people who actually to torpedo pvp without bomb spamming and have the same effect as intended to bomberwings.


I really like this idea. Make it apply even if the bomb launcher is offline.


well you have too imagine that bombers are very large frigates .. they had too make them bigger for the torp launchers too fit afterall

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#626 - 2014-10-20 13:30:13 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
TAckermassacker wrote:
can you just attach the signature + 16m to the bomb launcher module and leave the bomber hull itself unchanged in signaure radius?
This would buff people who actually to torpedo pvp without bomb spamming and have the same effect as intended to bomberwings.


I really like this idea. Make it apply even if the bomb launcher is offline.


well you have too imagine that bombers are very large frigates .. they had too make them bigger for the torp launchers too fit afterall


Actually they are normal size frigates that have had their speed and tanking abilities stripped out to accommodate torp/bomb launchers. :)

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Herrin Asura
Covert Operations Agency
#627 - 2014-10-20 13:43:27 UTC
Thats a thing of the past.
After Phoebe we have the size of a Destroyer....
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#628 - 2014-10-20 14:20:49 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
TAckermassacker wrote:
can you just attach the signature + 16m to the bomb launcher module and leave the bomber hull itself unchanged in signaure radius?
This would buff people who actually to torpedo pvp without bomb spamming and have the same effect as intended to bomberwings.


I really like this idea. Make it apply even if the bomb launcher is offline.


well you have too imagine that bombers are very large frigates .. they had too make them bigger for the torp launchers too fit afterall


Actually they are normal size frigates that have had their speed and tanking abilities stripped out to accommodate torp/bomb launchers. :)


not really a nemesis is a good 40m bigger than an enyo

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Lugh Crow-Slave
#629 - 2014-10-20 14:28:53 UTC
Calvyr Travonis wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
arming mechanism, no. That would be too hard on people whose vision might not be 100% or players who are drunk or just bad typists.

Defender missiles? I have tried multiple times to get them repurposed, drone killer, bomb killer, hell antilaser chaff cannon. So far I have had little (actually no) success.

m


Players being drunk or having poor typing skills though, really? So we're going to account for people who are suffering from a self inflicted impairment now? And poor typing, we're not talking about transcribing a dissertation on particle physics, we're talking about say a 6-12 character string. Even the worst "hunt and peck" typist can handle that.


Their is a man in my corp had a scaffolding fall on him not only does he play with two pencils taped to his hands but has trouble seeing or remembering the placement of keys

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#630 - 2014-10-20 14:29:08 UTC
I am a bit concerned with the Manticore and Nemesis having the same grid but one having more CPU.

The Manticore has long been the obvious choice over the nemesis since both had the same grid (not to say it's the go to bomber, just that there isn't much reason to pick the Nemesis instead), but the manticore has more CPU which means anything you can fit on the nemesis can be fit on the maticore, but the manticore is slightly more maneuverable (mainly due to mass, and though the difference isn't what I would call significant, I have seen it brought up) and has fitting room to spare, so anything Nemisis can do, manticore can do better.

Under these changes, the situation is reversed, Nemesis can fit anything Manticore can and then some, and now has better mobility (aside from speed). I really think they need some differentiation similar to the Hound and Purifier in that one has more CPU while the other has more grid, so they can have different fittings rather than one just being able to fit more stuff. it may not make the Nemesis more attractive as a ship, but does at least provide differentiation rather than having a ship be mostly redundant.

Also Nemesis needs to be changed to a Roden ship.
====
I would also add my support to saying making cloaked ships decloak each other once again is a bad change in general. it disrupts covert gangs too much, and I fail to see very many advantages to the metagame as a whole. if we could at least track the location (and thus, distance) of cloaked fleetmates, that would at least mitigate the disadvantages by letting us prevent accidental decloaks.


On a side note. While it is nice you are looking at bombs, I would hope you guys are also looking at Stealth bombers from the Torpedo platform standpoint. The bomb launchers are the primary point of these ships, but the fact they use battleship sized weaponry despite being a (much) smaller platform, is still and important aspect of their design, so their viability in that role needs to be preserved even with bomb changes. I am a bit concerned the sig radius changes meant to allow fleets to better defend themselves against bombing runs may harm the viability of Stealth bombers as torpedo platforms.

If you feel bombers on a bombing mission need to be easier to target and destroy, you should attach a sig radius penalty to the bomb launcher so ships using them are easier to take down, while ships fitted solely as torpedo platforms aren't harmed by the change (being in active combat that long is already hazardous enough on its own given the paltry defenses)

Also, a personal note: I think it would be neat to expand bombers to be able to carry all of the Battleship launcher types to enhance their diversity a bit.
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#631 - 2014-10-20 14:30:47 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
TAckermassacker wrote:
can you just attach the signature + 16m to the bomb launcher module and leave the bomber hull itself unchanged in signaure radius?
This would buff people who actually to torpedo pvp without bomb spamming and have the same effect as intended to bomberwings.


I really like this idea. Make it apply even if the bomb launcher is offline.


well you have too imagine that bombers are very large frigates .. they had too make them bigger for the torp launchers too fit afterall


Actually they are normal size frigates that have had their speed and tanking abilities stripped out to accommodate torp/bomb launchers. :)

They used to be, but since they added models for missile launchers, the Bombers have gotten new models that are a fair bit larger than other frigates in order to fit torpedo launchers
Lugh Crow-Slave
#632 - 2014-10-20 14:40:39 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Adrie Atticus wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:


3. EVE won't and shouldn't snoop around your computer to look at everything that is running. for reasons.


But it does, and has for years, EULA section 7.:

Quote:
D. MONITORING

You agree that CCP may remotely monitor your Game hardware solely for the purpose of establishing whether in playing the Game and accessing the System you are using software created or approved by CCP, or whether you are using unauthorized software created by you or a third party in contravention of Section 6.


It looks at EVE not everything else on your computer.


do you know what hardware is because its not the game's software

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#633 - 2014-10-20 15:24:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Soldarius
CW Itovuo wrote:
CAPITAL BOMB: Love the idea. Dislike the proposed method. "Aiming" things in EVE is especially difficult. Would prefer something along the lines of a very slow torpedo, the modern equivalent of laser guided bomb. Bomber pilot would have to lock & paint the target and stay on grid until impact.


I always get a kick out of people that think they know about about modern weapons tech and then try to apply it to eve.

There is this thing called a Target Painter that can take the place of the aircraft mounting laser. Anyone can carry one, even infantry. Its how an aircraft can launch a cruise missile from 100km away or a 500lb bomb from 50,000 feet and still hit a 1-foot-square target like the air-shaft of a bunker complex even when its cloudy.

Eve target painters are of course used for a different purpose.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
TAckermassacker
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#634 - 2014-10-20 15:25:33 UTC
Xindi Kraid wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
TAckermassacker wrote:
can you just attach the signature + 16m to the bomb launcher module and leave the bomber hull itself unchanged in signaure radius?
This would buff people who actually to torpedo pvp without bomb spamming and have the same effect as intended to bomberwings.


I really like this idea. Make it apply even if the bomb launcher is offline.


well you have too imagine that bombers are very large frigates .. they had too make them bigger for the torp launchers too fit afterall


Actually they are normal size frigates that have had their speed and tanking abilities stripped out to accommodate torp/bomb launchers. :)

They used to be, but since they added models for missile launchers, the Bombers have gotten new models that are a fair bit larger than other frigates in order to fit torpedo launchers


really arguing the ship model to the stats?
if you go for this a machariel must have got 3000m signature radius in the last pirate faction rebalance.
So please gtfo with shipmodel to use of ship arguing.

you have a lot disadvantages already if you compare a stealthbomber with a worm in terms of stats, damage and projection you have already many sacrifices.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#635 - 2014-10-20 16:32:15 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Adrie Atticus wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:


3. EVE won't and shouldn't snoop around your computer to look at everything that is running. for reasons.


But it does, and has for years, EULA section 7.:

Quote:
D. MONITORING

You agree that CCP may remotely monitor your Game hardware solely for the purpose of establishing whether in playing the Game and accessing the System you are using software created or approved by CCP, or whether you are using unauthorized software created by you or a third party in contravention of Section 6.


It looks at EVE not everything else on your computer.


do you know what hardware is because its not the game's software


We had this the other year, CCP does not snoop on your computer like an Icelandic NSA.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#636 - 2014-10-20 16:34:18 UTC
TAckermassacker wrote:


you have a lot disadvantages already if you compare a stealthbomber with a worm in terms of stats, damage and projection you have already many sacrifices.



A bomber does not do the job of an assault frigate.
TAckermassacker
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#637 - 2014-10-20 17:01:13 UTC  |  Edited by: TAckermassacker
baltec1 wrote:
TAckermassacker wrote:


you have a lot disadvantages already if you compare a stealthbomber with a worm in terms of stats, damage and projection you have already many sacrifices.



A bomber does not do the job of an assault frigate.


i was referring a worm in specific cause its a position independent kiting frigate with high dps. (that sounds like the job of a bomber to me)
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#638 - 2014-10-20 17:17:51 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
TAckermassacker wrote:


you have a lot disadvantages already if you compare a stealthbomber with a worm in terms of stats, damage and projection you have already many sacrifices.



A bomber does not do the job of an assault frigate.


A worm isn't an assault frigate.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#639 - 2014-10-20 18:04:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Soldarius
So, I did a thing and added some theoretical damage stats to a bomb (expVel=100m/s, DRF=5.5) for the purposes of simulating percentage damage reduction to bombs for a typical baltec Megathron and a Rail Rokh. Relevant aspects of the fits are listed below the chart.

http://imgur.com/co68YeH

Obviously, a Mega or Rokh without an MWD is not going to go 1200m/s. But for the purposes of getting all the data into one chart, the data has to extend that far or google automatically stretches it to fit the chart. Google charts fail.

Each curve consists of 120 data points. The curves for "noMWD" apply identically to no prop mod or AB on, since the horizontal scale shows velocity and sigRad doesn't change for those conditions.

Relevant Stats: (all 5s and max links)
Mega with 2x 1600mm T2 plates, 2x T1 trimarks, and 1x T1 EM pump.

  • Mega w/o prop mod running: sigRad: 249m, max vel: 135m/s, align time: 9.4 sec.
  • Mega w/MWD running: sigRad: 1493m, max vel: 1201m/s, align time: 14 sec.
  • Mega w/AB running: sigRad: 249m, max vel: 423m/s, align time: 14 sec.


Rokh w 1x LSE II and 3x LCDFE I.

  • Rokh w/o prop mod running: sigRad: 388m, max Vel: 111m/s, 11.4 sec.
  • Rokh w/MWD running: sigRad: 2246m, max Vel: 986m/s, 16.8 sec.
  • Rokh w/AB running: sigRad: 388, max Vel: 347m/s, align time: 16.8 sec.


The above chart tells us a lot. Please remember, the Rokh is also slower than the Mega. So a direct vertical comparison at each ship's top speed is not possible.

  • The current linear reductions due to expRad/sigRad mean there is no way to mitigate bomb damage except with links and boosters (drugs).
  • Armor tanks currently enjoy an insanely unbalanced advantage over shield tanks. The difference between the no-prop lines clearly shows this.
  • The chart clearly shows that sigRad will still play a huge part in how much damage shield tanks take over armor tanks, even when velocity is figured into the equation.
  • Enabling velocity reductions would reduce the amount of damage taken, but only once the effected ship reaches a sufficiently high velocity. In this case, no-prop mod battleships don't benefit much from a velocity reduction.
  • Full speed align AB would give the Mega an apx 85% damage reduction. A Rokh would get apx 74% reduction. That being said, those are pretty big reductions. Bombs would become pretty meaningless to full-speed aligned ABing battleships.
  • Using an MWD increases mobility at the expense of taking more damage from pretty much everything. Full speed MWD Mega would still receive a 79% reduction. A Rokh would get only a 43% reduction. In this case, the huge difference in sigRad makes a huge difference in damage.


Now for another graph that show a comparison using a Rokh that suffers no penalties to its sigRad from shield rigs or extenders.
http://imgur.com/IOqXs5D

In this example, the Rokh would have only a 1965m sigRad with MWD on, 328m without. This brings the MWD reduction to 50% at 895m/s, and AB reduction to 77%. This compares a little bit better imo.

At this point, I feel its more of a balance point decision on exactly how much damage one feels is healthy for the environment. But some things MUST happen to bring bombs into balance: remove the shield sigRad penalties through either a straight removal of penalties, or give us skills to reduce the penalties to nothing, a combination of a reduction in the penalties and the skills to make them negligible, and consider velocity in the bomb damage equation.

Also, I'm providing the link to my spreadsheet so people can see for themselves that the math and theory are good, as well as play with the numbers for themselves. Interesting things happen when you play with the DRF. Please don't wreck the sheet. Google is bad with their permission levels.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#640 - 2014-10-20 18:10:23 UTC
TAckermassacker wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
TAckermassacker wrote:


you have a lot disadvantages already if you compare a stealthbomber with a worm in terms of stats, damage and projection you have already many sacrifices.



A bomber does not do the job of an assault frigate.


i was referring a worm in specific cause its a position independent kiting frigate with high dps. (that sounds like the job of a bomber to me)


bomber is a stealthy torpedo boat built for attacking shipping and large targets such as battleships.Worm is an anti interceptor.

Two very different jobs.