These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Prince Kobol
#901 - 2014-10-29 09:45:42 UTC
Wettbewerb wrote:
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
Awesome. As for the whiners that think bombing is a scrub thing. Try it. It is pretty clear you haven't bombed and don't know what your talking about. With bombers not decloaking each other its possible. It just isn't with with decloaking. At least not practically and no its not about skill. Its about how the server works and how the flying and warping mechanics work.

And awww how sad, you may need a AF or cepter or 2 to fly with your BS fleets.

Just look at the killboards. Bombers are no OP and have already a host of counters if you weren't so lazy as to use them. You have local for gods sake. You know they are there.

And bombers are getting the jump nerf as well.

Really show me some proof that bombers are OP. If they are lots of people would be bombing all day. But they are not. It is the odd successful bomb run out of often many failed ones.

(I will refrain from discussing the isboxer rubbish, seriously HTFU).


As a member of the original group that made bombing what it is today, by routinely wiping out fleets before ccp changed the mechanics to make cloaked ships not decloak each other, I'm going to say you are wrong. It is very possible to bomb and wipe fleets out, it just takes more preparation and effort.


Bolded the important part. This is the part CCP does not like Big smile
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#902 - 2014-10-29 09:59:17 UTC
about orbitF1, and ISBoxer: They are the same concept.

With ISBoxer, one player controls multiple local characters. With orbitF1, one player controls multiple remote characters. The major differences are the third party programs (ISBoxer vs comms), and whether each character is manned by the FC or individuals who have agreed to relinquishing control of their executive functions.

feel the rhythm, feel the rhyme, give it up, just orbitF1 and follow broadcasts.

easy mode. like it, love it, it works.

despite the "Forum Support Yes/No" part of the balancing algorithm, the tryhard playstyle is a very, very small minority. the reality is bombing works with and without ISBoxer, with and without cloak nuances.

my opinion? not that it matters, but the exploitability is in the AOE, worsened by bomb resists to their own damage type. while other methods of dealing damage are single-point single-target, AOE scales very well. they scale with a 99% efficiency, according to their resists.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Aram Kachaturian
Aram Pleasure Hub Holding
#903 - 2014-10-29 10:20:05 UTC
Once again madness and casual gaming won

Godspeed CCP Fozzie, one day people will understand you

Servant of the Secret League, Wielder of the Monocle Clubhouse Flame.
Heinrich Rotwang
Spectre Fleet Corporation
#904 - 2014-10-29 10:41:33 UTC
dephekt wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
dephekt wrote:
Quote:
We can't weather such a sharp subscriber loss right now and we can't afford to dedicate time to actually fix things the way we should, so here are some token changes instead.
FTFY


If this is the message that you're getting from Phoebe, then I'm afraid I can't do anything to help you. Lol

I like the jump drive changes and the fact sov is being reworked, but that's not here or there regarding the bomber and ISBoxer issue you guys are dodging and giving yourself breathing room on with these changes. If you don't see the problem with 1 user controlling 30 accounts simultaneously in PvP, then I'm afraid I can't do anything to help you.


Everyone can see that there is a problem with ISboxed bomber fleets and shield doctrines over at your null sov world. While you might be willing to sacrifice something you don't really care about because it happens to be outside your world, there are actually players that do care about bombers. Players that don't use lameass ISboxing software. Players that put a lot of time and effort in getting a successful bombrun organized.

You might not know or care but there is eve gameplay outside your null sov world. And what has happened here is that a lot of those people voiced their objection against sacrificing their gameplay in order to improve yours. And it appears that CCP actually seems to have an understanding and said: back to the drawing board. Because thats what you do if you realize your solution wasn't good enough. It doesn't mean the problem is gone or is never going to be solved.

I'm sorry throwing the gameplay of thousands of players down the drain in order to solve your problem a little faster didn't happen.
Shinah Myst
Celestial Dragon
#905 - 2014-10-29 10:41:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Shinah Myst
Hey Fozzie, how about making bombers bubble immune? It's too hard to wipe BS fleets this days.
Heinrich Rotwang
Spectre Fleet Corporation
#906 - 2014-10-29 10:50:33 UTC
Shinah Myst wrote:
Hey Fozzie, how about making bombers bubble immune? It's too hard to wipe BS fleets this days.


.oO(and thats the people calling us crybabies)
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#907 - 2014-10-29 10:53:32 UTC
Elise Randolph wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Elise Randolph wrote:


Didn't want to fly anything but Tengus, anyways.


bombers dont really change anything about 250mm rails and 350k tank being good

and besides bombers decloaking each other doesn't change anything about what bombers are strong against vs what they are weak against. some of the other suggestions in this thread [like explosion velocity for bombs for example] would address that issue and it looks like fozzie is going to be looking into something that next patch but its too late to implement now

edit: and yeah i think bombers still need a nerf, but i think whats more important than that is a change that makes them affect armor and shield targets equally



I guess my statement requires some explanation.

When bombers can decloak one another, it means setting up a bombing run was a tactical decision that took more than 3 minutes to do. "I am going to setup my bombers on this grid, so taking a fight here will be advantageous to me because I have a strategic asset in place". When bombers dont' decloak one another this task becomes rather trivial, letting someone make perches regardless of the system or the grid that the fight is taking place on.

But that's not really all that bad by itself. The real zinger that people have been a bit grumpy over is that bombing is very important in the current meta, and the most efficient way of doing it is not with a ~specialized~ bomber FC but instead with one or two individuals controlling all the bombers. There is an inequality between effectiveness and difficulty.

Bombers being **** easy affects the meta as a whole, because it means that any doctrine you make must be able to deal with bombers in some way beyond maneuverability. Any ship with a high signature must be able to survive the fight without perching - since perching can equal death very easily. Additionally a mid-slot module like the MicroJumpDrive becomes "core" on any ship, to deal with the threat of bombs. Shield tankers, who rely on midslots, get the short end on this one since they more or less need two of their tank slots for maneuverability. Since locking bombers quickly is a priority, many shield doctrines are further erased from contention since the supporting cast naturally has a higher signature and lower lock time (a bad combination for bombers). At least in terms of Battleships and BCs. Tengus are still largely untouched.

When looking at armor doctrines, due to the risk of perching with bombers that can be setup anywhere, the most viable platforms are the ones with a decent projection envelope. If I just sit in once place with my HIC 1 alt bubbling, then I'm at no risky of dying horribly. Finesse ships also become more risky to fly unless you rely on motoring around the field and not perching.

Don't get me wrong, I love the concept of bombers - the ability to wipe the floor with the ill-prepared through superior tactics and coordination is sexy to the max. However in practice they're quite effective in this role without any modicum of difficulty (or manpower). In their current state, Bombers simply excel in making combat stale.


not empty quoting.
AOSA
Atreidun Order
#908 - 2014-10-29 10:58:28 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Here are our latest updates to the plan.

Firstly and most significantly, the change to decloaking mechanics has been put on hold indefinitely. We are going to take some more time to work on the best way to have ships interact with cloakies and it's very possible that our eventual changes will be significantly different than what we talked about earlier. For now, cloaked ships will not decloak each other.

We're also going to be removing some of the earlier increase in signature radius and shifting it to a penalty on the bomb launcher itself. The T1 bomb launcher will add +10m signature radius and the T2 will add 12m.

We're increasing the capacity of the T2 bomb launcher to 300m3.

The Focused Void Bomb will have an explosion radius of 5000m, 1000m more than originally proposed.

Both the new bomb and new interdiction probe will be made available exclusively in the Syndicate LP store.

The new interdiction probe will be delayed slightly as we've run into some graphical issues with it that we'll need more time to properly fix.

We've sourced a lot of these changes from this thread, thanks to everyone who has been providing feedback.


Sounds great! These modification plus the original changes mentioned before should work well.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#909 - 2014-10-29 11:07:25 UTC
make bombs require a target lock, somehow. like other weapons, like other cloakies.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
5pitf1re
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#910 - 2014-10-29 11:15:10 UTC
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:
dephekt wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
dephekt wrote:
Quote:
We can't weather such a sharp subscriber loss right now and we can't afford to dedicate time to actually fix things the way we should, so here are some token changes instead.
FTFY


If this is the message that you're getting from Phoebe, then I'm afraid I can't do anything to help you. Lol

I like the jump drive changes and the fact sov is being reworked, but that's not here or there regarding the bomber and ISBoxer issue you guys are dodging and giving yourself breathing room on with these changes. If you don't see the problem with 1 user controlling 30 accounts simultaneously in PvP, then I'm afraid I can't do anything to help you.


Everyone can see that there is a problem with ISboxed bomber fleets and shield doctrines over at your null sov world. While you might be willing to sacrifice something you don't really care about because it happens to be outside your world, there are actually players that do care about bombers. Players that don't use lameass ISboxing software. Players that put a lot of time and effort in getting a successful bombrun organized.

You might not know or care but there is eve gameplay outside your null sov world. And what has happened here is that a lot of those people voiced their objection against sacrificing their gameplay in order to improve yours. And it appears that CCP actually seems to have an understanding and said: back to the drawing board. Because thats what you do if you realize your solution wasn't good enough. It doesn't mean the problem is gone or is never going to be solved.

I'm sorry throwing the gameplay of thousands of players down the drain in order to solve your problem a little faster didn't happen.



I suggest you reread what he wrote because nothing you just said makes any sense at all.
Pandoralica
DEFCON.
The Initiative.
#911 - 2014-10-29 11:18:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Pandoralica
Valentine Wiggin Wiggin wrote:

Congrats on caving to a bunch of spoiled whiners and their easy win button.


You seem to have a lack of understanding of what you are talking about.
He asked for feedback and good ideas in his first post and thats what he got, then he made a decision.
Being registered with your alt (atleast i hope for you its an alt) and talking **** about stuff you prolly dont even know much about is a level whining most people won't reach in years.

*edit: with these changes it will be very hard to bomb from more than one direction effectively without losing a lot of bombers (thats if hostiles brought ships that are capable of doing so)
there wont be any EASY wipe outs anymore but it might still be possible tho
Herrin Asura
Covert Operations Agency
#912 - 2014-10-29 11:22:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Herrin Asura
Guys, please stop being ridiculous.

Nearly all bomber pilots I know would accept a bomber nerf bc. we know that we're kind of OP atm.
But the cloak change was not the right way. CCP makes the life of all players better by implementing quality of life changes and this change would have been completley contrary to the way CCP is going the last few months.

This change wouldn't even be a nerf, we would have been able to handle this changes and still bomb like before. Bombing would have been more annoying, yes but not less effective.

We all know that a bomb nerf is incoming and I am happy that CCP changed their mind and thinks about better solutions to handle this problem.
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#913 - 2014-10-29 11:22:54 UTC
Ok so, the decloak changes were good, it meant that cloaky pilots had to coordinate effectively to do their job, and felt the risk of things going wrong. Sadly ccp has listened to the pilots who couldnt coordinate a pissup in a brewery and yet again made the game easier for newer pilots to take on those who have spent large amounts of time in this game perfecting skills for pvp. Grats.
Eddiie
Hooded Underworld Guys
Brotherhood of Spacers
#914 - 2014-10-29 11:34:47 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
How about you guys quit dancing around the elephant in the room and address ISBoxer already?

That's the crux behind about half of this thread.


^
Captain Creampie
Captain Creampie's Creamy Biscuits
#915 - 2014-10-29 11:37:43 UTC
thank god.

the decloaking thing was ********.

epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#916 - 2014-10-29 11:53:27 UTC
Thank you Fozzie for listening regarding changes to the decloaking mechanic, there was the potential for considerable collateral damage to many other areas of the game other than the effects on bombers, It would have resulted in a great deal of work to mitigate and otherwise consider those unintended effects, so a smart move.

Once again, thank you, and as a side note, the direction you seem to be going in overall, where there are no off limits for IMPROVING the overall health and activity of the game, is encouraging. Nice to see that just because something has always been, is no longer a reason to keep bad and painfully awkward mechanics (skill queue length etc).

I know I gave you a hard time with the wormhole Hyperion changes, I still believe unfortunate choices were made, but I am getting the impression, that you have other plans in mind to bring some life and vitality back to wormholes, I do hope so, you have many challenges and much work ahead of you in so many ways, please, remember to look back after your changes with an open mind.
Hopefully we will reach the desired goals, Devs and players together.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
August - Breeze
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#917 - 2014-10-29 11:54:20 UTC
Wow! This (among other reasons) is why people are unsubscribing. Bombers needed that nerf and CCP knew it. Now we are back to only 25% of the ships in the game being able to be flown in fleets. Battleships will now stay irrelevant. CCP buffed bombers instead of their stated nerf! Just WOW is CCP bad at understanding what is going on in game.

One of the main reasons everyone fly's the Ishtar and Tengu in null and ignore almost every other ship in the game is that they are hard to bomb.

I am unsubscribing my second account because I have no faith in CCP. o7
Grave Digger Eriker
Doomheim
#918 - 2014-10-29 12:07:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie,

Ban ISKBoxer tha'ts the problem not the bombers themselves. All this rubbish about buffing or nerfing bombers is not the problem.

Just use the EULA and ban all accounts that use ISBoxer.

Good luck to bombers bar they do a great job. The issue is 1 guy screwing entire fleets full of individuals!
Khiluale Zotakibe
Protection of Underground Resources
#919 - 2014-10-29 12:07:31 UTC
Sof0s wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Here are our latest updates to the plan.

Firstly and most significantly, the change to decloaking mechanics has been put on hold indefinitely. We are going to take some more time to work on the best way to have ships interact with cloakies and it's very possible that our eventual changes will be significantly different than what we talked about earlier. For now, cloaked ships will not decloak each other.

We're also going to be removing some of the earlier increase in signature radius and shifting it to a penalty on the bomb launcher itself. The T1 bomb launcher will add +10m signature radius and the T2 will add 12m.

We're increasing the capacity of the T2 bomb launcher to 300m3.

The Focused Void Bomb will have an explosion radius of 5000m, 1000m more than originally proposed.

Both the new bomb and new interdiction probe will be made available exclusively in the Syndicate LP store.

The new interdiction probe will be delayed slightly as we've run into some graphical issues with it that we'll need more time to properly fix.

We've sourced a lot of these changes from this thread, thanks to everyone who has been providing feedback.



The bold part is wrong why do you penalize the tech2 item more than the tech1, most bombers dont care about the reload time but will care about the signature penalty .


I'm guessing that it's to balance with the fact that after phoebe you will be able to carry 4 bombs instead of 3 in a T2 bomb launcher
Aram Kachaturian
Aram Pleasure Hub Holding
#920 - 2014-10-29 12:08:14 UTC
August - Breeze wrote:

I m unsubscribing my second account because I have no faith in CCP. o7



Good, stay away from us scrub demon. You werent ready for this game. I heard that the latest WoW patch is great.

Servant of the Secret League, Wielder of the Monocle Clubhouse Flame.