Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I think you failed to notice the word Stealth in the ship class name...

It has happened before (Freighter/JF changes, Advanced industry skill changes and I'm sure many others more) and I'm sure it will happen again.

@CCP Fozzie and team, thank you for listening to the considerations made regarding the cloak changes and going back on it until finding a better solution.

imo, stealth bomber balancing doesn't need to go through cloak changes (although I would like to see a solution that would allow bringing the "decloak the enemy with your own cloaked ship" without affecting the quality of life of cloaked fleets).

Possible balancing ideas:

- Give an explosion velocity attribute to bombs

- Reduce the bomb explosion radius

- Reduce the cap of simultaneous bombs being launched

Possible ideas for countering bombs:

- Create defensive tools to reduce bomb effectiveness (deployables with limitations similar to the mobile cyno inhibitors would be an idea, these could also be limited to be only effective against specific bomb types (see bomb variety idea below) so that they wouldn't become too OP)

- A module to detect active bomb launchers (something that would detect active bomb launchers on grid by a method like dscan fixed to a narrow angle)

Possible ideas to make larger hulls/shield fleets more viable:

- Create mass destabilizing bombs (affecting mostly armor and having their effect dampened by the shield buffer) and Shield Disruption bombs (affecting mostly shields but having low effect on armor), thus forcing bomber fleets to choose if they want to be more effective against shield or armor.

- Give BS/BC hulls a warp acceleration/deceleration buff (not speed, just acceleration/deceleration as that is one of the main factors why people don't use those more and without the constant bridging after phoebe this factor will be even more relevant).



Summing it up, although the needed balance might have to be through some degree of nerfing, I think it would be much more interesting to all parties involved (lazy scrub blobbers excluded) to have stealth bombers, BS fleets and shield fleets in general balanced more via adding options and variety to the game rather than taking options out of the game via extreme usage of the nerf bat.

P.S. - I know this is supposed to be a discussion only around stealth bomber balancing and that I derailed a little bit on the subject as I felt that there's some degree of interconnection with other areas of game play. My apologies for that.

P.S.² - Regarding the multiboxing controversy, all other factors aside, getting more accounts under the same customer ultimately makes it so that small group of customers have a bigger weight on revenue, thus increasing the risk revenue loss by losing a small group of customers (in a basic sense, don't put all eggs in one basket kind of theory).

Layman thoughts on Bomber rebalance.

I had thought that part of bomber rebalance would be to address AFK camping + ‘OP Isboxing by a single player’ that the following would be introduced…

Prototype Cloaks would remain as is, acting like camouflage which only works if you’re stationary has suitable counters already in game.

Covert Cloaks would ‘install’ a specialized bay on the fitted ship and consume Heavy Water.

Rational for Covert Cloak changes specialized bay. EVE has been moving in the direction with specialized bays in Mining, Hauling and Carrier ships, so there’s precedent. The specialized bay would be consumption, of Heavy Water for Covert Cloaks (Cyno = LO, Siege = Stront, Carrier/Blops = Isotopes, hence Covert Cloak = Heavy Water sticking to the ice belt theme).

Consumption rate would be minimal, allowing long deployments. To prevent 23/7 AFK camping it would consume a bay in 6 hours if you wanted to prevent “go to work cloaked” or 12 hours if EVE/CCP wanted to keep a day shift + night shift scenario possible.

By having consumption rate it adds to noticing in ‘Local’ when a possible cloaky has arrived. Requires refueling by ideally a Covert Frigate capable of carrying enough Heavy Water for say a Squad of 10. Alternatives obviously would include Blockade Runner cyno fit or the new industrial frigate Prospect (even give it a ‘Field Refiner’ skill). During refueling window it gives defenses a chance to scan out the resupply. There is also an alternative here to introduce a deployable (which could get counter camped).

On Bombers devastating Shield ships. Is Angular Velocity not an element in bomb damage? If it currently is not, but introduced, then speed tanked shield ships could cut both ways. Speeding into bombs increases damage, broadside would be standard, away would be mitigated. The argument that the Micro Jump Drive as unbearable Shield defense against bombers seems odd since Armor ships ‘lose’ a DPS mod usually to their tank mod, fair.

The element of Not de-cloaking cloaked ships by other cloaked ships in same Fleet should remain as it correlates with an FC being able to www his fleet which do so at the slowest ships warp speed to destination. We have at present the possibility to exempt from fleet warp now, so a covert fleet could also distinguish a ‘refueler’ (think Ship Maintenance Bay Astero/Nestor) holding HVY Water) not going to same desto as bombing squad.

AFAIK, one of the only things that doesn’t deplete through the use of capacitor or consumption that is used offensively is T1 Laser Ammo, even mining crystals take damage. With a Covert Cloak consumption/bay you separate ISBoxing mining from ISBoxing Bombing because even space rocks pop causing the miner to be at keyboard periodically just as the AFK ratter still has to time his anoms.

Again, layman’s thoughts, Ty,
Eo

Thank you Fozzie!

If your fleet gets hit with every wave of bombers, your fleet deserves every single explosion at least twice over. I don't care what your situation is.

That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.

Insta-canes == dead bombers

This shows a complete lack of adaptation. Either evolve, die (in spaceships), or go back to high sec.

Thank you for holding back the decloak others change. I do think that bombers still need a nerf but not this.

Because such an army of alts is very likely to be funded by real money and not paid for in isk.