These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Bombers and Battleships

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Speedkermit Damo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2015-04-28 11:45:04 UTC
Tusker Crazinski wrote:
Zan Shiro wrote:
James Baboli wrote:

Remove sig entirely from the equation, and drop damage per bomb by 25%




slippery slope effect. Sig radius is universal to missiles as a whole. And ccp in many fixes has made all missiles the same. GMP,rigs, etc that exempted unguided now work for them as an example.


CCP removes this for bombs....they would have to remove it for all. And I can think of many cases where I'd happily give up 25% of my theoretical damage to lose sig radius dependency. As even a target slammed with web if sig low enough is still not getting premium returns on missile damage. edit: Vice guns. I don't ponder long and hard as to why if I know I will have web support out the wazoo why I'd favor bringing a blasterthron over a torp BS.

But thats me...applied damage > theoretical.


I'd also kindly request my TP and sig radius related skills SP invested back. As would many. "Well TP helps turrets" would be a line of crap to sell to the tourists really.


There is a core difference between bombs and missiles, one requires a brian.


Who is Brian? And what's he got to do with anything?

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#62 - 2015-04-28 14:23:08 UTC
I like the idea of halving the bomb EHP. Making it require a more sustained assault as opposed to just one press of an 'I win' button makes a lot more sense to me. It would certainly make the fight more of a challenge, instead of just an instant loss. And also give the defending fleet a chance, which would certainly promote the use of battleships again.

Or we can just stick to t3 and ishtars.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#63 - 2015-04-28 14:25:41 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Bombers are not much of an issue with armour battleship fleets. The issue isnt with battleships but with all sheild tanking ships. A good bombing run will rip the heart out of any shield doctrine you care to bring.


And how can we "unfuck" that? What penalty do we give to shield if not sigbloom? Or do we make bombs ignore sig radius and just outright murder anything small?
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#64 - 2015-04-28 16:01:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Zan Shiro
Frostys Virpio wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Bombers are not much of an issue with armour battleship fleets. The issue isnt with battleships but with all sheild tanking ships. A good bombing run will rip the heart out of any shield doctrine you care to bring.


And how can we "unfuck" that? What penalty do we give to shield if not sigbloom? Or do we make bombs ignore sig radius and just outright murder anything small?



Well....shield weakness shows up quick in some doctrines ghetto shield fit to get more damage mods on if spec'd armour by slot layout and stats. In for a penny in for a pound here really. Sometimes that pound is great damage output to own. That pound can also be the weaker tank that kills you faster.


For the true shield tankers....don't cluster up. Now the minmatar get the shaft here a bit since can be range limited (vice rokh) but when I flew rokhs in fleets if the call was made warp to player x, I warped + 30 at least. Range could be random fudge factored based on what was most common in fleet. As that is what fc could be calling warp to ranges on. But generally I found range not an issue with rokh's bonuses if the fudge factor off.

edit: then after landing I'd look at ov and adjust course to get away other people as well.

main thing was to not be in the cluster. From bomber flying I know how much clusters are loved. Bag you a few BS's in the run....you don't emo rage over the few that got away. I actually liked seeing this smarter game play. It restored some faith in humanity to see some knew something so simple can work out well for them.


Now case of gate jumps...you just take your chances here tbh. You trust scout gave good info to help the fc make a good decision.
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#65 - 2015-04-30 14:22:15 UTC
Show me the data. Bombs and bombers are not causing widespread mayhem. In fact i hardly see them around at all going over the kill-boards. Shield tanked or otherwise.

The biggest problem with shield tank is mid slots. They are just too dam useful to give up if you can get the tank in the lows.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.
Nalia White
Tencus
#66 - 2015-04-30 16:47:53 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Tabyll Altol wrote:



And i have seen titans without a support fleet, if your dumb enough you can do anything.

Do you even tryed to bomb a fleet ? It´s not that simple as you said.

And is btw one of the few option to counter a bigger blob. And i think we would need more of those options not less.

still -1


I've helped bomb some larger gangs, but never a full fleet.

I realize that this is one of the few effective forms of asymetric warfare, and respect it for that, but would prefer that such things be more reliant on inventiveness and novel approaches than stealth bomber runs hitting almost everything in a fleet if you get lucky enough and your enemy obliges.


so you say you have to be lucky and your enemy has to **** up for bombs to really wtfpwn. sounds fine to me.

Syndicate - K5-JRD

Home to few, graveyard for many

My biggest achievement
SGT FUNYOUN
Elysian Space Navy - 1st Fleet
#67 - 2015-04-30 19:14:39 UTC  |  Edited by: SGT FUNYOUN
A) There is no problem with bombs or bombers. Just whiny cry baby's whimpering because they lost their BS fleet.

BUT... Sure, let's fix them anyway...

Proximity decloaking, NO. Not only would that screw with every cloak in existence but would make them nearly useless.

Buffing Battleships... all for that actually.... except for BS Speed. I say NO to a heavy speed and agility buff on BS's. WHY? Because they are BIG. You want fast and quick turning, you have to fly a smaller ship. You want power and tank, fly a bigger ship... simple as that. Think about it like this... I fly exclusively Gallente, I have flown others and find I like Gallente the best as part of my personal play style... so my BS's can do nearly the speeds and turns that my BC's can do... why? Because Gallente ships were speed buffed in the updates last year and are no longer big slow lumbering behemoths. Compared to other classes of Gallente ships yes they are slow and lumbering.... but that is the point.

If you want fast and quick turning, you have to fly a ship that has a smaller mass. If you want epic power and lots if tank you have to fly a ship with a larger mass... and the trade off is faster = less power & more power = slower... there is no way around it as it is a simple law of basic physics. Inertia is a with witch a capital B when it comes to trying to slow down and turn a ship as big as a BS... there is simply no way around them being big slow lumbering giants... so no... NO SPEED OR AGILITY BUFF THAT MAKES BS'S OUTCLASS BC's... a SMALL buff to their speed and agility across the board would be nice... but not anything significant. Just enough to give the a higher edge against bombs.

Quite frankly the fact that your BS fleet got blasted to pieces by an 8 man team of SB's tells me you don't know how to properly fit your ships and you don't know how to keep on your toes either. Yes the bomb is an AoE weapon... LEAVE THE ONLY AoE WEAPON LEFT IN THE GAME ALONE!!!

You are the type of person who griped and whined... and are the reason TITANS ARE NOW AS USELESS AS A SECOND SET OF BUTT CHEEKS!!! I can fully sympathize with the fact that Titans were being over used as Blob-spankers and were obliterating entire blobs in one shot... I can see why this was frustrating people and I agree that making them more suited to attacking other caps and POS's was a good idea of sorts... but now they are just about useful for nothing more than mobile jump bridges.

So no, we don't want you to mess AT ALL with Stealth Bombers.... don't fudge around with cloaks either,... leave those 2 alone because any little tweak is going to absolutely destroy the entire ship type... if you are worried about BS's getting smoked by SB's and want a "fix" for a non-existent problem... buff the TANK and DPS of BS's... THAT way... you are not only NOT messing with SB'd and ticking everyone off by screwing up a perfect working ship type, but you are ALSO making it harder for SB's to destroy them in one shot, AND making BS's more useful as a fighting ship, AND making them more survivable against EVERYTHING and not just an SB blob.

Leave SB's alone, and buff the Tank and DPS of BS's... problem solved.

*** EDIT: BOMBS and cutting their EHP in half:

I can live with less DPS coming out of a bomb exploding... NO problem with that at all. Cutting it by 30-40% though may be a little better. But yes, as a Stealth Bomber pilot myself, I actually agree that the EHP coming out of a bomb right now is kind of ZOMGWTFBBQDPSBLEEPBLEEPDEAD!!! pwnge...so yes, make the BOMBS slightly less powerful if you must... but DO NOT change anything else about them... don't make them so that Defender missiles can kill them, as they are really slow and a pack of Defender missiles will be able to kill every bomb in the area in no time flat... DO NOT make them fly slower... and DO NOT make them have a SMALLER damage radius... there is no need for all that. Simply buff BS's DPS and TANK and decrease the DPS OUTPUT of the bombs themselves. Simple elegant solution. THERE IS NOTHING wrong with Stealth Bombers themselves... only that BOMBS can be nerfed a bit on output power and still be perfectly effective, and then the BS's TANK can be buffed a bit and make the bombs slightly less effective.

These changes do not take massive reprogramming of stats, it does not take gigantic amounts of rebalancing afterwards... and it serves both purposes easily. Some people want more survivable BS's some want less DPS out of bombs... don't mess with cloaks, don't mess with SB's... if anything... make SB's DE-cloak FASTER... so that they are recognizable on grid faster and can be caught, locked and shot more easily. If you REALLY need to mess with SB's... then that is the ONLY thing I think would be plausible. Decrease the time it takes for them to show up on grid after the pilot hits the de-cloak button so that the rest of the grid has that extra second or 2 to lock them up. Easiest, simplest, and least destructive adjustment possible.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#68 - 2015-04-30 22:35:52 UTC
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:
A) There is no problem with bombs or bombers. Just whiny cry baby's whimpering because they lost their BS fleet.

BUT... Sure, let's fix them anyway...

Proximity decloaking, NO. Not only would that screw with every cloak in existence but would make them nearly useless.

Buffing Battleships... all for that actually.... except for BS Speed. I say NO to a heavy speed and agility buff on BS's. WHY? Because they are BIG. You want fast and quick turning, you have to fly a smaller ship. You want power and tank, fly a bigger ship... simple as that. Think about it like this... I fly exclusively Gallente, I have flown others and find I like Gallente the best as part of my personal play style... so my BS's can do nearly the speeds and turns that my BC's can do... why? Because Gallente ships were speed buffed in the updates last year and are no longer big slow lumbering behemoths. Compared to other classes of Gallente ships yes they are slow and lumbering.... but that is the point.

If you want fast and quick turning, you have to fly a ship that has a smaller mass. If you want epic power and lots if tank you have to fly a ship with a larger mass... and the trade off is faster = less power & more power = slower... there is no way around it as it is a simple law of basic physics. Inertia is a with witch a capital B when it comes to trying to slow down and turn a ship as big as a BS... there is simply no way around them being big slow lumbering giants... so no... NO SPEED OR AGILITY BUFF THAT MAKES BS'S OUTCLASS BC's... a SMALL buff to their speed and agility across the board would be nice... but not anything significant. Just enough to give the a higher edge against bombs.

So, align times that just kiss the inside of 10s with all skills 5 is a good place? Glad we agree.



SGT FUNYOUN wrote:

Quite frankly the fact that your BS fleet got blasted to pieces by an 8 man team of SB's tells me you don't know how to properly fit your ships and you don't know how to keep on your toes either. Yes the bomb is an AoE weapon... LEAVE THE ONLY AoE WEAPON LEFT IN THE GAME ALONE!!!

Smartbombs.
Tell RnK that there is only one AoE weapon left. I dare you.

SGT FUNYOUN wrote:

So no, we don't want you to mess AT ALL with Stealth Bombers.... don't fudge around with cloaks either,... leave those 2 alone because any little tweak is going to absolutely destroy the entire ship type... if you are worried about BS's getting smoked by SB's and want a "fix" for a non-existent problem... buff the TANK and DPS of BS's... THAT way... you are not only NOT messing with SB'd and ticking everyone off by screwing up a perfect working ship type, but you are ALSO making it harder for SB's to destroy them in one shot, AND making BS's more useful as a fighting ship, AND making them more survivable against EVERYTHING and not just an SB blob.

Leave SB's alone, and buff the Tank and DPS of BS's... problem solved.


The exemplars of the weapon systems that are in line with the progression, blasters and beams, don't need any more DPS. Everything else probably needs a slight buff to make them fit the curve established by small and medium guns (more than slight in the case of projectiles, but still not huge).

Tank, 15-20% increase is good, and more than does it.

But what really kills the BS is the avionics being absolute crap on most ships.


SGT FUNYOUN wrote:

*** EDIT: BOMBS and cutting their EHP in half:

I can live with less DPS coming out of a bomb exploding... NO problem with that at all. Cutting it by 30-40% though may be a little better. But yes, as a Stealth Bomber pilot myself, I actually agree that the EHP coming out of a bomb right now is kind of ZOMGWTFBBQDPSBLEEPBLEEPDEAD!!! pwnge...so yes, make the BOMBS slightly less powerful if you must... but DO NOT change anything else about them... don't make them so that Defender missiles can kill them, as they are really slow and a pack of Defender missiles will be able to kill every bomb in the area in no time flat... DO NOT make them fly slower... and DO NOT make them have a SMALLER damage radius... there is no need for all that. Simply buff BS's DPS and TANK and decrease the DPS OUTPUT of the bombs themselves. Simple elegant solution. THERE IS NOTHING wrong with Stealth Bombers themselves... only that BOMBS can be nerfed a bit on output power and still be perfectly effective, and then the BS's TANK can be buffed a bit and make the bombs slightly less effective.

These changes do not take massive reprogramming of stats, it does not take gigantic amounts of rebalancing afterwards... and it serves both purposes easily. Some people want more survivable BS's some want less DPS out of bombs... don't mess with cloaks, don't mess with SB's... if anything... make SB's DE-cloak FASTER... so that they are recognizable on grid faster and can be caught, locked and shot more easily. If you REALLY need to mess with SB's... then that is the ONLY thing I think would be plausible. Decrease the time it takes for them to show up on grid after the pilot hits the de-cloak button so that the rest of the grid has that extra second or 2 to lock them up. Easiest, simplest, and least destructive adjustment possible.

The concept is sound. The implementation needs serious work to bring it to a reasonable place, which is what this thread seems to be about. People were spitballing ideas so they could be shot down if bad, or tweaked until good if a good concept.

As for decreasing time to show up, it is allegedly the tick they decloak.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp