Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

I completely agree. These should have been added back in 2013. Adding them now feels like you are micturating on a horse carcass that has already been beaten to death and burned.

Also, as trivial as it may be, will bombs generate killmails if I shoot them down? Because psychologically, you want to give people a tangible reward for being good at this role. A killmail will do that.

Or, give them some aspect that requires ship fitting skill, flying skill, or something. As it is now,it's going to be very much a keep at range on fleet anchor, pray no killmail-whoring pilot takes a shot at me, and then wait for bombs. Then push button and pray.

Additionally, I know you all think that this needs to be a module for more than one kind of destroyer, but we don't need these on Command Destroyers or T3D's. If you want some progression, have them fit on T1 Destroyers and Interdictors. Then add a Battlecruiser sized variant as well.

He's trolling you.

Dear all,

Buckle your seatbelts, because in 5 retardedly simple words i am going to storytell you a tiny thing that i only learned myself since i started flying with BB, so sit down and enjoy the experience of my 4-am-CCP-induced-self-hatred-fuelled-writing-extravaganza.

RIGHT.NOW.BOMBING.IS.UNDERWHELMING.

Now if we disregard everybody's personal / alliance interests, then everybody must admit:
Adding defender missiles , with the current state of bombing, would architect the demise of the whole idea of bombing, since it is already quite underwhelming. Ofc it might have not become as ludicrous as some say, but there are already tons and tons of ways to counter a bombing run that basically happens once in a lifetime, somewhere in the depths of New Eden...
People saying that bombs are OP..pls...bombs are retardedly far from OP. Also infiltrating a sufficiently-sized bomber fleet that is to at least try and achieve the "omg my 100 cane fleet was rekt by bombs" won't be easy from the begining, because of the microscopic fuel bays of BLOPs (but that is another story).


So all things aside, with an already niche role in eve, what would be the purpose to push it more down the drain?

I do encourage the new meta, since eve should never stagnate and stay in one place, in fact, it will never stay the same, BUT @CCP , please try to be impartial, and take into consideration both sides .
If this change is bout to happen, the only way to make peace is to add the defender missiles AND buff the SB or generally the whole SB entourage as already mentioned in one of the previous posts. Un-nerfing bombing is the most logical and fair set of events that one would expect from the devs. I even wanted to use the word "balanced" but lately it seems to be a taboo thing in Eve.

It's take it or leave it.

Conclusion: CCP, pls don't be hasty and already start posting defender missiles stats and vids on the YT channel, ready to launch it. Below the dfender missiles info, we are expecting bombing changes.

Excellent change and a nice way to make defender missiles and destroyers at the same time more useful, while encouraging battleship fleet again... I am a little sad to see bombing at 0 m/s go, though.

By the way, there are lost of posts here, such as Nova's or Chance Ravinne's, which argue removing some previous nerfs would balance this nerf. Make no mistake. While other changes related to bombing (warp speed, agility, fozsesov etc.) had indirect impacts on the position of bombing in meta, DICKs are a direct intervention on how they work. A possible agility or warp speed unnerf won't change anything in the ability to land these bombs, which is the challenge in the first place. If we desire bombing to have its fair place in meta, DICKs can only be balanced by direct buffs on them (reducing the flight time, increasing the amount of bombs you can explode at the same time, giving more damage options via t2 bombs, etc etc.).

Hound, Torps, Painter, blap the destroyers ( they'll have less guns in play because of defender turrets if I understand this correctly ), and that's the path clear for the bombing wave.

So wolfpack goes in first.


More people will be able to jump away from what I can see, unless they are scrammed AT THE SAME TIME as wolfpack does it's things on the destroyers.


It'll be tricky on both sides.


ECM Bomber Wave & Wolf Pack hit at same time. Dessies pop, and no-one can run. Defenders launch drones. If the Bomb-droppers can get in fast they'll nail the drones when the bombs go off.

Then general Whalers go in to do their thing.


Oooh, this won't be easy....


.


I'm new to Bombers, so if I've made a mistake just say so :)

Bringing my 2 posts together, in my fevered little newbie mind, I am seeing:


Defender haulers with Defender Dessie Escorts & Frigate 'Anti-bomber' Wings. Some drones too natch.


Someone like BB having to take that on using High Speed Wolfpack 'stuff', high speed ECM experts, Bombs, Whalers, and something anti-frigate too.

Hence the desire for a 3rd Cov Ops role deploying Rapid Light Launchers instead of Torps.


Even if you were shot down you wouldn't give a pap. That would be amazing to fly.


.


I'm of the opinion that little ships in swarms are where the cool kids are at.

Haha, what you write is very funny to read, but nope, not how those things work. Afaik the new launcher is supposed to not use up a weapon slot.
The only thing in your post that would be fun is more cov. ops ships. Sister of Eve thinking about making destroyers and battlecruisers? I'd love a rapid light cloaky other than the rapier, but i fear that could be too overpowered.

Before saying whether this might be good or bad, I want to know what problem this would solve or what gameplay this really opens up; then we can figure out if it's good or bad.

Also, why should it be restricted to destroyers?

Right now I'm just seeing it as an unnecessary thing, which doesn't really accomplish anything.

"Should we bring a Defender missile shield?"
"Do you think they're going to bomb us?"
"I doubt it."
"Yeah probably not. I'd rather bring more TP and dps."

The very questionable effectiveness is rather dissuading.



MAYBE, If the Defender missile system did cycle quickly and could shoot down missiles and damage bombs (so multiple missiles would destroy a bomb) then it might give the coverage required to be more reliable, and also a cool factor for throwing out a little swarm of anti-missile missiles (if one ship had multiple launchers) ... and cycling quickly instead of slowly, but then having a long reload time .... I think this style would have a cool factor and degree of reliability that might be compelling enough to try. Definitely multiple launchers per ship contributing to the missile/bomb defense of the fleet, and not a class restriction. If people want to put defender-missile-launchers on their battleships instead of heavy guns, let them!

Nope. :)


Correct.


Its nether. Its the reactivation delay like on a cloaking module.


They don't. But I think they probably could...what do you think?


The defender missile won't re-target another bomb. It will wander off into the distance like all missiles fired at something that is destroyed or leaves grid before the missile hits. Lost, and alone :(


Because I'm not at EDU :(


Variety in bombs is something we're looking at :)