These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Strategic Bombers

Author
Hakiri Saisima
Victory or Whatever
Pen Is Out
#1 - 2017-06-04 14:23:35 UTC
maybe with the new bomb ideas people are suggesting, having a ship that is more useful in a large fleet fight situation instead of a stealth bomber, maybe a dedicated strategic bomber, like can fit 3 bomb launchers and 3 torp launchers but not covops, battlecruiser class, bonuses to anti capital/focused bomb types, faster than normal BC's, less tankier than normal bc's but better agility and speed

Basically a stealth bomber, that isnt stealthy, can drop more bombs and is more useful in capital fights, say against fax wings, launching 3 focused void bombs at 3 different faxes to disrupt logi for capitals

would kind of help the Faxes in WH's problem if implemented soundly, especially with new bomb type ideas.

fitting style as below maybe

6 Highslots

3 Launcher slots, can fit torp launchers

can fit 3 bomb launchers

4 High slots

4 Low slots

2 Rig slots


maybe introduce new rigs that give bonuses to bomb launchers (cycle and cooldown times maybe), or just a role bonus to decrease cooldown / cycle time for bomb launchers

suggestions or similar ideas maybe
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2017-06-04 14:34:14 UTC
Why should it be easier to delete entire fleets?
Cade Windstalker
#3 - 2017-06-04 15:03:47 UTC
Stealth Bombers are already ridiculously useful in capital fights, and in fact their usefulness goes up the larger the fight gets.

Something like this is really not needed.
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#4 - 2017-06-05 06:41:55 UTC
That's not what "strategic bomber" means. Strategic bombers are intended to destroy cities/industry/etc far from the battlefield, they aren't just bigger versions of tactical bombers. The EVE equivalent would be a stealth bomber variant that traded its conventional weapons for anti-citadel weapons capable of destroying a citadel with a single shot. And, while the MAD situation would certainly be entertaining until some troll decided to end the world for lols, I don't think that's something we really want in EVE.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2017-06-05 16:58:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Elyia Suze Nagala
I've proposed Strategic/tactical Bombers before too.

My idea was for high slots: 2 bomb launchers, 2 torpedo launchers (RoF nerfed slightly), 1 utility slot and no covert cloaks. The ship would be frigate sized, based off SB hulls, but would have a much reduced agility and max speed compared to the stealth bomber variants. It would also have stronger repair bonuses and either destroyer strength shield or armor base HP. So basically they could tank just long enough to maybe get one round of bombs off before getting caught, but theyd do twice the damage. If the pilot was talented he might pull a bomb run off and get out alive, but he can't warp in or out cloaked. So, maybe set a trap with them?? These would likely draw in major attention because of the high threat, but like I said twice the risk twice the damage, maybe it's a wash? Yes, no, maybe?

It was emediately shot down. Must sound too over power, or not worth the Isk to risk ratio I guess. Either way there are other priorities for development in the near future.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2017-06-05 17:03:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Elyia Suze Nagala
Danika Princip wrote:
Why should it be easier to delete entire fleets?


More tears?!?

Maybe nerf the strength of bombs some or develop more specific sized launchers? Tactical/Strategic bombers could use heavy bomb launchers while stealths use lights. Heavies have lower RoF, more damage, and long reloads, while lights are faster, less damage, and quicker reloads?
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2017-06-05 17:09:57 UTC
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Why should it be easier to delete entire fleets?


More tears?!?

Maybe nerf the strength of bombs some or develop more specific sized launchers? Tactical/Strategic bombers could use heavy bomb launchers while stealths use lights. Heavies have lower RoF, more damage, and long reloads, while lights are faster, less damage, and quicker reloads?



So...why should it be easier to delete entire fleets? A bomb that does more damage does not make it harder to delete entire fleets, even if there's a cooldown on it.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2017-06-05 17:41:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Elyia Suze Nagala
Danika Princip wrote:
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Why should it be easier to delete entire fleets?


More tears?!?

Maybe nerf the strength of bombs some or develop more specific sized launchers? Tactical/Strategic bombers could use heavy bomb launchers while stealths use lights. Heavies have lower RoF, more damage, and long reloads, while lights are faster, less damage, and quicker reloads?



So...why should it be easier to delete entire fleets? A bomb that does more damage does not make it harder to delete entire fleets, even if there's a cooldown on it.


Okay to be fair, I did not intend to sound like I was advocating for new "more powerful" bombs to be added. "Heavy bombs" can be the same strength as the current bombs in game ATM, "light bombs" can be a "new" class of bombs, let's say half the strength of current bombs.. or whatever. I'm not even saying that's needed, but it's just a thought.

What about a spool up timer? Stealth bombers could get a trait bonus/reduction and remain mostly unchanged, while heavy bombers get an increase/penalty. This could give the fleet staring down the barrel time to react, be warp off, attack the bomber(s), or chance a miss, or tank the damage.

Or, maybe, tweak current bomb stats, weaken the DPS, but add DPS strength bonuses to certain ship classes.

I'm trying to make his idea feasible here in someway, not just shooting it down and abandoning it without any thought.

That's easy, trying make an idea work and be viable, that's hard.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2017-06-05 17:55:09 UTC
So let me get this straight. There is a possible problem (faxes in w-space) so we need a brand new class of ship to deal with this problem?

If I have summarized this correctly this is a very bad suggestion. There would be nothing to keep this “solution” from getting out into other parts of space and being used there and creating unforeseen balance issues.

Here is a good rule to try and live by, when fixing a problem….don’t make a whole bunch of new ones in the process.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#10 - 2017-06-05 18:38:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Elyia Suze Nagala
Teckos Pech wrote:
So let me get this straight. There is a possible problem (faxes in w-space) so we need a brand new class of ship to deal with this problem?

If I have summarized this correctly this is a very bad suggestion. There would be nothing to keep this “solution” from getting out into other parts of space and being used there and creating unforeseen balance issues.

Here is a good rule to try and live by, when fixing a problem….don’t make a whole bunch of new ones in the process.


Lol, isn't this the story of CCPs life? Look at Tactical Destroyers, or Excavator Drones. Look at every time they've tried balancing something, or introduce something new only to have players take advantage of it and then boom, new update, new nerf, etc.

Who said it's a problem? There's no problem. It's called diversification, creation, evolution, sandbox, whatever! You guys loose your minds every time something new get proposed instead of being useful to the process. Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order and everything becomes chaos... oh why haven't you goons figured this out yet? Didn't an eviction teach you this? Since when have you guys really worried about loosing fleets? Maybe you wouldn't have lost your space if you had some of these ships!

Woah, lol there's a rant.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2017-06-05 18:43:27 UTC
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
So let me get this straight. There is a possible problem (faxes in w-space) so we need a brand new class of ship to deal with this problem?

If I have summarized this correctly this is a very bad suggestion. There would be nothing to keep this “solution” from getting out into other parts of space and being used there and creating unforeseen balance issues.

Here is a good rule to try and live by, when fixing a problem….don’t make a whole bunch of new ones in the process.


Lol, isn't this the story of CCPs life? Look at Tactical Destroyers, or Excavator Drones. Look at every time they've tried balancing something, or introduce something new only to have players take advantage of it and then boom, new update, new nerf, etc.

Who said it's a problem? There's no problem. It's called diversification, creation, evolution, sandbox, whatever! You guys loose your minds every time something new get proposed instead of being useful to the process. Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order and everything becomes chaos... oh why haven't you goons figured this out yet? Didn't an eviction teach you this? Since when have you guys really worried about loosing fleets? Maybe you wouldn't have lost your space if you had some of these ships!

Woah, lol there's a rant.


This is not evolution. Evolution is a process of change and emergence, what this is just dropping something fully formed into the game.

Yes, look at CCP and the stuff they've done and take warning. Sheesh. You see all that and yet here you are in your overbearing hubris.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2017-06-05 19:08:00 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
So let me get this straight. There is a possible problem (faxes in w-space) so we need a brand new class of ship to deal with this problem?

If I have summarized this correctly this is a very bad suggestion. There would be nothing to keep this “solution” from getting out into other parts of space and being used there and creating unforeseen balance issues.

Here is a good rule to try and live by, when fixing a problem….don’t make a whole bunch of new ones in the process.


Lol, isn't this the story of CCPs life? Look at Tactical Destroyers, or Excavator Drones. Look at every time they've tried balancing something, or introduce something new only to have players take advantage of it and then boom, new update, new nerf, etc.

Who said it's a problem? There's no problem. It's called diversification, creation, evolution, sandbox, whatever! You guys loose your minds every time something new get proposed instead of being useful to the process. Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order and everything becomes chaos... oh why haven't you goons figured this out yet? Didn't an eviction teach you this? Since when have you guys really worried about loosing fleets? Maybe you wouldn't have lost your space if you had some of these ships!

Woah, lol there's a rant.


This is not evolution. Evolution is a process of change and emergence, what this is just dropping something fully formed into the game.

Yes, look at CCP and the stuff they've done and take warning. Sheesh. You see all that and yet here you are in your overbearing hubris.


😁 Lolz
SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#13 - 2017-06-05 19:14:32 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:


This is not evolution. Evolution is a process of change and emergence, what this is just dropping something fully formed into the game.



I see what you're getting at, but calling this flipper-baby of an idea "fully formed" is a little charitable, don't you think?

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2017-06-05 19:44:15 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


This is not evolution. Evolution is a process of change and emergence, what this is just dropping something fully formed into the game.



I see what you're getting at, but calling this flipper-baby of an idea "fully formed" is a little charitable, don't you think?


Well...how about fully formed abomonation?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#15 - 2017-06-05 20:43:26 UTC
While the OP idea here is horribly broken (we're trying to encourage capital fights these days and knowing that bombs are waiting will just leave them docked), I must say that deleting anchored fleets is a good thing. Players should pilot their own ships. If they're anchored, they're just F1 monkeys and they deserve to get bombed into oblivion.

Perhaps a guided bomb that does damage based on how many ships are within 3km. Make it a cruiser utility high slot module, and anchor fleet strategies of every sort will disappear overnight! Say for example the damage gets to be troublesome around 5 ships within 3km. 10 ships and you can probably kiss your hind quarters goodbye.

I'm kind of trolling, but kind of not. I hate anchoring.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2017-06-06 00:41:29 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:
While the OP idea here is horribly broken (we're trying to encourage capital fights these days and knowing that bombs are waiting will just leave them docked), I must say that deleting anchored fleets is a good thing. Players should pilot their own ships. If they're anchored, they're just F1 monkeys and they deserve to get bombed into oblivion.

Perhaps a guided bomb that does damage based on how many ships are within 3km. Make it a cruiser utility high slot module, and anchor fleet strategies of every sort will disappear overnight! Say for example the damage gets to be troublesome around 5 ships within 3km. 10 ships and you can probably kiss your hind quarters goodbye.

I'm kind of trolling, but kind of not. I hate anchoring.


Seriously, why in what ever millennia we're in are bombs still "dumb fire", wait, wait, i know, game play... guided bombs with a several thousand meter explosion/splash radius makes some sense though.
grgjegb gergerg
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#17 - 2017-06-06 03:51:00 UTC
That's why I posted this one: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6952173

Not bigger bombs, or more bombs, but weirder bombs. Like one bomb for each weapons system that decreases damage in an area, or bombs used to kill asteroid belts after sneaking into enemy industrial systems. Or even PVE bombs... does anyone actually use bombs in PVE?
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2017-06-06 10:01:19 UTC
grgjegb gergerg wrote:
That's why I posted this one: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6952173

Not bigger bombs, or more bombs, but weirder bombs. Like one bomb for each weapons system that decreases damage in an area, or bombs used to kill asteroid belts after sneaking into enemy industrial systems. Or even PVE bombs... does anyone actually use bombs in PVE?


That's a good question... so many mission rats spawn in close proximity to each other. I'm mean there are the obvious security restrictions on where you can use them, but still.
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#19 - 2017-06-06 13:38:31 UTC
Has anyone considered doing a bomb run with several bombers on Drifters when their over-shield are about to pop? I mean if you warp off and there's no one else on grip when the bombs hit what can they DD? Even if the DDed a bomber who cares their cheap. I don't know how the mechanics of Drifters work though, never had anything to do with them, so this maybe impossible.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#20 - 2017-06-06 15:36:30 UTC
grgjegb gergerg wrote:
Or even PVE bombs... does anyone actually use bombs in PVE?


Machs with smartbombs make very effective ratting ships :)