These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Smartbomb tiericide: all sizes should do the same damage
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-06-04 21:40:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Change: increase medium and small smartbomb damage DPS to the same as large smartbombs now.

Now I know what you're thinking, you think making small smartbombs deal the same DPS as larges currently do would make frigates and destroyers overpowered. But would it really? Think about it. Yes, a smartbomb frigate or destroyer might out-DPS a turret one (not always), but small ship DPS is already really only major when in gangs, and with powerful smartbombs like that, they'll have to be extra careful not to kill each other. Consider this: battleship smartbomb damage is based around hitting frigates such as tacklers, and drones. It is balanced for attacking small targets, and it takes a considerable amount of smartbombs to really blap a frigate quickly.

So I'm thinking the only difference between smartbomb sizes offensively should be their blast radius. Battleships and capital ships will still be able to hit the largest number of targets with smartbombs, although a battleship can alternatively save a lot of powergrid and capacitor at the expense of range and go for a medium or small smartbomb.

edit: CW Itovuo brought it to my attention that giving frigates 300-damage smartbombs would allow a tackler to fit just 2 and blap a capsule. Because of this, I believe it would be important to greatly decrease the duration of medium and small smartbombs, with a corresponding decrease to the alpha. I would start with 63(tech 1) or 75(tech 2) damage for small, with a duration of 2.5 seconds. This leaves their alpha similar to before, but still increases their DPS.

Lastly, it would be nice if the capital ship smartbomb bug were fixed. For those of you who don't know: capital ships can take advantage of their large radius and gain a large smartbomb attack area around themselves. The bug is that the bump radius is smaller than the radius at which the smartbomb blast "begins", enabling them to attack with smartbombs at a greater radius than is listed in the smartbomb's info page. Along with fixing this, a capital smartbomb could be added with the same radius as or maybe a slightly larger radius than before, with the same damage as a large. This way, capital ships are not nerfed in their ability to hit a large area with smartbombs, but they will have to spend a significant amount of their capacitor and powergrid to get the maximum range.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Trin Javidan
Caymen Labs
#2 - 2014-06-04 21:50:20 UTC
Good idea!! proposing this for ages by now!!
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2014-06-05 00:43:15 UTC
Post a link to one of yours? I want to compare!

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Rowells
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2014-06-05 00:58:12 UTC
Would the cap use or fittings change for the smaller sizes?

And I believe it uses the model size for smart bombs rather than sig radius otherwise you might not be able to damage anything since you are bigger than your smart bomb blast area
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-06-05 01:16:13 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Would the cap use or fittings change for the smaller sizes?
I don't think so, but I have not yet ran any comparisons to see how they would pair up on larger ships.

Rowells wrote:
And I believe it uses the model size for smart bombs rather than sig radius
I think it might be based on model size, but it should be based on bump radius.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Trin Javidan
Caymen Labs
#6 - 2014-06-05 13:21:24 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=307274
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=179982

Just use the search function, jsut type in "smartbomb" and go back futher than 14 pages
Atram41
Doomheim
#7 - 2014-06-05 13:45:40 UTC
This won't work.

A destroyer with a fit totaling 2.2 million ISK market price could do 2000 alpha. They can get 4 of those cycles in while in a 0.5 system before CONCORD arrives. That's 8000 smartbomb damage per destroyer.

10 destroyers, totalling 22 million ISK, could smartbomb an entire fleet of Skiffs.
TheMercenaryKing
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#8 - 2014-06-05 13:47:28 UTC
ASB

Ancillary SmartBombs

nuff said.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2014-06-05 19:03:46 UTC
Atram41 wrote:
A destroyer with a fit totaling 2.2 million ISK market price could do 2000 alpha. They can get 4 of those cycles in while in a 0.5 system before CONCORD arrives. That's 8000 smartbomb damage per destroyer.
4 cycles would take 30 seconds. CONCORD doesn't take that long to arrive. If they did, a 10 mil Catalyst could kill a Mackinaw in highsec.

If the alpha is too high (and I'm thinking it is), then the rate of fire can be increased with a corresponding decrease in the damage.

Atram41 wrote:
10 destroyers, totalling 22 million ISK, could smartbomb an entire fleet of Skiffs.
22 million ISK barely covers ten destroyer hulls. And this entire fleet of Skiffs would have to be flying pretty close together. I know mining fleets sometimes gang up on each other like that but they don't have to, and the reason they're okay with it is because it's not much of a danger. If it were, they would simply disperse a bit.

I don't see a problem with increasing the mineral cost of small and medium smartbombs to the same as large. That would make a single destroyer with 8 tech I smartbombs cost around 10-15 million ISK I'm thinking off the top of my head. I haven't checked the prices on those lately but I'm probably in the ballpark.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#10 - 2014-06-05 19:53:41 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
[quote=Atram41]A destroyer with a fit totaling 2.2 million ISK market price could do 2000 alpha. They can get 4 of those cycles in while in a 0.5 system before CONCORD arrives. That's 8000 smartbomb damage per destroyer.
4 cycles would take 30 seconds. CONCORD doesn't take that long to arrive. If they did, a 10 mil Catalyst could kill a Mackinaw in highsec.

If the alpha is too high (and I'm thinking it is), then the rate of fire can be increased with a corresponding decrease in the damage.

I'm fairly sure a catty can gank a mack, just sayin'

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-06-05 23:59:58 UTC
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
I'm fairly sure a catty can gank a mack, just sayin'
Tanked? Not a chance.

With a fairly moderate tank consisting of balanced resists from shield hardeners and rigs, a tech 2 damage control, and a medium shield extender, a Mackinaw easily reaches over 35k EHP vs. hybrids. If a Catalyst with t2 neutron blasters, t2 mag stabs, damage rigs, Dread Guristas ammo, and overheated guns with a max skilled character were shooting the Mackinaw (EFT 604 DPS) and were making a huge string of perfectly wrecking shots (~900 DPS), it would take at least 40 seconds to take out the Mackinaw. Given that you don't even get 20 seconds, you aren't going to get that many wrecking shots, CONCORD will jam sometimes, and the lack of availability of small Dread Guristas antimatter ammo, it's pretty much unreasonable to assume even three catalysts can do it without being very lucky. Now those catalysts are each going to cost 15-20 mil minimum.

Now if the Mackinaw isn't tanked, that's a different story, and irrelevant as people who don't tank their ships when they are fully capable of doing so cheaply get what's coming to them.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#12 - 2014-06-06 00:46:22 UTC
not to mention, groups of destroyers smartbombing will likely kill each other before concord even gets a chance.

im cautious of the idea though.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#13 - 2014-06-06 00:55:05 UTC
The first wave of destroyers to get a cycle off annihilates everything around them. There won't be a second pulse...
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2014-06-06 01:09:30 UTC
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
ASB

Ancillary SmartBombs

nuff said.
I'm into the idea. I think they would work best by being able to pulse off more total damage than a typical ship could (with smartbombs) before it ran out of capacitor, and would damage at a higher rate while active, but would have a cooldown longer than a typical ship would need to recharge that capacitor.

Perhaps 25% more damage than tech 2 with the same duration (375 damage, 10s), runs for 6 cycles (45-60 seconds), same range as tech 1, and has a 2 minute cooldown. It also uses capacitor booster charges, but can run without them at 56.25% greater capacitor cost than a tech 2 smartbomb.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Zexy Jeffries
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#15 - 2014-08-15 13:41:32 UTC
I agree!! WIth the T2 ships buffs, including the ceptors, they can only be killed by rack of 7 racial sb's. It actualy nerfed smartbombs, so yes!
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2014-08-15 13:58:57 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Change: increase medium and small smartbomb damage to the same as large smartbombs now.

Now I know what you're thinking, you think making small smartbombs deal the same DPS as larges currently do would make frigates and destroyers overpowered. But would it really? Think about it. Yes, a smartbomb frigate or destroyer might out-DPS a turret one (not always), but small ship DPS is already really only major when in gangs, and with powerful smartbombs like that, they'll have to be extra careful not to kill each other. Consider this: battleship smartbomb damage is based around hitting frigates such as tacklers, and drones. It is balanced for attacking small targets, and it takes a considerable amount of smartbombs to really blap a frigate quickly.

So I'm thinking the only difference between smartbomb sizes offensively should be their blast radius. Battleships and capital ships will still be able to hit the largest number of targets with smartbombs, although a battleship can alternatively save a lot of powergrid and capacitor at the expense of range and go for a medium or small smartbomb.

Lastly, it would be nice if the capital ship smartbomb bug were fixed. For those of you who don't know: capital ships can take advantage of their large radius and gain a large smartbomb attack area around themselves. The bug is that the bump radius is smaller than the radius at which the smartbomb blast "begins", enabling them to attack with smartbombs at a greater radius than is listed in the smartbomb's info page. Along with fixing this, a capital smartbomb could be added with the same radius as or maybe a slightly larger radius than before, with the same damage as a large. This way, capital ships are not nerfed in their ability to hit a large area with smartbombs, but they will have to spend a significant amount of their capacitor and powergrid to get the maximum range.


stealth 'buff smartbomb so i can suicide macknaw fleets with catalysts' thread

no.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#17 - 2014-08-15 14:20:39 UTC
Or stealth "let me and my destroyer focused alts create an absolute field of death for anything but a bricktanked battleship or captial to land in my smartbomb trap o' doom" thread. If you use keep at range right on a gate or station, you could grid the bombs so tightly they would absolutly wreck anything landing in such a space.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Ix Method
Doomheim
#18 - 2014-08-15 14:58:14 UTC
Rather see them get the same range than damage tbh. Agree that the damage values of all are worth a look but this isn't a solution at all.

Travelling at the speed of love.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2014-08-15 21:05:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Ix Method wrote:
Rather see them get the same range than damage tbh. Agree that the damage values of all are worth a look but this isn't a solution at all.
The only time smartbombs do a lot of damage is when they are layered from several ships, overlapping each other. Destroyers can't afford to overlap smartbombs because they'll kill each other. Giving them the same damage as battleship smartbombs won't make destroyers into powerful smartbombers, it won't even make them fearful. It'll just make them viable.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2014-08-15 21:07:41 UTC
LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote:
stealth 'buff smartbomb so i can suicide macknaw fleets with catalysts' thread

no.
Even with the buff, it'd still be easier to get macks with blasters.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
12Next page