These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Phoebe] Stealth Bombers

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#841 - 2014-10-29 02:02:11 UTC
Elise Randolph wrote:

Adding complexity for the sake of it adjusts the effectiveness-easiness scale, which is really the only thing plaguing them at the moment.


okay, effectiveness vs armor/shields isn't an issue at all you're right Roll

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Sl8er13
The Fork
Clever Use of Neutral Toons
#842 - 2014-10-29 02:04:20 UTC
Masterkiller Mechanics wrote:
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
Mrs Comfortable wrote:
Bombers remain OP, nothing to see here.

That 15 players can basically remove BS from fleet fights is lame.

Might as well bring tracking titans back its that level of lame.

Bring some support ships with your BS. How dam hard is it to field a few AFs or destroyers or whatever. They really are glass cannons. You practically instaspolode. Oh and how exactly would the cloak thing change torp strategy? Bombing runs on something like a real fight is hard.

If it so easy. Show me ..I will check your killboard at the end of the week.


You have never seen 100+ Dominix die instantly when you land on a gate have you....


Sounds like a classic Rooks and Kings Pipebomb, just need more BS to break the armor hp
Zverofaust
Ascetic Virtues
#843 - 2014-10-29 02:06:35 UTC
Incredibly disappointed. More experienced and skilled wordsmiths have explained why better than I ever could, but I feel this change was needed. I love wheniammzi as much as anyone but erasing entire fleets of enemy shis is simply too easy at the moment and the pressure of that fact has had a huge effect on the meta. That fight a couple of weeks ago in which almost 800 tengus faced off from a half dozen different fleets should have been a wakeup call that **** is getting ridiculous.

I don't know the best way to do it but the announced changes seemed to be on the right track -- not so much a nerf as simply requiring mote effort, organization and planning to wield the horrific power that bombers undeniably hold.

I'd hoped like many that ccp was serious about revolutionizing the game with huge changes but this really hits me in the feels.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#844 - 2014-10-29 02:10:39 UTC
Way to **** the bed CCP

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#845 - 2014-10-29 02:11:31 UTC
Zverofaust wrote:
Incredibly disappointed. More experienced and skilled wordsmiths have explained why better than I ever could, but I feel this change was needed. I love wheniammzi as much as anyone but erasing entire fleets of enemy shis is simply too easy at the moment and the pressure of that fact has had a huge effect on the meta. That fight a couple of weeks ago in which almost 800 tengus faced off from a half dozen different fleets should have been a wakeup call that **** is getting ridiculous.

I don't know the best way to do it but the announced changes seemed to be on the right track -- not so much a nerf as simply requiring mote effort, organization and planning to wield the horrific power that bombers undeniably hold.

I'd hoped like many that ccp was serious about revolutionizing the game with huge changes but this really hits me in the feels.


wheniaminspace and ammzi have both posted in this thread telling you why this change didn't really change their ability to bomb effectively with isboxer
in fact both of the previous people have argued in favour of banning the use of isboxer with bombing instead

everyone agrees isboxing bombing is completely out of control but that nerf wasn't going to effect to even nearly the same extent it would have classic bombing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Nauclerus Serpens
Provi Rapid Response
#846 - 2014-10-29 02:13:11 UTC
An ill prepared bs fleet will have a bad day against a well prepared fleet with a bomber wing. Bring logi. Bring destroyers to shoot the bombs. You have twelve seconds. Or is that too hard? What else? Nerf logi? Nerf teamwork and a good fc? Thanks fozzie forllistening.
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#847 - 2014-10-29 02:16:10 UTC  |  Edited by: SFM Hobb3s
I had high hopes we would start seeing a resurgence of battleship doctrines as a result of the original plan. Emphasis on Had...as in, no longer.

How bout this: Make bombs weak enough that a single bomb can only tank one other bomb. This way, if you want to destroy a whole fleet with just bombs, you'll require to do it in several volleys, not just all at once.
Vesperi Kobra
Outfit 418
Blue Loot Not Included
#848 - 2014-10-29 02:17:44 UTC
Capqu wrote:
Zverofaust wrote:
Incredibly disappointed. More experienced and skilled wordsmiths have explained why better than I ever could, but I feel this change was needed. I love wheniammzi as much as anyone but erasing entire fleets of enemy shis is simply too easy at the moment and the pressure of that fact has had a huge effect on the meta. That fight a couple of weeks ago in which almost 800 tengus faced off from a half dozen different fleets should have been a wakeup call that **** is getting ridiculous.

I don't know the best way to do it but the announced changes seemed to be on the right track -- not so much a nerf as simply requiring mote effort, organization and planning to wield the horrific power that bombers undeniably hold.

I'd hoped like many that ccp was serious about revolutionizing the game with huge changes but this really hits me in the feels.


wheniaminspace and ammzi have both posted in this thread telling you why this change didn't really change their ability to bomb effectively with isboxer
in fact both of the previous people have argued in favour of banning the use of isboxer with bombing instead

everyone agrees isboxing bombing is completely out of control but that nerf wasn't going to effect to even nearly the same extent it would have classic bombing



In classic bombing you have 1 person per ship and they can warp at distance and burn to where they need to be. When you control 40 it is hard to do them all that way but hitting fleet warp it **** easy.
Aivlis Eldelbar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#849 - 2014-10-29 02:20:59 UTC
Just dropping by to thank CCP Fozzie and the rest of the devs involved for listening to us and deciding that forcing covops pilots to dance around fleetmates they can't see wasn't a great idea after all. I had almost lost faith Big smile
Rebnok
Dependable Delinquents
Fraternity.
#850 - 2014-10-29 02:22:03 UTC
So why was my AEO DD taken away again? Too easy for one dude to wipe out an entire fleet?
Bisba
Teddybears.
#851 - 2014-10-29 02:23:17 UTC
Rebnok wrote:
So why was my AEO DD taken away again? Too easy for one dude to wipe out an entire fleet?


This is so true!
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#852 - 2014-10-29 02:25:12 UTC
Vesperi Kobra wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Zverofaust wrote:
Incredibly disappointed. More experienced and skilled wordsmiths have explained why better than I ever could, but I feel this change was needed. I love wheniammzi as much as anyone but erasing entire fleets of enemy shis is simply too easy at the moment and the pressure of that fact has had a huge effect on the meta. That fight a couple of weeks ago in which almost 800 tengus faced off from a half dozen different fleets should have been a wakeup call that **** is getting ridiculous.

I don't know the best way to do it but the announced changes seemed to be on the right track -- not so much a nerf as simply requiring mote effort, organization and planning to wield the horrific power that bombers undeniably hold.

I'd hoped like many that ccp was serious about revolutionizing the game with huge changes but this really hits me in the feels.


wheniaminspace and ammzi have both posted in this thread telling you why this change didn't really change their ability to bomb effectively with isboxer
in fact both of the previous people have argued in favour of banning the use of isboxer with bombing instead

everyone agrees isboxing bombing is completely out of control but that nerf wasn't going to effect to even nearly the same extent it would have classic bombing



In classic bombing you have 1 person per ship and they can warp at distance and burn to where they need to be. When you control 40 it is hard to do them all that way but hitting fleet warp it **** easy.


no. in one person per ship bombing you have to communicate distances and vectors for every pilot and update on the fly with players joining/leaving the fleet

with one person 8 ships bombing you use pre set distances per client and bomb as normal, was tested and it was very easy to do on sisi

the above combined with the knowledge of the position of your entire cloaked fleet without the need to communicate, perfectly synchronised bomb waves & warpouts and the ability to have a full wave of bombers on demand was going to be the death of non-isboxed bombers. many of us would prefer the opposite

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
DNSBLACK
Dirt Nap Squad
#853 - 2014-10-29 02:31:05 UTC
Why not make it this then

1. Fit a bomb launcher on a bomber you cant warp cloaked. This seems to be the thinking with our so OP Black Ops BS LOL.

2. Fit bomb launchers your sig goes up

3. Allow bomber to load torp or cruise missles.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#854 - 2014-10-29 02:32:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Primary This Rifter
CCP refuses to even discuss ISBoxer.

Any mention of their recent behavior gets you an official forum warning for rumor mongering, despite of course the fact that any post that isn't rumor mongering in their eyes would be violating the EULA for posting GM correspondence.

We know what you're doing. Stop pretending you're not doing it.

Edit: This post isn't rumor mongering since I didn't say what you were doing.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#855 - 2014-10-29 02:34:17 UTC
Rebnok wrote:
So why was my AEO DD taken away again? Too easy for one dude to wipe out an entire fleet?

It was taken away because we did not like it.

:sun:

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Langbaobao
Tr0pa de elite.
#856 - 2014-10-29 02:35:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Langbaobao
Elise Randolph wrote:
I like the idea of making bombing more skill intensive, and your solution seems to solve a problem, but I'll be the first to admit that when it comes to game design changes I'd make a terrible game designer. I think pretty much everyone who posts on the forums suffers from the same ailment. I mean if I had it my way, caps wouldn't have jump fatigue and titans would have DDs 3x as strong, and able to fit 7 of them. So long capital proliferation! If a fight like b-r were to happen, then basically every active supercap in the game would be down for the count. Hilarious? Definitely. A sensible game design decision? Let's just say you won't be seeing "CCP HazedScrub" anytime soon.

I think nobody is really arguing that bombers are fine right now - we all recognize that they're too strong and have been for awhile. Same is true about tons of stuff in the game, though, and I'm fine with that. It gives the game flavor. But it's very frustrating as a player to see the issue addressed, mechanics reversed to a time when bombing wasn't considered broken, and then just having all that that chucked in the trash and tabled for a later date at the last minute. But I mean, there's this new TSwift album out so I'll get over the :smith:.


Exactly. And to disapprove the notion that bombing was not a thing before bombers got the cloaking buff a few years ago, I'd like to point to the fight that occurred UB-UQZ, 2012-01-05 18:59 - 22:04 (posted this way because of the ridiculous restrictions on posting KB links on EVEO forums, you will have to look it up yourself on eve-kill) where I participated and in which we massacred 2.5 consecutive waves of CFC Alpha Maelstroms.

What changed with the cloaking buff is that it made things much easier to automate because of the reduced chance of being decloaked during positioning, which usually results in having to reposition and start from scratch. Before to do a successful positioning a more intensive preparation was needed and using something like isboxer was much more difficult because each bomber/client had to have a different warpin distance which could sometimes change depending on the situation. That is not a problem when you've got 40 dudes at the keyboard because each one of them can do that easily for their own client. However doing it for isboxed clients it's much more difficult and time consuming because you have to fiddle with each one of them. For maximum success one had to get into the system 30-45 min before, and make bookmarks on the various perches for every bomber. It was also more prone to player mistake because if one warped wrong there was a good chance of decloaking someone else in your bomber wing. In general a minimum of training was necessary to do things right and people at the keyboard were necessary to do things right.

With the advent of the cloak buff a lot of things changed. Automation of bomber control with isboxer became a trivial thing, and worse it made using isboxer much more efficient compared to using living, breathing people, because you don't have to train them to work in a fleet and you reduce the chance of player mistake considerably. The cloaking buff also made positioning trivial. Before you had to take into account the spatial disposition of your fleet, the bombers needed to be spread over a wide area to prevent them decloaking each other. Now? Just warp them all into a single point in space, no need to worry about anything. You can just make a ping on the spot and you will be bombing as efficiently as if you had prepared everything before the fight meticulously.

In conclusion, taking into account my experience before and after the cloaking buff, I think I can reasonably well say that the cloaking buff has made bombers pretty much OP because it removed the intrinsic limitations that did not allow for its automation with isboxer. This in turn has made BC and BS shield fleets essentially obsolete, as Elise has explained already.

TL;DR So instead of a well deserved nerf bombers are actually getting an overall buff to the already OP abilities they have.
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#857 - 2014-10-29 02:49:09 UTC
Why don't CCP just reduce the radius of the bombs doing damage, from 15 km to 5 km or something along those lines.
I liked the idea someone else came up with of bomb launchers being a targeted module too.
Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
Seraphim Division
#858 - 2014-10-29 02:56:37 UTC
The issue with bombers isn't bombers and how they work now. It's ISboxer. The changes detailed in this thread by CCP are a terrible way of dealing with ISboxer indirectly. Unfortunately as several ISboxing bombers have pointed it, it's only going to further alienate conventional bombers in favor of ISboxer bombers.
Sister Bliss
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#859 - 2014-10-29 03:00:45 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Here are our latest updates to the plan.

Firstly and most significantly, the change to decloaking mechanics has been put on hold indefinitely. We are going to take some more time to work on the best way to have ships interact with cloakies and it's very possible that our eventual changes will be significantly different than what we talked about earlier. For now, cloaked ships will not decloak each other.

We're also going to be removing some of the earlier increase in signature radius and shifting it to a penalty on the bomb launcher itself. The T1 bomb launcher will add +10m signature radius and the T2 will add 12m.

We're increasing the capacity of the T2 bomb launcher to 300m3.

The Focused Void Bomb will have an explosion radius of 5000m, 1000m more than originally proposed.

Both the new bomb and new interdiction probe will be made available exclusively in the Syndicate LP store.

The new interdiction probe will be delayed slightly as we've run into some graphical issues with it that we'll need more time to properly fix.

We've sourced a lot of these changes from this thread, thanks to everyone who has been providing feedback.


I'm happy to see the reversal of the proposed decloak changes as that was a very ugly tactical fix indeed, however I really hope you prioritise balancing of bombs as a matter of urgency. That this has gone untouched for a number of years is really staggering.

It's no coincidence that the variety of ships being flown in 0.0 has been reduced massively to a fraction due to the overwhelming impact of bombers. This even prior to the emergence of Isboxing was an issue which needed addressing as even the most hapless of bomber FC's can wing warp a 2/4-wave daisy cutter onto a hostile fleet and destroy it with relative ease.

I see claims about how much skill bomber FCing requires, but really it doesn't. I also see claims about the ease of negating the bomb threat with bubbles or fast lockers etc. In practise this can usually be overcome in all but the most extreme of situations (where the grid is impregnable).

I feel a great sense of hypocrisy in writing this as I love the principles of bombing and the experience of wiping out entire fleets at a stroke, but on balance I don't think it is good for the game. Remember that most people play to want to have a fight and have fun. There is more than enough tedious preamble in getting to the point where a fight is actually going to happen, only for the potential for it to last < 60 seconds. This does not feel like good game design.

There also seems on occasion to be a sense of entitlement in the bombing community to a right to be able to destroy whole fleets on a whim with very little risk involved on their part unless draconian and impractical countermeasures are employed by their opponent. Imagine for a moment if a bomber cost 500m...given the destructive power and likely ability to escape unharmed, does that seem reasonable given the risk v reward? Heaven forbid CCP add a 5s immobility timer after bomb launch! If you turn the tables, there is really an imbalance here.

It also seems hypocritical when you see examples quoted 'you didn't bring a 50 man insta-cane fleet to accompany your main fleet' therefore you deserve to die to my 14 guys (or 2 guys as it may be). An anti-blob WOMD which requires more blobbing to negate.

Currently those who can afford it, will fly Tengus or low-sig BS (Napoc etc.) to increase the probability of survival, which has led to very 1 dimensional combat and fleet selection. As soon as bombers are in the air, fleets re-ship and/or stand down which denies content for everyone in all but the most suicidal or desperate of times. The end result is that nobody wins.

The irony is the success of bombers have virtually starved them of their own habitat and increasingly the only bombers remaining are bred in captivity via Isboxer.

I hope to see a balanced solution where bombers can have fun with a target rich environment, but also where their prey can also have fun with a reasonable risk profile and sensible countermeasures and/or survivability. Perhaps we will also see more people stepping up to try their hand at FCing and taking out fleets for fights which is what everyone wants.

It may also be enjoyable to fly something which isn't a Tengu.
Zverofaust
Ascetic Virtues
#860 - 2014-10-29 03:04:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Zverofaust
Capqu wrote:
Vesperi Kobra wrote:
Capqu wrote:
Zverofaust wrote:
Incredibly disappointed. More experienced and skilled wordsmiths have explained why better than I ever could, but I feel this change was needed. I love wheniammzi as much as anyone but erasing entire fleets of enemy shis is simply too easy at the moment and the pressure of that fact has had a huge effect on the meta. That fight a couple of weeks ago in which almost 800 tengus faced off from a half dozen different fleets should have been a wakeup call that **** is getting ridiculous.

I don't know the best way to do it but the announced changes seemed to be on the right track -- not so much a nerf as simply requiring mote effort, organization and planning to wield the horrific power that bombers undeniably hold.

I'd hoped like many that ccp was serious about revolutionizing the game with huge changes but this really hits me in the feels.


wheniaminspace and ammzi have both posted in this thread telling you why this change didn't really change their ability to bomb effectively with isboxer
in fact both of the previous people have argued in favour of banning the use of isboxer with bombing instead

everyone agrees isboxing bombing is completely out of control but that nerf wasn't going to effect to even nearly the same extent it would have classic bombing



In classic bombing you have 1 person per ship and they can warp at distance and burn to where they need to be. When you control 40 it is hard to do them all that way but hitting fleet warp it **** easy.


no. in one person per ship bombing you have to communicate distances and vectors for every pilot and update on the fly with players joining/leaving the fleet

with one person 8 ships bombing you use pre set distances per client and bomb as normal, was tested and it was very easy to do on sisi

the above combined with the knowledge of the position of your entire cloaked fleet without the need to communicate, perfectly synchronised bomb waves & warpouts and the ability to have a full wave of bombers on demand was going to be the death of non-isboxed bombers. many of us would prefer the opposite


I agree that it doesn't do anything to really counter isboxer; I never expected it would. My comments were aimed towards traditional multiperson bombing being too easy for the potential effect it could have; most of the most hilariously effective boming runs I've had first hand experience in weren't isboxers. In fact people like oodel, space, ammzi only run 1 squads worth of bombers but it's the multi squad consecutive waves of 20+ that are responsible for wiping out entire bs fleets.