+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Discovery Mod Balance (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=31)
+---- Thread: Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? (/showthread.php?tid=4793)
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - Jack Archer - 12-04-2007
Plse delet me this post was an acident
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - Jwnantze - 12-04-2007
Yes, we only had one super nova. The point was, it had 4 other ships covering, harrasing and doing massive shiled dammage so the one supernove could operate effectively.
@pip Yeah I know about the swordfish, but I fail to see when only 1 attacked and sank a cruiser or above...
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - chopper - 12-04-2007
Yes Duke nuke'm, but how many infernos you had?
You can't compare OC bombers to every other bombers, because you have an extra tool.
Yes, i agree, 2 bombers and 2 fighters can easily beat the crap out of BS + GB.
But, 2 bombers? They could before. Now, they can, but much more work.
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - pipsqueak - 12-04-2007
Well I guess, all I was saying that if the GB and the BS had concentrated on the bomber only for 30 seconds...
You would be telling a totally different story right now.
You bomber probably would not have survived the attack without either flying out of firing range or not firing novas and concentrating on evading.
I hope you didnt encounter a battleship whose pilot is still looking for the turret view on his keyboard.
Any how, I am not going to say any more... I will just fly whats available in the next version.
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - chopper - 12-04-2007
Ok, i'v checked the numbers and..
Every bomber should be above 1.0 max angular speed.
Maybe only RM should stay (if it wasn't nerfed, and users don't complain).
The logical explanation for this is simple.
Falcata is above 1, and everyone says it's fine and balanced.
Dragon is above 1, everyone says it's fine.
Kusari is above 1, everyone says it's fine.
Taiidan is bellow 1.0, and i'm bitching hard about it.
Barghest is 0.83, can't imagine that one.
Don't forget the Civilian, Praetorian, Brettonian (not sure about this one, just guessing),
It should be something like.
If for example (i'm just taking this, as two most opposite sides) Outcasts are great Capital ship builders, Corsairs should have better bombers.
And now, Outcasts have better capital ships, and better bombers. Great:)
Can't we bring them closer one to another?
All should be pretty much the same, around 1.0, and only Kusari and Dragon slightly more agile.
(this is just a suggestion, not flaming the mod, not flaming the agile-bomber users)
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - mjolnir - 12-04-2007
As I wrote you in another thread you cannot take the numbers too seriously....
Sometimes the results are quite different in reality. (for two bombers with exactly the same number)
But in this logic - under 1 max. angular speed:
Barghest, Waran, RH bomber, Civilian bomber, Praetorian, Challanger, Taidan
All these bombers have 58 000 power supply, instead of the 48 000 of the more agile ones. Barghest has really high armor too.
RH bomber is just fine for me...Praetorian is just fine for me too
Users of the other ones should complain about them..... well none use Waran I guess.
EDIT: @ Chopper check the regenaration rate by yourself :) I don't know how much it was in beta4, I just know it got increased (tested it)
Now it's 2400 on bombers with more capacity and 2200 on the ones with less. And capacity by itself is not useless...
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - chopper - 12-04-2007
Give 48k power supply to Taiidan:)
Do they have the better energy regain too?
Because, capacity by itself is useless.
If they have, then i guess it is ok like this.
Just a slightly more agility to taiidan, so he can survive and use that energy in some purpose..
If regain is the same for all bombers, capacity doesn't really matter.
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - Jinx - 12-04-2007
hmm.. if the warren was able to shoot two supernovas, i wonder if there were people flying it - or still consider it too ugly to outweigh such an advantage:D
( i checked the model in a viewer and 3d modelling program.... i mean, its really detailed and very nicely done. i just wonder why it HAD to look like kirby <('.')> )
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - Lohingren - 12-04-2007
thought id clarify this, pip the GB + BS fired on me straight away so the did concentrate fire and didn't do a good job of doing it. they went down with ease i used 30 shield bots and 10 nano's, there was 3 bombers duke being in duel inferno setup me and silent assasin being in a inferno/supernova.
as for the inferno, the firing speed has been nerfed thus making it hard to hit gb's even the corsair one now without being at extremely close range. and the inferno is not the be all and end all of weaponry 4 del cids would do a better job than it now with its gimp the only thing that made the inferno so good was it was fast firing weapon............. still don't know why the razor was upgraded and that downgraded when a razor does both good shield and hull. so id say your little aquisation was wrong bud they both used "turret view" and both fired on me and both got they're butts kicked.
Do Bombers suck as much as I think they do? - chopper - 12-04-2007
As i am aware, Inferno speed is nerfed only for 30?
How come you can't hit big-fat m26 with 560 speed?
And now it seems you had 3 bombers and 2 fighters.
That is exactly what i was talking about.
Yes, bombers are good if in large groups, but not that good if only 2 of them.
But, that's the way it should be. Just add some agility so they can dodge cap ship shots.
Because, it won't make them invulnerable to fighters, Falcata is still very easy to shoot down by a fighter.