+- 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: Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs (/showthread.php?tid=13034)
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Orin - 10-16-2008
No no, you misunderstood. I meant that if SNs are nerfed, their ability to ever hit VHFs will suffer, then they will lose every battle against VHFs.
Sorry for the confusion.
EDIT: I don't see why SNs should never be able to hit a VHF. They're energy cannons in actuality.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Akumabito - 10-16-2008
Bombers need their size doubled and their maneuverability reduced, then they will be fine.
Likewise the SN could be removed from the game.
Right now bombers are the most abused ship in the game, and bomber whoring puts cap ship whoring to shame.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - RingoW - 10-16-2008
Quote:In other words they should be augmented and then their usage limited artificially on the server, perhaps like Panzer says making BS licenses Admin distributed.
This idea is not new and was brought up before release of 4.84. I would also count the loophole battleships in here. However, i bet no admin will bother himself to check the giant amount of applications, decide and henceforth get flamed with "why he and not me?" topics.
Concerning bomber use. This is the point when the so often mentioned "RP" part comes in. Even if a bomber can be a match for Fighters atm, the players should limit themself, using bomber against cap ships, transports and other bombers and leave the fight as soon as fighters are left only. I'm not without guilty here myself, but i will do it in the future.
If you would take it very serious and straight, the use of bombers against fighters would fall under oorp and should cause a sanction. I'm far away to demand this, but setting limits by players for themself would be appreciated.
AoM
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Orin - 10-16-2008
That is actually a good point.
The thing is, that while bombers may have too much capabilities against fighters (which I honestly don't believe as much as the others here), if they get nerfed, serious balance would be thrown. As it stands, an OC Dessie with two missile turrets and a capable pilot can tear bombers apart. I know this from experience. I consider myself an alright bomber pilot, and against these, I have serious problems. Now obviously a single bomber shouldn't be taking on an OC Dessie, but the fact stands. Missile turrets already rape bombers. If bombers lose manueverablity, how do you think missile turrets will fare? Answer me that, please.
On top of that, a GB with fast tracking turrets and a pilot good with turret view controls can do very well against bombers already. Again, if bombers get bigger or lose handling, they are going to be seriously unbalanced in the other direction.
What AoM said is good. Bombers shouldn't be used in every case. I'm guilty on occasion too, but I try myself to limit it. Just the other day there was a Corsair attack on Malta. I only pulled in to attack when a Destroyer came along. I took it down, then I pulled off. The only reason a attacked again was in self defense.
So moderation is always good. Sometimes it's not applicable, especially if you're a pirate in hostile territory, but at times when VHFs can fight VHFs, let them.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - NonSequitor - 10-16-2008
I don't think that the bomber itself is the problem. Most bombers seem relatively balanced, with some notable exceptions being the Red Cat (basically a good VHF with an SN) and the Barghest (flying coffin). I believe both are getting a makeover in the next mod.
The problem is the potency of the supernova gun. I don't have access to the numbers at the moment, but I recall that the bomber SN's damage output is many times greater than a BS's equivalent weapon, the Battle Razor (or Mortar).
Obviously there is a reason for this discrepancy, probably a game-play issue. Despite the fact that the FL universe is full of NPC fighters, most players hold to the belief that too many player capships in the game makes for a unrealistic roleplaying experience. Enter the supernova, the bane of every pwnzer capship pilot. If a capship pilot (even one that can rp reasonably) gets fed this SN humble pie frequently enough, it is likely that he or she will give up on piloting his or her capship and find something smaller. This isn't a rant or even a complaint - it just how I see the bigger picture in all of this.
I have three suggestion on how to solve the bomber issue:
1.) The Starlancer bombers: Remember those? Big, ungainly torpedo bombers that could deliver a horrific payload, but absolutely needed fighter protection. What if we had these type of bombers in the game?
2.) The supernova's damage output reduced by 20-25%.
3.) The supernova made into a munitions-based weapon system. A torpedo. Give it a good speed and tracking rate. Damage output stats would remain the same as the current model. The bomber would still dish out serious damage on capships, but would have careful about using supernovas on fighters. Supernova torps could be countered by cds.
Peace.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - mjolnir - 10-16-2008
' Wrote:Solution:
-optimize the size of the bombers, i.e. no more 'light' or small bombers.
There comes the problem with GBs the smaller ones are about 2-3 times the size of average bomber now (Praetorian, Challenger...)
If you make bombers bigger they will suddenly get killed by anti-gb guns. On the mention the GBs themselves.
Quote:-remove elite fighter guns from the bombers entirely, put guns or turrets on them such as they would need to complete missions effectively but be useless against a VHF. class 7 guns or less in other words. And no missles.
I'd love that yes... but it's not possible without a playerwipe.
Quote:**There is an interesting option with bombers not explored yet. Why not increase their thrust speed to something faster than normal, like 250. Give them the extra speed to in effect make them 'dive bombers.' You could compensate for the increased speed by further decreasing their maneuverability (much like WW2 dive bombers that were slow turners but fast climbers and divers.) This would of course mean the supernova/nova speed would have to be decreased to compensate.**
This will make it impossible for fighters to defend capships from them.
Also I don't get where you have the "capships and bomber groups" from. You might have noticed that in all the events that were around everyone mostly stopped using bombers (unless only 3 people meet on each side). Even in the RM vs TBH in 4.84 Dustin of all people was forced to stop using one of the smallest bombers in game because he was getting gang-raped in it.
So all these fights are mostly VHF swarm vs another VHF swarm... and if someone tries to bring a BS or some other caps in there.. the VHF swarm blasts it in seconds without problems (ex. Eppy in Eta).
...ehh what class was overpowered again?
One of the biggest reasons why bombers are "overused" is that for many factions they are simply the best non-vanilla fighters. And people get tired of dying to one lucky nuke from a nuke-spamming enemy in their extramely armored Templars/Titans/Avengers....
with that problem removed I think we'll see some changes.
------------------------------------------------
And pls stop bringing Red Cat/Cat vs x ships on the table..yes it's overpowered..same for Taiidan... try to do the same in a Havoc or BHG bomber.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - ScornStar - 10-16-2008
I like Meggidos idea. Make the Supernova a ammo weapon but if that was done give it more speed, tracking, and a blast radius. The mini razor is plenty strong for a energy cannon.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Robert.Fitzgerald - 10-16-2008
If the supernova were a torpedo with faster tracking and speed, wouldn't it be good against fighters? Also, I don't know how the issue with Capital ship shield generator hard-points and explosives will be resolved. If the blast radius is too big to encompass the generator hardpoint, then it might get ridiculous (the explosions could be used to kill fighters flak-style).
A touchy issue balance and player-attitude wise. I would personally rather increase capital strength than nerf the supernova, but if it were to be reduced in usefulness, I'd reduce the damage.
Edit: apart from changing weapon numbers on bombers (player wipe needed?) I don't know the best way to reduce their "anti fighter" strength. Perhaps the fire arc of the supernova could be reduced, so it can't just fire across in a joust at wide angles. But that might affect gunboat-bomber combat.
Most bombers don't seem good against fighters, apart from the catamarans and the Taiidan. Those are hard to hit and are good in dogfights. The rest however, are large, sluggish and rely on very lucky hits with a supernova to win combats.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - ScornStar - 10-16-2008
' Wrote:If the supernova were a torpedo with faster tracking and speed, wouldn't it be good against fighters? Also, I don't know how the issue with Capital ship shield generator hard-points and explosives will be resolved. If the blast radius is too big to encompass the generator hardpoint, then it might get ridiculous (the explosions could be used to kill fighters flak-style).
A touchy issue balance and player-attitude wise. I would personally rather increase capital strength than nerf the supernova, but if it were to be reduced in usefulness, I'd reduce the damage.
Edit: apart from changing weapon numbers on bombers (player wipe needed?) I don't know the best way to reduce their "anti fighter" strength. Perhaps the fire arc of the supernova could be reduced, so it can't just fire across in a joust at wide angles. But that might affect gunboat-bomber combat.
Most bombers don't seem good against fighters, apart from the catamarans and the Taiidan. Those are hard to hit and are good in dogfights. The rest however, are large, sluggish and rely on very lucky hits with a supernova to win combats.
Good point maybe since things have come as far as they have. We should base all balance off the Bombers. Give the fighters a speed buff and the caps a armor buff.
I say armor buff since a shield buff of the same magnitude would be many times better than a hull buff. I do think that the SN should be a ammo weapon, maybe just faster but same dumb fire capabilities. Yes this may make it better but the loss of the bomber would be more expensive. I learned that the Nova torpedos are not used because the SN is better and the Novas cost so much to replace after death. I think the best "BOMB" should use ammo. Otherwise if its a canno theres no RP reason for not wanting to mount 8 SN on my gunboat when there better than battleship Hvy Mortars. If I was a shi[p designer in any house with half a brain I'd say this is the answer for anti cap operations.
That or make the SN to require a full battery to fire and then use all remaining energy.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - gekerd - 10-16-2008
if the bombers would represent the ww2 dive bombers, they would be able to stand up to fighters.