[Ship Concept] Ultraheavy bombers

[RmJ]

SOME of you may have heard about my idea's of a class of bomber that isn't all that conventional. Well after reading the thread '[Ship Concept] Ultralight bombers' I figured might as well throw this idea out there for the masses to pick apart and pretend it really matters.


THUS I bring you a modeled reflection of a Heavy Bomber based off from Rhiny tech...

Bergelmir - 140-ARKM-N58 Rheinland Bomber


Guns/Turrets 4 / 2
Opt. weapon class 1
Max. weapon class 6
Additional equipment
2xCD/T
1xCM
1xM
Hull strength 20,200
Max. shield class 10
Cargo space 105 units
Nanobots/Batteries 105/105
Max. impulse speed 80 m/s
Max. thrust speed 199 m/s
Power output 45,390 u
Power recharge 1,880 u/s


SOME KIND OF Heavy Bomber (Specialized anti-cap bomber)

Guns/Turrets 0 / 4
Opt. weapon class 1
Max. weapon class 6
Additional equipment

2xCM
4xM

Hull strength 35,200
Max. shield class 10
Cargo space 200 units
Nanobots/Batteries 126/126
Max. impulse speed 90 m/s
Max. thrust speed 199 m/s
Power output 40,000 u
Power recharge 1,880 u/s


Bomber Mine Type I (Long range)

Hull Damage 25,000
Shield Damage 7,800
Explosion Radius 164m
Detonation Range 6m
Mine Statistics
Lifetime 30s
Self Safe Time 4s
Seeker Range 1,500m
Top Speed 60m/s
Acceleration 200m/s^2


Bomber Mine Type II (Long Range)

Hull Damage 7,800
Shield Damage 25,000
Explosion Radius 164m
Detonation Range 6m
Mine Statistics
Lifetime 30s
Self Safe Time 4s
Seeker Range 1,500m
Top Speed 60m/s
Acceleration 200m/s^2


Bomber Mine Type III

Hull Damage 15,000
Shield Damage 3,800
Explosion Radius 100m
Detonation Range 6m
Mine Statistics
Lifetime 15s
Self Safe Time 4s
Seeker Range 800m
Top Speed 60m/s
Acceleration 200m/s^2


Bomber Mine Type IV

Hull Damage 3,800
Shield Damage 15,000
Explosion Radius 100m
Detonation Range 6m
Mine Statistics
Lifetime 15s
Self Safe Time 4s
Seeker Range 800m
Top Speed 60m/s
Acceleration 200m/s^2


Bomber Flac Turret MKI


Weapon Class: 6
Hull Damage: 1,000
Shield Damage: 500
Range: 1,000 m
Projectile Speed: 350 m/s
Refire Rate: 2.00
Energy Usage: 600
Explosion Radius: 50 m


Bomber Flac Turret MKII


Weapon Class: 6
Hull Damage: 500
Shield Damage: 1,000
Range: 1,000 m
Projectile Speed: 350 m/s
Refire Rate: 2.00
Energy Usage: 600
Explosion Radius: 50 m



So pick away at it this is just rough off the top of my head but the general idea I am aiming for.

---

[AeternusDoleo]

4 mines? You nuts amigo? Drop a pack of mines while something's chasing you, EK turn, disruptor... instant fighter killing explosion of 164m range. Njet on the quad minedrop. Not to mention the fact that mines home in on the nearest target, not the one you select. The FLAK turrets make sense, but since they're projectiles with a detonator, they'd need to be tracked serverside, which increases server load, at that refire...

If you truly want to make a heavy bomber, a larger variety of torpedoes would be the way to go, and specifically, torpedoes with shield busting capacities. Something with 4 torpedo slots (1x shieldbuster torpedo, 2x nova torpedo, 1x SNAC) as a superbomber would give most capital vessels pause. Since torpedos are utterly useless against gunboats, fighters and smaller transports it'd not imbalance things much against those.

---

Wide awake in a world that sleeps, enduring thoughts, enduring scenes. The knowledge of what is yet to come.
From a time when all seems lost, from a dead man to a world, without restraint, unafraid and free.

Mostly retired Discovery member. May still visit from time to time.

[RmJ]

4 mines? You nuts amigo? Drop a pack of mines while something's chasing you, EK turn, disruptor... instant fighter killing explosion of 164m range. Njet on the quad minedrop. Not to mention the fact that mines home in on the nearest target, not the one you select. The FLAK turrets make sense, but since they're projectiles with a detonator, they'd need to be tracked serverside, which increases server load, at that refire...

If you truly want to make a heavy bomber, a larger variety of torpedoes would be the way to go, and specifically, torpedoes with shield busting capacities. Something with 4 torpedo slots (1x shieldbuster torpedo, 2x nova torpedo, 1x SNAC) as a superbomber would give most capital vessels pause. Since torpedos are utterly useless against gunboats, fighters and smaller transports it'd not imbalance things much against those.

Can you be certain that every fighter or war vessel will have CD's? Nor can you suggest it's not a factor I haven't considered.

The factors of the target select can be changed amigo (Seeking closest target). And I don't like nuts.:PPeanut butter is fine but that's it.

Well with the 40k power plant it would fire 16 loads per run. 8 for 4 turrets. I suppose I can see the server begging for patience.


Your torps don't really excite me however. My thinking is that longer range mines would do the trick - with 90% rates for tracking. Considering if that I was in a military contracting company mines and long range weaponry would be the key components in next generations of warfare. Mines , as in autonomous seeking devices, would at as a curtain barrier between the target and the bomber itself.


The less my bombers have to get into the range of enemy capital ships the better. Swoop in, drop payload, get the heck out of dodge and repeat. When you have torps you have to line up that leads a vulnerable spot. I perfer to avoid having to mess with it.


And the flac guns are not designed to be at all offensive weapons.



Edit: Yes...yes I did misread that. Yes. I am on the wrong account. :L

---

[Hielor]

The factors of the target select can be changed amigo (Seeking closest target). And I don't like nuts.:PPeanut butter is fine but that's it.

Fairly sure that they can't be changed, actually. If it could, I'd bet it would've been changed already.

[Captain]

if I think of a super heavy bomber, I would think of a
GS sized ship, GS powerplant, agility of a bomber,
Armor of a GS,

and having 3 torpedo/snac slots, a dedicated tcd slot
4 guns, dual cmd, but no mines.

---

[AeternusDoleo]

Can you be certain that every fighter or war vessel will have CD's? Nor can you suggest it's not a factor I haven't considered.

I meant the bomber itself using an EK turn, spitting 4 mines so a pursuer will be in the path of them, then firing a TCD at the pursuer to force-trigger them. Time it right and you have a way to instagib any fighter, without too much effort. This gives the bomber an anti-fighter configuration/tactic that it's not designed to do. That, and mines aren't effective versus capital ships to begin with.

And no, to my knowledge, mine tracking cannot be changed to target specific vessels, it's "whichever ship that is within tracking range". Mines are an inherent friendly fire risk.

[Edit]
Counter concept for a superheavy bomber:
Guns/Turrets 4 / 4 (Bomber guns)
Opt. weapon class 6
Max. weapon class 6
3x CD/T, 1x CD.
Additional equipment 1xCM 1xM
Hull strength 25,000
Max. shield class 6 (FR)
Cargo space 140 units (no CAU on these things)
Nanobots/Batteries 126/126
Max. impulse speed 90 m/s
Max. thrust speed 199 m/s
Power output 46,000 u
Power recharge 2,000 u/s

Maneuverability and model size about similar to that of the Bottlenose gunboat.

This thing would get raped hard by fighters, but it should be able to quite easily eat any caps. Able to sustain fire on the SNAC, and mount a dual NOVA to bomb the snot out of any cap that has it's shields down. 8 guns/turrets (all forward fire enabled) should be able to deal good damage at close range too - but this would not be a bomber that you'd want to go close range with.

---

Wide awake in a world that sleeps, enduring thoughts, enduring scenes. The knowledge of what is yet to come.
From a time when all seems lost, from a dead man to a world, without restraint, unafraid and free.

Mostly retired Discovery member. May still visit from time to time.

[n00bl3t]

I would not mind a 200m/s mine on my fighter.:laugh:

Seriously, lower the mine speed. Otherwise it will be anti-fighter insta-kill.

I am going through the rest of it in my head, and will probably give you feedback in Skype. (But the mines really hit me.)

Edit: Stupid alternate account posting crazy ideas. Mis-read speed and acceleration. Need another drink.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[J.Miller]

I actually like this idea. But what if you give the mines no acceleration and a fixed speed.(Which would be slow) This would disable the bombers ability to eat fighters, whereas it is still effective versus caps. About the flak guns: What Re they supposed to accomplish at a speed of 350ms? You might as well not mount any.

/2cents

[Toaster]

The current bombers are already certain death for 99.9% of Capships. They have a light mortar on board (or two, if they decide to use Novas), they have heavy armor, they are too agile for most capship weapons, and fighters can hardly take them out in time.
So making even more powerful bombers seems like a nonsensical idea.

/2cents

---

Olivia Sable

[Anonymous User]

We have mafic.

---

]