' Wrote:This entire discussion is held up by nothing more then empty , void and in no way solid evidence. There is nothing to suggest that if bombers are to get nerfed , the entire server will start abusing Capital ships. That is and to this day forward has been - The only line of defense against nerfing this particular ship type.
Ok, maybe the entire community won't start whoring capships if bomber's do get nerfed. However, the only way to destroy a capship at that point would be to use another capship, which is not always available to everyone. Bomber's are a cheap ship which the average disco player can afford, and thus they keep the balance as well, discouraging people to use capships, or at least encouraging to come along with support (as I stated before). But if you can suggest any other outcome, my ears are listening.
' Wrote:While you may not believe that there are people who use Battleships for something other then shoot stuff around with large cannons ,
I never said I think people use battleships to just blow stuff up. This thread was directed at those people who had battleships and complained they stood no chance against bombers because they went without support thinking battleships were supposed to be godlike and destroy everything in their way, not the players who knew the weaknesses of the battleship and chose intelligently to use them only with support, just as proper RP should dictate (in my opinion).
' Wrote:you should know that plausible escorts can't , in no way , protect their leader , be that a battleship or a battle cruiser , before 2-3 bombers destroy it and flee.
The escort part is really getting old , find another excuse.
On that part, I agree with both Jinx's proposal, and Reisiger's proposal that the SNAC should have an explosion radius. I'm not sure, but I think the explosion radius might've been debated before, but I'm not sure.
