Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs

[Camtheman Of Freelancer4Ever]

Its freaky, not being able to be invincible to almost all the NPC's in a battleship.
Ugh. I just hope there are dual barreled turrets:)

[Yngen]

Two things wrong with this. First, someone could simply use engine kill and continue at 250m/s speed for a very long time.

Second, Then they would be WAY too easy to kill in a fight. They'd be at 80m/s 90% of the time. No matter how agile your ship, moving at only 80m/s will get you killed, and fast.

-Put a cruise disruptor on the VHF and the 250 m/s drift is taken care of. I do it all the time to bombers now when they want to get their guns on me. This puts the VHF in a unique position to counter the bomber.

-increasing the energy drain on a bomber's thruster would have to be done judiciously. The suggestion was for 5 seconds of thrust which is ridiculous. However something less than the 11K or so one can thrust on a Nomad thruster could be worked out. Try to put the thrust time at just enough to get in range to fire and back out of BS range again, 5 or 6k total distance thrusted before you're at 0%? I think it would mean a special thruster that only bombers can equip...is that even possible?

@Kress:

-increasing bomber armor or firepower simply makes them more difficult for VHFs to kill. As I see it, most bombers take a long time to kill because they have so much armor and a huge pool of bats/bots. You can deliver accurate blows on them continuously and they will regenerate themselves 4 or 5 times over before you can kill them. There are no insta-kill weapons for bombers either. Hit them with a sunslayer or 10 and you might snap off a gun, same goes for missles, but the time you spend plowing through all those nanos...you basically have no choice but to take them down piece at a time.

Increase their anti-cap ship potential yes (augment the nova damage, reduce speed, if you want to increase its range go ahead but as slow as it goes I don't think it will help,) and either leave the armor alone or decrease the nano/bot count.

The idea about increasing thrust speed is merely an attempt to add uniqueness and specialization to the bomber class (I mean class too, to me bombers are a breed apart from fighters.) Nobody wants to see the Bomber usurp the VHFs position in the game, and it would be nice to have a ship elegant enough in it's purpose to do one job very well and suck at everything else.

---

[AU]Anton_Blix
-Signature by Doom

[gekerd]

but I think every fighter (LF - Bomber) should not be able to mount an armor upgrade, it is a bit weird to have a fighter to have twice the weight on armor it normally has (MkVII)

---

[Camtheman Of Freelancer4Ever]

^ I dont know about that, Armor upgrades are important
But mk 8 upgrades on a BHG gunship is stupidly unrealisitic.
Somehow, certain upgrades should be only made for bigger captial ships.
I think its possible, since supernovas can only be mounted on bombers, whats the difference?

[Cellulanus]

I still want to see bombers that have 3-4 torp slots and only 2 guns.

[Akumabito]

Armor should come with the ship. Fighter armor that adds more than 10% is crap, making fighter duels last an hour or more is one reason no one flies a fighter, the second reason is that there is nothing you can do in a fighter than you can't do in a bomber, but you can do things in a bomber you can't do in a fighter.

[Orin]

You can't look as cool in a bomber as you can in a VHF. That has to count for something.

But seriously, you can have an advantage against the arguably most-used ship class in the game in a VHF. I've said it once, I'll continue to say it:

VHF > Bombers

PvP-wise.

[Akumabito]

Actually bomber = VHF, but GB > vhf and bomber.

[Orin]

Indeed? Want to prove it?

In my VHFs, I can destroy most bomber pilots. In my bomber, I can destroy most GB pilots.

I'm not a very good pilot.

Want to enlighten me?

[Akumabito]

You must not fight much, in a bomber I am equal to a fighter, in a GB I am far better than a bomber or fighter.