Cap vs. Fighter/Bomber weapons.

[El Nino]

well that delay time (source: -censsored-) is nerfing... also I heard many rumors about reduced blast efect (source: -censsored-)... but every player = different rumor:)

Take it from me then...:DDon't trust rumors to much...

Anyhow it is true missiles got a "nerf" but then again they also got a "boost" so overall they are perfect.

Why the cap weapons are "off-balance" energy wise is very simple...

Gunboats have 10x more energy then bombers, just so bombers cannot fire gunboat forward guns... that's where you get that 10x diffrence in energy efficiency, Note that they also get 10x larger powerplants 10x more regen... so the diffrence is then just a number game.

In reality some capital ship weapons are one of the most efficient in the game... battleship can dish out serius sustained firepower that far exceedes that of bombers, even a simple corsair gunboat has 3x more firepower than a bomber... (that is sustained firepower)

does SN seem asskicking? Yes it is, but when compared to Heavy Mortar on the battleship, it is a bit punny... Even more so in 485... SN trades off it's speed for high damage output. Overall it is less efficient then lvl 9 guns not to mention codes... so a bomber can solo a battleship shield with 4 codes, but not with 1 SN alone...

In the end however you turn things around you get this...

VHF dishes out about 4k damage per second, Bomber 8k, GB 20k, cruiser 30k, battleship 50k...

This will no longer apply in 4.85 for GB, cruiser and battleship. You can spot from a mile away GB has quite an awesome firepower, for its size, so it is obvius it would get a nerf,... but anyhow, where do you see cap vs fighter/bomber weapons unbalanced?

It has a lot to do with how you deliver your damage that counts as well, but when taking out a cruiser a gunboat can do it faster than a bomber... becouse for a large target damage/many seconds counts... that's why vhf's dish out up to 16k/s for 5 seconds... but that hardly touches transport shields.

So balance is not as simple as (SN does 132k damage, and my BS turret only does 2.4k)

And finaly when you take in to consideration projectile speeds, capital ships are really much better off...

Flak was revised aswell...

Oh well the obvius pain in the butt are gunboats... but they were reworked, basicly to give them a light cap feel...

---

Donate to the Poor Pilot's Fundation via Sirius Bank /givecash GreenHawk 1000000 now, and support poor pilots sirius wide!
Skype: jure.grbec
My primary char: Jose El Nino - Corsair Elder captain of the SS Greenhawk

Currently Inactive due to pursuit of life long dreams, will be back...*edited* As promised am back.

[Grumblesaur]

Take it from me then...:DDon't trust rumors to much...

Anyhow it is true missiles got a "nerf" but then again they also got a "boost" so overall they are perfect.

Why the cap weapons are "off-balance" energy wise is very simple...

Gunboats have 10x more energy then bombers, just so bombers cannot fire gunboat forward guns... that's where you get that 10x diffrence in energy efficiency, Note that they also get 10x larger powerplants 10x more regen... so the diffrence is then just a number game.

In reality some capital ship weapons are one of the most efficient in the game... battleship can dish out serius sustained firepower that far exceedes that of bombers, even a simple corsair gunboat has 3x more firepower than a bomber... (that is sustained firepower)

does SN seem asskicking? Yes it is, but when compared to Heavy Mortar on the battleship, it is a bit punny... Even more so in 485... SN trades off it's speed for high damage output. Overall it is less efficient then lvl 9 guns not to mention codes... so a bomber can solo a battleship shield with 4 codes, but not with 1 SN alone...

In the end however you turn things around you get this...

VHF dishes out about 4k damage per second, Bomber 8k, GB 20k, cruiser 30k, battleship 50k...

This will no longer apply in 4.85 for GB, cruiser and battleship. You can spot from a mile away GB has quite an awesome firepower, for its size, so it is obvius it would get a nerf,... but anyhow, where do you see cap vs fighter/bomber weapons unbalanced?

It has a lot to do with how you deliver your damage that counts as well, but when taking out a cruiser a gunboat can do it faster than a bomber... becouse for a large target damage/many seconds counts... that's why vhf's dish out up to 16k/s for 5 seconds... but that hardly touches transport shields.

So balance is not as simple as (SN does 132k damage, and my BS turret only does 2.4k)

And finaly when you take in to consideration projectile speeds, capital ships are really much better off...

Flak was revised aswell...

Oh well the obvius pain in the butt are gunboats... but they were reworked, basicly to give them a light cap feel...

It's got really nothing to do with standard turrets. Those are good for anti-fighter and all, but what I'm going for are mainly cruisers, since that is like the cap version of bombers.

VHF < Bomber/SHF
Gunboat < Cruiser

Bombers line up with cruisers in the fact that they have weapons meant for capbusting:

Supernova Antimatter Cannon: 132,000 hull, 64,000 shield, at 38,000 energy.
Light Mortar: 23,000 shield and 46,000 hull at 500,000 energy.

Sure, bombers have a very limited power core, but after two consecutive mortar shots [with or without standard turrets], the power is at about 1/4.
The SN takes 38k power, but on a bomber, it regenerates faster. Smaller power core + smaller damage = fast regen, in comparison to what a cruiser can do.

Gunboats, are a bit overpowered for their size, but we know for sure that it's getting fixed.

But at any rate, let's say you have 3 bombers attacking a Battleship. If they fire their SNs in succession, they'll kill the battleship faster, especially due to high damage. Not to mention the fact that they can mount class 10 guns [codes or high-end shield-busters] and another anti-cap weapon, like the mini-razor or inferno, which in joint use, will allow better shield damage per second. When the shields are down, those SNs are going to eat the hull.

3 x 132,000 = 396,000. Most battleships have about 400,000 as their base armor. Even with a 2.5 armor upgrade [400,000 x 2.5 = 900,000], over a third the damage, for way less of a power cost.

Now when you have two cruisers [which would be the equivalent of 3 bombers, damage-wise] against a battleship, they have to fire their cap-busters a lot more. If both have two light mortars, they'll hit hard, yes. But they take a lot of power. Cruisers have about 1.5mil to 2mil power, I would think. They both fire their light mortars on the hull. They just spent 1mil power each to do a grand total of:

46,000 x 3 = 138,000. That's just 6,000 more damage than an SN.

My suggestion to solve this [and yes, this probably will have a flaw in it, so don't flame], is to drop the armor on caps by 15% - 20%. BUT, in return, the damage on the SN would be dropped by about 30%, and the mortar damage would be upgraded by about 10%, which should leave it a bit closer to balance, if there is such a thing.

As for projectile speeds, bombers don't need them as high when their main targets are things that are at least an eighth the size of a planet. Fighters that don't have shield-busters or mini-razors shouldn't even be engaging caps.

---

A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay,
brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.

[Grimly]

<_<

Every one here who wants to make capships better are ... UNSKILLED !!!

What's making you will win a battle or not is not the weaponry (as everyone seems to look at) but the skill ! If you don't have skills and you want to be a pvp whore, train yourself in Connecticut or become a corsair pirating in Sigmas (there is a huge dragon/gmg/hessian/outcast fleet there) !

Also you can ask one of the best bomber who fight and killed me : [RHA]Arado aka [RHA]Wuerger or his mate [HT]Claus.Rheinhardt
I was killed by those 2 pilots in falcatas while I was in my gunboat with 350 bots / 60 bats ... They will confirm I was a really hard target (they were close to their death).
But ... here my weapon configuration :
1 * Cerberus turret
7 * Order turret
0 * Missile turret
0 * Razor turret
0 * Inferno turret

If you want to kill bombers in singular fight, GET THE SKILL FOR IT !

A flak turret will make me absolutely invulnerable to the bombers. I want fair fights, not crappy ones cause unskilled capwhores decided they are too weak with actual weaponry !

I hate the capwhores cause they think they have to be the strongest.

Also, for the ones thinking I'm concentrating my skills against bombers, I may tell you all I'm actually able to shot down any vessel up to cruisers, even I'm only a gunboat.


DO NOT UP THE POWER OF CAPS !
DROP OFF THAT MISSILES AND FLAK CANNON IDEA !
UP YOUR SKILLS !


Also, I hate capwhores. (that mean half of the server hehe)

---

Taking what's yours since 816 A.S.

[Jinx]

its a bit rich to say "Every one here who wants to make capships better are ... UNSKILLED !!!" - you know.... ( besides, you re too late - we already rebalanced ... and we re all unskilled:P)

trying to improve a balance ( not an equilibrium of stats - but a balance ) does not necessarily mean that one wants to boast the own ship - but it has often much more to do with some sort of a vision about how certain shipclasses should compare to others. - very rarely it is purely about a win and loose pvp situation.



a problem about comparing only the stats doesn t work when comparing weaponry. - one must also take size, behaviour and agility into account. - a bomber / warship engagement is a much more complex thing than to compare energy consumption vs. damage output.

Jure has stated that the supernova is .... by numbers ... not an overpowered weapon, and by numbers.... that is a valid and correct statement. - but if we take into account that a low refire rate+high damage is not the same as a low damage+high refire rate ( like comparing an Archangel with a Purple goddess [ you have 2.0 refire, 600ms, 1400 damage ..... vs. 16.3 refire, 700ms, 220 damage or something ] )

furthermore - a bomber that is recharging its weapons switches into a state of active defense... for a capital ship - he becomes practicly unhittable once he decides to concentrate purely on dodging. - a battleship that has fired its heavy mortar and needs to recharge its weapons can NOT switch to a pure active defense... the chance to hit a battleship will be the same while it is trying to dodge. ( and it takes longer for a battleship to refill the energy that was used for a heavy mortar compared to a bomber that fired a supernova )



this is just to show how its impossible to compare stats - by experience.... one cannot compare warship weapons with fighter weapons its like comparing bricks with logs.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[Grimly]

its a bit rich to say "Every one here who wants to make capships better are ... UNSKILLED !!!" - you know.... ( besides, you re too late - we already rebalanced ... and we re all unskilled:P)

I know it's already balanced. But I get sick seeing all capwhores writing here cause they think a bomber can not have any chance to blow a bigger ship. If they may not, why the hell did we made the bombers ?

---

Taking what's yours since 816 A.S.

[Nightwind]

IMO bombers should be able to cause heavy damage to BS or cruisers but not single-handedly...
Take a look at their size. And then think about the hypothetical costs for cap ships. No one would construct these flying fortresss, if your enemy could bring along one bomber and destroy such an expensive construct.

I think bombers should be able to damage them (unlike normal fighters, which should normaly only scratch the hull a bit). The overusage of capital ships is another thing.

Capital ships are way to weak, but we can't buff them a lot since everybody would only fly caps then...
It's a dilemma. Our real problem is that everybody wants to fly one...

[swift]

Our real problem is that everybody wants to fly one...

I don't, and I probably never will. Why can't you be like me?:P

---

<span style="font-familyalatino Linotype">

<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.

</span></span>

<span style="color:#33FFFF">The CFF</span>

<span style="color:#33FF33">CFF Communication Channel and RP Collection</span>

[gekerd]

Me wants bomba
(I think the ballance is quite right now, because you can still be blown out of the sky in secconds by a good flown capship in a bomber if you aren't dodging so killing caps is all about the skill in bombers now and I think that's how it should be.)

And yes I love bombers, but do fly a GB as well (don't have any skill in it) and I know they can get a GB down on there own faster then a bomber.)

---

[Derkylos]

IMO bombers should be able to cause heavy damage to BS or cruisers but not single-handedly...
Take a look at their size. And then think about the hypothetical costs for cap ships. No one would construct these flying fortresss, if your enemy could bring along one bomber and destroy such an expensive construct.

I think bombers should be able to damage them (unlike normal fighters, which should normaly only scratch the hull a bit). The overusage of capital ships is another thing.

Test-fire your SN onto a battleship shield and then tell me you could solo that battleship...cruisers are not much easier to take down, especially if they use thrusters properly (note, I'm talking 1v1 here)

---

[Kambei]

As I was allways talking... is single bomber solo you (imposible to loose in gunship against one omg, how can someone loose in cruiser?), it was only your fault, not fault of balancing... learn to aim or fly something smaler.

---