' Wrote:Is anyone aware of the balance challenge an EMP SNAC would cause, Specifically in a dual torp Bomber?
As in, one shot two shot, red ship dead ship?
Just a thought.
Can you pissibly fire two snacs now?
See the point is bomber is still limited to it's power.
It can't solo cruissers just becouse of same reason. After taking shield down bomber do not posses power to fire hull buster before shield restored. And it doesn't matter is that shield which restored will have 30 000 or 50 000. Shield busting snac will kill just same as snac does. And after that bopmebr won't have any energy to shot hull busting snac into the hull until the shield restores again, and the circle repeats.
Solo bomebr can take down cruisser shields to the "restore cycle" quite easy by the time now too.
From what I see now. Most people commenting here has littile to no experience in bombers, since are making such imaginative claims based "It should be" "It might be" like this. Thing it won't. It's not possible.
Any other arugments which are sufficient please?
And what poltergeist said. A lot of people who were fond of using bombers simply swtiched to firghters only way.
' Wrote:I was thinking about this last night, actually. But then I though about this too:
Really, you do need the hullbuster power of the Snac for use against caps anyway, the 50% damage reduction against shields fails in comparison to the up to 400% addition of armour to many capital ships. The SNAC is really already a good all rounder anyway. Plus everyone would just go around pwning everything bigger then a bomber using Shieldbuster SNACs and regulars SNACs. Just my opinion.
^^
It can't solo cruissers just becouse of same reason. After taking shield down bomber do not posses power to fire hull buster before shield restored. And it doesn't matter is that shield which restored will have 30 000 or 50 000. Shield busting snac will kill just same as snac does. And after that bopmebr won't have any energy to shot hull busting snac into the hull until the shield restores again, and the circle repeats.
Blah. Maybe it's time to read? or maybe I write so bad. If that so I'll find soem native speaker who will write this in proper english.
It is good idea. Really good one. It will add more diversity and bombers will be able to kill easier Gunboats- I think that the circle will be in favour of the bomber against gunboats( one high energy weapon shot to left the gb with nottle shield then 2 as now with snac) It will hurt the Gunboat class. If the bomber mount EMP snac and Hull Snac, not cruisers but Gunboats. I like it and I will use it. On the other side I agree that SN torpedo need to deliver more dmg. With its bug that cannot down shields every time when it hits I can imagine that it could be hull only torpedo with 200 - 220 dmg.
(10-09-2013, 10:51 AM)Knjaz Wrote: Official faction players that are often accused of elitism, never deploy them and have those weird, immersion killing "fair fight/dueling" suicidal hobbies. (yes, i've seen enough of those lolduels, where house military with overwhelming force on the field willingly loses a pilot in a duel. ffs.)
I think people are forgetting the fact that Vilkas' suggested weapon would have the same power drain as a SNAC. It's hardly balance destroying stuff. Heavy bombers could now opt for this EMP weapon or the Nova for that extra hull busting punch. Regular bombers can now juggle around three choices between two slots.
People need to step aside from their bias and think about this clearly. It does not affect bomber vs cap balance in any meaningful way when it comes to one on one. In groups, caps might die a bit quicker, but they will still die even if this weapon wasn't implemented.
Quote:Bombers are already good enough against caps. we don't need to give them any more advantages.
Signed.
Quote:BOMBERS ARE POWERFUL ENOUGH AS IT IS!!!!!!!!! IMPLEMENT THIS= CAP BUFF,NON CAP BUFF= UNBALLANCE MORE SO THEN WHAT WE HAVE ALLREADY
Signed.
Haelll naw.
Unless the bomber cant fire the regular snac at the same time. So it'd be either fire a regular snac or fire a EMP snac. Either way, caps get nerfed AGAIN, and thats not fun.
Then I could maybe perhaps not support it.
Quote:It does not affect bomber vs cap balance in any meaningful way when it comes to one on one.
Let me see, How many times are bombers against a cap one on one? Of course it wouldnt effect it, One ship of any cap has the capabillity to kill one bomber.
Quote:In groups, caps might die a bit quicker, but they will still die even if this weapon wasn't implemented.
I disagree. I survived quite long against 3/4 challengers with my lagging Kusari Solaris Destroyer friend helping.
Your shield might drop faster if those Challengers used an EMP Snac instead of a Nova, but your hull damage would go down a lot slower without said Novas pounding your hull. It's a tradeoff.
' Wrote:Your shield might drop faster if those Challengers used an EMP Snac instead of a Nova, but your hull damage would go down a lot slower without said Novas pounding your hull. It's a tradeoff.
Umm... The faster shields go down, the more often you can score hull hits :/
' Wrote:It is good idea. Really good one. It will add more diversity and bombers will be able to kill easier Gunboats- I think that the circle will be in favour of the bomber against gunboats( one high energy weapon shot to left the gb with nottle shield then 2 as now with snac) It will hurt the Gunboat class.
Snac plus emp snac leaves you with no cd. Which means = you loose versus gunboat.
This weapon would likely only pay of in the group of 4 or 3 bombers. Since shields -capacity- isn't the main strenght of the capital ships.
' Wrote:Unless the bomber cant fire the regular snac at the same time. So it'd be either fire a regular snac or fire a EMP snac. Either way, caps get nerfed AGAIN, and thats not fun.
What about reading instead of
"Oh a thread which offers something usefull for bombers. No I don't like bombers, they manage to kill my BS which I want to be pwnsome against everything no matter how many people fight me, becouse I grinded a lot, who cares about pvp ablities. Stfu about sportsmanship, I'll go write no, and addition to that, that they need more nerf!"
I actually don't know why I bother to write this to a guy who whines for cruisse becouse he can't chase down fleeing fighters and cruisser (which are ment to pwn battleships from distence) but. Read the damn thread before you freaking start to post.
No bombers won't be able to fire two snacs same as they aren't capable of it now. EMP snac should have same or even bigger energy requiriments than regular snac.
Actually, with a Challenger (for example) equipping an EMP version of a SNAC, they actually sacrifice the hull busting power of a Nova torpedo. So, while 460,000 shield capacity is negligible compared to the well armored hull of a battleship, it would take a longer time for a battleship to go down because they have less options to break open the hull once the shields fall.
So really, is this balance destroying stuff? Or are cap lovers having another knee-jerk reaction to any idea that diversifies bomber loadouts?
What can I see... about shield busting snac.. and where it can be much more useful. Actually very usefull is for barghest instakilling 100k shields at single shot.
In the other cases, that gun won't do much, but could be handy in balanced fleet fights.
![[Image: 2emctxg.png]](http://i55.tinypic.com/2emctxg.png)
