Bomber Balance

[Sand-Viper]

Perhaps the Catamarans should only be given enough energy to dual-fire Nova's, but not a Super Nova..


On a side note..

I think that a single Nova should equal the same amount of damage of an SN, in my opinion, along with giving them unlimited ammo, so you don't have to spend 700,000 credits just to get 70 torpedoes. If a Nova torpedo did the same amount of damage as a Super Nova, then there are pro's and con's to deciding which to use..

The SN would have a much higher speed (not different from it is now, just in comparison to SN and Nova current stats), but it would be dumb fired, meaning it just flies straight.

The Nova would have tracking abilities, and have a much greater range, but could be shot down before it reached it's target (hopefully it would be made so that it wouldn't be destroyed by a randomly fired CD).


Or, here's another idea: Since the new Catamarans have a long tube-like thing that is supposed to fire the torpedo, why not just make it so that ship's torpedoes had no firing arc? That way you have to actually aim the entire ship at the object you want destroyed, making it much harder to down fighters.

Just my bit of thought in this..

---

The Gaelic Wyvern Inn
If you've interacted with us recently, please consider checking out our in-character Public Guest Reviews thread!

[Kambei]

- removed by my own decision... Mjolnir's analysis is stuning and in comparation with that I have nothing to say to this theme -K

---

[Dab]

Since I can just about keep up with (but not out turn) an old cat with an old titan, maybe your GC HF was broken? By that, I mean that we had about the same turn rates, but the cat had slightly slower response times. If the GC HF is meant to turn like the Eagle does, then you should easily be able to outmaneuvre even the fastest bombers on the market.

My main concern with the GC bomber would be its size. Maybe the new catamaran needs another nerf.

GC is Bigger, Slower, and has 15,700 armor opposed to the Ku Bomber's 16,800.. GC infocard even says it sacrifices some (some) agility for armor, but it doesn't get that.. Its inferior in every way to ever other bomber I've seen so far.. It has -the- lowest armor.. Its slow.. Its HUGE. Its like a Barghest. GC Bomber is severely gimped.

About the GC HF.. I don't know how it compares to Eagle, as I've not fought one yet, but it doesn't feel like it turns as fast as an Eagle. Not even close really. And I was definitely not outturning him. I was having trouble staying on his tail when he was chasing the GC Bomber.

The Nova would have tracking abilities, and have a much greater range, but could be shot down before it reached it's target (hopefully it would be made so that it wouldn't be destroyed by a randomly fired CD).
Or, here's another idea: Since the new Catamarans have a long tube-like thing that is supposed to fire the torpedo, why not just make it so that ship's torpedoes had no firing arc? That way you have to actually aim the entire ship at the object you want destroyed, making it much harder to down fighters.

This idea actually sounds very good. However, we'd need a slight increase to the strafing ability of bombers so they aren't raped everytime they try to line up a shot.

---

[mjolnir]

As to "light" bombers, they can be balanced as some of the types clearly show.
Examples being:
Falcata
BHG Bomber

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we are to go to more radical measures there are basically two ways that I can imagine to avoid bombers being "too good" vs fighters.

a)make bombers bigger/slower - Barghest, Rheinland superbomber way - needs remodeling of some ships

and/or

b) change or remove the "fighter weapons" on the bombers -
b1.if change then:
light bombers can for example have 2lvl8s and 2 lvl9s, it is nice that they can SN fighters, but when they don't have effective means to down the fighter shield it's quite hard to do that

b2.ff "remove" then they can get specific "bomber guns" with ~500m/s speed and codename damage

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


All this being said, I really do think it's very early to start extensive discussion about bomber balancing after half a day of the public beta

... and after first fight where Dab dies to his own stupid mistake (eating mini with damaged hull)

Remember that:
- there will be at least 3 weeks until the final release
- at some point the auto-updater will be used so changed could be done at any time


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address Dab's specific points

[Alright, we just got done dealing with a extremely-long version (4.84) in which we had a big problem concerning two bombers; Kusari Catamaran and Red Catamaran. Both were 48K energy core bombers with the agility of a VHF. In some cases, agility higher than that of a VHF. Now both of these bombers were given new models which make them larger from the side, but the same size from above/below/front/back.

Size comparison of new as well as old ships is here:
http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff111...m/kus2.jpg

Note that the Catamaran shown there is 10% larger than 4.84 catamaran.

Even compared with that one the new one is more than 2 times larger from front and side. On top of that it lost the forward turret. Turns slower now (slower than GC bomber) and responds much worse.

Furthermore, they were changed to 58K energy to make up for that larger model.

This is simply incorrect and shows how much you are informed about the matter.

The turning rates on these ships have not been changed. They are the most agile bombers, up to the point of VHF turning, as they were before.

Incorrect again as stated, above. Use either Flstat (gives only upwards turning) or Datastorm (gives all the numbers used by FL engine). To compare them.
Civilian bomber and GC bomber both turn faster than the new kusari bombers.

Or should these two bombers be made more in-line with other bombers of this mod?

"These two" are perfectly in line with other bombers.


-----------------------------------------------------------------

Dab as far as I have heard you the fight do to your very own mistake of eating a mini while having damaged hull. The Kusari bomber in question had 0 bots at that point.

For the numbers again:

GC VHF has 1.25 rad/second upwards turning

Kusari bomber has 1.0625

=> 0.1875 difference

We just had a fight with 2 Chimaeras vs GC bomber, GC VHF and a transport. The GC bomber had no chance at any point and left when it was about to die.

Chimaera turning 1.17

GC Bomber 1.075

=> 0.095 difference

Your really sure it's the ship that is the problem?

---

Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.

[Kubotan]

The battle Dab is referring to is with me.

I was Akishino Kyokutei against Dab (GC VHF) and his friend flying a GC Bomber.

Now, I was flying the said Kusari Bomber. They both got me down to 12 bots in merely minutes (The bomber is now much slower and alot larger, very easy to hit.) Then I was lucky and managed to supernova the bomber so I got full bots.

After that the battle continued for about five more minutes where Dab was taking my hull down. I had reached 0 bots and 8 hull-bars left where I finally managed for once to hit with the Mini Razor against Dab's GC VHF. This was only accomplished because at that moment he fired a CD and his engine kill was dropped so I had a chance.

Up until that point where I landed my Mini Razor which killed Dab because he had forgotten to repair his hull so it was an insta-kill, he was basically sliding around me and was too fast for me to keep up with.

Your proposal contains flaws in my eyes due to three reasons.

1) It was made just after you were killed which leads to frustration and then when you attempt to write you become irrational. This can clearly be seen when several of your claims in your first post simply turned out to be incorrect facts.

2) Again, just like me on my post about increasing the armor of GC and Hogosha VHF, you initiated with wrong facts.

3) You cannot make a poll about your proposal when your first post contains wrong information, this leads to a false election.

These numbers (highlighted in red) is also very important to read:

For the numbers again:

GC VHF has 1.25 rad/second upwards turning

Kusari bomber has 1.0625

=> 0.1875 difference

We just had a fight with 2 Chimaeras vs GC bomber, GC VHF and a transport. The GC bomber had no chance at any point and left when it was about to die.

Chimaera turning 1.17

GC Bomber 1.075

=> 0.095 difference

Your really sure it's the ship that is the problem?

Kusari VHF versus GC bomber where the GC bomber has approximately twice the amount of turning rate as to GC VHF versus Kusari Bomber.

Edit: Updated, wrote a third reason as to why this proposal is flawed.

[Dab]

First; The removal of fighter weapons and use of bomber-specific would be best. Because even with level 8 and 9 guns, they could still use Adv. and Imp. Debs and take out a fighter shield on a single pass.

Second; The GC bomber is NOT faster than the Kusari Bomber. Not even close. I can bring in Enko who was flying the GC Bomber during that fight. He had no chance because he was being outturned everytime, and the bomber is huge. Refer to the post I just put up about GC and FA bombers.

Also, I was able to drop your hull because I flew around until you engine killed, shot before you could SN me, then turned away. My shield was lowered more than the bomber's was because everytime I fired on it, I lost my shield since he was already turned around by the time I was. This has nothing to do with the razor. If I was angry about that, I'd be calling for an MR nerf, but I'm not. They're fine. The SNing ability is what the problem is, and the agility of the Ku and Dragon bombers. This is something I said since 4.84. I was under the impression that it was fixed for .85, and it has turned out not to be.

The Falcata is much larger than the Ku and BD Cats from any direction you look at it. Its not a 'light' bomber. It turns better than many, but its also very large and an easy target. However, I'd agree on it being a bit too good, especially at SNing fighters. Furthermore, the new Ku/BD Bomber is just as small from the front as the old. From the front it is NOT bigger. From the top, its actually smaller, because the wide engines that make it the same as old are only at the very back. The front 75% is thinner than the old bomber. This is shown in the picture you posted. Also, while you are there, compare to the GC Bomber. The bomber that is 3 times the size from the top, twice from the front and back. Equal only on the side.

And yes, we have at least 3 weeks.. Why not start discussing it immediately instead of waiting for the last minute?

Now you keep citing numbers of turning rads.. But have you even tested them in-game effectively? Because the GC Bomber doesn't turn anywhere close to the Ku and BD bombers. You state it turns twice as fast, when in reality it turns slower, and even gets close to the GC HF's turning. Even the GC HF barely turns any faster than the Ku Bomber. Its such a small difference that you can't use it, because the bomber is turned around by the time you can fire on it. On top of that, from the front, the Ku Bomber is just as small as the GC HF, and can SN easily.

And Kubotan, about my 'flaw,' when else was I supposed to post it? Should I post BEFORE I can test the two ships against each other? Should I fight, then wait a week? Even if I had won that fight, I was still going to post this. People post about the balance issues when they are fresh in their minds and after they have a chance to test the ships against each other.

---

[Kubotan]

Well, what I meant about the "frustration" part is that the moment you got killed during that battle, you immediately began to personal message me about how unbalanced the Kusari Bomber is. This and the fact that your initial post contained several information errors leads to my conclusion that you were irrational during the writing process of this thread. However, it was not meant as a person insult nor as a personal attack, I was simply stating my observations. If you still take it as an insult, I apologize it was not my intention.

All arguments that contains actual numbers and information regarding the ship such as turning rate and etc. I will not discuss with you. Because I have no program or file that has the correct information so I wouldn't know where to start, I assumed since Mjolnir is the balance leader of the development team - his facts would be most likely correct and as such I used his numbers to further extend my own arguments.

Now, about how we experience things are completely subjective. You might "feel" that a said vessel is faster/slower as compared to another, whilst I might "feel" completely the opposite. Yes there usually exist a middle-ground were both parties comes to the same conclusion that Ship A is indeed slower than Ship B. But this is not always the case such as the GC Bomber versus Kusari Bomber situation. The turning-rate numbers presented by Mjolnir further increases this "subjective conflict" as numbers say one thing and you say another.

I agree that you should post this issue as soon as possible, but perhaps you should have waited a day or two and researched further to ensure that your information posted is correct else your whole proposal becomes faulty. And you can't put a poll about the issue either when that said proposal is indeed faulty which leads to votes based on wrong information.

[Grumblesaur]

By removing fighter class weapons from bombers, you basically kill all weapon dealers. Fighters don't have the energy to efficiently fire most codes. This thread isn't like the dozens of others trying to nerf bombers. It's about making certain stats on a few bombers proportional.

Just because you are killed by a bomber while you're in a fighter does NOT mean the bomber needs a nerf or that the fighter needs a buff. Just learn to dodge SNs and MRs.

End this already.

---

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.

[mjolnir]

The front 75% is thinner than the old bomber. This is shown in the picture you posted. Also, while you are there, compare to the GC Bomber. The bomber that is 3 times the size from the top, twice from the front and back. Equal only on the side.

You didn't properly read the description, the Catamaran shown there is 10% enlarger version of the 4.84 one as it was during one stage of development (when we decided to make a new model instead).

And yes, we have at least 3 weeks.. Why not start discussing it immediately instead of waiting for the last minute?

With anauto-updated there's no "last minute". But there's still "too early to tell".

Now you keep citing numbers of turning rads.. But have you even tested them in-game effectively? Because the GC Bomber doesn't turn anywhere close to the Ku and BD bombers. You state it turns twice as fast, when in reality it turns slower, and even gets close to the GC HF's turning. Even the GC HF barely turns any faster than the Ku Bomber. Its such a small difference that you can't use it, because the bomber is turned around by the time you can fire on it.

All the fighters and bombers were tested on one point or another. Talk to Frozen when it comes to GC bomber as he loved the ship's handling.

I do not state that it turns twice as fast in any way, I just present the actual numbers. You are throwing about what you "know".

Should I post BEFORE I can test the two ships against each other? Should I fight, then wait a week? Even if I had won that fight, I was still going to post this. People post about the balance issues when they are fresh in their minds and after they have a chance to test the ships against each other.

You had free access to anything in the 4.85 development since September, that you post first after you loose a fight is suspicious.

---

Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.

[Markam]

Honestly, nothing wrong with this proposal at all, fact is bombers with 48k bomber agility are not balanced at all. Ok, you can say that the GC HF is faster than the KNF bomber, you can even say that the GC bomber is faster too, but you CANT balance kusari ships by comparing them to other kusari ships.

its great that you can say that the likes of the falcata and bh bomber are balanced because you can kill them with xxx ship, its great that you can say cats are ok because they fight red cats and various agile ships in kusari. But it doesnt hold water when they're taken all over the shop, they're used to invade Bretonia and whatever madness the falcata/bh bomber gets up to.

Mjol misses out that all of these turning figures of 48k bombers are equal, or close to the larger VHF's in the mod, the templar, the titan and so forth, and you know all that lovely armour? it means jack **** when it eats a 130k SN. In experienced pilots cases, a long time wasted trying over and over to out turn the bomber. Hoping someone else comes along to 2-1 the bomber is NOT BALANCED.

its frustrating, its plain wrong and all bombers should be moved away from VHF agility, stop comparing them to the fastest VHF as some sort of justification.

It's not just the cat even, the Falcata and other such bombers are an absolute pain in the arse to fight as a VHF, sure you can SN them in a bomber with their.. largeness, but that means nothing to faithful VHF whores.

I'm sure though, that the new 48k bombers are easily handled in group fighter combat, maybe they'll outperform unfairly against caps, but meh..

however for small scale combat, i think that the current state of agile bombers is unacceptable.