(09-24-2018, 04:26 AM)Unseelie Wrote: The corona bomber must use a different weapon to crack a cruiser's shield, all of which require it to get inside your effective range.
The ASURAS has longer range that the Corona, just sayin'...
So it does.
As it turns out, so does the SNAC, which the ASURAS seems to be slightly better than in both range and speed, but the SNAC hasn't ruined capital ships forever.
Use ASURAS as your shield buster, and then bring out the Corona. Problem solved.
the corona is good, hitscan weapon that requires you to be still for few moments which make you vulnerable to damage.
i like the concept but the range is the issue. nothing a cruiser,bc or bs can do to a bomber which sits at max range and spams corona.
before this, if you saw multiple bombers logging you knew that you could bait them close and get good hits in or kill them but now its certain death.
better to fly snubs now
(09-24-2018, 05:30 AM)Reddy Wrote: the corona is good, hitscan weapon that requires you to be still for few moments which make you vulnerable to damage.
i like the concept but the range is the issue. nothing a cruiser,bc or bs can do to a bomber which sits at max range and spams corona.
before this, if you saw multiple bombers logging you knew that you could bait them close and get good hits in or kill them but now its certain death.
better to fly snubs now
If a bomber sits at max Corona range, it will easily get nuked by bs solaris...
Ive not used nor encountered the weapon however i think all things considering the recent changes to bombers is a good one.
I appreciate that there are alot of players on the server who use bombers to fight other snubs and were very *through gritted teeth* good at hitting SNACs shots and such.
The thing is in a more RP setting, bombers should be bombing capitol ships, that's their purpose, there's nothing wrong with them having the ability to defend themselves from Snubs but they shouldn't be used for anti fighter duties over an actual fighter.
And this sort of philosophy can be seen in games and other settings alike.
In Star Wars the Y-Wing is the dedicated Rebellion Bomber, yes it can engage fighters but its slow and not very manuverable so it requires X / A Wing escorts.
in the Homeworld series the Bomber squadrons can engage Fighters but they do next to no damage and can quickly be destroyed by fighter squads unless supported by anti fighter ships.
In Star Conflict (i think) you can play as a bomber and unless you have someone flying escort with you, you will get your arse handed to you if your engaged by a fighter.
Check any franchise that has a flight focus whether real life based or fictional, bombers are always treated as large slow heavy armoured ordinance delivery platforms that are escorted by a mass of fighters.
This also applies to capitol ships, in any setting, fiction or IRL big ships always have anti fighter capabilities which can deal with one or two attackers but unless the ship is set up to deal with fighters its defences are needing to be bolstered by Fighters.
All this change does it make the dynamic of fleet battles more varied. Last big fleet battle i was in essentially was almost all capitol ships and a couple of snub craft, a mix of bombers and fighters. The bombers spent more time fighting the fighters then doing their actual role.
It means that people are going to have to consider taking snub craft on the regular, seeing gunboats and smaller cap ships actually have anti fighter set ups. It gives more variance to whats needed in fights i think.
Back in the day i forget how many years ago, engaging another fighter that wasnt a bomber, in a bomber was a really stupid idea, you just didnt do it, there was alot of focus on protecting bombers back then. This just brings that dynamic back if you ask me
(09-23-2018, 11:50 PM)Lythrilux Wrote: Actually hang on, maybe this is the way forward?
Perhaps we can look at suitable ways to buff capital weaponry to make them better at anti-snub if bombers are reasonably terrifying now.
I couldn't possibly put to words how much I detest both this individual statement and the overarching philosophy it represents.
I'm just thinking outside the box. For too long bombers have felt pretty puny and jacking them up to being very potent, and then designing the anti-snub cap guns (or redesigning capital interactions with snubs entirely) might be the way forward. So what if fighters find themsleves in a position where they can't sent caps anymore. Fighters should not be going anywhere near capitals and vice versa, bombers (and to an extent gunboats) should be the bridge between the two.
People tend to forget that it isn't battleships vs VHF's anymore. It's (both heavy and light variants) battleships, battlecruisers, cruisers, gunboats, SHF's, bombers, VHF's, HF's and LF's. And that's without transports.
There is no one single bridge that is going to make it work. You'll need a lot of bridges and a lot of walls to keep each section to its own, and in the end people will still cry because their build doesn't allow it to deal with type A and type B at the same time.
Yesterday, I've heard of an engagement of a Corona Bomber versus a transport (Percheron). Percheron won because Corona doesn't hit that hard. When a SNAC or some Scorchers would be the prime answer.
My advice? Dress for the date you're going to have. Same philosophy applies to capitals. Some get Solaris, others get Heavy Mortars. VHF's, high refire for group fights, lower refires to duels. Etc.
The current Corona range seems to be around 1000m regardless of the infocard claiming 1200. The fact you see the crosshair doesn't actually mean your shots would reach the target, which I found kinda weird and it took me a bit to learn to ignore it and get a tad closer. Not saying it's balanced, just sharing my experience with the gun.
There is no risk for bombers when they attack cruiser or battlecruiser. Against Battleships it doesnt really matter because you can also hit battleships with snac from even more longer distances compared to Corona
I think reducing range of the Corona will work. There shouldn't be any High Reward No Risk weapon. I'd still go for more Missile/Torpedo launchers for Bombers. I don't know why devs bother making stupid beam hitscan weapon when you can make Torpedo/Missile that is hard to counter with Flaks.
(09-24-2018, 10:57 AM)Titan* Wrote: I don't know why devs bother making stupid beam hitscan weapon when you can make Torpedo/Missile that is hard to counter with Flaks.
Because missiles and torpedoes are completely dependent on the server not sperging out, which it loves to do in big fights or under higher load. Missiles are great when the server gives them proper tracking, but are absolutely garbage when it doesn't.
Corona is the biggest bullsh*t ever. 1200 range is just ridiculously op against caps bigger than GBs. You can just box and nothing can hit you. So what now? Effectively denying caps fun. Lets remove caps and stick to eagles and sabres at this point perhaps