So how about the idea of lowering bot count for bombers, say to 50% or 60% of the current amount?
Keep the shield battery count intact (if possible) thought. They are not the problem in any way. It would boost fighters chances in mortal combat shortening the combat and it would still leave skilled bomber pilots a fair chance. This way and fighters would be more useful in escorting caps.
That would also severely hinder a bombers' primary role, anti-cap. Its' not like bombers can kill capital ships without taking -any- damage.
EDIT: which further brings forth the point that any nerfs to bombers anti-fighter capabilities can't directly or indirectly effect their anti-capital abilities.
' Wrote:Subquestion, if I may: Is SuperNova being abused by pirates?
No. I would not say it's abused at all. The problem is that it's an instakill weapon for fighters and other bombers. It's designed to take out capital ships, but people have found a way to use it effectively against smaller craft too. So SNAC is misused from design point of view more likely.
' Wrote:That would also severely hinder a bombers' primary role, anti-cap. Its' not like bombers can kill capital ships without taking -any- damage.
EDIT: which further brings forth the point that any nerfs to bombers anti-fighter capabilities can't directly or indirectly effect their anti-capital abilities.
A bomber's effectiveness would be a little more limited. But considering the fact that catching fire from caps is going to eat away your hull in any case, say 30-40 bots less, will not make a big difference (one full repair less) whereas against fighters that number will cut the fighting time significantly. And besides, caps seem to be in trouble dealing with bombers anyway, so it could level the field to a bit more realistic way.
For the record I fly bombers quite often. And when I do I love the idea how long they can hold out in a fighter furball. BUT when I'm flying a fighter I'm pretty unhappy how long it does take to wear a bomber down. Especially if I'm doing an escort for a cap me being on a bombers tail has no consequence on the fight. Currently it takes 2 very skilled fighter pilots or 3 regular ones to render bomber ineffective just because the bomber pilot knows that he can trade the SNAC run for some damage.
But no one has answered my question, that is it even possible to have a different number of bats and bots for one craft?
' Wrote:That would also severely hinder a bombers' primary role, anti-cap. Its' not like bombers can kill capital ships without taking -any- damage.
EDIT: which further brings forth the point that any nerfs to bombers anti-fighter capabilities can't directly or indirectly effect their anti-capital abilities.
An Armored.... Bomber can't do what iv been doing in my Unarmored Bomber since 4.85's release? Blasphemy.
If you compare my Unarmored Upholder, to another Armored Upholder, I effectively have in comparison, 34 Bots. Yet, it has not diminished my effectiveness in the anti-capital ship functions as a bomber.
Sure, new tactics are needed other than flying head first taking hits as you line up a shot.... But then again you shouldn't be doing that to begin with right?
Thats 85/2.5=34 (2.5 coming from the Mk8 Armor)
Lets use that skill comment here shall we? If someone's able to do it, why cant everyone else?
The only time I ever get shreaded by guns is when I'm flak'ed (note: not flak BS gun, just a general term) by heavy anti fighter guns, in which case Range is your friend. Solaris, multiple fighters, etc.
If nothing else is done, dropping all bomber's bot count by 50% would be all but unreasonable.
I am quite interested to see where this heated debate leads. Some official( modding team) comment about the plans if there is any, to solve this, would be appreciated.
' Wrote:Lets use that skill comment here shall we? If someone's able to do it, why cant everyone else?
That is true, but the difference between my statement and his was that he was proposing a nerf to make up for a lack of peoples' skill. I'm not the one asking for nerfs, here, I'm just trying to be a voice of reason and pointing out why your proposed SNAC nerfs are ridiculous. Why should we nerf other peoples ship just because we can't beat them? By that logic we should nerf... well... everything. Lets just all fly MK I Patriots and be happy.
I don't doubt that people would adjust to the new environment if such a nerf ever would take place, but like I said, bombers are anti-capital ships, and it is merely a side effect that they are also able to kill fighters. You can't nerf what bombers are designed to do to correct what they are not designed to do. That's counter productive.
A bombers anti-capital abilities should always be taken into account when considering nerfs for the ships and/or bombers. If bombers are no longer able to effectively kill capital ships then we get a dangerous imbalance between fighters and capital ships. So in short, if your nerf for a bombers' anti-fighter abilities somehow reduces their anti-capital abilities, then it is not acceptable.
' Wrote:That is true, but the difference between my statement and his was that he was proposing a nerf to make up for a lack of peoples' skill. I'm not the one asking for nerfs, here, I'm just trying to be a voice of reason and pointing out why your proposed SNAC nerfs are ridiculous. Why should we nerf other peoples ship just because we can't beat them? By that logic we should nerf... well... everything. Lets just all fly MK I Patriots and be happy.
I don't doubt that people would adjust to the new environment if such a nerf ever would take place, but like I said, bombers are anti-capital ships, and it is merely a side effect that they are also able to kill fighters. You can't nerf what bombers are designed to do to correct what they are not designed to do. That's counter productive.
A bombers anti-capital abilities should always be taken into account when considering nerfs for the ships and/or bombers. If bombers are no longer able to effectively kill capital ships then we get a dangerous imbalance between fighters and capital ships. So in short, if your nerf for a bombers' anti-fighter abilities somehow reduces their anti-capital abilities, then it is not acceptable.
' Wrote:My opinion, the snack is balanced already, those who go up against bombers in fighters mount missiles and TCDs and MRs, which work perfectly well.
DODGE FFS
Lets go off the "SNAC Change" Topic for once and, reread my post instead of just one line.
My post concerned a completely separate issue, one that other people made mention of in the thread.
The fact that Bombers as is, have not only more armor, but more bots/bats storage.
The least armored bomber, the FA Bomber, with 15200 armor, increased by 2.5x MK8 Armor.
Has (due to the effects of armor reducing damage, decreasing whats needed to repair damage), the equivalent of that same 15200 armored ship, with 212 Bots Storage
For a few more stats:
Fafnir at 26500 armor + 2.5x Armor + 125 bots = Same ship unarmored with 312 Bots
Junker Bomber at 24600 + 2.5x Armor + 260 bots = Same ship, unarmored, with 650 Bots.
Now, bots repair a set amount of 600 points each. Taking that into consideration for the final armor count of each bomber they have damned near Unarmored Gunship stat. In some cases, near Cruiser stat.
FA Bomber has a total of 142,400 armor that must be shot through, before actually killing the thing.
Fafnir = 213,700 armor
Junker Bomber = 414,600 armor
With the Werewolf being the only ship to break most VHF's armor limit going into Bomber stats in armor.
The next in line is Nepthys at 14,500 + 78 bot, +2.5x Armor = Same ship, unarmored, with 195 bots.
A good sized drop there, Nepthys only has 131,500 armor that has to be shot through.
Raisu Wrote:An Armored.... Bomber can't do what iv been doing in my Unarmored Bomber since 4.85's release? Blasphemy. If you compare my Unarmored Upholder, to another Armored Upholder, I effectively have in comparison, 34 Bots. Yet, it has not diminished my effectiveness in the anti-capital ship functions as a bomber.
Sure, new tactics are needed other than flying head first taking hits as you line up a shot.... But then again you shouldn't be doing that to begin with right? Thats 85/2.5=34 (2.5 coming from the Mk8 Armor)
<strike>Lets use that skill comment here shall we? If someone's able to do it, why cant everyone else?</strike> (you've read this line obviously, striking it from quote) The only time I ever get shreaded by guns is when I'm flak'ed (note: not flak BS gun, just a general term) by heavy anti fighter guns, in which case Range is your friend. Solaris, multiple fighters, etc.
If nothing else is done, dropping all bomber's bot count by 50% would be all but unreasonable.
' Wrote:The fact that Bombers as is, have not only more armor, but more bots/bats storage.
The least armored bomber, the FA Bomber, with 15200 armor, increased by 2.5x MK8 Armor.
Has (due to the effects of armor reducing damage, decreasing whats needed to repair damage), the equivalent of that same 15200 armored ship, with 212 Bots Storage
For a few more stats:
Fafnir at 26500 armor + 2.5x Armor + 125 bots = Same ship unarmored with 312 Bots
Junker Bomber at 24600 + 2.5x Armor + 260 bots = Same ship, unarmored, with 650 Bots.
Yes. But Bombers are anti-capital ships. For a fighter to have these statistics, it would be unbalanced, of course. But fighters =/= bombers. Bombers aren't designed with fighting fighters in mind, they are designed to counter capital ships. Their ability to kill fighters is just a side effect of their abilities to kill capital ships. However, fighters are far more effective at killing bombers than the reverse. It just takes a different kind of flying tactic, which few people seem capable of doing unfortunately.
But, in short, don't compare bombers to fighters. They serve different roles, despite the fact that bombers can kill fighters and fighters can kill cap ships.
![[Image: SLRU.png]](http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv46/Nighthawkashes/SLRU.png)
