• Home
  • Index
  • Search
  • Download
  • Server Rules
  • House Roleplay Laws
  • Player Utilities
  • Player Help
  • Forum Utilities
  • Returning Player?
  • Toggle Sidebar
Interactive Nav-Map
Tutorials
New Wiki
ID reference
Restart reference
Players Online
Player Activity
Faction Activity
Player Base Status
Discord Help Channel
DarkStat
Server public configs
POB Administration
Missing Powerplant
Stuck in Connecticut
Account Banned
Lost Ship/Account
POB Restoration
Disconnected
Member List
Forum Stats
Show Team
View New Posts
View Today's Posts
Calendar
Help
Archive Mode




Hi there Guest,  
Existing user?   Sign in    Create account
Login
Username:
Password: Lost Password?
 
  Discovery Gaming Community Discovery Development Discovery Mod General Discussion Discovery Mod Balance
« Previous 1 … 38 39 40 41 42 … 55 Next »
Another conceptual thought for bombers

Server Time (24h)

Players Online

Active Events - Scoreboard

Latest activity

Pages (3): « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Another conceptual thought for bombers
Offline lw'nafh
09-13-2009, 01:52 AM,
#11
Member
Posts: 2,648
Threads: 115
Joined: Dec 2006

' Wrote:Bad Idea.

Like I continue to say, what we need to do is:

-Remove the SNAC
-Add additional torpedoes each with it's own use, different damage types, blast ranges, etc.
-Remove all gun hardpoints from bombers, and give each bomber 3-4 missile hardpoints plus a CD hardpoint
-Buff Fighter guns to 1000m/s speed.
I second this motion!

Jokes.

Bombers should be left as they are, I think.

вellυм ѕe ιpѕυм aleт
  Reply  
Offline reavengitair
09-13-2009, 02:50 AM,
#12
Member
Posts: 3,399
Threads: 108
Joined: Dec 2008

Yup

Keep bombers as they are!
  Reply  
Offline Death.RunningVerminator
09-13-2009, 02:55 AM,
#13
Member
Posts: 4,308
Threads: 143
Joined: Nov 2008

No offense, but you should have stopped at, "Greetings discovery!" After that, you are no longer safe from flame.

*cough* no *cough*

Too much talk of bombers and modding them. It's quite disturbing.
Reply  
Offline farmerman
09-13-2009, 04:04 AM,
#14
Off in space for a bit
Posts: 3,215
Threads: 162
Joined: Jul 2008

Ok then, there seems to be a desire to keep them as they are.

Of course, why is there constantly issues being thrown around? Clearly something needs to be adjusted, and we should explore all possibilities to get to the point where everyone is happy. The one issue is certainly that bombers can generally kill caps before any fighter escorts can take them out, making escorts not very useful.

As an alternative, what about making supernovas far more vulnerable to explosions (mines and fighter missiles)?

[Image: 4986_s.gif]
Faction info links: Samura Heavy Industries : LWB : Watchers
Reply  
Offline n1kodemus
09-13-2009, 07:27 AM,
#15
Member
Posts: 394
Threads: 17
Joined: Apr 2009

Is this a joke?
You can't be serious. Right?
Reply  
Camtheman Of Freelancer4Ever
09-13-2009, 09:24 AM,
#16
Unregistered
 

Ah, No.
Bombers arent supposed to be absolutely invincible to caps, If you get close enough, your basically dead.

However, I agree with tenacity, so far, sadly, this community is run by bomberwhores so the lobby against
The Way will be quite large.

Balance is currently not correct.

As Ive been saying before.

2 fighters and a capital ship cruiser or higher in a fleet. Two-3 bombers come along. The cap will die before the fighters can kill the bombers.

Thats not right, people, but blindfolds are basically a requirement in this community, so ill just leave it at that.
Reply  
Offline farmerman
09-13-2009, 09:48 AM,
#17
Off in space for a bit
Posts: 3,215
Threads: 162
Joined: Jul 2008

Quote:2 fighters and a capital ship cruiser or higher in a fleet. Two-3 bombers come along. The cap will die before the fighters can kill the bombers.

That was exactly the sort of thought I was trying to come up with solutions for. The numbers here may make things a bit much for caps (which would probably need adjustment), but they would get torn apart by fighters. That's less armor than a Griffin in the example.

[Image: 4986_s.gif]
Faction info links: Samura Heavy Industries : LWB : Watchers
Reply  
Offline tansytansey
09-13-2009, 10:04 AM,
#18
Member
Posts: 4,099
Threads: 67
Joined: Aug 2008

' Wrote:As Ive been saying before.

2 fighters and a capital ship cruiser or higher in a fleet. Two-3 bombers come along. The cap will die before the fighters can kill the bombers.

Thats not right, people, but blindfolds are basically a requirement in this community, so ill just leave it at that.
You're right, that's not correct. I would be happy to have a way for fighters to protect cruisers/battleships properly providing it doesn't remove a bombers ability to kill an unguarded cruiser/battleship. Because right now, every suggestion that's being made will make it easier for caps to kill bombers, which means people still won't get escorts, they will just fly solo and beat the crap out of bombers.

And that's not right either. So you have to ask yourself what you'd prefer, as a fighter pilot. Bombers killing Caps, or Caps killing you?

http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv46/Ni...gcloudscopy.png
Image turned into a URL because it made your sig too tall. -Zuke
|Ashes and Draya's Epic Adventure|Ashes "Nighthawk" Yotaka|Nightfall|Eva Jones|
[5:50:49 PM] JakeSG (William Darkmoor) says: I like you, Ashes. You're more cynical than God.
[Image: SLRU.png]
  Reply  
Offline ... kur nubėgo?
09-13-2009, 11:17 AM,
#19
Member
Posts: 3,019
Threads: 114
Joined: Jul 2008

Oh noz ... O NOZ... two bombers can kill a bs slowly..

Two VHF's can kill a batltecruisser ! The only reason no one whines about it, its becouse nota lot of people are doing it.

[sarcasm]A VHF can kill slow gunboat one on one if teh gunboat captain is equiped with cerberus ands uch, so perhaps nerf them too?

Oh and LF, dies before VHF.. light fighters should be able to outmanuver VHF.. so perhaps lets nerf VHF

O noz, starflea dies to a Zoner juggernaut, nerf it too ! [/sarcasm]

Omega Pirates Guild
History of OPG | Antonio "Vilkas" Devivar
Reply  
Offline Lanakov
09-13-2009, 12:13 PM,
#20
MNG
Posts: 989
Threads: 73
Joined: Nov 2008

Very interesting and constructive, vilkas, as usual.

I like Ktayn's idea, to be honest.There would be some balancing to be made about proportions (500% would be too much in my opinion).
But it's a really good basis if balanced correctly.

And that would please all the "GIT ESCORTZ" supporters, as caps would effectively be munched if let alone.


Feedback, insults, marriage proposals and declarations of fealty
(06-14-2019, 12:25 PM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: If everyone was a bit more like Lanakov, the entire world would be more positive. Including pregnancy tests.
Reply  
Pages (3): « Previous 1 2 3 Next »


  • View a Printable Version
  • Subscribe to this thread


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)



Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2025 MyBB Group. Theme © 2014 iAndrew & DiscoveryGC
  • Contact Us
  •  Lite mode
Linear Mode
Threaded Mode