Remove Bombers from Galactic Starfighter

[OscarDivine]

I have been. Messing around with EMP missile hit and runs on satellites during Domination with a Pike. It's effective in mine sweeping a satellite and disabling most of the nearby satellite huggers. Requires two barrel rolls and will become much less effective post patch because of this.

[Morgrid]

Bawwwwwwwwwwwwww whine whine whine bawwwwwww

 

Maybe you should work on your piloting before asking for things to be removed.

[Mallorik]

Maybe you should work on your piloting before asking for things to be removed.

 

So he should work on his piloting so he will be able to counter a ship that requires no piloting? lol anyone that flies bombers is a joke.

[Morgrid]

So he should work on his piloting so he will be able to counter a ship that requires no piloting? lol anyone that flies bombers is a joke.

 

Fly a bomber for a week and come back.

 

And I mean fly it, not sit under a sat or in a little hidey hole and camp. Put on your big boy pants and get into dogfights with something slow and ungainly.

 

Missile breaks are for sissies.

[Armonddd]

Fly a bomber for a week and come back.

 

And I mean fly it, not sit under a sat or in a little hidey hole and camp. Put on your big boy pants and get into dogfights with something slow and ungainly.

 

Missile breaks are for sissies.

 

but why would I want to play a bomber suboptimally

[Morgrid]

but why would I want to play a bomber suboptimally

 

How do you know it's sub optimal? You're out there doing damage and assisting your team.

 

You've seen me fly my bomber before. It's not that crazy to think of.

[Armonddd]

How do you know it's sub optimal? You're out there doing damage and assisting your team.

 

You've seen me fly my bomber before. It's not that crazy to think of.

 

Yeah, and every time you ditch the point I cheer because it gives me a chance to capture it. And any time you don't, you're playing the optimal but boring way.

[wvwraith]

I like moving around a lot in tdms when I'm playing my bomber. Its pretty fun to drop mines and drones right in the middle of engaging ships. Sit back and watch the chaos.

[Highborne]

I've had several battles in Starfighter pvp now in which I can say the enemy won completely because of their bomber. The battle I just lost a few minutes before posting this was the final straw for me; a single bomber using a Warcarrier bomber ship had set up healing probes, a railgun turret and a rocket turret around the two satellites that his team controlled.

 

So report them for hacking. One bomber can lay out two drones at a time - one offensive, one defensive. They can't have a railgun turret AND a rocket turret AND a repair drone.

 

Or perhaps there was more than "a single bomber"?

 

This, in addition to defensive turrets and player defenders made assaulting the two satellites completely impossible.

 

Two words: Ion. Cleave,

 

Bombers HATE gunships, because gunships can take out anything and everything they lay down, quicker than they can lay it down and from outside any plausible retaliation range.

 

Even with my entire team gunning at the one satellite, (which had only two enemy players defending it) we were unable to take it; the enemy was being healed, and defended by railguns and rockets.

 

In other words, your team were a pack of lolscouts who couldn't be arsed hopping into their gunships and actually using tactics. Got it.

 

I've had about a dozen battles go like this within my past 30 played, and I am sick and tired of it. Either remove the bomber ship type, or severely tone down the effectiveness of their abilities. And it's worth mentioning that in the battle I just lost, while piloting a reasonably upgraded Scout fighter, said bomber was able to kill me in four shots. I was full health before it started shooting.

 

Ah. You are a lolscout. Here's a hint: Don't take a scout up against a bomber - use it to shred gunships or outmaneuver strike fighters instead. And if you must attack a bomber with the fighter type that's worst suited to the task, use your frigging missiles.

 

This has to STOP, Bioware. One ship can now monopolize the entire field, and it's ruining the fun of Starfighter pvp. Of course, you'll never hear complaints from the people who actually pilot these bombers. But speaking from the general SWtoR community,

 

Don't speak for me. I've never so much as entered a bomber cockpit, but I'm perfectly fine with them in the game.

 

I can say that the bomber class is in need of some serious nerfing to bring it back into a balance with the original three ship classes.

 

Or you need to learn how to play, now that scouts aren't God Mode anymore. Speaking as someone who's had to deal with pestiferous scouts in many a GSF match, all I can say is this: Call a waaambulance.

 

Bombers are fine, and such tweaking as is needed is just that - tweaking, not taking a nerf-by-four to them until you're happy that they're just another flavour of meat for your lasers. Grow up.

[Highborne]

If your group is having problems with bombers, then it's because none of you are using the right ships. This game has 2 options for dealing with bombers very effectively.

 

1: Nova Dive (republic) Blackbolt (imperial)- EMP pulse: this ability will completely wipeout mines from any area (or make them not function for 15 seconds, while you clear them out yourself) This will destroy seeker mines outright, as well as concussion and seismic mines. you'll need to target and destroy the repair/railgun/missile drones, but they won't lock or work for 15 seconds.

 

2: Pike (republic), Rycar (imperial)- EMP Missile

 

so you see, it's not the Devs fault nobody in your group uses either of these options. It's your own.

 

Here's a third way - any gunship's ion cannon with the cleave set up will clear out drones, mines or anything else a bomber can lay down - well out of retaliation range.

[Jasa]

Single bomber isn't usually a problem if there isn't some good support backing it up, but I do agree with OP that bombers in domination unbalance the game really badly.

 

I have pike and scout with upgraded emp (scout missing final tier) and problem with scout is long cooldown time and need to be close to mines/drones or otherwise you don't get them all. Problem with pike is long-ish lockdown time and getting emp missile locked on bomber orbiting satellite can be hard. Ofcourse you can target drones or something else, but often there is enough chaos to make it hard no matter what you choose. Long cooldown becomes a problem, if bomber has deployed mines alot earlier and using emp missile/field will take down mines deployed, but due to bomber's short cooldown on mines they may be able to lay them all back right away. They are slow and unmaneuvereable so I understand that they need atleast that defence mechanism... other ships just can't really do anything else than backoff or eat the dmg at that point and yes I know it's possible to shoot mine on the moment they deploy it, but it does require certain amount of "luck".

 

Pike with protons might do decent job too, but long lockdown time with them may be a problem too. My scout on other hand isn't really optimal for going againts bombers yet and I have to try out sabotage drone at some point.

 

Gunship may be best tool to take them down, but killing bomber orbiting satellite isn't easy when it probably takes atleast 4 shots to take them down even with mastered gunship that is if they don't get behind some object to recover their shields.

 

Railgun drone never missing is quite annoying thing since apart from placing it in decent spot it requires no skill from player. Atleast gunship pilot can miss every now and then.

 

That is one on one... but atleast I have rarely gone againts them 1v1... From my experience it's both teams on 1 satellite and 1-2 defending 2nd satellite of team winning. Going to 2nd satellite with force usually means that other team moves to defend it too, if it's even possible to coordinate decent attack plan with pugs. Hyperspace beacon "hidden" somewhere close by can make big difference in the outcome, but even without it taking down bomber usually means that other ships can last long enough for bomber to get back to satellite and taking out other ships usually means that by the time bomber/s is down other ships are back to defend the satellite. Repair drones make it even harder. It's always easier to take down bomber closing in than one orbiting satellite so it doesn't matter if attacking team tries to get their own bombers in.

 

More bombers there is harder it becomes. I think max I have seen in enemy team is 6/12 that's 3 per satellite. My point is that while there is tools to take them down EMP's and gunships it's not easy no matter how unmaneuverable things they are and no matter whether they have no evasive moves or not. They just usually have too much support and they give too much support to other ships that you can take them down without really experienced or/and coordinated team. One problem with bombers may be the way people build their ships. Alot of people especially those who started in early access may not have chosen components that help againts bombers, because they rather have their mastered ones.

 

That is just my opinion which I base to my experience. I admit that I'm not best pilot in the game and maybe I need to learn to play againts bombers.. or it's possible that rest of my team has been full of noobs, but I think bombers are too unbalancing in domination at the moment.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

More bombers there is harder it becomes. I think max I have seen in enemy team is 6/12 that's 3 per satellite. My point is that while there is tools to take them down EMP's and gunships it's not easy no matter how unmaneuverable things they are and no matter whether they have no evasive moves or not. They just usually have too much support and they give too much support to other ships that you can take them down without really experienced or/and coordinated team. One problem with bombers may be the way people build their ships. Alot of people especially those who started in early access may not have chosen components that help againts bombers, because they rather have their mastered ones.

 

I've found Type 1 strikers using Ion cannons, Heavy cannons, and concussion missiles work really well if you're team can provide even half decent cover for you while you take them down. Ion cannons will shred away their shields in no time and heavy cannons + concussion missiles wipe them out really fast if they can't break LOS (I find retro thrusters very useful in countering efforts to get so close that I can't hit due to the silly poor accuracy at point blank). Ions also mean that they become vulnerable to fire from allies that have weaker weapons/weapons that lack shield piercing.

 

Since a bomber's mines/drones disappear when they die if you can down them fast enough you'll be able to tank whatever damage the drones dish out (I use quick charge shields with the 60% regen under fire + large reactor).

 

With that combo I can down a bomber very very fast if they don't have a good fighter escort. When the scouts on my team engage the escorting fighters (ie perform their role as interceptors) rather than try to pretend that we're playing pre-2.6 GSF this set up also works well even if the other team has decent fighter pilots.

 

I'm inclined to say though that the Pike or GS may be better suited to bomber hunting when you have a bunch of scouts on your team hell bent on clearing mines by banzai charging into them instead of keeping a bomber's fighter escort busy. I think a lot of the problems with bombers is that scouts aren't performing their role as interceptors either out of ignorance of what their role is or stubborn refusal to accept that 2.6 happened and target bombers instead of escorting fighters. The natural result being the escort fighters shoot down the scouts and then target/shoot down the strikers that do have the capability to take out bombers before they can take out the bomber.

Edited March 9, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[Altheran]

I've found Type 1 strikers using Ion cannons, Heavy cannons, and concussion missiles work really well if you're team can provide even half decent cover for you while you take them down. Ion cannons will shred away their shields in no time and heavy cannons + concussion missiles wipe them out really fast if they can't break LOS (I find retro thrusters very useful in countering efforts to get so close that I can't hit due to the silly poor accuracy at point blank). Ions also mean that they become vulnerable to fire from allies that have weaker weapons/weapons that lack shield piercing.

 

At last I see someone else using the same load than me.

 

I remember the old thread where people shared their Strike builds and saw everyone using some kind of heavy/light combo or Light/Ion with clusters. I was a bit worried to be the only one using a Heavy/Ion(/Conc) build

[Gavin_Kelvar]

At last I see someone else using the same load than me.

 

I remember the old thread where people shared their Strike builds and saw everyone using some kind of heavy/light combo or Light/Ion with clusters. I was a bit worried to be the only one using a Heavy/Ion(/Conc) build

 

If I recall right you posted your build in that thread and that thread is where I got the idea to use that build. After trying it out and finding it was both highly effective against bombers and as a general purpose build I've become quite devoted to it as my permanent load out.

[Altheran]

If I recall right you posted your build in that thread and that thread is where I got the idea to use that build. After trying it out and finding it was both highly effective against bombers and as a general purpose build I've become quite devoted to it as my permanent load out.

 

Yeah, I did post mine there. Pleased you liked it, then.

 

Amongst all the possibilities it offers, my personnal preference is finding an unaware scout, locking a conc while stripping shields with Ions. Obliteration guaranteed.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Yeah, I did post mine there. Pleased you liked it, then.

 

Amongst all the possibilities it offers, my personnal preference is finding an unaware scout, locking a conc while stripping shields with Ions. Obliteration guaranteed.

 

I've done that! The first time I pulled that off I was completely sold it was a solid build. My second favorite thing is stripping the shields from a scout that boldly rushes into the fray and watching them panic when they realize they have no shields. Sweet sweet vengeance for all those pre-2.6 days of scout dominance.

[Jasa]

I've found Type 1 strikers using Ion cannons, Heavy cannons, and concussion missiles work really well if you're team can provide even half decent cover for you while you take them down. Ion cannons will shred away their shields in no time and heavy cannons + concussion missiles wipe them out really fast if they can't break LOS (I find retro thrusters very useful in countering efforts to get so close that I can't hit due to the silly poor accuracy at point blank). Ions also mean that they become vulnerable to fire from allies that have weaker weapons/weapons that lack shield piercing.

 

Thanks for the tip I will have to try out heavy cannons and concussions since so far I have only used ion/quads/clusters build on type 1 striker. While it has been effective againts bombers every now and then it may be little too close range focused.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Thanks for the tip I will have to try out heavy cannons and concussions since so far I have only used ion/quads/clusters build on type 1 striker. While it has been effective againts bombers every now and then it may be little too close range focused.

 

I use range capacitor to help in that regard, it really helps you stay out of range of drones/mines while you take out the bomber. I'm able to begin firing my heavies shortly after I begin my missile lock and not have to get so close with Ions. I use retros to help put distance between me and the bomber after I've stripped away their shields while still maintaining fire on them. Usually works out pretty well if allied fighters keep the bomber's escort off my back.

 

The main plus I've found with heavies is that running the armor + shield piercing upgrades means against a bomber I start doing damage to their hull before I'm in Ion range and it sometimes allows me to get that kill shot in even if they've started to get their shields back up. It also works well against shielded drones as I can bring them down just about as fast as the bomber spits them out.

 

The armor piercing also gives me a tool to bring down sat defense turrets very fast which allows me or allies to quickly begin capping a sat. For domination I've found that's really helpful since I can also quickly eliminate the turrets that might otherwise help defend a camping bomber.

 

You do loose a bit of close range ability but I've found that if you switch to Ions and focus on stripping away their shields then either allies with better close range weaponry kill them for you or it allows your heavies to directly damage their hull. If it doesn't kill them it usually is enough to make them retreat.

Edited March 10, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[Dragaunus]

I'm all for the removal or alteration of the Bomber Class.

 

He who plants the most rail guns, turrets, and mines owns the satellite. The bombers then just fly about or sit still, letting NPC's do the work.

 

Before it was about good piloting, evasive action, lining up the shot, the kind of thing you'd expect from Star Wars. I don't remember the Imperial Bombers dropping AI turrets and toys to defend the Death Star, do you?

 

Now it's just let your 'pets' do the work, and players playing the most bombers and dropping the most 'pet mines' win.

 

I have no problem with them being the GSF equivalent of 'Healers' with healing probes; that's an interesting dynamic. I have no problem with them some day playing a more realistic 'Bomber Role' if we ever have matches involving taking out capital ships/space stations.

Edited March 10, 2014 by Dragaunus

[zaskar]

I'm all for the removal or alteration of the Bomber Class.

 

He who plants the most rail guns, turrets, and mines owns the satellite. The bombers then just fly about or sit still, letting NPC's do the work.

 

Before it was about good piloting, evasive action, lining up the shot, the kind of thing you'd expect from Star Wars. I don't remember the Imperial Bombers dropping AI turrets and toys to defend the Death Star, do you?

 

Now it's just let your 'pets' do the work, and players playing the most bombers and dropping the most 'pet mines' win.

 

I have no problem with them being the GSF equivalent of 'Healers' with healing probes; that's an interesting dynamic. I have no problem with them some day playing a more realistic 'Bomber Role' if we ever have matches involving taking out capital ships/space stations.

 

You do realize that three (scouts, strikes & gunships) ships have weapons (emp & ion) to turn off/destroy all of the dreaded drones and mines long enough to kill a bomber? There is plenty of balance between the ship types, as changes to the game happen, don't you think new tactics will be needed?

 

Adapt or die, it's a law of the universe.

[Dragaunus]

You do realize that three (scouts, strikes & gunships) ships have weapons (emp & ion) to turn off/destroy all of the dreaded drones and mines long enough to kill a bomber? There is plenty of balance between the ship types, as changes to the game happen, don't you think new tactics will be needed?

 

Adapt or die, it's a law of the universe.

 

Yet the class doesn't focus on flying or ship-to-ship combat, it focuses on pets doing the work! That's my main point as apposed to adapting to change. Strait up, obviously; I and others don't like this change.

 

It removes the 'twitch based' portion of GSF. I'm sure you and others will argue still despite that "Well it's a new tactic, yadda yadda..." but before it was about piloting as apposed to dependency on NPCs.

 

While yes, different, does Ground PvP have a class that can drop AI controlled mines or soldiers to defend an area or rack up kills for the player? As far as I know, till some troll posts me otherwise, I don't believe so.

 

While not a Flight Simulator (another thing people hate on folks for wishing it was more like), I don't recall the greats like Wing Commander and Descent: FreeSpace / FreeSpace 2 where they had a class of ship, or Bombers for that matter, specced to just drop mines/turrets/etc. to defend a key asset or rack up kills.

 

Yes, the developers gave us abilities/powers to compensate for Bombers and Mines. You can call that 'balanced.' However I feel it has taken away from the ship-to-ship combat feel of GSF which is true Star Wars / Airborne Combat Genres in general.

 

I at first felt similar about gunships, but it is true you can even engage a sniping gunship in ship-to-ship combat; you risk an objective to chase a gunship (a tactical choice), but you can force it to face you player-to-player; no dependency on the accuracy of AI gunners/explosives of any kind.

 

Two bombers creating a armada of traps around themselves and an objective which forces you (at present) to equip powers with no purpose other than destroying mines is just not that fun in my opinion.

 

At least name the ship a 'Mine Layer' instead if that's how it's played. Bombers dodge incoming heavy fire to deploy missiles and torpedoes at large targets, not release computer controlled toys to take the shot for them instead of themselves with a player in their targeting reticle.

 

I think I've made my peace from my standpoint. Again it's an opinion, which I have a feeling many will disagree with or worse will combat with heckling as apposed to facts or constructive criticism.

 

I only hope it's something, regardless of whether change comes or it stays the same, that is looked into by the Development Team regarding this recent addition to GSF.

 

Thank you all for letting me share my views on the matter.

Edited March 10, 2014 by Dragaunus

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Before it was about good piloting, evasive action, lining up the shot, the kind of thing you'd expect from Star Wars. I don't remember the Imperial Bombers dropping AI turrets and toys to defend the Death Star, do you?

 

It still really is. To some degree I'd say that bombers actually make it even more about good piloting. It's not longer just being evasive, line up the shot, and position yourself in the most advantageous way, it's also about understanding your ship's role which is the greatest hallmark of a good pilot, even more so that the previously mentioned attributes.

 

Previously I think a lot of people could pass off as "good pilots" so long as they knew how to get on a guy's tail, shoot them down, and not run into a wall doing so. There was no requirement to actually understand the strengths/weakness of your ship and understand the roles of different ships. Now with bombers that isn't the case as they will punish pilots who only think about positioning, evasive action, and lining up the shot without also factoring in the role of their ship.

 

Certainly there are cases where bombers lock down 2/3 of the sats but I'd hesitate to declare that, without bombers, the outcome would have been different.

[Dragaunus]

Previously I think a lot of people could pass off as "good pilots" so long as they knew how to get on a guy's tail, shoot them down, and not run into a wall doing so.

 

But that, in itself, is what keeps real pilots alive! Having the best ship or components won't save you if you can't pull a Han Solo-like turn to evade that enemy fighter that either leaves him off your tail or ends his life face-first into an asteroid.

 

I miss that sort of star fighter experience, that's all...

Edited March 10, 2014 by Dragaunus

[zaskar]

I fly my bomber like anything else, my piloting skills around a sat is what keeps me alive when I'm flying vs. the best pilots in the game, not my drones as they are disabled while we melee. Looking at my records, my heavy lasers do just as much damage as my drones. Everyone is lucky they did not give bombers quads or burst, then they would be op.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

But that, in itself, is what keeps real pilots alive!

 

Granted, but knowing your ship's role, it's strengths/weakness and making tactical/target choices based on that understanding is even more important to being a good pilot. You can know how to perform every aerial maneuver and have a detailed knowledge of how to evade enemy fire while shooting down your target but it won't matter much if you lack the understanding of what your ship can and cannot do (by which I mean not understanding turn rate/speed etc. but rather what targets your ship is ideally suited for combating and what situations play to their crafts strengths while doing their best to avoid combat against ships or situations that play to their weaknesses).

 

Do I get annoyed by bombers? Sure they tick me off some times but honestly what ticks me off more is when I see my team's Type 2 scouts hell bent on trying to kill a bomber instead of taking out the bomber's escorts and when I see Type 1/Type 2 strikers or GS too obsessed with padding their K/D to be bothered to focus on shutting down the enemy bombers which may in turn force the scouts to try to take out bombers.

 

When everyone on my team understands the capabilities and limitations of their ships and flies accordingly usually we have plenty of good old fashioned Star Wars dogfights as the scouts intercept enemy fighters which clears the way for the strikers to use their heavy weapons to take out bombers & mop up any fighters that survive the scouts with GS/bombers providing supporting fire as needed. That's what happens in the matches I've been in where both teams are of comparable skill and fly their ships according to their roles/strengths (note that I never cue in a pre-made and always solo cue).

 

The only times I've found bombers to be horrible monsters of death are in heavily slanted matches where we would have probably lost even if there hadn't been bombers. To be fair sometimes we also loose because my team had bombers and the extent of their contribution (typically in domination matches) was to set up shop at the only sat we had get less than 4 kills/assists combined. I very much doubt that those pilots that lack even the basic comprehension that what they are doing is what is causing us to loose would be of much greater value in the cockpit of a different fighter.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong about the delight of pure dogfighting (although I would not go back to pre-2.6 as dogfighting was arguably worse then because of scouts abusing the evasion mechanic). Nor am I saying that the devs shouldn't closely watch bombers (and all ships for that matter) to ensure they aren't performing beyond expected parameters or experiencing glitches that make them too powerful (read fixing drone LOS/missile break issues and similar). Just pointing out that it's entirely possible to still have dogfights it just requires more tactical play and a degree of understanding the capabilities of your ship that was not required pre-bomber.

Edited March 11, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar