Bombers have been for a lot of time a point of contention in the player base. Supposedly, they would be excellent with crushing turtles. But putting information on numerous simulators has displayed that their presence against defense rarely makes much of a difference, and there have been numerous threads about it already (example: board.en.ogame.gameforge.com/i…-not-sure-if-right-forum/). Battlecruisers and destroyers are generally seen as a much better investment, and in the late game, RIPs are the go to ship to destroy turtles.
Here's the problem with bombers:
* They are only good for defenses, unlike battlecruisers and destroyers who can take just about everything;
* Even though they should be very useful against defenses, they do not have rapid fire against Gauss cannons, which will be seen a lot against opponents in the same bracket (to say nothing about plasma cannons). The only ship that has that is the Deathstar, at 50;
* They cost too much to field. With the same impulse drive and about the same structural integrity, they cost more than 3x to deploy than battlecruisers, and the same as a destroyer, and it has hyperspace drives. After more research, the costs will be even greater, which makes it more expensive to deploy than destroyers;
* Along the same lines, it has 3 times less speed than the battlecruiser., slowing your fleet. So it costs 3 times more deuterium, while being 3 times slower. Costs got higher;
* It has low cargo capacity, which eats away your storage space from other ships.
* Bulding time is greater than the battlecruiser.
Overall, there is little incentive to field that ship, especially if you are going against ships and defenses.
Given that, my suggestions are (any of them being taken would be good):
* Change the fuel consumption to be about the same of the battlecruiser. The bomber being slow makes it balanced. It being slow, having about the same mineral cost and having higher upkeep makes it a doubtful addition to the fleet;
* Give it rapidfire against gauss cannons, of either 2 or 5. Gameforge could progressively give it more rapidfire until it reaches five, so as to not give much of an impact at first. Could give it a rapid fire of 2 against plasma guns, as no ship in the game has that;
* The bomber description mention it using laser guidance. It could receive some sort of an independent damage buff with laser technology or, even better (if possible), better rapidfire against some targets (which would make sense, since it involves targeting). Currently, there is no benefit in improving laser technogy.
* In order to balance these changes and keeping with the "fortress" theme, given its reasonable structural integrity, heavy fighters could have some form of rapidfire against bombers (a value of only 2), as to emulate a heavily armed, fast moving and well shielded WW2 fighter going against a bomber.
Thanks in advance =)
Here's the problem with bombers:
* They are only good for defenses, unlike battlecruisers and destroyers who can take just about everything;
* Even though they should be very useful against defenses, they do not have rapid fire against Gauss cannons, which will be seen a lot against opponents in the same bracket (to say nothing about plasma cannons). The only ship that has that is the Deathstar, at 50;
* They cost too much to field. With the same impulse drive and about the same structural integrity, they cost more than 3x to deploy than battlecruisers, and the same as a destroyer, and it has hyperspace drives. After more research, the costs will be even greater, which makes it more expensive to deploy than destroyers;
* Along the same lines, it has 3 times less speed than the battlecruiser., slowing your fleet. So it costs 3 times more deuterium, while being 3 times slower. Costs got higher;
* It has low cargo capacity, which eats away your storage space from other ships.
* Bulding time is greater than the battlecruiser.
Overall, there is little incentive to field that ship, especially if you are going against ships and defenses.
Given that, my suggestions are (any of them being taken would be good):
* Change the fuel consumption to be about the same of the battlecruiser. The bomber being slow makes it balanced. It being slow, having about the same mineral cost and having higher upkeep makes it a doubtful addition to the fleet;
* Give it rapidfire against gauss cannons, of either 2 or 5. Gameforge could progressively give it more rapidfire until it reaches five, so as to not give much of an impact at first. Could give it a rapid fire of 2 against plasma guns, as no ship in the game has that;
* The bomber description mention it using laser guidance. It could receive some sort of an independent damage buff with laser technology or, even better (if possible), better rapidfire against some targets (which would make sense, since it involves targeting). Currently, there is no benefit in improving laser technogy.
* In order to balance these changes and keeping with the "fortress" theme, given its reasonable structural integrity, heavy fighters could have some form of rapidfire against bombers (a value of only 2), as to emulate a heavily armed, fast moving and well shielded WW2 fighter going against a bomber.
Thanks in advance =)
