Stealth bomber flexibility

As of now and for as long as i can remember, stealth bombers have always been extremely limited in their use for niche situations. I have always had an affinity for these ships though and have tried to utilize them for more diverse situations.
One of my favorite is to put small arms on them and use them as a hunting ship. The problem with this is the mismatch of high slots homogenized compatibility. It doesnt really make sense why we have 3 launcher slots and 2 turret slots. it leaves room for mixed weapon builds which are ok but certainly not ideal. allowing the ship to fit 4 blasters or 4 launchers would greatly improve its ability to step outside the box with much more efficiency… especially allowing for 4 launchers since we could just change launchers for large ship engagement to small ship engagements that we expect.
why not add a launcher slot so we can field 4 rocket launchers instead of 2 blasters and 2 rocket launchers or 3/1.

3 Launchers - 2 Utility
3 Torpedoes + Cloak + Bomb Launcher

Ship does its job. What’s the problem?

There’s no need to change the way modules are fitted on a ship just because you personally want to do something off meta with them. That’s not how CCP does it.

4 Likes

I wonder why CCP could possibly not want to give stealth bombers 33% more launcher slots…

1 Like

Um, no. Stealth bombers already have their uses, and are good at what they do. They don’t need to be turned into swiss army knives. Instead, you should pick the right tool for the job, whether it be a stealth bomber, or something else.

T2 ships are, in general, meant to be highly specialized.

Stealth bombers are (largely) working as intended: a covert glass cannon with good application and range and almost zero tank.

-1

Niche situations is by design. Perhaps you are looking for an Astero.

1 Like

kinda hilarious how people who respond to these posts are like “no, thats different than it is now, so why would they do that?” haha.
because eve is all about being able to do things multiple ways from different points of view and methodology. your arguments are all entirely moot because the ship already possesses the capability to do what i do with it and am suggesting, its just relatively inefficient due to dual weapon types. try to step out of your little box if you are responding to a well thought out question. they clearly intended it to be able to fit frigate weapons otherwise it wouldnt have 2 turret slots. the only thing a 4th launcher slot would change is it’s ability to unify small arms if desired. or give it 4 turret slots… either way works and doesnt change the intended design.
and to the guy who complained about a 4th launcher slot, theres no possible way you could add another torpedo launcher to the ship so thats also entirely irrelevant.

No, sorry, you are hilariously wrong here. This is not how CCP does balance patches on their ships.

“Well, as a random forum goer, I think it’s ‘doesn’t change the intended design’ so CCP should listen to me and ignore all of their backend stats and information.” lol yeah, give me a break, kid.

1 Like

{citation needed}

1 Like

That’s the thing.

You’re using a ship outside of it’s designed role and complaining that it’s inefficient. And then asking if it can be redesigned to your niche case.

Do you also write to sieve manufacturers and complain that they are inefficient at holding water?

Stealth bombers are deliberately inefficient at everything outside of their intended role. Why are you so against using an Astero?