Why don't we have tech 1 bombers?

Communications Center General Discussion
1

So i was wondering we have tech 2 stealth bombers but no tech 1 bombers now i get the fact that stealth bombers are designed as a glass cannon for hit and run so stealth naturally is the requirement to allow them to get in close drop there payload and get out.

Yet why don’t we have none stealth bomber crafts that use torps that still have the bonus to there empire bonus for example EW for amarr as well as having the bonus of heavy missile launcher instead of bombs.

Tech 1 bombers would be a nice learning experience for those who would specialise into becoming full bomber piolets rather then losing a very expensive ship that takes months to train in.

2

Its a stretch to call it ‘designed as a glass cannon’ when its really just a frigate hull with a frigate tank that just happens to have a battleship sized weapon on it. It could be a destroyer hull or a cruiser hull, and it would still be a ship using a weapons platform two classes up from it.

It makes no sense to have a generic t1 destroyer or frigate hull fit a weapons platform so many sizes larger, its not suitable for the targets it will need to attack/defend against. A torpedo will do like 10 damage to a frigate with any kind of speed on it.

A catalyst would be better.

3

Expensive ship?

Bombers are cheap ships and the entry level ship for newbies who are interested in covert ops fleets.

Recons, T3Cs and black ops battleships are all much more expensive and SP intensive.

Once you can use covert ops cloaks you’re almost flying a bomber.

4

We already had that some time in 2005. or 2006., if I remember correctly. I think it was removed in Red Moon Rising expansion. It didn’t make sense, it was overpowered and removed in favor of T2 bombers.

We also had anchorable proximity mines. That backfired really quickly and they were removed. I still have a bunch of them sitting in a hangar somewhere.

5

I mean your first paragraph already sort of answers why, they are hit and run, and they need the cloak in order to do that effectively, uncloaked they just become easy to spot frigate sized hulls that just have fancy weapons on them, they would die before they got the drop on someone or people would see them coming a mile away on d-scan and just leave

6

Thank you all for the responses i will ponder this.

3 Likes
7

Boy, do I wish we had more players with that attitude! Fly safe!

1 Like
8

  • bombers aren’t so expensive;

  • they require a covert cloak or they are useless;

  • you can train relatively fast into CovOps ships, especially with these daily SP rewards;

  • it’s an Omega account tool.

It’s the same as saying: “Why don’t we have a V10 700HP Dodge Viper engine into a $15000 Ford Polo car just for training into racing pilots”.

1 Like
9

The real question is why don’t we have BS Bombers that can use multiple bomb launchers and/or larger bombs???

10

We have battleship that can use multiple torpedo launchers though!

Battleships launching bombs would feel… odd, if only because to ambush fleets, launch bombs and warp off is a playstyle suited better for frigates than slow battleships.

Battleships are more about staying on the grid, for which again torpedos are much better.

1 Like
11

I have to admit, I would love to see a BS connect with a wave of bombs. You’re a better pilot than I if you can pull that one off, other than being lucky.

12

Bad idea, you can fly a bomber in a week maybe two traning time. It’s really not high entry level.

13

A new player? With fit and weapon skills? All that in a week? Well yeah, if you’re buying large skill injectors, but that’s true of any ship in Eve.

University says it’s 23 days just for the hull alone. I know it takes at least that long before you’re proficient with torpedos.

1 Like
14

Don’t forget the plex it takes to get cloaked. Not a big deal with a CC.

A good cash sink for new players trying to learn.