Why oh why?

I've noticed in Search and Destroy missions, where pilots will fly bombers and attack the carrier... is there some points advantage in this? Do you get the equivalent of "kills" for doing damage to the carrier?

Also, in nearly all game types, some will fly nuke bombers into the asteroid field and set them off. I'm assuming it's because they have a large aoe and you can take out several enemies at once with a well timed shot. Or is there something else?

Good question. I've never really been able to figure it out. However, I think it's for two reasons in particular:

1) New players like the bomber due to heavy armor. It gives them the feeling that they are in the fight longer. And they can go head to head against other ships rather than evade and maneuver. Torp fishing helps too.

2) You do get points for killing turrets and and torps. And I think the description does say you need to find and kill the enemy with a carrier kill ending the match as well. I could be wrong on that though.

Either way it's frustrating because few players can pull it off and usually end up providing easy kills to the enemy.

As soon as they made it possible to remote detonate missiles nuke spamming became an issue. It's an easy way to make kills and there is usually at least one new player who gets frustrated with dying enough to use it in almost every game. Best advice is to shoot them down or keep your distance.

I've seen a few full S&D games in Broadsides or Rock Field where the top kill-getter was flying a Rhino. Its seriously retarded, and I don't think IMBA thought it through when they brought it in, but until/unless they change it we all have to deal with it.

Another tactic is to grab the flag with a bomber & nuke the chasers behind you, which is also pretty lame but that's how it is.

Don't turrets and torp hits on the carrier count towards S&D? They certainly don't in CTF, but you always get some idiot attacking the carrier in a bomber regardless

There's always been someone flying a bomber in almost every S&D match I've ever played, and many of these attack the carrier regardless of game type. I wouldn't worry about those guys.

The nuke spam is a little annoying, but at until we can turn on the friendly fire option, I don't think there's anything we can do about it (aside from shooting down enemy torps). I find it's settled down somewhat since the initial implementation.

You do score reduced creds for turret (50) and carrier kills (150) in S&D and even in CTF (25 and 50; worthless for the effort in CTF), and I think the Carrier respawns immediately (haven't tried it in a while).

Self detonating nukes should only be an option in CTF games. OR give the bombers a shitty turret and remove remote det. There's no reason you shouldn't have to fire a nuke at an asteroid to blow it up. I used to do that all the time and it was just as funny as remote detonating.

I second the "shite turret" idea! Most if not all of the bombers apprear to have additional guns on top that do nothing, and even one auto-tracking slow MG on the back of those suckers would make them way more formidable.

I have never ever ever seen a carrier go below 25% health in CTF or S&D. I think new players assault the carrier because the flavor text voice over at mission launch tells them to.

Nuking your own carrier in CTF is a valid defense tactic... for players that dont have anything useful unlocked. I learned that from watching cycloptic, who was doing it with his panther. I've found it works a little bit for Carrier Assault too, though again, there are other ships that are far better at defending the carrier, & if any of them are around, you're not helping.

Friendly fire I think would just make Nuke Spamming much much worse. If the nukes were the only friendly fire weapon; there would be no way to retaliate against a greifer on your own team. If all weapons were friendly fire.... why would we bother with the pretense of teams at all.

I treat every plasma cloud as hostile anyway, & I can lock on through the white out just fine.

At the moment that turret is a fixed part of the bomber 3D model, which would need to be changed (and some coding done too I imagine) for it to be a separate weapon that turned & tracked etc. As nice as it'd be to have it, I don't imagine its high on WJ's extensive todo list.

Kackling Kobold wrote:
I have never ever ever seen a carrier go below 25% health in CTF or S&D. I think new players assault the carrier because the flavor text voice over at mission launch tells them to.

I've blown up a carrier in S&D to see what happens, and the answer is: Nothing. The carrier give's that white-out explosion, then has full health again.

I think you're right about the flavour text. There's almost always a rookie trying to take on the carrier alone in every match.

I'm totally mystified by it. Why venture out alone in a Rhino in S&D knowing you're just making yourself cannon fodder for a swarm of angry red ships? And do it again and again and again? I don't get the attraction.

It is so cool after the carrier is destroyed.

you know, if the Dev's gave the bomber a rear gun to control when using the reverse cam then maybe fewer nukes would fire and there might be more gun fights. Now, granted, this would mean the bombers would be a harder nut to crack. But, at the same time it could be a good excuse to remove remote det.

While there are lots of hints and instructions here in the forum, they are pretty vague in the game. It took me some time to figure out the fine details of the game. They really need a better set of instructions in the game itself.
Also, don't hate on bomber pilots too much. Yes it is pretty annoying to have your thoroughbred fighter vaporized out from underneath you by some bomber pilot chucking nukes, but remember the nuke is the only real weapon they have. They can't out turn you, they don't have fancy rockets or missles to fend you off. All they can do is run away, or use the nuke. The nuke is a pretty poor weapon anyway. It can be shot down, or out run and it takes several seconds to arm. I think it takes a lot more skill to be an effective bomber pilot in S&D then it does to be a fighter pilot (probably why I never do it).

Or they could fly a timberwolf and actually have some speed and maneuverability. Or better yet, they could not fly a thrice damned bomber in S&D! Also, it should be mentioned, it may take some skill to use a nuke in self defense when being chased, but standing back in a rhino chucking nukes into a furball is about as brain dead easy as it comes.

i agree that nukes are terrible in dogfights, not only annoying, i myself tried that tactic a few times, and noticed your nuke doesn't usually survive, also another thing is ive noticed that some players launching nukes at carriers can launch it at an angle to whereas the turret wont shoot them down whether or not the turrets are dead on that side, the carriers dont have a very well defense either, people keep complaining of players venturing off into carrier fire and dying, they dont really track that well and always prioritize nukes as their target, ive been flying the kingfisher that i got from the steam rookie pack its fully upgraded now, it takes down anything solo with its little cannon, and at a large distance, i also dont really like tracking missiles, they're just an option to launch and forget, and some ships can launch 2 at you, when i can finally afford my heavy fighter ill try them out but i believe i wont go from the kingfisher its the best afterburner fighter

Last Night I saw 3 rhino pilots actually be effective in a S&D match. They flew together and every time you would get beind one and start to chew on his armor, the other 2 would start to chew on yours. They were like vultures on the battlefield, everytime I was half dead from dog fighting some X99 and out of burner fuel, there they were 3 sets of MGs hosing me. They shot me down more then Crazy Gremlin, who had 60+ kills that game.

Now it may sound like I support bomber pilots in S&D from this post and my previous one, but that would be wrong. I hate Bombers in S&D and one of the reasons I fly a Hammer Head, nothing else tears bombers up faster. But, I do respect that others may prefer a different play stlye then I do, and anyone should be allowed to fly whatever they want in whatever mission.

danielwhateley wrote:i agree that nukes are terrible in dogfights, not only annoying, i myself tried that tactic a few times, and noticed your nuke doesn't usually survive, also another thing is ive noticed that some players launching nukes at carriers can launch it at an angle to whereas the turret wont shoot them down whether or not the turrets are dead on that side, the carriers dont have a very well defense either, people keep complaining of players venturing off into carrier fire and dying, they dont really track that well and always prioritize nukes as their target, ive been flying the kingfisher that i got from the steam rookie pack its fully upgraded now, it takes down anything solo with its little cannon, and at a large distance, i also dont really like tracking missiles, they're just an option to launch and forget, and some ships can launch 2 at you, when i can finally afford my heavy fighter ill try them out but i believe i wont go from the kingfisher its the best afterburner fighter

There is not a single period in that entire sentence. Well done sir, you have baffled me.