Bombers are supost to be the best at taking on defenses, but they don't have rapid fire against Plasma Cannons. Does that make them not as effective as they would be because a defenses of Plasma Cannons would destroy a defenses of bombers?

Edit: When rapid fire comes in to play.

Nothing has Rapid Fire against Plasma Cannons, still, they wouldn't stand long on their own if they weren't behind a wall of lesser guns.

-Istalris-

Bombers will suck until rapid fire comes out. Just like the BCs

at this point they are slightly improved BS for a much more improved price.

no they are not better then a bs at all... the bs is much faster, and cheaper

Sadbutrue wrote:no they are not better then a bs at all... the bs is much faster, and cheaper

Not to mention the fuel consumption of the Bomber rivals the Destroyer, so really, they are pointless right now.

-Istalris-

Bombers and Battlecruisers both have more structure points and stronger shields than battleships. They are better for defence and for hitting strong fortifications, but worse on fuel, cargo space, and speed(the bomber that is, the BC is the same as the BS) to me, this means that while they are more expensive, they will last longer in a fight and dish out more or equivilent damage with a better chance of coming home. It depends on what kind of fleet you want to field.

Until Rapidfire is implemented Stick with BattleShips they will be your best bet for now.

Sadbutrue wrote:no they are not better then a bs at all... the bs is much faster, and cheaper

bombers have higher attack, structure, and shields. Hence my previous statement, a slightly improved BS for a greatly improved price.