Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ferocitan
Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore
85
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 00:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
Militia grenade and Contact grenades x1 same ammo value on nanohives. All other grenades x2 multiply by 1,33 on ammo value on nanohives.
And make supply depost give grenades and remote explosives every 10 sec maximum.
I Would say that you could reduce all MD explosion damage by 0.8 too, but Im sure CCP got numbers to crunch to come up with a better MD nerf in the future.. Allso make the shots spread more while fireing.
|
Garth Mandra
The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine
139
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 02:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
Splash weapons in general don't seem to be in a very good place at the moment.
I would like to see what happens if we add simple falloff to splash weapons. So you do direct hit damage at 0m and decreased damage down to zero at the maximum radius.
This would obviously need some changes to numbers.
Then splash weapons would reward accuracy but still not require it.
As for contact grenades I think the 'fix' for them was incredibly lazy. They should have left them at 3 and just reduced the damage to a suitable number. |
lithkul devant
Legions of Infinite Dominion
95
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 02:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ferocitan wrote:Militia grenade and Contact grenades x1 same ammo value on nanohives. All other grenades x2 multiply by 1,33 on ammo value on nanohives.
And make supply depost give grenades and remote explosives every 10 sec maximum.
I Would say that you could reduce all MD explosion damage by 0.8 too, but Im sure CCP got numbers to crunch to come up with a better MD nerf in the future.. Allso make the shots spread more while fireing.
Your idea is lacking and leads to even worse gameplay mechanics, because not only would this affect Locus gernades, this would affect Flux and AV gernades. These are both utility support gernades, where one destroys shields and usually equipment and the other is aimed at scaring off or killing vehicles. Not only would your idea backfire on it's intention of lowering down Gernade spam, people would intentionally commit suicide to get more gernades as they sometimes do with just wanting to get more ammo. If you want to have a meaningful change, change the resistances upon how armor and shields handle explosions, the reason people throw gernades at others is because of the high damage they can potentially get against someone who is mostly armor based.
Also, if someone is using milita gernades, it's probably cause they can't afford anything better, they are rather worthless gernades compared to what you can get for just a little more. Contact gernades aren't really that much of an issue either to be honest, since you can cook gernades and use them at the right time to basically make them on contact.
|
KalOfTheRathi
Nec Tributis
792
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 02:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
They already made a fix. There is no indication that they believe another is necessary. |
Ferocitan
Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore
85
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 08:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
lithkul devant wrote:Ferocitan wrote:Militia grenade and Conta...
Your idea is lacking and leads to even worse gameplay mechanics, because not only would this affect Locus gernades, this would affect Flux and AV gernades. These are both utility support gernades, where one destroys shields and usually equipment and the other is aimed at scaring off or killing vehicles. Not only would your idea backfire on it's intention of lowering down Gernade spam, people would intentionally commit suicide to get more gernades as they sometimes do with just wanting to get more ammo. If you want to have a meaningful change, change the resistances upon how armor and shields handle explosions, the reason people throw gernades at others is because of the high damage they can potentially get against someone who is mostly armor based. Also, if someone is using milita gernades, it's probably cause they can't afford anything better, they are rather worthless gernades compared to what you can get for just a little more. Contact gernades aren't really that much of an issue either to be honest, since you can cook gernades and use them at the right time to basically make them on contact. Would it really be so bad to reduce flux to 2 grenades but making no changes to AV grenades? I still find it somewhat funny that I can just run into a tank with LAV and throw 3x packed av grenades. Kill allnost any tank and just walk off. But thats my opinion on the giving end.
|
Ferocitan
Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore
85
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 08:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
Garth Mandra wrote:Splash weapons in general don't seem to be in a very good place at the moment.
I would like to see what happens if we add simple falloff to splash weapons. So you do direct hit damage at 0m and decreased damage down to zero at the maximum radius.
This would obviously need some changes to numbers.
Then splash weapons would reward accuracy but still not require it.
As for contact grenades I think the 'fix' for them was incredibly lazy. They should have left them at 3 and just reduced the damage to a suitable number.
I do aupport this too. Falloff slipped my mind on this post. I've posted about scanners should have falloff streangth too. Allso make equiptment harder to scan with scan radiuses too. |
lithkul devant
Legions of Infinite Dominion
98
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 00:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ferocitan wrote:lithkul devant wrote:Ferocitan wrote:Militia grenade and Conta...
Your idea is lacking and leads to even worse gameplay mechanics, because not only would this affect Locus gernades, this would affect Flux and AV gernades. These are both utility support gernades, where one destroys shields and usually equipment and the other is aimed at scaring off or killing vehicles. Not only would your idea backfire on it's intention of lowering down Gernade spam, people would intentionally commit suicide to get more gernades as they sometimes do with just wanting to get more ammo. If you want to have a meaningful change, change the resistances upon how armor and shields handle explosions, the reason people throw gernades at others is because of the high damage they can potentially get against someone who is mostly armor based. Also, if someone is using milita gernades, it's probably cause they can't afford anything better, they are rather worthless gernades compared to what you can get for just a little more. Contact gernades aren't really that much of an issue either to be honest, since you can cook gernades and use them at the right time to basically make them on contact. Would it really be so bad to reduce flux to 2 grenades but making no changes to AV grenades? I still find it somewhat funny that I can just run into a tank with LAV and throw 3x packed av grenades. Kill allnost any tank and just walk off. But thats my opinion on the giving end. People kill themswlf to get more grenades? So you would need to hurt your team 1.3x more and prolly get bigger costs on suit deaths. It might encurage people to do so yes, but you would allso penalize them more for doing it but killing off clones and making it suck morw ISK of the market for those willing to cook a grenade properly.
You do realize that people do play with default suits in order to make money at times, and will not care if they loos less then 5k isk. Also, hi welcome to internet gaming, where people will kill themselves just for a laugh and make sure their team looses nice to meet you. Their's actually been a rash of games going on recently that people kill themselves as fast as possible to get the game over for the rewards. People will always find a way to cheat the system or bypass it all together.
On what you said, you usually can't bail out of your vehicle in time to survive, not only that, but a good tanker with a blaster cannon which a lot of them are, will kill you while you are in your vehicle and then blow up your lav anyways. Packed AV is also the strongest AV type, has the smallest blast radius, so that if you miss with it, it does no damage unless the tank rolls over it. So yeah your tactic can work, but I'm not sure it's as effective as you are stating it to be that you "always" win when you do this and walk away. Also, tanks dying so easily at times is a whole other issue that could easily span over this entire forum.
Also, yeah it might actually be a bad thing to reduce number carried and how fast you can get flux gernades if spawnable equipment isn't lowered as well, especially the R/E's that people use to camp objectives with. Flux gernades are often times used as a way to clear out equipment farms and R/E's that have been set down. If you change the amount of gernades people carry, they will just go onto what is the next FOTM like what happened with the flaylock pistols. The Flaylocks got to be so powerful that the people using them didn't even always use a main gun or gernades. In this regard, change the number of gernades and you'll probably see more mass drivers and forge guns, more then what is currently happening as is.
Why would I say this, the answer is simple, the gernade is how you keep a mass driver user at bay, because they know they can get over to you jump around and spray out more dps then you usually can with your weapon. The forge gun though is a different beast all together, that does not have the limited range an MD does. So while your intentions might be good on limiting down the number of gernades, remember people are highly adaptable and when you change something to much they jump out of the boiling water you dumped them in, slowly heat them up and they'll stay.
|
Ferocitan
Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore
86
|
Posted - 2013.10.10 02:03:00 -
[8] - Quote
Would it really hurt to try to do this change? Even lessen the damage output on the MDs even. Might it give the game more firefights than random explosive kills? Hold on to their grenades untill they really need it?
I understand this will make people adjust. But might it have more pros than cons in the long run? Do you wish to improve it or just argue to argue about something?
Try to give positive feedback about proposed change, and I'll make up some new negatives for the hell of it ;) |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 :: [one page] |