DUST Search - Swarm Launchers .. A Balance Proposal ... discuss

All Channels

General Discussions

Swarm Launchers .. A Balance Proposal ... discuss

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 129	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:16:00 - [1] - Quote Almost everyone (even Tankers) agree that the Current Swarm Launchers are almost completely ineffective with anything less than PROTO level Launchers/Skills. Here is a proposal for Swarm Launcher Balance that I have been thinking about for quite a while and I believe will bring the MLT/STD/ADV swarm launchers into effective usability without being overpowered, and only slightly increase PRO swarm launcher power. 1. Increase Lock-on Range to 250 M ... Almost Everyone agrees that 175 m is far too short and 400 m is far to long, the general consensus on the forums is that lock-on range should be 250 m. 2. Increase missile Speed to 75% of Missile Turret Speed ... Almost Everyone agrees that Swarm Missiles are far too slow and can easily be outrun by any type of vehicle. They're MISSILES, they're Supposed to much fly faster than the target they're fired at. Missile Turret missiles fly very fast and setting the Swarm Missile speed at 75% of Missile Turret speed would be about the right speed, to make them fast enough to hit their target, but slower than Dumbfire missile turrets to compensate for the guidance system 3. Make ALL Standard/Specialist variant Swarm launchers fire 4 missiles per volley with higher Dam./missile and increasing Damage for MLT/STD/ADV/PRO instead of increasing the number of missiles fired per volley. MLT/STD Swarm - 4 missiles 320 Dam. ea. (1280 Dam/Volley) instead of current - 4 missiles 220 Dam. ea. (880 Dam./Volley) ADV Swarm - 4 missiles 330 Dam. ea. (1320 Dam/Volley) instead of current -5 missiles 220 Dam. ea. (1100 Dam/Volley) PRO Swarm - 4 missiles 350 Dam ea. (1400 Dam/Volley) instead of current - 6 missiles 220 Dam. ea. (1320 Dam/Volley) 4. Make ALL Assault variant Swarm Launchers fire 6 missiles per volley with lower Dam./missile and increasing Damage for STD/ADV/PRO instead of increasing the number of missiles fired per volley. STD Asslt. Swrm. - 6 missiles 220 Dam. ea. ; 1320 Dam./volley vs. Single Target or 660 + 660 Dam./Volley vs. Two Targets. instead of current - 4 missiles 220 Dam. ea. ; 880 Dam./Volley vs. Single Target or 440 + 440 Dam./Volley vs. Two Targets. ADV Asslt. Swrm. - 6 missiles 230 Dam. ea. ; 1380 Dam./Volley vs. Single Target or 690 + 690 Dam./Volley vs. Two Targets. instead of current - 5 missiles 220 Dam. ea. ; 1100 Dam./Volley vs. Single Target or 660 + 440 Dam./Volley vs. Two Targets. PRO Asslt. Swrm. - 6 missiles 250 Dam. ea. ; 1500 Dam./Volley vs. Single Target or 750 + 750 Dam./Volley vs. Two Targets. instead of current - 6 missiles 220 Dam. ea. ; 1320 Dam./Volley vs. Single Target or 660 + 660 Dam./Volley vs. Two Targets. I realize that the Assault Swarm Damage is higher vs. Single Targets than the same level Standard/Specialist Swarm, but it is far less likely that all 6 Assault Swarm missiles will hit the target than all 4 Standard/Specialist Swarm missiles, which balances them out. And it will encourage some people to use the Assault variant, which is currently unused by almost everyone, to try to get that extra little bit of damage. nothing to see here ... move along
BobThe 844-1 CakeMan Murder Cakes Of Doom 1366	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:22:00 - [2] - Quote first off don't assume almost everyone agrees with anything because tht is just not true. for example who has ever said the missiles were to slow. they r fine now. if they were faster what would be the point of afterburners of dropships if they can't outrun them with it on. and as for lock on range it is fine now. they shouldn't have as long range. now distance each missile goes on for is debateable. but extra damage is needed as u posted. but it is still just light AV and should be no where near as strong as a forgegun as u posted. Main - BobThe843CakeMan Ringing for PC for a price, msg for details. Prices are based on who ur facing and how i feel.
ADAM-OF-EVE Dead Man's Game 702	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:23:00 - [3] - Quote better than most suggestions but maybe they should just be moved from weapons to equipment with single clip. or converted to sidearms this way you can still assault but if a tank appears then some sort of coordination could be used to take it out without having to run back to a resupply. obviously that would need squad coordination so as not to be left short of av dps or other utility. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=99075&find
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2093	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:27:00 - [4] - Quote Swarms so hard to use QQ Its why 2 infantry guys i know are soloing tanks with CBR7s lol Lock range fine, you can fire all 3 in the clip in less than 4seconds and the missiles go upto 400m anyways DMG fine Intelligence is OP
Flix Keptick Red Star. EoN. 3199	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:28:00 - [5] - Quote As a tanker I agree with those changes, apart from the speed increase. If you want more speed you need less agility, 360-¦ dime-turning fast missiles would just be stupid. Lack of content makes stuff broken... Tank driver // specialized tank destroyer
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 130	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:31:00 - [6] - Quote Flix Keptick wrote: As a tanker I agree with those changes, apart from the speed increase. If you want more speed you need less agility, 360-¦ dime-turning fast missiles would just be stupid. Yes, missile agility would have to be reduced - I agree. nothing to see here ... move along
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 130	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:39:00 - [7] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Swarms so hard to use QQ Its why 2 infantry guys i know are soloing tanks with CBR7s lol Lock range fine, you can fire all 3 in the clip in less than 4seconds and the missiles go upto 400m anyways DMG fine this is not a "QQ" thread, it is an honest attempt to propose a balance to the Swarm Launchers so that they aren't useless with anything less that PROTO. nothing to see here ... move along
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2094	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:43:00 - [8] - Quote SHANN da MAN wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Swarms so hard to use QQ Its why 2 infantry guys i know are soloing tanks with CBR7s lol Lock range fine, you can fire all 3 in the clip in less than 4seconds and the missiles go upto 400m anyways DMG fine this is not a "QQ" thread, it is an honest attempt to propose a balance to the Swarm Launchers so that they aren't useless with anything less than PROTO or stacked Dam. Mods. and I agree PRO Dam. is fine - my proposal only Slightly increases PRO Damage, it's the MLT/STD/ADV that need help. They are not useless The player behind the trigger is Intelligence is OP
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 130	Posted - 2013.12.31 19:50:00 - [9] - Quote NO amount of player skill is going to make up for a MLT/STD Swarm Launcher doing only 880 Damage per volley. That low of a Damage makes the weapon nearly useless vs. vehicles with thousands of EHP that can leave your engagement range before you can fire 3 Volleys. and yes, I know what you're going to say next ... use Teamwork (or PROTO)... but even teamwork with MLT/STD Swarms isn't enough when they only have 880 Dam. per Volley. and I already stated that PRO Swarms are OK, my proposal aims to raise the lower tier Swarms to be more relevant and effective in battle, and leaves the PRO Swarms Damage nearly as-is. nothing to see here ... move along
Everything Dies Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 391	Posted - 2013.12.31 20:03:00 - [10] - Quote Keep the damage as-is, but increase the lock-on range to 300m. At least allow the low-level SLs to act as harassment weapon while allowing protos to actually pose a real threat to unprepared tanks. I've said it elsewhere, but I'll repeat it here: It's laughable that it's not only CHEAPER for me to bring out a rail tank, but also far MORE effective at fighting tanks than my proto SL build. As soon as I spot an enemy tank on the field, I'll call in mine and find a high place from which to cover the battlefield. I'm not worried about destroying enemy tanks so much as trying to scare them away from charging in with their hardeners on and blasting dozens of infantry down before they retreat safely out of the range of any SLs in the area. Life is killing me.

Lynn Beck Granite Mercenary Division Top Men. 440	Posted - 2013.12.31 20:08:00 - [11] - Quote Hmm... I might just be consistently finding stupid tankers, but mlt swarms CAN scare a tank, if he stays for your 6th volley or even your reload, then he's hurting. I killed one tank using Flux nades and triple cx dmg mod CBR7s. Albeit he sat in a corner trying to shoot me the whole time... Still, -maybe- we should increase swarm damage by 10-15%? Under 28db Officially nerfproof (predicting CR nerf February '14) I have a God, His name is Dakka.
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 134	Posted - 2014.01.01 00:41:00 - [12] - Quote BobThe 844-1 CakeMan wrote: first off don't assume almost everyone agrees with anything because tht is just not true. for example who has ever said the missiles were to slow. they r fine now. if they were faster what would be the point of afterburners of dropships if they can't outrun them with it on. and as for lock on range it is fine now. they shouldn't have as long range. now distance each missile goes on for is debateable. but extra damage is needed as u posted. but it is still just light AV and should be no where near as strong as a forgegun as u posted. If you have been reading the forum posts concerning Swarm Launchers since the introduction of 1.7 you would have seen that the general consensus is that the missiles are too slow, and Swarms need a longer lock-on range. Hence my assuming almost everyone agrees - obviously You do not - perhaps I should have stated general forum consensus instead of almost everyone agrees, my bad. nothing to see here ... move along
ladwar Death by Disassociation Legacy Rising 1946	Posted - 2014.01.01 00:46:00 - [13] - Quote well its not bad idea and it does bring the SL back into the normal curve of power vs tiers i just don't think the AVers will go for it. Level 2 Forum Warrior, bitter vet. I shall smite Thy Trolls with numbers and truth not looking for a corp, don't ask.
Kane Fyea Scions of Athra 2531	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:00:00 - [14] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: SHANN da MAN wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Swarms so hard to use QQ Its why 2 infantry guys i know are soloing tanks with CBR7s lol Lock range fine, you can fire all 3 in the clip in less than 4seconds and the missiles go upto 400m anyways DMG fine this is not a "QQ" thread, it is an honest attempt to propose a balance to the Swarm Launchers so that they aren't useless with anything less than PROTO or stacked Dam. Mods. and I agree PRO Dam. is fine - my proposal only Slightly increases PRO Damage, it's the MLT/STD/ADV that need help. They are not useless The player behind the trigger is Yep everyone knows that swarm launchers aren't supposed to be effective at killing tanks only tanks and REs are. (Hint to OP militia tanks with miltia railguns are more effective then proto swarms with prof 4 and three complex damage mods for 1/3 of the price and 0 SP investment)
Kane Fyea Scions of Athra 2531	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:02:00 - [15] - Quote ladwar wrote: well its not bad idea and it does bring the SL back into the normal curve of power vs tiers i just don't think the AVers will go for it. All I want is more range (225 would be fine) and miltia tanks nerfed so they aren't more effective then my proto swarms with prof 4 and three complex damage mods against vehicles.
Darius Ashran Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 46	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:07:00 - [16] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: SHANN da MAN wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Swarms so hard to use QQ Its why 2 infantry guys i know are soloing tanks with CBR7s lol Lock range fine, you can fire all 3 in the clip in less than 4seconds and the missiles go upto 400m anyways DMG fine this is not a "QQ" thread, it is an honest attempt to propose a balance to the Swarm Launchers so that they aren't useless with anything less than PROTO or stacked Dam. Mods. and I agree PRO Dam. is fine - my proposal only Slightly increases PRO Damage, it's the MLT/STD/ADV that need help. They are not useless The player behind the trigger is Sir, I feel you have underlined one of the most fundamental issues in Dust 514. As evidence I offer the general experience with Amarr/ Caldari Blueberrys and many blueberrys in general. They suck horribly, so bad that I honestly sometimes wonder how the **** they put one foot in front of the other without falling on their face.
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 134	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:08:00 - [17] - Quote Wallaby1 wrote: as a tanker i have to agree that swarms are just pathetic now , they work well as a harrasing area denial weapon but do not have sufficient range to effectively carry out there intended purpose , on top of that it now takes 3 swarm shots from an adv swarm to kill a mlt LAV with 0 reppers or mods?......pretty pathetic , i think the travel time of the rockets needs to be buffed big time because a lav and even hav's are literally outrunning the swarm rockets which shouldnt happen! QFT from another thread nothing to see here ... move along
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 2886	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:14:00 - [18] - Quote ladwar wrote: well its not bad idea and it does bring the SL back into the normal curve of power vs tiers i just don't think the AVers will go for it. Really? As you know, I am about as AV as it gets around these parts and I "go for it". ...
WUT ANG D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 46	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:14:00 - [19] - Quote I think the lock on range is fine they did that so dropshits can be more aggressive but the dmg does need a buff even with proto swarms you pose little threat to an hav with hardners and the havs in game are just std imagine when the adv havs come back surya and sagaris then proto havs. swarms will be useless.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 2886	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:18:00 - [20] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: They are not useless The player behind the trigger is Got anything to say other than "Get Good"? Because I don't like arguing with children. ...

Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 1121	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:26:00 - [21] - Quote Your proposal breaks the balance against dropships and militia lavs and also the 250m change means we are back to game breaking swarms covering 2 or more objectives from a single point. You cannot balance AV using just damage and range. It will always result in an imbalance. Tanks, dropships and lavs share modules but tanks have more HP. Anything you do to balance against tanks with those 2 stats will break other vehicles, and even installations Your OP is well constructed in itself, but not in the scheme of a multi vehicle game with limited map size. not a viable or fair solution to something that is not only about how hard you can punch and how long your arm is. Swarms are effective as they are. When used well. But all I see is swarmer a shooting hardened ships. Everything Dropship youtube channel my Community Spotlight
ladwar Death by Disassociation Legacy Rising 1946	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:30:00 - [22] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Your proposal breaks the balance against dropships and militia lavs and also the 250m change means we are back to game breaking swarms covering 2 or more objectives from a single point. You cannot balance AV using just damage and range. It will always result in an imbalance. Tanks, dropships and lavs share modules but tanks have more HP. Anything you do to balance against tanks with those 2 stats will break other vehicles, and even installations. Your OP is well constructed in itself, but not in the scheme of a multi vehicle game with limited map size. keep the same range as now then. the damage isn't greatly changed. Level 2 Forum Warrior, bitter vet. I shall smite Thy Trolls with numbers and truth not looking for a corp, don't ask.
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 1121	Posted - 2014.01.01 01:39:00 - [23] - Quote That damage change will likely break the hardeners regen ceiling. A deliberate design decision to allow us to attack then retreat. The issue is not swarms, damage or range. Perhaps it is tank speed, price, map size, turret rotation, ammo count, 3rd person tank view..... Etc. But it is not a simple as range and damage changes at this point. Everything Dropship youtube channel my Community Spotlight
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 2894	Posted - 2014.01.01 07:36:00 - [24] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: That damage change will likely break the hardeners regen ceiling. A deliberate design decision to allow us to attack then retreat. The issue is not swarms, damage or range. Perhaps it is tank speed, price, map size, turret rotation, ammo count, 3rd person tank view..... Etc. But it is not a simple as range and damage changes at this point. Agreed. However, I think the price shouldn't be increased too much. We don't want to create another situation where vehicles weren't profitable if you lost your tank or dropship. I believe that map layout is a problem, and the problem doesn't stop at Swarm Launchers. I personally would like to see more buildings and structures that Dropship pilots can use for cover when facing Railguns. I don't believe that removing 3rd Person View is a good idea, as it could make navigating around some terrain (such as a hill or spiraling incline) difficult to nearly impossible. I'd just adjust the camera angle to where you cannot see certain angles of your tank. Most hated person since Lueko and Checkmate
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 136	Posted - 2014.01.01 17:38:00 - [25] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Your proposal breaks the balance against dropships and militia lavs and also the 250m change means we are back to game breaking swarms covering 2 or more objectives from a single point. You cannot balance AV using just damage and range. It will always result in an imbalance. Tanks, dropships and lavs share modules but tanks have more HP. Anything you do to balance against tanks with those 2 stats will break other vehicles, and even installations Your OP is well constructed in itself, but not in the scheme of a multi vehicle game with limited map size. not a viable or fair solution to something that is not only about how hard you can punch and how long your arm is. Swarms are effective as they are. When used well. But all I see is swarmer a shooting hardened ships. This proposal is designed for general balance vs. All vehicle types, not just HAV's, and does not break balance for Dropships and LAV's. It currently takes 3 volleys from an ADV Swarm (without stacked Dam. Mods) to destroy a MLT LAV or Dropship and it's Very difficult to destroy Anything with a MLT/STD Swarm, and any type of vehicle can currently leave a Swarm 175m area of engagement easily before 3 volleys are fired. This proposal will bring the MLT/STD Swarm to the 3 volley kill, and ADV Swarm to a 2 Volley Kill for MLT LAV's and Dropships (again, without Dam. Mods) while leaving the PRO Swarm almost the same. The 250m range is Far lower than the previous 400 m range and in most cases would not allow Swarms to cover more than one objective unless positioned between them (where Anti-Infantry Infantry are running around, a Swarm Carrier w/sidearm would be an easy Kill) and if positioned near one objective, the Swarm would be at almost the range limit for any other objective so would not be effective cover for more than one. Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: That damage change will likely break the hardeners regen ceiling. A deliberate design decision to allow us to attack then retreat. The issue is not swarms, damage or range. Perhaps it is tank speed, price, map size, turret rotation, ammo count, 3rd person tank view..... Etc. But it is not a simple as range and damage changes at this point. The Current PRO Swarms do not break the Hardeners Regen Ceiling, and this proposal leaves them almost as-is. It attempts to bring the lower Tier Swarms up to a level where they would be an effective weapon in battle instead of their current, ineffective state. They would still be substantially weaker than the PRO Swarms, so the Hardener Regen Ceiling should not be an issue, but HAV's would not be able to stay in one area and absorb damage from multiple AV as they do now, they would actually Have to attack and retreat in waves of opportunity (as 1.7 design intended) nothing to see here ... move along
ONE-I-BANDIT The Generals General Tso's Alliance 1	Posted - 2014.01.01 17:56:00 - [26] - Quote I believe the Intent of CCP was that an group of swarm launchers should be used to take tanks and the like out. Which is called team work. In too many cases I have seen ppl just camp to blow up tanks.
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 136	Posted - 2014.01.01 18:02:00 - [27] - Quote ONE-I-BANDIT wrote: I believe the Intent of CCP was that an group of swarm launchers should be used to take tanks and the like out. Which is called team work. In too many cases I have seen ppl just camp to blow up tanks. I agree, and this will still require AV Teamwork. it Currently takes Multiple PRO Swarm teamwork (most of the time, there are some Exceptional players who can regularly solo) to take out most vehicles. This Proposal just allows Lower Tier Swarms to be more effective, promoting Teamwork using lower Tier Swarms as well as PRO nothing to see here ... move along
jerrmy12 kahoalii Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic 214	Posted - 2014.01.01 18:06:00 - [28] - Quote SHANN da MAN wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Swarms so hard to use QQ Its why 2 infantry guys i know are soloing tanks with CBR7s lol Lock range fine, you can fire all 3 in the clip in less than 4seconds and the missiles go upto 400m anyways DMG fine this is not a "QQ" thread, it is an honest attempt to propose a balance to the Swarm Launchers so that they aren't useless with anything less than PROTO or stacked Dam. Mods. Ask 'the guys you know" if their Swarm Skill tree is maxed, and if they're stacking double or triple complex Damage Mods to get these Solo Kills with a CBR7 ... I bet the answer to both questions is yes. My proposal allows for Swarms to be effective , but not overpowered with an average players Skill progression. and I agree PRO Dam. is fine - my proposal only Slightly increases PRO Damage, it's the MLT/STD/ADV that need help. or just buff curent damage to 240 recuruit link 5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit I use a tablet so beware of typos
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 136	Posted - 2014.01.01 18:18:00 - [29] - Quote jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: or just buff curent damage to 240 That is too simple of a shortcut. That would not correct the problem of the huge difference in damage between the Swarm Tiers, firing 4,5,6 missiles, it would only make it worse. Firing 4 missiles at All Tiers with varying Damage allows for a more easily controlled progression of Damage from MLT - PRO It would also not account for the issue of the multiple lock-on shots of the Assault variant vs. Two Targets firing 4,5,6 missiles. If All Assault variant Swarms fired 6 missiles they would always be evenly split 3+3 vs. Two Targets. (instead of current ADV Assault Swarm split 3+2 with no choice of which of the Two Targets gets 3 missiles and which gets 2 missiles) nothing to see here ... move along
ADAM-OF-EVE Dead Man's Game 709	Posted - 2014.01.02 05:48:00 - [30] - Quote the map with 6 towers and 4 capture points with the tabletop in the middle. those towers are more than 175m high or atleast from the majority of vantage points. the same can be said for a lot of the other maps with high buildings. how do you protect these buildings. sure you can take the swarm to the top but now you have a swarm on top of a building that can't fire down to the ground and tanks on buildings is just plain wrong. sure you could stick a forge up there but then you have bored forge gunner sniping players on the ground and with hardners as they are now he is likely to get swatted by the hardened ds before he can kill it. also swarms should have their costs reduced to the same level as other av only weapons such as re and av grenades. at 40k+ each they are just far too expensive to warrant using. if they were cheaper then people would be more willing to risk using them. at the moment swarms equals in most cases instant death https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=99075&find

Elmo Love U 514 Mile High Club 851	Posted - 2014.01.02 18:09:00 - [31] - Quote Ccpp don't give a fk and neither do I. I am now retired from swarms PERMANENTLY. I like proto stomping better anyway. ChantsPVE PVE PVE PVE
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 142	Posted - 2014.01.04 17:47:00 - [32] - Quote I would like to thank everybody who participated in this discussion. (although I expected a bit more critique/suggestions) The purpose of this thread was to present an Idea for Swarm Balance, invite critique/suggestions for improvement, and make adjustments before submitting to Feedback/Requests Forum. Since the discussion has died down and no further input is being made, I will make the final edits to my Original Post and submit it to Feedback/Suggestions. Again, Thank you everyone. nothing to see here ... move along
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3028	Posted - 2014.01.04 18:50:00 - [33] - Quote Flix Keptick wrote: As a tanker I agree with those changes, apart from the speed increase. If you want more speed you need less agility, 360-¦ dime-turning fast missiles would just be stupid. I didn't want the "360 dime-turning" part in the first place. What I do want (and need) is DUMBFIRE Most hated person since Lueko and Checkmate AV is easy huh? Talk is cheap.
Thumb Green Titans of Phoenix Legacy Rising 631	Posted - 2014.01.04 19:00:00 - [34] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: SHANN da MAN wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Swarms so hard to use QQ Its why 2 infantry guys i know are soloing tanks with CBR7s lol Lock range fine, you can fire all 3 in the clip in less than 4seconds and the missiles go upto 400m anyways DMG fine this is not a "QQ" thread, it is an honest attempt to propose a balance to the Swarm Launchers so that they aren't useless with anything less than PROTO or stacked Dam. Mods. and I agree PRO Dam. is fine - my proposal only Slightly increases PRO Damage, it's the MLT/STD/ADV that need help. They are not useless The player behind the trigger is Prove it. CCP: Is it the most asinine way possible to do this? Yes. Then that's how we're doing it.


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.