DUST Search - Well done CCP

Cross Atu wrote:

snip
Looks like a pretty good list to me, though I do have to say the swarm launcher lock on mechanic needs to be fixed regardless and it might be worth looking at the swarm launcher lock on time in addition too, or as an alternative too the lock on range (of course if both are done they should each be done in a much lessor capacity).
snip

Hobo on Fire wrote:

I remember a few people commenting that the range nerf to swarms was just a workaround to the rendering issues they had for so long. If true, it means that CCP has every intention of at least retuning them to their original range once they figure out the issue... Having invisible missiles flying into your vehicle was a problem.

If they really did do it because they felt the range was too long, I'd suggest having the launcher work as it currently does out to it's current max lock-on range of 175m. At ranges beyond that, the launcher could still lock on (up to the old 400m max) but there would be an increased lock on time of 0.1 seconds for every 10m past the 175m "optimal" range. A target 375m could still be targeted, but at 200m past the "optimal," it would increase the lock on time by a full 2 seconds.

Letting swarms reach these targets, even at what amounts to a significantly reduced rate of fire, would allow players not skilled into heavy suits or vehicles to at least suppress long range vehicle targets. Forcing tanks or dropships to retreat obviously isn't as good as killing them, but it can absolutely mean the difference in a pitched battle. In addition, rail tanks and installations more than 175m past the redline can now only be targeted by forge guns or large rail/missile turrets. If these objects can strike at us, we shouldn't be forced to spec into heavy suits or HAVs just to shoot back.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hobo on Fire Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 194	Posted - 2014.03.06 11:32:00 - [1] - Quote My poor swarm launchers. It will be a sad state of affairs when the only reliable way to kill LAVs will be with a damn tank. I don't even want to comment on how popular sentinels will become, but I would like to see the following for AV balance: -AV grenades need 3 in the pocket, or a damage increase, if not both. -Buff Swarms up to 300 damage per missile and increase their lock-on range to at least 250m -Do SOMETHING to turn plasma cannons into a serious weapon, they've been a joke since they were introduced. -Increase the hull cost of HAVs to at least double what they are now (100k for an unfit militia HAV, 200k for standard) Now I'll get back to planning on which fatsuit to skill into. I hate moving so slow, but heavies will be everywhere and sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.
Hobo on Fire Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 194	Posted - 2014.03.06 12:01:00 - [2] - Quote General12912 wrote: i used to think 2 heavy damage mods with a forge gun was good av. then i swithched to standard sentinel and realised the forge gun still does great damage against vehicles. with an advanced assault forge gun, its about 4 hits to kill an HAV. and swarm launchers will still be viable in groups, specifically, AV squads. its no that hard to outsmart a tanker... and sometimes brains>brawn Coordinated AV can still beat tanks, the problem is a single HAV takes 3 or 4 infantry out of the fight to break out AV gear. More than one tank on the enemy team? You can't afford to give up that many players. It takes fewer players and less isk just to call out your own tanks and fight fire with fire. That will be even more pronounced with the upcoming changes. If the team quota is full, or you are a new player who can't effectively use your own HAV, or you are like me and just consider tanks to be boring as all hell, you spend the rest of the match sitting around twiddling your thumbs. SP invested into AV weapons go unused, matches turn into boring rounds of watching big things plink away at each other. People give up on Dust.
Hobo on Fire Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 194	Posted - 2014.03.06 16:26:00 - [3] - Quote Toobar Zoobar wrote: Buff swarms?!? No. Just NO! they already have plenty of range as it is. Anyone using a dropship would be completely screwed if there was a swarm buff. We have enough to contend with as it is with redlining tanks and forge guns. Clearly you have never used swarms against a dropship, or you are an incredibly situationally unaware pilot. Swarms lost both lock-on range and damage with 1.7, the range being the bigger factor. In previous builds, swarms had a lock-on range of 400m, and still weren't a reliable way to bring down a dropship. They could shoo the DS away from a location pretty well, but a single volley was never enough to bring one down; any competent pilot would bug out, regen/repair, and come right back. "Killing" a DS with swarms was usually a result of hitting them when they were close to an object and bouncing them into it. In 1.7, swarm lock-on range was cut to 175m, and their damage went from 330 per missile to 220. A proto swarm firing six missiles (with complex damage mods) was still enough to knock a dropship sideways and crash them, but without the range, the swarm user has to basically be under the DS to get a shot off. DS pilots who start taking fire don't have to fly anywhere near as far to get out of range and repair, and take significantly less damage per impact, so they don't have to take as much time repairing. Assault dropship pilots fitting hardeners can sit there, tanking impacts from prototype AV weapons, and kill the AV crews with missile launchers. Dropships are currently vulnerable to forge guns, railguns, and the ground. Swarm users are vulnerable to forge gunners, railguns, missile launchers, blaster turrets, grenades, HMGs, SMGs, rifles, shotguns, remote explosives, nova knives, plasma cannons, LAV bumpers, orbital bombardments, and being bashed over the head with rep tools and nanohives. DS pilots can be vulnerable to one more weapon. Take your own advice: Toobar Zoobar wrote: Seriously can you people not look at the situation objectively? Quit looking for ways to make life easier for yourselves. I'll give you this though, since I left it out of my last post: Dropships are way too expensive. For as fragile as they are and as difficult as they are to fly, losing one shouldn't cost the pilot an arm and a leg. I'll ammend my list: -AV grenades need 3 in the pocket, or a damage increase, if not both. -Buff Swarms up to 300 damage per missile and increase their lock-on range to at least 250m -Do SOMETHING to turn plasma cannons into a serious weapon, they've been a joke since they were introduced. -Increase the hull cost of HAVs to at least double what they are now (100k for an unfit militia HAV, 200k for standard) -Reduce the cost of dropship hulls by at least half. 500k for something that's biggest enemy is the terrain is absurd.
Hobo on Fire Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 203	Posted - 2014.03.07 01:01:00 - [4] - Quote Cross Atu wrote: snip Looks like a pretty good list to me, though I do have to say the swarm launcher lock on mechanic needs to be fixed regardless and it might be worth looking at the swarm launcher lock on time in addition too, or as an alternative too the lock on range (of course if both are done they should each be done in a much lessor capacity). snip I put out an idea along these lines when we first got the 1.7 patch notes. Hobo on Fire wrote: I remember a few people commenting that the range nerf to swarms was just a workaround to the rendering issues they had for so long. If true, it means that CCP has every intention of at least retuning them to their original range once they figure out the issue... Having invisible missiles flying into your vehicle was a problem. If they really did do it because they felt the range was too long, I'd suggest having the launcher work as it currently does out to it's current max lock-on range of 175m. At ranges beyond that, the launcher could still lock on (up to the old 400m max) but there would be an increased lock on time of 0.1 seconds for every 10m past the 175m "optimal" range. A target 375m could still be targeted, but at 200m past the "optimal," it would increase the lock on time by a full 2 seconds. Letting swarms reach these targets, even at what amounts to a significantly reduced rate of fire, would allow players not skilled into heavy suits or vehicles to at least suppress long range vehicle targets. Forcing tanks or dropships to retreat obviously isn't as good as killing them, but it can absolutely mean the difference in a pitched battle. In addition, rail tanks and installations more than 175m past the redline can now only be targeted by forge guns or large rail/missile turrets. If these objects can strike at us, we shouldn't be forced to spec into heavy suits or HAVs just to shoot back. I also wanted swarm lock-on to be moved to the aim-down-sights button, so players inadvertantly locking on to the wrong target could easily break the lock instead of either turning away and waiting, or intentionally firing at the wrong object. Of course, altering the lock-on mechanic would require actual time and effort to code into the game. CCP can't seem to be bothered to hotfix simple changes like altering damage values.