| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Clone D
271
   |
Posted - 2014.04.24 13:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tanks in this game are racing around like they belong in the Indy 500. When tank speed got buffed, swarm lock on speed remained the same. Mathematically, that gave tanks a huge advantage over AV. I propose that lock on speed needs to be adjusted in proportion to the speed boost that tanks got back in 1.7.
.
|
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers
Dirt Nap Squad.
2512
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 13:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
I propose they fixed acceleration under a fuel injector instead.
You know... Fix the actual thing that's broken. |
Harpyja
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1645
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 13:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
I'd like to see how a faster swarm speed would work out.
ZDub 303 wrote:I propose they fix acceleration under a fuel injector instead.
You know... Fix the actual thing that's broken.
Yes, reaching top speed feels near instantaneous with a fuel injector.
"By His light, and His will"
- The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
|
Ripley Riley
Incorruptibles
1859
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 13:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
A faster lock-on speed and faster missile speeds... seriously, swarm missiles act like they've got all week to hit their targets.
He imposes order on the chaos of organic evolution...
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
632
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 13:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
That should work great against drop ships .
Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
|
Nomed Deeps
319
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 13:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Quote:Balance Fast Tanks With Faster Swarm Lock On Speed
Yes, please.
I'm so tired of HAVs and DSs being able to quickly fly out of swarm range. Lock on is part of the problem but I still believe the Swarm range was over nerfed. After all, if drivers drive defensely, they could easily block swarms at longer range.
I cannot be bought, but I can be leased.
|
DozersMouse XIII
Ultramarine Corp
490
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
what about range?
blasters can out range swarms lol
Bacon pancakes makin' bacon pancakes
Take some bacon and I'll put it a pancake
Bacon pancakes thats what it's gonna make
|
Fahlyn
Phantom Universe Task Force
Die Fremdenlegion
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
Look here there is a other Thread
With the same problem but i dont think CCP do something.  |
Justicar Karnellia
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement
Caldari State
803
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:I propose they fix acceleration under a fuel injector instead.
You know... Fix the actual thing that's broken.
I think this is more reasonable.
What you are trying to do is address the symptom, and not the root cause. Tank speed is just too high... plus physics don't apply to them the way they do to LAV's (ie. instead of crashing they just slide over each other like slugs)...
There are other things to fix too but the speed would be a nice start... |
Rynoceros
Rise Of Old Dudes
3807
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:21:00 -
[10] - Quote
Swarms needed a projectile speed buff long before that long-awaited, garbage 1.7 patch.
**** it.
These assholes could've thrown in some incremental hotfixes by now but they're too god damned lazy to do it. They want it to be "just right" when they do it, but it never is. Change a few values and roll them out for ****'s sake. If it doesn't work, do it again. These mother ******* act like they have to rewrite the entire script just to adjust something.
And what's with all the secrecy around fixes and updates? Do you think another dev team is going to hawk in and steal your **** dirty coding, **** mechanics, and **** ideas? Get over it. Nobody steals from a losing investment.
Go **** yourselves.
I GÖú Kittens.
|
|
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7169
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:26:00 -
[11] - Quote
I think Swarm Launchers need a lock time decrease.
Not because of vehicle speed, but because your forced to sit out in the open if you want to lock onto a target, as opposed to other AV weapons (bar Breach FGs) that allow you to charge/spool behind cover.
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
lee corwood
Knights Of Ender
Galactic Skyfleet Empire
768
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:28:00 -
[12] - Quote
Ripley Riley wrote:A faster lock-on speed and faster missile speeds... seriously, swarm missiles act like they've got all week to hit their targets.
Oh!...we left the barrel..ok *yawn* I guess we better follow the target. ...where is he again? Oh, there he is, over here guys!! ..well wait, I think he's moving, let's see what he does. Ok, he's trying to turn the corner, we can catch up, we've got time. Ok boys we're almost there, we just nee-OMGAWALL!!!
Minmatar Logisis | Heavy lover. Ping for video services.
|
Fahlyn
Phantom Universe Task Force
Die Fremdenlegion
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:30:00 -
[13] - Quote
You got faster lock-on speed from the swam skill (25%)
in 1.6 times it was 5% to clip cap. |
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7171
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
Fahlyn wrote:You got faster lock-on speed from the swam skill (25%)
in 1.6 times it was 5% to clip cap.
I'm pretty sure it was lock time in 1.6
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Alena Ventrallis
PAND3M0N1UM
Top Men.
1211
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:34:00 -
[15] - Quote
Because everything needs to be balanced off of tanks, instead of all vehicles.
That's what you get!! - DA Rick
|
Cenex Langly
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
723
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:35:00 -
[16] - Quote
Missiles need faster flight velocity. Right now they are unrealistically slow that it's comical. They would fall out of the sky if it were reality.
But seriously, they do need an increase in flight speed, not lock speed, so that tanks and ADS cannot just run from them.
Newb
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7171
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:35:00 -
[17] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:Because everything needs to be balanced off of tanks, instead of all vehicles.
In the same sense that everything needs to be balanced around PRO AV...
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Clone D
273
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 14:46:00 -
[18] - Quote
Cenex Langly wrote:... But seriously, they do need an increase in flight speed, not lock speed ...
Even with the 25% bonus, an 80GJ blaster can pivot nearly 180 degrees, target and kill an AV merc before lock on is ready.
A RR at 90 meters can take down an AV merc before lockon completes.
Vehicles drive/fly out of range before lockon completes.
Regardless of how fast the missiles go (I agree that flight velocity should be faster) if you can't lock on in time, then AV faces a huge disadvantage, since the merc doesn't even have time to fire.
.
|
Temias Mercurial
Knights Of Ender
Galactic Skyfleet Empire
63
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 16:25:00 -
[19] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:I'd like to see how a faster swarm speed would work out. ZDub 303 wrote:I propose they fix acceleration under a fuel injector instead.
You know... Fix the actual thing that's broken. Yes, reaching top speed feels near instantaneous with a fuel injector.
Fuel injectors bring you above the top speed, and the effect is instantaneous. |
Clone D
277
|
Posted - 2014.04.25 18:26:00 -
[20] - Quote
We still need this.
.
|
|
|
DUST Fiend
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
13104
|
Posted - 2014.04.25 18:27:00 -
[21] - Quote
Lock on speed is fine. Projectile speed is what needs to be buffed. Also, NOS needs to not be so amazing on HAVs
My Music Videos & Fan Fiction
Incubus Pilot, ISK plz
|
Clone D
279
|
Posted - 2014.04.25 18:55:00 -
[22] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Lock on speed is fine.
Do you frequently use SL? I have to mount a SL on a minmintar light frame in an attempt to keep up with vehicles as they drive away as I am waiting to lock on.
.
|
mordiby
G.R.A.V.E
INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS
80
|
Posted - 2014.04.25 18:57:00 -
[23] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Tanks in this game are racing around like they belong in the Indy 500. When tank speed got buffed, swarm lock on speed remained the same. Mathematically, that gave tanks a huge advantage over AV. I propose that lock on speed needs to be adjusted in proportion to the speed boost that tanks got back in 1.7.
Yes yes, if you though ROCKETS could go fast, you should see some of those futuristic tanks, of course rockets some how devolved over the year, weird huh?
Director of G.R.A.V.E
Logi cake here!
|
Clone D
289
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 20:32:00 -
[24] - Quote
We could do the math. Assume that you only get one chance to lock on and fire rockets before a tank drives away and that if a tank gets away then it will just rep and return.
If a madruger has only base HP (3800), then it will take 18 rockets at 220 damage each to destroy it. That's 5 AV mercs firing swarm launchers simultaneously with nearly all rockets impacting.
No wonder it is such a headache to take down tanks. It is ridiculous how many team resources are required to bring down a tank. In real combat, for years we've been setting mines and disabling tanks which only requires the initial time of deploying a minefield.
If lock on time were reduced by half, then if would take half as many people to take down a tank if they can fire twice each before it runs away.
As for now, AV is merely a mild deterrent. Regardless of the new damage WP, to play AV is the least rewarding of all classes and the most hazardous. The payout for this class is minimal and the only mercs who play it are the ones ambitious enough to take on a challenge against all odds, or those testing the waters. Any normal person would just consider it suicide.
Best of luck, AVers. Your courage and valor are known to but a few 
We need this change implemented and we need more anti-tank measures!
.
|
Tectonic Fusion
1591
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 20:35:00 -
[25] - Quote
It seems like just yesterday I was reading how OP swarms were :o
Oh the good ol days of 1.6...
Solo Player
Squad status: Locked
Ehem...OBVIOUSER troll is OBVIOUSER
|
Mojo XXXIII
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
58
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 20:41:00 -
[26] - Quote
In spite of all the (current) shortcomings of being AV, when everyone else yells "Oh, ****, a tank!" and runs away, I still kinda like being that one crazy guy that yells "Where?", and runs towards it. |
Sylwester Dziewiecki
Interregnum.
289
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 21:03:00 -
[27] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Tanks in this game are racing around like they belong in the Indy 500. When tank speed got buffed, swarm lock on speed remained the same. Mathematically, that gave tanks a huge advantage over AV. I propose that lock on speed needs to be adjusted in proportion to the speed boost that tanks got back in 1.7.
It would be more funny to be able to share locking system with squad teammates
I'm here since may 2012, my EVE alter ego is Nosum Hseebnrido.
|
THEPIMP NAMED SLICKBACK
THE BONERBOMBS
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 22:36:00 -
[28] - Quote
I'm a tanker i would like to see them lock on faster only if they fix the delay where the next pod of rockets are fired and the speed of the missiles increased as a whole clip is fired from a proto SL and has reloaded by the time the first rockets hit me. And how the rockets animation lags most of the time and doesn't show where they hit you form or where they were fired from when your in the vehicle and all you can see is just explosions. The reload is nice on the swarm launcher but the speed i agree is too slow. |
deepfried salad gilliam
Sanguine Knights
671
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 23:16:00 -
[29] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Alena Ventrallis wrote:Because everything needs to be balanced off of tanks, instead of all vehicles. In the same sense that everything needs to be balanced around PRO AV...
why not around the flaylock?
It'll help define roles, i promise:)
|
Poonmunch
Sanguis Defense Syndicate
866
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 23:58:00 -
[30] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Tanks in this game are racing around like they belong in the Indy 500. When tank speed got buffed, swarm lock on speed remained the same. Mathematically, that gave tanks a huge advantage over AV. I propose that lock on speed needs to be adjusted in proportion to the speed boost that tanks got back in 1.7.
I'd rather see a bump in swarm launcher range than a decrease in lock-on time.
If they brought up the ranges 25m per equipment tier (standard, advanced, proto), it would go a long way to improving the swarm launchers.
Munch
Minmatar Patriot (Level 7)
Dedicated Sniper
|
|
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
Lokun Listamenn
4053
|
Posted - 2014.04.27 00:21:00 -
[31] - Quote
It's the range that's the problem. But dropship pilots and tanks pilots (mostly dropship pilots because they can floatcamp points and annihilate people) will fight that tooth and nail since they cried so hard to get the range reduced.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
Are you OUKH?
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
Lokun Listamenn
4053
|
Posted - 2014.04.27 00:23:00 -
[32] - Quote
Clone D wrote:DUST Fiend wrote:Lock on speed is fine. Do you frequently use SL? I have to mount a SL on a minmintar light frame in an attempt to keep up with vehicles as they drive away as I am waiting to lock on.
Because if you had range, you wouldn't have to worry about fitting a light suit (for speed) with a SL just to keep within the lock on range with a tank thats speeding away.
If the tank is speeding away and you still have range, it wouldn't matter. You could stand there and still acquire lock while he's hauling ass.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
Are you OUKH?
|
Clone D
293
|
Posted - 2014.04.27 05:31:00 -
[33] - Quote
Michael Arck wrote:If the tank is speeding away and you still have range, it wouldn't matter. You could stand there and still acquire lock while he's hauling ass.
It does matter. If the tank is farther away, then there is a greater likelihood that some impediment will come between me and the target. Reduced lock on speed ensures that I can get a clear shot without the enemy darting behind cover.
Shorter lock on speed is the correct response to fast tanks.
.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |