Harpyja
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1914
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 03:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Infantry < Marauders < Enforcers < Infantry, and Basic HAVs can be fitted to slot in anywhere.
Essentially what I'm thinking is make Marauders a hyper-durable hull, in the order of 2-3x as durable as a traditional HAV. Balance by separating the turrets.
Give tighter dispersion on all turrets as a reward for levelling, as well as passive resistance (say 5% per level), and a flat nerf of say 30% to Large Turret damage output, like the old LLAVs.
The durability of these vehicles would make them superior to a generalist-fit Basic HAV, but inferior to a fitting designed to destroy them. They would also require teamwork to operate, balancing them against the potential for two HAVS more traditionally. I'd perhaps consider adding medium turrets as the passenger's weapon, to differentiate them from the Pilot and the Gunner.
Their natural counter would be the Enforcer, which would have a comparable, but slightly inferior durability to traditional hulls, with tighter dispersion, somewhat greater range and a significant damage bonus, say, 10% per level. It would be somewhat more mobile than the traditional hull, as a compensation for its price and relative lack of durability. Like the Marauder, it would have a separated turret/pilot.
Essentially, all of these vehicle hulls would be equivalent to 2 Basic HAVs, as justified by their greater co-operation necessitated by the split away layout. It would be possible for a competent pair of tankers to defeat the combined might of a competent Specialist crew, but it would be comparatively easy for a Specialist Crew to deal with its counterpart.
The issue here of course would be the lack of adequate infantry response to a Marauder team, although competently combined arms would serve to drive it off, and I would recommend that three proto-AV wielders could efficiently destroy a Marauder.
An Enforcer would optimally be destroyed by a single (highly) competent proto-AV user, with two easily destroying it.
This would hopefully allow the use of Marauder hulls to breach as infantry support, but requiring competent infantry AV support to survive Enforcer challenges.
(This is really a WIP at the moment; I'm considering recommending Black Ops hulls as the third part of the triangle instead of infantry, while recommending that infantry AV and Basic HAVs could slot in at any point based on fitting) I'm sorry but I cannot stand behind splitting up the driver seat into pilot and gunner seats. I feel like based on what you propose for the marauders and enforces that their gains are already balanced by their losses. Increased firepower is offset by less durability, while increased durability is offset by less firepower. So theoretically infantry should stand as much chance against them as they do against basic HAVs. The only difference here would be that people with preferred playstyles can choose a specialized hull for their playstyle, e.g. someone who wants mobility and firepower can use the enforcer, someone who wants durability can use the marauder, and someone who wants to be jack-of-all-trades can just go basic (though I'd suggest that basic HAVs get some sort of skill bonus as well that's neither offensive or defensive).
I feel like infantry AV vs HAVs is quite balanced now. Today I may have actually lost a Gunnlogi to two militia swarms. At first it was just one 'tickling' me so I figured that popping my shield hardener was just going to be a waste so I just reversed to get out while he kept chipping away at my shield. However, I reversed into an obstacle rendering me stuck for several seconds and during the process of my reversing the second person showed up and started shooting me from behind. At that point I was now under half shield and I pop my shield hardener and fuel injector but it was too late as I couldn't drive off fast enough. I jump out, kill one of them (also first time using a combat rifle) and as I'm turning around to kill the other, a volley of swarms flies past my screen and blows up my Gunnlogi.
So I'll say that infantry AV can be very effective now. Most people are just not doing it right when they all try attacking at the same time, because that just marks them as a serious threat at which I can respond to with full health. Though if they use, say a militia swarm, they make it so I don't recognize them as a serious threat and I don't respond to them as if they were a serious threat. Usually, I escape such solo players with about 1/2 to 2/3 shield remaining and I spare myself of waiting out the cooldown timer. Though if they have friends to join in at that point, I probably don't have enough EHP remaining to respond to them as I would to a serious threat.
I almost had the same fate a few other times, had I not been a bit faster to react and having a bit of luck (such as escaping with less than 500 armor remaining). Sorry for this long post!
Anyways, that's my reasoning for why infantry AV is fine, at least against Gunnlogis, and also why specialization by itself doesn't require the separation to driver and gunner, as long as the tradeoffs are balanced, which I think they are (firepower and mobility for durability and durability for firepower and mobility(?)).
"By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
--
"Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
|
Harpyja
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1914
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 04:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
Well either way, I'm not spending any SP into vehicles that I can't operate and shoot at the same time, at least while I got better stuff to skill into and upgrade. I don't want to invest SP into something that requires another player that's also similarly skilled and on comms.
"By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
--
"Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
|