DUST Search - [Suggestion] Change Swarm launcher operation

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Suggestion] Change Swarm launcher operation

» 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)
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 184	Posted - 2014.11.25 02:38:00 - [1] - Quote How about dumbfire missiles that auto lock once they are 50m within of the target It would require skill to lead the target Greater range, operational to 400m without the DS having to be 175m to get a lock Missiles don't explode unless they get a lock, to avoid anti infantry
Finn Colman Immortal Guides 64	Posted - 2014.11.25 02:46:00 - [2] - Quote Juno Tristan wrote: How about dumbfire missiles that auto lock once they are 50m within of the target It would require skill to lead the target Greater range, operational to 400m without the DS having to be 175m to get a lock Missiles don't explode unless they get a lock, to avoid anti infantry This may be a great idea or an awful idea, I'm really not sure. The little Min with the little voice.
ImIvan 52	Posted - 2014.11.25 03:25:00 - [3] - Quote So, the missiles follow your cross hairs? That sounds great! Why must you use prototypes?
TIMMY DAVIS Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 51	Posted - 2014.11.25 04:10:00 - [4] - Quote I hope CCP gives this idea a try in a Test environment. This sounds promising - Maybe implement it as a Proto Specialist variant.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1006	Posted - 2014.11.25 05:13:00 - [5] - Quote This is definitely something that would be a very interesting change to the Swarm. It would allow vehicles to actually evade through erratic movement but good Swarmers would be able to box them, guaranteeing a certain amount of hits. I'd probably say that a velocity increase should go with it: currently swarms start at about 10m/s with a 10m/s-¦ acceleration (I think it's 10 anyway) but a start at about 30-45m/s and a max speed of about 100m/s with a 15-20m/s-¦ accel could be more reasonable, since they'd have a long travel time past 200m. All that said, I love this idea! Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 190	Posted - 2014.11.27 11:59:00 - [6] - Quote So to add more detail, you wouldn't need to keep the target locked, they'd be fire and forget as they currently are, but would only track targets once inside the certain range A 'cool down' or something would need to be added so that the interval between shots is maintained, so you can't just spam 12 missiles so for example, start of the match you see the usual dropship heading to a tower routine, you could fire your rockets towards the top of the tower the dropship does not take any evasive action and continues on its path Provided you got the trajectory right the rockets will then target the dropship once it gets in range, +75wp, +75wp depending on the pilots evasion and your follow up shots it would come down to skill, do you pre shoot the 4th swarm ahead of the drop ship or do you feel they'll turn around? will they pop their afterburner? in which case a shot above them could cut off their path I would be interested to hear what tankers have to say about the suggestion as with the extended firing range a smaller lock on sphere might work better
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1024	Posted - 2014.11.27 14:06:00 - [7] - Quote Juno Tristan wrote: I would be interested to hear what tankers have to say about the suggestion as with the extended firing range a smaller lock on sphere might work better Not a tanker, but what about two variants? Standard which is relatively slow with a good 30-50m lock-on radius; Assault which has faster projectiles but a smaller (15-25m?) lock-on radius. I think most interesting would be to hear from Swarm users. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 140	Posted - 2014.11.27 14:26:00 - [8] - Quote 1. That requires a little bit of aim for DS but not for ground vehicles 1a. Is that 400m dumbfire limit? but also if dumbfire is 400m limit what happens when it locks on will it them keep moving for another 400m of lock on? 2. Against ground vehicles could be OP still 2a. Say i fire swarms at a tank which i know is hiding around the corner, all i have to do is aim to the right or left of cover and when the missiles get close enough lock on do a 270deg turn on the spot and hit a vehicle behind cover thus making cover useless again 3. I think i would prefer the laser lock on, you have to tag the target and keep the target tagged for the missiles to hit, if the tag is lost in any way the missiles blow
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides Learning Alliance 5148	Posted - 2014.11.27 14:40:00 - [9] - Quote It might work, but the image which came to my mind was off all my missiles deciding to lock on nearby Supply Depots, Turrets, and CRUGÇÖs. Or all the missiles deciding to lock on different targets. Could be frustrating. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1024	Posted - 2014.11.27 15:13:00 - [10] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: It might work, but the image which came to my mind was off all my missiles deciding to lock on nearby Supply Depots, Turrets, and CRUGÇÖs. Or all the missiles deciding to lock on different targets. Could be frustrating. That is a good point. Though with the current system, if a HAV is sheltering behind a depot/CRU then the same issue sort of applies. Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. That requires a little bit of aim for DS but not for ground vehicles 1a. Is that 400m dumbfire limit? but also if dumbfire is 400m limit what happens when it locks on will it them keep moving for another 400m of lock on? 1) It does require some aim, though the lock-on range may need tweaking. As I said above, it might be worth having two variants: one with larger lock-on range but slower; one faster but smaller lock-on range. 1a) I'd assume that it would have a 400m max travel distance. That's a point that would need to be fiddled with. Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 2. Against ground vehicles could be OP still 2a. Say i fire swarms at a tank which i know is hiding around the corner, all i have to do is aim to the right or left of cover and when the missiles get close enough lock on do a 270deg turn on the spot and hit a vehicle behind cover thus making cover useless again 2) In this circumstance, they'd still have the ability to put cover between them. As above it might be necessary to fiddle with lock-on ranges. 2a) That's a good point, and again, lock-on ranges would need looking at. Maybe a 25m lock-on range base? Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 3. I think i would prefer the laser lock on, you have to tag the target and keep the target tagged for the missiles to hit, if the tag is lost in any way the missiles blow 3) That's another option. I think the idea behind Juno's idea is that you still have an element of fire and forget, but would restrict it from being entirely skill less to use. An autolock mehcanism would reward intelligent estimations of enemy movement. A laser-guidance system could be interesting, though it depends on the laser: is it a pinpoint? Does the missile explode if the laser is off the target for a fraction of a second? Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.

Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 140	Posted - 2014.11.27 15:54:00 - [11] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 3. I think i would prefer the laser lock on, you have to tag the target and keep the target tagged for the missiles to hit, if the tag is lost in any way the missiles blow 3) That's another option. I think the idea behind Juno's idea is that you still have an element of fire and forget, but would restrict it from being entirely skill less to use. An autolock mehcanism would reward intelligent estimations of enemy movement. A laser-guidance system could be interesting, though it depends on the laser: is it a pinpoint? Does the missile explode if the laser is off the target for a fraction of a second?[/quote] 1. The lock on sphere would have to be tweeked over several weeks because it can be easily manovered around i think 2. The laser would be like the RPG in Half life 2 to an extent, one it follows the laser so if the target goes behind a build it hits the building but it needs to tag so you cant hit infantry with it 3. The TAG would disappear if target gets an obstruction beyween them and the user, maybe 5sec relock window but i dont want it where the target gest to cover lock is broken yet the missiles carry on target and hit thats just as bad
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2629	Posted - 2014.11.27 16:44:00 - [12] - Quote If have to think about it a bit more but it sounds good. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Kaeru Nayiri OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 217	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:44:00 - [13] - Quote I can get behind this idea. Here are some ideas to help get it under control: Remove it's ability to target buildings, this weapon goes after things with an engine only, not CRU or Supply Depots. The missile does not arm until it is locked, cannot intentionally be used to harm infantry I prefer autolock withyin X meters of a vehicle over laser painting because laser painting, from an infantry's pov can be an extremely frustrating mechanic. The Swarm Launcher, above all else, must remain fun to use. Also in order to retain the use of the term "Swarm" launcher, it would have to somehow be multiple missiles per shot. Perhaps this idea can be a racial equivalent to the swarm launcher? Make this the CALDARI LIGHT AV WEAPON. Swarms would still need to be looked at. And since there would suddenly be multiple light AV weapon options available, I think the laser target painted missile launcher can be revisited as the AMARR LIGHT AV WEAPON. Homing Rocket Launcher Caldari Light AV Weapon, uses swarm launcher sprite (temporary) Kinetic damage profile 300m range, burns up if no lock after 300m travel within 50m of a vehicle, it autolocks and tracks them (as swarms do) 6 Shots before reload, reload time 3 seconds Basic: 350 dmg Adv: 400 dmg Pro: 425 dmg Laser Guided EMP Launcher Amarr Light Av Weapon, uses swarm launcher sprite (temporary) EMP/laser damage profile 500m range, burns up if no vehicle is laser painted for more then 5 seconds 5 shots before reload, reload time 2 seconds Missiles track vehicle as long as it is painted by the laser being emitted from the launcher itself. User simply places their weapon crosshair on the vehicle to paint it. Cannot be used on infantry. Only one missile can be shot and guided at a time. Basic: 520dmg Adv: 560 dmg Pro: 575 dmg If infantry have the option between different AV weapons, it is easier to tone down the current swarm launcher. When you have only one reliable light AV weapon, it has to be better than decent or else vehicles seem OP. Even if the that light av weapon can be used half asleep.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2405	Posted - 2014.11.28 15:06:00 - [14] - Quote Juno Tristan wrote: How about dumbfire missiles that auto lock once they are 50m within of the target It would require skill to lead the target Greater range, operational to 400m without the DS having to be 175m to get a lock Missiles don't explode unless they get a lock, to avoid anti infantry Using a lock-on weapon doesn't require "skill." I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1027	Posted - 2014.11.28 15:10:00 - [15] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Using a lock-on weapon doesn't require "skill." Perhaps try reading the thread/suggestion next time? Maybe then you won't act like an incorrigible douchebag... Juno's idea is to make it such that the missiles are launched dumb, like a Plasma or Large Missile round then lock-on when they get near to a target. That would mean that some element of skill must be used to judge the target's movement and account for it. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
DDx77 The Exemplars RISE of LEGION 35	Posted - 2014.11.28 16:14:00 - [16] - Quote [quote=Juno Tristan]So to add more detail, you wouldn't need to keep the target locked, they'd be fire and forget as they currently are, but would only track targets once inside the certain range A 'cool down' or something would need to be added so that the interval between shots is maintained, so you can't just spam 12 missiles You might not need a cool down if it fires one missile as opposed to the normal volley of four with reg swarms. You could adjust the rof accordingly. So the advantage could be longer optimal range and quicker firing the disadvantage is lower dps - and probably less ammo
IZI doro Terminal Courtesy Proficiency V. 17	Posted - 2014.11.28 21:33:00 - [17] - Quote So, to simplify this thread in a quick-n-dirty statement, you want to convert the Swarm Launcher into a larger-scale AV Grenade launcher? The mechanic sounds very similar to the AV Grenade now, with a localized seek range. I would not mind a change to this mechanic, but the Swarm Launcher Operation skill would then have to be changed to something like a larger seek range or shorter "charge" time. Ignorance is only a problem when left untreated. Stop the spread of ignorance with a daily dose of knowledge!
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 14012	Posted - 2014.11.28 21:57:00 - [18] - Quote I like the idea. However, I don't like that last part. SLs have a re-fire delay along with only 68HP of splash damage so it's not neccesary. Plus, without that last part you'd be able to kill Infantry if you're a good shot (like the PLC). The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 195	Posted - 2014.11.29 10:09:00 - [19] - Quote Atiim wrote: I like the idea. However, I don't like that last part. SLs have a re-fire delay along with only 68HP of splash damage so it's not neccesary. Plus, without that last part you'd be able to kill Infantry if you're a good shot (like the PLC). I want to maintain the damage/time balance but give the user more chance to miss and the vehicles more chance to evade
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1032	Posted - 2014.11.29 10:11:00 - [20] - Quote Atiim wrote: I like the idea. Honestly, I'm very pleased to see that Atiim wrote: However, I don't like that last part. SLs have a re-fire delay along with only 68HP of splash damage so it's not neccesary. Plus, without that last part you'd be able to kill Infantry if you're a good shot (like the PLC). Agreed. I'm not entirely sure if it would be best to maintain the four-shot volley and refire delays, or change to more of a burst-fire type style (like a Burst ScP for example.) Maybe variants could have the different functionality with the standard keeping the volley/refire system. As far as splash is concerned, it's not going to be murdering infantry as the Swarm of old. The splash damage is curtailed heavily and even the direct damage is relatively low since you'd be unlikely to land multiple hits on the same target; and a Mass Driver would be better against a cluster due to the radius. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.

Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 198	Posted - 2014.11.29 10:13:00 - [21] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: It might work, but the image which came to my mind was off all my missiles deciding to lock on nearby Supply Depots, Turrets, and CRUGÇÖs. Or all the missiles deciding to lock on different targets. Could be frustrating. That is a good point about installations, but I think a minimal lock on range could be the best solution <5m That way swarms could still target installations on purpose but could be used vehicles for cover without being excessive
Spademan Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4829	Posted - 2014.12.01 22:38:00 - [22] - Quote So the MBT LAW from Battlefield? I like it. I am part shovel, part man, full scout, and a little bit special. Official Time Lord of the Scout Community
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1250	Posted - 2015.01.15 16:41:00 - [23] - Quote Just wondering if anyone else has an opinion on this. I honestly feel this change would remove a lot of the annoyance about Swarmer spam, since it would require some aiming to achieve effects, unlike the current system which leads to incredibly easy to apply AV. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Onikanabo Brigade Caldari State 1710	Posted - 2015.01.15 21:37:00 - [24] - Quote What will you all do when more people start using forges .?. ban together and call for a change to the mechanic of forges ? 5m lock .?. you try standing 5m from an enemy turret and swarm it and let me know what happens 9 times out of 10 . I just can't believe that swarms are that much trouble to a pilot , because that's who mostly call for changes to swarms while tankers and LAV users are pretty much quiet on this topic ... who uses common sense and is aware of their surroundings . I like the idea of a warning system because I called for one when the vehicles were being changed and no one backed that until now , where it seems like such a great idea . Enjoy folks , didn't want to interrupt , just interested in the next item that your looking to change if you keep getting shot down . Not too much to screw with and I guess that's great for players who don't want any opposition to their efforts . Doubts are like flies and should be treated as such and crushed .
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 256	Posted - 2015.01.15 22:22:00 - [25] - Quote There are plenty of discussions on the why in GD, I'd just like to focus on the proposal and get some feedback from swarmers. In regards to the 5m lock on installations it is to avoid vehicles sitting near one and never being targeted as the swarms lock onto the installation Whilst if you were to fire at it with line of sight you could directly target it (if you really want to compete your daily missions)
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5387	Posted - 2015.01.15 22:45:00 - [26] - Quote If they're dumbfire, do they kill infantry now too? Juno Tristan wrote: I want to maintain the damage/time balance but give the user more chance to miss and the vehicles more chance to evade We'd need to make them a lot faster and hit harder if they're going to be easier to evade. Swarms are finally relevant. I'm not going to let them get nerfed into oblivion again. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 15552	Posted - 2015.01.15 22:52:00 - [27] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: What will you all do when more people start using forges .?. ban together and call for a change to the mechanic of forges ? 5m lock .?. you try standing 5m from an enemy turret and swarm it and let me know what happens 9 times out of 10 . I just can't believe that swarms are that much trouble to a pilot , because that's who mostly call for changes to swarms while tankers and LAV users are pretty much quiet on this topic ... who uses common sense and is aware of their surroundings . I like the idea of a warning system because I called for one when the vehicles were being changed and no one backed that until now , where it seems like such a great idea . Enjoy folks , didn't want to interrupt , just interested in the next item that your looking to change if you keep getting shot down . Not too much to screw with and I guess that's great for players who don't want any opposition to their efforts . You clearly dont fly much lol. No one worth mentioning ever complains much about forges aside from the occasional rant because they take skill and aim to be efficient with, and can be dodged via good piloting, none of which applies to swarms that deal nearly the same damage. Theres a lot less cover to hide behind in the sky, and hiding behimd cover can be even more dangerous than just eating the swarm because of knockback and collision damage. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Finn Colman Immortal Guides Learning Alliance 116	Posted - 2015.01.15 22:54:00 - [28] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: What will you all do when more people start using forges .?. ban together and call for a change to the mechanic of forges ? 5m lock .?. you try standing 5m from an enemy turret and swarm it and let me know what happens 9 times out of 10 . I just can't believe that swarms are that much trouble to a pilot , because that's who mostly call for changes to swarms while tankers and LAV users are pretty much quiet on this topic ... who uses common sense and is aware of their surroundings . I like the idea of a warning system because I called for one when the vehicles were being changed and no one backed that until now , where it seems like such a great idea . Enjoy folks , didn't want to interrupt , just interested in the next item that your looking to change if you keep getting shot down . Not too much to screw with and I guess that's great for players who don't want any opposition to their efforts . A note for your consideration: The environment and controls of land and air vehicles are significantly different. As such there will be unique issues for each type of vehicle. I'm fairly certain that we all know that a dropship does not handle like a HAV, or LAV. Beyond that, there is significantly less cover able in the sky than on the ground. Additionally, I don't think I've ever seen a HAV get flipped on its side by AV. Obviously, there are disadvantages on the other side as well. Ground vehicles certainly do not have the upward mobility that a DS has, nor can they run to a place where they are outside of the altitude where infantry weapons can hit them. Their lack of upward mobility may prevent them from taking as direct a path as a DS. PSA: Tell players to terminate in order to access mCRUs.
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 256	Posted - 2015.01.15 23:00:00 - [29] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: If they're dumbfire, do they kill infantry now too? Juno Tristan wrote: I want to maintain the damage/time balance but give the user more chance to miss and the vehicles more chance to evade We'd need to make them go faster and hit harder if they're going to be easier to evade. Swarms are finally relevant. I'm not going to let them get nerfed into oblivion again. Infantry damage would be the same as now. Swarms are armed once they get a lock on I would not like to change the damage given the increase to the effective targeting range to 400m (flight range)
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5387	Posted - 2015.01.15 23:08:00 - [30] - Quote Hmm... that's right, you did propose buffing the range a lot. The only thing is how much range will probably not matter without lock-on mechanics. At 400m, your chance of getting swarms within 50m is probably low if they're moving at all. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.