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.

Finn Colman Immortal Guides Learning Alliance 117	Posted - 2015.01.15 23:21:00 - [31] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: 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. Forge guns currently have a 400m effective range, and I doubt that their shots covers an area of 50m around the central point of their aim (it doesn't even seem to hit the whole area covered by the visual for a FG shot). There isn't a huge point being made here, but it is significant. Edit: Personally, I'm in favor of making SL missiles something that can be avoided by using evasive maneuvers. PSA: Tell players to terminate in order to access mCRUs.
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 256	Posted - 2015.01.15 23:49:00 - [32] - Quote Whilst hitting at the range limit would be difficult that's true for any gun, it would be effective though if the enemy was heading somewhere obvious, like a rooftop for example If vehicle pilots think they have a chance to evade they're more likely to stay and fight avoiding the binary run or die scenario Or If they do run being able to get that 4th shot off after the vehicle is over 175m will be of significant benefit
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1254	Posted - 2015.01.16 03:51:00 - [33] - Quote Juno Tristan wrote: Whilst hitting at the range limit would be difficult that's true for any gun, it would be effective though if the enemy was heading somewhere obvious, like a rooftop for example Definitely. Similarly, it would allow for the Swarmer to preemptively fire at a corner, or fire around the corner if there is a vehicle hiding just behind it. Essentially it allows the Swarmer to use skill more, while simultaneously allowing the vehicle pilot to use their skill. Forge Guns are bastards, but at I can respect them. I have even had several back-and-forth mails with some Forgers because while I was doing my damndest to avoid them they still pegged me. I have never respected a Swarmer, because they are so easy to use that it takes no skill to be half-decent with them and with the Commando suit introduction they have far less troubles against infantry than Forgers do, even though this weakness is so hyped up. Juno Tristan wrote: If vehicle pilots think they have a chance to evade they're more likely to stay and fight avoiding the binary run or die scenario Or If they do run being able to get that 4th shot off after the vehicle is over 175m will be of significant benefit For sure. There have been several times where I could have finished off a HAV or dropship, or gotten a few more missiles off at the blob of infantry bearing down on my allies on the objective, but because the Swarms were unavoidable I had to immediately run. Soraya Xel wrote: 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. As mentioned, Forge Guns have a 300m range and no lock-on. I believe the notion has been raised in this thread to increase either starting velocity, acceleration or both. Provided I can actually use my ability to fly, I'm totally fine with a Swarmer using their ability to shoot me down. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5400	Posted - 2015.01.16 04:55:00 - [34] - Quote Swarms are a lot slower than forge gun blasts though, Kallas. Forge gun blasts are almost instant, they move very fast, so you do not have to lead by much. If swarm speed was kept the same, dumbfiring 400m away would be near impossible. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1255	Posted - 2015.01.16 06:34:00 - [35] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Swarms are a lot slower than forge gun blasts though, Kallas. Forge gun blasts are almost instant, they move very fast, so you do not have to lead by much. If swarm speed was kept the same, dumbfiring 400m away would be near impossible. Yeah, I was in favour of an increase to acceleration, velocity or both: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: I believe the notion has been raised in this thread to increase either starting velocity, acceleration or both. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 261	Posted - 2015.01.16 07:21:00 - [36] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Swarms are a lot slower than forge gun blasts though, Kallas. Forge gun blasts are almost instant, they move very fast, so you do not have to lead by much. If swarm speed was kept the same, dumbfiring 400m away would be near impossible. If a Dropship is 'minding its own business' (and not just hovering) 400m away I would expect, and want, it to be hard to hit. But say that Dropship is engaging blueberries on the tabletop are you're within 400m you're likely to be able to hit it, something you cannot do now
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 261	Posted - 2015.01.16 07:25:00 - [37] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Swarms are a lot slower than forge gun blasts though, Kallas. Forge gun blasts are almost instant, they move very fast, so you do not have to lead by much. If swarm speed was kept the same, dumbfiring 400m away would be near impossible. Kallas' post about an assault variant with faster missiles could help address this
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4231	Posted - 2015.01.16 08:42:00 - [38] - Quote Instead of replacing the swarms why not make this the amarr launcher weapon? Gallente- Plasma Cannon Minmatar - Mass Driver Caldari - Swarm Launcher Amarr- AV Grenade Missile (this new weapon) Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6474	Posted - 2015.01.16 08:53:00 - [39] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Instead of replacing the swarms why not make this the amarr launcher weapon? Gallente- Plasma Cannon Minmatar - Mass Driver Caldari - Swarm Launcher Amarr- AV Grenade Missile (this new weapon) Or instead of tracking make it a proximity/EM blast. Instead of homing it gets close enough to a vehicle and BOOM! Kinda how AAMRAAMs work. A bomb-pumped omnidirectional X-ray laser burst seems more amarr than a magnetic/homing weapon. Amarr weapons need flash and light because the logic of their weaponry is purification through God's light. It's as much symbolic as functional. Also, found the logi tourist! Please cry directly into the bucket. -Ripley Riley
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4261	Posted - 2015.01.18 04:27:00 - [40] - Quote Same damage profile as a scrambler would be interesting. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

taxi bastard Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 342	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:13:00 - [41] - 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 no lock on time = + ROF decreace = - will have less DPS ....needs more alpha to level things out.
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 653	Posted - 2015.01.24 00:00:00 - [42] - Quote Sounds like a good proposal to me. As for locking onto depo's and whatnot, I would suggest just not allowing them to lock onto those things, but have them explode if they hit them, so you can still damage them if you want to... With a bit of splash damage it could be useful for taking over a depo surrounded by enemies, or even a risky way to clear a turret installation, you take a shot to remove the guy controlling it, at the risk of being blown to pieces once the AI takes over. Also leaves room for a decoy module for vehicles, but instead of being a 'no skill' "I've been locked, launch the decoy to instantly evade the swarms" you could have it launch a distance out the back of the vehicle, making it only effective if the missiles are coming from that side. So yeah, I like this idea, well played.
Zepod Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 94	Posted - 2015.01.24 00:05:00 - [43] - Quote Unless you plan on increasing the damage to compensate only being able to launch Swarms 1 at a time, this idea is terrible and would make me feel sorry for those who specced into the Swarm Launcher. You may not like what I said, but it's true. It might anger or offend you, but it's still true.
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 292	Posted - 2015.01.24 00:12:00 - [44] - Quote Zepod wrote: Unless you plan on increasing the damage to compensate only being able to launch Swarms 1 at a time, this idea is terrible and would make me feel sorry for those who specced into the Swarm Launcher. i think you've got the wrong idea, missiles would still fire in batches of 4 (I mean they are called swarm launchers) currently the lock on time limits the amount of missiles you can put in the air, this proposal would remove the lock on so i need something to maintain the current rate of fire and therefore a 'cooldown' this proposal is all about rewarding skill both in AV aim and pilot evasion
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1273	Posted - 2015.01.24 08:45:00 - [45] - Quote Just to point out: numbers for DPS can be balanced at any time, the focus should be on the core mechanics of the weapon and how it functions. The current Swarm Launcher is incredibly easy and rewards neither players' (the pilot's nor the Swarm user's) skill at using their respective tools. With the proposition, the important change is the mechanics of the lock-on and the firing; by changing it such that the weapon requires thought and consideration (ie, you can aim 'around' corners, you can pre-empt vehicle movements by shooting ahead of them, etc) then you are rewarding the Swarm user (by making them more devastating in the hands of a pro) and the vehicle pilot (by letting them use their ability at piloting to avoid and/or outfox the Swarmer.) Essentially, don't worry about the numbers right now, they can be balanced immediately and tweaked at any time (as per Rattati's Hotfixes) but the underlying mechanics need support to get implemented because it is a bigger change and one that is not Hotfixable. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1373	Posted - 2015.03.02 01:49:00 - [46] - Quote Since we've got a lot of talk about Swarms again, I'd like to see if more people think this would be a good change to Swarm operation. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7417	Posted - 2015.03.02 08:54:00 - [47] - Quote Honestly the main reason swarms are lock only is using them as an anti-infantry shotgun.Just thinking about the damage output it's almost impossible to direct hit with more than one and the splash is 75 for one meter. why not drop the splash to 25 with a .25m radius and make the swarms "follow the leader" and only going where the crosshairs point? A lot of the old "infantry shotgun" issue can be solved by treating swarm missiles like shaped charges that do minimal collateral damage. That would address both the superlock fire and forget as well as the potential abuse vs. Infantry. Have the sight put a reddot on the aim point and swarms track on the dot. Let's introduce a little human error. AV
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1378	Posted - 2015.03.07 23:42:00 - [48] - Quote Reasonable stuff[/quote] Sounds good to me. The current splash damage is pretty low anyway, and I think somewhere in here is suggested that it only explodes once locked, which would also remove shotgunning with Swarms. Also, bump. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2290	Posted - 2015.03.09 12:48:00 - [49] - Quote I'm absolutely positive I made a post exactly like this a while back. That said I support the idea and think that it would be good as it allows swarms to 1) potentially be dumbfired at infantry again (seriously, create a breach swarm that doesn't do the lockon stuff) and 2) allows swarms to be balanced a lot more closely to the plasma cannon. You could probably just flat copy the magazine size, rof, ammo and a few other aspects, while giving the swarm a flat travel path instead of the slight arc of a PLC and adding an av grenade like lockon to the missile (solely for dropships, lavs and tanks. Then bump the PLC's damage up by a little bit as it's now the 'harder to use' weapon and pair swarm damage with it making a few subtractions for ease of use. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Diesel Heat seeker UKheadhunters 14	Posted - 2015.03.09 14:08:00 - [50] - Quote I was in a DS yesterday in a dom match. I took a hit with swarms as I was below 100m, once I took the first round I hit one complex armor hardener and headed straight up to recharge. after reaching what I thought was a safe distance I took the second round of swarms which killed me in air. At 330m a swarm is good to a point and to be fair if he can reach in the air to 330m then there should be no issue hitting turrets on the ground just as far. Closed Beta Vet. New Eden is at the horizon. Pilots beware.

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1439	Posted - 2015.04.03 10:20:00 - [51] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: I'm absolutely positive I made a post exactly like this a while back. That said I support the idea and think that it would be good as it allows swarms to 1) potentially be dumbfired at infantry again (seriously, create a breach swarm that doesn't do the lockon stuff) and 2) allows swarms to be balanced a lot more closely to the plasma cannon. You could probably just flat copy the magazine size, rof, ammo and a few other aspects, while giving the swarm a flat travel path instead of the slight arc of a PLC and adding an av grenade like lockon to the missile (solely for dropships, lavs and tanks. Then bump the PLC's damage up by a little bit as it's now the 'harder to use' weapon and pair swarm damage with it making a few subtractions for ease of use. This, very much so I still feel that this is probably the best possible change to make to Swarms to allow us all a greater degree of balance: as has been said before, this would actually increase the effectiveness of a skilled Swarm by allowing them 'round the corner' shots. (Also bump) Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Doshneil Antaro The Xclusive Lounge 329	Posted - 2015.04.03 16:19:00 - [52] - Quote Great idea, but I cannot condone a range increase. 400m would cover about 70% of most Dom maps. This would cause players to just pre spam the air with missiles regardless of vehicles, and would effectively keep dropships from entering into the playable area. As it stands, a good dropship pilot starts evading as soon as they hear swarms launched. This still leaves the AV Swarm user a chance to shoot a second time. Even with afterburners on, and flying deep into ones own redline, both rounds will still likely hit. Pilots don't use afterburners to get away from swarms, but rather to get away before the AV can fire more at them. AT 400m, escape would not be possible. Sage /thread
Diesel Heat seeker UKheadhunters 17	Posted - 2015.04.04 14:23:00 - [53] - Quote Being in maps daily before and after the patch, most pilots get hit and retreat after first shots. When they are above all buildings and are above there own mcc that is not a experienced pilot, that is a pilot that doesn't want to lose his low armored/shield ds. I run advice and proto hav's, I will bring in both if needed but run 90%complex on my advanced, I try not brining proto out just due to 2mil isk to restock. Ads take damage from swarms but do not need to fly above 300m in the air to recharge, try doing that in eve cause you will not survive. When all the red dots are away, all the blueberries can come out and play...
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1444	Posted - 2015.04.05 01:43:00 - [54] - Quote Doshneil Antaro wrote: Great idea, but I cannot condone a range increase. 400m would cover about 70% of most Dom maps. This would cause players to just pre spam the air with missiles regardless of vehicles, and would effectively keep dropships from entering into the playable area. While I appreciate that notion, Swarm users - or more specifically Commandos - are very vulnerable to infantry while actually firing. If AV players are spamming the (very expansive) sky to act as a flak battery they are not only leaving themselves wide open to infantry but actively announcing their presence, and status as vulnerable, to any nearby blueberries. That said I don't, personally, feel that a particularly large range increase is needed: 400m is probably still excessive, but matching the FG's 300m with advantages (still homing, but less so) and disadvantages (still a longer travel time) wouldn't be unreasonable. Not to mention the fact that while spamming could be possible as an area denial tool (mercpower intensive as it would be, to saturate enough airspace) the mere fact that a pilot would be able to dodge is such an enormous change to the current situation that even 400m would have pilots in a much more responsive place: rather than simply running and getting hit, they'd be able to manoeuvre and could actively participate in a Swarm/DS duel in a similar fashion to FG/DS. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1909	Posted - 2015.04.05 03:35:00 - [55] - Quote Juno Tristan wrote: How about dumbfire missiles that auto lock once they are 50m within of the target Yes, something like that. Or maybe this as well here: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2671962#post2671962 Looking at both sides of the coin. Even Aurum one.


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.