Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
166
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 07:55:00 -
[91] - Quote
THUNDERGROOVE wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:A quick idea just came to mind.
Why not give small blasters a 77/63 (the old rails' damage profile against vehicles) profile against vehicles. It's damage is already too low to break recharge but, it can give better combat support in the sense of AV.
Rail = 90s/110a vehicle : 63s/77a infantry Missile = 79s/119a Blaster = 77s/63a vehicle : 110s/90a infantry
This will cause:
Rail - Superior AV capabilities, best at vehicle combat support. Some infantry support ability. Missile - the bridge between AV and AI, equally effective. Blaster - Superior AI capabilities, best at infantry combat support. Some vehicle support ability.
Well, after hit detection on infantry is fixed. (Thunder that's your queue)
I know hit detection is dealt with serverside but can you show some blaster variables that we can analyze? I Appreciate it!! Welp 80GJ Ion Cannon wrote: "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fMaxOffsetAngle": 2, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fMaxShootAtTimeAccuracy": 1, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fMaxStationaryAccuracy": 2, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fMinOffsetAngle": 0.12, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fNewOffsetInterval": 2, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fNoiseConstant": 0.1, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fPitchOffsetScalar": 0.1, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fShotTimeTillAccurate": 8, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fStationaryDecay": 50, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fStationaryTimeTillAccurate": 8,
I did find some interesting things that look like they tweak turret AI, so it seams installations use the turrets types for stats. Nifty. Other stuff too like overlay colors/alpha/positions. Attack/Defend order score bonus radius. Draw distances, even WP rewards. Soo much stuff CCP can easily tweak.
any chance you can find projectile velocities for Missile Turrets, Forge Guns, and Large Railguns? oh, and swarm launchers
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
|
THUNDERGROOVE
Fatal Absolution
1333
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 08:30:00 -
[92] - Quote
Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: any chance you can find projectile velocities for Missile Turrets, Forge Guns, and Large Railguns? oh, and swarm launchers
I actually have my tool for analyzing export data running at the moment looking for changes in between recent hotfixes.
I'll edit this post with any findings with velocities
Dual tanking is for bad players.
21 day EVE trial.
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION
64
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 11:27:00 -
[93] - Quote
THUNDERGROOVE wrote:Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: any chance you can find projectile velocities for Missile Turrets, Forge Guns, and Large Railguns? oh, and swarm launchers
I actually have my tool for analyzing export data running at the moment looking for changes in between recent hotfixes. I'll edit this post with any findings with velocities e: Having the same issues when the SDE first came out, where types don't list the entities they use for projectiles. Dumping a list of all things in the Entity class for anything of value.
If you manage to find the difference blasters went through, we can "tweak" small blasters till it's "better" on paper.
And! You did say User Interface is in the .py right? A quick way to understand some variables is to see what info is displayed when someone goes over the weapon.
I'll take some time after my exam to try and understand the large blaster variables.
What if large blasters' worked with small blasters' version of dispertion?
I'm guessing -> "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fStationaryDecay": 50, -> might be dispertion
Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
|
rasputin900000
Subsonic Synthesis RISE of LEGION
27
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 11:56:00 -
[94] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:I disagree on the range of swarms. I believe it's a rate of fire problem.
They would be easier to balance around average flight time to target with the time it takes to travel the full 200m being the refire delay time.
This would allow the longer lock ranges Without having vehicles hhammered by three shots in under 3.5 seconds.
That ungodly DPS rate needs to be slowed.
Swarms be been broken since the nerf, 1 you can't lock on say a rail tank he out ranges you as well with any tank that wants too they can. Drop ships have the ability to stay out of range with altitude, if you're "getting hammered" you probably should look at your modules there are several tankers and ads pilots that have no problems surviving if not your modules it could be that you're situational awareness isn't as good as you think. My forge and swarms are maxed and lots of vehicles get away because of the lock on range and times on the swarms if they need anything it would be more range and quicker lock on times. The missile travel limit is OK as it is they shouldn't be able to chase you forever across the map. Most vehicles that are killed all have the same thing in common "greed" they overstay their welcome trying to get kills they should've passed up. F-22 raptors are some of the best attack aircraft in the world but the pilots don't hang around trying to kill 1 more guy, Abrams drivers don't for the most part drive into 20 enemies without some kind of troop support to back them up either if they did they would most likely "get hammered" too. |
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6762
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 12:54:00 -
[95] - Quote
I think you're missing my intent on the swarms.
I'm not advocating a blanket nerf.
I'm advocating a rethink on how we use their existing mechanics. I think we can do better than giving a three second kill window overall.
Unfortunately any attempt to nerf anything with the current lock range limit will render swarms untenable unless fired en masse.
And bluntly I don't accept any argument based on "well it's unfair because three of them can gang up on me" as valid, so while I dislike the current mechanics, unless we find a better balance fulcrum they have to stay as-is.
AV
|
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
1918
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 12:58:00 -
[96] - Quote
THUNDERGROOVE wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Thundergroove:
The 0.5 second delay between shot fired and reload on the PLC. And if there is an iidentical trait on any other weapon. I'll look again. Roughly 450 attributes and nothing that I found pertaining to that. there does not have to be an attribute, it can be simply hardcoded because of reasons...
and there definately is a lock after after firing. the swarm launcher had this long time ago too. |
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6765
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 14:24:00 -
[97] - Quote
If it's hardcoded then it cannot be hotfixed.
AV
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION
65
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:23:00 -
[98] - Quote
If it's hardcoded, i hope they (CCP) used a constant. If they used code conventions you'll see a constant (ALL CAPS) at declaration.
Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6766
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:31:00 -
[99] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:If it's hardcoded, i hope they (CCP) used a constant. If they used code conventions you'll see a constant (ALL CAPS) at declaration. You nerds have exceeded my nerd knowledge threshold.
You should feel bad.
But if you find it let me know.
AV
|
Vesta Opalus
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance
351
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:33:00 -
[100] - Quote
Not sure why people are buttmad about the ability to lock on, then turn and shoot the swarms.
If you have used swarms for more than a total of half a minute you'd know that its absolutely vital to be able to do this to direct the swarms around pipes, rails, walls, etc that are around the swarm user, otherwise swarms wouldnt be useful because half their damage would always go straight into the walls around whoever is firing them.
Crazy Idea To Balance Swarms vs. Dropships: What if we imagine dropships (I dont care about tanks, **** tanks, they are fine vs. swarms as is) have some kind of passive anti lock system that prevents more than 4-6 swarm missiles at a time from being locked on?
STICK WITH ME HERE.
This means that the current balance of "if you gtfo immediately you will probably survive" vs. one swarm launcher is preserved, but it helps get rid of the situation where 2-3 swarmers all fire on you at the same time and you are screwed, and theres nothing you can do (which sucks and only really happens due to the near guaranteed hit factor on the first one or two volleys fired). This means some other form of AV would be required to ensure a kill, and it would have to be a "skill based" AV type. |
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6768
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:48:00 -
[101] - Quote
Haye to say it, but that's not a solution unless it comes in the form of an active module.
AV
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION
65
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:12:00 -
[102] - Quote
The most i can hope for is dodgable swarms. Same speed, looser turning radius (80 degrees is still too high... 65-50 degrees is my guess.) and, a few other things... Like inertia.
But start inertia, turning circle next
Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
|
Stupid Blueberry
Pure Evil. Capital Punishment.
973
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:46:00 -
[103] - Quote
Haven't read the whole thread yet but I want to talk about doing something to the standard forge variant to give people a reason to use it over assault. I was thinking maybe let people actually store a charge without holding r1? Faster projectile speed? Something, I dunno.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
Haajakin Kalen.
Blueberry smokin' that crack y'all
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6769
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:59:00 -
[104] - Quote
Stupid Blueberry wrote:Haven't read the whole thread yet but I want to talk about doing something to the standard forge variant to give people a reason to use it over assault. I was thinking maybe let people actually store a charge without holding r1? Faster projectile speed? Something, I dunno.
working on it. I'll spring my ideas on Rattati once I get a feel for how powerful the new HAVs are going to be
AV
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION
65
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:59:00 -
[105] - Quote
The assault forge gun should be weaker than the standard version. I understand it's not a big difference but... It's an assault weapon (lower damage, higher rof) it shouldn't be both stronger and quicker charge.
That's just a thought though.
Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6769
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:04:00 -
[106] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:The assault forge gun should be weaker than the standard version. I understand it's not a big difference but... It's an assault weapon (lower damage, higher rof) it shouldn't be both stronger and quicker charge.
That's just a thought though. Actually I wanted to set the alpha strike of the standard directly between the breach and assault.
AV
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION
65
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:19:00 -
[107] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:The assault forge gun should be weaker than the standard version. I understand it's not a big difference but... It's an assault weapon (lower damage, higher rof) it shouldn't be both stronger and quicker charge.
That's just a thought though. Actually I wanted to set the alpha strike of the standard directly between the breach and assault.
Works out. In the sense of stronger tanks, does that mean stronger dropships? in the sense of slots, ehp or both?
Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
|
Mobius Wyvern
Sky-FIRE
5673
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:19:00 -
[108] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:I disagree on the range of swarms. I believe it's a rate of fire problem.
They would be easier to balance around average flight time to target with the time it takes to travel the full 200m being the refire delay time.
This would allow the longer lock ranges Without having vehicles hhammered by three shots in under 3.5 seconds.
That ungodly DPS rate needs to be slowed.
Agreed. The damage on them seems fine, but you can throw out that damage at a psychopathic rate.
I support Keshava for Gallente Specialist HAV
R.I.P. Kesha
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
429
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:00:00 -
[109] - Quote
I have wanted dropships to be able to scrub swarms since I first took to the sky. I still wish I could do this and have lots of ideas on how to implement it. The truth, though, is that at best, only something moving the speed of a jet should be able to scrub a homer. I haven't given up on jets and the future of Dust/Legion so making dropships able to scrub swarms now does seem like we'd be ruining things for later.
Even so, here is an idea on changing swarms to work in a less artificial fashion:
Give swarms fuel instead of max flight range.
When Swarms change their angle at "x milliseconds", force them to lose extra fuel and most importantly, lose speed based on the sharpness of the direction change. Extreme angles costing more fuel and more loss of speed. The speed can then progress back towards maximum at their normal acceleration rate.
When swarms run out of fuel they pop.
I would also point out this would do VERY LITTLE for tanks vs swarms, as they wouldn't often be able to create situations where any of this mattered.
I also noticed THUNDERGROOVE that your data dump shows swarms still have a 90 degree turning before losing lock. I thought this was changed to 70 degrees in the last balancement pass on swarms? What happened? |
THUNDERGROOVE
Fatal Absolution
1335
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:28:00 -
[110] - Quote
To clarify, the data I'm getting is from a serialized Python object which I used CCP's internal script which ships with DUST for whatever reason which is modified to export everything to the SDE instead of just what they want to export.
I then use the database file with my custom tool to get attributes easier.
As for the stuff with projectile velocities, I gave up after letting it run for 2000 individual entities to try to find the typeID. When I get time, I'll re-write the method to make it faster and more memory efficient.
Dual tanking is for bad players.
21 day EVE trial.
|
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6783
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 22:16:00 -
[111] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:The assault forge gun should be weaker than the standard version. I understand it's not a big difference but... It's an assault weapon (lower damage, higher rof) it shouldn't be both stronger and quicker charge.
That's just a thought though. Actually I wanted to set the alpha strike of the standard directly between the breach and assault. Works out. In the sense of stronger tanks, does that mean stronger dropships? in the sense of slots, ehp or both? too early to tell.
if HAVs get buffed to where AV has to spike up to counter then yeah dropships will natively have to follow. If HAVs get properly unf***ed then we have a solid basis to iterate dropships into the system.
But until I see the final numbers on HAVs?
It's all a giant guessing game.
AV
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION
66
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 23:27:00 -
[112] - Quote
THUNDERGROOVE wrote:To clarify, the data I'm getting is from a serialized Python object which I used CCP's internal script which ships with DUST for whatever reason which is modified to export everything to the SDE instead of just what they want to export.
I then use the database file with my custom tool to get attributes easier.
As for the stuff with projectile velocities, I gave up after letting it run for 2000 individual entities to try to find the typeID. When I get time, I'll re-write the method to make it faster and more memory efficient.
Good luck! Would help if i knew Python at all.
So the order we looking at is this: PLC, Swarm, forge > large turrets, HAVs >> DS > ADS, small turrets >> LAVs?
If that made any sense.
I'll talk to some people in 1st Airborne for some swarm suggestions, i'll post about the fair/viable ones. Later i'll make a mega post with other peoples' opinion/ideas (i.e when i get on a computer)
Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2133
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 23:45:00 -
[113] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:I disagree on the range of swarms. I believe it's a rate of fire problem.
They would be easier to balance around average flight time to target with the time it takes to travel the full 200m being the refire delay time.
This would allow the longer lock ranges Without having vehicles hhammered by three shots in under 3.5 seconds.
That ungodly DPS rate needs to be slowed.
Somebody break out a stopwatch and a youtube clip, I've ran swarms since closed beta and I've not been able to fire swarms that fast since pre 1.7..... when did this happen? Because when I fire, at all maxed swarm skills, it's nearly 2 seconds just to lock, then you have to wait about 1.5 seconds before you can lock again. If you press the lock button again too fast it does nothing.
You know I've been behind you on AV since we used to bash balance over Mr. Zitro's head daily, but 3 shots in under 3.5 seconds? ....lets just say I've personally not managed that stat on the best of days.... Do you have a video of this feat?
Winmatar Assault, Proficiency 5 SMG's & Proficiency 5 Swarms Since Uprising 1.0
I GÖú Puppies
(Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.*pâ+n+ín+ƒ.
|
THUNDERGROOVE
Fatal Absolution
1335
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 04:55:00 -
[114] - Quote
Scan Resolution would be a nice way to balance swarms against different targets, maybe?
Dual tanking is for bad players.
21 day EVE trial.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6789
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 05:29:00 -
[115] - Quote
Baal Omniscient wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:I disagree on the range of swarms. I believe it's a rate of fire problem.
They would be easier to balance around average flight time to target with the time it takes to travel the full 200m being the refire delay time.
This would allow the longer lock ranges Without having vehicles hhammered by three shots in under 3.5 seconds.
That ungodly DPS rate needs to be slowed.
Somebody break out a stopwatch and a youtube clip, I've ran swarms since closed beta and I've not been able to fire swarms that fast since pre 1.7..... when did this happen? Because when I fire, at all maxed swarm skills, it's nearly 2 seconds just to lock, then you have to wait about 1.5 seconds before you can lock again. If you press the lock button again too fast it does nothing. You know I've been behind you on AV since we used to bash balance over Mr. Zitro's head daily, but 3 shots in under 3.5 seconds? ....lets just say I've personally not managed that stat on the best of days.... Do you have a video of this feat? Ok 3.15 exactly according to the math with level 5 swarms. The weird little shot delay at the back end of the PLC was apparently removed from swarms.
It's a full second delay on the forge hilariously
AV
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2138
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 17:28:00 -
[116] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Baal Omniscient wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:I disagree on the range of swarms. I believe it's a rate of fire problem.
They would be easier to balance around average flight time to target with the time it takes to travel the full 200m being the refire delay time.
This would allow the longer lock ranges Without having vehicles hhammered by three shots in under 3.5 seconds.
That ungodly DPS rate needs to be slowed.
Somebody break out a stopwatch and a youtube clip, I've ran swarms since closed beta and I've not been able to fire swarms that fast since pre 1.7..... when did this happen? Because when I fire, at all maxed swarm skills, it's nearly 2 seconds just to lock, then you have to wait about 1.5 seconds before you can lock again. If you press the lock button again too fast it does nothing. You know I've been behind you on AV since we used to bash balance over Mr. Zitro's head daily, but 3 shots in under 3.5 seconds? ....lets just say I've personally not managed that stat on the best of days.... Do you have a video of this feat? Ok 3.15 exactly according to the math with level 5 swarms. The weird little shot delay at the back end of the PLC was apparently removed from swarms. It's a full second delay on the forge hilariously Does the math include the time you are releasing a volley and the down time it takes before you can make a lock again?
I trust your math, but I'm not sure it's all inclusive. I will be testing this later just to be sure.
Winmatar Assault, Proficiency 5 SMG's & Proficiency 5 Swarms Since Uprising 1.0
I GÖú Puppies
(Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.*pâ+n+ín+ƒ.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6799
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:01:00 -
[117] - Quote
Baal Omniscient wrote: Does the math include the time you are releasing a volley and the down time it takes before you can make a lock again?
I trust your math, but I'm not sure it's all inclusive. I will be testing this later just to be sure.
What you are talking about is the refire delay I was talking about.
I can't find it.
We've found the values for the PLC and the forge gun, but cannot locate any of the others as yet.
AV
|
THUNDERGROOVE
Fatal Absolution
1337
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 00:01:00 -
[118] - Quote
Tesfa Alem wrote: more please?
What are you interested in? I gave out pretty much everything currently not exported in the public SDE and also is relevant to the type itself.
There are other stuff like bullet magnetism, AA and aim friction(adhesion) but really don't feel comfortable dropping that stuff out there considering some of the stuff that might get stirred up Oh and it's not that relevant to the topic at hand.
Looks like there's a few attributes left over from when swarms were dumb fire. Oh ejection angles of the swarms.
Quote: "mEjectHorizontalAngle": 16384, "mEjectVerticalAngle": 5000,
As for the swarm launcher projectile
Quote: Opened DB with version debug Name: 'prj_swarmlauncher_std' | 353038 { "typeId": 353038, "typeName": "prj_swarmlauncher_std", "attributes": { "NetCullDistanceSquared": 2.5e+09, "mArcHeight.0": 1000, "mArcHeight.1": 1000, "mArmDelay": 0, "mBounces": 0, "mConstantTrackingTimer": 0.2, "mDispertionAngle.0": 0, "mDispertionAngle.1": 0, "mEjectVelocity": 40, "mFlightVfxParameter.floatValue": 0, "mIgnitionTriggerDistance": 30000, "mKillRange": 500, "mLaunchLength.0": 10, "mLaunchLength.1": 10, "mMaxRotationSpeed": 12743, "mMeshScale": 0.5, "mMissileKillRange": 100, "mPathMode.0": 1, "mPathMode.1": 1, "mProjProp.accelRate": 1200, "mProjProp.damageDecay": 10, "mProjProp.damageRadius": 100, "mProjProp.damageType": 351771, "mProjProp.directHitDamage": 260, "mProjProp.explodeByTouch": "True", "mProjProp.explosionMomentum": 500, "mProjProp.explosionType": 354592, "mProjProp.gravityScale": 0, "mProjProp.initSpeed": 500, "mProjProp.maxRange": 40000, "mProjProp.maxSpeed": 6500, "mProjProp.minimumDamage": 0, "mProjProp.occludedSplashDamage": "True", "mProjProp.projectileLifeSpan": 9, "mProjProp.splashDamage": 19, "mProjProp.splashDamageType": 351772, "mRandomModPercent.0": 0.1, "mRandomModPercent.1": 0.1, "mSounds.0.isDummyOneShot": "False", "mSounds.0.isLocal": "False", "mSounds.1.isDummyOneShot": "False", "mSounds.1.isLocal": "False", "mSounds.2.isDummyOneShot": "False", "mSounds.2.isLocal": "False", "mSpeedAfterIgnition": 6000, "mSpiralFactor.0": 0.5, "mSpiralFactor.1": 0.1, "mSplashDamage.curveIndex": 0, "mSplashDamage.m_fMultiplier": 1, "mSplashDamage.m_fOffset": 0, "mSplashDamage.maxInValue": 1, "mSpread.0": 1000, "mSpread.1": 1000, "mTeleportingTime": 5, "mTracing": "True", "mTrackDelay": 0.8, "mTrackTurningSpeed.0": 800, "mTrackTurningSpeed.1": 800, "tag.0": 353512, "tag.1": 354887 } }
Dual tanking is for bad players.
21 day EVE trial.
|
Text Grant
PIanet Express Smart Deploy
387
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 03:08:00 -
[119] - Quote
The assault swarm launcher is pointless, and should be given a different buff instead of locking on to multiple targets. There is never a need to half your DPS. Instead a faster lock on, or a longer lock on range would be appreciated. |
THUNDERGROOVE
Fatal Absolution
1338
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 07:18:00 -
[120] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:The assault swarm launcher is pointless, and should be given a different buff instead of locking on to multiple targets. There is never a need to half your DPS. Instead a faster lock on, or a longer lock on range would be appreciated. I'm more partial to removing it.
It's just another stupid thing for CCP to "balance"
Dual tanking is for bad players.
21 day EVE trial.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |