DUST Search - Would 2 different swarm type be easier to balance?

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Would 2 different swarm type be easier to balance?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 3853	Posted - 2015.01.27 11:29:00 - [1] - Quote One type for dropships and one for terrestrial vehicles. Dropship usually have less HP and apart from ADS, they are not really fast or able to avoid swarms (this is another great problem, swarm just seek targets in open air) and i think it's not fair for them to be hit hard like a HAV would be. LAVs even if they don't have a lot of HP, do not really suffer of that problem, because they are fast and the swarm has to fly at terrain level to hit them, usually there are many obstacles on the ground. Pronounced Scam - man - hoga Minmatar omni-merc
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6793	Posted - 2015.01.27 12:48:00 - [2] - Quote Ehhh I'd rather have the firing mechanics rebuilt in a real update. Honestly I think jus staggering out the shots and giving back some lock range would be a good way to go. .85 second lock time is a bit much, and we still haven't pinned down if swarms actually have a refire delay in the code. AV
TheD1CK Dead Man's Game RUST415 1656	Posted - 2015.01.27 14:01:00 - [3] - Quote I like this proposal.. One variant, less missiles/dmg better lock range, short lock on time = anti ADS Second variant. more missiles/dmg less range, longer lock on time = anti HAV Having the same AV for both really screws over both classes
Zepod Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 100	Posted - 2015.01.27 14:54:00 - [4] - Quote Yes, but it's the lazy way out and frankly doesn't make sense when the AFG is good against both ADSs and HAVs. You may not like what I said, but it's true. It might anger or offend you, but it's still true.
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 3860	Posted - 2015.01.27 14:57:00 - [5] - Quote Zepod wrote: Yes, but it's the lazy way out and frankly doesn't make sense when the AFG is good against both ADSs and HAVs. FG can be avoided in open air by dodging the shot, is up to the ability of forgegunner to land his shot and of the DS pilot to avoid it, swarm are unavoidable, the only thing you can do is AB away. Pronounced Scam - man - hoga Minmatar omni-merc
Zepod Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 100	Posted - 2015.01.27 15:00:00 - [6] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Zepod wrote: Yes, but it's the lazy way out and frankly doesn't make sense when the AFG is good against both ADSs and HAVs. FG can be avoided in open air by dodging the shot, is up to the ability of forgegunner to land his shot and of the DS pilot to avoid it, swarm are unavoidable, the only thing you can do is AB away. Which in no way justifies nor explains the reasoning behind splitting the SL between 2 optimal variants. You may not like what I said, but it's true. It might anger or offend you, but it's still true.
Baal Omniscient Qualified Scrub 2136	Posted - 2015.01.27 15:09:00 - [7] - Quote Still waiting for someone to show me a video of this 0.85 second lock on time, I've got max proficiency and it still always takes me nearly 2 seconds to lock and about a second Or so of down time before it will even let me attempt to lock again 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.
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 3861	Posted - 2015.01.27 15:19:00 - [8] - Quote Zepod wrote: shaman oga wrote: Zepod wrote: Yes, but it's the lazy way out and frankly doesn't make sense when the AFG is good against both ADSs and HAVs. FG can be avoided in open air by dodging the shot, is up to the ability of forgegunner to land his shot and of the DS pilot to avoid it, swarm are unavoidable, the only thing you can do is AB away. Which in no way justifies nor explains the reasoning behind splitting the SL between 2 optimal variants. Well, it justify because FG or PLC are avoidable in open air while swarm are not, both ability of the pilot and ability of the swarmer are set to zero. Swarmer is sure to hit, pilot is sure to be hit. When one go fishing can use a fish rod or can use explosives, both works, but one is just out scale for job you are doing. Pronounced Scam - man - hoga Minmatar omni-merc
H0riz0n Unlimit Dead Man's Game 373	Posted - 2015.01.27 15:26:00 - [9] - Quote OMG...that example...LMFAO Vote "Stucazz" for new gallente HAV.One of the few vehiculist remained in dust 514
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 673	Posted - 2015.01.27 16:53:00 - [10] - Quote separate variants would work, although AV will ***** and moan about only being effective against 1 vehicle or the other. Not that I see a problem, you take the easy option and have less choice, or you take a weapon that requires aim and can work on both. Of course, Plasma cannons need another variant as well, one with faster travel, higher dmg and no splash. Because when someone gets a vehicle kill with a Plasma cannon, you can look up and see a blue moon shining.

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1278	Posted - 2015.01.28 02:33:00 - [11] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: I've got max proficiency and it still always takes me nearly 2 seconds to lock First off, proficiency does nothing for lock-on time, that's operation's job. Second, the base lock-on time is 1.4 (1.65 for the specialist, IIRC) so if you're taking 2 seconds to lock-on then you're doing something wrong. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1338	Posted - 2015.01.28 07:27:00 - [12] - Quote Zepod wrote: shaman oga wrote: Zepod wrote: Yes, but it's the lazy way out and frankly doesn't make sense when the AFG is good against both ADSs and HAVs. FG can be avoided in open air by dodging the shot, is up to the ability of forgegunner to land his shot and of the DS pilot to avoid it, swarm are unavoidable, the only thing you can do is AB away. Which in no way justifies nor explains the reasoning behind splitting the SL between 2 optimal variants. I don't really see a point in adding another variant. I much prefer the idea of adding scan resolution + signature radii to swarms and vehicles. In short, the higher your scan resolution the faster it takes to lock on to something. The lower your signature radius the slower it takes for something to lock onto you. This means, instead of complicating everything with another variant that people will need to put on a fit they can just tweak values to adjust the DPS against different targets. It's probably more work on CCP's end, but would be well worth it. Along with this, they could have certain active modules increase your signature radius AB/OD. In EVE, shield extenders increase your signature radius which would finally be a penalty for running extenders. Dual tanking is for bad players. 21 day EVE trial.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6824	Posted - 2015.01.28 09:19:00 - [13] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: I've got max proficiency and it still always takes me nearly 2 seconds to lock First off, proficiency does nothing for lock-on time, that's operation's job. Second, the base lock-on time is 1.4 (1.65 for the specialist, IIRC) so if you're taking 2 seconds to lock-on then you're doing something wrong. wiyrkomi specialist swarms have a lock time of 1.96. Hilariously except for lock times they're identical. that's probably where he's going wrong. AV
Vitharr Foebane Terminal Courtesy Proficiency V. 2223	Posted - 2015.01.28 11:24:00 - [14] - Quote came in hoping for a thread about adding Kahnid EM swarms, was disappointed Amarr Omnisoldier: Assault, Commando, Logistics, Scout, Sentinel at V My faith is in my God, my Empress, and my Laz0r


Pages: 1 :: [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.