|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Scheneighnay McBob
Tribal Liberation Force Paramilitary
7
   |
Posted - 2015.05.30 21:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
So, plenty of you are probably familiar with the old logi LAVs and dropships, fewer may be familiar with the old vehicle armor reps, and shield transporters (that's right, vehicles could rep shields)
While logi dropships were pretty sound (albeit overpriced) with a built-in CRU, everything else in the way of vehicle-based logistics sucked.
Vehicle-based reps were very poorly implemented. When I was in Bojo's school of the trades, I went with some corp mates to see what we could do with them.
They sucked. Not only were they pretty pointless (they cost more to fit than a shield booster, and were equally effective. Keep in mind boosters were far worse back then), but LAVs couldn't rep HAVs worth ****, because LAVs weren't able to fit heavy reps, and light reps didn't make a noticeable difference on HAVs.
On top of all that, they were a pain to use: it was difficult to lock on another vehicle, you could set off the rep on accident without locking onto anything, and it would take a long time to retry because they had a very long cooldown for some reason. The rep range was also very short, forcing vehicles to be extremely close in order to rep.
Those problems were worse with logi LAVs, which has increased eHP and a build-in infantry rep, in exchange for a weaker turret. Infantry were even harder to get a lock into, and the lock broke and went into cooldown if the infantry put so much as a crate between themself and the vehicle. Logi LAVs were also an AVer's nightmare: they were both tough and agile, dodging most AV, and tanking what hits them. They were also the source of the term "Murder taxi" due to their yellow color and tendency to be used to run over enemy players.
So- how should we re-introduce vehicle-based logistics without it completely sucking?
The actual suggestion
First off, let's forget reintroducing logi LAVs. All LAVs should support infantry. They kindof suck at everything else.
The reintroduction of the Logi dropships- the good old Prometheus and Eryx- should be done as follows:
- Increase eHP so AVers don't completely stop it from doing its job.
- Remove turrets- this is a happy friendly dropship. Not an angry murderer dropship with bonus logi benefits
- Bring back the built-in mCRU. Duh.
- Now for the weird-ass one to piggy-back off of an old dev's dumbass idea of making bomber dropships: let's minmatar-rig this ***** drop triage hives. Yep. Ammo and reps from above, implemented in a way that actually works kindof sortof. It should probably get an ammo limit, and only allow 2 or 3 hives active at a time.
Now that that's out of the way, how to implement vehicle reps. Actually quite simple:
Again looking at triage hives, let's put a rep bubble around the vehicle (like a bigass nanohive), rather than a repair beam. There could be 2 variants: one that slowly reps infantry, and has a smaller bubble (the bubble should still be a pretty good size- like a 20m radius), along with one that reps vehicles, and has a large bubble (say, 75m radius?)
Now onto the effectiveness of these reps:
I think a standard vehicle-based infantry rep should rep at 20 hp/s, adv at 30/s, and pro at 35/s.
A vehicle-basic vehicle rep should rep at 100 hp/s at standard, 125 at adv, and 150 at proto
These numbers are based off of heavy armor reps because I'm not worried about over-repping an LAV. An LAV should be constantly on the move, so stopping inside a bubble for an extended period of time would be risky.
As far as fitting stats, they should be relatively easy to fit. You're sacrificing a slot to fit them, and LAVs should be able to rep HAVs.
Thoughts?
Aloha snackbar
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Tribal Liberation Force Paramilitary
7
|
Posted - 2015.05.31 22:24:00 -
[2] - Quote
Terry Webber wrote:What do you think about repair turrets, Scheneighnay? They could use the same mechanics as the hand-held repair tool and have no cool-down.
While it would be cool, I don't think it would be very popular. In casual matches, you would DEFINITELY need a squad to do this (blueberries with a rep turret? lolno), and it still wouldn't really work well outside of your squad, because line-of-sight reps require a good deal of coordination if they're on a vehicle.
In PC battles, I doubt a corp would sacrifice 2 people just to efficiently run a rep turret.
If legion ever becomes a reality and we can get much larger battles, that could become a thing.
Rule 34.6.1: every parody will have a crossover
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Tribal Liberation Force Paramilitary
7
|
Posted - 2015.05.31 22:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Galm Fae wrote:Logistic dropships were beautiful, and offered a mobile clonevat that was really only limited by a pilots skill and creativity. Bringing them back would be wonderful.
However, while the logistics LAV offered quick support I'd much rather see logistics IFVs if CCP ever ends up reintegrating them into their planned units.
... Also jets... And scopes... I mean, you know... after powercores....
Please CCP, I beg you.
I think an APC would be a better logi vehicle than an IFV. They're almost the exact same thing, but APCs generally carry more people and aren't as well armed.
For a real-life comparison, a Bradley (IFV) carries 6 and has an autocannon, machine gun, and TOW missiles, while a Stryker (APC) carries 9 and has either a .50 machine gun, or a Mk-19 automatic-motherfucking-grenade-launcher
Rule 34.6.1: every parody will have a crossover
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Tribal Liberation Force Paramilitary
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 03:51:00 -
[4] - Quote
Roger Cordill wrote:(message form your Glorious Fish Lord)
1: A LDS was in general ****, the mCRU didn't save it. It trying to be a repper is even more suicide, more so because, well hovering over a target is as bad of a n idea as trying to put siege mode for HAV's; you're begging to be shot down. Instead, making them excellent transport platforms, and Giving them some sort of dropping mechanic to allow them to drop off like big nanohives (or maybe even something as crazy as small turrets). That way, they can keep moving as DS's usually do, but can drop infantry and gear to help them do their things.
2: A LLV for the most part was amazing for repping any ground vehicle. Even though it could only fit small reps, it worked, and worked well. To be fair, it wasn't well equipped to rep DS's in the air (that was however inherent to the design of DS's and air vehicles in general's movement) or infantry (which again is inherent to the design of it), but landing the DS or making the infantry rep tool be better at by design repping infantry would fix any real issues that they have.
TL;DR: Not really necessary, this will probably harm more than fix. This isn't infantry we're talking about, yo can't just say "All logis should rep" and it'll make sense.
First who is this fish lord? Nobody is ringing a bell, aside from the space fish empire guy.
I like the idea of dropping small turrets; dropping nanohives were in my original post, as I figured that was the only way a dropship would be able to support ****.
Did you ever actually try logi LAVs? I did, and it was the most broken, awkward to use module that existed in Dust. I did manage to start repping myself somehow, though.
Rule 34.6.1: every parody will have a crossover
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Tribal Liberation Force Paramilitary
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 04:31:00 -
[5] - Quote
XxGhazbaranxX wrote:I want my bumblebee back. Apar from the price there was nothing wrong with them. Same bonus for the MCRU as th amarr has so spawning into a fully skill logi dropship shouod be a pretty quick spawn amd drop sort of thing.
That being said, we only have MLT and basic mCRUs right now. We should get enhanced and complex mCRUs, with spawn time reductions on them.
Even if you're running it in a pub match, the short spawn time will tempt blueberries to spawn on your dropship, rather than ignoring the spawn that's obviously extremely safe because it's hovering at an altitude double the max range of any AV
Rule 34.6.1: every parody will have a crossover
|
|
|
| |
|