| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Free Beers
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
1041
   |
Posted - 2012.09.03 17:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
I am going to not get into the damage and lock distance nerf here. We have all had fun with the version 1 of swarms but would like see what the next generation ccp has for us.
I have been proto swam and forge guy for last 2 builds while also being a tanker.
Give swarms enough difference to make them useful in any situation. More diverse launchers means different ways to balance and not just less damage or lock range.
AV vs HAV needs to be a gun fight. Terrain, skills, tactics, support, team work should all matter. I have just made up some categories and attributes below to show what can be done. I will address forges in another thread
Swarm launchers need ability to just hold R1 once a lock is made and first shots fired to continue to shoot missiles at target as long as line of sight isnGÇÖt broken. Taking any sort of damage should make user re-target
Examples: Below
Heavy Swarm Launchers GÇô HAV and installations. Trying to hit a moving drop ship or moving LAV would be pointless here. You would need a nanohive to max use of this weapon. No suit restrictions though. I would add different damage type too. Tanks using terrain or structures to avoid missile should have reasonable chance to avoid them or minimize damage taken. Tanks that are just moving in the open shouldnGÇÖt be able to out run missiles unless the tank is fit to be nano tank.
+ Higher damage per missile
+ Longer range
+ Longer flight time
+ Better resists to ecm
+higher splash so infantry around tank or installation will take damage
+high lock distance
- Less clip
- Less total ammo
- slower speed
-longer lock time
- slower tracking
- no dumb fire
- higher cpu/grid needs then standard (you are basically a gank fit with side arm)
Standard Swarm Launchers GÇô This is just where your avg swarm launcher that does everything average
Assault Swarm launchers GÇô Drop Ships and LAV here. I would add different damage types here also. There needs to be balance between Drop Ship maneuverability and survivability.
+Higher tracking
+Higher speed
+Medium flight time
+Medium ECM resists
+Medium clip
+Medium Ammo
+less cpu/grid needs then heavy swarm launcher
-Less Damage
-medium lock time
-Lower lock range
-Less missile flight time
-no dumb fire
Breach Swarm Launcher GÇô Close range (high risk vs reward) In your face combat
+ammo size
+low lock time
+missile speed
+clip size (like 6)
+dumb fire (but it will go for closest things even friendly mercs if in range)
+direct damage is higher but splash is non existant
-lower cpu/grid requirements
-low resists to ecm
-Bad tracking GÇô basically line of sight
-minimal flight time GÇô maybe under 25 meters?
-contact damage only (unless it hit target missiles donGÇÖt explode)
These are all just ideas to show a variety can help with balancing. I probably made some mistakes above but it was intended for discussion.
Thoughts or ideas or troll welcome
|
xAckie
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Legacy Rising
125
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
Good list. Some quick thoughts.
Whats your thinking on why the heavy class should have the best AV route? I like AV. I want to use those swarms to take out HAVs. The heavies have forge guns as well..
The assault: I like dumb fire. I used it a lot last build. Dumb fire needs to remain. its a useful skill/ ability to have. I dont want it taken out of any swarm launcher - though the forums say they are going to do this next build for some.
the breach swarm launcher sounds like an over the shoulder rpg type weapon. Perhaps ccp could bring something like this in? slung over the shoulder 2/ 3 round rockets? Not sure what damage but cheap to skill into add this to AV grenades and infantry start to have a useful counter? They could even be slightly unreliable. Like 1 in 8 not firing etc...like Rpgs...and they dont track? |
Just Bad
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
I quite like what I see - not necessarily the specific stats but rather the idea that instead of all the variants of swarm launchers being basically the same thing they could have widely varying characteristics that determine what they're effective against. |
Free Beers
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
1041
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:17:00 -
[4] - Quote
xAckie wrote:Good list. Some quick thoughts.
Whats your thinking on why the heavy class should have the best AV route? I like AV. I want to use those swarms to take out HAVs. The heavies have forge guns as well..
The assault: I like dumb fire. I used it a lot last build. Dumb fire needs to remain. its a useful skill/ ability to have. I dont want it taken out of any swarm launcher - though the forums say they are going to do this next build for some.
the breach swarm launcher sounds like an over the shoulder rpg type weapon. Perhaps ccp could bring something like this in? slung over the shoulder 2/ 3 round rockets? Not sure what damage but cheap to skill into add this to AV grenades and infantry start to have a useful counter? They could even be slightly unreliable. Like 1 in 8 not firing etc...like Rpgs...and they dont track?
xAckie the word heavy is a name only like heavy missiles in eve. I use swarm launchers on assult suits myself.
I dont really care either way on dumb fire but limiting it does help balance things better. If you look at my examples dumb fire on a heavy swarm launcher avoids the lock time attribute which a factor in balancing.
As for breah I think there is a difference between say standing on pipes and waiting for tank to roll by and they shooting it from above and running up to a tank with AV grenades.
I think a "breach" missile launcher can fullfill a close range need. How it does that is the questions so all options throw out helps |
Skytt Syysch
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
My only issue is the assault one (the one expected to counter dropships) should have a long flight time. Dropships being able to evade them is fine, but circling the map like people do now isn't evasive maneuvering, and the swarms meant to bring down dropships shouldn't be outrun with that tactic. |
Captain-Awesome
38
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:38:00 -
[6] - Quote
I always thought the AV weapons were fine, I particularly adored the forge gun. |
Kincate
Algintal Core
Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 19:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
I think you need to clearly define what you mean by 'good for every situation' because I remeber several builds ago they where good for every situation. Prehaps to good. |
Free Beers
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
1041
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
Skytt Syysch wrote:My only issue is the assault one (the one expected to counter dropships) should have a long flight time. Dropships being able to evade them is fine, but circling the map like people do now isn't evasive maneuvering, and the swarms meant to bring down dropships shouldn't be outrun with that tactic.
you are a tanker your opinion doesn't matter  |
Free Beers
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
1041
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 21:41:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kincate wrote:I think you need to clearly define what you mean by 'good for every situation' because I remeber several builds ago they where good for every situation. Prehaps to good.
My intention is that swarm launchers become more diverse. The stand types are still there but add more specialized ones for 'different' situations. One swarm launcher shouldn't be good at every situation. So picking one of the speicalized swarm launchers is a risk vs reward thing.
example you use assult to kill drop ship then there is tank trying to snipe you from far away. You might not have the distance to lock and or hit him, but you still could if he was close enough. |
Skihids
Tritan-Industries
Legacy Rising
969
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 00:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Skytt Syysch wrote:My only issue is the assault one (the one expected to counter dropships) should have a long flight time. Dropships being able to evade them is fine, but circling the map like people do now isn't evasive maneuvering, and the swarms meant to bring down dropships shouldn't be outrun with that tactic.
What are these evasive maneuvers of which you speak?
Dropships have no wings and cannot make tight turns. They skid around the sky and have to counter momentum with thrust. If you shoot them head on they have to tilt and start accelerating away from you as if they were at a dead stop.
Think of yourself skidding around on a floating disk with a fire extinguisher as your only propulsion AND control. You shoot it o get yourself headed at someone and they throw a ball at you. You have no skates to dig into the ice, you have to fire your extinguisher sideways to start movie laterally away. So very painfully slowly at first. Meanwhile your enemy is busy lobbing more at you. That is the lot of the dropship pilot. Recall how you have seen them fly in game and you won't think of them as hot fighter aircraft.
The dropship's only defense is altitude combined with a bunch of speed, or the ability to break lock by hiding behind a building. There really is no nimble dodging of those small maneuverable rockets. |
|
|
William HBonney
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
318
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 02:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
The skill bonus needs to change too, 5% dmg to a 35 damage splash is dumb |
Skytt Syysch
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 03:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
Skihids wrote:Skytt Syysch wrote:My only issue is the assault one (the one expected to counter dropships) should have a long flight time. Dropships being able to evade them is fine, but circling the map like people do now isn't evasive maneuvering, and the swarms meant to bring down dropships shouldn't be outrun with that tactic. What are these evasive maneuvers of which you speak?
I'll admit there really isn't any right now, but I hear of people doing barrel rolls all the time, and they're supposed to get some kind of lock-breaking mechanism in the future (or at least it's being talked about). It just doesn't seem to me that "drive in a wide circle" should keep you safe from "locked-on missile." |
Sees-Too-Much
332
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 03:43:00 -
[13] - Quote
Either "fly high and fast" suffices as evasive maneuvering, dropship mechanics get changed drastically (again), or dropships insta-die to every militia swarm that shows up on the field. I like option one, because it offers the balance of allowing the dropships to stay alive but has the effect of seriously mitigating the damage they can deal. |
STB-LURCHASAURUS EV
Circle of Huskarl
Minmatar Republic
173
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 05:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
id like to see a heavy variant of the swarm launcher, but one that can only be used by heavy suits. would add to the heavy's role and give someone the feeling of carrying the big guns around. |
Seran Jinkar
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
214
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 13:22:00 -
[15] - Quote
Why not have Launchers and actual ammunition like Swarm, Dumbfire Breach and Highspeed Anti-Aircraft ? |
Nova Knife
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
789
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 18:23:00 -
[16] - Quote
I really like the idea of holding R1 and getting a constant stream of swarms going. It'd make the swarm launcher operation (reduction in rate of fire per level) a little more meaningful. One of the main reasons why swarms aren't that great against HAV is because the lock>fire>relock>fire takes up time, in which the tank can usually escape before you've fired all your shots.
Though, overall their tracking ability needs to be cut down. I find one of the silliest things ever is that you can avoid swarms by flying fast, but you can't avoid them by flying fancy. I've done midair flips, watched the missiles soar past me and think I'm safe, only to have one of my gunners on mic say "**** they are coming back man!". Flying fast should not avoid swarms. Flying fancy should.
Swarms as they are are kind of bad against HAV (Except when used in unison by a well planned squad. I've had my tank instantly killed by a group of swarm launchers, from full health!) But they are too good against dropships. I think beers has good ideas on how to make them better all around but not too good at either! |
Sleepy Zan
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
2048
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 06:19:00 -
[17] - Quote
These ideas would help to vary the roles of the swarms alot, right now they almost feel like complete copies |
Patches The Hyena
204
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 07:07:00 -
[18] - Quote
Skytt Syysch wrote:Skihids wrote:Skytt Syysch wrote:My only issue is the assault one (the one expected to counter dropships) should have a long flight time. Dropships being able to evade them is fine, but circling the map like people do now isn't evasive maneuvering, and the swarms meant to bring down dropships shouldn't be outrun with that tactic. What are these evasive maneuvers of which you speak? I'll admit there really isn't any right now, but I hear of people doing barrel rolls all the time, and they're supposed to get some kind of lock-breaking mechanism in the future (or at least it's being talked about). It just doesn't seem to me that "drive in a wide circle" should keep you safe from "locked-on missile."
I've dodged plenty of swarms in my DS, its not that hard once you figure it out. Problem is swarms just do a quick 180 and hit you anyway. When tracking airborne targets they are way too perfect and their flight time is entirely too long for such a small missile. Combined with the bug that causes impacts to sometimes randomly flip over the dropship the only real option for a dropship is to run around in circles for the second half of the match.
I like the idea in the OP. Specializing swarms for ground to air and ground to ground is a great idea. One swarm launcher being equally effective against all vehicles doesn't promote balance, variety or team play.
Also we need a different method of tracking for the ground to ground swarms. They should attempt to fly over the target and attack from above, not slam into the ground behind a moving tank. This will make them even more useful against tanks and installations and less effective against airborne targets. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |