| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rhadiem
Algintal Core
Gallente Federation
496
   |
Posted - 2012.09.09 17:29:00 -
[31] - Quote
RedBleach wrote:Rhadiem wrote:Take a dropship, and give it a pilot controlled swarm launcher pods, and use the "cockpit" view to lock on.
They become the counter to tanks.. without being OP against infantry.
Very little coding, little graphics changes, and watch tanks run.
Thoughts? To aim at the ground would extremely angle the dropship, forcing you to bail or crash. Also, how powerful? A regular swarmlauncher would take it's whole ammo capacity on a non-repping top tier tank. Just make it A RAILGUN!  (quick fire and powerful
Railguns would be even harder to aim, but I'd be fine with that. |
Lazarus Solo
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
66
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 18:05:00 -
[32] - Quote
To be honest, I think gunships might be a bit OP.
I also think forge guns and swarms are too cheap, especially forge guns.
It's ridiculous how effective a 12k forge gun is against anything other than second tier tanks or above. |
Needless Sacermendor
98
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 18:19:00 -
[33] - Quote
Lazarus Solo wrote:To be honest, I think gunships might be a bit OP.
I also think forge guns and swarms are too cheap, especially forge guns.
It's ridiculous how effective a 12k forge gun is against anything other than second tier tanks or above.
Firstly you can't say something might be OP until you've seen how it's going to be implemented.
Second AV weapons are no cheaper than other weapons, give us a good reason why you think they should cost more and we can discuss it.
Thirdly the forge gun is not as effective as you make out, more likely you're using the wrong type of HAV, forge guns are ment to be effective against shield but not armor and swarms are effective against armor but not shield, why do you think the shield tanksa're more popular ... it's because there's only the heavy class that can be effective against it and not many play the heavy class. |
FatalFlaw V1
ISK Faucet Industries
76
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 18:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
Dropships can kill tanks but if the tank driver knows what they are doing it's easy to avoid, and even easier to just kill the dropship. The dropship has to stay directly above the tank to avoid their turret, but if that same team has a forge gunner or second tank they are screwed. Even a solid fit dropship goes down in ~3-4 shots from a tank, sometimes they give up and crash after only 2 if their armor is on fire..
+1 to the gunship idea though. I would fully support an anti-vehicle swarm launcher type weapon for the dropship pilot. They really do need a buff, especially as a means for the pilot to get some SP other than an assist here and there. |
STB Vermaak Doe
558
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 18:34:00 -
[35] - Quote
Add a fixed small turret at a slight angle with a hud the shows where it will land. Any other pilots agree? |
Noc Tempre
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 18:41:00 -
[36] - Quote
Tank health is not the problem, the turrets lack of role balance is. Missiles win at everything, rails are really good at all ranges, and blasters are lol but still wreck at CQC vs infantry. The environment all being flat or sloped inward open spaces doesn't help in the slightest. The idea of an I-win dropship is really bad though.
Also lol at anyone who lists blops as "above" tier one tanks. If you look at the fittings and slots, they are below tier one with a small amount of extra health. The CRU doesn't even work yet. They are a nice paint scheme though. |
STB Vermaak Doe
558
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 18:45:00 -
[37] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:Tank health is not the problem, the turrets lack of role balance is. Missiles win at everything, rails are really good at all ranges, and blasters are lol but still wreck at CQC vs infantry. The environment all being flat or sloped inward open spaces doesn't help in the slightest. The idea of an I-win dropship is really bad though.
What if the turret was a module. That decreased some aspect but added a small turret.
(Equipping the module to a tank would add a coaxial turret) |
Noc Tempre
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 19:00:00 -
[38] - Quote
STB Vermaak Doe wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:Tank health is not the problem, the turrets lack of role balance is. Missiles win at everything, rails are really good at all ranges, and blasters are lol but still wreck at CQC vs infantry. The environment all being flat or sloped inward open spaces doesn't help in the slightest. The idea of an I-win dropship is really bad though. What if the turret was a module. That decreased some aspect but added a small turret. (Equipping the module to a tank would add a coaxial turret)
A small missile turret variant that acted like a lock-on only swarm launcher would be interesting as a turret. A gunship "dropship" should really be it's own category, model, and behavior. Customization turret locations/numbers is an interesting idea I've pitched before, but asking the art dept to do more work seems to kill a lot of good ideas... |
STB Vermaak Doe
558
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 19:03:00 -
[39] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:STB Vermaak Doe wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:Tank health is not the problem, the turrets lack of role balance is. Missiles win at everything, rails are really good at all ranges, and blasters are lol but still wreck at CQC vs infantry. The environment all being flat or sloped inward open spaces doesn't help in the slightest. The idea of an I-win dropship is really bad though. What if the turret was a module. That decreased some aspect but added a small turret. (Equipping the module to a tank would add a coaxial turret) A small missile turret variant that acted like a lock-on only swarm launcher would be interesting as a turret. A gunship "dropship" should really be it's own category, model, and behavior. Customization turret locations/numbers is an interesting idea I've pitched before, but asking the art dept to do more work seems to kill a lot of good ideas...
This wouldn't make a dedicated gunship as gunships will most likely have medium turrets and be a bit different looking.
Ps this helps all vehicles at a price |
Noc Tempre
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 19:39:00 -
[40] - Quote
STB Vermaak Doe wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:STB Vermaak Doe wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:Tank health is not the problem, the turrets lack of role balance is. Missiles win at everything, rails are really good at all ranges, and blasters are lol but still wreck at CQC vs infantry. The environment all being flat or sloped inward open spaces doesn't help in the slightest. The idea of an I-win dropship is really bad though. What if the turret was a module. That decreased some aspect but added a small turret. (Equipping the module to a tank would add a coaxial turret) A small missile turret variant that acted like a lock-on only swarm launcher would be interesting as a turret. A gunship "dropship" should really be it's own category, model, and behavior. Customization turret locations/numbers is an interesting idea I've pitched before, but asking the art dept to do more work seems to kill a lot of good ideas... This wouldn't make a dedicated gunship as gunships will most likely have medium turrets and be a bit different looking. Ps this helps all vehicles at a price
Sacrificing tank for gank is what the low slot turret upgrades are for (well when they work anyway). I'm on the fence about the driver/gunner combo of the HAV vs the other vehicles, but making modules that bring other vehicles in line is one valid way to approach balancing this, but not one I support. If any slot can be a weapon, it kind of defeats the intuitive lines between what is high/low/weapon. |
|
|
STB Vermaak Doe
558
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 19:45:00 -
[41] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:STB Vermaak Doe wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:STB Vermaak Doe wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:Tank health is not the problem, the turrets lack of role balance is. Missiles win at everything, rails are really good at all ranges, and blasters are lol but still wreck at CQC vs infantry. The environment all being flat or sloped inward open spaces doesn't help in the slightest. The idea of an I-win dropship is really bad though. What if the turret was a module. That decreased some aspect but added a small turret. (Equipping the module to a tank would add a coaxial turret) A small missile turret variant that acted like a lock-on only swarm launcher would be interesting as a turret. A gunship "dropship" should really be it's own category, model, and behavior. Customization turret locations/numbers is an interesting idea I've pitched before, but asking the art dept to do more work seems to kill a lot of good ideas... This wouldn't make a dedicated gunship as gunships will most likely have medium turrets and be a bit different looking. Ps this helps all vehicles at a price Sacrificing tank for gank is what the low slot turret upgrades are for (well when they work anyway). I'm on the fence about the driver/gunner combo of the HAV vs the other vehicles, but making modules that bring other vehicles in line is one valid way to approach balancing this, but not one I support. If any slot can be a weapon, it kind of defeats the intuitive lines between what is high/low/weapon.
It wouldn't be able to go to absolutely any slot (high powered most likely) and it would be limited to one like damage control |
Noc Tempre
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 20:12:00 -
[42] - Quote
STB Vermaak Doe wrote:
It wouldn't be able to go to absolutely any slot (high powered most likely) and it would be limited to one like damage control
Still, why not just add a third turret slot if that is the design, perhaps with a different size so only certain ones fit? |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |