|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Skytt Syysch
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
235
   |
Posted - 2012.10.12 02:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
There are a number of us that feel the current swarm mechanics just arenGÇÖt working, and that the entire weapon needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. As it stands right now, the idea is that the weapon requires minimal skill to use and simply performs too well for such little investment and player action. Also, one of the problems is the damage scales far too much across the tiers.
The proposition is this: The swarm launcher needs to have specializations within its weapon class. These specializations need to excel at combating one type of target while being disadvantaged against others. The base swarm launcher also needs to require skill to use, rather than lock, fire, and forget.
Base Swarm Launcher:
-Dumb fire only
-Missiles converge on a focal point at a distance
-Missiles require flight time before becoming explosive (20m) [applies to all variants]
-Max flight range: 125m
-Moderate speed missiles (50m/s)
-10 missiles at 120 damage per missile (11 missiles for advanced, 12 for prototype)
Heavy Missile variant:
-(+20) damage per missile
-Max flight range: 75m
-Slow speed (20m/s)
Light Missile variant:
-(-20) damage per missile
-Max flight range: 200m
-Fast speed (80m/s)
Lock-on variant:
-(-60) damage per missile
-Lock-on range: 100m for ground targets, 150m for aerial targets
-Can have standard, heavy, and light missile variants
Anti-Infantry variant:
-(-95) damage per missile
-1.0m blast radius per missile
-Missiles do not converge on a focal point
-Can have standard, heavy, and light missile variants
-Cannot have lock-on variant
For the examples given, the numbers donGÇÖt matter as much as the concepts. The flight speeds for the varying types have heavy at slightly faster than HAVs, base at slightly faster than LAVs, and light at faster than dropships. Heavy could hit anything standing still, but to catch a specific vehicle running at max speed, you would need an appropriate missile type.
The base version requires you to aim or lead a moving target, while being able to lock-on comes at the cost of a damage penalty. People skilled at dry firing will be able to outperform others with the weapon, being able to cause more damage than those that have to resort to lock-on mechanics. The harder hitting missiles are also restricted by range, so as not to have max damage coming from across the map and trailing forever.
IGÇÖve also included an anti-infantry variant, as IGÇÖve seen that asked for a few times, and it comes with a severe damage penalty, and is restricted by blast radius.
The number of missiles were chosen to lessen the damage gap when upgrading to a higher tier. The weapons I had looked at (which isn't very many, but included the forge gun), seemed to follow the pattern of +10% base damage per tier, and at 10 missiles as the base, it allows it to follow the same pattern. It may be too resource-intensive at those numbers, however. |
Skytt Syysch
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 02:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Governor Odius wrote:Skytt Syysch wrote:
Dry fire only
The phrase you're looking for is "dumb fire". "Dry fire" is when you fire a weapon that isn't loaded.
Same thing as far as I care, you know what I meant.  |
Skytt Syysch
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 07:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:Why not just make them three missiles and have the damage go up like other weapons? Locking weapons need a significant damage nerf and there needs to be a working militia AA option.
I guess that could work, just felt easier for bonus/penalty purposes to have the missiles the same damage across the board, and to split up the damage across more points for the anti-infantry one, so the damage wasn't as condensed. I remember an early image or video of them being a group of spiraling missiles, so maybe they could use that. I don't consider any of the numbers set in stone, though, so I wouldn't care how they made it happen as long as the underlying idea was still intact. |
Skytt Syysch
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
235
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 21:31:00 -
[4] - Quote
Supercakers wrote:
Also - having to specialize in half a dozen types of launchers is kind of ridiculous. Same should go for AR's then, if someone wants to use something besides Assault Rifle, they have to specialize in Assault Rifle first, then continue specializing into Burst, or Tactical, or GEK etc...
Well they're not meant to be separate skill paths, just specialized weapon variants, like we have the burst, tactical, etc rifles. I would just like for weapons to move away from the well-rounded area and focus more on specialization so that there are actually counters available and you have to be smart about what you're bringing into the battle. |
|
|
| |
|