|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 21:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Range limit? Awesome. Damage nerf? Awesome. Splash radus nerf? Too far.
Nerfing EVERYTHING was too much. Range was the main issue. Damage wasn't a major problem, but I'm not too upset with the change. Splash radius is the key. Missiles NEED that with the other nerfs in place. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.21 22:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Sev Alcatraz wrote:my gunlogi use to wipe out all infantry like nothing, now i got to volley the target from close range 3 or 4 times just to make a noticeable difference.
they over nerfd turrets, there missiles, there meant to kill things effectively not pelt the target with pillows >_>
tryed to run a heavy over, only thing i did was push him around. Missiles were never meant to be great vs everything like they were. If you want to wipe out infantry, fit your tank with a large blaster. If you want to take down other tanks, fit it with a large railgun. Exactly.
If you want to be at all effective against anything, fit something that isn't a Missile Turret.
Do you see why this argument doesn't work?
Missiles HAVE been over-nerfed. If they give back the splash radius on Missiles, and maybe (only MAYBE) bump the splash damage a little - doesn't even need to be much - we'll have something that's actually balanced against other options.
I can literally unload 20 missiles at a Dropsuit standing still right in front of me and not get a single point of damage on target with a Large Missile Turret. If I'm alone in my Missile HAV, and need to take on infantry, I HAVE TO JUMP INTO MY TOP TURRET TO HIT THEM. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 00:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
semperfi1999 wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Range limit? Awesome. Damage nerf? Awesome. Splash radus nerf? Too far.
Nerfing EVERYTHING was too much. Range was the main issue. Damage wasn't a major problem, but I'm not too upset with the change. Splash radius is the key. Missiles NEED that with the other nerfs in place. +1 I agree here. I havent played yet but from what people have been saying I agree with this. If the dmg done in the splash was nerfed then I dont think the radius also needs to be nerfed. The range nerf was also a good idea i just think it was taken too far. Now Snake just want to note that RPG that are designed to take out vehicles (IE tanks or other armored vehicle) actually has a shaped explosive. What this means is that the actual blast radius of an RPG with an anti material warhead is actually very small. All of its power is put into taking out the vehicle (many of them use the blast to actually melt and then force mercury (or similar material) through the armor in an attempt to penetrate into the interior or at least damage electronics. So an arguement could be made that the splash radius should be smaller because they are supposed to be anti material warheads and not anti infantry. Now that being said I go back to what I originally stated. Range nerf and splash dmg nerfs are good but also including a splash radius nerf was probably too far. My main problem with the missiles before is that it didnt even need a close hit to severly dmg or kill me. Heck i had missiles from the main turret miss me so badly they landed on the wall that was 4-5 ish meters behind me and the splash has so much dmg that is insta killed my ADV type A suit that has more than 450 total HP. This is the problem I had with missiles before. Hopefull after testing this for a bit they will find a happier medium but you are blind if you think missles were balanced before. At the moment, splash will (usually) not kill an enemy Dropsuit. I've seen a SCOUT survive a splash hit from my Small Missile Turret. Lost almost the entire shield, but he was still going. I've seen an obvious Starter Fit Assault get one-shotted as well though, so they potentially CAN hit hard enough to one-shot low-tier infantry with a close enough splash hit.
The big problem, imo, is the Large Turret, which has its shots scatter randomly over a wide area, AND doesn't touch nearly enough of its area of effect with the blast radius of its missiles.
I'm tempted to say a small buff (or even NO buff) to Small Missile radius would be fine. They're pretty much in line with the other Small Turrets now. Large Missiles need basically their original blast radius to be any use now though, because with the other nerfs in place, I actually LIKE them for an area denial weapon, or as crowd control. You're not likely to land kills even with an improved radius, but you'll hurt the targets, and force them into cover. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.22 01:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mavado V Noriega wrote:Vassteel Rydex wrote: who uses tanks in CQC ?
75% of the lolmissile tankers did they played careless, no thought process, charged right in and blew evryone up because they know they can kill a grp of ppl alot quicker than they can get him down And now, even at CQC range with ideal positioning and a stationary target, you can't hit a dropsuit on purpose with a Large Missile Turret.
From OP to broken.
I miss having to take cover to avoid mid-range fire from a Missile Tank, instead of just standing out in the open with my Swarm launcher, confident in the knowledge that even a lucky near-miss will probably not hurt, and won't break my shield if it does. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 13:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
Small Missiles, as of the update, are ALMOST where they should be.
The nerf has brought them in line with the other Small Turrets - which means they're marginally underpowered for where I think they should be - and I usually run AV, not tanks, so if anything, I'm biased in favour of NOT buffing vehicles. Only need a VERY small buff, and blast radius is the core element where I think a buff would help differentiate them from the other weapon types.
Large Missile Turrets, on the other hand, are just completely broken. Lets look at what they did:
1. Reduced damage. 2. Cut blast radius by more than 50% 3. increased spread massively without it being a progressive "kick" type effect, so even the first missile goes off-course just as randomly as the last show in a salvo. 4. Reduced range.
Either blast radius OR scatter needs to be addressed. Removing the scatter (or reducing it enough to make them a reliable weapon again) would make the Missile Turret a harsher anti-infantry weapon than it has a right to be.
In their current state, Large Missile Turrets pretty much CAN'T hit enemy infantry at ANY range on purpose unless the target is exposed and close to a nearby wall you can aim to get splash damage from. When an Assault suit can stand out in the open, 20 - 50m from a Missile Tank, and reasonably expect NOT to take any damage at all from said tank, there's something wrong. I've been on both sides of exactly that scenario more than once. When I have to switch into one of my Small Turrets just to have a CHANCE of dealing ANY damage to an enemy, my main gun isn't doing its job.
Range? Fine. Damage? Fine. Scatter? Fine. Radius? Too badly nerfed.
Small Turrets are all about even in terms of effectiveness now, but ALL of them are slightly weaker than they should be.
Large Turrets all need some form of buff. Railguns could use a turn rate increase - not TOO much of one, but a bit of a boost. Blasters need something - I think range is probably best. Missiles need a MUCH better blast radius. And of all the Large Turrets, Missiles are the ones with the least effectiveness in any situation. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.23 13:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
Aellar Dae wrote:emotional post Sorry. Dropships aren't meant to be Gunships.
Small Missile Turrets could use some improvement, just like the other Small Turrets, but not enough to turn Dropships back into near-invulnerable destructive weapons. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 15:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
EnglishSnake wrote:With missiles changes it should have had a reload time similar to railguns charge i think
Range wise got nerfed hard, i have forge gunners hitting me but i cant hit them back unless i have the railgun as my main turret
Radius should be back to normal for large at least and up the damage i think
Skill books i wouldnt have prof or even the normal skill to give out damage bonuses tbh, leave the damage bonuses to the turret skillbook and the damage mods and instead give the skillbooks bonuses to the the weapon instead, like -5% cooldown time or heat build up for hybrids, missiles could be ROF or range
All damage mods should really be the same
Random missile spread lolworthy
I disagree with only 1 damage mod tbh, they have stacking penalties as it is and its not like a DCU either, if you can fit em let em
As for turrets, railgun still needs its turn speed increased at least to the missile turn speed and also i think it builds up heat way too fast, after 2 cont shots you overheat and need a 15sec cooldown even tho its was around 5sec to fire 2 shots i think it should at least be 3 tbh Just to be clear, I don't think Missile damage should go back to how it was - but a buff in splash damage - at least for Large Turrets - is probably in order. Bring the radius back to where it was, and that should mostly negate the problems with spread, because you won't NEED to be landing your hits directly on-target to deal damage.
A small buff to radius on Small Turrets is probably in order too, but Small Blaster and Railgun Turrets need love too - right now, all the Small Turrets are pretty well balanced against one another, imo. The whole Small Turret collection are equally underpowered, and equally deserving of a (slight) buff.
Other than that, I agree with you though. I'd suggest blast radius as another possible bonus that Missile Skillbooks could provide - it would be in line with Swarm Missiles. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 00:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
mikegunnz wrote:Missiles NEEDED a nerf of some sort. I dont know if this the right way to go about it, but it is an improvement. Another solution migt be to keep the original dmg stats, but severely cut the ROF. This would keep missiles as more of an AV weapon, with some infantry use as well (because of old splash dmg) Missile needed a nerf.
But cutting away EVERYTHING that made them even USEFUL is too much.
They weren't OP because of each individual advantage they have. They were OP because of the combination of factors. Removing or reducing SOME of the factors making them OP is a fix. Removing ALL the things that made them OP has turned them into dead weight.
I've LITERALLY fired 20 missiles from my Large Missile Turret (5 shots with 4 missiles each) at and around a Scout who just STOOD THERE DOING NOTHING and when a friendly sniper finally shot him, I didn't even get an Assist. There have been times where I've lined up accurately on a fast-moving LAV's destination, and it hasn't changed course, and my missiles exploded all around it without a single hit, even from splash damage.
If they return blast radius to where it used to be - and maybe tighten up the spread a little bit - then you'll actually be able to hit targets without needing someone to strap the enemy onto your turret before you fire. I'd be happy with that, honestly.
Large Missile Turrets will then be useful (something they currently AREN'T), but not uber-destructive. They'd be a good weapon for support and area denial - unless you get a lucky direct hit, you won't be landing OHKs on enemies, but you'll deal significant enough damage that people will have to move when you're firing at them, instead of just standing out in the open and lining up a Forge or Swarm shot while you have no hope of ever killing them.
You know there's a problem when you're driving a tank and HAVE TO SWITCH TO THE SMALL TURRET TO FIGHT. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 11:10:00 -
[9] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Post fix, the situation is better. Not perfect but way better. I'd argue that.
The situation is equally bad, but in the opposite direction. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 11:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Post fix, the situation is better. Not perfect but way better. I'd argue that. The situation is equally bad, but in the opposite direction. Yeah ? I like to think that seeing blasters and railgun instead of just missile is better. You have Anti-Infantry HAV and Anti-vehicle HAV wich seems more logical. Now, Blasters HAVs are too fragile due to the stupidity of EZmod SL, the range boost from last fix to FG and the painfull reduction in Resistance modules for vehicles. I dont think we're that far from getting a nice balance between vehicles and infantry. Anyway I guess we're all just talking for nothing until next build lands. In the specific scenario of Large Missile Turret vs. anything, the situation hasn't become any better than it was before the 'fix" happened though. It's just that now, instead of Missile Turrets being the "I win" button, they've become an "I can't win" button instead.
While yes, that's encouraged more diversity in fittings because the other previously-outmatched weapons are viable, it hasn't actually improved the Missiles vs. enemies scenario - only made it equally bad in the opposite direction.
Calling it "better" is a matter of how you look at things, which is why I said it's arguable. |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 12:19:00 -
[11] - Quote
Daalzebul Del'Armgo wrote:Scout smallest sig radius may take 20 seconds to lock (base no skills/modules factored into either side) heavy largest infantry sig radius make take 15 seconds Lav 10 seconds Drop ship 7 sec HAV 4 seconds Honestly, WAY too slow.
No more than 5 seconds for a Scout lock, imo.
Targeting other HAVs should be near-instant.
But there should be a delay between shots to balance that.
Also, Large Missile Turret (rename it to Rockets) still falls WELL short of being a viable weapon in its current state. Renaming it "Rocket" won't make it less broken. It needs a buff as well. Yes, it should be a Rocket Turret instead of a Missile Turret. But it should also have a larger blast radius so it has some vague hint of a chance at dealing damage when aimed properly. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 14:54:00 -
[12] - Quote
EnglishSnake wrote:You cannot split the turrets up for missiles
Even if 2 types of missile launchers come out you are shafting the drivers anyways because sods law you bring out the lock on turret for vehicles and no vehicles turn up on the enemys side plus its a dumb idea and why? because the blasters and railguns can do anti vehicle and infantry to an extent while with the missile idea you can only do one or the other which make it even more ******* useless
lol @ this wtf aswell tbh you have like 1 AV guy to begin with who is out of milita/basic AV stuff and none of you drive anything Seems like you totally missed the point. Our current "Missiles" should really be "Rockets" instead, meaning they aren't being split up - merely adding a new weapon type that should be called Missiles, and renaming the current weapon, each of which has a unique functionality.
You also managed not to notice the fact that the new Missiles would be able to lock onto infantry, but would lock on FASTER to enemy vehicles than to infantry. The suggested lock times were totally broken though, hence my post suggesting a massive change to those numbers. |
|
|
|