|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 18:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
+1 to the self propelled artillery and larger maps so they can be used as well, and as a DS pilot, NO to the mobile AA. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 18:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
But I'm probably going to be one of those AS pilots I'm planning to cross train so I can fly everything. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 19:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yeah I agree with you we definitely need counter measures and some kind of lock on warning, and getting the same cloaking as the RDV's would be awesome, but I can imagine that we would get some kind of EW module to counter it. And yes I don't like getting shot down, my DS fit costs 430k isk and that's with basic modules, I am loath to think what Gunship's and Fighters will cost per ship when they get released. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 20:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
drake sadani wrote:gbghg wrote:Yeah I agree with you we definitely need counter measures and some kind of lock on warning, and getting the same cloaking as the RDV's would be awesome, but I can imagine that we would get some kind of EW module to counter it. And yes I don't like getting shot down, my DS fit costs 430k isk and that's with basic modules, I am loath to think what Gunship's and Fighters will cost per ship when they get released. actually i think they need to be rebalanced drop ships should actually be drop ships heavy armor slow and maybe one weapon system like a ball turret . they should remain at their current price though. fighters should be cheap with middle ground shields and middle ground armor with middle ground weapons . maybe have a co pilot seat for a little extra firepower . with versatility have bomber. recon. direct engagement . and maybe cargo ? the ability to drop limited use installations would be cool I personally think that there should be different types of dropships, for example a heavily armoured on like you described for assualt drops into enemy fire, and a lightly armoured, fast DS for use by QRF's, you could probably tie these into racial variants like amarr and minmatar for the above two. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 20:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vermaak Doe wrote:If some kind of arty/bombardment type weapon is added I think it should function a bit like a stealth bomber on eve in the sense of:
Highly expensive but effective ammo
Extremely limited magazines
If used too close could destroy the launching vehicle
Fragile
Requires drops of ammunition via rdv which will have to be bought
As for the AA argument there will be a gunship in the future so ground vehicles need a direct counter
Yes to them being fragile, but I'm not so sure about the ammo idea, if you were going to implement that it would only make sense if all vehicles had a limited supply of ammo. And we could stick an absolute minimum range on them, say the smallest arc in which the shell could travel but not damage the launch vehicle. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 21:10:00 -
[6] - Quote
But when we consider how fragile it is the only way to safely use it will be outside of LOS so you will be relying on your team to call it in, of course for this to work we need maps to be gridded so a squad can say " we need a bombardment on A-3 now". To be honest it's not like we're going to have them be deadly to everything, i can see it being most effective agianst infantry, but most vehicles will be going too fast and have too much tank for artillery to get decent damage. And don't forget that we have to factor in shell travel time as well, we might shoot at a square but the enemy might have left it by the time the shell hits.
The only way I can see for this thing to be considered OP is when you get 2-3 people actively working together and targeting the same spots with a Forward observer spotting targets for them. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 21:23:00 -
[7] - Quote
Vermaak Doe wrote:gbghg wrote:But when we consider how fragile it is the only way to safely use it will be outside of LOS so you will be relying on your team to call it in, of course for this to work we need maps to be gridded so a squad can say " we need a bombardment on A-3 now". To be honest it's not like we're going to have them be deadly to everything, i can see it being most effective agianst infantry, but most vehicles will be going too fast and have too much tank for artillery to get decent damage. And don't forget that we have to factor in shell travel time as well, we might shoot at a square but the enemy might have left it by the time the shell hits.
The only way I can see for this thing to be considered OP is when you get 2-3 people actively working together and targeting the same spots with a Forward observer spotting targets for them. That's a reason the ammo will be so costly, and not pub stomp costly more like 450k a round and it's actually intended more for vehicles than infantry, with high direct damage but low splash over a high radius You could get multiple types of rounds, a general one for use against infantry and LAV's, an AV like you described, a round similar to flux grenades in its effects, oh the tactical possibilities this could provide to a well drilled team are huge |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 21:26:00 -
[8] - Quote
deleted |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 21:26:00 -
[9] - Quote
Of course you would have to buy them in bulk, packs of 100 maybe, at a cost of 7-10k per round |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 21:47:00 -
[10] - Quote
I see artillery as being something that can give a team more tactical options than "go there and kill everything", it shouldn't excel against anything in particular but it should do a little damage to everything so to be used effectively they have to be deployed in units. And I agree with you that this should be costly, these should require corp funding to be fielded in enough numbers to be effective, seeing a migration of these into widescale pub use would be horrifying |
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.23 00:13:00 -
[11] - Quote
Agreed this is definitely a feature for the future, if implemented now it would just be nerfed to hell |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.23 20:43:00 -
[12] - Quote
ideally it should also have no anti infantry capability, this thing needs to hang back behind friendly lines to be effective |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
385
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 15:23:00 -
[13] - Quote
Kristoff Atruin wrote:I like the idea of drone based weapon systems. ie: a gallente APC that deploys drones instead of having turrets, as a short range anti-infantry weapon. They could make the enemy have to look toward the sky to shoot them down, providing a distraction for ground troops approaching the site or disembarking. You could balance it out by having the drones stay active for a set period of time: ie: 60 seconds, and making the system have a really long reload time. Only if they sort out the collision damage, otherwise these things will be like RDV's except there's more of them and they're harder to spot |
|
|
|