DUST Search - [Request] Splash radius buff for missiles

Bojo The Mighty wrote:

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

Important balance tweak is important.

Important=Important: That's true but redundant.

I figure that the whole rocket launcher needs to overhauled. They don't really even feel like shooting high explosives. The damage they do is equatable to that of bottle rockets to a cow. I would prefer the basic rocket launcher to be
1. Slow RoF
2. High Damage
3. Medium Velocity and to enforce gravitational pull on them.
4. Decent Splash Damage
5. Still better against Armor than Shields.
6. Rather Costly-Rail Guns are Specific, Blasters are Specific, but rockets do good against both vehicles and infantry, so a higher price tag is only reasonable.

Splash Radius is definitely an issue with the current set-up. My Methana gunners got more kills with blasters than rockets. In fact, only one was killed with rockets.

This is prime example of nerf vs. balancing.

Yes they were god in time before Codex, but nerfs make no one happy. I consider the recoil on the ARs balancing. It was a fair choice, and a similar one should be made on the missile launchers. I call them rockets this whole time to appease the NASA and Air Force employees roaming around.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.12.20 14:19:00 - [1] - Quote Yes, missiles were OP. I was happy when they got nerfed. Range nerf - good Damage nerf - good Splash radius nerf - bad, and defeats the purpose of the weapon Each kind of turret is supposed to have its own role: > Railguns are suppose to be like a sniper or forge gun; requires precision, and does lots of damage. > Missiles are suppose to be an area-of-effect mass driver style weapon relying more on splash damage, and not so much on precision. > Blasters are suppose to be like the assault rifles of turrets, low damage, but very fast firing. All these turrets need to be useful and viable. The splash radius of the missiles needs to be increased to make them useful as area-of-effect weapons. The way things are now, its almost impossible to land a direct missile hit because the vehicle's movement throws off the missile trajectory (which is ok), but the splash radius is so low that getting a splash kill is unreasonably hard. Getting direct hit kills is not very feasible, and getting splash hit kills isn't either; how is this thing suppose to kill? Please raise the splash radius by a few meters.
The dark cloud Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1060	Posted - 2012.12.20 16:10:00 - [2] - Quote i approve this request.
fenrir storm Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 314	Posted - 2012.12.20 16:49:00 - [3] - Quote You cant do that , you may actually kill some one :)
Iskandar Zul Karnain Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 176	Posted - 2012.12.20 16:50:00 - [4] - Quote What OP said.
Nova Knife Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 789	Posted - 2012.12.20 20:58:00 - [5] - Quote I am Nova Knife and I support this thread.
Bojo The Mighty Bojo's School of the Trades 435	Posted - 2012.12.20 22:38:00 - [6] - Quote A mi tambien However, I think the RoF should be toned down in exchange for splash radius and better accuracy. When I shoot, it goes like 20 degrees left for no reason. At close range, they should be very accurate but they usually aren't. Accuracy needs a buff as well, maybe price adjustment as well, maybe. I like what Horned Wolf has to say.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.12.23 06:22:00 - [7] - Quote Important balance tweak is important.
Hobos-N-Guns Soldiers Of One Network Orion Empire 44	Posted - 2012.12.23 06:42:00 - [8] - Quote Would be nice to see splash damage increase
Bojo The Mighty Bojo's School of the Trades 435	Posted - 2012.12.23 07:00:00 - [9] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Important balance tweak is important. Important=Important: That's true but redundant. I figure that the whole rocket launcher needs to overhauled. They don't really even feel like shooting high explosives. The damage they do is equatable to that of bottle rockets to a cow. I would prefer the basic rocket launcher to be 1. Slow RoF 2. High Damage 3. Medium Velocity and to enforce gravitational pull on them. 4. Decent Splash Damage 5. Still better against Armor than Shields. 6. Rather Costly-Rail Guns are Specific, Blasters are Specific, but rockets do good against both vehicles and infantry, so a higher price tag is only reasonable. Splash Radius is definitely an issue with the current set-up. My Methana gunners got more kills with blasters than rockets. In fact, only one was killed with rockets. This is prime example of nerf vs. balancing. Yes they were god in time before Codex, but nerfs make no one happy. I consider the recoil on the ARs balancing. It was a fair choice, and a similar one should be made on the missile launchers. I call them rockets this whole time to appease the NASA and Air Force employees roaming around.
Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2012.12.23 12:36:00 - [10] - Quote More splash would be good. Missile exploding at motor burnout works, many missiles generate lift while in flight so while powered they may not drop. Many also use an inertial guidance to correct for wind, gravity, ect... Even some shoulder fired manually aimed rockets have this type of auto-correction(can't really be called guidance, to simple). Many rockets, like rpg-7, self destruct at a set range. The large turret could get it's range back by having the motor burnout at current range, then falling in arc like mass driver. It might be able to match range of rail then, but would take a lot of skill. Deviation and target moving away before impact would make it more an artillery bombardment then a super heavy sniper like the railgun. Blaster are high damage short range, those smaller hits add up to more damage then the rail gun. A blaster tank at optimal range should take out a rail tank easily, rail tanks fault for letting it get that close. I don't think technical difference of rocket and missile applies in new eden. Only rifle we have are the smg, mass driver, and hmg. Light assault rifle not having rifling in barrel to spin the plasma(counter productive to spin it anyway) and sniper rifle having a square bore it is not likely to spin the dart. Same with laser rifle, it's shaped like a rifle but has no groves to spin the light leaving barrel.

Washlee UnReaL. 131	Posted - 2012.12.23 16:54:00 - [11] - Quote Agreed I find myself looking to change to large blaster turrets on my tank because I'll be spraying right at guy with my tank and be doing little to no damage. For the tank missiles the description says - Can decimate ground and air targets. But I find damn near impossible.
Crm234 Wraith Shadow Guards 166	Posted - 2012.12.23 16:54:00 - [12] - Quote Turrets are horrible in this beta, to the point I avoid them at all cost. Every time I have enter a tanks or jeeps turret they never shoot right at all. I don't know if you have to be Lvl 5 in order for them to work or not. Everything should have splash damage from the impact alone.and movement of fluid. A turret should scare you and they don't at all in Dust and hurt you . I think most of the problems come from the open field policy of every map more than the vehicles themselves.
Necandi Brasil Conspiratus Immortalis 245	Posted - 2012.12.23 18:29:00 - [13] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf another good thread... congrats ... Btw I agree with the op, They only needed a damage nerf.
Vermaak Kuvakei Doomheim 89	Posted - 2012.12.23 18:50:00 - [14] - Quote Actually, you have blasters and autocannnons mixed, the blasters should actually be low rof but high damage
copy left BurgezzE.T.F Orion Empire 43	Posted - 2012.12.24 02:30:00 - [15] - Quote I approve this message. Dropships using missles now? Forget about it.
OgTheEnigma Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 90	Posted - 2012.12.24 02:53:00 - [16] - Quote I think they would be fine if they were back to the old blast radius, or maybe slightly less. With the current damage nerf they wouldn't be anywhere near as deadly as the original overpowered missiles, but in their current state they're all but useless.
Encharrion L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 104	Posted - 2012.12.24 03:12:00 - [17] - Quote This is precisely what I thought when I heard about the nerf. Aside from that though, I have to point out to some of the posters in this thread, the missile launcher SHOULD NOT be effective against vehicles. It might say that in the description (not sure though), but that is a bad idea. The splash on these weapons makes them great at hitting small targets, so that should be their speciality - crowd control. Their direct damage should be toned down to near or equal to their splash damage, good against infantry, bad against vehicles. On that note, the blaster turret IS NOT ONLY anti-infantry. It tears apart vehicles as well, and in this instance, that is ok, unlike for missiles, because the drawback of the blaster turret is that it has extremely short range. Edit: Also, vehicles should all get a health boost. With low damage and high health, they would be far better geared to supporting infantry, for example acting as mobile cover, while adding it's own dps to that of the team.
Ydubbs81 RND Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 886	Posted - 2012.12.24 03:27:00 - [18] - Quote umm
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.12.27 00:12:00 - [19] - Quote Any more thoughts?
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.12.29 13:37:00 - [20] - Quote This is quite a modest request, not asking to bring back the damage and range, only the splash radius.

Encharrion L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 104	Posted - 2012.12.29 16:00:00 - [21] - Quote I had forgotten I had already read this thread, so when I opened it and took a look, I went to like the post, and found I had already done so previously. I then proceeded to the bottom of the page to write a comment... which I had also already done. I think I need to improve my memory a little. Still supporting this ofc.
Deveshi WarRavens 144	Posted - 2012.12.29 21:23:00 - [22] - Quote agreed with OP +1
Jonquill Caronite Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 115	Posted - 2013.01.01 02:41:00 - [23] - Quote As a side note on range, missiles ARE long range weapons, but lets be clear, we don't have missiles in this game, we have ROCKETS, so why don't we call it what it is? Rockets should fire, have a parabolic trajectory, and when they run out of fuel, quickly begin descent... Missiles, should be locking on to enemy vehicles, and have a dumb fire option if we're going to use it as an anti-infantry weapon (Which is itself weird). Swarms are missiles, nothing on ANY vehicle in this game even remotely resembles a missile... That all being said, I agree the rockets have been nerfed improperly, they had their damage dropped and range, which is fine, though I would prefer that they actually descend rather then just all of sudden disappearing into the mystical CCP void the matrix created for OP **, and the splash damage MUST be increased. As a side note, if our missiles had 'slight' tracking capability on vehicles, then they would match the description given to them, OTHERWISE please remove the comment that they are good AA weapons, its misleading, and missiles from vehicles don't do ** to dropships unless they're on the ground, or floating immobile in the air like retards.
Deveshi WarRavens 144	Posted - 2013.01.01 04:43:00 - [24] - Quote Jonquill Caronite wrote: As a side note, if our missiles had 'slight' tracking capability on vehicles, then they would match the description given to them, OTHERWISE please remove the comment that they are good AA weapons, its misleading, and missiles from vehicles don't do **** to dropships unless they're on the ground, or floating immobile in the air like retards. Travel time of these 'rockets' makes them retared anti-vehicle weapons anyway. It appears that they were designed to be anti-infantry weapons, but when CCP saw they were working as intended they had to be nerfed. Like a bad santa giving you a puppy for Christmas, it had to be drowned before the end of the day!
Skihids Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 970	Posted - 2013.01.01 15:23:00 - [25] - Quote CCP should correct the missile/rocket terminology as it causes confusion. "Rocket Tank" may not roll off the tongue as nicely as "missile tank", but that's what it is. Rockets are either anti-infantry or anti-vehicle, but cannot be both at the same time. Either they have a shaped charge warhead that does very high direct damage with tiny splash, or they have grenade like warheads with moderate direct damage and a significant splash radius. What we have now is a moderate direct damage with a tiny splash radius which makes them crappy at both missions. Rockets are not good mid to long range AV weapons due to the difficulty of achieving a direct hit on a moving target with a slow moving round. That difficulty is only compounded when firing from a moving vehicle. Therefore all rockets should probably be anti-infantry and have an effect similar to the MD. Direct damage AV is better achieved by rail technology. If you don't want that, then be honest and just pull them from the game. Having a costly yet ineffective weapon system in game only discourages new players who skill into it before realizing they can't do anything with it.
Alduradvoratrelundar Dvora Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 7	Posted - 2013.01.01 17:55:00 - [26] - Quote Bojo The Mighty wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Important balance tweak is important. Important=Important: That's true but redundant. I figure that the whole rocket launcher needs to overhauled. They don't really even feel like shooting high explosives. The damage they do is equatable to that of bottle rockets to a cow. I would prefer the basic rocket launcher to be 1. Slow RoF 2. High Damage 3. Medium Velocity and to enforce gravitational pull on them. 4. Decent Splash Damage 5. Still better against Armor than Shields. 6. Rather Costly-Rail Guns are Specific, Blasters are Specific, but rockets do good against both vehicles and infantry, so a higher price tag is only reasonable. Splash Radius is definitely an issue with the current set-up. My Methana gunners got more kills with blasters than rockets. In fact, only one was killed with rockets. This is prime example of nerf vs. balancing. Yes they were god in time before Codex, but nerfs make no one happy. I consider the recoil on the ARs balancing. It was a fair choice, and a similar one should be made on the missile launchers. I call them rockets this whole time to appease the NASA and Air Force employees roaming around. +1, and combine with the OP's ideas. Missiles aren't missiles anymore, in a match I was literally stepping to the side to dodge a missile. I miss the awe-inspiring feel that you're launching something, that while it takes you a while to do it again, feels powerful in every sense of the word.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2013.01.05 02:35:00 - [27] - Quote Missiles, rockets, whatever you want to call them, more splash radius is needed.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2013.01.06 15:25:00 - [28] - Quote Splash splash muthathukka
Sev Alcatraz Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 185	Posted - 2013.01.06 17:24:00 - [29] - Quote MIssiles are supposed to kill things at a range thats what they do damage nerf? well if you get hit in the chest by a missile there is no way you should walk away from that....
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2013.01.10 01:36:00 - [30] - Quote Fixed it needs to be.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page