Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
shaman oga
Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY
264
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 12:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm not a dedicated AV, but i've tried the ADV variants off all the AV weapons (except the plasma cannon, is the PC AV???) Changing efficiency levels would balance the situation:
AV grenades
They should be there to kill LAV not HAV but they are very good against HAV because they are slow. So, change the efficiency of AV nades
- on HAV 50%
- on LAVs 150-175%
If you fly a DS so close to be attacked by AV nades you deserve it and half of the time the AV nades bounce on DS. Packed AV nades should completely loose their homing ability, the other two types are fine.
Swarm Launchers
The most ignobile AV weapon on the battlefield, it requires no skill, its fire and forget mechanic suck. I would not change it's efficiency values, but i would change the way it works:
Lock on version (the version we have now)
- Decrease the range of lock on
- Don't let shoot the second swarm if the first is flying
- Consider "Z" value as distance too
Manually drived version
- Loger range, if you are good at driving the swarm, you will hit the target
- No time to lock before shooting
- Higher efficiency on everything, except dropship, they already have their problems.
Forgeguns
Nothing to say, except i would give the assault variant 1 less bullet in clip. (3 instead of 4) They are powerful but at least they require some skill to be used.
Weapon damage modifiers
I would not let the damage modifiers affect the values of AV weapons, they already have an high amount of damage. |
BL4CKST4R
WarRavens League of Infamy
490
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 12:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
shaman oga wrote:I'm not a dedicated AV, but i've tried the ADV variants off all the AV weapons (except the plasma cannon, is the PC AV???) Changing efficiency levels would balance the situation: AV grenadesThey should be there to kill LAV not HAV but they are very good against HAV because they are slow. So, change the efficiency of AV nades
- on HAV 50%
- on LAVs 150-175%
If you fly a DS so close to be attacked by AV nades you deserve it and half of the time the AV nades bounce on DS. Packed AV nades should completely loose their homing ability, the other two types are fine. Swarm LaunchersThe most ignobile AV weapon on the battlefield, it requires no skill, its fire and forget mechanic suck. I would not change it's efficiency values, but i would change the way it works: Lock on version (the version we have now)
- Decrease the range of lock on
- Don't let shoot the second swarm if the first is flying
- Consider "Z" value as distance too
Manually drived version
- Loger range, if you are good at driving the swarm, you will hit the target
- No time to lock before shooting
- Higher efficiency on everything, except dropship, they already have their problems.
ForgegunsNothing to say, except i would give the assault variant 1 less bullet in clip. (3 instead of 4) They are powerful but at least they require some skill to be used. Weapon damage modifiersI would not let the damage modifiers affect the values of AV weapons, they already have an high amount of damage.
Or keep AV the same and lower the price of tanks. |
Halador Osiris
Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn
421
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
I think larger maps, higher HAV health, and higher AV efficiency against LAVs will do the trick.
Larger Maps: Dropships are currently confined because of railgun tanks. If a railgun tank sits in the redline, he can usually cover beyond the main outpost on the map all while remaining entirely safe. If the maps were large enough that the red line wasn't within sight of the closest objective, redline snipers and HAVs would no longer be an issue. This does, however, create a new issue which we will explore in the next section.
Give HAVs an extra slot and the PG to use it: Assault dropships can rip any tank to pieces if he is out of the redline and not under sufficient cover like the warehouses on line harvest or the half-pyramid on manus peak. Giving HAVs an extra slot and PG would enable them to either increase their buffer or increase their reps. Either of these would give them a stronger platform against ground-based AV, and would give them time to seek cover from an aerial assault. Otherwise, people will start griping about how OP Pythons and Incubuses are, which is laughable considering they can be 2-shotted by a rail tank in their current form.
Increase ground-based efficiency against LAVs: Seriously, who wouldn't support this (other than the murder taxi drivers themselves)? |
Wojciak
Soldiers Of One Network Orion Empire
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:27:00 -
[4] - Quote
shaman oga wrote:I'm not a dedicated AV, but i've tried the ADV variants off all the AV weapons.
Yes you have no AV experience. so do not post unless you are a vehicle user. Most of your ideas are bad.
Swarms are more for Aircraft, they are SAMs. They need to be smarter and be able to travel longer distances. We could use more Anti Armor weapons but is neither here nor there.
Forge guns could loose the splash damage and they need to stop people sniping with it.
AV grenades do need to one shot Milt LAV, but that is more one the fact the LAV has too much health.
Plasma canons need to do more damage and/or have a shorter time between shots. |
shaman oga
Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY
264
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 13:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
Wojciak wrote:shaman oga wrote:I'm not a dedicated AV, but i've tried the ADV variants off all the AV weapons.
Yes you have no AV experience. so do not post unless you are a vehicle user. Most of your ideas are bad. Swarms are more for Aircraft After this, i can stop reading, you have less experience in AV than me. |
Wojciak
Soldiers Of One Network Orion Empire
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 14:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
shaman oga wrote:Wojciak wrote:shaman oga wrote:I'm not a dedicated AV, but i've tried the ADV variants off all the AV weapons.
Yes you have no AV experience. so do not post unless you are a vehicle user. Most of your ideas are bad. Swarms are more for Aircraft After this, i can stop reading, you have less experience in AV than me.
For stating a fact that lock on shoulder fired missiles would be Surface to Air missiles. As of Right now they are the only anti-armor ranged. Your Guided missile (only one( would have to do 1000-1500 dmg and have a short range to not be abused, then it still could be a Plasma canon with out the plasma. If it was small damage ( for just one missile) like 330-500 dmg and long range people would camp in the red line to use it but it would still be no skill. |
shaman oga
Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY
264
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 14:11:00 -
[7] - Quote
i mean a swarm like you have now, with 4,5,6 missiles per shot, same amount of damage but guided by the player, with no scope. The splash damage is laughable, it would be difficult to use it against infantry, except for snipers, |
Wojciak
Soldiers Of One Network Orion Empire
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 14:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
shaman oga wrote:i mean a swarm like you have now, with 4,5,6 missiles per shot, same amount of damage but guided by the player, with no scope. The splash damage is laughable, it would be difficult to use it against infantry, except for snipers, I have had the same idea but it is a Heavy weapon and guided by a laser pointer and the missiles are fired from a backpack.
Flaylocks are single swarms, that would be abused in cqc because they could cover an area larger than what the Flaylock can. Also back in closed beta had a dumb fire ability and where said to be OP and now they are only Lock on. |
Meeko Fent
Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State
186
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 15:18:00 -
[9] - Quote
Halador Osiris wrote:I think larger maps, higher HAV health, and higher AV efficiency against LAVs will do the trick.
Larger Maps: Dropships are currently confined because of railgun tanks. If a railgun tank sits in the redline, he can usually cover beyond the main outpost on the map all while remaining entirely safe. If the maps were large enough that the red line wasn't within sight of the closest objective, redline snipers and HAVs would no longer be an issue. This does, however, create a new issue which we will explore in the next section.
Give HAVs an extra slot and the PG to use it: Assault dropships can rip any tank to pieces if he is out of the redline and not under sufficient cover like the warehouses on line harvest or the half-pyramid on manus peak. Giving HAVs an extra slot and PG would enable them to either increase their buffer or increase their reps. Either of these would give them a stronger platform against ground-based AV, and would give them time to seek cover from an aerial assault. Otherwise, people will start griping about how OP Pythons and Incubuses are, which is laughable considering they can be 2-shotted by a rail tank in their current form.
Increase ground-based efficiency against LAVs: Seriously, who wouldn't support this (other than the murder taxi drivers themselves)?
EDIT: I should note that I'm a Python pilot. I continually see attempts to "balance" AV, but it's really only ever balanced against tanks. Nobody ever thinks about dropships, and winds up screwing them in the process. This solution is intended to help both dropships and HAVs. It'll also help dropships find a better role as they are intended for transport and aren't currently utilized as such. Why don't you work for CCP?
+1
Cookie for You. |
Halador Osiris
Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn
451
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 15:13:00 -
[10] - Quote
Meeko Fent wrote:Halador Osiris wrote:I think larger maps, higher HAV health, and higher AV efficiency against LAVs will do the trick.
Larger Maps: Dropships are currently confined because of railgun tanks. If a railgun tank sits in the redline, he can usually cover beyond the main outpost on the map all while remaining entirely safe. If the maps were large enough that the red line wasn't within sight of the closest objective, redline snipers and HAVs would no longer be an issue. This does, however, create a new issue which we will explore in the next section.
Give HAVs an extra slot and the PG to use it: Assault dropships can rip any tank to pieces if he is out of the redline and not under sufficient cover like the warehouses on line harvest or the half-pyramid on manus peak. Giving HAVs an extra slot and PG would enable them to either increase their buffer or increase their reps. Either of these would give them a stronger platform against ground-based AV, and would give them time to seek cover from an aerial assault. Otherwise, people will start griping about how OP Pythons and Incubuses are, which is laughable considering they can be 2-shotted by a rail tank in their current form.
Increase ground-based efficiency against LAVs: Seriously, who wouldn't support this (other than the murder taxi drivers themselves)?
EDIT: I should note that I'm a Python pilot. I continually see attempts to "balance" AV, but it's really only ever balanced against tanks. Nobody ever thinks about dropships, and winds up screwing them in the process. This solution is intended to help both dropships and HAVs. It'll also help dropships find a better role as they are intended for transport and aren't currently utilized as such. Why don't you work for CCP? +1 Cookie for You. I need to pick up Icelandic and a few more programming languages first. VB.net isn't much of a start. |
|
Kekklian Noobatronic
Goonfeet Top Men.
159
|
Posted - 2013.07.10 15:20:00 -
[11] - Quote
Mardugars are fine, buff gunlogi pg/cpu to match. Leave the rest alone. AV us fine, prices are fine, quit whining. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |