Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Upgradecap]

I've got two words: ground combat

[Thana]

I've actually thought about the Vulcan change, btw - but I think it's too much when you consider where the Broadsword ends up relative to other fighters (pretty much bottom tier - can't even scratch the paint on a Gladius wing).

This sounds kinda wrong, since doesn't the Vulcan do fragmentation damage, which is supposed to be optimal against fighters?

(Wrong as in "that's just wrong, man!")

[Iscariot]

Don't Gladius's have some pretty impressive armor?

[Alex]

This sounds kinda wrong, since doesn't the Vulcan do fragmentation damage, which is supposed to be optimal against fighters?

(Wrong as in "that's just wrong, man!")

Well, frag is mostly "horrible vs anything with armor or shields", not "good vs fighters". It's best vs missiles, really, since those never have any armor, just hitpoints. The heavy fighters in particular have some decent armor, never mind the Xyphos that has shields.

The Vulcan has a very high dps, sure, but a lot of the shots miss - so unlike the flak, it's hard to get anywhere near the stated dps out of it vs fighters. It's much better against missiles.

I've been thinking of making frag damage be based on the target's size, instead of whether it hits armor or shields... undecided on that, though.

[Dreyven]

I've actually thought about the Vulcan change, btw - but I think it's too much when you consider where the Broadsword ends up relative to other fighters (pretty much bottom tier - can't even scratch the paint on a Gladius wing).

maybe the broadsword should have a Light Dual MG instead of 2 light MG's... would need some tests though

I've been thinking of making frag damage be based on the target's size, instead of whether it hits armor or shields... undecided on that, though.

i would actually really like that...

[Wyvern]

Hm.  I might just change the modifiers - make fragmentation damage do like 75% effect vs. armor or shields, and re-balance weapon damage values around that.  For example, flak cannons, right now, are just murder if your armor is gone, let alone thumpers.  And it'd make it much more viable to give fighters vulcan cannons instead of machine guns.

[Nanostrike]

This sounds kinda wrong, since doesn't the Vulcan do fragmentation damage, which is supposed to be optimal against fighters?

(Wrong as in "that's just wrong, man!")

Well, frag is mostly "horrible vs anything with armor or shields", not "good vs fighters". It's best vs missiles, really, since those never have any armor, just hitpoints. The heavy fighters in particular have some decent armor, never mind the Xyphos that has shields.

The Vulcan has a very high dps, sure, but a lot of the shots miss - so unlike the flak, it's hard to get anywhere near the stated dps out of it vs fighters. It's much better against missiles.

I've been thinking of making frag damage be based on the target's size, instead of whether it hits armor or shields... undecided on that, though.

I thought it WAS based on the size, in addition to armor/shields.  If it's not, making that change would be a good idea, IMO.

Honestly, the Broadsword doesn't do all that bad against other fighters with the dual Vulcans, from what I've seen.  The only difficulties it really has with them are against, as you said, Gladius' and Warthogs.  Ironically, it turns the "Broadsword vs Xyphos" matchup on it's head, as without the Light MGs, the Broadsword doesn't overload the Xyphos' shields in 0.2 seconds and the Xyphos can actually use it's Ions to disable the Broadsword.  Which, really, is what SHOULD be happening.  The Xyphos is a top-tier fighter and the Broadsword is an older one.

[Upgradecap]

But seriously, will there be some kind of ground battles?

[Iscariot]

But seriously, will there be some kind of ground battles?

That would certainly give a reason to carry around large assault transports. I mean, you'd need marines, tons of supplies for said marines, gunships for air support under cloud cover, tanks and armored vehicles.... then you could do all sorts of cool stuff like think about insertion options: by drop pod, drop ship, or just straight up landing a ship....

Goddamn that would be cool.

[Upgradecap]

But seriously, will there be some kind of ground battles?

That would certainly give a reason to carry around large assault transports. I mean, you'd need marines, tons of supplies for said marines, gunships for air support under cloud cover, tanks and armored vehicles.... then you could do all sorts of cool stuff like think about insertion options: by drop pod, drop ship, or just straight up landing a ship....

Goddamn that would be cool.

Let's just hope alex thinks so too

[Iscariot]

I wouldn't even really care if the execution took place really simplistically. Selected units, select mode of insertion, select rules of engagement, initiate operation. Operation takes days to weeks depending on resistance, a fleet parked overhead gives its ground forces a substantial bonus. Simple. Don't need to add RTS or turn based strategy elements or anything like that.

Ok, maybe select a marine commander, that would be super cool.

[Upgradecap]

And add orbital bombardment too , if you totally fail with the incursion you can atleast make sure they wont be successfull either

[Iscariot]

Supporting orbital bombardments would be factored into an overhead fleet's bonus to ground forces. Orbital bombardment without any ground forces at all would be similar to taking stations, I imagine. We're gonna have that, right?

[Upgradecap]

But there should be atleast one major ground battle the player can play, or?

[Iscariot]

Huh? I don't follow. I thought we were talking about implementing ground battles. Or rather, our pipe dreams about implementing ground battles.