Agreement for all populated servers about nukes and rails

what i'm saying is if everyone could agree to something, you could make some minor adjustments without anyone noticing. Like RPG damage. or increasing the heat on rails by 1 or 2 points. no one would notice, but it would help. This would be up to the server owners to change it though.

 

<filler>

 

we dont want an extensive balance overhaul, just a little patch that fixes the biggest probs, for example the rpg dmg.

anyway, devs already said no to the balance patch and i dont think they will change their attitude because a few guys complaing ...

omg, why do so many people want that nukes get nerfed? they are already pretty useless (slow, expensive and u are vunerable when u carry them). in which serious (standard ress!) game u see nuke rushes? maybe there are 1-2 nuke tanks to stun enemy tanks, rest is double uml or double rail.
but i read somewhere that nukes get reworked in the next big patch (true?). hopefully.

 

The real purpose of nuke research is do deal large area damage.
Right now it is a large plasma missile.

Set nuke to what it should be, damage, and it will be good.

 

I havn't read past first 3 pages but did you all miss the 10+ times it has been said nukes are bugged. Run along.

 

I have seen comms that rush nukes. At first, the team that has one of those comms will have nothing but paperlts and so on to fight the enemy. They usually don't get anything better than an LT or an AFV with standard-engine, plain armor and standard-cannons. It's just annoying when comms try to rush nukes. Also, nukes are actually game-enders, not a wtfpwn-weapon. Doubling the research time makes nuke-rushing almost impossible because the enemy will rape you with better tanks before you get nukes.

 

I didn't read most of this thread, but I'll say,

If BE gets rails, nukes by far is fine by me. If you really think about it, dual rails are much better, and besides, NF has so many advantages, one being they don't get dual nukes, while BE can dual rail their tanks to death. So if anything, nuke freaking BE crap, I could list over a dozen NF disadvantages right now

 

Alright, lets give some numbers to this arguement.

Raise heat per shot of rail gun from the current 6 to a higher number, like 8 or 9.

currently, 2 shots from the rail will be 12 heat, less than the 16 heat from a single shot of HE or Plasma, and still less than the 14 heat from a single shot of standard or Ranged. Making it 8 will make 2 rails much more like shooting 1 HE, with slightly higher damage.


Nukes:

I don't understand how they are glitched, so I won't go into much about nukes. Possibly increasing damage to 250. Will still take at least 4 shots to kill a building, but will do slightly more to enemy armor.

Currently, a salvo from a homing missile launcher will hit for a total of 160 damage, only 40 less damage than a nuke.

a full clip from a regular upgraded homing missile launcher will do 320 damage total. I think 250 is a nice middle ground for a nuke. maybe even 240.


Currently, Grens are supposed to all do 105 damage for a basic RPG. Unfortunately, the script for NF still says 80 damage. that is a simple quick fix.




I can write up the changes to any of these scripts quickly, and the effects would not affect ones ability to buy vehicles or use weapons. If the ghost clan would like me to post or send then the code for the script corrections or edits, at least for the RPG's, send me a PM. Or you can do it yourself, its not really that hard. The devs did a wonderful job commenting their scripts.

 

WHICH IS WHY WE WANT THE QUICK PATCH ><
l

 

how are they bugged?

9 heat is too much. i wouldnt increase heat (much), rather decrease firerate or dmg a bit. and increase cost of research.

we must be careful with buffing nukes, or they get a uber defense killer because of large area dmg (poor turrets ). if we increase dmg we must increase cost too.

i think every1 agrees on that.

 

Bart.
1) Read like every dev post in a thread about nukes, the heat is a bug.
2) Meh.
3) Turtling is bad, having a lategame turtle breaker makes things end faster, so long as it is effective only against turrets and possibly infantry.
4) WE NEED TO REPEAT THIS MOAR

 

a bug? seriously? lol, nukes would be completely useless without heat ... (except vs groups of infantry, but how likely is it that u get a lucky shot into them? (if the enemy team doesnt consist of gang bang noobs))
i always thought the heat is a feature, because real nukes make intense heat too, vaporizing everthing instantly that is close, even metal.

but many people (mostly the noobs from the mass ress servers) already complain that nukes are too strong and they should be nerfed. so if we buff them without a cost increase many people will cry: "NF/nukes is/are so fucking imba. this patch sucks!!1111".

 

Understood.

8 heat I think is what it should be. that would do 80 damage per shot, and you have a high fire rate, which is the biggest draw of the things. it would also be enough to overheat the tank when firing it. As it is, with advanced coolant, it takes nearly 80 continuous shouts to overheat a dual rail heavy. (when Idling)

The reason I say nuke damage should be increased is because that in the time that you fire 1 nuke, for less heat and in half the time you can unload an entire clip of UML into a single target for 700 damage. shot for shot, nuke is only a third the power of UML. I agree that maybe we should increase the cost or heat of nukes, but without a damage buff, they are worthless as ever except, as previously stated, for use as a massive plasma missile.


also, 240 damage for nukes would be best, that gives turrets a small bit of health instead of 1 hit kills, believe they have 250 base health.

bah, just read empties note on heat. I'll look at it.


from weapon_emp_nf_rpg.txt in the scripts folder.

that should be what the script should look like, with the 80 changed where I noted.



lastly, here's the section of the vehicle_weapons.txt script in question regarding nukes.

I dunno if it kept the formating, but every line should start with quotes and the variable that it is refering to, with the wonderful explanation of exactly what it is doing to the side ^_^. As stated, that is the base heat added, with the damage * .025 for most armors, .03 for bio and .01 for absorbant being the extra heat added due to damage. The only glitch I can see coming from this is that it will add, to plain armor for example, 200 * .025 heat per plate, which would be 5 heat per plate. Ive never taken 90 heat before, so if it only affects one side of armor, it probably would add anywhere from 5 to 30 extra heat per plate of regular armor.

if that is the case, then the angle modifier and damage modifier of the armor would also greatly affect the amount of heat extra that the target receives. if the tank only takes 100 damage from a nuke due to the angle modifier, it would only add 2.5 heat per hit, and possibly per plate if that is how nukes are glitched.


does any of that make sense?

 

^I didn't read all of it, but its a good suggestion.

Kill the damage by 10-30, decrease the radius so if I get nine mined in my nuke heavy and mess up my aim by 80 yards it still doesn't kill the infantry. The nuke's explosive diameter should be drawn better, and should be reduced to the east-southeast chokepoint on emp_slaughtered, and a bit bigger.

 

I wonder who has the patience to read all of this.

 

now that I think about it, i believe that nukes were never meant for tank combat. That being thought, killing the damage back down to 210 or so would be a good idea. also, due to the high damage, the heat added to target should be dropped as well, maybe to 35.

to give you an idea, Ranged artillery cannon, the largest blast radius of all the tank guns, has a radius of 1100, HE arty coming in second at 900.

Plasma adds 8 damage per shot (to enemy, not including the damage modifier), and can shoot as fast as Rails. They can shoot 4 shots for 32 heat before being equal to heat in what nukes gives to it's own tank. that's only adding 32 heat to the target. Nukes should be at least within 5 points of that, otherwise they are too much more effective than Plasma. 4 plasma will add 64 heat to your tank. 1 nuke will add 70 heat to your tank. 4 plasma will add 32 to their tank, + a little extra. Nukes will add 50 heat, + around 5 extra heat.

nukes per heat added to self add 22 more heat than a weapon designed to overheat tanks. drop heat down to 35~ and it should be much more reasonable.

Last thought for now:

standard cannons weigh 50
all 2 slot cannons weigh 70
rails weigh 80?

can we up rail weight to at least 90 or possibly 100? The idea is to knock down how much armor you can pack onto a dual rail heavy. The difference in armor to a missile boat will be made up in the simpleness to dodge those missiles in comparison to a persons ability to dodge cannon shots, as well as the compounded effect of high RoF. This won't change the damage, and won't effect comp tanks, but will make it a pain to build a good dual rail tank for a cheap price.

 

eventually someone will sum it up and ask a dev if they will consider it. Right now there is no consensus as to what should be and what shouldn't be, making this whole thread moot point.

 

Solokiller has repeatedly shot it down though.

 

Rails actually should be 100 weight if I'm not mistaken. I believe that was part of the script error with initial 2.0 release with the crazy heat to target on rails and few other things. (Yes rails actually used to be significantly better than they are now)

 

I was wondering about that, rails are lightweight and cheap...