Apologies if this is the wrong place, but I have some miscellaneous weapon questions that i'd like ya'll to answer iff'n ya could. 1) Is the BE mortar reload now slower than it was, or slower than the NF one? 2) Standard ML shoots quite fast, does its damage/s (including reload times) outweigh Salvo ML? Cheers
I know that with both new mowtar models the reload time has definitly changed making it less effective.. and should be acknowledged with future balancing But I want to see it do more damage to buildings because its near impossible to kill foward barracks anymore.. the engy tool repairs too fast for them to do enough damage to kill it
If you can get me a team that are smarter than AI turrets, then please point me in the right direction.
I agree with you about tank combat being a tad slow, but I don't agree with you that the armor is too tough. The mid-game tank battles with AFV/LTs + Meds works great with the standard amount of armor you have. The problem I feel is that you are still stuck with the weapons that worked great mid-game when in the late-game where those weapons aren't quite so effective anymore when the enemy has really good armor and lots of it. What we need is a couple more that just the railgun for late-game weapons. PS: Railgun seems to just purely suck at killing anything quickly. 70% of the armors have resistances against it, and it only does moderately more damage than HE.
Maybe damage should just do double damage to tanks to what they do now, but no change to anything else?
Nope, I'm fresh outta that. Anyways I don't think there exist more than ~10 empires players suitable for a team of your liking. Half of them must be quantum enchanced, being in 3 different parts of the map at the same time.
Sandbag: Regarding Railgun --> (warning rant, no nerf post) Well if one would lower the speed to damage modifier or absorbant armor to something more sensible or revamp the whole speed to damage system railgun wouldn't have such distinct weaknesses anymore. This would be good (it is the most expensive cannon) and bad (the weapon-armor system loses it's rock-paper-scissor-chemistry system) I wish the script files came with a large documentation, but I guess it works something like that: (base damage of weapon + Speed of projectile * speed to damage modifier * obscure angle modifier?) * normal damage modifier If one just looks at the + speed of projectile * speed to damage one can see that 3500 (Railgun) * - 0.009 (Absorbant) equals - 31, 5 reducing Railguns damage to 18,5 (before boost = 8,5) dmg. IF my assumption is correct absorbant also seems to reduce all the other cannons damage (HE: - 28. 8 dmg) Okay you say, absorbant rocks against every cannon (because they are high speed weapons) but it is insanely weak against missiles!!! Why I ask? 1600 (Standard ML) * -0.009 = - 14, 4 means the damage gets reduced to 25,6 dmg per missile... (checked it with the damage calculator too) How is reducing the damage "insanely weak" ? Only the advantage of reduction is lowest so missiles are "the good bet" against it. So in other words absorbants weak point is its low HP per inch of plate only. (Without this it would be out of whack, best armor evar) But given it is "the cheapest" armor... I don't know if one can still call that balanced. I'm not advocating a "nerf" here just something to think about systemwise, perhaps everything is balanced the way it is. For the other armors, that have positive modifiers they get their damage upped for... no real apparant reason it seems. All weapons do more damage to them, even missiles. In other words: Missiles are and always will be mediocre weapons because both their damage penalty and bonus are lower. Imagine a missile (lets say a upgraded homing) with 4000 speed hitting normal armor : 80 base damage + 32 = 112 dmg. WHOPPY that I'd call a weakness to missile (and a reason to use homing missiles)
Those medium tanks which you were shootin at your double rail guns... They used absorbant and rail guns are next to nothing against absorbant armor. Rail guns doesn't even scratch absorbant armor because of bug related to them. And I personally liked a lot at that situation. It was long and tough match and NF tried all the time to push BE back but at the same time tried not to advance too far away because everyone on NF knew that BE had better weapons and turret farms behind that canyon so even the whole medium tank army could have gotten leveled very quickly. Which in fact happened too. There were like... 5 or 6 medium tanks going through the canyon and when BE came there with 3 heavy tanks most of the tanks got blown up right away and only maybe 1 or 2 survived with damages to hold the line until they got reinforcements. But when the canyon got filled up again and when NF and BE had arty I think I finally made BE lose. I was squad leader and our squad had a lot points so the only thing which I had to do was go to grenadier and call those artillery strikes as much as possible. Soon after calling them the canyon was clear again and NF made its push. For me that battle was the best possible battle in the Empires' history. I loved it right from the beginning till the end. And you have to remember that there were all the time like 4-6 vs 4-6 tanks there and if people would have just kept shooting at one single target, then those armors wouldn't have lasted that long. But people kept shooting at different targets which was just fun, the armors lasted a lot longer. In my opinion armors are fine now. If there comes a stalemate situation, you have to think a way to get over it or just push harder to get through it. I also like at that when the front line just stands still and you have to go ninja the enemy from behind or something else. It isn't all the time that same tanks vs tanks then. You have to find a new way how to deblock the situation. But I think we need to end this now because this is just arguing about opinions and everyone has different kinds of opinions. As far as I have seen, armors work as they should and they are enough balanced if we don't count the reactive in, which no one ever uses.
well origionally I was using dual HE, but even with coolant engine and engineer cooling upgrade I was overheating before any kills could be made.
Umm... When you are using rail guns against absorbant armor? I don't think so. It is a bug in the code which Krenzo knows. I'm not sure has he managed to fix it but at least a few RCs backwards rail gun just barely scratched the absorbant armor. I don't think there's any way to elude this bug. Get better gun than rail gun. :p
can we discuss this idea I think is pretty cool: change the purpose of apc grenades from being like engineer grenades to being like rifleman grenades. I.E: make them do half as much damage against structures, but 3x as much damage vs infantry. they'd still be really useful in a base assault where you want to clear out a building, or kill enemies hidden behind walls and such. but they wouldn't be the cheif base killer- the infantry spawning would be.
It has to due with the fact rails are fast and do somewhat low dmg per hit so the speed modifier affects them alot.
The problem with APC nades is that hey have too long of a timer... by the time they detonate the infantry is long gone... Now if they detonated on contact; or if an enemy was close; now that would be alot better
Thats an old bug weedy, it was fixed with 1.08. Also sandbag I believe the problem you're talking about is purely one with the map slaughtered only.
well I felt the same way about the streets of fire match, but d/w, you guys are probably right I don't like arguing everyone when it's clear people don't agree... makes me feel so... old.
