XRM Antibase Missiles

Post by **Raveen** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:32 pm

Make XRMs bigger and easier to shoot down?

Kltplzyxm · Post by **Kltplzyxm** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:33 pm

So a full run of 8 bbrs (@$500 ea) + 1 rack each (@$100 ea) = $4800. That might be a little too cheap. $200-250 is porbably more like it.

apochboi · Post by **apochboi** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:38 pm

I did consider 250 per rack.

Kltplzyxm · Post by **Kltplzyxm** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:51 pm

Apochi, might I suggest you take another stepwise approach to this. Give XRM a nerf somehow (price or stats) and see how it goes. If it's still too powerful, then get rid of it.

apochboi · Post by **apochboi** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:52 pm

Certianly food for thought.

DrBeginner · Post by **DrBeginner** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 9:26 pm

Have it require a shipyard to be built and upped at least once. That should deter it for a while.

Correct · Post by **Correct** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 9:46 pm

Mr. Kltplzyxm wrote:QUOTE (Mr. Kltplzyxm @ Jul 1 2008, 01:33 PM) So a full run of 8 bbrs (@$500 ea) + 1 rack each (@$100 ea) = $4800. That might be a little too cheap.

Missile Damage in Tac means missiles do 100% damage instead of 121% as they currently do.

Ramaglor · Post by **Ramaglor** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:06 pm

Until the most plausible methods of re-balancing it are proven false, I don't think it should be removed. My vote is for cost per missile/rack. In the case of Mr K's numbers.... having 8 bombers at $4800 instead of $4000 represents a 20% increase in cost..... and therefore a 20% increase in time between tp2 attacks. At $250 a rack that would be $6000, or a 50% increase in the time between tp2 attacks.

Also Death3D, giving the missiles a longer life but same range means that you could fire them from substantially farther away.... so it would actually be a perk (unless they can be shot down like xrm nukes of course). For example, if current range and life is 3300 m and 12.5 seconds (i dont know, im guessing) than the launch distance can be up to 3300 + your speed x 12.5 seconds = about 4100+ at top speed. On the other hand, if range and life were 3300m and 25 seconds, the launch distance can be up to 3300 + your speed x 25 seconds = about 4900+ at top speed.

EDIT: also moving missile damage GA to tac would have hunter 3 and sbs being even more powerful.....so that might require more balancing.

Kltplzyxm · Post by **Kltplzyxm** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:18 pm

Ramaglor wrote:QUOTE (Ramaglor @ Jul 1 2008, 03:06 PM) Until the most plausible methods of re-balancing it are proven false, I don't think it should be removed. My vote is for cost per missile/rack. In the case of Mr K's numbers.... having 8 bombers at $4800 instead of $4000 represents a 20% increase in cost..... and therefore a 20% increase in time between tp2 attacks. At $250 a rack that would be $6000, or a 50% increase in the time between tp2 attacks.

50% of what? I think we should focus on the amount of time between tp2 attacks... allow the defender to mount a counter attack or set up a better defense. It would make things certainly more interesting.

EDIT: For example, given Bios capability to ripcord, without miners how fast can they generate attacks given just paydays? I think this is something to recognize as it may also be a nerf to Bios SUP.

Broodwich · Post by **Broodwich** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:23 pm

How about remove xrm2? That would make you require more bbrs as well, also its not a huge change