Heavy Troop Transports

[Psychosis]

cc1.26 FTW

[gr4vity]

I can't remember where I mentioned it before but I still think a little top speed increase could help some factions HTTs already (maybe except for Bios/GT AP HTT). Why? Because most well organised runs can be stopped by a quick responding defender that rams the HTT in the last second and buys his team the time it needs to eliminate the thread.

But concerning PPs.. now its already hard for a single HvyInt to stand up against a single AdvSF (with er2 sniper and hunter3) but without PP he wont stand a chance at all (especially on miner defense) ..

[Adept]

Best thread for a long time

QUOTE (mcwarren4 @ Mar 3 2010, 04:20 PM) As it stands now if you are against exp you can negate the risk of stealthy htt's for $15,000 and a U rock.

This could be adjusted by placing PPs in adv exp. It would be a perk to tac, but probably not a massive one.

[takingarms1]

I would think tac would completely own if not for PPs

a small boost to force capping probably makes sense because with gat3/df3 its pretty easy to spike an HTT. This doesn't seem like it would affect stealth capping at all so its a relatively small boost. Also isn't there a test case here with GT armor plating? Doesn't that typically play out with making force caps viable but not total ownage?

Making it too expensive will defeat the purpose because people would just buy the sup anyway and get tp2, it'd still be better.

[Drizzo]

It would not. Removal of PPs just means you get your voobs into scouts to spot for vet combat ships. Removal of PPs means you *have* to buy cm2/3 you can't get away with not buying it anymore. Removal of PPs means adv. scouts become a must, which scout enthusiasts will enjoy.

Tac right now can be utterly cold cocked without PPs. It's not like they're some god saving grace tech.

[mcwarren4]

QUOTE (gr4vity @ Mar 3 2010, 02:08 PM) But concerning PPs.. now its already hard for a single HvyInt to stand up against a single AdvSF (with er2 sniper and hunter3) but without PP he wont stand a chance at all (especially on miner defense) ..

grav, why would an int ever need to dogfight a sfig anyway? If a lone int is defending a miner that miner is dead anyway unless the sfig pilot is clueless. I don't see the practical reasoning behind this.

QUOTE (Adept @ Mar 3 2010, 03:00 PM) This could be adjusted by placing PPs in adv exp. It would be a perk to tac, but probably not a massive one.

That is a viable suggestion as well.

QUOTE (TakingArms @ Mar 3 2010, 03:14 PM) I haven't played in over a year, but I'll give you my best guess as to how the game works now.

Just messin...


Once again, I agree most with Drizzo's thoughts. We already have the techs to counter tac. People just refuse to buy it because pulse probes can eliminate the need for most of it.

[Broodwich]

i am confused how this thread turned from perking exp to nerfing exp
guess people are still pissed they get killed by ints

[SpkWill]

Removing pps makes exp vs exp more fun as htts are actually viable again, it would make tac overpowered but no one goes tac anyway because it's gay. Should probably just delete it.

[Jimen]

Removing or nerfing down PPs would make people learn to fly scouts again, which I fully support. Really, anything that might convince people to launch in scouts instead of ints for once in their damn lives; there are too many people who, given the choice between int or scout, will always pick the int regardless of the situation. I don't really support the scout version, either; they're often used to make up for poor scouting. So many times I've seen things get to the point where you can't get the team to even finish the damn map until they've got PPs to save them the effort of finding alephs.

[Broodwich]

you really think getting rid of pps is going to do that