Carbon SpecMines

[Drizzo]

QUOTE (Koln @ May 13 2010, 09:18 AM) Read his first post:

It's funny that you say that then go on to say

QUOTE (Koln @ May 13 2010, 09:18 AM) Anyway, i'd go for the better hull/shield perk. That way you can chose between weaker but more paydays, stronger but less paydays, not as strong but stealthier spec.

(Read the first post)

[pkk]

QUOTE (theTroy @ May 13 2010, 12:53 PM) Increased scan range (up to pps, maybe a bit less) will add another option for the commander against tac team.. ( hard to sbs ca specs, while ur/si specs will easily die)

Special mines need only two ABMs, so increasing scan range (to 3k) won't help against tac.

Code: Select all

Damage of two ABM1 against light bases:
2 x 400 x 15 = 12000

Hitpoints of special mine:
C/Si: 6000 + 4000 = 10000
U:    6000 + 8000 = 14000

A pilot with 0 kb kills a C/Si mine with two missiles.
A pilot with 17 KB (or ABM2) kills a U mine with two missiles.


Why increasing scanrange won't help defending against Tac (2400 vs 3000 scanrange):

Code: Select all

SB signature with mounted missiles and active Sig3:
(100% + 100%) x 0.225 = 45%

SB gets spotted at (excluding base radius):
2400 m x 45% = 1080 m
3000 m x 45% = 1350 m

With 25% more scanrange you will spot a bomber about 3.3 seconds earlier, that time won't help you, because it is already in firing range.

[DasSmiter]

Why are we changing it? Because as Compellor said the current sig buff to CA mines is no buff at all. That said the reason you buy Ur/Ca mines is not for their buffs, but to deny your opponent a certain tech rock. Si is the obvious best, but that is to make them a counterpoint to Giga's superior Tac.

After all of that though, I don't really think Giga needs to be changed much at all. It's currently in a fairly good place I think.

[theTroy]

I think in many games you are better of with Sup/Exp to deny a rock, its also a tech con, which means it will survive longer, than having to research a specmine, then build it, then make it plant.

@pkk

I was going to suggest to buff it to crazy amounts, where you would have time to rip in with 2 rip GAs and have a good chance killing the sbs approaching, I could easily be asking something crazy though.

[Koln]

QUOTE (Drizzo @ May 13 2010, 03:32 PM)

(Read the first post)

I read it i was just saying what i voted .

[spideycw]

I'm surprised so many have voted for increased sensor range myself

[Freyja]

I don't really see the need to change them, though if I had to choose it would probably be the sensor range- only because it's (slightly) thematic.

Now getting on to the real question, let's fix Dreg He3 mines.

[zombywoof]

I feel like a sensor increase would be a good idea in addition to increasing the payday/decreasing the con cost.

[Xeretov]

Since this question seems to be coming up more than it should, here is a very simple breakdown as to why Si mines make and cost more:
Giga tac was very powerful. Si mines use up Si rocks. Tac bases use up Si rocks. A giga team going Tac would not be able to get as many Si mines. A giga team going Si mines would be risking it getting a tac. The high income of Si mines and power of Tac forced a choice between the two, or running a huge risk going both. In short, the best mine and best techpath (at the time) were mutually exclusive. This change was made in MS 1.25 where balance was very different.
One last note: You can disagree with changes and current core balance all you want, so long as you give intelligent reasons why. Proposing a better alternative would also help. But simply trolling instead will cause your post to be deleted. You know who you are.

[zombywoof]

QUOTE (Xeretov @ May 13 2010, 02:48 PM) Tac bases use up Si rocks.

REALLY?!


Ok, here's reasons (I'll let you decide if they're intelligent):

1) Sensor increase on Ca specs isnt' that powerful
2) +$250 per minute isn't that powerful
3) Put them together and it kind of equals Ur mines in my mind.