To make the discussion a bit more diverse...
Increase XRM damage by quite a bit (2X or 2.5X) the original damage.
Increase the arming time of the missile by an even larger factor.
Increase the scale, give them low acceleration, and maybe a launch velocity of 30. increase their lifespan so that their max range is similar to what it is now (maybe a little more) when launched from a bomber going near full speed.
Result is fewer, bigger, slower misiles in the air, defenders try and shoot them down.
We should probably talk about what we want XRM to be and then decide on the numbers on how to achieve it, rather than come up with the numbers and hope it works.
The DN xrm + tp2 was basically an 8K a pop kill a base button.
Is that what we want?
For 8K you would want to be very sure you will get the base killed.
You also need to consider how it scales with game size.
Perhaps we want it to cost less and be less likley to succeed? Although, with the way XRMs with tp2 currently work, your probability of success is proportional to cost.
Perhaps if people needed to nan the bombers and you had fewer bombers... (..can you nan missiles?...)
Can we make XRM missiles useful again?
madp... how is that different from using the cruise with a clip of 1? I'd like to see that tried.madpeople wrote:QUOTE (madpeople @ May 7 2009, 03:53 PM) <snip>
Result is fewer, bigger, slower misiles in the air, defenders try and shoot them down.
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
It doesn't need SY and woulldn't be as powerful as cruise, alhough otherwise it is basically the same idea. (also why use bombers if you can use caps? why use caps if you can use bombers?)
I was emphasising the shooting down a bit moe than you did, cruise do get up quite a lot of speed if I remember right which isn't what I wanted. these would be more like baby/mini cruise missiles.
Either way, my point wasto get people thinking of more/new options and to question what they want it to be / come up with a new ideas (e.g. make FBs instead of figs sup's anti cap weapon [ ala torpedo bombers] as well as being anti base tools, I'm not sure as to why you would want to do that, but it's an idea that could be saved until there is a motivation to do so)
I was emphasising the shooting down a bit moe than you did, cruise do get up quite a lot of speed if I remember right which isn't what I wanted. these would be more like baby/mini cruise missiles.
Either way, my point wasto get people thinking of more/new options and to question what they want it to be / come up with a new ideas (e.g. make FBs instead of figs sup's anti cap weapon [ ala torpedo bombers] as well as being anti base tools, I'm not sure as to why you would want to do that, but it's an idea that could be saved until there is a motivation to do so)
Last edited by madpeople on Thu May 07, 2009 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sure, why not? Only up it to 10k or 11k a pop, so it's as expensive or more expensive than the base itself. At the end of the game it's not exactly easy to scrounge up 10k for a bomb run. Miners are usually dead, it's usually payday ($600 a minute) and cashbox.madpeople wrote:QUOTE (madpeople @ May 7 2009, 05:53 AM) The DN xrm + tp2 was basically an 8K a pop kill a base button.
Is that what we want?
For 8K you would want to be very sure you will get the base killed.
Please explain this to virtually every bbr pilot in pugs, and demand to know why they *need* lock before they start firing their missiles.Valiance wrote:QUOTE (Valiance @ May 7 2009, 08:50 AM) Bases are static and it isnt hard to hit a base with XRP, so noone would pay attention to the lock and just fire when the trajectory indicator is on the base
Don't find fault, find a remedy; anybody can complain.
Cookie Monster wrote:QUOTE (Cookie Monster @ Apr 1 2009, 09:35 PM) But I don't read the forums I only post.
Why are we talking about lock time? It's null and void for exactly the reasons you state.Valiance wrote:QUOTE (Valiance @ May 7 2009, 04:50 PM) Would a longer lock time really make a difference? Bases are static and it isnt hard to hit a base with XRP, so noone would pay attention to the lock and just fire when the trajectory indicator is on the base
If it was a response to me, I said arming time, which is the missile specific time which you have to wait after a missile mounts (i.e. after the last one fired or after you load the missiels) before you can fire the missile (It's the yellow progress bar in f4).
QUOTE Can we un-nerf XRM a bit in the next release? At the moment it's useless, maybe we should give it 3/4 of the original dmg and see where that takes us?[/quote]
That's from December 1st last year in a pm I sent to apochy and a couple other CC corees. Since CC is small changes can we try this while leaving everything else as is? It should make it so that a decent sized run of 10k credits or so has a good chance of killing the base, but if the defenders get there fast enough they have a good chance of killing enough bombers that the run won't work with XRM alone.
That's from December 1st last year in a pm I sent to apochy and a couple other CC corees. Since CC is small changes can we try this while leaving everything else as is? It should make it so that a decent sized run of 10k credits or so has a good chance of killing the base, but if the defenders get there fast enough they have a good chance of killing enough bombers that the run won't work with XRM alone.
Get over yourselves, don't try to win arguments on the internet where the option of a punch in the mouth is unavailable
"It is not that I cannot create anything good, but that I will not." And to prove this, he created the peacock.