PCore007

Post by **zombywoof** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 1:53 am

kaiser33 wrote:QUOTE (kaiser33 @ Nov 17 2014, 05:49 PM) more success rate for counters 2 and 3

Did I leave out the part where this doesn't do anything, or are you trolling me? I can't remember.

kaiser33 · Post by **kaiser33** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 1:54 am

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 15 2014, 12:05 AM) TBH I think PP1 should go to 4k and PP2 should go to 6k. Also make the PPs last another two seconds.

i agree with the first part, but i dont about the 2 more seconds.. already with the range increased, a couple ints with 2/3 pps in cargo that last 4 seconds could easly foil any stealth run.

Deathrender · Post by **Deathrender** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 2:39 am

Question - Is there any way to decrease the dead zone for lock-ons?

By that I mean, how accurately the reticule needs to be pointed on the target for missile lock. That could help with scouts and their defenses vs hunts.

Just trying to think outside the box, get some ideas flowing.

Post by **zombywoof** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:31 am

No none of that matters. The problem is that once the hunter is launched there is no counterplay. There is no dodging. There is no cross nanning. There is just "did the chaff work" or death.

kaiser33 · Post by **kaiser33** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:38 pm

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 17 2014, 08:31 PM) No none of that matters. The problem is that once the hunter is launched there is no counterplay. There is no dodging. There is no cross nanning. There is just "did the chaff work" or death.

so yeah apparently rising the SF signature or lowering the damage of the hunter could do it.. not both though since sfs still need to have a chance at defending a corssnan bomb run...but scouts need a chance to be able to survive the sf horde .. leaving the decision of who wins to the best pilots as it should be

Post by **zombywoof** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:58 pm

Signature of SFs have nothing to do with how @#(!ty hunter3 is right now from a design standpoint. SFs could have eight billion sig and scout survival will still be a coinflip.

Djole88 · Post by **Djole88** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 11:53 pm

Would it help if we implemented more damage classes (so that lrm retains dmg vs others but its damage decreases vs scouts)?

kaiser33 · Post by **kaiser33** » Wed Nov 19, 2014 4:25 am

Djole88 wrote:QUOTE (Djole88 @ Nov 18 2014, 04:53 PM) Would it help if we implemented more damage classes (so that lrm retains dmg vs others but its damage decreases vs scouts)?

it would not be realistic, hunter is a dangerous missile.. its only fair that it destroys scouts.. only more effective and more amount of chaffs could be the definitive solution but ..

Raven_42 · Post by **Raven_42** » Wed Nov 19, 2014 11:53 am

I'm not sure the coin-flip thing is a problem, so long as the coins flip OK. Its about attrition of a large nanned bomb run vs adv tac, and if the counters are good enough, they will buy enough time for enough nans to make it, on a run that would otherwise have been stopped by more defence oriented tech. Its a leveler, sure some pilots can normally avoid pod-rides, but if enough people on your team nan up and start rolling counter3 dice (bring extra) then you have a decent chance to get the important base, and a way back vs the tough tech. If that's not the case, then maybe we have to look at counter strength? Hunts vs counter levels? Make Hunts take longer to arm?

kaiser33 · Post by **kaiser33** » Wed Nov 19, 2014 1:02 pm

you could make hunter 2/3 a more difficult tech to aquire, you could either need more upgrades or make everything a bit more expensive..
delaying a bit this research could allow the opponent to develop theirs in hopes of survivability..