PCore007

[pkk]

Nerf tac, so exp can retake superiority?

[kaiser33]

QUOTE (pkk @ Nov 19 2014, 06:24 AM) Nerf tac, so exp can retake superiority?

exp sup and garr*

[zombywoof]

QUOTE (Raven_42 @ Nov 19 2014, 03:53 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?

Again the problem is it's literally the only part of Allegiance that doesn't have a skill check.

Also it's not so much that any tech becomes superior, it's more that hunter 3 is just no fun to play against and it's barely fun to play with. At least with, say, mini3 heavies vs gat3, qf3 adv figs the figs can get heavy booster and try to do fun things like drop minepacks on the ints.

[Archangelus]

QUOTE (Phantom032 @ Nov 17 2014, 10:35 PM) Whats wrong with xrm hvy bombers?
I thought they worked decently now, even if a bit expensive to get.

Nope, back on DN they were OP. Right now, the way they are, useless.

But in fact it all resumes to current allegiance playerbase. The big damage reduction was fair when you could get 20 bbrs ripping to an uneyed tp2, right now, you can barely get 10. And I am not even commenting about the warning of the tp2 drop.

Hunter3 has been the way it is, since DN, (sorry p1 but you are just looking at the cheapest solution here, we could use the same principle to mg3, they are too powerfull, nerf their damage!!!) but the signature and cloak, have been tweaked a lot with cc, xc & etc. So yes that approach looks way better. I could recomend checking the DN values, because back on, SF's even adv with sig 3, werent able to hide well against pp´s.

[zombywoof]

QUOTE (Archangelus @ Nov 23 2014, 01:46 PM) Hunter3 has been the way it is, since DN, (sorry p1 but you are just looking at the cheapest solution here, we could use the same principle to mg3, they are too powerfull, nerf their damage!!!)

I didn't realize that design principles were such high level concepts. Let me try this again as simply as possible:

With minigun 3, there is a skill check involved. Aiming is not simple. There is a vast gulf of difference between people who can hit stuff with miniguns and people who can't. There are also things you can do when someone starts shooting at you, including running the $#@! away, shooting back, or even dodging. Against bomb runs, you can xnan and actually alter the rate at which your teammate dies from minigun 3.

Hunter 3 HAS no skill check. The skill that's checked is "are you vaguely pointed in the right direction." In a 1v1, you can't simply "shoot back" because unless you're an SF you can't see what's shooting you in the first place. You can't run the $#@! away because you can't rip in time to dodge the missiles and unless your plan is to boost from 2k to >2k away from the SF (which is probably a win for the SF in the first place) you aren't outrunning them. You can't dodge hunt3. Xnaning does nothing vs hunt3 because it one shots every basic/adv scout who's lost shields with the exception of belters scouts.

The argument for hunter3 couldn't be applied to minigun 3 right now. It would be asinine and stupid to apply this particular anti-hunter3 to minigun 3. Probably the best answer for hunter3 with regards to proper balance would be to make them so $#@!ing huge that shooting them down became trivial... and that would ruin verisimilitude for gameplay which isn't necessary if you just lower hunter damage vs light hull until basic scouts don't get 1hko'd by the damn things. Even if scouts live with 1 hunt3.

You can use my argument against hunt3 and my reasoning for minigun3 when 3 minigun 3 deals the scout's entire damage in less than .25 seconds.

[Student]

What P1 is trying to point out (at least in the hunt 3 case) is that missiles do damage at once. Lets say a scout has 100hp with no shields. hunt3 fires, Countermeasures fail, that scout is dead if the missile has an attack damage of over 101hp taken. nothing that scout can do to keep it from dieing, except the rare chance of counter or dodging works. What p1 is saying is that make it so scouts aren't dead if the have no shields. Give xnaning a chance. I hope this clarifys and p1, correct me if I'm wrong.
-Student

[Vortrog]

Increase lrm sig when mounted 15%, while decreasing sniper/utl sig when firing by 15%

That will force teams to hunt sfs while bombing more, and either make sis more visible or bring them in closer to be found.

EDIT: Because Autocorrect on Apple devices makes me want to destroy every iPhone and iPad I see

[Win98SE]

How is tac overpowered? You push cons and bomb it before it gets to avd. Or get a tac of your own. Counter3 still works pretty good as well. I think tac is fine.

Yes, avd tac is pretty strong, but can still be beaten. IMO you really want avd sfs, hunt3, and sig3 to defend. Maybe even sniper2.

As for Hunt3 being low skill, so what? I don't think Quickfire, Seeker, Zeus, turrets, or Hunter-Killer require a lot more skill. Nor does proxing an aleph.

It could be changed I guess, but I think it is OK as it is now.

[Deathrender]

QUOTE (Win98SE @ Nov 24 2014, 07:01 PM) How is tac overpowered? You push cons and bomb it before it gets to avd. Or get a tac of your own. Counter3 still works pretty good as well. I think tac is fine.

Yes, avd tac is pretty strong, but can still be beaten. IMO you really want avd sfs, hunt3, and sig3 to defend. Maybe even sniper2.

As for Hunt3 being low skill, so what? I don't think Quickfire, Seeker, Zeus, turrets, or Hunter-Killer require a lot more skill. Nor does proxing an aleph.

It could be changed I guess, but I think it is OK as it is now.

While I agree that bombing basic tac is a good counter, adv tac still offers a significant advantage over choosing other techs.

Hunt3 does not require timing like prox does. It can also be countered by A. Going slow or B. Not going into the prox, not going into the aleph

Quickfires can be countered because they are close range and figs can't cloak. ints can rush the fig, get within 100m, and easily outdamage them

Seekers can be dodged, easily, unless you suck

Turrets, same as Quickfires, only contrary to the point on getting close, it requires more players to commit to a single ship

HK is very situational, specificly counter to SY.


A group of 6-8 sfs can easily combat 6-8 ints, or 6-8 figs. This is mainly because of how difficult it is to eye the sf in contrast to their damage. The ability to react and counter is the big thing. I don't know how much tracking hunts has changed over the last couple years, but it certainly doesn't take many of them to pod an int or a fig.

[Win98SE]

QUOTE (Deathrender @ Nov 24 2014, 05:40 PM) While I agree that bombing basic tac is a good counter, adv tac still offers a significant advantage over choosing other techs.

Hunt3 does not require timing like prox does. It can also be countered by A. Going slow or B. Not going into the prox, not going into the aleph

Quickfires can be countered because they are close range and figs can't cloak. ints can rush the fig, get within 100m, and easily outdamage them

Seekers can be dodged, easily, unless you suck

Turrets, same as Quickfires, only contrary to the point on getting close, it requires more players to commit to a single ship

HK is very situational, specificly counter to SY.


A group of 6-8 sfs can easily combat 6-8 ints, or 6-8 figs. This is mainly because of how difficult it is to eye the sf in contrast to their damage. The ability to react and counter is the big thing. I don't know how much tracking hunts has changed over the last couple years, but it certainly doesn't take many of them to pod an int or a fig.

Yea, but the things I mentioned are still fairly low skill, even if they have counters. Although I don't think Hunter Killer or skycap really have a counter, nor do they need it. IMO Hunter Killer is meant to be used against any ship, Killer Swarm and XRM Torpedo are specific for anti-cap.


As for 6-8 SF vs ints/figs, I think it depends on tech level etc; ie sig2, hunt2, sniper, pulse probe, scout support to eye the sfs. I find if ints have enough pulse probe they can often kill sfs, or just outrun Hunter 1 and 2. Hunter 1 kinda sucks. Heavy Ints can usually outrun Hunt3 also. Now avd SFs, with tier3 tech sure, they can beat most medium or small ships. The problem is getting to tier3. And not going Tac against Bios or TF. That tends not to work either.

Anyway tac is not about straight up fighting imo, tac is about killing miners, killing cons, and defending against the usual bombing. Oh and caltrops, need caltrops for d.

I dunno tho, I guess tac could be changed to make it more mainstream and more of a primary tech, the biggest issue with it are how hard it is to defend against sbs though, not hunt3. This might be a bit tricky to accomplish though. I don't think making it easier to bomb tac is a great idea tho.........