well, I see the advantage of XRMs is that bombers carry more missies than FBs, and they don't use booster fuel.
This makes them more useful for doing ninja tp2 drops, where you drop one place, fire ze missiles!, kill the base, then rip to the next base while the defenders are disorganised from losing the last base.
I don't really see that as possible with FBs as the ones that made it would have fired their missiles, and used their fuel.
Perhaps we could partly mtivate the use of XRMs for that purpose? - a super tool if you have good teamwork
Can we make XRM missiles useful again?
Last edited by madpeople on Sat May 16, 2009 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
But IMO that is the point of Game ending tech. I'm not personally keen on playing many games that last several hours, the occasional one is okay, but when games drag on the deadlock needs to be broken by the team that has superiority.Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ May 16 2009, 10:31 AM) Ryhne & Jarvis, sure the cost was high, but they were still seen in a whole lot of PuGs so it was clearly not prohibitive. Any time a game ran long, it tended to mean TP2 XRM, or at least the attempt.
They are boring to use and tend to be impossible to intercept with a half decent drop and enough players ripping in. Figbees are more fun to fly and more fun to swat from the sky. Win-win.
there should be a selection of means to ending the game......
Make it better than figbees but also (much) more expensive. No one complains about HoD being broken, do they?
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.
100% is overpowered? 50% is underpowered? Go for 75% and see what happens. And remove the price tag.
With going from 100% to 50% you doubled the number of bombers needed to put out the same damage.
Twice as many bombers are harder to kill. But it takes a lot of effort to get a tp2 run going in a standard PU game. Twice as large TP2 runs just dont happen.
With going from 100% to 50% you doubled the number of bombers needed to put out the same damage.
Twice as many bombers are harder to kill. But it takes a lot of effort to get a tp2 run going in a standard PU game. Twice as large TP2 runs just dont happen.
signature deleted
What if they kept the range but made it slower and/or more easily destroyed? Keep them as something that can end games, but make it so that defending against them while you are organized is significantly easier.
Increasing the damage to what it used to be at the same time of course. Doesn't need further nerfing.
Increasing the damage to what it used to be at the same time of course. Doesn't need further nerfing.
Last edited by RoboTel on Sat May 30, 2009 11:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
1) Because if you make them slower then you have to increase their lifespan to keep the same range. If you do that then you increase their effective range as bbrs can use their own velocity to launch them from further away.
2) What do you think will happen if you encourage people to shoot down a swarm of missiles instead of the swarm of bombers?
3) These ideas have already been discussed.
2) What do you think will happen if you encourage people to shoot down a swarm of missiles instead of the swarm of bombers?
3) These ideas have already been discussed.
Usually though, "skill" is used to covertly mean "match the game exactly to my level of competence." Anyone who is at all worse than me should fail utterly (and humorously!) and anyone better is clearly too caught up in the game and their opinions shouldn't count.