Can we make XRM missiles useful again?

Gandalf2 · Post by **Gandalf2** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:00 am

As is currently being discussed in the gameplay forum....

Sorry I'm not one for digging up numbers but I hope this qualifies under spidey's rules as a good enough post!

A recent history of XRM

When CC started, XRM was considered to be too strong. So, XRM missiles were given a cost of, I think, $20 each ($100 for a rack). This was very much a small revision in the traditions of the stated aims of CC, since the bombers themselves would cost $500 a shot anyway. However people still went XRM and still won games with them. Not too suprising - $600 for a bomber instead of $500 is not much of a killer.

It was considered more needed to be done. Prior to a subsequent release, a poll was created, asking if XRM should be removed or not. "Keep them" won the vote with about 60% of voted AFAIK. They were indeed kept... BUT they were heavily nerfed - I think their damage was halved.

Now, we almost never see XRM in play, because fig bombers are a lot cheaper, and a lot likelier to result in dead bases. I could waffle more about this point, but I *think* it's self evident for anyone who plays the game much, that this is the case. Fig bombers are harder to shoot down than heavy bombers because they boost and have smaller models - also you have a lot less time to kill them because they are getting in range that much faster.

So, in summary....

I would like to see something done to make XRM's useful again, at least in some circumstances. How? Well, maybe not by simply removing the last change, though that could be an option. Another option would be to put their damage half way between, and/or increase/decrease their range. I'm sure people can come up with other options.

juckto · Post by **juckto** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:05 am

XRM are fine. Nerf fig bees.

Death3D · Post by **Death3D** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:15 am

Nerf?

guitarism · Post by **guitarism** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:26 am

why not just make all of sup's endgames useless juckto? We can all rely upon Tac and sbs to win games

juckto · Post by **juckto** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:28 am

I think you mean NG sbs

apochboi · Post by **apochboi** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:29 am

Gandalf2 wrote:QUOTE (Gandalf2 @ May 7 2009, 02:00 AM) As is currently being discussed in the gameplay forum....

Sorry I'm not one for digging up numbers but I hope this qualifies under spidey's rules as a good enough post!

A recent history of XRM

When CC started, XRM was considered to be too strong. So, XRM missiles were given a cost of, I think, $20 each ($100 for a rack). This was very much a small revision in the traditions of the stated aims of CC, since the bombers themselves would cost $500 a shot anyway. However people still went XRM and still won games with them. Not too suprising - $600 for a bomber instead of $500 is not much of a killer.

It was considered more needed to be done. Prior to a subsequent release, a poll was created, asking if XRM should be removed or not. "Keep them" won the vote with about 60% of voted AFAIK. They were indeed kept... BUT they were heavily nerfed - I think their damage was halved.

Now, we almost never see XRM in play, because fig bombers are a lot cheaper, and a lot likelier to result in dead bases. I could waffle more about this point, but I *think* it's self evident for anyone who plays the game much, that this is the case. Fig bombers are harder to shoot down than heavy bombers because they boost and have smaller models - also you have a lot less time to kill them because they are getting in range that much faster.

So, in summary....

I would like to see something done to make XRM's useful again, at least in some circumstances. How? Well, maybe not by simply removing the last change, though that could be an option. Another option would be to put their damage half way between, and/or increase/decrease their range. I'm sure people can come up with other options.

It wasnt my plan when i created the Community core. To make it that specific tech nerfed into oblivion. But i'd also like to say the old XRM was too much, I propose that xrm damage is rebalanced and perhaps increased to make it a bit more viable.

Andon · Post by **Andon** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:35 am

Well, at $100 per rack, they were still overpowering. At half damage and $100 per rack, they're pretty useless.

Perhaps, instead of simply removing the change, just increase their damage some?

apochboi · Post by **apochboi** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:37 am

Andon you should start copying and pasting my posts. Since you pretty much copy them anyway.

Xeretov · Post by **Xeretov** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:39 am

Some quick numbers:

DN 4.60

XRM AB1: 120 damage, $0/ea
XRM AB2: 150 damage, $0/ea

CC_04

XRM AB1: 60 damage, $20/ea ($100/rack)
XRM AB2: 75 damage, $20/ea ($100/rack)

Even before the XRM nerf it still cost more money to deploy an XRM / Hvy Bbr run than it did to deploy a FB run, just that XRM was considered easier to use. Here are some different options (note: I don't agree with all of the below):

Remove the cost, keep the damage.Keep the cost, increase the damage.Allow XRM to be mounted on regular bbrs and not just hvy bbrs.Keep XRM tied to SY on, and remove FBs (and related FB tech) from the SY on requirement.Decrease the range on XRM from its current 4K or so to something less, requiring closer drops.Remove XRM entirely.

I'd like to see figbbrs made available regardless of SY settings to give sup a decent endgame in SY off games, as its currently stuck with galvs & hvy bbrs where exp still gets HTTs and tac still has SBs. I admit HTTs are a weak endgame though, but thats a topic for another thread.

I would personally remove the individual cost on XRM and increase the damage a bit. A small nerf to range (3500m instead of 4000) might help too. One of the problems in comparing XRM runs to FB runs is that hvy bbrs are able to take a lot more damage than a fig bbr, so the defense generally takes longer to destroy all of the bombers. This becomes even more noticable when you upgrade the bombers from med shield 1 to 2 or 3, hence why I suggest reducing the range to give the defenders that extra bit of time. As it stands right now though, XRM is too pricey and does too little damage compared to FB runs and is thus less reliable. It was the opposite of this before the nerf though, so there has to be a good balance to range & damage in here somewhere.

Some more numbers:

Fig Bomber with Sm. shield 2 and hull2 GA: 540 hull, 180 shield
Hvy Bomber with Med. shield 2 and hull2 GA: 1440 hull, 350 shield

Both small and med shields take 50% damage from gatt and mini.
FBs have light armor class, which takes 100% damage from gatt and mini.
Hvy Bbrs have medium armor class, which takes 75% damage from gatt and mini.

djrbk · Post by **djrbk** » Thu May 07, 2009 2:41 am

* Remove the cost, keep the damage.
Do not like.

* Keep the cost, increase the damage.
Like, maybe a split between the level it was at before and the level it is at now?

* Allow XRM to be mounted on regular bbrs and not just hvy bbrs.
Do not like. That's one of the bigger reasons to get hvy bbrs as sup.

* Keep XRM tied to SY on, and remove FBs (and related FB tech) from the SY on requirement.
FBs should not be tied to SY, I agree.

* Decrease the range on XRM from its current 4K or so to something less, requiring closer drops.
Hmm.. Yeah I could live with that. Reasonable!