![]() |
|
Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Printable Version +- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums) +-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7) +--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37) +---- Forum: Discovery Mod Balance (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=31) +---- Thread: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted (/showthread.php?tid=153321) |
RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Sombs - 09-02-2017 (09-02-2017, 06:05 PM)Wesker Wrote:(09-02-2017, 06:01 PM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: I like it when people ask for a bigger skill gap while only so many profit from it. When there is a skill gap that makes people rant about them losing a 5vs1, something is definitely weird. You're overexaggerating. I didn't talk about the removal of the skill gap. If it takes 5 snubs to hunt you with Sidewinders, that's already enough show of skill, don't you think so? Matchmaking should be a thing in Discovery, because neither are people having much fun killing noobs, nor are people having fun getting crushed by 24/7conn.mp3 players. RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Backo - 09-02-2017 (09-02-2017, 06:15 PM)Auzari Wrote: How is making something incredibly powerful 'closing the skill gap'? They'll just smash unskilled players as well as skilled ones, perhaps unskilled even more so if they don't know how to utilize counters. You forget skilled players refuse to mount sidewinders because they have to show off Mini Razor skill! RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Kauket - 09-02-2017 (09-02-2017, 06:16 PM)Jayce Wrote:Quote:CMs are unreliable, half of the time they work - working too good half of the other time they don't work at all after splurting out 40% of it also people pick MR because it's a client-side based weapon, unlike the missiles which are serverside and actually have an ammo limit, nothing to do with ego Vasko. RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Jack_Henderson - 09-02-2017 Seeing the options... I say: buff. RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - LordBuglette - 09-02-2017 To be fair, I wouldn't mind having the missiles deleted, Less countermeasure dropping for my freighter than. RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Antonio - 09-02-2017 (09-02-2017, 06:01 PM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: I like it when people ask for a bigger skill gap while only so many profit from it. When there is a skill gap that makes people rant about them losing a 5vs1, something is definitely weird. ![]() Yet again the_holy_rper jumps in and completely misses the point except this time you did it while intentionally taking stuff out of context to hope it helps in proving the point. It doesn't matter if it's a 5v1 or a 4v4, if the first 4 use sidewinders and the other 4 don't, the former are at a big advantage from the start, without taking ships, gun loadouts, skill or anything else into consideration. Encouraging everyone to use a broken missile to what, "make it fair" (?), is not going to solve the issue. Reducing the skill gap is not the core issue of Sidewinders, it's merely a consequence of a broken weapon. Any broken weapon/ship inherently reduces skill gap. Old Bergelmir, Typhoon, Crecy, 1500ms 1500 range gunboat solarises, 1000 ms no spread GB cerbs, 8.33 snub meta before the gun rebalance, and any other blatantly overpowered or very strong thing in one way or another reduced the skill gap. Were they not supposed to be nerfed? No, they were rightfully nerfed, that's how balance works. You don't leave something blatantly broken as it is because "it reduces skill gap" and "you can use it as well". The core issue, if not obvious by now, is the pure speed and acceleration they have, and CMs being very unreliable. Other issues are aux slots in general and the high damage they have for such a fast projectile. It's too fast to dodge, CMs don't work as soon as there's more than 4 people in a fight, it's very hard to CD since it's so fast, and it hits pretty hard. RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Goliath - 09-02-2017 I am not agreeing with this. Sidewinders are easily dodgeable. You can CM them, you can CD your PvP enemy right when he shoots the missle(the missle will simply blow in his face), you can just instantly change your direction(the missle's agility is bad), the price for 25sidewinders is huge, so each missle really counts. I've been testing the missles, and all I can say is that the missles are BAD, like...really bad. It only gives an advantage against newbies(which is kinda insignifiant). They should stay avalable. RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - thisDerius - 09-02-2017 All I see is a complaining thread of someone who got smacked hard. Its not easy to dodge them while running away, that is true, but its really easy to do so while fighting 1v1 while using CMs. More to it, the Sidewinder will eat 33% of your hull if you get hit by it. A nuke takes about 66% if I am not mistaken which leaves you with 1% HP. (This is unimportant) If you want torps that deal about 70% HP damage per shot instead of sidewinders, sure, I am up for that. Also keep in mind that Sidewinders have 10 second cooldown with 25 ammo. Torps had less cooldown and more ammo. Nerfing the missiles would make no sense since you can time your CD and do damage to the opponent. Sidewinders are not broken, you just don't know how to fight against people who use them. RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Karst - 09-02-2017 (09-02-2017, 06:15 PM)Karst Wrote: We're aware that Sidewinders are broken. They will not stay as they are now. You don't need to go on for another five pages. They're broken. We know it. They're a part of the more general issue of auxiliary slots, but regardless of what happens to those, Sidewinders will not stay this way. There is no need to get overly excited at each other. RE: Sidewinder missiles need to be nerfed/deleted - Kauket - 09-02-2017 Closed. The issue was addressed, there's no need for further discussion for now. |