+- 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: Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll (/showthread.php?tid=15624)
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - swift - 01-22-2009
' Wrote:You're trying to bring realism into the conversation. Nothing is realistic in Freelancer. A Starflier can carry, what, 20 passengers? Mk. 2 ships have more capacity than their Mk. 1 cousins, despite being the exact same size.
The question should concern balance, and a LF with 2-4 missiles is no more unbalanced than a VHF with 2-4 missiles. It's more agile, yes, but that's the whole point of flying a LF, and the reason why they have fewer guns, lower gun levels, less armor, and no torpedo. Agility matters when using missiles, but not as much as it does when using guns.
Point accepted. Partly. Although it does not strive for total realism, some is wanted.
As much as it's not pro realism, it is not anti realism.
I'll leave this one to the balancing team.
I made my general point regarding all this in a couple of those long posts.
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - Panzer - 01-22-2009
Big yes to damage increase.
And along with that - I'd go for a global upgrade of all missles. Make them be worth their price.
And since they'll be worth using - impose cargo restrictions on ammo. There'll be sense using amunition carriers and rationalizing the ordnance loadout.
Quality [.I.......] Quantity
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - gezza999 - 01-22-2009
Voted yes for a damage increase, and yes for using cargo... it makes sense that a LF wouldn't have space for ammo for a missile if it's been enforced with armour, but.. Make lower level missiles take less cargo (incase you've not already thought of it) so that low level ships can still use the crap missiles.
EDIT: Oh, yeah, the rest of my thoughts are on the previous post I guess..
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - Orin - 01-22-2009
My qualms with cargo usage is that pirates can no longer have the RP applet of asking for cargo, rather than demanding credits if the hold is already full with ammo.
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - mjolnir - 01-22-2009
' Wrote:My qualms with cargo usage is that pirates can no longer have the RP applet of asking for cargo, rather than demanding credits if the hold is already full with ammo.
Not like missiles are that usefull for pirating anything.
Also pirates will have new and shiny freighters for that job;)
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - Unseelie - 01-23-2009
' Wrote:Just wrong.
I believe you expect that the hardpoint has a "max weapon class" set. That is wrong. A hardpoint is usually capable of mounting all classes 1..n, but I could as easily create a hardpoint that can mount gun classes 2, 5, 8 and 9 (or any other set of classes I want).
Ah, you are correct, I had forgotten.
That said...
This point still stands:
Quote:Such a change would, if you've missed that, force every single ship to either use 4 instead of 6 guns, or use 4 guns and a pair of missiles, or whatever. Every single powerplant, then, would be effectively larger than it was before because missiles use less energy, and, in general, people do not use missile/gun loadouts as much as they use pure gun loadouts.
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - Grumblesaur - 01-23-2009
*ahem*
Me Wrote:I bet this could solve the missile-abuse problem:
Similar to the Torp/CD mounts, we could have plain Gun, and Gun/Missile mounts. Maybe two hybrid mounts per ship, and have them the highest class on that ship.
Example: Starflier has a Class 3 gun mount as it's highest level hardpoint, so that'd be the missile/gun mount.
You stole my idea.
Leave the damage as-is. We raise the damage, it negates the effect of stronger equipment.
Regardless, only the devs know what the exact changes are, unless you are a dev, then we know too.
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - Derkylos - 01-23-2009
If you were to make ammo use up cargo, would that not make LFs even less common? Presently, one can mount 3 guns and one missile and still have a chance in a one-on-one fight. Remove the ability to mount missiles and you end up with a CD platform and not much else...
LFs thrive on missiles, it is pretty much the only way they can deal significant damage. I would actually advocate making a class 8/9 shieldbuster missile purely for LFs so that they can actually kill things...
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - Varyag - 01-23-2009
LF are a very usable class right now. I use mostly LF for all of my fighter fights. It is just a matter of being patient while killing somone in it.
The real thing that makes them fragile is missiles, especially if they become more powerful. I am really glad they upped the armor on CMs. when I loose my CM on my LFs, death is ussually right around the corner.
Lets just say I am waiting nervously for the next mod. I trust the devs will keep things fair, but the two classes I play the most are changing quite a bit.
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll - Blackvertigo1 - 01-23-2009
Maybe keep the settings with the missiles and LF's and just make em a little faster to turn?
By the way, does the Order have an Order LF?
Maybe keep the settings with the missiles and LF's and just make em a little faster to turn?
By the way, does the Order have an Order LF?