• Home
  • Index
  • Search
  • Download
  • Server Rules
  • House Roleplay Laws
  • Player Utilities
  • Player Help
  • Forum Utilities
  • Returning Player?
  • Toggle Sidebar
Interactive Nav-Map
Tutorials
New Wiki
ID reference
Restart reference
Players Online
Player Activity
Faction Activity
Player Base Status
Discord Help Channel
DarkStat
Server public configs
POB Administration
Missing Powerplant
Stuck in Connecticut
Account Banned
Lost Ship/Account
POB Restoration
Disconnected
Member List
Forum Stats
Show Team
View New Posts
View Today's Posts
Calendar
Help
Archive Mode




Hi there Guest,  
Existing user?   Sign in    Create account
Login
Username:
Password: Lost Password?
 
  Discovery Gaming Community Discovery Development Discovery Mod General Discussion Discovery Mod Balance
« Previous 1 … 42 43 44 45 46 … 55 Next »
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll

Server Time (24h)

Players Online

Active Events - Scoreboard

Latest activity

Poll: Should damage done by explosives be increased? (note that vanilla and equipment vulnerability is removed)
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes
68.68%
125 68.68%
No
31.32%
57 31.32%
Total 182 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Pages (17): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 17 Next »
Fighter Explosives (missiles + torps and mines) Poll
Offline swift
01-22-2009, 11:02 PM,
#51
Member
Posts: 2,838
Threads: 61
Joined: Jul 2008

' 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.

<span style="font-familyTonguealatino Linotype">
<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.
</span></span>
<span style="color:#33FFFF">The CFF</span>
<span style="color:#33FF33">CFF Communication Channel and RP Collection</span>
  Reply  
Offline Panzer
01-22-2009, 11:04 PM,
#52
Man of iron, blood and Nyxes
Posts: 3,092
Threads: 56
Joined: Dec 2006

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

[Image: Vxqj04i.gif]
Reply  
Offline gezza999
01-22-2009, 11:26 PM, (This post was last modified: 01-22-2009, 11:27 PM by gezza999.)
#53
Member
Posts: 935
Threads: 33
Joined: Mar 2006

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..

This is my signature.
  Reply  
Offline Orin
01-22-2009, 11:37 PM,
#54
Member
Posts: 3,124
Threads: 75
Joined: Aug 2008

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.
  Reply  
Offline mjolnir
01-22-2009, 11:50 PM,
#55
Member
Posts: 3,774
Threads: 71
Joined: Sep 2007

' 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;)

[Image: sigiw102.jpg]
Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.
Reply  
Offline Unseelie
01-23-2009, 12:00 AM,
#56
Member
Posts: 4,256
Threads: 235
Joined: Nov 2006

' 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.



Reply  
Offline Grumblesaur
01-23-2009, 12:08 AM,
#57
Fleet Tender
Posts: 2,742
Threads: 56
Joined: Sep 2008

*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.

A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay,
brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.
Reply  
Offline Derkylos
01-23-2009, 12:21 AM,
#58
Member
Posts: 1,410
Threads: 48
Joined: Sep 2008

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...

[Image: 2ecf33o.png]
Reply  
Offline Varyag
01-23-2009, 01:16 AM,
#59
Member
Posts: 1,336
Threads: 23
Joined: Dec 2007

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.

[Image: RHShroom2.png]
"I looked up and all I saw was green death"
Reply  
Offline Blackvertigo1
01-23-2009, 02:08 AM,
#60
Member
Posts: 681
Threads: 40
Joined: Jun 2008

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?

"The path to hell is paved with good intentions."


Quote:* Nodoka Hanamura is all about that SSH life
If you can't RP then 1.0

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy - from our odyssey into Hell, we have returned with a gift."
Reply  
Pages (17): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 17 Next »


  • View a Printable Version
  • Subscribe to this thread


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)



Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2026 MyBB Group. Theme © 2014 iAndrew & DiscoveryGC
  • Contact Us
  •  Lite mode
Linear Mode
Threaded Mode