New Idea for a New Lancer

Peacemaker · 2004-05-25, 01:25 PM

Just discusing on IRC about this when an Idea poped into my head. What if you gave the Lancer a charge up time that based how much damage it did and ammo it uses (same idea as the spiker). You press and hold, the longer you hold the more ammo is consumed. THe more ammo used the stronger the bolt. It would take the same time to charge up a lancer to full as it does for the present one to fire all six shots minus the first charge of the first shot. The lancer can also be fired immediatly (just press the button and with no charge it fires) although there is a waiting period for the next insta shot.

Lartnev · 2004-05-25, 01:32 PM

I'm not keen on the idea of getting hit by 6 lancer shots at the same time. I mean yeah the damage over time will remain the same, but the difference will be that you can take a MAX down completely by suprise, and hide until you can pop out and hit something with all 6 shots before going back into hiding.

I'm pretty sure the Vanu would love it though

Peacemaker · 2004-05-25, 01:34 PM

Thats the point though. The thing would benefit from that. Maybe if you made it so they had to hold still while charging also the bolt is more distinct like that of a bolt driver.

Majik · 2004-05-25, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by Lartnev

I'm not keen on the idea of getting hit by 6 lancer shots at the same time. I mean yeah the damage over time will remain the same, but the difference will be that you can take a MAX down completely by suprise, and hide until you can pop out and hit something with all 6 shots before going back into hiding.

Yeah and who would want an empire to have an AV weapon where the infantry unit could hide behind a rock and then fire it.....oh wait, the nc already have that, guess that would just leave the tr to have an AV weapon that would, I don't know, chase a target down by locking in on it and everyone could use their AV from relatively safe cover

Lartnev · 2004-05-25, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by Majik

Yeah and who would want an empire to have an AV weapon where the infantry unit could hide behind a rock and then fire it.....oh wait, the nc already have thatt

1)The power of 6 lancer shots is greater than that of a single pheonix
2)You can't move while guiding your missile making you sniper/infil bait
3)It takes time to reach long distance targets. The lancer, whilst isn't instantaneous, is pretty quick.

I'm just warey about giving such a weapon to anyone.

scarpas · 2004-05-25, 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by Majik

Yeah and who would want an empire to have an AV weapon where the infantry unit could hide behind a rock and then fire it.....oh wait, the nc already have that, guess that would just leave the tr to have an AV weapon that would, I don't know, chase a target down by locking in on it and everyone could use their AV from relatively safe cover

AltaEgo · 2004-05-26, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by Majik

Yeah and who would want an empire to have an AV weapon where the infantry unit could hide behind a rock and then fire it.....oh wait, the nc already have that, guess that would just leave the tr to have an AV weapon that would, I don't know, chase a target down by locking in on it and everyone could use their AV from relatively safe cover

The TR? Not likely. For a start, your damn lucky if it even locks. And secondly, you have to keep your reticule on the target for it to hit, and even then it can mess up. So no, 90% of the time you're always an available target on the field.

ChewyLSB · 2004-05-26, 04:37 PM

Er, I've used every AV weapon extensively and I don't mind the Striker that much. In fact, I find it to be quite good.

AltaEgo · 2004-05-26, 04:54 PM

Correct myself here. Its a GOOD weapon yes. But in terms of hiding, safety and the "perfect weapon" people say it is, it isnt all happy aim and fire.

Sputty · 2004-05-26, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Majik

Yeah and who would want an empire to have an AV weapon where the infantry unit could hide behind a rock and then fire it.....oh wait, the nc already have that, guess that would just leave the tr to have an AV weapon that would, I don't know, chase a target down by locking in on it and everyone could use their AV from relatively safe cover

Wha? You actually think the Striker can be fired from cover? You must not understand the other weapons at all. Hell, the Lancer has far more range than the striker, and covers the distance far quicker than a Striker. With a Striker I have to sit out in the open running around trying to get a lock and then I have to hold it as the missile travels.

Majik · 2004-05-27, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by Sputty

Wha? You actually think the Striker can be fired from cover? You must not understand the other weapons at all. Hell, the Lancer has far more range than the striker, and covers the distance far quicker than a Striker. With a Striker I have to sit out in the open running around trying to get a lock and then I have to hold it as the missile travels.

When I tried the TR, I used to popup from cover to get a lock, fire, and duck back. When I tried the NC, of course I didn't even have to come out of cover. The VS, however, have to pop out, maintain LOS while they are firing, then they can take cover again. I am just pointing out that a VS AV user spends more time exposed then the others.

AltaEgo · 2004-05-28, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by Majik

When I tried the TR, I used to popup from cover to get a lock, fire, and duck back. When I tried the NC, of course I didn't even have to come out of cover. The VS, however, have to pop out, maintain LOS while they are firing, then they can take cover again. I am just pointing out that a VS AV user spends more time exposed then the others.

What he means is the time you're stood out on the field acuiring the target, aswell as keeping your cross-hair on while the projectile follows and hits it is time enough for some geezer to waste you. It takes time for the projectile to home in, and then follow that vehicle, waiting for it to hit. We are equally exposed; because aslong as we can SEE the target (cross-hair on) THAT, my friend, is not cover; because they can see us too.

Sputty · 2004-05-28, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Majik

When I tried the TR, I used to popup from cover to get a lock, fire, and duck back. When I tried the NC, of course I didn't even have to come out of cover. The VS, however, have to pop out, maintain LOS while they are firing, then they can take cover again. I am just pointing out that a VS AV user spends more time exposed then the others.

One Lancer shot does more damage, travels faster, and is easier to shoot than one Striker shot. The Striker has to maintain LOS on the target until it hits otherwise the lock fails. You really don't understand how the Striker works if you think you can shoot and get cover quickly.

Onizuka-GTO · 2004-05-25, 02:10 PM

sounds good to me. I mean i think all Vanu weapons should have an Alternative mode.

That's what Versatility is all about, the ability to change modes to adapt to a given situation.

At the moment the only true versatile weapon that encompass the Vanu philosophy is the Pulsar and Beamer.
The former being a very good example of how it does under combat.

SilverLord · 2004-05-26, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by Onizuka-GTO

At the moment the only true versatile weapon that encompass the Vanu philosophy is the Pulsar and Beamer.

This is not true. The Lasher is AV and AI if you didn't know. The Quaser has two firing modes, the Comet is a bitch against infantry and vhel alike and the starfire is rule against aircraft, I don't know about AV.