anti air

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Queensidecastle

hmm, It works just dandy for me.

Please, stop insulting our ability. We are not inept players, you are not some god. It doesn't matter if you see a reaver coming first, whether you're using a striker or a lancer. If it is heading for you, you can not get off enough rounds to kill it before you die. It takes over two clips of striker rounds to kill a reaver if they have full shields, with an unshielded one taking almost two clips. I don't care what you say regarding this, with the amount of time I've been playing Planetside and playing as infantry, I know for a fact that a single striker user has absolutely no hope against a full strength reaver if the reaver has a bead on you. It will simply afterburn right in your face, and spam you to death in no time flat.

I don't play VS much, but from the lancers I've looted, they have even less hope, because at least with a striker I can fire while trying to (vainly, most of the time, thanks to aircraft strafing ability) run for something to hide behind.

Originally Posted by ChewyLSB

This is what I propose:

- Reaver is made a two man vehicle

I would approve of this change. The reaver's power being given to a two-man vehicle would be fine, I think, provided the rockets were tied to the second seat controls, so all the pilot has is the chainguns.

[Queensidecastle]

It doesn't matter if you see a reaver coming first, whether you're using a striker or a lancer. If it is heading for you, you can not get off enough rounds to kill it before you die.

That is just flat incorrect.

[Madcow]

They could up the decimator power, make that TR specific (I can already hear them screaming) and make Striker common pool. The fact that the TR are the only ones with an AV that is semi-effective as AA kind of messes with the argument anyhow. Then again, with the current lock-on bugs I might just prefer the Lancer or Phoenix.

[WritheNC]

I haven't read the whole thread. Only after I posted.

I just wanna make sure we're on the same page: Nobody is expecting lone infantry or a few infantry without AV to be on even footing with Air Cav, right?

[Baneblade]

My Reaver solution is to make it basically an Apache. Two person, Pilot and Gunner, Pilot has a vulcan cannon and the Gunner fires guided weaponry...like a gunship based Phoenix.

[JetRaiden]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

My Reaver solution is to make it basically an Apache. Two person, Pilot and Gunner, Pilot has a vulcan cannon and the Gunner fires guided weaponry...like a gunship based Phoenix.

[NO]

[EarlyDawn]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

My Reaver solution is to make it basically an Apache. Two person, Pilot and Gunner, Pilot has a vulcan cannon and the Gunner fires guided weaponry...like a gunship based Phoenix.

I'd agree with that if you make the warheads on the rockets armor piercing (no splash) and laser guided by the gunner, plus give it less rockets. Maybe 18 total. But make the rockets hugely effective against hard targets.

Then, to balance the change out, give the Pilot a 30mm center-mounted gun.

[Cauldron Borne]

I'd say yes to a 20mm, or even a 15mm, but not a 30mm. That's the Libby Gunship's gun. Even on a Libby it shreds...

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by EarlyDawn

I'd agree with that if you make the warheads on the rockets armor piercing (no splash) and laser guided by the gunner, plus give it less rockets. Maybe 18 total. But make the rockets hugely effective against hard targets.

Then, to balance the change out, give the Pilot a 30mm center-mounted gun.

Why laser guided? What's wrong with having to aim?

Also, 30mm slaughters infantry like nothing. Even on a big clumsy vehicle like the liberator that weapon is dangerous. On a more agile vehicle like a reaver... yeah, no, not a 30mm.

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by EarlyDawn

I'd agree with that if you make the warheads on the rockets armor piercing (no splash) and laser guided by the gunner, plus give it less rockets. Maybe 18 total. But make the rockets hugely effective against hard targets.

Then, to balance the change out, give the Pilot a 30mm center-mounted gun.

Well it would be like three Decimators all at once. Wouldn't do much to infantry. The ammo box would hold two, and you can to reload after each one.

Splash is realistic, but for game purposes it isn't really needed.

Pilot only needs a center mounted 20mm...should get that anyway.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

Splash is realistic, but for game purposes it isn't really needed.

Not so unrealistic, actually. Armor piercing warheads don't explode as much as you'd think. They channel their force into a fairly thin stream forward at whatever the rocket hits, rather than exploding out-ward (damn filter) , with the heat of the blast melting some copper inside the warhead into a molten bolt which bores through the thickest of armors, killing the crew or hitting the ammo or fuel stores and destorying the vehicle that way. Warheads of that sort don't explode very much, and they certainly aren't designed to kill infantry, so you don't get a lot of fragmentation either. If you're going to pass the reaver's rockets off as being meant to defeat armor specifically, there you go, no need for a huge blast radius on a realism level either. You don't make weapons designed to blow up tanks that would simply explode and dent the out armor of the vehicle, or fragment up and scratch the tank's paint coat.

[Baneblade]

That assumes it is an armor piercing warhead, but yeah.

I rather like the idea of doubling AV dmg, but keeping the AI the same on AV weapons.

AV weapons should be devastating...but should also take a bigger cert investment. I would be willing to spend 4 or 5 cert points on a Phoenix that did more AV dmg.

[EarlyDawn]

Originally Posted by Warborn

Why laser guided? What's wrong with having to aim?

Because it gives the gunner something to do, makes the splashless missles a little more precise, and because it would be extremely clumsy to put a rotating rocket launcher on the reaver.

Also, 30mm slaughters infantry like nothing.

Now you're getting it.

Even on a big clumsy vehicle like the liberator that weapon is dangerous. On a more agile vehicle like a reaver... yeah, no, not a 30mm.

Yes, a 30mm, unless you can give me a valid reason why not (Most of the reaver redesigns I hear are making the rockets splashless and the guns more infantry-effective, this accomplishes this purpose while not making the pilot feel gimped.)

The pilot needs some viable way to take on infantry, 30mm (interestingly enough, a weapon that isn't in the game, to my knowledge, and yet you're telling me how it functions. ) Like I said, knock down the vehicle damage, and center it.

The alternative is giving the Gunner control of some kind of rotating 15-20mm turret and give the PILOT control of the dumbfire, Armor-Piercing rockets. I'd prefer that a little less, but it's still acceptable to the status quo.

[Cauldron Borne]

The 30mm IS in the game, Early. It's the nose mount of a Liberator. The only reason it isn't overpowering on a Liberator is because:
a) there aren't very many of them, and
b) they aren't manuverable enough to be used as weapons against nimble ground infantry.

Having a Reaver with a 30mm mount would be just as bad as a reaver w/ AI rockets. It would be worse, actually. It only takes four shots with a 30mm to kill a rexo-tank using PShield. If the gun was toned down to something like the caliber of the rear ball turret of the liberator, or the side mounts of a Galaxy, I could see it happening.

Both of those guns have better than decent AI ability, and exceptional AA capability. Their only draw back, and in my opinon a balanced drawback, is their CoF bloom. Maybe tighten it up a bit for a reaver, but not much. That way we don't have an invulnerable infantry sniper for a plane.

[EarlyDawn]

Liberator = 35mm, chief.

Make the 30mm sick against infantry and decent on light vehicles if you hold it on them long enough. But it's primary function should be anti-infantry.