The TRUE overall balance of all Empires

[FliggenMan]

interesting idea everay

[CmdNeo]

the lancer is good at AV if you have good aim?
have you ever played as the VS? and if so have you ever tried shooting down a moving reaver? good aim is not what you need to hit it... to hit it you need the damn striker or phoenix... simple as...

1 way to buff the lancer that would be good is , remove the charge up delay and increase damage versus vehicles... and degrade it versus infantry (or keep damage same and then it gets nerfed cos it owns the infantry and they complain cos we get 1 decent weapon... e.g the lasher... which now is not even 1/2 as good.... i could ramble on and on but the only thing needing nerf is the striker , and lancer needs buffing a little.....

if you flame me you are just an idiot..... this is my opinion which i am entiltled to , and btw if u do flame it just shows im correct... the TR / NC just complain when we get 1 decent weapon... yet all the VS complain about the other empires AV weapons and nothing gets done

[Sputty]

Originally posted by CmdNeo
the lancer is good at AV if you have good aim?
have you ever played as the VS? and if so have you ever tried shooting down a moving reaver? good aim is not what you need to hit it... to hit it you need the damn striker or phoenix... simple as...

if you flame me you are just an idiot..... this is my opinion which i am entiltled to , and btw if u do flame it just shows im correct... the TR / NC just complain when we get 1 decent weapon... yet all the VS complain about the other empires AV weapons and nothing gets done

I've played VS alot firstly. Secondly, your reply which is basically saying if you question my statement you're stupid and proving my statement right makes no sense. Those statements make your entire argument invalid

[Doppler]

Originally posted by CmdNeo
the lancer is good at AV if you have good aim?
have you ever played as the VS? and if so have you ever tried shooting down a moving reaver? good aim is not what you need to hit it... to hit it you need the damn striker or phoenix... simple as...

Actualy yes, i have one Vanu character specificly devoted to nothing but the lancer before I finnaly gave him reinforced for more ammo space and a shotgun for upclose fighting. The lancer is a great weapon, well balanced, versatile and requiring the satifaction of knowing that you actualy outshot your oponents. Now however having played the other two empires i know the following.
a phoenix cannot hit a moving reaver because it simply cannot course correct fast enough to catch low speed course operation, a phoenix cannot catch a reaver at full speed.
A striker can indeed hit a reaver not moving at it's top speed because of it's homing ability, however at it's top speed a reaver will outpace the stiker missile and find someway to shake the lock, yes it is annoying but it's bette rthen hanging around and taking the hit.
In both cases a reaver moving at it's full non afterburner speed will outdistance a rocket, and be a hard target to lead with a lancer.

1 way to buff the lancer that would be good is , remove the charge up delay and increase damage versus vehicles... and degrade it versus infantry (or keep damage same and then it gets nerfed cos it owns the infantry and they complain cos we get 1 decent weapon... e.g the lasher... which now is not even 1/2 as good.... i could ramble on and on but the only thing needing nerf is the striker , and lancer needs buffing a little.....

Why does the lancer need a buff? Is it not used? No? Do vanu traditionaly get their butt beat because of a gear deficiency? Even after patch, no? Ok moving right along then

if you flame me you are just an idiot..... this is my opinion which i am entiltled to , and btw if u do flame it just shows im correct... the TR / NC just complain when we get 1 decent weapon... yet all the VS complain about the other empires AV weapons and nothing gets done

Despite what you may think you do not constitute the whole of the Vanu empire, mayn many vanu I know are very happy with the lancer. As for the rest of your comments it's so laughable it's almost sig worthy, you are entitled to your opinion however everyone that has a counter opinion is an idiot and shows your correct, I'm close to stunned by the beautiful non logic of your statement. It's like a cool breeze of amazing stupidity in a relatively logical intelligent forum.

But since your mystified let me expain it to you. The lasher got hit with the wifflebat because even many of the VS admitted it was the best damn HA weapon in the game. ANy weapon that's power of versatility is so far greater then anything else in it's class that it shifts the population balance on servers across the board is going to get looked at. It wasnt that the lasher was more powerfull per se, but that it was more versatile, it killed witht he power of the jackhammer but at the range of the MCG, it permitted the side stepping constant straffing of the MCG but killed quicker. It allowed the user without changing ammo to engage vehicles air targets max's and infantry with the same ease. Is it really fair that the vanu lasher should be an antivehicle weapon superior to their AV weapon (and not because their av weapon was a slouch either) A MCG user could not do half the damage a lasher could to vehicles as a lasher, and even then they'd have to switch ammo. Engaging a tank or other vehicle witha jackhammer is a good way to get yourself run over or shot, but was quite possible with a lasher. Is it fair the nc main battle tank, the vanguard or the prowler for that matter, or the magrider if the situation were reversed. had to run from a lasher user behind a tree? I really doubt it.

[FliggenMan]

Originally posted by Doppler
As for the rest of your comments it's so laughable it's almost sig worthy, you are entitled to your opinion however everyone that has a counter opinion is an idiot and shows your correct, I'm close to stunned by the beautiful non logic of your statement. It's like a cool breeze of amazing stupidity in a relatively logical intelligent forum.

But since your mystified let me expain it to you. The lasher got hit with the wifflebat because even many of the VS admitted it was the best damn HA weapon in the game. ANy weapon that's power of versatility is so far greater then anything else in it's class that it shifts the population balance on servers across the board is going to get looked at. It wasnt that the lasher was more powerfull per se, but that it was more versatile, it killed witht he power of the jackhammer but at the range of the MCG, it permitted the side stepping constant straffing of the MCG but killed quicker.

just wtf are you suggesting? are u stating that vanu are supposed to be versatile like that? look its not that i think u are dumb, but i am seriously wanting to look into balance issues in this game and you seem to understand what your talking about more than other people on this forum. i am actually the strategist for my outfit more or less, and im looking to investigate the issue of empire balance. if you ever want to discuss it to me than email me at [email protected]. If u aint interested, than thats coo too. but id really like to get a second point of view more often.

[Skullhead]

sticks and stones will be the ulitmate balance.
Sticks to poke out their eyes
stones to bash their heads in.
All melee combat until someone decides to throw the stones.
Then someone decides to fasion bows and arrows out of the sticks that were suppost to poke someone's eye out.
Then they fasion the stone into knifes.
Then the sticks into giant clubs
then they break the stones to find metals.
Then they make a sword
then the sticks are used to make a wooden shield
Then they find gun powder
then they mix the sticks and stones and the metal in the stones with the gunpowder and they make guns
They then make the single shot gun
Then the multi shot gun
then the fully automatic gun
then a bigger gun
then an even bigger gun
then the biggest gun ever made
then they build a tank
then a better tank
then an even better tank
then they build a skyscraper
then they build an even bigger skyscraper
then they build the largest skyscraper ever built
then they build a spaceship
then they build a spaceship that goes farther
then they build an even better space ship that can send asteroids to their home planet
then a better spaceship that can send even bigger asteroids to their home planet.
They first send small asteroids to their home planet
then even larger asteroids to their home planet
then even the largest of the largest asteroid to their home planet
then they decide to blow up the sun
then they decide to blow up an even bigger sun
then after they they decide to blow themselves up
the other side decides to blow themselves up in a better fasion
then the other side that opposes the other side that wants to blow themselves up in a better fasion than the other side will blow themselves up and the other side as well so no one would be left.

---Then a cockroach becomes intelligent
Then they pick up a stone
Another cockroach picks up a stick
The stone carrying cockroach smashes the stick carrying cockroach
The stick carrying cockroach gets smashed but it pokes out the eyes of the cockroach with the stick
The stone carrying cockroach is blind
the stick carrying cockroach is smashed.

Its the endless cycle of sticks and stones

[Aegis]

Strikers are a pain when driving, i think the Lancer is pretty effective too, it seems to me from playing all three AV types that the Phoenix is the weakest, i dont know if it does the most damage, but it cant hit moving vehicles!!! The thing just wont turn fast enough to get anything other than directly incoming or outgoing vehicles. The range is too poor as well IMO. Reload is stupidly slow. It cant be used as AA weapons as the striker and to a lesser degree the lancer can. (thank god NC have the sparrow eh?)

Sure, its amazing fun to fly missiles at people, and great for taking out MAXs, but not very effective overall.

[SandTrout]

Originally posted by Skullhead
Its the endless cycle of sticks and stones

Well put.

I think the AV weapons could be balanced fairly easaly by doing 2 things.
A) Slight nerf to striker damage(still 4 shots on MAX, but just barely, or maybe 5 shot Its still 2 clip kill). As is, it kills a MAX in 1 clip if the MAX has seen any fighting whatsoever.

B) Give phoenix a 2 round clip. You can keep the refire rate down to hinder it's use indoors, and outdoors you have to wait until the first missle hits before you can fire the next anyways.

On a separate, somewhat related, note, Reavers have too much armor for what they are. 4 phoenixes are required to make it loose control, which means it has more armor than a Lightning. As is, the Reaver is the second fastest/most menuverable aircraft, has arguably the most powerful firepower, and has heavier armor than the majoraty of ground vehicles. Given it costs 4 certs, but cert cost are not there to balance the weapons power, but rather the vecitility of the weapon-user.

[BigTexas]

Originally posted by FliggenMan
Unbleievably better than the Pheonix and the Lancer against Air, vehicles, and MAX units. Instantaneous travel time is othing compared to homing capabilities. Neither is slightly maneuverable missles controlled by the shooter.
Change needed: A total nerf. Change the striker from a homing missle to a fast firing ballistic AV weapon with lots of Ammo and a lightning fast RoF. Needs smaller ammo for inventory space.

The Striker is, yes quite good, it can home, it does a lot of damage. It does what it is supposed to do very well, take out MAX's, vehicles and aircraft. However, it does little against soft targets, while the Lancer does amazing damage versus infantry, and the Phoenix has proven itself time and time again against infantry. Not to mention that the Striker has a smaller effective range than both of the other anti vehicular weapons, aircraft can use their afterburners and dodge the missle, MAX's can find cover, and vehicles can find a tree to hide behind or simply run over whoever is trying to shoot them. While there is no escape from the Phoenix or Lancer as there is no big red warning prior to the weapon being fired, and the player firing it can be at a much longer range, meaning you can be killed by Phoenix missles and Lancer bolts litteraly before you even know what hit you. The Strikers biggest draw back is the fact that it does lock on, alerting the Armored target with a big red flashing warning.

I like the idea that this guy came up with to "nerf" the Striker, not because I think the Striker is overpowered, but because I think its not as good as the other two. Plus it would be fun as high hell to fire 1000 miniature missles at the enemy like a swarm of exploding gnats.

[Happy lil Elf]

That Reavers have more armor than Lightnings is something that has annoyed me for quite awhile but I seriously doubt they'll change it /shrug

CmdNeo, you're an idiot. First of all what you're talking about is the lancers AA capabilities not it's AV capabilities. There is a difference between the two. The only Empire AV weapons that works well as an AA is the Striker, because of it's relatively fast refire rate and it's homing capabilities and more importantly because it's generally used in large numbers. The Phoenix packs a good punch but it lacks the manuverability to hit air targets reliably unless they are holding still. If they're holding still it's not hard for a Lancer to hit them either, and the Lancer refires a hell of a lot faster (damage over time on a Lancer is greater than a Phoenix and that becomes much more true the further the target gets from the user).

The Lancer does not need to be upgraded against vehichles, by which I mean ground vehicles. I can be driving along minding my own business and all of a sudden some dick with a Lancer starts sniping me. There is no dodging, because there's nothing to dodge. If he keps his crosshairs over me (which isn't all that tough when you're talking about ground vehicles) I get hit. There's no chance to break the lock. There's no chance to try and screw the pilot of the missile up.

Even with that I'm fine with the Lancer. I think it's a decently balanced weapon. Maybe a bit too effective against infantry but I can deal with that, especially since I drive tanks about 90% of the time. But to suggest that it needs an upgrade? That's just pure idiocy. If any AV weapon needs an upgrade it's the Phoenix, and all that could really use is just a tweak to be a little more effective inside. Overall the AV weapons are pretty well balanced.

AV weapons are not good at AA. Even the Striker isn't all that good unless it's being used by multiple people (which it usually is but that's beside the point because we can't balance weapons based on the number of peole using them, for obvious reasons). If you want AA get an AA MAX or a skyguard. Hell even a Lightning/Medium tank with a decent gunner is better for AA than most of the Empire specific AV weapons. Yes I know the Vanu AA MAX has problems but before you point that out let me also point out they're being fixed.

[SandTrout]

Originally posted by BigTexas
the Phoenix has proven itself time and time again against infantry.

Since when has the phoenix proven itself against infantry? The Phoenix sucks against infantry more than even the striker. At least the stiker can be used close range vs. infantry(I've seen it done enough).

The only reason you see phoenixes used against infantry is because its just fun as hell to fly bombs into people, even if not that effective. The phoenix is easaly the Least vercitile of the AV weapons. It's only particularly good for takeing out MAXes outdoors(it is good at that though). It's less than useless indoors and you cant fire fast enough to kill aircraft before the jet, or do signifigant damage to ground vehicles before they run you over.

[Kikinchikin]

Ok b4 we get into balancing the weapons and what not lets look at each empires strengths YET AGAIN.

MA- no clear cut winner all weapons are good- pulsar is like a sniper rifle almost, cycler has a huge clip and gauss deals good dmage
HA- VS win lasher still ownz, NC follow behind closely and TR are trailing horribly, even tho I love the MCG and i use it every time i set foot on a battlefield it still is not up to par with the others IMO.
AV- TR win. striker is a great weapon but gosh the TR wouldnt need a good weapon would they??? NO OF COURSE NOT!
Buggy- enforcer is best IMO altho the maurader is ok as is thresher
Tank- VS/NC are tied on thisone. Both are great. as i stated in a different thread Prowler is severely lacking
AI max- TR pounder other thing they have thats good. Comet and scattercannon are very close tho so thgis category is balanced
AV max- IMO all of them suck but i guess the NC one
AA max- NC hands down. SINCE WHEN CAN U NOT SEE THE MISSILES ON UR PROXY MAP I CANT SEE A STARFIRES SHOTS NOR A SPARROWS SHOTS ITS SOOOOOO GAY! Burster requires more skill than the others cuz u have to actually place ur shots instead of lock ons.

well thats ur break down. Empires are balanced IMO altho many say the TR are underpowered which i sometimes agree its just that each xcells in different places. so stfu about nerfing crap.

[SandTrout]

Originally posted by Lilbird2431
SINCE WHEN CAN U NOT SEE THE MISSILES ON UR PROXY MAP I CANT SEE A STARFIRES SHOTS NOR A SPARROWS SHOTS ITS SOOOOOO GAY!

Can't see striker's either. It's very annoying.

Bursters are a fine MAX as long as you dont let the enemy get close to you. Their advantage is that they dont give a lock-on warning like the sparrow and starfire, and when anchored, nothing gets out alive.