Cant dumb fire AA rockets = 100% illogical

[Wolfgang Mozart]

Now we wont be able to dumb fire AA rockets without a lock on. So what happens exactly, does the trigger simply disappear without a lock on? They could've implemented many other changes (decreased dumbfire damage) than this wholly illogical one.

[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by Wolfgang Mozart

Now we wont be able to dumb fire AA rockets without a lock on. So what happens exactly, does the trigger simply disappear without a lock on? They could've implemented many other changes (decreased dumbfire damage) than this wholly illogical one.

This is really what you are upset about? I'm more upset about the AV rocket requiring a lock-on because as it is the rocket typically fires at the bottom portion of vehicles meaning any variation in terrain will prevent the rocket from connecting... much less all the other things tanks/sunderers can roll behind. The saving grace for the AV rocket launcher was you could dumbfire it to actually get hits.

The AA rocket change was needed in my opinion because you could pick it up and be just as effective as having the default against infantry/vehicles and still lock-on to air.

I keep suggesting that SOE change the AV rocket launcher to more like a Javelin out of Battlefield 3. Tanks already have IR smoke.. make it break the lock and the Javelins still lock-on and hit angle will help better ensure the AV rockets usefulness.

[Bear]

Originally Posted by Dragonskin

I keep suggesting that SOE change the AV rocket launcher to more like a Javelin out of Battlefield 3. Tanks already have IR smoke.. make it break the lock and the Javelins still lock-on and hit angle will help better ensure the AV rockets usefulness.

This would also make top armor far more valuable!

[Wolfgang Mozart]

A weapon should have the capacity to discharge, even if its not pointed at anything. They could have made it less effective without a lock on and it would've been much more logical.

[ShadetheDruid]

I think the change is great.

For reference, I picked up the AA launcher the other day knowing full well that this change was coming (I got it to shoot aircraft anyway, not to abuse the mechanics against vehicles). After a few days of using the launcher, I can totally see why they decided it needed fixing.

It's just way too effective against ground targets when it shouldn't be, because of the speed of the missile.

[Wolfgang Mozart]

Originally Posted by ShadetheDruid

I think the change is great.

For reference, I picked up the AA launcher the other day knowing full well that this change was coming (I got it to shoot aircraft anyway, not to abuse the mechanics against vehicles). After a few days of using the launcher, I can totally see why they decided it needed fixing.

It's just way too effective against ground targets when it shouldn't be, because of the speed of the missile.

As I said, they could've made it FAR less effective than it is against ground vehicles and that would have made much more sense. Having the trigger simply disappear is lazy.

[ShadetheDruid]

How does the same missile magically doing less damage without a lock on make more sense?

It's not even about the "trigger disappearing" at all, this is a lock on launcher after all. It probably has a complex computer system inside that refuses to trigger the firing mechanism if it doesn't detect and lock a target.

[james]

Make dumb fire a cert, problem solved. It is a bit more realistic as in reallife most a2g launchers don't dumb fire.
The major downside is now no one will run crows except when needed, it makes the 14 dollars i spent a crap load less useful

[Wolfgang Mozart]

Originally Posted by james

Make dumb fire a cert, problem solved. It is a bit more realistic as in reallife most a2g launchers don't dumb fire.
The major downside is now no one will run crows except when needed, it makes the 14 dollars i spent a crap load less useful

Its probably a money grab and not a balancing act. Im sure down the line there will be another aa rocket that can dumb fire... for a low low price :/

[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by Wolfgang Mozart

Its probably a money grab and not a balancing act. Im sure down the line there will be another aa rocket that can dumb fire... for a low low price :/

How can you argue against the change for balance? You have a dumbfire only rocket launcher. Then you could buy a lock-on AV or AA rocket launcher that could also dumbfire. Technically that made the stance of buying power more true because free to play users were at a disadvantage for not spending money to get a rocket launcher that was dual function. Now if you want to dumbfire you have to use the default that is available to everyone or you can buy rocket launchers that have specific advantages that come with a clear disadvantage to balance the advantage.

QQ MOAR!

[Wolfgang Mozart]

Originally Posted by Dragonskin

How can you argue against the change for balance? You have a dumbfire only rocket launcher. Then you could buy a lock-on AV or AA rocket launcher that could also dumbfire. Technically that made the stance of buying power more true because free to play users were at a disadvantage for not spending money to get a rocket launcher that was dual function. Now if you want to dumbfire you have to use the default that is available to everyone or you can buy rocket launchers that have specific advantages that come with a clear disadvantage to balance the advantage.

QQ MOAR!

lol no ones arguing against balance. as I said many times so far: Make it FAR FAR less effective against ground vehicles, but simply removing the capacity to fire is lazy and retarded. I also wonder what your stance will be when they offer a new rocket that can dumb fire and lock on.

[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by Wolfgang Mozart

I also wonder what your stance will be when they offer a new rocket that can dumb fire and lock on.

IF games are fun... I wonder what will happen IF the world ends on 12/21/12. I wonder what happens IF FireFall takes all of Planetside 2's population because it has PvE content and a story with it's PvP. What IF you actually are in the matrix and this is all fake?

What IF you are just wrong?

[Wolfgang Mozart]

Originally Posted by Dragonskin

IF games are fun... I wonder what will happen IF the world ends on 12/21/12. I wonder what happens IF FireFall takes all of Planetside 2's population because it has PvE content and a story with it's PvP. What IF you actually are in the matrix and this is all fake?

What IF you are just wrong?

one thing im not wrong about is the skies and ground just got a whole lot friendlier. guess ill just have to be a dedicated engi from here on out

[Zaik]

bolt action rifles and personal shield systems, don't even bother trying to bring any sort of real world logic into this.

[Elgareth]

Originally Posted by Wolfgang Mozart

Make it FAR FAR less effective against ground vehicles, but simply removing the capacity to fire is lazy and retarded.

Huh. Just imagine that you are shooting the rocket, it just doesn't do any damage when not locked
What exactly would you want to do with a rocket that you CAN fire, but only does exactly 1 Damage on Vehicles and Infantry if not locked?...

It isn't even THAT illogical IMHO. As someone said: The intelligent rockets need a target, so that they can bury themself into their target before exploding, to maximize damage. To not waste them and prevent Friendly Fire, you can't dumbfire them accidentally onto friendly Vehicles or when you didn't want to.

I don't really see the problem in accepting that logic, once you realize we have Nanites Rebuilding Bodies and Turrets infinitely with your Medic/Engy Gun, Teleportation, infinite Fueled Aircraft etc.
And I don't really see a problem gameplay-wise either... if the damage indeed was cut by 90% if not locked...what would you do with it? Gathering 50 HAs to focus on one tank with AA Missiles, to bring him down after 150 Rockets? Not the best plan