anti air

[Baneblade]

Mosquitos are too effective on vehicles for a 30mm not to be.

[EarlyDawn]

I could give a damn what number you want to call it. The bottom line is it would have to be great against infantry, and decent against light vehicles. 25 is taken, IIRC, so I picked 30.

There number means nothing. I just picked an empty number that seemed reasonable for an aircraft (Apaches carry a 35mm cannon, IIRC, not that it means anything), and suggested it. The key is great vs infantry, decent vs light vehicles over time.

[Baneblade]

I think a fixed 25mm or even the current 20mms cept more centered would be sufficient.

[Cauldron Borne]

Read my post on too effective = bad. It's the one where I mistook the lib nose mount to be a 30mm, instead of a 35mm. If infantry are shreaded faster with a nose cannon than they were with rockets, we have acheived nothing.

[Baneblade]

Rockets take less precision, using guns takes more balls since you spend more time taking each target down even if you use a 35mm.

The Lib is successful mainly because it has endurance. Bet giving it Reaver armor would change its effectiveness greatly.

[EarlyDawn]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

Rockets take less precision, using guns takes more balls since you spend more time taking each target down even if you use a 35mm.

Precisely, which is why I think the <Insert Nose Gun Size Here> should chew through infantry at approximately the same damage as the rockets, but individually. Then you'd actually have to aim.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

The Lib is successful mainly because it has endurance. Bet giving it Reaver armor would change its effectiveness greatly.

The lib's gun that can kill infantry before they have time to react some of the time. It's really, really strong. But the liberator's endurance is also its enemy, as its bulk and slower turning ability make it more difficult to aim with. Give a 30mm or so gun to a more agile craft like a reaver and we're not making any progress at all, especially if it's also got armor-killing warheads, as the 30mm would be awesome at killing infantry, AND it'd be great at killing armor. What, exactly, would be the point of all this? To make the reaver even more powerful? Who would ever use ground vehicles if this were to be done? I'm not seeing the method to this madness at all.

[Hoza]

I think the main suggestion is that they're changing the Reaver to a 2 man craft with a gunner controlling either the rockets or the gun. I could see how this might stop (or rather slow) the Reaver swarm and encourage more teamwork. AirCav would still have the mossy as rapid 1 man transport and Air to Air.

This could change the Reaver from a Uber Sky Lightning able to do everything pretty well to the Main Battle Tank of the sky - requiring some team work and co-ordination between the players to be able to rule.

I quite like the idea of adding the minimum flight speed as well, if the nose cannon was pretty effective it would be nice to see some strafeing runs.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Hoza

I quite like the idea of adding the minimum flight speed as well, if the nose cannon was pretty effective it would be nice to see some strafeing runs.

It would also make for more interesting air combat. To be fair, I think homing weapons should be nerfed somewhat if this change were to come into place, though. The entire game's AA basis has been built up alongside these overpowered vehicles, and if Air Cavalry were to finally be put in its place, there'd be no need for the level of ground-to-air weaponry we have now. If a reaver can't kill you in a couple seconds, every time, there's not as much call for the powerful-en-mass, never-miss weaponry that the TR infantry tend to have, and that the VS and NC MAXs are armed with. If reavers actually need to aim, I'd think homing weapons should be made imperfect, a la Battlefield: Vietnam, where the missiles have a large turning radius, making when you fire, and how good the enemy is at jinking, an important part of using the weapons successfully.

[Madcow]

Again, I would say remove AA MAXs altogether if they made that change. Maybe nerf the Striker's air ability (either can't lock or does very minimal damage) and leave only Skyguards and opposing air as the only things that are truly effective at bringing air down. There would be dogfights all the time, that seems cool, and pilots wouldn't have to worry about AA disrupting their fun.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Madcow

Again, I would say remove AA MAXs altogether if they made that change. Maybe nerf the Striker's air ability (either can't lock or does very minimal damage) and leave only Skyguards and opposing air as the only things that are truly effective at bringing air down. There would be dogfights all the time, that seems cool, and pilots wouldn't have to worry about AA disrupting their fun.

I'd actually agree with the removing of AA MAXs (and the toning down of the striker vs aircraft), but, thing is, they've already done the art for the AA MAXs. It would be a waste to remove them, even though I certainly do agree that at their current power they too will only impede the betterment of the game. I dunno, I'm still kind of trying to think of a way that a melee MAX could be compelling and balanced enough to be worthwhile. Maybe the AA MAXs could be switched to that, art-wise, or some other previously non-existant variant?

[Queensidecastle]

not to mention playing as an AA MAX is very fun

[Madcow]

Originally Posted by Warborn

I'd actually agree with the removing of AA MAXs (and the toning down of the striker vs aircraft), but, thing is, they've already done the art for the AA MAXs. It would be a waste to remove them, even though I certainly do agree that at their current power they too will only impede the betterment of the game. I dunno, I'm still kind of trying to think of a way that a melee MAX could be compelling and balanced enough to be worthwhile. Maybe the AA MAXs could be switched to that, art-wise, or some other previously non-existant variant?

For a melee MAX (which is something I've also been giving thought) I think they should just steal the 'tank' concept from RPGs. Give the MAX melee power that wouldn't even exceed a knife on secondary mode, but give them like 4x the armor. Bullet sponges, basically. Put those bad boys on the front line and let Thumper users hide behind them raining hell. It would increase teamwork, increase strategy, keep the Uni-MAX cert worth 5 points and suddenly the 2 point MAX suit would make sense as being worth less than 3 certs as you'd be hard pressed to score a lot of kills with a slow moving, not powerful melee machine. My only concern would be how few people would actually use it specifically because it wouldn't score a lot of kills.

[Warborn]

Yeah. The idea I was envisioning for them would be deadlock-breakers. Taking a tower can be a pain in the ass, but with some MAXs that had increased footspeed, melee power (this requiring they get right up into the enemy), and big armor, a few of them would cause most defenses to buckle as the enemy flees their advance, trying to kill them while also causing damage to their allies.

As for few people using it, I think if they made it cosmetically cool enough (look to Warhammer 40k for some neat melee weapons on big suits of armor) and didn't make it too ineffective (they'd have to move faster than normal MAXs) they'd have enough of a following. They'd of course be a niche suit of armor, but then, so are AA MAXs. Well, the TR one anyway. VS and NC ones are actually pretty good at killing infantry.

[Sanguinius]

mmmmmm. lightning claw max.


now if only they made NC+TR max helms look more like terminator helms, instead of the silly looking glass bubbles.

its too bad flamethrowers would cause too much lag......