Rockets effectivity? - Page 2

Venoxile · 2003-04-01, 05:42 PM

That's what I'm hoping, Warborn. I wonder how much damage a rocket would do to an infantry? 50 hp? 30 hp?

Also, I would really like to know how many rockets it would take to beat down a tank? Or a reaver? I think it'd be unfair if it took like 5 to take down a reaver, meaning it would take a squad of infantry just to take down a 1 man flying unit. 5 people take down 1 person. That's what i'm worried about. I still think there needs to be some kind of anti-air weapon that could take a reaver down in 2 shots.

Ouroboros · 2003-04-01, 05:53 PM

Which one Zat? If you're talking about the fileplanet video, I'm pretty sure he got hit by a bolt driver, and then a AI VS MAX finished him off. Why AI? Because the AV MAX does damage over time, which would probably make the rate of fire slow, while the MAX in the video had like full auto.

Zatrais · 2003-04-01, 05:55 PM

Not the fileplanet video, that guy gets sniped and a AI VS MAX on him.

Its in one of the gamespot vids.

Ouroboros · 2003-04-01, 05:57 PM

Oh yeah, but that's old school man.

Old school.

Zatrais · 2003-04-01, 06:01 PM

It did less damage than the AI weapon would over small timespan BUT devs has also stated that AV weapons (least on MAXs) will be efficient enough to let them defend themselfs against infantry.

Ouroboros · 2003-04-01, 06:06 PM

It won't be efficient, no way the devs would make a weapon designed to take out vehicles still do well against infantry. Yes, a well place AV MAX could take out an infantry or two, but other then that, if it's just wondering in an open area, I think infantry has a great chance of taking them out.

AV weaponries.

Zatrais · 2003-04-01, 06:14 PM

And based on what i've seen i think you're dead wrong. Just because the vid is old dosn't mean it's invalid. Also been said by devs that they won't be defenceless against infantry no matter what the config. PS isn't a pure paper, rock and scissors game from what i've gathered.

Annyways, as for infantry versus a MAX, course infantry can kill a MAX whitout to much problem, just need some AV weapons. Decimators for instance hehe. Or some AP rounds in your weapons.

Think of it like this, you can't make MAXs become to specialised else they would be WAY to good at the thing they're specialised in.

Ouroboros · 2003-04-01, 06:18 PM

The thing is, they ARE good at what they are specialized in. AI TR MAX mow down infantry like there's no tomorrow. Now, I don't know about you, but I would NOT want a twin chaingun welding MAX being able to take down vehicles and aircrafts well. Yes, they would probably do some damage, but come on, that IS why there are specialized MAXs right?

Venoxile · 2003-04-01, 06:19 PM

I'm just worried that a max would take 6 rockets to go down. I mean 6 infantry vs. 1 max being equal is incredibly bad. I mean whats the point of infantry when there are squads of maxes, all different kinds. 10 infantry vs. 3 anti infantry maxes, 3 anti vehicle maxes, and 3 anti air maxes. Who wins? I think it'd be good if you could take down a max with 2-3 rockets.

Ouroboros · 2003-04-01, 06:23 PM

And on top of what Veno said, PS is about strategy and team work, if a MAX specialized for taking out vehicles could take out infantry effectively, then all you would need is a bunch of AV MAXs without the need of AI.

Venoxile · 2003-04-01, 06:29 PM

I'm not worried av killing infantry or ai maxes killing vehicles. I'm worried about infantry being pointless when squads of maxes can take out the same number of infantry.

Warborn · 2003-04-01, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by Venoxile
I'm not worried av killing infantry or ai maxes killing vehicles. I'm worried about infantry being pointless when squads of maxes can take out the same number of infantry.

Squads of MAXs will be screwed blue if they don't have any infantry with them, both for repairs, healing, and for opening doors, hacking bases, and that kind of thing. I know if I was against a half-dozen MAXs and they had one infantryman with them, I'd do whatever I can to kill the infantryman, as the MAXs might as well pack it up and call it a day without infantry support.

1024 · 2003-04-01, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by Venoxile
That would actually be incredibly powerful, I still think that the striker will be best av, then lancer, then phoenix even though im nc. The only real reason I'm NC is I like the colors, and I like the gauss. I plan to be assaulting bases, so the assault rifle really matters to me... I still don't understand why in the polls there are so many pilots, if you really like flying that much, play a flight sim, not an fps.

hey if you dont wanna be in the air, you can be on the ground being shot at

Venoxile · 2003-04-01, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by Spike
hey if you dont wanna be in the air, you can be on the ground being shot at

Yeah... that's what I was saying, I'd rather be in the front lines on the ground then in the air.

mr_luc · 2003-04-01, 11:52 PM

I don't think the whole "wah, 6 guys to take out 1 guy" argument is a very valid one. :P

The MAX has a lot of disadvantages. It's slow. It takes a lot of preparation (you can't just spawn it from an AMS, so you need to get a ride). These disadvantages mean that, yes, maybe it will take a lot of infantry to take out a MAX. They're apples to oranges. In a different situation, one infantry might take out one MAX with no trouble -- in fact we have heard of this happening!

A player in Reenforced armor can call his own shots -- get in a buggy, drive around at very high speed, snipe some enemies, get out, assault a base, fly a guided missile, hack into a base, repair people, resurrect people . . .

A MAX armor has one ability, one option. No sneaking. No breaking into bases. No easy play time -- you get into your MAX and get a ride with someone, or you walk.

Same with an Agile armor. They can pilot, but there's nothing that an Agile can do besides that that a Reenforced armor can't do better. Piloting is their ONLY ability -- and so, if they meet you one-on-one and they're in their Reaver and you're out in the open, one-on-one, they SHOULD win. And if you don't have AA, they should win even if there are 6 of you, unless you get to some cover, or they really suck.

I don't think any player's weapon should take down a Reaver in 2 shots. Stop and think about that. Almost anyone could get off two shots at a Reaver in the course of a fight. :P I think that it should take at least 4 or 5 shots from any homing missile, *maybe* 3 shots from a Phoenix. The Pheonix is the one weapon I can see justifying 2-shot kills on a Reaver . . . but the thing is, for those other weapons, you can shoot over and over and over, and it's harder to aim a ship than it is a gun -- which means that even in the open, if you have a strong, fully loaded AA weapon, you probably have a chance.

If you have any cover around at all, then the odds become extremely even. And if there's significant cover, and multiple people with AA weapons, the Reaver would have a tough time doing anything, because you can always duck behind cover -- whereas aircraft are just ripe, juicy targets waiting for someone to pluck them out of the sky.