Increase Titan-150 AP velocity - Page 2

Baneblade · 2013-06-01, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by FaxManiac

It can shred through anything at close range and is just as deadly from a distance.

Define distance. Are we talking about over 500 meters?

Ruffdog · 2013-06-01, 05:03 PM

I'd be fine with just the NC getting this but with the caveat of a longer refire time.
With faster travel time on your payloads it's fair to say you will miss less. And as your one round damages exactly the same as two TR rounds, plus the extra armor on a vannie, engagements will all be pre decided.

Falcon_br · 2013-06-01, 05:58 PM

If we were playing world of tanks were almost all engagement happens from 500+ to 1.500+ I would agree with the increase of muzzle velocity.
But we are playing a game where if you move beyond 500+ the enemy can no longer see or damage you, I don´t see the point of very high speed bullets.
On wot we need about 0,5-2 seconds of bullet time travel to hit the enemy tank.
On planetside we got the same.
Looks ok for me, it takes the same kind of skill to hit moving targets on both games.
Any increase on the muzzle velocity = magrider nerf, be sure about that.
It is very common to see strafing ADADADAD macros magriders that are almost impossible to hit on long range without deploy, the time we got the deploy is the same time the vanguard shield lasts so he can close in the target, so I really dont see any problem here, the bigger difference is that we are sitting ducks while on deploy mode while the vanguard is still a moving target with better armor.
And one of the things the kill me most while on ESF flying on maximum velocity, are vanguard HEAT or AP rounds, so I really think if they increase the speed, they will become the best anti air in the game.

isilyan · 2013-06-01, 07:42 PM

My 5 certs about AP....

Lower the drop to Halbard level, drop starts around 150 meters.
Buff speed to 300-400 meters per second, Empire specific.
Remove splash dam from AP, the Titan in its current form has 4 meters, dont know what the Mag and Spamburger AP area is

Remove OHK from non headshot to Inf, Maxes should still take full damage.
Tewaks to Empire specific AP reload times.

Rbstr · 2013-06-02, 12:32 AM

Not unless Mags get a straight velocity buff and Prowlers get one + a rebalance of lockdown.

I think it's fine as is. More speed would make the AP gun too powerful against aircraft and faster vehicles. It's already borderline IMO.

Baneblade · 2013-06-02, 12:37 AM

The velocity buff wouldn't really do much for short (<100 m) and medium (100-500 m) range combat scenarios, the idea is to increase the viability of long (>500 m) range MBT combat.

Rendering is not an issue for MBTs at those ranges. At least I've never had issue with it.

Now, it is possible that it would be a negative change all round for aircraft when engaged by MBTs. But I'm not concerned with that so long as air still has the ability to destroy an MBT without any risk.

Ruffdog · 2013-06-02, 03:30 AM

http:// https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Amnj8jnZLDIOdDRjMURYRlY0bDlpNjNfSW11MV83X 1E&output=html

The least breaking route may be to lower the gravity on all AP rather than up the speed. I would log test server time for that. Or is it nonsensical a largely metal payload weighs less than explosives housed in a case?

Emperor Newt · 2013-06-02, 05:59 AM

As driving the Lightning more then anything else (MBT second) I would welcome a AP velocity buff. Would make sniping ESFs and Libs even easier. AP already is the best vehicle based AA (maybe except a double AA sundi), this would make it even better. If this would be a good thing on the other hand...

Baneblade · 2013-06-02, 08:37 AM

I guess the question should be, has anyone noticed a sudden lack of ability to engage a lock down Prowler from the air?

AThreatToYou · 2013-06-02, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by Ruffdog

http:// https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Amnj8jnZLDIOdDRjMURYRlY0bDlpNjNfSW11MV83X 1E&output=html

The least breaking route may be to lower the gravity on all AP rather than up the speed. I would log test server time for that. Or is it nonsensical a largely metal payload weighs less than explosives housed in a case?

I understand this is a game, where mechanics and balance are in play,

but doesn't SOE know that gravity effects -all- mass the same?
Bowling ball and a baseball accelerate toward the center of Earth's mass at the same rate... thus same speed...

so the gravity of the lightning 75mm, falcon, pounder, fracmax, et cetera should all be the same number... and I would accept that at 4.

Anyway, physics rant. No, I think all weapons should have the same gravity. The use of a weapon gets complicated when different weapons are affected by gravity differently.

Now, it would be a solid argument to say that the AP shell might be more aerodynamic than other projectiles. Or it may even be self-propelled in addition to that. In which case, the shell might generate lift to counter-act gravity and result in its effective mitigation...

Rbstr · 2013-06-02, 11:38 AM

Yeah they should all fall roughly the same. Especially over the relatively short distances they travel vertically in the game.
Arc should be based on projectile velocity, foremost.

But all the tank shells are the same.

I don't see anything wrong with AP velocity, even as a user of the slowest (and lowest DPS) gun. Nobody has made an argument why it's good for the game. "It'll make the gun better". Why does it need to be better? It's already good.
The fact it's relatively hard to hit a moving target at range is a critical part of the balance.
Why do you want to push tank ranges farther out?

Kail · 2013-06-02, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

I understand this is a game, where mechanics and balance are in play,

but doesn't SOE know that gravity effects -all- mass the same?
Bowling ball and a baseball accelerate toward the center of Earth's mass at the same rate... thus same speed...

so the gravity of the lightning 75mm, falcon, pounder, fracmax, et cetera should all be the same number... and I would accept that at 4.

Anyway, physics rant. No, I think all weapons should have the same gravity. The use of a weapon gets complicated when different weapons are affected by gravity differently.

Now, it would be a solid argument to say that the AP shell might be more aerodynamic than other projectiles. Or it may even be self-propelled in addition to that. In which case, the shell might generate lift to counter-act gravity and result in its effective mitigation...

Dropping a flat piece of paper and a baseball, they hit the ground at different times, which is of course due to the fact that falling speed is dependent on more than just gravity.

PS2 could have tried to program an accurate fluid dynamics model, and from a geeky perspective, that would be cool. However that would be a tall order for a computer in a heavy firefight. So they took a performance hack approach - they rolled all the different systems into a multiplier to gravity so that they can get the gameplay they want for a fraction of the CPU power required.

Sunrock · 2013-06-02, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by Baneblade

The velocity buff wouldn't really do much for short (<100 m) and medium (100-500 m) range combat scenarios, the idea is to increase the viability of long (>500 m) range MBT combat.

Rendering is not an issue for MBTs at those ranges. At least I've never had issue with it.

Now, it is possible that it would be a negative change all round for aircraft when engaged by MBTs. But I'm not concerned with that so long as air still has the ability to destroy an MBT without any risk.

You're aware that the range between bases is around 500m right? So you want it to be easier for MBT to sit at base A and kill stuff at base B.

This would not been a bad idea if the continents where bigger and more space between the bases. Or if they remove every other base from the map. But as the bases are very close to each other.... no.

Baneblade · 2013-06-02, 12:47 PM

Well I can only speak for myself, but I'm regularly in tank battles at those ranges.

KesTro · 2013-06-02, 12:51 PM

Must be same seabed or Esamir fights hehe. While I would like to see AP velocity or damage increased we have to keep in mind that things are balanced around Indar. (>>

It'll be interesting to see how exactly the game changes with a new continent in the rotation and what new problems it exposes.

You may not even be able to have a fight at 500m on Hossin, who knows.