The "How to Fix teh VS" Thread

[Zarparchior]

I have the discenting opinion on the Lancer. Yeah, good infantry weapon. Damn good. Still... it's difficult to use at distances if the target is moving or if it's not infantry. The damage vs. vehicles is very very crappy. Vangaurds quiver at the sight of Reavers while a stray Phoenix may give them pause. The lock-on message from a Striker will surely upset them, but they only shrug "teh uber" Lancer shots off, the VS' "only" cause.

I personally think that the Lancer should be replaced with the Lasher as the Anti-Vehicular, which would automatically albeit not perfectly and rather stupidly track the nearest "vehicle" it was fired at (counting MAXs). It might miss, but at least the "lashes" would do some minimal damage to the vehicle. It would have about the same projectile speed as it does now, but would only fire about 6 shots before needing to reload. Instead of having a seperate ammo-type, it would use the standard VS battery (versatility! whoa... dude...) and might use maybe 16 units per shot. This weapon would obviously have to made more effective against vehicles, and less against infantry. I could name off some percents I guess, but exact numbers would be rather vague as I seem to have kept my Notebook of Excrutiating Details in my other jacket. I think we'd all be able to agree on what this "balanced" medium would be, though.

On the flip side, the Lancer would replace the Heavy Assault category. It would have two modes of fire: the one it has now (for longer ranges) and... ehem... an energy flamethrower! Yes, I'm aware that they didn't put it in the game for a reason (frames per second would turn to crap if it looked respectable, yet would look really really crappy if it would run smoothly). But being "energy" would make it kinda vague, and allow more creativity for the visual. Not that I care what the action looked like that much. Hell, it could be just some sparks for all I care - as long as it was a short range powerful firing mode (like the other HA certs).

Before you cry overpowered and claim I smoke the crack, obviously these would have the staple VS disadvantage: damage. Our damage sux0rs, but it's supposed to... it's just not supposed to sux0r this badly. So, it might take a full 6 direct shots of the new Lasher to down a MAX. THAT IS OKAY, as it's RoF would be faster than the previous Lasher and would kill at about the same rate as the Striker, instead of much much longer...

I have many other suggestions, but my break is already finished. I know no one cares anymore, I know no one likes me anymore, but at least my assholesness can be explained somewhat as my work is one of the more stressful jobs out there, and with the customer care business not doing as well you feel the stress even moreso everyday. So if I lash out on you guys and this game from time to time, it's because I had a piss poor day at work and came home to dying a bunch in PS. You know... the rubbing salt in open wounds effect.

But I really do most of you guys still... mostly .

And if you don't care about what I have to say and that the TR are fine and that the VS should shutup and stop playing cuz we suck so much and that we should all die and go to hell because that's where all purple pirates go, then fine. I'm still going to whine, complain, and provide my flawless arguments.

[TheJingle]

Honestly I dont think they need much buffing up...I think they should make it so the Pulsars damage drops off less at range (make it comparative to the other 2) , and maybe add a bit more ammo to the clips of the AI max (not alot more , maybe up it to 50 from 40) . Other than that theyre fine , I also think though , that the TR maxes should be toned down a bit (inc flames to me ) , because even though I realize different empires have different strenghts/weaknesses , the other empires (NC's jackhammer and overall well roundedness , and VS's Magrider/jumpjets) advantages are not nearly as far ahead of the "competition" as the TR maxes are .I just think its a bit silly that the AI and AV max of the TR are both signifigantly better at killing infantry than the VS ones even when they are not locked down (have not played NC maxes so I wont comment there , but I have played both TR and VS maxes , and not just in VR training ;p ). Sorry for turning this into somewhat of a TR whine thread , though I still dont think TR are as overpowered as some people do , only slightly .

[Seer]

I think the lasher and lancer are both fine weapons well suited to their task. If there's something wrong with the VS, it isn't those.

[Zarparchior]

TheJingle - I agree with you about the TR. The Ass-Pounder (i.e. Pounder) MAX wipes the floor with infantry. Three direct to very close shots will usually kill you as agile OR reinforced, still does very nice damage against vehicles, and has the added bonus of being area effect and being able to bounce the explosives off walls, making them teh gods of indoor tower camping. And the I Win (i.e. Dual-Cycler) MAX must be some kind of devly joke. I mean, it's effective against EVERYTHING. I want it.

As for the Pulsar... this weapon is crap. It has significantly lower damage at longer ranges, but has good recoil and accuracy. WTF? Those things cancel each other out! At ranges the Gauss is much better and close up the Cycler will rip you apart. Tell me when the Pulsar is oh-so-effective.

Seer - You are wrong. You provide no argument, so neither should I.

[Slice]

Being a TR MAX player but a former VS player, I understand you perfectly. I would try and re-cap one of my bases only to find 2 TR MAX Dual Cyclers planted in the door. However, most ppl blow the power of the TR WAY out of proportion. Ppl get angry about the mini-cg, and that thing is inaccurate as all get out. The only way to kill someone with it is to be in an indoor area, gaurenteeing (sp? lol) hits. However, I do admit, although I hate to, being a TR player, that there are major problems with the TR Max's. Such as Dual-Cycler being AV but being excellent at mowing down infantry. Dual-Pounder being AI but is good at AV. So personally, I think there are problems all around. Personally, I'd trade the versatility of the Max's for better CG accuracy, right now the cycler is better then the CG and the cycler costs less.

[Seer]

The only 'argument' you really offered was your opinion that the Lancer doesn't do enough damage to vehicles and maxs. I also use the lancer on a daily basis, and it's my opinion that the Lancer does do enough damage to vehicles. It's true that weapons that deliver heavy hits will cause vehicle units to be afraid and retreat more often--but shrugging off the lancer is a mistake, I've killed plenty that way. It's true that I would give up a little of the Lancer's power against infantry to have greater effectiveness against vehicles, but I feel that this balance is part of the philosophy of the weapon.

Likewise, you think that the Lasher isn't up to the task of heavy assault--killing infantry in close quarters. I've used it in this capacity to great effect, clearing out entire rooms of enemy infantry. In my experience the Lasher is a highly lethal, if underrated, weapon in its category. The mini-chaingun isn't that great, and the jackhammer might be better for facing off against single infantryman in close quarter--but for groups of enemy infantry, the lasher offers unequaled suppression and above average lethality.

[Slice]

I agree Seer, the CG is only good, and I mean ONLY, if your in a freakin spawn room or a heavily defended CC room. You have to be in an enclosed, target-rich room for the CG to own.

[Zarparchior]

I agree with you there. The chaingun is not overpowered. If a Chaingunner runs into a Lasherman it'll depend on who got the jump on who... if it's a Jackhammer vs. any infantry at close range then just get up and grab yourself a soda or something, because you're already respawning.

But I don't think it's overpowered by any means. At medium distances the damage is quite laughable, and at longer rangers... well, the yokes on you the yokes on you. The Chaingun is pretty crappy right now if you run up against a Jackhammerer. You need to get close to do any damage but if you do you'll probably die... hard choice.

The main reason I said the above idea for the Lancer/Lasher switch is a) it's original, b) it would help the balancing, and c) this would help promote something *new.* What do I mean by that? Well... Let us see...

TR advantage = Superior Rate of Fire (more bullets in them = less in you)
NC advantage = Superior Damage (more pain for them = less pain for you)
VS advantage = Versatility (?)

The VS advantage is not very well definied... We're supposed to be "Versatile." Well whoopdefrickendoo. We can change our medium assault, AI MAX, and pistol to AP mode without having to bring extra ammo. Weeeeeeee. Isn't that great since when I'm playing one of the other empires that I don't even CARRY AP ammo? It's pointless. It's like changing from a fat free meal to a meal that only has a one calorie. You're not going to taste the difference. So... no. Not a fighting advantage.

We also get "hover" abilities for our extremely underused and craptacular buggy and more beefy and better Magrider. The hover seems to cause more problems for me then give benefits. I rarely seem to use this wonderful ability during battle. Never have I evaded an enemy's wrath by running away over water. Never have I sped at ludicrous speeds over the waves, getting a surprise attack on a comfy looking evil AMS near the water. And the travel aspect of it is not very exciting either. It might shave off 30 seconds cutting across the water, but there's a good chance you'll need to go across the bridge anyway because rather then a beach on both sides of your crossing, you'll find vertical walls. So... no. Not a fighting advantage.

Our MAX's special ability is the Jumpjets... and I believe it cannot be compared to the lock down ability by any means. By locking down, you can make massive mayhem and deal death and destruction. With jumpjets, you get to surprise them at most - and maybe (if your have either an excellent squad or an organized outfit) co-ordinate an attack to catch the opponent from both sides. However, I can deal with this. This actually DOES have a very small flair of actual and usuable versatility. Still... it doesn't have a direct combat advantage (like the other two MAXs). Ah well. The self-shield really isn't that good right now anyway.

Instead of versatility, we need something more defining. As it stands now most of each empires' weapons:

NC
Greater Advantage: Highest damage
Lesser Disadvantage]: Low rate of fire
Greater Disadvantage]: Very short range

TR
Greater Advantage: Highest rate of fire
Lesser Advantage: Medium damage
Lesser Advantage: Medium range

VS
Lesser Disadvantage: Short range
Lesser Disadvantage: Low rate of fire
Greater Disadvantage: Lowest damage

Makes me sad when I put it like that... of course, those aren't 100% correct. While the Jackhammer fits the NC's description to a T, the Gauss is less so - one of their few weapons that is actually very good at range. This also goes for the Chaingun vs. the Cycler, and the Lancer vs. Pulsar.

The VS advantage is illusionary. Let's make something a bit more tangible, yah? Such as... better range perhaps? Funny how it works out, but it appears that this would be the only kind of advantage that wouldn't encroach on the other Empire's advantages.

Make the Pulsar do the crappiest damage (as it does now) but have the lowest damage drop-off rate. I mean, it's a fricken LASER (or energy projectile at least, if you want to be a stickler ) after all. It shouldn't be that significantly better, but enough to make it noticibly better at ranges.

The Beamer is crap. The only people I see who use it are infiltrator newbs. It's very visible, it's not very powerful, and it's ability to switch to AP rounds is even more useless than normal (since pistol AP rounds do even less damage then normal AP rounds...).

The Lancer (we're going to leave it as AV weapon for now as it seems people have hard time accepting crazily-wildly-new ideas) is good, but needs to be more of an effective AV weapon. For reference, the Striker kills a MAX in 4 shots, with one reload. Total time it takes if all 4 missles hit and you reload the instant you finish firing the last one is about 6 seconds. Same with Lancer, except you need to fire off your entire clip w/ no reload, but must hit all 6 shots (does not have tracking - which is both good and bad). And then there's the Phoenix... if you use it in very close range and reload very quickly, it'll take you about 7 seconds to kill a MAX (3 hits). Of course, you're foolish if you're using that weapon up close. Might as well pack a decimator if you're using Phoenix point blank. Anyway, back to the Lancer. It's a decent AV weapon... but I feel it is almost impossible to kill a Reaver with it. Unless it's a total Reaver newb, you will lose all the time. Why? Is it because the Reaver has much too much armor, firepower, and mobility? Yes, but it's also because the Lancer shots will miss mostly. When zoomed, it is VERY hard to try and lead your shots so it will hit the Reaver. Then trying to play Ms. Cleo and predict the lag and also what the other person is thinking... ugh. So I have three suggestions. Of course, I would not want ALL of them to be implemented, as they are seperate ideas, but I would consider looking at two of them in conjunction. Anyway, the first is to make the Lancer projectile faster. It is not instant hit, and when trying to flex it's high range capabilities against moving targets you'll find yourself frantically jerking your mouse while zoomed to some kind of lead on your target. The other would be to decrease damage vs. infantry and increase damage vs. vehicles. This wouldn't solve all of the problems, IMHO, but is better than leaving it as is. If I want to take out infantry from a distance I'll get the sniper cert. The last (and my favorite) would be to get rid of the stupid Lancer cartridges and replace them with the standard VS battery. Of course, it would have to consume more units... like I said beforehand (except different idea) an ideal amount would be around 16 per shot. that would be *about* the equivilent for inventory space taken up. This would actually add some versatility to teh VS ammo types.

Dammit... I get so off tangent. I bet no one even really reads these posts.

[Zarparchior]

There now Seer, that wasn't so hard was it?

In my opinion (just as you have yours), an AV weapon shouldn't be very effective against infantry. You don't see people with Strikers or Phoenixs gunning for those soft targets. I would rather not see so many people using the Lancer so as well. Of course... if they just nerfed the damage vs. infantry without some other kind of increase right now, I'd quit the game, quit EQ (finally), and cancel my entire family's subscriptions. If they want to pay to play a game where the execs smoke crack-cocaine all day, I won't stop them. It just would not be on my pennies.

The Lasher is good in that it's range is actually pretty damn good. The projectiles are just too slow for them to be used effectively against anything that moves. However, as we all agree, that's teh way it should be. But slow moving orbs that "sometimes" lash (I guess when they feel like it ) the enemy doesn't seem very innovative to me. I guess I'm biased though, as I never wanted to play the VS... damn... I guess I'm just a glutton for punishment.

Anyway, I forgot to say if anyone has better suggestions to go ahead and post them. I don't claim to be even remotely correct in my "fixes." As long as you explain your reasoning you have my respect.

[Hamma]

I dont think the VS is broken to begin with.

Everyone thinks their respective empire is "broken" and needs x y and z so they can dominate

[Incompetent]

Only thing wrong with the barneys is the pulsar and to a much lesser extent, the max suits, i think the best way to fix them would to keep the pulsars close range damage near to what it is now, but have only a very minor amount of damage reduction out to around ~100 meters give or take 20 or so, at which point it would dive down very suddenly. This would make the pulsar the extremely effective midrange weapon that, iirc it was originally planned to be, but still leave it slightly less effective up close and innefective at long range. the VS maxes could also use larger clips, maybe a 30ish percent increase. But other then that i think the overall balance in the game would be even, provided the TR MAXes recieve a slight nerf.

[kerosene31]

The only thing we Vanu really need is for the pulsar to be on par with the gauss and the cycler.

As for the MAXs, they are pretty good. The only slight improvement I would like to see is more ammo capacity without having to reload. Our weapons are pretty decent against other maxs, but the problem is we have to reload before we can kill another Max. To my knowledge, none of the other 2 maxs need to do that in mid fight. I can take down an NC max 1 on 1, but not without having to jet, reload and dodge like crazy.

Sure we have mobility in the max, but the jetpack can only really be used once or twice in a fight.

[Plato]

I run around in a DC max a fair amount and I fear that Lasher, it's a really nasty weapon and it's becoming a lot more common. Trees are only light cover against it and indoors when I get flanked by one, I'm dead real quick.

This morning I encountered a Magrider after getting out of my drop pod. It was a stereotypical encounter. It had no gunner and didn't fire it's driver controlled weapon at me initially. It just ran over me and took out 500 points of armour and tried reversing over me a few times. Luckily it wasn't going fast enough and I peppered away at it as it decided to finally use it's gun on me. Too late, it was already damaged and my supposedly AV DC as the driver bailed and destroyed it

Nice to finally survive being run over by those lawn mowers and take one out too!

[Nitsch]

I think that VS really only have two glaring weaknesses and they are rather minor.

The beamer! On paper it may sound like a cool idea to be able to switch to AP ammo by right clicking, but in reality it will hurt you more than help you. If you accidenlty click on ap ammo... you aint going to kill anything! I have used the AP ammo toggle for one thing, after throwing a jammer on a spitfire and destroying it with 1 shot left in the gun. Other than destroying jammed spitfires, the beamer AP ammo is worthless.

I know you are saying "So, just don't use the damn AP toggle". The problem is that the weapon was balanced against the other guns with this ablity in mind. Because of this ablity it doesn't do as much damage and not as accurate as the repeater (mag-scatter just kicks ass for unique reasons).

Pistols are used primarly by stealthers, when you use a beamer it just sends a homing beacon to your location (the mag-scatter doesn't even send trace fire at all).

My second beef. Why is our knife the only one that glows? I could understand if it didn't make any noise, but it makes a unique noise that will turn someone's back as quickly as a TR or NC knife. Stealthers are the only ones who really use a knife (other than stupid n00b who stands in the CC stabbing the walls for hours when he could be using the sweeper), so why make it glow???? This boggles the hell outa me.

Other than those two self evident things... I think the VS are balanced.

[Zarparchior]

I give up. The Vanu will never be fixed. I believe I have found the problem...

Stupidity.

I joined my Outfit on Markov, and I barely even got to see any of my teamates. I was killed by Vangaurd fire every time. But that's okay... I didn't have a gunner for my Magrider, right? THAT is the problem. Out of our entire outfit and squad, no one wanted to gun. Vehicles kept killing us time and time again, and we had zero for air and vehicle support - just like always.

The majority of VS players are stupid. The only people who seem to play them now are the newbs who think they look cool and stubborn people like myself.

I played all of yesterday and most of today as TR on Johari. My kill to death ratio was about 3:1. Not bad. But you know what? Every time we tried to take a base, we did. We could fend off ANYTHING. We had at any given time 4 reavers in the air. We had at any given time 2 prowlers cruising around. Let me tell you folks... when you dominate the air and ground vehicles you will win all the time. I'd occasionally see some people try to fly a reaver in or even have a few mags that would come and try to run a few over. But they didn't last for longer than 30 seconds. Between the reaver rocket spam and striker spam (since 1 outta 3 people usually carry one), we had things set. Along with our incredibly powerful MAXs, we have everything we would ever need. Intelligence, it seemed.

So this is my offical post of defeat then. I can no longer tolerate the VS. They suck. Whether it's just the weapons, vehicles, players, or mind set I don't know. I'm a significantly better player on any other empire. People seem to actually DO the things I tell my squad all the time. When I say we need reaver support, I don't want everyone to run off by themselves and masturbate or whatever it is that they do. I find it so hard to believe that no one else sees these things and at least attempts to get some kind of organization. Enough is enough. I only play games I have fun with, so I'll be the Empire that I wanted to be since the very first time I heard of this game.

The Terran Republic.

So goodbye, crappy VS players. I hope you guys eventually band together and gain intelligence. I know some of you acutally are smart[/i], and all I can say is I wish you fun and much much luck. Eventually... eventually maybe the others will learn. But that day is not today.

Good luck everyone. Hope to see on the friendly side of the TR's barrel.