This Might Be A Good Time To Introduce Thunder Lrm's
#1
Posted 17 December 2014 - 01:00 PM
For those that don't know, thunder LRM's are an alternative ammunition for lrms that change every missile in to a mine thrower, dropping 5 mines per missile.
deadly against legs, covers an area in mines, same damage as an lrm ie a thunder lrm 5 still does just 5 damage, or as much damage actually hits the target.
Tabletop says the mines are spread allover a hex, a hex being 30 meters across. As near as I can tell the best visual description is two Atlas lying end to end is 28 to 32 meters.
because ammo selection is not in game yet (hurry the hell up on that buy the way) it would mean either a mech equipping dedicated thunder lrm launchers or turning it into a consumable to call down a minefield.
if its a consumable it could be either one size or multiple sizes, delivered via airstrike or turret launch.
#2
Posted 17 December 2014 - 01:14 PM
#3
Posted 17 December 2014 - 01:16 PM
#4
Posted 17 December 2014 - 01:16 PM
#5
Posted 17 December 2014 - 01:17 PM
Hardcore meta-using defenders would have a wave of heavies to batter defenses, a wave of mediums to take out turrets, a wave of lights for the zerg, and now....just imagine.....and entire wave of A1's (or other missile boats) to cover the main paths with an insane amount of mines.
Edited by xeromynd, 17 December 2014 - 01:18 PM.
#6
Posted 17 December 2014 - 01:25 PM
Have a feeling friendly fire would go through the roof though.
#7
Posted 17 December 2014 - 01:25 PM
#8
Posted 17 December 2014 - 01:30 PM
Jody Von Jedi, on 17 December 2014 - 01:25 PM, said:
slight issue there, clans do have it, they never lost it, clans call it FASCAM (Field Artillery Scatterable Mines.) doesn't look like they improved it thought. Technically Clan LRM is sussposed to be longer ranged.
#11
Posted 17 December 2014 - 04:31 PM
#12
Posted 17 December 2014 - 06:08 PM
RAM, on 17 December 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:
Wrong, not in the least.
As near as I can tell all of the extended range lrm ammo was designed because they wanted to match the range of clan lrm's.
Brody319, on 17 December 2014 - 04:31 PM, said:
that's why I am saying maybe it should be a consumable, at least that would be the limiting factor.
you can probably dumb down the graphic for the mines so there not that much of a resource, could just be a blinky red light on the ground.
#13
Posted 17 December 2014 - 06:17 PM
Because of a simple tactic that worked for like 2 days in the opening moments of CW and has already been addressed by PGI within the first week?
I'm all for getting our advanced timeline mechs, weapons, etc. but trying to use "zergs" as a reason for knee jerk reactions like this is a little silly.
#14
Posted 17 December 2014 - 06:18 PM
evil713, on 17 December 2014 - 06:08 PM, said:
that's why I am saying maybe it should be a consumable, at least that would be the limiting factor.
you can probably dumb down the graphic for the mines so there not that much of a resource, could just be a blinky red light on the ground.
I just have a problem with Consumables. Often times they are easy to use, have no downsides, and really only exist for people to burn off C-bills and deal a lot of damage.
I would much prefer if Artillery was a mech equipped weapon that required tag. Like the Tom cannon.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users