38 replies to this topic

[MechaBattler]

No to anything that is a one shot instagib.

[1453 R]

Cassa Nova, on 19 January 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

I agree with you, consumables would be the absolute worst way they could be implemented. But I don't think that we'd be better off without them, weapons with much more devastating potential are coming in the 3060+ time skip. Clans are no doubt getting heavy lasers, the medium HL does 10 damage pinpoint for a single ton. You could easily load up an arctic cheetah and blap 80-90 points of pinpoint damage into someone before possibly overheating.

The TT HML generates 7 heat per shot. Assuming the same 20% increase currently applied to the cERML, that comes to 8.4 heat, probably rounded to 9 because otherwise OMG. This is assuming that MWO's heavy lasers, if implemented, retain their TT damage values, which I personally find to be wildly unlikely.

Seven HMLs, which is the largest number that can be equipped on one Cheetah, generates a 70-damage shot with TT values, as well as between 56 (8 heat/shot) and 63 (9 heat/shot) heat. I don't know the exact math for MWO heat caps, but that Cheetah is not doing that more than once. This is also ignoring the inevitable p!ss-poor range (canonically heavy lasers had Sphere standard laser range; the MWO versions would likely have less) and the fact that heavy lasers notoriously interfered with their own firing unit's electronics, i.e. Self-ECM-ing.

At a much more likely/balanceable 8/7 (with the cERML FINALLY cut down to 6/5 as it should've been many moons ago), a 7xHML Cheetah deals 56 damage for 49 heat, which is still a brutal kick to the heat bar. All of this is, of course, completely ignoring Ghost Heat and the likely sharp GH limits on heavy lasers.

HML Cheetahs, if they ever exist, will not be a Direstar-level threat.

As for rocket launchers...do we have to? One-shot weapons are boring as hell and pretty much the literal definition of "Gimmick". As Fup said, either they're party favors not worth weight/space that could've been better spent on heat sinks or ammo or something, or they're one-shot instagibs that're fundamentally unfair to the individual being so gibbed. There's not a lot of room for them to be valid and meaningful contributions to the game, and frankly I'd really rather not have Rocket Leeroys totally screwing up matches with actual suicide-bomber tactics.

They're just not good. If used in the "hey I've got a spare slot/hardpoint, why not?" manner they have essentially no impact on the match - yes, you may get the extremely occasional clutch play with them, but most of the time they'd amount to nada. If used in the "I've got an Archer, and I've got Rocket Launchers. Time to make a YouTube montage!" method, then nobody wants that guy on the field. Not the guy getting Rocket'd out of the match in the cheesiest manner since Long Toms, and not the team who sees a heavy 'Mech shoot the entirety of its payload one time at one guy.

Just...please no?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

For rocket launchers won't really work well considering we are strictly following TT construction rules, they made more sense in MW4 mods where you could add ammo to them so they were more than just one-shot launchers (because one-shot launchers are just as pointless here as they are in TT imo).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 19 January 2017 - 03:29 PM.

[Cassa Nova]

MechaBattler, on 19 January 2017 - 02:46 PM, said:

No to anything that is a one shot instagib.

So take out the dire star and MRMs and a good portion of the new tech

1453 R, on 19 January 2017 - 02:56 PM, said:

The TT HML generates 7 heat per shot. Assuming the same 20% increase currently applied to the cERML, that comes to 8.4 heat, probably rounded to 9 because otherwise OMG. This is assuming that MWO's heavy lasers, if implemented, retain their TT damage values, which I personally find to be wildly unlikely.

Seven HMLs, which is the largest number that can be equipped on one Cheetah, generates a 70-damage shot with TT values, as well as between 56 (8 heat/shot) and 63 (9 heat/shot) heat. I don't know the exact math for MWO heat caps, but that Cheetah is not doing that more than once. This is also ignoring the inevitable p!ss-poor range (canonically heavy lasers had Sphere standard laser range; the MWO versions would likely have less) and the fact that heavy lasers notoriously interfered with their own firing unit's electronics, i.e. Self-ECM-ing.

At a much more likely/balanceable 8/7 (with the cERML FINALLY cut down to 6/5 as it should've been many moons ago), a 7xHML Cheetah deals 56 damage for 49 heat, which is still a brutal kick to the heat bar. All of this is, of course, completely ignoring Ghost Heat and the likely sharp GH limits on heavy lasers.

HML Cheetahs, if they ever exist, will not be a Direstar-level threat.

As for rocket launchers...do we have to? One-shot weapons are boring as hell and pretty much the literal definition of "Gimmick". As Fup said, either they're party favors not worth weight/space that could've been better spent on heat sinks or ammo or something, or they're one-shot instagibs that're fundamentally unfair to the individual being so gibbed. There's not a lot of room for them to be valid and meaningful contributions to the game, and frankly I'd really rather not have Rocket Leeroys totally screwing up matches with actual suicide-bomber tactics.

They're just not good. If used in the "hey I've got a spare slot/hardpoint, why not?" manner they have essentially no impact on the match - yes, you may get the extremely occasional clutch play with them, but most of the time they'd amount to nada. If used in the "I've got an Archer, and I've got Rocket Launchers. Time to make a YouTube montage!" method, then nobody wants that guy on the field. Not the guy getting Rocket'd out of the match in the cheesiest manner since Long Toms, and not the team who sees a heavy 'Mech shoot the entirety of its payload one time at one guy.

Just...please no?

See I can actually respect this opinion, you have a reason besides "No i don't like it!" But at the same time you will be able to take that same archer max the armour with an XL315 and carry 4 MRM40s and 4 tonnes of ammo giving you a 160pt alpha. Thats almost guaranteed to happen because of how much MRMs have been asked for, Rocket launchers whether they're there or not aren't suddenly going to promote such play or prevent it.

But for lighter mechs, Things like the X-5, the commando and the vindicator that have one or two missile slots but don't have the tonnage to justify using them Rocket launchers present an opportunity to squeeze in that extra punch that they are so often missing.

Edited by Cassa Nova, 19 January 2017 - 04:00 PM.

[1453 R]

Cassa Nova, on 19 January 2017 - 03:58 PM, said:

...
See I can actually respect this opinion, you have a reason besides "No i don't like it!" But at the same time you will be able to take that same archer max the armour with an XL315 and carry 4 MRM40s and 4 tonnes of ammo giving you a 160pt alpha. Thats almost guaranteed to happen because of how much MRMs have been asked for, Rocket launchers whether they're there or not aren't suddenly going to promote such play or prevent it.

But for lighter mechs, Things like the X-5, the commando and the vindicator that have one or two missile slots but don't have the tonnage to justify using them Rocket launchers present an opportunity to squeeze in that extra punch that they are so often missing.

MRMs, if I were Balance Overlord for a day, would end up as streamfire weapons, and also come with heavy Ghost Heat limitations, to help offset their immense damage potential. Now certainly that Archer can indeed run MRMs, but an MRM-40 weighs 12 tons (12 tons/7 slots, according to Sarna). To get four launchers with four tons of ammo on a fully-armored Archer is, in fact, impossible. Assuming a the lightest feasible engine for the design (255XL), you can get two MRM-40s (24t) and a 20 (7t, 31t total) with six tons of ammunition, or two 40s and a 30 (34t) with only three tons of ammunition. Still hellacious, but not nearly as insane as your model predicted as it would not be nearly as fast and would, in fact, manage significantly less alpha.

MRMs will be game-changers, yeah. But they're also valid, logical weapons. One-shot Rocket Launchers are so limited in their application that I cannot think of a single situation where I'd rather have Rocket Launchers over, say...just regular SRM-2s. I get a whacking buttload less instantaneous punch, yeah, but I also get a lot more sustainability. The whole "Locust shoots its RL20s at target, then flees and fights with just its medium laser for the rest of the match" sounds like torture, not a fun time. You'd be absolutely terrified of missing those RL shots, which would lead to bad decision-making on the RL user's part, and as stated, it'd be the cheesiest way left in the game to get gibbed out of nowhere.

At least you know a Direstar pays in blood for instagibbing you. The RL guy gets to just pop you like a pinata and then flee. He doesn't get to do it again, but does he really have to?

[Cassa Nova]

1453 R, on 19 January 2017 - 04:12 PM, said:

MRMs, if I were Balance Overlord for a day, would end up as streamfire weapons, and also come with heavy Ghost Heat limitations, to help offset their immense damage potential. Now certainly that Archer can indeed run MRMs, but an MRM-40 weighs 12 tons (12 tons/7 slots, according to Sarna). To get four launchers with four tons of ammo on a fully-armored Archer is, in fact, impossible. Assuming a the lightest feasible engine for the design (255XL), you can get two MRM-40s (24t) and a 20 (7t, 31t total) with six tons of ammunition, or two 40s and a 30 (34t) with only three tons of ammunition. Still hellacious, but not nearly as insane as your model predicted as it would not be nearly as fast and would, in fact, manage significantly less alpha.

MRMs will be game-changers, yeah. But they're also valid, logical weapons. One-shot Rocket Launchers are so limited in their application that I cannot think of a single situation where I'd rather have Rocket Launchers over, say...just regular SRM-2s. I get a whacking buttload less instantaneous punch, yeah, but I also get a lot more sustainability. The whole "Locust shoots its RL20s at target, then flees and fights with just its medium laser for the rest of the match" sounds like torture, not a fun time. You'd be absolutely terrified of missing those RL shots, which would lead to bad decision-making on the RL user's part, and as stated, it'd be the cheesiest way left in the game to get gibbed out of nowhere.

At least you know a Direstar pays in blood for instagibbing you. The RL guy gets to just pop you like a pinata and then flee. He doesn't get to do it again, but does he really have to?

Indeed it is impossible, I missread the crit slots as the tonnage on sarna, my bad.

I do still think that Rocket launchers have a place just like they did on TT but i do know that you are much more knowledgeable then me when it comes to minmaxing. I think there are ways to make them work from streamfire to spread and velocity tweaks but at the same time I can acknowledge that i lack the ability to get my point across.

[1453 R]

Cassa Nova, on 19 January 2017 - 04:22 PM, said:

Indeed it is impossible, I missread the crit slots as the tonnage on sarna, my bad.

I do still think that Rocket launchers have a place just like they did on TT but i do know that you are much more knowledgeable then me when it comes to minmaxing. I think there are ways to make them work from streamfire to spread and velocity tweaks but at the same time I can acknowledge that i lack the ability to get my point across.

I understand the desire. If it helps, visualize arguments against Rocket Launchers as being somewhat akin to arguments against "I'm going to start the game with one sticky grenade!" in a Halo match, for example. The sticknade guy can easily eliminate one single target, who doesn't really get to do much of anything about it, but once the grenade is thrown the stickynade guy is useless. You don't want him on your team because the one guy he gets rid of isn't enough for him to pull his weight, you don't want to fight against him because he can just assassinate you without effort and you can't stop it. It's a rotten situation for both teams to be in, however much fun the stickynade/Rocket Launcher guy might have getting his one free gib a match.

[Cassa Nova]

1453 R, on 19 January 2017 - 04:27 PM, said:

I understand the desire. If it helps, visualize arguments against Rocket Launchers as being somewhat akin to arguments against "I'm going to start the game with one sticky grenade!" in a Halo match, for example. The sticknade guy can easily eliminate one single target, who doesn't really get to do much of anything about it, but once the grenade is thrown the stickynade guy is useless. You don't want him on your team because the one guy he gets rid of isn't enough for him to pull his weight, you don't want to fight against him because he can just assassinate you without effort and you can't stop it. It's a rotten situation for both teams to be in, however much fun the stickynade/Rocket Launcher guy might have getting his one free gib a match.

A completely valid point. But in my limited opinion, I could see this being an issue shortly after release just like how everyone is going to want to boat the new weapons in some form or another. But after as short as a week to as long as a month the practice will die down significantly just like Direstars did after B33f released that video. Direstars now a days are unicorns and i see Rocket spam to go along similar lines where yes it'll crop up once in a blue moon but its a terribly inefficent build that only limits you, where as if you take them in moderation they would expand your flexibility.

A good way to put it is that even though you can stuff 14 PPCs into a direwolf and oneshot near anything on the field doesn't mean the PPC is a problem. Sure people will have a giggle with it for a week after it comes out but afterwards it'll be rare to see outside of the random t5 or the drunk drops units will run.

Edited by Cassa Nova, 19 January 2017 - 04:44 PM.

[Alex Morgaine]

Could do it by having two versions of each RLx size: one is a normal weapon system, takes one M slot. Comes with one volley of ammo. Ok fine for someone boating 4-8 slots but say someone has one slot and wants 3 RL units?
Have a second version as ammo, as one volley per unit of "ammo" extra. Set cooldown to 6-8 seconds. So with one RL20, and 3 more ammo type "RL20" units that weigh the same and fill the same slots, you can fire one RL20 shot 4 times, with a cooldown in between, and with 4m slots you can load 4 RL20 weapons for one magic missile style porn star macross missile... Er lots of missiles at once. Allows all Mechs with at least one M slot to utilize.

[1453 R]

Cassa Nova, on 19 January 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:

A completely valid point. But in my limited opinion, I could see this being an issue shortly after release just like how everyone is going to want to boat the new weapons in some form or another. But after as short as a week to as long as a month the practice will die down significantly just like Direstars did after B33f released that video. Direstars now a days are unicorns and i see Rocket spam to go along similar lines where yes it'll crop up once in a blue moon but its a terribly inefficent build that only limits you, where as if you take them in moderation they would expand your flexibility.

A good way to put it is that even though you can stuff 14 PPCs into a direwolf and oneshot near anything on the field doesn't mean the PPC is a problem. Sure people will have a giggle with it for a week after it comes out but afterwards it'll be rare to see outside of the random t5 or the drunk drops units will run.

At which point, why devote development time and resources to a unicorn? Direstar PPC spam is something B33f can do without any additional resources; Rocket Launchers require the devs to code the weapons into the game, figure out how to balance them, and then weather the inevitable forum hue-and-cry when the systems are unbalanced as hell one way or another, and continue to devote the occasional afternoon to trying to tweak them into a position where they feel fair to both the user and the target - which is a position a lot of folks would argue is so narrow as to be effectively nonexistent. One-shot weapons that don't give you a huge edge when you use them are really bad one-shot weapons for the user, and one-shot weapons that give the user a huge edge when they're used are really bad weapons for the target.

There's not really any middle ground there, considering these things carry less than a fifth part of the overall damage capacity of even one ton of regular munitions ammo (~150-160 damage, on average, for any given weapon system's 1 ton of reloads). an RL20 gives you twenty total damage for 1.5 tons. That's a really awful return on your weight if you're not instagibbing someone with it, man.

[Cassa Nova]

1453 R, on 19 January 2017 - 05:00 PM, said:

At which point, why devote development time and resources to a unicorn? Direstar PPC spam is something B33f can do without any additional resources; Rocket Launchers require the devs to code the weapons into the game, figure out how to balance them, and then weather the inevitable forum hue-and-cry when the systems are unbalanced as hell one way or another, and continue to devote the occasional afternoon to trying to tweak them into a position where they feel fair to both the user and the target - which is a position a lot of folks would argue is so narrow as to be effectively nonexistent. One-shot weapons that don't give you a huge edge when you use them are really bad one-shot weapons for the user, and one-shot weapons that give the user a huge edge when they're used are really bad weapons for the target.

There's not really any middle ground there, considering these things carry less than a fifth part of the overall damage capacity of even one ton of regular munitions ammo (~150-160 damage, on average, for any given weapon system's 1 ton of reloads). an RL20 gives you twenty total damage for 1.5 tons. That's a really awful return on your weight if you're not instagibbing someone with it, man.

I only meant the Pure RL boats as unicorns. As for damage for weight that ALWAYS been the RL trade off since the day it was introduced. Sure you could take an SRM2 and half a ton of ammo but to get 20 damage out you need to fire 10 salvos over 20 seconds all while face tanking a mech. OR you can put 20 damage up front either instantly or assuming stream fire under a second allowing you to twist away the damage.

It's prefrence of play style man, I've played Marian Hegemony on TT for years and everyone always writes off RLs as useless but i know how much work they can do. For something like the X-5 you have that quick garentueed access to 40 points of damage in a pair of RL20s while still having 4 MLs would be a huge thing for it, because it definately doesn't have the durability to go toe to toe in brawls with high dps srm2s and to a lesser extent 4s.

And while I'm not a programmer I do work in a studio, so I know that when MRMs are finished they will have the code for RLs done. If they wanted to do a quick bastardized job of it they could use the MRM fire mechanics and tie it to the refire code for lasers and give the RL a 30 minute cooldown giving it one shot without having to worry about ammo at all.,

Edited by Cassa Nova, 19 January 2017 - 05:35 PM.

[1453 R]

Cassa Nova, on 19 January 2017 - 05:32 PM, said:

I only meant the Pure RL boats as unicorns. As for damage for weight that ALWAYS been the RL trade off since the day it was introduced. Sure you could take an SRM2 and half a ton of ammo but to get 20 damage out you need to fire 10 salvos over 20 seconds all while face tanking a mech. OR you can put 20 damage up front either instantly or assuming stream fire under a second allowing you to twist away the damage.

It's prefrence of play style man, I've played Marian Hegemony on TT for years and everyone always writes off RLs as useless but i know how much work they can do. For something like the X-5 you have that quick garentueed access to 40 points of damage in a pair of RL20s while still having 4 MLs would be a huge thing for it, because it definately doesn't have the durability to go toe to toe in brawls with high dps srm2s and to a lesser extent 4s.

And while I'm not a programmer I do work in a studio, so I know that when MRMs are finished they will have the code for RLs done. If they wanted to do a quick bastardized job of it they could use the MRM fire mechanics and tie it to the refire code for lasers and give the RL a 30 minute cooldown giving it one shot without having to worry about ammo at all.,

Nah, in TT I totally get it, especially in defensive engagements. If you have to protect your refinery/factory/city/planet with peanuts and pocket lint, then loading up a bunch of cheap-as-dirt, reasonably mobile units with masses of rocket launchers is definitely a viable way to go. The lack of longevity on massed RL units doesn't matter nearly as much because you're sitting on your supply lines and the attacker, presumably, is not. For Periphery states rocket launchers make a ton of sense, and anyone who writes them off in TT is in for a bruisin' if they go at you balls-out t!ts-up figuring they can just swing their big swaggering rooster and knock you over.

But here's the thing - MWO isn't a Periphery fight. For one, RLs are literally only half as effective here as they are in TT because of doubled armor values. A Javelin in TT retrofitted with five or six RL-20s over its SRMs gets exactly one shot, but that one shot can cripple or destroy an Atlas in one turn by itself - not a bad trade at all if you're working to break an enemy attack in a TT campaign setting. In MWO, the same five/six RL-20 Javelin might take a bite out of that Atlas, but it stands little chance of wrecking the Atlas in one slam by itself because even 120 damage delivered straight to the CT isn't enough unless it goes through weak back armor.

We're also not fighting a campaign battle. Money isn't a factor, and neither are supply lines. Everyone starts the game fresh out of the factory with full munitions loads, and when the fight is done they got right back to the factory for full repair and tune-up. The economic advantage of rocket launchers is lost, as is the ability to buy cheapass RL-equipped tanks in droves and sic them against a quarter their number of enemy attackers. You have to take one 'Mech, which has to be worth at least its own value against an equal-sized enemy team, and ideally more than that. Being able to break a single bigger-than-you unit isn't enough - what if an entire team ends up laden with Rocket Launcher guys and nobody can account for misses, or finish off targets that survived their one assigned rocket barrage?

In MW5? Absolutely, do rocket launchers up. Combined-arms is where the weapons thrive. In HBS' BattleTech? I would be outright disappointed if rocket launchers didn't make an appearance given the game's setting and general era. But in MWO? Single-shot spamlaunchers just don't fit the combat paradigm the game is built on.

[Cassa Nova]

1453 R, on 19 January 2017 - 06:59 PM, said:

But here's the thing - MWO isn't a Periphery fight. For one, RLs are literally only half as effective here as they are in TT because of doubled armor values. A Javelin in TT retrofitted with five or six RL-20s over its SRMs gets exactly one shot, but that one shot can cripple or destroy an Atlas in one turn by itself - not a bad trade at all if you're working to break an enemy attack in a TT campaign setting. In MWO, the same five/six RL-20 Javelin might take a bite out of that Atlas, but it stands little chance of wrecking the Atlas in one slam by itself because even 120 damage delivered straight to the CT isn't enough unless it goes through weak back armor.

We're also not fighting a campaign battle. Money isn't a factor, and neither are supply lines. Everyone starts the game fresh out of the factory with full munitions loads, and when the fight is done they got right back to the factory for full repair and tune-up. The economic advantage of rocket launchers is lost, as is the ability to buy cheapass RL-equipped tanks in droves and sic them against a quarter their number of enemy attackers. You have to take one 'Mech, which has to be worth at least its own value against an equal-sized enemy team, and ideally more than that. Being able to break a single bigger-than-you unit isn't enough - what if an entire team ends up laden with Rocket Launcher guys and nobody can account for misses, or finish off targets that survived their one assigned rocket barrage?

True but very few mechs will be able to completely fill their tonnage by just loading RLs, either they don't have the slots or just have too much tonnage. The possibility of matchmaking putting together an entirely missile based team, let alone a pure RL team is infinitesimally small. You would have to go out of your way to launch with an archer missing a dozen or so tonnes free to go pure 20s.

Another way i came up with to curtail boating them is instead of ghost heat the more RLs you load the more inaccurrate they grow.

Either way, it's not like we get to decide and it's been a blast going back and forth!

[stealthraccoon]

I love the idea, but I think rather than have them work like an IS LB-X, I'd say have them function more like a cLRM launcher = click and hold until empty. Or they would essentially act like disposable machine guns; higher damage and cone of fire/spread but without the crit bonus.

[1453 R]

Cassa Nova, on 19 January 2017 - 07:30 PM, said:

True but very few mechs will be able to completely fill their tonnage by just loading RLs, either they don't have the slots or just have too much tonnage. The possibility of matchmaking putting together an entirely missile based team, let alone a pure RL team is infinitesimally small. You would have to go out of your way to launch with an archer missing a dozen or so tonnes free to go pure 20s.

Another way i came up with to curtail boating them is instead of ghost heat the more RLs you load the more inaccurrate they grow.

Either way, it's not like we get to decide and it's been a blast going back and forth!

Indeed, you've done a better job of arguing and defending your position than half the folks with five-digit post counts I've encountered. Heh, don't take any of this as an attack or hostility, I do just enjoy a proper debate. Like I said, in either of the other upcoming games rocket launchers would potentially be a very worthwhile addition. I'm simply worried about the knife-edge balancing job Piranha would have to do in this one to get the system right between "worthless" and "broken". They...don't have the greatest track record with super-delicate balancing acts like that...

[Valhallan]

IMO even here RL's got a use, their main draw would be their extremely light weight to compensate for their one-shot, an all RL mech is as stated a terrible idea missing loads of weapons since a RL20 only weighs a measly 1.5 tons. I see them as basically an alternative to M-Guns, an alternative weapon to fill in the tonnage for "those" situations. While the balancing would definitely be an issue(though i think spread+steamfire could already solve it, getting instagibbed by missiles is already a thing with the butt hugging srm36 jen2c after all), let's be fair all of the future tech weapons will have the same deal, RAC's, Heavy Gauss, Heavy Lasers, HAG's all of these weapons are pretty much in the same boat.

[Ted Wayz]

FupDup, on 18 January 2017 - 07:32 PM, said:

Being able to instantly wipe out a mech from full health with very low-tonnage weapons (RL20 is 1.5 tons) can easily swing the tide in your team's favor, since this is an attrition game with no respawns.

Hello, FW.

I'm all for them if they spread damage like an LBX. Pinpoint damage, no.

[Cassa Nova]

Valhallan, on 20 January 2017 - 12:03 AM, said:

IMO even here RL's got a use, their main draw would be their extremely light weight to compensate for their one-shot, an all RL mech is as stated a terrible idea missing loads of weapons since a RL20 only weighs a measly 1.5 tons. I see them as basically an alternative to M-Guns, an alternative weapon to fill in the tonnage for "those" situations. While the balancing would definitely be an issue(though i think spread+steamfire could already solve it, getting instagibbed by missiles is already a thing with the butt hugging srm36 jen2c after all), let's be fair all of the future tech weapons will have the same deal, RAC's, Heavy Gauss, Heavy Lasers, HAG's all of these weapons are pretty much in the same boat.

Thats a fantastic way to treat them, as a missile slot MG. More punch but alot less sustain, having them be hold to fire would also be a nice touch.

Ted Wayz, on 20 January 2017 - 03:42 AM, said:

Hello, FW.

I'm all for them if they spread damage like an LBX. Pinpoint damage, no.

Exactly, their inaccurate beasts so a spread on par with LBXs would be a good starting point.

[L1f3H4ck]

I want them, only to see the geometry on a Javelin with 6 RL20s.

Edited by Frechdachs, 20 January 2017 - 03:52 PM.