33 replies to this topic

[An Innocent Urbie]

I have seen a lot of dead fish in the batttlefield, the Airstrike is the literal equivalent of dynamite fishing.

time to change the damage of airstrike to percentage base instead of what we have now which is point base damage.

Edited by An Innocent Urbie, 27 January 2018 - 06:16 AM.

[Telemachus -Salt Wife Salt Life-]

well in that case let's just make all weapons percentage based damage too...

[An Innocent Urbie]

Telemachus -Salt Wife Salt Life-, on 27 January 2018 - 06:18 AM, said:

well in that case let's just make all weapons percentage based damage too...

airstrike is not a weapon it is a tool of [Redacted] warriors

Edited by draiocht, 27 January 2018 - 08:39 PM.
discriminatory language, replies removed

[Luminis]

Strikes shouldn't be changed, they should be removed.

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 27 January 2018 - 08:41 PM.
Quote Clean-Up, reference

[Dee Eight]

[El Bandito]

An Innocent Urbie, on 27 January 2018 - 06:14 AM, said:

I have seen a lot of dead fish in the batttlefield, the Airstrike is the literal equivalent of dynamite fishing.

time to change the damage of airstrike to percentage base instead of what we have now which is point base damage.

I personally want strikes to be more limited, reworked, or even removed, entirely.

[Bombast]

Thank god for the Locust's extra 6 leg armor that ensured this was never an issue worth concern before the Piranha.

[SOL Ranger]

I've seen this suggestion before recently and it is detrimental to the game because it sets a new precedent of band-aids, this time weapons arbitrarily mitigating damage based on weight alone; It adds another layer of complexity to balancing as well as yet another "exception" to the fundamental rules of the game that everything should abide by.

We again lose both authenticity and make yet another magical exception mechanic that is inherently unintuitive like ghost heat, but even worse.

Rather my solution would be to make strikes last significantly longer and do damage in a gradual manner. That way lights can avoid the brunt of it easier but still get wrecked if they stand in it, larger mechs can also mitigate some of the damage without just going "oh, strike, too late to move anyway so I'll just eat it". Because lets face it, strikes are easy mode CBills to damage conversion and not area denial right now.

Set a strike duration to something like 10-15 seconds and have the damage be gradual. You still have heavy potential damage, low damage to awake lights, moderate damage to sluggish mechs but everyone can mitigate some damage if they are on their toes and the strike acts like area denial as well for a useful but still short period.

Such a strike that denies paths like that in a prolonged manner would be exceptional to stop nascar pushes, and these strikes would be ongoing rather often so clustered formations will be continually challenged and halted with them.

[XDevilsChariotX]

Personally, I like to see strikes removed entirely but that'll never happen.

[PurplePuke]

There should be more types of strikes in the game. An inferno/napalm strike would be cool to shut down enemies.

[Khobai]

consumables should just be removed entirely

consumable strikes should be transitioned to mech based artillery weapons instead.

support mechs should lay down artillery that has an actual tangible cost in tonnage and crits and requires at least a modicum of skill to use.



you could also give each team strategic asset points. using strikes, UAVs, satillite sweeps, etc... would all consume those points. so if you wanna use a strike, it takes it from the team pool, and the commander has to press a button to authorize it.

say each team starts with 12 points and it costs
2 points to use a strike
1 point to use everything else

that would still allow strikes in the game but it would cut down on the strike spam considerably

and it would give the commander something more to do. managing the strategic asset pool.

Edited by Khobai, 27 January 2018 - 11:46 AM.

[Sjorpha]

I mean it's annoying with all the strike spam but the suggestion or percentage based damage makes no sense, lights and other fast mechs already have the easiest time avoiding strikes. They are much stronger against slow and heavy mechs.

I could see them replaced with something else though.

I'd like a seismic beacon you place on the ground that gives your team seismic in the area where it's placed. Seismic is a lot weaker than real targeting like UAV gives but in exchange It could be permanent until destroyed.

In general it seems things that do extra damage are harder to balance well, so long tom and strikes are a bit similar in the sense that they produce free damage without having any tradeoffs.

Part of the problem is of course that some people use consumables and some don't because of the cost to replace them. If consumables were free to replenish between matches then everyone would use them and it would be easier to balance, they could have a larger upfront cost to put on your mech instead like the old modules.

Edited by Sjorpha, 27 January 2018 - 11:56 AM.

[Angus McFife VI]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 27 January 2018 - 08:45 PM.
unconstructive, replies removed

[Mcgral18]

Smaller targets would take less fragmentation, but I'm not familiar with HE and size



Comp play makes for terrible amounts of strikes being thrown about, and its never pleasant.

[Luminis]

[Redacted]

Sjorpha, on 27 January 2018 - 11:45 AM, said:

I'd like a seismic beacon you place on the ground that gives your team seismic in the area where it's placed. Seismic is a lot weaker than real targeting like UAV gives but in exchange It could be permanent until destroyed.

Reminds me of wards in Dota and the like. I like it.

Edited by draiocht, 27 January 2018 - 08:45 PM.
Quote Clean-Up, reference

[Grus]

[Armored Yokai]

Only cowards use Airstrikes; advocates for weakism would say otherwise.

Edited by Armored Yokai, 27 January 2018 - 04:14 PM.

[Mystere]

[Redacted]

Armored Yokai, on 27 January 2018 - 04:12 PM, said:

Only cowards use Airstrikes; advocates for weakism would say otherwise.

Can we get rid of all Air Forces then, especially the drone pilots?

Edited by draiocht, 27 January 2018 - 08:46 PM.
Quote Clean-Up, reference

[FupDup]

Mystere, on 27 January 2018 - 04:26 PM, said:

Can we get rid of all Air Forces then, especially the drone pilots?

Definitely the drone pilots, their bombing runs only had a 10% success rate (as in, the other 90% of the time they hit the wrong thing and caused collateral damage) during the previous US administration.

[Armored Yokai]

Mystere, on 27 January 2018 - 04:26 PM, said:

Can we get rid of all Air Forces then, especially the drone pilots?

if we get battlemechs in place of them then the UN should deem all aircraft used to fighting to be banned forever and those who own fighters get the death penalty, this would allow people to be more brave and skilled instead of using easymode!

Edited by Armored Yokai, 27 January 2018 - 04:31 PM.