Jump to content

Pts 2 Direct Fire Spread Is Horribly Worse Than Live... Its Bad... Really Bad.


8 replies to this topic

#1 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • 4,728 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 07 February 2019 - 02:19 PM

Just tested the direct fire spread in PTS and compared them to live client.

One word: RIDICULOUS!!!

It spreads way more than live... with DIRECT FIRE mode... you know the mode that requires the most risk, for more efficient and focused damage.


Here are two videos, demonstrated on the largest targets possible to show how bad it is... just imagine how it will be on smaller targets.








SOLUTION:

TIGHTEN THE SPREAD TO OBLIVION.... HELL... SOMETHING!!!!

Edited by Navid A1, 07 February 2019 - 02:24 PM.


#2 The Glasswalker

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Nocturnal
  • The Nocturnal
  • 32 posts
  • LocationMaple Valley, WA

Posted 07 February 2019 - 02:25 PM

We wanted LRM nerfs. We wanted incentives for line of sight. At what cost?

#3 Admiral_Korean_Jesus

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • WC 2017 Bronze Champ
  • WC 2017 Bronze Champ
  • 98 posts

Posted 07 February 2019 - 02:30 PM

Oh no, they’re nerfing your “skill incoming” missiles, lol.

#4 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • 4,728 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 07 February 2019 - 02:33 PM

View PostAdmiral_Korean_Jesus, on 07 February 2019 - 02:30 PM, said:

Oh no, they’re nerfing your “skill incoming” missiles, lol.


Yes... They are nerfing indirect cancer... and I'm totally fine with that.

#5 The6thMessenger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Captain
  • 7,459 posts
  • LocationIn an Urbie with LBX10, asking people if they can find Kurt Cobain

Posted 07 February 2019 - 03:25 PM

Tried that with IS LRMs, got 12 volleys of 2x LRM20A.

I was going to try it on Live, but I don't have a Thanatos 5P for consistency lel.

#6 Bad Pun

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Moon
  • The Moon
  • 109 posts

Posted 07 February 2019 - 03:36 PM

OP, it's actually less bad than LRM test 1.0, so we're on the right track. Indirect is quite nerfed comparatively, which I'm OK with.

Spread in direct fire needs just a little more tightening and it should be fine.

#7 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • 4,728 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 07 February 2019 - 06:20 PM

View PostBad Pun, on 07 February 2019 - 03:36 PM, said:

OP, it's actually less bad than LRM test 1.0, so we're on the right track. Indirect is quite nerfed comparatively, which I'm OK with.

Spread in direct fire needs just a little HELL LOT more tightening and it should be fine.


FTFY

#8 Bad Pun

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Moon
  • The Moon
  • 109 posts

Posted 08 February 2019 - 02:26 AM

Hyperbole aside, reducing the radius only a little bit will be enough, the equation for area will do the rest. Your tests are showing the same ~20% increase in missiles required that my tests have found, so all the numbers remain solid here at least.

#9 Curccu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 2,650 posts

Posted 08 February 2019 - 05:48 AM

View PostThe6thMessenger, on 07 February 2019 - 03:25 PM, said:

Tried that with IS LRMs, got 12 volleys of 2x LRM20A.

I was going to try it on Live, but I don't have a Thanatos 5P for consistency lel.

Doesn't matter if your test mech has extra 5% velocity or not.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users