Warbrand2

[legendary idea] Rocket artillery

Recommended Posts

yay, with hope people will like this one.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2018 at 9:59 PM, Chevypimp said:

Got it triple cricket and teammates

Hey that is the inspiration, but unlike the crikets which are pure burst this would be sustained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the slow fire rate (one round per second) makes is pretty interesting. You could basically use it as an area denial weapon or to suppress campers.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, scoutgamerfin said:

What about the accuracy?

Something like between cannons and crickets?

If it's sustained fire then should the accuracy improve from staying still?

That is probably a better perk idea then my one.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I like that idea.. with the relative slow fire rate it seems balanced.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GentlemanRevvnar said:

Why do i feel that those would be triple welded on hovers :d

Seeing as the weapon would be designed as maybe an 7 power one, I doubt that would be possible.


That and this would probably be to heavy for hovers.... hopefully... if done right... I hate hovers.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Looks interesting, but I'd remove the Passive Reload perk - keep it as full magazine reloads only otherwise there will be no break in the area denial effect.

Give it a 24-round magazine firing in 6-round bursts (full burst on trigger press), each burst firing a rocket every 0.5 seconds with a c.2 second cool-down between bursts, and a c.5 second reload.  8 reload magazine for ammunition purposes.  Makes it interesting without being instantly dominating.  Test, and adjust for balance.

Make it nice and heavy, and perhaps introduce an arming time on explosive damage so it doesn't become abused as a short-range alpha-burst weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pickle_CO said:

Looks interesting, but I'd remove the Passive Reload perk - keep it as full magazine reloads only otherwise there will be no break in the area denial effect.

Give it a 24-round magazine firing in 6-round bursts (full burst on trigger press), each burst firing a rocket every 0.5 seconds with a c.2 second cool-down between bursts, and a c.5 second reload.  8 reload magazine for ammunition purposes.  Makes it interesting without being instantly dominating.  Test, and adjust for balance.

Make it nice and heavy, and perhaps introduce an arming time on explosive damage so it doesn't become abused as a short-range alpha-burst weapon.

I agree with teh perk needing to be changed but not the rest of your post. The idea of this is a sustained fire weapon, your post would turn it into just another cricket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason why this wouldn't be OP on hovers would be due to the slow fire rate; hovers are all about peek-a-boo.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
2 hours ago, Warbrand2 said:

I agree with teh perk needing to be changed but not the rest of your post. The idea of this is a sustained fire weapon, your post would turn it into just another cricket.

On a basic level it's always going to be "just another cricket", you can't get away from that.  It's never going to be a variation on a grenade launcher with looks like that.

What you can do is extend the burst duration and increase the AoE so it becomes a medium-/long-range Area Denial Cricket (a Cricket-Mandrake hybrid, if you like).  Imposing an arming timer stops the smart alecs sticking legs on the back and small wheels on the front to get sufficient tilt to bast*rdise your original suggestion into a short-range alpha-damage l33t Cricket.

Sustained fire area denial is a good niche to design something to occupy, but there has to be some limits on that capability in order to be balanced.  Sitting half-a-map away and denying a cap point continuously for 30+ seconds is not going to be a balanced capability in this game.  There needs to be some sort of re-loading break that gives the OpFor a chance.  I suggest making it ammunition based so that the user has to consider taking ammo crates for the sake of balance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea but I would give it to Steppenwolves instead of Lunatics. Nice art!

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Pickle_CO said:

On a basic level it's always going to be "just another cricket", you can't get away from that.  It's never going to be a variation on a grenade launcher with looks like that.

What you can do is extend the burst duration and increase the AoE so it becomes a medium-/long-range Area Denial Cricket (a Cricket-Mandrake hybrid, if you like).  Imposing an arming timer stops the smart alecs sticking legs on the back and small wheels on the front to get sufficient tilt to bast*rdise your original suggestion into a short-range alpha-damage l33t Cricket.

Sustained fire area denial is a good niche to design something to occupy, but there has to be some limits on that capability in order to be balanced.  Sitting half-a-map away and denying a cap point continuously for 30+ seconds is not going to be a balanced capability in this game.  There needs to be some sort of re-loading break that gives the OpFor a chance.  I suggest making it ammunition based so that the user has to consider taking ammo crates for the sake of balance. 


Uh, what. Seriously what. None of what your posting makes any sense. atleast in the first bit. This isn't a cricket it is an artillery piece, its function is completely different stop trying to make it similar.

Note I said grenade launcher like range and arc you can't half map with that type of arc, sure it would be slightly longer but 1/3rd the range a way well it wouldn't be any more OP then some one using an incinerator build and good placement to area denial part of the map.

Also 24 seconds is not 30+ seconds, Seriously I can already hit the 30+ with incinerators and the right co-driver anyway even with that just being medium range the difference here area denial wise is this one as a slower rate the one second gap between hits with spread makes it a camper punisher more then anything as firing it on a point it wouldn't have the blast to hit the hole point.


And of course it would be ammo based.

was thinking 48 missiles by default, as it can only fire 24 at a time that puts maybe an 8-10 second reload gap between the bursts.

Though yeah replacing the passive reload with the "the longer you fire the more accurate it gets" perk suggested by scoutgamerfin

5 hours ago, _f0r3v3r_ said:

I like the idea but I would give it to Steppenwolves instead of Lunatics. Nice art!

Yeah I am torn, as steppenwolves are more military style but they use missiles not rockets, and the lunatics use rockets more then the wolves. That and I think it would be cool to see a scrapped together version of the weapon with the standard military version being a CK.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
10 hours ago, Warbrand2 said:

This isn't a cricket it is an artillery piece, its function is completely different stop trying to make it similar.

I'm pretty sure the Cricket was originally inspired by and designed by the Devs to be a multiple launch rocket artillery system, and not based on an unguided rocket pod from an aircraft.  It may be used in the latter fashion, but the model is based on an artillery rocket similar to that you use in your example.  What I've suggested are adjustments to the mechanics of its operation that make sure it doesn't end up as another Cricket.

Unless it's going to have a restriction on the number that can be mounted (either hard-coded or Energy based), then putting this at 6/7E will allow two to be mounted - 48 second area denial from one sequential salvo, rinse-and-repeat without break because the first reloaded whilst the second discharged.  I'd like to revise my suggestions - I'd still go for a higher rocket discharge rate than you (one per half-second) and I'd still go for a full-volley discharge per trigger press (but perhaps 4 volleys of 12 rockets per 48 rocket magazine), but a significantly longer reload time than it takes to discharge a full magazine to deal with the dual deployment scenario.  And that still has to factor in reload perks.  This may mean reducing the magazine size.

.

(we're not really disagreeing on fundamentals as much as we're using different terminology - I like the idea, and I suspect it fits into the scheme of things - and is more likely to be accepted - the closer it resembles a Legendary Cricket rather than a new category of Rocket Artillery, because it gives the very nice progression Wasp-Cricket-Whatever that sits alongside the 3-step Cannon/Turret Cannon progressions)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Pickle_CO said:

I'd still go for a higher rocket discharge rate than you (one per half-second) and I'd still go for a full-volley discharge per trigger press (but perhaps 4 volleys of 12 rockets per 48 rocket magazine), but a significantly longer reload time than it takes to discharge a full magazine to deal with the dual deployment scenario

The problem with this is it's going to play straight into hovers' pockets if you increase the rate of fire but slow down the reload speed.

 

You could totally do the same thing with Crickets: split all three into three mouse buttons and fire them sequentially yet nobody does that. It's all about dat Alpha and gtfo.

 

I'd say let them go for it: run two of these and fire them sequentally if you want to deny an area until you run out of ammo. The fast crafts counter this by going around, the heavy crafts counter this by walking through the rocket fire.

 

The uniqueness of Warbrand's idea is the slow rate of fire which sets it apart from Cricket.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
35 minutes ago, Spedemix said:

The uniqueness of Warbrand's idea is the slow rate of fire which sets it apart from Cricket.

But as soon as you split-trigger a dual installation you get the infinite area denial loop.

Unless the suggested "the longer you fire the more accurate it gets" perk (it's probably a nerf rather than a buff for this type of weapon) causes the spread of shot to narrow, that may help - the first few rounds are all over the target area giving very good area denial characteristics, but the shots towards the end of the volley have a far tighter circular error probability so have less of an area effect.

I picture the problem with this being denying cap points - areas that light builds can't avoid to achieve victory conditions.  And in the absence of Friendly Fire damage it could end up an Incinerator/Mandrake on steroids when it comes to risk-free dangerous close artillery calls on cap points being occupied/defended by friendly forces.  Add a direct fire capability (which neither the Mandrake nor the Incinerator have) and it gets ridiculous.

The direct fire role is the one feature I'd most like to see mitigated in this suggestion.  Something that makes it less effective at short ranges, hence my arming timer suggestion.

.

Btw, 12 rockets over 6 seconds or 12 rockets over 12 seconds, neither is a rapid rate of fire in this game.  You're missing the all-or-nothing volley-per-trigger proposal which makes this less attractive for hovers as they have bigger issues holding on a single target for more than a second or so.  Giving this weapon a chunky recoil makes this even less hover friendly if the user is committed to the full burst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pickle_CO said:

I'm pretty sure the Cricket was originally inspired by and designed by the Devs to be a multiple launch rocket artillery system, and not based on an unguided rocket pod from an aircraft.  It may be used in the latter fashion, but the model is based on an artillery rocket similar to that you use in your example.  What I've suggested are adjustments to the mechanics of its operation that make sure it doesn't end up as another Cricket.

Unless it's going to have a restriction on the number that can be mounted (either hard-coded or Energy based), then putting this at 6/7E will allow two to be mounted - 48 second area denial from one sequential salvo, rinse-and-repeat without break because the first reloaded whilst the second discharged.  I'd like to revise my suggestions - I'd still go for a higher rocket discharge rate than you (one per half-second) and I'd still go for a full-volley discharge per trigger press (but perhaps 4 volleys of 12 rockets per 48 rocket magazine), but a significantly longer reload time than it takes to discharge a full magazine to deal with the dual deployment scenario.  And that still has to factor in reload perks.  This may mean reducing the magazine size.

.

(we're not really disagreeing on fundamentals as much as we're using different terminology - I like the idea, and I suspect it fits into the scheme of things - and is more likely to be accepted - the closer it resembles a Legendary Cricket rather than a new category of Rocket Artillery, because it gives the very nice progression Wasp-Cricket-Whatever that sits alongside the 3-step Cannon/Turret Cannon progressions)

 

So you want to take a unique function of a weapon and make it generic because people might double gun it and force people to think about their movement? I personally see no problems with people using it to lock down an area until they are out of ammo, you can already do that iwth turrets and the incinerators if you know what you are doing.

No people would be more likely to as Spedemix put it use doubles to alpha strike especially with your idea which would play into hovers more then anything. having a long term area denial isn't a bad thing especially if you read the new perk which makes it so letting up on that means you get less from it. Using it makes you weak to flanks.

Your idea with making it fire volleys negates the concept of a sustained damage weapon turning it into something that can be used for dealing high damage alpha strikes.
 

The way I see it I would rather it be a rocket artillery then a legendary cricket cause if it was a legendary cricket I would count that as a bastardization of the idea.I would be a progression but instead of a burst progression is is sustained.

not how the wasp then cricket goes.

wasp direct burst, cricket has minor sustain if used right, this would be full sustain but no burst.

EDIT: screw the you must play 15 battles a week thing, it delayed this post.

EDIT 2

10 minutes ago, Pickle_CO said:

But as soon as you split-trigger a dual installation you get the infinite area denial loop.

Unless the suggested "the longer you fire the more accurate it gets" perk (it's probably a nerf rather than a buff for this type of weapon) causes the spread of shot to narrow, that may help - the first few rounds are all over the target area giving very good area denial characteristics, but the shots towards the end of the volley have a far tighter circular error probability so have less of an area effect.

I picture the problem with this being denying cap points - areas that light builds can't avoid to achieve victory conditions.  And in the absence of Friendly Fire damage it could end up an Incinerator/Mandrake on steroids when it comes to risk-free dangerous close artillery calls on cap points being occupied/defended by friendly forces.  Add a direct fire capability (which neither the Mandrake nor the Incinerator have) and it gets ridiculous.

The direct fire role is the one feature I'd most like to see mitigated in this suggestion.  Something that makes it less effective at short ranges, hence my arming timer suggestion.

.

Btw, 12 rockets over 6 seconds or 12 rockets over 12 seconds, neither is a rapid rate of fire in this game.  You're missing the all-or-nothing volley-per-trigger proposal which makes this less attractive for hovers as they have bigger issues holding on a single target for more than a second or so.  Giving this weapon a chunky recoil makes this even less hover friendly if the user is committed to the full burst.

 

Ok for one this weapon is not meant to be some high DPS weapon it is meant to be an area denial punsher weapon. Stop trying to maek it a DPS weapon. You remove all unique traits of it. And looking around you are the only one doing this or thinking like that.

This will not be able to deny cap points more then a mandrake can. it can hit them yes but not accurately unless sustained which with the new perk means you are hitting a lower area allowing people who are smart to dodge.

Never focus mechanics around the stupid players, let them die and learn from it.

Second the incinerators exist and can easily deny a cap point if you know how to use them making your point nul and void in the first place.


third, xxxx your all or nothing volley proposal, that is not what the weapon is meant to be stop trying to make it that. Seriously.

Edited by Warbrand2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Warbrand2 Thanks, I understand. Mostly I just think Steppenwolves need more/better epics. And the style seems to fit the profile. Cheers!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.