For the record, I'm comparing these to Heavy Mortars/Heavy GRN whatevers. Not super efficient regular mortars, we're talking manly mortars. And as for the BAF-Molly thing, skill can be a rather big factor, blah blah.
So here, how about this. I revised my original idea and came up with this refined edition.
(Faction) Heavy Siege Turret
Information: Heavy Siege Turrets are an experimental weapon, based off the Heavy Mortar and are as such limited only to Battleship-class vessels and above. Engineers increased the damage output of a traditional Heavy Mortar, but in the process of which increased energy consumption. Speed has also been sacrificed to bring the largest payload possible, but the weapon fires in such a velocity that use against moving targets outside of point blank range is unoptimal and futile at best.
Hull Damage: 700,000 /round
Energy Damage: 100,000 /round
Refire Rate: 0.10 /sec
Power Usage: 3,500,000 u/round
Damage Type: Direct
Energy Pulse Stats
Speed: 100 m/sec
Travel Range: 3,000 meters
Lifetime: 7.50 seconds
If this sounds good to you guys, okay, if not, tell me what I can do to improve my suggestion to make it more appealable to people.
EDIT:
(08-11-2013, 06:03 AM)Tel-Aviv Wrote: You are better off with Cerbs -And no, aint going to happen.
Look at you, Mister Cool, calling the shots for what content goes into Discovery Mod.
When alls said and done, it just comes down to wether devs want base sieges to take less time or not, and the fact that if they did, they could accomplish it much more easily by altering base regen rate/shield absorption.
P.S: It's Sub optimal.
User was banned for: Griefing others
Time left: (Permanent)
Well, this seems to be more of a conversation between Tal and Hone more so than community feedback but I'll go ahead and throw my 2 cents in anyway.
If the Devs decide not to decrease base regen then I would be all for Siege Weapons. It would add a nice support role which is currently not available with the current system since there are no specific "Base Siege" roles. And having a super powerful and extremely slow cannon would fit perfectly. Yes, I do suppose there are some people who would try to mount it on a CAU8 Dread and just fly full speed at you, ram you, blast away with their siege cannons and enjoy your QQ but if you let that happen to you, then you're just a bad pilot who doesn't deserve a cap ship at all.
That being said, however, I think having Gunboats with Siege Weapons would be a terrible idea. Gunboats are supposed to serve as an anti-snub role and I don't think that repurposing them for a Base Siege support ship would allow them to be all that effective in either role but I could probably give you more realistic feedback on this idea after the supposed Gunboat shipline and weapon "rebalancing" (nerfs) in the next patch.
Either way, IMO, Bases are a pain in the ass. Both to build and to destroy. My personal vote would actually be to make them easier to build and easier to destroy and that would include Core 4. I know the whole idea of having bases being so strong is to make a big group fight a long time to destroy a base and give the defenders a chance to resupply the base and even defend it but (and again this is just my observations) there doesn't seem to be enough people interested enough to actually take down a fully supplied Core 4 base. People either have real life stuff to do and can't stick around for it or they just get bored and go do something else.
The simple solution is always the most effective: Nerf the bases. What it takes to build them, what it takes to destroy them, what it takes to maintain them and their total damage output should be reduced. That way people can actually log and participate in base sieges and they'll still be fun instead of: "Hey, let's go kill that base." "Sure! Let me just aim at the base and put a weight on my mouse. I'll be back in 12 hours." Cuz that's kinda how base sieges go these days. Again, all of this is just my personal observation. I'm sure not all base sieges are that boring..... right?
(08-11-2013, 03:15 AM)Tal Wrote: Think about it. A BS Heavy Turret that goes at 100 M/S, does 3x the damage of a Heavy Mortar, and takes around the same/less energy than one?
This is beatiful. No, really.
A 1.500.000 hull damage weapon that has 0.60 (!!!!!!!!) or more DpE.
It's possible to insta Dunkirks with 2 Valors (FG/2HM combo). A risky "all or nothing" tactic, but still.
With this, you'd would be able to insta everything with 4.500.000 health (That's more than a Cau8 Liberty carrier.), with just 1 heavy battleship. (300k regen ones).
P.S. Forgot to mention that balancing base sieging has more difficult questions, than inventing an uber-base-sieging gun. (and actually, there were better ideas than this before, like a specialized sieging ship), like solving time zone problem.
PoBs are OP, which is ooRP. InRP, it would never take 3 hours to siege a core 1 base with 11 battleships shooting it down. Thats just to much ooRP. Thats my opinion, but think inRP, probably all Battleships need to shoot 1 mortar each and base=dead. Freeport in Vanilla went down to 3 Nomad Torps :|
(08-11-2013, 09:06 AM).Flash. Wrote: PoBs are OP, which is ooRP. InRP, it would never take 3 hours to siege a core 1 base with 11 battleships shooting it down. Thats just to much ooRP. Thats my opinion, but think inRP, probably all Battleships need to shoot 1 mortar each and base=dead. Freeport in Vanilla went down to 3 Nomad Torps :|
And in-RP, several factions - including Bretonia, as of 4.87, don't even have 11 battleships.
![[Image: PFjFVMW.png]](https://i.imgur.com/PFjFVMW.png)
![[Image: Siggy_zpsd4956016.jpg]](http://i875.photobucket.com/albums/ab318/Vyticoz/Freelancer/Siggy_zpsd4956016.jpg)
![[Image: r2ArfxY.png]](http://i.imgur.com/r2ArfxY.png)
