139 replies to this topic

[AsianJoyKiller]

Contention for the Anti Air platform should be based purely on the skill of the team.
Why should I have to worry about the damned environment killing me or chipping away at half my health on top of whatever else is going on_
Why should I escape from battle, only to be killed by a turret than I can't even avoid because the nearest roof is the AA platform where a huge battle is going on_
Why does a team that already has control of the AA platform need the extra advantage of their opponents having to fight an uphill battle because they're taking bits of random damage_

Battleships firing on players is a mechanic that's definitely not PvP friendly, and from a competitive standpoint, I don't see how it could possibly be tolerated.
Having the environment actively try to kill you removes skill from the equation.

EDIT: Obviously, I'm not a big fan of having multiple aimbots flying high above me.

Edited by AsianJoyKiller, November 22 2012 - 12:27 PM.

[Necro]

I do like the fact that it has guns on it but it does stack the odds against the players trying to bring the ship down when the other team has the AA.

Also there Pretty easy to shoot off if they are that detrimental, i don't often feel that effected by it but i can see where the idea is coming from.


Also i would miss this image every time i see it.

[Thygon]

It does make you work harder knowing your ass could go up in flames by that. (just look at that beautiful picture Necro posted)

And it's quite easy to take those cannons out with your mech weaponry.

Although I've had my moments of frustration when have died because of that ship.

Edited by Thygon, November 22 2012 - 12:40 PM.

[Deu]

So everyone has to stop and take 15-20 seconds away from trying to take over AA to shoot the battleship turrets_ Devs really threw out all logic in CBE3 just to do some experimenting.

Edited by Deu, November 22 2012 - 12:44 PM.

[marshalade]

Deu, on November 22 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

So everyone has to stop and take 15-20 seconds away from trying to take over AA to shoot the battleship turrets_ Devs really threw out all logic in CBE3 just to do some experimenting.

...Battleships have always had weapons. In CB2, the third battleship had missile turrets. THOSE were nasty.

I understand these complaints, but this is a very minor annoyance. Turrets above you forces you to increase your spatial awareness, and increase your awareness of your armor level.

Yes, it's obnoxious. Do they need to be removed_ No, I don't see why.

AsianJoyKiller, on November 22 2012 - 12:27 PM, said:

Why should I escape from battle, only to be killed by a turret than I can't even avoid because the nearest roof is the AA platform where a huge battle is going on_

I think you're too focused on your k/d in an objective-based game.

Edited by marshalade, November 22 2012 - 12:53 PM.

[Beemann]

marshalade, on November 22 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

I think you're too focused on your k/d in an objective-based game.

Staying alive to make another assault on the AA is incredibly important
Dying due to something that the other team didn't really have any control over, and that you couldn't mitigate with cover or movement, is dumb
What's especially dumb is that you can't look straight up, meaning that often while fighting for the AA the ship will enter your blind spot before it starts firing on you, and then you can only take free damage or reposition yourself into what could be multiple hostile targets under the platform

[Phaaze]

Beemann, on November 22 2012 - 01:40 PM, said:

What's especially dumb is that you can't look straight up, meaning that often while fighting for the AA the ship will enter your blind spot before it starts firing on you

yeah.....needs to be fixed....

[AsianJoyKiller]

Necro, on November 22 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:

Also there Pretty easy to shoot off if they are that detrimental, i don't often feel that effected by it but i can see where the idea is coming from.

Thygon, on November 22 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

And it's quite easy to take those cannons out with your mech weaponry.

It's not like you can just look up, pop them and be on your way.
They take long enough to bring down (ex: A full Hellfire volley won't 1 shot them) that it takes a significant toll on your AA presence.
And a good team will pressure their opponents so that they can't spend time looking up at the sky.

marshalade, on November 22 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

...Battleships have always had weapons. In CB2, the third battleship had missile turrets. THOSE were nasty.

I didn't like them then either, but they've really made them more of a problem now.

Quote

I understand these complaints, but this is a very minor annoyance. Turrets above you forces you to increase your spatial awareness, and increase your awareness of your armor level.

Yes, it's obnoxious. Do they need to be removed_ No, I don't see why.

They are an ACTIVE threat. This isn't like lava or an endless pit you have to try to avoid.
I would be okay with having PASSIVE environmental dangers, but the battleships ACTIVELY targets and damages players.

And again, why should the team that launched the battleship get an automatic advantage over the defenders_
Why shouldn't they fight for the AA on even terms_

Quote

AsianJoyKiller, on November 22 2012 - 12:27 PM, said:

Why should I escape from battle, only to be killed by a turret than I can't even avoid because the nearest roof is the AA platform where a huge battle is going on_

I think you're too focused on your k/d in an objective-based game.

I think you're making that up and have no real evidence to back it.
Strawman harder please.

Edited by AsianJoyKiller, November 22 2012 - 02:23 PM.

[RipperT]

I would support the removal of automated turrets on the ship as well. I have spent way too much time shooting missle turrets as a defense measure and it does take too much time from the real objectives.

[Zorvaz]

Ya, I would definitely like to see the turrets taken away from the ships, as it just stacks the odds against the team that has to blow it up even more. I have seen a good amount of teammates picked off by the thing as they try to heal up while trying to take the AA. If the enemy team cant finish you off they should not have an aim bot in the sky to do it for them.

[fwip]

I really like the turrets on the ship. They are killable, and hide-fromable.

Why shouldn't the team that put in the work to launch a battleship get a bonus for a while_

[Beemann]

fwip, on November 22 2012 - 07:39 PM, said:

I really like the turrets on the ship. They are killable, and hide-fromable.

Why shouldn't the team that put in the work to launch a battleship get a bonus for a while_

Because they already get a chance to score a point_
Why don't teams that cap missile silos get missiles to hit the enemy team with_

[Stummer_Schrei]

i don't really know if i agree or not

i see your point
but also, you endet up that the other team startet their battleship anyway, so it is your fault and you have to deal with the consequences.

if you ask me, it is ok thisway. In the end you have the same on your ship also

[Beemann]

Stummer_Schrei, on November 23 2012 - 12:08 AM, said:

i don't really know if i agree or not

i see your point
but also, you endet up that the other team startet their battleship anyway, so it is your fault and you have to deal with the consequences.

if you ask me, it is ok thisway. In the end you have the same on your ship also

Er... how exactly are you going to stop 6 mechs from carrying a moderate amount of EU back, particularly when the effort you'd expend means you've wasted time in launching your own ship_
It's piss easy to get a ship in the air
And it doesn't become any less dumb when it benefits both teams. That's like suggesting that an OP weapon is fine because everyone can just play that class instead

[Russhole]

I think they just need to scale the battleship damage depending on how many people are on the server. They aren't really an issue when you have 16v16, and plenty of people to take pot shots at the guns.

When it's 4v4 or 6v6, any guns that are busy looking up are losing the game at the AA.

[Ryujin]

A Hawken battleship without weapons isn't a battleship any more, it's just a flying phallic symbol. :-/

We can then have the devs rename them as 'Freudian Rams.'

I personally don't like how much damage the turrets on CBT3's battleships can do either, but they now contribute a bigger sense of danger & urgency, instead of just being a giant countdown timer in the background that you can laugh & shoot at or blithely ignore.  Damage scaling depending on the ppl in the match, as mentioned by Russhole, sounds like one solution.

Edited by Ryujin, November 23 2012 - 12:55 AM.

[Etan]

It would be fine if killing the turrets actually DID damage to the ship. But they don't.

[NY_TimeBombTimmy]

An overall decrease of damage per shot from the turrets would be acceptable, or scaling according to number of players. When you're getting pounded by that thing, you have maybe 5-15 seconds before your halfway through your health. That's usually a surprise, there's no warning that you're the target of the ship. I feel either the damage or accuracy has increased since CB2.

It would be nice if the turrets contributed to the overall health of the ship, but I can see why they don't. They serve as a defense mechanism, not as propulsion like the engine.

I tried to think about what would occur if the ships would fire on each other while they both were in the air, and ONLY when both in the air. If there's only one in the air, turrets would resume normal operation as defense. They wouldn't be able to destroy each other throughout the flight, but maybe contribute 25% to the total damage. So all things being equal, two ships in flight battling each other would still reach their target with about 75% health left. Would the fight for the AA become more/less important_ Would controlling the AA with two ships in the air be too overwhelming on the opposing ship(i.e. too quickly taken down)_

While we're thinking, what would occur if they were removed_ Do we think that ships would be more easily taken down by players_ Would that be good for balance of the game_

Just some thoughts...

Edited by NY_TimeBombTimmy, November 23 2012 - 07:24 AM.

[Dreizehn]

I feel armed Battleships introduces another element to the gameplay. Perhaps your team might opt to send out their battleship right after the enemy. Now we got two battleships firing on each other's teams, evening the field a bit. Though it makes losing the AA that much more painful. You just bombed that 600 energy and lost a life. But victory is that much sweeter.

[tasnitoken]

^{I disagree with the OP, the battleship turrets are no different from the base turrets other than their motion. It does require more effort but if you're playing a decent match there are a pair of turrets heading at the other team.
Dreizehn's statement about strategy is well made.}