Can you buff it by adding the ability to 90% resistance to infantry light arms fire. I can understand if people think this might be OP. But I have never saw a Valk. survive any engagement air/ground.
I doubt that would be enough. It has a 88% resistance right now. That means it would take a whopping 1/6th less damage compared to the damage it currently takes, with your suggestion. I'd actually recommend jacking it up to 95-98% It could use increased resistance to Heavy Machine Guns as well (Basilisks and the like). As well as a small increase to flak of all types. Another change it needs is the ability to manually deploy the landing rails. Those do not seem to come out fast enough when trying to land quickly to pick up peeps or drop them off in close.. resulting in a crash. Those changes would make the thing a helluva lot more survivable.. then we can actually see if the weapons need any tweaking.
i agree. i think it needs a healthy resistance boost to just about everything, as well as a few tweaks to how it works. i said as much in some other posts, but since it will be on topic here i'm not worried about repeating it (thanks Dr Bash). changes to the airframe to make it behave more like an ESF/Lib hybrid might be debatable, so let's ignore that for the moment. at bare minimum it needs: stabilized weapon handling stabilized rumbleseat handling 360 degree traverse arc of main weapon resistance increases of 5-10% to every type splash protection for rumble seats (direct hits should stay deadly) passive afterburner passive squad logistics with these changes in place i think that with the weapon strength where it is, it will be a reasonably strong unit that is fun enough, and effective enough to be used regularly. from there we can see what to do with it, as Taemien suggests. very probably the AI would need to be toned down and AV increased a bit. and then we could start to talk about airframe options that radically change the handling to a forward flight vehicle for even more versatility and mobility. i know that is what i would want, but i know at least some people like the hover flight model and i don't see a reason to take that away when it's probably not difficult, and possibly advantageous to have both. at that point we could also look at including cool utility functions to further specialize different combat roles. i personally think a stalker cloak would be a great compromise on the "sunderer cloak" debate. also some sort of light energy shield could be a possibility. but whatever things people come up with to add to the platform, the fundamentals need to be in place first. right now we just don't even know what this thing is because it was so poorly implemented that it just doesn't even fit in the game.
I just wouldn't put afterburner as passive: squad logistic system is enough so the utility slot is available for other things. Right now sls is basically mandatory.
yeah i understand that. to clarify my thinking, i feel that mobility is so important to survival that you shouldn't have to choose, it's just part of 'fixing' the vehicle like moving to passive Turbo on the Harasser was. i could see having a very basic AB and a utility slot option that increases function, or then trading that option out for other utilities like flares, prox radar, or other cool things.
Good stuff m8. but I still think 2 fixed LMGs/miniguns would be better for the rumbles, considering how much easier it would be than fiddling with the rumble seats. Just slam one on each side, make SLS passive, passive AB with cooldown instead of fuel and the valk would be pretty much done. Rumbles are good for 2 things atm, dropping mines and repairing. Have you ever been killed by someone shooting you from a rumble seat?
they should just turn off the small arms damage for it, make it only get damaged by flak, AA and explosives like other big vehicles.
On the note of resistances, I think part of the problem is that not only is it relatively unarmoured, but everyone knows it is unarmoured. It tends to attract all the more fire because of it. That aside, I think it could use buffs to it's resistances which should work out some of the focused fire they seem to attract. I would suggest buffing small arms from 88 to 92% (33% reduction in damage). HMG resistances need somewhere buff between a 5-15% in damage done. Flaw and heavier probably shouldn't be touched unless the resistances in other areas are very merge. However, for the vehicle as a whole, there needs to be some buffs short term, a bit of reworking long term. Off the top of my head, -Thermals need to work out to at least 200m. -Stabilize guns and improve by ~5-15% effectiveness (depends on which gun) -Either include the no damage drop into the valkyrie by default (maybe under certain speed/height) or make it obvious to the passengers whether SLS is equip or not. Now, as for passive sls vs passive afterburner, if one or the other has to be added, the choice really depends on what the vehicle is supposed to be. Afterburners will leave it in a little neutral, while SLS will make it more transport oriented. That's most of the short term stuff I can think of. Long term stuff (such as door guns and making airframes carry more dramatic specializations are another matter).
Considering what it does. Make it immune to small arms. Add 2 or 4 side guns for crews to use. Add an option to carry a flash, or a max in the back. Drastically buff all its weaponry. Give an upgrade you can use to resupply nearby troops. And for God's sake, fix the textures on the weapon models, they're awful.
I was thinking the same. Why does it need to take small arms damage? One of its roles is to be a small squad logistics unit, similar to how Galaxies work for larger squads/platoons. This would have obvious ripple effects to its more aggressive roles as well, but the Valk is very very slow, and doesn't have the mobility of the fighters, or the health pool of the Galaxy, so it needs something big like immunity to small arms fire to help it along, rather than just increased resistances or slightly higher HP IMO. Roles, counters, and all that.
I think what they were going for was a Futuristic Huey. The problem with this is that it was too slow to be a ESF, to weak to be a Liberator, and not powerful enough to be a Galaxy Gunship. What they would have to do is debuff Small arms shooting at it and buff it to 90% resistance, I could understand when a walker wants to rip the vehicle in half but when a sniper lone sniper can **** up my ****, i'm a little pissy about it. And if they do this they may have to keep the weapons where they are at. I can only wonder they were wanting a vehicle that at ESF altitude could come onto the battlefield **** up some **** and fly away before it could be destroyed and not overstay its welcome like a Liberator and piss a bunch of people of.
I actually enjoy gunning the cas on my outfit mates valk its still ******, and its masochistic as ****, but you can shoot down gals and kind of kill infantry with it.
I think the only other problem concerning the valk is that when it flys into the airspace near a battle, everyone one stops what they are doing and shoots at it.
I agree that the valk is in desperate need of a buff against small arms fire. I don't think it should be as high as OP suggested. I don't know what the actual resistance is right now but I think it should be doubled. That is doubled before including the bonuses of flak armor. This would also make flak armor worth while for heavy engagements and other options actually worth while period.
