Looks like the Tank Cannon and rocket changes are going to go full speed ahead to live :(

Maybe 1 out of every 25, but no significant change will happen to the HE spam with that. The difference will be imperceptible to the average user. Keep in mind that anyone within a distance approximately equal to the height of a person will die instantly without flak armor with the current HE rounds.

Look at this graph: link

The blue line is the Supernova VPC now, the red line is your proposed change, the yellow line is the PTS version. I tried it out on PTS and I think it performs just fine. Right now, I have little reason to use the VPC over the PC because the PC already does 1000 splash damage.

Yes, I did read what you said, and I have encountered enough people firing rockets into groups of infantry to say with confidence that your statements are false. For example, I do remember a fight on Amerish about two days ago where a lot of people in the TR were firing rockets into infantry with no MAXes or vehicles in sight. I will say it was a specific outfit that seems to have done it the most, but I won't name them just so I don't end up defaming people for association with that outfit.

Though to make sure we're clear on this from now on, rocket primary isn't a literal term, and it doesn't exactly mean people are using a rocket launcher as their weapon, only switching to the LMG when their rocket misses. It generally means using a rocket against infantry in a situation where you could have just used your gun instead (like where you didn't switch out of desperation on an empty magazine, or where you already had your LMG out and swapped to your rocket launcher, or where you're bombarding helpless infantry from atop a structure).

I have also read your explanation of how it will cut down on rocket deaths by a significant portion, and your logic there does not follow because you never explained how it wouldn't just make these anti-infantry rocket users stop using the lock-on launchers entirely.

You also never explained what would make people use the faction-specific lock-on launchers over the Annihilator.

Then what advantage do people have with the faction-specific lock-ons, still? Faction-specific lock-ons actually have a longer reload time than the Annihilator. Any weapons sold for SC have to be a sidegrade to other weapons. For the case of the lock-ons versus the Annihilator, the trade-off is either having dumb-fire and one lock-on category, or no dumb-fire and both lock-on categories, while the default launcher offers higher damage and belongs to the Heavy Ordinance category instead of Medium Ordinance and the Decimator offers even higher damage at the cost of taking five years to hit its target. What would you give the lock-ons to make them more desirable?

You also haven't given any reason why people won't just use the dumbfire rocket launcher when they're killing infantry. There is no reason for someone to take a lock-on inside a bio lab, especially if you remove the dumb fire mode. I already use lock-ons extremely rarely, since I can shoot aircraft just as easily for the same damage with the Lancer without giving my opponent warning, and vehicle lock-ons seem to hit the ground more consistently than they hit the vehicle (and again, I can probably do the same damage or more with the Lancer).

A day or two ago, I was on the Crown doing some shameless rocket spam, shooting down on people from the landing pads. I roughly aimed where an enemy was and generally killed them in one hit. It really isn't that hard to kill people with rockets. The splash damage range is about the same as the Spear Phalanx turret, although the Spear does a maximum of 700 splash damage. It does present a good picture of what the rocket launchers will be like post-nerf, though.

0.5 meters may not seem like much, but what effect it has is dependent on the situation. For example, in a typical CQC situation where you and your opponent are 8m apart, the hipfire reticule should pretty accurately cover the splash damage "killzone" when pointed at an enemy's feet. For example, look at this graph.

You can use this to see how far away someone can be from the rocket at various amounts of health. When revive grenades are being used, you will often see people bunched up with these amounts of health. If someone has only half health and full shields, for example, the kill zone for rocket launchers becomes a circle 3 meters in diameter.

Also, when the circumstances surrounding rocket spam are considered, these changes seem as if they would solve a lot of the rocket spam. Consider the situation where I was rocket spamming. What would I gain from indirect hits if the splash damage was 750 within 0.35 meters? Probably just a bunch of kill assists as people quickly finish off the people I severely wounded. Therefore, I'd be more inclined to pull out my XM98 or a loadout with my Eidolon. Even though I could probably kill just as many people with the Eidolon, it's much more understandable when people die from a battle rifle and people certainly get less frustrated from it.

I doubt you have any experience with the Modified enforcer. The sad reality is that just giving it a 20 rounds mag wouldn't really fix it compare to the PPA.

I don't come up with ideas out of thin air, More importantly they are not "ideas", They can and do work out ingame, That is why I am pointing out or suggesting.


What ego do I have if I am realistic and know factual things about the game and its history and its combat levels etc? I know my stuff very very well, I make sure of that.

Nothing ground wise is 8 meters.


No ability etc.


Take this for instance, max ammo pack and max shield regen device has a radius of 7 meters.



7 meters brings things inline quite well and makes HE rounds effective but not to effective.

You use rockets to kill/clear out groups of clustered enemies, That is a valid tactic.

Rockets are much more effective against groups of enemies then you gun is.

if theres a ball of medics, you open up with the rocket and clear up with the LMG.

Less splash means less effectiveness against clustered and entrenched infantry, and will make medic balls go out of control.

They will still use the lock ons..... for there intended purposes/targets.

people purchased the lock ons to deal with air or armor, not to kill infantry with them. Since SOE allowed those rockets to be dumb fired it lead to rocket spam from rockets that shouldn't have been able to be dumb fired in the first place.

The NS annihilator is more expensive because it can lock onto both, and has a slower lock on time.

The other lock ons(the G2A and G2G) are cheaper and lock on faster.

people will still use those lock ons.


And if your telling me that they will stop using them because they won't be able to shoot at infantry with them..... then that proves my point.

less graphs more gameplay.

Look

These rocket changes are unneeded, rockets have been fine for a very long time.

not like what I'm saying will get threw with you, because your so convinced that SOE is right.

the "rocket primary" was a false crisis, and SOE has used it to "solve" a false problem to make them look like they are doing something good, when in reality even they know changing the rockets has consequences, and will lead to more rocket spam.

My changes go for the jugular, It will cut down on rocket and HE tank round spam, While keeping the infantry and vehicle balance good. Also the ES AI changes will put all 3 on equal ground interms of effectiveneness.

I'm not overly complex( i can be), but I tend to just get to the point, with no fluff or babying.

I just logged onto the forums and I am currently witnessing what appears to be a forumsider having a mental breakdown.

PS: I love the logic that making it take more rockets to kill will increase rocket spam (maybe if they nerfed it even more it would promote even MORE spam right?).

But you know, you are "right" so what do I know.

what?


Were you not around when both reddit and the Forums were against those 2 Sets of PTS notes?

less effective explosives mean more infantry clusters, meaning More explosives are needed to kill the same groups compared to before.

Its simple to understand.

well rather then insulting me, you could have created a discussion with me, so we could talk, but "what do i know?".

I actually hate the splash changes btw, I did want OHK rockets removed because it feels like a diceroll when I encounter someone using it as a primary (which many do) rather than a match of any kind of skill.

Basically I agree that the changes are bad, but you are making it very hard to agree with you.

rocket deaths are rare and don't happen often, finding someone that solely uses rockets is even rarer.


The point is that the changes are bad in general. you can't sugar coat that.


Even you agree that the changes are bad, Even if you don't agree with how I'm saying what I am saying, i'm not saying all of it for a bad reason.

So you're deciding what the range of a HE weapon should be based on the range of support deployables at max rank? And how exactly is this supposed to make sense?

Hmm, if only there was a throwable device that behaved in a similar manner to a rocket... If only...

Also, I do appreciate how you responded to my example of gameplay as a rocket primary with "less graphs more gameplay" followed by what might as well have said "look, I know you're not going to accept what I say at face value as I consistently refuse to support my claims beyond repeating that I am right, so... I'm right, and you're wrong." It's almost as if you're skimming my posts.

So all of the rocket spam came from people buying the lock-on launchers and then using them to kill infantry instead of vehicles, since that's what people like to waste certs on? You don't have a lot of evidence for this claim, and it makes no logical sense either.

Except for the fact that it was explicitly stated from very early on that all weapons are supposed to be sidegrades. Anything you are able to purchase with Station Cash is supposed to be either a sidegrade or cosmetic, so that claim is refuted. And a slower lock-on time isn't that much of a downgrade in light of the fact that even the slowest lock-on can be an effective deterrent for any type of vehicle.

What point? Everything resembling a point on your side is riddled with logical flaws and lacks sufficient reasoning to back it up. Are you just wanting people to not use lock-ons? Because that's what this is going to do.

Ah, so you're switching to ad hominem because you're unwilling to admit any flaws in your plan. This is the ego problem that Verenz mentioned.

By the way, I'm not convinced SOE is right as much as I am extremely skeptical of your claims as you've made some rather extreme claims with next to no evidence at all to support them. If nothing else, explain how nerfing rockets to where they don't one-hit with splash will somehow magically make people use more of them as if they will never adapt to changes and start using something else when what they were doing becomes less effective.

You still haven't said anything about why a rocket damage nerf will lead to more rocket spam.

By the way, under this logic that damage nerf = more spam, you should buff the PPA to 1-hit anything within 10 meters. After all, people won't spam it if they don't have to use it that much to kill infantry, right? You'll completely eradicate the PPA menace!

no what I'm saying is that 8 range compared to 7 is abit to big.

I've already explained it.

nice job trying to discredit over and over.

I've explained this.

Something is very fishy about you.

what....... are you what???


people use lock ons....... to lock onto aircraft or armor....


not dumbfire against infantry.


The whole purpose of a lock on is to to target X or Y (or in the case if the NS annihilator X & Y)


people use lock ons to target vehicles and aircraft..... not target infantry.



How is that hard to understand???


look ingame.... and look at the Fire modes of the launchers.

The whole lock on system is side grades.


1 does VS armor

1 does Vs aircraft

and 1(the NS one) does both, but has a longer lock on time.


Also did you know that the G2G lockons have a splash radius of 6m?


thats 1 meter bigger then the other rockets.

But apparently to you that doesn't matter.

are you kidding me with this right now?


I never said that.


your using a dis info/discredit tactic right now.



I said that If those 6 Lock ons were not able to be dumbfired anymore it would significantly cut down on the "rocket spam".

I never said someone is wasting certs.

Grenades do not work like rockets.

They are 2 different things, with different usages and roles ands strengths.

you cannot use a apple to compare a orange.

your baffling me sir.


Also All your responses are extremely un-usual lately for your forum posting, I've been noticing this, somethings off.

I... what? I still don't see how that's going to increase rocket primarying or should I say, the use of rockets to kill infantry, or more specifically, spam chokepoints, since you're so hung up on the term. If it takes 2 hits to kill with rockets, then it'll have slower TTK than just using a regular weapon. Discouraging use of it.

I must ask, why do launchers NEED this ability to oneshot infantry? No one is giving me this answer. Why do rocket launchers even NEED splash at all? Splash does nothing to most vehicles.

So, instead of addressing the heart of my post. You latch onto one term I use and attack it? This is forumside, I suppose.

Anyone dumbfiring at maxes or just at close range in general just switches to dumbfires, one of which EVERYONE has available in their arsenal.

Anyway, to the NS annihilator nerf. This further enforces what I've said in another topic. This nerf could actually have as much to do about them nerfing rockets against vehicles, something vehicle players HAVE been asking for, as much as it does with making flak a useful counter to rocket launchers in infantry combat. Something that was intended for a long time, ever since they changed flak to resist direct fire as well.

Because rocket kills happen massively less then Team-kills do.

Your more likely to die to a teammate then a rocket(or its splash).

Rockets are not a major gamebreaking balance concern, nor have they ever been.


Rockets already have a slow TTK, Shotguns are faster! lol.

I wasn't attacking, sorry it was coming off that way, I was just making something clear and giving you abit of history on it.

EVERYONE is not a HA.

HA is the only class with rockets.

look.....



If they wanted to nerf infantry VS vehicles they would have decrease the G2G lock ons,Engineer AV turret, and max AV weapons max ranges to 300 meters.


Infantry render distance in this game is 300 meters.

Meaning Tanks(and other infantry) can't see you, but you can kill them(the vehicles), before they can see you.


there is NO reason why infantry AV has a range of over 300 meters, when the render distance of infantry in this game is 300 meters.


Basically as a Vehicle driver you can have infantry killing you, Because they don't render to you, and you can't see them to shoot back.


Thats the problem..... not rockets and there damage themselves.

Again, you dodge this question. How would taking away its ability to oneshot INCREASE the use of rockets to kill infantry? If it's unlikely to happen currently, why does it's ability to oneshot even matter?

I know everyone isn't HA all the time. But I don't see how that is even related to my point.

You said: "if they wanted to nerf rocket spam(heavily might I add), Was Remove the dumbfire from the 6 ES Lockons..... as I've been saying over and over again."

To which I responded that anyone intending to dumbfire in close quarters, for whatever reason, already pulls the default or the decimator. Assuming these even own another rocket launcher, aside from the default.

It still begs the question. Why does the rocket launcher NEED to oneshot infantry, even the ones with flak armor? All this change is accomplishing is allowing flak infantry to survive a shot and a slight nerf against vehicles. Which is going hand in hand with the vehicle nerf against infantry.

I'm not saying it's the "right" nerf, just that it's part of their nerfs against infantry AV. Since they're nerfing the tanks ability to kill infantry as well.

its splash..... I've explained this.


0.5 radius.

thats 1.5 feet.

you literally have to be touching the rockets impact site

Its going to increase the usage of rockets, Because people will have to use a second rocket inorder to kill that group(or that person) thats Clustered up or entrenched(defending or offensively)

Flak armor should be buffed to 60(or more)% at max level. Flak armor should be buffed if they want a viable way to deal with splash damage.


Do you understand that all this nerfing of splash will just cause more infantry zergs and not punish infantry for clustering up?


Its going to create a slippery slope.


Also..... look at the radius ingame.

0.5 radius is so small its amazing SOE is even nerfing that, or nerfing rocket splash ingeneral.


How often do you die from rocket splash?(I'm asking you)

Basically no one is going to win out in the end with these patchnotes.

They are "fixing" things that don't need fixing(or are gamebreaking), Rather then correct problems that actually exist!

They're not ideas? Then what are they? Because unless you have some case study to point out, pretty sure you're stating an opinion. "Can and do work out ingame" could only be said if it has already been demonstrated, otherwise it's just a theory. It could work. It should work. Not "it DOES work".

What ego do you have if you just know everything and are always right? I REALLY hope you're being ironic, because that's narcissism on a downright cartoonish level. No one is going to be able to take you seriously if that's how you view this discussion.

Rockets need splash to deal with infantry. It is in fact an intended design...though how powerful that splash should be could be debated. I have times where I shoot someone up, then they duck into cover. I'll then ready up a rocket and splash where my bullets can't go, either finishing the target or flushing them back out of cover, weaken them further as I move forward to finish, etc.

Honestly I don't need the one-shot as long as the splash damage is still at least decent. The splash also helps deal with engineers who are actively trying to repair the vehicle that you're hitting. If the drop is just enough to stop the OHK I don't see much issue with it, though I also don't see current rocket damage as much of an issue either.

I honestly don't have much of a ego, I am just a very good visionary who knows how things can/do work out ingame.


I've been doing game design/gameplay related things for 6+ years now.

Its not that I'm always right, Its that I have a "Structure that blocks water flow" good ability of being right alot.

as I said, I've been doing game design related stuff for 6+ years now. If its a game or something I enjoy I make sure that whatever I want to change in it, will not negatively impact it, and tend to think about all the angles etc to it.

I don't just see the problem, I see the solution,impacts etc. I look at the full picture, but zoom in on the details.

I comes off as ego i know...... But i just have experience with this stuff, especially from a visionary/planning/gameplay perspective.



PS: you did a good job with your response to regpuppy. That was well made.

my 2 cents:
I use rockets a lot, mostly the dumbfires. (Around 5k kills with all of my rockets combined)
1. They are necessary for vehicles and maxes.
2. Usually there are infantry around when there are maxes and vehicles around
3. I've learned to shoot rockets at infantry if i get jumped or ambushed while hunting vehicles.
4. The splash is pretty weak although it is great for taking out weakened bunches of enemies.
5. Most infantry and max kills with my rockets come from direct hits.

While I may lose some ability to control bio lab door camping with rocket splashes, the nerf to rocket splash won't affect most of my HA gameplay. I will be able to defeat maxes and vehicles with the rocket while retaining the ability to survive an ambush by infantry while wielding a rocket launcher.

What I am a bit unhappy about is flak protecting against direct hits from rocket launchers - I find that "Breaks Immersion" for me, HE being effective in an AT role, and HEAT and AP being weaker against maxes. Yes in a 1v1 fight HE will be edged out by HEAT and AP, but the difference is so narrow that one miss will give the HE tank victory. HE is high explosive, and generally will not penetrate or damage a tank except when it hits armor so thin that it can penetrate. So I would have HE do minimal damage to the side and front of a tank, but full damage to the top and rear of a tank for "immersion." Finally, currently a max at full health will be killed in 3 shots with the AP prowler but 2 shots with HEAT. With the reduction of damage for AP and HEAT, both will require more shots to kill a max with a tank.

your going to lose the ability to kill the engineers repairing the maxes & vehicles with splash......

Also the ability to actually kill/put a dent in clustered infantry.


As a HA this will impact you in alot of ways.


These rocket changes are unneeded.

You dont know how much experience I have with the Canister (that's what it's called now, refer to it as such.), so you trying to dismiss my assessment of your bad idea isnt going to work.