Forums » Suggestions

Some ideas on the AGT

«123»
Jan 24, 2006 Shapenaji link
Tru Dat
Jan 25, 2006 terjekv link
I still like the "warm up" idea, that it takes the AGT a bit to start fireing from the time you press the button (maybe fireing at a slower ratio before going all out after a bit) and that it'll keep fireing for a bit *after* you let go as well. it'd make it a bit harder to spray and pray at least, and small zippy ships can try to exploit the startup time for the weapon.
Jan 25, 2006 KixKizzle link
That would most likely work as well.
Jan 25, 2006 Renegade xxRIPxx link
terjekv, it would change nothing to the present utilisation of the agt.

You'll just press that button a couple secs before you would press it otherwise and seeing that none of the other stats change it won't really change the reason why people use it. Unless the person fighting you will do jousts... but in that case you have the flares to set them up with...

Meaning that fix wouldn't counter any of the reasons why the combo warthog/prom/atlas agt and flares are so powerfull compared with any of the other options available.
Jan 25, 2006 CrippledPidgeon link
I really dislike the idea of slowing the AGT's firing rate. I mean, it's already outclassed by the N2 in accuracy, damage, weight, and shot speed. The only thing that the AGT has is its firing rate and auto-aim cone, and even that can be a liability.

I notice that all examples of an AGT being too powerful is when it's a on a Prometheus in conjunction with flares. No one's saying that the Hog Mineral Extractor is too powerful. No one's saying that the Hog Territorial Defender is too powerful. No one's even saying that the Centaur with dual AGTs is too powerful.

I think there's something wrong with this picture. I'd personally like to see the firing rate (of both the AGT and the GC) doubled, energy consumption and damaged halved, shot speed increased to 190, spin up time and a reduced auto-aim cone (well, reduced for the AGT, and increased for the GC). For the first .5 seconds after firing, the weapon doesn't fire and a spinup sound plays, and from there it takes another 1.5-2 seconds to reach full firing rate. Once the trigger is let off, the AGT takes 1.25 seconds to spin down, so if the trigger is pulled again before the weapon fully spins down, then the spin-up is abbreviated.

And personally, I really don't care much for the AGT's huge auto-aim cone. At 100+ meters, it can be more of a liability than an advantage. The shots travel slower than most others and the AGT shoots with a huge compensation, and I find that if the light fighter just watches where the shot stream is traveling, he or she could spoof the auto-aim into firing where the light fighter really had no intention of travelling in the first place. The AGT is most effective when the target is less than 100m away and the AGT's slow shot speed is overcome by the auto-aim cone.

True, suggestions like increasing shot speed would increase the AGT's effective range, but if you consider that the AGT is already the most inaccurate weapon in the game (meaning that if you fire two consecutive shots at a single target, in all likelyhood, the two shots will not hit the exact same spot, unlike, say, the N2), it really doesn't gain all THAT much.

Renegade: the Warthog and Atlas with AGT and flares aren't really that powerful. The Atlas X only has 8500 armor, and the Hog TD has 10000, compared to the Prom I's 18000. The weakest Prom's armor is over twice as strong as the heaviest Atlas's, and nearly twice as strong as the heaviest Hog. Sure, a light fighter would have to change his attack strategy, and not simply charge in on the Atlas or Warthog where their weapons are most effective, but once hit, the Hog and Atlas go down pretty quickly in comparison to the Prom.

And AGT spin up would change the spray-and-pray mentality. Most of the time, true opportunities to hit with the AGT are on very short notice, and spinup would require a lot more prediction. And if the prediction is incorrect, then the AGT platform could potentially find itself vulnerable to the much faster light fighter.
Jan 25, 2006 softy2 link
the warm-up idea rules.

People (looking at ya Rene) who says it "changes nothing" should write a macro such to simulate a 1 second delay on their fire button. (Go ahead Rene, do it.)
Jan 25, 2006 Shapenaji link
CrippledPigeon: Um, I'm saying that a hog is too powerful, I'm also saying that a tung centaur is too powerful.

Also with the Atlas X and even the wraith.

Look, when I fly an AGT I rarely EVER get hit, there's too much freedom to dodge.

And to be honest, a good AGT stream kills faster than anything else (Unless you're firing neuts at a target that's still.)
Jan 25, 2006 KixKizzle link
Ha Rene you and your jedi skills.
Most decisions to fire (the ones that hit anyway) are made within .5 seconds on "average".
So if you know your going to have the enemy's broadside by their accident only....
Then you just rock.

CP,
"True, suggestions like increasing shot speed would increase the AGT's effective range, but if you consider that the AGT is already the most inaccurate weapon in the game (meaning that if you fire two consecutive shots at a single target, in all likelyhood, the two shots will not hit the exact same spot, unlike, say, the N2), it really doesn't gain all THAT much."

First off the firing arc makes up for its match up against the N2.
The fact that the AGT spray's instead of fire's a straight shot every time is one of the reasons its so good.
That of course matched up with the refire rate so if the refire rate is doubled like you suggest then it should greatly increase its effective accuracy.
Double the refire rate.... That's going in the wrong direction.
Double the rate of fire....
Or are you saying decrease the rate of fire?

I don't know I'm confused.

I fought a dual AGT centaur the other day and it was a piece of cake.
The pilot kinda sucked though and I'd like to fight someone with some real skill to test it out.
Someone /msg me.
Jan 25, 2006 LeberMac link
I'll break out the Lumbering Lebertaur™, Kix.
(Oh, wait, he said someone with SKILL...)
Jan 25, 2006 Cunjo link
Shape Said:
"Maybe make it track slower... so that it always starts firing straight and then tracks toward the reticle as you fire for longer."

Harry Seldon Said:
"No, that would massively under-power it, unless you made it possible to fire for *longer* (EG, reduce energy used), because then it wouldn't be what it's description states: A turret, capable of fending off light fighters. If it has to track, then it'll never hit anything, unless you get the jump on them."

Not Necessarily, Harry. How "Massively" it underpowers it is only a function of how much of a tracking delay there is. If you put something like 1/4 second tracking time from centered firestream to the edge of the autoaim cone, it would still track fast enough that it would make virtually no difference. The trick would be to find a sweet spot of balance between where it's still too effective, and where it's not effective enough. If that was the only thing you changed about it, I'd guess that somewhere between half a second and a second to traverse the arc would put it in line.

My 2c:
AGT Needs a nerfing, but only in the sense that it's far too effective on the smaller, more mobile ships (like the 'hog). The obvious solution then, to handicap its effectiveness on those ships while still keeping it a workable weapon for the heavies that depend on it, is to increase its mass. A heavier AGT would keep any ship carrying it from dancing about - something the heavies can't do anyway. An AGT on a ragnarok would lose only minimal performance, which is okay, because the rag is still vulnerable due to its inability to evade at medium range, or turn at close range. Conversely, an AGT on a warthog would slow the ship down so that it performs only margainally better than the Ragnarok with the same setup.

This could go hand-in-hand with ships that are still too overpowered with an AGT - tune down their thrust, and the AGT becomes more of a burden.

So:
1. Increase the AGT's total mass to about 150% what it currently is
2. Decrease (slightly) the thrust on the Prom


Problem Solved.

As for Shape's suggestion, that's workable too, if I understand it right - if the AGT kept its current auto-aim cone, but started out firing to the center when the button is pressed, and then race to catch up with the target's current intercept, then the pilot using the AGT would have to either
a) plan ahead for off-center bombardments (a good thing)
or
b) not fire until the target is in your sights (also a good thing)
The AGT could still track a target, but you would have to put at least some minimal thought into aiming. Again, though, you need to tune the tracking speed finely, so that it isn't too underpowered.

As mentioned above, you could also decrease the weapon's scatter and increase its speed, which would make it more effective at longer range while not making it much more deadly up close. I think the mass should be toyed with first though, and see if it needs further tuning/balancing.
Jan 25, 2006 Renegade xxRIPxx link
I always presumed you shot in the direction where you were expecting the opponent to be in the next sec which is for most energybased weapons when the reticule turns yellow, with the exception of the agt seeing that you let that over to the aimingcone o nthe agt.

Seeing that the idea about an agt is to come within 50-75m of your opponent and just let it loose or make them not come that distance as distancecontroll, it wouldn't be that dificult to just start that stream a bit earlier. you might lose some extra energy, but like you said by adding a slower fire rate at the beginning that loss won't be that bad. (maybe 1/5th of your battery so 50 energy on max).

I'm stating that an agt on an atlas outperforms a plasmadev, gt with a mile and the difference in weight ain't that big. And the plasmadev is in actuality a decent enough weapon for a hog or an atlas or even a prom. they really don't need the agt to be ok. As shape stated.

Oh and softy i would write such a macro if i had the skill to do so, but as in real life and in game i'm skillless.
Mar 06, 2006 Ghost link
Sorry all, but this thread needs to be kept alive.

Why not just leave everything the same and decrease the damage on the AGT?
Mar 06, 2006 CrazySpence link
As someone who has been using and facing an AGT for almost 3 years and watching these silly threads over and over again.

for a prom, stay above the ship to avoid the agt spray, for a hog stay to the left, for a centaur, wraith or atlas hit it with a rocket then get underneath and let it have it with whatever energy weapon you choose.

Don't go around saying "my usual strategy that I dont feel like changing doesnt work on every freakin ship"

head to head with a hog at less than 100m i can avoid most of the spray, there is a sweet spot for every agt ship that there guns wont hit as long as you stay there you just gotta get into it and then let them have it

However! even I know when something is a little to extreme.... reducing its aim cone diameter by 2cm would be fair as i can pretty much look 60 degrees away and still hit you and that is a bit much.
Mar 06, 2006 tumblemonster link
Spence, have you ever fought me in the Atlas of Doom? The Atlas X has pretty low armor, and is basically a big flat sided box. It should be easy to hit in range and a pretty fast kill. Still, I win 85% of the time in it. Even taking into account I have more skill than most players, 85% in that setup is still pretty rediculous. It generally doesn't matter what I'm fighting either. I have won 2v1 and 3v1 in the Atlas of Doom. The point is, slap a plas dev or a mega posi on an Atlas X and it's just another Atlas, and against anyone but a highly skilled pilot, it's an easy kill. The AGT is why.
Mar 06, 2006 Cunjo link
We've been here once, we've been here a MILLION TIMES...

Shape Said:
"Maybe make it track slower... so that it always starts firing straight and then tracks toward the reticle as you fire for longer."

Rather than making it start out centered, it would be more reasonable to assume that the barrel actively tracks the targeted object/ship even when it is not firing, thus a limitation could be placed instead on it's maximum speed of travel (in theta), so that while it tracks quickly enough to stay on target in almost all situations, it would not be able to track instantaneously, and would fall behind the target if either the platform (ship) or the target were moved violently.

I maintain that this is only a PARTIAL solution to the problem of the AGT.

The real issue is its mass in proportion to the available thrust of some of the ships that carry it.

Raise the AGT's Mass Significantly
and Lower the Prometheus' Thrust Slightly
The increase in mass would keep the grossly overpowered Warthogs from dancing about with the thing, and the decrease in thrust:AGT-mass ratio on the prom would make it mortal.
Mar 06, 2006 Shapenaji link
Spence, when you can beat take me down in a hog duel below 50%, then maybe I'll agree with your suggestion regarding AGT.

As it is, its the most absurdly powerful weapon I can imagine.

My toughest fights these days are against players in dual AGT Centaurs. I'm on the defensive the ENTIRE time. And if it becomes a multi-fight, the AGT's just get better. I fail to see their inherent weakness.

For example, the Neutrons have good speed, but they require you to open yourself to aim, and they telegraph WHERE you're aiming. (all you have to do is look at the front of the ship)

AGT, well, its not really heavy (1400 kg is less than a pair of basic rails, and only slightly more than a pair of neuts), and for the ships its on, it makes them no more sluggish.

But even on the SLUGGISH ships, at the ranges that it forces players to fight at, there's no reason why those ships would get hit.

Look, in a fight at 200m, I could fly an EC-88, and would be only mildly disadvantaged against a Rev C. Why? because at that range, the Bus is just as capable of dodging energy fire as the Revver.
The only way the Rev C gets its advantage is at closer ranges.

Likewise, an AGT is no more disadvantaged at long range than neuts are. Both just turn off autoaim and spray.

The reason why you get this absurd suggestion that AGT somehow DOESN'T work at long range, is because everybody rolls, and they keep their autoaim on.

We shouldn't keep a broken weapon just because some people haven't worked out the tactics to use it effectively. Especially when the vast majority of strong PvP'ers suggest that it needs a bit of fixing.

I'm not arguing this cuz I get beat routinely by AGT, but because I beat other people with it, by an INSANE margin.
Mar 06, 2006 KixKizzle link
AGT is only good with flares.
Otherwise I'm happy to dodge.
Mar 06, 2006 Shapenaji link
I offer myself as a test to anyone who feels that their AGT dodging skills are up to par.
Mar 06, 2006 Gavan link
OOOH OOH! I love testing!

/me raises his hand.

/me thinks for a moment.

/me lowers hand after realizing he hasn't played for four months.
Mar 07, 2006 softy2 link
You know, everytime I think about resubscribing, I just have to see a thread like this, then I'd think again and stop. Because then I realize I'll just resubscribe into a game where some things that are obviously broken like the prom and agt are still around after more than a year of constant complaints.