Forums » Suggestions
Everyone is whining about overpowered sunflares because they are the most commonly used rockets in VO.
Almost nobody ever uses starflares or iceflares and for a good reason.
Sunflare safety range is around 30 m.
Starflare and iceflare safety range is around 10 m.
Backsplash damage is 2x the damage dealt to your target if you hit it at close range.
As splash damage radius for flares is 60m, when you hit a target at 30m or even closer (stars and ices) you usually and very successfully kill yourself.
Also.... sunflare speed is 85 m/s, star and ice 75 m/s.
How about leveling the playing field and giving those unused rockets some love:
1. make the safety range for starflares and ice flares 30 m (the same as suns)
2. give them 85 m/s speed (the same as suns)
Almost nobody ever uses starflares or iceflares and for a good reason.
Sunflare safety range is around 30 m.
Starflare and iceflare safety range is around 10 m.
Backsplash damage is 2x the damage dealt to your target if you hit it at close range.
As splash damage radius for flares is 60m, when you hit a target at 30m or even closer (stars and ices) you usually and very successfully kill yourself.
Also.... sunflare speed is 85 m/s, star and ice 75 m/s.
How about leveling the playing field and giving those unused rockets some love:
1. make the safety range for starflares and ice flares 30 m (the same as suns)
2. give them 85 m/s speed (the same as suns)
+1
-1 this solves nothing
-1, this would take away my beloved rocket ramming. Sure, it hurts me more than the target, but that's the choice I make. The speed difference is negligible if you know how to fire flares.
@ wally
This suggestion does not provide any comfort for the 'overpowered sunflares' whiners but it solves the problem of completely neglected and unused starflares and iceflares. Why not make them a usable alternative to suns?
They pack less damage but they are slightly lighter and would probably make people try some different weapons combos on their ships. Variety in weapons and more choices are always good.
This suggestion does not provide any comfort for the 'overpowered sunflares' whiners but it solves the problem of completely neglected and unused starflares and iceflares. Why not make them a usable alternative to suns?
They pack less damage but they are slightly lighter and would probably make people try some different weapons combos on their ships. Variety in weapons and more choices are always good.
it solves the problem of completely neglected and unused starflares and iceflares. Why not make them a usable alternative to suns?
The obvious seems to escape you. Sunflares are the top-level rockets. Ice and Starflares are lower in specs because they have lower requirements. Ice and Starflares are no more neglected than other lower level weapons. In fact I use ice and starflares occasionally for close proximity fighting. But they are, above all, lower level rockets and should remain that way.
If you want NEW top-level alternatives to sunflares, propose as much.
The obvious seems to escape you. Sunflares are the top-level rockets. Ice and Starflares are lower in specs because they have lower requirements. Ice and Starflares are no more neglected than other lower level weapons. In fact I use ice and starflares occasionally for close proximity fighting. But they are, above all, lower level rockets and should remain that way.
If you want NEW top-level alternatives to sunflares, propose as much.
The obvious seems to escape you. Sunflares are the top-level rockets. Ice and Starflares are lower in specs because they have lower requirements. Ice and Starflares are no more neglected than other lower level weapons. In fact I use ice and starflares occasionally for close proximity fighting. But they are, above all, lower level rockets and should remain that way.
If you want NEW top-level alternatives to sunflares, propose as much.
For someone who seems to be missing the obvious, perhaps you should begin your responses with a less arrogant assertion. This suggestion still results in the same 1500/1000/800 damage, so even with the modifications they will not all be "top-level".
The biggest issue here seems to be the so-called "safety range". It's been some time since I've tinkered with Rockets, but it seems to be what we internally call "LockoutDistance", set to 60 for the sunflares, 30 for the iceflares, and 50 for the starflares. If that was made the same across the board, the safety range should be the same (they're all derived from the Sunflare, and inherit the same area effect radius).
The only question here is whether the safety range is of value as another balancing factor against the masses of the lower-end rockets being considerably less (if so, it seems a little haphazard.. I'm not sure why it's 50 on starflares and 30 on iceflares, but there may have been individual changes over time that I don't recollect).
There might be some general value to the lower-end rockets having the same basic properties (other than damage), as they act as training weapons, and otherwise it can be a little more challenging to learn one set of parameters, and then another. On the other hand, diversity can be interesting.
But, at any rate, I'm open to continued (positive) debate on the subject.
If you want NEW top-level alternatives to sunflares, propose as much.
For someone who seems to be missing the obvious, perhaps you should begin your responses with a less arrogant assertion. This suggestion still results in the same 1500/1000/800 damage, so even with the modifications they will not all be "top-level".
The biggest issue here seems to be the so-called "safety range". It's been some time since I've tinkered with Rockets, but it seems to be what we internally call "LockoutDistance", set to 60 for the sunflares, 30 for the iceflares, and 50 for the starflares. If that was made the same across the board, the safety range should be the same (they're all derived from the Sunflare, and inherit the same area effect radius).
The only question here is whether the safety range is of value as another balancing factor against the masses of the lower-end rockets being considerably less (if so, it seems a little haphazard.. I'm not sure why it's 50 on starflares and 30 on iceflares, but there may have been individual changes over time that I don't recollect).
There might be some general value to the lower-end rockets having the same basic properties (other than damage), as they act as training weapons, and otherwise it can be a little more challenging to learn one set of parameters, and then another. On the other hand, diversity can be interesting.
But, at any rate, I'm open to continued (positive) debate on the subject.
To me the worrysome part of this is that it will give valks less weight and more ammo, yes it would give every other ship with s ports that same thing but the only one that worries me is the valk
edit
I should clarify yes the damage is the same so they can have more ammo and less weight now but I can probably move out of the way of a star or ice still due to speed
edit
I should clarify yes the damage is the same so they can have more ammo and less weight now but I can probably move out of the way of a star or ice still due to speed
Meh i've changed my mind now it's probably fine
Another possibility is to nerf suns, bringing its speed and safety range down to be equal to stars/ices. I would actually prefer this than the other way around.
your idea would then make jacks and even the rarely used screamers more useful as they would still have the big hit
Maybe its just me but shouldn't the lighter flares be the fastest flares? They pack less of a punch but iceflares should go the fastest in my book.
Also true, those useless npc seekers you can grab go crazy fast.
Also, take the trailing fire effect from fireflies and add it to sunflares. I like that affect but it is on the most useless weapon ever released
Also, take the trailing fire effect from fireflies and add it to sunflares. I like that affect but it is on the most useless weapon ever released
[Stealth edits, blah :P]
Way back when, Sunflares used to be 16 rounds per tube and got nerfed down to 12. I believe, though I need to dig up the thread to be sure, that Ice and Star flares got a bit of a buff back then too (yep, though nothing to do with safety ranges).
Ah, here we go: https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/11006
Way back when, Sunflares used to be 16 rounds per tube and got nerfed down to 12. I believe, though I need to dig up the thread to be sure, that Ice and Star flares got a bit of a buff back then too (yep, though nothing to do with safety ranges).
Ah, here we go: https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/11006
Yeah, "LockoutDistance" is probably the main problem for star and ice.
You say it's set at 50m for stars and 30m fro ices but, as I have been using them for fun a lot, I have a feeling that limit is much lower.
I recollect getting backsplash damage from stars detonating at a target like 20-30m from me. I might be terribly wrong, of course, it's just a matter of proper perspective in that swift moment during the fight.
In any case, whether distance was 30 or 50m, something like that never happens with sunflares.
Star and Ice backsplash damage is a killer and quite a deterrent for players to use them.
The other factors are lower damage and speed but that was never a big issue because of their positive side - lower mass.
If we are talking here just about star and ice flares, setting the same "LockoutDistance" for them as for suns would be really good.
Now about speed...
I think Ores idea about lighter flares having better speed could be the balancing factor in the whole rockets conundrum (overpowered suns threads that keep coming up and result in requests for upping armor on ships, changing grid requirements etc, etc.)
Just as an idea, how about suns get a speed nerf down to 75 m/s, and stars get a buff to 80 m/s and Ice to 85 m/s?
You say it's set at 50m for stars and 30m fro ices but, as I have been using them for fun a lot, I have a feeling that limit is much lower.
I recollect getting backsplash damage from stars detonating at a target like 20-30m from me. I might be terribly wrong, of course, it's just a matter of proper perspective in that swift moment during the fight.
In any case, whether distance was 30 or 50m, something like that never happens with sunflares.
Star and Ice backsplash damage is a killer and quite a deterrent for players to use them.
The other factors are lower damage and speed but that was never a big issue because of their positive side - lower mass.
If we are talking here just about star and ice flares, setting the same "LockoutDistance" for them as for suns would be really good.
Now about speed...
I think Ores idea about lighter flares having better speed could be the balancing factor in the whole rockets conundrum (overpowered suns threads that keep coming up and result in requests for upping armor on ships, changing grid requirements etc, etc.)
Just as an idea, how about suns get a speed nerf down to 75 m/s, and stars get a buff to 80 m/s and Ice to 85 m/s?
-1 like yoda i like them the way they are.
A mix Starflare+Sunflare does very nice against a revC or on a corvult that try to stick on your face or on those pesky laggy androidiers.
Iceflare are the top giggles! You will die 90% of the time but you may take one down with you.
I suggest you learn to use them.
A mix Starflare+Sunflare does very nice against a revC or on a corvult that try to stick on your face or on those pesky laggy androidiers.
Iceflare are the top giggles! You will die 90% of the time but you may take one down with you.
I suggest you learn to use them.
You say it's set at 50m for stars and 30m fro ices but, as I have been using them for fun a lot, I have a feeling that limit is much lower.
I recollect getting backsplash damage from stars detonating at a target like 20-30m from me.
Inc will need to explain for confirmation, but this sounds exactly correct. Your distance from the target and the center points of you and the target that "LockOutDistance" appears to be calculate from...are not the same. So, LockOutDistance is 50m center to center, and you're seeing splash damage right around 25m of perceived distance from the target...functioning as intended.
Speed among rockets has always been a progression - tweaks to overall damage per tube have been made to balance them, but faster has always been associated with better. Which makes sense, because speed is probably second only to prox distance in how deadly flares are. -1 to screwing around with shitty flares being super speedy.
I recollect getting backsplash damage from stars detonating at a target like 20-30m from me.
Inc will need to explain for confirmation, but this sounds exactly correct. Your distance from the target and the center points of you and the target that "LockOutDistance" appears to be calculate from...are not the same. So, LockOutDistance is 50m center to center, and you're seeing splash damage right around 25m of perceived distance from the target...functioning as intended.
Speed among rockets has always been a progression - tweaks to overall damage per tube have been made to balance them, but faster has always been associated with better. Which makes sense, because speed is probably second only to prox distance in how deadly flares are. -1 to screwing around with shitty flares being super speedy.
I don't think anyone is suggesting super speedy but just balance the weight of the rocket with the speed. Shitty rockets will become less shitty.
Incarnate, Bojan is arguing in his original suggestion that Iceflares and Starflares should see as much use as Sunflares; the implication being to give sunflare users a reason to choose the lower tier weapons. Let's use another tiered weapon to illustrate my point: Nobody in their right mind would choose a Plasma Cannon MKI over an MK3 in the majority of circumstances. That, to me, seems obvious. Is it not?
There already exist tradeoffs between the rocket variants that would give people cause to use one of the lesser ones (smaller proximity trigger, higher ammo, considerably less weight). I don't agree that "everyone is whining about overpowered sunflares". But lets assume "they" were. It would make way more sense to provide a top-tier alternative to the sunflare (one with more concussion but less damage, for instance) than to mess around with the existing, well balanced-according-to-XP, rocket offerings.
And, to answer your only question: Yes I do think the safety range is of value. It may be minor, but there is value there. Sure you could change them with probably minimal effect on the game, but the purpose for doing so seems inconsequential in regards to addressing the minority concern (and premise of the OP) that "sunflares are too overpowered", since people will continue to favor the top tier weapons the majority of the time.
@Bojan
Star and Ice backsplash damage is a killer and quite a deterrent for players to use them.
Totally depends on what ship you are flying, who you are fighting, and HOW you are fighting. If you like close-quarter combat and have a valk (i.e. higher armor) for instance, the lower "safety trigger" of the ice and starflares has advantages. If you are flying a Centurion, it's a different story.
There already exist tradeoffs between the rocket variants that would give people cause to use one of the lesser ones (smaller proximity trigger, higher ammo, considerably less weight). I don't agree that "everyone is whining about overpowered sunflares". But lets assume "they" were. It would make way more sense to provide a top-tier alternative to the sunflare (one with more concussion but less damage, for instance) than to mess around with the existing, well balanced-according-to-XP, rocket offerings.
And, to answer your only question: Yes I do think the safety range is of value. It may be minor, but there is value there. Sure you could change them with probably minimal effect on the game, but the purpose for doing so seems inconsequential in regards to addressing the minority concern (and premise of the OP) that "sunflares are too overpowered", since people will continue to favor the top tier weapons the majority of the time.
@Bojan
Star and Ice backsplash damage is a killer and quite a deterrent for players to use them.
Totally depends on what ship you are flying, who you are fighting, and HOW you are fighting. If you like close-quarter combat and have a valk (i.e. higher armor) for instance, the lower "safety trigger" of the ice and starflares has advantages. If you are flying a Centurion, it's a different story.
Higher damage ratio for sunflares will always be the deciding factor for people to use them more.
Looking at the big picture and how the speed of your ship is added to the real speed of the rockets, I don't think 5 or 10 m/s makes a big difference.
Maybe if Ice and Star get some 'love' we could see them used more in some interesting ships/weapons combos.
Looking at the big picture and how the speed of your ship is added to the real speed of the rockets, I don't think 5 or 10 m/s makes a big difference.
Maybe if Ice and Star get some 'love' we could see them used more in some interesting ships/weapons combos.