Commando Archive
Thread: Faction Purchasable Rocket Launcher
omw this post has turned into a reb vers imp post wth and the imps arent even useing comen senc
tell me imps wich would you rather have
a dued with a flamer staking 4 dots on your toy and killing it (most of yousay this is unrealistick and gay)
or a pistoler with a puny litel launcher pistole (or lag pistol) blowing a tatst away
or some thing thats realistick and a dued siting back with a havey ROCKT LAUNCHER and hiting the atst
if you cant figur this out for your shelf you need to go to the insan asilem
a RL so be the most power full wep in game and thats that
1: Its the imperial army, lightly armored to us is insanely armored compared tothe tin cans covering your -censored, but it has something to do with spheres-.
2: AT ST won't even be a pet for a vehicle, your going to have to deal with players piloting them as war machines the way they were originally intended when combat vehicles come out.
3: None of the damage applications are working the way SOE claims they are suppose to. According to SOE HEAVY damage objects should do 50% more damage for every level of damage they are OVER the targets armor level. Thus RL gets shot at a guy with light armor, the RL does normal damage of 2k, but since its heavy ar pierceing it should do 100% more damage (50% x2) it would do 150% to players without armor. This is ofcourse in theory, and it works the other way, heavy armor is suppose to SUBTRACT damage from lighter armor pierceing weapons, if a weapon doesnt have armor pierceing and is shot at a heavily armored object the damage should be reduced by 75% (25% per armor rateing above the armor pierceing of the weapon, if it was 50% it would be 150%, obviously its not) THEN the armor's resists reduce the damage AGAIN by whatever percentages they are at. But as it stands all weapons treat the AT STs armor as light anyway.
4: Commandos can light an AT ST onfire, flamesingle 1 flamecone 1 flamesingle 2 and flamecone 2, the DOTs for all of these stack. I killed a Kimogila or whatever its called on Lok by stacking just Flame2 and Flamecone2 twice while it was attacking my group mates. Because the fire DOTs stack and aren't effected by resistances AT STs go down very fast to a some what intelligent commando. Just don't attack one when your the only target available.
5: Turrets have 100k hits resist EVERYTHING but blast damage to high hell and are 20x tougher to kill then an AT ST, trust me my group of 30 imperials raided a rebel base (with deffenders) we lost 3 AT STs (of 5) and the rebels lost 0 towers, a great big fat 0.
6: Someone mentioned that AT ST armor was lowered to medium and its hits raised to 55k, I think this is to bring it more in line with the lightly armored scout vehicle you rebels keep crying about, infantry have the light armor, you want this AT ST to have light armor and be put on a level with common infantry? Its a block of steel with legs, hardly common infantry. AT ATs would (or should) have heavy armor (or a level above that -shrugs-) and 100k hits, they are, after all, quite impossible for infantry to kill.
7: Damage levels don't appear to be balanced, SOE seems to like going to the extremes when it comes to keeping commandos from doing their jobs (in order to shoot an RL or anything at all at a turret, a commando must cross a distance of 10m while being shot at by the turret) In this SOE seems to be bent on insureing that people don't sit outside the turrets fireing range and killing it off easy like.
8: Havn't your children heard of a Launcher pistol? I've heard Fan Shot with the LP can bring down AT ST's rather fast. Stop bitching there are plenty of ways to destroy an AT ST, as a imperial I happen to know this first hand as my imperial friends have lost theirs more then once.
But since no ones gonna shut up untill a fix is offered heres mine:
They COULD fix this by increaseing RL ranged to 75-78m and only able to target turrets and large vehicles, and move the RL to master commando instead of novice, this would keep dabblers from getting the same power, give commandos amore pronounced role, and give BOTH sides an advantage. Once combat vehicles comes out the RL will be a bit more popular anyway.
Ok for the guy who said those logs wouldn't crush an A1-Abram. Picture a redwood tree, this is a tree people can drive cars through if a large enough hole is cut in it, picture trees 20 times their size, these trees are going to be very dense very heavy trees. Those logs were almost as large in diamiter as the AT ST's top is wide, not to mention nearly as tall as the metal chicken, it was crunched like a tin can. Watch the **edit** scene. For stupidity's sake lets picture 2 logs cut from redwoods set up in the same manner long wide heavy logs that would take a crane to pick up and set up in such a manner, the length of the rope, length width density and shape of the logs all play a part in this, the tank would get crunched like a tin can. Its like takeing 2 A1-Abram tanks, doubleing theirweight (filling them with steel)and smashing them into a third in the exact same manner as those logs were smashed into that AT ST. The logs being solid matter (not hollow like the AT ST, another reason why it was crunched like an empty tin can) were heavier dispite being roughly the same size. This is proven when the other AT ST is knocked over by the logs rolling down the hill.
I admit you have a valid point, a HEAT round is hardly 3 times the weight of a tank, BUT its not designed to blow the tank up from the outside, its designed to pierce THROUGH the armor and detonate its charge INSIDE the tank, you shoot one at a tank the tank will still be whole, everything in it will be gone. Shoot one at one of these AT ST's I'm sure the effect will be the same thing, flaming someone else however isn't a way to show off your intelligence, it just makes you look stupid when that person comes back with examples of how 2 trees smashing into something from either side would destroy it a great deal better then a HEAT round.
Also scientific law proves an AT ST in that situation would get crunched and HOW it happens, even if those logs were half their size the AT ST wouldn't have walked away from it, one log is smashing the target into the other log which is smashing it into the first log, the force HAS to go somewhere and since both logs are more dense then the hollow steel box, the steel box is going to get crunched. Even the SHAPE of the AT ST's cockpit makes it vulnerable to that effect, if it was more of a sphere it would have withstood those tree logs alot better.
Honestly rebels onlytry to start flame wars, try and attack a rebel base and all I ever get to do is kill NPCs, the players are usually hideing and peeing their pants, unless ofcourse they have the advantage in numbers.And maddogs I thought you were smarter then that, aparently not.
Imperial are supposed to have:
1) Much better technology than Rebels.
2) More personel than Rebels
3) More rights than Rebels
I'm sure the lists goes on, but only those 3 are in my mind right now.
As of today, we have technology that's *slightly* better than Rebels, that being our AT-ST. We are vastly outnumbered and we have the same in game rights. It's not 9450 faction point for an AT-ST only if you're human. For a Zabrak, it takes 18k fp to get an AT-ST, for a wookie, 27k.It's already bad that none-human imperials suffers a faction penalty, which makes more people want to join the Rebels, but it's worse that people are crying aboutthe SINGLE perk thatmakes being anImperial "worthwhile." The AT-SThas alreadybeen nerfed from the anti-personel killing machine that it was meant to be intosomethingthat most Imperials won'tpvp with dueto its wounds being unhealable. To heal 1/4 of an AT-ST's ham, i have to leave it inthe datapad for a day. Currently, I see the AT-ST as being useless because players can and have soloed the current version of the AT-ST. The 2 story tall machine is a joke of what's it supposed to be. If you guys want balance, then give us half of current Rebel PCs. Better yet, if you want balance, go play another game.
The Devs have not represented the time frame at all. However, they put so much emphasis ON the time frame. If you don't want to play the game during the time frame, come back in a decade or so, maybe we'll be post RotJ. Like Yoda said, "Well represented this time frame is not."
did you guys even read the thread at all or just come in here yelling to save your ATST's?
we're not asking to nerf them. we're asking for a more realistic way to take them down like we had before. Its not realistic to have it taken down by a LP or flamer. we'd happily lose those methods if we had a armour piercing weapon that could actually scratch it.
We're not asking for them to be 4k fp's thats just what they are atm.(might even be 5k fps) and we're not asking for them to be general use. We're happy for them to have the faction cost raised and be PVP only JUST LIKE the ATST's.
Whichever guy compared the armours i suggest you go learn about armour. Theres personal armour and vehicle armour. When we talk about the ATST having light armour we're talking about it having light armour in terms of vehicles. Theres a big difference between the two. they arent the same thing.
Now go re-read the thread and comment with common sense this time.
Oh and faction costs of the ATST are irrelavent all we're asking for is a realistic way of being able to damage them like we used to be able to before the beef up.
And comparing them to turrets is retarded. Turrets are a static heavy defence with large chunks of armour etc.
An ATST is a very mobile lightly armoured scout vehicle.
BIIIGGG difference there.
I think a pistol launcher taking an AT-ST down is pretty unralitsitc. This is the first I heard about it, but I never fought one. Every Commando I see uses Rockets or flames it. A flamethrower against a AT-ST would work nicley IMO... There are 2 viewports that are open in the front, very easy to shoot a flame through there and burn everything and everyone inside... Also plenty of examples of flamethrowers burning armored vehicls in wars... Look some up. AT-ST is a scout and should have light armor instead of medium. No scout vehicle can stand up to to much punishment.
Another thing, yes those logs were big enough to crush those AT-ST... Look again. Now the ewoks were small so don't ask me how they got them up there so fast. It's a movie... So far not much in this game is anything like the movie as to combat. Wasnt whining azarken, but it seems that all you say about any imperial who replies... I guess thats about all you guys ever say.
Oh and as for the commando, yes it WAS easy for him... AT-ST was engaged already so he didnt have to worry about it shooting him atm. He sprinted in and flamed it and sprinted out. He hit first time so dont say 8-15 seconds wait time... He didnt have to wait. And big deal, 37k ham v 40k ham, it was 40k. As I said it had "about" which means around . You telling people to read and your trying to get technical about something you didnt read.
Not all armor pierce rounds blow a great big hole in it as you put.. DO you even know anything about military weapons? Have you ever even used an anti-tank roket. I serioulsy doubt it. Like the one guy said. HEAT punches a hole, not a big freaking hole and goes through and detonates inside burning and killing everyone inside. Now if the rebels had any such weapon fine, yeah get it. I dont care but I dont recall it. I dont recall quite a bit of weapons we're using here.
I hear Imps talk about how if you want to bring down the ATST you need to group up. Well it shouldnt be that way. A single player and his faction pet shouldnt be able to last against four or five commandos before it goes down. thats just bad.
However, you conveniently forget that rockets MISS. 10 out of those 30 will miss.
Of the 20 left, the commando WONT be able to SINGLE handedly take down an atst with it UNLESS the atst is not attacking the commando.
Since its obvious you have never fired a rocket launcher, you should know that the ham cost is horrendously high, the commando has to KNEEL to shoot and then there's a 6 second delay between shots.
Only a fully buffed commando can fire 5 rockets in a row, a normal commando will only be able to fire 2 or 3 at the most HAM-wise. Time-wise the atst/owner is in tremendous danger.. 12 seconds for 2 shots means the atst and the owner can shoot him 18 times total (owner firing once per second if he has any elite combat skills and atst firing once per 2 seconds) for an average of 8400 damage! (atst 1000 damage per shot X 6 shots, owner 200 damage per shot).
and if you think about it, the atst would get hit by 2 rockets and commando dies.. the result is a dead commando (defeat) and an atst with 24k damage (if both rockets hit for their max 12k damage that is)... but with only about 3000 wounds.
Atst owner stores atst, and the total damage the commando did was... *drumroll* 3k!!! for the atst ham bars heal themselves except for wounds.
Using the leg. rocket launcher against creatures would be a complete waste of faction points. just look at the resists and ham bars of krayts or kimos. wasted faction points. any commando can take down the standard 'hunting' critters with the flamer alone, why do you think people dont use HPBC's or RL's in PVE nowadays? its a waste of money. And faction points are far more valuable than credits.
Tycho78 wrote:
Oh and as for the commando, yes it WAS easy for him... AT-ST was engaged already so he didnt have to worry about it shooting him atm. He sprinted in and flamed it and sprinted out. He hit first time so dont say 8-15 seconds wait time... He didnt have to wait. And big deal, 37k ham v 40k ham, it was 40k. As I said it had "about" which means around . You telling people to read and your trying to get technical about something you didnt read.
Not all armor pierce rounds blow a great big hole in it as you put.. DO you even know anything about military weapons? Have you ever even used an anti-tank roket. I serioulsy doubt it. Like the one guy said. HEAT punches a hole, not a big freaking hole and goes through and detonates inside burning and killing everyone inside. Now if the rebels had any such weapon fine, yeah get it. I dont care but I dont recall it. I dont recall quite a bit of weapons we're using here.
to touch on the first part of that quote. the 8-15 seconds wait time was the wait that all commandos endure after they fire their flamer special. do you even PLAY a commando or you just here lurking and trolling? after a commando fires a flamer special they have to wait 15 seconds before they can fire again(reduced to 8 at master i believe). that means for a whole 8-15 seconds he was completely vunerable and couldnt shoot a shot.
Nope never used and anti tank rocket however i have seen one used and studied them etc. im aware it doesnt blow a huge hole on the outside but it does on the inside when the explosive element goes off.
And once again tacwraith has absolutly nailed you. just read his stats etc about firing a rocket launcher. theres no way a commando will be able to take down a ATST on his own because the ATST is too beefed up for a lightly armoured vehicle.
Tycho78 wrote:
AT-ST is a scout and should have light armor instead of medium. No scout vehicle can stand up to to much punishment.
precisly what we've been saying all along but then why does it take 6 to 12 shots to take one down with a RL?
And do you have any clue about flame throwers? for a commando to actually get his flame thrower to fire almost directly up and into the view ports he'd have to get up hella close. dodge the ATST's feet, and lasers. and then aim perfectly. a bit nuts if ya ask me. and not to mention if he did manage to burn the crew that way the ATST would either be partially imobalised while they tend to burns/put out fires or it would be outright dead because the crew would be fried.
Not to mention the dangers of firing a flame thrower almost directly upwards.
LOL, yes Im a Master and no it doesnt take 8-15 seconds for my first flame special... It's usually right off. Are you a commando? It's after the first special where the delay always hits. It's supposed to be a war azarken, why do you rebels want everything to be so easy for you. It's supposed to be tough to kill the enemy. Yes a RL can take a scout easy, but not all RL's are good enough. Alot will do enough damage to immobilze the tank but not neccesarrily destroy it.
As I said, you rebels have no such rocket launcher so why should you get something like that now? I agree about the armor of the atst and that it shouldnt be a monster, but IMO pistoleer's, TK and any profession but commando shouldn't be able to take a atst out. I just thinks its dumb for a pistoleer and other professions helping commandos out on taking one out. I can see combat meds healing the guys doing it. If the atst has a 55k ham, I cant imagine what a atat will have since its heavy armor and much much bigger.
In short IMO I think only commandos should be able to take out a atst. You dont have such a rocket so you make do with what you got like the rebels in the books and movies did. The resis on a atst is pretty low now so it takes alot of damage in fights. I used my last atst last night against 3 rebels. 1 was commando and flamed it. luckily I got it stored before this one blew but 1/4 the bar was wounds after the fire was on it. 3 rebels did quite well against it so I dont see how any of you are having such trouble with it.
Its not hard to use a flamethrower there azarekn, read some history.. you point a shoot and move side to side. the flame goes in any hole it comes across... Dont have to be directly under it either. I can fire from 16m and its not straight up at something big either.
Earlier you had said you were using sources for all your info.. I didnt see any I would like you to place them so I can go look at them myself.
I think it's funny how alot of people come on here talking about how a wepaon should work when they have no experience or training with such weapons. This is a game but jeez, you act like its Real so in that sense, let me know if you got the experiene with the real weapons. Frankly reading what you say, you dont have a clue.