Vanguard Balance Suggestion: Make them the Vehicle Bomb Bot

I like that the hornet out ranges defences, it's a siege unit.

And fighters aside, they are still really easy to kill.

And no I haven't played that much of RCBM, T1 bots and tanks look cool however, but this has nothing to do with yet another advert for RCBM, this is to do with the current hornet.

And besides, your main problem is with the hummingbird, not the hornet.

What is wrong with the hummingbird?

I still think the issue is with the Hornet, not the Hummingbird.

If the Hornet was changed to a bomber, be it strategic or carpet, then air would be more balanced.

yea lets not under any circumstances have a plane that outranges aa ... god forbid it could take no damage ...
lets instead have a bomber that basicly does the same as its t1 counterpart ... cause you know that's variety....

Carpet bombing and strategic bombing fulfill two completely different roles.

One is to take out a single target, the other is to take out a group of targets.

so the strategic one does what? fall on a structure high damage no or low aoe? because that is what the missile does except that it flighs into it ... dropping bombs always require to pass over the target ... launching missiles not ...
it only makes sense to have that for the hornet as to only drop bombs is a relic of ww2 ... modern bombers use guided missiles aswell and not only drop weapons ... if hornetbombs have propper aoe what would stop the player to use them against groups of groundunits other than aa ? ... the kestrel imo is rather for unithunting than structurebusting were the bumblebee is the generalist of air antiground

You brought it up.

But there isn't a problem with siege.

Why the hell has the Hornet not taken the route of the A10 Thunderbolt II? Keep the missile class weapon, cut the damage in a third or something, and give it several missiles. 4 or 6 maybe. It flys down, fires all of them out of range to guarantee damage, wrecks the targeted area, and has to survive flying past. Fire first, survive attention later. Problem solved.

because it would be even more of a gunship against everything than a structurebuster ... imo those bombers should be prone to overkill against units and with the high damage they have i think they do ...

I don't understand why the hornet would even be considered to be unbalanced?

It's got poor range and speed, a low fire rate, big turning circle.

Like, its only advantage is that it flys, and why is it a problem to have a flying siege weapon? Might be in games that don't have proper AA counters, but PA does.

does it still outrange the aa tower ?

Even if it does, why does that matter?

Shellers out range laser towers as well, and battleships out-range torpedo tubes.

As far as I've seen from streams that have used them, it's because when they're told to attack a ground unit, or even simply attack move, they will back up as well as strafe the unit at it's maximum range if the unit tries to get closer.

I believe it outranges the AA structure, but I don't know if they increased it's range recently.

Edit :

This very idea is the reason why defensive structures tend to become a waste of time and resources. Shellers outrange all land-based defensive structures, so there's no counter for them in this respect. Battleships are in the same boat. At least SupCom and TA had ground-based artillery and dumbfire missiles that were able to successfully defend. There's nothing in PA, and the Hornet with it's backing up while being faster than the only mobile AA ground unit makes it pretty broken in my opinion.

So the unit self micro's?

Wasn't there a thread about that....

Anyway, if the unit self microing is a problem, then remove it, make the unit sit still to attack.

yeah and that's cool just wanted a confirmation it still does ... got to wait a few days until i can play again ... broken laptopcable -_-

if the bomber behaves like a gunship/vtol then obviosly that needs to be changed as in it flies into fire range launches the missile and turns in a propper radius after launch ... but this seems to be a general problem with planes not behaving like regular planes ...

Except with the current tactical missile hornet it can sit out of range in perfect safety and destroy an entire base. Big difference.

That's not a problem with hummingbirds.

Except with Shellers you have a variety of options for taking out the Shellers. Pelters, Holkins, Catapult, flanking bots, bombing runs from aircraft.

With hornets, you have one option: have more fighters than your opponent.

Damn, you reply fast. couldn't even edit my previous post before you responded :

Yeah making the hornet sit still while launching missiles would solve that issue I think. Mobile AA could be amassed and sent to it all at once since it's firing is slow, but it backing up could let it passively stay outside range of anything save fighter aircraft because they're faster.

Now, I think the Hornet, with it's large wingspan and heavy build, would be using that wingspan to, you know, fly instead of just VToL-ing about the place. I can't imagine watching a B2 Spirit bomber hovering outside a city just casually launching individual missiles at things. The aircraft's physical properties just aren't designed for that, and it's a total waste of wingspan. A simple Apache gunship would do the same job easier and more efficiently.

Visuals aside, I think the Hornet is doing the wrong job. What job it should be doing? I dunno. Tactical strike, carpet bomb, building-buster, tactical nuclear payload, the list goes on. It can fulfill a number of things, but right now it's already doing the same thing the gunship does.. just a bit too effective.

That sounds like a problem where the person with the more humming birds wins.

The hornets still aren't fast either, so catching them is still really easy.

The gunship is anti-unit, the hornet is anti-building.

as i said the bombers flight behavior needs to be changed
it firing cruisemissiles isnt the problem ...