Tactical Missiles - Discuss

Discussion in 'Balance Discussions' started by davostheblack, March 24, 2015.

  1. davostheblack

    davostheblack Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    313
    Tactical missile launchers kind of suck. Whether it's from a bluehawk, hornet, stingray or TML launcher, they just feel sadly lacking. They don't hit with quite the oomph I'd expect, don't have the AoE to make up for that, and the range just feels short of expectation. It feels like they lack a real role

    I'd feel happier if their range was increase by 25 to 30, especially when they're hitting orbital units
    ace63 likes this.
  2. MrTBSC

    MrTBSC Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,829
    Likes Received:
    1,818
    no aoe for tacmissiles
  3. andrehsu

    andrehsu Active Member

    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    120
    arent the purpose of the tactical missiles to be accurate and high damaging?
    thetrophysystem likes this.
  4. iacondios

    iacondios Active Member

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    53
    From what I see, they need to be higher damage or longer ranged, and they have to not overkill when multiple missiles are launched. E.g., you have 5 catapults, and they all target the same tank when there are 5 tanks in range. The overkill is the single biggest weakness, and makes it nearly pointless to use multiple tac missile launchers in a group. Also, Hornets need to do a better job at attacking from maximum range without ridiculous amounts of micro.

    Especially since they have a counter unit, there's no reason for them not to be more powerful. There's also basically no reason to use them instead of umbrellas, since the range is similar, but the missiles take forever to launch, and don't oneshot their targets anyways. Not really a good defense against SXX. It's also pretty hard to take out anchors with Stingrays or Bluehawks without accidentally walking in range of the anchor and getting shot to death first, since the ranges are so similar.
    Last edited: March 25, 2015
    huangth, klavohunter and tunsel11 like this.
  5. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,965
    Likes Received:
    3,134
    I don't see the problem with overkill as it was never a problem in supcom.

    They are building killers is all.

    Or at least should be.
  6. radongog

    radongog Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    638
    Likes Received:
    295
    Well, you don´t see the problem in stupid targeting then? If I give an area annihilation command to Hornets, I wanna see that area annihilated and not...
    ...see them flying in AA-turrets...
    ...see them targeting all the same ground unit...
    ...or even see them getting killed by ground units!

    There is no logical reason why they shouldn´t be able to be clever enough to use there firepower in an efficient way!
    tunsel11 and Abaddon1 like this.
  7. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,965
    Likes Received:
    3,134
    Well one logical reason would be to make the player do it manually.
  8. Abaddon1

    Abaddon1 Active Member

    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    169
    Which I would assume was largely what the player was doing in giving the area attack command... No point for added needless micro.
  9. iacondios

    iacondios Active Member

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    53
    Its a limitation imposed by the UI and game. I thought PA was all about removing these limitations...?
    tunsel11 likes this.
  10. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,965
    Likes Received:
    3,134
    Unless that is the point of it.
  11. radongog

    radongog Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    638
    Likes Received:
    295
    Well, it makes definitly no sense in-lore; and as this is a huge part in PA, I would recommend it to be fixed!

    But well,of course this one is adding micro and Hornets are pretty strong units when microed well---but anyways: Is this what we want PA to have? Much micro for AN EASY COMMAND?!
    Doesn´t seem legit!
    tunsel11 likes this.
  12. thetrophysystem

    thetrophysystem Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,050
    Likes Received:
    2,874
    Discuss? They are great. Discussion ended.
  13. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,965
    Likes Received:
    3,134
    In lore it makes even more sense as the commanders are supercomputers.

    So that isn't a point for it either.
  14. mot9001

    mot9001 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    650
    I disagree. Im using them a lot more recently and with excellent results. Just practise with them and find their uses, they definitly are good units when you use them properly.
  15. radongog

    radongog Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    638
    Likes Received:
    295
    This is exactly one of the reasons WHY it´s as I described:
    Such easy tasks will be standardized in his set of methods! If the commander is able to have quite efficent area building orders (an easy example), he should have quite efficient area attack commands as well!
  16. davostheblack

    davostheblack Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    313
    Good units, maybe, but I find myself only using blue hawks when I've got anchor creep to deal with, for example. Their range is just short of being truely effective as bombardment units
  17. mot9001

    mot9001 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    650
    Have u tried putting them in pelicans to snipe weakly protected high value targets?
  18. stylisticsagittarius

    stylisticsagittarius Active Member

    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    57
    I agree the tactical missiles don't feel as strong as they should be.
    There range for the missle launcher building AND the bot AND the missile ship is way to short.

    On naval it's redicilus that a battleship can shoot almost twice as wide as a missile ship could...
    The only reasen i built missile launchers are because they are both defense to orbital and land against very small groups...

    The only reasen i built missile bots are because they are mobile and can deal with anchors there where no other mobile land unit can't. (it would seriously help here if missile bots targets orbital first)

    The only reasen i built missile ships: i don'built missile ships...
  19. mot9001

    mot9001 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    650
    I feel like their only real downside besides the t2 requirement is sniperbots being able to shoot them.
  20. redpiner

    redpiner New Member

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    6
    Until I saw this thread I didn't know bluehawks could kill anchors without waltzing in range... or that they prioritized land units over orbital (!).

    I agree on the overkill problem. High damage, slow fire units need to fire at targest more randomly, to avoid all units focusing on the same target.

    The overkill problem is why instant fire GILE outclass BlueHawks despite being the same class, and unable to shoot orbital.


    PS Is there anyone here that has used a missile ship? Ever? Are they even useful?

Share This Page