Main > Gameplay

Some interesting math about the Mercury Field Gun.

<< < (9/17) > >>

Echoez:
So what you are trying to say is that if I want to play against people that are are being serious and use that gun as a spamming tool across the map, making approach 80% more difficult because the damn thing can kill you on top of disabling you and armor stripping you, I should look for an other match?

I'm sorry but I am not a tournament player yet, maybe in the near future, but in game I will encounter people that will abuse the gun in pubs as well and that takes out a lot of the fun of the game for me. I want to be able to play against good players while I'm sure that there is no gun that can be abused to such extend as the current Mercury.

And despite the fact that Zill messed up his arguement, what he proposed is actually the best solution without touching the gun itself. Reduce the damage modifier of Shatter on Perma Hull to 0, buff guns like the Hwacha a tiny bit to compesate for the loss, boom, gun is mostly fine now since it lost 2/3 of its Perma Hull damage source, effectively trippling the ammount of shots you need to put on a target to destroy them with it.

N-Sunderland:
I have to agree. Getting rid of shatter's effect on permahull would make no difference to the mercury's use as a disabler or armour stripper, so there'd really be no cause for concern. The sole change would be reduced instances of quad mercs (which occur in pub matches and don't require very much coordination). I think everybody here can concur that quad mercs are not a good thing by any stretch of the imagination.

RearAdmiralZill:
From Echo's wording, it sounds like he wants absolutely 0 perma hull damage from a merc, which I believe will make the gun useless. It needs to make people move. That's always been my intended use of it apart from a disabler.

If it does no perma damage, the other team can just sit back and chuckle at their attempts to do anything worth moving for. That would force the other team to move closer, into the effective range of the real damage dealers.

It's really a fine line to make it so it's not so powerful that it kill's too fast when spammed at max range, but also not so tiny that the enemy can ignore it and simply beat the team using mercs outright. I've never considered the merc a killing weapon, but one that forces people closer, as if you just sit back and let me merc you, yea, you're going to eventually die, very slowly.

Of course, the whole thing is moot as awkm has worded his reasoning. I just wanted to explain my thought there.

Echoez:
4 shots of that thing into permahull is one less flak shot and 2 less mortar shots you will later need to destroy a ship and with its reload time and accuracy plus how fast it takes down armor if brought en-masse, putting 4 shots into an other ship isn't so hard and gives you a big advantage.

The gun will still deal Permahull damage, it deals piercing as well after all, but it won't be a threat unless you realy sit there and eat it in the face.

N-Sunderland:
@Zill

But quad mercs are difficult enough to approach (especially on Dunes) that you'll usually end up with both teams taking them, and that's what leads to hour-long sniping matches.

The merc has other uses. You can combine it with a flak like Polaris did to get some serious range with the piercing-explosive combo, or you can use it to disable while approaching (like on the front of a Junker). It excels at those roles, and neither require any permahull damage. So I don't see how it would be useless.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page