IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Aurora Hurricane, It's a bouncing baby suggestion!
Darky
post 14 Jan 2014, 13:53
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 791
Joined: 15 January 2013
Member No.: 9643



Unit Name: Aurora Hurricane

Description: Capable of the same supersonic speeds as the regular Aurora, the Aurora Hurricane trades its powerful bomb for a pair of Long Range Anti-Ship missiles. These missiles have the same extreme range and they can also be used against stationary ground targets, but they lack guidance against ground units.

The Aurora Hurricane also dumps three sets of 12 chaffs after launching its missiles, temporarily making it immune to tracking by ballistic weapons, but it does not protect it against missile locks from infantry units.

The extra payload means the Aurora Hurricane takes wider turns, but it is just as fast as its bomb-carrying counterpart.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Knossos
post 19 Jan 2014, 5:12
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 392
Joined: 19 May 2013
From: Mountains of Asia
Member No.: 9942



That'll have the same problem as the ZH aurora has; U.S. vs. anyone fights becomes U.S. aurora spam.


--------------------
"The biggest problem of humanity is that it sees the failures first before the successes."

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darky
post 19 Jan 2014, 23:36
Post #3



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 791
Joined: 15 January 2013
Member No.: 9643



You'll need to elaborate on that since my experience with the Aurora has been the opposite. Because it requires a lot of micro and planning, it is a horrible unit to spam and it is most effective when used as a support unit instead of being your main attacking force.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Knossos
post 22 Jan 2014, 9:41
Post #4



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 392
Joined: 19 May 2013
From: Mountains of Asia
Member No.: 9942



Now let me elaborate; auroras are invulnerable before it attacks, right? Now, let's say, on a big map, you get at least 6 fields and at least 10 supply drop-points. You can spam your auroras against the enemy's buildings, rendering the game effectively done in your favor.


--------------------
"The biggest problem of humanity is that it sees the failures first before the successes."

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darky
post 22 Jan 2014, 18:56
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 791
Joined: 15 January 2013
Member No.: 9643



QUOTE (Knossos @ 22 Jan 2014, 10:41) *
Now let me elaborate; auroras are invulnerable before it attacks, right? Now, let's say, on a big map, you get at least 6 fields and at least 10 supply drop-points. You can spam your auroras against the enemy's buildings, rendering the game effectively done in your favor.


I think that's an unrealistic situation, 24 auroras cannot destroy a base; an Aurora can only OHKO a Power Plant and maybe a Barracks, the bigger structures don't get destroyed in one hit. That's not cost effective at all, and if you have 6 Airfields, 10 SDZ's and 24 Auroras, your opponent is extremely unlikely to be defeated by 24 Auroras. Assuming they would all be shot down, not unlikely at all with their paper-thick armor, a player could easily replace their structures in the time it takes the other player to get their Auroras back. Aurora is not a spammable unit; in fact it is the opposite for it is a unit that is more effective when used scarcely and in smaller numbers.

To make it short, Auroras are not base razers and are extremely cost ineffective when used for that role. The Aurora in the suggestion carries anti-ship missiles and not bombs anyway, so I suggest you re-evaluate your stance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Knossos
post 23 Jan 2014, 11:34
Post #6



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 392
Joined: 19 May 2013
From: Mountains of Asia
Member No.: 9942



Now, this is just all my assumptions of the design you wish to say.

Now, let's say that player A has an airbase full of these things. 4 of these means 4 pairs of missiles which correspond to 8 missiles all in all. So, let's say that player B has a shiny pair of high-tier ships. Player B would almost certainly lose these since Auroras cannot be shot down while going to the target, and to top it all off, has chaffs that might just be able to make it return to base, unless there's infantry on the seas with AA capability. Isn't that OP in your opinion?

P.S.: Spam doesn't care much if it's cost-effective, just that you are able to spam it over and over again until the other player wears out.


--------------------
"The biggest problem of humanity is that it sees the failures first before the successes."

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kalga
post 23 Jan 2014, 12:52
Post #7


Writer do his best now and BSing...
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 536
Joined: 10 February 2013
From: Somewhere in America (currently, not always that way)
Member No.: 9758
Yes I like Touhou... and the problem is?



QUOTE (Knossos @ 23 Jan 2014, 5:34) *
P.S.: Spam doesn't care much if it's cost-effective, just that you are able to spam it over and over again until the other player wears out.


By the time you can spam high tier single purpose units and not worrying about your base/forces getting rolled over I'm pretty sure you'll win the match anyway...

Realistically the amount of mircoing involved would allow the other side to pull off their own stunt (assuming they aren't almost dead already).

Though the problem I see is the fact that they can be used are a area denial tool to effectively block off certain areas of the water to opponent forces...


--------------------
... wait, oh s--t! I've been surrounded by raging modders!

The forum is ripe with the stench of gamers!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeke
post 23 Jan 2014, 15:16
Post #8


The X General
Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 2150
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Philippines
Member No.: 73
Uniqueness is Overrated



Since n5p29 is having problems accessing the forums right now, I'm gonna reply for him. The idea is rejected due to violating suggestion rule no. 4: "Prevent suggesting a unit that already in the game or essentially have similar niche." As it stands there's very little difference between this unit and the normal aurora, so there's not much reason to add it.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darky
post 23 Jan 2014, 15:26
Post #9



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 791
Joined: 15 January 2013
Member No.: 9643



QUOTE (Zeke @ 23 Jan 2014, 16:16) *
Since n5p29 is having problems accessing the forums right now, I'm gonna reply for him. The idea is rejected due to violating suggestion rule no. 4: "Prevent suggesting a unit that already in the game or essentially have similar niche." As it stands there's very little difference between this unit and the normal aurora, so there's not much reason to add it.


I understand, however long range anti-ship missiles are quite different from bombs, and I feel that they fit the theme better. It also gets unique chaffs that disrupt radar tracking, so I'm still asking you to consider at least parts of the suggestion.

It was also made under the assumption that Aurora would be removed, so the current Aurora could still be open for changes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeke
post 23 Jan 2014, 15:58
Post #10


The X General
Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 2150
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Philippines
Member No.: 73
Uniqueness is Overrated



QUOTE (DarkyPwnz @ 23 Jan 2014, 22:26) *
I understand, however long range anti-ship missiles are quite different from bombs, and I feel that they fit the theme better. It also gets unique chaffs that disrupt radar tracking, so I'm still asking you to consider at least parts of the suggestion.

It was also made under the assumption that Aurora would be removed, so the current Aurora could still be open for changes.


In real life maybe, but SAGE makes very little distinction between land and water, so both Auroras would more or less be equally good at blowing ship up (pun intended) ingame. In fact, the Auroras bomb is actually coded as a missile ingame, so it would literally just be a case of changing how it looks. As for the chaff, the Aurora already has a "remain unhittable for this long after attacking" module in it's codes, which pretty much gives the same effect, on top of that all USA aircraft get countermeasures as well.

This post has been edited by Zeke: 23 Jan 2014, 16:00


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darky
post 23 Jan 2014, 16:50
Post #11



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 791
Joined: 15 January 2013
Member No.: 9643



QUOTE (Zeke @ 23 Jan 2014, 16:58) *
In real life maybe, but SAGE makes very little distinction between land and water, so both Auroras would more or less be equally good at blowing ship up (pun intended) ingame. In fact, the Auroras bomb is actually coded as a missile ingame, so it would literally just be a case of changing how it looks. As for the chaff, the Aurora already has a "remain unhittable for this long after attacking" module in it's codes, which pretty much gives the same effect, on top of that all USA aircraft get countermeasures as well.


The chaffs are meant to be different though, for a few seconds it's total immunity against anything but AA infantry from the behind. It can still be attacked from the front. But I understand, changing a unit just to give it extreme range (long range anti ship missiles) would be unimaginative.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22 October 2019 - 17:10