Lets talk about Arcs.
antacid
Join Date: 2007-08-07 Member: 61821Members, NS2 Playtester
Join Date: 2007-08-07 Member: 61821Members, NS2 Playtester
<div class="IPBDescription">Be honest.</div>This is something I never really though of until now, but I have played maybe 15 games of NS2 since the Exos were released, and I have not seen a single arc being built in that time.
I really feel that exos have replaced arcs overall in terms of a heavy duty base siege weapon.
So I ask the simple question, do you guys still find that people use arcs in NS2? Has their role been replaced? Macs most certainly have much more usage now. But it is nothing like NS1 where building siege turrets to take down hives and defending them was a common practice. I honestly can't think of a time where arcs have been game changing, now that we have exos.
I really feel that exos have replaced arcs overall in terms of a heavy duty base siege weapon.
So I ask the simple question, do you guys still find that people use arcs in NS2? Has their role been replaced? Macs most certainly have much more usage now. But it is nothing like NS1 where building siege turrets to take down hives and defending them was a common practice. I honestly can't think of a time where arcs have been game changing, now that we have exos.
Comments
In my opinion, the damage of ARCs should be reduced to 1/5th of what it currently is, and their range should be doubled. They are meant to be siege weapons, used from distance against heavy fortifications which players cannot attack directly. The role of the player is to protect an encampment of arcs while they <b>slowly</b> eat away at alien defences.
If you think back to NS1, the sieging of a hive could take as long as 5 minutes, during which the aliens applied constant pressure to the sieging outpost. Now the ARCs just roll directly into the hive room, deploy, shoot twice, and the hive is down.
In my opinion, the damage of ARCs should be reduced to 1/5th of what it currently is, and their range should be doubled. They are meant to be siege weapons, used from distance against heavy fortifications which players cannot attack directly. The role of the player is to protect an encampment of arcs while they <b>slowly</b> eat away at alien defences.
If you think back to NS1, the sieging of a hive could take as long as 5 minutes, during which the aliens applied constant pressure to the sieging outpost. Now the ARCs just roll directly into the hive room, deploy, shoot twice, and the hive is down.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Couldn't agree more.
In my opinion, the damage of ARCs should be reduced to 1/5th of what it currently is, and their range should be doubled. They are meant to be siege weapons, used from distance against heavy fortifications which players cannot attack directly. The role of the player is to protect an encampment of arcs while they <b>slowly</b> eat away at alien defences.
If you think back to NS1, the sieging of a hive could take as long as 5 minutes, during which the aliens applied constant pressure to the sieging outpost. Now the ARCs just roll directly into the hive room, deploy, shoot twice, and the hive is down.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's true, I've always been struck by how short the supposed siege weapons' range is.
Cost break down:
robo+adv robo = 40 res -- this is the almost the same amount of res as AA + gl. It also takes a fair amount of time
Each ARC is 20 res! You need at least 3 to have anything approaching a useful force, sooo
100 res for 3 arcs, plus the build time, plus the travel time = why bother?
I'd like to see ARCs as something commanders could drop in the field, and then marines need to build (like a structure) that way at least we wouldn't be as much of a hassle.
The only issue is pathing like rant said imo.
actually i prefer what imbalanxd posted, so quite the opposite. i also miss that "build and hold your siege outpost" feeling from ns1
An idea to retain the mobility of the arc while also adding a "build and hold" aspect would be to add a 5 second marine deploy timer to the arc.
For example, the commander would move the arc into range and then a marine would would E to "build" the arc into it's deploy phase. Then it would fire normally. The commander can still undeploy and retreat. This fixes the entire arc train problem because it requires marines to secure the area around the arcs for long enough to deploy them. It also eloquently limits the effectiveness of huge numbers of arcs. If you have 10 arcs, you probably won't be able to deploy all of them in a reasonable time frame. Thus, smaller parties of 2-4 arcs are just as effective.
Give ARCs a bit more range and nerf their damage, Hive rooms in NS2 seem to go down in like 3 volleys from handfull of arcs.
Perhaps give hives a bit more health or armor as well, I've seen a few games where 2 marines snuck into a hive and nearly brought it down.
You never saw that in NS1, not even if 2 shotgun marines snuck in.
Possible solutions could be as simple as.
- Reduce arc damage
- Greatly increase arc range
- Put a cap on the maximum number of arcs
- Increase time to siege / unsiege
- perhaps increase health / cost accordingly
As imbalanxd stated, the range is too low to feel like a siege weapon, the damage is too high to really have to defend them for long periods of time, and their unlimited numbers can break them in late late game. The whole premise of NS1 siege was to set up base outside the hive, and siege it down while defending, it was a valid strategy and lead to interesting attack/defend gameplay. The current arc just cannot do this role at the moment.
In NS1, there were rooms which marines, regardless of what they were outfitted with, simply could not go into. It was also common for sieging out a hive room to be more cost effective than kitting everyone out in jetpacks or heavies. That simply is not the case anymore. ARCs are antiques from a bygone age in my opinion.
So much player ability and playability is being *NERFED*!
How about letting commanders drop pre-deployed ARCs as ghost structures that need to be built, similar to a turret? You can drop them where you need them, and then move them later.
Heck, while we're on this topic... Why not have ARCs and sentries both become "undeployable structures". Eg you build them where you need them, and can later choose to relocate them if desired. Only deployable in powered areas, automatically undeploys when power goes out.
ARCs should be the anvil to push the attack forward (like armories) and not the hammer... players are the hammer. Arcs should act like actual siege units. Slowly widdling away at alien strongholds from a distance, and force aliens to either respond in the marines terms or leave gorges in permanent heal mode to counter the arcs damage. ARCs tie down aliens, but shouldn't devastate them. They keep aliens off balance, to allow marine players to topple them.
With that in mind, lower damage significantly and give them longer range. If marines can arc aliens 5 rooms away, that is not exactly a bad thing. Of course the numbers will get tweaked, but a long range siege is the point. Since ARCs are doing significantly reduced damage, the aliens will have more than enough time to respond with something. Buildings getting damaged won't get destroy within seconds. Plus the scanning needed for the arcs to target will get expensive in the long run. Shades can slow down the process by countering the scans with ink cloud, not to mention crag healing and gorges. With the longer range, their travel time will be less of an issue since they don't have to roll up right next to dangerous alien territory. Hell you might actually see aliens put down more support structures, and less fade eggs.
I think we should try it.