Rename the Tank Killer?

[robby_kane]

LAW AT rocket



as one soldier once said:
it is the judge jury and executioner on the battlefield, it is the "Law"

[lav_coyote25]

ROTFLMAO!!! good saying!!!! xD

[DFStormbringer]

Id say name it the TOW at.
and who ever really uses these things any ways??? if your hammering the rocket/missile tech tree hard any ways.. theres really not much difference between the TK and the lancer upgraded.. and JUST as soon as the TK is researched.. the scourge becomes available which is far superior... and its just another 5 minute wait.

there needs to be some better.. ballence in spacing the TK and the scourge

[Dalton]

if your hammering the rocket/missile tech tree hard any ways.. theres really not much difference between the TK and the lancer upgraded.. and JUST as soon as the TK is researched.. the scourge becomes available which is far superior... and its just another 5 minute wait.

there needs to be some better.. ballence in spacing the TK and the scourge

I agree there really is a very limited time when there is a point to using the tank killer anyways I kind of think that should be changed so there is no tank killer and just another lancer upgrade or give tank killer a longer use time than 5-10 minutes. I don't really care about name especially when I really never use it.

[KenAlcock]

I kind of agree With Daltx, except I think the Lancer is too damned ugly to even be in this game. So I suggest the following:

1. Actually merge the Lancer and Tank Killer into a single weapons system.
2. Use the Tank Killer graphics, and toss out the ugly Lancer ones.
3. Name it whatever you want, but I think it should be the Tank Killer (since I'm proposing that graphic).
4. Change researching the current "Tank Killer" tech to researching a "Heavy Tank Killer Upgrade" (like Daltx suggested).
5. Make the "Heavy Tank Killer Upgrade" automatically upgrade all existing "Tank Killer" (formerly Lancer) turrets, hardpoints and towers.
6. Drop the current "Tank Killer" Hard Point from the Tech Tree altogether (since it would be redundant, and no one hardly every builds these anyway.
7. Leave the current "Tank Killer Emplacement" in the Tech Tree, but rename it to the "Heavy Tank Killer Emplacement". So this structure would still only become available after one has researched the "Heavy Tank Killer Upgrade".
8. If they don't already, ensure that all rocket upgrades are applicable to both the "Tank Killer(formerly Lancer)" and Heavy Tank Killer, inlcuding : HESH, Rocket Autoloader, and so on.

The net result of all this would be an upgradable weapon system that bridges from T2 to T3, and doesn't end up becoming quite as completely useless when the scourge arrives. And you no longer have a weapon that no one is likely to actually build.

[dmkp]

I kind of agree With Daltx, except I think the Lancer is too damned ugly to even be in this game. So I suggest the following:

1. Actually merge the Lancer and Tank Killer into a single weapons system.
2. ...etc.

The net result of all this would be an upgradable weapon system that bridges from T2 to T3, and doesn't end up becoming quite as completely useless when the scourge arrives. And you no longer have a weapon that no one is likely to actually build.

Oh I like this idea.

[Zarel]

I kind of agree With Daltx, except I think the Lancer is too damned ugly to even be in this game. So I suggest the following:

1. Actually merge the Lancer and Tank Killer into a single weapons system.

...etc

No.

[Per]

I kind of agree With Daltx, except I think the Lancer is too damned ugly to even be in this game. So I suggest the following:

1. Actually merge the Lancer and Tank Killer into a single weapons system.
2. ...etc.

The net result of all this would be an upgradable weapon system that bridges from T2 to T3, and doesn't end up becoming quite as completely useless when the scourge arrives. And you no longer have a weapon that no one is likely to actually build.

Good idea, except I like both the lancer graphic (it is kinda cute) and name (it has become somewhat iconic now).

[Zarel]

Better idea: Remove the RLD prereq for TK.

If researched correctly, the TK is a significant bit earlier than Scourge. It's also higher-damage than Scourge until the Scourge has quite a few upgrades.

[KenAlcock]

I kind of agree With Daltx, except I think the Lancer is too damned ugly to even be in this game. So I suggest the following:

1. Actually merge the Lancer and Tank Killer into a single weapons system.
2. ...etc.

The net result of all this would be an upgradable weapon system that bridges from T2 to T3, and doesn't end up becoming quite as completely useless when the scourge arrives. And you no longer have a weapon that no one is likely to actually build.

Good idea, except I like both the lancer graphic (it is kinda cute) and name (it has become somewhat iconic now).

Fine keep calling it the Lancer AT Rocket then, but it needs more color. I think the Tank Killer looks better, but it's more because the vibrant color.

No

Better idea: Remove the RLD prereq for TK.

If researched correctly, the TK is a significant bit earlier than Scourge. It's also higher-damage than Scourge until the Scourge has quite a few upgrades.

I don't think I've seen anyone use the Tank Killer in multiplayer, except maybe in first fews steps of T3 game, which most people are opposed to playing for some reason (perhaps because people actually can build an adequate defense to stop rush machine gun/Cannon attacks).

Two researches later you get the Scourge, which has better range. They key to researching effectively is get the weapon you really want first, then upgrade it later. That way any power you paid for units/defenses is an investment for both short term and long term. Building Lancer/Tank Killer Hard points, when enemy units have Scourge Missiles is poorly spent power.

[Dalton]

Two researches later you get the Scourge, which has better range. They key to researching effectively is get the weapon you really want first, then upgrade it later. That way any power you paid for units/defenses is an investment for both short term and long term. Building Lancer/Tank Killer Hard points, when enemy units have Scourge Missiles is poorly spent power.

I understand what you mean but it's never poorly spent money when you are defending yourself with either units or an actual defense. If someone builds 50 lancers while your waiting for scourge and they attack then the money would have been very well spent on defense. I think the major thing to rember when building a defense is to allow yourself to be able to incorporate more defense later on.

[Zarel]

I don't think I've seen anyone use the Tank Killer in multiplayer, except maybe in first fews steps of T3 game, which most people are opposed to playing for some reason (perhaps because people actually can build an adequate defense to stop rush machine gun/Cannon attacks).

Two researches later you get the Scourge, which has better range. They key to researching effectively is get the weapon you really want first, then upgrade it later. That way any power you paid for units/defenses is an investment for both short term and long term. Building Lancer/Tank Killer Hard points, when enemy units have Scourge Missiles is poorly spent power.

Yeah, that's what reducing the lancer and tank killer prerequisites is supposed to solve - giving players more time between getting TK and getting Scourge.

(LOL, I just realized your name is "Ken Alcock" - I'd been misreading where the space was until now, and was really confused by what your username was supposed to mean.)

[KenAlcock]

I usually use CampleHumps case, so it shows as KenAlcock, but I missed that opportunity when I first registered in forums. I'm almost afraid to ask what you thought my name was. My last name usually gets a few wise cracks, but I've also won some drinks off of women in bars with it.

[KenAlcock]

I understand what you mean but it's never poorly spent money when you are defending yourself with either units or an actual defense. If someone builds 50 lancers while your waiting for scourge and they attack then the money would have been very well spent on defense. I think the major thing to rember when building a defense is to allow yourself to be able to incorporate more defense later on.

That's quite, true. But it actually helps make my point. If you have already built Lancer Towers/Hardpoints, why waste the extra research time and increased build cost to build Tank Killer Towers/Hardpoints, Just wait for the scourges and keep building more cheaper Lancer versions.

[Zarel]

I usually use CampleHumps case, so it shows as KenAlcock, but I missed that opportunity when I first registered in forums. I'm almost afraid to ask what you thought my name was. My last name usually gets a few wise cracks, but I've also won some drinks off of women in bars with it.

Heh. I can change your username for you now. Would you prefer "KenAlcock" or "Ken Alcock"? (Most username systems support spaces, at this point.)

That's quite, true. But it actually helps make my point. If you have already built Lancer Towers/Hardpoints, why waste the extra research time and increased build cost to build Tank Killer Towers/Hardpoints, Just wait for the scourges and keep building more cheaper Lancer versions.

Yeah, that's one of the reasons why I made Lancer more expensive. Maybe I should also make TK cheaper?

Perhaps if I further reduce the time it takes to get Tank Killer... How's having it just require HEAT Mk2? And maybe reducing the price to 250?