successor for Bunker Buster

[CinC]

I'm wondering if there is any consideration for an successor of the Bunker Buster (BB). The BB is an early T1 tech, and it becomes with every T-step more useless. when i have seen right, the BB is the only T1 weapon category without a later replacement. Machine Gun>Twin Machine Gun>Heavy Machine Gun....
light Cannon>medium Cannon>heavy Cannon...
...
BB>?

So why not for the BB too?

I think there should be implemented an useful BB weapon for the later game periods.

[Zarel]

Um... The BB is a mid-T2 tech. o_O

The BB is in the Rocket subclass; the line goes Minipod -> MRA -> Lancer -> Sunburst -> BB -> TK -> Ripple

Other T1-T2 techs with no clear replacement include the Hyper Velocity Cannon and the Minipod.

In T3, the BB's niche is superseded by the Scourge and the Seraph. I think this makes for more interesting strategy than a straight-up replacement.

[3drts]

I see no reason a Railgun couldn't do what a high velocity cannon could.

Perhaps the Needle or Rail gun can be made analogous to the HPV cannon, since rails are the T3 replacement of cannons.

FWIW, I think the Mass Driver Fort needs a range increase to be more competitive with the Missile fort.

Between the range of the missile fort, and its ability to hit air, I think people use them way more than the Mass driver, which only really has the advantage of splash and a better modifier vs borgs.

[Verin]

Yes some other higher version of the BB would be nice.

[Zarel]

Railguns branch off the HPV line, but there are differences. HPV can target air. And HPV is in a longer-range niche (unlike the rail, it has no accuracy dropoff for long range).

I should probably make the accuracy advantage of higher tiers a bit weaker.

[3drts]

Yes, I know there are differences, I was speaking about IRL, and suggesting we make a gun of the rail line, that serves as a replacement for the HPV.

For one, I don't think anyone will use the Needle Gun, its just not any better than the cannons until upgraded sufficiently, at which point there is the railgun.
By the time Needle is worth using, you have Rail.
Maybe we should make needle a V weapon.

As for a long range niche, by T3, all the weapons are pretty much limited by vehicle sensor range, and we don't need a direct port of HPV to a T3 weapon, but the rail "line" should have the aspects of the cannon "line", even if they are found in different combinations:
ie Gauss has the range advantage, analogous to the HPV, but the high damage and splash analogous to the heavy cannon.
Hmm, I wonder if a rotary or twin needle would be a good idea as sort of a T3 Assault cannon+HPV hybrid.

In addition to throwing my vote behind a T3 Bunker buster, I'll also throw my vote in behind some form of rail gun/gauss artillery, as longer ranged T3 howitzers, which I know has been proposed before.


One last thought, many people still view a weapons Tech level by which campaign it appears in: ie All Alpha Campaign weapons are T1, all beta campaign weapons are T2, and all Gamme Campaign weapons are T3, though this view is flawed for multiplayer I think.

[Verin]

How about an increase on the bunker busters range?
Its hard to kill defenses when the only Anti- structure weapon in the game has a moderate range.

[Black Project]

How about an increase on the bunker busters range?
Its hard to kill defenses when the only Anti- structure weapon in the game has a moderate range.

Bunker buster has a bigger range than most T1-T2 direct fire weapons, it got a max range of 10 tiles & can only be rivalized (in therms of max range) by the HV Cannon & Tank Killer

Or we can bring back the Devastator Missile from the old retail game.

Here's my balance proposal of the new Bunker Buster Missile:

Devastator Missile (Bunker Buster Missile)
Price: $350
Build Time: 1200 (120 Seconds)
Weight: 300 (750 for VTOL variant)
HP: 20
Min/Max Range: 640/1920 Meters (5/15 Tiles)
Accuracy (Short Range/Long Range, in %): 70%/80%
Interval between shots: 100 (1 shot each 10 seconds)
Damage: 343 (600 when upgraded)
Muzzle Speed: 1350
Min. Range to fire: 256 (less than 2 tiles it wont fire)
Pre-requisites: Scourge Missile, Neural Synapse Research Brain Mk3
homing-guided kinetic bunker buster missile
Replace Bunker Buster

Thats all...

BP

[Zarel]

How about an increase on the bunker busters range?
Its hard to kill defenses when the only Anti- structure weapon in the game has a moderate range.

...why does no one ever read my posts?

Normally, I'd give you the answer right here, but since I've already given the answer once in this thread, I'm instead going to assign you that question as homework.

Due Monday:

1. Which long range weapons are strong against hard structures?
2. Which long range weapons are strong against bunkers?

[CinC]

@ Zarel

here is a small quote of the wz2100 guide

anti-structure – Anti-structure weapons do the most damage against bunkers, but a lot of damage against other structures. They do little damage against tanks and cyborgs. The bunker buster is the only anti-structure weapon in the base un-modded game of Warzone.

your suggestions are no real alternative to a bunker buster.

first of all it is the only weapon which have a bonus against every structure or is at least not worse because of a malus.

In T3, the BB's niche is superseded by the Scourge and the Seraph. I think this makes for more interesting strategy than a straight-up replacement.

The Scourge is an anti Tank Weapon which means the multiplier are on anti tank not on anti structure. (remember malus bonus system (anti tank weapons does only 1/4 damage on hard points! You call that an alternative against a bonus of 300%?????)
The Seraph is artillery, and it is useless too, because of the instant replacement of the archangel missile (stronger and fires over the complete map). What is important too, you can't use it on a VTOL. (The killing of key structures via VTOL and BB are very effective.)

Railguns branch off the HPV line, but there are differences. HPV can target air. And HPV is in a longer-range niche (unlike the rail, it has no accuracy dropoff for long range).

Both are all rounder guns. The multiplier are on very different areas. BBs have effective multipliers on all structure types, the all rounder become always more useless the harder a structure is.(and at the and it have even a malus of 50%)

I guess you remember, but here for reference... http://guide.wz2100.net/w/

[3drts]

Stop thinking of the Seraph like the old Angel missile.

Its DPS is way higher than that of the archangel, and its range is shorter than that of a mortar, it is indirect fire, but it is meant for frontline units.

Yes, it gets a decent multiplier vs hardpoints (1.0), it is not however, a bunker buster replacement

BB fully upgraded, with multipliers vs bunkers has a DPS of about 200, vs hardpoints: 150

Seraph DPS vs bunkers 150*0.4 = 60, vs hardpoints: 150

Scourge vs hardpoints:
207*0.25 = 51.75
vs bunkers: 207* 0.6 = 124

The T-3 missiles *at best with full upgrades* equal the BB at destroying structures *once within range* if going up against hardpoints (although by T3, there are few bunkers that pose a threat).
I think there is room for something better, something that you can actually throw at missile and gauss fortresses and have a chance of winning.

Bunker buster was highly specialized, crappy for combat vs units, but awesome vs structures, I dont think seraph and scourge make that role obsolete.

[Zarel]

Don't forget the T3 missiles have longer range. That's quite a bit important. And they're good against other targets.

The Bunker Buster was introduced mostly because of how powerful bunkers were. Modern Warzone bunkers are relatively less powerful, since they're at least relatively weak to AP, AT, and Flamer, unlike Hardcrete, which are relatively strong against all three. Considering the three most common types are AP, AT, and AR, that gives Hardcrete significantly better type coverage, unlike 1.10 where Bunker had more advantages (and higher relative HP).

That said, I'll look into reimplementing the Devastator missile from 1.11/1.12, but that makes me fear for T3 balance.

[Verin]

T3 is unbalanced, taking out multiple super fortresses with scourge rockets is not logical. We need a weapon that is good for taking out those turtle defenses WITHOUT getting blown up before we can even fire!!! >:( Reduce superfortress range on increase bunker buster range

[Zarel]

T3 is unbalanced, taking out multiple super fortresses with scourge rockets is not logical. We need a weapon that is good for taking out those turtle defenses WITHOUT getting blown up before we can even fire!!! >:( Reduce superfortress range on increase bunker buster range

Erm, if you get blown up before you can even fire, no matter how powerful I make the next Bunker Buster, it's not going to help.

Also, for reference, Seraphs do quite well against fortresses. I obviously wasn't suggesting scourges for that particular purpose.

[TVR]

... I'll also throw my vote in behind some form of rail gun/gauss artillery ...

I find that quite intriguing, how exactly would magnetic accelerators launch a payload of high-explosive on a non-LOS trajectory?

An extremely thick & magnetic shell casing, or a discarding sabot system? Launch into partial orbit at maximum velocity, or sacrificing the potential velocity for better time on target?

The concept doesn't seem like a replacement to a pressure-based launcher.

... We need a weapon that is good for taking out those turtle defenses WITHOUT getting blown up before we can even fire!!! ...

I suggest the "Jackhammer" Rotary Assault Rocket Launcher, a rapid-fire BB launcher that could be very effective against slow-firing fortresses.

Which makes slightly more sense as a weapon system than a Super Bunker buster or SRMA, as hit-and-run is pretty pointless against a structure that is designed to deal massive initial shot damage.