Thors ruining basing again

[vetta64]

Raising thor price WILL decrease the number of thors in a basing game. The problem is that it may stop people who have less money but some people who will remain nameless but play Hyperspace every day and have basically unlimited resources really don't care if it costs $200 to thor so long as they consider it a fun thing to do in order to ruin the basing game.

[Dadoc]

I agree that raising the price would just make it harder for the poor people to counter the thors. I like the idea to have thors sold at base 8 instead, it may be a very temporary fix. I'm interested to see what is planned by the mods...

[Syrith]

planned by the mods...

 

Since when have the mods made plans for anything?

[TerraForceII]

There's an easier fix: limiting the Siege Mount to one, at least for a while. If you want to double Thor, then you waste your sig on Combo mount.

[vetta64]

I find it interesting that this topic can go crazy, and everyone can come up with awesome ideas about how to lessen the aweful effects of overpowered thors in this zone, yet nothing will happen until people get better ships and don't have to worry about thors so much anymore.

[Deathmonger]

As I said at the beginning, I have no problem with a barrage of well-aimed thors taking out a campsite--that's what they're there for. The problem is the splash radius is so huge and so damaging, and recharge in general has been so nerfed, that 4-5 thors takes out an more than half a screens' worth of enemy freq. All of these price/capacity limits people are proposing don't address this fundamental problem, nor does antiwarp. The splash radius must be nerfed.

[»Ceiu]

As an addendum to A, why not just have it so any special weapon gives less (none) money/exp per kill?

 

My main argument with Arnk with thors is always been that they're so easy to spam because it's both effective and profitable to do so. Killing a single enemy more than negates the cost of a single thor where a multikill will pay for 3+.

 

Also, how about this:

It seems to me that people will spam any item they can get because items in themselves are overpowered (since their original implementation kept them somewhat difficult to have a pseudo-infinite supply). This means that once thors 'go away', we'll see more bursts/repels as part of the item-rush. After that, bricks.

 

At most we can have 3 mounts. Something I think would greatly reduce item-spam is to make every mount provide a single capacity for the item in question. For the signature mounts, we could do a few that provide a combination of the bunch. Here is what I would like to see:

 

- Mount (+1 max, +5 capacity) [Mount] <- One of these exists for every item.

- Siege Mount (+1 burstmax, +2 thormax, +5 burst/thor capacity) [Mount, Signature]

- Defense Mount (+1 brickmax, +2 repelmax, +5 decoy/repel capacity) [Mount, Signature]

- Speed Mount (+1 portalmax, +2 rocketmax, +5 portal/rocket capacity) [Mount, Signature]

 

This means, at most, someone can have 3 of any item and 4 thors, repels or rockets if they're willing to sacrifice their signature slot (!@#$%^&*uming the other items don't provide +itemmax). Sure, we may eventually run into the same problem, but if people are double-thoring, they're not going to be bursting or repelling and we won't even see the triple or quad item setups until fairly late into a reset (or 2 weeks at the rate some of you !@#$%^&*gots play. Go outside, wtf. [/rant]).

 

Personally, I think limiting item availability will improve the overall quality of basing and the zone as a whole. As it stands now, basing is won by whichever team can buy themselves more items -- which means they get more money to spend next round. It's an endless cycle perpetuated again by people who abuse flaws in the system and refuse to see the sun more than once a week.

 

Eventually, I would like to see a system where rather than just buying the items to use them, the mount provides a "recharge," similar to how AD works. You may have a +2 thormax, but you only get a thor every 20-30 seconds. This provides the availability to people who use them "regularly," but effectively prevents the endless stream/spam of items in basing.

 

 

Anyway, that's how I'd do it. And because I'm me, it's clearly the most awesome solution to the problem. If you disagree, you probably enjoy the company of small boys. !@#$%^&*.

[Exiili]

No. You don't want to but thors and bursts on the same mount. It's imba. Otherwise I agree Edited August 16, 2008 by Exiili

[Unix]

Thorrers that cause damage to their own team lose $1/1 Energy - One TK costs a total of 500 + penalty.

 

The bigger problem with thorring is, it doesnt make people wanna rush, it makes people just wanna sit back. It's stupid to penalize players that know how to thor and change everything because of that, it's better to detour idiots thor users, which is more than half of the people using thors. A lot of times people just dont care if they cause TKs or not, they just want the exp.