MrPenguin wrote:I was interested in Peg's description of it as a kind of troop carrier. Maybe thats the next project? Something that can carry three players straight to a target node while fending off hostile fire with flares, armour and manoeuvrability, but not necessarily doing much damage by itself.
I never thought of that. That actualy might be very cool to test! And maybe useful on middle- and large- sized maps where it takes a while to get from a spawning node/core to a desired node which is under attack.
Something like this: ...with 6 seats, 2000 health, ludicrous speed and handling, puffing harmless smoke as a primary fire and somehow not killing players when it runs into them (maybe "bump" the players out of the way without any health damage?)
Sooo, just to move things along now, it's been over 6 weeks since the Draco (not sure on which RC version it was, maybe RC3?) made its online debut in MasterShower and it would seem like most of the feedback has now come in. Would it be reasonable to say that this version's testing has ran its course? Is there any more feedback on the vec still expected or other aspects of its behaviour that haven't been looked into far enough that we should be asking players to focus and report back here on? If not, should we be starting to consider moving Draco testing over to a (slightly?) different terrain & geometric environment, like the aforementioned Icarus/Tropic/Nevermore suggestions and bringing MS back to a non-testing state? Should we just hold off until a next version incorporating various tweaks from current feedback arrives before proceeding with further map "injections" instead? GLoups, Wormbo: thoughts?
Not to take as an exact science on my part, bringing MS back to a non-testing state is a good thing on my own view, and try on another map too, as every one seem to think that Draco is a good funny vehicle.
Recently I had more chance to see Draco in action and its usefulness is questionable. Main problem is that everything can take it out before the driver could do something. Even though that it is faster than the Cicada, Cicada is way more useful, because it doesn't have to get too near to the target. Even Flamebadger's flamethrower can outrange the Draco's flamethrower. It can carry 2 passengers and each of them can use those rocket launchers whose usefulness is also questionable.
It is good if you can sneak behind the enemy, but hey it isn't possible always.
Also its explosion can kill the driver when he already left it, but was near to it.
The only reason why it is used because the maps it is featured on don't offer other flying units.
Suggestions:
-Since I'm not a professional at programming and modding I'm not sure that it is possible to make the Draco more rigid which means that Shock Rifle's primary won't turn it into a boat in a storm
-Increase the range of the flamethrower.
-Remove the explosion or decrease its damage
-Increase HP to 600 or 700
Regarding the comparative advantages of the Cicada as opposed to the Draco, for one thing, I'd have to say they're not exactly universal or spanning across the board; instead, they're most typically expressed in fights at mid-distance or farther away, in more open environments and in terms of attack immediacy (rockets & stinger traveling quite fast). OTOH, with maps that produce encounters in much more constrictive geometry, the fact that the Draco pilot's weapons fire from an insignificant lateral offset (compared to the Cicada's that have to be launched from its sides and swirl their way to their target) makes it far more likely that the Draco will manage to damage targets (right) in front of it, whereas the Cicada might just be wasting time firing rockets that just explode on adjacent walls. Moreover, providing the Draco with a luxury that before was only available to (cheating!) bots by way of the alt-fire flare decoys being assigned to the pilot's arsenal is another pretty significant defensive boon for the flyer compared to the Cicada, which can increase its survivability chances - especially in one-player flights - considerably. Lastly, the combo of the Draco's better handling and seating of 3 players arguably also make it a better means of aerial transportation than the Cicada, even if the passengers' weapons aren't as instantly effective as the cic's stinger. In fact, I gotta admit that I've frequently found myself questioning those blob-generating rockets' usefulness and effectiveness in every flamethrower-sporting vec I've encountered 'em in :/.
Of course none of those observations are meant to suggest that on the average map and in the typical battle scenario the Draco should be expected to prove as useful to its team as the stock Cicada, but mappers being cognizant of what situations it can be most helpful in should give the Draco a leg up with not getting placed in all the wrong situations again n' again, and thus preventing its perceived bad rep from taking further roots. Still, considering we are talking about a flyer with a quite limited range of overall combat suitability, something that players can be expected to bear in mind going forward when picking what vec they get into, I'd have to say that the verdict is still out on whether Wormbo's IMO novel and worthwhile flamethrower weaponry/mechanic has found its rightful place with a nimbler cicada variant, instead of, say, with a land-based vec as small and fast as the Flame Badger or some other arrangement. One last experiment I'm still standing by in caring to see tried out so as to assess the Draco's value would be placing it in Icarus, where the numerous confined spaces created by its geometry could allow it to attain a significant, match-deciding role.
Btw, I just checked, the differences between the Draco's and the Flame Badger's flamethrowers in terms of stats are imperceptibly minor (Draco's are slightly taller and more damaging) and none of them has anything to do with the weapon's range/lifetime, which I couldn't immediately assess. Lastly, while reducing the Draco's imparted momentum multiplier or increasing its hit points are certainly easy enough to do, one adjustment I would caution against would be messing with its range in a way that would push it beyond the sensible limit that players instinctively associate with limited range weaponry, such as the link gun's alt-fire shaft, which is what a flamethrower is intended and understood to be, as well as what makes it different and interesting enough to incorporate into gameplay compared to the rest of the game's ranged/hitscan offensive solutions.
Well Draco is good on those maps where you can hide with it or sneak up on the enemy. On IronSpine neither of them seem to be possible. I mean, the map is too open and snipers and AVRiL lovers will always target it. I tried to ambush the enemy in many ways, however some players always spotted me and started attacking me, even though I survived with 100hp the plan was ruined, because 2-3 shots can take out the remaining 100hp.
[P]etya wrote:Well Draco is good on those maps where you can hide with it or sneak up on the enemy. On IronSpine neither of them seem to be possible. I mean, the map is too open and snipers and AVRiL lovers will always target it. I tried to ambush the enemy in many ways, however some players always spotted me and started attacking me, even though I survived with 100hp the plan was ruined, because 2-3 shots can take out the remaining 100hp.
Eh, not really. You have to fly above it to be able to shot down. And if it approaches you from a direction where the flamethrower can't turn it will probably hit you unless you evade it.
um, the secondary fire is a countermeasure/decoy that you can spam all that you want, i thought it's a known fact, considering wormbo told this in the first post
...with 6 seats, 2000 health, ludicrous speed and handling, puffing harmless smoke as a primary fire and somehow not killing players when it runs into them (maybe "bump" the players out of the way without any health damage?)
)
