| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gorra Snell
Guardian Solutions
DARKSTAR ARMY
86
   |
Posted - 2013.08.19 13:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
As the title says...a successful plasma cannon hit causes, maybe, 25% of rail and blaster turrets' heat gauges to fill up...and it can cause an overheat. This seems like something that could lead to some interesting tactical decisions, both from the PLC user's perspective (you can wait until an HAV turret seems near overheating, then jump out and fire to push it over the top), and vehicle/turret operators' (if you think PLCs are on the field, and decide whether to go for a kill while pushing the temperature into the danger zone, or play it safe and be ready to fire instantly). |
DeadlyAztec11
Max-Pain-inc
Dark Taboo
1922
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 14:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
+1
Can't wait till people start calling it OP lol |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Brutor Vanguard
Minmatar Republic
5473
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 14:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
Actually a very cool idea, +1 |
Zeylon Rho
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1912
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 14:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
I like it, but I wonder if that's too complicated of a mechanic for them to bother implementing. I'm not sure if it could "save" the Plasma Cannon from mediocrity either. |
Gorra Snell
Guardian Solutions
DARKSTAR ARMY
96
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 20:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
I think the only risk of this really being OP is if, say, four guys pulled out PLCs at the same time...they could make a tank overheat in an instant. Then again, if you have four guys going AV who are that well-coordinated, no vehicle will stand a chance against them anyway, so it's kind of a moot point. Still, there could be a cap placed on the heat generated by external sources, just as a safeguard. |
Telleth
DUST University
Ivy League
118
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 21:38:00 -
[6] - Quote
+1 I really like |
Bojo The Mighty
Zanzibar Concept
1536
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 21:44:00 -
[7] - Quote
That's an outside box idea. Good thinking Gorra.
My question is this however: How would this apply to Missile turret using tanks? Because it would seem that if this idea is to buff plasma cannons then the missile turret would come along and make it UP. |
Alena Ventrallis
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2013.08.21 22:46:00 -
[8] - Quote
What if the PC didn't mess with overheat, and instead the EMP released from the explosion scrambled electronic systems? The HUD could flicker and get static, Weapons lose ROF/get shut down for 2 secs or so, Modules that are active get turned off, and have theyre CDs refunded (The recharge really fast if they were shut off at the beginning of their cycle, and close to regular recharge time if they were almost at the end.)
That'd make them fun to use. Not necessarily AV to kill vehicles, but AV to make them less effective. |
Gorra Snell
Guardian Solutions
DARKSTAR ARMY
101
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 14:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
Bojo The Mighty wrote:How would this apply to Missile turret using tanks? Because it would seem that if this idea is to buff plasma cannons then the missile turret would come along and make it UP.
Much of this game is predicated on asymmetry...hence the 'rock, paper, scissors' analogy that comes up pretty frequently...and I therefore think that's a feature, not a bug ;) To paraphrase, a PLC that does a chunk of damage to one HAV and messes with their weapons, but only does the chunk of damage to a different HAV, isn't much different than a flux grenade that takes out 80% of one dropsuit's eHP, but only 20% of another's.
Balance passes seem to be made by CCP more slowly than most of us would like or expect, but I suspect that's because of workload rather than technical capability...so, if implementing this change to the PLC ended up weakening rails and blasters more than expected, they should be able to tweak some values (damage, speed of heat reduction, etc.) fairly quickly to make things viable again.
|
zzZaXxx
The Exemplars
Top Men.
201
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 14:30:00 -
[10] - Quote
Great idea! |
|
|
Gorra Snell
Guardian Solutions
DARKSTAR ARMY
101
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 14:31:00 -
[11] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:What if the PC didn't mess with overheat, and instead the EMP released from the explosion scrambled electronic systems? The HUD could flicker and get static, Weapons lose ROF/get shut down for 2 secs or so, Modules that are active get turned off, and have theyre CDs refunded (The recharge really fast if they were shut off at the beginning of their cycle, and close to regular recharge time if they were almost at the end.)
That'd make them fun to use. Not necessarily AV to kill vehicles, but AV to make them less effective.
Also a solid idea, but I suspect that would involve significant code change, including a new graphics effect, whereas the heat spike could be implemented by just changing a few numbers on the back end...all educated guesswork, at best, but that's all I have to go with ;)
Also, I think electronic warfare is on the roadmap already, or is at least a bullet point on the giant feature list CCP intends to implement eventually. |
Justicar Karnellia
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement
Caldari State
81
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 14:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
Gorra Snell wrote:As the title says...a successful plasma cannon hit causes, maybe, 25% of rail and blaster turrets' heat gauges to fill up...and it can cause an overheat. This seems like something that could lead to some interesting tactical decisions, both from the PLC user's perspective (you can wait until an HAV turret seems near overheating, then jump out and fire to push it over the top), and vehicle/turret operators' (if you think PLCs are on the field, and decide whether to go for a kill while pushing the temperature into the danger zone, or play it safe and be ready to fire instantly).
Nice idea. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |