|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command
Lokun Listamenn
15
   |
Posted - 2013.10.20 18:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
TL DR
What about a DS that has no turrets? This would allow a player on each side to use there own weapon. This should also balance it out. Yes an aerial swarm is not fun, but you do only have two and may not get the lock from both onto the same target. This also would make this DS dedicated to a certain role, no universal pwnage. But this might be a cool platform for scramblers or mass drivers too. Are two side gunners too powerful? Idk, it depends on the strength of the DS really. Some are gods to a mere 5.3 mil sp mortal like myself, I have no hope of taking one down with any of my AV options, so I do my best to stay indoors.
Obviously there is no nano hive in a DS, so two swarms may only prove to be effective against one target, same for mass. There are only so many rounds to fire, before you need to fly to an ammo depot for resupply. |
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command
Lokun Listamenn
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 21:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
Of course, but the only way to get a player used weapon should be to swap out a turret. That would be the high risk/reward. Like taking a forge gunner for a turret. There needs to be a limit to power, players firing in addition to two turrets I think is too much. You could always have one side with the traditnal turret and the other a player weapon. |
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command
Lokun Listamenn
18
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 23:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yea, but the idea of a player weapon turret option is what is most intriguing to me. Regardless of what CCP has agreed to do, let's dream and talk about future alterations. After all, CCP has inferred that the community can provide insightful suggestions for changes in gameplay.
Thanks 4 the link though, very professional.  |
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
Omega Elite Mercs INC.
37
|
Posted - 2014.01.01 18:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
Bump
But no more than two gunners per vessel. Instead of a turret option a harness option should be available. This harness would be comparably priced to a turret and take up a comparable amount of cpu/pg. I think if done properly gives more control to drop ships and creates new tactics. Would it be op? Idk, but worth a test I think.
FAME
|
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
Omega Elite Mercs INC.
40
|
Posted - 2014.01.15 05:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
What about aerial dog fights? I think we would see redline forge guns in a higher vantage point. Unless of course your passengers could only fire from low altitude.
FAME
|
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
Omega Elite Mercs INC.
64
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 16:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
To build off your idea Ski, a dropship transport pilot (me) could have a command click wheel of his own. Then, when I set the capture objective marker, a colored one appears over my ship too so people can get the idea that I will take you somewhere.
However, this takes more time than having a dedicated squad to fly for, what I usually try and secure, and it also might be hard to orchestrate as would my entire team be ale to see my marker?
FAME
|
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
Omega Elite Mercs INC.
64
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 20:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
I suppose high ground wouldn't be as safe either as you wouldn't need to jump out to flush off the enemy. In current map design I think that would be OP against tower campers. If maps were more varied and one tower didn't rule the map then I think tower camps would flee before being assaulted. This would give the DS pilot the role of maintaining safe building tops, not simply clearing just one for your own boys.
FAME
|
|
|
| |
|