Heinrich Jagerblitzen
D3LTA FORC3
1101
   |
Posted - 2013.12.02 03:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
My thoughts are this - its a clever idea and works to some degree, and I really don't mind giving infantry a disclaimer (which is what this would be, a "you don't get to complain now cuz laser") so that I could resume blapping them in one hit anyways. But I think that's just it: the ones that stand in the open stationary are dumb and going to die anyways, and the ones sprinting across the open from danger are not going to stop mid sprint and reverse because they see a faint blue laser a few meters in front of them, while sprinting several meters per second.
For vehicles though - the role that the Forge Gun was designed for first and foremost, I fear this could be a disaster in 1.7 depending on how it plays when we get our hands on it. The whole "windows of opportunity" design and the fact that it'll be fairly easy to create a hardened state that cannot be soloed - means that even weapons as strong as Forge Guns will ONLY be getting their kills stacked while shooting at unhardened targets.
To me, all the cards on the table point to the element of surprise being absolutely crucial to the A/V game. Remote explosives. Proximity explosives. Grenade gangbang ambushes. Breach Forge guns in pairs. Swarm users in triplets. Or, just plain shooting a tank in the back while its driving down the map looking somewhere else. However you look at it - giving vehicles a chance to go into ubermode and than sail away on their new juiced up engines seems like a pretty bad idea on paper, given what we know about how this is going to change.
TL,DR: Warning lasers would be great for allowing FG users to have our cake and eat it too where blapping infantry are concerned, but could be downright broken in 1.7. Consider my opinion highly neutral/skeptical until we have more information about what we're actually dealing with. |
Heinrich Jagerblitzen
D3LTA FORC3
1123
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 17:36:00 -
[2] - Quote
Shijima Kuraimaru wrote:My personal experience while using an alt...
DAU Scrambler at point blank into the rear panel of a HAV with no active modules was less than 25%.
Same scrambler at optimal aimed at a heavy forger/HMG head was over 160%
If vehicles didn't have resistance to small arms, then I'd still show over 160% to the HAV's weak point. If that doesn't prove vehicles have damage resistance against small arms, then you're too stubborn to see the truth or have no sense of basic logical deduction.
To be clear - my experience and comment to Mobius was subjective, I probably shouldn't used the word "definitely" as this isn't something I've sat down and scientifically tested. You may be absolutely right, it's something I'll check myself next time I play. Thanks! |