| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4728
   |
Posted - 2013.12.16 17:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Sinboto Simmons
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
3196
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 17:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
I don't think removing the only galente turret is very smart.
Just my opinion though.
Sinboto - The True Blood Minja
Forum Warrior level 3
STB-Infantry (Demolition)
|
Flix Keptick
Red Star.
EoN.
1673
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 17:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
A reduction to damage would be more fair tbh.
Going to stay out of AV/V debates, better for my sanity.
G˙åTank driverG˙å
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4728
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 17:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sinboto Simmons wrote:I don't think removing the only galente turret is very smart.
Just my opinion though.
Eh, have a railgun with shorter range but higher damage.
Blaster :P
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Jason Pearson
3470
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 17:26:00 -
[5] - Quote
Remove AV.
King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire.
Buffing or Debuffing Vehicles or AV will never fix anything.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4728
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 17:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV.
Considering it takes around 3-5 people to take down my 72k tank, It's practically a non issue.
Blasters however are more effective than any infantry weapon.
So basically, tanks get all the power.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2364
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 17:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
Honestly its a reasonable idea and the blaster turret has always been in a ridiculous idea, should have been essentially a big ass plasma cannon instead
Im not drunk, the planet just happens to be especially wobbly today.
|
Chunky Munkey
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
2678
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 17:43:00 -
[8] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins.
Makes sense.
All the infantry AV weapons are hopeless, may as well make the Anti-infantry tank weapons useless too.
No.
|
Our Deepest Regret
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
385
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:15:00 -
[9] - Quote
Blaster turrets have gotten really silly, lately.
The main problem is how many rounds each clip holds. Rail guns and missiles are reasonable. (9-12 rounds.) Blasters on the other hand, are downright stupid. It should be capped at 50 per clip. |
Mossellia Delt
Militaires Sans Jeux
765
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:16:00 -
[10] - Quote
shorten the range on large blaster turrets
Got killed at 400 meters with over 1000 damage in less then 4 seconds by one today
Parody Dust 514 Lyrics
Vote for Delt
|
|
|
Knight Soiaire
BurgezzE.T.F
Public Disorder.
3806
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:18:00 -
[11] - Quote
Remove? No.
We're begging for racial items, and you want to remove the only Gallente turret?
Change? Maybe.
I think its just the speed that makes HAVs so powerful, add Webifiers, and we're perfect, but HAVs, could use a speed nerf, that is the only nerf they should do.
International Hunt a Wolfman Day
16 / 18 / 20 of December
|
Horizen Kenpachi
Kenpachi's Castle
45
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mossellia Delt wrote:shorten the range on large blaster turrets
Got killed at 400 meters with over 1000 damage in less then 4 seconds by one today
Was u lying in a tent camping
Hit me with your nerf bat.
|
ADAM-OF-EVE
Dead Man's Game
652
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:24:00 -
[13] - Quote
make the galente tank a drone tank. no heavy weapon but a swarm of tank eating drones
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=99075&find
|
Ranger SnakeBlood
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
263
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:30:00 -
[14] - Quote
Perhaps if ther is either a spread added to the gun or lower the rof and buff the damage by the same amount lowering the rof would in theory at least lower its effectivness against infantry the main turrets should not be anti infantry but anti vehicle and small turrets should be anti intanfry that would even kinda balence tanks out as if it takes a few people to run one effectivily it would balence that it current takes a few people to kill one effectivly. |
knight of 6
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
845
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:38:00 -
[15] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins.
no, not really.
if you want the blaster to be a less effective anti-infantry weapon there are far better ways than outright removing content. for instance lower the fire rate(da-da-da-da-da-da to like a thwack thwack thwack), lower the ammo store and mag size and give it increased damage and I really minor spash increase. lowering the fire rate will make it require more accuracy and precision to hit small targets. that way it would still be the most effective anti-infantry weapon but it's overall effectiveness would be decreased. what it lost to infantry however it would make up in becoming more effective against enemy armor and installations.
proposed new fire rate
"God favors the side with the best artillery" ~ Napoleon
Ko6, scout, tanker.
CLOSED BETA VET
|
Justicar Karnellia
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement
Caldari State
247
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:40:00 -
[16] - Quote
Make tank turrets only shoot swarm missiles - now they can only hurt other tanks and can't hurt infantry..... don't worry, they work really well against tanks. really. Hey are you still reading this? |
Aramis Madrigal
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
78
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:48:00 -
[17] - Quote
Ranger SnakeBlood wrote:Perhaps if ther is either a spread added to the gun or lower the rof and buff the damage by the same amount lowering the rof would in theory at least lower its effectivness against infantry the main turrets should not be anti infantry but anti vehicle and small turrets should be anti intanfry that would even kinda balence tanks out as if it takes a few people to run one effectivily it would balence that it current takes a few people to kill one effectivly.
I agree. The tanker should have to choose between a main-turret that is either AV or anti-infantry. If they want to make an anti-infantry HAV, so be it, but they are now gimped vs. other tanks. Secondary turrets that are anti-infantry require removing an infantryman from the field, and therefore require a choice based on the relative value of each. Right now, tanks can dictate terms of engagement and are powerful in too many situations without having to make any sacrifices. |
Lynn Beck
Granite Mercenary Division
Top Men.
356
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 20:58:00 -
[18] - Quote
Reduce RoF and give us a plasma-cannon turret.
Under 28db
Officially nerfproof (predicting CR nerf February '14)
The only bad AV is ones not using Plc.
|
calisk galern
BurgezzE.T.F
Public Disorder.
1538
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 21:00:00 -
[19] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV.
they did |
True Adamance
Scions of Athra
4931
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 21:10:00 -
[20] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins.
Ever seen a tank without an anti infantry gun on it from 50 cal to high explosive rounds?
Why has no one ever commented on my suggestion of making small turrets vastly better infantry killers, and re formatting vehicle turrets to be AoE high alpha battle cannon?
To a Texan like you, a hero is some type of weird sandwich, not some nut who takes on three Gunlogi.
Reference = ISK
|
|
|
Skihids
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
2546
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 21:10:00 -
[21] - Quote
You can't completely remove a tank's ability to kill infantry as they would have no purpose other than to attack their own kind and that would make them a drag on their team rather than an asset. There are no bunkers to blow up or buildings you can destroy to reduce the effectiveness of infantry in this game.
On the other hand altering large turrets to be effective against only vehicles OR infantry would be reasonable.
Tanks then could be super effective against infantry but be very vulnerable to anti-vehicle tanks or they would need secondary gunners to man small turrets which balances things by taking a gun off the field. |
Mobius Wyvern
Guardian Solutions
DARKSTAR ARMY
4099
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 21:26:00 -
[22] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins.
This is actually a bad idea.
I mean, don't get me wrong, you've come up with a lot of cool ideas and I've posted so in many of them.
This one just isn't good. By this same logic the Railguns and Missiles should be removed as well because those are quite capable of "slaughtering" infantry as well.
Look, the Repeating Blaster we have now is the Gallente equivalent of the Missile turret. I fully support the idea of a "Blaster Cannon" because then the Gallente would have a weapon that was equivalent to the Railgun, albeit with different functionality.
I don't see the current Blaster turrets as a problem. Yes, they can be use against infantry, but in the 8 matches I played the last time I was on, I never had an issue with being unable to avoid them. And yes, I ended up in matches with many of them on the field.
I think we all need to take a step back once more and try to curb our knee-jerk reactions to such things, okay?
Amidst the blue skies
A link from past to future
The sheltering wings of the protector
|
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
550
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 21:36:00 -
[23] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins.
Wow.
troll?
One of my more twisted hobbies, is hacking a railgun turret... and then playing sniper against the redberries that inevitably think, "Ohh, railgun! Easy hack!"
Even when they know it's active, I've almost never had one reach me alive. I usuaully get taken out, if at all, by an sneak assault from behind, while my attention is in front.
Having one of those mobile, sounds like a lot of fun.
And of course, NO-ONE EVER got killed by a missile turret, as infantry.
sheesh
|
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
265
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 21:38:00 -
[24] - Quote
Our Deepest Regret wrote:Blaster turrets have gotten really silly, lately.
The main problem is how many rounds each clip holds. Rail guns and missiles are reasonable. (9-12 rounds.) Blasters on the other hand, are downright stupid. It should be capped at 50 per clip.
message from Godin: And make it absolutely useless in a HAV fight? I swear some people has lost it. |
Fizzer94
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
1244
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 22:03:00 -
[25] - Quote
Give the plasma bolt travel time.
Or...
Make them like Plasma Cannons. small magazine, long reload, HIGH damage, semi automatic with .5 second change time, slow projectile speed, projectile drop, medium sized blast radius, ect...
Fizzer94 // Level 1 Forum Warrior // The Plasma Cannon is not as good as it once was.
|
Fizzer94
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
1244
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 22:04:00 -
[26] - Quote
Roger Cordill wrote:Our Deepest Regret wrote:Blaster turrets have gotten really silly, lately.
The main problem is how many rounds each clip holds. Rail guns and missiles are reasonable. (9-12 rounds.) Blasters on the other hand, are downright stupid. It should be capped at 50 per clip. message from Godin: And make it absolutely useless in a HAV fight? I swear some people has lost it.
Blasters Turrets are anti infantry, they SHOULD be pretty useless in a HAV fight.
Fizzer94 // Level 1 Forum Warrior // The Plasma Cannon is not as good as it once was.
|
Omareth Nasadra
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
185
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 22:31:00 -
[27] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. Ever seen a tank without an anti infantry gun on it from 50 cal to high explosive rounds? Why has no one ever commented on my suggestion of making small turrets vastly better infantry killers, and re formatting vehicle turrets to be AoE high alpha battle cannon?
i'm all for this, if the small turret were more effectives against infantry gunning from a LAV would be viable, you should allow a tank pilot to switch to his small turret though, that would completely change the balance, good idea
Minmatar, In rust we trust!!!
Omareth Nasadra/Erynyes
|
True Adamance
Scions of Athra
4934
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 22:34:00 -
[28] - Quote
Omareth Nasadra wrote:True Adamance wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. Ever seen a tank without an anti infantry gun on it from 50 cal to high explosive rounds? Why has no one ever commented on my suggestion of making small turrets vastly better infantry killers, and re formatting vehicle turrets to be AoE high alpha battle cannon? i'm all for this, if the small turret were more effectives against infantry gunning from a LAV would be viable, you should allow a tank pilot to switch to his small turret though, that would completely change the balance, good idea
Would definitely in my mind encourage team play in tanks if one man has to deal with infantry as a primary concern while the other works vehicles and bombardment fire.
To a Texan like you, a hero is some type of weird sandwich, not some nut who takes on three Gunlogi.
Reference = ISK
|
KING CHECKMATE
Scions of Athra
3299
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 22:37:00 -
[29] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins.
I like this.
AV-TANK BALANCE = https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1612446#post1612446
|
Xender17
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
965
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 22:38:00 -
[30] - Quote
Requirements for removing blasters would being removing all AV except maybe grenades.
Prt SL, SCR, SR . ADV FGs, MDs, LaZor, KNs.
Gunnlogi, Falchion, Python, Caldari LDS. (+require)
Prt L. Am, Adv HVY, LGS
|
|
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4739
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:06:00 -
[31] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. Ever seen a tank without an anti infantry gun on it from 50 cal to high explosive rounds? Why has no one ever commented on my suggestion of making small turrets vastly better infantry killers, and re formatting vehicle turrets to be AoE high alpha battle cannon?
I actually agree of this.
I'm fine with small turrets being infantry killers, that means team work to pilot.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4739
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:08:00 -
[32] - Quote
Xender17 wrote:Requirements for removing blasters would being removing all AV except maybe grenades.
They're practically not there already
Ever seen a Soma eat up volley after volley of proto swarms?
Because I did.
Until I finally got sick of it and just insta killed the dude.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:10:00 -
[33] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins.
HTFU
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Cosgar
ParagonX
8809
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:11:00 -
[34] - Quote
Dropsuit HP needs to be looked into in respect to TTK anyway. I'd say leave the turrets the same and focus on the real issue.
I tried to put a level into Amarr Commando once, but got a server notification saying "Why?"
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4739
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:12:00 -
[35] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:Dropsuit HP needs to be looked into in respect to TTK anyway. I'd say leave the turrets the same and focus on the real issue.
Could do that too.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4739
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:13:00 -
[36] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. HTFU
I did, I called in a Soma, activated a hardener and damage mod and laughed my way to easy kills.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:13:00 -
[37] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV. Considering it takes around 3-5 people to take down my 72k tank, It's practically a non issue. Blasters however are more effective than any infantry weapon. So basically, tanks get all the power.
LOL
RND infantry trying to boast about being a MLT tanker? You wouldn't survive me at all.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:14:00 -
[38] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Honestly its a reasonable idea and the blaster turret has always been in a ridiculous idea, should have been essentially a big ass plasma cannon instead
Of course you'd agree with that.
But then we have to lose all Gallente rifles, too.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:15:00 -
[39] - Quote
Our Deepest Regret wrote:Blaster turrets have gotten really silly, lately.
The main problem is how many rounds each clip holds. Rail guns and missiles are reasonable. (9-12 rounds.) Blasters on the other hand, are downright stupid. It should be capped at 50 per clip.
Try tanking for a week with just a blaster, then come back and tell me you want blaster magazines capped at 50.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4739
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:15:00 -
[40] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV. Considering it takes around 3-5 people to take down my 72k tank, It's practically a non issue. Blasters however are more effective than any infantry weapon. So basically, tanks get all the power. LOL RND infantry trying to boast about being a MLT tanker? You wouldn't survive me at all.
I took down 5 Maddys and a Gunlogi in a single match with that tank.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
|
|
Kaltos Darksbane
Shadow Wolves Inc.
127
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:16:00 -
[41] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. HTFU
And so ends a perfectly civil and productive thread.
Dust 514?...............More like Dust 5150.
I support SP rollover!
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4739
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:17:00 -
[42] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Honestly its a reasonable idea and the blaster turret has always been in a ridiculous idea, should have been essentially a big ass plasma cannon instead Of course you'd agree with that. But then we have to lose all Gallente rifles, too.
False comparison.
Assault Rifles can't do **** against tanks.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:17:00 -
[43] - Quote
Lynn Beck wrote:Reduce RoF and give us a plasma-cannon turret.
Do you even tank?
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4739
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:18:00 -
[44] - Quote
Kaltos Darksbane wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. HTFU And so ends a perfectly civil and productive thread.
Meh, I'm used to this on the forums.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:18:00 -
[45] - Quote
calisk galern wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV. they did
You're only saying that because you relied on a 400m lock on range crutch.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4740
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:20:00 -
[46] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:calisk galern wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV. they did You're only saying that because you relied on a 400m lock on range crutch.
No, he's saying that because my friend has a Maddy that can passively out repair constant volleys from a single swarm.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Cosgar
ParagonX
8809
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:21:00 -
[47] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:Dropsuit HP needs to be looked into in respect to TTK anyway. I'd say leave the turrets the same and focus on the real issue. Could do that too.
We need to get together and brainstorm how to fix dropsuit fittings. Somehow I managed to get back into EVE and was blown away with the new ship re-balance. Some of that needs to make its way to Dust. Imagine if dropsuit base HP was significantly increased to the point that you're less module reliant like tanks. Extenders and plates would give you a significant HP boost, but have crazy CPU/PG costs to the point that you can't equip more than one complex, two enhanced, and maybe 3-4 basic. (Depending on the suit) secondary modules like rechargers/energizers and armor reppers would cost much less to the point that you can stack them while everything else like stamina and electronics would be the easiest to fit for the sake of utility. You think this would work?
I tried to put a level into Amarr Commando once, but got a server notification saying "Why?"
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:21:00 -
[48] - Quote
KING CHECKMATE wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. I like this.
Of course you like it, you relied on the 400m lock on crutch while you had it.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:22:00 -
[49] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. HTFU I did, I called in a Soma, activated a hardener and damage mod and laughed my way to easy kills.
I won't believe someone like you until I see video.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:23:00 -
[50] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV. Considering it takes around 3-5 people to take down my 72k tank, It's practically a non issue. Blasters however are more effective than any infantry weapon. So basically, tanks get all the power. LOL RND infantry trying to boast about being a MLT tanker? You wouldn't survive me at all. I took down 5 Maddys and a Gunlogi in a single match with that tank.
Again, I'll believe you when I see video.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
|
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:23:00 -
[51] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Honestly its a reasonable idea and the blaster turret has always been in a ridiculous idea, should have been essentially a big ass plasma cannon instead Of course you'd agree with that. But then we have to lose all Gallente rifles, too. False comparison. Assault Rifles can't do **** against tanks.
They're not supposed to.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:24:00 -
[52] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:calisk galern wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV. they did You're only saying that because you relied on a 400m lock on range crutch. No, he's saying that because my friend has a Maddy that can passively out repair constant volleys from a single swarm.
It's called 2 complex heavy armor repairers and an enhanced.
Guess what, it doesn't work against tanks.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Kane Fyea
Scions of Athra
2411
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:25:00 -
[53] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV. Considering it takes around 3-5 people to take down my 72k tank, It's practically a non issue. Blasters however are more effective than any infantry weapon. So basically, tanks get all the power. LOL RND infantry trying to boast about being a MLT tanker? You wouldn't survive me at all. I took down 5 Maddys and a Gunlogi in a single match with that tank. Again, I'll believe you when I see video.
Can you kindly fuck off if you are just going to be a dick and derail the thread. |
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4740
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:25:00 -
[54] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:Dropsuit HP needs to be looked into in respect to TTK anyway. I'd say leave the turrets the same and focus on the real issue. Could do that too. We need to get together and brainstorm how to fix dropsuit fittings. Somehow I managed to get back into EVE and was blown away with the new ship re-balance. Some of that needs to make its way to Dust. Imagine if dropsuit base HP was significantly increased to the point that you're less module reliant like tanks. Extenders and plates would give you a significant HP boost, but have crazy CPU/PG costs to the point that you can't equip more than one complex, two enhanced, and maybe 3-4 basic. (Depending on the suit) secondary modules like rechargers/energizers and armor reppers would cost much less to the point that you can stack them while everything else like stamina and electronics would be the easiest to fit for the sake of utility. You think this would work?
Yes it would.
I also had another idea, but I haven't had it peer reviewed on Skype yet.
It's mostly about shields vs armor, but it also has notes about CPU/PG requirements.
I also didn't finish writing it, I just wrote the general idea and some very very short descriptions of what each change is supposed to do:
http://pastebin.com/aJaiqLzC
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4740
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:26:00 -
[55] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:Remove AV. Considering it takes around 3-5 people to take down my 72k tank, It's practically a non issue. Blasters however are more effective than any infantry weapon. So basically, tanks get all the power. LOL RND infantry trying to boast about being a MLT tanker? You wouldn't survive me at all. I took down 5 Maddys and a Gunlogi in a single match with that tank. Again, I'll believe you when I see video.
Give me a capture card.
Most tankers are **** is what I learned from this update.
They rely too much on crutches and when an infantry player applies what he learned from infantry to tanks he beats up tanks left and right.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4740
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:27:00 -
[56] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Honestly its a reasonable idea and the blaster turret has always been in a ridiculous idea, should have been essentially a big ass plasma cannon instead Of course you'd agree with that. But then we have to lose all Gallente rifles, too. False comparison. Assault Rifles can't do **** against tanks. They're not supposed to.
Indeed.
So your comparison is dumb.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:33:00 -
[57] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:
Give me a capture card.
Most tankers are **** is what I learned from this update.
They rely too much on crutches and when an infantry player applies what he learned from infantry to tanks he beats up tanks left and right.
LOL crutches? What crutches have we had? The Sagaris and Surya were removed because infantry tried to solo tanks with MLT Starter Fits, found out they couldn't, tanks pounded each other to kingdom come, infantry said that wasn't fair and wanted to do all that themselves, Uprising dropped, then swarms were buffed and it was the dark ages of tanking, now tanks finally see the light, and you're all not happy with the changes YOU forced on CCP.
We were fine rail gunning each other all day, but nooooo, that's not fair for you, infantry is supposed to do everything in the game. ARs are supposed to kill tanks, and so are locus grenades.
Please, go to Call of Duty. There aren't any vehicles for you to worry about, stop trying to destroy my play style, I don't tell infantry how they're supposed to do their own role, don't think you have the right to tell me how to do mine.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Sgt Kirk
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
3608
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:35:00 -
[58] - Quote
Why don't we have like a Large Plasma Cannon Turret.
That'd be awesome (with a much higher velocity of course) |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:35:00 -
[59] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Honestly its a reasonable idea and the blaster turret has always been in a ridiculous idea, should have been essentially a big ass plasma cannon instead Of course you'd agree with that. But then we have to lose all Gallente rifles, too. False comparison. Assault Rifles can't do **** against tanks. They're not supposed to. Indeed. So your comparison is dumb.
So why do you want to remove the best anti-infantry turret from the game?
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4743
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:37:00 -
[60] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:
So why do you want to remove the best anti-infantry turret from the game?
If AV is hugely ineffective against tanks, tanks should be hugely ineffective against infantry.
Seems fair to me.
AV kills tanks from once in a while, just like railguns and missiles kill people from once in a while.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
|
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4744
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:40:00 -
[61] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:
Give me a capture card.
Most tankers are **** is what I learned from this update.
They rely too much on crutches and when an infantry player applies what he learned from infantry to tanks he beats up tanks left and right.
LOL crutches? What crutches have we had? The Sagaris and Surya were removed because infantry tried to solo tanks with MLT Starter Fits, found out they couldn't, tanks pounded each other to kingdom come, infantry said that wasn't fair and wanted to do all that themselves, Uprising dropped, then swarms were buffed and it was the dark ages of tanking, now tanks finally see the light, and you're all not happy with the changes YOU forced on CCP. We were fine rail gunning each other all day, but nooooo, that's not fair for you, infantry is supposed to do everything in the game. ARs are supposed to kill tanks, and so are locus grenades. Please, go to Call of Duty. There aren't any vehicles for you to worry about, stop trying to destroy my play style, I don't tell infantry how they're supposed to do their own role, don't think you have the right to tell me how to do mine.
Sorry what?
Back in Chromo tanks went 67/0 easily, I used to run around in a proto swarms squad and we got wiped often even though we were all shooting it and then hiding when it turned it's turret.
Had a scout somewhere else telling us where his turret is facing.
Uprising tanks were bad, 1.7 tanks are too good, get over it.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:42:00 -
[62] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:
So why do you want to remove the best anti-infantry turret from the game?
If AV is hugely ineffective against tanks, tanks should be hugely ineffective against infantry. Seems fair to me. AV kills tanks from once in a while, just like railguns and missiles kill people from once in a while.
How is it fair?
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4744
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:42:00 -
[63] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:
So why do you want to remove the best anti-infantry turret from the game?
If AV is hugely ineffective against tanks, tanks should be hugely ineffective against infantry. Seems fair to me. AV kills tanks from once in a while, just like railguns and missiles kill people from once in a while. How is it fair?
How is it not fair?
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:42:00 -
[64] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:
Give me a capture card.
Most tankers are **** is what I learned from this update.
They rely too much on crutches and when an infantry player applies what he learned from infantry to tanks he beats up tanks left and right.
LOL crutches? What crutches have we had? The Sagaris and Surya were removed because infantry tried to solo tanks with MLT Starter Fits, found out they couldn't, tanks pounded each other to kingdom come, infantry said that wasn't fair and wanted to do all that themselves, Uprising dropped, then swarms were buffed and it was the dark ages of tanking, now tanks finally see the light, and you're all not happy with the changes YOU forced on CCP. We were fine rail gunning each other all day, but nooooo, that's not fair for you, infantry is supposed to do everything in the game. ARs are supposed to kill tanks, and so are locus grenades. Please, go to Call of Duty. There aren't any vehicles for you to worry about, stop trying to destroy my play style, I don't tell infantry how they're supposed to do their own role, don't think you have the right to tell me how to do mine. Sorry what? Back in Chromo tanks went 67/0 easily, I used to run around in a proto swarms squad and we got wiped often even though we were all shooting it and then hiding when it turned it's turret. Had a scout somewhere else telling us where his turret is facing. Uprising tanks were bad, 1.7 tanks are too good, get over it.
So you should've skilled into tanks during Chromosome. Back then, core skills worked for both infantry and vehicles. But of course, that's too hard to do.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1504
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:44:00 -
[65] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:
So why do you want to remove the best anti-infantry turret from the game?
If AV is hugely ineffective against tanks, tanks should be hugely ineffective against infantry. Seems fair to me. AV kills tanks from once in a while, just like railguns and missiles kill people from once in a while. How is it fair? How is it not fair?
Arguing with you is like talking to a brick wall.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4744
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:44:00 -
[66] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:
Give me a capture card.
Most tankers are **** is what I learned from this update.
They rely too much on crutches and when an infantry player applies what he learned from infantry to tanks he beats up tanks left and right.
LOL crutches? What crutches have we had? The Sagaris and Surya were removed because infantry tried to solo tanks with MLT Starter Fits, found out they couldn't, tanks pounded each other to kingdom come, infantry said that wasn't fair and wanted to do all that themselves, Uprising dropped, then swarms were buffed and it was the dark ages of tanking, now tanks finally see the light, and you're all not happy with the changes YOU forced on CCP. We were fine rail gunning each other all day, but nooooo, that's not fair for you, infantry is supposed to do everything in the game. ARs are supposed to kill tanks, and so are locus grenades. Please, go to Call of Duty. There aren't any vehicles for you to worry about, stop trying to destroy my play style, I don't tell infantry how they're supposed to do their own role, don't think you have the right to tell me how to do mine. Sorry what? Back in Chromo tanks went 67/0 easily, I used to run around in a proto swarms squad and we got wiped often even though we were all shooting it and then hiding when it turned it's turret. Had a scout somewhere else telling us where his turret is facing. Uprising tanks were bad, 1.7 tanks are too good, get over it. So you should've skilled into tanks during Chromosome. Back then, core skills worked for both infantry and vehicles. But of course, that's too hard to do.
Huh?
It's obvious you're hopeless, there is no reasoning with you.
I didn't skill into tanks because I wanted to play as infantry, why should I be forced into tanks exactly?
Tankers get to tank, infantry get to infantry.
Simple.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4744
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:45:00 -
[67] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:
So why do you want to remove the best anti-infantry turret from the game?
If AV is hugely ineffective against tanks, tanks should be hugely ineffective against infantry. Seems fair to me. AV kills tanks from once in a while, just like railguns and missiles kill people from once in a while. How is it fair? How is it not fair? Arguing with you is like talking to a brick wall.
I feel the same way with you.
Tell me how is it not fair?
Explain to me, because everyone else I talked to on Skype and IRC said it actually sounds fair, even tankers.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
736
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 06:52:00 -
[68] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Explain to me, because everyone else I talked to on Skype and IRC said it actually sounds fair, even tankers.
Seems fair. Ateast nerf the blaster against infantry; if you want to tankstomp infantry, fit some smalls and get some friends.
Or perhaps nerf Large Blaster's performance against tanks, so you're about as good at dealing with tanks as a railgun is at dealing with AV.
I use railguns anyway - the abundance of tanks these days requires me to run as primary AV.
Also, Spkr, the abundance of one line responses from you suggests that you're the brick wall after all...
>Cosgar: You know, tanks are actually paper thin once their modules are in cooldown.
|
Cosgar
ParagonX
8813
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 07:03:00 -
[69] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:Dropsuit HP needs to be looked into in respect to TTK anyway. I'd say leave the turrets the same and focus on the real issue. Could do that too. We need to get together and brainstorm how to fix dropsuit fittings. Somehow I managed to get back into EVE and was blown away with the new ship re-balance. Some of that needs to make its way to Dust. Imagine if dropsuit base HP was significantly increased to the point that you're less module reliant like tanks. Extenders and plates would give you a significant HP boost, but have crazy CPU/PG costs to the point that you can't equip more than one complex, two enhanced, and maybe 3-4 basic. (Depending on the suit) secondary modules like rechargers/energizers and armor reppers would cost much less to the point that you can stack them while everything else like stamina and electronics would be the easiest to fit for the sake of utility. You think this would work? Yes it would. I also had another idea, but I haven't had it peer reviewed on Skype yet. It's mostly about shields vs armor, but it also has notes about CPU/PG requirements. I also didn't finish writing it, I just wrote the general idea and some very very short descriptions of what each change is supposed to do: http://pastebin.com/aJaiqLzC
I agree modules need to be shifted a bit, but that seems to be a bit too extreme, especially increasing plate penalty. The current movement penalty seems to be in a good spot, even better since the plate glitch is fixed. Damage profiles on weapons could use some work to better distinguish "Holy crap! my ScR wrecked that guys shields!" and "Damn, why did he have to be armor tanked?!" But as far as shield/armor differences and module shifting, (with possible future modules in mind) this is what I had in mind:
Shields
-Crazy fast regen
-Can use biotics and weapon mod low slots items with little drawback
-High DPS potential
-Best at hit and run or kiting tactics
-Good in groups without logi support
-Extremely vulnerable to high alpha damage and EM
-Low HP ceiling
-Extenders extend depleted delay duration
Armor
-Highest HP ceiling
-Constant repair rate built in suit (Repper module increases % like recharger for shields)
-Can use utility high slot modules with no drawback
-Best at snaring, (with EWAR) defending, and brawling
-Better with logi support
-Extremely vulnerable to high DPS or easy to evade explosives
-Slow regen over time
High slots:
-Extenders
-Rechargers/Energizers
-All scanning
-Range Amplifier
-Shield hardeners (passive)
-Damage control (works on shield/armor, passive)
-Any EWAR like passive webs and nos
Low slots
-Regulators
-All biotics
-All electronics
-Weapon mods
-energized plating
I tried to put a level into Amarr Commando once, but got a server notification saying "Why?"
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4748
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 07:13:00 -
[70] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:Dropsuit HP needs to be looked into in respect to TTK anyway. I'd say leave the turrets the same and focus on the real issue. Could do that too. We need to get together and brainstorm how to fix dropsuit fittings. Somehow I managed to get back into EVE and was blown away with the new ship re-balance. Some of that needs to make its way to Dust. Imagine if dropsuit base HP was significantly increased to the point that you're less module reliant like tanks. Extenders and plates would give you a significant HP boost, but have crazy CPU/PG costs to the point that you can't equip more than one complex, two enhanced, and maybe 3-4 basic. (Depending on the suit) secondary modules like rechargers/energizers and armor reppers would cost much less to the point that you can stack them while everything else like stamina and electronics would be the easiest to fit for the sake of utility. You think this would work? Yes it would. I also had another idea, but I haven't had it peer reviewed on Skype yet. It's mostly about shields vs armor, but it also has notes about CPU/PG requirements. I also didn't finish writing it, I just wrote the general idea and some very very short descriptions of what each change is supposed to do: http://pastebin.com/aJaiqLzC I agree modules need to be shifted a bit, but that seems to be a bit too extreme, especially increasing plate penalty. The current movement penalty seems to be in a good spot, even better since the plate glitch is fixed. Damage profiles on weapons could use some work to better distinguish "Holy crap! my ScR wrecked that guys shields!" and "Damn, why did he have to be armor tanked?!" But as far as shield/armor differences and module shifting, (with possible future modules in mind) this is what I had in mind: Shields-Crazy fast regen -Can use biotics and weapon mod low slots items with little drawback -High DPS potential -Best at hit and run or kiting tactics -Good in groups without logi support -Extremely vulnerable to high alpha damage and EM -Low HP ceiling -Extenders extend depleted delay duration Armor-Highest HP ceiling -Constant repair rate built in suit (Repper module increases % like recharger for shields) -Can use utility high slot modules with no drawback -Best at snaring, (with EWAR) defending, and brawling -Better with logi support -Extremely vulnerable to high DPS or easy to evade explosives -Slow regen over time High slots:-Extenders -Rechargers/Energizers -All scanning -Range Amplifier -Shield hardeners (passive) -Damage control (works on shield/armor, passive) -Any EWAR like passive webs and nos Low slots-Regulators -All biotics -All electronics -Weapon mods -energized plating
Still iffy about damage mods going to low slots.
The HP difference isn't that high with shields vs armor.
Like, not at all, my best fittings for Caldari and Gallente have near identical shields/armor.
Most of the fittings with 600 armor + come straight out of a forum warriors den, they're not sustainable for the most part.
Armor would need some serious buffs before I would agree to damage mods moving to low slots, because otherwise armor would be worse off than it was pre 1.4.
It's the only reason armor is even viable right now.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
|
|
Zatara Rought
Fatal Absolution
1905
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 07:15:00 -
[71] - Quote
Chunky Munkey wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Yes really.
Infantry can't be slaughtered by tanks, and tanks get their tank vs tank battles.
Everybody wins. Makes sense. All the infantry AV weapons are hopeless, may as well make the Anti-infantry tank weapons useless too.
QFT.
Master naders: Geniuses at evening the odds.
Favorite
Skype: Zatara.Rought
|
Cosgar
ParagonX
8814
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 07:18:00 -
[72] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:
I agree modules need to be shifted a bit, but that seems to be a bit too extreme, especially increasing plate penalty. The current movement penalty seems to be in a good spot, even better since the plate glitch is fixed. Damage profiles on weapons could use some work to better distinguish "Holy crap! my ScR wrecked that guys shields!" and "Damn, why did he have to be armor tanked?!" But as far as shield/armor differences and module shifting, (with possible future modules in mind) this is what I had in mind:
Shields
-Crazy fast regen
-Can use biotics and weapon mod low slots items with little drawback
-High DPS potential
-Best at hit and run or kiting tactics
-Good in groups without logi support
-Extremely vulnerable to high alpha damage and EM
-Low HP ceiling
-Extenders extend depleted delay duration
Armor
-Highest HP ceiling
-Constant repair rate built in suit (Repper module increases % like recharger for shields)
-Can use utility high slot modules with no drawback
-Best at snaring, (with EWAR) defending, and brawling
-Better with logi support
-Extremely vulnerable to high DPS or easy to evade explosives
-Slow regen over time
High slots:
-Extenders
-Rechargers/Energizers
-All scanning
-Range Amplifier
-Shield hardeners (passive)
-Damage control (works on shield/armor, passive)
-Any EWAR like passive webs and nos
Low slots
-Regulators
-All biotics
-All electronics
-Weapon mods
-energized plating
Still iffy about damage mods going to low slots. The HP difference isn't that high with shields vs armor. Like, not at all, my best fittings for Caldari and Gallente have near identical shields/armor. Most of the fittings with 600 armor + come straight out of a forum warriors den, they're not sustainable for the most part. Armor would need some serious buffs before I would agree to damage mods moving to low slots, because otherwise armor would be worse off than it was pre 1.4. It's the only reason armor is even viable right now.
What damage mods?
I tried to put a level into Amarr Commando once, but got a server notification saying "Why?"
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4749
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 07:22:00 -
[73] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:
I agree modules need to be shifted a bit, but that seems to be a bit too extreme, especially increasing plate penalty. The current movement penalty seems to be in a good spot, even better since the plate glitch is fixed. Damage profiles on weapons could use some work to better distinguish "Holy crap! my ScR wrecked that guys shields!" and "Damn, why did he have to be armor tanked?!" But as far as shield/armor differences and module shifting, (with possible future modules in mind) this is what I had in mind:
Shields
-Crazy fast regen
-Can use biotics and weapon mod low slots items with little drawback
-High DPS potential
-Best at hit and run or kiting tactics
-Good in groups without logi support
-Extremely vulnerable to high alpha damage and EM
-Low HP ceiling
-Extenders extend depleted delay duration
Armor
-Highest HP ceiling
-Constant repair rate built in suit (Repper module increases % like recharger for shields)
-Can use utility high slot modules with no drawback
-Best at snaring, (with EWAR) defending, and brawling
-Better with logi support
-Extremely vulnerable to high DPS or easy to evade explosives
-Slow regen over time
High slots:
-Extenders
-Rechargers/Energizers
-All scanning
-Range Amplifier
-Shield hardeners (passive)
-Damage control (works on shield/armor, passive)
-Any EWAR like passive webs and nos
Low slots
-Regulators
-All biotics
-All electronics
-Weapon mods
-energized plating
Still iffy about damage mods going to low slots. The HP difference isn't that high with shields vs armor. Like, not at all, my best fittings for Caldari and Gallente have near identical shields/armor. Most of the fittings with 600 armor + come straight out of a forum warriors den, they're not sustainable for the most part. Armor would need some serious buffs before I would agree to damage mods moving to low slots, because otherwise armor would be worse off than it was pre 1.4. It's the only reason armor is even viable right now. What damage mods?
Still, not sure.
Damage mods in high slots work well in tanks.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Cosgar
ParagonX
8814
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 07:26:00 -
[74] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Still, not sure.
Damage mods in high slots work well in tanks.
It's a bit hit or miss. One of the biggest issues shield tanks have is they have nothing for low slots aside from ammo and enhancers. If they had passive damage mods (more CPU/PG, less bonus than active) it might even out. I'm curious what future module placement is going to look like and how it's going to work when the other two racial tanks come out.
I tried to put a level into Amarr Commando once, but got a server notification saying "Why?"
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
4749
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 07:32:00 -
[75] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Still, not sure.
Damage mods in high slots work well in tanks. It's a bit hit or miss. One of the biggest issues shield tanks have is they have nothing for low slots aside from ammo and enhancers. If they had passive damage mods (more CPU/PG, less bonus than active) it might even out. I'm curious what future module placement is going to look like and how it's going to work when the other two racial tanks come out.
Yeah, I'm curious too.
I really think they should mirror tanks in terms of armor vs shield balance, since it works well.
Shields just need some modules to put there, but even currently my Sica is just as effective as my Soma.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
276
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 23:33:00 -
[76] - Quote
message from Godin: This idea is still laughable. No. |
Borne Velvalor
Endless Hatred
1086
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 23:36:00 -
[77] - Quote
What players don't realize about Blasters is that they received a big range buff. Standard Blasters have a higher optimal than old Stabilized Blasters, with no additional fitting costs. 85m optimal, 175m effective from my experience. My longest kill is usually 100-150m against enemy AV.
Many suits I've worn, many burdens I've borne, for the oaths I've sworn.
Panda.
|
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
276
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 23:37:00 -
[78] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Cosgar wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Still, not sure.
Damage mods in high slots work well in tanks. It's a bit hit or miss. One of the biggest issues shield tanks have is they have nothing for low slots aside from ammo and enhancers. If they had passive damage mods (more CPU/PG, less bonus than active) it might even out. I'm curious what future module placement is going to look like and how it's going to work when the other two racial tanks come out. Yeah, I'm curious too. I really think they should mirror tanks in terms of armor vs shield balance, since it works well. Shields just need some modules to put there, but even currently my Sica is just as effective as my Soma.
message from Godin: Although it's true that the Hi slots have more things for Gallente HAV's to put on, it's not like they can fit anything in said slots, without having a **** tank (one that can not get insta ganked by a complex Gunnlogi). Fix that first, then add in more things.
First thing that should come in is a vehicle jammer since we have scanners, and then tracking enhancers/disruptors next. Also, things like nanos and torque boosters should return as well. |
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
276
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 23:39:00 -
[79] - Quote
Borne Velvalor wrote:What players don't realize about Blasters is that they received a big range buff. Standard Blasters have a higher optimal than old Stabilized Blasters, with no additional fitting costs. 85m optimal, 175m effective from my experience. My longest kill is usually 100-150m against enemy AV.
message from Godin: .... I got a 126m headshot with a combat rifle. most blaster kills happens around 30-50 meters. Don't make it seem like it isn't.
That being said, stabilized blasters better b back soon........ |
Borne Velvalor
Endless Hatred
1090
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 06:23:00 -
[80] - Quote
Roger Cordill wrote:Borne Velvalor wrote:What players don't realize about Blasters is that they received a big range buff. Standard Blasters have a higher optimal than old Stabilized Blasters, with no additional fitting costs. 85m optimal, 175m effective from my experience. My longest kill is usually 100-150m against enemy AV. message from Godin: .... I got a 126m headshot with a combat rifle. most blaster kills happens around 30-50 meters. Don't make it seem like it isn't. That being said, stabilized blasters better b back soon........
Message from Borne: You needed a headshot and were probably at 25-30% damage. At 100m, my Blaster does 70-80% damage and does not need a headshot to kill most enemies in seconds, provided I'm accurate. Most Blaster kills occur within that range because most combat does. If the enemy sets up AV 120m away, I can kill them as they peek out to try to pop me. My longest kill two matches in a row on the first day of 1.7 were 175m and 178m. Now, those were equal to your CR kill at 126m in terms of efficacy. 100-120m? No. It's rare for my longest kill of the match to be below 80m, usually is above 100m on a map that's relatively open.
Many suits I've worn, many burdens I've borne, for the oaths I've sworn.
Panda.
|
|
|
Racro 01 Arifistan
501st Knights of Leanbox
INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS
87
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 06:27:00 -
[81] - Quote
Our Deepest Regret wrote:Blaster turrets have gotten really silly, lately.
The main problem is how many rounds each clip holds. Rail guns and missiles are reasonable. (9-12 rounds.) Blasters on the other hand, are downright stupid. It should be capped at 50 per clip.
50 per clip is not enough to kill an oppsoing tank if you include its rate of fire/ how quickly it heats up. and the repair rate of opposing tank.
out of all the rounds in my madrugar i tend to go through all of them. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |