|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
388
   |
Posted - 2014.01.18 21:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
I don't understand why they can't just buff the direct damage while keeping everything else the same (most noticeably splash damage and RoF). That way the PLC would become more powerful against vehicles while not becoming overpowered against infantry. Does anyone have an idea why this wouldn't work? |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
388
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 21:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
XxGhazbaranxX wrote:Stefan Stahl wrote:I don't understand why they can't just buff the direct damage while keeping everything else the same (most noticeably splash damage and RoF). That way the PLC would become more powerful against vehicles while not becoming overpowered against infantry. Does anyone have an idea why this wouldn't work? I understand what you mean but, I think that simply buffing direct damage a bit won't do the trick since it will just slightly make it better which would still have it at the lowest part of the spectrum on power vs difficulty of use. Since the weapon is so difficult to use and it's rate of fire is already the same as the breach forge gun, it leaves just one viable or worthwhile option. Making it have the same damage as the breach forge gun. Since that implies almost doubling the damage, but still maintaining mobility, it is then prudent to change it to the heavy category to further impede it's mobility and warrant such an increase in power.
Thanks for taking the time to write up an explanation.
What's stopping it from having less DPS than the breach? It can be mounted on light and medium frames and has much better anti-infantry capabilities than a breach FG does, so some sacrifices can be made. Similarly the anti-infantry capabilities are a good reason to give it a lower DPS against vehicles than Swarm Launchers.
What I'm going at is that a dev could buff the PLC direct damage by 50% until downtime tomorrow and the weapon would suddenly become an actual option to use. A tough weapon with noticeable disadvantages, but an option nonetheless. I think this is the much superior option to completely redesigning a weapon and leaving the PLC as an unused weapon for the next 6 months. |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
388
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 21:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
I'm thinking 300 dps against vehicles would be in order. With my math a normal forgegun with operation 5 runs at about 350 DPS including the reload after 4 shots. From the top of my head it deals something like 1350 damage, takes 4 seconds to charge before skills, at operation 5 gets a 25% reduction to charge-up time and takes 4 seconds to reload if I'm not mistaken. So DPS is 4*1350/(4*4*0.75+4) = 337.5 DPS.
Thus a consistent 300 dps for the PLC sounds very useful. This results in a direct damage of 1500, if the RoF is actually 5 seconds per shot as was argued above. If I remember correctly it's direct damage currently sits at about 1000 damage, so a 50% buff seems like it'd actually do something.
(300 DPS for a light weapon may sound like a lot, but then the PLC is very difficult to actually use as an AV weapon when blaster-tanks do drive-bys at over 50 km/h.)
Again, I have no idea why CCP thinks this isn't an option. At least fix it temporarily until you have better designers that can come up with a better weapon-design or something. The PLC could be made useful within 24 hours, or it could be left unattended for the next 6 months. Which shall it be? |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
389
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 22:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Fizzer94 wrote:Armor HAVs have at least 100 repairs per second. This puts the TTK at a staggering ~25 seconds, even without their hardeners. The fact that it takes several AVers to scare away proper tanks is a problem in itself right now that the PLC will likely not be able to fix until the relation of AV to HAVs in general has been taken a look at.
Anyways, the PLC can, as demonstrated, be buffed to the same level of DPS as other AV weapons by changing a single value. This would not, as CCP has claimed, make the weapon in any way OP, not even against LAVs. Are there any reasons not to do this at downtime on monday? |
|
|
| |
|