DUST Search - [Request] increase MD and HMG efficacy on vehicles

Aeon Amadi wrote:

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

Aeon Amadi wrote:

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

Aeon Amadi wrote:

I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon.

It already is a makeshift AV weapon, look at the efficacy against LAVs and dropships. I just want it to also apply to HAVs, no reason why it shouldn't.

On the other side of the spectrum I don't think there's any reason it should do as much damage to LAVs and Dropships as it does.

Its a HEAVY weapon, something with fire power comparable to a vehicle turret. I think that justifies having moderate effectiveness against vehicles.

Scrambler Rifle fires lasers but still has recoil, lol. Anyway, point there is that just because it's a heavy weapon doesn't necessarily constitute that it should perform the same as vehicle grade weaponry (I'd argue that small turrets are under-performing if anything). It's sort of an argument on association with the terminology more than anything and if it's not that than it seems to be just wanting to flatten stats 'because'.

It's described as an anti-infantry weapon, performs as described and does pretty damn well at that job for all intents and purposes. I get that heavies are supposed to be powerful but they're already doing fairly well as it is. If you want to kill vehicles just switch out to a Forge Gun.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8821	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:19:00 - [1] - Quote The mass driver should have full damage efficacy against vehicles. The weapon is very underused right now, and increasing its effectiveness on vehicles would really expand its niche; would make it more useful, and more used. Furthermore it is classified as a launcher along with the plasma cannon and the swarm launcher according to CCP, so it would make sense. I would also like to see the HMG do more damage against vehicles; not full damage, but a percentage comparable to a small vehicle turret. 35% against shields, 50% against armor: basically 40% efficacy with the shield/armor efficacy of projectiles applied. The forge gun is anti-vehicle, yet effective against infantry, so I think the HMG being moderately effective against vehicles would be fair; the low range and the fact that it only has half the efficacy also balances it as an AV option. We need more variety of AV options anyway Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Scalesdini BlackWater Liquidations INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS 314	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:22:00 - [2] - Quote Your HMG values probably need toned down 5-10%. I can already cut down a shield tank after I flux it in 2 clips assuming I'm the only one shooting it. Other than that I'm in favor of this idea.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8821	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:25:00 - [3] - Quote Scalesdini wrote: Your HMG values probably need toned down 5-10%. I can already cut down a shield tank after I flux it in 2 clips assuming I'm the only one shooting it. Other than that I'm in favor of this idea. Toned it down by 10%, did seem like a bit too much DPS. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Bojo The Mighty L.O.T.I.S. 3032	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:27:00 - [4] - Quote Actually HMG is still fairly AV effective, my methana has taken some good sustained HMG fire and got me down to at least a 1/3 armor before I boogied. In fact better than a 20GJ Blaster which as so much more fitting requirements. I'd agree with the MD though, it used to make the Breach more popular for anti Sica work. Rifle Changes: DPS, range, and damage
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8822	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:30:00 - [5] - Quote Bojo The Mighty wrote: Actually HMG is still fairly AV effective, my methana has taken some good sustained HMG fire and got me down to at least a 1/3 armor before I boogied. In fact better than a 20GJ Blaster which as so much more fitting requirements. I'd agree with the MD though, it used to make the Breach more popular for anti Sica work. In my experience, the HMG works alright against LAVs and dropships (took a dropship down with it, but got no points ) few builds ago at least, but its pretty crappy against HAVs. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
True Adamance Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 6644	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:33:00 - [6] - Quote Yeah I busted a shield tank yesterday with an ASCR......no jokes murdered the damn thing. "My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity."
Bojo The Mighty L.O.T.I.S. 3032	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:34:00 - [7] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Bojo The Mighty wrote: Actually HMG is still fairly AV effective, my methana has taken some good sustained HMG fire and got me down to at least a 1/3 armor before I boogied. In fact better than a 20GJ Blaster which as so much more fitting requirements. I'd agree with the MD though, it used to make the Breach more popular for anti Sica work. In my experience, the HMG works alright against LAVs and dropships (took a dropship down with it, but got no points ) few builds ago at least, but its pretty crappy against HAVs. Well same with Mass driver. And really the HMG buff we already got brought them pretty up to par. I don't think we need Heavies sneaking up on HAVs and just draining their life. Let the scouts do that with Bombs. Rifle Changes: DPS, range, and damage
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8822	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:38:00 - [8] - Quote Tested LAV: 38% on shields, 44% on armor Dropship: 38% on shields, 44% on armor HAV: 9% against shields, not sure how much against armor, but it is certainly low Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
zibathy numbertwo Nox Aeterna Security 391	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:55:00 - [9] - Quote bumping for more awesome heavies Long Live Freedom; Long Live the Federation.
Bradric Banewolf D3M3NT3D M1NDZ The Umbra Combine 124	Posted - 2014.02.05 04:34:00 - [10] - Quote Agree on the MD statement. It's barely anti anything right now?! First it was OP, then it was garbage?! Find the happy median already. Because of its short capacity, accuracy, and fire rate against infantry it's a rough job at best, but it could be a decent deterent to atleast the dropship and lav at close range. That would make it a decent all around weapon that isn't OP on infantry. "Anybody order chaos?"

KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 470	Posted - 2014.02.05 05:39:00 - [11] - Quote +1 on the Mass Driver I miss being able to pop careless LAVs, Tanks, and the occasional dropship. We need the mass driver to do normal damage vs vehicles to keep them in line.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8861	Posted - 2014.02.05 17:43:00 - [12] - Quote I want! Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8901	Posted - 2014.02.06 06:26:00 - [13] - Quote I want to see HMGs damaging tanks that make the mistake of entering their optimal range. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Meee One The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 308	Posted - 2014.02.06 06:51:00 - [14] - Quote +1 Sexy jutsu Time to jaaam!
McFurious TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 607	Posted - 2014.02.06 08:53:00 - [15] - Quote + 1 for mass driver AV abilities. Still want a direct damage increase and more ammo though. And I have killed dropships with it. Half Irish. Often angry. Closed Beta Masshole
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8940	Posted - 2014.02.07 21:30:00 - [16] - Quote Anyone else? Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Aeon Amadi Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 4816	Posted - 2014.02.08 00:47:00 - [17] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Tested the HMG against vehicles LAV: 38% on shields, 44% on armor Dropship: 38% on shields, 44% on armor HAV: 9% against shields, 11% on armor Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why, though? Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8945	Posted - 2014.02.08 01:06:00 - [18] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Tested the HMG against vehicles LAV: 38% on shields, 44% on armor Dropship: 38% on shields, 44% on armor HAV: 9% against shields, 11% on armor Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why, though? I don't see why tanks need the extra resistance compared to other vehicles, especially given how powerful they are in this current build. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 3997	Posted - 2014.02.08 01:26:00 - [19] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Tested the HMG against vehicles LAV: 38% on shields, 44% on armor Dropship: 38% on shields, 44% on armor HAV: 9% against shields, 11% on armor Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why, though? Why not? My alts: General John Ripper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Anarchide, Long Evity And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior
Aeon Amadi Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 4816	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:15:00 - [20] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Tested the HMG against vehicles LAV: 38% on shields, 44% on armor Dropship: 38% on shields, 44% on armor HAV: 9% against shields, 11% on armor Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why, though? I don't see why tanks need the extra resistance compared to other vehicles, especially given how powerful they are in this current build. I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon. Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8945	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:20:00 - [21] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Tested the HMG against vehicles LAV: 38% on shields, 44% on armor Dropship: 38% on shields, 44% on armor HAV: 9% against shields, 11% on armor Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why, though? I don't see why tanks need the extra resistance compared to other vehicles, especially given how powerful they are in this current build. I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon. It already is a makeshift AV weapon, look at the efficacy against LAVs and dropships. I just want it to also apply to HAVs, no reason why it shouldn't. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Aeon Amadi Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 4816	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:26:00 - [22] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Tested the HMG against vehicles LAV: 38% on shields, 44% on armor Dropship: 38% on shields, 44% on armor HAV: 9% against shields, 11% on armor Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why, though? I don't see why tanks need the extra resistance compared to other vehicles, especially given how powerful they are in this current build. I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon. It already is a makeshift AV weapon, look at the efficacy against LAVs and dropships. I just want it to also apply to HAVs, no reason why it shouldn't. On the other side of the spectrum I don't think there's any reason it should do as much damage to LAVs and Dropships as it does. Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Shadow Archeus OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 270	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:28:00 - [23] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Tested the HMG against vehicles LAV: 38% on shields, 44% on armor Dropship: 38% on shields, 44% on armor HAV: 9% against shields, 11% on armor Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why, though? I don't see why tanks need the extra resistance compared to other vehicles, especially given how powerful they are in this current build. I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon. with the high HP of tanks moving it up to par with the other damage models Not to mention any tanker with a brain has a hardener....that also will keep the hmg from just popping tanks left and right It won't make it a GOOD av weapon but it can work in a pinch to deter tanks Personally I think hmgs should do 50% damage to armor and shields on all vehicles.....maybe 60% to lavs but that's my opinion +1 for buffing hmgs vs vehicles & +1 for MD rounds damaging them as well...... Real heavies use lasers
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8945	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:29:00 - [24] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Why, though? I don't see why tanks need the extra resistance compared to other vehicles, especially given how powerful they are in this current build. I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon. [/quote] It already is a makeshift AV weapon, look at the efficacy against LAVs and dropships. I just want it to also apply to HAVs, no reason why it shouldn't.[/quote] On the other side of the spectrum I don't think there's any reason it should do as much damage to LAVs and Dropships as it does. [/quote] Its a HEAVY weapon, something with fire power comparable to a vehicle turret. I think that justifies having moderate effectiveness against vehicles. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Aeon Amadi Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 4816	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:40:00 - [25] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon. It already is a makeshift AV weapon, look at the efficacy against LAVs and dropships. I just want it to also apply to HAVs, no reason why it shouldn't. On the other side of the spectrum I don't think there's any reason it should do as much damage to LAVs and Dropships as it does. Its a HEAVY weapon, something with fire power comparable to a vehicle turret. I think that justifies having moderate effectiveness against vehicles. Scrambler Rifle fires lasers but still has recoil, lol. Anyway, point there is that just because it's a heavy weapon doesn't necessarily constitute that it should perform the same as vehicle grade weaponry (I'd argue that small turrets are under-performing if anything). It's sort of an argument on association with the terminology more than anything and if it's not that than it seems to be just wanting to flatten stats 'because'. It's described as an anti-infantry weapon, performs as described and does pretty damn well at that job for all intents and purposes. I get that heavies are supposed to be powerful but they're already doing fairly well as it is. If you want to kill vehicles just switch out to a Forge Gun. Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Megaman Trigger Knights of Eternal Darkness League of Infamy 54	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:53:00 - [26] - Quote The proposal reminds me of the Assault Cannons from Warhammer 40,000: essentially they were like the HMG in that they were multi-barrelled rotary cannons that could only be carried by the heaviest of armoured suits (otherwise they were only mounted on vehicles.) The weapon's RoF meant it could actually chew through armour that would normally be impenetrable to a weapon of its calibre. Purifier. First Class.
Asha Starwind VEXALATION CORPORATION Partners of Industrial Service and Salvage 294	Posted - 2014.02.08 03:09:00 - [27] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon. It already is a makeshift AV weapon, look at the efficacy against LAVs and dropships. I just want it to also apply to HAVs, no reason why it shouldn't. On the other side of the spectrum I don't think there's any reason it should do as much damage to LAVs and Dropships as it does. Its a HEAVY weapon, something with fire power comparable to a vehicle turret. I think that justifies having moderate effectiveness against vehicles. Scrambler Rifle fires lasers but still has recoil, lol. Anyway, point there is that just because it's a heavy weapon doesn't necessarily constitute that it should perform the same as vehicle grade weaponry (I'd argue that small turrets are under-performing if anything). It's sort of an argument on association with the terminology more than anything and if it's not that than it seems to be just wanting to flatten stats 'because'. It's described as an anti-infantry weapon, performs as described and does pretty damn well at that job for all intents and purposes. I get that heavies are supposed to be powerful but they're already doing fairly well as it is. If you want to kill vehicles just switch out to a Forge Gun. Concerning the HMG, I disagree because that is what heavy weapons are they are mounted weapons vehicular, or fixed emplacement that are small enough that it is practicable to be carried around by infantry. They pull both double duty as AI/AV. e.g. gunship mounted chainguns, grenade launchers, .50 Cals, etc.. That said all heavy weapons shouldn't always perform equally against both vehicles and infantry(50/50) for all heavy weapons and AV/AI efficiency should be varying (e.g. 75/25, 60/40, 40/60, 25/75). Hope that makes sense, I'm sleepy. 32db Mad Bomber.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8946	Posted - 2014.02.08 03:23:00 - [28] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: I don't think that tanks being powerful in a particular build is good justification for turning HMG's, which are primarily an anti-infantry weapon, into a makeshift AV weapon. It already is a makeshift AV weapon, look at the efficacy against LAVs and dropships. I just want it to also apply to HAVs, no reason why it shouldn't. On the other side of the spectrum I don't think there's any reason it should do as much damage to LAVs and Dropships as it does. Its a HEAVY weapon, something with fire power comparable to a vehicle turret. I think that justifies having moderate effectiveness against vehicles. Scrambler Rifle fires lasers but still has recoil, lol. Anyway, point there is that just because it's a heavy weapon doesn't necessarily constitute that it should perform the same as vehicle grade weaponry (I'd argue that small turrets are under-performing if anything). It's sort of an argument on association with the terminology more than anything and if it's not that than it seems to be just wanting to flatten stats 'because'. It's described as an anti-infantry weapon, performs as described and does pretty damn well at that job for all intents and purposes. I get that heavies are supposed to be powerful but they're already doing fairly well as it is. If you want to kill vehicles just switch out to a Forge Gun. Funny that you bring up the forge gun, an AV weapon, bu still moderately effective against infantry; in fact, forge gun sniping can be very effective. The forge gun sets a precedent for heavy weapons being both AI and AV. I would like this to be a definite thing for all heavy weapons, as part of what separates them from light weapons. Scrambler rifle recoil might not be from the laser itself, but perhaps from internal mechanism (like heat management parts), and yes I know that's besides the point. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8967	Posted - 2014.02.09 03:12:00 - [29] - Quote I want! Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Twelve Guage Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 66	Posted - 2014.02.09 04:27:00 - [30] - Quote You want to give my mass driver back its balls I mean bite. I'm all for this I really do miss taking vehicles out with this thing. Death Firm recruiter and sandwiches maker.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page