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

True Adamance wrote:

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

True Adamance wrote:

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

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.
EDIT: Flaylock should also do full damage.

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

EDIT:
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

I don't see why HAVs get extra resistance against HMGs, they don't need it. Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles.

Why? You are firing small calibre bullets at 120mm of armour plating or massive kinetic shield....

Because its a heavy weapon on par with small vehicle turrets. The individual shots themselves may not do much, but collectively they should have a noticeable effect when shooting at 15000 rounds per minute.
I'm not asking for full damage, just the same damage it already does to dropships and LAVs. The fact that the HAVs have tougher defenses is already factored in the HP, extra resistances aren't required.

You have no idea how Minmatar small turrets are going to work..... you cannot justify firing small calibre weaponry at heavy armour and simply saying that it........ works...... that doesn't make sense...... I agree that I don't think HAV should have better
resistances to light weapons....that also doesnt make sense given we already have higher armour and shield values.

Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+


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+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8821	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:25:00 - [2] - 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+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8822	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:30:00 - [3] - 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+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8822	Posted - 2014.02.05 03:38:00 - [4] - 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+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8861	Posted - 2014.02.05 17:43:00 - [5] - 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 - [6] - 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+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8940	Posted - 2014.02.07 21:30:00 - [7] - Quote Anyone else? 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 8945	Posted - 2014.02.08 01:06:00 - [8] - 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+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8945	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:20:00 - [9] - 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+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8945	Posted - 2014.02.08 02:29:00 - [10] - 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+

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 8946	Posted - 2014.02.08 03:23:00 - [11] - 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 - [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 9025	Posted - 2014.02.11 08:01:00 - [13] - Quote Make it a reality! 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 9251	Posted - 2014.02.16 22:14:00 - [14] - Quote General12912 wrote: the reason why we dont see matari and amarr AV is because neither of them have vehicles... yet. as long as they dont, it would make no sense to do so. im sure once the matari and amarr vehicles, matari nd amarrian AV be out too. or at least soon to follow I'm pretty sure lore-wise they already exist, but they just haven't been released to mercs yet. Example: The burst assault rifle existed in the game before the combat rifle, but in lore it is actually the Gallente's attempt to mimic the combat rifle. 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 9527	Posted - 2014.02.23 09:18:00 - [15] - Quote Do it! 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 9661	Posted - 2014.02.28 16:34:00 - [16] - Quote Dooo it! 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 9843	Posted - 2014.03.08 22:30:00 - [17] - Quote Still should happen 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 10368	Posted - 2014.04.09 22:21:00 - [18] - 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 10368	Posted - 2014.04.09 22:27:00 - [19] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: NEVER doubt the HMG.. i have made even hardened dropships run from this weapon. I am aware, in fact in the OP I state that I want the HMG to be as good against tanks as it currently is against LAVs and dropships. I don't want it to be any stronger against dropships. 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 10373	Posted - 2014.04.09 23:56:00 - [20] - Quote True Adamance wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: 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. EDIT: Flaylock should also do full damage. 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 EDIT: 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 I don't see why HAVs get extra resistance against HMGs, they don't need it. Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why? You are firing small calibre bullets at 120mm of armour plating or massive kinetic shield.... Because its a heavy weapon on par with small vehicle turrets. The individual shots themselves may not do much, but collectively they should have a noticeable effect when shooting at 15000 rounds per minute. I'm not asking for full damage, just the same damage it already does to dropships and LAVs. The fact that the HAVs have tougher defenses is already factored in the HP, extra resistances aren't required. 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 10382	Posted - 2014.04.10 01:36:00 - [21] - Quote True Adamance wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: True Adamance wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: 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. EDIT: Flaylock should also do full damage. 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 EDIT: 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 I don't see why HAVs get extra resistance against HMGs, they don't need it. Just make the HMG efficacy on tanks same as other vehicles. Why? You are firing small calibre bullets at 120mm of armour plating or massive kinetic shield.... Because its a heavy weapon on par with small vehicle turrets. The individual shots themselves may not do much, but collectively they should have a noticeable effect when shooting at 15000 rounds per minute. I'm not asking for full damage, just the same damage it already does to dropships and LAVs. The fact that the HAVs have tougher defenses is already factored in the HP, extra resistances aren't required. You have no idea how Minmatar small turrets are going to work..... you cannot justify firing small calibre weaponry at heavy armour and simply saying that it........ works...... that doesn't make sense...... I agree that I don't think HAV should have better resistances to light weapons....that also doesnt make sense given we already have higher armour and shield values. I was not making a specific comparison between Minmatar turrets and the HMG, but a general comparison of heavy weapons and small turrets. Consider that a small blaster is actually pretty much a light weapon attached to a tank, they are basically ARs, while the HMG outputs far more damage per second. It doesn't make sense why a small blaster would really be more damaging to a tank than an HMG. Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+