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

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Request] increase MD and HMG efficacy on vehicles

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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.

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 9025	Posted - 2014.02.11 08:01:00 - [31] - Quote Make it a reality! Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
McFurious TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 617	Posted - 2014.02.11 08:40:00 - [32] - Quote I need to kill assault dropships with my MD. Or at least make them fly away. Half Irish. Often angry. Closed Beta Masshole
General12912 Gallente Marine Corps 58	Posted - 2014.02.11 10:47:00 - [33] - Quote 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
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 9251	Posted - 2014.02.16 22:14:00 - [34] - 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+
IR Scifi Knights of Eternal Darkness League of Infamy 111	Posted - 2014.02.17 01:14:00 - [35] - Quote I miss the bad ole days when I could stare down a crappy LAV with my mass driver and have a good chance of blowing them up. My MD hungers for LAV kills, CCP LET ME FEED IT!
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 1236	Posted - 2014.02.17 01:17:00 - [36] - Quote Would be cool if the flaylock was a sidearm option for AV aswell... Having a Flaylock that does 50% less damage to infantry but 200% to Vehicles would be neat.. There is a travel distance to rounds so it would be used as a defensive means that a tank could counter with situational awareness and approach. But a general 50% damage increase would be agreeable even.
Grimmiers 0uter.Heaven 415	Posted - 2014.02.17 02:05:00 - [37] - Quote lasor could be a good av light weapon too SoundCloud Recruiter Link Pronounced Grim-e-urs
Thrillhouse Van Houten DIOS EX. General Tso's Alliance 83	Posted - 2014.02.17 07:33:00 - [38] - Quote Laser rifles should at least eat vehicle shields. It might bring them back into vogue, too, as capable AI (at the right ranges) and mentionable AV. +1 on the MDs for sure. +1 on the HMG, too, but a little more leery. Blaster tanks are almost fearless in tight quarters maps (especially if you can't get a FGer up on something with a DS). Tanks used to fear the tighter spaces and they bloody should. HMGs doing at least some more damage, if not the same as to other vehicles, is pretty justifiable. Maybe with the conciliation of SLIGHTLY less damage to infantry (they **** everything that isn't at RR/ScR range).
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 9527	Posted - 2014.02.23 09:18:00 - [39] - Quote Do it! Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines 469	Posted - 2014.02.23 13:19:00 - [40] - Quote 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. 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. No. MD shouldn't have full damage against vehicules. Maybe 50% but not 100% It already DESTRO LAV and dropships with some flux.

Mahal Daj Mahal Tactical Enterprises 21	Posted - 2014.02.23 15:58:00 - [41] - Quote I agree in general with the manipulation of damage resists against vehicles. It would be great if a 6-squad could at least cause concern to MLT tanks with anti-infantry weapons, while the quality (resists) of basic+ gear wouldn't suffer from the same issue and require more dedicated AV. I think this would alleviate some MLT tank spam and give infantry a "chasing off the T-Rex" experience that would be very rewarding for Anti-Infantry specialists. Boost your squad's points by 40%, learn to use the Squad Wheel! I provide training: 1M isk: 90 Minutes of Basic Command
Beeeees KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 374	Posted - 2014.02.23 16:34:00 - [42] - Quote I agree, changing the MD would give medium and light infantry some more room concerning multi-purpose weaponry. So far mediums have no options for that save for the PC, which is only good for trickshots if you ask me. The HMG dealing more damage to tanks seems fitting, too. Considering its effective range, there is really not a single reason not to.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 9661	Posted - 2014.02.28 16:34:00 - [43] - Quote Dooo it! Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
The-Errorist 521	Posted - 2014.03.02 18:51:00 - [44] - Quote +1
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 9843	Posted - 2014.03.08 22:30:00 - [45] - Quote Still should happen Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
The-Errorist 553	Posted - 2014.03.09 21:51:00 - [46] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Still should happen I agree.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10368	Posted - 2014.04.09 22:21:00 - [47] - Quote I want Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
CLONE117 True Pros Forever 759	Posted - 2014.04.09 22:24:00 - [48] - Quote NEVER doubt the HMG.. i have made even hardened dropships run from this weapon. mlt vets are eternal. they shall be the bane to proto scrubs everywhere...
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10368	Posted - 2014.04.09 22:27:00 - [49] - 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+
ADAM-OF-EVE Dead Man's Game 1214	Posted - 2014.04.09 23:15:00 - [50] - Quote there is no reason at all why there should be any damage resistance to small arms on vehicles in dust. at the end of the day armor is armor and shield is shield. I will logi the s* out of you https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=99075&find

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9380	Posted - 2014.04.09 23:35:00 - [51] - Quote 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.... "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10373	Posted - 2014.04.09 23:56:00 - [52] - 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+
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9389	Posted - 2014.04.10 01:27:00 - [53] - Quote 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. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10382	Posted - 2014.04.10 01:36:00 - [54] - 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+
McFurious TeamPlayers Dirt Nap Squad. 705	Posted - 2014.04.10 04:09:00 - [55] - Quote +1 for the MD I'm sick of ADS's floating above me, not moving and firing missiles down on me because they know my MD rounds aren't even going to scratch them. Half Irish. Often angry. Closed Beta Masshole


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.