DUST Search - Remove WP for destroying yellow installation

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Remove WP for destroying yellow installation

» 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)
Liquid Big Boss Quebec United 117	Posted - 2014.02.14 15:20:00 - [1] - Quote I don't know why yellow (not capture) installation should give WP. Tank spawn and the only thing they do at first is to destroy turret for having their free 100WP. So i think yellow installation should not give WP, you can destroy it if you think this is dangerous to keep it on but no WP if it's yellow. I'm the boss to superpass big boss itself
Liquid Big Boss Quebec United 118	Posted - 2014.02.18 14:24:00 - [2] - Quote so nobody desagree, do it CCP I'm the boss to superpass big boss itself
Glitch116 On The Brink CRONOS. 71	Posted - 2014.02.18 17:56:00 - [3] - Quote the problem is those turrets are dangerous to tanks you can take the war points but tankers are still going to kill them infantry only see turrets a quick 50wp and way to get their hands on large turret weapon without paying for so they can get cheap kills at no cost to them to tankers it is not about the wps but removing a dangerous asset before it can be used against you I AM THE KING OF THE BLASTER!!! deal with it
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1160	Posted - 2014.02.18 19:04:00 - [4] - Quote This has been discussed already multiple times. A decent tanker will always destroy turret installations because they are liabilities. It can't suck any more than retreating after winning a tank battle with a bare minimum of your EHP left and being blown up by a rail installation that used to be blue. Also, I disagree with removing WP from neutral installations because destroying them absolutely ensures that the enemy won't get ahold of them, which should technically be considered as "playing the objective." "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Bradric Banewolf D3M3NT3D M1NDZ The Umbra Combine 134	Posted - 2014.02.18 19:06:00 - [5] - Quote Glitch116 wrote: the problem is those turrets are dangerous to tanks you can take the war points but tankers are still going to kill them infantry only see turrets a quick 50wp and way to get their hands on large turret weapon without paying for so they can get cheap kills at no cost to them to tankers it is not about the wps but removing a dangerous asset before it can be used against you I don't disagree, but the tanker you refer to is different from the tanker he was referring to. Some tankers get mad when we assault kill red turrets before them with swarms or forge guns. You would think they would rejoice, but not so much apparently. We all want war points, and if our squad agrees to destroy or hack and use turrets it's ultimately a squad decision. There are, however, useless tankers who make rounds racking up 700+ wp's killing turrets we may need. Then they return to the redline to rail gun snipe the whole match, leaving us to defend for ourselves with AV weapons. If said tanker was in squad communicating that we keep control of these turrets in certain areas they could be helpful. If we loose them he knows to drop them. Instead of only looking out for themselves tankers could try and understand how difficult it is to fight blaster tanks on foot, while friendly tankers are safe in a tank in the redline. "Anybody order chaos?"
Liquid Big Boss Quebec United 121	Posted - 2014.02.18 20:06:00 - [6] - Quote Harpyja wrote: This has been discussed already multiple times. A decent tanker will always destroy turret installations because they are liabilities. It can't suck any more than retreating after winning a tank battle with a bare minimum of your EHP left and being blown up by a rail installation that used to be blue. Also, I disagree with removing WP from neutral installations because destroying them absolutely ensures that the enemy won't get ahold of them, which should technically be considered as "playing the objective." haha what a joke, then let your team take it, it will help you destroy enemi tank, yellow installation don't even shoot. You all criing for WP don't get me wrong. I'm the boss to superpass big boss itself MAG vet Raven forever
The Black Jackal The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 1026	Posted - 2014.02.19 05:25:00 - [7] - Quote Liquid Big Boss wrote: Harpyja wrote: This has been discussed already multiple times. A decent tanker will always destroy turret installations because they are liabilities. It can't suck any more than retreating after winning a tank battle with a bare minimum of your EHP left and being blown up by a rail installation that used to be blue. Also, I disagree with removing WP from neutral installations because destroying them absolutely ensures that the enemy won't get ahold of them, which should technically be considered as "playing the objective." haha what a joke, then let your team take it, it will help you destroy enemi tank, yellow installation don't even shoot. You all criing for WP don't get me wrong. As a tanker myself. I know that ANY installation is a massive threat to HAVs. Even Blue Ones are mindful because the infantry do not attempt to hold them, and when they go red, it puts tankers at a disadvantage without them knowing it. Infanrty don't relay that turrets turned red, so the most expedient way to safeguard ourselves in to d3estroy the installations. Removing the WP reward for destroying them will not deter us from this. It is simple common sense to remove the threat to ourselves, before the enemy is able to gain control of it. If and when deployable turrets are in place, maybe they will have greater strategic value. I also agree that removing said turrets reduces your team's effectiveness Vs. Enemy Armor, but in public matches, and even Faction Warfare matches, this is a null consideration since communication and teamwork is almost zero. Infantry should not have to rely solely on AV to counter vehicles. I'm one of the major proponents to having multiple ways to deal with every situation (inclusive of deployable walls, gate structures, and most important of all Map Balance). But the idea of removing WP for destroying neutral installations is ill considered, worthless, and will not prevent their immediate destruction upon spawning in a vehicle. Once you go Black, you just never go back!
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars Top Men. 146	Posted - 2014.02.19 06:13:00 - [8] - Quote Liquid Big Boss wrote: I don't know why yellow (not capture) installation should give WP. Tank spawn and the only thing they do at first is to destroy turret for having their free 100WP. So i think yellow installation should not give WP, you can destroy it if you think this is dangerous to keep it on but no WP if it's yellow. I like this. +1 I support the idea.
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars Top Men. 146	Posted - 2014.02.19 06:17:00 - [9] - Quote The Black Jackal wrote: Liquid Big Boss wrote: Harpyja wrote: This has been discussed already multiple times. A decent tanker will always destroy turret installations because they are liabilities. It can't suck any more than retreating after winning a tank battle with a bare minimum of your EHP left and being blown up by a rail installation that used to be blue. Also, I disagree with removing WP from neutral installations because destroying them absolutely ensures that the enemy won't get ahold of them, which should technically be considered as "playing the objective." haha what a joke, then let your team take it, it will help you destroy enemi tank, yellow installation don't even shoot. You all criing for WP don't get me wrong. As a tanker myself. I know that ANY installation is a massive threat to HAVs. Even Blue Ones are mindful because the infantry do not attempt to hold them, and when they go red, it puts tankers at a disadvantage without them knowing it. Infanrty don't relay that turrets turned red, so the most expedient way to safeguard ourselves in to d3estroy the installations. Removing the WP reward for destroying them will not deter us from this. It is simple common sense to remove the threat to ourselves, before the enemy is able to gain control of it. If and when deployable turrets are in place, maybe they will have greater strategic value. I also agree that removing said turrets reduces your team's effectiveness Vs. Enemy Armor, but in public matches, and even Faction Warfare matches, this is a null consideration since communication and teamwork is almost zero. Infantry should not have to rely solely on AV to counter vehicles. I'm one of the major proponents to having multiple ways to deal with every situation (inclusive of deployable walls, gate structures, and most important of all Map Balance). But the idea of removing WP for destroying neutral installations is ill considered, worthless, and will not prevent their immediate destruction upon spawning in a vehicle. It may not stop all tankers from destroying them but it may deter some from doing so because some would be doing it because of the WP reward, not the strategic reward.
Liquid Big Boss Quebec United 123	Posted - 2014.02.19 11:49:00 - [10] - Quote Or I'm ok with only 25wp, 100 is too mush, 50 too. Destroy depot should be -1000 lol I'm the boss to superpass big boss itself MAG vet Raven forever

Dusters Blog Galactic News Network 671	Posted - 2014.02.19 12:45:00 - [11] - Quote +1 to this. no points for destroying nuetral installations. our battery of questions for CPM1 candidates: http://tinyurl.com/mjvwe7f
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2865	Posted - 2014.02.19 14:19:00 - [12] - Quote -1 Blue dots hack yellow turrets just for the points, then they abandon them. They don't use them and they don't guard them, they are just "free points". So vehicle pilots who are actually invested in not allowing red turrets around should be able to get those free points as well. Case in point: I'm practicing with my Incubus deep in our redline when some red dot hacks a turret just on our line, which proceeds to cost me 350k ISK. What was my offense? Not killing that damn yellow installation right at the start.
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1164	Posted - 2014.02.19 14:52:00 - [13] - Quote Liquid Big Boss wrote: Harpyja wrote: This has been discussed already multiple times. A decent tanker will always destroy turret installations because they are liabilities. It can't suck any more than retreating after winning a tank battle with a bare minimum of your EHP left and being blown up by a rail installation that used to be blue. Also, I disagree with removing WP from neutral installations because destroying them absolutely ensures that the enemy won't get ahold of them, which should technically be considered as "playing the objective." haha what a joke, then let your team take it, it will help you destroy enemi tank, yellow installation don't even shoot. You all criing for WP don't get me wrong. Help? Allowing a turret installation turn blue only becomes a hinderence. The AI is entirely unpredictable. Sometimes it will snipe you at max range, other times it's focused on shooting something else. Also, the AI doesn't lock on to you immediately unless you shoot the turret. Also, imagine it this way. Most blue dots just hack turrets for a +50 WP bonus then move on. It's extremely rare that I see a player using an installation show on the killfeed. Turrets for now are just situational; you don't see anyone spending more than a few minutes using a turret before moving on. Now when the enemy comes along and destroys the turret, they get +100 WP for doing so. Now the enemy has a net advantage of 50WP assuming that nobody used that turret, which is the case almost always. As an end result, it's better to destroy a neutral installation than it is to hack it with regards to WPs. Neutral installations are always a top priority for vehicles (tanks and dropships) and always will be; nothing will change that. It's entirely our own fault and we pay dearly if destroying that installation was a bad idea. But in almost all cases, it's never a good idea to let an installation get hacked. And as such, there should be a WP award for permanently removing an asset that could potentially harm your team. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Rogue Saint Science For Death 799	Posted - 2014.02.19 16:10:00 - [14] - Quote I agree about yellow installations being a threat, I also agree that there should be no WP for killing them, BUT what would be better in skrimish matches is if the turrets randomly appeared through the match and were actually useful and not WP whoring tools. GôêGÆ+GÆ+GÆ¦ - Causes headaches, it's official +1 for Infantry Skills Refund in 1.8 or I win DUST514
Orion Sanjeet Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 37	Posted - 2014.02.19 16:23:00 - [15] - Quote What I would prefer to this would be to start out with no installations on the map but instead beacons that you "hack" to request an installation be called to that point, and the beacon should always be there however be on a timer so that you can repeatedly call in the same installation without it being spammed thus giving newberries a way of fighting the titans of the battlefield e.g. tanks and/or protostompers. This would change the game in a good way I think. P.S. CCP would be able to track which installations are called in more and which ones less and start changing the locations of installations based on data.
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2869	Posted - 2014.02.19 18:03:00 - [16] - Quote Unguarded/abandoned material is best destroyed rather than left to be captured by the enemy and used against your forces. It's an ancient doctrine of warfare. Turrets qualify as abandoned material 99.9% of the time. Hacking WPs should be removed from turrets because it incentivizes negative behavior. Hand them out for getting kills with the turret, but not for simply tagging it. Infantry isn't affected by red turrets so they have no skin in the game. It is vehicle pilots who suffer when a previously blue turret turns red behind them. Good pilots clear away enemy turrets as they move into an area, but they can't do squat about abandoned blue turrets, they just sit there like automated mine fields waiting to go off. How would infantry feel if CCP scattered AI turrets around the map? Would they just leave them in odd places to gank them if they turn red? Or would they destroy them if they weren't using them? I feel there should be no yellow turrets. Let people buy and deploy them if they want one. The menu mechanism for deployment is already in game, as are the art assets and slot in the market so it shouldn't take more than six months to make the change. And while we are at it, why the hell are there any neutral objects in the game at all? Why do the defenders wait for the referee's whistle to race the attackers for possession of their own property? It doesn't make a lick of sense.
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p TRA1LBLAZERS 701	Posted - 2014.02.19 18:13:00 - [17] - Quote Glitch116 wrote: the problem is those turrets are dangerous to tanks you can take the war points but tankers are still going to kill them infantry only see turrets a quick 50wp and way to get their hands on large turret weapon without paying for so they can get cheap kills at no cost to them to tankers it is not about the wps but removing a dangerous asset before it can be used against you I call bullshit. Most people i know who are massive war point whores take out a militia rail tank with double damage mods at the start of each match, destroy every installation they can find, recall, and then put out uplinks and use a rifle Kills- Archduke Ferdinand Balance!
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 435	Posted - 2014.02.19 20:12:00 - [18] - Quote I'd like to add that there are those of us who do use turrets. We may move from one location to another if we're needed somewhere else, but that doesn't mean turrets are a complete liability. The thing I hate the most is when a blue tank takes out turrets on the side of our MCC where I was holding a defensive perimeter. There was no way a red was going to hack a redline turret. I've been in plenty of pub matches where the reds have us pinned in our drop zone because we lost a valid defense at the beginning of the match to a tanker that wanted easy WP. Mihi gravato Deus - "Let God lay the burden on me!"
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2870	Posted - 2014.02.19 21:10:00 - [19] - Quote Chesyre Armundsen wrote: I'd like to add that there are those of us who do use turrets. We may move from one location to another if we're needed somewhere else, but that doesn't mean turrets are a complete liability. The thing I hate the most is when a blue tank takes out turrets on the side of our MCC where I was holding a defensive perimeter. There was no way a red was going to hack a redline turret. I've been in plenty of pub matches where the reds have us pinned in our drop zone because we lost a valid defense at the beginning of the match to a tanker that wanted easy WP. Don't be too sure about that. Some folks can run a fast scout with hacking mods to make it pretty deep in the redline to get a hack and make it back out again, especially if they hitch a ride in a dropship. Frankly turrets are sitting ducks to basic SL's. If it can see me I can see it and I can destroy it in 3-4 volleys, so it's not going to help your redline situation very much.
Shadow Archeus OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 293	Posted - 2014.02.19 21:17:00 - [20] - Quote ......just saying if av was stronger against vehicles this wouldn't be an issue Real heavies use lasers

Tallen Ellecon KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1465	Posted - 2014.02.20 08:37:00 - [21] - Quote Shadow Archeus wrote: ......just saying if av was stronger against vehicles this wouldn't be an issue As if they weren't blowing up neutral installations before 1.7. +1 Where is my Gallente sidearm? 1.8? When is that? SoonGäó514 "No blue tags make Tallen go crazy."
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 167	Posted - 2014.02.20 09:30:00 - [22] - Quote Liquid Big Boss wrote: Or I'm ok with only 25wp, 100 is too mush, 50 too. Destroy depot should be -1000 lol You know, IDGAF if installation kills reward WP or not, but if you infantry want to have those installations, then make damn sure that the enemy wont get it's hands on it. And if the worst comes to worst and the enemy gets hold of it, let ALL friendly vehicles know that it is about to turn red, also announcing which turret it is and where. You see the problem here? And even if destroying a depot means losing all my WP I would still destroy it if I consider it a threat. Red turret that you are aware of: very low threat Yellow turret: moderate threat Blue turret: high threat Red turret that you are not aware of: very high threat R.I.P. Pre-1.7 tanks, you will be missed.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 167	Posted - 2014.02.20 09:43:00 - [23] - Quote Chesyre Armundsen wrote: I'd like to add that there are those of us who do use turrets. We may move from one location to another if we're needed somewhere else, but that doesn't mean turrets are a complete liability. The thing I hate the most is when a blue tank takes out turrets on the side of our MCC where I was holding a defensive perimeter. There was no way a red was going to hack a redline turret. I've been in plenty of pub matches where the reds have us pinned in our drop zone because we lost a valid defense at the beginning of the match to a tanker that wanted easy WP. On Ashland map my dropship has been destroyed before landing, by our redline rail. So think again. PS. Sorry about douple posting but I am on my phone. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 tanks, you will be missed.
BulletsOfFury Paladin Survey Force Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.02.20 13:16:00 - [24] - Quote Even better how about removing yellow installation since nobody is paying ISK to have them in the battlefield
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1169	Posted - 2014.02.20 14:35:00 - [25] - Quote Skihids wrote: Unguarded/abandoned material is best destroyed rather than left to be captured by the enemy and used against your forces. It's an ancient doctrine of warfare. Turrets qualify as abandoned material 99.9% of the time. Hacking WPs should be removed from turrets because it incentivizes negative behavior. Hand them out for getting kills with the turret, but not for simply tagging it. Infantry isn't affected by red turrets so they have no skin in the game. It is vehicle pilots who suffer when a previously blue turret turns red behind them. Good pilots clear away enemy turrets as they move into an area, but they can't do squat about abandoned blue turrets, they just sit there like automated mine fields waiting to go off. How would infantry feel if CCP scattered AI turrets around the map? Would they just leave them in odd places to gank them if they turn red? Or would they destroy them if they weren't using them? I feel there should be no yellow turrets. Let people buy and deploy them if they want one. The menu mechanism for deployment is already in game, as are the art assets and slot in the market so it shouldn't take more than six months to make the change. And while we are at it, why the hell are there any neutral objects in the game at all? Why do the defenders wait for the referee's whistle to race the attackers for possession of their own property? It doesn't make a lick of sense. Agreed with everything, especially the last part. Especially in FW and PC where one team owns/defends the district, why isn't everything theirs to start out with? "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 452	Posted - 2014.02.20 16:55:00 - [26] - Quote Glitch116 wrote: the problem is those turrets are dangerous to tanks you can take the war points but tankers are still going to kill them infantry only see turrets a quick 50wp and way to get their hands on large turret weapon without paying for so they can get cheap kills at no cost to them to tankers it is not about the wps but removing a dangerous asset before it can be used against you Theres more than one valid reason to destroy yellow turrets, but WP shouldn't be one of them. +1 OP Who cares what some sniper has to say
Krom Ganesh Nos Nothi 1426	Posted - 2014.02.20 18:03:00 - [27] - Quote Krom Ganesh wrote: Chuck Nurris DCLXVI wrote: As it is now, [neutral installations] are all just free WP for tanks. Turrets (neutral and enemy controlled) are just free WPs. Give turrets a ton of eHP but decrease their damage. This would cause turrets to be less of a target to vehicles (low wp/time to destroy) but they also wouldn't be a major threat to vehicles on their own. They would still be useful as a deterrent to vehicles or providing extra damage when coordinating with friendly AV. I.E. The turrets should be difficult enough to destroy that tanks are better off leaving to find easier and more rewarding targets. To balance this, they need to have low enough dps that tanks can leisurely drive away but still have enough that a tank can't sit in their range without a care. Also, make neutral turrets attack both teams. What use is a defense system that is turned off as an invasion force arrives?
Glitch116 On The Brink CRONOS. 79	Posted - 2014.02.21 22:22:00 - [28] - Quote Bradric Banewolf wrote: Glitch116 wrote: the problem is those turrets are dangerous to tanks you can take the war points but tankers are still going to kill them infantry only see turrets a quick 50wp and way to get their hands on large turret weapon without paying for so they can get cheap kills at no cost to them to tankers it is not about the wps but removing a dangerous asset before it can be used against you I don't disagree, but the tanker you refer to is different from the tanker he was referring to. Some tankers get mad when we assault kill red turrets before them with swarms or forge guns. You would think they would rejoice, but not so much apparently. We all want war points, and if our squad agrees to destroy or hack and use turrets it's ultimately a squad decision. There are, however, useless tankers who make rounds racking up 700+ wp's killing turrets we may need. Then they return to the redline to rail gun snipe the whole match, leaving us to defend for ourselves with AV weapons. If said tanker was in squad communicating that we keep control of these turrets in certain areas they could be helpful. If we loose them he knows to drop them. Instead of only looking out for themselves tankers could try and understand how difficult it is to fight blaster tanks on foot, while friendly tankers are safe in a tank in the redline. the problem i feel is that turrets simple are not needed anything your squad could gain through the use of a turret they could gain through using a tank as for the not working with people that is another thing you can't expect everyone to be on the same page or even want to if you are in a squad then your squad needs to be able to handle everything one its own this is how my squads work and they work pretty well (not being mean here just trying to help) dicks will happen that is just the way it is so plan for it I AM THE KING OF THE BLASTER!!! deal with it
Glitch116 On The Brink CRONOS. 79	Posted - 2014.02.21 22:27:00 - [29] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: Glitch116 wrote: the problem is those turrets are dangerous to tanks you can take the war points but tankers are still going to kill them infantry only see turrets a quick 50wp and way to get their hands on large turret weapon without paying for so they can get cheap kills at no cost to them to tankers it is not about the wps but removing a dangerous asset before it can be used against you I call bullshit. Most people i know who are massive war point whores take out a militia rail tank with double damage mods at the start of each match, destroy every installation they can find, recall, and then put out uplinks and use a rifle WP whores will always find ways to ***** mate that is why they are WP Whores I AM THE KING OF THE BLASTER!!! deal with it
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2890	Posted - 2014.02.21 22:41:00 - [30] - Quote Krom Ganesh wrote: Krom Ganesh wrote: Chuck Nurris DCLXVI wrote: As it is now, [neutral installations] are all just free WP for tanks. Turrets (neutral and enemy controlled) are just free WPs. Give turrets a ton of eHP but decrease their damage. This would cause turrets to be less of a target to vehicles (low wp/time to destroy) but they also wouldn't be a major threat to vehicles on their own. They would still be useful as a deterrent to vehicles or providing extra damage when coordinating with friendly AV. I.E. The turrets should be difficult enough to destroy that tanks are better off leaving to find easier and more rewarding targets. To balance this, they need to have low enough dps that tanks can leisurely drive away but still have enough that a tank can't sit in their range without a care. Also, make neutral turrets attack both teams. What use is a defense system that is turned off as an invasion force arrives? Edit: As for why neutral turrets are neutral to both attackers and defenders I attribute it to both sides being mercenaries. No corporation is going to cough up the funds to keep a clone team guarding some buildings on a mostly uninhabited planet all the time. More likely, corporations are only contracting us when they hear another group has contracted a different group of clones to attack their outpost. This would explain why the defenders start in similar circumstances as the attackers. The defenders just arrived themselves and the corporation contracting the defenders wouldn't have had time to update the defense systems to identify the defenders as friendlies. Doesn't explain PC... but PC is broken and half-baked anyways. Edit2: This would also explain the turrets being extremely tough but having fairly weak attacks. These turrets are meant for normal non-clone enemies like bandits that similarly won't be using clone level gear. The extra punch needed to destroy a clone tank would be a waste of money 99% of the time. However, the turrets are also meant to be used in harsh conditions and work for long periods of time so they need to be tough giving them the durability to withstand clone-level weaponry. No, it doesn't explain yellow turrets in pub matches. The defending organization owns the turret, so it has programming access to it. Having programming access means they know and can give the IFF code to the mercenary organization they contract with. They wouldn't need to have their hires hack the equipment.

Nothing Certain Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 267	Posted - 2014.02.21 22:49:00 - [31] - Quote You will notice the only ones objecting are the tankers who get the WP. They should definitely remove the WP for destroying neutral turrets, you are destroying a potential team asset. I think they should go further and make them indestructible or at least as durable as CRU's and supply depots. They should be allowed to be disabled though. They should also remove AI so they are only useful when manned but strategic points when manned. Because, that's why.
Nothing Certain Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 267	Posted - 2014.02.21 22:58:00 - [32] - Quote Skihids wrote: Unguarded/abandoned material is best destroyed rather than left to be captured by the enemy and used against your forces. It's an ancient doctrine of warfare. Turrets qualify as abandoned material 99.9% of the time. Hacking WPs should be removed from turrets because it incentivizes negative behavior. Hand them out for getting kills with the turret, but not for simply tagging it. Infantry isn't affected by red turrets so they have no skin in the game. It is vehicle pilots who suffer when a previously blue turret turns red behind them. Good pilots clear away enemy turrets as they move into an area, but they can't do squat about abandoned blue turrets, they just sit there like automated mine fields waiting to go off. How would infantry feel if CCP scattered AI turrets around the map? Would they just leave them in odd places to gank them if they turn red? Or would they destroy them if they weren't using them? I feel there should be no yellow turrets. Let people buy and deploy them if they want one. The menu mechanism for deployment is already in game, as are the art assets and slot in the market so it shouldn't take more than six months to make the change. And while we are at it, why the hell are there any neutral objects in the game at all? Why do the defenders wait for the referee's whistle to race the attackers for possession of their own property? It doesn't make a lick of sense. I agree with some of what you say but think the answer lies in incentivizing the manning of turrets, not the hacking of them. There would be more use of turrets if they were not so easily destroyed, they also leave you vulnerable but that is ok. Are you not aware that many of the turrets are blasters and primarily AI? Infantry do face the same challenges as tanks with regards to turrets but we generally don't try to destroy them, the exception being grabbing a turret and milking WP by destroying other turrets, just like tankers. No one does it because they are a threat, even though they pose a threat to infantry, they do it for the WP. Because, that's why.
Awry Barux New Eden Blades Of The Azure Zero-Day 1011	Posted - 2014.02.21 23:04:00 - [33] - Quote Just take the turrets out until we can buy them, custom-fit them, and call them in using the OMS menu. As it is, they're simply an annoyance. Edit: actually, really, how hard would it be to make turrets a vehicle hull? 0 high slots, 2 low slots, one L turret slot. Have the RDV drop them off as usual.
The Black Jackal The Southern Legion 1041	Posted - 2014.02.25 02:06:00 - [34] - Quote Awry Barux wrote: Just take the turrets out until we can buy them, custom-fit them, and call them in using the OMS menu. As it is, they're simply an annoyance. Edit: actually, really, how hard would it be to make turrets a vehicle hull? 0 high slots, 2 low slots, one L turret slot. Have the RDV drop them off as usual. Though I'm not aware of exactly what CCP has done, I believe that the turrets are currently socketed. That is they will always remain in te same position, or drop in the same series of positions during OMS matches no matter what. Probably done to conserve memory and avoid collision failures. Even Vehicles have issues getting dropped off. Add to that that the vehicle call-in menu doesn't allow precision placement either, so you'd be effectively calling in a turrt at a random location somewhere in your vicinity. Now I don't know about most people, but if I'm paying for something to be dropped off, I'd want the ability to drop it anywhere and at whatever orientation I want within a metre or two. Once you go Black, you just never go back!
Aerius Corius FACTION WARFARE ARMY FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE 8	Posted - 2014.02.25 02:18:00 - [35] - Quote Proposition: Turrets in Red Zone reward no sp - enemy or friend. The points tankers make are valid and until CCP looks at installations (there are lots of infantry who think they aren't good either for other reasons - notably a team should rely on vehicle support, not map support, to win) its not really fair to make neutrals not worth anything...because infantry do by and large take them for wp then move on since so many are poorly placed for infantry purposes. But you could change the ones under the MCC (and usually in the red zone or near it - to where they have no value since the enemy can't hack them (red zone) and its pointless for your team to destroy the assets. This could go one step further where the 'starting' installations on a map are this way only - so those usualy two or three guns, the supply depot, and one clone unit are now worthless for friendly kills. Food for thought. EDIT: Clarification below Infantry have a guaranteed fallback as do vehicles. Being deep in the field is risky - for anyone - so asset deprivation is a valid tactic. Near the "final stand" area of the MCC though, asset deprivation serves no purpose and should not be rewarded. Players don't get wp for taking these because they already belong to the team, tanks aren't concerned about them because they cannot be taken. That guy you killed with 0% shields? Yeah, I sniped him - go team. Oh, you didn't know...hmm. *CCP: Display Assists!!!
Asha Starwind VEXALATION CORPORATION Partners of Industrial Service and Salvage 381	Posted - 2014.02.25 02:23:00 - [36] - Quote Nope, nope, nope, too many times have I been sniped by unmanned installations to leave them alone, I'll destroy them before I'll capture one, can't destroy them when they're blue unless it's FW. Come back and make this suggestion again after you been sniped by an installation that was white/blue when you looked at it a few seconds earlier a few times. 32db Mad Bomber.
Talos Alomar Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2062	Posted - 2014.02.25 02:43:00 - [37] - Quote I hate turrets on principal. If you've ever been sniped by an unmanned turret you can see why. The auto turrets should be disabled, until then **** turrets. Kill em all. Most of them are in terrible positions, anyway. They're just there to maybe make a tanker roll a critical fail when it gets hacked by a red. Try to kill it all you want CCP, I still <3 my laser.
Mobius Wyvern Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 4645	Posted - 2014.02.25 04:05:00 - [38] - Quote Liquid Big Boss wrote: Harpyja wrote: This has been discussed already multiple times. A decent tanker will always destroy turret installations because they are liabilities. It can't suck any more than retreating after winning a tank battle with a bare minimum of your EHP left and being blown up by a rail installation that used to be blue. Also, I disagree with removing WP from neutral installations because destroying them absolutely ensures that the enemy won't get ahold of them, which should technically be considered as "playing the objective." haha what a joke, then let your team take it, it will help you destroy enemi tank, yellow installation don't even shoot. You all criing for WP don't get me wrong. Uh, no, that's not the only reason. You wanna take a bet on how many times some "helpful" blue dots have taken over railgun installations, only for a red dot to come along 5 minutes later, hack it, and then three-shot me out of the air? I could give a **** less about War Points. Whether I get anything from it or not, all turrets are going down because they pose too much of a potential threat. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Obodiah Garro Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 679	Posted - 2014.02.25 04:17:00 - [39] - Quote -1 Its only prudent to destroy the installations if you have any vehicle support on your side, so 99% of the time. WP should be paid out because its a much higher priority to destroy them than it is to let your own side capture them to use against the enemy. Even a blaster HAV at range will destroy an installation before it can be used to destroy it, therefore they are useless and not only should capturing them be dissuaded. the blueberries that indeed do cap them should be put down as well (FW). Am more in favour of removing turrets all together, until such a time installations gain a HP buff to depot/CRU level. Then maybe infantry will man them more often and make use of them.
Thrillhouse Van Houten DIOS EX. General Tso's Alliance 84	Posted - 2014.02.25 04:39:00 - [40] - Quote I agree with the idea that turrets should have somewhat lower DPS and much, much more life. I pretty much agree with the OP. If not zero WP then 25 or so. I remember doing the same exact thing on my rail tanker in 1.5. Sure it is as much or more about personal safety for the tanker, but that still doesn't mean you should rack up huge amounts of WP destroying 10 or 12 installations. WP equal Warbarge Strikes and OBs can mean a huge turning of the tide. A blue on the ground only gets 50 for taking out an enemy clone...why are unmanned neutral installations deemed strategically more important? Silly. ...and all you tankers that say red installations aren't something for infantry to fear have never won a 2 vs. 1 just to turn and walk 3 meters into an AI railgun blast to death... There are a lot of great points in this thread.

Glitch116 On The Brink CRONOS. 92	Posted - 2014.02.25 05:02:00 - [41] - Quote the thing i want to get across and that i don't think people get is you can remove WP from killing yellow turrets that is fine however that will not change anything or make yellow turrets useful they will still die no matter what hell i will take negative WPs if i have to nothing you can ever change about turrets is going to stop pilots from killing turrets I AM THE KING OF THE BLASTER!!! deal with it
Krom Ganesh Nos Nothi 1433	Posted - 2014.02.26 12:50:00 - [42] - Quote Skihids wrote: No, it doesn't explain yellow turrets in pub matches. The defending organization owns the turret, so it has programming access to it. Having programming access means they know and can give the IFF code to the mercenary organization they contract with. They wouldn't need to have their hires hack the equipment. To do so would require transferring IFF codes across large distances which can be tapped. I doubt anyone would think the risk of those codes being discovered would warrant the mercs getting a little extra firepower at the beginning of the attack.
maka rax Space Road Truckers. 19	Posted - 2014.02.26 13:28:00 - [43] - Quote Glitch116 wrote: the thing i want to get across and that i don't think people get is you can remove WP from killing yellow turrets that is fine however that will not change anything or make yellow turrets useful they will still die no matter what hell i will take negative WPs if i have to nothing you can ever change about turrets is going to stop pilots from killing turrets I disagree, I kill turrets now because they give the same amount of WP as taking an objective (+100). You can see the little scouts running their asses off for +50, but I can grab a tank and pop 3-5 of them before the match really kicks off and get +500 WP. I do understand the strategic nature of destroying them however, so it's sort of 50/50 (maybe 60/40 to WP) for me - as if I kill enough I've just about paid for my MLT tank. I say, just get rid of the damn things all together...make them player deployable.
Kilo Shells G.L.O.R.Y 33	Posted - 2014.02.26 17:02:00 - [44] - Quote +1 Points for target practice? I was in an ambush once in which my squad guarded blaster turret all game while the AI got the better part of the 50 kills. Are the arguments about reds hacking unguarded turrets has to be applied to both sides. This arguments hold no weight. Caldari Assault
Mahal Daj Mahal Tactical Enterprises 30	Posted - 2014.02.28 16:16:00 - [45] - Quote I agree with maka rax... make them deployable Boost your squad's points by 40%, learn to use the Squad Wheel! I provide training: 1M isk: 90 Minutes of Basic Command
The-Errorist 522	Posted - 2014.03.02 21:10:00 - [46] - Quote Destroying neutral installations should only award half of the WPs.
The-Errorist 522	Posted - 2014.03.02 21:10:00 - [47] - Quote Destroying neutral installations should only award half of the WPs.


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.