|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lorhak Gannarsein
Science For Death
1695
   |
Posted - 2014.02.17 07:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
First, I'm glad I see you're not banned; something someone said in 'DevHangout' the other day suggested as much. Anyway, into business.
So I've done a bit of raging/trolling (xD) recently, through which I've made my positions known. First off, I'm perfectly happy with the balance at the moment (in the sense that the shoe's now on the other foot) and while I'm expecting a nerf, I'm damn well going to enjoy it while it lasts.
Your points I agree with to some extent.
1. Ammunition reserves are actually not too high in HAVs at the moment; I often fit an ammunition module because they're free and because I often run dry otherwise. Now, I run a Gunnlogi so I have the slots to do it. Should base capacity be reduced, I'd want my complex ammo cache to be buffed to give me the same capacity that I have now. I'd also want many more supply depots scattered around the maps. Something in the order of two in every redline, for example. I'd also want their HP buffed to CRU levels, and the recall function changed to be less convenient (doubling the hack timer would work wonders here).
2. Nerf the living shit out of blasters, please. It's these that are causing all the issues. It's harder by far to kill with a railgun, which is why you don't see so many MLT ones spammed at the start of matches. Obviously they're superior for AV as a general rule (although they're inferior as far as keeping tanks away from your squad is concerned; nothing beats a forge for that).
I like the idea of either cutting their vehicle damage to 50%, like pre1.6 small rails, or doing the same to their infantry damage. I think HMG damage with 50m optimal and 75m effective is pretty reasonable. HMG is still pretty powerful.
Forge on for great justice!
Defend the meek! Destroy the weak!
Q-sync breaches into the rectum of everyone else!
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
Science For Death
1695
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 07:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:
2. Nerf the living shit out of blasters, please. It's these that are causing all the issues. It's harder by far to kill with a railgun, which is why you don't see so many MLT ones spammed at the start of matches. Obviously they're superior for AV as a general rule (although they're inferior as far as keeping tanks away from your squad is concerned; nothing beats a forge for that).
I like the idea of either cutting their vehicle damage to 50%, like pre1.6 small rails, or doing the same to their infantry damage. I think HMG damage with 50m optimal and 75m effective is pretty reasonable. HMG is still pretty powerful.
If you think a blaster is better at AV than rails or missiles,, you're doing it wrong.
I don't. They're still viable AV. I've done quite well even against particle cannons . This is with an MLT blaster, by the way.
They've got higher sustained DPS than the other turrets by quite a bit. The only hurdle is that they can't break a hardened Gunnlogi's regen without a damage mod.
I think they need to be forced into a single role. HMG damage against infantry from a shorter range (this could actually open the doors for a general damage buff to actually make them the best choice for CQC AV) or alternatively making them unable to function as AV without support.
EDIT: if they're nerfed against HAVs, Gal need an AV option. A PLC optimised for a little less range than missiles (so about 150m - talking about damage profiles, rather than actual effective range. Missiles need to be tighter to actually have range) seems like the best bet.
Forge on for great justice!
Defend the meek! Destroy the weak!
Q-sync breaches into the rectum of everyone else!
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
Science For Death
1695
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 07:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Alaika Arbosa wrote:NK Scout wrote:Alaika Arbosa wrote:NK Scout wrote:Alaika Arbosa wrote:All of that seems reasonable to me.
I do however, still think that the Driver and Main Gunner should be separate seats in the HAV. Minimum two needed to be able to move and shoot simultaneously. The option for the two secondaries should remain. This would mean that you could run the HAV solo if you liked though you wouldn't be moving and shooting at the same time, if you brought a single friend, you can move and shoot and if you brought more than one friend, you'd have a better chance of killing any infantry resistance. NO I love how it is always a simple "NO". Never an explanation of why outside of childish demands to have their own solo pwnmobile. You might as well have just typed "NUH-UH **STAMPS FEET WHILE WALKING OFF**". I think it is hilarious too since it would amount to a larger buff to vehicles than the one CCP gave in 1.7. No way in hell im lettingnrandoms shoot or drive Im not going to squad up every time in dust, I like playing solo and it makes my framerate better. Oh so because you want to be able to have your solo pwnmobile when you're playing solo in an admittedly teambased game, that is reason enough to not include something that would encourage teamplay? Still not hearing rational, articulate arguments, just more of the "IT HAS TO BE THIS WAY BECAUSE I WANT IT THIS WAY WAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!" @True I thought that "standing apart" was something that most of the community has wanted for Dust from the beginning? I mean, I know it is different, though I don't think that it is nearly so much of a "fun killer" as you put forth. In fact, I think it would make things more fun, social activities usually are. Would you rather fap or spend the evening with your gender of choice?
I'd be happy to require two people for max effectiveness if I could control the front turret, and if my EHP was buffed.
We're not that durable. I can often solo tanks (with my forge - only ones I have issues with are driven by 1.6 tankers) and if we were mechanically altered like that, I'd very much want it to be impossible to solo one.
Forge on for great justice!
Defend the meek! Destroy the weak!
Q-sync breaches into the rectum of everyone else!
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
Science For Death
1695
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 08:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:
2. Nerf the living shit out of blasters, please. It's these that are causing all the issues. It's harder by far to kill with a railgun, which is why you don't see so many MLT ones spammed at the start of matches. Obviously they're superior for AV as a general rule (although they're inferior as far as keeping tanks away from your squad is concerned; nothing beats a forge for that).
I like the idea of either cutting their vehicle damage to 50%, like pre1.6 small rails, or doing the same to their infantry damage. I think HMG damage with 50m optimal and 75m effective is pretty reasonable. HMG is still pretty powerful.
If you think a blaster is better at AV than rails or missiles,, you're doing it wrong. I don't. They're still viable AV. I've done quite well even against particle cannons . This is with an MLT blaster, by the way. They've got higher sustained DPS than the other turrets by quite a bit. The only hurdle is that they can't break a hardened Gunnlogi's regen without a damage mod. I think they need to be forced into a single role. HMG damage against infantry from a shorter range (this could actually open the doors for a general damage buff to actually make them the best choice for CQC AV) or alternatively making them unable to function as AV without support. EDIT: if they're nerfed against HAVs, Gal need an AV option. A PLC optimised for a little less range than missiles (so about 150m - talking about damage profiles, rather than actual effective range. Missiles need to be tighter to actually have range) seems like the best bet. Making a large turret not viable at hitting the targets it was most likely designed for (otherwise it wouldn't be that big), is quite stupid. Additionally, making it to where it's inaccurate as **** would make no sense either. it needs to be accurate to fire on the move (kinda Gallente's fighting style). Like I said, this is only a band aid, and would only solve **** for a week. Also, whoever you are fighting that has that particle cannon needs to stop using it. They're bloody awful if they can't kill someone with a MLT blaster.
I don't mean inaccuracy, I simply mean DPS. Its effective DPS would be far higher than the HMG's. I mean HMG's maximum potential DPS, which is pretty high.
I don't like that blasters are an insta-win against infantry at huge ranges. Prior to 1.7, I'd have serious issues killing infantry sitting on the mushroom at the Gallente Communications Centre (or whatever), nowadays I can pick people off with ease. Our potential DPS might have been lowered, but I think our hit detection improved, so our actual DPS has increased. Certainly range has increased enormously.
It's happened a few times. I'd circle the poor bastard with my Gunnlogi until his hardeners go down, then I'd sit there and death-by-a-thousand-cuts them.
Was my ISK printing fit.
Forge on for great justice!
Defend the meek! Destroy the weak!
Q-sync breaches into the rectum of everyone else!
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
Science For Death
1697
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 08:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Something exceedingly ironic.
Forge on for great justice!
Defend the meek! Destroy the weak!
Q-sync breaches into the rectum of everyone else!
|
|
|
| |
|