DUST Search - HAV Turret Can Aim Too Close

Chesyre Armundsen wrote:

I've been trying to dig up a page to link to (that isn't "World of Tanks" related) that would emphasize tank design and have numbers for cannon depression. While I haven't found an 'official' page there is lots of info corresponding to the less than 10 degree declination and numbers of 20-30 degrees inclination.

The design comes from a few factors:

- placement of crew inside
- mechanism for firing cannon
- amount of armour, and placement of armour on the tank
- weight and balance of the tank

I think a few of these items might have been overlooked by CCP in the design of our HAV's or they are slightly skewed. I do believe you're right that the Madrugar can aim lower, despite it and the Gunnlogi having similar silhouettes. Even if we assume that the large Blaster doesn't require a firing mechanism in the turret (like a "Metal Storm" weapon) and thus can offer a greater range of motion I still find it dubious that the engineers would design it in such a way.

Both of the current HAV's offer the option of 2 additional small turrets. Both of these would be far greater suited for precision strikes on nearby infantry, and how often do we see them being utilized? The depression on the cannon coupled with the accuracy of the Blaster has been exploited by tankers who found it was more satisfying and more convenient for them to run as solo machines.

I'm hoping that in future builds with either armour/shield alterations to HAV's or a more effective AV arsenal that infantry will be able to become a real threat to HAV's.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 451	Posted - 2014.03.09 20:47:00 - [1] - Quote Just played the "Fracture Road" map in a domination match and the the raspberry's had 4 blaster HAV's deployed. Needless to say it was a bloodbath with massive blueberry casualties, but a good match for me to try out some of my AV fit builds. The challenge was daunting and I was working with some other Mercs to flank the HAV's, but it was a solid attack. The kind that would overwhelm a single unit, and it was the number of them that was the variable. This is when I learned just how much declination the blaster cannon has on a HAV. There were 2 locations in particular: a steep bank on the south side of the road at the SW most bend, and a structure on the NW side of the road sitting bellow the ground level with a CRU. Being targeted on the south most bank could have been attributed to the distance from the HAV, but the unit was sitting level at the top and was certainly aiming down the hill. The second location was where it got annoying... Standing at the bottom of the stairs within 20m of the blaster HAV simply parked at the top we were sitting ducks. I know this has been mentioned in other threads. I know this is a fantasy game using future tech, but there should still be a mechanical limitation to the degree of inclination/declination of such hardware, and i'm sure the main turret shouldn't be able to aim that close to the HAV it's attached to. Mihi gravato Deus - "Let God lay the burden on me!"
SponkSponkSponk The Southern Legion League of Infamy 703	Posted - 2014.03.10 02:11:00 - [2] - Quote I think gallente HAVs can aim lower than caldari HAVs. Either way, it should be +30 degrees/-10 degrees elevation on non-AA turrets. Selling dust codes!
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 455	Posted - 2014.03.11 00:26:00 - [3] - Quote I've been trying to dig up a page to link to (that isn't "World of Tanks" related) that would emphasize tank design and have numbers for cannon depression. While I haven't found an 'official' page there is lots of info corresponding to the less than 10 degree declination and numbers of 20-30 degrees inclination. The design comes from a few factors: - placement of crew inside - mechanism for firing cannon - amount of armour, and placement of armour on the tank - weight and balance of the tank I think a few of these items might have been overlooked by CCP in the design of our HAV's or they are slightly skewed. I do believe you're right that the Madrugar can aim lower, despite it and the Gunnlogi having similar silhouettes. Even if we assume that the large Blaster doesn't require a firing mechanism in the turret (like a "Metal Storm" weapon) and thus can offer a greater range of motion I still find it dubious that the engineers would design it in such a way. Both of the current HAV's offer the option of 2 additional small turrets. Both of these would be far greater suited for precision strikes on nearby infantry, and how often do we see them being utilized? The depression on the cannon coupled with the accuracy of the Blaster has been exploited by tankers who found it was more satisfying and more convenient for them to run as solo machines. I'm hoping that in future builds with either armour/shield alterations to HAV's or a more effective AV arsenal that infantry will be able to become a real threat to HAV's. Mihi gravato Deus - "Let God lay the burden on me!"
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 823	Posted - 2014.03.11 06:02:00 - [4] - Quote I think each turret should have different declinations. Raulguns the smallest, missiles the largest, with blasters in the middle. There needs to be a way for tanks to engage drop ships, but I completely agree with a -10 degree declination. There should be a dead zone around the tank where infantry cannot be hit. Best PVE idea I've seen.
Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz Renegade Alliance 659	Posted - 2014.03.11 12:07:00 - [5] - Quote Chesyre Armundsen wrote: I've been trying to dig up a page to link to (that isn't "World of Tanks" related) that would emphasize tank design and have numbers for cannon depression. While I haven't found an 'official' page there is lots of info corresponding to the less than 10 degree declination and numbers of 20-30 degrees inclination. The design comes from a few factors: - placement of crew inside - mechanism for firing cannon - amount of armour, and placement of armour on the tank - weight and balance of the tank I think a few of these items might have been overlooked by CCP in the design of our HAV's or they are slightly skewed. I do believe you're right that the Madrugar can aim lower, despite it and the Gunnlogi having similar silhouettes. Even if we assume that the large Blaster doesn't require a firing mechanism in the turret (like a "Metal Storm" weapon) and thus can offer a greater range of motion I still find it dubious that the engineers would design it in such a way. Both of the current HAV's offer the option of 2 additional small turrets. Both of these would be far greater suited for precision strikes on nearby infantry, and how often do we see them being utilized? The depression on the cannon coupled with the accuracy of the Blaster has been exploited by tankers who found it was more satisfying and more convenient for them to run as solo machines. I'm hoping that in future builds with either armour/shield alterations to HAV's or a more effective AV arsenal that infantry will be able to become a real threat to HAV's. The madrudger has much greater gun depression than the gunnlogi. A gunnlogi's turret will only go as far as level with it's tank. A madrudger on the other hand can point it's turret down, far enough that it can hit units standing right next to it. This in effect makes the blaster far superior on a madrudger than a gunnlogi. But the gun depression doesn't just apply to a single turret, a madrudger has better gun depression with all turrets (not sure on the missiles). So they are very effective at CQC against infantry with a blaster, and far more effective with a rail turret at range in rough terrain. Best way to beat a gunnlogi, keep your elevation lower than the gunlogis position. If it can't angle itself downward, it's turret won't be able to touch you. It's been like this as far as I can remember, and while I think it gives a madrudger, unfair advantages, I don't think it's going away anytime soon. Mostly what I get of people when I bring this up is QQ some more, gun depression is fine. But I agree wholeheartedly that gun depression should be replaced by the need of small turrets for dealing with infantry near your tank. Tanks really shouldn't be as effective at killing infantry as they are. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
GVGMODE WorstPlayersEver 142	Posted - 2014.03.11 13:54:00 - [6] - Quote Gallente HAVs are able to aim lower than Caldari HAVs and it is a known issue by CCP. It seems the issue on turret depression will take a while, since there is no timeline on a fix yet... Pilot: (Tanks / Assault Dropships) Skype: GVGMODE
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 461	Posted - 2014.03.11 21:47:00 - [7] - Quote We'll keep learning and adapting till then Mihi gravato Deus - "Let God lay the burden on me!"


Pages: 1 :: [one page]