| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1972
   |
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
I try not to cry about mechanics because I am a total scrub and my tears don't count but here it goes.
I think that making small turrets optional is where CCP borked up HAVs and the balance that goes with them. Although I think that HAVs can be handled like they are I feel like the removal of the small turrets have put us in the spot were are in. Just wondering what others thought about this. Would HAVs be as OP as some think if there were still the extra turret requirements?
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
Joseph Ridgeson
WarRavens
League of Infamy
730
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
Before I could put basic turrets with all prototype stuff. Now, with turrets, I can barely squeeze in advanced gear. It is a sacrifice to have gunners now. I like it as such. |
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1972
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
Joseph Ridgeson wrote:Before I could put basic turrets with all prototype stuff. Now, with turrets, I can barely squeeze in advanced gear. It is a sacrifice to have gunners now. I like it as such.
I don't pilot so it is difficult for me to speak about what would be good or bad. What about dropping the small from two required to one? Peoples biggest complaint is that the HAV is a solo merc destroying entire squads and I would like to see a way that only a really good pilot could do it without gimping new players. I still feel like a major part of the problem is that mercs don't field AV and just try to avoid them but still get wrecked. Me and two other players destroyed about 5 HAVs and even more LAVs -in one match- the other day with a PLC, swarms and a forge. I even got a gg mail from one of the pilots I soloed with a PLC and AV nades, I sent him some ISK with "For more HAVs" as the reason.
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers
Negative-Feedback
2357
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
What's the point though? It seems all you are really asking for is a nerf to the CPU/PG on a tank.
What we need is for tankers to want small turrets on in the first place. A great first step would be to relocate that utterly useless front turret to the top. Or make it so that you can fit the top turret without having the front one on as well. |
Henchmen21
Planet Express LLC
748
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
Would spell doom for placing remotes on a tank if they had a gunner. They really just need to reduce the acceleration and make prox mines a real threat.
CCP you better nail 1.8, as it stands 1.7 is a total disaster.
Henchmen21: Infantry
Gotyougood Ufkr: Vehicles
|
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1972
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
Henchmen21 wrote:Would spell doom for placing remotes on a tank if they had a gunner. They really just need to reduce the acceleration and make prox mines a real threat.
Personally I like the speed tanks but I do think prox mines should be more like bouncing Bettys and react faster. I would also like to see flux prox mines so we can have a shield mine.
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
4562
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:Or make it so that you can fit the top turret without having the front one on as well.
Ummmm... you CAN do that... |
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1972
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:ZDub 303 wrote:Or make it so that you can fit the top turret without having the front one on as well. Ummmm... you CAN do that...
yes but make one required
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
Henchmen21
Planet Express LLC
748
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:42:00 -
[9] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:Henchmen21 wrote:Would spell doom for placing remotes on a tank if they had a gunner. They really just need to reduce the acceleration and make prox mines a real threat. Personally I like the speed tanks but I do think prox mines should be more like bouncing Bettys and react faster. I would also like to see flux prox mines so we can have a shield mine.
Top speed sure, but they need something to give them pause from taking heavy damage and just running away. If it took them longer to get a way they would at least have to leave earlier.
CCP you better nail 1.8, as it stands 1.7 is a total disaster.
Henchmen21: Infantry
Gotyougood Ufkr: Vehicles
|
KalOfTheRathi
Nec Tributis
1011
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:46:00 -
[10] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote: ... I am a total scrub ... I think that making small turrets optional is where CCP borked up HAVs and the balance that goes with them The small turrets being optional saved tanks. Blue Belles jumping in my tanks were at least 25% of my losses. Let me kill any Blue Belle that gets in my tank uninvited and I will put a small turret back in.
Also do you realize how much SP a small missile turret costs? Exactly the same amount as the large one and it is not worth the SP nor is it worth pissing away the PG and CPU on a gun that is operated by a loser that cannot keep his finger off the trigger and announces our position (and after 1.7 wastes ammo). I will never run them again.
If you are a scrub that never played before then go somewhere else and QQ those forums. Or play World of Tanks. It is a simulator Dust is just a silly science fiction FPS about immortal Mercs in Space.
And so it goes.
|
|
|
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1972
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 04:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
KalOfTheRathi wrote:The Robot Devil wrote: ... I am a total scrub ... I think that making small turrets optional is where CCP borked up HAVs and the balance that goes with them The small turrets being optional saved tanks. Blue Belles jumping in my tanks were at least 25% of my losses. Let me kill any Blue Belle that gets in my tank uninvited and I will put a small turret back in. Also do you realize how much SP a small missile turret costs? Exactly the same amount as the large one and it is not worth the SP nor is it worth pissing away the PG and CPU on a gun that is operated by a loser that cannot keep his finger off the trigger and announces our position (and after 1.7 wastes ammo). I will never run them again. If you are a scrub that never played before then go somewhere else and QQ those forums. Or play World of Tanks. It is a simulator Dust is just a silly science fiction FPS about immortal Mercs in Space.
Been playing for two years. I say I am a scrub because it is funny and half true. I am drunk so don't take that the wrong way.
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
Foundation Seldon
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
570
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 05:14:00 -
[12] - Quote
I don't like this idea. Partly because I seriously enjoy the fitting versatility that comes with not having to fit small turrets and partly because the idea proposed here does nothing to address the real imbalance that comes with AV vs. Vehicle interactions in their current state.
If the problem is that a single man in a Tank can completely wreck a team then the solution should be addressing the ridiculousness of having a giant assault rifle fitted to a Tank as a large turret to begin with. The solution in my eyes is to make it so that Large Turrets are fit to take on other vehicles and Small Turrets are fit to take on infantry, the problem is the Large Blaster Turret, not the ability to not fit small turrets.
Garrett Blacknova wrote:ZDub 303 wrote:Or make it so that you can fit the top turret without having the front one on as well. Ummmm... you CAN do that...
No you can't.
Saga v. Methana Balance
|
MINA Longstrike
2Shitz 1Giggle
United Brotherhood Alliance
344
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 05:15:00 -
[13] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:I try not to cry about mechanics because I am a total scrub and my tears don't count but here it goes.
I think that making small turrets optional is where CCP borked up HAVs and the balance that goes with them. Although I think that HAVs can be handled like they are I feel like the removal of the small turrets have put us in the spot were are in. Just wondering what others thought about this. Would HAVs be as OP as some think if there were still the extra turret requirements?
the mistake was largely with shifting damage out of skills with large sp investments and instead just giving modules (militia variants even) that have utterly insane amounts of 'free' damage on them. there are some other mistakes floating around, but tanks are doing unbelievable damage right now for 0 sp or and minimal isk investment.
Honestly I'd prefer 1.6 tanks, provided that they fix the gunnlogi's cpu/pg issues and 6~ min shield recharges, tone down av (the biggest offenders being forge guns, av grenades and proto swarms). |
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1972
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 05:23:00 -
[14] - Quote
so is the problem applied damage or the amount of damage applied to infantry before destruction?
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1972
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 05:24:00 -
[15] - Quote
I am really drunk so please forgive me
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers
Negative-Feedback
2357
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 05:40:00 -
[16] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:ZDub 303 wrote:Or make it so that you can fit the top turret without having the front one on as well. Ummmm... you CAN do that...
Can you elaborate? I've not yet found a way to do it and there are numerous threads abut that very issue. I didn't see anything in rubicon 1.3 that would indicate it was fixed, and 1.8 isn't out yet.
Or... Have you never actually tried it? |
Joel II X
Dah Gods O Bacon
1691
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 18:02:00 -
[17] - Quote
I don't think the turrets are the problem, but I think it may be a good thing not having them, that way people don't steal your vehicle. Unless CCP adds a proper lock system, this shouldn't be implemented.
This is how I lost a dropship right as I got off to recall it. |
Joel II X
Dah Gods O Bacon
1691
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 18:05:00 -
[18] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:ZDub 303 wrote:Or make it so that you can fit the top turret without having the front one on as well. Ummmm... you CAN do that... Can you elaborate? I've not yet found a way to do it and there are numerous threads abut that very issue. I didn't see anything in rubicon 1.3 that would indicate it was fixed, and 1.8 isn't out yet. Or... Have you never actually tried it?
You CAN'T do it. In the fittings screen, it'll look like it's possible, but in-game during a match, it'll always go to the front. |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
8266
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 18:53:00 -
[19] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:I try not to cry about mechanics because I am a total scrub and my tears don't count but here it goes.
I think that making small turrets optional is where CCP borked up HAVs and the balance that goes with them. Although I think that HAVs can be handled like they are I feel like the removal of the small turrets have put us in the spot were are in. Just wondering what others thought about this. Would HAVs be as OP as some think if there were still the extra turret requirements?
Currently if you aren't using small turrets you are tanking wrong.
Only issue with enforcing small turret use is it only cripples armour HAV and benefits shield HAV.
I'm now using Small Turrets in conjunction with 2 dedicated gunners in FW and over the weekend we didn't loose a fight, and would have downed infantry on a 15-1 scale and HAV on an 8-1 ratio.
Significantly better than when I use my solo Ion Cannon fit.
" ..- -.- --. I wish I remembered morse code so I wasn't typing random letters"
- Malleus Malificorum
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |