DUST Search - Nerf Railgun Damage

Harpyja wrote:

Baal Omniscient wrote:

Temias Mercurial wrote:

Dauth Jenkins wrote:

DUST Fiend wrote:

The range was never really the issue, particularly if they had introduced damage falloff FOREVER ago. The range was annoying, ceraintly, the problem was the DAMAGE they could put out at those ranges. AKA, DAMAGE was the problem, and still is. The redline still enables glass tanks to have invulnerability, and they can still cover a large portion of the map.

I repeat.

Range was NEVER the problem.

Damage (mods), RoF, and the Redline, are the problems. Apparently nerfing infantry damage mods from 10% to 5% was entirely called for, but god forbid they touch 30% damage mods.

#CCPlogic

Range was a major problem for dropships, as they could be denied the majority of the map

That's the one change I like as a pilot, but the hardener nerf for dropships... CCP could at least buff dropships by a little bit. And extra high slot for Pythons and low slot for an Incubus would work quite well, or add something else into the Python and Incubus skills. I don't want them to be OP, but those hardeners pre 1.7 did not work well for a dropship... and I hated it.

Not arguing, just wanted to say... dropships also got a HP buff in 1.7, not just a hardner buff. Dropships are fine as they are, it's the large rail turrets that are the issue. The hardner changes are just the first round of hotfixes though, let's see what their final product looks like before we make any decisions. For all we know Dropships may be in for another HP buff to make up for the hardner nerf. Just be cool.

Railguns still need further nerfing. Their damage output is just way too high, and especially now when our best defense (resists) against them has been nerfed. I for one shouldn't be able to hold R1 until the enemy tank is dead without overheating. The railgun in its current form needs reduced damage, increased fire interval, and increased heat cost.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1404	Posted - 2014.03.27 13:44:00 - [1] - Quote With the nerf to hardeners, railguns will only become more OP. Good job CCP, now you're forcing them into CQC where they will tear up everything. The ONLY reason my missile Gunnlogi can beat rail Sicas at CQC is because my 60% resists and 5300 shield. I don't even try going against rail Gunnlogis though, I just call in my own rail Gunnlogi. The nerf to range was TOO MUCH. Now they are forced to go CQC, which should be an area DOMINATED by missile and blaster tanks. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Adell Shinzumakami 60 Revolutions 15	Posted - 2014.03.27 13:48:00 - [2] - Quote I think ralguns were the only way to counter and army of hardening tank spam.... Although I mostly use harden on my roadkilling LAV, so I'm pretty angry of nerf because of tankers....
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1404	Posted - 2014.03.27 13:59:00 - [3] - Quote Adell Shinzumakami wrote: I think ralguns were the only way to counter and army of hardening tank spam.... Although I mostly use harden on my roadkilling LAV, so I'm pretty angry of nerf because of tankers.... Railguns were and still are the easy-to-use, no skill needed go-to weapon of choice for AV for both non-invested and invested pilots alike that want cheap kills. Yesterday I played some Ambush for the fist time in a while and I took on THREE tanks, destroyed two of them, and escaped the third, all while I was in a missile Gunnlogi. I had a total of four tank kills without losing my own. I've also stalked hardened shield tanks and waited for their hardener to come offline so I can launch my volley and pop them. It's really fun. But missiles take skill, knowledge, and patience, while rails require nothing other than charging head first and remembering to activate your damage mod(s) and/or shield hardener. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
DUST Fiend OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 12611	Posted - 2014.03.27 14:03:00 - [4] - Quote The range was never really the issue, particularly if they had introduced damage falloff FOREVER ago. The range was annoying, ceraintly, the problem was the DAMAGE they could put out at those ranges. AKA, DAMAGE was the problem, and still is. The redline still enables glass tanks to have invulnerability, and they can still cover a large portion of the map. I repeat. Range was NEVER the problem. Damage (mods), RoF, and the Redline, are the problems. Apparently nerfing infantry damage mods from 10% to 5% was entirely called for, but god forbid they touch 30% damage mods. #CCPlogic "It seems you've mistaken me for someone who cares"
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2447	Posted - 2014.03.27 14:04:00 - [5] - Quote Don't nerf damage. Nerf RoF. Damage is fine; it's the obscene rate of fire that ruins things. The damage of a railgun now is actually lower (before damage mods, which are their own issue) than it was in 1.6. I think railguns needed a RoF nerf more than a range nerf, and that damage modifiers needed a good strong whack with the nerfbat. ak.0 4 LYFE Guess who's butthurt about light-assaults!? <------This guy!!
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1404	Posted - 2014.03.27 14:07:00 - [6] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Don't nerf damage. Nerf RoF. Damage is fine; it's the obscene rate of fire that ruins things. The damage of a railgun now is actually lower (before damage mods, which are their own issue) than it was in 1.6. I think railguns needed a RoF nerf more than a range nerf, and that damage modifiers needed a good strong whack with the nerfbat. Railguns just need everything nerfed to be honest. Lower damage, increased fire intervals, increased heat cost... For one, I shouldn't be able to simply hold R1 until the other tank is dead without worrying about overheating. And if I do overheat, it was on the death-dealing blow so the overheat didn't matter anyway. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Temias Mercurial ANGEL FLEET 30	Posted - 2014.03.27 16:38:00 - [7] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: The range was never really the issue, particularly if they had introduced damage falloff FOREVER ago. The range was annoying, ceraintly, the problem was the DAMAGE they could put out at those ranges. AKA, DAMAGE was the problem, and still is. The redline still enables glass tanks to have invulnerability, and they can still cover a large portion of the map. I repeat. Range was NEVER the problem. Damage (mods), RoF, and the Redline, are the problems. Apparently nerfing infantry damage mods from 10% to 5% was entirely called for, but god forbid they touch 30% damage mods. #CCPlogic Until CCP decides to redesign maps or adjust the redline, we can only create temporary solutions that may seem unrealistic.
Dauth Jenkins Ultramarine Corp 314	Posted - 2014.03.27 16:52:00 - [8] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: The range was never really the issue, particularly if they had introduced damage falloff FOREVER ago. The range was annoying, ceraintly, the problem was the DAMAGE they could put out at those ranges. AKA, DAMAGE was the problem, and still is. The redline still enables glass tanks to have invulnerability, and they can still cover a large portion of the map. I repeat. Range was NEVER the problem. Damage (mods), RoF, and the Redline, are the problems. Apparently nerfing infantry damage mods from 10% to 5% was entirely called for, but god forbid they touch 30% damage mods. #CCPlogic Range was a major problem for dropships, as they could be denied the majority of the map Sees prototompers... Sees blueberries start to snipe... Pulls out commando suit with laser rifle and swarm launcher...
Temias Mercurial ANGEL FLEET 30	Posted - 2014.03.27 17:16:00 - [9] - Quote Dauth Jenkins wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: The range was never really the issue, particularly if they had introduced damage falloff FOREVER ago. The range was annoying, ceraintly, the problem was the DAMAGE they could put out at those ranges. AKA, DAMAGE was the problem, and still is. The redline still enables glass tanks to have invulnerability, and they can still cover a large portion of the map. I repeat. Range was NEVER the problem. Damage (mods), RoF, and the Redline, are the problems. Apparently nerfing infantry damage mods from 10% to 5% was entirely called for, but god forbid they touch 30% damage mods. #CCPlogic Range was a major problem for dropships, as they could be denied the majority of the map That's the one change I like as a pilot, but the hardener nerf for dropships... CCP could at least buff dropships by a little bit. And extra high slot for Pythons and low slot for an Incubus would work quite well, or add something else into the Python and Incubus skills. I don't want them to be OP, but those hardeners pre 1.7 did not work well for a dropship... and I hated it.
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1367	Posted - 2014.03.27 17:45:00 - [10] - Quote Temias Mercurial wrote: Dauth Jenkins wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: The range was never really the issue, particularly if they had introduced damage falloff FOREVER ago. The range was annoying, ceraintly, the problem was the DAMAGE they could put out at those ranges. AKA, DAMAGE was the problem, and still is. The redline still enables glass tanks to have invulnerability, and they can still cover a large portion of the map. I repeat. Range was NEVER the problem. Damage (mods), RoF, and the Redline, are the problems. Apparently nerfing infantry damage mods from 10% to 5% was entirely called for, but god forbid they touch 30% damage mods. #CCPlogic Range was a major problem for dropships, as they could be denied the majority of the map That's the one change I like as a pilot, but the hardener nerf for dropships... CCP could at least buff dropships by a little bit. And extra high slot for Pythons and low slot for an Incubus would work quite well, or add something else into the Python and Incubus skills. I don't want them to be OP, but those hardeners pre 1.7 did not work well for a dropship... and I hated it. Not arguing, just wanted to say... dropships also got a HP buff in 1.7, not just a hardner buff. Dropships are fine as they are, it's the large rail turrets that are the issue. The hardner changes are just the first round of hotfixes though, let's see what their final product looks like before we make any decisions. For all we know Dropships may be in for another HP buff to make up for the hardner nerf. Just be cool. MAG ~ Raven I GÖú puppies.

Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1408	Posted - 2014.03.27 18:23:00 - [11] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: Temias Mercurial wrote: Dauth Jenkins wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: The range was never really the issue, particularly if they had introduced damage falloff FOREVER ago. The range was annoying, ceraintly, the problem was the DAMAGE they could put out at those ranges. AKA, DAMAGE was the problem, and still is. The redline still enables glass tanks to have invulnerability, and they can still cover a large portion of the map. I repeat. Range was NEVER the problem. Damage (mods), RoF, and the Redline, are the problems. Apparently nerfing infantry damage mods from 10% to 5% was entirely called for, but god forbid they touch 30% damage mods. #CCPlogic Range was a major problem for dropships, as they could be denied the majority of the map That's the one change I like as a pilot, but the hardener nerf for dropships... CCP could at least buff dropships by a little bit. And extra high slot for Pythons and low slot for an Incubus would work quite well, or add something else into the Python and Incubus skills. I don't want them to be OP, but those hardeners pre 1.7 did not work well for a dropship... and I hated it. Not arguing, just wanted to say... dropships also got a HP buff in 1.7, not just a hardner buff. Dropships are fine as they are, it's the large rail turrets that are the issue. The hardner changes are just the first round of hotfixes though, let's see what their final product looks like before we make any decisions. For all we know Dropships may be in for another HP buff to make up for the hardner nerf. Just be cool. Railguns still need further nerfing. Their damage output is just way too high, and especially now when our best defense (resists) against them has been nerfed. I for one shouldn't be able to hold R1 until the enemy tank is dead without overheating. The railgun in its current form needs reduced damage, increased fire interval, and increased heat cost. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Temias Mercurial ANGEL FLEET 30	Posted - 2014.03.27 21:33:00 - [12] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: Temias Mercurial wrote: Dauth Jenkins wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: The range was never really the issue, particularly if they had introduced damage falloff FOREVER ago. The range was annoying, ceraintly, the problem was the DAMAGE they could put out at those ranges. AKA, DAMAGE was the problem, and still is. The redline still enables glass tanks to have invulnerability, and they can still cover a large portion of the map. I repeat. Range was NEVER the problem. Damage (mods), RoF, and the Redline, are the problems. Apparently nerfing infantry damage mods from 10% to 5% was entirely called for, but god forbid they touch 30% damage mods. #CCPlogic Range was a major problem for dropships, as they could be denied the majority of the map That's the one change I like as a pilot, but the hardener nerf for dropships... CCP could at least buff dropships by a little bit. And extra high slot for Pythons and low slot for an Incubus would work quite well, or add something else into the Python and Incubus skills. I don't want them to be OP, but those hardeners pre 1.7 did not work well for a dropship... and I hated it. Not arguing, just wanted to say... dropships also got a HP buff in 1.7, not just a hardner buff. Dropships are fine as they are, it's the large rail turrets that are the issue. The hardner changes are just the first round of hotfixes though, let's see what their final product looks like before we make any decisions. For all we know Dropships may be in for another HP buff to make up for the hardner nerf. Just be cool. Railguns still need further nerfing. Their damage output is just way too high, and especially now when our best defense (resists) against them has been nerfed. I for one shouldn't be able to hold R1 until the enemy tank is dead without overheating. The railgun in its current form needs reduced damage, increased fire interval, and increased heat cost. I do believe that they should receive further nerfing. I'm not saying they're balanced now, it's just a step in the right direction. Honestly, I think they're OP against other tanks. The number of people that use missiles to deal with armour tanks is... next to none, simply because rails are too effective and require no risk. They should charge shots individually, like the forge gun. The reason why I suggested 1 more slot for each ship is so we could put plates/extenders on, as fits with 3 slots is excessively limiting, and an appropriate increase to cpu and pg would suffice if they didn't want to increase hp or decided to do something different, as hardeners will cripple dropships with those new stats.
GVGMODE WorstPlayersEver 155	Posted - 2014.03.27 21:39:00 - [13] - Quote Don't QQ until they make enhanced and prototype shield hardeners have 40% resistance (they currently have 60%). Maybe tomorrow they will hot fix the first hot fix of the the hot fix series... I like saying hot fix it gives me the idea that ccp is working Pilot: (Tanks / Assault Dropships) Skype: GVGMODE
SgtDoughnut DUST University Ivy League 546	Posted - 2014.03.27 21:41:00 - [14] - Quote But tanks are supposed to be the only counter to tanks, and well rail tanks are ANTI MATERIAL rifles, yes they are supposed to punch through armor like butter.
CLONE117 True Pros Forever 737	Posted - 2014.03.27 21:48:00 - [15] - Quote all it nerfed were proto scrub tanker who sat in the redline all day with a partical accelerator turret. rarely have i EVER EVER!. seen a mlt sica in the redzone sniping from atop a hill with a mlt railgun..but we still have cycled hardeners so it hasnt fixed much in av's case. the many rail tanks with mlt turrets ive gone up against and killed or died 2 are less than 300m. so who are the real scrubs there?. the maxed out everything proto player with a major advantage over just about every1 else but extremely scared to enter the battle. or that guy in mlt who seems to be the only one willing to risk his stuff.
Thumb Green THE STAR BORN 848	Posted - 2014.03.27 22:02:00 - [16] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Adell Shinzumakami wrote: I think ralguns were the only way to counter and army of hardening tank spam.... Although I mostly use harden on my roadkilling LAV, so I'm pretty angry of nerf because of tankers.... the easy-to-use, no skill needed go-to weapon of choice Fck off with that elitist noise man. Nothing in this game takes any real skill or is hard to use not even your missile gunlogi Support Orbital Spawns
DUST Fiend OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 12649	Posted - 2014.03.27 22:02:00 - [17] - Quote SgtDoughnut wrote: But tanks are supposed to be the only counter to tanks, and well rail tanks are ANTI MATERIAL rifles, yes they are supposed to punch through armor like butter. They can have high damage or high RoF Choose. "It seems you've mistaken me for someone who cares"
Sir Dukey KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 482	Posted - 2014.03.27 22:05:00 - [18] - Quote Harpyja wrote: With the nerf to hardeners, railguns will only become more OP. Good job CCP, now you're forcing them into CQC where they will tear up everything. The ONLY reason my missile Gunnlogi can beat rail Sicas at CQC is because my 60% resists and 5300 shield. I don't even try going against rail Gunnlogis though, I just call in my own rail Gunnlogi. The nerf to range was TOO MUCH. Now they are forced to go CQC, which should be an area DOMINATED by missile and blaster tanks. yeah, Tank vs Tank was balanced with the hardeners before. Now its like driving a glass cannon.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 11848	Posted - 2014.03.27 22:05:00 - [19] - Quote 600m was a ludicrous range. But 300m is still pretty good. I see this range nerf changing very little apart from some redline sniping (which was stupid anyway). The significant buff in the form of making its prey a lot weaker will make it even more effective than it is now, though. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
DUST Fiend OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 12649	Posted - 2014.03.27 22:07:00 - [20] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: 600m was a ludicrous range. But 300m is still pretty good. I see this range nerf changing very little apart from some redline sniping (which was stupid anyway). The significant buff in the form of making its prey a lot weaker will make it even more effective than it is now, though. Also don't forget that redline railguns are still a thing, as 300 meters is plenty of a kill zone, especially when you can just roll out a little ways. So, this in one sense is actually a buff to redline railtank survivability, as enemy railtanks now have to move that much further into the combat zone to attempt to dislodge you, and you can still just roll backwards. This game will never see a state of balance as long as team specific redlines exist. "It seems you've mistaken me for someone who cares"



Pages: 1 :: [one page]