Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
I-Shayz-I
I-----I
3182
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
"I'd love to make the PLC a viable AV weapon without making it OP against infantry"
I've heard multiple DEVs state this and I want to know the reasoning behind the statement. Let me clarify why this statement doesn't make any sense:
-The plasma cannon deals two different types of damage, direct and splash. -Direct damage is how much it deals on contact (primarily AV), while splash is how much it does within a small blast radius outwards from the point it hits -Direct damage is enough to kill almost any suit except for the very heavily armored sentinels. -Splash is almost never taken into account when it comes to dealing damage to vehicles.
So what does this mean? It means that increasing direct damage won't have much effect at all against infantry, while increasing its effectiveness against vehicles. Even if the plasma cannon's direct damage was over 9000, it still would be exactly as effective as it is now against anything that isn't a vehicle. It would not be OP at all against infantry. _____________________________________________________
CCP, is it really an issue for sentinels with tons of armor to not be 1-shotted by a skilled plasma cannon user that you won't buff it to be a more effective AV weapon?
Obviously there are plenty of other bugs and issues with that weapon (probably more than any other weapon in the game), but please tell us why increasing direct damage (i.e. making it more viable for AV) would make the weapon OP against infantry.
Links:
7162 wp with a Repair Tool!
I make logistics videos!
|
Cyrius Li-Moody
0uter.Heaven
5169
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
The statement of "we don't know how to fix it" really just translated to "too lazy to fix" to me.
Youtuber. Your friendly neighborhood whiskey-fueled merc.
|
Roofer Madness
1096
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
I highly agree. It reminds me of the "don't buff remotes" argument. If they already almost OHK every suit in the game then what is the difference?
I spent half my ISK on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The rest I wasted.
|
Topher Mellen
Scott-Mellen Corporation
45
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:16:00 -
[4] - Quote
I-Shayz-I wrote:"I'd love to make the PLC a viable AV weapon without making it OP against infantry"
I've heard multiple DEVs state this and I want to know the reasoning behind the statement. Let me clarify why this statement doesn't make any sense:
-The plasma cannon deals two different types of damage, direct and splash. -Direct damage is how much it deals on contact (primarily AV), while splash is how much it does within a small blast radius outwards from the point it hits -Direct damage is enough to kill almost any suit except for the very heavily armored sentinels. -Splash is almost never taken into account when it comes to dealing damage to vehicles.
So what does this mean? It means that increasing direct damage won't have much effect at all against infantry, while increasing its effectiveness against vehicles. Even if the plasma cannon's direct damage was over 9000, it still would be exactly as effective as it is now against anything that isn't a vehicle. It would not be OP at all against infantry. _____________________________________________________
CCP, is it really an issue for sentinels with tons of armor to not be able to be 1-shotted by a plasma cannon that you won't buff it to be a more effective AV weapon?
Obviously there are plenty of other bugs and issues with that weapon (probably more than any other weapon in the game), but please tell us why increasing direct damage (i.e. making it more viable for AV) would make the weapon OP against infantry.
I mostly agree. I do have to go through most of my ammo to pop a tank. The only caveat is that I think PLC currently does alright against vehicles, you just need a Nanohive or Supply Depot nearby. |
Flyingconejo
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
876
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:18:00 -
[5] - Quote
Every time I have to use 4 shots (out of a grand total of 10) to destroy an installation with my standard PLC, I get a bit depressed.
Your suggestion is pretty good, as others made by other people. Don't know why CCP has not implemented any of them, when the PLC obviously needs some kind of buff.
The only explanation I can think off, is that they don't want to make a light weapon that is able to compete with the Forge Gun. Which makes sense I suppose, but leaves the PLC only usable as a troll weapon. |
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives
1391
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Making it able to destroy a lav with out reloading would be a start.
Crush them
|
Roofer Madness
1097
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:Making it able to destroy a lav with out reloading would be a start.
Or fixing the reload skill so that it actually does something would be a heck of an even better start!!!!
I spent half my ISK on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The rest I wasted.
|
Marc Rime
375
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:25:00 -
[8] - Quote
Topher Mellen wrote:I mostly agree. I do have to go through most of my ammo to pop a tank. The only caveat is that I think PLC currently does alright against vehicles, you just need a Nanohive or Supply Depot nearby. ...you also need a target that isn't moving or shooting back. And an area that's otherwise clear of reds. |
Awry Barux
Ametat Security Amarr Empire
2308
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
+1. Right now the plasma cannon is literally the worst at everything. At PRO it does less DPS than a STD swarm launcher and has less alpha than a proto swarm launcher, with the lovely benefit of being a huge pain in the ass to hit with due to arc and an amazingly slow projectile.
Nerdier than thou
|
Awry Barux
Ametat Security Amarr Empire
2308
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
Topher Mellen wrote:
I mostly agree. I do have to go through most of my ammo to pop a tank. The only caveat is that I think PLC currently does alright against vehicles, you just need a Nanohive or Supply Depot nearby.
That is a lie. An absolute, absolute lie. At proto, the PLC does less than 300 DPS. It is not "alright", it is terrible.
Nerdier than thou
|
|
Asha Starwind
849
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
IMO increasing the damage wouldn't do much unless the buffed damage to 3k or something
- limited range - steep firing arc - slow projectile speed - long reload - lock-up after firing - charge to fire - 1-round magazine - low reserve ammo
Trying to figure out how much to buff it's damage by would be the same thing as figuring out what shade of lipstick the pig is going to wear.
Mad Bomber - 50% less profile
Return dumbfire to Swarms
|
Roofer Madness
1099
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:44:00 -
[12] - Quote
Asha Starwind wrote:IMO increasing the damage wouldn't do much unless the buffed damage to 3k or something
- limited range - steep firing arc - slow projectile speed - long reload - lock-up after firing - charge to fire - 1-round magazine - low reserve ammo
Trying to figure out how much to buff it's damage by would be the same thing as figuring out what shade of lipstick the pig is going to wear.
Well, given the known cons what could be addressed?
-limited range
This is fine. Not exactly meant to be super long range anyways.
-steep firing arc/projectile speed/charge to fire/1-round magazine
I would classify these as characteristics of the weapon and not necessarily problems.
-long reload
Fix the reload skill
-lock-up after firing
Doesn't happen if you sprint-cancel it out. I switch to my SMG quickly to finish off people. Still, the animations and workings of the Plasma Cannon really do need to work properly. Too buggy.
-low reserve ammo
I have the ammo skill maxed out and I don't really find this to be an issue. I also rock nice hives so meh.
In my opinion until the bugs are fixed we can never know the true power of this weapon. In true CCP fashion, what will most likely happen is they will buff it and fix the bugs and then it will be OP. I could see the splash radius being increased if the splash damage went down and I could see the direct hits being stronger, but not until the bugs are fixed.
I spent half my ISK on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The rest I wasted.
|
Zaaeed Massani
RisingSuns Dark Taboo
375
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:46:00 -
[13] - Quote
Awry Barux wrote:+1. Right now the plasma cannon is literally the worst at everything. At PRO it does less DPS than a STD swarm launcher and has less alpha than a proto swarm launcher, with the lovely benefit of being a huge pain in the ass to hit with due to arc and an amazingly slow projectile.
Pretty much sums it up right here.
Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor
/
Do you even lift?
|
Spectral Clone
Dust2Dust. Top Men.
2485
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:46:00 -
[14] - Quote
Shayz, do not try going down this route.
CCP logic.
HTFU Gë£ Live with CCP´s mistakes.
"I tried so hard and got so far.... but in the end it doesnt even matter."
|
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
1347
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:57:00 -
[15] - Quote
I-Shayz-I wrote:"I'd love to make the PLC a viable AV weapon without making it OP against infantry"
I've heard multiple DEVs state this and I want to know the reasoning behind the statement. Let me clarify why this statement doesn't make any sense: ....
here's a point I think you missed, to add to your list:
there is already a differentiation between weaponsfire against infantry vs vehicles. Point your weapon against infantry at 10m, and check your tac readout for efficiency. Now do the same against a vehicle. Way, way less efficiency. Therefore, the efficiency calc does more than just "shields or armor?" it also checks for "infantry/installation/vehicle?" and does something different for each.
Therefore, making PLC more powerful against JUST vehicles, should be almost trivial to implement. Just change the efficiency against vehicles. Trouble is, they just dont want to do it.
|
The dark cloud
The Rainbow Effect
2938
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:59:00 -
[16] - Quote
it doesnt matter if a PLC does 1100HP direct damage or 3000HP. In both cases when you get directly hit in a dropsuit you are dead.
Head of public relations from The Rainbow Effect.
|
Spectral Clone
Dust2Dust. Top Men.
2486
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:01:00 -
[17] - Quote
CCP DO YOU EVEN LIFT?!?!?1
HTFU Gë£ Live with CCP´s mistakes.
"I tried so hard and got so far.... but in the end it doesnt even matter."
|
Rifter7
Ancient Exiles.
439
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:04:00 -
[18] - Quote
make it a one shot mass driver with a rail rifles charge up time. projectiles the same as a md, hell use mass driver round and make it green who cares.
the things garbage atm.
Primus sucks.
|
Flyingconejo
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
880
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:05:00 -
[19] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:it doesnt matter if a PLC does 1100HP direct damage or 3000HP. In both cases when you get directly hit in a dropsuit you are dead.
Actually, with 1100HP of direct damage, most heavies would survive. That's part of the problem. |
Awry Barux
Ametat Security Amarr Empire
2314
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:13:00 -
[20] - Quote
Roofer Madness wrote:Asha Starwind wrote:IMO increasing the damage wouldn't do much unless the buffed damage to 3k or something
- limited range - steep firing arc - slow projectile speed - long reload - lock-up after firing - charge to fire - 1-round magazine - low reserve ammo
Trying to figure out how much to buff it's damage by would be the same thing as figuring out what shade of lipstick the pig is going to wear. Well, given the known cons what could be addressed? -limited range This is fine. Not exactly meant to be super long range anyways. -steep firing arc/projectile speed/charge to fire/1-round magazine I would classify these as characteristics of the weapon and not necessarily problems. -long reload Fix the reload skill -lock-up after firing Doesn't happen if you sprint-cancel it out. I switch to my SMG quickly to finish off people. Still, the animations and workings of the Plasma Cannon really do need to work properly. Too buggy. -low reserve ammo I have the ammo skill maxed out and I don't really find this to be an issue. I also rock nice hives so meh. In my opinion until the bugs are fixed we can never know the true power of this weapon. In true CCP fashion, what will most likely happen is they will buff it and fix the bugs and then it will be OP. I could see the splash radius being increased if the splash damage went down and I could see the direct hits being stronger, but not until the bugs are fixed. What bugs are you referring to? It's my understanding that the post-firing lock-up is deliberate to try to prevent fast-swap tactics. From using the PLC for the past week, I haven't encountered any problems with it working from a technical standpoint- it just doesn't do enough damage to make it a remotely viable AV weapon.
IMO, due to its shotgun-like range requirement (on the AV weapon scale) and the extreme difficulty of hitting moving targets, it should have both the highest alpha and highest DPS of any AV weapon. The projectile is so slow that, from 50m, a situationally aware stationary nitro HAV can literally see the shot coming and have time to dodge it with a quick forward or backward boost.
For reference, a PRO SL puts out 517 base DPS with no rapid reload skill, proficiency, or damage mods.
To bring the PLC in line with the current PRO SL in terms of DPS, the PRO PLC should be doing at least ((.6*.75) + 3.5) * 517 = 2042 damage per shot.
I would argue that, due to the extreme range limitations and difficulty of landing shots in comparison to other light and heavy AV weapons, the PLC should be rewarded with an additional roughly 20% damage, brining the proto PLC's direct damage per shot up to 2400. Splash damage, of course, should remain unchanged, or even nerfed slightly to further focus the weapon on AV.
Nerdier than thou
|
|
THE-PIMP-NAMED-SLICKBACK
Intrepidus XI EoN.
78
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:15:00 -
[21] - Quote
Flyingconejo wrote:The dark cloud wrote:it doesnt matter if a PLC does 1100HP direct damage or 3000HP. In both cases when you get directly hit in a dropsuit you are dead. Actually, with 1100HP of direct damage, most heavies would survive. That's part of the problem.
Damage mods/proficiency solves that problem, I one shot heavies frequently. If not a damage buff something as to be done about its arc/bullet speed, anything more than 50 meters away can casually stroll to the side and dodge the round entirely. There has to be some sort of buff to its damage or projectile stats for it to even reach the level and damage output of any other AV weapon.
Dez gunz ah blazin~
|
Roofer Madness
1100
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:31:00 -
[22] - Quote
Awry Barux wrote:Roofer Madness wrote:Asha Starwind wrote:IMO increasing the damage wouldn't do much unless the buffed damage to 3k or something
- limited range - steep firing arc - slow projectile speed - long reload - lock-up after firing - charge to fire - 1-round magazine - low reserve ammo
Trying to figure out how much to buff it's damage by would be the same thing as figuring out what shade of lipstick the pig is going to wear. Well, given the known cons what could be addressed? -limited range This is fine. Not exactly meant to be super long range anyways. -steep firing arc/projectile speed/charge to fire/1-round magazine I would classify these as characteristics of the weapon and not necessarily problems. -long reload Fix the reload skill -lock-up after firing Doesn't happen if you sprint-cancel it out. I switch to my SMG quickly to finish off people. Still, the animations and workings of the Plasma Cannon really do need to work properly. Too buggy. -low reserve ammo I have the ammo skill maxed out and I don't really find this to be an issue. I also rock nice hives so meh. In my opinion until the bugs are fixed we can never know the true power of this weapon. In true CCP fashion, what will most likely happen is they will buff it and fix the bugs and then it will be OP. I could see the splash radius being increased if the splash damage went down and I could see the direct hits being stronger, but not until the bugs are fixed. What bugs are you referring to? It's my understanding that the post-firing lock-up is deliberate to try to prevent fast-swap tactics. From using the PLC for the past week, I haven't encountered any problems with it working from a technical standpoint- it just doesn't do enough damage to make it a remotely viable AV weapon. IMO, due to its shotgun-like range requirement (on the AV weapon scale) and the extreme difficulty of hitting moving targets, it should have both the highest alpha and highest DPS of any AV weapon. The projectile is so slow that, from 50m, a situationally aware stationary nitro HAV can literally see the shot coming and have time to dodge it with a quick forward or backward boost. For reference, a PRO SL puts out 517 base DPS with no rapid reload skill, proficiency, or damage mods. To bring the PLC in line with the current PRO SL in terms of DPS, the PRO PLC should be doing at least ((.6*.75) + 3.5) * 517 = 2042 damage per shot. I would argue that, due to the extreme range limitations and difficulty of landing shots in comparison to other light and heavy AV weapons, the PLC should be rewarded with an additional roughly 20% damage, brining the proto PLC's direct damage per shot up to 2400. Splash damage, of course, should remain unchanged, or even nerfed slightly to further focus the weapon on AV.
The bug that I am referring to that I believe to be the main offender would be the bug that causes a lot of splash damage to not register on infantry.
See - I actually have quite a bit of luck using the PLC as AV. I run it in combination with remotes/proximities and av nades. I have blown up countless tanks, hell even dropships. But this is because I am not relying on the PLC to do the brunt of the damage really. it's just a shield killer for AV. You still need explosives or you have no chance against the armor.
I generally use the proto variant (cuz I'm a baller lol) but really, you are indeed correct, there is just not enough of a scale up in damage output from STD to PRO. I would like to see the 20% buff to the direct hits only to AV, which as someone else pointed out, should be do-able with the built in efficiencies.
Come to think of it, the missing variants could solve all this mess. The breach could be more AV and the Assault could be more infantry.. Hmmmmmm....
I spent half my ISK on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The rest I wasted.
|
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
1377
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:40:00 -
[23] - Quote
Awry Barux wrote:Topher Mellen wrote:
I mostly agree. I do have to go through most of my ammo to pop a tank. The only caveat is that I think PLC currently does alright against vehicles, you just need a Nanohive or Supply Depot nearby.
That is a lie. An absolute, absolute lie. At proto, the PLC does less than 300 DPS. It is not "alright", it is terrible. the DPS is close to 200 but only because after firing there is a delay were you cant do **** additionally to the reload time.
not to mention the myriads of annoying bugs that happen frequently: reloading without reloading reloading fake projectiles that instantly fire but deal no damage hit detection issues of the splash against anything on uneven surface hit detection issues of the splash past 1.5m radius in general phantom projectiles passing through targets |
pseudosnipre
698
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 19:09:00 -
[24] - Quote
If they turn it into the quake 3 arena railgun, I will use it as such.
I prefer the BF2142 approach that required max skills and strategic shot placement to OHK vehicles. Vehicle weak spots and modules to protect them would be an awesome step forward.
Today is the sort of day where the sun only comes up to humiliate you.
BitterVet the turkey says GOML GOML GOML
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10662
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 19:14:00 -
[25] - Quote
+1
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
Awry Barux
Ametat Security Amarr Empire
2326
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 19:40:00 -
[26] - Quote
Roofer Madness wrote: The bug that I am referring to that I believe to be the main offender would be the bug that causes a lot of splash damage to not register on infantry.
See - I actually have quite a bit of luck using the PLC as AV. I run it in combination with remotes/proximities and av nades. I have blown up countless tanks, hell even dropships. But this is because I am not relying on the PLC to do the brunt of the damage really. it's just a shield killer for AV. You still need explosives or you have no chance against the armor.
I generally use the proto variant (cuz I'm a baller lol) but really, you are indeed correct, there is just not enough of a scale up in damage output from STD to PRO. I would like to see the 20% buff to the direct hits only to AV, which as someone else pointed out, should be do-able with the built in efficiencies.
Come to think of it, the missing variants could solve all this mess. The breach could be more AV and the Assault could be more infantry.. Hmmmmmm....
Oh, I thought that bug was just a sharp splash damage falloff and me being bad. It's nice to know that maybe it's not just me.
I use the PLC in the same way for AV- 2-3 remotes, 1 PLC shot, 2 AV nades, detonate remotes -> dead tank, but of course that means that the PLC is really doing at most about 1/4 of the work. Like the other AV weapons, it should be able to potentially do 100% of the work with good positioning and aim.
One very important point- I'm not saying there should be a bigger gap, percentage wise, between the STD and PRO versions. Swarms clearly demonstrate why that sort of balancing is just awful- a 10% gap between STD and PRO is good, 50% is not. The PLC just needs a major raw direct damage buff at all tiers, or a huge anti-vehicle efficiency increase.
Variants would be a great solution, I would love to see variants.
Nerdier than thou
|
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
1354
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 20:29:00 -
[27] - Quote
Awry Barux wrote: I would argue that, due to the extreme range limitations and difficulty of landing shots in comparison to other light and heavy AV weapons, the PLC should be rewarded with an additional roughly 20% damage, brining the proto PLC's direct damage per shot up to 2400. Splash damage, of course, should remain unchanged, or even nerfed slightly to further focus the weapon on AV.
Meh.. I'd rather see them just take away the post-firing lockup. Then Commandos finally get a weapon that is specially for them
|
Roofer Madness
1105
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 20:34:00 -
[28] - Quote
Awry Barux wrote:Roofer Madness wrote: The bug that I am referring to that I believe to be the main offender would be the bug that causes a lot of splash damage to not register on infantry.
See - I actually have quite a bit of luck using the PLC as AV. I run it in combination with remotes/proximities and av nades. I have blown up countless tanks, hell even dropships. But this is because I am not relying on the PLC to do the brunt of the damage really. it's just a shield killer for AV. You still need explosives or you have no chance against the armor.
I generally use the proto variant (cuz I'm a baller lol) but really, you are indeed correct, there is just not enough of a scale up in damage output from STD to PRO. I would like to see the 20% buff to the direct hits only to AV, which as someone else pointed out, should be do-able with the built in efficiencies.
Come to think of it, the missing variants could solve all this mess. The breach could be more AV and the Assault could be more infantry.. Hmmmmmm....
Oh, I thought that bug was just a sharp splash damage falloff and me being bad. It's nice to know that maybe it's not just me. I use the PLC in the same way for AV- 2-3 remotes, 1 PLC shot, 2 AV nades, detonate remotes -> dead tank, but of course that means that the PLC is really doing at most about 1/4 of the work. Like the other AV weapons, it should be able to potentially do 100% of the work with good positioning and aim. One very important point- I'm not saying there should be a bigger gap, percentage wise, between the STD and PRO versions. Swarms clearly demonstrate why that sort of balancing is just awful- a 10% gap between STD and PRO is good, 50% is not. The PLC just needs a major raw direct damage buff at all tiers, or a huge anti-vehicle efficiency increase. Variants would be a great solution, I would love to see variants.
It is a light weapon after all. It shouldn't have the damage of the forge gun (a heavy weapon). They sacrifice mobility for the forge whilst I can slap a PLC on a scout that runs 10+ mps.
I think part of the Plasma Cannon is weapon synergy. Now granted that synergy was born out of necessity but it's a defining characteristic of the weapon IMO. I enjoy blapping out shields with the PLC and then quickly switching to SMG/res/whatever to finish the job.
I spent half my ISK on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The rest I wasted.
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
667
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 20:36:00 -
[29] - Quote
I-Shayz-I wrote:"I'd love to make the PLC a viable AV weapon without making it OP against infantry"
I've heard multiple DEVs state this and I want to know the reasoning behind the statement. Let me clarify why this statement doesn't make any sense:
-The plasma cannon deals two different types of damage, direct and splash. -Direct damage is how much it deals on contact (primarily AV), while splash is how much it does within a small blast radius outwards from the point it hits -Direct damage is enough to kill almost any suit except for the very heavily armored sentinels. -Splash is almost never taken into account when it comes to dealing damage to vehicles.
So what does this mean? It means that increasing direct damage won't have much effect at all against infantry, while increasing its effectiveness against vehicles. Even if the plasma cannon's direct damage was over 9000, it still would be exactly as effective as it is now against anything that isn't a vehicle. It would not be OP at all against infantry. _____________________________________________________
CCP, is it really an issue for sentinels with tons of armor to not be 1-shotted by a skilled plasma cannon user that you won't buff it to be a more effective AV weapon?
Obviously there are plenty of other bugs and issues with that weapon (probably more than any other weapon in the game), but please tell us why increasing direct damage (i.e. making it more viable for AV) would make the weapon OP against infantry. I understand what your saying Shayz , but I can understand where they are coming from and it's not just Sentinels but I was roasted in a hall by Ghaz ( I know from the video's you know who I'm talking about ) and I felt like I had NO chance , I had the high ground and everything in a assault suit pre 1.8 and I mean I felt like I have never been so defenseless in the game ever before .
Even falling off of high places being brushed back by my drop ship , being in tanks and being double and triple teamed by the enemy, falling out of drop ships .. I mean that was brutal and that thing , when in the absolutely right hands .. is a dangerous force .
Seriously .
Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
|
Kane Fyea
2642
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 20:38:00 -
[30] - Quote
Awry Barux wrote:Roofer Madness wrote:Asha Starwind wrote:IMO increasing the damage wouldn't do much unless the buffed damage to 3k or something
- limited range - steep firing arc - slow projectile speed - long reload - lock-up after firing - charge to fire - 1-round magazine - low reserve ammo
Trying to figure out how much to buff it's damage by would be the same thing as figuring out what shade of lipstick the pig is going to wear. Well, given the known cons what could be addressed? -limited range This is fine. Not exactly meant to be super long range anyways. -steep firing arc/projectile speed/charge to fire/1-round magazine I would classify these as characteristics of the weapon and not necessarily problems. -long reload Fix the reload skill -lock-up after firing Doesn't happen if you sprint-cancel it out. I switch to my SMG quickly to finish off people. Still, the animations and workings of the Plasma Cannon really do need to work properly. Too buggy. -low reserve ammo I have the ammo skill maxed out and I don't really find this to be an issue. I also rock nice hives so meh. In my opinion until the bugs are fixed we can never know the true power of this weapon. In true CCP fashion, what will most likely happen is they will buff it and fix the bugs and then it will be OP. I could see the splash radius being increased if the splash damage went down and I could see the direct hits being stronger, but not until the bugs are fixed. What bugs are you referring to? It's my understanding that the post-firing lock-up is deliberate to try to prevent fast-swap tactics. From using the PLC for the past week, I haven't encountered any problems with it working from a technical standpoint- it just doesn't do enough damage to make it a remotely viable AV weapon. IMO, due to its shotgun-like range requirement (on the AV weapon scale) and the extreme difficulty of hitting moving targets, it should have both the highest alpha and highest DPS of any AV weapon. The projectile is so slow that, from 50m, a situationally aware stationary nitro HAV can literally see the shot coming and have time to dodge it with a quick forward or backward boost. For reference, a PRO SL puts out 517 base DPS with no rapid reload skill, proficiency, or damage mods. To bring the PLC in line with the current PRO SL in terms of DPS, the PRO PLC should be doing at least ((.6*.75) + 3.5) * 517 = 2042 damage per shot. I would argue that, due to the extreme range limitations and difficulty of landing shots in comparison to other light and heavy AV weapons, the PLC should be rewarded with an additional roughly 20% damage, brining the proto PLC's direct damage per shot up to 2400. Splash damage, of course, should remain unchanged, or even nerfed slightly to further focus the weapon on AV. The plasma cannon is a high alpha weapon not high dps. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |