DUST Search - Ridiculous idea

knight of 6 wrote:

MarasdF Loron wrote:

Currently not many people fit small turrets on their HAVs because that makes them less durable. Soo....
Why not create different types of HAV hulls with different kind of turret hardpoint layout? Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting. That way hulls with more turrets can be stronger (and more expensive) where as these lone wolf tanks can be weaker (and cheaper).

that would be awesome.

while they're at it can we make the small turrets we have useful?

the turret mounted small (the one with 360 field of fire) has absolutely atrocious gun depression and terrible accuracy. the small turret is located off center on the large turret making tracing with both turret simultaneously damn near impossible. compound that with it's poor gun depression (it can't shoot scrubs in RE range or even grenade range) and you're better off not having one.

the front mounted turret is equally useless due to it's limited field of fire. since all sides of the tank have the same armor values there is no need to angle your armor. a smart tanker positions his tank perpendicular to the enemy that way if he needs to move he can go forwards or backwards whenever necessary and at the same time maximize the transversal on the enemies guns. that alone nullifies the need for a front sponson.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 512	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:40:00 - [1] - Quote Currently not many people fit small turrets on their HAVs because that makes them less durable. Soo.... Why not create different types of HAV hulls with different kind of turret hardpoint layout? Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting. That way hulls with more turrets can be stronger (and more expensive) where as these lone wolf tanks can be weaker (and cheaper). R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
KatanaPT Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 720	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:45:00 - [2] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: Currently not many people fit small turrets on their HAVs because that makes them less durable. Soo.... Why not create different types of HAV hulls with different kind of turret hardpoint layout? Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting. That way hulls with more turrets can be stronger (and more expensive) where as these lone wolf tanks can be weaker (and cheaper). like it! There would be tank killers, infantry hunters, even Apc's! Who knows! Tech Guard Recruiting Video
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 3134	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:45:00 - [3] - Quote It's so ridiculous... It might just work!! coughMarauders/Enforcerscough ak.0 // 4 LYFE I am the Lorhak // I speak for the trees. Jason Person for CMP!
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 512	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:55:00 - [4] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: It's so ridiculous... It might just work!! coughMarauders/Enforcerscough Indeed, and then those single turret HAVs can actually be made so weak that they could be relatively easily be destroyed by single AV personel where as those with, say, 3 turrets could be made so strong that it requires multiple people to effectively take down, still possible to solo if you know how to, but just harder. I think it would be win-win. Still haven't figured out how to indirectly force you to man those other turrets as well, but I'm open to suggestions. Because I can still see people just be willing to pay more to take more beating and let blueberries use the turrets if they feel like it. But then again, if they want to pay a lot more to roam alone without nobody gunning for them and then get killed when somebody competent shows up seems fair to me in a way. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 5274	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:39:00 - [5] - Quote Make it so CCP. Taco Cat backwards is still Taco Cat a¦Ñ_a¦Ñ
Jason Pearson State Terrestrial Mercenaries 4254	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:43:00 - [6] - Quote [quote=MarasdF Loron]Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting Didn't we just spend the last year begging for the ability to not fit small turrets? o.O <--- Picks out one sentence and deals with that, **** the rest of your post :D King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire \\ Bad Mathematician Vote me for CPM1!
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 514	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:46:00 - [7] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: [quote=MarasdF Loron]Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting Didn't we just spend the last year begging for the ability to not fit small turrets? o.O <--- Picks out one sentence and deals with that, **** the rest of your post :D Read the rest of it, lol. We did, but read the rest. And dropships are fine as they are for the way turret fitting works. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Jason Pearson State Terrestrial Mercenaries 4255	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:49:00 - [8] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: [quote=MarasdF Loron]Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting Didn't we just spend the last year begging for the ability to not fit small turrets? o.O <--- Picks out one sentence and deals with that, ** the rest of your post :D Read the rest of it, lol. We did, but read the rest. And dropships are fine as they are for the way turret fitting works. I came here to ***, not to read. :D King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire \\ Bad Mathematician Vote me for CPM1!
Mobius Wyvern Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 5084	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:51:00 - [9] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: It's so ridiculous... It might just work!! coughMarauders/Enforcerscough We could easily bring those back with a bit of adjustment to pricing. Marauders could get bonuses to defense, and Enforcers could get turret damage bonuses while having less hitpoints. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 514	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:23:00 - [10] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: [quote=MarasdF Loron]Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting Didn't we just spend the last year begging for the ability to not fit small turrets? o.O <--- Picks out one sentence and deals with that, ** the rest of your post :D Read the rest of it, lol. We did, but read the rest. And dropships are fine as they are for the way turret fitting works. I came here to ***, not to read. :D ... R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.

Gaurdian Satyr Glitched Connection 211	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:26:00 - [11] - Quote No... 1 reason Assholes that get in and NEVER get out -holds arms in O-throw it in the story basket bro
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 514	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:30:00 - [12] - Quote Gaurdian Satyr wrote: No... 1 reason Assholes that get in and NEVER get out That's exactly what the solo option is for. Different hulls for those who like to run with multiple people. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Alex-P-Keaton Kramer Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 144	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:36:00 - [13] - Quote small turrets suck though i like to go to craigslist and look at the personal ad's transexuals put up
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 515	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:50:00 - [14] - Quote Alex-P-Keaton Kramer wrote: small turrets suck though Wait wait wait... what did you say? Only the small blaster sucks. Small missiles are great for AI if you are not that great with your aim and even better if you are good with your aim. Small missiles are decent for AV as well. Small rails are far more effective against infantry than Large Blasters are. Small rails are decent for AV as well. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
knight of 6 SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 1841	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:01:00 - [15] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: Currently not many people fit small turrets on their HAVs because that makes them less durable. Soo.... Why not create different types of HAV hulls with different kind of turret hardpoint layout? Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting. That way hulls with more turrets can be stronger (and more expensive) where as these lone wolf tanks can be weaker (and cheaper). that would be awesome. while they're at it can we make the small turrets we have useful? the turret mounted small (the one with 360 field of fire) has absolutely atrocious gun depression and terrible accuracy. the small turret is located off center on the large turret making tracing with both turret simultaneously damn near impossible. compound that with it's poor gun depression (it can't shoot scrubs in RE range or even grenade range) and you're better off not having one. the front mounted turret is equally useless due to it's limited field of fire. since all sides of the tank have the same armor values there is no need to angle your armor. a smart tanker positions his tank perpendicular to the enemy that way if he needs to move he can go forwards or backwards whenever necessary and at the same time maximize the transversal on the enemies guns. that alone nullifies the need for a front sponson. "I speak for the trees!" Ko6 scout,
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 517	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:51:00 - [16] - Quote knight of 6 wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: Currently not many people fit small turrets on their HAVs because that makes them less durable. Soo.... Why not create different types of HAV hulls with different kind of turret hardpoint layout? Forcing us to use all of the hardpoints to make a valid fitting. That way hulls with more turrets can be stronger (and more expensive) where as these lone wolf tanks can be weaker (and cheaper). that would be awesome. while they're at it can we make the small turrets we have useful? the turret mounted small (the one with 360 field of fire) has absolutely atrocious gun depression and terrible accuracy. the small turret is located off center on the large turret making tracing with both turret simultaneously damn near impossible. compound that with it's poor gun depression (it can't shoot scrubs in RE range or even grenade range) and you're better off not having one. the front mounted turret is equally useless due to it's limited field of fire. since all sides of the tank have the same armor values there is no need to angle your armor. a smart tanker positions his tank perpendicular to the enemy that way if he needs to move he can go forwards or backwards whenever necessary and at the same time maximize the transversal on the enemies guns. that alone nullifies the need for a front sponson. The gunner I usually use would probably like to have a word with you about the top turret but I agree the front one is pretty useless. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]