|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
lithkul devant
Legions of Infinite Dominion
Zero-Day
217
   |
Posted - 2014.05.16 16:36:00 -
[1] - Quote
I will raise my objections currently against what has been said about the small rail turrets. It does not need a straight outright buff, it needs a trade off and to become more specialized, since it is similar to the small missile turret.
The small rail turret does need a longer amount of shots it can fire in a row, but it also needs a longer cd bar to go along with that. Otherwise the small rail turret will become far to effective against infantry and vehicles, it already is quite powerful and can one hit kill many of the infantry, maybe a slight splash damage range buff at the cost of splash damage might be in order?
The small blaster turret, this thing for LAV's is useless as it can not hit anything while going even at any speed at all. For tanks it can be useful if you can fit no other turret into your tank at the time, otherwise it is completely underwhelming in damage and in range and the accuracy isn't the best either.
The small missile turret....it's cool as is, I have no real problems with it.
For the large turrets now.
Large Rail turret, it's close to in a very good place, it does not need the range back that it once had, but perhaphs another 50m in order to be able to fight tanks and ADS better.
Large Blaster turret, I use it, but I understand how cheap this thing is, it needs to be more CQC then it currently is, especially since it can mow down infantry from over 150m currently with ease. Though to be honest it does not need to be messed with to much, just some so it isn't used to completely negate all AV measures of swarms and forge guns.
Large Missile turret, Something needs to be done about this, but I'm not sure what, it just feels overpowered at times. |
lithkul devant
Legions of Infinite Dominion
Zero-Day
218
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 16:49:00 -
[2] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote:It is not about vehicle turrets but installation turrets should have much higher HP, neutral ones should give no WP and AI should be nerfed or eliminated.
I can agree with you that the installation turrets need higher hp, they aren't moving they are stationary, I can agree with you that neutral ones should give no wp for a kill or reduced wp. However, AI should not be reduced or nerfed, it does need tweeking, such as it shouldn't constantly shoot an objective point for no reason. To get rid of the AI on the turret would make them useless assets to only be captured by the enemy or occassionally used and have no true defensive or offensive purpose. |
lithkul devant
Legions of Infinite Dominion
Zero-Day
218
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 18:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Raedon Vo-Graza wrote:Evolution-7 wrote:Also, leave ADS cost where it is, increase tank prices slightly, if you decrease ADS price, just like what happened to militia DS overtime, they will be used to ram. Currently, the most effective anti-ADS is a 27k Gorgon.
And if you do not heed my words. I am just saying I told ya first. i think that mlt tanks need their ehp cut in half, and the std's to be buffed by 10%. make a gap between them so that people don't spam the little militia craps all around. make a reason to go standard
No, 60% is way to high of an ehp gap just for being different by one step, I could support a 10-20% gap and see how that does, but a 60% no way (actually it might even be higher then 60% depending on how you do the math) The main difference between tanks should be amount of modules possible and cpu/pg from the basic stat end. Only very few of the mlt dropsuits for an example have any hp dispersion between them and proto level, the same with vehicles. Your suggestion would cause mlt tanks to be 1-3 shotted by forge guns and rail tanks, since the proposed hp would roughly be 1800-2500 with no modules added, and even after modules added would be very low. You would be having tanks with less shields then some sentinels have. |
|
|
| |
|