| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Starfire Revo
DUST University
Ivy League
247
   |
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:05:00 -
[31] - Quote
Small rails are in a good place stats-wise, but their hit detection is really weird (even when stationary). The ADS camera makes it hard to see where your shots are landing as well. When you're having trouble hitting someone, it's actually hard to tell how you should adjust your aim because of the turret blocking your view.
Never had an issue with it's damage or heat mechanic that wasn't my own fault for not paying attention. Damage mods can make up the difference and let you take out dropships or even tanks if you have support.
I make videos of EVE and Dust http://www.youtube.com/mrgimbleb
I write about EVE and Dust http://mrgimbleb.blogspot.com
|
Joseph Ridgeson
WarRavens
Final Resolution.
1857
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:12:00 -
[32] - Quote
I disagree with Shotgun style reload for missiles. The reasoning behind people wanting it is generally "because it goes up one shot at a time during reload" but do does a Railgun. Missile turrets are capable of instantly factor eliminating a Hardened + Plate Madrugar. I think that letting them reload half their clip in half the time to be able to do it again in the rare scenarios the target survives is a bad idea. Missiles are already the hardest counter to Madrugar builds so I believe expanding on that hard counter is a poor idea.
While not to do with turrets themselves, Damage Mods for vehicles are far, far too powerful. 30% was based on 40/60 hardeners. Hardeners were nerfed by 37.5% and 33% while Damage Mods were not. For my Madrugar, my Hardener is worth less than a Damage Mod. This is a problem as it means that glass cannons are too powerful.
Small Blasters are terrible. They have about as much range as a shotgun and seem to have hit detection issues. For my gunner, I have removed them in favor of a Railgun.
"This is B.S! This is B.S! I paid money! Cash money, dollars money, cash money!"
|
JP Acuna
Pendejitos
Zero-Day
155
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:28:00 -
[33] - Quote
Small turrets:
1.-BLASTERS:
Dropships: blasters are useless on dropships of any kind. As a gunner you are unable to hit infantry, same as a pilot in ADS. On vehicles the damage is too low and the shields regenerate constantly without delay, so it's not viable at all.
LAV: works sometimes but: range is too short ---> Vulnerable gunner.
2.-RAILGUNS:
Dropships: Somewhat useful as AV. But overheat plus reload times make it too hard to destroy vehicles considering their speed and rep/regen times. No use for anti-infantrty.
LAV: Excellent for flanking infantry. The range is great, you can 1-2 hit kill almost every suit from a fairly safe distance. Also works as a support AV against other vehicles.
3.-MISSILES:
Dropships: The most viable turret. Effective on both Infantry and Vehicles (equipment as well). Makes the Python the better bonused dropship.
LAV: Rarely effective, only on stationary targets or from a stationary high position against a group of concentrated infantry. Not too good. |
Grimmiers
546
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
I think to really fix and balance small turrets there needs to be a fix for the shots completely missing the target while the vehicle is in motion. Also it's so bad now that if you're using a missile turret on a dropship you can actually shoot yourself in the turret.
Small Blasters:
The small blaster just isn't fun to use because it can only be effective if the vehicle isn't moving, the splash was taken away making them unusable on dropships, and trying to destroy a vehicle with it is pretty much impossible. If a vehicle has any shields it will be invincible to a small blaster and if it's in armor the blaster will overheat/run out of ammo well before you get anywhere near killing something. The range for the blaster is much better than it was, but should be increased further.
- Add splash
- Increase efficiency rating against vehicles
- Increase optimal to around 80 and the effective to around 120
- Increase base tracking speed to make it easier to hit targets while moving
I'll also like to point out that there should be a minmatar turret that fills that spray and pray role.
Small Railguns
This should be the go to weapon for av, but is much better at killing infantry. It's basically a full auto charge sniper only not accurate and with less range. This is the only turret that should require a full complete stop to kill infantry. For vehicles the efficiency rating never made sense. It being a rail tech weapon and only doing around 60% damage to armor was pretty laughable.
- Fix the damage profile to make it better at av
- If you reduce the overheating you should also reduce the clipsize
b]Small Missiles[/b]
Small missiles are the most useful of the three. It might be too easy to kill infantry with small missiles on an assault dropship. I think the splash damage should be closer to the large missiles because the splash alone 1~2 shots most players with ease. The direct hit damage and the damage profile makes it very good at destroying vehicles. The only thing that really makes it balanced is the travel time and clip size.
- Lower splash damage
- Increase clip size
That being said I can't wait to see changes to the blaster because I loved using it in the past. |
Harpyja
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1726
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
Temias Mercurial wrote:A suggestion has been made to give large blaster turrets HMG dispersion and functionality. If you want, I could list the thread(s?) regarding them. I believe the suggestion was proposed by Cat Merc and someone else.
This allows infantry to be more survivable while still retaining damage, as not 100% will hit.
I'm rather skeptical of adding dispersion to the large blaster.
I feel like it will not do anything, or it won't have the effects you think it will. Tracking moving targets would be much easier to hit with dispersion than with the current precision, since I'd only have to aim somewhere in the range of a little in front and behind of a running infantryman to hit, whereas with precision I'd have to have my aim directly on him moving at the same angular speed as he is.
"By His light, and His will"
- The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
|
843 Epidemic
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
1243
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:51:00 -
[36] - Quote
Small rails - absolutely fine from a tank/LAV point of view. I've gone 32-1 with an ADV small rail on the back of an LAV, and I play like this often. They suffer from hit detection problems occasionally but the damage to infantry is great, and the overheat is not a problem. Without being too rude if anyone finds overheat a problem it's probably their aiming. However, they could do with an increase damage to vehicles.
Small Missiles - fine
Small blasters - Seems to be a hit-detection problem from what I've experienced and others have said, I think that needs to be addressed. Also it wouldn't harm them to have a small blast radius, too.
Brb, sister needs the TV
|
Evolution-7
The Rainbow Effect
536
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:51:00 -
[37] - Quote
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.
Veteran Pilot
"Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart."
|
JP Acuna
Pendejitos
Zero-Day
155
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:56:00 -
[38] - Quote
I like the idea of adding splash damage to small blasters. Buff the damage and range also and they might work from DSs. |
Ares 514
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
870
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:58:00 -
[39] - Quote
The biggest issue for infantry vs tank is the large blaster turret on a tank. The rotation speed on it needs to be drastically reduced. I personally like the idea of decreasing the rate of fire on them and increasing the damage to compensate. So that tankers have to be a bit more accurate not just spam R1 and watch all infantry die.
You should also increase AV grenade capacity back to 3 if you also plan on increasing how much damage they do or to say 5 if you plan on keeping the damage as horrible as it is.
CCP continues to make the wrong choices, one choice at a time. aka Legion.
|
Raedon Vo-Graza
Armored Dragon Corp
18
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 17:58:00 -
[40] - Quote
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 |
|
|
Driftward
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
958
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 18:47:00 -
[41] - Quote
If the small blaster turrets are going to get an increased dispersion, then you need to also include an increase RoF as well as larger clip size. DPS then increases slightly due to RoF but is offset by a decrease in accuracy with increased dispersion.
Increasing dispersion alone would only exacerbate the issue by decreasing DPS even more (less accuracy with the same number of "bullets") |
lithkul devant
Legions of Infinite Dominion
Zero-Day
218
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 18:48:00 -
[42] - 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. |
shaman oga
Nexus Balusa Horizon
2140
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 18:51:00 -
[43] - Quote
Another thing about missilistic turrets in general, they should have a limited range and in that range 100% effectiveness, then explode.
PSN: ogamega
I'm here to bla bla bla...
|
Regis Blackbird
DUST University
Ivy League
220
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 19:31:00 -
[44] - Quote
Awww, here I came thinking this was a thread about tackling turrets (like tackling frigate in EVE) 
Hang on a second... That might not be a bad idea 
Back to the point.
I am not really a vehicle person so I don't think I can contribute much, but what I would like is the following:
(Primarily from being on the wrong side of said turrets)
- Large Blaster Turret: Less effective against infantry (main HAV turrets should primary be anti vehicle)
- Small Blaster Turret: Very effective against infantry, but fairly short range.
What this will do is to force HAVs to bring extra seats to effectively deal with infantry, thus requiring more people to play the tank role, and less on the ground. If they want a kick ass HAV, the team have to sacrifice a few players to get it. |
CMDR Girr
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 19:58:00 -
[45] - Quote
CMDR Reporting. Been using vehicles for a while now, so I've been on the receiving end and I deal it out quite a bit.
I'm just going to chime in, some of this is the same as others, but here we go.
Large
- Rail: The range is decent, the reloads are realistic. Damage is very good. Splash is almost non-existent. Only time you can hit infantry for the most part is a sniper and you have a clean bead. Not sure if it needs splash at all. I get the role, so for the most part I'm happy with rail tanks. Maybe add some better fall off. In EVE if i'm using rails, I should not be able to hit anything up close. The round should fail or be weak.
- Missile: Only effective if you have dmg mods / prototype for the most part. Really the only time I can't get away from a missile tank is when they are skilled into it, and i'm rolling milita fitting. Main issues is that you have to spread your DMG out over the entire barrage and they miss pretty easily. And if you miss one shot, you can't even kill a militia tank. Also have had issues hitting any infantry with the missile splash. The largest issue is WHY IS THIS A LVL 5 SKILL.
- Blaster: Blasters are pretty great for blasting infantry and I find them to be pretty strong vs tanks as well. I like the idea of adding a little drift on the shots, this would not impact anti-vehicle much, but would cut down on the sheer precision of the gun at closer range which i find to be a little OP. Also the OPT range might be a little high. Maybe increase the turn speed on the blaster.
Reasons for my opinions. Close range Rail V Blaster, should always be blaster. At range, a rail should obliterate a blaster. Notice I don't mention how missiles play into this, because no body really runs them.
Small
HAV/LAV
- Rail: Almost useless on a moving vehicle is standing still. Can be good if you have skills and sneak up on a sica or another LAV though.
- Missile: Good solution, range, some splash.
- Blaster: Not used often. Under powered, not enough spread. Might as well jump out of the LAV and use a gun. Need to be stable to use.
Dropship
- Rail: Situational, great if you are on an open map with HAVs. Since there is little splash, you have to stand very still to hit infantry. Maybe up the splash a tad.
- Missile: The only real option for Dropships, gives you range, dmg and some splash. Also great on LAVs for the same reason.
- Blaster: Useless, never used. Under powered, not enough spread, range for a DS
Commander Girr. Doom, etc, etc.
|
matsumoto yuichi san
SVER True Blood
Dirt Nap Squad.
42
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 20:03:00 -
[46] - Quote
well looking at how BF4 feels a lot more reasonable on this front
1. turrets turn slower so i can out track you as infantry if i try
2. turrets fire a lot slower so you missing matters / when they burst they have more downtime between bursts
3. turrets are not omnicient (NO 3rd person camera)
4. there are far more effective dumb fire AV options
5. vehicles have much slower acceleration and speed is overall much slower (except aircraft) so infantry has more ability to finish the engagement without the vehicle simply running
6. damaging a vehicle means more as repairing it means having an ally do so, or disengaging from combat |
Sole Fenychs
Sinq Laison Gendarmes
Gallente Federation
430
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 20:30:00 -
[47] - Quote
The most important thing:
It might sound sensible to make large turrets weaker against infantry, (In fact, I quite like it in terms of fluff) but that essentially removes the point of tanks in the game. Both tanks in general (Why build a vehicle, that can't interact with the target layer of the game, i.e. the infantry combat, unless you man it with two people who will lose the ability to do anything else?), as well as AV tanks (Why invest into something that all tanks can counter by default, due to all main turrets being automatically AV-enabled? Let's just go infantry AV!) would have trouble finding any purpose.
So I'm in favor of using turret type to determine targets - Blaster against infantry, Railguns against vehicles and Missiles somewhere in between.
Missiles should be better than Railguns against infantry because of splash damage/multiple projectiles.
And they should be better than Blasters against tanks due to their higher damage output and range.
I like the idea of shotgun-style reload for missiles. It basically makes them the to-go weapon for when you aren't sure what will happen - You don't need to plan your reloads and you can do adequate damage against all types of enemies.
Blaster and Railguns, meanwhile, should be specializations. Blaster tank against Missiles? Bad. Blaster tank against Railgun? Run away.
AV infantry against Railgun tank? I hope you are in open space and have skill in crushing infantry or an overdrive module.
However, this is just theory. If we give small missiles shotgun reload with no other change, we'll run into the issue that ADS are currently *very* lethal against infantry. A changed reload system would make them ridiculously powerful, as they'd basically have unlimited clips with slightly higher re-fire delay.
So I'll let people with more knowledge than me go into specifics. |
ANON Cerberus
Tiny Toons
708
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 20:36:00 -
[48] - Quote
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 have been saying this for a while. +1 |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10798
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 21:20:00 -
[49] - Quote
Vehicle large blaster turrets are fundamentally a problem.
A large turret designed for anti-infantry (large blasters) is inherently a problem because it goes far beyond the fire power of infantry weapons, yet is designed to kill infantry. Only small turrets should be designed as anti-infantry since they are within the general effectiveness of infantry weapons. Large blasters should have higher DPS, but lower range than railguns, and also have a low ROF weapon to keep them from too easily farming kills from infantry; make large blasters more like plasma cannons. Seriously, if you can't do this for Dust, do it for Legion; Legion is a fresh start.
The large blaster issue is essentially different from the vehicle vs AV balance; no matter how balanced vehicle vs AV is, it should not be possible for a large blaster to be as effective against infantry as it currently is. This is because there will be cases in which no infantry will have skilled into AV (like if everyone is a new player), and that will make them extremely susceptible to kill-farming by a large blaster tank; even in other shooter where no one on the team has AV, its never as bad because other games never have the main tank turret be so good at anti-infantry.
An easy alternative would be to nerf ROF of large blasters, buff damage, and nerf accuracy. While it would be satisfactory, I don't like this solution however because i feel like the large blasters should be completely redesigned for a different role (a shorter range, higher DPS, anti-shield railgun equivalent) so it will gain a new role to make up for the removal of its anti-infantry role.
Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
|
Tebu Gan
Dem Durrty Boyz
General Tso's Alliance
956
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 22:50:00 -
[50] - Quote
Hey fellas(CCP), very good choice with Rattati. He is certainly one of my most liked devs, as he often demostrates a very strong understanding of the actual gameplay. It's one thing to look at things on paper; a totally different thing to actually put them to practice.
But I've been itchin all day to get in front of this keyboard, as I live and breathe tanks. Vehicles in general, but tanks certainly are my baby. I've made a thread pertaining to this very subject, and have discussed with Harpyj this very thing in his own thread. Excuse me if I get a bit long winded.
To start with, I understand the need for narrowing the discussion down to specific topics. But when we talk tanks, or anything for that matter, the solutions aren't always rooted solely with something like say turrets.
For example, I can say that blasters are too strong, and from there deduce that they need a change because they are doing so well against infantry. But that isn't the only problem when it comes to AV and Tank interactions. If the blaster was just as effective against infantry but very easily pushed back or eliminated, we would not have a problem at this moment.
So let's use a bit of caution, and take other factors into account, when we go about talking turrets, or any balancing theories for that matter.
Large Blasters
At first glance, I know it's rather obvious that they are just too good at killing infantry. I've seen numerous people posting about the strength and "accuracy" of these things, and concluding that the problem must lay there. I've even seen a few that declare they are far too effective against tanks!
But my first question would be, WHY do these things make them so effective? When I think of a turret, I don't just imagine the turret, but the tank the turret fits to. The whole picture. So let me walk ya through a fitting scenario.
Madrudger Blaster
In all honesty, is that all you see when a blaster is shooting you, the turret? Yes, the turret is causing you much grief, but I feel it's more the fact that what that turret is mounted to is damn near invincible to infantry. So for instance, a madrudger is typically ALWAYS fit with a rep. A well fit one at least. Pop three on that sucker and what do you get?
A lot of pissed off AV that's what. See, a madrudger has a very easy time taking AV damage, and mitigating it to 0. Add to that a very decent range with the blaster. So I can very easily sit back at a distance, using cover to break swarms (Obstructions or elevation) when needed to heal, and basically maintain a near constant presence on the field.
The devs know this I know, but I think it's important to bring this up when we consider balancing the turret types. Else you nerf something else into oblivion, because you overlooked other factors that tie into balancing a particular item. (not just aimed at CCP but EVERYONE, as I've seen everyone do it, myself included)
]Any changes to a turret type MUST consider how this affects the tanks themselves -
What I'm saying here, is if we consider just balancing the blaster turret, we will likely end up overdoing it (or under) as we didn't consider what would be using said turret. Will adding dispersion, or lowering the damage output, really fix the problem?
While you can make it much harder to actually kill infantry with a blaster, this won't have a major affect, as often times we can take all the time we want. And in all honesty, it is very hard to kill infantry now with a blaster. Though the trick is to burst out your shots, which mitigates the kick and allows for pinpoint accuracy. As that first shot basically goes where it is aimed.
A ROF nerf wouldn't change their killing power.
RANGE
So, now I consider what I think is the best idea going forward for blaster turrets.
Reducing effective range considerably
What if the blaster had a 75M optimal range and damage falloff to 125M? While we do need to address some other glaring issues, like armor reps, damage mods, ect; I think this could be a very positive change.
This would in effect, force a tank to engage at distance infantry are much more familiar with. But let's think about it for a minute.
-Forgegun range 300M
-Swarm range 175M
This shifts the advantage, as a swarm or forge gunner have a very large window to engage one before it presents a threat. Meaning a blaster tank will have FAR less time to engage an enemy that is actively trying to counter him.
It gives AV the advantage, as they do work at a disadvantage to infantry, they need considering how tough a tank actually is. Not to mention the time a tank will need to actually get out of a hot zone. While fast, at such a short engagement range, their impact will be limited if AV actually presents itself, as they will still be able to target a tank in safety from said tank. (Buildings anyone?)
Focused on just blaster here, but I have MUCH to say on tanks as a whole. Let me know what ya think fellas, love me some constructive criticism.
Tanks - Balancing Turrets
|
|
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10798
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 23:35:00 -
[51] - Quote
Small blasters need more dispersion, its really hard to hi targets with small blasters because the dispersion is so low, and it requires too much precision.
Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
|
THUNDERGROOVE
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
770
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 00:32:00 -
[52] - Quote
Large blasters:
- Way too good at AI and AV. They need to be one or the other
- Think about cutting it's range. The 100 meters is ridiculous.
Large Rais:
- Very good at killing vehicles as they should be.
- Very good at being unreliable. Often times "phantom shots' occur where you're unable to fire your turret. This is the biggest reason I loose tank fights
- Could use an extra 100m range
Large missiles:
- Very good. Would suggest the shotgun reload if possible.
Small blasters:
- Very meh. Rails are better in every way
- They need more range and higher damage against vehicles
Small rails:
- Very good. I believe they are fine as is.
Small missiles:
- Very good. A little OP on an ADS.
- The splash damage buff given in 1.7 was a little too much IMO
Quick note: Can you guys look into fixing the phantom shots (Rails and small rails) and the bug that prevents you from firing after activating modules? The only way you can start firing again is if you get out and back in.
TDBS
"Does Krin want his gun back?" - sub random nub
|
Foundation Seldon
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
671
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 08:01:00 -
[53] - Quote
Okay so I'm gonna be bringing in my experience as both LAV Driver/Gunner and someone who frequents an Assault Dropship, the focus will primarily be on Small Turret side as a result. In another post I'll try to respond to some things brought up in the thread.
Small Turrets as a whole :
All small turrets need to be effective against enemy vehicles in some fashion. This includes the Small Blaster turret as there's no way to really balance the dual infantry and vehicle killing prowess of the Small Railgun and Small Missile turrets (short of giving wildly different efficiency ratings for vehicle v. infantry) without also allowing the Small Blaster to deal a decent amount of damage against vehicles as well.
Small Railgun Turret
I want to highlight from the outset that these turrets are glitched. Currently they have a very annoying issue in which they can sometimes fail to hit their target or the turret itself becomes "desynched" compared to the actions of the gunner. I've had instances where I've fired multiple shots into a person only to do no damage and then, as my driver runs out, the heat indicator rises and the ammo count lowers as if I'm still shooting. This can cause random overheats and cases in which my driver will report my shooting randomly with no targets around. The same issue occurs when I'm driving and I notice erratic actions of my gunner despite him reporting to me that he's not shooting anything.
Glitches aside though,on the ground this turret is EXTREMELY effective on the anti-infantry front. It's a rapid fire, high damage tactical sniper that destroys pretty much anyone that thinks to go up against it. If you plan to tweak its damage against vehicles (I think it's something around 70-80% efficiency currently) then do so with the knowledge that you're making the thing very effective against both infantry and vehicles equally (like the Small Missile turret so not a huge deal). In either case I would not touch its base damage amounts, just its efficiency. DO NOT LISTEN TO ANYONE WHO SAYS THAT THESE TURRETS ARENT INFANTRY KILLING MONSTROSITIES ON THE GROUND. These are THE turrets to fit on any LAV or Tank.
Its infantry killing prowess is only really seen on ground vehicles though as Dropships (especially of the assault variation) can't very effectively use these turrets due to the pin point accuracy required. It sort of devalues the Incubus as a Dropship one should spec into because its only really effective against other vehicles. In the long term I'd consider releasing a Small Railgun (or Blaster as the problem is there as well) turret variation with smaller direct damage but a large splash radius in order to be more effectively used in the air and against infantry.
Small Blaster Turret :
Has little to no point on the battlefield. A turret completely outclassed both in the air and on the ground by the Small Missile and Small Railgun turrets respectively. Even if one specced into the Ion Cannon + Prof. level required to be able to be effectively used at its effective range one would still almost always be better off using a Railgun instead because they do MORE damage at LONGER ranges. It's almost the exact mirror of the situation of the original Rail Rifle's/Current Combat Rifle release compared to the Assault Rifle. It's a situation I've brought up multiple times among my LAV crew, a Small Blaster Turret LAV driver has to get much closer and expose their gunner to more inherent danger in order to do LESS damage than the Small Railgun turret would have done from afar.
So from the outset - Buff its damage. It's the one turret that sincerely needs it.
Beyond that though you still have a problem with the turret itself being only truly useful against one type of enemy on the battlefield. It's too specialized next to the Railgun and Missile turrets that can easily take on both Vehicle and Infantry equally. The Small Blaster turret can't be coordinated with other players to take out a tank, it can't be used to drive off a Dropship and so long as shield regen can't be turned off based on damage dealt over time the damage that a Small Blaster can put out will never be enough to take out any vehicle that has an existing, unbroken (as in the regen hasn't been stopped) shield buffer.
So in the short term what would also need to be done is for its efficiency against vehicles to be increased as well, perhaps even to the point where its doing 100% against both infantry and vehicle like the Small Missile and the proposed change to the Small Railgun, but in the long term we need to look at potentially messing with vehicle shield regen not being able to be stopped based on damage dealt over time and with multiple projectiles vs. a single powerful hit.
Small Missile Turret
Not super effective on the ground due to their increased difficulty of making use of splash damage on a horizontal plain / difficulty in getting direct hits against opponents but pretty much the end all be all turret for anything related to Dropship turret selection. If the above buffs are considered I would only advocate for a Small Missile variation with a high projectile speed and perhaps reduced splash as something that would make it more viably used on Ground vehicles against infantry.
|
Hakyou Brutor
G0DS AM0NG MEN
629
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 13:34:00 -
[54] - Quote
I usually make TL;DR posts but this time I'll make it short and sweet:
Add variation to turrets. i.e. Scattered Ion Cannon, XT-1 Accelerated Missile Launcher, Compressed Particle Cannon.
This isn't really a turret, but it highly affects it, damage amplifiers. Change Railgun & Missile to 15% damage increase and Blaster to 25% or 20%.
Small turrets need better hit detection in ADS', as of now only missiles have good hit detection for infantry.
Give railgun turrets 75% of the damage they do now, but 450 meter range.
Make blasters do 70% of damage to infantry, and 100% to other vehicles.
Large Missiles- useless against infantry, add more splash radius.
That is just some of my thoughts.
GÇ£War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.GÇ¥
GÇò George Orwell
|
God Hates Lags
The Last of DusT.
1134
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 19:59:00 -
[55] - Quote
This may be a bit off from what you're thinking, but I can't stress enough how broken turret installations are right now. Their auto aim blows through infantry like they're nothing, but tanks eat them for breakfast.
- Turret Installations need to be a dynamic, more permanent part of the battlefield, rather than just free war points for tanks.
- Turret Installations need a sizable HP increase, up to that of a CRU or Supply Depot.
- Turret installation auto aim on infantry should be reduced in effectiveness as should turret ability to aim down.
- Turrets should be easier to hack than to destroy, making them a key strategic component on the battlefield that tanks fear and infantry can capture. This is critical to preventing vehicle dominance while also making them viable. Tankers need infantry to keep turrets off them. Infantry need tanks for area control and pushing up. This given and take needs to be essential to how turret installations operate.
I don't know if this is hotfixable. If not keep it in mind for legion. Because right now turret installations are useless to anyone other than the tanks destroying them or infantry unlucky enough to get killed by overzealous auto aim. Turret installations should be a crucial party of the battlefield landscape. Not just an add on that gets destroyed in the first thirty seconds.
"Look what I destroyed in two days"
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
746
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:44:00 -
[56] - Quote
Weekly Statistics
DUNA2002 - 2,637 kills, 9 deaths
Milkman1 - 1,271 kills, 62 deaths
Shadow of War88 - 462 kills, 6 deaths
(Wonder which turret these guys use?)
Shoot scout with yes...
- Ripley Riley
|
DUST Fiend
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
14360
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 23:06:00 -
[57] - Quote
Stop pilot skills from stacking on small ADS turrets, or make it so gunners only add 50% of their skill (max 75% RoF bonus, instead of the current 100%), and please keep looking at the Dropship side gun glitch that pulls the aim from the operator when pointing towards the front of the ship.
|
anaboop
NECROM0NGERS
Caps and Mercs
81
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 07:31:00 -
[58] - Quote
Large rails should have increased cpu or pg usage, especially on militia and or a separate damage mod that increases it by less then 30%
Fully sick Anaboop trading card
|
Cardio Therapy
Tech Guard
RISE of LEGION
19
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 09:58:00 -
[59] - Quote
CCP Logibro wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:I feel that large missile turrets should have a shotgun style reload, but I don't think that's a server side change. (?)
On small turrets:
Small missile turrets are the best atm, for both anti-infantry and AV. Especially on assault dropships, where they're basically the only option.
Small railguns are mostly in a good place but I'm baffled as to why there's an overheat on them. It would excel in a focused AV role except overheat stops it being able to sustain the damage output long enough to kill vehicles. I'd like to see these as the best small turret for pure AV.
Small blasters aren't really very good. They're just kind of... lacking. You can't really use them on an assault dropship, if you're going to use them on an LAV it's more effective (and safer) to get out and use a rifle, and if you're going to use them to gun on an HAV there are better things to do with that player.
One thing I don't like about small turrets in general is their use on LAVs. They're overly difficult to hit targets with whilst moving and if you're stationary the gunner can get killed very, very easily. I'd like to see a frontal shield on LAV gunners - that way they're still very vulnerable if you flank them but if you attack them head on they can actually be dangerous. Though again that's not really a server side change... Shotgun style reload for missiles is interesting, might actually be possible serverside. I'll look into it. I think I've heard from some people on the forums that small rails have reduced damage against vehicles (?!), so we'll look at that first. I think the overheat is there more to limit it against infantry, so maybe we need to just give it a boost in damage against vehicles anyway. Small blasters are the one I'm most worried about for the small turrets. Not really sure where to start with them personally, I think someone else had some ideas. Still interested to hear some ideas from people on how to make them better in an anti-infantry role, with at least some ability to tickle vehicles. It would be nice to have them as a viable option for dropships against infantry.
make the small blaster turrets shoot like HMG but double the range. it will be very usefull agains infantry. |
Baal Omniscient
L.O.T.I.S.
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
1519
|
Posted - 2014.05.18 11:30:00 -
[60] - Quote
Large Blaster Turret Perfection::
Semi-auto Fire
High Damage Rounds
Moderate ROF (around the speed of the breach SCP)
Moderate Heat Build-up
25-35 Round Clip
Allow charged shots (like with the Ion pistol)
The blaster turret would, imho, be best as a semi-auto turret that fires high damage rounds. You would have to place shots in order to kill infantry as opposed to spamming rounds into doorways and spawn points for free kills, and the turret should overheat after 15 consecutive shots (making heat management a big deal). Allow charged shots (I'm thinking 300-400% damage increase, but debateable) so you can deal massive damage with a single round when needed, rewarding good aim with a guaranteed kill when in the proper range of your target, but punishing bad aim with a huge heat build up after the shot is fired (not instant overheat, but around 3/4 overheat build-up).
This would, in my view, make the large blaster turret perfect. It would reward skilled pilots regardless of SP level and make the large blaster a tool that finally requires some skill.
~ 2 year AV vet
PSN ID: AlbelNox2569
MAG Vet ~ Raven
R.I.P.~ Dust, R.I.P.~ MAG
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |