Please please do something about the unkillable 3 repper madrugars.

As for the large blasters, they do not do enough DPS to be preferable to large railguns as close range AV. Large blasters need to deal more DPS then the large railguns, but large blasters need much much lower ROF than they currently have now to make them not so powerful against infantry, perhaps also give the shots travel time instead of being hit-scan as well; they still seem like anti-infantry even after hotfix Alpha. Large railguns should be like snipers (high range, low DPS), while large blasters should be more like the vehicle version of a shotgun (short range, high DPS).

Please please do something about the unkillable 3 repper madrugars.

As for the large blasters, they do not do enough DPS to be preferable to large railguns as close range AV. Large blasters need to deal more DPS then the large railguns, but large blasters need much much lower ROF than they currently have now to make them not so powerful against infantry, perhaps also give the shots travel time instead of being hit-scan as well; they still seem like anti-infantry even after hotfix Alpha. Large railguns should be like snipers (high range, low DPS), while large blasters should be more like the vehicle version of a shotgun (short range, high DPS).

Its like you didn't even read what I said, I want the large blasters to have MORE DPS, but at the cost of anti-infantry capabilities. If you raise DPS alone while leaving the large blasters otherwise the same, then it will be extremely overpowerful against infantry.

Rattati said in the OP that he wants them to be primarily for AV, currently railguns are better for AV even at the blaster's optimal range.

Alternatively, the large railguns could have a DPS nerf to make blasters more preferable for close range AV; if that is what happens, I would still prefer if damage got increased and ROF go decreased to make it less effective against infantry while still maintaining the same (or higher) DPS.

Read the "Alternatively" part about railguns. Either way, large blasters have to become preferable to large railguns at close range, and large railguns should be preferable at longer ranges. If large blasters are meant to be anti-vehicle as Rattati states, then they are awful at it since large railguns have both the range and DPS advantage. Whether if its by buffing large blasters, or nerfing large railguns (while leaving large blaster DPS the same), large blasters need to have a niche as the close range AV option.

Rattati stated that the large blasters are now supposed to only be a suppressor of infantry, but currently even after hotfix Alpha they still just slaughter infantry as if they are meant to be primarily slayers of infantry. Many people I talk to say its now much harder to strafe and avoid being hit by large blasters because the dispersion makes shots fly at their direction even when the driver did not have aim on them.

My comments are based on Rattati's stated goals for large blasters, those goals are not met.

On the subject on TTK, I would recommend looking at damage mods; perhaps lowering their efficacy and/or adding stacking penalties.


As always with everything I post, I'm expecting you to try to get the last word in, I've said what I needed to say, so have fun.

We propose the following:

1) Stacking penalties on Armor Repairers
2) Reduction and progression to Damage Amplifiers
3) Reduction of Large rail damage and ROF, increase of Heat Cost

We won't change shield modules for tanks this time around, but with these changes Shield tanked vehicles should be more viable and Armor tanked a little less, such as the Madrugar and ADS.

Here are the numbers:

Numbers

I don't really like most of what is suggested here. I'll go into more detail later this afternoon. Damage, ROF AND heat cost. Are you crazy?

also rails on armor tanks are 2 effective maby a bonus for using all caldary turrents on shield tanks, and all gallente turrents one armor tanks?

edit: woops, didnt mean to quote that

I was also wondering if we could see a buff to large missile turret elevation to combat ADSs more efficiently. I was thinking about something like a 70-80 degree max inclination of the turret, for it to better fulfill its AA/AT role.

In regards to Kagehoshi, personally I think the large blaster should have it's rate of fire, ammo and clip size toned down significantly (and it's damage increased to compensate) so that it is remains the most efficient turret to kill infantry with, but requires much greater aim and tracking then before.

Generally, I think turret types need to drastically lose their rate of fire (or in the missile's case, it's consistency) as they advance up through the sizes. Higher overall dps and efficiency versus armoured targets should at least warrant a decrease in volume of fire. Currently, all large turrets generally follow this rule, however the large blaster sticks out like a sore thumb in comparison to its smaller variant; they are in direct competition.

With that being said, I propose that the large blaster turret be redesigned as a fairly accurate (tone down the dispersion nerf), low RoF weapon (about 150 or so rpm and a damage buff to compensate for the dps loss) with it's current efficiency towards vehicles. The small blaster should have a massive advantage in accuracy (which it does), volume of fire (which it does) and therefore effective range (it definitely needs a large buff to it's effective range) as well as considerable damage (it has this now), to make it a much more effective anti infantry weapon.

Also, fix the hit detection on the small turrets and you'd see that this would all fall neatly into place.

But caldari are long range snipers, duh.

You missed my sarcasm, clearly. I'm aware of this, but consider also that caldari have crap missiles, so **** lore, lol.

Are you saying caldari get missiles and gallente get rails AND blasters. Not fair sir, not fair.

Not in order but my reply as a tank girl.

3, is not totally valid. While they might seem to be the most effective, personally, I find them to be less so. Of course, I don't want others to know this. Dust is filled with qq spewers and this is just the current favorite. The problem is we listen to qq but they don't relate their side of the story. Were they working alone? What weapon were they using? What about relative positions?

Many feel that any AV fit should kill any tank. Also my Maddy gets hit by flux grenades constantly. Wow. No doubt they come back and ***** here about my triple reps. Which I don't run, btw. I tried it a few times but a smart AV pair, not a full squad, can pop you quick. It just takes timing. Much like killing the ccp favorite the 900+ hp bunny hopping invisible scout.

The number of times I have sat still destroying whatever I targeted while getting hit by some totally ignorant red berry with a militia swarm launcher is beyond measure. I even get hate mail about it. But a militia AV care barely damage a properly fitted tank - by itself. Yet one scout with an RE can destroy the very same tank. Somebody is seriously wrong about this. And while I would prefer to say it is the RE scout it is actually the ignorant militia AV swarmer that never notices my shields have recovered by the time they reload. Fools.

1 and 2 in combination are the actual problem, but only to other tanks so why do non-tankers care?

If 1 is true then how can 5 be true as well? When running a shield tank you cannot stand toe to toe with an armored tank. You Will Die. Shield tanks have speed and maneuverability over armor tanks. Armor have higher damage resistance. Coming up behind or flanking an armor tank a shield tank can take them out. If the rail gun actually fires, if the rounds do damage or if the operator doesn't miss. Two of the three problems are the games fault, BTW.

High top speed is still consistent with tanks and the purported goal for the infamous vehicle rebalance of 1.7 if you don't recall I can clarify it for you. Waves of opportunity mean waiting for modules to recharge/cooldown/whatever while reloading ammor and waiting for shields and armor to regen. We are merely doing what ccp demanded we do to run tanks. Rush in guns blazing, use modules to enhance functions/defense, run like frightened rabbits when the modules die down or we have taken too many hits. Then rinse and repeat. Not that much different than many infantry roles.

Now, you are saying what exactly? That this is wrong as well?

Not mentioned is a guy running a Soma that can one shot any tank he comes across. Yep, two friends of mine went against him in a variety of tanks and he shot each of them once and killed them each and every time. How is that possible? I am actively searching for his name and numbers. Neither noted the damage inflicted which was unfortunate.

There is no log, nor statistics that let the players know who is killing who, what is being used to kill what and what is the most effective, common, lethal or cheapest solution. I only hope that CCP Rattiti has some information to base the upcoming changes on. Because the list as its stands is nearly laughable as it is fueled mostly by qq.

Fantastic! You are acting just like the original developers. Wow, that was a fast change. You promised to make small changes and now you are going to hammer tanks with a three way whack to just make us cringe.

Fun guy, I cannot express how happy I am that you fit in the ccp developer mind set so quickly. Cause I ain't happy at all.

I noticed that the stacking penalties are still unknown as is the tradition at ccp. Keep the information away from the users so they will waste sp and isk having to test it themselves. Why is it so difficult just to tell us the information?

And no mention of the rotation speed actually being correct thus no mention of returning sp for anything that you are now making useless. Cause decisions have consequences even though most of those are because of actions by ccp after the fact.

Well, publish when you take your shot at tanks so I can log in for an hour or so to see how bad it is. Then I can log out and play something else.

nerf to damage mod = nerf to missiles, no more killing shield tanks...

I'm not really a huge fan of heavyhanded nerfs to armor repairers (I know that they are technically overpowered currently), Ideally I would like to see fitting *other modules* like armor plates / hardeners incentivized. It feels like plates don't give enough HP currently - whether that's a function of incoming damage being so high or plates being underpowered I'm not sure.

If slot layouts were good, you could brick out and slap a small armor repper on there or something, then go sit next to a supply depot for +100hp/s

thers that. but missiles have other problems:

- volleys are too small

- full auto fire is bugged

- reloads are too long (only a problem because full auto is bugged)

- need more range

- need less dispersion

With the Damage Mod nerf, and maybe a slight Rail nerf a Rail tank should still be able to kill another tank in 3 to 5 shots depending on whether they are hitting the engin block (3 shots) or the hard spots (5 shots). This will mean they are still effective at distance.

If Blaster turrets are given a bit more Direct damage they will be better than Rail Turrets at close range. Dispersion can reduce their effectiveness against infantry and against Tanks at longer range.

I would think that to compensate for the Damage Mod nerf the Missile turrets should get a buff to direct damage (but not splash damage) to increase their effectiveness against tanks without making them OP against infantry.

Remove all railgun nerfs proposed for bravo.

The glass cannon fits are too powerful because of how effective damage mods are. Tweak those, then test out everything else.

Except it needs it range back for it to be relevant

That's not entirely true. I know tankers keep asking for pre 1.6 stats, but we no longer have the stuff from 1.6. This thought process is backwards and illogical. It's a different time and place, dreaming of how things USED to be isn't productive.

While I agree that damage needs to come down, ROF and Heat should be untouched in the first go around just to see how things pan out. Ever actually TRY a railgun without a damage mod against a defense oriented tanker? Just last night, as I ran my double dam modded fit, my mods were down and I was forced to engage basically in a bare gunnlogi.

I won of course, but it took upwards to 5 shots (or more, good tankers are a rarity though) to drop the maddie / gunnlogis without the mods. So I really don't think that changing all of those variables are necessary. I would like a bit more proof, Godin, and less trolling from you.

Would bringing the rails back to 1.6 values REALLY be the best thing for rails. And have you stopped to consider a gunnlogi vs a maddie using a rail? Taking into consideration, plates, hardeners, PG/CPU, ect.

I don't understand their thought process sometimes. Nerf repair modules to a point of uselessness, so you are forced to either use a nearly useless hardener, or stack plates.

What happend to damage mitigation, a combination of heals, HP values, and resistances??? I mean come on, we only have 3 slots to work with, what variety could possibly come of THREE slots.

Agreed it was more fun, but I do not see that as a possibility with CCP. I'm more about working with what we got, not what we had. Things are a LOT different now, and not just the HP values. Things work differently, and shield hardeners provide a LOT more resistances than they used to.

And logic would dictate we adjust just ONE variable and observe the changes. 20% reduction to damage (proposed is 10% I think), that way with a damage mod, you have values similar to what we have now at proto level. I don't think that is all that bad.

The glass cannon stacking damage would STILL be very easy to drop, and at the same time wouldn't 2 shot you from behind. Maybe adjust the PG/CPU values a bit of damage mods (seem very cheap atm) to stop the use of armor in the lows for gunnlogis, and make them MUCH harder to fit on a maddie.

But with a change to damage like this, a single shield hardener will cancel out 2 damage mods. While an armor tank, with a single hardener can cancel 1 damage mod, and stack armor or reps to further mitigate the damage.

My point is, the current value (on proto rails) present a decent TTK. Factor in stacking penalties with damage mods, a 20% nerf to damage greatly prolongs the TTK when coupled with the damage mod changes. Glass cannons would still be glass cannons, and defense oriented tanks would become viable again.