DUST Search - [Idea] Reimplementing Turret Variants

Teba Gan wrote:

Roger Cordill wrote:

The scattered was no less accurate than the regular, stabilized, or compredded (you forgot); it was just downright better than all the rest. Stabilized had a insane fitting cost for a slightly higher optimal (scattered's damage and ROF buff made it to be pretty much the same, but lower fitting, so pointless). Normals were just downright inferior, and Compressed just overall sucked, and had nothing going for them, especially since scattered blasters (yes, again) our damaged them very quickly. There was really no point in not using anything other than scattered.

missiles were actually balanced nice, as each could be used how the person wanted to use it, and they worked how they were supposed to (unlike rails and blasters, more on rails in a bit). Cycled would need to just be overall faster, but lower damage as a result ( like before, but full auto instead of that burst fire **** :D)

Rails were the same as blasters, being pointless for every other turret but the compressed. Regulated was a even crazier ***** to fit (why did it even have higher fitting costs in the first damn place? And why you you want higher fitting costs now, especially when we can't fit ****), all the thing had going for it was a slightly higher tracking speed. That's it. It had lower damage, and iirc, a lower ROF.

From reading this, it's either you didn't understand what they actually did, or you became a pilot in 1.7 (scrub if that was the case), because you missed turret types, and didn't get many of the turret types right on how they worked. Also, as you said, all you want vehicles to do is either shoot at vehicles, or shoot at infantry.

On the issue of the compressed rail, it wasn't THE BEST in my opinion. It did trump others, my fav being the regular version that had more shots with lesser damage, slightly. It could have done with less range to emphasize the power in comparison to other rail varieties.

But I always loved nailing tanks with the regular version of the railgun (typically blasters or other short range tanks) from afar. While I couldn't outright kill them, I felt it was a good long range siege gun that served to contain an control tanks on the field. That or it worked in tangent with other tanks on the field, adding extra damage (that required some killer accuracy) so other tanks could finish the job.

I would be all for bringing in a rail type that emphasized range over power.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
MRBH1997 Knights Of Ender Proficiency V. 111	Posted - 2014.06.25 16:22:00 - [1] - Quote Before 1.7 we had a lot more vehicle fitting combinations due to all the different active and passiv modules and turret variants. This thread is about how the variants would work with the current turret system. Firstly we have of blasters the scattered, normal, and stabilized for both large and small. -Scattered would take more to fit that the normal because it has a higher damage output and fire rate but is less accurate and is meant for infantry suppression or close quarters tank v tank combat. -The stabilized would take more than the scattered to fit because it has more range and high accuracy but a slow fire rate and lower damage. This makes it a more anti infantry weapon and less effective against vehicles. -Then the normal would of course be between the two in range, damage and accuracy but could be used for either and would have the lowest fitting cost. Then we have missiles with the accelerated, fragmented, and normal for both while we have a small cycled. -Normal would be what we have now of course being the lowest cost for fitting and can be used for any purpose. -The accelerated would take more to fit but has increased range and projectile speed but the same damage and would be more of a ranged weapon. -The fragmented would take about the same to fit but has increased splash and decreased direct and is a more anti infantry focused missile. -The cycled which was only a small variant woul be a three round burst missile with lower damage but fast fire rate. It would also probably have a slower reloa speed so it woul be a high risk high reward in regards to damage based on your aim. It could be both anti vehicle or infantry but would probably be better against infantry. Then we have railguns with the compressed, normal, and regulated. -The normal would of course be the easiest and most basic one to fit. -The compressed would be a slow shooting heavy hitter that would overheat faster and takes more to fit makein it only ideal against vehicles and requires great aim so you don't miss and screw yourself over. -The regulated I believe was a lower damage rail that fired faster an overheated slower and took more to fit but I am not sure so that variant could be changed. I feel reimplementing turret variants would bring different options to pilots and tankers when it comes to the point of focusing on infantry or other vehicles. I plan of making an update with possible stats. CEO of Knights of Ender Corporation Website: http://koe.shivtr.com Public Channel: Knights of Ender Public
Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 373	Posted - 2014.06.25 16:38:00 - [2] - Quote The scattered was no less accurate than the regular, stabilized, or compredded (you forgot); it was just downright better than all the rest. Stabilized had a insane fitting cost for a slightly higher optimal (scattered's damage and ROF buff made it to be pretty much the same, but lower fitting, so pointless). Normals were just downright inferior, and Compressed just overall sucked, and had nothing going for them, especially since scattered blasters (yes, again) our damaged them very quickly. There was really no point in not using anything other than scattered. missiles were actually balanced nice, as each could be used how the person wanted to use it, and they worked how they were supposed to (unlike rails and blasters, more on rails in a bit). Cycled would need to just be overall faster, but lower damage as a result ( like before, but full auto instead of that burst fire ** :D) Rails were the same as blasters, being pointless for every other turret but the compressed. Regulated was a even crazier * to fit (why did it even have higher fitting costs in the first damn place? And why you you want higher fitting costs now, especially when we can't fit **), all the thing had going for it was a slightly higher tracking speed. That's it. It had lower damage, and iirc, a lower ROF. From reading this, it's either you didn't understand what they actually did, or you became a pilot in 1.7 (scrub if that was the case), because you missed turret types, and didn't get many of the turret types right on how they worked. Also, as you said, all you want vehicles to do is either shoot at vehicles, or shoot at infantry.
MRBH1997 Knights Of Ender Proficiency V. 111	Posted - 2014.06.25 16:45:00 - [3] - Quote I tanked in open beta and I don't remember the exact stats of any of them. As what I said for ROF and such were ideas to make ones more favorable than the others in different situations. And I'm saying these as an idea, how they fit and work can be changed. Also yes I forgot the compressed blaster and the regulated I couldn't remember what it did different than the normal. Any turret can be used against infantry as vehicles but some are better at one more than the other. CEO of Knights of Ender Corporation Website: http://koe.shivtr.com Public Channel: Knights of Ender Public
Teba Gan da durrty dozenz 1	Posted - 2014.06.25 17:40:00 - [4] - Quote Roger Cordill wrote: The scattered was no less accurate than the regular, stabilized, or compredded (you forgot); it was just downright better than all the rest. Stabilized had a insane fitting cost for a slightly higher optimal (scattered's damage and ROF buff made it to be pretty much the same, but lower fitting, so pointless). Normals were just downright inferior, and Compressed just overall sucked, and had nothing going for them, especially since scattered blasters (yes, again) our damaged them very quickly. There was really no point in not using anything other than scattered. missiles were actually balanced nice, as each could be used how the person wanted to use it, and they worked how they were supposed to (unlike rails and blasters, more on rails in a bit). Cycled would need to just be overall faster, but lower damage as a result ( like before, but full auto instead of that burst fire ** :D) Rails were the same as blasters, being pointless for every other turret but the compressed. Regulated was a even crazier * to fit (why did it even have higher fitting costs in the first damn place? And why you you want higher fitting costs now, especially when we can't fit **), all the thing had going for it was a slightly higher tracking speed. That's it. It had lower damage, and iirc, a lower ROF. From reading this, it's either you didn't understand what they actually did, or you became a pilot in 1.7 (scrub if that was the case), because you missed turret types, and didn't get many of the turret types right on how they worked. Also, as you said, all you want vehicles to do is either shoot at vehicles, or shoot at infantry. On the issue of the compressed rail, it wasn't THE BEST in my opinion. It did trump others, my fav being the regular version that had more shots with lesser damage, slightly. It could have done with less range to emphasize the power in comparison to other rail varieties. But I always loved nailing tanks with the regular version of the railgun (typically blasters or other short range tanks) from afar. While I couldn't outright kill them, I felt it was a good long range siege gun that served to contain an control tanks on the field. That or it worked in tangent with other tanks on the field, adding extra damage (that required some killer accuracy) so other tanks could finish the job. I would be all for bringing in a rail type that emphasized range over power.
MRBH1997 Knights Of Ender Proficiency V. 111	Posted - 2014.06.25 18:13:00 - [5] - Quote Teba Gan wrote: Roger Cordill wrote: The scattered was no less accurate than the regular, stabilized, or compredded (you forgot); it was just downright better than all the rest. Stabilized had a insane fitting cost for a slightly higher optimal (scattered's damage and ROF buff made it to be pretty much the same, but lower fitting, so pointless). Normals were just downright inferior, and Compressed just overall sucked, and had nothing going for them, especially since scattered blasters (yes, again) our damaged them very quickly. There was really no point in not using anything other than scattered. missiles were actually balanced nice, as each could be used how the person wanted to use it, and they worked how they were supposed to (unlike rails and blasters, more on rails in a bit). Cycled would need to just be overall faster, but lower damage as a result ( like before, but full auto instead of that burst fire ** :D) Rails were the same as blasters, being pointless for every other turret but the compressed. Regulated was a even crazier * to fit (why did it even have higher fitting costs in the first damn place? And why you you want higher fitting costs now, especially when we can't fit *), all the thing had going for it was a slightly higher tracking speed. That's it. It had lower damage, and iirc, a lower ROF. From reading this, it's either you didn't understand what they actually did, or you became a pilot in 1.7 (scrub if that was the case), because you missed turret types, and didn't get many of the turret types right on how they worked. Also, as you said, all you want vehicles to do is either shoot at vehicles, or shoot at infantry. On the issue of the compressed rail, it wasn't THE BEST in my opinion. It did trump others, my fav being the regular version that had more shots with lesser damage, slightly. It could have done with less range to emphasize the power in comparison to other rail varieties. But I always loved nailing tanks with the regular version of the railgun (typically blasters or other short range tanks) from afar. While I couldn't outright kill them, I felt it was a good long range siege gun that served to contain an control tanks on the field. That or it worked in tangent with other tanks on the field, adding extra damage (that required some killer accuracy) so other tanks could finish the job. I would be all for bringing in a rail type that emphasized range over power. Yes not necessarily bringing back old variants but having some variants would change tactics of many tankers. CEO of Knights of Ender* Corporation Website: http://koe.shivtr.com Public Channel: Knights of Ender Public
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1088	Posted - 2014.06.25 21:18:00 - [6] - Quote Not yet please as the turrets are still in such a state of flux. Masses are still learning (how to feather their trigger fingers etc) :-S
Tonka Legacy Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 117	Posted - 2014.06.26 10:58:00 - [7] - Quote yeah, I liked the variety, I want them back Sentinel: I am heavy weapons guy... Commando: I got a RR and a CR, Im so good. Logi: In it 4 the points and points only.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page