Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Greiv Rabbah
KiLo.
14
|
Posted - 2014.07.26 21:26:00 -
[61] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Everyone, as you know we want to make them more durable so they become a part of the strategy and tactics of every battle. Our proposal is that turrets will go from Shield 750 Armor 3.015 to Shield 2.000 Armor 10.000 set well below Supply Depots at 2.500 and 15.000 respectively. We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Please share your thoughts, in a civilized manner. And yes, this means that Vehicles will need to manouver and possibly even have teammates hack turrets(teamwork, gasp) before venturing into turret defended areas. And no, we don't hate vehicles, just so that is pre-answered Thanks!
i have a little problem with this and the words "player bought turrets" can be twisted to suit my purpose here rather well...
we have large turrets and small turrets; many of us have skilled into them, and for a tanker thats great, but gunners have no real reason to atm aside from being better gunners(great when theres a tanker but..................................) but turrets will have more tactical value and battlefields will become less turret-barren if we could purchase, fit, and OMS our own turrets. overall i like the idea of buffing turrets to keep them getting destroyed all the time, but i'd like even more for turrets to be possible to destroy AND ALSO possible to call in. the OMS that follows could be used to make the commander more useful than (step 1: donut logi step 2: OB)
edit: also, both small and large turrets should be available i think, and being able to use squad WP for OMS could reduce the incidence of OB farming. last i checked, nobody really has a problem with shelling out a million isk for a small turret installation(price came from trailer) |
Apothecary Za'ki
Biomass Positive
144
|
Posted - 2014.07.26 21:42:00 -
[62] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Everyone, as you know we want to make them more durable so they become a part of the strategy and tactics of every battle. Our proposal is that turrets will go from Shield 750 Armor 3.015 to Shield 2.000 Armor 10.000 set well below Supply Depots at 2.500 and 15.000 respectively. We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Please share your thoughts, in a civilized manner. And yes, this means that Vehicles will need to manouver and possibly even have teammates hack turrets(teamwork, gasp) before venturing into turret defended areas. And no, we don't hate vehicles, just so that is pre-answered Thanks! normalizeing is a sin.. i do however think they need some range differances between blaster/rail/missile with a possable range nerf on missiles and slight on rails.. blaster seems fine for now.
but this HP buff is a much needed thing as iv been asking for it since like 1.6 or 1.7 iirc
Minmatar Logibro in training. Rusty needles anyone?
No Mic and no time for "Squeekers"
Nerf scout cloak+shotgun
|
Tesfa Alem
Until thee End
175
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 01:23:00 -
[63] - Quote
A lttile too much of a buff to HP, if you're also going to also improve the AI. The only way to engage turrets for long periods of time would be at the safest range i.e. with rail tanks popping around corners. I'lll just say ADS flying is going to be very tricky, (every tried killing a supply depot with small turrets?) let alone a turret with 12k HP.
From a vehicle users point of veiw it will probably be best to tackle each installation one at time in pairs or more. It'll be more tricky vs red installations and god help you if a blue installation falls into enemy hands behind your back.
Blueberries never defend installations, which have the most potential vehicle killers, thats why vehicles target them first. I'm more relieved to see a manned turret vs an AI turret because at least the manned one can be made to miss.
Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
|
Logi Bro
Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic
3116
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 05:00:00 -
[64] - Quote
Out of curiosity, what are the stats for installation shield delay/shield regeneration?
H
M
G
|
Peregrinuus
16
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 05:08:00 -
[65] - Quote
I fear that this is going to be too much...
Hi.
|
wripple
WarRavens Final Resolution.
194
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 05:44:00 -
[66] - Quote
I do feel like some turrets should be spawned in halfway into the match for certain maps however, there already exist some heavilly exploited turrets that lazily sit safe in the redline that have a perfect veiw of key objectives that are a blessing for cowardly jockeys (cough cough, bridge map) |
Doc DDD
TeamPlayers
248
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 17:53:00 -
[67] - Quote
wouldn't be any problems if there were no redline installations
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
4911
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 20:28:00 -
[68] - Quote
Tesfa Alem wrote:A lttile too much of a buff to HP, if you're also going to also improve the AI. The only way to engage turrets for long periods of time would be at the safest range i.e. with rail tanks popping around corners. I'lll just say ADS flying is going to be very tricky, (every tried killing a supply depot with small turrets?) let alone a turret with 12k HP.
From a vehicle users point of veiw it will probably be best to tackle each installation one at time in pairs or more. It'll be more tricky vs red installations and god help you if a blue installation falls into enemy hands behind your back.
Blueberries never defend installations, which have the most potential vehicle killers, thats why vehicles target them first. I'm more relieved to see a manned turret vs an AI turret because at least the manned one can be made to miss.
"improve the AI"? Please clarify.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
ACT1ON BASTARD
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 20:32:00 -
[69] - Quote
If youre going buff them by that much remove the redline turrets, and please fix the redline glitch where your dropship explodes before the timer ends. Ive lost many dropships trying to kill these turrets. Also decrease the range on the missle installation, theres always someone that will sit in it the whole match pegging me but too deep in the redline to kill. |
gauntlet44 LbowDeep
Heaven84 Devils General Tso's Alliance
97
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 20:35:00 -
[70] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Tesfa Alem wrote:A lttile too much of a buff to HP, if you're also going to also improve the AI. The only way to engage turrets for long periods of time would be at the safest range i.e. with rail tanks popping around corners. I'lll just say ADS flying is going to be very tricky, (every tried killing a supply depot with small turrets?) let alone a turret with 12k HP.
From a vehicle users point of veiw it will probably be best to tackle each installation one at time in pairs or more. It'll be more tricky vs red installations and god help you if a blue installation falls into enemy hands behind your back.
Blueberries never defend installations, which have the most potential vehicle killers, thats why vehicles target them first. I'm more relieved to see a manned turret vs an AI turret because at least the manned one can be made to miss. "improve the AI"? Please clarify.
shooting at null cannons that belong to the enemy while enemies are closer and shooting you while standing next to the turret
Absorb what is useful,
discard what is not,
make it uniquely your own........ Bruce Lee
|
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
4911
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 20:37:00 -
[71] - Quote
ACT1ON BASTARD wrote:If youre going buff them by that much remove the redline turrets, and please fix the redline glitch where your dropship explodes before the timer ends. Ive lost many dropships trying to kill these turrets. Also decrease the range on the missle installation, theres always someone that will sit in it the whole match pegging me but too deep in the redline to kill.
Remove redline turrets - no
Range is already addressed in the OP, which will also help balance red line turrets, that are actually there to stop redline spawn tank camping, but not snipe dropships across the map.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
4912
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 20:40:00 -
[72] - Quote
Apothecary Za'ki wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Everyone, as you know we want to make them more durable so they become a part of the strategy and tactics of every battle. Our proposal is that turrets will go from Shield 750 Armor 3.015 to Shield 2.000 Armor 10.000 set well below Supply Depots at 2.500 and 15.000 respectively. We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Please share your thoughts, in a civilized manner. And yes, this means that Vehicles will need to manouver and possibly even have teammates hack turrets(teamwork, gasp) before venturing into turret defended areas. And no, we don't hate vehicles, just so that is pre-answered Thanks! normalizeing is a sin.. i do however think they need some range differances between blaster/rail/missile with a possable range nerf on missiles and slight on rails.. blaster seems fine for now. but this HP buff is a much needed thing as iv been asking for it since like 1.6 or 1.7 iirc
normalizing means that Installation Turrets have similar range as Large HAV Turrets, and AI radius should be the same as maximum range, not less and not more.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
ACT1ON BASTARD
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 20:41:00 -
[73] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:ACT1ON BASTARD wrote:If youre going buff them by that much remove the redline turrets, and please fix the redline glitch where your dropship explodes before the timer ends. Ive lost many dropships trying to kill these turrets. Also decrease the range on the missle installation, theres always someone that will sit in it the whole match pegging me but too deep in the redline to kill. Remove redline turrets - no Range is already addressed in the OP, which will also help balance red line turrets, that are actually there to stop redline spawn tank camping, but not snipe dropships across the map. So youre reducing range? Can you see about the redline bug for dropships next patch? |
JP Acuna
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
222
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 20:52:00 -
[74] - Quote
I love the idea. Please make it so a redline missile turret can't annoy a dropship across the whole map. Even now it's a problem. |
Temias Mercurial
Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION
133
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 22:13:00 -
[75] - Quote
Greiv Rabbah wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Everyone, as you know we want to make them more durable so they become a part of the strategy and tactics of every battle. Our proposal is that turrets will go from Shield 750 Armor 3.015 to Shield 2.000 Armor 10.000 set well below Supply Depots at 2.500 and 15.000 respectively. We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Please share your thoughts, in a civilized manner. And yes, this means that Vehicles will need to manouver and possibly even have teammates hack turrets(teamwork, gasp) before venturing into turret defended areas. And no, we don't hate vehicles, just so that is pre-answered Thanks! i have a little problem with this and the words "player bought turrets" can be twisted to suit my purpose here rather well... we have large turrets and small turrets; many of us have skilled into them, and for a tanker thats great, but gunners have no real reason to atm aside from being better gunners(great when theres a tanker but..................................) but turrets will have more tactical value and battlefields will become less turret-barren if we could purchase, fit, and OMS our own turrets. overall i like the idea of buffing turrets to keep them getting destroyed all the time, but i'd like even more for turrets to be possible to destroy AND ALSO possible to call in. the OMS that follows could be used to make the commander more useful than (step 1: donut logi step 2: OB) edit: also, both small and large turrets should be available i think, and being able to use squad WP for OMS could reduce the incidence of OB farming. last i checked, nobody really has a problem with shelling out a million isk for a small turret installation(price came from trailer) hey guy below me... would you have a problem with small turrets being available for OMS and having HP comparable to current turret installations?(i think a small player owned turret would make more sense to get 3 shotted to death than a large one thats supposed to be part of the map) again, i like the proposed changes, but i think that turrets will best be saved by making players take ownership of and devote some amount of care to turret installations rather than just making stationary npc turrets harder to do away with
Placing down turrets was something that was thought of and possibly was in development, but it was scraped a long time ago in the early development of Dust.
My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
|
Tesfa Alem
Until thee End
175
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 00:22:00 -
[76] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Tesfa Alem wrote:A lttile too much of a buff to HP, if you're also going to also improve the AI. The only way to engage turrets for long periods of time would be at the safest range i.e. with rail tanks popping around corners. I'lll just say ADS flying is going to be very tricky, (every tried killing a supply depot with small turrets?) let alone a turret with 12k HP.
From a vehicle users point of veiw it will probably be best to tackle each installation one at time in pairs or more. It'll be more tricky vs red installations and god help you if a blue installation falls into enemy hands behind your back.
Blueberries never defend installations, which have the most potential vehicle killers, thats why vehicles target them first. I'm more relieved to see a manned turret vs an AI turret because at least the manned one can be made to miss. "improve the AI"? Please clarify.
Sorry about that, misread the charlie hotfixe update OP. Since you are going to be scaling back the AI and the range, i don't have too much of a problem with it, except for the fact that it will be really difficult to fight an installation with an ADS.
To be honest, it will be one of those things i'd have to try out in game in order to have any real feedback. 12K hp does sound pretty high, and i have never even bothered trying to take down a supply depo or CRU in an ADs and rarely bother with my tank( it takes a while for my friend delb0y to do it and he runs proto missiles with a damage mod) so yeah naturally having somthing with nearly as much HP with a mounted large turret....makes me worry. It will add a lot tactically, so give it a go, but hopefully don't wait till hotfix delta to scale it down if it is deemed a bit too much. High SP players wont find it too worrysome to build a demolition suit ( 8 or more REs should do the trick) low SP players will have to either hack or defend the turrets causing trouble. Well except for the redline turrets, killing those is really going to suck.
Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3150
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 01:30:00 -
[77] - Quote
Regis Blackbird wrote:I like the changes, provided the turret ranges are normalised (as suggested). Question: Do we really need the turret AI?We blame the vehicle users to farm WP, but infantry is guilty as well... Just run up and hack for 50WP, then leave If we want turrets to be tactical installations, why not make it so a turret have to be manned to be useful for the team. Remove the AI and make vehicle (turret) skills apply on fixed turrets as well, and I foresee people specialising as "turret operators" after they become more survivable.
I wouldn't say we need to remove it completely but the AI could do with some tweaking.
Reduce it's accuracy (Prehaps add random dispersion to AI controlled turrets?)
Increase Aggressiveness (It should attempt to fire at anything with 50m for infantry, 100m for vehicles)
Increase Intelligence (Rails should prioritise Vehicles over infantry, and Blasters vice versa)
They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank!
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
|
CHANCEtheChAn
0uter.Heaven
632
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 02:06:00 -
[78] - Quote
Monkey MAC wrote:Regis Blackbird wrote:I like the changes, provided the turret ranges are normalised (as suggested). Question: Do we really need the turret AI?We blame the vehicle users to farm WP, but infantry is guilty as well... Just run up and hack for 50WP, then leave If we want turrets to be tactical installations, why not make it so a turret have to be manned to be useful for td Remove the AI and make vehicle (turret) skills apply on fixed turrets as well, and I foresee people specialising as "turret operators" after they become more survivable. I wouldn't say we need to remove it completely but the AI could do with some tweaking. Reduce it's accuracy (Prehaps add random dispersion to AI controlled turrets?) Increase Aggressiveness (It should attempt to fire at anything with 50m for infantry, 100m for vehicles) Increase Intelligence (Rails should prioritise Vehicles over infantry, and Blasters vice versa) Reducing accuracy isn't a problem because if a AI turret is shooting at you, 95% of the time you can just start strafing back and forth and never be hit by a turret unless you get knicked by the splash (Except sentinel suits, but if your in a sentinel suit out in the open around a turret, you decide to do anyway)
Reducing aggressiveness should be anything inside 75m for infantry and 150-200m for vehicles
And auto fire at anything withing 350m that shoots at the turret
I Like the intelligence idea
Closed Beta Vet/ Chromosome and Corp battle Vet/ Uprising 1.0-Now PC vet
Ex D.F. Director
Current Inner.Hell Director
|
Greiv Rabbah
KiLo.
14
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 03:50:00 -
[79] - Quote
Temias Mercurial wrote:Greiv Rabbah wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Everyone,
stuff more stuff Placing down turrets was something that was thought of and possibly was in development, but it was scraped a long time ago in the early development of Dust.
i get that its an old idea, and maybe its a little dusty, but everyone i talk to in game thinks its good and i think ownership would make players care more about turrets. well, thats why i bring it here to see what ppl think |
Evan Gotabor
Prima Gallicus
50
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 07:22:00 -
[80] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Apothecary Za'ki wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Everyone, as you know we want to make them more durable so they become a part of the strategy and tactics of every battle. Our proposal is that turrets will go from Shield 750 Armor 3.015 to Shield 2.000 Armor 10.000 set well below Supply Depots at 2.500 and 15.000 respectively. We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Please share your thoughts, in a civilized manner. And yes, this means that Vehicles will need to manouver and possibly even have teammates hack turrets(teamwork, gasp) before venturing into turret defended areas. And no, we don't hate vehicles, just so that is pre-answered Thanks! normalizeing is a sin.. i do however think they need some range differances between blaster/rail/missile with a possable range nerf on missiles and slight on rails.. blaster seems fine for now. but this HP buff is a much needed thing as iv been asking for it since like 1.6 or 1.7 iirc normalizing means that Installation Turrets have similar range as Large HAV Turrets, and AI radius should be the same as maximum range, not less and not more.
Will there be any turret location modifications ? I think in particular to the railgun turret right bellow the northern MCC in Line Harvest http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/64656/1/LineHarvest_skirmish.jpg
A lot of players already camp within this turret the whole game, because it has a good sight on both charlie and it's CRU. In a way it is interesting to see a single player which is able to defend strategic installations. However, there is no risk/reward in that kind of gameplay. The only good point I see it is that the player can prevent blasters tanks and ADS to spawnkill on this CRU.
Also, I have two more questions, will turrets have armor regeneration (I haven't see this on this topic, but I know the devs already point out that possibility) ? And my last question, is there a +75 WP for damaging turrets like for vehicles, or is it like CRU and supply installations ?
Incubus pilot
|
|
Temias Mercurial
Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION
133
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 07:55:00 -
[81] - Quote
Greiv Rabbah wrote:Temias Mercurial wrote:Greiv Rabbah wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Everyone,
stuff more stuff Placing down turrets was something that was thought of and possibly was in development, but it was scraped a long time ago in the early development of Dust. i get that its an old idea, and maybe its a little dusty, but everyone i talk to in game thinks its good and i think ownership would make players care more about turrets. well, thats why i bring it here to see what ppl think
I understand what you're saying, and I'd like the idea to be implemented, but it's just that particular thought was jumbled up with a larger project in mind; A project of which that seems highly doubtful to ever be revived. If anything, it may be something they might consider adding to Legion, but I just don't see them adding this to Dust as of now, especially when the staff that is in charge of the direction of the development for Dust has changed a few times already, and they may not have the same ideals or opinions on what they want Dust to be. That's sadly the way it goes... but what makes it more convincing that it's unlikely to be implemented is that the entire subject of placing turrets and the project just... went quiet. It's as if it was swept under the rug cautiously and silently... never to be spoken of again.
My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
|
Temias Mercurial
Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION
133
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 08:12:00 -
[82] - Quote
Monkey MAC wrote:Regis Blackbird wrote:I like the changes, provided the turret ranges are normalised (as suggested). Question: Do we really need the turret AI?We blame the vehicle users to farm WP, but infantry is guilty as well... Just run up and hack for 50WP, then leave If we want turrets to be tactical installations, why not make it so a turret have to be manned to be useful for the team. Remove the AI and make vehicle (turret) skills apply on fixed turrets as well, and I foresee people specialising as "turret operators" after they become more survivable. I wouldn't say we need to remove it completely but the AI could do with some tweaking. Reduce it's accuracy (Prehaps add random dispersion to AI controlled turrets?) Increase Aggressiveness (It should attempt to fire at anything with 50m for infantry, 100m for vehicles) Increase Intelligence (Rails should prioritise Vehicles over infantry, and Blasters vice versa)
Even with random dispersion, having a blaster turret lock-on to you without you so much as looking at it is kind of bullsh*t as infantry (not to be mean).
The aggression part is a nice thought, but is worrisome when AI turrets are just as powerful as vehicle turrets. Before doing that, I think we should see just exactly what "normalizing" turrets is first. I don't believe AI turrets can even overheat when left unmanned, which is especially dangerous when blasters and rails could potentially shoot infinitely. I don't know if the non-overheating part is true, but I've never had a rail installation stop firing after 4 shots unless I've left it's detectable range by then.
My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
|
shaman oga
Nexus Balusa Horizon
2549
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 10:19:00 -
[83] - Quote
Is it possible to have different tier of turret installations?
I mean redline turrets with more HP and turrets on the battlefield with less HP.
PSN: ogamega
"Dust is full of communists who despise people with enough isk to buy expensive items"
|
Jadd Hatchen
Kinda New here
636
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 14:57:00 -
[84] - Quote
Monkey MAC wrote:Gonna make flying a hell of a lot more interesting! I would however suggest you make an RE variant specifically for destroying the Installations, perhaps a damge bonus when stuck directly to it?
Certain Installations are more benifical in 1 direction than another, I still want to be able to destroy a turret if I believe it to be tactically benifical.
AS to the RE portion of the discussion...
YES, make RE's so that they cannot be thrown, then make them powerful enough for two to be able to take out one of these new turrets. You set explosive charges, then you move away and set them off. No one ever throws the damned things! If you want to throw explosives, then use a grenade, mortar, or mass driver!
|
lee corwood
Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION
911
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 15:19:00 -
[85] - Quote
LegacyofTable wrote:What will this mean for the position of the turrets?
I'm sure we all know how useless most of the redline ones are on some maps (except missile turrets that harass ADS) and how poorly positioned other are on the field. Not to mention the direction the AI choose to look towards are sometimes away from the main action.
I guess my real questions are:
Will useless redline turrets be removed/moved? Will the AI of turrets face the main action or remain as is? And would either of those things require more than a hotfix to update?
I actually think some of the redline ones (some, definitely not all) would be beneficial to keep for horribad maps like Ashland. I've seen enemy tankers who were uncontested stop infantry hunting for a quick run around the town to kill any incoming vehicles from dropping from an RDV. Once the tank is on the ground, its down to less than half armor and toast. Having a few red lined turrets with a bit more beef might be enough to deter the enemy long enough to allow opposition vehicle balance.
Minmatar Logisis | Heavy lover. Ping for video services.
|
CELESTA AUNGM
Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation
183
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 18:47:00 -
[86] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:[quote=Apothecary Za'ki][quote=CCP Rattati]Everyone, as you know we want to make them more durable so they become a part of the strategy and tactics of every battle. Our proposal is that turrets will go from Shield 750 Armor 3.015 to Shield 2.000 Armor 10.000 set well below Supply Depots at 2.500 and 15.000 respectively. We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. And yes, this means that Vehicles will need to manouver and possibly even have teammates hack turrets(teamwork, gasp) before venturing into turret defended areas. And no, we don't hate vehicles, just so that is pre-answered normalizing means that Installation Turrets have similar range as Large HAV Turrets, and AI radius should be the same as maximum range, not less and not more.
This is significant and GOOOOD! There are a lot of worries posted here (in the form of negative words like "sin" and "ridiculous"), and there are also posts in here where players are reciting the "steps", "methods" and "risks" you'll be forced to take in order to hack or destroy an installation...
...That is EXACTLY the effect I hoped would occur, and it seems to be the aim of the Devs here too. The Devs are right, we have NOT been valuing installations as tactical tools, we have NOT been challenged enough by them that we have to work as a team to deal with them, and we have NOT really been destroying them early in the matches because they were "threats" to us travelling the maps (it was because they were annoying pimples delaying our fun hunting down infantry who were trying to travel the maps--and in the process of swatting nuissance installations we got easy WP).
This is not all the changes I and others were suggesting, but it is often good in this game to take small steps and measure, rather than take a full leap right away. Boosting the squishiness of installations, and using a Supply Depot as your reference, is a correct move (though I still believe, due to their individualized damage capabilities, Rail -to- Missile -to- Blaster installations each ought to have individualized shield/armour accordingly.
Adjusting (ulitmately I suspect this means "raising") the AI of each turret relative to its range, is also a correct move (though in future hotfixes I think the ranges or dispersions will need to be revisited, once we see how players' BEHAVIOR changes from Hotfix Charlie).
We should know by now, fellow players, that this "balance" thing in the game is NOT acheived by numbers---so let's not get panicked by seeing 700 get raised to 2000 and not to 1800, or not quite 2500, etc. If raising the "perceived threat" of these installations:
--makes HAV drivers look for new tactics to destroy them (while enemy dots are running past your HAV and hacking nulls because your mind is fixated on racking up installation-kills and not on helping blue dots defend their assets )...
--makes four blues decide to work together to hack the installation and use its improved AI for cover before they dash recklessly for the null-hack and get ambushed by reds... (, yes I resemble that remark, and often)
--makes a player choose a brand new role for her hand-repper and for herself (Adi Smitts: Gun Installation Specialist & Repairs Expert )...
--gives players the desire to DEFFEND a nearby installation (because it can protect them from HAV and ADS better than the proto-AV player who's leaves his fellows unprotected while she's solo-hunting vehicles for personal WP glory )...
...then it is encouraging our behavior to move in the right direction. Thank you, Devs. This small step looks promising.
Universe of good wishes for the 49, especially CCP Eterne...
No story can have life without writers and publishers.
|
Dustbunny Durrr
ReD or DeaD
259
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 19:52:00 -
[87] - Quote
Jadd Hatchen wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:Gonna make flying a hell of a lot more interesting! I would however suggest you make an RE variant specifically for destroying the Installations, perhaps a damge bonus when stuck directly to it?
Certain Installations are more benifical in 1 direction than another, I still want to be able to destroy a turret if I believe it to be tactically benifical. AS to the RE portion of the discussion... No one ever throws the damned things! If you want to throw explosives, then use a grenade, mortar, or mass driver!
People do in fact throw the damned things. Charlie should be interesting though, whereas Hotfixes Alpha and Bravo were "mostly everyone agrees these changes will make the game better" fixes, Charlie diverts from that and goes to a more traditional patch (1.6, 1.7, 1.8) of "half the people like or dislike X, and CCP will change it anyways. |
CELESTA AUNGM
Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation
183
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 20:38:00 -
[88] - Quote
And just to keep the conversation stirred up:
Rail and Blaster Installations DO overheat when on running on AI. (Sometimes it is the ONLY way a lone player has been able to roll up on a blaster installation...Whew!)
I agree with Rattati's opinion, that installations NOT be removed from the Redzone. (They are the only decent protection a team's home staging area has---we certainly can't hold our breaths relying on our fellow players to cover the LZ). Redlining the enemy is a reward that must be EARNED after tenaciously drilling through and wearing down their barrier of enemy support fire.
And it would not make sense to "try to make installations last longer and be more valuable in the matches", but then make a new peice of equipment like an RE that swats the installation away in two blasts...
Universe of good wishes for the 49, especially CCP Eterne...
No story can have life without writers and publishers.
|
Edgar Reinhart
Resheph Interstellar Strategy Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 09:10:00 -
[89] - Quote
I'm just going to paste in an abbreviated version of something I added to an earlier discussion on a similar topic,
As a novice blueberry in a Militia suit I often find that falling back and using a turret is one way that I can...... briefly..... be of genuine use to the team, and although I'm not sure of it's viability with the fixes that can be made at the moment I was wondering if it would be worth buffing the turrets in a way that would encourage them to be manned during battles.
To this end I thought it might be worth giving them active modules as standard so that if there is somebody operating them they have access to a decent dmg module, repair module and hardener module. This would mean that if a turret was being operated it would be possible can keep it in the fight longer and tactically choose to do more damage.
I don't know how the AI works but presumably it wouldn't have access to the modules and therefore a manned turret would have the potential to be more dangerous and useful than an AI one and to repair itself after an engagement. HAVs and, especially, Dropships and LAVs can easily out manoeuvre a turret and would need to use this advantage more.
As I said this is coming from the POV of a relative newberry with little experience of using vehicles themselves so I only have a one sided view of balance at the moment but that's my two cents worth.
I'd also remove WP from un hacked neutral turrets, by all means destroy them for the threat that they potentially pose but until they are an actual threat substantially reduced..... you could make a good argument for +5 like equipment. |
CELESTA AUNGM
Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation
183
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:24:00 -
[90] - Quote
Edgar!!!
I LIKE some of your ideas. Not all, but the ones I do, I like alot.
Part of my suggestions included making the installations behave differently when they are MANNED, than when they are on AI. This way, players who are not good at using turrets and have no interest in them, can see a benefit in hacking them and leaving them on AI mode----ony those players who are practiced at turrets can MAN the installation and use it to levels slightly more lethal than leaving it on AI mode...
Newberry or not, you've got your head in the right direction for this game.
.....(tears)...I remember when I was a Newberry in Dust ...(fade to Sepia)
Universe of good wishes for the 49, especially CCP Eterne...
No story can have life without writers and publishers.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |