DUST Search - Sticky:Hotfix Charlie

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:Hotfix Charlie - Installation eHP

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 4853	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:00:00 - [1] - Quote 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! "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Cody Sietz SVER True Blood Dark Taboo 3692	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:04:00 - [2] - Quote Love it. It will be nice not to be sniped from AI turrets and it will be nice to be able to man a turret without it blowing up the second you flip it. "I do agree with you there though. shudders" -Arkena Wyrnspire
JRleo jr Xer Cloud Consortium 128	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:07:00 - [3] - 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! Any plans to increase shield recharge on turrets? And player bought......as in the hav turrets? Max level brony. Pink fluffy unicorns http://youtu.be/C34BzC7rnos Best song evar.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 3137	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:07:00 - [4] - Quote 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. 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
Cody Sietz SVER True Blood Dark Taboo 3692	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:11:00 - [5] - 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. I would love breach REs with a .01 meter explosive radius and high dmg for installations and tanks. Hell, give it a -.01 meter radius for all I care. As long as I can stick it to the back of a tank. "I do agree with you there though. shudders" -Arkena Wyrnspire
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 2535	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:11:00 - [6] - Quote Turrets are already good in my opinion and they are for free, there is no need to make them more durable, ADS pilots will go mad, tank pilots will not like, infantry will not like because AV will take some time to destroy a turret (and ammo count on AV is already low). Plus in some maps turrets can destroy supply depots. Why not use OMS support and drop new turrets after a certain time (2/3 minutes)? Meanwhile you should set a little WP reward for the distruction like 75 points. PSN: ogamega "Dust is full of communist who despise people with enough isk to buy expensive items"
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2636	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:35:00 - [7] - Quote Turret AI confuses me I can literally out strafe a blaster by walking towards one side but a Rail can snipe the driver out of moving LAV at top speeds. Here are a few issues with Turrets: 1 unmanned Rail installations not overheating, I'll count consecutive shots and it will be well over 4 in fact it might not even stop 2 Rail installations not doing any damage while the majority of the time Installations will damage you sometimes they will not it may have something to do with the first issue 3 Blaster turrets have not received the dispersion to the degree the tank blaster has, the blaster installation in my opinion is far more deadly then my 280k Ion Cannon. Annoyances: Missile turrets pegging my tank from 600 meters away, it must be a so annoying to ADS pilots To test it's range I fired a volley at the enemy MCC and got a hit marker the distance was 1000+ meters Can you make it so that when supply depots and installations drop it is either slowed down or a verbal warning or written warning flashes across your screen so that I don't lose 500k+ in assets to a falling neutral installation? Tanker/Logi
LegacyofTable Planetary Response Organisation FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE 21	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:35:00 - [8] - Quote 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? Licensed Thales Hunter Total Thales taken - 18
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 127	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:47:00 - [9] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Turrets are already good in my opinion and they are for free, there is no need to make them more durable, ADS pilots will go mad, tank pilots will not like, infantry will not like because AV will take some time to destroy a turret (and ammo count on AV is already low). Plus in some maps turrets can destroy supply depots. Why not use OMS support and drop new turrets after a certain time (2/3 minutes)? Meanwhile you should set a little WP reward for the distruction like 75 points. If the AI changes are indeed good enough, and the missile range for AI turrets is reduced immensely (they can currently shoot across the entire map...), then I as a pilot wouldn't mind the changes, but I don't agree with 30,000 armour. I'm more in favor of 20,000 to 22,000 armour. Also, the blaster AI turret needs dispersion, currently it has the dispersion reticule, but still shoots in a straight line. I also believe that turrets should be given finite clips/magazines, but have an infinite pool of ammunition, and be required to reload. Another thought I presented was to allow turrets to give ammunition to vehicle turrets of it type, to increase their worth on the battlefield, when buffing Ai turrets were first discussed. My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 3704	Posted - 2014.07.25 23:59:00 - [10] - Quote Holy cow. New shield module!

The Eristic Dust 90210 586	Posted - 2014.07.26 00:26:00 - [11] - Quote Good. Good. Reality is the original Rorschach. Verily! So much for all that.
MINA Longstrike 1057	Posted - 2014.07.26 00:47:00 - [12] - Quote I will state outright that I dislike these changes and think that the buffs are far too large in scope and that they don't address any real existing problems, yes vehicles destroy installations - it is done because they are incredibly threatening to leave unhacked or in enemy control. I firmly believe that with these changes the traditional 'redline' turrets will need to be placed outside the redline. As it currently stands there are more than a few maps where someone can sit on a missile installation and shoot at things all the way across the map (missile installations currently have no maximum range). In order for some of these redline turrets to be destroyed currently one needs to make a 'redline dive' with an assault dropship for as little as two shots - with the HP buffs these incredibly troubling installations are getting they have now become effectively impossible to destroy. I also think that with the increased hp values, there should be increased rewards for damaging, hacking or destroying these installations. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
David Spd Caldari State 145	Posted - 2014.07.26 01:01:00 - [13] - Quote Glad this will be a thing, to be honest. They were pointless before. Free WP for experienced players, and just problematic for new players. With these changes people will need to actually pay attention to them and plan around it. Good move in my opinion. --> I'm a closed beta vet; I just don't post often <-- "Other people just complicate my life." ~Solid Snake
Mauren NOON The Exemplars Top Men. 392	Posted - 2014.07.26 01:05:00 - [14] - 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! Honestly, I don't like this.....this will give people even more motive to man redline missile turrets.... I say maybe: Shield: 1,250 Armor: 5,500 Scr and commando enthusiast. A commando is not just a suit, but a way of life... "The only thing to fear is fear itself"
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 3141	Posted - 2014.07.26 01:09:00 - [15] - Quote Mauren NOON 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! Honestly, I don't like this.....this will give people even more motive to man redline missile turrets.... I say maybe: Shield: 1,250 Armor: 5,500 Missile Turret Ranges will be normalised to about 150m I think, same as large turret version on HAV's 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
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1179	Posted - 2014.07.26 01:23:00 - [16] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Can you elaborate what you mean by player bought turrets, as there has never ever been any info on those for the players? We have no stats for starters, and they haven't been in game for our testing so far. Of course, we'd be glad to see them implemented =)))) As long as map engine allow bringing more stuff in at arbitrary locations and you solve the issue of using landing turrets as bombs on tank (by giving them same kind of signal+more delay as OBs) People would enjoy Dust a lot more if they accepted the fact that EVERYTHING is subject to change
MINA Longstrike 1058	Posted - 2014.07.26 02:03:00 - [17] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Can you elaborate what you mean by player bought turrets, as there has never ever been any info on those for the players? We have no stats for starters, and they haven't been in game for our testing so far. Of course, we'd be glad to see them implemented =)))) As long as map engine allow bringing more stuff in at arbitrary locations and you solve the issue of using landing turrets as bombs on tank (by giving them same kind of signal+more delay as OBs) He's talking vehicle turrets Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Rusty Shallows Caldari State 1913	Posted - 2014.07.26 02:32:00 - [18] - Quote David Spd wrote: Glad this will be a thing, to be honest. They were pointless before. Free WP for experienced players, and just problematic for new players. With these changes people will need to actually pay attention to them and plan around it. Good move in my opinion. Tactics in a game aiming to be a Tactical Shooter? Crazy talk! As a someone who has messed around with Forge Guns since Closed Beta I approve. While you are at it please remove all free Instillations and make people pay and deploy them OMS style. Forums > Game: So here is a cookie and a Like. Please keep posting. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! >>> GòÜ(GÇóGîéGÇó)Gò¥ >>>
Tread Loudly 2 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 18	Posted - 2014.07.26 02:38:00 - [19] - Quote This pretty much tops off issues with vehicles lol the turret will have double the HP of my most bulky tank and then their will be even more blue dots camping in the redline which will take away from teamwork even more :/ ADS Now will be decimated by turrets HAV's vs rail installations or even blasters if shield based HAV = no chance 1v1 This means that AV will be more effective at taking down these turrets just because of their ability to poke in and out to take shots at the installation Even as of right now the only reason HAV/ADS operators destroy turrets so fast is because in truth they are more deadly than any other entity on the battlefield. Then with this insane HP GJ HAV you were nice while you lasted looks like it's time to start skilling into scouts or maybe heavies I Like Tanks, ADS's, and Ion Pistols!
Senator Snipe Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dark Taboo 178	Posted - 2014.07.26 03:32:00 - [20] - 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! hmmmmm My forge skills are unmatchable. It's not that i lose battles, its just that sometimes i don't feel like winning them.

Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 128	Posted - 2014.07.26 03:34:00 - [21] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Can you elaborate what you mean by player bought turrets, as there has never ever been any info on those for the players? We have no stats for starters, and they haven't been in game for our testing so far. Of course, we'd be glad to see them implemented =)))) As long as map engine allow bringing more stuff in at arbitrary locations and you solve the issue of using landing turrets as bombs on tank (by giving them same kind of signal+more delay as OBs) He's talking vehicle turrets I believe at some point the developers were actually considering allowing players to put down purchased turret installations, but that was a looooooooong time ago. I believe that may have been why he asked for clarification. My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Atiim Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 10938	Posted - 2014.07.26 03:36:00 - [22] - Quote Not sure if this would require a client side update, but I'll suggest anyways. What if upon clicking on the Installation option on the Deployment Tab, we were shown the overhead map, similar to the Orbital Strike Menu. Then, we'd use the same mechanics as selecting where to place a Warbarge Strike to deploy an Installation. The Installations, would then appear in the same place as the 80GJ Turrets on the Marketplace. Y/N? And nothing of value was lost that day... -HAND
Atiim Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 10938	Posted - 2014.07.26 03:37:00 - [23] - Quote Also, could we make it to where AV Grenades work against Installations? And nothing of value was lost that day... -HAND
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 128	Posted - 2014.07.26 03:44:00 - [24] - Quote Atiim wrote: Also, could we make it to where AV Grenades work against Installations? I always found it odd that they didn't, yet everything else did. I know that they are 'Anti-Vehicle' grenades, but come on... if everything else works on them why don't they work too? My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Doc DDD TeamPlayers 248	Posted - 2014.07.26 04:35:00 - [25] - Quote This is, for the most part rediculous... unless rail and Missle Installation range is HEAVILY NERFED. A tank will have no chance to take out a.rail installation as the installation will blow up the tank in 4 shots, but.the installation will.require like 12 shots? Missle Installations already shoot 1000m and now a tanker/ads pilot has to deal with it being near indestructible in the redline. all redline installations will be rediculous to ddestroy and EVERY match will consist of 4 no talent scrubs manning them the entire match spamming endless fire across the map. the only saving grace would be at least halving the range, and in the case of Missle Installations, actually applying some sort of range, like 275 meters. honestly, why is there a need for a free stationary Militia tank to be sitting in the redline with insanely high sp and unlimited ammo, I was under the impression the community disliked redline tanks.
Y-BLOCK BioCyberDevelopment 13	Posted - 2014.07.26 04:36:00 - [26] - Quote Last to Hack Bonus!! You will do what you will with the turrets, no matter what my opinion on the matter; however, I do propose a bonus for the first 3 kills an un-manned turret makes, if any, to the last player to have hacked the turret.
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 129	Posted - 2014.07.26 04:43:00 - [27] - Quote Y-BLOCK wrote: Last to Hack Bonus!! You will do what you will with the turrets, no matter what my opinion on the matter; however, I do propose a bonus for the first 3 kills an un-manned turret makes, if any, to the last player to have hacked the turret. That could be nice. Now, about the dropship bonus... My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Brush Master HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 1276	Posted - 2014.07.26 06:02:00 - [28] - Quote What will the ranges of each turret be? As dropships are hit by every turret on the battlefield, if you want our feedback, we need to know this as well. Dust Veteran. June 2012 - ? True Logi. Flying DS from the start. @dustreports
Dustbunny Durrr ReD or DeaD 252	Posted - 2014.07.26 06:45:00 - [29] - Quote I'm worried that the tripling of turret HP + reduced points for destroying a turret leads to one of those problems of "you're changing too many things at once to keep it balanced". The tripling of HP makes it more than 3 times as hard to kill due to current kill methods (which do not require finding cover), not to mention the much higher time involved. Essentially you'll be doing a riskier job, which takes MORE time/effort, and will be getting paid less (WPs)? Change one thing at a time, not both, unless you're godly confident that you haven't broken the system. If the fix isn't enough, you can always buff more later.
Syeven Reed G0DS AM0NG MEN 784	Posted - 2014.07.26 07:23:00 - [30] - Quote If they're more in line with tank turrets could you also apply skill books to them, turret rotation for example? Word Crimes

Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1767	Posted - 2014.07.26 08:52:00 - [31] - Quote Please please no. There's no need for this. Large Rails are OP as heck now anyway with perfect tracking and insta-locking, even out of range (so they'll keep shooting even after you back out to cooldown or reload). No one even uses turrets even if they're not blown up, so keeping the out is only an annoyance to tankers and more so DSs and LAVs. What is an LAV going to do against an installation? Forge it? Small rail or missile it? This change will be like taking out a Supply Depot currently. Seriously, try doing that in a LAV, heck, even an ADS and see how effective it is. This isn't going to stop tanks from destroying them or make them anymore useful. It's only going to hurt DSs and LAVs and be generally annoying in every case. Honestly, I'd be for removing them entirely. Edit: And as shaman oga said, it's more of a pain on AV since they're wasting more ammo. There's nothing good coming from thisGÇª
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 988	Posted - 2014.07.26 09:13:00 - [32] - Quote I think doubling the HP values is enough, AV grenades should work on turrets and turret skills should work on turrets. Tone the AI WAY down, if I shoot a rail turret it one pops me, that may be Ok now but if my engagement time is doubled or more that is just too much. I suggest this wait until Delta, we have quite a few AV/vehicle balance changes to test out already. Vehicles are starting to feel some pain and us AV'ers want their to be plenty of vehicles. I predict Jihad jeeps against turrets. Because, that's why.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 2536	Posted - 2014.07.26 10:09:00 - [33] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: I predict Jihad jeeps against turrets. I approve jihad jeeps against turrets Off map support is the key imo, the only good thing of domination in Line Harvest is the off map support. Installation should drop 2-3 minutes after they have been destroyed, this should happen for supply depots and cru as well. PSN: ogamega "Dust is full of communist who despise people with enough isk to buy expensive items"
Zhenechka Zivonencia Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1	Posted - 2014.07.26 11:06:00 - [34] - Quote Have to agree with Nothing, double their eHp is just ebought and then they will be fine.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 709	Posted - 2014.07.26 12:06:00 - [35] - Quote I just calculated that it takes ~22 seconds to kill the 12k ehp installation with an IAFG. 8 Shots is what I assumed. This is a number rather similar to what we have with an actual fight against a Madrugar if the HAV driver is smart enough to move about a bit instead of just taking the shots. A single logi with an axis repair tool will be able to extend the lifespan of the installation to ~30 seconds. So in conclusion I'd like to see how this pans out. It will probably be preferable to just hack them so that's a mission accomplished I guess. Did you check on the technical possibility of having installations redeploy a while after being destroyed? That would allow us to go lower on the ehp numbers maybe. Perhaps this is rather a topic for Delta. I have long since wanted Dust to be more about territory control and this change might improve that aspect a lot. So I'm looking forward to how this community will adapt to the changes in the weeks following Hotfix Charlie.
anaboop Dem Durrty Boyz General Tso's Alliance 126	Posted - 2014.07.26 12:33:00 - [36] - Quote Would be nice if vehicle skills such as increased shield armor turret rotation blah blah, increased turrets instead of something everyone can use, or new skills so u have to skill into it to make it good, would force newbies out them and peopoe that skill into worth hacking and staying on them. Fully sick Anaboop trading card
Vitharr Foebane Terminal Courtesy Proficiency V. 1655	Posted - 2014.07.26 13:36:00 - [37] - Quote Like the changes nothing annoys me more then hacking a turret only to have it blow up in my face because some tanker wants a free 100 wp Amarr: Assault V, Scout V, Sentinel V, Commando IV, Logistics IV I place my faith in my God, my Empress, and my Laz0r
Cat Merc Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 11306	Posted - 2014.07.26 13:44:00 - [38] - Quote Just make sure the AI doesn't go ham with infantry killing. The last thing we need is railguns sniping us with perfect accuracy from 300m. Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
ladwar HEARTS OF PHOENIX 2016	Posted - 2014.07.26 13:53:00 - [39] - 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! will you tell us these ranges or what? and by normalize with player bought turrets you mean missiles turrets which have been needing a range reduction from their 2km range. so will you change the location of some clearly bad placed turrets? also can you add friendly fire to blue turrets in all game modes? i only ask this because there is no reason for ground troops to protect turrets from being hack and normally won't hack it back. the armor is bit high 5,000 is a bit more reasonable. Level 2 Forum Warrior, bitter vet. I shall smite Thy Trolls with numbers and truth doing reviews in free time, want 1?
ladwar HEARTS OF PHOENIX 2016	Posted - 2014.07.26 14:01:00 - [40] - Quote Temias Mercurial wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: We will normalize the AI radius and Weapon ranges as well, in correlation with player bought Turrets. Can you elaborate what you mean by player bought turrets, as there has never ever been any info on those for the players? We have no stats for starters, and they haven't been in game for our testing so far. Of course, we'd be glad to see them implemented =)))) As long as map engine allow bringing more stuff in at arbitrary locations and you solve the issue of using landing turrets as bombs on tank (by giving them same kind of signal+more delay as OBs) He's talking vehicle turrets I believe at some point the developers were actually considering allowing players to put down purchased turret installations, but that was a looooooooong time ago. I believe that may have been why he asked for clarification. they planned on it and then abandoned it and finally removed the tab along with other things. it was on of the early selling points for dust. Level 2 Forum Warrior, bitter vet. I shall smite Thy Trolls with numbers and truth doing reviews in free time, want 1?

Nao Kun Nyain San General Tso's Alliance 6	Posted - 2014.07.26 14:04:00 - [41] - 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! Tanker is completely dead. AND We want to take the Null Cannon and kill the enemy, we did not want to hakking. This will lead to a deterioration of efficiency. I don't think this change is necessary. thanks for watching. I love Madrugar.
Killar-12 The Exemplars Top Men. 3058	Posted - 2014.07.26 14:14:00 - [42] - Quote Way too much HP x2 or less I am an Idiot, and so are you!
voidfaction Void of Faction 350	Posted - 2014.07.26 15:22:00 - [43] - 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! Now only if the Yellow turrets that are not in control by either side would return fire on anything that shoots at them I would be happy. Will be nice having turret for cover fire from a patrolling tank for more than 1 sec.
Atiim Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 10953	Posted - 2014.07.26 15:24:00 - [44] - Quote Killar-12 wrote: Way too much HP x2 or less The Installations are stationary and anyone who's smart enough to look here will never be surprised by one, so they need to have an extreme amount of eHP.. And nothing of value was lost that day... -HAND
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 1496	Posted - 2014.07.26 15:57:00 - [45] - Quote I approve. The turrets are stationary so it's no surprise to anyone where they are. It means that tankers will have to rely and support the infantry on their side while they hack them to allow them to move forward. It'll also mean that Tankers will, if they want to be successful defend those on their team from other Tanks rather than just act as a solo slayer. Like Rattati says, you'll have to use teamwork. Dropships are getting a buff so they'll fair better against the turrets. Let's see how it plays out before demanding changes CPM1 Candidate CEO of DUST University
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution 6740	Posted - 2014.07.26 16:04:00 - [46] - Quote I'm completely fine with these changes. The Blaster Turret should have a lot less dispersion because of the stable platform it's on. All Turrets should have to reload like any other turret but I'm fine with them having infinite ammo. see you space cowboy...
gauntlet44 LbowDeep Heaven84 Devils General Tso's Alliance 92	Posted - 2014.07.26 16:44:00 - [47] - Quote it will be nice to be able to hack a neutral turret before the tanker on my team that sees me hacking it, can destroy it. Absorb what is useful, discard what is not, make it uniquely your own........ Bruce Lee
Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 411	Posted - 2014.07.26 16:50:00 - [48] - Quote My 2 cents: The Reason why I kill turrets first has nothing to do with WP's (shocker, I know). They alone are a massive threat. They could really damage me and lower my mag size, even get me using my modules, and there could be a HAV rushing me right after I deal with it, and I'm done unless I get help. All that has to happen is some reddot hacks it, and boom, you got basically a weak HAV sitting guard. So I make it a point to go kill them pronto. Yet now you are quite literally adding in turrets with more eHP than 1.7 2x hardened Maddies, and they STILL have their AI. If you want them to be tougher to kill, get rid of their AI. Otherwise, hell no.
Dalton Smithe OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 103	Posted - 2014.07.26 16:57:00 - [49] - 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! So now HAV's will become even less effective. How is this in line with their purpose? I can understand taking them out of ambush where the only objective is to deplete clones, but in Skirm/Dom, they are supposed to break deadlocks on objectives. They aren't supposed to be squishy, which is what they have become. Dropships in contrast, which are supposed to be, pretty much reign over the battlefield, raining down death with impunity. It takes a well coordinated team to take out a dropship, where infantry can solo a tank extremely easily... A dropship pilot takes a hit and flys away, regenerates, comes in again, rinse and repeat.... A tank takes a hit, tries to leave the area, and gets popped before it can reach any kind of cover..... I only run a tank every now and then, but I have seen my teams tank get popped within moments of coming into an area, by a single player with a forge, or one with a swarm launcher(which are a joke for dropships)
The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 3714	Posted - 2014.07.26 17:01:00 - [50] - Quote well at least theres a reason to hack them now in PC matches rather then trying to blow them up for some WP. New shield module!

Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 1500	Posted - 2014.07.26 17:32:00 - [51] - Quote Worth hacking AND defending. A smart squad leader could so some good WP farming putting a defend order on one in a strategic place. CPM 1 member CEO of DUST University
501st Headstrong G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 401	Posted - 2014.07.26 17:45:00 - [52] - Quote Dalton Smithe 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! So now HAV's will become even less effective. How is this in line with their purpose? I can understand taking them out of ambush where the only objective is to deplete clones, but in Skirm/Dom, they are supposed to break deadlocks on objectives. They aren't supposed to be squishy, which is what they have become. Dropships in contrast, which are supposed to be, pretty much reign over the battlefield, raining down death with impunity. It takes a well coordinated team to take out a dropship, where infantry can solo a tank extremely easily... A dropship pilot takes a hit and flys away, regenerates, comes in again, rinse and repeat.... A tank takes a hit, tries to leave the area, and gets popped before it can reach any kind of cover..... I only run a tank every now and then, but I have seen my teams tank get popped within moments of coming into an area, by a single player with a forge, or one with a swarm launcher(which are a joke for dropships) It may be me, but your tanker sucks then if a single forge can kill them. Perhaps they got stuck on cover when backing up, overestimated enemy AV, etc. The point a tanker that is trying to solo five AV isn't going to win. Sorry to ruin your parade, but it aint happening. You want to be come death, you get a team to get your back. Otherwise stop trying to return to 1.7. A blaster that catches me out in the open is an assured death. I don't understand your dispersion issues, but i get slaughtered regardless. HAVS are to inspire fear and slay, but they aren't the killing a chines of 70-0 that was 3 months ago. Dropships are worth that investment. 350k with a militia missile? You go down once and you most likely aren't making that isk back. 90k for a tank, you can die 3 times and still cost less than that one ads. I personally like these changes, but in this case then please change the placement of the turrets so it forces the infantry to battle over choke-points. My biggest reference (bridge map. Make a turret right in the middle of the bridge, and then one on either side. A team that controls the middle turret can still get blown up by the other turret on either side. To prevent it from becoming OP, the turrets on either side become Rail turrets, and the center of the bridge is a blaster for destroying infantry and vehicles. If a tank wants to pass the bridge, that turret must be destroyed. It will be off to the side however so if a friendly hacks it, you can still move your tanks across. Tdlr: Change vehicle locations to focus chokepoints. Remove redline installations From the Clone Wars I came. Here I am a man among tamed beasts, and a god...among men CEO of G0DS AM0NG MEN
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 133	Posted - 2014.07.26 18:06:00 - [53] - Quote Atiim wrote: Not sure if this would require a client side update, but I'll suggest anyways. What if upon clicking on the Installation option on the Deployment Tab, we were shown the overhead map, similar to the Orbital Strike Menu. Then, we'd use the same mechanics as selecting where to place a Warbarge Strike to deploy an Installation. The Installations, would then appear in the same place as the 80GJ Turrets on the Marketplace. Y/N? That's what the developers were initially thinking about doing in early Dust, but was scraped. It would require a client side update, as it adds onto the user interface, or any content for the matter. Server side updates can change numbers (damage, turret rotation speed, module numbers, etc.); however, there are always exceptions that might require a client side update. 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 - 2014.07.26 18:16:00 - [54] - Quote Dalton Smithe 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! So now HAV's will become even less effective. How is this in line with their purpose? I can understand taking them out of ambush where the only objective is to deplete clones, but in Skirm/Dom, they are supposed to break deadlocks on objectives. They aren't supposed to be squishy, which is what they have become. Dropships in contrast, which are supposed to be, pretty much reign over the battlefield, raining down death with impunity. It takes a well coordinated team to take out a dropship, where infantry can solo a tank extremely easily... A dropship pilot takes a hit and flys away, regenerates, comes in again, rinse and repeat.... A tank takes a hit, tries to leave the area, and gets popped before it can reach any kind of cover..... I only run a tank every now and then, but I have seen my teams tank get popped within moments of coming into an area, by a single player with a forge, or one with a swarm launcher(which are a joke for dropships) Even with that 'rinse and repeat' method, the most kills any pilot will make on average is 10, which isn't game breaking. Also, if a dropship is reigning over the battlefield, then it's quite obvious that it's being ignored by any form of counter and is being allowed to do so. Dropships can't take damage. The moment that first swarm hits you must activate your burner, especially when there is the possibility of more than one player with AV. You don't take chances. The most number of people you need to take down a dropship is one or two people who are communicating or at least coordinating with one another. Tanks are only 'squishy' if you allow them to be. Any tank that gets popped by a single AV guy is obviously not that great of a tanker... I have a friend who will have everyone cowering in a corner (AV, tankers, and infantry) because of how damn good he is when tanking. My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
CHANCEtheChAn 0uter.Heaven 620	Posted - 2014.07.26 18:50:00 - [55] - 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 75tan3.015 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! As a tanker, I LOVE THESE CHANGES It never made sense to me that a turret, twice the size of a supply depot, only had 1/4 the health, and a supply depot is much more tactical to control This means that in the heat of a battle, if a enemy tank/ADS is assaulting a position, instead of having to switch out to AV as a deterrent, you could simply hack an enemy turret and fend off the vehiclek He already said ranges of turrets will be normalized so...150m for missle turrets, 300m for rail turrets, and about 80-150m for blasters, so calm down all you hobos with your "Oh no ranges, oh no redline strawberries, oh no I'm a scrub" talk It would be a breathe of fresh air to see turrets be used tactically instead of just something you blow up as a tanker on the way to the enemy Even with the health changes, as infantry you can take cover from a turret, as a tank you can run away from a turret, and as an ADS you can fly away, so you ALWAYS have the advantage over a frozen installation And its not like rail turrets take like 10-20 seconds to turn all the way around or anything And turrets do not regen health outside of shields, and even then they do not recharge fast enough that an assault rifle couldn't keep it down As an installation, the top part is a cannon essentially, and the bottom is all ammo, this is why the turrets have heat build up and not clip like ammo, because the turret is being continually fed a deep reserve if ammo, and I think this is correct, but if turrets become too much of a problem, they can simply be given tank turret ammo clips in a "Charlie hotfix 1.5" Another tip is to increase the WP you get from destroying a CRU or Supply depot These are the most tactical installations on the battlefield, and the reason people would rather let them be rehacked, than flat out destroy them is because the WP benefit (50 WP for destruction) is so low for the amount of time it takes to destroy a supply depot or CRU its just not worth it I suggest the WP for destruction shouod be150-250 WP, and even that may be too low for the time, but its a good start The only problem I forsee is the frustration of vehicle pilots when blueberries go to hack turrets while a pilot is currently trying to destroy it (Because the installation is, say, on enemy HP and you KNOW the enemy is gonna take it back), so the blueberry goes for the easy points, and right when the tanker is in an exposed position, the turret gets hacked from behind him and now the vehicle is as good as gone But overall +1 Closed Beta Vet/ Chromosome and Corp battle Vet/ Uprising 1.0-Now PC vet Ex D.F. Director Current Inner.Hell Director
dogmanpig black market bank 136	Posted - 2014.07.26 19:32:00 - [56] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Everyone, And no, we don't hate vehicles, just so that is pre-answered Thanks! bear face doesn't = troll face, everyone knows its You hate me, I hate you. Lets keep it that way. Level 11 2/10 Forum alt. "Its worth half a penny and a reach around"
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 993	Posted - 2014.07.26 19:46:00 - [57] - Quote Dalton Smithe 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! So now HAV's will become even less effective. How is this in line with their purpose? I can understand taking them out of ambush where the only objective is to deplete clones, but in Skirm/Dom, they are supposed to break deadlocks on objectives. They aren't supposed to be squishy, which is what they have become. Dropships in contrast, which are supposed to be, pretty much reign over the battlefield, raining down death with impunity. It takes a well coordinated team to take out a dropship, where infantry can solo a tank extremely easily... A dropship pilot takes a hit and flys away, regenerates, comes in again, rinse and repeat.... A tank takes a hit, tries to leave the area, and gets popped before it can reach any kind of cover..... I only run a tank every now and then, but I have seen my teams tank get popped within moments of coming into an area, by a single player with a forge, or one with a swarm launcher(which are a joke for dropships) As A forge gunner, the only vehicle which seems unbalanced to me is Pythons. I feel every other vehicle has a good chance against me but I have a good chance against them. Dropships other than the Python are usually the easier target, unless they have good gunners and/or drop down heavies with HMG's on me. Because, that's why.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 213	Posted - 2014.07.26 19:50:00 - [58] - Quote I'm okay with these changes, and would like them even more if: 1. Turret destruction blast radius were increased with WP for kills so that when that tanker does finally get his hard earned turret destruction, that ammo supply there acts like the bomb it would be and obliterates any infantry or equip within some TBD radius (15m?) 2. The OMS feature was reintroduced as a deployable equipment beacon, bought in the market, giving players the ability to "call down" the turrets for battlefield buttressing as we see fit. 3. The AV nade idea from above was instituted. Even without these tho, doesn't sound too bad at all especially in light of the craziness called "Swarm Launcher nerfs". Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 351	Posted - 2014.07.26 20:19:00 - [59] - Quote 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.
Dalton Smithe OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 103	Posted - 2014.07.26 21:00:00 - [60] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: Dalton Smithe 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! So now HAV's will become even less effective. How is this in line with their purpose? I can understand taking them out of ambush where the only objective is to deplete clones, but in Skirm/Dom, they are supposed to break deadlocks on objectives. They aren't supposed to be squishy, which is what they have become. Dropships in contrast, which are supposed to be, pretty much reign over the battlefield, raining down death with impunity. It takes a well coordinated team to take out a dropship, where infantry can solo a tank extremely easily... A dropship pilot takes a hit and flys away, regenerates, comes in again, rinse and repeat.... A tank takes a hit, tries to leave the area, and gets popped before it can reach any kind of cover..... I only run a tank every now and then, but I have seen my teams tank get popped within moments of coming into an area, by a single player with a forge, or one with a swarm launcher(which are a joke for dropships) It may be me, but your tanker sucks then if a single forge can kill them. Perhaps they got stuck on cover when backing up, overestimated enemy AV, etc. The point a tanker that is trying to solo five AV isn't going to win. Sorry to ruin your parade, but it aint happening. You want to be come death, you get a team to get your back. Otherwise stop trying to return to 1.7. A blaster that catches me out in the open is an assured death. I don't understand your dispersion issues, but i get slaughtered regardless. HAVS are to inspire fear and slay, but they aren't the killing a chines of 70-0 that was 3 months ago. Dropships are worth that investment. 350k with a militia missile? You go down once and you most likely aren't making that isk back. 90k for a tank, you can die 3 times and still cost less than that one ads. I personally like these changes, but in this case then please change the placement of the turrets so it forces the infantry to battle over choke-points. My biggest reference (bridge map. Make a turret right in the middle of the bridge, and then one on either side. A team that controls the middle turret can still get blown up by the other turret on either side. To prevent it from becoming OP, the turrets on either side become Rail turrets, and the center of the bridge is a blaster for destroying infantry and vehicles. If a tank wants to pass the bridge, that turret must be destroyed. It will be off to the side however so if a friendly hacks it, you can still move your tanks across. Tdlr: Change vehicle locations to focus chokepoints. Remove redline installations The only tanks that cost 90K are militia. Every one of my tanks run at around 350+. So yeah, I don't bring them in very much. Of course any infantry/dropship pilots are going to love these changes, it makes it easier on them. Everyone hated the fact that it took teamwork to take a tank out(or a jihad LAV), now a single player can take one down without breaking a sweat. Yeah, if you run a milita tank you should get melted by a blaster, that goes without saying, but when you spend a good deal of money on your vehicle only to see it go up in flame the minute you bring it into play, there is an issue....tanks should not be easy to take out. Any tanker that has their tank popped(if they are running a decent fit) won't see a return on that battle.

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.

Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz General Tso's Alliance 1106	Posted - 2014.07.29 16:45:00 - [91] - 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 question. WHY DO YOU KEEP MAKING CHANGES THAT AFFECT TANKS. You continually nerf them, rather that is indirectly or directly. You have made tanks into something that doesn't directly affect infantry with the large turrets, bringing swarm damage in line with with one another across the board, and now making installation turrets require a lot of effort to bring down. Yes, tanks at one time were unstoppable death machines, but I do believe the general consensus is that tanks are no longer the threats they once were on the battlefield. Yet you still continue on making changes like they ARE THE THREATS THEY ONCE WERE. Why? Can give reasons as to why this is NEEDED at this time. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 3753	Posted - 2014.07.29 16:56:00 - [92] - Quote Large rails and missiles are problematic in the redline espacially with that much HP. Its allready tricky enough to destroy them while beeing in a ADS but with like tripple the HP it becomes a long time task. Large missile AI currently keeps shoting dropships nonstop when beeing agressed and that from across the map. The only way to loose the agression is to hide behind a building so it looses track. New shield module!
ACT1ON BASTARD Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 41	Posted - 2014.07.29 19:06:00 - [93] - Quote Lets look at it this way. A supply depots already hard to kill with a tank, now well be killing supply depots that shoot rails at you in the redline and on the map. I think its ridiculous because sometimes ill be the only tanker or ads pilot on the map. Itll take the whole match to kill them all.
OP FOTM Commando Perkone Caldari State 187	Posted - 2014.07.29 19:41:00 - [94] - Quote You have my official seal of approval, Rattati. tinfoil hat Dust servers will be a ghost town on 09/09/14 Destiny kicks ass... Like Halo knocked up Mass Effect and gave birth
Dustbunny Durrr ReD or DeaD 259	Posted - 2014.07.29 21:18:00 - [95] - 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 maneuver 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! Whereas I have been greatly supportive of the changes made in Alpha and Bravo, this may be one of those times where the only response I can come up with is: "When you fall out of that tree, and break both of your legs, don't go running to me". But in all seriousness, it seems like such a drastic change considering turrets don't overheat when the AI uses them (they will OUT-DPS a player controlled turret by roughly double because of this) and have infinite tracking (especially rail) when the AI uses them (taking away 'speed tanking' as an effective counter by either tanks or LAVs). Also, due to their soon to be ineffectiveness, we will no longer see the "easy to kill" solo tanks, as these will be mowed down by turrets. These solo tankers will be replaced by either infantry only, or multiple tank columns (which are harder to deal with if you are AV). The one positive out of this is that the shield to armor ratio remains low, so that someone pinging away at it over time, will make gains slowly, and chew through its armor. As for not hating vehicles, it feels like you just slapped someone in the face and then respond with "I've got no beef with you".
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 133	Posted - 2014.07.29 21:21:00 - [96] - Quote Dustbunny Durrr 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 maneuver 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! Whereas I have been greatly supportive of the changes made in Alpha and Bravo, this may be one of those times where the only response I can come up with is: "When you fall out of that tree, and break both of your legs, don't go running to me". But in all seriousness, it seems like such a drastic change considering turrets don't overheat when the AI uses them (they will OUT-DPS a player controlled turret by roughly double because of this) and have infinite tracking (especially rail) when the AI uses them (taking away 'speed tanking' as an effective counter by either tanks or LAVs). Also, due to their soon to be ineffectiveness, we will no longer see the "easy to kill" solo tanks, as these will be mowed down by turrets. These solo tankers will be replaced by either infantry only, or multiple tank columns (which are harder to deal with if you are AV). The one positive out of this is that the shield to armor ratio remains low, so that someone pinging away at it over time, will make gains slowly, and chew through its armor. As for not hating vehicles, it feels like you just slapped someone in the face and then respond with "I've got no beef with you". I just think that 10,000 armour is a tad too much. 7,000 would be my preferable approximation. My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 881	Posted - 2014.07.30 19:18:00 - [97] - Quote The dark cloud wrote: Large rails and missiles are problematic in the redline espacially with that much HP. Its allready tricky enough to destroy them while beeing in a ADS but with like tripple the HP it becomes a long time task. Large missile AI currently keeps shoting dropships nonstop when beeing agressed and that from across the map. The only way to loose the agression is to hide behind a building so it looses track. The whole point of the Large Missile Installation is to shoot at dropships. Especially those that try to use the sky as a "safe zone" there is no other vehicle, or dropsuit that can hide away out of range of almost all gunfire whenever it wants to. If you're on the battlefield, you have to expect being shot at. UNLESS you want to increase the range of forge guns and Swarms so that they can hit you when you're idling at the map ceiling? No? Well then, take that singular installation as a sign of them being lenient to your plight. Imagine 4+ swarmers being able to shoot you at all times regardless of your height. Makes that turret look like a godsend eh? http://youtu.be/dtXupQg77SU Dust to Dust Remember the dream you had before the day you were born.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 4995	Posted - 2014.07.30 22:15:00 - [98] - Quote Thanks for the feedback everyone. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"



Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.