|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gabriella Grey
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
132
   |
Posted - 2014.08.25 03:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
After some researching the two there are some issues with them both
Small Rail Turret:
Small Rail Turrets are plagued with misfire, and issuing out no damage on targets since closed beta. If reloading the small rail turret manually and then starting to fire after, it is prone to shoot but the rail rounds do no damage until the rail turrets box is depleted and reloads. Another issue is the cursor. In first person it is a bit easier to use compared to the third person with this reticule but this isn't meant for a dropship. It just doesn't allow anyone to gauge how far ahead they should shoot depending on speed and approach. A good example of something that could help the small rail turret would be this one here It doesn't need all the extra flight instruments added to the vehicle, though they would be extremely welcomed by the pilot community, I think the core pieces like the circular main reticule and the two lines across the center would give players a better judge of where to aim.
Small Missile Turret:
Compared to the small rail turret, which is plagued more so with a not so great reticule and bugs, The small missile turrets fails with it's function design. The Splash damage radius is too small. At Standard all the way through prototype it has the exact same splash damage radius of 2.50 m. 2.50 m was a great starting point but a dropship with small missiles needs a more reasonable splash radius. Ideal splash radius for advanced should be at 5 meters and prototype at an maximum of 7 m. 1.20 s fire interval needs to brought somewhere around 1/4 to 2/4 the time it currently has so that it can still be relevant for engaging other vehicles mounted with small rail turrets. Another spin on interval fire that can balance out the interval problem would be increasing small missile turrets damage at standard by 20, advanced an additional 30, and prototype level an additional 30, totaling prototype with an additional 80 health point damage increase.
Small Blaster Turret:
This turret needs a serious damage buff. Technically the turret is still considered gallente by design, but it doesn't put enough damage to actually support ground troops from the air. Damage should be brought up to 55 damage per plasma cannon shell. At the moment I can't comment on range, and bullet dispersal at the moment but I look forward to seeing some progress to it.
My personal thoughts is that all of these issues really proves that arial vehicles need their own set of turrets/modules, just like HAV's. Most if not all of these issues apply to only dropships. I have not seen many issues with small turrets mounted on LAV's nor on HAV's with the exception of the misfiring that small rail turrets have. If anyone has videos that can support this solid information for CCP or other accounts please post. As always I do like to hear from the Dust 514 community, CPM's, and even the Developers! I hope this information helps with making dust better or at least helps with legion if this project will come to pass.
Always Grey Skies
|
Gabriella Grey
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
133
|
Posted - 2014.08.25 05:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
Vulpes Dolosus wrote:>Rails
Yes, they're bad, really bad, with misfiring. From shots not registering to the continuous-fire glitch, it's a pain sometimes. However, they are much better than they have been in the past, and despite all their problems, they are very effective both anti-air, anti-vehicle, and anti-infantry (on LAVs at least).
>Missiles
GǪare fine as is. The 2.5m radius is perfectly acceptable for the amount of damage it does and they requiresa bit a skill to use effectively. 7m is FAR too large; that's the size of a proto nanohive. I could see a "fragmented" variant like pre-1.7 that was a larger area with lower damage, useful for clearing equipment or crowd control, I guess.
As for RoF, I think it's fine as it. While I'm used to Python RoF, when flying my Incubus I have little difficulty attacking vehicles with missiles. Also, I think more RoF boosts would make the Python a too powerful.
>Blasters
By their design, blasters are not meant to be used on dropships, especially on the front of an ADS. Their close range means ADSs need to be dangerously close to the ground in order for them to be effective. Even with side gunners, this puts them in dangerous range of ground fire. It's just not meant to be.
Now, I have had a some success with them on my LAV. I've only tried it solo (switching to the gunner seat and switching back if needed), but I could definitely see a great improvement in the Charlie update. I don't know how many people have actually tried it on an LAV or HAV like this and given it a proper review and feedback.
I disagre Vulpes on the 7 m range. 7 m is an extremely small window to be effective. Try hovering the most of your ADS next to a supply depot and landing it near it or a CRU. The space between them is so small it's very subtle. 5 m is what a locus grenade has, so 7 m is not in the slightest asking too much for an splash damage from a small turret. Oh and I so forgot to mention the firing glitch, thank so much for bringing it up.
Always Grey Skies
|
Gabriella Grey
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
133
|
Posted - 2014.08.25 05:20:00 -
[3] - Quote
medomai grey wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1PYHL7CwII&list=UU5fiMDQEZhpOZGR5wkCMYDw
^ That guy seemed to do ok with blasters.
He is doing fairly decent, though if you notice most of the footage placed where the infantry and ground vehicles start shooting back he is about to die before the video is cut to another instance or flying away only surviving with little armor. If anything this video screams out that this turret is not working as it should on a arial vehicle. Also look at how close he is to the ground just to kill one person. The dropship is an arial vehicle which can operate close to the ground and at higher altitudes but everything that has been shown has the player too close to one target to really be effective. On the good side, Loved the mashed up footage of the different matches, and they have a solid game footage film there  
Always Grey Skies
|
|
|
| |
|