|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Foundation Seldon
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
709
   |
Posted - 2014.08.29 03:02:00 -
[1] - Quote
ladwar wrote:Not over rails on any platform. You want the truth you got it.
This.
I've written a lot about LAVs in the past but the crux of the situation where the LAV is concerned is that there will never be a reason to fit Small Blasters so long as the Small Rail has the power that it has, at the range that its able to operate, and with the versatility in terms of choice of targets. The Small Rail is superior in both solo and team LAV formats due to its destructive ability both against Infantry and Vehicular targets. Even if you gave Small Blasters the damage they would need to sincerely compete the Small Rail still has the upper hand due to insane destructive ability at 200 meters out. Why would I risk my pilot and my own safety to do comparable damage against solely infantry when I can use the Small Rail and give my gunner a high powered rapid tactical sniper that also damages vehicles?
As for Dropships they're still not a very viable choice due to Missiles reigning supreme. They have the combination splash radius (which is easier to make use of when looking down) and damage to the point where no other turret type really comes close from an infantry perspective. Rails have a niche when it comes to taking out vehicles with an Incubus though but the versatility of the Missile turret is hard to ignore. There would need to be a variant of the blaster that worked from a longer range with a cone of fire that applied to the entirety of the cone. Think in terms of Closed Beta HMGs with the old sharpshooter skill.
|
Foundation Seldon
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
709
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 04:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:All right
A few points
The blaster is clearly not intended to compete with a landed DS on top of a building with rails. It was meant to be anti infantry - close range. What you are kind of saying, "the HMG is worse then a Forge because I can't kill vehicles and infantry with it." Not, splitting hairs, it's just a different role.
I don't think anyone's brought up landing a DS on top of a building and using it with rails, the rails are just a far better multipurpose and general use weapon. The Forge/HMG example fails here because where as the Forge is clearly an AV weapon that occasionally can be used to effectively go against Infantry the Small Rail turret is what happens when you give a Breach Rifle variant the ability to take down LAVs. It's not just an AV focused weapon, the thing absolutely destroys infantry and vehicles alike. Missiles are great against Infantry and Vehicles (Air). Rails are great against Infantry and Vehicles (Ground). Blasters, if their focus is solely on infantry, do not do anywhere near well enough in their area of expertise to ever justify their use compared to either the Rails or Missiles.
There is no niche for the Blaster that wouldn't be better used for the Rail (on the ground) in its current state.
Quote:
Second, it was also meant to be a drive by weapon, I don't see anyone using rails whilst moving. We were hoping that the firepower of the Blaster would be enought to hurt/kill infantry in those situations.
Third, and that's not for PC/competitiveness, it was also meant to be fun, yes, an alien concept. I like the idea of mowing down infantry with a vehicle mounted turret, or adding some serious firepower to a HAV that goes deep into enemy territory or is on point defense.
All that said and done, if the Small Blaster fits none of these criteria, we need to keep looking at it.
You're not going to find many situations where ANY Small turret is used whilst on a moving, grounded platform.
Okay now we have a direction with which to make suggestions. A Drive-By based turret.
First let's think about what a "Drive-By" vehicle is competing with in the current state of the game. If I'm gunning in an LAV I'm using a Heavy frame in order to soak up as much damage as possible first and foremost. If I'm running a heavy frame that opens up a certain number of weapon types to me immediately, namely the HMG. So you have to create a situation where it is preferrable for me, the pilot (or gunner), to want to use my Blaster turret instead of jumping out and gunning them down with my HMG. Use that as the base for your ideas for balancing the weapon moving forward. If I'm immediately competing with an infantry based counterpart then rotation speed and damage come to mind from the get go. If they're meant to be used in a moving vehicle then you need to consider the coordination involved with a driver having to slowly circle a target and do enough damage to kill them in that short engagement time, remember that every bump and acceleration difference felt by the driver is immediately applied to the gunner, you're not going to find your aim is at all effective in these scenarios unless the LAV turrets movement is made to be independent of the movement of the vehicle. The ONLY turret that i've used on an LAV thats been effective while the driver is moving were the old Small Missile turrets back before the movement of the vehicle effected the trajectory of the bullets. That was ONLY because I could take advantage of their splash and didn't need to be super precise with my aim.
If you change the damage a gunner takes whilst using a turret then think VERY VERY carefully about what that means with respect to the rail turret. Is it possible to change the damage taken on individual turrets vs. every turret? Hopefully I've shed some more light on the situation at hand.
|
Foundation Seldon
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
709
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 04:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
And to those bringing up lowering the Small Rail turret's rate of fire just don't forget that what you're talking about directly impacts the effectiveness of the Incubus as well.
|
Foundation Seldon
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
710
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 04:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sgt Kirk wrote:Foundation Seldon is spot on.
I'd also like to add that back in the old days when LAV Blaster gunning was actually good it actually had a very small splash radius which also helped with hit and runs and man, did it help! I remember me and my buddy going around in our Scattered Blaster Turret just pushing objectives with Infantry mowing people down that dared to pop out of cover.
sighs The good Ol days...
I said before the problem with the Small Blaster is literally the exactly same problem the plasma rifle has with other rifle variants (besides the fact that it's on a vehicle compared to vehicle type small turrets).
You specifically proposed a damage buff because you CCP Rattati, said something along the lines of 'The Plasma Rifle Sacrifices range for power'. This is pretty much the same way you can solve a lot of the Small Blasters issues.
I think we both agree that a buff to the Splash Radius of the weapon (with another damage buff or rotation buff pending the testing of said addition) for Small Blasters would be something that's seriously considered for making the Blaster turret an effective anti-infantry turret then, especially if we want its use potentially being made viable on moving platforms (LAVs) or Dropships.
While we're on the subject of things that'd be NICE to have for the Small Blaster if not super game changing with respect to its viability I think the base ammo amount of the Small Blaster is a bit on the low side compared to what the Small Missile and Small Rail can do with comparable ammo amounts.
Nice to see that there are other LAV Beta vets out there.
|
Foundation Seldon
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
714
|
Posted - 2014.08.29 08:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Sgt Kirk wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Last comment, would fixing Small Blasters to the std dropships be too draconian as to say, this is the intended role? It's probably due to me working 13 days in a row but I'm not understanding that sentence. Are you asking about putting it on a dropship automatically? Like a Pre-fitted vehicle or fixing it to the dropship as in not being able to move independently. sorry, I don't even understand that sentence, pre-fit and can't be removed from one or more turret hardpoints
For the same reason we don't put mandatory cloaks on scout or HMGs on heavies I'd be against putting turret hardpoints on standard dropships. Just seems to go against a lot of the philosophy behind all the customization on the game. Feel free to stick them on MLT or Aurum variants though.
|
|
|
| |
|