DUST Search - [PROPOSAL]Sentinel battle role

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[PROPOSAL]Sentinel battle role

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3854	Posted - 2014.10.23 08:03:00 - [1] - Quote I have been thinking about some of the issues people have with sentinels and the problems Sentinel Suits present to balance. Quite frankly in my opinion Sentinels aren't being utilized in the best manner that plays to their strengths. This is not a complaint on current balance. Period. Rattati has done phenomenally well with the cards he has been handed. This is a proposal to alter the role a Sentinel plays on the battlefield. The objective of this proposal is twofold: 1: Bring Sentinels into line with a role that fits their size, durability and lack of mobility. This includes a re-introduction of turn speed penalties to sentinels but not to the suits directly. 2: Remove Sentinels as the go-to suit in PC for CQC operations in favor of the assault. This objective does not include completely removing Sentinel capacity in CQC. Proposed primary role: long range point defense and support suppression and vehicle deterrent/destruction. Primary weapons: All Forge Guns, Standard HMG, Assault HMG. Proposed Secondary Role: Suicide Breach operations. Primary weapon: Burst HMG Tertiary role: Distraction. Primary weapon: Any People will always fixate on the largest percieved target. The suit does not need to be altered. What would need to be altered is the Heavy Machineguns. The reason for this is simple: The suit is not dictating the role of the weapon. The weapon is dictating the role of the suit, and this puts sentinels on the razor's edge for balance continuously and without fail. It is also a source of long-standing irritation among the playerbasse for a long time. Proposed change to the STD Heavy Machinegun: 1: Increase range comparable to rifles. 2: reduce dispersion dramatically, possibly tone down the damage. 3: apply a turn speed penalty to the HMG, not the dropsuit. This should bring the Sentinel into line with the role that makes sense, as open-field fire suppot. Changes to Burst HMG: none. Do not apply turn speed. The weapon is great for attacking and breaking lines. It is not good for sustained, long-term engagement which is needed for viable point defense. The current standard HMGs do better defensively. Assault HMG: Light damage, long range with a higher rate of fire in between the standard and Burst in both range and output. 1: leave damage as is 2: place range between STD and burst and reduce dispersion accordingly 3: slightly increase RoF 4: apply 1/2 the standard HMG turn penalty. These changes are proposed to provide a better differentiation of battle role. Close combat: minimal or no turn penalty. Long Range: turn speed penalty. Forge guns aren't horribly viable vs. Infantry in close. At best you might get a couple lucky kills. So the penalty to turning is pointless. But utilizing this would make lighter suits be able to deal with sentinels in CQC as they should. Given the Bursts tendency to get the operator killed it's likely this could solve a few headaches among the playerbase. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3893	Posted - 2014.10.24 08:01:00 - [2] - Quote Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4259	Posted - 2014.10.24 09:19:00 - [3] - Quote mmmm....what if heavies took longer to spawn? Changes to Burst HMG: none. Do not apply turn speed. The weapon is great for attacking and breaking lines. It is not good for sustained, long-term engagement which is needed for viable point defense. The current standard HMGs do better defensively. People use heavy spam to negate the weakness of the burst. rotate heavies and wala. 1 heavy > 2 assaults or logi's firing on him. now add in 4 heavies rotating in an area. add in 1 logi rep tool for maximum ownage. Bursts win engagements with regular HMG's so the more sustainable fire of the standard variant is only good if you suck and need to spray and pray. Which is just **** poor IMO. need to make them more different. B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4259	Posted - 2014.10.24 09:21:00 - [4] - Quote Putting turn speed on the weapons and not the suit does nothing to solve the problem aside from allow ADS targets a higher success rate at escaping. B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Kyoudai Furinkazan 1293	Posted - 2014.10.24 09:46:00 - [5] - Quote Why would anyone use them .?. think they get shot gunned and knifed now .. how is this helping " define " their role .?. if anything , this will lead to their being less viable and visual on the battlefield . Scouts already can out strafe any and all suits , get the drop on heavies and NK them with regular consistency and there already weight penalties in place which effects a persons mobility . If you wanna see less heavies on the field , then enact these proposals . I just can't see why people wanna nerf roles out of use like that's creating a greater experience and environment , yeah lets change more things and make them useless so we can not have another reason to deny a SP refund and kill the game all at the same time . How can you people make such suggestions and still say that choices matter .?. or you should be ready to adapt if you make a role totally useless ??? Are you a scout that's upset with the coming changes to your role so you wanna " exact justice " by making heavies more useless so their even more easier for you to kill ??? Are you really having that hard of a time now .?. or do you think you will after 1.9 ??? Their not as mobile as you would lead one to believe to be made to cause that much of a problem for such proposed changes but it seems that you have some that believe , this type of thinking is warranted and these changes necessary . Just when things begin to seem like they were falling into place . Do what you will community , you seem to be so good at that and then complaining about the after effects . Delta should come with a SP or infantry SP refund so that a campaign for one is not needed .
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3893	Posted - 2014.10.24 09:52:00 - [6] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Putting turn speed on the weapons and not the suit does nothing to solve the problem aside from allow ADS targets a higher success rate at escaping. You're not looking at the whole post. Its a combination of factors: 1: you cannot have a CQC combatant be effective if he cannot track a target. This was the original reason for turn speed normalization. 2: heavies are huge, easy to hit, slow as hell, heavily armed and armored with limited mobility. These are not traits of good CQC combatants where speed, maneuverability and rapid kill capacity are the norm. They are traits of open ground fire support platforms. 3: making heavies long range fire support platforms incapable of CQC defensive dominance opens critical portions of the map to assaults as the primary attack force potentially with burst HMG door kickers to breach a hole. 4: putting turn speed penalties on long range weapons allows sentinels to perform long range hardpoint defense and makes them vulnerable to assault and scouts that successfully maneuver in close. 5: keeping close range sentinel weapons on the burst HMG meta of high damage, short engagement duration with penalties like the near-suicidal seize creates another window of opportunity for assaults to overcome and kill careless heavies. 6: the turn speed penalty for long range anti-infantry weapons should be sufficient that it matches assault strafe speed at 15 meters, allowing fast movers to tear heavy dropsuits apart in CQC the way they SHOULD. 7: Finally, forcing sentinels to play to the design strengths of the dropsuit rather than the artificially created/enforced CQC role exposes them to counter-fire from weapons that can kill them such as charge snipers and laser rifles. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3893	Posted - 2014.10.24 09:59:00 - [7] - Quote Shinobi I'm a career sentinel player. Sentinels should never have been shoehorned into a CQC only role. If you give HMGs range and make them vulnnerable in close you will find that they are anything BUT useless, especially on bridge maps, and open area maps like line harvest and manus peak while ensuring when you go into the orbital artillery station you're going to see more assault and commando and less HMG spam. You basically turn HMG sentinels into what modern machinegun teams are. Something you don't want to run toward that is lethally vulnerable to close combat. By leaving the burst unchanged you take away long term sustained CQC spam and gain a hard attack that disrupts enemy defenses. Which is why you put turn speed on long range suppression weapons and keep cqc attack weapons penalty free while keeping them like the burst: more likely to kill an incautious operator than by enemy fire alone. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3893	Posted - 2014.10.24 10:03:00 - [8] - Quote Finally... there need to be less heavies on the field. Tgere need to be less scouts. The bulk of any force should consist of line infantry. Assaults and logi support are line infantry. Scouts and sentinels should be the SUPPORT, not the primary bulk of your forces. In order for that to happen sentinels need to get ejected from this CQC idiocy and EWAR needs to be fixed so permascan and permahide are not possible. Assault utility and dominance within their role are being held hostage by bad ewar mechanics and sentinel dominance in CQC. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 4713	Posted - 2014.10.24 15:51:00 - [9] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: I have been thinking about some of the issues people have with sentinels and the problems Sentinel Suits present to balance. Quite frankly in my opinion Sentinels aren't being utilized in the best manner that plays to their strengths. This is not a complaint on current balance. Period. Rattati has done phenomenally well with the cards he has been handed. This is a proposal to alter the role a Sentinel plays on the battlefield. The objective of this proposal is twofold: 1: Bring Sentinels into line with a role that fits their size, durability and lack of mobility. This includes a re-introduction of turn speed penalties to sentinels but not to the suits directly. 2: Remove Sentinels as the go-to suit in PC for CQC operations in favor of the assault. This objective does not include completely removing Sentinel capacity in CQC. Proposed primary role: long range point defense and support suppression and vehicle deterrent/destruction. Primary weapons: All Forge Guns, Standard HMG, Assault HMG. Proposed Secondary Role: Suicide Breach operations. Primary weapon: Burst HMG Tertiary role: Distraction. Primary weapon: Any People will always fixate on the largest percieved target. The suit does not need to be altered. What would need to be altered is the Heavy Machineguns. The reason for this is simple: The suit is not dictating the role of the weapon. The weapon is dictating the role of the suit, and this puts sentinels on the razor's edge for balance continuously and without fail. It is also a source of long-standing irritation among the playerbasse for a long time. Proposed change to the STD Heavy Machinegun: 1: Increase range comparable to rifles. 2: reduce dispersion dramatically, possibly tone down the damage. 3: apply a turn speed penalty to the HMG, not the dropsuit. This should bring the Sentinel into line with the role that makes sense, as open-field fire suppot. Changes to Burst HMG: none. Do not apply turn speed. The weapon is great for attacking and breaking lines. It is not good for sustained, long-term engagement which is needed for viable point defense. The current standard HMGs do better defensively. Assault HMG: Light damage, long range with a higher rate of fire in between the standard and Burst in both range and output. 1: leave damage as is 2: place range between STD and burst and reduce dispersion accordingly 3: slightly increase RoF 4: apply 1/2 the standard HMG turn penalty. These changes are proposed to provide a better differentiation of battle role. Close combat: minimal or no turn penalty. Long Range: turn speed penalty. Forge guns aren't horribly viable vs. Infantry in close. At best you might get a couple lucky kills. So the penalty to turning is pointless. But utilizing this would make lighter suits be able to deal with sentinels in CQC as they should. Given the Bursts tendency to get the operator killed it's likely this could solve a few headaches among the playerbase. For the Standard HMG the turn speed reduction alone would give medium suits an advantage in CQC. I donGÇÖt agree with changing the Standard HMGGÇÖs range, dispersion, or damage. (Assault HMG can provide a ranged option.) The Assault HMG is already sub-par in CQC so I would leave its turn speed alone. I think a dispersion reduction to give it an effective 10m range buff would make it effective without being OP. RP Explanation would be that the Assault HMG and Burst HMG are made out of lighter materials; with the Assault HMG using smaller rounds that can be fired farther with less gun powder, producing less heat at the cost of reduced damage; while the Burst HMG turns out a great deal of damage but overheats quickly. The Standard HMG by contrast has a more robust construction using heat resistant materials which allows it to put out large amounts of damage without heat buildup being as much of a problem, but this also makes the weapon heavier, making it more ponderous and difficult to track fast moving targets. Personally I would prefer increased turn inertia, over a turn speed cap, but I am not sure if that is supported by the game mechanics. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3911	Posted - 2014.10.24 16:16:00 - [10] - Quote You missed the point of the whole post gaden. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.

Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 48	Posted - 2014.10.24 17:10:00 - [11] - Quote I'm halfway liking and halfway not-liking this... but it mostly comes down to preference, if I'm honest. On the whole- I really like heavies with heavy weapons being effective over range. That is, IMO, something that's also logical. Any argument of "a heavy at range will be impossible to kill" is very effectively neutered by the fact that heavies that are speedfit are also not as durable, and will want to be closer, where you can probably shotgun them. Heavies that are not speedfit are therefore slow, which means that if you're smart you could probably either run a heavy down, or more likely just avoid the area that heavy is in. That being said... I'm not sure that a turnspeed limitation would be necessary. Consider that, at present, a shotgun (or RE) user can pretty effectively kill heavies anyways, then I do think a turnspeed limit falls under the umbrella of "we may not need it". If this is implemented, I would heavily advocate not including the turnspeed limitations... at first. Then CCP could gather data and figure out if it was needed, or if the other changes you suggest would be all that is necessary. Buff Logis \| Nerf Goldfish
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 4713	Posted - 2014.10.24 17:11:00 - [12] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: You missed the point of the whole post gaden. Sentinels never should have been CQC monsters to begin with. They were pinholed there because you can't strafe glitch high dispersion weapons at long range. During beta when the "top players" were enjoying almost no CQC maps and longer ranges on the justification that range on the HMG would be unfair. Read: "we want heavies to be neutered and easy kills." I donGÇÖt entirely agree with the premise of your proposal. However, I am not vehemently opposed to it either. It just makes me uneasy. I also donGÇÖt have the PC experience to speak directly to its use in that environment, so any suggestions I make in that regard would be based on other peopleGÇÖs description of what is being done, and my understanding of the tactical principals behind the strategies they describe. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3916	Posted - 2014.10.24 17:16:00 - [13] - Quote Im basing my premise on standard cqc fights in FW and pubs where it's a race to see who can flood CQC cap points with fatties faster via uplink spam. I see it in practice in pubs and in FW. PC is another idiot ball of wax EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Vitharr Foebane Terminal Courtesy Proficiency V. 1943	Posted - 2014.10.24 19:20:00 - [14] - Quote this wouldn't be an issue if we weren't given just two weapon and told to make it work. The lack of a heavy plasma and laser weapon destroys any balance and role designation we try to make. Amarr: Assault V, Scout V, Sentinel V, Commando V, Logistics IV I place my faith in my God, my Empress, and my Laz0r
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3924	Posted - 2014.10.24 19:24:00 - [15] - Quote Vitharr Foebane wrote: this wouldn't be an issue if we weren't given just two weapon and told to make it work. The lack of a heavy plasma and laser weapon destroys any balance and role designation we try to make. HMGs should have a range longer than my wang. But the hue and cry was for them to be CQC even though CCP was making strides in making them hella effective at decent ranges. then the nerfs began. specifically nerfs to make them CQC weapons. It made no sense whatsoever. Gallente heavy weapon as CQC? Ok I can see it. MINMATAR???? Last I checked Minmatar weren't knife-fighters. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Vitharr Foebane Terminal Courtesy Proficiency V. 1943	Posted - 2014.10.24 19:26:00 - [16] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: this wouldn't be an issue if we weren't given just two weapon and told to make it work. The lack of a heavy plasma and laser weapon destroys any balance and role designation we try to make. HMGs should have a range longer than my wang. But the hue and cry was for them to be CQC even though CCP was making strides in making them hella effective at decent ranges. then the nerfs began. specifically nerfs to make them CQC weapons. It made no sense whatsoever. Gallente heavy weapon as CQC? Ok I can see it. MINMATAR???? Last I checked Minmatar weren't knife-fighters. don't get me wrong i agree HMGs should have a longer range but we need all weapons before we can put them in their proper place Amarr: Assault V, Scout V, Sentinel V, Commando V, Logistics IV I place my faith in my God, my Empress, and my Laz0r
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3924	Posted - 2014.10.24 19:38:00 - [17] - Quote never gonna happen. We'll see legion alpha testing invites before we see full vehicle and weapon spreads EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3462	Posted - 2014.10.24 20:11:00 - [18] - Quote /me marks thread for observation and goes to consider more heavy fits for first hand testing See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Bradric Banewolf D3ATH CARD RUST415 424	Posted - 2014.10.24 20:50:00 - [19] - Quote Cost change could help with managing spam. Why would a player run proto assault when he can get more for the same price with proto heavy? A medium suit with less going for it cost as much as a heavy suit. Same goes for the light suits. I always thought it was weird, and poorly planned?! If you want the maximum damage output of the heavy dropsuit you should pay more. Before scouts were buffed to predator statistics this was my same argument. Since they would die so much more often, and had low ehp, why dI'd they cost just as much as assault suits? The same can be said for the weapon classes. We see that sidearms, shotguns, kn's, mass drivers, and swarm launchers price tags vary from other weapons. My guess is they lack in one area of another that warrants cheaper pricing. So why doesn't the suits get the same consideration? Clearly the assault and logi spend and loose more money than the heavy, and that's why everyone is running them. Will it stop heavy/scout spam? Probably not, but it will make some think twice before risking so much isk to run some suits. A true assault player could afford to loose the suits they do in PC. The game has changed tremendously over time, and it's time for a price overhaul. "Anybody order chaos?"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3936	Posted - 2014.10.24 20:59:00 - [20] - Quote you don't play a heavy to save money. Doing that is an idiot game UNLESS you have a logi-slave. Contrary to what everyone seems to think, Sentinels die a LOT. The problem is, you can't kill SIX of them fast enough to break their camp before they start to respawn and re-engage. And right now in CQC maps the meta is load in the uplinks and flood the area with fat. Increasing the price is a non-balance point. people will simply pay more to do the same thing. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.

Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 74	Posted - 2014.10.24 22:46:00 - [21] - Quote Bradric Banewolf wrote: Cost change could help with managing spam. Why would a player run proto assault when he can get more for the same price with proto heavy? A medium suit with less going for it cost as much as a heavy suit. Same goes for the light suits. I always thought it was weird, and poorly planned?! If you want the maximum damage output of the heavy dropsuit you should pay more. Before scouts were buffed to predator statistics this was my same argument. Since they would die so much more often, and had low ehp, why dI'd they cost just as much as assault suits? The same can be said for the weapon classes. We see that sidearms, shotguns, kn's, mass drivers, and swarm launchers price tags vary from other weapons. My guess is they lack in one area of another that warrants cheaper pricing. So why doesn't the suits get the same consideration? Clearly the assault and logi spend and loose more money than the heavy, and that's why everyone is running them. Will it stop heavy/scout spam? Probably not, but it will make some think twice before risking so much isk to run some suits. A true assault player could afford to loose the suits they do in PC. The game has changed tremendously over time, and it's time for a price overhaul. In open beta heavies were, in fact, costed higher than everyone else. It also wasn't just the suits, it was the weapons too. The end result was that heavies were far too expensive, and offered almost no benefits when compared to other platforms. I'll certainly allow that during Chrome assaults/logis were often able to rival heavy eHP, the HMG was only somewhat useful compared to the greater damage projection of the AR, and forge guns were considered undesirable due to platform limitations (as in, a slow, difficult-to-turn, overly expensive heavy suit) as an AV system. Even so, Breakin is right- pricepoint really isn't an overly effective way to balance things. My personal opinion on the matter is that it is ideal to reference ISK pricing in balance, but it should really be the case that it's one of the last things looked at; IE, we have given the players item xyz with abc capability, similar items have efg price. This is especially the case when one considers the increasing solvency of many- though certainly not all- veteran DUST players- more and more of them either still have or have gain hundreds of millions to billions of ISK- the price of their gear no longer matters to them, because they can afford to sustain a "negative" income stream for years to come. Buff Logis \| Nerf Goldfish
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4155	Posted - 2014.10.30 07:48:00 - [22] - Quote Let's continue the conversation. I still think putting the sentinel in cqc where it's mobility problems don't matter is a bad idea and think they need to be altered. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Kensai Dragon Dust University Ivy League 31	Posted - 2014.11.01 19:30:00 - [23] - Quote I generally like the ideas of variation in the HMG lineup, but I'm confused on how a longer reaching and lighter hitting HMG would be significantly different than, say, an ACR on a Sentinel?When a sentinel currently runs Light Weapons the community looks down and says 'scrub'. I personally don't care, I'll run what works - figure that's why they made commandos for, heavies are supposed to run lights. If CCP doesn't like it then they'll change it. When they finish the balance of Racial Heavy Weapons then maybe there'll be a valid reason to call a Heavy with Light scrub. Until then, use the tools available to get the job done, because you're right in saying the Heavy Class should NOT be a CQC only suit. Concerning the artificial CQC role, already the Assault HMG is comparabel to the ACR in range, and still out-damages the ACR, the only problem is trying to aim at range with the terribad reticule on ALL HMG's. I like running the Min Heavy with an HMG on the more open maps with cover, and I think the HMG is great there. It should though, HMG is a Min Weapon, right? Mins run faster (sitll not exactly fast) and close the gap. You let me get too close and you'll pay for it, but I'm running the risk by trying to get there. Rather than focus on the HMG, I'd rather see more Heavy Weapons introduced. The forge is a great long range weapon, the HMG is a great close range weapon. The others should bring some kind of countering-balance to the game. I like running the Burst on Amarr Sentinel, soaks up a little bit more while trying to kill those other pesky Heavies in the way, and the Amarr Sents get the bonus reduction to HMG (projectile) damage, but at the severe cost of movement speed. Concerning the viability of a Sentinel in CQC, it makes sense to have the super heavy weight throwing around his weight in a small room. He throws a wild tantrum and burns out quick. The HMG is not the problem, the lack of countering options is. With a balanced lineup of counters available, I think we'd see the HMG become a more situational weapon instead of the current all purpose CQC spam. I just think changing the HMG to be the all purpose, catch all weapon is stretching things a bit. Asking too much from a single type.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4338	Posted - 2014.11.01 19:45:00 - [24] - Quote all purpose is not the intent in fact it would be counterproductive EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 54	Posted - 2014.11.01 19:48:00 - [25] - Quote 1. Such a bad idea, they are already slow and turn speed just makes it easier to kill them and a scout would have a field day 2. HMG has the range of an AR? Why use an assault then? The heavy has more HP and resistances to 2 types of damage and if you want more range use the assault HMG 3. Sentinals are fine as point defence, if they are in open fields they get gunned down by assaults/logi so much easier due to the main weapon having poor range and that they are the size of a small planet and move as slow as syrup 4. Commandos can use ARs and move slightly faster and can engage at longer distances 5. Sentinals seem to be the most balanced, built to be tough and take damage with mulitiple enemies, go toe to toe with vehicles with the FG or engage at distance, can be great at point defence or just jump into the thick of it to make a mess
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4339	Posted - 2014.11.01 20:33:00 - [26] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. Such a bad idea, they are already slow and turn speed just makes it easier to kill them and a scout would have a field day 2. HMG has the range of an AR? Why use an assault then? The heavy has more HP and resistances to 2 types of damage and if you want more range use the assault HMG 3. Sentinals are fine as point defence, if they are in open fields they get gunned down by assaults/logi so much easier due to the main weapon having poor range and that they are the size of a small planet and move as slow as syrup 4. Commandos can use ARs and move slightly faster and can engage at longer distances 5. Sentinals seem to be the most balanced, built to be tough and take damage with mulitiple enemies, go toe to toe with vehicles with the FG or engage at distance, can be great at point defence or just jump into the thick of it to make a mess There's nothing balanced about assault balance and utility being held hostage in order to keep heavies in CQC where they were put so they could be farmed for easy kills in beta. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 306	Posted - 2014.11.02 07:39:00 - [27] - Quote OP, I think you have a well written out and reasoned post. That being said I can't agree with it pretty much at all. One of the major concerns is that it would eliminate the heavy weakness of being killed at range. If a heavy can put all that damage downrange you will see a situation similar to the return of the RR/Heavy fit that was so popular and so annoying when RRs first came out. Only worse with the extra DPS. The 'fire support' role should not be held by a slow class (fire support requires LOTS of repositioning which makes heavies poor fire support when attacking a point.) PLUS them being sniper bait in that scenario - so they wouldn't be all that useful even then. So you give heavies a role they never had making them annoying -- but bad at said role as far as teamwork is concerned. We used to have a heavy turn speed cap. And heavies got splattered left and right. I, myself, in my Caldari assault would go toe to toe with them ALL the time and win 80% of the time. They couldn't hit me. And that was before cloak. I shudder to think at how they would fight now. So heavies would be pointless close range. Laser rifles and RRs would be severly infringed where as shotguns and NKs would proliferate even more so than before vs heavies. Heavies are area defense and control. They always have been -- just change your tactics for taking them out. Limit their spawn ability. (uplink changes are needed ANYWAY.) Take away their ability to drive LaVs. There are other ways to limit heavy spam besides making the suit mess up other suit's jobs+make them easy kills. That's how I feel anyway.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4352	Posted - 2014.11.02 08:01:00 - [28] - Quote Well thought out response but I think you vastly underestimate the ability to hit at range mattering in keeping people OUT of cqc range unless they flank. The turn speed shoul match an assault strafe at 20m. The window would be there. The scout thing... Open ground fire support increases the odds of spotting an inbound cloak and getting early fire off. But heavy suits survive scouts better in the open than in builfings in my experience. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3361	Posted - 2014.11.02 19:21:00 - [29] - Quote Interesting idea, and it actually touches on an idea I had for a Heavy Caldari Anti-Infantry I had some time ago. If anyone has played Killzone 3, in multiplayer there was a couple LMGs that you could use, one of which was the STA-3. It had no ability to aim down sights, it sprayed all over the place, and it was clunky and hard to use. Pretty much a useless weapon. Until of course you crouched down, the cone tightened to near pinpoint accuracy, and it wrecked at long range. The kicker was that if you moved at all, the cone would severely spread out again, so the weapon could only be used if you were planning on sitting still, typically defending a choke point from range. Now normally I'm against reduction to rotation speed from the hip (though I'm completely fine with it while aiming down the sights) because I feel it overly dampens normal movement in an attempt to hinder combat tracking speed. Back when heavies has that reduced turn speed all the time, going around a corner was basically suicide because it took so damn long to turn a corner. That being said, perhaps we could discuss a modified version of what you're getting at. What if this modified HMG had terrible spread/DPS to a point of uselessness in CQC but had unhindered rotation speed. But if you either crouched or aimed down the sights, that cone tightened significantly to a degree similar to rifles as you stated, and the rotation speed dropped significantly, and any sort of movement at that point would cause the spread to revert back to its normal hipfire state, forcing you to not move around much. Another thing that I surprisingly don't see people talking about much is spin up time. While it is interesting and unique with the way that CCP basically...doesn't have spin up time, it is often a mechanic used in other games to keep the HMG from being overpowered by delaying the time before it can apply damage. Perhaps for this longer range HMG we should consider a spin up mechanic (Much like a long range Caldari weapon would have a charge up time). Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4361	Posted - 2014.11.03 06:11:00 - [30] - Quote The idea is to make standard and assault longer range and unwieldy but leave the burst completely as-is. That way if you put turn speed on the guns at long range you don't screw the CQC weapons like the burst that have deadly drawbacks. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.

THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1153	Posted - 2014.11.03 07:58:00 - [31] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Why would anyone use them .?. think they get shot gunned and knifed now .. how is this helping " define " their role .?. if anything , this will lead to their being less viable and visual on the battlefield . Seriously come play a PC for FA as a heavy and tell me that scouts are as big of a problem as you think. Protip: 80% of your deaths will be heavies. People would use mediums more if heavies were a suppressive role. Scouts and assaults should be for pushing points while heavies and logis should be defense. Currently heavies and logis do whatever, assaults sit back and give cover fire while scouts thin out points, hack or provide scans. The biggest problem CCP has for balancing is the huge differences in competitive play and pubs. There are so many muppets rolling in pubs with no clue what they're doing compared to a mostly balanced 16v16 where everyone knows what they're doing and there's a proper game plan on both sides. I would much rather see heavies lose base HP across all tiers much like Chromosome where STD heavies had 700 total HP. But I'm happy for anything that makes anything other than a heavy more viable. Do you really not find it ridiculous when people sit in 10,000 ISK suits with 900-1300 armor+300-400 shields with, what I would say is the best weapon right now? Even when they're getting slapped around by good heavies, they're still bound to get a 1.0 KDR. Amarrica! It's Not Safe to Swim
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4362	Posted - 2014.11.03 08:55:00 - [32] - Quote Tweaking EHP has always caused more issued than it fixes. Changing the way you can deploy a sentinel will open more of the cqc areas. The burst HMG haa the disadvantage in sustained defense but it is a superb line breaking tool. If you make the other HMG and make them longer range, slower rotation you keep them useful in support but it makes it so that the sentinel's weaknesses, low mobility, large hitbox, sensor-blindness, mean something. you could trash at range but if you don't pay attention you can be killed by assault in cqc. The logical weakness of a slow'moing, easy target should be a fast moving enemy. Can you overcome this by putting two sentinels back to back in a corridor? Yes. But immobility in CQC invariably is a losing prospect. Every time I fight a sentinel who puts his back to a wall and stays there I invariably kill him. But the HP in cqc isn't the problem. It's the ability to do long-term, sustained fire at high DPS that combines with the HP that creates the spam. Instead of nerfing something to crap, why not change the role and how it is deployed? A longer range, slow turning sentinel makes it harder to sustain a defense in the lab or in orbital artillery while making them viable point defenders and zone controllers in maps like manus peak and line harvest. It also exposes them to more weapons that can counter them. You can't evict heavies from firing positions with a sniper while they are in cqc. But you can when they cannot park in a spot that makes a sniper meaningless and still be effective. Make the assault and standard long range and keep the burst fast turning and close-up for doir kicking. Sentinels should define the line a force draws in the sand, not be the be-all, end all of that line. And dropping heavies below 1000 HP basically means we go back to square 1 where they are as useless to a team as the commando and everyone swaps to assault for cqc ANYWAY, which STILL achieves my objective for this proposal. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Meee One Amakakeru-Ryu-no-Hirameki 1244	Posted - 2014.11.03 18:33:00 - [33] - Quote I can see them now... Sentinels on rooftops camping with HMGs... Official Blueberry of the Forums. Title given by my #1 fan Sgt Kirk.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4389	Posted - 2014.11.03 18:36:00 - [34] - Quote Meee One wrote: I can see them now... Sentinels on rooftops camping with HMGs... And charged sniper Rifles instapopping the ones stupid enough to do it. Forge Guns finding easy targets. It wouldn't be any worse than sentinels on a roof with an assault forge. Only difference is the HMG won't be able to kill vehicles while being a rooftop tard. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
G Felix 100	Posted - 2014.11.04 00:23:00 - [35] - Quote There's alot of experience with sentinels in this thread, and Breakin especially has made a lot of points that resonate with me, but is it possible that the real issue with a great deal of the heavy spam is actually uplink spam? It's not hard to kill a sentinel if you engage properly, I run sentinel fits at least 50% of the time and it's not particularly good for my kdr. What's very hard to do is kill 4-6 sentinels before they have started to respawn. More and more I am of the opinion that uplinks are what's really breaking this game. Dust can be frustrating. (Gò»°Gûí°)Gò»n+¦ Gö+GöüGö+)
Magnus Amadeuss Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1202	Posted - 2014.11.04 00:24:00 - [36] - Quote Here is something nuts..... Don't allow sentinels to get into vehicles. EWAR tool
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 93	Posted - 2014.11.04 01:27:00 - [37] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Meee One wrote: I can see them now... Sentinels on rooftops camping with HMGs... And charged sniper Rifles instapopping the ones stupid enough to do it. Forge Guns finding easy targets. It wouldn't be any worse than sentinels on a roof with an assault forge. Only difference is the HMG won't be able to kill vehicles while being a rooftop tard. I have to agree with Breakin as to how that will work out; roof camping is one of the few things that, IMO, should be a binary situation (unlike, say, EWAR or AV). I will elaborate. Let's assume something like the proposed changes happen, and suddenly HMG rooftop camping is a thing. In pubs, the following will happen: 1. Nobody will do anything, at which point HMG roofers will be murderizing lots of things, much the same way that they would do so with any other fit and any other long-range weapon. 2. Somebody will do something, which will result in a significant impedance to outright denial of an HMG roofer team doing anything useful. I can safely say that even one person with as little as L2 Sniper Rifle Ops, a Tac SR, and a moderate degree of intelligence in terms of awareness of target areas and basic positioning can quite handily suppress multiple enemies attempting to roofcamp. For reference, I can say this because I've actually done it. Had a fairly entertaining match on Manus Peak Skirm (which I usually hate), where I sat at C with a TacSR and picked off a few enemy snipers on the B-side mountains, while also harassing some swarmer on a B-point socket roof, and generally making an unpleasant time for various enemy players who attempted to approach C-point, or camp on the B-point roofs that faced C. Magnus Amadeuss wrote: Here is something nuts..... Don't allow sentinels to get into vehicles. I somewhat disagree, depending on your meaning. What I think you mean is that sentinels should not be allowed to drive vehicles, which is a somewhat valid idea. If you are being quite literal... then I thought you were much more reasonable and analytical than that Magnus. Now, for the latter possibility, there's not a lot that I'm interested in saying simply because most of it boils down to insulting you heavily for something so obviously dumb. I'm assuming that the latter isn't what you mean, and so I won't waste any more of my time or yours on such. So, for the former, more likely, meaning: I disagree somewhat. I'm actually fine with sentinels being prohibited from flying dropships or driving HAVs, but quite frankly the main flaw of the generally hated "HMG Heavy in an LAV" problem is that it ultimately stems from forcing the sentinel into the CQB dominance role. Heavy suit users look at their HMG, and just how unhelpful it is on larger and/or more open maps (IE, Border Gulch, Manus Peak), and they look at how slow their suit can walk/sprint places. So somebody way back in the misty sands of time that shroud the closed (or open) beta era decided to buy some LAVs to drive around in while carrying an HMG as a heavy. Lo and behold, we have the original incarnation of the so-called "Murder Taxi". It's very simply just the result of somebody coming up with a way to take advantage of DUST's sandbox nature to counter some of their dropsuit's weaknesses. In a way, we should applaud this sort of breakthrough in player thought and intelligence. It's the sort of thing that would pretty much never happen in Battlefield or Planetside 2- the part where players figure out how to work around weaknesses using other mechanics, that is. I'd actually argue that changing the HMG to a long-ranged weapon role will generally remove the attractiveness of the drive-by HMG heavy as a tactic; the weapon will lose some of its CQB dominance, meaning that it will be more likely that a heavy would use an LAV to get into position or rapidly change position to react to changing combat conditions. Or maybe he still drives around, but instead he only occasionally runs people over or stops and switches to the turret mount to shoot stuff. Either way, HMG heavies doing a drive-by using an LAV becomes something of a relic of a forgotten era- something like the stories of dumbfire swarms. With that said, I'd like to pose two questions to Breakin: 1. How would we differentiate the Assault and "basic" HMG variants? 2. Would a turn-speed penalty be absolutely necessary? For the latter, I'm not sure that it's needed- obviously it existed in Chrome, and was bad, but that was due to the ultimately flawed decision to chain heavies to CQB dominance- a role they are not necessarily suited for. But HMG heavies being a long-ranged fire support platform, somewhat in the vein of a LR user, it doesn't quite click with me that such a penalty is actually necessary. After all, heavies are slow. This will by nature make them more defensive in deployment, which will in turn indicate a more static deployment strategy- you'll probably throw some HMG heavies in an LAV/derpship to get them from point A to point B really fast, but other than that, you'll want them in a good position that provides excellent overwatch potential. This will also mean that they will end up having a limited field of fire- simply because they will mostly pay attention to the direction enemies are most likely to approach from. Which in turn means they are very open to flanking maneuvers; it also means that HMG heavies will be more desirable in outdoor areas rather than the current building-humper paradigm. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 14109	Posted - 2014.11.04 02:17:00 - [38] - Quote Magnus Amadeuss wrote: Here is something nuts..... Don't allow sentinels to get into vehicles. Technically no suit other than say...... a pilot suit should be able to use specialist vehicles. GÇ£How does this all work then?GÇ¥ GÇ£Like so Choirboy.GÇ¥ Mila to Kador, Sub Zero Club, Shoashu Sasaanko
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4440	Posted - 2014.11.04 05:20:00 - [39] - Quote Turn speed penalty for a couple reasons. 1: because making an HMG useful at ranges even similar to a BAR or RR (I'd go for longer) would mean dispersion needs to be cut to a quarter or less what it is now. Not adding a turn speed penalty makes it instant death at point blank CQC. 2: because the only thing that changes between a long range HMG heavy and a short range HMG heavy is that a long range heavy can easily exert the current level of dominance at all ranges. This leaves no counter that isn't dependent upon a sentinel screwing up. Any counter that is dependent upon the enemy screwing up is not a counter. 3: because CCP made the HMG remarkably similar to my 240 Golf I hauled around serving in the marines. Trust me when I say you want sentinels to have an exploitable weakness. Currently you have to either dogpile a heavy, deploy your own heavy or hope the heavy is wounded or really screws up when you get to him. This isn't a counter. Right now the only real counter is borderline broken scouts and remote explosives. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4440	Posted - 2014.11.04 05:34:00 - [40] - Quote In short, not putting turn speed penalty on a long range heavy means there is no impetus to STOP spamming them in buildings. We get the new FOTM whose only weakness can be subverted by dropping an LAV. Enter the omni-slayer. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.

Aeon Amadi Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 6908	Posted - 2014.11.04 05:50:00 - [41] - Quote People will complain that it's a "viable strategy" to spam heavies and in one person's own words the "HMG is the least complained about weapon in Delta" but IMO it's just defending the current meta, which has been needing to change since 1.8 was released. I remember very fondly that there was a -glorious- balance in 1.7 when the HMG received a Rate of Fire increase and proper dispersion (before it had laser-like accuracy so it wasn't actually getting any spread as it fired). Once the HMG received that, there was a proper balance between it and the rifles. It shelled out DPS by the boatload and it was challenging to fight against but it wasn't one-sided as long as you knew what you were doing. Then they made a sweeping 10% damage nerf to the entire line-up of weapons with only one exception: The HMG. Ever since then, Sentinels and HMGs have been spammed to high heaven with no end in sight. A handful of us protested that and I even brought it up in a thread back in March before the release of 1.8. Because the HMG took over in CQC territory, and the cloak was implemented, Arkena Wrynspire's prediction in that thread was hitting the nail right on the head. Someone argued that the "HMG -should- be the king of CQC with no rival", which makes sense until you think of the fact that... if it -is- the king of CQC with no rival, then the only viable counter is another HMG. Cloaky scouts wound up working a lot better then expected (well, I say that, but CCP wanted to make it so that you could shoot while cloaked until the CPM intervened) so it wasn't -entirely- one sided but when you're only options in the 0-40m range are HMG or Shotgun, your choices are insanely limited and entire playstyles die out (CQC Gal Assault). In essence, my theory is that people don't have a problem with Sentinels... People don't have a problem with HMGs. People have a problem with there being -so many at once- that they become unmanageable. You just have to provide an option that allows people to have an advantage at times without having to go into a niche playstyle. The problem with turn speed or manueverability changes is that people will just find ways around it. They already do with LAVs. Important Legion Transparency Post Lv5
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1971	Posted - 2014.11.04 06:57:00 - [42] - Quote So you want to make heavies even more susceptible to fast moving scouts and turn them into long-range killers ala Heavy RR scrubs? I can't say I agree with that. What's wrong with a heavy playing point defense as a role? Really? Do you, by chance, play solo a lot? Because when you're in a half way decent squad it's pretty rare that the other team gets dug a spot so much as you can't get them out...except perhaps Domination if you're going against an entire team. And in PC if they get dug in like that, it's generally because they are simply better. I fail to see a problem to solve here, but I do appreciate your out of the box thinking.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4444	Posted - 2014.11.04 07:48:00 - [43] - Quote Point defend is not the same as CQC defense. Long range sentinel in sat orbital artiller would have two options for viability: 1:Burst HMG for short work without a turn penalty. 2: post at the entry areas of the CQC areas and deny entry. But my problem with heavies as undisputed kings of CQC against all comers posits the question: Why do gallente assaults exist? Gallente are supposed to be the brawler kings, but one class of suit denies across-the-board utility of all other dropsuits in CQC. None of a heavy's weaknesses matter in CQC because an HMG is more capable of sustained engagements with more DPS than ANY OTHER WEAPON. The change I'm proposing would change heavy meta from "I win CQC" to "If I see you coming you're dead. But if you get up on top of me, I am dead." Only the burst HMG has an exploitable weakness. It's the biggest ammo hog ever and it overheats faster than ANY OTHER WEAPON. It's a good cqc weapon. By the same token the boundless HMG is the best weapon in CQC. It has no drawbacks in close. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 94	Posted - 2014.11.05 00:55:00 - [44] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: In short, not putting turn speed penalty on a long range heavy means there is no impetus to STOP spamming them in buildings. We get the new FOTM whose only weakness can be subverted by dropping an LAV. Enter the omni-slayer. Mostly I'm just quoting this part because it's a succinct summary of your explanation, but you've adequately explained your reasoning. I fully admit I still don't like turnspeed penalties very much... but in the interests of balance and overall gameplay experience I will fully understand and probably advocate it. That being said... you didn't give any ideas about Assault HMGs. Which, having settled the turnspeed issue, seems to really be a big thing to figure out as part of this proposal. Assault variants of a weapon tend to nearly always have a higher rate of fire. Then it filters down into one of two paradigms: One is a higher-capacity, lower-damage version, such as the assault variants of the racial rifles and the assault MD. Assault forges mostly fit on this side of the fence, trading clip capacity for splash damage. The other side that is reduced capacity, but slightly increased range. Which is where the scrambler pistol and SMG fit in... and quite frankly I find it rather strange that an assault variant would be associated with "reduced damage, reduced capacity, increased range", since all three don't really go together. It's sort of a pick two-out-of-three thing, IMO. So, that leaves us with a bit of a quandary. Given that weapons that have what could be considered a "long" range and also sport assault-type variants never use the second paradigm, and your proposal is for the HMG to be a long-range fire support weapon with a turnspeed penalty and the Burst HMG to be a door-kicker heavy weapon of choice, that then leaves us with a slight pickle of where to put the Assault HMG. Perhaps for the Assault HMG we keep the current damage but give it a 50% increase in clip capacity, putting it at a solid ~650 round capacity? If we assume that the current spread mechanic of the regular HMG is kept (which I think would be cool), then the Assault could have a similar time-to-max-accuracy, but a significantly slower accuracy decay, then this makes the Assault HMG a superb pure-suppression weapon- it would literally be the highest-capacity weapon in the entire game, but with somewhat low-ish DPS and an incentive to fire to nearly-overheating and then backing off a bit. It seems like it might give the Assault HMG an interesting dynamic with the regular and Burst variants. What have you considered for differentiating the Assault and regular HMGs? Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 94	Posted - 2014.11.05 01:10:00 - [45] - Quote So, double-posting here because I'm replying to some other people rather than giving suggestions about certain parts of the OP. Aeon Amadi wrote: snip really well-written, informed, and thought-out post So, I'm not sure quite what you're saying as relates to the OP's proposal. At first it seems like you're somewhat in favor, but then it seems like not... which is it? Also, I'm curious as to how people will "find a way around" a turnspeed penalty? Quite frankly, the current drive-by HMG heavy phenomenon would probably vanish overnight if HMGs were more limited to long-range fire support and door-kicker's best friend, depending on the variant equipped. Leadfoot10 wrote: So you want to make heavies even more susceptible to fast moving scouts and turn them into long-range killers ala Heavy RR scrubs? I can't say I agree with that. What's wrong with a heavy playing point defense as a role? Really? Do you, by chance, play solo a lot? Because when you're in a half way decent squad it's pretty rare that the other team gets dug a spot so much as you can't get them out...except perhaps Domination if you're going against an entire team. And in PC if they get dug in like that, and your team can't get them out, it's generally because they are simply better (or you didn't bring enough clones). If getting heavies dug out of their entrenched positions is really our goal, a DPS/dispersion nerf and/or a rep tool nerf (along with an assault suit bonus to something like damage) would seeming be an easier way to accomplish it without completely changing the heavy's role on the battlefield....and the assault suit with it. I agree with Aeon. I don't know about Breakin, but I personally do play mostly solo. With that being said, I will agree with him- Point Defense isn't the same as CQC dominance; the latter is really what heavies are right now, not the former. This was actually something I believe was brought up during the beta- that you can't do point defense if you cannot keep people away from a point. HMGs being the CQC "god gun" means that a heavy who's busy humping a point is not "point defense", he's really just "I shoot you while hacking the point"... which is helpful, to be sure, but isn't point defense. Point defense would be an Amarr Assault/Commando with a LR burning dudes down from 70+ meters away from the point, preventing them from ever getting close in the first place. Moreover, right now the heavy role is quite frankly stupid. You're either the supposedly most-awesome AV around... which is cool, and Forges are undeniably awesome... or you're supposed to be busy point-humping and shooting hackers off the console. Sure, most squads will generally keep people from getting to the console to hack it anyways, and they usually use heavies to do it... but that also tends to include digging in. A heavy in an entrenched position should be difficult to displace, certainly- but the nature of that entrenched position should not boil down to "point humper". It's also the case that the proposal laid out in the OP suddenly means that CQC Gallente Assault will suddenly become a thing, which is good. I honestly don't notice GalSalts around that much- it's either scouts, the odd CalSalt/whatever Logi, or heavies. Sometimes there'll be a pretty good AmSalt/MinSalt, or a Commando, or a murderlogi, but mostly it's the others. Part of that is scout balance problems, but that's not relevant to this thread/proposal. The other part is that HMG heavies are ultimate murder-death-kill machines in CQC, when it quite frankly makes more sense that they would be long range fire support in the style of the LR. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
Zindorak G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1221	Posted - 2014.11.05 01:48:00 - [46] - Quote Wat change HMG range to be the same as rifles? lo i wonder how that would work out Pokemon master and Tekken Lord Gk0 Scout yay :)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4510	Posted - 2014.11.05 04:37:00 - [47] - Quote I laid out that I would make the assault HMG the advancing fire support version. In between the burst and standard for range and raw damage with a lesser turn peenalty. Also making the weapon like a heavy rifle is not the intent. The only universe in which the rurn speed penalty is justified is if the unholy DPS is left as-is. Lowering the DPS would beg the question "why bother?" And as to doubling the laser rifle optimal? HELL YES! I always thought that the Laser Rifle should have been the amarr snip EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Cat Merc Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 13019	Posted - 2014.11.05 05:17:00 - [48] - Quote I like this, but it will require a shift of thinking on the part of the community. Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4515	Posted - 2014.11.05 05:24:00 - [49] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: I like this, but it will require a shift of thinking on the part of the community. And this is why they don't like it for the most part EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 94	Posted - 2014.11.05 05:34:00 - [50] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: I laid out that I would make the assault HMG the advancing fire support version. In between the burst and standard for range and raw damage with a lesser turn peenalty. Also making the weapon like a heavy rifle is not the intent. The only universe in which the rurn speed penalty is justified is if the unholy DPS is left as-is. Lowering the DPS would beg the question "why bother?" I think we ended up sort of saying the same thing but in a slightly different way. Incidentally, do you think a magazine capacity buff would be well-suited to the "Assault HMG=advancing fire support" concept? It might fit pretty well, since advancing fire support would want to continue firing for as long as possible, and a higher capacity might be a way to do it. Breakin Stuff wrote: And as to doubling the laser rifle optimal? HELL YES! I always thought that the Laser Rifle should have been the amarr snip Well, it's not quite doubling the optimal; currently the evidence is pointing to something that starts at 40 or 50 meters and then ends at about 105 meters. So it'd be more like a 20-50% increase over the current. So we definitely agree on LR optimal getting longer, though I don't necessarily agree that the LR should be the Amarrian sniper weapon; it seems a lot more likely that it was always intended as the precision vs AoE counterpart to the MD IMO. Cat Merc wrote: I like this, but it will require a shift of thinking on the part of the community. Well, I wouldn't say a shift in the community's thinking, so much as just convincing Rattati that this is a great way to diversify some roles and even bring a few underused ones (like CQB GalSalt) into greater usage/prominence. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts

Aeon Amadi Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 6982	Posted - 2014.11.05 13:02:00 - [51] - Quote Victor Moody Stahl wrote: So, double-posting here because I'm replying to some other people rather than giving suggestions about certain parts of the OP. Aeon Amadi wrote: snip really well-written, informed, and thought-out post So, I'm not sure quite what you're saying as relates to the OP's proposal. At first it seems like you're somewhat in favor, but then it seems like not... which is it? Also, I'm curious as to how people will "find a way around" a turnspeed penalty? Quite frankly, the current drive-by HMG heavy phenomenon would probably vanish overnight if HMGs were more limited to long-range fire support and door-kicker's best friend, depending on the variant equipped. Take it as you will. I can't say that I'm for anything that affects Heavies or Scouts in any negative way because the community will automatically outcast me if I do. /sarcasm Legion Transparency Me and My Girl
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4521	Posted - 2014.11.05 13:05:00 - [52] - Quote the community of angry neckbeards with a raging hardon to defend their playstyles at all costs regardless of whether it's healthy for the game as a whole? Or the player community who is tired of seeing nothing but heavies whenever two bricks are pressed closer than five feet together and swarms of scouts? EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 426	Posted - 2014.11.05 22:26:00 - [53] - Quote After reading the OP and the subsequent responses, I'm a no at this point. I don't see the cqc/point defense "issue" as stemming from the heavy frame or its attachments, I think its a matter of playerstyle. Some players want to point defend right up close to the point, some from farther out. The heavy, from what I've seen of them in both PCs and PUBS, accomodates either of these playstyles just fine with no other accomodation being needed. If the HMG isnt giving you the range you want to be able to not "hump the console" put on your RR and block everyone else in the match so as to not get the hatemail bombardment you'll be due. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4531	Posted - 2014.11.05 23:30:00 - [54] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: After reading the OP and the subsequent responses, I'm a no at this point. I don't see the cqc/point defense "issue" as stemming from the heavy frame or its attachments, I think its a matter of playerstyle. Some players want to point defend right up close to the point, some from farther out. The heavy, from what I've seen of them in both PCs and PUBS, accomodates either of these playstyles just fine with no other accomodation being needed. If the HMG isnt giving you the range you want to be able to not "hump the console" put on your RR and block everyone else in the match so as to not get the hatemail bombardment you'll be due. And you have completely missed the point. It's not "the HMG doesn't have enough range." It's "the HMG heavy makes no logical sense in CQC and because of the asspull leaps that must be made to balance it, any time you have two bricks nearby each other you'll find a sentinel between them." The meta in cities among people that pay attention (not sub-10m SP newbros) is as soon as you enter the building go fat or go home. Why is it that people are complaining that heavies are being spammed? because they are. Why are they not being screamed about being OP? Because Rattatti somehow managed to do what no other Dev could. This right here frightens me. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 427	Posted - 2014.11.05 23:50:00 - [55] - Quote The two bricks with a heavy between as critisism makes as much sense as complaining people are using vehicles to cover large open areas faster. Thats what they're for. Maybe the real issue is the map design putting most control points within some sort of tightly controllable area? Heavies are the guardians of the gates. Where theres gates, there will be heavies. Many heavies then maybe = many gates? Or the overwhelming urge on the part of teams to protect those gates fully, with multiple heavies? I still don't see the problem here, heavies have counters (flux and smg to the dome is my fav), plenty of counters. EDIT before needing to EDIT: not a 10m SP newbro. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 427	Posted - 2014.11.05 23:52:00 - [56] - Quote As far as heavies being OP, they are still second to scouts soooooooo one problem at a time? Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4531	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:10:00 - [57] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: As far as heavies being OP, they are still second to scouts soooooooo one problem at a time? Heavies aren't OP, quit looking at a thread and assuming it's a complaint. Just because you consider your personal crusade against scouts > all doesn't mean you need to come in here, read part of the proposal by skimming and then threadcrapping. This is a role change not a call for a nerf. If you have to make scouts the center of attention go make more scout threads, God knows there are dozens, all equally ignored. But heavies in CQC negate the value of assaults in CQC. Bottom line. Are heavies supporting assaults? Or are Assaults supporting heavies? It looks to me like assaults are supporting heavies in the current meta, and that's bass-ackwards. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 95	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:13:00 - [58] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Take it as you will. I can't say that I'm for anything that affects Heavies or Scouts in any negative way because the community will automatically outcast me if I do. /sarcasm The problem is that I refuse to "take it as I will", because I asked what you actually think about the issue at hand. If I did as you suggest, then at that point I'm basically just deciding what you think for you, or even going as far as claiming that you're saying something that you aren't. Yes, yes, I realize you're being a bit sarcastic, but really. You can't just say straight up what you think about it? el OPERATOR wrote: The heavy, from what I've seen of them in both PCs and PUBS, accomodates either of these playstyles just fine with no other accomodation being needed. If the HMG isnt giving you the range you want to be able to not "hump the console" put on your RR and block everyone else in the match so as to not get the hatemail bombardment you'll be due. The heavy suit as a weapons platform has traditionally been defined by, gasp the ability to carry heavy weapons. Saying "just throw a RR on that sucka and ignore the hatemail if you want range" is asinine. The point is that the HMG is ultimately a flawed weapon concept, for two reasons: 1. Logical consistency; HMG-analogues have never been a close-encounter ordnance, and likely never will be; they are heavy, cumbersome weapon systems with fantastic range and firepower that are far more usefully deployed in more open terrain conditions. 2. A lack of additional heavy weapons. This isn't quite as big a deal in terms of HMG role, but there would honestly not be as many complaints about this issue if the Sentinel class had more heavy weapon variety. Moreover, light weapon heavies are only a thing because there is no long range anti-infantry heavy weapon. There's also the issue that the whole "durable enough to go toe-to-toe with vehicles" thing that's part of the description seems to imply more of a "I keep people far away from the point", not "I hump the console and shoot hackers in the back". There currently is not any ability for a heavy suit user to be an effective long range combatant, unless they do one of two things: 1. They fit a light weapon to their heavy suit. Which is something that CCP is trying to discourage through the use of the heavy weapon fitting bonus and the accompanying reduction in fitting resources that Sentinel suits have. 2. Use a different suit that is more suited to light weapon deployment. In other words, for a heavy to, in current patch state, be useful over range, they have to either sacrifice heavily on their fit to accommodate something like a RR, or they have to change role entirely. Is this seriously acceptable to you, or are you too busy hating scouts? I mean, I get it, I don't much like scouts in the current patch state either, but it's possible to work through multiple issues simultaneously you know. Breakin Stuff wrote: Why are they not being screamed about being OP? Because Rattatti somehow managed to do what no other Dev could. This right here frightens me. Out of curiosity... what is it that Rattati did? I wasn't playing between just after 1.8 dropped and just before Hotfix Delta dropped, so I am probably out of the loop on that. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
Kensai Dragon DUST University Ivy League 40	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:17:00 - [59] - Quote I get the point about heavies and turn speeds, similar to a tank on the field vs a motorcycle, or a battle cruiser less maneuverable than a speed boat. I wasn't around when they were working out the turn speed penalties before, but I think it could be doable. Aside from turn speeds though, I'm not quite seeing how a heavy should NOT be able to perform at CQC with a proper normalized mechanic such as the turn speed. Again, I'm going back to a boxing and MMA analogy, a heavy weight will murder a featherweight if he keeps the distance and lands his shots. A featherweight, as long as he uses his maneuverability advantage, can circle and strike at his choosing to take down the fatty. Especially if / when stamina is a factor. I like the idea of getting the Sentinels outside of strictly CQC, but not eliminating CQC from the repertoire. Additionally, as I read you're description of Sentinels defending the point from afar my mind is filled with images of 'murder taxi'. Trying to get out of the way in a heavy is certainly less than ideal, which leads to depending on your team to protect you, much like a A/V is now. Maybe I missed your point, can you give a better idea or example of how you envision point defence from afar?
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 95	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:28:00 - [60] - Quote I don't know about Breakin, but personally I consider "point defense from afar" to be within 50 meters of a point and then keeping other players away from the point. I will use Manus Peak Skirmish as an example; When defending C, the heavy will most likely be within 20-30 meters of the console; I will assume that the socket in this example is the mini-bridge/wall thing that basically keeps the console/null cannon and CRU on the side closest to the ridge, while the side facing the A/B points has the supply depot and turret. With this proposal, I would envision the heavy on top of the bridge, firing at long range to prevent enemies from getting close to the point. The heavy is still "on the point", defending; however, rather than staying behind the wall and gunning down randumbs that try to hack the point, he's actually on the wall preventing said randumbs from getting that close in the first place. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4531	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:36:00 - [61] - Quote Kensai Dragon wrote: Maybe I missed your point, can you give a better idea or example of how you envision point defence from afar? Manus peak is the perfect example. There are open ground objectives with long open areas between objectives. the idea is that a Sentinel could cover those approach fields and DENY YOU APPROACH and keep your squad discouraged from engaging. But once you get in close it's pretty much all over. That is the purpose of a suppression weapon, to deny an enemy approach to your battle line. If they approach kill them. But I want to leave the burst as-is because a Burst HMG works better as a CQC concept. It's kinda dumb as a long-range asset because of how it works. But it also has two massive drawbacks: 1: it eats ammo like a ten year old at halloween. 2: it overheats stupid fast. these two things combine with it's ungodly damage output to make it an excellent door kicker weapon, but suboptimal for sustained engagement and long-term point-defense. Long range weapons are always better point-defense weapons because you can use them to deny an enemy approach to your point rather than trying to clean up while they swarm you EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4531	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:38:00 - [62] - Quote Victor Moody Stahl wrote: I don't know about Breakin, but personally I consider "point defense from afar" to be within 50 meters of a point and then keeping other players away from the point. I will use Manus Peak Skirmish as an example; When defending C, the heavy will most likely be within 20-30 meters of the console; I will assume that the socket in this example is the mini-bridge/wall thing that basically keeps the console/null cannon and CRU on the side closest to the ridge, while the side facing the A/B points has the supply depot and turret. With this proposal, I would envision the heavy on top of the bridge, firing at long range to prevent enemies from getting close to the point. The heavy is still "on the point", defending; however, rather than staying behind the wall and gunning down randumbs that try to hack the point, he's actually on the wall preventing said randumbs from getting that close in the first place. Annnd Moody makes my point right as I do. This right here is essentially correct. Difference is, need more than 50m. Laser rifle is a good example of a suppression weapon. a 50m machinegun with a turn speed penalty would only have an effective engagement window of about 25-30m. The range would need to be longer to compensate for close quarter engagement vulnerability. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Ace Boone 333	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:39:00 - [63] - Quote My issue with heavies is their enormous amounts of HP. You have THE HIGHEST DPS weapon in the entire game, I don't see the need for 1340 armor with 500 shields. If heavies had less HP, but kept their damage resistance, it would force them to actually play smart, and use cover. As of now, a heavy can just charge in with a logi and demolish everything except other heavies. Only loyal to the republic.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 310	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:54:00 - [64] - Quote HMG really isn't the highest DPS weapon in the game due to dispersion. It's just pretty high up there. But the heavy HP thing is a result of their GIANT hitbox (heavies TAKE more damage from incoming fire-- especially the head) and their super slow sidestep speed (they take even MORE damage.) The huge issue with slayer scouts is that they can sidestep so fast they can actually lag through a hit and take no damage. Heavies are on the other side of that. Near impossible to miss and can actually take damage from shots that missed them. It's actually pretty easy to focus down a heavy solo provided you aren't trying to go toe to toe. I really don't see the need for a change to the suit. At best I would say change how uplinks work.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4531	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:55:00 - [65] - Quote Ace Boone wrote: My issue with heavies is their enormous amounts of HP. You have THE HIGHEST DPS weapon in the entire game, I don't see the need for 1340 armor with 500 shields. If heavies had less HP, but kept their damage resistance, it would force them to actually play smart, and use cover. As of now, a heavy can just charge in with a logi and demolish everything except other heavies. Because the traditional Tank/DPS/Healer trinity only works in DND or against opponents scripted to automatically attack the tank. Human opponents are smarter, and thus will not be sucked into the "tanks always have Low DPS" meta BS. Playing heavy means you draw fire. all of it. It also means you're more vulnerable to gangups and your own screwups than any other class because you are slow, and running away is something that works about once a year. I used up my once a year earlier today while getting shot by a BAR. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4531	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:57:00 - [66] - Quote Imp Smash wrote: HMG really isn't the highest DPS weapon in the game due to dispersion. It's just pretty high up there. But the heavy HP thing is a result of their GIANT hitbox (heavies TAKE more damage from incoming fire-- especially the head) and their super slow sidestep speed (they take even MORE damage.) The huge issue with slayer scouts is that they can sidestep so fast they can actually lag through a hit and take no damage. Heavies are on the other side of that. Near impossible to miss and can actually take damage from shots that missed them. It's actually pretty easy to focus down a heavy solo provided you aren't trying to go toe to toe. I really don't see the need for a change to the suit. At best I would say change how uplinks work. doesn't solve the problem. Even if uplinks are removed or unavailable (odd it does happen) then smart heavies move to the tightest quarters they can and entrench and force you to come to you. This behavior will not change even if uplinks do, and they have the ability to smash their way in and dig in like ticks because the ideal terrain for them (CQC) is right where most enemies want to hold.\ Heavies never should have been CQC kings. that honor should have gone to the gallente assault. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 313	Posted - 2014.11.06 03:33:00 - [67] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Imp Smash wrote: HMG really isn't the highest DPS weapon in the game due to dispersion. It's just pretty high up there. But the heavy HP thing is a result of their GIANT hitbox (heavies TAKE more damage from incoming fire-- especially the head) and their super slow sidestep speed (they take even MORE damage.) The huge issue with slayer scouts is that they can sidestep so fast they can actually lag through a hit and take no damage. Heavies are on the other side of that. Near impossible to miss and can actually take damage from shots that missed them. It's actually pretty easy to focus down a heavy solo provided you aren't trying to go toe to toe. I really don't see the need for a change to the suit. At best I would say change how uplinks work. doesn't solve the problem. Even if uplinks are removed or unavailable (odd it does happen) then smart heavies move to the tightest quarters they can and entrench and force you to come to you. This behavior will not change even if uplinks do, and they have the ability to smash their way in and dig in like ticks because the ideal terrain for them (CQC) is right where most enemies want to hold.\ Heavies never should have been CQC kings. that honor should have gone to the gallente assault. Then I'm sorry we are just going tohave to disagree. I think heavies should be Cqc suits. They are too slow and too easy to hit to do anything except entrench. That's kind of their job. But really this is all just a way of thinking. Your last comment made it clear -- when you said entrenched CQC should be Gallente Assault. Gallente are the armor rep class. Amarr stack plates which you need for CqC. So it would be them -- not Gallente. Ah. I see -- you yourself ARE a Gallente. You know -- it appears that you are trying to change the fit the playstyle you want right? EDIT: On second thought -- you did mention that a lot of parts that ppl want to hold (for example objectives) are CQC. It wouldn't be hard to make half the points in any Obj based match have half low cover points and half high cover points. Then all the suits would have a spot.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4536	Posted - 2014.11.06 03:37:00 - [68] - Quote Imp Smash wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Imp Smash wrote: HMG really isn't the highest DPS weapon in the game due to dispersion. It's just pretty high up there. But the heavy HP thing is a result of their GIANT hitbox (heavies TAKE more damage from incoming fire-- especially the head) and their super slow sidestep speed (they take even MORE damage.) The huge issue with slayer scouts is that they can sidestep so fast they can actually lag through a hit and take no damage. Heavies are on the other side of that. Near impossible to miss and can actually take damage from shots that missed them. It's actually pretty easy to focus down a heavy solo provided you aren't trying to go toe to toe. I really don't see the need for a change to the suit. At best I would say change how uplinks work. doesn't solve the problem. Even if uplinks are removed or unavailable (odd it does happen) then smart heavies move to the tightest quarters they can and entrench and force you to come to you. This behavior will not change even if uplinks do, and they have the ability to smash their way in and dig in like ticks because the ideal terrain for them (CQC) is right where most enemies want to hold.\ Heavies never should have been CQC kings. that honor should have gone to the gallente assault. Then I'm sorry we are just going tohave to disagree. I think heavies should be Cqc suits. They are too slow and too easy to hit to do anything except entrench. That's kind of their job. But really this is all just a way of thinking. Your last comment made it clear -- when you said entrenched CQC should be Gallente Assault. Gallente are the armor rep class. Amarr stack plates which you need for CqC. So it would be them -- not Gallente. Ah. I see -- you yourself ARE a Gallente. You know -- it appears that you are trying to change the fit the playstyle you want right? EDIT: On second thought -- you did mention that a lot of parts that ppl want to hold (for example objectives) are CQC. It wouldn't be hard to make half the points in any Obj based match have half low cover points and half high cover points. Then all the suits would have a spot. gallente are brawlers with high damage cqc weapons. amarr are damage soakers. amarr are better in cqc defense and gallente are better in cqc attack. and I'm not a gall rp loyalist. I tend to lean to caldari sentinels by preference EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 95	Posted - 2014.11.06 04:48:00 - [69] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Annnd Moody makes my point right as I do. This right here is essentially correct. Difference is, need more than 50m. Laser rifle is a good example of a suppression weapon. a 50m machinegun with a turn speed penalty would only have an effective engagement window of about 25-30m. The range would need to be longer to compensate for close quarter engagement vulnerability. I just want to clarify that I mean "heavy is within 50 meters of objective", not "HMG range is 50 meters". I merely noted that as a measure of how close to an objective a heavy would probably be when conducting long range suppression fire. So I absolutely do agree that a 50 meter range would be much too low. My bad for not making that clear. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 06:38:00 - [70] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: As far as heavies being OP, they are still second to scouts soooooooo one problem at a time? Heavies aren't OP, quit looking at a thread and assuming it's a complaint. Just because you consider your personal crusade against scouts > all doesn't mean you need to come in here, read part of the proposal by skimming and then threadcrapping. This is a role change not a call for a nerf. If you have to make scouts the center of attention go make more scout threads, God knows there are dozens, all equally ignored. But heavies in CQC negate the value of assaults in CQC. Bottom line. Are heavies supporting assaults? Or are Assaults supporting heavies? It looks to me like assaults are supporting heavies in the current meta, and that's bass-ackwards. Your previous comment about spam and ppl crying about OP is why I mentioned OP and scouts. I didn't read part of the proposal and decide to **** on your table. I have yet to start ANY anti-scout threads. The only thread I think I have ever created was the day of the Rouge Wedding where, amidst countless QQ and RAaAaaGE threads, I said I would stay playing DUST. Because I like it. To your actual point: The heavy/assault relationship is very clear- Assaults take, Heavies hold. Thats a two-way street so it works both ways sometimes, Heavies take and Assaults hold, but for the most part it's the first way. This isn't backwards or inappropriate, it's logical and it works. The two units (ideally) support each other using their strengths to compensate for the others' weakness blahblahblah you know the drill. HMG range buffing will take us backwards in time, to a DUST of not that long ago (a year and a half to two) where the forums were devoid of OP scout threads and flush with, "NERF HMGs" threads. People hated crossing those open areas to be pelted from afar by HMG rounds that didn't kill but would damage enough to make the runners easy pickings for whoever they ran into next. People hated turning a corner, finding a heavy, racing backwards to create distance and squeeze out a few rounds just to be utterly evicerated by the first sneeze out of that HMG. You are point defense. You don't have to do that all the time, but its what the frame is based on being for. That HMG is based on the idea of DPS, close to mid-range. Longer range already proved itself problematic overwhelmingly. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.

el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 06:44:00 - [71] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: But heavies in CQC negate the value of assaults in CQC. Bottom line. No, from what I've seen, they don't. Heavies are supported by assault players all the time. You might not realize though, since most of those assaults are in scout suits. Yes, thats where I took that. I'll leave my opinion about that out, but that the circumstance exists is undeniable by anyone who's actually played for more than an hour in the last 4 months. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4542	Posted - 2014.11.06 07:05:00 - [72] - Quote Once rattati hits scouts with the nerf bat then we are going to come right back here. You may disagree with me but heavies were put in cqc so it wouldnGÇÿt take as much effort to kill them. Look how well that turned out. And the killing field everyone complained about was because you cannot exploit the strafe glitch at range because dispersion doesn't care whether you are synced or not. Beta players cried way too much EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 07:12:00 - [73] - Quote Victor Moody Stahl wrote: The heavy suit as a weapons platform has traditionally been defined by, gasp the ability to carry heavy weapons. Saying "just throw a RR on that sucka and ignore the hatemail if you want range" is asinine. * SNIP * In other words, for a heavy to, in current patch state, be useful over range, they have to either sacrifice heavily on their fit to accommodate something like a RR, or they have to change role entirely. Is this seriously acceptable to you, or are you too busy hating scouts? 1. I don't hate scouts. Maybe someday I'll start a thread and explain myself but that day and thread ain't right now. 2. YES. YES. YES. If you missed it, YES it IS ACCEPTABLE TO ME for heavies, OR ANY OTHER ROLE to SACRIFICE in order to PERFORM outside their initial ROLE-DESIGN. -If you are a heavy but want to move fast YES you must sacrifice your innate invulnerability to AV weapons to drive that LAV around! -If you are a heavy and want to shoot people from 75m YES you must sacrifice your fitting space to cram on that CR/RR/AR/SNIPER/Whatever you choose!! ....and just so you don't mistake me as "hating heavies" or some bs.... -If you are a Logi but want to slay like an Assault, YES you must sacrifice some fitting bonuses to stack that relatively inferior HP/DM/BIO combo you'll need!! -If you are a scout but want to tank armor like a heavy YESYESYES you must sacrifice your speed to tank that extra 800 hp!!!!!! Need I go on? The entire game is built on risk/reward, benefits and sacrifices. EVERYONE is sacrificing something to perform outside of what their role usually doesn't include. If I want to cloak, I either design my entire Logi around accommodating that cloak, at the loss of my hp, my biotics, my ewar and my hacks OR I go put on my scout suit, cloak up and then fit the rest of it out however I want. Your patronizing tone regarding me, my opinion and scouts betrays your absolute lack of understanding of this game's fundamentals as well as the basis of my perspective. Hopefully I've enlightened you a little bit. If not, all I can say is gbfw. Oh, and the Forge Gun some of my corpmates wield does some amazing things from range. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 07:26:00 - [74] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Once rattati hits scouts with the nerf bat then we are going to come right back here. You may disagree with me but heavies were put in cqc so it wouldnGÇÿt take as much effort to kill them. Look how well that turned out. And the killing field everyone complained about was because you cannot exploit the strafe glitch at range because dispersion doesn't care whether you are synced or not. Beta players cried way too much scouts *** about heavies being OP all day, almost as much as everybody without a scout-superiority-centered focus bitches about scouts. Working as intended. And the killing fields were a mess. They still are, its just more palatable to people to have those kills be RR, CR and AR than be HMG on the feed. Beta players....idk. This game was craaazy when I started, ridiculouly dumb ** abounded. But the foundation for serious fun was obvious and well-laid. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4542	Posted - 2014.11.06 07:29:00 - [75] - Quote Your statement that heavies are supported by assaults all the time, even though it turns into a stab at scouts underlines the problem. Heavies should be the support for the assaults. The fact that assaults are now seen as the support for the heavies is a problem. Understanding how the game works and the core principles is not the problem. Accepting that some of those things are inherently broken and need fixing is the solution. The only reasons to defend the current heavy meta are: 1: Scouts are far more obnoxious, so they distract people from heavies. 2: It is an easily exploited meta that allows one to entrench in a way that means the only counter is another heavy. Once scoutsscouts are brought to heel every eye will turn to sentinel meta and the outcry will begin again. It has been proven time and time again that the only thing which can eject heavies in play is to hit their lines with other heavies. The only reasonable counter to a thing cannot be itself. Right now scouts have the stage. Next month fatties are on the chopping block because instead of " play a scout they're better" it will be "roll heavy, nothing else works in cqc maps." EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 07:46:00 - [76] - Quote Ok, freeze frame- Heavies and Assaults support one another (ideally) equally but who and how that support materializes really is based on what they're doing. If they are pushing a point the Assaults have the lead and are backed up by the slower but more damage-dealing heavies who arrive to the battle after the Assaults have started -but- If they are defending a point the Heavies have the lead and are backed up by the Assaults, who by virtue of mobility are falling in and out of flanks as well as chasing those attackers who try to run. Heavies have a ton of weaknesses and a ton of counters that exploit those weaknesses. Heavies are great at wiping out other heavies but are not required, not even close. scouts, even after a serious nerfbludgeon, will still hold some keys to heavy defeat but not all of them. If anything, Heavies are the most Equal Opportunity Victim on the field, ANYONE can kill a heavy. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4543	Posted - 2014.11.06 08:34:00 - [77] - Quote But no one can oust six heavies from an objective without more heavies. This is why spam is a problem. Your statement is the ideal, but it doesn't represent the reality. Scouts are achieving critical mass as far as being problematic goes. But it is equally problematic that pubs are beginning to follow PC meta. As much as I love picking on the PC tryhards they are the majority meta in three months. Right now the meta is heavy brick team supported by scouts with maybe an assault or a couple logis. The pubmatch meta is following suit with most teams beginning to spam sentinels or scouts. I am seeing less and less assaults and logis because the sentinels and scouts are dominating the field. People are not joking when they talk about 6-10 sentinels or scouts per team. This is becoming the at-large meta because both classes weaknesses are easily subverted. Scouts are just the most obvious because they can kill EVERYONE with impunity except other scouts. Heavies have to be mobbed or scoutssassinated if there isn't another heavy in play. I believe scouts should be the go-to counter to heavies but when they get nerfed heavy survivability jumps UP sharply. Nothing in this game lives in a vacuum. But follow the PC meta. When there is a variety of suits vehicles and tactics beyond one class dominance then balance will trickle into pubs. But the scout meta was the PC meta three months ago and pubs are catching up. If scouts are nerfed and something isn't done to eject heavies from CQC we will see sentinels where we see scouts now three months after the nerf hits. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 430	Posted - 2014.11.06 18:22:00 - [78] - Quote So, I guess the real disagreement here is what will become of heavies once scouts are rebalanced relative to the game at large, with your idea being that heavies need to be rebalanced out of cq dominance and further into a mid-long range competition? Because if not, then heavies will be up for nerfswat and no-one wants to be or see anyone nerfed? Okay. The current PC meta isn't far from the old PC meta: take the points, keep the points, kill everyone, get paid. That the methods used in PC are beginning to surface in Pubs, IMO, is a good thing, insofar as the teamwork elements go. Yes, this can mean spam of w/e, scouts, heavies, uplinks, logi-heavy spidering etc. Again, I don't really see a problem with that, provided that all the game elements are balanced individually and overall, so that those elements can be combined to create super potent task-specific solutions, that are still highly vulnerable somehow. If the goal is to run around and rip hacks, then super-fast hacker squads get to work, capable of hacking consoles in 2-3 seconds but super low HP (a sacrifice) so susceptible to instadeath from any form of focused fire. If they can get to the console they WILL flip it, but once they get it they aren't fitted to actually HOLD it and need other units to present themselves. I don't see an issue here. I see exactly what sets DUST apart from EVERY other shooter, fp or otherwise, on the market. Teamwork, here, is king . Heavies' place in this is a good one, and really I feel that with a rebalancing of scouts yes heavy survivability will jump up. BUT I don't think heavies will be alone in this, ALL frames will have better survivability (even scouts) because that's how out of whack scout frames are. Nothing in this game lives in a vacuum. And should sentinels become the new FOTMscrub favorite as they stand now, I'm actually okay with that since sentinels as they stand now while being cqkings are far from the grossly imbalanced scout frames as far as strengths/weakness ratios go and are actually very easy to kill. Which is all the more reason, I feel, that giving sentinels a range buff to their weapons isn't really a good idea. If anything, not to beat a dead horse, once scouts are balanced and logis are restructured and balanced, frame-wise the meta will be complete and relatively ideal. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 430	Posted - 2014.11.06 18:23:00 - [79] - Quote So sorry so much of this just comes out as block text, hope you've got your reading glasses on! Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Argetlam Thorson Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 102	Posted - 2014.11.06 19:00:00 - [80] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. Sentinel - a soldier stationed as a guard to challenge all comers and prevent a surprise attack The whole definition of a sentinel is someone who is guarding a point. Ergo, one would assume it should be the king of CQC as the points are generally in close quarters. The penalty for being the king of CQC (which also pushes the suit into fitting the word's definition) should be being extremely slow. Then you have Sentinel suits playing the role of a sentinel. Basic heavy suits could understandably be faster (relatively, anyway), possibly weaker, not as good at CQC, etc. They should be the suits people should want to use when they're not guarding a point but still want to wield a heavy weapon or have more HP than Medium/Light suits. Youtube channel

Argetlam Thorson Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 102	Posted - 2014.11.06 19:03:00 - [81] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: this wouldn't be an issue if we weren't given just two weapon and told to make it work. The lack of a heavy plasma and laser weapon destroys any balance and role designation we try to make. HMGs should have a range longer than my wang. But the hue and cry was for them to be CQC even though CCP was making strides in making them hella effective at decent ranges. then the nerfs began. specifically nerfs to make them CQC weapons. It made no sense whatsoever. Gallente heavy weapon as CQC? Ok I can see it. MINMATAR???? Last I checked Minmatar weren't knife-fighters. cough Min scout cough Youtube channel
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 431	Posted - 2014.11.06 19:50:00 - [82] - Quote wtf? Thorson! o7 Dude, login and play some matches tonight, we've got PCs and I'm sure Shep will be happy to see you in! Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game RUST415 634	Posted - 2014.11.06 20:00:00 - [83] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: mmmm....what if heavies took longer to spawn? What did the commandoooooooo do to deserve this? a simple 'max turn speed' on the heavy machine gun would solve this, as you could still spray down that tunnel, but you'd need someone watching your back, instead of instantly turning around... On the other hand just making the weapon unwieldy from hip fire + having to wait for heat to drop below a certain point before re-firing (On all but the burst, which should just require aim to spin it up before being able to fire.) If you nerf all heavy turn speed, then forge gunners will be worthless in favour of the swarmers... you'll never lose an LAV to a forge gun again.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4590	Posted - 2014.11.06 20:36:00 - [84] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: mmmm....what if heavies took longer to spawn? What did the commandoooooooo do to deserve this? a simple 'max turn speed' on the heavy machine gun would solve this, as you could still spray down that tunnel, but you'd need someone watching your back, instead of instantly turning around... On the other hand just making the weapon unwieldy from hip fire + having to wait for heat to drop below a certain point before re-firing (On all but the burst, which should just require aim to spin it up before being able to fire.) If you nerf all heavy turn speed, then forge gunners will be worthless in favour of the swarmers... you'll never lose an LAV to a forge gun again. because the turn penalty would be placed on the GUN. Not on the DROPSUIT. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4590	Posted - 2014.11.06 20:37:00 - [85] - Quote Argetlam Thorson wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. Sentinel - a soldier stationed as a guard to challenge all comers and prevent a surprise attack The whole definition of a sentinel is someone who is guarding a point. Ergo, one would assume it should be the king of CQC as the points are generally in close quarters. The penalty for being the king of CQC (which also pushes the suit into fitting the word's definition) should be being extremely slow. Then you have Sentinel suits playing the role of a sentinel. Basic heavy suits could understandably be faster (relatively, anyway), possibly weaker, not as good at CQC, etc. They should be the suits people should want to use when they're not guarding a point but still want to wield a heavy weapon or have more HP than Medium/Light suits. Point defense is "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come close." It does NOT mean CQC. Point defense and Close Quarter Defense are NOT the same thing. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.06 21:20:00 - [86] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Argetlam Thorson wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. Sentinel - a soldier stationed as a guard to challenge all comers and prevent a surprise attack The whole definition of a sentinel is someone who is guarding a point. Ergo, one would assume it should be the king of CQC as the points are generally in close quarters. The penalty for being the king of CQC (which also pushes the suit into fitting the word's definition) should be being extremely slow. Then you have Sentinel suits playing the role of a sentinel. Basic heavy suits could understandably be faster (relatively, anyway), possibly weaker, not as good at CQC, etc. They should be the suits people should want to use when they're not guarding a point but still want to wield a heavy weapon or have more HP than Medium/Light suits. Point defense is "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come close." It does NOT mean CQC. Point defense and Close Quarter Defense are NOT the same thing. lol, dude, cmon now. "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come CLOSE". " CLOSE" as in nearby, adjoining, abutting. Not "CLOSE" as in 50-70m downrange. CQC= Close Quarters Combat. "CLOSE" Quarters. Not "Over There" Quarters. "CLOSE" Quarters. Have some Doritos and Kickstart, they're actually good together. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4595	Posted - 2014.11.06 21:34:00 - [87] - Quote You seem awfully invested in keeping heavies where they are. Newest round of HMG nerfs already announced. I hope rattati breaks the class entirely. Because the HMG exists on the razor's edge of balance. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4599	Posted - 2014.11.06 21:56:00 - [88] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Argetlam Thorson wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. Sentinel - a soldier stationed as a guard to challenge all comers and prevent a surprise attack The whole definition of a sentinel is someone who is guarding a point. Ergo, one would assume it should be the king of CQC as the points are generally in close quarters. The penalty for being the king of CQC (which also pushes the suit into fitting the word's definition) should be being extremely slow. Then you have Sentinel suits playing the role of a sentinel. Basic heavy suits could understandably be faster (relatively, anyway), possibly weaker, not as good at CQC, etc. They should be the suits people should want to use when they're not guarding a point but still want to wield a heavy weapon or have more HP than Medium/Light suits. Point defense is "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come close." It does NOT mean CQC. Point defense and Close Quarter Defense are NOT the same thing. lol, dude, cmon now. "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come CLOSE". " CLOSE" as in nearby, adjoining, abutting. Not "CLOSE" as in 50-70m downrange. CQC= Close Quarters Combat. "CLOSE" Quarters. Not "Over There" Quarters. "CLOSE" Quarters. Have some Doritos and Kickstart, they're actually good together. And don't try to correct me on Military terminology unless you have also served in the military. I guarantee you that your definition does not match reality. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.06 22:30:00 - [89] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Argetlam Thorson wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. Sentinel - a soldier stationed as a guard to challenge all comers and prevent a surprise attack The whole definition of a sentinel is someone who is guarding a point. Ergo, one would assume it should be the king of CQC as the points are generally in close quarters. The penalty for being the king of CQC (which also pushes the suit into fitting the word's definition) should be being extremely slow. Then you have Sentinel suits playing the role of a sentinel. Basic heavy suits could understandably be faster (relatively, anyway), possibly weaker, not as good at CQC, etc. They should be the suits people should want to use when they're not guarding a point but still want to wield a heavy weapon or have more HP than Medium/Light suits. Point defense is "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come close." It does NOT mean CQC. Point defense and Close Quarter Defense are NOT the same thing. lol, dude, cmon now. "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come CLOSE". " CLOSE" as in nearby, adjoining, abutting. Not "CLOSE" as in 50-70m downrange. CQC= Close Quarters Combat. "CLOSE" Quarters. Not "Over There" Quarters. "CLOSE" Quarters. Have some Doritos and Kickstart, they're actually good together. And don't try to correct me on Military terminology unless you have also served in the military. I guarantee you that your definition does not match reality. I guarantee that my definition serves the intents and purposes of the circumstances we are in here, your RL military background is as relevent as my RL military background, in that in the fantastic sci-fi setting we're in neither really matters. Reality here is as the game parameters define them, the "Virtual Reality", if you will. I didn't miss the point about Point Defense vs CQC, I'm just emphasizing the very productive design of Heavies in fufilling their Point Defense role by capitalizing on their CQC superiority not being broken, OP or otherwise innappropriate and justifying an adjustment. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.06 22:32:00 - [90] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: You seem awfully invested in keeping heavies where they are. Newest round of HMG nerfs already announced. I hope rattati breaks the class entirely. Because the HMG exists on the razor's edge of balance. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Perhaps if your persuasive abilities were applied to reinforcing the Heavy's role and positon on the field instead of attempting re-defining it some of what Rattati is doing wouldn't happen. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4602	Posted - 2014.11.06 22:43:00 - [91] - Quote The heavy spam has reinforced everything I have said. CQC negates all disadvantages sentinels have. They are the meta and the FOTM. And the only way they can be balanced in cqc is by removing them from it. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.06 23:02:00 - [92] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: The heavy spam has reinforced everything I have said. CQC negates all disadvantages sentinels have. They are the meta and the FOTM. And the only way they can be balanced in cqc is by removing them from it. No. Bitches need to Harden the **** Up and Adapt. Groups of Heavies are easier to kill the closer together they all are. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4604	Posted - 2014.11.06 23:24:00 - [93] - Quote Because scouts tossing RE at people is so much better. Bluntly you're not going to convince me that I'm wrong. I'm not going to defend broken and failing mechanics. Sentinel meta is a mixed bag of broken and failing mechanics. The assault is and should be the mainline slayer suit, not that joke newbies who don't know better use. And the only things that really counter sentinels in CQC are OHK niche weapons. Enjoy the nerf. I'm going to giggle and not respec out of heavies. They will have their day again sooner or later. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.07 00:12:00 - [94] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: And the only things that really counter sentinels in CQC are OHK niche weapons. This all there needs to be. Those weapons are available to EVERY suit. Like I said before, Heavies are the most Equal Opportunity Victims in the game, ANY suit packing for the bear Heavies are can get the job done, not just "scouts". Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 95	Posted - 2014.11.07 00:16:00 - [95] - Quote Except that throwing RE's into a group of heavies is 99% ********. This is not BattleDuty 15, this is DUST. If at all possible "stupid" should not be actively discouraged, so much as brutally punished. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
Kensai Dragon DUST University Ivy League 50	Posted - 2014.11.07 00:48:00 - [96] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: You seem awfully invested in keeping heavies where they are. Newest round of HMG nerfs already announced. I hope rattati breaks the class entirely. Because the HMG exists on the razor's edge of balance. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Perhaps if your persuasive abilities were applied to reinforcing the Heavy's role and positon on the field instead of attempting re-defining it some of what Rattati is doing wouldn't happen. Or, if people weren't spamming the HMG with such massive success, some of what Rattati is doing wouldn't happen, lol I'm thinking of respeccing (is that even a real word?) specifically to increase my heavy / Sentinel capabilities. After trying various suit/weapon combos I find the scout only useful for dropping uplinks (2 equipment slots). I'm pretty much useless in an assault variant. Logi sits forgotten on the shelf. Commando, Sentinel, and Basic Heavy are what I spend the overwhelming majority of my time in. The nerfs to HMG? Ok, we'll see how it goes. I think it's gonna be real similar to the scout nerfs - those that know how to use it 'properly' won't have much trouble with the changes. Those that are looking for 'easy mode' will quickly get frustrated and leave or get good.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.07 01:40:00 - [97] - Quote Victor Moody Stahl wrote: Except that throwing RE's into a group of heavies is 99% ********. This is not BattleDuty 15, this is DUST. If at all possible "stupid" should not be actively discouraged, so much as brutally punished. Even without REs Heavy counters abound for anybody with an IQ higher than cheetos. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 320	Posted - 2014.11.07 02:23:00 - [98] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Imp Smash wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Imp Smash wrote: HMG really isn't the highest DPS weapon in the game due to dispersion. It's just pretty high up there. But the heavy HP thing is a result of their GIANT hitbox (heavies TAKE more damage from incoming fire-- especially the head) and their super slow sidestep speed (they take even MORE damage.) The huge issue with slayer scouts is that they can sidestep so fast they can actually lag through a hit and take no damage. Heavies are on the other side of that. Near impossible to miss and can actually take damage from shots that missed them. It's actually pretty easy to focus down a heavy solo provided you aren't trying to go toe to toe. I really don't see the need for a change to the suit. At best I would say change how uplinks work. doesn't solve the problem. Even if uplinks are removed or unavailable (odd it does happen) then smart heavies move to the tightest quarters they can and entrench and force you to come to you. This behavior will not change even if uplinks do, and they have the ability to smash their way in and dig in like ticks because the ideal terrain for them (CQC) is right where most enemies want to hold.\ Heavies never should have been CQC kings. that honor should have gone to the gallente assault. Then I'm sorry we are just going tohave to disagree. I think heavies should be Cqc suits. They are too slow and too easy to hit to do anything except entrench. That's kind of their job. But really this is all just a way of thinking. Your last comment made it clear -- when you said entrenched CQC should be Gallente Assault. Gallente are the armor rep class. Amarr stack plates which you need for CqC. So it would be them -- not Gallente. Ah. I see -- you yourself ARE a Gallente. You know -- it appears that you are trying to change the fit the playstyle you want right? EDIT: On second thought -- you did mention that a lot of parts that ppl want to hold (for example objectives) are CQC. It wouldn't be hard to make half the points in any Obj based match have half low cover points and half high cover points. Then all the suits would have a spot. gallente are brawlers with high damage cqc weapons. amarr are damage soakers. amarr are better in cqc defense and gallente are better in cqc attack. and I'm not a gall rp loyalist. I tend to lean to caldari sentinels by preference Well, I have to agree with your assessment of Amarr and Gallente based on that argument. That is totally fair. Although that is with the current meta after all. We only have the Caldari and Minmatar heavy weapons. Once we see what the Amarr and Gallente heavy weapons are (if we see what they are) then that may change. But yes, I completely did not factor in racial weapons in that as I was thinking purely in "Heavy with HMG" terms for the purposes of this conversation. You make a fair point about Gallente and blasters.
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 634	Posted - 2014.11.07 03:18:00 - [99] - Quote I think I agree with Breakin. I'm imagining Sentinels operating similarly (but not exactly like) a large Blaster Turret. Normally, when you have a blaster turret close to the objective, it deters you from running in open terrain to the point. This is the definition of Point Defense - the turret defends the point from attack. However, once you flank the turret (Which has a slow turn radius), you can take it down. In this part of the analogy, this would be a player taking down the heavy. We don't have Blaster turrets that only work at 40m and then stop. They have a presence (But not a particularly strong force) at a much longer range than what HMGs do. DUST 514 BETA VET 16.2M Lifetime SP SH4T --> PFBHz --> PFB --> SH4T --> Fatal
Powerh8er The Rainbow Effect 516	Posted - 2014.11.07 10:53:00 - [100] - Quote HMG as squad support weapon now!

Kensai Dragon DUST University Ivy League 50	Posted - 2014.11.07 19:03:00 - [101] - Quote I agree with inertia applied to the HMG under the condition that it is also applied to the dropsuits. It seems the only things that have inertia in this game are vehicles. If HMG has a turn speed nerf then suits should get a strafe nerf to balance.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4650	Posted - 2014.11.07 19:05:00 - [102] - Quote Inertia is a whole different bucket of wax. But it's on the list. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Spankdamonke ScReWeD uP InC 38	Posted - 2014.11.10 12:55:00 - [103] - Quote Bringing this back to the top, as hopefully a Dev will EVENTUALLY grace you with a response. I was admittedly uneasy first reading through your proposals, but have come to accept it to be the honest truth. I miss the days when being the HMG heavy in a squad was a respectable playstyle, unique with it's own strengths and weaknesses. I just don't want to be the turtle getting a shotgun to the head constantly again... But when 2/3 of all matches nowadays are dominated by Sentinels, a reiteration and distinction of their battlefield role becomes necessary. Kill the spam by any means deemed fitting to do so.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4800	Posted - 2014.11.10 17:25:00 - [104] - Quote Spankdamonke wrote: I just don't want to be the turtle getting a shotgun to the head constantly again... But when 2/3 of all matches nowadays are dominated by Sentinels, a reiteration and distinction of their battlefield role becomes necessary. Kill the spam by any means deemed fitting to do so. This statement sums up the long, the short, the alpha, the omega and whatever other poetic BS you want to attach to it in the most succinct and simple way possible. For the health of the game, regardless of how this is achieved, Sentinel spam needs to die. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 14728	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:47:00 - [105] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: Putting turn speed on the weapons and not the suit does nothing to solve the problem aside from allow ADS targets a higher success rate at escaping. You're not looking at the whole post. Its a combination of factors: 1: you cannot have a CQC combatant be effective if he cannot track a target. This was the original reason for turn speed normalization. 2: heavies are huge, easy to hit, slow as hell, heavily armed and armored with limited mobility. These are not traits of good CQC combatants where speed, maneuverability and rapid kill capacity are the norm. They are traits of open ground fire support platforms. 3: making heavies long range fire support platforms incapable of CQC defensive dominance opens critical portions of the map to assaults as the primary attack force potentially with burst HMG door kickers to breach a hole. 4: putting turn speed penalties on long range weapons allows sentinels to perform long range hardpoint defense and makes them vulnerable to assault and scouts that successfully maneuver in close. 5: keeping close range sentinel weapons on the burst HMG meta of high damage, short engagement duration with penalties like the near-suicidal seize creates another window of opportunity for assaults to overcome and kill careless heavies. 6: the turn speed penalty for long range anti-infantry weapons should be sufficient that it matches assault strafe speed at 15 meters, allowing fast movers to tear heavy dropsuits apart in CQC the way they SHOULD. 7: Finally, forcing sentinels to play to the design strengths of the dropsuit rather than the artificially created/enforced CQC role exposes them to counter-fire from weapons that can kill them such as charge snipers and laser rifles. Basically a Mobile Support tank/platform with legs? This I like. "HeGÇÖs sorry. ThatGÇÖs his sorry faceGÇª. Just keep quiet for now and maybe you'll get through this." -Kador Ouryon
Powerh8er The Rainbow Effect 537	Posted - 2014.11.18 04:54:00 - [106] - Quote The heavy bolter in the warhammer 40k: space marine game is an example of a well designed machine gun. Where the machine gunner moves around in normal mode, but can only hipfire with low ROF and high dispersion, like a slow firing HMG with high damage. In the brace mode the operater roots to ground like the breach forge gun and fires with much higher ROF and alot tighter dispersion, basically becoming a heavy weapons plattform. it requires skill to be a succesfull devastor with heavy bolter in pvp. My point: It shouldnt be difficult to balance a machine gun,perhaps the old super accurate HMG version only needed more range and slightly more damage. The way it is now its resembling more of a giant fully automatic shotgun than an actual HMG/minigun.
Sequal Rise Les Desanusseurs 343	Posted - 2014.11.27 10:43:00 - [107] - Quote So even more range (35-40m isn't already enough??), same 800 OP DPS at basic lvl, and a poor rotation technique to make them less viable in CQC. If you do this, rifles would have absolutely no point. Everybody prefers fitting a high eHP suit with incredible damages AND range than a medium or light suit. Ho wait, it's already like that. Do you want to make it worse? I don't like these changes. Assault suits were made for close to mid range battles, heavies can't have the same purpose or everybody will run them (even more than today). We talked about it before, my point of view is to REDUCE their range a lot to make them CQC only. Not take them out of CQC with a poor design technique and give them the assault role.. Take out all forms of scans and you'll see how great Dust can be. Scrubs will cry, good players will love it.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5379	Posted - 2014.11.27 10:48:00 - [108] - Quote Sequal Rise wrote: So even more range (35-40m isn't already enough??), same 800 OP DPS at basic lvl, and a poor rotation technique to make them less viable in CQC. If you do this, rifles would have absolutely no point. Everybody prefers fitting a high eHP suit with incredible damages AND range than a medium or light suit. Ho wait, it's already like that. Do you want to make it worse? I don't like these changes. Assault suits were made for close to mid range battles, heavies can't have the same purpose or everybody will run them (even more than today). We talked about it before, my point of view is to REDUCE their range a lot to make them CQC only. Not take them out of CQC with a poor design technique and give them the assault role.. I think you haven't thought your argument through. It is predicatrd on the idea that sents are supposed to be CQC. As it stands sentinels absolutely dominate on close in point fights when they should be encouraging you to stay away from the points entirely. A CQC vulnerability is there specifically to allow assaults and other fast suits a viable means of carving sentinels up insteadof having to expend three assaults to evict one fatty. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5379	Posted - 2014.11.27 10:56:00 - [109] - Quote Actualy let me clarify something. This change will make the sentinel something you run behind a squad to force enemies to hunker down or die. The change would reverse the sentinel to be most effextive supporting assaults rather than not needing them. It's kinda like vehicles. Without infantry support they're meat for AV. I want sentinls to have their "meat to infantry" condition that isn't mitigated by simply putting your back to a wall or running into a building. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Sequal Rise Les Desanusseurs 343	Posted - 2014.11.27 11:17:00 - [110] - Quote Hmm I didnt see it like that indeed. The HMG will have to be completely rebalanced and see its damage lowered a lot if you do so, knowing CCP they would easily make this absolutely OP. Your idea seems good on paper but I don't how it would be IG. Take out all forms of scans and you'll see how great Dust can be. Scrubs will cry, good players will love it.

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5382	Posted - 2014.11.27 12:48:00 - [111] - Quote Sequal Rise wrote: Hmm I didnt see it like that indeed. The HMG will have to be completely rebalanced and see its damage lowered a lot if you do so, knowing CCP they would easily make this absolutely OP. Your idea seems good on paper but I don't how it would be IG. Dropping the DPS wouldn't be as necessary with a turn speed. If at 20m a sentinel starts having a hsrd time tracking and somewhere between 10-15 it's kill time you have an effective "minimum effective range" Utilizing a turn speed penalty on long range anti infantry weapons creates a differentiation between long range AI and short range. The burst, for example, is hella good at killing but it's really easy to screw up with. It's actually well balanced for CQC. The higher sustain HMGs are what you want clunky in CQC. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 738	Posted - 2014.11.27 16:31:00 - [112] - Quote bump Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
DarthPlagueis TheWise 434	Posted - 2014.11.27 18:01:00 - [113] - Quote Oh, you're saying to keep the regular turn speed on the Burst HMG? I'd compromise for that. I just really don't want to see heavies completely not even have a CQC option. I didn't skill into the ScP for CQC. You should really make it a bit clearer in your OP that you want to keep the Burst the same. It's an important point and keeps heavies like me from going into bloodshot eyes rage mode at you. I actually agree that Assault needs a window of opportunity to approach heavies. What I'm afraid of is the goddamn scouts running in circles around me, but I can handle that if we keep the Burst the same as it is now. F*k this cash grab fix the shit that matters: unkillable uplinks, invisible remotes on null cannon hack panels, etc.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5403	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:38:00 - [114] - Quote DarthPlagueis TheWise wrote: Oh, you're saying to keep the regular turn speed on the Burst HMG? I'd compromise for that. I just really don't want to see heavies completely not even have a CQC option. I didn't skill into the ScP for CQC. You should really make it a bit clearer in your OP that you want to keep the Burst the same. It's an important point and keeps heavies like me from going into bloodshot eyes rage mode at you. I actually agree that Assault needs a window of opportunity to approach heavies. What I'm afraid of is the goddamn scouts running in circles around me, but I can handle that if we keep the Burst the same as it is now. Perhaps even add a Breach HMG or something, CCP. With horrible RoF and dispersion so it's only good at CQC. that was an important part of the proposal, to keep CQC heavy weapons like the burst with clear drawbacks and apply the turn speed thing to long range weapons that don't have the forge's Unholy charge times. Very specifically put in there. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Meeko Fent Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 2149	Posted - 2014.11.27 21:55:00 - [115] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. Defending points. Which are almost all in the outpost. Which is almost entirely CQC territory. See the line of reasoning that Heavies should be defenders... I Live for Tears
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 166	Posted - 2014.11.27 22:28:00 - [116] - Quote I'd argue that has more to do with the current map design paradigms than anything else. As an aside, one of the new Caldari sockets has a very exposed console that in theory allows players to actually snipe a would-be hacker off of the point. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be seeded heavily enough for that to be a thing. There's also the remaining issue that a heavy's disadvantages are 99% nullified in the confined CQC conditions it presently dominates in. Furthermore, it is still preventing assaults from being anything close to "useful" in actually assaulting stuff (like objectives), and is chaining logis to the eternal hell of the "walking rep tool" stereotype. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5408	Posted - 2014.11.27 22:51:00 - [117] - Quote Victor Moody Stahl wrote: chaining logis to the eternal hell of the "walking rep tool" stereotype. I want to kill this with fire. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 166	Posted - 2014.11.27 22:53:00 - [118] - Quote I do as well. That perception is actually half of the reason I do not have any SP invested into rep tools, but have proto nanos, links, scanners, and proto AmLogi. The other half of that is that I also find repping to be insufferably boring. As an aside, I wish DUST had more offensively-minded support options for equipment slots, since that would help flesh out the "Combat Engineer" side of the Logi paradigm. We have amazing "Combat Medic" options. We have hardly any "Combat Engineer" options. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
Grimmiers 721	Posted - 2014.11.28 00:14:00 - [119] - Quote Have the spawn time for heavies increased by 50% and have the assault spawn time reduced by 25~30. Instead of slowing down turn speed for the hmg, just slow down their movement speed while shooting. Another change that might work is making resistances go up while crouching and giving heavies a 20% hp nerf. With the hp nerf you could make hmg's do less damage since they high damage feels like it's only needed for another heavy while melting every other suit.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5438	Posted - 2014.11.28 00:16:00 - [120] - Quote Grimmiers wrote: Have the spawn time for heavies increased by 50% and have the assault spawn time reduced by 25~30. Instead of slowing down turn speed for the hmg, just slow down their movement speed while shooting. Another change that might work is making resistances go up while crouching and giving heavies a 20% hp nerf. With the hp nerf you could make hmg's do less damage since they high damage feels like it's only needed for another heavy while melting every other suit. Crouching with an HMG is stupid. God no. Don't encourage that idiocy. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.

Megaman Trigger Knights of Eternal Darkness League of Infamy 134	Posted - 2014.11.28 01:07:00 - [121] - Quote Powerh8er wrote: The heavy bolter in the warhammer 40k: space marine game is an example of a well designed machine gun. Where the machine gunner moves around in normal mode, but can only hipfire with low ROF and high dispersion, like a slow firing HMG with high damage. In the brace mode the operater roots to ground like the breach forge gun and fires with much higher ROF and alot tighter dispersion, basically becoming a heavy weapons plattform. it requires skill to be a succesfull devastor with heavy bolter in pvp. My point: It shouldnt be difficult to balance a machine gun,perhaps the old super accurate HMG version only needed more range and slightly more damage. The way it is now its resembling more of a giant fully automatic shotgun than an actual HMG/minigun. To add to this, the Heavy Bolter is actually terrible in close quarters once braced because the Devestator has a slow turn in order to accommodate the need to shuffle his feet (the guy squats to brace, so turning is a pain) if you try to aim outside about 45 degrees of the braced position. The trade off, as posted, is an incredible RoF, a decent handle on recoil and dispersion of shots and a lower heat build up (surprisingly) compared to the unbraced, which as the advantages of mobility and being able to use CQC attacks. Powerh8er, have a like for knowing Space Marine/being a player. You still play? Purifier. First Class.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 437	Posted - 2014.11.28 01:14:00 - [122] - Quote Megaman Trigger wrote: Powerh8er wrote: The heavy bolter in the warhammer 40k: space marine game is an example of a well designed machine gun. Where the machine gunner moves around in normal mode, but can only hipfire with low ROF and high dispersion, like a slow firing HMG with high damage. In the brace mode the operater roots to ground like the breach forge gun and fires with much higher ROF and alot tighter dispersion, basically becoming a heavy weapons plattform. it requires skill to be a succesfull devastor with heavy bolter in pvp. My point: It shouldnt be difficult to balance a machine gun,perhaps the old super accurate HMG version only needed more range and slightly more damage. The way it is now its resembling more of a giant fully automatic shotgun than an actual HMG/minigun. To add to this, the Heavy Bolter is actually terrible in close quarters once braced because the Devestator has a slow turn in order to accommodate the need to shuffle his feet (the guy squats to brace, so turning is a pain) if you try to aim outside about 45 degrees of the braced position. The trade off, as posted, is an incredible RoF, a decent handle on recoil and dispersion of shots and a lower heat build up (surprisingly) compared to the unbraced, which as the advantages of mobility and being able to use CQC attacks. Powerh8er, have a like for knowing Space Marine/being a player. You still play? I do this in Battlefield 4. Support with a LMG and a bipod.
Megaman Trigger Knights of Eternal Darkness League of Infamy 134	Posted - 2014.11.28 01:27:00 - [123] - Quote Imp Smash wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: Powerh8er wrote: The heavy bolter in the warhammer 40k: space marine game is an example of a well designed machine gun. Where the machine gunner moves around in normal mode, but can only hipfire with low ROF and high dispersion, like a slow firing HMG with high damage. In the brace mode the operater roots to ground like the breach forge gun and fires with much higher ROF and alot tighter dispersion, basically becoming a heavy weapons plattform. it requires skill to be a succesfull devastor with heavy bolter in pvp. My point: It shouldnt be difficult to balance a machine gun,perhaps the old super accurate HMG version only needed more range and slightly more damage. The way it is now its resembling more of a giant fully automatic shotgun than an actual HMG/minigun. To add to this, the Heavy Bolter is actually terrible in close quarters once braced because the Devestator has a slow turn in order to accommodate the need to shuffle his feet (the guy squats to brace, so turning is a pain) if you try to aim outside about 45 degrees of the braced position. The trade off, as posted, is an incredible RoF, a decent handle on recoil and dispersion of shots and a lower heat build up (surprisingly) compared to the unbraced, which as the advantages of mobility and being able to use CQC attacks. Powerh8er, have a like for knowing Space Marine/being a player. You still play? I do this in Battlefield 4. Support with a LMG and a bipod. Pretty much the same, only you're firing mass reactive (explosive) rounds the side of a coke can. Purifier. First Class.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5464	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:57:00 - [124] - Quote Sentinel is somewhere between devastator and terminator. But unfortunately the sentinel is vulnerable to weapons that can't go into it's preferred combat area. And we seem to lack a "bumrush with fifty hormagaunts" option. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 167	Posted - 2014.11.28 04:50:00 - [125] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Sentinel is somewhere between devastator and terminator. But unfortunately the sentinel is vulnerable to weapons that can't go into it's preferred combat area. And we seem to lack a "bumrush with fifty hormagaunts" option. Have a like for the emphasized part. This being said, it's also absolutely true. The weapons which excel at killing heavies are simply unable to compete in any way resembling an effective manner in the preferred engagement area of the heavy suit. LRs are pretty good at killing heavies- it'll take a while to melt that megabrick AM/GA sentinel, but if he's megabricked he's also got a slower sprint speed than the walk speed of some dropsuits, so you've got all the time in the world to cook him to perfection. Forge sniping? If you've got the aim for it, it's quite excellent (and entertaining!) at removing heavies from the field. If they're crossing open terrain, that is. Same goes for any variety of sniper rifle- the charge SR is the most optimal heavy-killer, but all of the sniper rifle variants can do it. Vehicle-wise, it's become increasingly rare in my experience to find sockets which have null cannon consoles that are exposed to "open air" environments that you can see with ease. One of the new Caldari sockets does have this, but it seems to spawn infrequently and it's usually in a spot that precludes the hacker from being sniped. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [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.

I Live for Tears