| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
14149
   |
Posted - 2014.11.04 08:55:00 -
[61] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Lupus Wolf wrote:If the higher level tanks were brought back, that would require re-balancing... INCLUDING AV. This is actually one of the core points of the discussion. In fact I would say it is THE core point.
Indeed.
One of my core concerns about HAV is that in Dust 514 they do not function as I feel Heavy Attack Vehicles should. Their very description suggest that they should anchor a terrestrial battle line and that the possess significant fire power, enough to destroy low altitude star ships.
Another issue is that I feel HAV have had the functionality of the operator removed a little too much from their fitting and operation, these concerns begin with how HAV are fit and the limited number of viable fittings that you can have as well as lack of diverse modules, and continue into the removal of active module activation and management that was lost during the transition from 1.6-1.7.
Where previously an HAV would consist of roughly 4-6 active modules that required management and careful timing for peak efficiency most HAV only require 1-2 active modules to operate.
Finally I feel like Large Turrets lack the power (damage in terms of alpha) that they should possess as massive ordinance packed onto mechanized hulls. Moreover while I feel HAV turrets lack a sense/ the ability to convey as sense of power so too does AV. AV weapons are supposed to be able to penetrate Heavy Shielding and 120mm hardened plate armour they should feel like it.
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
4447
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 09:00:00 -
[62] - Quote
I keep saying that large turrets should be cannons and not big machineguns/oversized bolt pistols.
But people are SO ENTRENCHED in current meta that suggesting a role or method change is anathema regardless of how much sense it makes.
Example: my assertion that sentinels should not be CQC dominant. They should be ranged fire support dominance.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
jace silencerww
Krullefor Organization
Minmatar Republic
72
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 09:50:00 -
[63] - Quote
Quasar Storm wrote:If CCP decides to bring them back, I hope they do, I've been thinking about some of the possible issues we might have.
I've studied all the damages that the LRG Railgun turrets can do from Basic to Proto. Now, I remember my Enforcer & Marauder tank fits. The damages the turrets do now I really believe will not be suffice enough to even bother a full proto Enforcer & especially a Marauder tank.
A Proto Rail Sagaris/Surya Vs. Proto Rail Sagaris/Surya is not gonna work. They'll never kill one another even if they tried -- assuming the pilots are taking care of their Caldari steel. The LRG Rail simply just doesn't have the DPS even with DMG mods.
- I'm pretty sure a well-fitted Falchion/Vayu will have the same deal going on.
So, I think CCP may have to rework the LRG Rails a bit & with that comes a lot of balancing with Dropships Vs. Rail.
Or they could rework the tanks themselves, But in the end, I don't see that helping the Rail much. Marauder bonuses might be able to help, But those bonuses must be tread on lightly.
Just some thought on the possible upcoming matter. Any thoughts from any of you?
--Also, Credit goes to ShadowOfWar88 for brainstorming with me.
storm the enforcer bonuses were increase range and damage by 2% per level (gall-blaster and cald-missiles) however remember tanks at the time had a natural damage reduction plus there were skills and mods to increase that reduction but enforcer tanks lost 15-25% of that. remember the murder taxis were so hard to kill due to the damage reduction they could get if memory serves in the range of 60-65% damage reduction. oh to get to your point they might not kill each other without help from the ground troops. I have seen tanks that can not kill each other now. 3 rep armor with adv blasters against each other are stalemate. my tanker alt with 2 complex damage mods can kill a turret in 5 shots or with one full clip 2-3 tanks. with gunners that is a different story. I have a gunlogi with 3 proto rails and 1 damage mod that cuts other tanks to nothing in 4 seconds or less so even with those tanks if they have gunners I don't see a problem of a stalemate. |
Shadow of War88
0uter.Heaven
463
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 10:12:00 -
[64] - Quote
hmm....what if instead of more slots, the enforcer tank hull actually buffs turrets behavior?
For example: Caldari Falchion increases missile and rail turrets range by 50 meters or so. Or missiles reload 25% faster and rails cool down 20% faster? Don't get too hung up on the exact numbers. Im just trying to present a concept.
Gallente Vayu can receive 20% faster recovery from dispersion towards their blaster turrets, thus allowing them to recover accuracy from bursts quicker!
All these bonuses are given to the turrets when fitted on the enforcer tank hull. The hull costs more iskies, and also costs more SP to unlock than a standard hull. CPU/PG & number of slots remain the same. Mobility, shield recharge rate and delay, armor reps and all other stats remain unchanged.
What if Marauder tank hulls receive a change in slot layout. Caldari 4h/1l, Gallente 1h/4l. Gives the tank different set of options. Appropriate CPU/PG values can be reworked according to CCP's math. Slot totals remain the same.
Standard tank hulls are cheaper and have no bonuses.
Enforcers tank hulls are expensive and buff turret behavior.
Marauder tank hulls are more expensive and customizable, & are more survivable because of the change in slot layouts.
& justice for all
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |