DUST Search - @rattati Forge Guns

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

@rattati Forge Guns

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4882	Posted - 2014.11.11 23:25:00 - [1] - Quote Ok I'm going to get flamed to hell and back for this, but right now the most viable Forge Gun for AV and AI is the Assault Forge Gun with some situational exceptions. AFG: at the advanced tier and proto the charge time is 3 sec with 1375 and 1500 damage respectively with no STD variant for 500 DPS at proto. I'm going to say "let's not touch the Assault Forge Gun." However... The Assault Forge Gun retains splash, does higher DPS and better alpha than the standard Forge Gun. (500 DPS base at proto) The current Standard Variant charge time is: 4 seconds. I don't recommend changing this. Damage profile is 1200/1320/1440 this is the worst forge gun for anything but sniping infantry, where it beats the Breach hands down. it does not stand on it's own as an AV platform. I propose the Standard Forge Gun damage be buffed to 1500/1620/1740 so it remains ahead of the Assault Forge in Alpha if not DPS. (DPS to 435 base at proto) The Breach Forge Gun is the worst of the lot by far. Not only does it have a 6-second charge time, but it immobilizes you and has the WORST DPS in the AV crowd. I would suggest bringing the DPS to a whopping 420 from 350 at base proto by dropping the charge time to 5 seconds and reducing the movement speed penalty from 100% to 80%. the Holy Jeebus alpha strike of 1750/1925/2100 doesn't seem to me something that should be buffed further. TL;DR: Don't change the assault, it's the most balanced, make the standard hit a bit harder, make the breach hit a bit faster. All numbers pre-skill to match up to the unmodified assault forge guns. Skill calculations will affect all of them, obviously. DPS calculations assume a four shot magazine and do not take into account reload times. 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 4882	Posted - 2014.11.11 23:31:00 - [2] - Quote True Adamance wrote: That would certainly make sense to me if CCP ever plan on introducing and rebalancing AV for Marauders tanks. It'd also mean there are heavy weapons in the AV with a high enough alpha that the damage mods might actually alter TTK instead of being a damn joke. On a more hilarious note: I found out what happens when you quad mod a wiyrkomi breach today. Had me giggling for five minutes straight. Too bad when they fix the Apex i will NEVER SEE THAT AGAIN. 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 4892	Posted - 2014.11.12 05:31:00 - [3] - Quote Huh. Less hate than I expected. 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 4892	Posted - 2014.11.12 13:40:00 - [4] - Quote Her Chosen wrote: Keep normal variant the same. And Breach variant. Make assault changes: STD/ADV/PRO Charge: 3.5s/3.2s/2.7s Direct: 890/950/1025 Splash: 200/240/310 Splash radius: 1.5m/2.5m/3.2m They'd be more assault-like against infantry, but still be okay against vehicles. Yeah no. the only Forge gun that is really functional is the assault, period. the other two cannot fire fast enough to apply their DPS properly. Your suggestion is a net nerf and keeps two forge guns out of play as anything but heavy sniper weapons (which is their near-exclusive use currently) and removes the utility of the assault forge gun entirely. Especially wioth your proposed charge time nerf as well as DPS nerf. You would render the forge gun obsolete and replaced entirely by the Swarm and Plasma cannon. Worst idea yet. 1/10 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 4893	Posted - 2014.11.12 14:01:00 - [5] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. The breach is fine, use it a few times and funny to one shot stuff, nit the weakspot and its gone in most cases 2. Normal FG is generally fine, it can hold its charge which is the main plus if you are waiting for an ambush to happen or want to hit the sweet spot 3. AFG requires more aim as the round is fired automatically, miss and no DPS is applied 4. FG are fine as they are, mess with FG and i want a buff for all vehicles since the balance is being ****** up again while i cannot get into my proto pilot suit with proto mods for my proto amarr HAV using its proto turret with proto modules and skills with useful bonuses Your opinion has been noted and summarily dismissed as your response is always "Screw everyone else MAI VEHICLES!!!" Contribute more than "NONONONONONONONO!" and get taken more seriously. Both of the hold charge versions of the forge gun are underperforming and more or less used as infantry blap tools with the worst DPS of any AV. Swarms and Plasma cannon are more reliably able to kill things. 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 4893	Posted - 2014.11.12 14:27:00 - [6] - Quote 1. Fully proto sentinal with fully proto FG with prof 5 and all other skills to 5 Yes because a proto fit Gunnlogi shouldn't be challenged by prototype AV. NEXT 2. Different FG for different uses in different situations - just because you dont use it doesnt mean everyone else doesnt The assault forge does everything better. When splash went away, damage versus a point target should have gone up so that the AV purpose the Forge maintains lesser cousin to the assault. Not only that, why does the standard model maintain both inferior alpha and DPS to the assault? The assault is supposed to have the highest DPS, with the breach having the highest alpha. the standard falls short in performance with AV. both the breach and the standard are opportunist killers, and the odds of pulling a kill before a vehicle escapes are thin and laughable , so they are entirely dependent upon other AV to soften the target so they can killsteal. 3. FG are fine to use and get plently of vehicle kills, if they are used for killing infantry not my problem Your obsession with refusing anyone else a buff until your vehicles are fixed the way you want them is not my problem. I supported ADS pilots when I said the ADS fire rate was overnerfed, and all of you idjits still attacked my findings when I said the blaster turret was crap, and the missile launcher wasn't going to be able to maintain parity with an assault forge sentinel. I openly despise the watering down of HAV heavy turrets. Your continuous reaction to my posts seems to assume that I'm in Soraya's camp gleefully shouting "Vehicles need to be easy to kill!" I want the guns functional, but in both of the cases the proposed buffs will likely only bring them to parity with the assault overall, not make them more efficient since both charge at the stupid and slow rate. And finally, People naysaying and screaming about everything on behalf of vehicles, including threads that have nothing to do with vehicles, rapidly diminishes peoples' interest in your crusade. Because you refuse to listen, refuse to acknowledge that anyone else might have a point, and bluntly between you and Spkr4thedead, I've seen more reasoned debate from the tea Party, given that you two have adopted their "Never compromise with anyone" platform. I have no respect for this attitude. Period. Good day. 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 4893	Posted - 2014.11.12 14:36:00 - [7] - Quote I said proto FIT. Get out. you don't read, you don't listen, your input is biased and adds nothing. Oh and you seem to be under the delusion that I hate vehicles. You're hilarious, and your usefulness has more or less ended. 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 4899	Posted - 2014.11.12 15:01:00 - [8] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Breakin Stuff, Laser doesn't react to logic or well phrased points, it's inimical to their being. I agree the regular FG needs something. Your numbers seem entirely reasonable. Entirely too reasonable! the general idea isto keep the overall efficiency of each forge gun similar while allowing different playstyles to be accomodated. So I deliberately kept to the higher alpha = lower DPS and kept most of the speed penalty on the breach because YOU CANNOT ELIMINATE A VEHICLE'S OPTION TO ESCAPE, nor can you eliminate the window of opportunity they might need to kill you in turn. This is where most requests for AV buffs fail in my opinion. Eliminating those two things may contribute to rock/paper/scissors, but the RPS aspect isn't supposed to be absolute. It's supposed to be a guideline of how things work in an idealized world. What the hell was the point of giving sentinels the splash resistance to fight tank cannons if you were going to remove the splash from tank cannons, really? it's little things like that that people asking for buffs to AV or nerfs to vehicles usually do not take into account. 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 4901	Posted - 2014.11.12 15:09:00 - [9] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Indeed. There are a number of issues with V/AV balance and most of them stem from a poor groundwork. Large Blasters should fire projectiles more akin to Plasma Cannons; Rails need a longer range (and the redline needs to go waaaay back); we need deployables to slow and trap vehicles; we need deployable to allow infantry to fortify, and for vehicles to subsequently destroy in support of their own infantry...and so on. Sigh. Maybe when I'm old and grey, we will get a Soon from Rattati... Anyway, your thread is about FGs. Normal ones with better placed alpha/DPS is legit; Breach movement seems reasonable, though if we're going to keep their movement restricted I'd say disable jumping too, since the bunny hopping FGer is ridiculous. the move penalty to 80% is mostly because bunny hopping is stupid. if it's going to be left in, let's at least make the movement not idiotic. Plus a weapon that roots you for six seconds is usually a death warrant. 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 4912	Posted - 2014.11.12 17:16:00 - [10] - Quote Atiim wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: I said proto FIT. Get out. you don't read, you don't listen, your input is biased and adds nothing. Oh and you seem to be under the delusion that I hate vehicles. You're hilarious, and your usefulness has more or less ended. 1. Proto fit includes the hull 2. You do hate vehicles 3. Your more biased than me 1. No it doesn't. A "proto fit" refers to a fitting equipped with PRO items. 2. Hating vehicles is part if the job. Everyone has bias (some more than others). It's the ability to set aside your bias and look at things objectively that determines your credibility. 3. Not even remotely. I've done a review, he sh*tposts in almost every thread I comment in, usually directed at me. Bluntly I'm at the point where the "he's a troll" theory has flown and I'm beginning to believe active harassment. 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 4913	Posted - 2014.11.12 17:55:00 - [11] - Quote I don't use swarms, I don't deploy swarms, I don't operate with swarms, so I don't comment on them. I don't have enough interest in them and I have no intention of wasting SP on them. This thread is not about swarms. My lack of experience with Swarms except at the basic level has nothing to do with credibility. Your opinion on my credibility is not share by anyone but Spkr4thedead. Quit targeting my threads for automatic derailment. You're blocking useful conversation, critique and information. 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 4916	Posted - 2014.11.12 18:19:00 - [12] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: Whatever the final action, we need to fix that for forgeguns "Assault" means "Better". Right now you could really just rename the AFG to "Better Forgegun" and not do anyone a disservice. Holding a charge with a Forgegun isn't smart anyway. Every millisecond of holding a charge reduces your DPS. Rather miss one AFG shot and hit the second one than hold a charge for 1 second. I know that doesn't account for reloading, but any competent vehicle is gone within 9 seconds anyway. I think the current design for "assault" subtypes is high DPS & short range. Maybe that should be implemented. changing the range would likely do more harm than good I imagine. I'd like to start with just a couple pokes. 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 4931	Posted - 2014.11.13 07:49:00 - [13] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: It has nothing to do with vehicles being too tough, it's about balance between the forge guns. This is the only consideration. Killing vehicles has never been hard for me. This is not about how hard they are. Ever. This is about one forfe gun to rule them all, one forge gun to find them. There is only one situation where the breach and standard outperform the assault on a 1 for 1 basis: Sniping. The assault forge stands on it's own as a solo weapon platform as well as a team AV platform. The other two only stand out when you can absolutely count on backup. They fire so slowly that in order to have any chance of terminating a vehicle you mus either be opportunistically stealing kills from people doing the work or be utterly dependent upon having an AV buddy. Their rate of fire means any vehicle can always escape. Even your own comment on their effectiveness is predicated on having two of them. Now. I want them to be brought to the level of the assault so that they stand out on their own merits, so that choosing one of them is not a suboptimal choice. I don't want the assault to be the optimal choice. I want forge gun preference to simply be a choice entirely based on yoir playstyle rather than number crunching. Bringing them in line with each other means TTK levels off between them, not easy mode. But I can always count on you spkr4thedead, to take everything I say out of context and try to convince everyone that I am a clueless idiot even though the tactic has never worked. Your anecdotal opinions are based on hearsay, and some bizarre confluence of skill that only you seem to be able to achieve given that every single post you make in response to anyone is filled with accustion, invective and hostility. Both towards the other players and the devs. I am not going to put you on ignore because I need a comparison for my own posts. The day my posts read like yours is tge day I need to stop playing video games forever. 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 4944	Posted - 2014.11.13 16:20:00 - [14] - Quote It is deadly. And if you recall when you see one that makes you smarter than 90% of your peers because breachers will wait till a few missile volleys hit. The surprise buttsex may drop if they are made viable for primary AV. more chance to escape the second shot. 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 4955	Posted - 2014.11.13 18:02:00 - [15] - Quote That was me. A damage mod on an IAFG adds 75 damage to a 1500 damage shot. Even 2-3 don't alter TTK because the alpha is too low. Wirkomi adds a base of 120 on the first mod. So it starts to pull away. At +4 mods a wiyrkomi goes from 2100 base to 2520 ish before skills/resists for a four mods. Too bad the Ck.0 doesn't have the CPU for 4 mods 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 4958	Posted - 2014.11.13 18:38:00 - [16] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Too bad the Ck.0 doesn't have the CPU for 4 mods 4 CxMods and a Wiyrkomi Breach, what more do you need? Some day I'll actually deploy that fit... You run out of CPU. Calsent is fitting tight. I need to see if a CPU mod can help. 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 4959	Posted - 2014.11.13 19:01:00 - [17] - Quote 4.5 seconds actually. The fact that you seem to believe that I don't understand how the forge guns work is nothing short of astounding. I certainly haven't bothered to figure out how any of the variants of my favorite weapon and supporting skills work. At all. Example:I am utterly oblivious to the fact that at forge ops 5 the charge time of the standard model is 3 seconds. Or that the assault charges in 2.25 seconds. Totally unaware of the idiotic bunny hop workaround that has been there since beta. The changes are to raw gun stats. There is a reason I have the standard forge snuggled neatly into the COLOSSAL GAP between the assault and breach. The reduced charge time on the breach is because 350 DPS??? That's good in what universe? Please don't assume I have no idea what I am proposing. I did this because Rattati once said he would consider reiterating the forges when the splash debate was hapening when I pointed out that the other forges were inferior in every possible way that mattered. 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 4959	Posted - 2014.11.13 19:04:00 - [18] - Quote By the way I supported removing the splash from the hold charge variants. 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 4988	Posted - 2014.11.14 08:56:00 - [19] - Quote Oh neat. I found a nickel. 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 5050	Posted - 2014.11.16 12:11:00 - [20] - Quote Any further comments? 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 5078	Posted - 2014.11.17 16:13:00 - [21] - Quote NextDark Knight wrote: I hated any removal of the splash from both the Forge and the Rail Guns. Put better splash guards on hackable objectives. While I understand your sentiment I am of the opinion that only the assault forge ever really had major justification for splash. It remains the only forge gun with splash damage. It's just lousy splash damage, but still better than nothing. If I were to redesign it, it would be unrecognizable as similar to it's current iteration, but that is not the purpose of the thread. Quote: I used the Forge Gun as my main up until the Splash and Charge change. SInce then I only pick it up as something else to do not because I like using the weapon. For the standard forge and the Breach Forge the hold charge ability makes it a good and stable sniper tool capable of one-shotting infantry easily. Even a miss made it too easy to apply damage, and since the primary purpose of the Forge Gun is Anti-Vehicle, not Anti-Infantry work, I'm afraid i must disagree with you. The Forge Gun should remain deadly, but it should not be a better sniper weapon than a sniper rifle or laser rifle. With the splash damage the forge gun was easier to accrue kills and deny hack points in a manner that sniper rifles should have been employed for, or proper point defense infantry. I firmly believe the Forge Gun should remain primarily an AV weapon. Quote: The Forge was nerfed to $@#.. What ever it takes to get it back to where it was I will put 100% of my support behind. Honestly the nerfs just highlighted the problems with the weapons as deployed. The Assault Forge doesn't allow a held charge, but with practice this is not a clear disadvantage. The lack of meaningful Alpha capability versus vehicles is a problem, and the anemic DPS of the Breach Forge as well. By increasing the Alpha of the Forge Gun and the DPS of the breach my hope is that both weapons be made viable for primary AV. We won't see the use as a sniper rifle fall off, but I think it's an acceptable buff, because the difference of an OHK and an OHK for more damage is... Nothing. so it's not a buff Vs. Infantry. The problem is not with how Rattati changed the weapons. It's how they are employed, and I'm hoping that Rattati finds the time to review the Forge Gun and set it so that it is not furthering the situation where one variant is simply superior. I would like the choice of forge gun that a player makes to be a matter of playstyle and preference, not a clear math equation. Unfortunately the math, and actual practical application, point to the Assault Forge being the superior weapon in all situations. 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 5079	Posted - 2014.11.17 16:26:00 - [22] - Quote Commander Noctus wrote: I like this. Changes seem fair to me, though perhaps keep the whole "stationary" idea on the breach and instead give a damage increase, 50-100 points. That being said, Forge and other AV for that matter should NOT be touched at this point in time. For me at least, it's way too easy to pop a tank. Look at overall AV vs V balancing FIRST, release all previous Vehicle mods/variants SECOND, and then we can look at changing this stuff. These changes won't actually accelerate or make easier killing a tank. Even if the damage gets buffed the TTK will be slightly longer for a breach or standard variant. Especially considering I consider the alpha strike argument invalid. Doesn't matter what AV you're using, the first warning any vehicle driver gets that you're in play is literally the initial impact, flash or miss. precharge only matters on paper, because the assault forge? I can't remember the last time that the initial engagement between myself and a vehicle was them shooting at me rather than me shooting at them. 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 5081	Posted - 2014.11.17 18:15:00 - [23] - Quote Commander Noctus wrote: Err, how so? You're asking for a flat damage increase for the Standard and a DPS increase for the Breach. How is this not making it easier/more effective at dealing damage/making it easier to kill tanks? Especially when you later brought up the potential damage you get from damage mods. I said they won't kill FASTER. it would simply make the standard and breach viable for doing so. right now the only way for either to kill anything is for the driver/pilot to completely screw the pooch. They will both still take longer to kill than the assault forge gun does even with higher alpha because of charge times. The choice of which forge you use should be a matter of which forge you PREFER< not which one is simply better. Quote: Not too clear to me. I imagine you're saying "Fire first otherwise you as an AV suddenly become xx% less effective". Which is true if your sole goal is to kill them and not kill AND keep them away. Granted, killing the tank/dropship is basically what you want to do, once they know you're there, the goal becomes to make sure they can't do anything effective anymore. The statement is based on the idea that you can pre-charge the breach and standard. Some people argue that this makes them unfair. The reality is, as an AV gunner, that the inability to hold a charge on the assault makes precisely ZERO difference in the equation simply because the first warning to a vehicle driver that they are facing AV in the field is your first shot. So regardless of whether you are hot-firing an assault or releasing a held breach the result is the same. That's the first warning a pilot or driver is going to get. The odds of a vehicle driver firing upon me first as AV is pretty chuckleworthy and entirely an artifact of happenstance rather than intent. Quote: To be fair, I proposed a tiny boost. At max skill (reload & proto mods on the Caladari sentinel,the Wyrkomi Breach currently does 2484 damage vs shields, 3035 damage vs armor; an average of roughly 2759 damage (without damage mods, it's 2415). That's already in "shields? what shields?" territory for dropships. If we were to increase the damage to 100 (the biggest proposed number I gave) it would be an average of roughly 2869 damage. That is just slightly deeper inside the "shields? what shields?" territory. And the reason I say no is the fact that adding alpha of even a small amount can result in a one-shot breach of the shields of say, a python and more or less completely guarantee that they are instantly hosed if anyone nearby is paying attention. The higher the alpha creeps up, the closer you get to OHK territory on dropships and a few crapfit tanks. Unless Vehicle HP takes a very sharp uptick, increasing the damage alpha of a Breach strikes me as an incredibly bad idea. Quote: If we go with the whole DPS increase with the ridiculously high alpha damaging breach (2415 flat w/no mods), and give the user the ability to move around FASTER than by bunnyhopping, there'll be issues with more than just dropships. Which is why I want to keep the immobility factor. The flat damage of the Wyrkomi is 2100. Skills only boost the damage vs. armor, not versus shields at all, which results in some lopsided or odd numbers when one takes them into account on the baseline. Actually I want the movement speed penalty to be about 20%. just enough to maneuver a little if you need to take a shot, not enough to escape the wrath incoming in response, or dodge enemy infantry. Bunny hopping lets you move pretty close to your normal speed. Having a little bit of mobility keeps the breach from being a death sentence without making it a truly mobile murder platform, plus it gives chuckleheads like me who hate the bunnyhop an alternative to that idiotic workaround. Any weapon that roots you is stupid. It's that simple. Even crappy mobility is better than zero mobility. And I'd like to see the overall DPS of the forge alternates, while higher alpha, in the lower DPS than the assault range. the assault before mods, resists and skills is 500 even at prototype. My numbers are intended to keep the other two at a DPS range of 420-450. In effect I'm trying to make both viable while making it more a playstyle choice than a numbers game. Because in reality, dropping a second off the breach charge time you can potentially kill a dropship 5 seconds later. But with the assault forge from the first shot, you will drop two more shots in the time it takes to fire one from the breach. So we're not actually looking at a faster TTK overall on the forge gun line. If it was, I'd have proposed something else. 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 5095	Posted - 2014.11.18 01:28:00 - [24] - Quote Skil is an arbitrary and entirely subjective argument and bluntly useless as a metric for whether or how something should be made useful. The assault forge is easy to use. How do I know? I use it more than any other weapon. 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 5099	Posted - 2014.11.18 08:45:00 - [25] - Quote After initial shot the assault forge will squeeze off about 2 shots for every one the breach fires.. base damage for double tap on the assault: 3000 base. Base damage for the one shot the breach will get off: 2100. This is by design and I think that should be the rule. But making the breach interdependent upon support AV is dumb. Every other weapon has been set with the intention that it be able to stand on it's own merits. The breach is a giant ball of disadvantages that the one advantage it has cannot offset. A weapon that is more difficult than it is worth in a fight isn't one you need to be bringing out onto a battlefield. Especially when it basically makes you a sitting duck. I dare you to try using the breach anywhere but in the open. You can use the assault forge if you're slick in CQC but the standard and breach? Open ground long range only or you're dead. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.

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.