|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1788
   |
Posted - 2014.11.18 21:32:00 -
[1] - Quote
Zatara Rought wrote:How many of you would prefer Cal Assaults got a new bonus of reduced kick and charge up time?
Perhaps 5% reduced kick per level 10% reduced charge time (3% reduced charge time if they unnerf the current .6 charge up back to .3)
No, unless Gallente get a bonus that increases their optimal & effective ranges
How many of you would like to see the assault class given the 10% damage increase commando's currently receive?
I'm going to say no on this one too. Cammandos are supposed to deal out a lot of damage.
Lastly...how many of you would use the commando class if you did not have the 10% damage buff...but were given an extra 300 ehp per suit to compensate as well as a grenade slot? (and maybe some more stamina?)
I probably wouldn't. Been thinking of skilling into the minmando just for the damage bonus to swarms so I could have a AV suit that could put up a fight against infantry with something other than an SMG.
Commando's become a true heavy suit using light weapons but with more mobility and 2 light weapons. :P
Oh...and anyone feel like the logi could get a little bit of a move speed buff?
I support this
Thanks!
Edit: Copy-n-paste below of what I said in another thread
I don't want the the Gassault bonus to change. I'm just saying that if Caldari have a bonus that make their weapons better at CQC then the Gallente need one to be better at range. The kick/dispersion reduction would help the Caldari get their damage off at CQC by allowing more bullets to connect just as the current Gallente bonus helps us at longer ranges by allowing more bullets to connect; the difference is, weapons don't lose damage the closer you are to someone (Edit: other than the laser rifle). So a kick/dispersion reduction bonus is far more useful to the Caldari weapons in CQC than it is to Gallente weapons at range.
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1788
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 21:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
It's like you didn't even read the copy-n-pasted part.
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1791
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 23:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
Stupid Blueberry wrote:Atiim wrote:Zatara Rought wrote:
Imagine 50% reload speed....just you lose 10% damage in that first clip...but sustained DPS goes WAAAY up.
I use min mando and I salivate at having 50% reload speed...it's already very fast.
Or you could use the reload glitch like everyone else and not have to worry about reload speed. glitch lol It's called animation cancelling and plenty of games have it.
Which is a glitch.....
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1797
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 14:31:00 -
[4] - Quote
KING CHECKMATE wrote:Hi Zatara Rought, long time no see.
I think the Cal and Gal assaults bonuses should be switched.
Reload speed for AR users (enhancing CQ capabilities)
Reduced kick AND dispersion for RR users (enhancing med to long range capabilities)
Which also enhances their CQC capabilities. I said it before and I'll say it every damn time; if the Caldari are going to get a bonus that allows them to perform better in CQC then the Gallente will have to get a bonus that increases their optimal & effective ranges so they can perform better at range. Because none of the Caldari weapons lose damage the closer you are to someone while every Gallente weapon does lose damage the further away you are from someone. So giving the Caldari a CQC bonus gives them an unfair advantage by being able to fight effectively at both short and long range while leaving the Gallente to only be able to effectively fight at short to barely medium range.
Give and take, mother jammers, learn how it works. If you ain't willing to do that and still want to fight at short range, equip a short range weapon; otherwise keep your ass in the rear.
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1797
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 14:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Zatara Rought wrote:
Majority support for assaults to have the commando bonus. [/b]
Did you even read the replies to this thread? The people who want the Commando's bonus to stay out number Assaults 13-7.
He probably does, but it seems he doesn't really care. Just seems to be trying to find supporters for what he wants pushed through.
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1801
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 17:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
Meeko Fent wrote:
Because a reload speed bonus for the rifle with the longer reload time. It's not like you have people wanting to rush you guys to kill you...
That, and that reduction in dispersion could have negative effects on CQC abilities. We all remember when the shotguns skill reduced dispersion, making it worse as you skill up.
The RR doesn't really have dispersion; the main thing that throws it off is the kick. A bonus reducing it to what it was or close to it will put the RR back to that same spot people where b!tching about beforehand where the RR was good at all ranges. The reload time on the AR is inconsequential and I still got the AR reload speed skill to put points in if I want to reload a few milliseconds faster. Dispersion reduction on the SG was bad because you had to be so damn close to use the weapon that even aiming with hipfire was harder because of people strafing around thus a tighter spread made it harder for people to land shots.
I'm not saying the Caldari shouldn't have a better bonus. I'm just saying that bonus shouldn't make them better at CQC unless the Gallente get a bonus that makes them better at long range. Cause if they can come in our yard we should damn well be able to go into theirs.
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1802
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 18:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Zatara Rought wrote:
I don't have an issue with this..I just know there is a LOT of gal assaults who do not want to see the bonus changed because it enhances their CQC abilities and DOES enhance certain weapons long range capacity (TAC and burst)
I actually find the assertion that gal does less damage further away to be flawed.
ALL weaponry does less damage at whatever range is intended to be "too far" but gallente have 1 definitive long range weapon (tac) a medium and feasibly long range weapon (burst) and 2 I would suppose cqc to medium weapons (normal and breach)
Like I said in the other thread, I don't want the bonus to change but if you make Caldari better at CQC you've got to make Gallente better at long range. The Tac's max effective range is 78 meters at which point it's only doing around 20 base damage a shot (~22S ~18A). Whereas the RR is still doing full base damage at that range (haven't seen an optimal change on rifles just the effective range, if optimal has been changed point it out to me I'm too lazy to search at the moment). Even the combat rifle could beat the Tar if the CR user isn't a dipshit.
You're right, all the weapons lose damage if you're too far away but only one weapon loses damage if you're too close, and it ain't none of the Caldari weapons that's for damn sure. That's the thing, Gallente would lose damage for being out of their element but the Caldari wouldn't with the proposed reversion.
On a side note you can say you know how many ever people you want that don't want the Gassault to lose it's bonus but it don't mean sh!t until they post it themselves (though I expect to see some here shortly now that I mentioned that).
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1802
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 18:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
dwater wrote:Thumb Green wrote:
He probably did, but it seems he doesn't really care. Just seems to be trying to find supporters for what he wants pushed through.
Oh look at that my tard detector started going off in this comments direction. 
Says the guy in the same corp as the CPM proposing these changes. My conflict of interest detector is going off all over in this threads direction.
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
Thumb Green
Raymond James Corp
1803
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 18:54:00 -
[9] - Quote
Zatara Rought wrote:Thumb Green wrote:dwater wrote:Oh look at that my tard detector started going off in this comments direction. Says the guy in the same corp as the CPM proposing these changes. My conflict of interest detector is going off all over in this threads direction. On the contrary. I have no issue with none of the changes being implemented. -irrelevant parts snipped- Supported the RR CQC nerfs.
It was mostly just a jab at that dipshit cause he's too much of a ***** to openly associate himself with FA on the forums
And yet here you are advocating a RR CQC buff. That's the only issue I'm arguing against.
Kills:21, Deaths:5, KDR: time for a smoke.
Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
|
|
|
| |
|