|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Victor Moody Stahl
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
159
   |
Posted - 2014.11.27 01:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Whisperen Sub wrote:*snipped whining about AFG being nerfed by OP's proposal*
Clearly you are incapable of reading, and completely lack the skill known as "reading comprehension". I was under the impression that this fundamental ability was still taught in the most basic of schools that small children attend.
Obviously I was misinformed, but that is neither here nor there.
To clarify the OP:
HMG turn speed is slightly reduced. All other heavy weapons (IE, the Forge gun in all of its variations), as well as the Assault and Burst variants of the HMG, would remain unchanged.
As for the OP:
I'm ambivalent. That's all I can really say without putting up one or more walls-o'-text.
Imp Smash wrote:Disagreed with and disliked, Sorry mate -- but I've seen you running non-sentinel in pubs...
Just because someone occasionally pulls out a different suit from their main role in a pub match- or even FW/PC matches, for that matter- does not mean that they are not incredibly informed and well-acquainted with the core mechanics of their preferred class.
Myself for example- in pubs these days I have mostly been running a Quafe AmSalt or more recently the Amarr Commando. Primarily this is because my preferred Amarr Logi is only truly useful at ADV level... which also tends to mean that one of my Logi rigs tends to sit at around 40-50 thousand ISK, as compared to "never more than 15k" STD-level Commando rigs.
Buff Logis | Nerf Scouts
|
Victor Moody Stahl
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
161
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 05:36:00 -
[2] - Quote
Powerh8er wrote:Keep the HMG as cqc weapon, but nerf HMG turn speed. "Great" stuff.
If you'd read the relevant links, you would realize that this is part of experimenting with changing the HMG's role from "CQC beast mode" to "long range suppression fire".
Please pay more attention.
Imp Smash wrote:That's not why I disagree with Fox. I like fox a fair bit and am impressed by his rational discussion.
My point was merely that, since it appeared that that was why you were disagreeing with him- at least on this particular proposal- it is, in fact, fallacious to assume that since someone "runs suits that aren't their preferred role" then they have no ability to provide input to their preferred role.
Now, given that you have disputed that as being the reason- and I have no reason to discount your claim of such- could you perhaps enlighten me (and the other forumgoers who might stumble upon this thread) as to why you disagree with the OP?
Buff Logis | Nerf Scouts
|
Victor Moody Stahl
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
165
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 18:07:00 -
[3] - Quote
Imp Smash wrote:I have talked about this with him in other threads. So don't want to type out whole walls of text here.
For example heavies used to have a hard cap to turn speed -- it did not go well for them. That's just one example though.
Another is that I don't agree with the recent idea that 'heavies weren't meant to be CQC.' Says who really...that's just an arbitrary opinion being asserted as though it were fact. I could say that 'people weren't meant to play video games' with reasonable arguments but that doesn't make it true.
The idea that heavies are OP is an assertion as well with the only evidence being that they are spammed in PC. Sure it is evidence, but lacks context. Of those OP heavies getting a lot of kills, how many had 1 or 2 proto rep guns on them 99% of the time....the number is probably higher than being accounted for. In that case it may be rep guns that are op and not heavies.
Of course it may BE heavies. I see many assertions and opinions (much like this one) that only discuss part of the issue and do not address (or give a passing allusion to but do not fairly discuss) all the possible factors.
AND i see ideas that result in multiple simultanous changes. That is what I hate the most. CCP makes a change and everyone complains that 'they used a sledgehammer instead of a scalpel' to fix the problem -- then follow it up with large numbers of simultaneous change requests amounting to another sledgehammer fix. Very short sighted.
I could go into more detail but there are various threads on individual points that do so better. Suffice to say I do not agree.
I do agree (in part because I played heavy in late Chrome... that was a painful experience) that a pure CQC platform shouldn't have a turnspeed reduction.
The problem, as I see it, is that being a CQC dominance platform makes the lack of mobility that a heavy suit has a meaningless drawback. "Oh, it will take me a whole minute to get from A point to B point? I'll stay on A point instead, since it's lots of CQC and I roll face in CQC" is pretty much where it stands.
Yes yes, there's the whole "use an LAV" argument. LAVs cost ISK, and intelligent people will want their LAV to not be a rolling coffin, which means it costs more ISK as well as SP.
Heavies are spammed in PC, IMO, because there is almost nothing to counter them in the CQC environments that they currently dominate in. It's also why only AM/GA sentinels are seen- the CA/MN suits can't be bricked as high (that whole HP>everything mentality again) and- particularly the CA- don't benefit nearly as much from one or more rep tools being tethered to them.
I'd also like to point out that a weapon that is described as an "HMG" is somewhat bewildering a CQC armament, rather than an at least mid-range fire support weapon. Additionally, HMG heavy CQC dominance prevents people from, say, using the Gallente Assault as a CQC platform- it hasn't got anywhere near the durability or the DPS to dominate like a heavy, and it folds completely when faced by a heavy.
With that said, I would also like to say two more things to you:
1. My support for the OP's proposal is purely a case of "if it leads to Breakin's proposal, then I'm all for it". If it doesn't... yeah, not so keen on it then.
2. Thank you for clarifying your opinion; it has been helpful in determining where you stand on the OP's idea.
Powerh8er wrote:Dont insult me, ive read breakins awesome suggestion that i support before i read this half ass suggestion witch i dont support.
Please dont be naive.
Please point out where I insulted you. Also, please exercise a proper usage of the English language. Your barbaric butchery of it is an eyesore.
Buff Logis | Nerf Scouts
|
|
|
| |
|