|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15151
   |
Posted - 2014.11.28 02:24:00 -
[1] - Quote
Indeed especially regarding the rebalancing of Large Turrets and the propositions to covert them into actually Heavy Variations of existing AV options.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15153
|
Posted - 2014.11.28 02:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:True Adamance wrote:Indeed especially regarding the rebalancing of Large Turrets and the propositions to covert them into actually Heavy Variations of existing AV options. IMHO heavy turrets should be more cannon, less big autogun.
Certainly more like the Railgun or the 88mm Panzer VI H1 Tiger I always mention but in order to do that infantry would have to accept the potential of >5m Blast Radi on single shot high alpha canon powerful enough to drop smaller vehicles in 1-2 shots.
I've even suggested a rebalance from Large Blasters that make them more like Automatic Plasma Cannon....but that's probably what you are referencing....regardless I believe that it is better than .50 Cal Blasters we have now.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15153
|
Posted - 2014.11.28 03:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
Meeko Fent wrote:I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful.
Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc.
Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea.
Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range.
Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea?
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15167
|
Posted - 2014.11.28 12:51:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:True Adamance wrote:Meeko Fent wrote:I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful.
Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc.
Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea.
Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? Redline railgun Turrets destroying ADS.
Indeed. Trouble is ADS cannot destroy them and tanks take too long to do so leaving you with AV units doing that job as the turrets wont target them back.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15222
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 19:50:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary.
A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at:
LLAV, but not OP fast version
Two types of Missile Turrets
Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable
Ramming damage calculations
Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active
Small Blaster Dispersion is too high
Re-review Dropships
Turret elevation
Small turrets in proper fitting placement
Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed)
Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight)
Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport
Marauders (Mammoth tanks)
Fantastic. Sounds wonderful and I hope to be positive to provide you with the best feed back and suggestions I can offer.
Certainly now that you are looking at two kinds of Missile Launcher what are the chances of considering a rebalancing/redesign of the large blaster turret so it can compete more effectively on an Anti Tank/ Vehicle level, and dominate less so on an infantry level?
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15222
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 19:58:00 -
[6] - Quote
Helghus Resther wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary.
A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at:
LLAV, but not OP fast version
Two types of Missile Turrets
Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable
Ramming damage calculations
Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active
Small Blaster Dispersion is too high
Re-review Dropships
Turret elevation
Small turrets in proper fitting placement
Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed)
Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight)
Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport
Marauders (Mammoth tanks)
Does that also mean we'll get Minmatar & Amarr vehicles?
Unlikely. But depending on Rattati's technical support place holders might not be off the table.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15229
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 21:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
Powerh8er wrote:The tank role defeats its own purpose if its only effective against itself.
Not wholly true. I mean one design flaw that has irked me is that of the Large Turret. Why install a weapon that is fundamentally inferior in terms of penetrative and destructive power than a hand held weapon on a mechanised frame?
Answer you probably wouldn't as a main gun.
The main cannon of a tank is designed to apply massive fire power at range against other armoured vehicles and entrenched positions it was not a weapon deployed against individual infantry men (hence why most tanks have forward and cuppola gunners).
I wholeheartedly believe the role of an HAV should follow this archetype and not used as a tool for slaying infantry in droves unless anti infantry small turrets are specifically made use of.
That however is not to say a main gun would not instantly kill infantry on a direct hit and cause AoE splash damage against entrenched positions....but the cost of that has to be long reloads and sustained DPS.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15229
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 21:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
Lloyd Orfay wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary.
A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at:
LLAV, but not OP fast version
Two types of Missile Turrets
Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable
Ramming damage calculations
Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active
Small Blaster Dispersion is too high
Re-review Dropships
Turret elevation
Small turrets in proper fitting placement
Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed)
Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight)
Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport
Marauders (Mammoth tanks)
I feel like it would be a good idea to gimp installation and vehicle turret's ability to look up, but give small turrets the ability to look almost completely upwards. That's so tanks and installations just don't easily blast dropships out of the sky like they normally do, but it will give tank drivers the ability to defend their self through more team/squad orientation. Bring in players in their tank to protect them from AV and dropships and all.
Currently we don't though there are some instances I feel the barrel depression should be lessened (though a gunnlogi needs to be able to aim down) most DS kills I score are against low flying DP landing or strafing.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15258
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 03:16:00 -
[9] - Quote
GENERAL FCF wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary.
A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at:
LLAV, but not OP fast version
Two types of Missile Turrets
Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable
Ramming damage calculations
Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active
Small Blaster Dispersion is too high
Re-review Dropships
Turret elevation
Small turrets in proper fitting placement
Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed)
Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight)
Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport
Marauders (Mammoth tanks)
please tell me you are going to make a hover tank?! This is supposed to be the future so why in space are we still using wheels when we have the ability to cloak and transfer our consciousness immediately at the moment of death? The future ratatti the future ;P
Not as efficient as conventional tracked vehicles and cheaper as well.
Armour repair systems could easily deal with something as in-complex, relatively speaking, as a normal drive system.....but if you get into anti gravity systems for 60+ tonne vehicles....... more power is going to be needed...... perhaps this kind of power cannot be generated for the main gun and the drive system at the same time.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15395
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 20:16:00 -
[10] - Quote
Lynn Beck wrote:what is with people thinking tanks need to be anti-tank?
that's like saying "the only thing that should EVER kill a Logistics is a Logistics." Or Assault/Assault, or Commando/Commando.
If tanks are only there to be anti-vehicle, then what purpose would the AV Lav have? What purpose would any tank have then?
Not to mention that Tanks can't be Anti DS, DS pilots complain to high hell when you can shoot them.
Maybe if we could have some elements of the map(barriers, those humongous trucks) be destructable/repairable, and then having Tanks balanced for taking those out, then we could say Tanks are the heavy ordnance.
In the meantime, Tanks are your open ground slaughtering machines. Give them something else to do that isn't entirely dependent on someone else wanting to kill you with non-AV, and we'll have moar tanks to kill
Because when you look at a tanks fundamental design, both IRL, and in almost all forms of sci fi media, video games, film, etc...... what do tanks fire?
Heavy Cannon Shells. I'm not saying such as shell should not have AoE splash damage to allow a tank to bombard a static position but no HAV should have the equivalent of a .50 Cal Gun as its main cannon.
Moreover this Blasters should not have the lowest DPS of all the current turrets in the game.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
|
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15397
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 20:55:00 -
[11] - Quote
Ace Boone wrote:True Adamance wrote:Meeko Fent wrote:I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful.
Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc.
Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea.
Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? it was a dumb idea when the first guy suggested it and it's still dumb. They were free WP and good for the occasional kill. Now they're ridiculously tanked out useless installations that are still no more than good for the occasional kill. All they did was make it harder for ADS pilots.
The easy fix to that was buff EHP between 10-20% to allow turrets to fire of that extra shot or two and reduce the WP gains for destroyed turrets down to around 25-50WP.
I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this.
Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
|
|
|
| |
|