This isn't a bad idea at all. However, the problem then becomes: why run tanks at all? If tanks can only shoot tanks, what is their purpose?

All tank weapons should be anti-material...luckily for the tankers, infantry happen to be made out of material as well

I adore the concept of an offensive bombardment oriented weapon rather than a sniper or alpha volley weapon.

I adore the concept of an offensive bombardment oriented weapon rather than a sniper or alpha volley weapon.

Point out one place in this thread where I said tank could only shoot other tanks?

In the last post I expressly stated that Anti infantry work should be a combination of solid accuracy with your weapon and AOE damage through bombardment of an area.

In this case players still have the fair chance of firing automatic plasma cannon shells with a 3-3.5m splash radius at a target. This is still very good anti infantry capability but some more easily competes at AV level.

An excellent point.

And also plasma cannon rounds are really, really satisfying to kill with.

I used very simply logic to determine this as a suggestion.

-People say the Large Blaster requires no skill.

-People say the Plasma Cannon does require skill.

Thus if I fire Plasma Cannon rounds my turret now requires skill. Simple as that.

I would just be happy with a Turret that fires a cannon like Projectile for once.

Maybe this could be the thing with blasters.

The bigger it is, the lesser the RoF or we could just make a new catagory of turrets for Gallente (since Caldari have two) and have them be the Large/Small Blaster Turret and Large/Small Plasma Turret.

I would love to have a mini plasma Cannon on my LAV. It'd probably work like a grenade launcher on a LAV.

It also creates more diversity for Medium turrets (which will probably never exist)

I approve this logic.



I also like this idea of a sort of mini-auto-PLC turret for LAVs. It would also be nice to put on an Incubus as a substitute for missiles.

While I think that suggestion is cool lets see if we can get this one pushed ahead and then iterated up.

I have ideas for all the racial turrets.

Amarr- Beam and Pulse Lasers
Gallente- Hybird Blaster, Hybrid Rail
Caldari- Hybrid Rail, Missile
Minmtar- AutoCannon (kinda like the current blaster), Artillery

I'll allay some of your concerns.

Firstly I am not trying to turn the Blaster into an exclusively AV weapon. With this proposal I had two key thoughts in my mind.

1.) How can we better represent the ideal/paradigm of a main battle cannon on the Gallentean HAV and make it role appropriate.
2.) How can we bring its DPS up to a more respectable level and make it compete more directly with Shield HAV.

Now I do remember the old time where we had dot blasters and in some respects I can accept that yeah we did get too accurate with them (that was a matter of skill and target stupidity though) and yielded results better than should have been our role.

I do intend to address the ranges of turrets in other posts and suggest that once we start moving in a direction that sees turrets in positions where they are primarily anti vehicle weapons that we adjust and balance the ranges that each turret should have which depending on implementation could vary with the weapons own statistics.

Addressing point 5.) all tanks throughout history have been equipped with machine gunners, either on the forward hull or cuppola. This is an ideal that I believe should translate into Dust 514. While I did say I wanted to make the HAV primarily and AV unit that does not mean I wish to completely remove AI capacity from HAV which I why I am suggesting we shift focus to AoE splash damage and skill shotting infantry as the primary means AI work.

My ideals in suggesting this are

- Direct hits will kill outright or wound significantly
-AOE splash reflects the power and impact of your weapon allowing you to bombard static emplacements.


HAV will not get EHP buffs for fitting small turrets and there is no reason vehicle pilots should. Vehicles have 3 turrets slots and their use should be incentivised rather and deincentivised.

Unsurprisingly I love running 3 man HAV and from extensive experience doing it I can suggest that again there is no reason you should ever have additional EHP for manning a tank. When you mout 3 players in an HAV you gain the benefits of having 3 pairs of eyes, two anti infantry guns independent of your own main gun, and depending on your turret choices anywhere between 2300 and 5000 DPS when fire is focused.

e.g- Current Ion Cannon with 2x Particle Cannon = 975 + (2x 578) = 2131
Xt-201 Missile Launcher with 2x Particle Cannon = 3500 + (578x2) = 4656

A highly skilled tank should be a tool players want to use and not and invincible death factory.

It is already more effective in Shield HAV to fit two small turrets and switch to those vs infantry for fast tracking, high alpha, precision weapons....with arguably wonky hit detection.

reduce killing potential vs Infantry targets,

This right here is just a big no no its already pretty hard for blaser tanks to kill AVers especially FG users and Min Commandos there is no logical reason to make it even harder. Blaster tanks have gotten 3 nerfs already now you want to nerf it more this is getting ridiculous.

1. So basically you fine with 1 AV player killing a HAV with 3 ppl in it? I can do that now

2. Point 7 is the most important point of the lot frankly, the blaster has already been changed so if it gets changed again im not too fussed because the glory days of the past are dead and my skill and accuracy gone to the wall anyways since its decided by luck and nothing else
2a. If im using a vehicle with 2 others and 1 AV guy can wreck it then seriously what is the point? What use is the HAV? What use is the other 2 when 1 AV guy can out range all the turrets on it anyways

3. As it is the HAV is weak, these changes wont help if i need a crew of 3 to beat 1 person, frankly its like opposite day if anything it should be the other way around

This is not a discussion about how I believe the HAV's should be rebalanced this instead is about how I believe Large Blasters should be altered.

Just wait. I am confident the Pokey Dravon with his Vehicles Rebalance proposal can get CCP to reinstitute 180mm plates, Active Armour Reppers, adjust the PG CPU issues on Maddies, and bring Shield HAV back into line by reducing their natural passive reps.

1. If you change how it works and then also try and push onto pilots another 2 ppl with small turrets then you have to be able to answer the questions that will be asked, if you cannot answer them then leave them out or create a diff thread

2. I have no faith in the CPM and all we need is to bring back Chromo vehicles/turrets/skills/modules and skill bonuses

Bump.

Please God let Rattati actually read a Vehicles thread for once.

Then another thread to discuss your concerns will have to be made this one is solely for talk about the Large Blaster and how to make it more competitive and less infantry mauling focused.

1. Then you should leave out forcing pilots to use small turrets let alone another 2 players, if this is about the L Blaster then it should just be about the turret and not about anything else

1. Then you should leave out forcing pilots to use small turrets let alone another 2 players, if this is about the L Blaster then it should just be about the turret and not about anything else

Adamance's proposal is to make the Large Blaster Turret an Anti-Material Weapon first and foremost...as I've stated earlier, infantry happen to be made of material as well...it'll just become in some ways easier to hit infantry (as it'll have less dispersion and splash damage, albeit with a firing arc) while in other ways harder (as it will have fewer shots, and loose its spamability)

If it's reduced to 4 rounds we need to buff direct damage accordingly.

At 4 rounds that is 1638 damage per shot which starts to really encroach in on the Railgun Turret....which would then mean I'd have to post my railgun turret rebalance section.....and god knows the community does not want to see that.

not going to lie. but the blaster wouldn't need changing befor it got unfairly nerfed. you know when it had pin point accuracy and none of this dispersion bullshit.

I always remember finding and being attacked by and from forge gunners/swarmers on top of buildings pre-chromosome levels. you know back when the blaster had no dispersion and was pin point accurate. even from 300m damage was next to nothing with the blaster. you were luckly enough to be dealing even 10 points of damage from that distance.

getting blaster sniped from 300m? must have been sitting still long enough for me to overheat the cannon and kill you.

lets not forget the insta popping lai dai nades.

even though the ability to hit things at 300m was takein away it was irrelevant since the blasters best damage comes from 0-100m with decent damage out to 125 befor completely disapearring at 150m. so apparently the infantry/AV users still weren't happy with the blaster being a close range turret. (by close range I mean by vehicle standards not infantry) is it no surprise that these days missile launchers and railguns are BETETR at killing infantry than the actual blaster.

railguns are capable of cheap shotting (or skill shotting if you prefer) infantry therby instantly killing them.
missile are the cruel bastard turrets with many ways to kill you. either by single missile to the head. (missile head shots are hilarious) or firing bursts of 2-4 missiles to ensure your death. or unloading the entire clip at you since your campeing ona building and is highly likely one of those missiles is going to hit you.

then theres the blaster. thanks to dispersion makes it a harmless beast while still capable of killing you will do so with much difficulty. even just tapping the trigger to fire a lone single round wont gurrante its going to hit thanks to lol dispersion. and the fact it over heats befor it even unloads 60-70 rounds on full auto (not takeing the finger off r1) still dosnt bring its damage up to the missile launchers or the railguns damage output.

so alas. I agree with you adamance. that yes the blaster of current. needs changing. BUT it never would have if it wasnt unfairly nerferd in 1.6 with the vehicle changes.

iam all for nerfing the railgun into the ground. I hate the dam thing. and just to troll/**** off other rail tank users. have the particle cannon with 2 or even 3 complex mods on it just to laugh in their face and say..''this is why this turret is bullshit in tank vs tank fights. and the fit is nicely named as the noobcannon.