/me watches ADS perform strafing runs on an objective, successfully keeping redberries away even though they control the ground.

/me watches HAV provide mobile cover to a fire team while they advance on an entrenched squad.

...'Kay...

/me blows both of them up solo

/me watches ADS perform strafing runs on an objective, successfully keeping redberries away even though they control the ground.

/me blows both of them up solo

/me watches ADS perform strafing runs on an objective, successfully keeping redberries away even though they control the ground.

/me watches HAV provide mobile cover to a fire team while they advance on an entrenched squad.

...'Kay...

TO THE POINT THEN, to avoid them trolls XD

********AV and Turrets**********

AV is not only not COMPLETE (we are missing Racial variants for AV) but the Turrets that are supposed to help control vehicle movement are lame and get farmed for WP.

Turrets, are in definition defensive structures built to DEFEND a certain area from infantry AND vehicles alike.
Infantry gets Headshot sniped by Blaster Turrets and RAil turrets insta pop people when they see them.
But they do NOTHING against TANKS. (im talking about un manned turrets). I mean they might ATTEMPT to damage the enemy vehicle but they never win unless the TANKER or DS pilot is either a scrub or me.


There is NO reason a Tank should win against a turret 100% of the times just because its a player that purchased the tank.

IN FACT, i think Turrets should:
1-Not be destroyable while neutral (can only be destroyed if taken by an enemy)
2-Shouldn't be able to be solo'd by a tank.


I think a DEFENSIVE turret should be a solid defense structure and a valuable ASSET.

You know Turrets are lame when NO ONE but newblueberryscrubs hack them at the beginning of the match. WHY?
Because they have NO STRATEGIC VALUE. In order to destroy a turret at LEAST 1 tank and 1 AV infantry should team to take it down.
At least 2 tanks, or a tank and a DS , or whatevs but not a single vehicle. WIth no causalities whatsover. Taking on a turret straight on should be something to consider, something that needs planning, something difficult to do. Tankers should consider calling in a SCOUT to hack it instead of taking on a turret themselves, same as infantry has to call upon AV to at least scare said tanks away.

What i think should be done is exactly the OPPOSITE of what CCP did.

REDUCE TURRET EHP BY HALF
DOUBLE TURRET DAMAGE

This is not a ''discussion'' .
IF people keep requesting stupid nerfs like to scouts or Breach AR or R/E , then i can surely request something that makes sense like this...

I don't even entirely agree with this, but on the idea that turrets are only useless because... it's not so much their damage, it's the fact the AI for them kinda sucks. They generally won't target you, even if you shoot at them (Aside from missile turrets) unless you're within a few dozen meters of them. Blasters are a bit better, but rail turrets are so easy to fool it's not even funny. Discussion or no, while I'd like to see the AI buffed, even as is, I don't think they're useless, unmanned or otherwise. Whenever I can, while tanking, I'll try to ensure installations are hacked around me when dealing with other tanks. Whenever the chance arises, I'll try to keep my tank within range of the friendly installations, thus if someone wants to try and take my tank on, they also have to deal with friendly installations. Aside from that though, they provide a fair bit of cover.

TO THE POINT THEN, to avoid them trolls XD

********AV and Turrets**********

AV is not only not COMPLETE (we are missing Racial variants for AV) but the Turrets that are supposed to help control vehicle movement are lame and get farmed for WP.

Turrets, are in definition defensive structures built to DEFEND a certain area from infantry AND vehicles alike.
Infantry gets Headshot sniped by Blaster Turrets and RAil turrets insta pop people when they see them.
But they do NOTHING against TANKS. (im talking about un manned turrets). I mean they might ATTEMPT to damage the enemy vehicle but they never win unless the TANKER or DS pilot is either a scrub or me.


There is NO reason a Tank should win against a turret 100% of the times just because its a player that purchased the tank.

IN FACT, i think Turrets should:
1-Not be destroyable while neutral (can only be destroyed if taken by an enemy)
2-Shouldn't be able to be solo'd by a tank.


I think a DEFENSIVE turret should be a solid defense structure and a valuable ASSET.

You know Turrets are lame when NO ONE but newblueberryscrubs hack them at the beginning of the match. WHY?
Because they have NO STRATEGIC VALUE. In order to destroy a turret at LEAST 1 tank and 1 AV infantry should team to take it down.
At least 2 tanks, or a tank and a DS , or whatevs but not a single vehicle. WIth no causalities whatsover. Taking on a turret straight on should be something to consider, something that needs planning, something difficult to do. Tankers should consider calling in a SCOUT to hack it instead of taking on a turret themselves, same as infantry has to call upon AV to at least scare said tanks away.

What i think should be done is exactly the OPPOSITE of what CCP did.

REDUCE TURRET EHP BY HALF
DOUBLE TURRET DAMAGE

This is not a ''discussion'' .
IF people keep requesting stupid nerfs like to scouts or Breach AR or R/E , then i can surely request something that makes sense like this...

Y'know King for all those Crusades we went on I wont say what I think other than....

"**** off"

Seriously bad idea. They already have too much EHP for a tactical asset infantry barely bother to protect or use on a regular basis. It was actually a good time for vehicle balance when HAV could destroy CRU, Supply Depot, and Turrets in a meaningful manner.

Y'know King for all those Crusades we went on I wont say what I think other than....

"**** off"

Seriously bad idea. They already have too much EHP for a tactical asset infantry barely bother to protect or use on a regular basis. It was actually a good time for vehicle balance when HAV could destroy CRU, Supply Depot, and Turrets in a meaningful manner.

/me 360 no scopes you from another map.

There is NO reason a Tank should win against a turret 100% of the times just because its a player that purchased the tank.
...

The main issue is that a static target will never, ever, be able to withstand a mobile aggressor.

A tank will always be able to surprise the turret, and from then be able to go into cover and then at it again. Any time the tank starts losing it can go a few meters back to cover again, where as the turret is in one spot.

Next issue is, if the turrets are literally unkillable, then HAVs will be useless as will LAVs and Dropships, as you now have an unkillable extremely dangerous half dozen turrets covering the whole map collectively providing ridiculous areas-of-denial.


Currently Turrets already are deadly enough as is, just poorly placed the majority of the time in my opinion. Turrets could stand another HP buff, but not a ridiculous amount more. Currently a Rail can take them out with 10/8/7 shots depending on the level, which is a bit too fast.

But seriously, Turrets are static and thus can never ever expect to win against anyone with a brain and an HAV.

The main issue is that a static target will never, ever, be able to withstand a mobile aggressor.

A tank will always be able to surprise the turret, and from then be able to go into cover and then at it again. Any time the tank starts losing it can go a few meters back to cover again, where as the turret is in one spot.

Next issue is, if the turrets are literally unkillable, then HAVs will be useless as will LAVs and Dropships, as you now have an unkillable extremely dangerous half dozen turrets covering the whole map collectively providing ridiculous areas-of-denial.


Currently Turrets already are deadly enough as is, just poorly placed the majority of the time in my opinion. Turrets could stand another HP buff, but not a ridiculous amount more. Currently a Rail can take them out with 10/8/7 shots depending on the level, which is a bit too fast.

But seriously, Turrets are static and thus can never ever expect to win against anyone with a brain and an HAV.

The main issue is that a static target will never, ever, be able to withstand a mobile aggressor.
.

Which is fun, because most turret vs HAV fights go like this.

The tank gets in range of his weapon (turrnt 90% of the times wont fire until its fired upon first) then Stays still, and between Armor reps and shield boosters just stay still and trade fire and win.

Not very mobile if you ask me. Tankers say that they dont have equal EHP than turrets but forget turrets have no way to auto repair themselves in the mist of battle.

Which is fun, because most turret vs HAV fights go like this.

The tank gets in range of his weapon (turrnt 90% of the times wont fire until its fired upon first) then Stays still, and between Armor reps and shield boosters just stay still and trade fire and win.

Not very mobile if you ask me. Tankers say that they dont have equal EHP than turrets but forget turrets have no way to auto repair themselves in the mist of battle.

That's probably the most **** poor argument yet.

Turrets do have automatic passive repairs. They are by no means as powerful as HAV reps but then again you aren't paying for these assets, or fitting them yourselves. You are using turrets with 100% more EHP of the standard Madrugar and 33% more than the average Gunnlogi.

If only you could see how ****** up HAV were internally.......

So by your logic:
Since you are paying for the tank you should have an advantage over free stuff.

Thats like saying that when im running proto no MLT fit should kill me.



The thing is, turrets are useless. Waste of programming, of banwith,of time (to hack)....They either make them work or remove them. I hate that their only purpose is have tankers go around and destroy them while they are neutral. LOL (or not XD) This is not a HAV nerf thread for you to get all hyped. Im requesting for something that doesnt work, to WORK.

You know that the passive repairs of turrets is SO CRAP that it doesnt count at ALL in a vehicle vs turret battle.

Again with the EHP. I told you, remove half, or MOSt if you want of its HP. But give them Good AI and damage.

''If only you could see how ****** up HAV were internally''

I truly wont get back into AV vs HAV/DS talks like before True. This is about the turrets that dont work for s***. And any Vehicle driver saying that TUrrets are powerful is either a scrub or really new at Dust514.


IF I can easily kill turrets with a freakn soma fitted with MLT cr*p, then so can all the other Vehicle specialist...EVEN LAV's....

@ True Adamance

''All I am suggesting is that infantry do not deserve/require the presence of emplacements more heavily armed and armoured than vehicles when they also have access to powerful AV measures and the advantage on most maps now of not being target-able on objectives or in most key areas.''


We have access to powerful AV measures but we cannot deal with Infantry AND Vehicles and turrets as the same time as HAV users do. Again, Tankers prove to me that every time something that MIGHT threaten their vehicles is suggested they jump right in to attack the idea.



''Basically all your complaints are doing King is planting that final nail of the coffin in most vehicles preventing them from having true roles on the battle field.''
I AGREE, TANKS NEED A PURPOSE in this game besides moving around doing nothing and ruining the game for everyone not skilled into AV. This is the reason why i request turrets to be better. Im not going to SKILL into AV again. Im not interested. But i dont want to just cloak and fade away while my whole team of blue dots is massacred by a vehicle and even if i have the skill i dont have the weapon to do so...and THIS SI THE PURPOSE of the Turret.

You might be right thou. This might be the incorrect solution.
The reason most people DONT use Turrets is because Infantry kills you REALLY easy while operating one.


Tell me. IF i requested a PAssive Scan For turrets. maybe 10-15mts 36-35db scan. This wouldnt affect vehicles direclty, would increase the utilities of a Turret PLUS would make them slighly more usable ...right?

Can you just let me un-**** the huge imbalances in armour vehicles before you start posting stuff like this.

Tanks have not been enjoyable for the longest time (even when they were OP they ******* sucked ass to drive) since they removed active armour tanking.

There is no point on iterating on more AV measures when we cannot even balance the HAV themselves.