| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
sebastian the huds
Corrosive Synergy
177
   |
Posted - 2015.01.22 20:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
i've been thinking about this change for a while now. it seems with minmatar assault ,as it is now, is able to own an amarr assault 1v1 due to its new ability to armor tank. why is this? because a combat rifle doesn't have a very bad shield dmg reduction and very good armor shredding capabilities. not saying this is a bad thing, but why not make the scrambler rifle the opposite? have a new class of laser weapons label "pulse" and put scrambler weapons in it with a new dmg effecacy that still deals good dmg vs shield but doesn't suffer as bad a penalty vs armor. at the same time, leave the laser rifle in a class label "beam."
and the idea that minmatar assault is op (it's really not) goes right out the window because now it has a proper counter.
or i could just be dead wrong. i don't know, just thought i'd share some thoughts.
why would i use capital letters in my name?
|
Supacharjed
Storm Wind Strikeforce
Caldari State
157
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 20:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
The Combat Rifle (Or any projectile weapon) has opposite bonuses to Laser weapons.
Projectile Weapons get -20% to Shield +20% to Armour
Laser weapons get +20% to Shield and -20% to Armour
Someone correct me if the percentages are wrong.
Commando CK.0 Proto Combat Rifle
Commando MK.0 Proto Rail Rifle
|
sebastian the huds
Corrosive Synergy
177
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 20:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
Supacharjed wrote:The Combat Rifle (Or any projectile weapon) has opposite bonuses to Laser weapons.
Projectile Weapons get -20% to Shield +20% to Armour
Someone correct me if the percentages are wrong.
last i checked that was th explosive dmg effecacy.
which brings up a whole new point.
why does the minmatar have 2 weapon dmg types for anti-infantry?
amarr should too.
p.s. projectile is -10% shield and +10% armor.
why would i use capital letters in my name?
|
Atiim
Titans of Phoenix
15191
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 20:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
Supacharjed wrote:The Combat Rifle (Or any projectile weapon) has opposite bonuses to Laser weapons.
Projectile Weapons get -20% to Shield +20% to Armour
Laser weapons get +20% to Shield and -20% to Armour
Someone correct me if the percentages are wrong.
Projectiles are 15/15, you're thinking of the Explosives profile.
The 1st Matari Commando
-HAND
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
21029
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 20:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
sebastian the huds wrote:
p.s. i think projectile is -5% shield and +10% armor.
They used to be, but I believe the good saviour changed it to -15/+15
"A hamster is like a bullet, it doesn't have a terminal velocity." - BSc Physics colleague
|
sebastian the huds
Corrosive Synergy
177
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 20:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:sebastian the huds wrote:
p.s. i think projectile is -5% shield and +10% armor.
They used to be, but I believe the good saviour changed it to -15/+15
that is just bullshite.
point is the scrambler should have the opposite effecacy as combat rifle and laser be the opposite of mass driver.
why would i use capital letters in my name?
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
21029
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 20:55:00 -
[7] - Quote
They roughly do.
"A hamster is like a bullet, it doesn't have a terminal velocity." - BSc Physics colleague
|
Buwaro Draemon
WarRavens
Capital Punishment.
834
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 20:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
I think they should be changed to -10/+5
Or -15/+10
Or make it like in Eve (or so I heard it works this way)
Change all damage profile to Eve's
Thermal
Kinetic
Laser
Explosives
Changes to Damage mods!
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
21030
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 21:08:00 -
[9] - Quote
Buwaro Draemon wrote:I think they should be changed to -10/+5
Or -15/+10
Why?
No other damage profile is unbalanced like that.
"A hamster is like a bullet, it doesn't have a terminal velocity." - BSc Physics colleague
|
Nirwanda Vaughns
1250
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 21:12:00 -
[10] - Quote
the change to projectiles was enough tbh. i've got al my CR skills to 5 and even a well tanked C-I assault can be tough to break even with 85 rounds in an ACR. its funny as hell when you do break them shields though 
Never argue with an idiot. they bring you down to their level and beat you through experience
proud C-II bpo owner
|
|
|
LUGMOS
Quafe Premium
1637
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 21:14:00 -
[11] - Quote
Nirwanda Vaughns wrote:the change to projectiles was enough tbh. i've got al my CR skills to 5 and even a well tanked C-I assault can be tough to break even with 85 rounds in an ACR. its funny as hell when you do break them shields though
Instapop
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
All Gucci
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
General Tso's Alliance
84
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 22:25:00 -
[12] - Quote
Scrambler 15/15 for 2015!!! 
Emperor Gucci
|
Leadfoot10
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
2971
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 22:50:00 -
[13] - Quote
sebastian the huds wrote:i've been thinking about this change for a while now. it seems with minmatar assault ,as it is now, is able to own an amarr assault 1v1 due to its new ability to armor tank. why is this? because a combat rifle doesn't have a very bad shield dmg reduction and very good armor shredding capabilities. not saying this is a bad thing, but why not make the scrambler rifle the opposite? have a new class of laser weapons label "pulse" and put scrambler weapons in it with a new dmg effecacy that still deals good dmg vs shield but doesn't suffer as bad a penalty vs armor. at the same time, leave the laser rifle in a class label "beam."
and the idea that minmatar assault is op (it's really not) goes right out the window because now it has a proper counter.
or i could just be dead wrong. i don't know, just thought i'd share some thoughts.
Minmatar being OP has nothing to do with Amarr or the lack of a "counter".
Minmatar assault is OP because (a) dual tanking a speed suit in a game that has shoddy hit detection on fast moving targets, and (b) and it's useful bonus to a weapon designed to be better against the now-prevalent armor.
Adding a new weapon will, at best, only address (b), and your suggestion does nothing to address the more prominent problem with (a).
IMO, of course. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |