|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2824
   |
Posted - 2015.01.26 12:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Dear players, We want to reach a 100% equilibrium between the AV capabilities of Large Turrets, their primary purpose. The AI of Large Turrets should be thought in terms of an Active module, reducing Dispersion. All other factors should be towards making it the Close range brawler weapon of choice. There will not be a Large Fragmented Missile Launcher in Phase 1. Only Small Fragmented, and the current Small Missile Launcher will be converted to an AV weapon. Guidance Principles Missile Launcher Alpha is too extreme Railgun is too good at everything Blaster is not good enough at close There are a few "Best to Worst" guidance examples in my spreadsheet, found here under "Large Turrets" HAV Large TurretsPlease discuss.
If you're keeping the number of slots as is, then this is basically useless as nobody will gimp a shield fit to use it, and nobody will gimp a blaster fit over the place of NOS/scanner/active coolant.
Railgun isn't too good at anything. I have non-fires, misfires, reload glitches, fire-automatically-until-it-overheats glitches, and sometimes it goes right through a target, most often a turret installation. I've also watched rounds go through dropships. Dunno if that's a bug, or working as intended as if the dropship has a rectangular hole inside its hit box.
Also a new bug I saw a few days ago was a reload glitch with a Python, with a small missile.
I agree with the large missile. The rate of fire should be reduced as should the damage per missile. Is there a working bonus for the Falchion yet?
Blaster is not good enough at close range because of........... dispersion. I literally have to get right alongside a vehicle for it to be most effective. If you want it to be better, give the Vayu a bonus to the blaster.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2827
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 13:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
H0riz0n Unlimit wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Madrugars suffer from massive fitting failures. The gunnlogi fitting is very generous and allows solid fits. Even to the point of rendering many turrets and AV options moot. Madrugar has no CPU
It doesn't have enough PG either. If the Gunnlogi can use complex mods and a PRO turret, then the Maddy should be able to do the same.
If we didn't have the CPU and PG skills taken away from us, it wouldn't be such a big problem. It would still be a problem, but not as big as it is.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2828
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 07:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Also, if you run turrets at 2000 DPS and then use a module to allow you to consistently hit infantry I fail to see how this will not cause issues.
It's called being rewarded with +50 for a kill because of proper aim.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2829
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 16:46:00 -
[4] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Also, if you run turrets at 2000 DPS and then use a module to allow you to consistently hit infantry I fail to see how this will not cause issues. It's called being rewarded with +50 for a kill because of proper aim. Only you would think that is a good idea.
It works for infantry, why shouldn't it work for us?
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2836
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Instagib should be reserved for high alpha weaponry.
Railgun body shots.
Wait, is that even fair? Probably not.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2836
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 18:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
MINA Longstrike wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Also, if you run turrets at 2000 DPS and then use a module to allow you to consistently hit infantry I fail to see how this will not cause issues. It's called being rewarded with +50 for a kill because of proper aim. Only you would think that is a good idea. It works for infantry, why shouldn't it work for us? This is not a "them vs us" situation, anyone who thinks it is on either side shouldn't be involved here. If you're not willing to behave or discuss things like a rational adult to create a healthy gameplay experience for all involved you need to gtfo because your opinions are neither wanted nor are they constructive.
There is no "rational discussion" with people that insist on making vehicles useless when they don't use them.
I've made two spreadsheets already. That's not constructive?
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2836
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 19:05:00 -
[7] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Lazer Fo Cused wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:
Name a weapon that does 2000 DPS while rewarding people with +50 that isn't a heavy missile turret.
1. FG Not really sure how a gun that does 1725 damage every 2.25 seconds equates to 2000 DPS.... Time Dilation?
Wiyrkomi breach to the rear - 167% damage, on top of everything else.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2865
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 16:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Dear players, We want to reach a 100% equilibrium between the AV capabilities of Large Turrets, their primary purpose. The AI of Large Turrets should be thought in terms of an Active module, reducing Dispersion. All other factors should be towards making it the Close range brawler weapon of choice. There will not be a Large Fragmented Missile Launcher in Phase 1. Only Small Fragmented, and the current Small Missile Launcher will be converted to an AV weapon. Guidance Principles Missile Launcher Alpha is too extreme Railgun is too good at everything Blaster is not good enough at close There are a few "Best to Worst" guidance examples in my spreadsheet, found here under "Large Turrets" HAV Large TurretsPlease discuss.
Do you have my turret spreadsheet? As far as the large missile, lower the damage, give the Falchion a damage bonus to the missile turret to fulfill its intended role.
As far as the rail, I feel it's in a good place. It doesn't need a damage nerf, as it won't get a damage bonus for any role or hull.
The blaster does need less dispersion, the large one. It'll help as a tank closes in on a target. The small should have less dispersion as its meant for anti infantry.
What are your ideas for the fragmented? Obviously less damage, preferably faster fire rate.
I'm not hot on the idea of an active module for anti infantry purposes. Will it work for just the blaster, or the large missile too? How about the railgun?
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2866
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 18:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:First Turret Proposal is up in the spreadsheet, just to have a foundation to discuss.
Blaster DPS
Missiles in Clip down
Heat on Rails up
Check out the ratios calculated for comparison.
Attempting to equalize damage per clip/ammo
The railgun already generates more than enough heat per round. If the trigger is held down, how many rounds can be fired?
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2869
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 13:06:00 -
[10] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote: (not gonna name names, but Spkr) and that gets everyone all riled up until we are trying to win the argument, not to find balance.
I don't post to "start fights." I post to indicate errors, things that people would know from experience if they were to ever pilot a tank. I decided to check the status of two of the forum's loudest voices when it comes to this vehicle rebalance stuff, and you know what I saw? Neither of them have played in over a month. Could be far longer than that.
They're the voice of reason, yet haven't played in a long time, and I'm the extremist, calling a lot of ideas bad, because they're proposed by people that don't use vehicles, and I play basically every day.
So, you go figure that one out.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
|
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2869
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 13:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
Skybladev2 wrote:You should also check collision detection in general and for missiles particularly.
One time I got shot with my own missile in a still dropship (gunner seat).
That's been in the game for over a year, and unless it's posted on here with video evidence, it most likely will never get looked at because there's other stuff to do.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2869
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 13:11:00 -
[12] - Quote
D3LTA Blitzkrieg II wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:First Turret Proposal is up in the spreadsheet, just to have a foundation to discuss.
Blaster DPS
Missiles in Clip down
Heat on Rails up
Check out the ratios calculated for comparison.
Attempting to equalize damage per clip/ammo I would not increase the rail heat buildup unless you plan on bringing back a active module to really help out with that. Blaster sucks vs tank and past 30 meters worthless vs. intelligent infantry.
It takes too long to kill an anti-armor starter suit at 15m away with a blaster.
Have great aim, get nerfed because of it.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2869
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 13:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
MINA Longstrike wrote:
My experience in current tank vs tank is that rail tanks frequently have enough EHP that they can survive blaster or missile fire long enough even with their slow RoF that they can easily win vs other tanks.
You probably don't see any armor tanks.
Especially when you factor in things like damage mods.
Even harder to fit on an armor tank.
Fitting cost increases to rail might be appropriate, but I still forsee a lot S.H.A.V's with a large rail making other vehicles lives miserable.
What are they supposed to use?
Peakaboo gameplay is something I witness frequently with current particle cannon tanks.
You must be watching some bad tankers, and I don't mean very many people with 5mil SP into any vehicle skills.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2870
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 17:00:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:what is your feeling on blaster ROF, not DPS, just feeling.
do you generally like the
dum dum dum dum dum (current)
or you prefer
dum...dum...dum...dum more like an APC turret from other fpss
or dum.....dum......dum like a tank from other fpss
;) vote now
I still don't want them to be anywhere close to a rail, there is a sweet spot there, i think
also missiles, i feel the rof is way too high right now
You know what, practically everybody used the scattered blaster when we had it. If you want a module to help against infantry, then we use that to reduce the dispersion while slightly decreasing damage. I say slightly because it's not easy to kill infantry now.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2870
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 17:01:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tesfa Alem wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:what is your feeling on blaster ROF, not DPS, just feeling.
do you generally like the
dum dum dum dum dum (current)
or you prefer
dum...dum...dum...dum more like an APC turret from other fpss
or dum.....dum......dum like a tank from other fpss
;) vote now
I still don't want them to be anywhere close to a rail, there is a sweet spot there, i think
also missiles, i feel the rof is way too high right now Blaster ROF is fine the way it is. Most other tanks in FPS are trying to imitate life, and even then get it mixed up. Dust has its own style, that players already like. Missile ROF is also fine as is. Straight talk: These are two issues that I haven't seen brought up before from either tankers or infantry, so if your going to go with your feelings be prepared for a huge backlash if it doesn't quite work out. My advice: If it aint broke dont fix it.
Missile is too fast. Destroyer should get a rate of fire bonus, and a damage bonus.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2871
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 17:25:00 -
[16] - Quote
If you don't like what I have to say, then just block me on here, problem solved. You're essentially covering your ears and saying "la la la I can't hear you."
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2876
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 00:26:00 -
[17] - Quote
I don't have the best memory, so I sometimes forget that I already commented on something. What's the big deal?
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2876
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 00:27:00 -
[18] - Quote
duster 35000 wrote:The-Errorist wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:what is your feeling on blaster ROF, not DPS, just feeling.
do you generally like the
dum dum dum dum dum (current)
or you prefer
dum...dum...dum...dum more like an APC turret from other fpss
or dum.....dum......dum like a tank from other fpss
;) vote now
I still don't want them to be anywhere close to a rail, there is a sweet spot there, i think
also missiles, i feel the rof is way too high right now dum...dum...dum...dum more like an APC turret from other fpss Would make them have higher damage per shot and lower RoF which is what AV turrets should be like which would also help with stopping shield regen and be generally easier to balance as AV. If shields can't regen witha hardener vs a blaster then armor will always win...
So then where does that put the blaster? Anti-infantry role? Oh wait...................
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2878
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 04:11:00 -
[19] - Quote
Doc DDD wrote:Tebu Gan wrote:DeathwindRising wrote:
Missiles are being nerfed while armor is buffed at the same time? This none sense sounds familiar.
Should leave turrets alone until AFTER the hull changes
Agreed How is armor being buffed? I didn't see any posts, it used to need the hardener reduction% buffed, but if shield regen is going to be nerfed then there is no reason to buff armor hardeners.
Dunno if you've been tanking recently, but armor is in a really sad place right now. One hardener just doesn't do near enough attenuation. Its only use is on a dropship, where you have a better chance of escaping swarms. There's no reason for shield to be nerfed. Vehicles have been nerfed enough times to last a lifetime. Armor needs to be at the level shields are at, not bringing shields down to the level armor is at. If that were to be the case, then there'd be no reason to use vehicles at all, and the few pilots that are left would either leave, or go 100% infantry, which is what infantry seems to want anyway. Dunno why they can't find a different game to ruin.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2878
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 04:12:00 -
[20] - Quote
Devadander wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:what is your feeling on blaster ROF, not DPS, just feeling.
do you generally like the
dum dum dum dum dum (current)
or you prefer
dum...dum...dum...dum more like an APC turret from other fpss
or dum.....dum......dum like a tank from other fpss
;) vote now
I still don't want them to be anywhere close to a rail, there is a sweet spot there, i think
also missiles, i feel the rof is way too high right now I think moving to a lower fire rate for the Blaster is a good step, as I think they perform too much like an Autocannon right now. I am seriously interested in what level your blasters are Pokey.
You should ask him the last time he's played. (I checked)
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
|
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2880
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 06:20:00 -
[21] - Quote
Doc DDD wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Devadander wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:what is your feeling on blaster ROF, not DPS, just feeling.
do you generally like the
dum dum dum dum dum (current)
or you prefer
dum...dum...dum...dum more like an APC turret from other fpss
or dum.....dum......dum like a tank from other fpss
;) vote now
I still don't want them to be anywhere close to a rail, there is a sweet spot there, i think
also missiles, i feel the rof is way too high right now I think moving to a lower fire rate for the Blaster is a good step, as I think they perform too much like an Autocannon right now. I am seriously interested in what level your blasters are Pokey. You should ask him the last time he's played. (I checked) Out of curiosity, when would that have been. If a tanked out gallente heavy shot a gek assault rifle at a tanked out gallente scout of equal skill with a duvolle assault rifle, on paper the heavy suit would win every time. ON PAPER. So explain why anyone would run anything other than a tanked out heavy suit with a gek. This is the problem with being a spreadsheet wizard that doesn't play the game. Scouts don't fight heavies toe to toe standing still.
You can check by adding to friends. It's been at least a month, if not more. Dunno who you're calling a spreadsheet wizard. I've made a few, but I'm terrible at math, so I can't work numbers, ie I can't theorycraft fits and work out eHP and DPS.
But yeah, it comes down to experience. Something few don't have (not you Doc)..................
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2882
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 15:20:00 -
[22] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Your argument over the triple rep madrugar without actually naming it is amusing.
Triple/quad repping an armor tank anywhere near a forge gun is suicide. It's only survivable versus swarms.
It was good before 1.8.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2882
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 16:16:00 -
[23] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Your argument over the triple rep madrugar without actually naming it is amusing.
Triple/quad repping an armor tank anywhere near a forge gun is suicide. It's only survivable versus swarms. It was good before 1.8. and it died in a fire like it needed to.
Spoken by someone that has never used a vehicle.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2890
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 15:26:00 -
[24] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Pokey's had to put up with spkr's snide comments one time too many in the HAV threads denigrating his character.
Please make an effort to separate your statements from the riffraff.
I'd complain about him denigrating mine, but I'm content to point and laugh at him in turn so it works out.
How many times do I have to say that I'm commenting about the ideas, not the person?
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
|
|
| |
|