|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
1011
   |
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
To be quite honest, I'm not very sure whether reducing HMG range is the correct solution to the problem that HMGs are very popular at close range.
Problem:
Everyone uses the HMG for the CQC fights that happen a lot in PCs.
Solution:
Reduce HMG range.
What to do about that?
I'm not sure. One option would be to have more maps that have three objectives outside the outpost. That'd probably fix it.
The alternative would be to turn the HMG into the short-to-medium weapon it was supposed to be. That means down with the DPS but up with the range. Do this until other options dominate CQC. This won't fix the fact that PC fights pretty much appear to happen at less than 30m range. |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
1014
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 22:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
Varoth Drac wrote:Atleast, I worry about the hmg. It has to be a fair bit more powerful than a rifle or it doesn't make sense as a heavy weapon. If heavies need a nerf perhap their defence needs reducing. There is an important truth here. The basic gist is that we're looking at heavies killing infantry. There is only one heavy anti-infantry weapon. Thus the numbers we're looking at are a mixture of the effect of the HMG and the sentinel suits. It isn't immediately possible to say which of these two factors is to blame.
If the big upside of a heavy suit is being able to wield a heavy weapon - and using one should be preferable to a light weapon - then we can keep the HMG as powerful as it is as long as the heavy suit has enough disadvantages to keep it in balance.
The important point here is that the "product" - in the mathematical sense - of the heavy suit and weapon has to exceed a certain threshold of power with the constraint that the usefulness of the HMG must be better than that of a light weapon, if we don't want sentinels to run around with ARs again. |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
1015
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 22:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Big miku wrote:Stefan Stahl wrote:The important point here is that the "product" - in the mathematical sense - of the heavy suit and weapon has to exceed a certain threshold of power with the constraint that the usefulness of the HMG must be better than that of a light weapon, if we don't want sentinels to run around with ARs again. The issue cannot be narrowed down to one thing. It is a number of aspects. We have CQC points in nearly ever map, heavy+logi is powerful, choke points all over the place. Of course CCP will do the easiest thing and nerf instead of making better maps. I fully agree that having more maps with a majority of the objectives outside of the outposts would probably change those numbers a lot.
However I also agree that it's probably not going to happen in the mid-term, thus the limited scope of the analysis above. |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
1018
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 21:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
By the way, some optional terminology changes on the HMG topic:
- Burst HMG receives a range and dispersion buff, becomes standard HMG.
(Short bursts, medium range - typically Minmatar)
- Standard HMG gets a range reduction, becomes assault HMG.
(Short range bullet hose - typically Gallente)
- Assault HMG becomes autocannon, becomes breach HMG.
(Low RoF, long range - typically Caldari)
Also, while we're discussion heavy weapons, may I plant the idea that we're missing a anti-infantry Forgegun variant?
Such as the Tactical Forgegun - 80 m optimal range, 130 m effective range, 1.3 s charge up before skills, can't hold charge, 8 shots per clip, 500 damage per shot at proto, barely any splash damage. |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
1018
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 22:00:00 -
[5] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:I very deeply want to get the HAV thing done first before I brainstorm things like that And I wish you the best of luck with that. I fully expect the game to be unplayable for two months following the deployment of the new HAVs. And I have no idea how to avoid that under the current design goals for the new HAVs.
I'll just continue to distract myself with other suggestions. 
[Edit]
By the way, I very much hope all Swarm Launcher variants will be able to lock on to all targets. They should just have different efficiencies at fighting air and ground targets.
A short range SL should lock on quickly and apply large DPS. A long range SL should take a while to lock on and apply less DPS. Both can lock on any target within their individual range. |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
1018
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 22:49:00 -
[6] - Quote
The 404 page that links to told me that friends don't send friends broken links.
You're not a friend. 
|
|
|
| |
|