DUST Search - [Request] Reduce rail turret and forge efficiency against infantry.

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Request] Reduce rail turret and forge efficiency against infantry.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1082	Posted - 2015.03.04 09:04:00 - [1] - Quote I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7483	Posted - 2015.03.04 09:14:00 - [2] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. Get out. AV
LudiKure ninda Dead Man's Game RUST415 209	Posted - 2015.03.04 09:41:00 - [3] - Quote I can only say hahahahah ( -í° -£-û -í°) `SCAN ATTEMPT PREVENTED`
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5166	Posted - 2015.03.04 09:58:00 - [4] - Quote It's really not that easy to sniped infantry with a forge or railgun unless they're being derpy and just standing there. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1082	Posted - 2015.03.04 10:17:00 - [5] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. Get out. Forge guns take 3.25 seconds to fire at the fastest. That's less than 500 DPS. Rifles are higher. No. Get out. Rail turrets are similar DPS is hardly a factor if the alpha is higher than 95% of dropsuit EHP. Charge time is hardly a factor if forges and rails usually dictate engagement terms due to their range. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5182	Posted - 2015.03.04 11:14:00 - [6] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. 10/10 Usually banned for being too awesome.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7487	Posted - 2015.03.04 11:40:00 - [7] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. 10/10 No, he's actually being serious. that's the sad part. AV
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7487	Posted - 2015.03.04 11:41:00 - [8] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. Get out. Forge guns take 3.25 seconds to fire at the fastest. That's less than 500 DPS. Rifles are higher. No. Get out. Rail turrets are similar DPS is hardly a factor if the alpha is higher than the EHP of most dropsuits. Charge time is hardly a factor if forges and rails usually dictate engagement terms due to their range. So does a sniper rifle, which both out-ranges and is fully capable of killing a sentinel outright if you use the charged variant. AV
HOLY PERFECTION Corrosive Synergy RISE of LEGION 52	Posted - 2015.03.04 14:50:00 - [9] - Quote LISTEN TO ME THE REASON WHY TANKS CAMP ARE BECAUSE OF SWARMS. THEY BASICALLY REDLINE US. ohh and p.s. ill still kill you all even with a nerfed rail turrent. So dont matter eitherway. *I WILL WIN... DESTINY*
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5179	Posted - 2015.03.04 17:39:00 - [10] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: So does a sniper rifle, which both out-ranges and is fully capable of killing a sentinel outright if you use the charged variant. Plus a Forge Gun basically doesn't have any zoom like a sniper rifle, and a railgun can't hold the charge like a sniper rifle. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

XxBlazikenxX Y.A.M.A.H 420	Posted - 2015.03.04 17:46:00 - [11] - Quote Almost a good troll. Still can't top the thread about nerfing strafing though. Terrestrial Combat Officer of Y.A.M.A.H Recruitment, Free BPOs!
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3035	Posted - 2015.03.04 17:46:00 - [12] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. So you want to nerf aim? Go away Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Xocoyol Zaraoul Superior Genetics 3476	Posted - 2015.03.04 20:23:00 - [13] - Quote This idea is bad and you should feel bad. "You see those red dots over there? Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 561	Posted - 2015.03.04 20:26:00 - [14] - Quote If you can hit a moving target with a forge gun you deserve to kill them. The State will always survive.
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1084	Posted - 2015.03.04 20:35:00 - [15] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. So you want to nerf aim? Go away Nope, I don't want to nerf aim, that was another thread by somebody else. The problem with the random dispersion idea is that it will also affect AV capabilities. This is strictly a damage reduction nerf specifically against Infantry, in the same manner rifles can barely hurt Vehicles. With this change I'd like to bring splash back, which would make it easier to inflict damage and suppress infantry without the insta-gib. If Remotes are ever fixed, this will be the next point of frustration. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders 2953	Posted - 2015.03.04 20:42:00 - [16] - Quote But I like my Forge Snipers :'( click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
TooMany Names AlreadyTaken Going for the gold 849	Posted - 2015.03.04 20:47:00 - [17] - Quote It's funny how I rage yelling HOWWWW??? when I get sniped by a railgun, and laugh uncontrollably when I snipe others in the same way. Found my favorite DJ - ATB
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7514	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:05:00 - [18] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. So you want to nerf aim? Go away Nope, I don't want to nerf aim, that was another thread by somebody else. The problem with the random dispersion idea is that it will also affect AV capabilities. This is strictly a damage reduction nerf specifically against Infantry, in the same manner rifles can barely hurt Vehicles. With this change I'd like to bring splash back, which would make it easier to inflict damage and suppress infantry without the insta-gib. If Remotes are ever fixed, this will be the next point of frustration. you are 1 versus literally everyone else on this matter. AV
Jakkal Shoobah T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K RISE of LEGION 85	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:22:00 - [19] - Quote No no no. I agree with him. There's plenty or lore to support the OP. Stuff like uhh . Hey unngh hmm. I'll get back to you on that. While slow to anger and occasionally indecisive, they are also capable of harnessing enormous resolve when truly tested.
HOLY PERFECTION UNIVERSAL C.A.R.N.A.G.E 54	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:23:00 - [20] - Quote YOU the people of the forums, are so ***** ignorant. I WILL WIN... DESTINY**

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17461	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:26:00 - [21] - Quote Uh how do you propose to explain why a tank turret did less damage to your clone? Moreover why does a KE rounds like a Rail Rifle slug do full damage against and infantry man but a significantly larger calibre slug like an 80gj Railgun rounds not kill you outright. Assuming the 80Gj rounds function like the EVE Javelin Rounds with their graviton pulse detonators Railgun rounds are smart rounds and to some extend must carry a small payload.... just be glad CCP never implmented the Iridium Flechette that were supposed to come with that. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1084	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:33:00 - [22] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Uh how do you propose to explain why a tank turret did less damage to your clone? Moreover why does a KE rounds like a Rail Rifle slug do full damage against and infantry man but a significantly larger calibre slug like an 80gj Railgun rounds not kill you outright. I can explain it like this: because it's an unbalanced and frustrating mechanic. But if you need someone to heisenberg-compensate this away, you can say that the rail slugs are are energized with plasma that is specifically tailored to delaminate metallic armor, and is thrown off the large biological composition of dropsuits. Also nanites. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7515	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:51:00 - [23] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: Uh how do you propose to explain why a tank turret did less damage to your clone? Moreover why does a KE rounds like a Rail Rifle slug do full damage against and infantry man but a significantly larger calibre slug like an 80gj Railgun rounds not kill you outright. I can explain it like this: because it's an unbalanced and frustrating mechanic. But if you need someone to heisenberg-compensate this away, you can say that the rail slugs are are energized with plasma that is specifically tailored to delaminate metallic armor, and is thrown off the large biological composition of dropsuits. Also nanites. that's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Mostly I'm going to say that No. Sorry, learn to freaking dodge. AV
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 1018	Posted - 2015.03.04 22:10:00 - [24] - Quote I'm going to go ahead and suggest that instead all AV weapons need to have a useful anti-infantry component to them to make them enjoyable to use. Much like the Plasma Cannon. Within its range it's pretty awesome against shield vehicles (if used on a commando suit) but also lots of fun against infantry. I recently suggested a more anti-infantry inclined Forgegun variant (the tactical Forgegun at 1.3 s charge time, 500 damage a shot and ~90 m range) and I'd absolutely support the return of Swarm Launcher dumb fire mode (~200 splash damage every ~2 seconds at 2 meter splash per missile). Is anyone against reintroducing Forgegun Splash damage? Even if it's just ~200 damage at 2 meter radius. It'd be helpful.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17461	Posted - 2015.03.04 22:25:00 - [25] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: Uh how do you propose to explain why a tank turret did less damage to your clone? Moreover why does a KE rounds like a Rail Rifle slug do full damage against and infantry man but a significantly larger calibre slug like an 80gj Railgun rounds not kill you outright. I can explain it like this: because it's an unbalanced and frustrating mechanic. But if you need someone to heisenberg-compensate this away, you can say that the rail slugs are are energized with plasma that is specifically tailored to delaminate metallic armor, and is thrown off the large biological composition of dropsuits. Also nanites. Why bother with a specific kind of technology that deliberately limits your weapons destructive potential when existing examples are present that do not require this kind of modification? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1084	Posted - 2015.03.04 22:58:00 - [26] - Quote True Adamance wrote: KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: Uh how do you propose to explain why a tank turret did less damage to your clone? Moreover why does a KE rounds like a Rail Rifle slug do full damage against and infantry man but a significantly larger calibre slug like an 80gj Railgun rounds not kill you outright. I can explain it like this: because it's an unbalanced and frustrating mechanic. But if you need someone to heisenberg-compensate this away, you can say that the rail slugs are are energized with plasma that is specifically tailored to delaminate metallic armor, and is thrown off the large biological composition of dropsuits. Also nanites. Why bother with a specific kind of technology that deliberately limits your weapons destructive potential when existing examples are present that do not require this kind of modification? Because video game rules can be arbitrary but should submit to FUN. Also nanites. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1084	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:07:00 - [27] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: I'm going to go ahead and suggest that instead all AV weapons need to have a useful anti-infantry component to them to make them enjoyable to use. Much like the Plasma Cannon. Within its range it's pretty awesome against shield vehicles (if used on a commando suit) but also lots of fun against infantry. I recently suggested a more anti-infantry inclined Forgegun variant (the tactical Forgegun at 1.3 s charge time, 500 damage a shot and ~90 m range) and I'd absolutely support the return of Swarm Launcher dumb fire mode (~200 splash damage every ~2 seconds at 2 meter splash per missile). Is anyone against reintroducing Forgegun Splash damage? Even if it's just ~200 damage at 2 meter radius. It'd be helpful. That sounds like a good direction. I don't think any AV should be useless to infantry, and should have some killing ability. I think 200 splash for base damage is fine for most AV, and 300 for a direct hit is reasonable. But applying the full damage of AV against AI makes them too good. I think Rattati's recent data dump showed that rail tanks are ranked the #6 killer in PCs, and I doubt most of those are tank kills. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7515	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:18:00 - [28] - Quote So your idea of " balance is that forge guns are only allowed to do 300 damage every 3.25, 4 and 5.5 seconds, for a DPS count of less than 100. Gee. That isn't self serving and indicative that AV gunners aren't easy enough to gank so we're taking the challenge away amirite? This has little to no value when the weapon requires extremes of patience and a steady hand. I've had every rifle take a sentinel from max health to zero in the time it takes to charge ONCE. AV
Stormblade Green KnightKiller's inc. 33	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:22:00 - [29] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: So your idea of " balance is that forge guns are only allowed to do 300 damage every 3.25, 4 and 5.5 seconds, for a DPS count of less than 100. Gee. That isn't self serving and indicative that AV gunners aren't easy enough to gank so we're taking the challenge away amirite? This has little to no value when the weapon requires extremes of patience and a steady hand. I've had every rifle take a sentinel from max health to zero in the time it takes to charge ONCE. Been on both ends.... o7 One might say... I'm very skilled... yet I'm his apprentice... So what does that say about my mentor?
XxBlazikenxX Y.A.M.A.H 423	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:33:00 - [30] - Quote I can't believe there are serious answers to this thread. Terrestrial Combat Officer of Y.A.M.A.H Recruitment, Free BPOs!

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17465	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:38:00 - [31] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: Uh how do you propose to explain why a tank turret did less damage to your clone? Moreover why does a KE rounds like a Rail Rifle slug do full damage against and infantry man but a significantly larger calibre slug like an 80gj Railgun rounds not kill you outright. I can explain it like this: because it's an unbalanced and frustrating mechanic. But if you need someone to heisenberg-compensate this away, you can say that the rail slugs are are energized with plasma that is specifically tailored to delaminate metallic armor, and is thrown off the large biological composition of dropsuits. Also nanites. Why bother with a specific kind of technology that deliberately limits your weapons destructive potential when existing examples are present that do not require this kind of modification? Because video game rules can be arbitrary but should submit to FUN. Also nanites. Fun for you but not me or any vehicle pilots who already are relying on either luck due to dispersion or accuracy which you want to punish them for having by removing their killing power. How do you justify compromising my enjoyment of a specific role that functions similarly throughout the entire gaming genre. Aka- I shoot you with a tank round you die. (( I've seen his other threads. I have me my pile of salt right here)) "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
XxBlazikenxX Y.A.M.A.H 423	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:39:00 - [32] - Quote True Adamance wrote: KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: Uh how do you propose to explain why a tank turret did less damage to your clone? Moreover why does a KE rounds like a Rail Rifle slug do full damage against and infantry man but a significantly larger calibre slug like an 80gj Railgun rounds not kill you outright. I can explain it like this: because it's an unbalanced and frustrating mechanic. But if you need someone to heisenberg-compensate this away, you can say that the rail slugs are are energized with plasma that is specifically tailored to delaminate metallic armor, and is thrown off the large biological composition of dropsuits. Also nanites. Why bother with a specific kind of technology that deliberately limits your weapons destructive potential when existing examples are present that do not require this kind of modification? Because video game rules can be arbitrary but should submit to FUN. Also nanites. Fun for you but not me or any vehicle pilots who already are relying on either luck due to dispersion or accuracy which you want to punish them for having by removing their killing power. How do you justify compromising my enjoyment of a specific role that functions similarly throughout the entire gaming genre. Aka- I shoot you with a tank round you die. I really don't think you should take the OP seriously. You know this is the guy who wanted to remove strafing from the game.... Terrestrial Combat Officer of Y.A.M.A.H Recruitment, Free BPOs!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17469	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:52:00 - [33] - Quote XxBlazikenxX wrote: I really don't think you should take the OP seriously. You know this is the guy who wanted to remove strafing from the game.... As I said..... I have my grain... or bag of salt. What is a pain is not the OP but the idiots who'll inevitably latch on to the idea as if it were actually worth the time of day. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 720	Posted - 2015.03.04 23:53:00 - [34] - Quote I really didn't want to post. I'm annoyed at all the people who responded basically forcing me to post. If you haven't read the OP's posts, go read some of them. See what kind of thinking you are working with. And stop responding to his threads so they just fall off and disappear from the forums. Watching this **** get bumped flabbergasts me. Needing to bump this to post this so it can stop does as well. Seriously folks. Just let it go and it'll go away.
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1089	Posted - 2015.03.05 00:02:00 - [35] - Quote Imp Smash wrote: I really didn't want to post. I'm annoyed at all the people who responded basically forcing me to post. If you haven't read the OP's posts, go read some of them. See what kind of thinking you are working with. And stop responding to his threads so they just fall off and disappear from the forums. Watching this **** get bumped flabbergasts me. Needing to bump this to post this so it can stop does as well. Seriously folks. Just let it go and it'll go away. Troll threads go in General Discussion. Threads where I get shouted down by people comfortable with broken mechanics go in Feedback. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1089	Posted - 2015.03.05 00:04:00 - [36] - Quote True Adamance wrote: KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: KA24DERT wrote: True Adamance wrote: Uh how do you propose to explain why a tank turret did less damage to your clone? Moreover why does a KE rounds like a Rail Rifle slug do full damage against and infantry man but a significantly larger calibre slug like an 80gj Railgun rounds not kill you outright. I can explain it like this: because it's an unbalanced and frustrating mechanic. But if you need someone to heisenberg-compensate this away, you can say that the rail slugs are are energized with plasma that is specifically tailored to delaminate metallic armor, and is thrown off the large biological composition of dropsuits. Also nanites. Why bother with a specific kind of technology that deliberately limits your weapons destructive potential when existing examples are present that do not require this kind of modification? Because video game rules can be arbitrary but should submit to FUN. Also nanites. Fun for you but not me or any vehicle pilots who already are relying on either luck due to dispersion or accuracy which you want to punish them for having by removing their killing power. How do you justify compromising my enjoyment of a specific role that functions similarly throughout the entire gaming genre. Aka- I shoot you with a tank round you die. (( I've seen his other threads. I have me my pile of salt right here)) I justify it by telling you to get into a tank with a Blaster or Missile turret. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17472	Posted - 2015.03.05 00:45:00 - [37] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I justify it by telling you to get into a tank with a Blaster or Missile turret. The Blaster and Missile Launcher aren't even tank turrets. Just a **** poor attempt at a .50 Calibre Machine Gun and a pair dumb fire....what I suppose should be surface to air missiles. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 1579	Posted - 2015.03.05 01:07:00 - [38] - Quote tbh I'm never mad when I die to a forge/railgun unless they're in their spawn. Our lives are nothing but a means to an end. AIV member. 21 day EVE trial.
Xocoyol Zaraoul Superior Genetics 3494	Posted - 2015.03.05 04:27:00 - [39] - Quote Anyone have that document handy? I'd love to see this PC document again and look up the Forge Gun in how it's ranked for kills "You see those red dots over there? Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1091	Posted - 2015.03.05 07:35:00 - [40] - Quote Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: Anyone have that document handy? I'd love to see this PC document again and look up the Forge Gun in how it's ranked for kills Pokey put it into a Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bUltXQYBFeUqpvWsTbX72PEcSkUKlrqi8MSfWm3il0c/edit The forges are way down there, but the Rails being so high on the kill count probably means there's a problem. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate

Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 1023	Posted - 2015.03.05 10:00:00 - [41] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Stefan Stahl wrote: I'm going to go ahead and suggest that instead all AV weapons need to have a useful anti-infantry component to them to make them enjoyable to use. Much like the Plasma Cannon. Within its range it's pretty awesome against shield vehicles (if used on a commando suit) but also lots of fun against infantry. I recently suggested a more anti-infantry inclined Forgegun variant (the tactical Forgegun at 1.3 s charge time, 500 damage a shot and ~90 m range) and I'd absolutely support the return of Swarm Launcher dumb fire mode (~200 splash damage every ~2 seconds at 2 meter splash per missile). Is anyone against reintroducing Forgegun Splash damage? Even if it's just ~200 damage at 2 meter radius. It'd be helpful. That sounds like a good direction. I don't think any AV should be useless to infantry, and should have some killing ability. I think 200 splash for base damage is fine for most AV, and 300 for a direct hit is reasonable. But applying the full damage of AV against AI makes them too good. I think Rattati's recent data dump showed that rail tanks are ranked the #5 killer in PCs, and I doubt most of those are tank kills. When I said I like how the PLC works against infantry I meant that it does splash damage and also deals full direct damage. I think other weapons should behave similarly.
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1824	Posted - 2015.03.05 13:14:00 - [42] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: . . OP POST . . . That... Is an old topic. here and here. The forge is wicked sick versus all targets, versus infatry it's op as fudge as it is both easy to aim and the redberries just 'catch' the shots. Example video and another video. My short answer is: Fix the forge shake to really affect where the shot goes; now it's too easy to hit infantry pixels. My full answer with reasons here. Leave Rail Turrets as they are; they are far harder to aim and are easier to shelter from as they have several huge limitations. They aren't mass killing infantry, like the forge brawlers and forge snipers. Looking at both sides of the coin. Even Aurum one.
XxBlazikenxX Y.A.M.A.H 427	Posted - 2015.03.05 19:08:00 - [43] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: KA24DERT wrote: . . OP POST . . . That... Is an old topic. here and here. The forge is wicked sick versus all targets, versus infatry it's op as fudge as it is both easy to aim and the redberries just 'catch' the shots. Example video and another video. My short answer is: Fix the forge shake to really affect where the shot goes; now it's too easy to hit infantry pixels. My full answer with reasons here. Leave Rail Turrets as they are; they are far harder to aim and are easier to shelter from as they have several huge limitations. They aren't mass killing infantry, like the forge brawlers and forge snipers. Yes, let's make it so that ants can kill other ants. But a boot can't squash an ant and has to spend its time kicking other boots. Terrestrial Combat Officer of Y.A.M.A.H Recruitment, Free BPOs!
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7535	Posted - 2015.03.05 19:09:00 - [44] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: KA24DERT wrote: . . OP POST . . . That... Is an old topic. here and here. The forge is wicked sick versus all targets, versus infatry it's op as fudge as it is both easy to aim and the redberries just 'catch' the shots. Example video and another video. My short answer is: Fix the forge shake to really affect where the shot goes; now it's too easy to hit infantry pixels. My full answer with reasons here. Leave Rail Turrets as they are; they are far harder to aim and are easier to shelter from as they have several huge limitations. They aren't mass killing infantry, like the forge brawlers and forge snipers. dumb post is dumb AV
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5206	Posted - 2015.03.05 21:10:00 - [45] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: Anyone have that document handy? I'd love to see this PC document again and look up the Forge Gun in how it's ranked for kills Pokey put it into a Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bUltXQYBFeUqpvWsTbX72PEcSkUKlrqi8MSfWm3il0c/edit The forges are way down there, but the Rails being so high on the kill count probably means there's a problem. I guarentee you, the reason large rails are even remotely high is because they're often used to guard hack points, where people are forced to stand still for extended periods of time. It's a common tactic to use a rail to defend a point, but it is not indicative that the rails themselves are over performing against infantry. I'm not sure how much experience you have using large rails, but there are many factors working against them, which makes them difficult to use. Zoom is crappy for very small targets Turret rotation speed is difficult to use against small targets, especially at close range Charge cannot be held, meaning you have to predict where the target will be after the charge fires Projectile has travel time, so not only do you have to predict where the target will be be after the charge time, but you also have to account for travel time for the shot to get there No splash damage means it has to be a direct hit This is a glitch, but the projectile rarely hits where the aiming dot is, typically you have to compensate by not pointing directly at what you're shooting. So again....sure, if infantry are standing still its easy to snipe them, but thats true for any weapon. Under actual battle conditions where the target is moving, it actually takes quite a lot of skill to snipe infantry on a consistent basis with a large railgun. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1095	Posted - 2015.03.05 21:55:00 - [46] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: Anyone have that document handy? I'd love to see this PC document again and look up the Forge Gun in how it's ranked for kills Pokey put it into a Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bUltXQYBFeUqpvWsTbX72PEcSkUKlrqi8MSfWm3il0c/edit The forges are way down there, but the Rails being so high on the kill count probably means there's a problem. I guarentee you, the reason large rails are even remotely high is because they're often used to guard hack points, where people are forced to stand still for extended periods of time. It's a common tactic to use a rail to defend a point, but it is not indicative that the rails themselves are over performing against infantry. I'm not sure how much experience you have using large rails, but there are many factors working against them, which makes them difficult to use. Zoom is crappy for very small targets Turret rotation speed is difficult to use against small targets, especially at close range Charge cannot be held, meaning you have to predict where the target will be after the charge fires Projectile has travel time, so not only do you have to predict where the target will be be after the charge time, but you also have to account for travel time for the shot to get there No splash damage means it has to be a direct hit This is a glitch, but the projectile rarely hits where the aiming dot is, typically you have to compensate by not pointing directly at what you're shooting. So again....sure, if infantry are standing still its easy to snipe them, but thats true for any weapon. Under actual battle conditions where the target is moving, it actually takes quite a lot of skill to snipe infantry on a consistent basis with a large railgun. I'm sure it requires skill to rail snipe, but those skills are prevalent, and the reality is that there's rail tankers sniping infantry in every other match, and doing so effectively. I've seen rail gunners hit moving targets, and many of my deaths are on the move horizontally to the tank. But even assuming that ALL rail turret kills are against horizontally still targets, this is still a problem as there are many vital chokepoints (like hack panels) that generate those types of targets, and a single direct hit will kill most dropsuits. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5207	Posted - 2015.03.05 22:11:00 - [47] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I'm sure it requires skill to rail snipe, but those skills are prevalent, and the reality is that there's rail tankers sniping infantry in every other match, and doing so effectively. I've seen rail gunners hit moving targets, and many of my deaths are on the move horizontally to the tank. But even assuming that ALL rail turret kills are against horizontally still targets, this is still a problem as there are many vital chokepoints (like hack panels) that generate those types of targets, and a single direct hit will kill most dropsuits. The same argument could be made that skilled players can consistently kill infantry in 1 shot with a Plasma Cannon. Do you have an issue with that as well? Additionally a Sniper is more than capable of dominating a choke point as well, do you have an issue with that? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1095	Posted - 2015.03.05 22:24:00 - [48] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I'm sure it requires skill to rail snipe, but those skills are prevalent, and the reality is that there's rail tankers sniping infantry in every other match, and doing so effectively. I've seen rail gunners hit moving targets, and many of my deaths are on the move horizontally to the tank. But even assuming that ALL rail turret kills are against horizontally still targets, this is still a problem as there are many vital chokepoints (like hack panels) that generate those types of targets, and a single direct hit will kill most dropsuits. The same argument could be made that skilled players can consistently kill infantry in 1 shot with a Plasma Cannon. Do you have an issue with that as well? Additionally a Sniper is more than capable of dominating a choke point as well, do you have an issue with that? The skill and luck required to land a plasma cannon shot at range are in a different league compared to a rail turret. If some of the same constraints (projectile speed, range, arc, reload) were applied to Rails, sniping infantry with rails would be much less prevalent, and Blaster turrets would fill the AI niche in a much more sane way. But besides that I've mentioned before that I'd be happy with a 4-shot plasma cannon with reduced damage for the very reason you illustrate. Also most snipers need 2-3 hits to kill a dropsuit, so not really comparable when the BASE rail turret is a one shot kill with no damage modifiers. Snipers can control a choke point sure, but Rails absolutely dominate them. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5207	Posted - 2015.03.05 22:36:00 - [49] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I'm sure it requires skill to rail snipe, but those skills are prevalent, and the reality is that there's rail tankers sniping infantry in every other match, and doing so effectively. I've seen rail gunners hit moving targets, and many of my deaths are on the move horizontally to the tank. But even assuming that ALL rail turret kills are against horizontally still targets, this is still a problem as there are many vital chokepoints (like hack panels) that generate those types of targets, and a single direct hit will kill most dropsuits. The same argument could be made that skilled players can consistently kill infantry in 1 shot with a Plasma Cannon. Do you have an issue with that as well? Additionally a Sniper is more than capable of dominating a choke point as well, do you have an issue with that? The skill and luck required to land a plasma cannon shot at range are in a different league compared to a rail turret. If some of the same constraints (projectile speed, range, arc, reload) were applied to Rails, sniping infantry with rails would be much less prevalent, and Blaster turrets would fill the AI niche in a much more sane way. But besides that I've mentioned before that I'd be happy with a 4-shot plasma cannon with reduced damage for the very reason you illustrate. Also most snipers need 2-3 hits to kill a dropsuit, so not really comparable when the BASE rail turret is a one shot kill with no damage modifiers. Snipers can control a choke point sure, but Rails absolutely dominate them. Except rails DO have constraints, as I listed above. Not the exact same constraints as the PLC, but they're there. The fact remains that you're literally aiming at a couple pixels on the screen and the hit detection on it is dubious at best. It is not easy to consistently hit people with the large railgun, and saying "skill is OP" really isn't a valid argument. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17486	Posted - 2015.03.05 22:49:00 - [50] - Quote Not to mention I've asked for long range single shot, slight arc HAV turrets or multi-shot plasma cannon turrets in place of the current blaster but Rattati isn't having any of it. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."

KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1095	Posted - 2015.03.05 23:04:00 - [51] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I'm sure it requires skill to rail snipe, but those skills are prevalent, and the reality is that there's rail tankers sniping infantry in every other match, and doing so effectively. I've seen rail gunners hit moving targets, and many of my deaths are on the move horizontally to the tank. But even assuming that ALL rail turret kills are against horizontally still targets, this is still a problem as there are many vital chokepoints (like hack panels) that generate those types of targets, and a single direct hit will kill most dropsuits. The same argument could be made that skilled players can consistently kill infantry in 1 shot with a Plasma Cannon. Do you have an issue with that as well? Additionally a Sniper is more than capable of dominating a choke point as well, do you have an issue with that? The skill and luck required to land a plasma cannon shot at range are in a different league compared to a rail turret. If some of the same constraints (projectile speed, range, arc, reload) were applied to Rails, sniping infantry with rails would be much less prevalent, and Blaster turrets would fill the AI niche in a much more sane way. But besides that I've mentioned before that I'd be happy with a 4-shot plasma cannon with reduced damage for the very reason you illustrate. Also most snipers need 2-3 hits to kill a dropsuit, so not really comparable when the BASE rail turret is a one shot kill with no damage modifiers. Snipers can control a choke point sure, but Rails absolutely dominate them. Except rails DO have constraints, as I listed above. Not the exact same constraints as the PLC, but they're there. The fact remains that you're literally aiming at a couple pixels on the screen and the hit detection on it is dubious at best. It is not easy to consistently hit people with the large railgun, and saying "skill is OP" really isn't a valid argument. The PLC has almost every constraint you listed, sometimes a worse constraint. Zoom: -1 to PLC, it has NO zoom Rotation: +1 to PLC, no turn limit Charge: 0, equal constraint, PLC can't hold charge either. Travel Time: -1, PLC travels much slower Splash: +1 to PLC, has splash Hit Glitch: 0, PLC has the same issue with direct hits In addition, the PLC user: Is not in a 5k HP tank Has LESS range than a Rail Needs to adjust for arc Has a MUCH longer time between shots. Again though, my preferred PLC is a 4 shot weapon with less damage because I don't think insta-kills are a good mechanic. Either way, those few limitations on the Rail are not enough of a skill barrier to prevent the current reality, but instead of adding more restrictions ala PLC, I'd rather preserve the rail's effectiveness against vehicles and just curb it's usage against infantry with a damage modifier. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17487	Posted - 2015.03.05 23:08:00 - [52] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I'm sure it requires skill to rail snipe, but those skills are prevalent, and the reality is that there's rail tankers sniping infantry in every other match, and doing so effectively. I've seen rail gunners hit moving targets, and many of my deaths are on the move horizontally to the tank. But even assuming that ALL rail turret kills are against horizontally still targets, this is still a problem as there are many vital chokepoints (like hack panels) that generate those types of targets, and a single direct hit will kill most dropsuits. The same argument could be made that skilled players can consistently kill infantry in 1 shot with a Plasma Cannon. Do you have an issue with that as well? Additionally a Sniper is more than capable of dominating a choke point as well, do you have an issue with that? The skill and luck required to land a plasma cannon shot at range are in a different league compared to a rail turret. If some of the same constraints (projectile speed, range, arc, reload) were applied to Rails, sniping infantry with rails would be much less prevalent, and Blaster turrets would fill the AI niche in a much more sane way. But besides that I've mentioned before that I'd be happy with a 4-shot plasma cannon with reduced damage for the very reason you illustrate. Also most snipers need 2-3 hits to kill a dropsuit, so not really comparable when the BASE rail turret is a one shot kill with no damage modifiers. Snipers can control a choke point sure, but Rails absolutely dominate them. Except rails DO have constraints, as I listed above. Not the exact same constraints as the PLC, but they're there. The fact remains that you're literally aiming at a couple pixels on the screen and the hit detection on it is dubious at best. It is not easy to consistently hit people with the large railgun, and saying "skill is OP" really isn't a valid argument. The PLC has almost every constraint you listed, sometimes a worse constraint. Zoom: -1 to PLC, it has NO zoom Rotation: +1 to PLC, no turn limit Charge: 0, equal constraint, PLC can't hold charge either. Travel Time: -1, PLC travels much slower Splash: +1 to PLC, has splash Hit Glitch: 0, PLC has the same issue with direct hits In addition, the PLC user: Is not in a 5k HP tank Has LESS range than a Rail Needs to adjust for arc Has a MUCH longer time between shots. Again though, my preferred PLC is a 4 shot weapon with less damage because I don't think insta-kills are a good mechanic. Either way, those few limitations on the Rail are not enough of a skill barrier to prevent the current reality, but instead of adding more restrictions ala PLC, I'd rather preserve the rail's effectiveness against vehicles and just curb it's usage against infantry with a damage modifier. Consider also as negatives of the Railgun - Tracking Speeds - Elevation of Depression [ depending on the tank you can't even aim down] - Overheat and Cooldown - Limited weapon to HAV - Also has charge up time - Tiny Splash Radius "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5211	Posted - 2015.03.05 23:22:00 - [53] - Quote And again as I said, the majority of the kills you're seeing in PC are focused around people standing still at hack points and being blown off the panel. The amount of kills that happen outside of that specific situation are not substantial enough to merit this sort of change. It is easily the most difficult turret to use against infantry. I don't see why people feel the need to make it even worse. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7544	Posted - 2015.03.05 23:46:00 - [54] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: And again as I said, the majority of the kills you're seeing in PC are focused around people standing still at hack points and being blown off the panel. The amount of kills that happen outside of that specific situation are not substantial enough to merit this sort of change. It is easily the most difficult turret to use against infantry. I don't see why people feel the need to make it even worse. It's typical "it killed me, nerf it." AV
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5212	Posted - 2015.03.05 23:54:00 - [55] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: And again as I said, the majority of the kills you're seeing in PC are focused around people standing still at hack points and being blown off the panel. The amount of kills that happen outside of that specific situation are not substantial enough to merit this sort of change. It is easily the most difficult turret to use against infantry. I don't see why people feel the need to make it even worse. It's typical "it killed me, nerf it." I get it. No one likes to be instantly killed, but that's the nature of A LOT of weapons in Dust, all of which have been complained about as some point (save perhaps the Plasma Cannon). But the fact remains that a mix of downsides and situational requirements are what makes these balanced. Again I'm not sure how much experience the OP has with railguns, but from my personal experience this change is not needed. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1825	Posted - 2015.03.06 00:55:00 - [56] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: That... Is an old topic. here and here. The forge is wicked sick versus all targets, versus infatry it's op as fudge as it is both easy to aim and the redberries just 'catch' the shots. Example video and another video. My short answer is: Fix the forge shake to really affect where the shot goes; now it's too easy to hit infantry pixels. My full answer with reasons here. Leave Rail Turrets as they are; they are far harder to aim and are easier to shelter from as they have several huge limitations. They aren't mass killing infantry, like the forge brawlers and forge snipers. dumb post is dumb Elaborate. Looking at both sides of the coin. Even Aurum one.
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1825	Posted - 2015.03.06 00:57:00 - [57] - Quote XxBlazikenxX wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: That... Is an old topic. here and here. The forge is wicked sick versus all targets, versus infatry it's op as fudge as it is both easy to aim and the redberries just 'catch' the shots. Example video and another video. My short answer is: Fix the forge shake to really affect where the shot goes; now it's too easy to hit infantry pixels. My full answer with reasons here. Leave Rail Turrets as they are; they are far harder to aim and are easier to shelter from as they have several huge limitations. They aren't mass killing infantry, like the forge brawlers and forge snipers. Yes, let's make it so that ants can kill other ants. But a boot can't squash an ant and has to spend its time kicking other boots. You, sir, are making absolutely no sense whatsoever. Looking at both sides of the coin. Even Aurum one.
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1095	Posted - 2015.03.07 00:43:00 - [58] - Quote True Adamance wrote: KA24DERT wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: [quote=KA24DERT][quote=Pokey Dravon] Except rails DO have constraints, as I listed above. Not the exact same constraints as the PLC, but they're there. The fact remains that you're literally aiming at a couple pixels on the screen and the hit detection on it is dubious at best. It is not easy to consistently hit people with the large railgun, and saying "skill is OP" really isn't a valid argument. The PLC has almost every constraint you listed, sometimes a worse constraint. Zoom: -1 to PLC, it has NO zoom Rotation: +1 to PLC, no turn limit Charge: 0, equal constraint, PLC can't hold charge either. Travel Time: -1, PLC travels much slower Splash: +1 to PLC, has splash Hit Glitch: 0, PLC has the same issue with direct hits In addition, the PLC user: Is not in a 5k HP tank Has LESS range than a Rail Needs to adjust for arc Has a MUCH longer time between shots. Again though, my preferred PLC is a 4 shot weapon with less damage because I don't think insta-kills are a good mechanic. Either way, those few limitations on the Rail are not enough of a skill barrier to prevent the current reality, but instead of adding more restrictions ala PLC, I'd rather preserve the rail's effectiveness against vehicles and just curb it's usage against infantry with a damage modifier. Consider also as negatives of the Railgun - Tracking Speeds - Elevation of Depression [ depending on the tank you can't even aim down] - Overheat and Cooldown - Limited weapon to HAV - Also has charge up time - Tiny Splash Radius Yep, there's a list of things that makes Rails hard to use against infantry, but the reality is that sniping infantry is a common activity despite that list. The reason for that is that the benefits Rail sniping outweigh the high barrier of operation. Once you wipe the sweat off your brow from setting up your tank properly, you get to one-shot infantry with impunity from a safe distance. And that's just too one-sided. Blaster and Missile tanks are a much better design for an anti-infantry role due to increased risk on the part of the tanker. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
PLAYSTTION Corrosive Synergy RISE of LEGION 612	Posted - 2015.03.07 01:29:00 - [59] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. NO. Would a 120mm cannon hit a person and scratch him? NO. So a forge gun could completely destroy a merc. Plus have you ever tried FG sniping? You hit 1/4 shots and that one is usually someone who stood still to long. Rails are similar, what does a 20mm cannon do to a person? Rip them apart. A railgun should do just that. Gassault Calogi and more. Respec Pending. `- Open Beta Vet - 38 mil sp - - Director of Corrosive Synergy -`
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1095	Posted - 2015.03.07 01:56:00 - [60] - Quote PLAYSTTION wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. NO. Would a 120mm cannon hit a person and scratch him? NO. So a forge gun could completely destroy a merc. Plus have you ever tried FG sniping? You hit 1/4 shots and that one is usually someone who stood still to long. Rails are similar, what does a 20mm cannon do to a person? Rip them apart. A railgun should do just that. Yesterday I got shot by a hobo on the way back from work, my guts spilled all over the sidewalk, it was pretty terrible. But I had 23 armor left so it's all good. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate

Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 160	Posted - 2015.03.07 02:07:00 - [61] - Quote There is only one thing that I'll support. Rails profile is 63/77 on infantry. Blasters profile is 77/63 on vehicles. Missiles keep the 79/119 on both. I don't large turret so, i wouldn't know how blasters work for large vehicles. Entering the void and becoming wind. Message for 1v1 air to air
Dementia Maniaclease Dust 514 Elite Ops 1	Posted - 2015.03.07 02:48:00 - [62] - Quote No
XxBlazikenxX Y.A.M.A.H 433	Posted - 2015.03.07 23:44:00 - [63] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: XxBlazikenxX wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: That... Is an old topic. here and here. The forge is wicked sick versus all targets, versus infatry it's op as fudge as it is both easy to aim and the redberries just 'catch' the shots. Example video and another video. My short answer is: Fix the forge shake to really affect where the shot goes; now it's too easy to hit infantry pixels. My full answer with reasons here. Leave Rail Turrets as they are; they are far harder to aim and are easier to shelter from as they have several huge limitations. They aren't mass killing infantry, like the forge brawlers and forge snipers. Yes, let's make it so that ants can kill other ants. But a boot can't squash an ant and has to spend its time kicking other boots. You, sir, are making absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's called an analogy. Terrestrial Combat Officer of Y.A.M.A.H Recruitment, Free BPOs!
Cypher Nil Fireteam Tempest 5	Posted - 2015.03.08 00:01:00 - [64] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. Rocket launchers in halo RPG's in cod Repair tool in battlefield Honestly there's loads of examples Its ok, I'm a ninja
Tread Loudly 2 Ametat Security Amarr Empire 68	Posted - 2015.03.08 00:05:00 - [65] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. One question... Were you tripping off of acid while making this thread? Let's think about this for a second. I have a railgun shooting a projectile at super sonic speeds and it hits a Dropsuit, it shouldn't die just because it's an AV weapon and not a AP weapon? Then along the lines of frustrating deaths, you have no idea haha if you run infantry all the time. When is the last time you lost 700,000 Isk in 1 life? It happens pretty often whilst in a Team oriented vehicle :) I Like Tanks, Nova Knives and MagSec SMG's.
XxBlazikenxX Y.A.M.A.H 436	Posted - 2015.03.08 04:00:00 - [66] - Quote Tread Loudly 2 wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. One question... Were you tripping off of acid while making this thread? Let's think about this for a second. I have a railgun shooting a projectile at super sonic speeds and it hits a Dropsuit, it shouldn't die just because it's an AV weapon and not a AP weapon? Then along the lines of frustrating deaths, you have no idea haha if you run infantry all the time. When is the last time you lost 700,000 Isk in 1 life? It happens pretty often whilst in a Team oriented vehicle :) No, he's tripping off something more than acid for sure. Terrestrial Combat Officer of Y.A.M.A.H Recruitment, Free BPOs!
CarlitoX Jojooojo 151	Posted - 2015.03.08 07:51:00 - [67] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. #ButtHurt Amarr 4 ever. C3PO's alt
Miokai Zahou WarRavens 453	Posted - 2015.03.08 09:04:00 - [68] - Quote This thread and this proposal is just plain bad. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head. pâ+(n+ƒ-ön+ƒ)n+ë
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4680	Posted - 2015.03.08 09:11:00 - [69] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. I actually think that reducing the prevalence of one-hit kill weapons in the game would actually be beneficial. Also I think the approach of reduced direct hit damage while adding back splash so these weapons can be suppressive would be a balanced way to reduce the direct damage to infantry. Not sure about the specific numbers, but I think the idea has merit. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
ROMULUS H3X research lab 354	Posted - 2015.03.08 16:47:00 - [70] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: I'm going to go ahead and suggest that instead all AV weapons need to have a useful anti-infantry component to them to make them enjoyable to use. Much like the Plasma Cannon. Within its range it's pretty awesome against shield vehicles (if used on a commando suit) but also lots of fun against infantry. I recently suggested a more anti-infantry inclined Forgegun variant (the tactical Forgegun at 1.3 s charge time, 500 damage a shot and ~90 m range) and I'd absolutely support the return of Swarm Launcher dumb fire mode (~200 splash damage every ~2 seconds at 2 meter splash per missile). Is anyone against reintroducing Forgegun Splash damage? Even if it's just ~200 damage at 2 meter radius. It'd be helpful. Use the assault if you want splash FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!

Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3045	Posted - 2015.03.08 17:02:00 - [71] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. So you want to nerf aim? Go away Nope, I don't want to nerf aim, that was another thread by somebody else. The problem with the random dispersion idea is that it will also affect AV capabilities. This is strictly a damage reduction nerf specifically against Infantry, in the same manner rifles can barely hurt Vehicles. With this change I'd like to bring splash back, which would make it easier to inflict damage and suppress infantry without the insta-gib. If Remotes are ever fixed, this will be the next point of frustration. So basically another vehicle nerf. Please, go away. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3045	Posted - 2015.03.08 17:04:00 - [72] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: I don't large turret so, i wouldn't know how blasters work for large vehicles. Well that explains everything. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3045	Posted - 2015.03.08 17:07:00 - [73] - Quote The dispersion for all automatic weapons should be increased to make it harder to hit targets. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
ROMULUS H3X research lab 355	Posted - 2015.03.08 17:10:00 - [74] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. Hhahahahahha, so you want forgers to be almost completely defenseless against other fattys with HMG...LOL 180 direct damage to a clone..... God damn, do you even realize how little that is? The friggen splash does more damage hahahahhahahah SANE values this guy states.... Hahahahhahah you must be mental.. Ohh I remember you... I forged you in the face just the other day! Even more satisfying now that I know you are crying about forge direct shots. Whenever I see you in battle... This is all I am going to do to you. Forge face. Forge face. Forge face. FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!
Tread Loudly 2 Ametat Security Amarr Empire 73	Posted - 2015.03.08 18:36:00 - [75] - Quote ROMULUS H3X wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. Hhahahahahha, so you want forgers to be almost completely defenseless against other fattys with HMG...LOL 180 direct damage to a clone..... God damn, do you even realize how little that is? The friggen splash does more damage hahahahhahahah SANE values this guy states.... Hahahahhahah you must be mental.. Ohh I remember you... I forged you in the face just the other day! Even more satisfying now that I know you are crying about forge direct shots. Whenever I see you in battle... This is all I am going to do to you. Forge face. Forge face. Forge face. Why you no just punch him in face? I Like Tanks, Nova Knives and MagSec SMG's.
XxBlazikenxX Y.A.M.A.H 451	Posted - 2015.03.08 19:24:00 - [76] - Quote Tread Loudly 2 wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. Hhahahahahha, so you want forgers to be almost completely defenseless against other fattys with HMG...LOL 180 direct damage to a clone..... God damn, do you even realize how little that is? The friggen splash does more damage hahahahhahahah SANE values this guy states.... Hahahahhahah you must be mental.. Ohh I remember you... I forged you in the face just the other day! Even more satisfying now that I know you are crying about forge direct shots. Whenever I see you in battle... This is all I am going to do to you. Forge face. Forge face. Forge face. Why you no just punch him in face? Myofibs? Terrestrial Combat Officer of Y.A.M.A.H Recruitment, Free BPOs!
Tread Loudly 2 Ametat Security Amarr Empire 74	Posted - 2015.03.08 20:00:00 - [77] - Quote XxBlazikenxX wrote: Tread Loudly 2 wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. Hhahahahahha, so you want forgers to be almost completely defenseless against other fattys with HMG...LOL 180 direct damage to a clone..... God damn, do you even realize how little that is? The friggen splash does more damage hahahahhahahah SANE values this guy states.... Hahahahhahah you must be mental.. Ohh I remember you... I forged you in the face just the other day! Even more satisfying now that I know you are crying about forge direct shots. Whenever I see you in battle... This is all I am going to do to you. Forge face. Forge face. Forge face. Why you no just punch him in face? Myofibs? Of Course I Like Tanks, Nova Knives and MagSec SMG's.
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1101	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:07:00 - [78] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. I actually think that reducing the prevalence of one-hit kill weapons in the game would actually be beneficial. Also I think the approach of reduced direct hit damage while adding back splash so these weapons can be suppressive would be a balanced way to reduce the direct damage to infantry. Not sure about the specific numbers, but I think the idea has merit. That's my gist. Most of the insta-gibs should go away or be restricted. - Plasma Cannon should be a 3-4 shot weapon with lower overall damage (the jump buff will bring this to the forefront...) - REs should be re-tooled into a trap-only weapon (requiring placement and a 5 second initialization) - Rails and Forges shouldn't be able to 1-shot infantry (but splash should be added to let them still kill/suppress) etc... You're pointing to a more holistic rebalance, but getting the conversation started on "nerfs" is always rough, even when it's painfully obvious. I wish more tankers/forgers would come up with better numbers for what's fair against infantry, but so far it appears that "fair" is 1200 damage. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Tread Loudly 2 Ametat Security Amarr Empire 74	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:36:00 - [79] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Kain Spero wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. I actually think that reducing the prevalence of one-hit kill weapons in the game would actually be beneficial. Also I think the approach of reduced direct hit damage while adding back splash so these weapons can be suppressive would be a balanced way to reduce the direct damage to infantry. Not sure about the specific numbers, but I think the idea has merit. That's my gist. Most of the insta-gibs should go away or be restricted. - Plasma Cannon should be a 3-4 shot weapon with lower overall damage (the jump buff will bring this to the forefront...) - REs should be re-tooled into a trap-only weapon (requiring placement and a 5 second initialization) - Rails and Forges shouldn't be able to 1-shot infantry (but splash should be added to let them still kill/suppress) etc... You're pointing to a more holistic rebalance, but getting the conversation started on "nerfs" is always rough, even when it's painfully obvious. I wish more tankers/forgers would come up with better numbers for what's fair against infantry, but so far it appears that "fair" is 1200 damage. Well what we tankers/forgers ask is for people like yourself to think "logically" which may not always appeal to you and sometimes won't even appeal to the vast majority. By thinking "logically" what I mean is that if you are hit by a supersonic projectile even with your advanced armor you shouldn't be able to take a shot and keep on moving, hitting a strafing target or even just a moving target in general takes at least a decent bit of skill not to mention a good amount of knowledge of how to lead a target or guess where they are heading. If anything is painfully obvious as far as nerfs needing to happen, well to say the least you are looking at the wrong thing to fix... Personally I think that all of the current bugs should be worked out, then newer features/items be added, and finally work out the kinks to make it a level playing (Not a playing field that benefits scrubs and their needs). However the order of this could quickly change if something gamebreaking were to happen. However this is just my opinion, I'm sure your's is far different from mine... I Like Tanks, Nova Knives and MagSec SMG's.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5272	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:40:00 - [80] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I wish more tankers/forgers would come up with better numbers for what's fair against infantry, but so far it appears that "fair" is 1200 damage. So, when a new player comes into the game, I should tell them "This is a Large Railgun, It's used to kill vehicles. It will take 2-4 shots to kill the vehicle. Oh and it'll take the same number of shots to kill infantry too" and the new player will look at me and laugh because he thinks I'm joking. If you want to make Large Rails harder to use against infantry, that's fine. But as I told Kane in the Skype chat, there are half a dozen attributes that affect the performance of Large Railguns against infantry, and people are only focusing on the damage. Do I think it should be easy to snipe infantry? No. But god damn if I hit them they need to be liquified. Also a multi shot Plasma Cannon does does less damage per shot? We have that already, it's called the Breach Mass Driver. Why do we need another weapon that does the same thing? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1101	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:38:00 - [81] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I wish more tankers/forgers would come up with better numbers for what's fair against infantry, but so far it appears that "fair" is 1200 damage. So, when a new player comes into the game, I should tell them "This is a Large Railgun, It's used to kill vehicles. It will take 2-4 shots to kill the vehicle. Oh and it'll take the same number of shots to kill infantry too" and the new player will look at me and laugh because he thinks I'm joking. If you want to make Large Rails harder to use against infantry, that's fine. But as I told Kane in the Skype chat, there are half a dozen attributes that affect the performance of Large Railguns against infantry, and people are only focusing on the damage. Do I think it should be easy to snipe infantry? No. But god damn if I hit them they need to be liquified. Also a multi shot Plasma Cannon does does less damage per shot? We have that already, it's called the Breach Mass Driver. Why do we need another weapon that does the same thing? Plasma Cannon is anti shield. It wouldn't be the same thing. By that logic we should go back to just having the AR, but that's besides the point. Regarding realism, most of the weapons in this game would kill in one hit, dropsuit or not, if it were real life. Hell, a few weeks ago Lockheed tested a laser against a ground target and burnt a hole in it from 1 mile away. In the year 2015. What would a laser rifle TWENTY THOUSAND years in the future do? Certainly more than the annoying buzzing it does in Dust. And what does "armor" mean? How does one bullet always equate to the removal of a certain unit of "armor"? How do skills work? How can I "learn" more armor? You explain these idiosyncrasies to the noob the same way you explain everything else: "Because that's the way it is in this game, if you want real, join the army" The question isn't whether or not it's "realistic" or not, it's whether it's a good mechanic or not. Realism is a silly thing to be dogmatic about when designing a video game. You have no traction there. Also, it doesn't matter how "hard" rail/forge sniping is, the barrier to entry has been surmounted by enough players to make it a common occurrence. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Tread Loudly 2 Ametat Security Amarr Empire 74	Posted - 2015.03.08 23:39:00 - [82] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I wish more tankers/forgers would come up with better numbers for what's fair against infantry, but so far it appears that "fair" is 1200 damage. So, when a new player comes into the game, I should tell them "This is a Large Railgun, It's used to kill vehicles. It will take 2-4 shots to kill the vehicle. Oh and it'll take the same number of shots to kill infantry too" and the new player will look at me and laugh because he thinks I'm joking. If you want to make Large Rails harder to use against infantry, that's fine. But as I told Kane in the Skype chat, there are half a dozen attributes that affect the performance of Large Railguns against infantry, and people are only focusing on the damage. Do I think it should be easy to snipe infantry? No. But god damn if I hit them they need to be liquified. Also a multi shot Plasma Cannon does does less damage per shot? We have that already, it's called the Breach Mass Driver. Why do we need another weapon that does the same thing? Plasma Cannon is anti shield. It wouldn't be the same thing. By that logic we should go back to just having the AR, but that's besides the point. Regarding realism, most of the weapons in this game would kill in one hit, dropsuit or not, if it were real life. Hell, a few weeks ago Lockheed tested a laser against a ground target and burnt a hole in it from 1 mile away. In the year 2015. What would a laser rifle TWENTY THOUSAND years in the future do? Certainly more than the annoying buzzing it does in Dust. And what does "armor" mean? How does one bullet always equate to the removal of a certain unit of "armor"? How do skills work? How can I "learn" more armor? You explain these idiosyncrasies to the noob the same way you explain everything else: "Because that's the way it is in this game, if you want real, join the army" The question isn't whether or not it's "realistic" or not, it's whether it's a good mechanic or not. Realism is a silly thing to be dogmatic about when designing a video game. You have no traction there. Also, it doesn't matter how "hard" rail/forge sniping is, the barrier to entry has been surmounted by enough players to make it a common occurrence. I need to get online again, and definitely talk to doc if he stills gets on, but that's besides the point . C'mon think just for a little while, why should infantry have even the slightest chance of surviving a large rail shot? Because it's "unfair" based off of it's ability to one hit kill infantry? Well based off of that being your main argument it is no longer worth reasoning with you as you seem fairly set in the way you'd like to view the issue. I Like Tanks, Nova Knives and MagSec SMG's.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5273	Posted - 2015.03.09 00:09:00 - [83] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Plasma Cannon is anti shield. It wouldn't be the same thing. By that logic we should go back to just having the AR, but that's besides the point. Because the natural weapon of Assault Rifle, Scrambler Rifle, Rail Rifle, and Combat rifle are all different? If you want to have a variant with multiple weaker shots of the Plasma Cannon, sure. But the nature of weapon in terms of AV is highly dependent upon it's high alpha damage. Are you saying we should make it less effective against vehicles because you don't like getting 1-shotted as an infantry? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
ROMULUS H3X research lab 356	Posted - 2015.03.09 00:20:00 - [84] - Quote Tread Loudly 2 wrote: ROMULUS H3X wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. Hhahahahahha, so you want forgers to be almost completely defenseless against other fattys with HMG...LOL 180 direct damage to a clone..... God damn, do you even realize how little that is? The friggen splash does more damage hahahahhahahah SANE values this guy states.... Hahahahhahah you must be mental.. Ohh I remember you... I forged you in the face just the other day! Even more satisfying now that I know you are crying about forge direct shots. Whenever I see you in battle... This is all I am going to do to you. Forge face. Forge face. Forge face. Why you no just punch him in face? I actually leveled him 3 times with Melee yesterday. Apparantly he's okay with that thought of my Melee attacks doing more damage than his [[proposed forge gun direct damage]] Laugh my assssssss OFFFFFFFFFFFFF KA24DERP is my new name for him. FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1101	Posted - 2015.03.09 00:43:00 - [85] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: Plasma Cannon is anti shield. It wouldn't be the same thing. By that logic we should go back to just having the AR, but that's besides the point. Because the natural weapon of Assault Rifle, Scrambler Rifle, Rail Rifle, and Combat rifle are all different? If you want to have a variant with multiple weaker shots of the Plasma Cannon, sure. But the nature of weapon in terms of AV is highly dependent upon it's high alpha damage. Are you saying we should make it less effective against vehicles because you don't like getting 1-shotted as an infantry? It wouldn't necessarily be less effective. You can modify direct damage, rounds per clip, reload, and time between shots to strike a balance. It's also possible to preserve the current Plasma Cannon, but I would like that variant to have low efficiency against infantry to prevent most insta-kills. I'm not saying that AV should be less effective against vehicles. This whole thread is about reducing AV alpha damage against infantry specifically. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Doc DDD TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 380	Posted - 2015.03.09 01:31:00 - [86] - Quote Swarms should be able to lock onto infantry. That's how much sense this thread makes. Dert... I could maybe see pushing for a slightly smaller OHK hitbox on infantry, if there already isn't one.. but less damage is a tough one..
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1101	Posted - 2015.03.09 05:32:00 - [87] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Swarms should be able to lock onto infantry. That's how much sense this thread makes. Dert... I could maybe see pushing for a slightly smaller OHK hitbox on infantry, if there already isn't one.. but less damage is a tough one.. I would argue that a better analogy is rifles doing 100% damage to tanks. But your hitbox idea is even harsher than what I'm proposing though. I don't want rails/forges to lose their ability to hit infantry, in fact I think it's ok for rails and forges to kill infantry with 3-4 rounds of splash, or 2 direct hits, or a combination thereof. The idea isn't to remove the ability to hit infantry, it's to remove the ability to kill infantry with no warning. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate
Doc DDD TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 380	Posted - 2015.03.09 08:29:00 - [88] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Swarms should be able to lock onto infantry. That's how much sense this thread makes. Dert... I could maybe see pushing for a slightly smaller OHK hitbox on infantry, if there already isn't one.. but less damage is a tough one.. I would argue that a better analogy is rifles doing 100% damage to tanks. But your hitbox idea is even harsher than what I'm proposing though. I don't want rails/forges to lose their ability to hit infantry, in fact I think it's ok for rails and forges to kill infantry with 3-4 rounds of splash, or 2 direct hits, or a combination thereof. The idea isn't to remove the ability to hit infantry, it's to remove the ability to kill infantry with no warning. I would argue a better analogy is sidearms doing 500% damage to infantry... Because it doesn't make any sense other than you don't want the largest ammo rounds in the game to to hit you as hard as they hit a TANK an LAV or DROPSHIP. If dropsuit armor reduces large turret/forge damage by 80% then I want a layer of it coating my tank. Another analogy would be like saying lazer orbital strikes should only do 10% damage to infantry, large warbarge should only do 5%... because you don't like dying to orbitals.. Having weapons that only do alpha damage to vehicles and less damage to infantry should stop with Av nades and swarms... I don't like PLC damage on my tank, but I'm not going to start a thread asking to nerf all AV damage by 50% to vehicles if the same weapon can one shot infantry... Should a proto mass driver round do less damage to a cloaked scout with only 300 ehp than a heavy with 1500 ehp? No Dert.. the cloaked scout should stay away from the mass driver rounds so he isn't OHK.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5274	Posted - 2015.03.09 08:52:00 - [89] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: Plasma Cannon is anti shield. It wouldn't be the same thing. By that logic we should go back to just having the AR, but that's besides the point. Because the natural weapon of Assault Rifle, Scrambler Rifle, Rail Rifle, and Combat rifle are all different? If you want to have a variant with multiple weaker shots of the Plasma Cannon, sure. But the nature of weapon in terms of AV is highly dependent upon it's high alpha damage. Are you saying we should make it less effective against vehicles because you don't like getting 1-shotted as an infantry? It wouldn't necessarily be less effective. You can modify direct damage, rounds per clip, reload, and time between shots to strike a balance. It's also possible to preserve the current Plasma Cannon, but I would like that variant to have low efficiency against infantry to prevent most insta-kills. I'm not saying that AV should be less effective against vehicles. This whole thread is about reducing AV alpha damage against infantry specifically. You ....don't use Plasma Cannons all that much do you? Because the kinds of changes you're proposing (Because apparently you feel that Plasma Cannon kills on infantry are rampant enough to merit a change) would indeed make them less effective in the kinds of AV roles they fill. facepalm Just nevermind, I give up. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
KA24DERT TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 1101	Posted - 2015.03.09 10:09:00 - [90] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: KA24DERT wrote: Plasma Cannon is anti shield. It wouldn't be the same thing. By that logic we should go back to just having the AR, but that's besides the point. Because the natural weapon of Assault Rifle, Scrambler Rifle, Rail Rifle, and Combat rifle are all different? If you want to have a variant with multiple weaker shots of the Plasma Cannon, sure. But the nature of weapon in terms of AV is highly dependent upon it's high alpha damage. Are you saying we should make it less effective against vehicles because you don't like getting 1-shotted as an infantry? It wouldn't necessarily be less effective. You can modify direct damage, rounds per clip, reload, and time between shots to strike a balance. It's also possible to preserve the current Plasma Cannon, but I would like that variant to have low efficiency against infantry to prevent most insta-kills. I'm not saying that AV should be less effective against vehicles. This whole thread is about reducing AV alpha damage against infantry specifically. You ....don't use Plasma Cannons all that much do you? Because the kinds of changes you're proposing (Because apparently you feel that Plasma Cannon kills on infantry are rampant enough to merit a change) would indeed make them less effective in the kinds of AV roles they fill. facepalm Just nevermind, I give up. It's clear we have very different views on how the game works and I'm not going to bicker. I would however love to see you try to land multiple 3-4 consecutive railgun or plasma cannon shots onto a moving infantry, before they kill you. I use the plasma cannon every day. I could give you some long spiel about how hard it is to use, how much skill is involved, but it's irrelevant, ultimately myself and others are popping people in one hit on a regular basis. But this argument is boiling down into 2 camps: 1) The Low TTK instagib camp 2) The High TTK no instagib camp If you swing one way or the other you can achieve your desired dynamic with all sorts of mechanic changes. The core disagreement is over TTK. You guys think instant deaths are crucial to fun game design, and I think it's more fun to have drawn out brawls with time to react. I'll let the player retention speak for itself on that. But yeah, of course, if you like low ttk and instagibs, this thread is a hilarious heresy to you. BAN ADVANCED GEAR FROM PUBS \| Mass Driver Advocate

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17527	Posted - 2015.03.09 10:24:00 - [91] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: I use the plasma cannon every day. I could give you some long spiel about how hard it is to use, how much skill is involved, but it's irrelevant, ultimately myself and others are popping people in one hit on a regular basis. But this argument is boiling down into 2 camps: 1) The Low TTK instagib camp 2) The High TTK no instagib camp If you swing one way or the other you can achieve your desired dynamic with all sorts of mechanic changes. The core disagreement is over TTK. You guys think instant deaths are crucial to fun game design, and I think it's more fun to have drawn out brawls with time to react. I'll let the player retention speak for itself on that. But yeah, of course, if you like low ttk and instagibs, this thread is a hilarious heresy to you. That's a poor generalisation as I believe in certain circumstances Low TTK makes for good mechanics while in other not so good. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5274	Posted - 2015.03.09 11:12:00 - [92] - Quote True Adamance wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I use the plasma cannon every day. I could give you some long spiel about how hard it is to use, how much skill is involved, but it's irrelevant, ultimately myself and others are popping people in one hit on a regular basis. But this argument is boiling down into 2 camps: 1) The Low TTK instagib camp 2) The High TTK no instagib camp If you swing one way or the other you can achieve your desired dynamic with all sorts of mechanic changes. The core disagreement is over TTK. You guys think instant deaths are crucial to fun game design, and I think it's more fun to have drawn out brawls with time to react. I'll let the player retention speak for itself on that. But yeah, of course, if you like low ttk and instagibs, this thread is a hilarious heresy to you. That's a poor generalisation as I believe in certain circumstances Low TTK makes for good mechanics while in other not so good. Im curious to see how many shots it should take for a shotgun to kill someone. 5 or 6 maybe? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3049	Posted - 2015.03.09 14:58:00 - [93] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Kain Spero wrote: KA24DERT wrote: I think it's time we admit that Rails and Forges are too effective at sniping infantry. I can't think of any other AV weapon in the game that doubles as an AI weapon in a MORE deadly capacity than it's AV role. The current balance is as silly as letting rifles do 100% damage against vehicles, with the added frustration that these "AV" weapons kill infantry in one hit. I propose that the efficiency of the Rail turret be reduced to 20% against infantry, reducing the damage for the base railgun turret from 1395 damage to 195.75 damage. And for that matter, they can get their splash damage bumped to 100. A similar reduction for the forge reduces damage from 1200 to 180 damage. I think these are much more sane values and will improve gameplay via reduction of frustrating deaths. I actually think that reducing the prevalence of one-hit kill weapons in the game would actually be beneficial. Also I think the approach of reduced direct hit damage while adding back splash so these weapons can be suppressive would be a balanced way to reduce the direct damage to infantry. Not sure about the specific numbers, but I think the idea has merit. That's my gist. Most of the insta-gibs should go away or be restricted. - Plasma Cannon should be a 3-4 shot weapon with lower overall damage (the jump buff will bring this to the forefront...) - REs should be re-tooled into a trap-only weapon (requiring placement and a 5 second initialization) - Rails and Forges shouldn't be able to 1-shot infantry (but splash should be added to let them still kill/suppress) etc... You're pointing to a more holistic rebalance, but getting the conversation started on "nerfs" is always rough, even when it's painfully obvious. I wish more tankers/forgers would come up with better numbers for what's fair against infantry, but so far it appears that "fair" is 1200 damage. "What's fair against infantry?" Infantry have been coming up with "fair" numbers for vehicles for 3+ years. Where are we now? Expensive coffins that require extensive experience to make work properly, with AV so powerful that they could contend with a small moon devastating a planet. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3049	Posted - 2015.03.09 15:04:00 - [94] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: try, in fact I think it's ok for rails and forges to kill infantry with 3-4 rounds of splash, or 2 direct hits, or a combination thereof. The idea isn't to remove the ability to hit infantry, it's to remove the ability to kill infantry with no warning. So then let's remove REs and warbarge strikes completely. Take out the squish damage from vehicles dropping on heads completely, whether it be from a dropship squishing a red or a just-called-in vehicle squishing a friendly. Let's take out all alpha damage weapons, which would be the plasma and forge. Sniper too, because they're just annoying. Bolt pistol is incredibly powerful too, so let's take that out for good measure. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
MRBH1997 Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 175	Posted - 2015.03.09 16:50:00 - [95] - Quote Yeahhhhhh no. Would make nonsense if a scout couldn't get 1 shotted by either of those weapons. It takes skill to hit someone with those weapons, especially a moving target. What, you gonna claim a nerf against one shot sniper rifles next? And usually when I see people sniped by these weapons, they are being stupid and peeking over cover in front of said weapon hoping to get a kill and duck before said weapon user targets them. Or when they think hacking a console with forge coverage is smart even afte te 10th attempt. CEO of Knights of Ender Corporation Recruitment Channel: Ender's Keep KOE Agents now doing community events!


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.