| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Shley Ashes
And the ButtPirates
202
   |
Posted - 2015.03.27 11:36:00 -
[151] - Quote
I can see the reasoning behind this proposal to normalise AV damage, however I don't agree with it,
If the reasoning is simplifying the damage profiles because they are difficult to understand for newer players, then have some form of explanation in game with regards to them, I remember I didn't actually know the damage profiles until a post was made about Uprising 1.2 http://dust514.com/news/blog/2013/07/weapon-ranges-in-uprising-1.2-and-beyond/
The reason these things are difficult to understand is because you don't tell us them in game
Also someone has already mentioned, how long will it be before this same normalisation is applied to light weapons and side arms?
What will happen to the Proficiency skills ? 1.5% damage per level bringing Prof 5 to 7.5% damage increase ?
On a side note I'm all for the implementation of some current models having their skins changed to implement some new AV in order to bring some for of parity
Dust.... Dust never changes
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
228
|
Posted - 2015.03.29 03:04:00 -
[152] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:
So you would want to swap to a shield swarm and back to an armor swarm as AV infantry?
If you wanted to have swarms as an AV-system designed around ease-of-use (Note: this is not intended to be a comment on the skill level required to use swarms most efficiently, but rather on a proposed role for the swarm launcher...if you will something that's easy to pick up, difficult to master)...you could say that the nanites reconfigure the warhead to always be good against the selected target...and just give it the raw damage (a +0/-0 profile)...or perhaps have another weapon with that in-mind...
as I stated before, I love damage profiles, and they are present throughout the game already
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3145
|
Posted - 2015.03.30 03:30:00 -
[153] - Quote
Lady MDK wrote:Mass driver should be made viable AV in my opinion.
No
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7757
|
Posted - 2015.03.30 09:52:00 -
[154] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Lady MDK wrote:Mass driver should be made viable AV in my opinion. No
You would have to make mass drivers 140% damage to vehicles for it to have a prayer of killing an HAV who sits still.
If you mass fire them.
Utterly ineffective vs. Dropships.
LAVs would be the only vehicles threatened in any meaningful way.
AV
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3145
|
Posted - 2015.03.30 15:58:00 -
[155] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Lady MDK wrote:Mass driver should be made viable AV in my opinion. No You would have to make mass drivers 140% damage to vehicles for it to have a prayer of killing an HAV who sits still. If you mass fire them. Utterly ineffective vs. Dropships. LAVs would be the only vehicles threatened in any meaningful way.
Infantry weapons already have a larger explosive splash radius than a missile that's the size of a person. Infantry doesn't need any more insane bonus damage against vehicles.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7763
|
Posted - 2015.03.30 17:11:00 -
[156] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Lady MDK wrote:Mass driver should be made viable AV in my opinion. No You would have to make mass drivers 140% damage to vehicles for it to have a prayer of killing an HAV who sits still. If you mass fire them. Utterly ineffective vs. Dropships. LAVs would be the only vehicles threatened in any meaningful way. Infantry weapons already have a larger explosive splash radius than a missile that's the size of a person. Infantry doesn't need any more insane bonus damage against vehicles.
That wasn't an endorsement of the idea, that was me saying it'd be pointless. Do you ever actually read anything anyone says?
Because 120 damage per second splash is so very threatening, I know. Maybe you should stay inside if the splash of the mass driver is that scary.
AV
|
BraiNing Harloon
MANUFACTURERS OF DEATH
14
|
Posted - 2015.03.31 17:04:00 -
[157] - Quote
I would rather you not "Normalize". At least now there is a specific use for each weapon. If you make them less "Different" then only one weapon will be the right choice. Even more so than now.
|
Shley Ashes
And the ButtPirates
214
|
Posted - 2015.03.31 20:23:00 -
[158] - Quote
In this normalisation are Flux grenades likely to be normalised against Shield Vehicles ?? and the same question for AV grenades as well ?
Dust.... Dust never changes
|
RemingtonBeaver
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
2179
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 16:00:00 -
[159] - Quote
Watched 5 guys all with AV try to take down a proto tank.
The 5 AV guys lost. Tank went 32/0.
3 swarmers and 2 forgers.
I grabbed my forge to help. I'm no slouch when it comes to hitting tanks.
So now its just a ridiculous barrage of swarms and forge shots. I've never seen anything like it.
The swarms and forges didn't budge the tank after his hardeners were up. Tank retreated, rushed in, killed everything he could until his time was up and repeated.
Fix this garbage. Hardeners shouldn't render the tank invincible for 30 seconds. It's insane how good the hardeners work. Sort it the **** out.
Sincerely, everyone that isn't a tanker.
Unleash the BIMBOBOT!
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5731
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 20:39:00 -
[160] - Quote
RemingtonBeaver wrote:Watched 5 guys all with AV try to take down a proto tank.
The 5 AV guys lost. Tank went 32/0.
3 swarmers and 2 forgers.
I grabbed my forge to help. I'm no slouch when it comes to hitting tanks.
So now its just a ridiculous barrage of swarms and forge shots. I've never seen anything like it.
The swarms and forges didn't budge the tank after his hardeners were up. Tank retreated, rushed in, killed everything he could until his time was up and repeated.
Fix this garbage. Hardeners shouldn't render the tank invincible for 30 seconds. It's insane how good the hardeners work. Sort it the **** out.
Sincerely, everyone that isn't a tanker.
Armor Hardeners should be reduced to 35% and Heavy Passive Repairers need to be converted to Active Modules.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast & Blog
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
Godin Thekiller
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
3045
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 20:41:00 -
[161] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:RemingtonBeaver wrote:Watched 5 guys all with AV try to take down a proto tank.
The 5 AV guys lost. Tank went 32/0.
3 swarmers and 2 forgers.
I grabbed my forge to help. I'm no slouch when it comes to hitting tanks.
So now its just a ridiculous barrage of swarms and forge shots. I've never seen anything like it.
The swarms and forges didn't budge the tank after his hardeners were up. Tank retreated, rushed in, killed everything he could until his time was up and repeated.
Fix this garbage. Hardeners shouldn't render the tank invincible for 30 seconds. It's insane how good the hardeners work. Sort it the **** out.
Sincerely, everyone that isn't a tanker.
Armor Hardeners should be reduced to 35% and Heavy Passive Repairers need to be converted to Active Modules.
And if that won't do it, nerf it another 5%.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
265
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 22:43:00 -
[162] - Quote
RemingtonBeaver wrote:Watched 5 guys all with AV try to take down a proto tank.
The 5 AV guys lost. Tank went 32/0.
3 swarmers and 2 forgers.
I grabbed my forge to help. I'm no slouch when it comes to hitting tanks.
So now its just a ridiculous barrage of swarms and forge shots. I've never seen anything like it.
The swarms and forges didn't budge the tank after his hardeners were up. Tank retreated, rushed in, killed everything he could until his time was up and repeated.
Fix this garbage. Hardeners shouldn't render the tank invincible for 30 seconds. It's insane how good the hardeners work. Sort it the **** out.
Sincerely, everyone that isn't a tanker.
While I appreciate the sentiment...not exactly what this specific thread is about XD In fact, if we assume that it was a FoTM Armor HAV (Dual Hardened, Dual Rep, Armor HAV) then the ideas in this thread would actually make the problem worse...
Most of us who where pushing for the Armor Hardener Buff where wanting a 30% hardener level (some at 35%)...very few where still asking for 40% without reducing the Active Time and decreasing cooldown to match the Shield Hardener at the least.
Anyway, Normalization of AV Damage Profiles is still something I do not support...unless we're gonna normalize damage types across the board.
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
|
Sarus Rambo
Isuuaya Tactical
Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 20:56:00 -
[163] - Quote
Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Normalization of AV Damage Profiles is still something I do not support...unless we're gonna normalize damage types across the board.
Id be in favor of just reducing the advantages and disadvantages of different types.
For example:
EM based weapons: +5% damage to shields, -5% damage to armor
Thermal: +2.5% damage to shields, -2.5%damage to armor
Kinetic: -2.5% damage to shields, +2.5%damage to armor
Explosive: -5% damage to shields, +5% damage to armor
Something that still gives the game flavor, still leverages all the setup to make this work, but doesn't really have a big impact on the gun game/AV as much as it does now.
You might argue this is small enough not to be worth it, but with multiple AV on a single target, each 5% would stack up pretty quick, making it worth the extra effort in certain circumstances, but would also make skill and teamwork the primary thing necessary, not the "correct" weapon.
This sums up 75% of forum posts.
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7939
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 01:04:00 -
[164] - Quote
Sarus Rambo wrote:Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Normalization of AV Damage Profiles is still something I do not support...unless we're gonna normalize damage types across the board. Id be in favor of just reducing the advantages and disadvantages of different types. For example: EM based weapons: +5% damage to shields, -5% damage to armor Thermal: +2.5% damage to shields, -2.5%damage to armor Kinetic: -2.5% damage to shields, +2.5%damage to armor Explosive: -5% damage to shields, +5% damage to armor Something that still gives the game flavor, still leverages all the setup to make this work, but doesn't really have a big impact on the gun game/AV as much as it does now. You might argue this is small enough not to be worth it, but with multiple AV on a single target, each 5% would stack up pretty quick, making it worth the extra effort in certain circumstances, but would also make skill and teamwork the primary thing necessary, not the "correct" weapon.
actually this would force almost as much homogenous design as eliminating the profiles.
I as an AV nerd prefer the "right tool for the job" approach. making it so the AV weapons only differ in firing mechanics would pretty much require a serious buff to baseline damage to be able to fight vehicles on any sane term, because breaking the strong tank, which usually has between 4 and 6 times the HP or EHP of the weak tank (madrugar with 5600 armor HP and a single hardener has a raw EHP of 7840 vs 1200 shields before you start counting heavy reps) the profiles become ridiculously important in the breaking of the tank.
it also means we can have weapons that don't perform perfectly in all situations.
If the forge gun performed the same to all things every time then the Madrugar will always be the proper tank of choice.
Why?
Because it has more EHP than a gunnlogi because it regens constantly. This fits the armor motif of higher EHP, but after the nerfe to fitting, the gunnlogi doesn't have much to speak for it if all AV is equal suddenly.
AV
|
Sarus Rambo
Isuuaya Tactical
Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 18:25:00 -
[165] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:
I as an AV nerd prefer the "right tool for the job" approach. making it so the AV weapons only differ in firing mechanics would pretty much require a serious buff to baseline damage to be able to fight vehicles on any sane term, because breaking the strong tank, which usually has between 4 and 6 times the HP or EHP of the weak tank (madrugar with 5600 armor HP and a single hardener has a raw EHP of 7840 vs 1200 shields before you start counting heavy reps) the profiles become ridiculously important in the breaking of the tank.
it also means we can have weapons that don't perform perfectly in all situations.
If the forge gun performed the same to all things every time then the Madrugar will always be the proper tank of choice.
Why?
Because it has more EHP than a gunnlogi because it regens constantly. This fits the armor motif of higher EHP, but after the nerfe to fitting, the gunnlogi doesn't have much to speak for it if all AV is equal suddenly.
I would say this is a problem with a tank in general and you should lower the amount of EHP disparity instead of buff AV damage. A tank with 6x another tanks EHP isn't balanced. I would say at most it should be 2x-3x, 3x being full proto hp modules fit in all slots. You also need to balance modules at this point if they are making things to strong.
The disparity between proto and regular gear in general should be reigned in quite a bit across the board if you want player skill to be a determining factor and not just who has more money/sp.
This sums up 75% of forum posts.
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7969
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 21:36:00 -
[166] - Quote
Sarus Rambo wrote:
I would say this is a problem with a tank in general and you should lower the amount of EHP disparity instead of buff AV damage.
were it up to me, I'd do both.
AV
|
I-Shayz-I
I----------I
5321
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 08:11:00 -
[167] - Quote
Please make the Mass Driver 100%
At least the breach variant.
Breach has to be one of the least used weapons in the game, and 75% is not nearly enough
7162 wp with a Repair Tool!
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7991
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 10:01:00 -
[168] - Quote
I-Shayz-I wrote:Please make the Mass Driver 100%
At least the breach variant.
Breach has to be one of the least used weapons in the game, and 75% is not nearly enough
Submitted an AV variant to rattati. It needed a lot of love and work to be viable for the job.
Even with the changes I suggested it's going to be more LAV killer and deterrant to other targets. It CAN kill an HAV.
it's just not likely at all.
AV
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P
C C P Alliance
20620
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 03:12:00 -
[169] - Quote
We will keep this discussion alive, but not going ahead with anything in the near future.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |