I may be mildly annoyed with people trying to twist my intent right now. If that's not the intent, I apologize. I'm getting entirely too used to counterpoints being based on my words being used completely out of context.

Believe it or not almost none of my assertions about people's attitude are intended to be anything other than general.

If someone is being a douche it applies to them. If you are engaging in point/counterpoint and bringing something it does not.

I'm not calling you an idiot for disagreeing. I have a different perspective. You think area denial is better handle one way. That's fine. But why are we not allowing for other things?

You stated that removing the turn speed penalty was a bad move. If the sentinel was effective at long range and intended to get it's skull ripped off by anyone getting In close? Seems like balance to me.

However giving a sentinel a weapon that only works at point blank with a turn rate that allows anyone to circle around and kill you means sentinels are there to get farmed for warpoints. This is what happened before.

Rather than making sents ranged, the turn speed was removed and I facepalmed because what we have today was inevitable given the CCP nerf/buff cycle.

While the turn speed penalty was in effect, heavies utilized rifles to overcome the limitation. Because you can turn slow as hell all you want. At 60-80m it doesn't matter how fast the scout or assault can move you can kill them via hit point attrition.

That's why I say sentinel suits are better for open area. The raw HP allows you to win attrition combat while allowing weapons that don't require a scout suit to take shots at you.

Now this next point, which I also do not directly attribute to you, was that the devs removed the turn speed because popular opinion deemed that it was unfair for sentinels to be able to kill people at any significant range.

My problem is not any one person's ideas on a nerf. In fact even though I firmly disagree that it is the solution, is well thought out and grounded in the functional reality of the game.

My worry is that the people who want certain combinations of nerfs gaining traction. It's like what happened with the Minscout recently. One PARTICULAR nerf wasn't the killer. It was the combination.

And it wasn't JUST the sentinels. The assaults and logis were up in arms too because they were getting pasted by either HMGs or Shotty/NK from both directions.

Just because scouts were obnoxious did not mean that heavies weren't. That was about when I changed my tune about the HMG. I realized it would shift right back to Sentinel514 the instant scouts were nerfed.

Don't mistake me attacking your assertions with me attacking YOU. Just because I (wildly) disagree with you does NOT mean I automatically assume you are an idiot or 100%wrong.

My problem is the assertion that sentinels are supposed to be CQC. I don't remember or care if it is YOUR assertion. The fact that if we simply delete the HMG nothing will change because we'll immediately swap to rifles is real. It won't change the attrition war hellgrind meta in CQC vs. Fatties at all.

I firmly believe that if we want fatties to be balanced we need to make the optimal activity something other than turtling up in tight spaces with a logi indulging in a weird bromance.

I dunno how else to say it. The precedent is there, the logic is there, it's happened before.

But the rallying cry of the masses is "heavies are CQC. End. Stop."

Why is that? It only makes sense if they're trying to convince the devs that this nerf, then this one... then that...

Individually the nerfs are innocuous. Together they make the heavies into easy warpoint batteries. Counters that are dependent on the enemy to be a moron aren't counters. It wasn't with tanks, nor was it with scouts, nor now with HMGS. It'll never be a counter.

Gunlogis don't use nitro, maddy's do.

ah I see. So that's why as soon as they see a scout with a PLC and flux grenades their shield hardeners kick on and they bolt out of there so fast I thought I was having uprising 1.7 flashbacks...
Gunnlogis use the hell out of nitro bc if they didn't I'd slap 3 remotes on, flux, PLC and then push the button and they'd turn into fireworks.
You can speak for how you play, but you can't speak for how everyone plays

Imagine what happens if flux AV nades become a thing

Then basic flux nades will be nerfed? Likely to the point of being equipment breakers only. I fear the day, as flux grenades are one of only a couple hybrid ant-infantry+av weapons available

When 2 competent squads colide with each other on ambush the game gets stale till one squad earns a OB. Im sure alot of players experienced this on the large bridge with alot of installations on it. One side manages to get uplinks on the bridge and the other side camps on the hill.

Now competent squad A has amarr assaults with lasers to keep firing at competent squad B which is shield tanked and is using rail rifles. Squad A will get kills more frequently aswell generating WP by taking damage which can be repaired with the help of logis. Squad B has no way to keep up with squad A in terms of WP generation. What follows is that squad A will get a orbital strike, drop it on squad B and then overruns the opposition in a all out assault.

The assault cannot be stopped once in motion due to the ambush spawn mechanic. Similar things can be seen on the gallente research facility by playing domination. if you are loosing get some armor plated sentinels, let them take damage to repair, earn OB, assault the objective and barricade yourself in there with ++bertanked heavys and repping logis. Shields are not competetive as long the logistic gap is not closed.

The logistics gap isn't the problem. It clouds the problem. No one complains about a logi attached to a galassault's hip. Nor do people complain about logis attached to sentinels in the open.

So is the logi making the sentinel unfair?

Or is the sentinel being able to force combat in terrain where he can minimize any chance of a flank making the logi more potent?

Sentinels are entirely too good at attrition warfare to be a good thing in CQC. In the open, assaults can freely maneuver into a superior position Which allows a skilled assault to kill the geavy regardless of weapon. In CQC the assault gets funnelled directly into close quarters with a weapon-resistant heavy with twice to three times his EHP. That's a losing prospect even if the fatty is using a sidearm.

In the open the logi can help. But you don't need to drop an RE down the heavy's pants to get to him.

The less advantageous CQC is for sentinels, the faster the fatty/logi synergy breaks down to manageable levels.

I think I'd like to understand what you're saying, but I can't really make out what this statement was supposed to be. are you saying the only thing wrong with the assault hmg is dispersion at longer ranges and that with that fixed a damage buff wont be necessary? Sorry for my difficulty comprehending, please clarify this for me if you are able.

Sorry, i used google translator a little, but this i write without translator:
I want to say that i have big problems with my hmg, the shoots fly anywere, but not in the center from the circle (small point) the sprinkle/dispersion/scatter (didn't know the right word #english not good) by the assault hmg is unnecessary, because when you take it in short range (10m) you don't make more damage, because in near field with normal hmg you hit the enemy with "every" shoot and so the normal will winns against the assoult havy! Do you understand me now?

Sorry, i used google translator a little, but this i write without translator:
I want to say that i have big problems with my hmg, the shoots fly anywere, but not in the center from the circle (small point) the sprinkle/dispersion/scatter (didn't know the right word #english not good) by the assault hmg is unnecessary, because when you take it in short range (10m) you don't make more damage, because in near field with normal hmg you hit the enemy with "every" shoot and so the normal will winns against the assoult havy! Do you understand me now?

Turrets

Small Turrets
In our efforts to make the Small Blaster turret the Anti-Infantry turret it is supposed to be, we have reduced dispersion considerably, and used the same mechanic that HMG has, which is inverse dispersion, the weapon becomes more accurate over time. Utilizing some of the new Vehicle modules, our hope is that the Small Blaster becomes a real threat on the battlefield.

ThatGÇÖs it for now, please let us know your thoughts and give us constructive feedback.

I didn't originally suggest this in the new HAV thread because I'm not an expert on HAVs, but would returning the large missile turret to it's pre-1.7 operation mode (4 shot salvos) with a hybrid AV-AI functionality be preferable to the current suggestion?

By the way, did anyone so far agree with the size of the AScR buff?

Sorry, i used google translator a little, but this i write without translator:
I want to say that i have big problems with my hmg, the shoots fly anywere, but not in the center from the circle (small point) the sprinkle/dispersion/scatter (didn't know the right word #english not good) by the assault hmg is unnecessary, because when you take it in short range (10m) you don't make more damage, because in near field with normal hmg you hit the enemy with "every" shoot and so the normal will winns against the assoult havy! Do you understand me now?

"Different experiences", like Breakin statedGǪ

Overall, for the majority of the players who try using the small blaster turrets, I think the Echo adjustment IS really needed.

Plasma Cannons
These are, as demonstrated by the community, the worst AV weapon currently, and outclassed by the Swarm Launcher. Increasing reload speed, dps or flight speed, would make it too good against infantry, so we just went with a solid 13% increase in damage across all tiers. This will be good for those Anti-Shield Starter loadouts.

Dear players,

We have been working on Hotfix Echo,GǪ

Starter Loadouts


Basic Medium Frames


Movement


Game Modes and Maps


Handheld Weapons

Heavy Machine Guns


Assault Scrambler Rifles


Plasma Cannons


Equipment
Deployables


Cloak Fields


Dropsuit Modules

It's unjust to players, and unjust to all the prolific effort you put into these changes, if you ask players to log into their game, then log out to have to visit a forum to get educated on the changes, and have to log back into Dust to finally start playing with a full understanding of what's different.

Any chance that switching from an unactivated cloak to either eq or weapon will be 'fixed' or are you still not able to code? 'If $cloak='on' then let $swapping ='slow'?

OnCloakStatusChange += function(CloakEventArgs e) { SwapSlow == e.IsActive }

Dropsuit Shield and Armor tanking are currently at pretty good parity.

Wondering how a max level min assault with myofibers and hep mods will do...?

Thoughts or whatever they call those brain things:

A heavy shouldn't have to put on a module just to transverse basic terrain

Oh, I would like to echo though, that Heavies really should have slightly better jumping out-of-the-box.
The idea that they have to fit a module just to overcome immersion breaking hamster walls is pretty unfair. :\