DUST Search - Small Turrets as Heavy weapons?

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Small Turrets as Heavy weapons?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10067	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:20:00 - [1] - Quote What would you guys think about the idea for having some Small Turrets as Heavy weapons? They wouldn't perform in the same exact way because it's being held by a footsoldier but in general it's the same weapon re-purposed for infantry use. Imagine a small blaster Turret for Gallente Heavies. It would overheat at a much higher rate and be most inaccurate past 30 meters with constant firing but under that you'd wreck with profound DPS IF you can discipline yourself with managing overheat. It wouldn't have nearly as much ammo as the vehicle mounted one but still great for general infantry use. Imagine a Caldari Heavy with a shoulder mountain Small Rail Turret similarly to how the Heavy Frame Carries a Plasma Cannon. The functionality difference between the Small Rail to infantry small rail would be that the Fire Rate is much,much slower because the heavy as to compensate for the huge amount of recoil that comes with the small Rail. It's not as accurate firing in consecutive shots as you'd imagine and the mag size is not as big as the vehicle variant. So what do you guys think? We'd get more Heavy weapons and a Shield heavy weapon out of this idea, plu we already have the assets for them mostly. It's a great opportunity to add diversity and individuality to this game *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9470	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:32:00 - [2] - Quote I think you support ISIS. In all seriousness, it'd be pretty cool - I might actually spec into Sentinels if they had a Gallente weapon (small blaster) but that would also require small blasters to be worth a damn as they currently aren't. Though, I kind of fear that this would take incentive out of actually making LAVs and such -good- if we just focused on balancing the weapon(s) in Sentinel hands... I'd really like to see the LAV become a real suppression platform instead of just a free kill to anyone who can aim. It's a good idea but I'm really mixed about it. Can you make a Pros/Cons T-Chart? Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10068	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:38:00 - [3] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: I think you support ISIS. In all seriousness, it'd be pretty cool - I might actually spec into Sentinels if they had a Gallente weapon (small blaster) but that would also require small blasters to be worth a damn as they currently aren't. Though, I kind of fear that this would take incentive out of actually making LAVs and such -good- if we just focused on balancing the weapon(s) in Sentinel hands... I'd really like to see the LAV become a real suppression platform instead of just a free kill to anyone who can aim. It's a good idea but I'm really mixed about it. Can you make a Pros/Cons T-Chart? Well the Primary con of having the weapon that's meant to be for vehicles on infantry is that it wouldn't be as effective as it is mounted on a vehicle, plus. much, much less mobile but I will make a pros and cons list for each one. For other people, notice I lefted out Small Missile Turrets for obvious reasons :P *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10068	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:52:00 - [4] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: It's a good idea but I'm really mixed about it. Can you make a Pros/Cons T-Chart? And done *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3158	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:53:00 - [5] - Quote What a terrible idea. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 23092	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:55:00 - [6] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: What a terrible idea. What an insightful comment. Gallente Guide one day i may leave the basement but that day is not today
Mobius Wyvern Sky-FIRE 5900	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:55:00 - [7] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: MY TANK IS BEING THREATENED HOW DARE YOU Your opinion is noted and ignored. I support Keshava for Gallente Specialist HAV R.I.P. Kesha
Zaria Min Deir 0uter.Heaven Back and Forth 1309	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:57:00 - [8] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: What a terrible idea. What a fantastic, indepth analysis of the proposal. I admit that for a moment I thought there was some merit to this idea, but I feel I can't help but be persuaded to agree with you, with all this objective and constructive critique you have provided. Thank you. Have you considered installing the improved keyboard? "Go Go Power Rangers!"
Jonny D Buelle Mors Effera 906	Posted - 2015.04.06 17:09:00 - [9] - Quote As much as I want to see these implemented, I want an Amarr heavy weapon and the Gallente Heavy Weapon first. Granted you did propose a Gallente Heavy Weapon however I was looking forward to either a Mortar type weapon or a Plasma Flamethrower. I find your lack of heaviness... disturbing...
JARREL THOMAS Dead Man's Game RUST415 541	Posted - 2015.04.06 17:14:00 - [10] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: What a terrible idea. Go home... your drunk. Caldari Loyalist. LuL ( -í° -£-û -í°)

Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10068	Posted - 2015.04.06 17:16:00 - [11] - Quote Jonny D Buelle wrote: As much as I want to see these implemented, I want an Amarr heavy weapon and the Gallente Heavy Weapon first. Granted you did propose a Gallente Heavy Weapon however I was looking forward to either a Mortar type weapon or a Plasma Flamethrower. Oh, yeah. I still want that plasma Flamethrower. There's no doubt about that, it should definitely come out. This is in addition to the Heavy Weapons that we should already be getting. So you'd have the Small Blaster Heavy weapon and Plasma Mortar or thrower for Gallente. Small Rail Heavy Weapon and Forge for Caldari The Scrambler Lance for Amarr heavy weapons and the Autocannon for Minmatar The turret idea just takes the turrets and makes them usable on heavies. Once Minmatar and Amarr get their turrets we could add those in as well. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7860	Posted - 2015.04.06 17:36:00 - [12] - Quote there's a few problems with the idea, most notably the blaster's DPS overall compared to what's happened in the past with the HMG. Reconciling CQC with 1000+ DPS on a fatsuit is just asking for more screaming and a reversion back to where heavies outnumbered all other classes 3-1 (exaggeration? mebbe. Do I gives a crap? No). AV
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17975	Posted - 2015.04.06 20:48:00 - [13] - Quote Yes and no. I am profoundly terrified of having Small Railgun in the hands on infantry. They are nasty ******* things. GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥ -The Nameless City
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2485	Posted - 2015.04.06 21:03:00 - [14] - Quote I would be horrified by a man portable light rail turret that thing would be horrifically overpowered. I would be much more okay with something like a twin-linked rail weapon, that's a bit of a closer analogue to the 'assault' hmg. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9472	Posted - 2015.04.06 22:33:00 - [15] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: I think you support ISIS. In all seriousness, it'd be pretty cool - I might actually spec into Sentinels if they had a Gallente weapon (small blaster) but that would also require small blasters to be worth a damn as they currently aren't. Though, I kind of fear that this would take incentive out of actually making LAVs and such -good- if we just focused on balancing the weapon(s) in Sentinel hands... I'd really like to see the LAV become a real suppression platform instead of just a free kill to anyone who can aim. It's a good idea but I'm really mixed about it. Can you make a Pros/Cons T-Chart? Well the Primary con of having the weapon that's meant to be for vehicles on infantry is that it wouldn't be as effective as it is mounted on a vehicle, plus. much, much less mobile but I will make a pros and cons list for each one. For other people, notice I lefted out Small Missile Turrets for obvious reasons :P Don't think you understood what I meant by cons. I meant cons as in: - Less incentive to actually balance and develop small turret platforms (why use a paper-thin LAV when I can use a bricked out sentinel?) - Less incentive to actually develop proper heavy weaponry - Potential balance impact on the game as a whole - Community reaction if it **s up (which you know it will) - What would happen if a Sentinel with a small missile turret in hand just jumped out of an HAV with small missiles he was already using. Double jeopardy much? Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? Founder of AIV**
Kierkegaard Soren Corrosive Synergy Rise Of Legion. 739	Posted - 2015.04.06 22:34:00 - [16] - Quote Rail-cannon fat suits would be horrifying. I mean, for the three days that you could use them before the forums succumbed to the raw mass of QQ threads being made and collapsed in upon themselves, forming a new star that pulsed with pure hate, it'd be glorious. Utterly glorious. You'd be turning entire teams into ******* paste and scooping them up with the flat end of your gun to mail back to the customs office for re-processing. Paint the warbarge a new shade of blue or whatever. But no. Dedicated Commando. "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing."
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5698	Posted - 2015.04.06 23:32:00 - [17] - Quote Thing is...the general concepts are pretty damn close as it is Small Blaster is similar to an HMG Small Rail is similar to a Forge Gun Small Missile is similar to a Mass Driver (This one is a bit more of a stretch) Obviously some finer details like fire rate and damage per shot are different, but the general firing mechanics are not all that different. Makes one almost wonder why we didnt simply making light turrets mirror their heavy counterparts in the first place, or vice versa. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Megaman Trigger Ready to Play 255	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:08:00 - [18] - Quote For a Gallente Heavy weapon, I've always liked the idea of a Plasma version of the Assault Forge Gun. Too much Stargate SG1? maybe. But I still like the idea. Purifier. First Class.
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 3034	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:32:00 - [19] - Quote I'm not sure that it would work well, seeing as small blasters are basically upgraded PR's with a slight dispersion (if it's used in infantry range, it would be much more slight), and rails being upgraded RR's with heat. Both of them would just nuke infantry that they hit, but if they were adjusted in some way, like say less ammo and more heat due to being carried, I think it would then be more fair. Also, MTAC's. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 3034	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:34:00 - [20] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Thing is...the general concepts are pretty damn close as it is Small Blaster is similar to an HMG Small Rail is similar to a Forge Gun Small Missile is similar to a Mass Driver (This one is a bit more of a stretch) Obviously some finer details like fire rate and damage per shot are different, but the general firing mechanics are not all that different. Makes one almost wonder why we didnt simply making light turrets mirror their heavy counterparts in the first place, or vice versa. Small rails are more of big ass RR's, and small Rockets are more of big ass FL's imo. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5703	Posted - 2015.04.07 01:21:00 - [21] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Thing is...the general concepts are pretty damn close as it is Small Blaster is similar to an HMG Small Rail is similar to a Forge Gun Small Missile is similar to a Mass Driver (This one is a bit more of a stretch) Obviously some finer details like fire rate and damage per shot are different, but the general firing mechanics are not all that different. Makes one almost wonder why we didnt simply making light turrets mirror their heavy counterparts in the first place, or vice versa. Small rails are more of big ass RR's, and small Rockets are more of big ass FL's imo. And you could probably consider RR's as very small Assault Forge Guns. The point I'm making is that its a chart to fire mechanic, hell even the Charge Sniper rifle is basically a mini Forge Gun. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10073	Posted - 2015.04.07 05:42:00 - [22] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: I'm not sure that it would work well, seeing as small blasters are basically upgraded PR's with a slight dispersion (if it's used in infantry range, it would be much more slight), and rails being upgraded RR's with heat. Both of them would just nuke infantry that they hit, but if they were adjusted in some way, like say less ammo and more heat due to being carried, I think it would then be more fair. Also, MTAC's. I literally said what you said already in the original post. Dumping the Small Turrets into Heavy hands as is without changing them should be a fairly obvious bad idea to everyone. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Kinyuhk Goluhh Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 24	Posted - 2015.04.07 06:02:00 - [23] - Quote Uhm...they kind of are already made into infantry usage. Forge Gun = Rail Gun HMG = Pulse Cannon Plasma Cannon = Rocket Launcher Sorry if that's mixed up because those names are messed up in-game!(Last time I checked) Rail Gun turret should be the full-auto fire and Pulse Cannon should be the charge blast but they're not and that confuses me....and that Pulse Cannon/Plasma Cannon mixes me up! Anyway, we'd basically have the same thing if they did that. No point. 4/1/2015 at 3:05pm history was made. CCP Rattati announced the new matchmaking system.
Lady MDK Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 347	Posted - 2015.04.07 06:54:00 - [24] - Quote Not saying this is a bad idea necessarily but I would rather see light or other heavy weapons properties and effects modified for heavy use...... AMAR - Gold forge gun firing lasers but slowing its users speed and rotation while firing. GAL - plasma cannon that fires a similar shot to a forge but short range and also slows the user down somewhat. Anyone getting annoyed by reading of the above post should consider the following. I don't care so neither should you :)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7863	Posted - 2015.04.07 11:54:00 - [25] - Quote Lady MDK wrote: Not saying this is a bad idea necessarily but I would rather see light or other heavy weapons properties and effects modified for heavy use...... AMAR - Gold forge gun firing lasers but slowing its users speed and rotation while firing. GAL - plasma cannon that fires a similar shot to a forge but short range and also slows the user down somewhat. Slowing rotation speed while firing a laser actually helps more than it hinders. Keeping a laser beam on contact is harder than it seems AV
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 10075	Posted - 2015.04.07 14:37:00 - [26] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Lady MDK wrote: Not saying this is a bad idea necessarily but I would rather see light or other heavy weapons properties and effects modified for heavy use...... AMAR - Gold forge gun firing lasers but slowing its users speed and rotation while firing. GAL - plasma cannon that fires a similar shot to a forge but short range and also slows the user down somewhat. Slowing rotation speed while firing a laser actually helps more than it hinders. Keeping a laser beam on contact is harder than it seems Much, much harder than it seems. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Regnier Feros Pielords 271	Posted - 2015.04.07 17:10:00 - [27] - Quote Hawk missile launcher activated "You're like a she-male.. hates gym, doesn't know how to be alpha.. you'll stay in the friendzone for life" -Senpai
XxWarlordxX97 BurgezzE.T.F 4418	Posted - 2015.04.07 17:42:00 - [28] - Quote Strafing with Ion blaster turret, Lets do it I don't rage,I get even Close beta Pro heavy
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 762	Posted - 2015.04.08 02:28:00 - [29] - Quote Interesting idea. Not sure if it is a good or idea or not. But interesting.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.