Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Alena Ventrallis
Commando Perkone Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
1. Take the solo HAV model, color it something like bright red to make it stand out from HAVs.
2. Lower their base health and regen, lower slot count and lower fitting, to make them less able to take sustained AV fire than tanks.
3. Use the large turret models, color them bright red or whatever, and rebalance them against fighting infantry. Better splash radius and lower dispersion, but lower DPS and magazine size. They are better at killing infantry, but cannot sustain their fire for long.
4. No small turrets, give it 6 passenger slots like the DS have. Only turret is the "medium" turret controlled by the driver.
Basic idea is they can drop off a squad and provide some support to cover their passenger's advance on an objective. Their turrets will be good at killing/suppressing infantry, while their lower stats (health, regen, slots, fitting) ensures they will be easily dispatched by AV, and they will be stomped by HAVs, whose role is supposed to be destroying vehicles anyway. This gives us several things
A) a ground transport vehicle. B) a vehicle that we can balance around engaging infantry at the cost of their abaility to engage vehicles. C) a reason for HAVs to dedicate to anti-vehicle instead of trying to be both AP and AV. D) new content that uses no new art assets. E) something new for AV to blow up.
I'll draw up a spreadsheet if people think the idea holds promise.
Whirly gun make much thunder! - Victor
|
Lightning35 Delta514
48TH SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCE
667
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
That would be op when you fight tanks. 6 members pop out with av and it can destroy any tank. Plus it's faster so you can escape.
CEO of 48th Special Operations Force
Twitter-@48SOF
|
Alena Ventrallis
Commando Perkone Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Lightning35 Delta514 wrote:That would be op when you fight tanks. 6 members pop out with av and it can destroy any tank. Plus it's faster so you can escape. Where did I say the t was faster? And having that many people coordinated should wreck a tank.
Whirly gun make much thunder! - Victor
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Not sure I agree with how your turrets work out in the end. Splash damage should be something that is put on powerful larger calibre turrets. Not anti infantry guns.
"Crush all who complain!"
- Arkena Wyrnspire
|
deezy dabest
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
I was thinking more like a python with wheels when I heard ad hoc MAV. |
fragmentedhackslash
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
372
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:1. Take the solo HAV model, color it something like bright red to make it stand out from HAVs.
2. Lower their base health and regen, lower slot count and lower fitting, to make them less able to take sustained AV fire than tanks.
3. Use the large turret models, color them bright red or whatever, and rebalance them against fighting infantry. Better splash radius and lower dispersion, but lower DPS and magazine size. They are better at killing infantry, but cannot sustain their fire for long.
4. No small turrets, give it 6 passenger slots like the DS have. Only turret is the "medium" turret controlled by the driver.
Basic idea is they can drop off a squad and provide some support to cover their passenger's advance on an objective. Their turrets will be good at killing/suppressing infantry, while their lower stats (health, regen, slots, fitting) ensures they will be easily dispatched by AV, and they will be stomped by HAVs, whose role is supposed to be destroying vehicles anyway. This gives us several things
A) a ground transport vehicle. B) a vehicle that we can balance around engaging infantry at the cost of their abaility to engage vehicles. C) a reason for HAVs to dedicate to anti-vehicle instead of trying to be both AP and AV. D) new content that uses no new art assets. E) something new for AV to blow up.
I'll draw up a spreadsheet if people think the idea holds promise.
Looks at the removed Logistics Dropships, looks at OP, looks at removed logistics dropships
*scratches head.
You could just bring back what was previously removed from the game and was a critical piece of hardware that worked.
[49FYD FRAG] INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
|
Alena Ventrallis
Commando Perkone Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:13:00 -
[7] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Not sure I agree with how your turrets work out in the end. Splash damage should be something that is put on powerful larger calibre turrets. Not anti infantry guns. The idea is they are balanced to hit infantry. Splash damage aids in this. Its not set in atone, but the medium turrets are designed around killing infantry.
Whirly gun make much thunder! - Victor
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:True Adamance wrote:Not sure I agree with how your turrets work out in the end. Splash damage should be something that is put on powerful larger calibre turrets. Not anti infantry guns. The idea is they are balanced to hit infantry. Splash damage aids in this. Its not set in atone, but the medium turrets are designed around killing infantry.
I still don't agree with the concept. I feel it only serves to move the potential of large calibre anti tank guns with explosive force further and further from consideration. However I suppose the MAV concept is sound.
"Crush all who complain!"
- Arkena Wyrnspire
|
Alena Ventrallis
Commando Perkone Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 20:43:00 -
[9] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Alena Ventrallis wrote:True Adamance wrote:Not sure I agree with how your turrets work out in the end. Splash damage should be something that is put on powerful larger calibre turrets. Not anti infantry guns. The idea is they are balanced to hit infantry. Splash damage aids in this. Its not set in atone, but the medium turrets are designed around killing infantry. I still don't agree with the concept. I feel it only serves to move the potential of large calibre anti tank guns with explosive force further and further from consideration. However I suppose the MAV concept is sound. These are not large-caliber anti-tank guns I'm proposing. We only have tank guns for models, so we make do.
Whirly gun make much thunder! - Victor
|
deezy dabest
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 00:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
Wouldn't it be better if instead this vehicle lost the large turret and instead just had three turret slots for a "medium" version of all light turrets which have adjusted stats including damage, dispersion, PG and CPU?
Also not sure if it was mentioned but I do not think the driver should be able to operate a turret. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 :: [one page] |