|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
535
   |
Posted - 2015.10.23 17:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
Megaman Trigger wrote:XxBlazikenxX wrote:Mobius Wyvern wrote:I'd prefer bringing the range back up and reducing the rate of fire.
The rate of fire was the only problem with the turret in the first place. I have no idea why the decided to keep that high RoF but reduce the range to the point that it became what is effectively a sawed-off shotgun loaded with slugs. I totally agree, it should basically be the equivalent of the sniper rifle for tanks. Wasn't the range shortened to bring Rails out of the redline/curb redline Rail sniping?
That was part of it, but the larger part of it was to reduce the rail turret's efficacy vs dropships.
Edit: and Redline RDVs in general...Rail Tanks could effectively interdict any and all vehicles a redlined team would call in with relative ease
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
535
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 17:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
XxBlazikenxX wrote:Thaddeus Reynolds wrote:Megaman Trigger wrote:XxBlazikenxX wrote:Mobius Wyvern wrote:I'd prefer bringing the range back up and reducing the rate of fire.
The rate of fire was the only problem with the turret in the first place. I have no idea why the decided to keep that high RoF but reduce the range to the point that it became what is effectively a sawed-off shotgun loaded with slugs. I totally agree, it should basically be the equivalent of the sniper rifle for tanks. Wasn't the range shortened to bring Rails out of the redline/curb redline Rail sniping? That was part of it, but the larger part of it was to reduce the rail turret's efficacy vs dropships. It is not that efficient against dropships unless you have elevation because it does not turn that high.
Well...that implies that the nerf was at least somewhat effective xD
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
541
|
Posted - 2015.10.30 13:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:True Adamance wrote:..... I mean this makes how many '1st or 2nd Generation HAV pilots' complaining about the same things in the same thread all of whom have essentially quit the game for lack of better balance for tanks. At what point did pilots want balanced tanks? @ OP - Vehicles are big targets; why do Rail Turrets need splash damage?
I've always wanted balanced vehicles...people may dissagree on what that means, but there are still a few of us operators who want to see them balanced.
I'm not the OP...but for why do rail turrets need splash damage (when vehicles are such big targets)?
Suppression of infantry and to give the Rail Turret additional utility relative to the other turrets (both of which destroy vehicles and suppress infantry far better than the rail turret...granted the Blaster shouldn't be suppressing in addition to killing infantry as well as it is currently, but it is still a gap that needs addressing.
The OP says for equipment clearing power...which is also one of my personal annoyances with the large railgun...as you can be pointing right at the center of a piece of equipment with the reticule red and still miss, with the impact being to the side of the equipment.
and while the Railgun has a significant range advantage, range utility is balanced (traditionally) vs DPS...not general utility in other ways.
...put it under general Quality of Life changes...the radius and damage don't need to be absolutely massive, even a quarter-meter splash radius would help significantly
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
#PortDust514 ...Preferably to both PS4 and PC
|
|
|
| |
|