DUST Search - Splash damage for large rail tank turret?

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Splash damage for large rail tank turret?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.20 19:53:00 - [1] - Quote Come on... Zoom isn't good. 100-110HP for 3 meters to destroy equipments would improve the playability of rail tanks. Regressed to blueberry level.
XxBlazikenxX Pure Evil. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 3	Posted - 2015.10.21 02:47:00 - [2] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Come on... Zoom isn't good. 100-110HP for 3 meters to destroy equipments would improve the playability of rail tanks. It used to have splash damage. Director of Pure Evil. Pure Evil. is mass recruiting, apply today and join a war of the Bleeding Sun vs everyone!
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.10.21 04:52:00 - [3] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Zoom isn't good. Tell it to the Forge Gunners. You want splash damage? Use a Missile Turret, you only sacrifice 50m. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
XxBlazikenxX Pure Evil. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 3	Posted - 2015.10.21 04:54:00 - [4] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: shaman oga wrote: Zoom isn't good. Tell it to the Forge Gunners. You want splash damage? Use a Missile Turret, you only sacrifice 50m. Horrible splash radius, but still feasible for AI work if you can get good at it. Director of Pure Evil. Pure Evil. is mass recruiting, apply today and join a war of the Bleeding Sun vs everyone!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 21	Posted - 2015.10.21 06:00:00 - [5] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Come on... Zoom isn't good. 100-110HP for 3 meters to destroy equipments would improve the playability of rail tanks. 100? Too low. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Meee One Amakakeru-Ryu-no-Hirameki 1	Posted - 2015.10.21 09:49:00 - [6] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Come on... Zoom isn't good. 100-110HP for 3 meters to destroy equipments would improve the playability of rail tanks. Splash was removed to destroy it's anti-infantry ability,which at the time it accelerated at. No,it'll only be used to kill infantry again. Official Blueberry of the Forums. Title given by my #1 fan Sgt Kirk.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.21 11:24:00 - [7] - Quote Meee One wrote: Splash was removed to destroy it's anti-infantry ability,which at the time it accelerated at. No,it'll only be used to kill infantry again. 100-110hp splash for a little area would not be so good to slay at range, considering that every infantry target with little HP could easily avoid, while tanked suits have resistance, more HP and generally the ability to fight back. Little splash would be only useful to destroy equipments and prevent more AV to come in faster or to avoid an AV nades rain. At close range people clearly see where the turret is aiming, making even more easier to dodge. Also it was removed when it was too high and tanks were able to shoot 5 times before overheat, CCP overnerfed rail and now we have no splash for personal defense and also overheat at the 4 consecutive shot. Regressed to blueberry level.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 1	Posted - 2015.10.22 01:35:00 - [8] - Quote Would you be willing to trade useful splash damage for a slower projectile speed? Currently the projectile of both the railgun and forgegun is very fast. It travels to it's maximum range of 400 meters in much less than a second, making it barely necessary to lead a target. A reduced projectile speed would make it much less capable at sniping infantry, which would then be a good reason to reinstate splash damage. This would also put more focus on good aiming rather than trying to stay as close to the maximum range as possible for HAV-v-HAV fights. A skilled HAV driver may be able to use evasive movement to win a fight. I'm thinking of a projectile speed of ~4-500 m/s (still supersonic, despite the lack of a sonic boom) and a splash damage of 150 hp at ~2 meters radius. Remember that at long ranges any evasive moment by infantry will be very tough to account for, since the projectile will take about a second to impact. Static infantry behind cover will have to react however.
Megaman Trigger OSG Planetary Operations 862	Posted - 2015.10.22 11:08:00 - [9] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: Would you be willing to trade useful splash damage for a slower projectile speed? Currently the projectile of both the railgun and forgegun is very fast. It travels to it's maximum range of 400 meters in much less than a second, making it barely necessary to lead a target. A reduced projectile speed would make it much less capable at sniping infantry, which would then be a good reason to reinstate splash damage. This would also put more focus on good aiming rather than trying to stay as close to the maximum range as possible for HAV-v-HAV fights. A skilled HAV driver may be able to use evasive movement to win a fight. I'm thinking of a projectile speed of ~4-500 m/s (still supersonic, despite the lack of a sonic boom) and a splash damage of 150 hp at ~2 meters radius. Remember that at long ranges any evasive moment by infantry will be very tough to account for, since the projectile will take about a second to impact. Static infantry behind cover will have to react however. Large Rail and Forge range is 300m. Purifier. First Class.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.22 11:23:00 - [10] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: Would you be willing to trade useful splash damage for a slower projectile speed? Currently the projectile of both the railgun and forgegun is very fast. It travels to it's maximum range of 400 meters in much less than a second, making it barely necessary to lead a target. A reduced projectile speed would make it much less capable at sniping infantry, which would then be a good reason to reinstate splash damage. This would also put more focus on good aiming rather than trying to stay as close to the maximum range as possible for HAV-v-HAV fights. A skilled HAV driver may be able to use evasive movement to win a fight. I'm thinking of a projectile speed of ~4-500 m/s (still supersonic, despite the lack of a sonic boom) and a splash damage of 150 hp at ~2 meters radius. Remember that at long ranges any evasive moment by infantry will be very tough to account for, since the projectile will take about a second to impact. Static infantry behind cover will have to react however. I like the idea, but charge time is must be shortened. Regressed to blueberry level.

Megaman Trigger OSG Planetary Operations 862	Posted - 2015.10.22 11:38:00 - [11] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Stefan Stahl wrote: Would you be willing to trade useful splash damage for a slower projectile speed? Currently the projectile of both the railgun and forgegun is very fast. It travels to it's maximum range of 400 meters in much less than a second, making it barely necessary to lead a target. A reduced projectile speed would make it much less capable at sniping infantry, which would then be a good reason to reinstate splash damage. This would also put more focus on good aiming rather than trying to stay as close to the maximum range as possible for HAV-v-HAV fights. A skilled HAV driver may be able to use evasive movement to win a fight. I'm thinking of a projectile speed of ~4-500 m/s (still supersonic, despite the lack of a sonic boom) and a splash damage of 150 hp at ~2 meters radius. Remember that at long ranges any evasive moment by infantry will be very tough to account for, since the projectile will take about a second to impact. Static infantry behind cover will have to react however. I like the idea, but charge time is must be shortened. Why does the charge time need to be shortened? Purifier. First Class.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.22 12:01:00 - [12] - Quote Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: Stefan Stahl wrote: Would you be willing to trade useful splash damage for a slower projectile speed? Currently the projectile of both the railgun and forgegun is very fast. It travels to it's maximum range of 400 meters in much less than a second, making it barely necessary to lead a target. A reduced projectile speed would make it much less capable at sniping infantry, which would then be a good reason to reinstate splash damage. This would also put more focus on good aiming rather than trying to stay as close to the maximum range as possible for HAV-v-HAV fights. A skilled HAV driver may be able to use evasive movement to win a fight. I'm thinking of a projectile speed of ~4-500 m/s (still supersonic, despite the lack of a sonic boom) and a splash damage of 150 hp at ~2 meters radius. Remember that at long ranges any evasive moment by infantry will be very tough to account for, since the projectile will take about a second to impact. Static infantry behind cover will have to react however. I like the idea, but charge time is must be shortened. Why does the charge time need to be shortened? With his proposal i mean, while on other weapons you can control charge time (except ass FG), with large rails you can't, add charge time + bullet travel time and DPS will drop, also if you charge but don't shoot you have to wait cooldown, that is not a nice thing. Regressed to blueberry level.
Megaman Trigger OSG Planetary Operations 862	Posted - 2015.10.22 12:45:00 - [13] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: Stefan Stahl wrote: Would you be willing to trade useful splash damage for a slower projectile speed? Currently the projectile of both the railgun and forgegun is very fast. It travels to it's maximum range of 400 meters in much less than a second, making it barely necessary to lead a target. A reduced projectile speed would make it much less capable at sniping infantry, which would then be a good reason to reinstate splash damage. This would also put more focus on good aiming rather than trying to stay as close to the maximum range as possible for HAV-v-HAV fights. A skilled HAV driver may be able to use evasive movement to win a fight. I'm thinking of a projectile speed of ~4-500 m/s (still supersonic, despite the lack of a sonic boom) and a splash damage of 150 hp at ~2 meters radius. Remember that at long ranges any evasive moment by infantry will be very tough to account for, since the projectile will take about a second to impact. Static infantry behind cover will have to react however. I like the idea, but charge time is must be shortened. Why does the charge time need to be shortened? With his proposal i mean, while on other weapons you can control charge time (except ass FG), with large rails you can't, add charge time + bullet travel time and DPS will drop, also if you charge but don't shoot you have to wait cooldown, that is not a nice thing. how much of a DPS drop would this proposal bring? Purifier. First Class.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:08:00 - [14] - Quote IDK, it would be range dependent. The only thing i was asking for was a little splash to destroy equipments, idk why the thread took another road. Regressed to blueberry level.
XxBlazikenxX Pure Evil. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 3	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:11:00 - [15] - Quote Or maybe we introduce an Assault Railgun variant (similar to the AFG) where it has decent splash damage + radius and a shortened charge time at the cost of less damage per direct hit. Director of Pure Evil. Pure Evil. is mass recruiting, apply today and join a war of the Bleeding Sun vs everyone!
Megaman Trigger OSG Planetary Operations 866	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:22:00 - [16] - Quote shaman oga wrote: IDK, it would be range dependent. The only thing i was asking for was a little splash to destroy equipments, idk why the thread took another road. You can't ask for a buff to something that's working perfectly well without having something tuned down in balance. Purifier. First Class.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:27:00 - [17] - Quote Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: IDK, it would be range dependent. The only thing i was asking for was a little splash to destroy equipments, idk why the thread took another road. You can't ask for a buff to something that's working perfectly well without having something tuned down in balance. The problem is that it does not work perfectly well, it was overpowered, then it has been nerfed, unfortunately CCP swinged the nerf bat a little too hard. Regressed to blueberry level.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:29:00 - [18] - Quote XxBlazikenxX wrote: Or maybe we introduce an Assault Railgun variant (similar to the AFG) where it has decent splash damage + radius and a shortened charge time at the cost of less damage per direct hit. On spot, the only thing that still baffles me is why aFG still does more damage than vanilla version, can't uderstand. Regressed to blueberry level.
Megaman Trigger OSG Planetary Operations 869	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:31:00 - [19] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: IDK, it would be range dependent. The only thing i was asking for was a little splash to destroy equipments, idk why the thread took another road. You can't ask for a buff to something that's working perfectly well without having something tuned down in balance. The problem is that it does not work perfectly well, it was overpowered, then it has been nerfed, unfortunately CCP swinged the nerf bat a little too hard. So where is it lacking? Besides when used as an anti-infantry weapon, which is fine since it's meant to be an AV weapon. Purifier. First Class.
XxBlazikenxX Pure Evil. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 3	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:33:00 - [20] - Quote shaman oga wrote: XxBlazikenxX wrote: Or maybe we introduce an Assault Railgun variant (similar to the AFG) where it has decent splash damage + radius and a shortened charge time at the cost of less damage per direct hit. On spot, the only thing that still baffles me is why aFG still does more damage than vanilla version, can't uderstand. It shouldn't do more damage. I believe that the Vanilla Forge Gun does more damage. Let me check though. Director of Pure Evil. Pure Evil. is mass recruiting, apply today and join a war of the Bleeding Sun vs everyone!

XxBlazikenxX Pure Evil. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 3	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:35:00 - [21] - Quote So 1200 damage for the Vanilla FG and..... 1260 damage for the AFG Wait what? That makes no sense. I think the Vanilla Forge should do more damage. Director of Pure Evil. Pure Evil. is mass recruiting, apply today and join a war of the Bleeding Sun vs everyone!
Megaman Trigger OSG Planetary Operations 871	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:42:00 - [22] - Quote XxBlazikenxX wrote: shaman oga wrote: XxBlazikenxX wrote: Or maybe we introduce an Assault Railgun variant (similar to the AFG) where it has decent splash damage + radius and a shortened charge time at the cost of less damage per direct hit. On spot, the only thing that still baffles me is why aFG still does more damage than vanilla version, can't uderstand. It shouldn't do more damage. I believe that the Vanilla Forge Gun does more damage. Let me check though. Proto AFG does 1500 while Proto vanilla is 1440. Vanilla FG is overshadowed by the AFG; the latter has better charge, better DPS and a minor advantage in Alpha. All the vanilla has going for it is being able to hold a charge without being anchored to one spot, unlike the BFG. Purifier. First Class.
XxBlazikenxX Pure Evil. Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 3	Posted - 2015.10.22 17:43:00 - [23] - Quote Megaman Trigger wrote: XxBlazikenxX wrote: shaman oga wrote: XxBlazikenxX wrote: Or maybe we introduce an Assault Railgun variant (similar to the AFG) where it has decent splash damage + radius and a shortened charge time at the cost of less damage per direct hit. On spot, the only thing that still baffles me is why aFG still does more damage than vanilla version, can't uderstand. It shouldn't do more damage. I believe that the Vanilla Forge Gun does more damage. Let me check though. Proto AFG does 1500 while Proto vanilla is 1440. Vanilla FG is overshadowed by the AFG; the latter has better charge, better DPS and a minor advantage in Alpha. All the vanilla has going for it is being able to hold a charge without being anchored to one spot, unlike the BFG. Yep, explained that in the above post. Director of Pure Evil. Pure Evil. is mass recruiting, apply today and join a war of the Bleeding Sun vs everyone!
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.22 18:28:00 - [24] - Quote Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: IDK, it would be range dependent. The only thing i was asking for was a little splash to destroy equipments, idk why the thread took another road. You can't ask for a buff to something that's working perfectly well without having something tuned down in balance. The problem is that it does not work perfectly well, it was overpowered, then it has been nerfed, unfortunately CCP swinged the nerf bat a little too hard. So where is it lacking? Besides when used as an anti-infantry weapon, which is fine since it's meant to be an AV weapon. It lacks at basic personal defense, especially on shield tanks. Regressed to blueberry level.
Megaman Trigger OSG Planetary Operations 872	Posted - 2015.10.22 19:08:00 - [25] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: IDK, it would be range dependent. The only thing i was asking for was a little splash to destroy equipments, idk why the thread took another road. You can't ask for a buff to something that's working perfectly well without having something tuned down in balance. The problem is that it does not work perfectly well, it was overpowered, then it has been nerfed, unfortunately CCP swinged the nerf bat a little too hard. So where is it lacking? Besides when used as an anti-infantry weapon, which is fine since it's meant to be an AV weapon. It lacks at basic personal defense, especially on shield tanks. So it's vulnerable at close ranges? Is that not the point? Excel at range, vulnerable up close. Purifier. First Class.
Meee One Amakakeru-Ryu-no-Hirameki 1	Posted - 2015.10.22 19:34:00 - [26] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: shaman oga wrote: IDK, it would be range dependent. The only thing i was asking for was a little splash to destroy equipments, idk why the thread took another road. You can't ask for a buff to something that's working perfectly well without having something tuned down in balance. The problem is that it does not work perfectly well, it was overpowered, then it has been nerfed, unfortunately CCP swinged the nerf bat a little too hard. So where is it lacking? Besides when used as an anti-infantry weapon, which is fine since it's meant to be an AV weapon. It lacks at basic personal defense, especially on shield tanks. It's too bad HAVs can't have equippable small turrets that are specifically made to kill infantry... Oh wait... Official Blueberry of the Forums. Title given by my #1 fan Sgt Kirk.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.22 21:48:00 - [27] - Quote Meee One wrote: It's too bad HAVs can't have equippable small turrets that are specifically made to kill infantry... Oh wait... 2/10 When little turret will have an AI similar to installation you can come back with this argument. Megaman Trigger wrote: So it's vulnerable at close ranges? Is that not the point? Excel at range, vulnerable up close. I would say decent at range, defenseless up close, but that's a POV. Regressed to blueberry level.
Meee One Amakakeru-Ryu-no-Hirameki 1	Posted - 2015.10.23 05:19:00 - [28] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Meee One wrote: It's too bad HAVs can't have equippable small turrets that are specifically made to kill infantry... Oh wait... 2/10 When little turret will have an AI similar to installation you can come back with this argument. Mm hmm i thought so,you refuse to use teamwork and suggested this pretending to be innocent by saying "destroy equipments". Yet you shouldn't need so much damage unless you will be specifically hunting dropsuits. Your lie is exposed. Official Blueberry of the Forums. Title given by my #1 fan Sgt Kirk.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 4	Posted - 2015.10.23 11:29:00 - [29] - Quote Meee One wrote: shaman oga wrote: Meee One wrote: It's too bad HAVs can't have equippable small turrets that are specifically made to kill infantry... Oh wait... 2/10 When little turret will have an AI similar to installation you can come back with this argument. Mm hmm i thought so,you refuse to use teamwork and suggested this pretending to be innocent by saying "destroy equipments". Yet you shouldn't need so much damage unless you will be specifically hunting dropsuits. Your lie is exposed. 100hp are proto equipment hp, that what is needed to destroy equipment. If equipment had 50 or 25 hp, i would have requested 50 or 25. Regressed to blueberry level.
Megaman Trigger OSG Planetary Operations 876	Posted - 2015.10.23 11:57:00 - [30] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Meee One wrote: shaman oga wrote: Meee One wrote: It's too bad HAVs can't have equippable small turrets that are specifically made to kill infantry... Oh wait... 2/10 When little turret will have an AI similar to installation you can come back with this argument. Mm hmm i thought so,you refuse to use teamwork and suggested this pretending to be innocent by saying "destroy equipments". Yet you shouldn't need so much damage unless you will be specifically hunting dropsuits. Your lie is exposed. 100hp are proto equipment hp, that what is needed to destroy equipment. If equipment had 50 or 25 hp, i would have requested 50 or 25. Why not rely on your squad to clear equipment? Purifier. First Class.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page