| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
   |
Posted - 2012.08.01 09:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello,
CRUs, Supply depot, turrets : All those structures are way too weak and exposed to damage that cannot be compensate with repair guns. It's problematic as more than 90% of the games i play, more than 4 on 5 structures gets taken out.
Turrets:
With a regular assault forge gun, it takes only 5 to 6 shots to take down a turret. I would have thought that those pretty big defensive structure would be a LOT stronger than this. Now, with people who skilled on HAV, a fight between a turret and a tank is just ridiculous. An HAV, even a strong one, shouldnt be able to take down a turret on its own without taking massive risks. Two pretty well armed HAV should take it down. Two basic crappy HAV should get blown up in no time. I mean, those big turrets aren't made to counter infantry are
=> Boost Turrets HP and maybe damages : This would avoid a lot of troubles regarding vehicles just rocking the world at every game.... And it would force some interactions between HAV and infantry. One counting on the other to hack those basterd's down.
=> So HAV can have a shield booster and auto-rep while moving and turrets seems to have the lowest shield regen ever ? Raise it a bit.
=> Avoid direct opposition of turrets. On plateus, starting turrets can directly fire at each other ! It's to whoever reaches the turrets first. That's pretty damn stupid imo.
Regarding CRUs and supply depot:
For those two, being kinda weak and easily destroyed would make sense as they're note defensive structures. Still, they get destroyed way too often for various reason. Either people are stupid destroying the damn thing ( 80% of the time) or the structure is poorly placed.
=> This shouldnt be a problem when corp and commander roles will be implemented as logis and commander will be able to set a new supply depot \ CRUs \ etc... on various spots. But, in high sec where those functions will never be available, there should be ways to have destroyed structures back in the game. After all, the attacking NPC contracter is actually launching structures when the fight begins. Why couldnt he set up replacement structures something like 3 minutes after it's been destroyed ?
Same goes for defense.
=> It would avoid having a team crippled after only 5 minutes by having no more turrets, CRUs etc.... And get pinned downed at its spawn. Camping the red line wouldnt be so smart if you can have a CRU being dropped in the back spawning 10 ennemies !
=> Regarding poorly placed structures, Plateus is really a piece of work ! Compared to the bigger skirmishes we had last build, it's a complete non-sense : Turrets facing each other at the start ( 2 are blown up after 2 minutes no matter what side). Direct line of fire on the two offensive CRU and even the supply depot (wich is VERY badly placed also)
And i'm not even talking of the 10 sec delay to spawn in the freshly placed CRUs that makes the right attacking CRU pretty much useless if you're facing a decent opposition. Maybe fresh structures should have some sort of anti-hacking system for a couple of minutes.
Destroyable structures so you can offer modes where players are also in charge of dealing with those and set them in the right places ? Good idea. BUT it shouldnt become a building fest either. Investing in a CRU\turret should cost good money to a corp. Thus, limiting building loss should also be an objective. For that, we need stronger stuff.
Suggestions :
=> Add moderate amount of HP to CRU and supply depot. Raise shield regen slightly.
=> Add a good amount of HP tp turrets and raise damage inflicted. Raise shield regen
=> Add a "no-hack" period on fresh structures.
=> Avoid Plateus mistakes. Especially the turrets facing each other. |
Veigar Mordekaiser
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
676
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 09:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
I would be willing to bet that turrets, CRU's. and Supply Depots will all have various models that affect what they do, as well as skills that provide some sort of passive bonuses. I would reckon that turret installations may even be able to be fit with various repair modules or damage boosters. These are probably rather low level structures, I would expect to see stronger ones in upcoming builds. |
Milk Supreme
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
127
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 10:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
Or implement the structure dropping so that you can call down new ones when they get destroyed |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 10:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
Let's address some concerns...
I agree about the turrets. They have next to no function in the game at the moment. Tanks can take them out, infantry can dodge the blaster turrets, and the missile turrets don't do that much splash damage. Perhaps if they raised damage and shield regen, that would be fine. Health, I think, is in a good place. A forge gun taking you out in 5-6 hits... Seems about right.
CRUs and supply depots. Most of the time people blow these up for tactical reasons. For example, I blow up a CRU whenever an enemy has it and it's not beneficial for me to take it. Supply depots, on the other hand, I just hack. They're very useful. I disagree that they're in a bad place - they serve as a support structure, providing a spawn and a resupply. They should have very little defense, rendering them vulnerable. On the other hand, a forge gun taking six shots to take out a CRU, when it takes 6 to take out a turret, is ridiculous. I know this from experience.
You'll be able to call down the turrets, but I don't know about CRUs and supply depots. It would be very useful, and add a whole new element to the game, to add CRU and supply depot dropping. However, you'd need to secure that spot first, with turrets... |
Iceyburnz
316
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 10:26:00 -
[5] - Quote
You've made a lot of good points. However, turret placement is largely a moot point as players will eventually get that honour. 
I still don't understand why the people who designed a fortified emplacement would sit the pilot on the outside of the structure. Like thats a good idea. Turrets should have internal seating. Also placeable bunkers would be nice
|
Dewie Cheecham
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
677
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 10:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Hello,
CRUs, Supply depot, turrets : All those structures are way too weak and exposed to damage that cannot be compensate with repair guns. It's problematic as more than 90% of the games i play, more than 4 on 5 structures gets taken out.
True, killing these is ridiculously easy. We had the same problem in a previous build, where we had a two stage skirmish, and a Marauder would plough through the field, killing the first two objectives in short order, meaning the defenders had no way of winning. (The MCC would never die in time if the first stage were completed with the MCC having more than 60% shield left)
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:
Turrets:
With a regular assault forge gun, it takes only 5 to 6 shots to take down a turret. I would have thought that those pretty big defensive structure would be a LOT stronger than this. Now, with people who skilled on HAV, a fight between a turret and a tank is just ridiculous. An HAV, even a strong one, shouldnt be able to take down a turret on its own without taking massive risks. Two pretty well armed HAV should take it down. Two basic crappy HAV should get blown up in no time. I mean, those big turrets aren't made to counter infantry are
I KNEW those assault riffles were OP. It takes my main gun on the HAV 2-3 shots to kill a turret, or CRU, an AR doing it in 5-6 means that little gun does 1000+ HP damage???
Just kidding.
But a HAV should be able to kill those structures, it is a tank after all, however I'd say it should take a little more than just 2-3 shots. Added danger and risk comes from having to fire at it for longer.
Boost turret and CRU shields significantly, and that'll help a long way to solve the problems.
It should be more beneficial to capture the structures, than to destroy them.
|
carl von oppenheimer
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
158
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 10:49:00 -
[7] - Quote
Iceyburnz wrote:You've made a lot of good points. However, turret placement is largely a moot point as players will eventually get that honour. I still don't understand why the people who designed a fortified emplacement would sit the pilot on the outside of the structure. Like thats a good idea. Turrets should have internal seating. Also placeable bunkers would be nice
Likely because those guns are essentially star ship weapons with an external interface and a pedestal.
Though damage or hit points should go much much higher if the turrets were to give an adequate threat to infantry let alone tanks.
As it is you have to hit a bullseye if you plan on getting kills with a blaster turret, unless it's a scout that gets the hit.
Also over heat could be lower unless the damage is upped.
Missile turrets are so and so but the blast area damage helps area denial on C so missile turret sort of semi works; you don't get that much kills but they think twice on running to blast zone or stopping to hack C.
Rail gun also does kind of ok damage re-charge time is kind of meh for the damage the turret does however.
So what I'm saying is that turrets should be a threat not a speed bump they currently are. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 11:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
Dewie Cheecham wrote:
I KNEW those assault riffles were OP. It takes my main gun on the HAV 2-3 shots to kill a turret, or CRU, an AR doing it in 5-6 means that little gun does 1000+ HP damage???
Just kidding.
I think you misred me. I'm talking about forge guns, not AR 
And i maintain that a regular Forge Gun shouldnt take down a turret in 6 shots. It should be more like 15 shots. Maybe a fully skilled Forge gun could take out those turrets in less than 8-10 shots.
Otherwise, i'm glad to see you guys overall feel the same way about those structures.
I'm well aware that we'll be able to call on those in the future as i mentionned it. But, for some reason i dont see this function being available in High-Sec where battles are set and mostly directed by NPC corp.
on the other hand, i didnt hear anything regarding different types of turrets, CRU etc... But i wouldnt be surprised at all to see that. Even though i dont think we'll get to "fit" those. But again, those "evolved" structures will probably be mostly used on security spaces where battles are fully runned by players. There, the balance is in the hand of the players.
Regarding fight between HAV and turrets, i maintain a heavy HAV shouldnt be able to storm by itsefl a turret with 1-2 guys with decent swarmlaunchers/ AV grenade. A weak HAV shouldnt resist more than 15 seconds.
Why ? because this game is all about teamplay : Remote shield boosters, remote armor repairer etc.. NEEDS to be usefull.
Thus, strong turrets with a decent infantry cover should require from a good HAV player to have backup. Not just roll around everywhere and destroy everything while sipping a fresh fruit cocktail. lol.
I also see you guys think that those first turrets on plateus make absolutely no sense at all. Regarding supply depot, i'm not saying they're all misplaced. Just the first on Plateus for the attackers is a pure gift to the defender. Like the CRU.
When i defend, i rush out from A with my forge : destroy the CRU, then hack the supply depot and snipe every turret\CRU i can see.
=> With decent partners, there's nothing left (both CRU, turrets) in less than 4-5 minutes. And we got a brand new supply depot. Doesnt feel right. Why would an attacker send out structures this far ? Right in front ennemy turrets ? Old Skirmishes were overall solid maps ! With a sort stronghold for defenders. Much more clever.
About the dropping structure function : Yes, we shall be able to call on every kind of structures and more importantly, whatever structures on whatever layout that's the right size. For instance, call out a supply depot where there would usually be a turret or CRU. Same way that on similar "Height maps" the main outpost could be located in various locations etc...
For those who never watched or red anything about the "Scaling the Universe" conference from the last FanFest, i recommand it. It's full of very interesting informations ! Check out youtube or dust514.org. Dust514-france if you're francophone
|
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 12:15:00 -
[9] - Quote
Dewie Cheecham wrote:Boost turret and CRU shields significantly, and that'll help a long way to solve the problems.
It should be more beneficial to capture the structures, than to destroy them.
It is sometimes more beneficial to capture CRU's, but often, after I've capped a point, I find it more beneficial to destroy them. They're easily capped, and no one spawns there when they can spawn at an objective instead, and so they provide a way for the enemy to flank. Supply depots, on the other hand, are very useful. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 12:58:00 -
[10] - Quote
I agree destroying some building is more interesting than a capture sometimes. Especially with CRU.
Thus, i dont suggest we make building Rock-Solid. Just a bit more tough so they dont get blown up by one guy alone in less than a minute. ^^
Or, an option to use a self-destruct hacking sequence could be added. Would take longer to be set up and then maybe 2 minutes to blow up ? |
|
|
Tak Kak
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 13:41:00 -
[11] - Quote
The prototype repair tools should dish out more strength...alot more... |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 13:51:00 -
[12] - Quote
i guess. But even a 60 hp\sec on armor wont compete with the damage of an heavy HAV or forge gun. |
Zeran Haggai
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
196
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 14:02:00 -
[13] - Quote
Veigar Mordekaiser wrote:I would be willing to bet that turrets, CRU's. and Supply Depots will all have various models that affect what they do, as well as skills that provide some sort of passive bonuses. I would reckon that turret installations may even be able to be fit with various repair modules or damage boosters. These are probably rather low level structures, I would expect to see stronger ones in upcoming builds.
^^^This
We already know there's more to come in terms of structures and the ability for players to place them, heck there's even a dropsuit dedicated to it. We are working with basic versions, so of course a bunch of people running around with advanced and proto equipment are demolishing them. Once the proper mechanics for player control are in place i'm sure we'll see advanced and proto versions and likely an entire line of skills devoted to them. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 14:24:00 -
[14] - Quote
could be. Yet Command suit won't be dedicated to structures at all.
Logi will be able to call on some of the structures. (small ones) Most will be called down by the commander (wich may not use suits at all in its MCC) |
Kira Lannister
Hellstorm Inc
League of Infamy
711
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 20:08:00 -
[15] - Quote
Iceyburnz wrote:You've made a lot of good points. However, turret placement is largely a moot point as players will eventually get that honour. I still don't understand why the people who designed a fortified emplacement would sit the pilot on the outside of the structure. Like thats a good idea. Turrets should have internal seating. Also placeable bunkers would be nice
I completely agree! You have this powerful structure and you are completely exposed! Hopefully they change when you can deploy them.
I imagine you can even add shield boosters, and extenders to them. It would be the perfect answer to red lining. Different level of cannons and turrets. It would be like having a stationary tank. |
Chao Wolf
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
209
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 20:20:00 -
[16] - Quote
If I remember correctly in the last build turrets had at least a little cover for the gunners. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 07:40:00 -
[17] - Quote
I really dont think we'll get to fit turrets with shield boosters\extenders and such. Developping building fitting tool wouldnt be that much interesting. Maybe waaaaaay later. |
Veigar Mordekaiser
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
676
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 08:47:00 -
[18] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Dewie Cheecham wrote:
I KNEW those assault riffles were OP. It takes my main gun on the HAV 2-3 shots to kill a turret, or CRU, an AR doing it in 5-6 means that little gun does 1000+ HP damage???
Just kidding.
I think you misred me. I'm talking about forge guns, not AR And i maintain that a regular Forge Gun shouldnt take down a turret in 6 shots. It should be more like 15 shots. Maybe a fully skilled Forge gun could take out those turrets in less than 8-10 shots.
#1 Read the last line of what Dewie said, it explains everything you need to know.
#2 Forge guns have 14 rounds. Killing it in 15... is stupid. Even 8-10 for a fully spec'd one... is stupid. They are made to be very high damage, anti-vehicle/anti-structure weapons. Requiring us to unleash everything we have, would be one hell of a nerf. Heavies, cannot carry nanohives, so turrets would render us effectively useless if we decide to kill those, as half the time we can't get anyone to drop us a damn hive. So the option is blow them up for free points and suck until that godly fellow drops you a hive, or have really annoying damage harass you once in a while.
Now, I say again, we are probably using Militia turrets and installations. When we can actually purchase them, and upgrade them, and skill for them, they will become useful. Until then, I will take my +500 (Turrets +125 x4) at the start of each attacking game. I advise you to do the same. |
Veigar Mordekaiser
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
676
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 08:49:00 -
[19] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:I really dont think we'll get to fit turrets with shield boosters\extenders and such. Developping building fitting tool wouldnt be that much interesting. Maybe waaaaaay later.
A building fitting tool would literally be exactly the same as a dropsuit or vehicle fitting tool... All they would have to do is change the model in the background. I don't see how that wouldn't make sense, we are already using something very similar to the fitting tool in EVE, we just control it with a DS3 rather than a mouse. |
Raynor Ragna
266
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 08:52:00 -
[20] - Quote
Health boosts for structures should be in the form of armor. give it enough so its a miracle that you can take it out in one go (Not being countered for several minutes)... They should be destroyed, but It shouldn't be so quick. With shield regen, it takes out the gorilla tactic of these games. (Thats why I've never bothered to play any FPS with health regen up until now.) |
|
|
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 09:04:00 -
[21] - Quote
Veigar Mordekaiser wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:I really dont think we'll get to fit turrets with shield boosters\extenders and such. Developping building fitting tool wouldnt be that much interesting. Maybe waaaaaay later. A building fitting tool would literally be exactly the same as a dropsuit or vehicle fitting tool... All they would have to do is change the model in the background. I don't see how that wouldn't make sense, we are already using something very similar to the fitting tool in EVE, we just control it with a DS3 rather than a mouse.
I know that....
But adding a new layer of gameplay with customized building isnt just about a menu and a background..... You must add specific game mechanics so those building are now affected by modules. It's work. Also, this would pretty much mean creating new modules. A lot of work too.
And not everyone will have use of this function as not everyone will get to call on buildings to the ground. So may not be that usefull.
And you're mentionning EVE. Well in Eve, you dont get to add modules to your POS gun battery or player owned station etc.. So why would dust offer this possibility ?
=> Just change the native spec of those structures to make them tougher. And maybe add some new turrets for player-runned battles. |
Gelan Corbaine
BetaMax.
103
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 19:14:00 -
[22] - Quote
Milk Supreme wrote:Or implement the structure dropping so that you can call down new ones when they get destroyed
This ^^^ |
Uncle AWOL Protheans
BetaMax.
38
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:33:00 -
[23] - Quote
for those who dont know the installations are all militia grade. once we can call down our own this problem will largely solved. |
Fivetimes Infinity
Immobile Infantry
1086
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:08:00 -
[24] - Quote
I'd really like it if structures were highly resistant to projectiles, but had a small weak point where you could put REs and destroy the structure easily with only a couple bombs.
But I suspect that, given how the structures aren't available for purchase at all or anything, that their balance at this point is rudimentary. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 07:51:00 -
[25] - Quote
gentle bump ^^ |
Dankpancakes II
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 08:41:00 -
[26] - Quote
Thats an awesome idea. It gives more use for supportive infantry/Scout. Could have someone who just hacks them for a short time for the HAV's to go by,
There's just so many variables to this it would make it awesome. Thanks for that advice and i really hope the developers read this and take note. good idea |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |