Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 11:16:00 -
[121] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Post fix, the situation is better. Not perfect but way better. I'd argue that. The situation is equally bad, but in the opposite direction.
Yeah ? I like to think that seeing blasters and railgun instead of just missile is better. You have Anti-Infantry HAV and Anti-vehicle HAV wich seems more logical.
Now, Blasters HAVs are too fragile due to the stupidity of EZmod SL, the range boost from last fix to FG and the painfull reduction in Resistance modules for vehicles.
I dont think we're that far from getting a nice balance between vehicles and infantry. Anyway I guess we're all just talking for nothing until next build lands. |
Sha Kharn Clone
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
1087
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 11:23:00 -
[122] - Quote
I put The dark Clould as head of PR.
I totaly dont have a sense of humor so he's the perfect choice also there is no point trying to control the internets and the interactions on them...so you just have to not care.
Back on track
Missiles needed sorting out everyones 100% behind that but as usual ccp wade in like thugs and smash it to bits.
Why CCP cant just tweek things abit at a time untill they find somthing close to balance I dont know.
Personaly I have given up with feedback I will just play the game and in doing so help add to the data out there. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 11:37:00 -
[123] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Post fix, the situation is better. Not perfect but way better. I'd argue that. The situation is equally bad, but in the opposite direction. Yeah ? I like to think that seeing blasters and railgun instead of just missile is better. You have Anti-Infantry HAV and Anti-vehicle HAV wich seems more logical. Now, Blasters HAVs are too fragile due to the stupidity of EZmod SL, the range boost from last fix to FG and the painfull reduction in Resistance modules for vehicles. I dont think we're that far from getting a nice balance between vehicles and infantry. Anyway I guess we're all just talking for nothing until next build lands. In the specific scenario of Large Missile Turret vs. anything, the situation hasn't become any better than it was before the 'fix" happened though. It's just that now, instead of Missile Turrets being the "I win" button, they've become an "I can't win" button instead.
While yes, that's encouraged more diversity in fittings because the other previously-outmatched weapons are viable, it hasn't actually improved the Missiles vs. enemies scenario - only made it equally bad in the opposite direction.
Calling it "better" is a matter of how you look at things, which is why I said it's arguable. |
Daalzebul Del'Armgo
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
48
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 12:12:00 -
[124] - Quote
Should split them
Rocket turrets which is what we have
Missile turrets which is what we need
so basically take all the turrets you have now and rename them to rockets. then they fit perfectly with the stats you have now. dumb fire, no guidance, and dispersion when firing more than one at a time.
now make Missile turrets Must lock before firing. Can lock anything. Lock time varies by Signature radius of target. example Scout smallest sig radius may take 20 seconds to lock (base no skills/modules factored into either side) heavy largest infantry sig radius make take 15 seconds Lav 10 seconds Drop ship 7 sec HAV 4 seconds
Black op variants get +2 seconds
just throwing #'s out there for examples these can be tweaked Missiles would have less damage than the rockets (since more space is used for guidance systems and more fuel) also would have greater range than rockets.
that way rocket splash could be tweaked up a little then adding in missiles it would be more like the hybrid turret skill anti infantry=rockets/blasters anti vech= Missiles/Railguns
k that's my random synapses spark of the day |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 12:19:00 -
[125] - Quote
Daalzebul Del'Armgo wrote:Scout smallest sig radius may take 20 seconds to lock (base no skills/modules factored into either side) heavy largest infantry sig radius make take 15 seconds Lav 10 seconds Drop ship 7 sec HAV 4 seconds Honestly, WAY too slow.
No more than 5 seconds for a Scout lock, imo.
Targeting other HAVs should be near-instant.
But there should be a delay between shots to balance that.
Also, Large Missile Turret (rename it to Rockets) still falls WELL short of being a viable weapon in its current state. Renaming it "Rocket" won't make it less broken. It needs a buff as well. Yes, it should be a Rocket Turret instead of a Missile Turret. But it should also have a larger blast radius so it has some vague hint of a chance at dealing damage when aimed properly. |
GLOO GLOO
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
217
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 12:19:00 -
[126] - Quote
Sha Kharn Clone wrote:Missiles needed sorting out everyones 100% behind that but as usual ccp wade in like thugs and smash it to bits.
Why CCP cant just tweek things abit at a time untill they find somthing close to balance I dont know.
Personaly I have given up with feedback I will just play the game and in doing so help add to the data out there.
This !
CCP has always done this since the beginning. Same with remote (hey Sha ) --> instant explosion to 5 sec , now it's better. Without talking about missiles, before tank were too OP, too much HP (or AV useless), after a fix, now there are too weak. Well, we could apply this to a lots of things in this beta. It's the way it works, and we all knew it.
But as you, I have given up with feedback, and now definitely with the all game and his developement (3 maps joke, just mad here , just wanna smash a dev face on his desk), but almost since tourny's end. And CCP definitly want this game being a vehicules war before a FPS (even with missile turret nerf), cause of all thoose fanboys, it will turn too much in the EVE universe, a ship universe.
I'll take a look again when we'll really have the new maps, or next build. I don't have fun anymore on this game. The 2 games i did yeserday was hard but funnier than before. But we have the right to face Kevin Cloud on the forum after thoose... Sad... |
EnglishSnake
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
1012
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 13:31:00 -
[127] - Quote
You cannot split the turrets up for missiles
Even if 2 types of missile launchers come out you are shafting the drivers anyways because sods law you bring out the lock on turret for vehicles and no vehicles turn up on the enemys side plus its a dumb idea and why? because the blasters and railguns can do anti vehicle and infantry to an extent while with the missile idea you can only do one or the other which make it even more ******* useless
lol @ this wtf aswell tbh you have like 1 AV guy to begin with who is out of milita/basic AV stuff and none of you drive anything |
The dark cloud
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
1060
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 14:19:00 -
[128] - Quote
Meh just let 1-2 months go past and the tankers will have all advanced/proto blasters on top off their tanks. Then we will have again tons off complains on the forum why the large blasters can allmost insta kill any infantry on the game. Another thing that is unknown so far to most off people is that the hybrid damage mods have a effect on the rate off fire and the damage. Combine that with a stabilised blaster and you end up with carnage. For an example i run double damage mods with a blaster and the base ROF is 428 RPM with the damage mods i get a RPM off 517. Base damage is 105HP with damage mods and skillbooks i get around ~144HP damage per shot. The range on the stabilised is improved aswell as the zoom off the turret. On optimal range i need only 2-3 shots to kill somebody. heavys take a bit more to grind trough but they die very quickly aswell. If i would go up to proto blasters then i could get a damage off like ~208HP per shot. And damage mods are broken we dont have stacking penalty, we have stacking bonus. Yes you read that right. My source basically is when you put damage mods on a dropsuit you can see the multiplyer next to the dropsuit stats (like light weapon damage mod etc). I for an example have a advanced assault dropsuit with a swarm launcher and 3X10% damage mods. Normally without penalty/bonus i would get 1.30. But the stats next to the dropsuit are saying 1.33. So i get 1% bonus on each damage mod i put on? CCP=nuts |
Alldin Kan
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
169
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 14:23:00 -
[129] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:Meh just let 1-2 months go past and the tankers will have all advanced/proto blasters on top off their tanks. Then we will have again tons off complains on the forum why the large blasters can allmost insta kill any infantry on the game. Another thing that is unknown so far to most off people is that the hybrid damage mods have a effect on the rate off fire and the damage. Combine that with a stabilised blaster and you end up with carnage. For an example i run double damage mods with a blaster and the base ROF is 428 RPM with the damage mods i get a RPM off 517. Base damage is 105HP with damage mods and skillbooks i get around ~144HP damage per shot. The range on the stabilised is improved aswell as the zoom off the turret. On optimal range i need only 2-3 shots to kill somebody. heavys take a bit more to grind trough but they die very quickly aswell. If i would go up to proto blasters then i could get a damage off like ~208HP per shot. And damage mods are broken we dont have stacking penalty, we have stacking bonus. Yes you read that right. My source basically is when you put damage mods on a dropsuit you can see the multiplyer next to the dropsuit stats (like light weapon damage mod etc). I for an example have a advanced assault dropsuit with a swarm launcher and 3X10% damage mods. Normally without penalty/bonus i would get 1.30. But the stats next to the dropsuit are saying 1.33. So i get 1% bonus on each damage mod i put on? CCP=nuts
Already tried out the proto blasters with 3 damage mods but could only 2 shot most infantry :l |
Cyn Bruin
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
651
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 14:25:00 -
[130] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:Meh just let 1-2 months go past and the tankers will have all advanced/proto blasters on top off their tanks. Then we will have again tons off complains on the forum why the large blasters can allmost insta kill any infantry on the game. Another thing that is unknown so far to most off people is that the hybrid damage mods have a effect on the rate off fire and the damage. Combine that with a stabilised blaster and you end up with carnage. For an example i run double damage mods with a blaster and the base ROF is 428 RPM with the damage mods i get a RPM off 517. Base damage is 105HP with damage mods and skillbooks i get around ~144HP damage per shot. The range on the stabilised is improved aswell as the zoom off the turret. On optimal range i need only 2-3 shots to kill somebody. heavys take a bit more to grind trough but they die very quickly aswell. If i would go up to proto blasters then i could get a damage off like ~208HP per shot. And damage mods are broken we dont have stacking penalty, we have stacking bonus. Yes you read that right. My source basically is when you put damage mods on a dropsuit you can see the multiplyer next to the dropsuit stats (like light weapon damage mod etc). I for an example have a advanced assault dropsuit with a swarm launcher and 3X10% damage mods. Normally without penalty/bonus i would get 1.30. But the stats next to the dropsuit are saying 1.33. So i get 1% bonus on each damage mod i put on? CCP=nuts
Which is why Forge Guns should stay the way they are. If you can 2-3 shot most infantry (not as good as missles but still), Forge Guns should be able to 2-4 shot a tank.
Yep this is off topic, so what. We all knew missles were going to get "fixed" I just didnt think they would make them sterile too.
|
|
The dark cloud
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
1060
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 14:29:00 -
[131] - Quote
hell no after all the tank costs multiple millions off ISK when it is a proper fit. And then you want to come by and 4 shot it with a standard forgegun? Hell no. And you forget that blasters eat up alot off PG and shield tanks are losing alot off shields to fit them. |
Cyn Bruin
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
651
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 14:39:00 -
[132] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:hell no after all the tank costs multiple millions off ISK when it is a proper fit. And then you want to come by and 4 shot it with a standard forgegun? Hell no. And you forget that blasters eat up alot off PG and shield tanks are losing alot off shields to fit them.
ok Dark Cloud, what would your suggestion be to balance out the huge differential between infantry and tanks? Teamwork? already happens in our squads. We don't have issues with vehicles. But the random pub groups do.
Which is where I think the actual problem lies. Random pubs will get smoked by a decent vehicle user if they dont try to take it down as a team. And judging from the randoms I play with when I solo, thats not going to happen.
CCP seems like they are trying to balance the game around public games which is wrong. They should try to balance it around corp. battles, this is where all the game mechanics will come into play and actually matter.
On topic sort of; Heavy users with their suits/mods/Proto Forges cost around 400k? And how many times do you kill forge users before they actually destroy your tank? I'm betting you win 4/5's of those battles if not more.
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 14:54:00 -
[133] - Quote
EnglishSnake wrote:You cannot split the turrets up for missiles
Even if 2 types of missile launchers come out you are shafting the drivers anyways because sods law you bring out the lock on turret for vehicles and no vehicles turn up on the enemys side plus its a dumb idea and why? because the blasters and railguns can do anti vehicle and infantry to an extent while with the missile idea you can only do one or the other which make it even more ******* useless
lol @ this wtf aswell tbh you have like 1 AV guy to begin with who is out of milita/basic AV stuff and none of you drive anything Seems like you totally missed the point. Our current "Missiles" should really be "Rockets" instead, meaning they aren't being split up - merely adding a new weapon type that should be called Missiles, and renaming the current weapon, each of which has a unique functionality.
You also managed not to notice the fact that the new Missiles would be able to lock onto infantry, but would lock on FASTER to enemy vehicles than to infantry. The suggested lock times were totally broken though, hence my post suggesting a massive change to those numbers. |
GLOO GLOO
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
217
|
Posted - 2012.11.27 16:15:00 -
[134] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:Meh just let 1-2 months go past and the tankers will have all advanced/proto blasters on top off their tanks. Then we will have again tons off complains on the forum why the large blasters can allmost insta kill any infantry on the game. Another thing that is unknown so far to most off people is that the hybrid damage mods have a effect on the rate off fire and the damage. Combine that with a stabilised blaster and you end up with carnage. For an example i run double damage mods with a blaster and the base ROF is 428 RPM with the damage mods i get a RPM off 517. Base damage is 105HP with damage mods and skillbooks i get around ~144HP damage per shot. The range on the stabilised is improved aswell as the zoom off the turret. On optimal range i need only 2-3 shots to kill somebody. heavys take a bit more to grind trough but they die very quickly aswell. If i would go up to proto blasters then i could get a damage off like ~208HP per shot. And damage mods are broken we dont have stacking penalty, we have stacking bonus. Yes you read that right. My source basically is when you put damage mods on a dropsuit you can see the multiplyer next to the dropsuit stats (like light weapon damage mod etc). I for an example have a advanced assault dropsuit with a swarm launcher and 3X10% damage mods. Normally without penalty/bonus i would get 1.30. But the stats next to the dropsuit are saying 1.33. So i get 1% bonus on each damage mod i put on? CCP=nuts
I'm ok with everything you said here. But a direct shot is nothing compare to a missile splash damage before...
In the case of the blaster, I won't say anymore that it is totaly unskill, because you need to aim with it. Ok, with missiles, if you don't use accelerators, you need to take a hand before being good at it.
But with the Large Missile Turret, it was totaly noob on a tank. |
EnglishSnake
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
1012
|
Posted - 2012.11.28 13:37:00 -
[135] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:EnglishSnake wrote:You cannot split the turrets up for missiles
Even if 2 types of missile launchers come out you are shafting the drivers anyways because sods law you bring out the lock on turret for vehicles and no vehicles turn up on the enemys side plus its a dumb idea and why? because the blasters and railguns can do anti vehicle and infantry to an extent while with the missile idea you can only do one or the other which make it even more ******* useless
lol @ this wtf aswell tbh you have like 1 AV guy to begin with who is out of milita/basic AV stuff and none of you drive anything Seems like you totally missed the point. Our current "Missiles" should really be "Rockets" instead, meaning they aren't being split up - merely adding a new weapon type that should be called Missiles, and renaming the current weapon, each of which has a unique functionality. You also managed not to notice the fact that the new Missiles would be able to lock onto infantry, but would lock on FASTER to enemy vehicles than to infantry. The suggested lock times were totally broken though, hence my post suggesting a massive change to those numbers.
Locking on tho just seems like a bad idea to begin with and shafting the missiles anyway
Missile are in limbo and screwed for now, i expect we wont see them for a long time tbh and blasters and rails will be out more |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |