DUST Search - Should Turret Installations be A.I. Only?

All Channels

General Discussions

Should Turret Installations be A.I. Only?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Icy Tiger Universal Allies Inc. 1090	Posted - 2013.03.13 21:49:00 - [1] - Quote I believe so. My argument is that turret installations encourage camping, and give "free" kills using a high powered weapon, and requiring no skills. Also they are extremely deadly, and I've seen guys get literally 10-20 kills while camping on them. I believe they should either require skills to use, or have a 30 second timer to use before a 2 minute wait period.
King Kobrah SyNergy Gaming 49	Posted - 2013.03.13 21:51:00 - [2] - Quote They're extremely easy to destroy and can net you 150 WP if you catch the guy still on it. the only people who die to an installation over and over again are blueberries too unintelligent to realize they can pull out their anti armor starter fit and blow it up safely from cover.
Bendtner92 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 416	Posted - 2013.03.13 21:58:00 - [3] - Quote No, but the turn speed of the A.I controlled Railgun need to be fixed.
PAs Capone The Tritan Industries 24	Posted - 2013.03.13 21:58:00 - [4] - Quote Also with skills into turrets they become even moar powerful!!! no AI only, Turrets are fun to kill and kill with. Agree with the AI tracking speed. Its nowhere near comprable to the turning speed when manned.
Scipio Falconius Nemesis Consortium 4	Posted - 2013.03.13 22:09:00 - [5] - Quote While I'm not totally opposed to the idea of requiring skill levels to use, I disagree with making them AI controlled. Why should someone be punished for being good on a stationary weapons platform? What you refer to as camping, I would refer to as defending/area denial - Most of my kills on blaster turrets are usually preventing opponents from hacking objectives, something which an AI simply cannot do as efficiently.
Barnabas Wrex The Tritan Industries 154	Posted - 2013.03.13 22:26:00 - [6] - Quote I've gotten a lot more kills then that in a single game with turret installations.
Kovak Therim ZionTCD Legacy Rising 166	Posted - 2013.03.13 22:30:00 - [7] - Quote Why would you want to take away free forge gun kills?
Hagintora Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 113	Posted - 2013.03.13 22:34:00 - [8] - Quote I like the idea of making them "skill only", espescially since we already have the skill sets for them. But then, I'm for making everything skill based that doesn't have the word MILITIA attached to it. Don't have skills in vehicle piloting, no tank for you! Don't have skills in turret operation, no tank for you! You get the idea.
DUST Fiend Immobile Infantry 2021	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:08:00 - [9] - Quote I'm against this. Some people suck so bad, it's the only way they can get kills. Forge Guns, Swarm Launchers, and militia tanks can all take them out, pretty easily. If anything, turrets need a buff to health
Goat of Dover Shadow Company HQ 162	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:14:00 - [10] - Quote Turrets are fine they are slow and easily taken down. I agree with the AI rails those things are crazy can't get my LAV with it just back out it will take it down no prob. Also calling a turret camping is rather humorous.

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 632	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:19:00 - [11] - Quote Yeah turrets are painfully easy to destroy, if you're having issues with them, you're doing it wrong.
Thumb Green Starship Troppers 37	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:23:00 - [12] - Quote The game itself seems to encourage camping. As a former member of [CKA] (of the quake & tribes era) it drives me crazy to see so many campers; I'm slowly adjusting to it and am becoming more tolerate of camping in this game. If only because campers are easy to spot and in skirmish it can be considered defending rather than camping.
Scheneighnay McBob Bojo's School of the Trades 1106	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:28:00 - [13] - Quote "camping" is a term only used by run-and-gun CoDumbasses with no grasp of counterplay
RECON BY FIRE IMPSwarm Negative-Feedback 68	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:41:00 - [14] - Quote No, just cause you lost another of your tanks to a manned installation does not mean they need to be AI only.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 632	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:44:00 - [15] - Quote In a way Installation Turrets remind me of POS Guns in EVE. Dangerous if unmanned, ******* deadly if someone is skilled into controlling them manually.
Scipio Falconius Nemesis Consortium 5	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:46:00 - [16] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: The game itself seems to encourage camping. As a former member of [CKA] (of the quake & tribes era) it drives me crazy to see so many campers; I'm slowly adjusting to it and am becoming more tolerate of camping in this game. If only because campers are easy to spot and in skirmish it can be considered defending rather than camping. I'd actually argue there isn't enough (tactical) camping, the amount of times I've been able to simply stroll up to a enemy null cannon and hack it completely unopposed is unreal! To prove my earlier point, I have trouble doing this if there's a turret around!
Goat of Dover Shadow Company HQ 162	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:54:00 - [17] - Quote Scipio Falconius wrote: Thumb Green wrote: The game itself seems to encourage camping. As a former member of [CKA] (of the quake & tribes era) it drives me crazy to see so many campers; I'm slowly adjusting to it and am becoming more tolerate of camping in this game. If only because campers are easy to spot and in skirmish it can be considered defending rather than camping. I'd actually argue there isn't enough (tactical) camping, the amount of times I've been able to simply stroll up to a enemy null cannon and hack it completely unopposed is unreal! To prove my earlier point, I have trouble doing this if there's a turret around! True but that is due to lack of comms and because of the low amounts of players in a match. Not a hit just a reason.
Tiluvo Digital Mercs 35	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:59:00 - [18] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: The game itself seems to encourage camping. As a former member of [CKA] (of the quake & tribes era) it drives me crazy to see so many campers; I'm slowly adjusting to it and am becoming more tolerate of camping in this game. If only because campers are easy to spot and in skirmish it can be considered defending rather than camping. Sorry dude, if my side has 3/5 cannons, I'm not running to the other two to take them unless it's absolutely necessary. If we have three and they have two, they need our cannons more than we need theirs; and we need to keep ours more than we need to take theirs. Throwing bodies at the last cannon is how you clone out with 2-3 hits left on the enemy MCC. Also, Tribes 2 is awesome. Dust reminds me of it at nearly every turn.
neausea 1987 Krullefor Organization Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2013.03.13 23:59:00 - [19] - Quote RECON BY FIRE wrote: No, just cause you lost another of your tanks to a manned installation does not mean they need to be AI only. too funny too true
Scipio Falconius Nemesis Consortium 5	Posted - 2013.03.14 00:00:00 - [20] - Quote Goat of Dover wrote: Scipio Falconius wrote: Thumb Green wrote: The game itself seems to encourage camping. As a former member of [CKA] (of the quake & tribes era) it drives me crazy to see so many campers; I'm slowly adjusting to it and am becoming more tolerate of camping in this game. If only because campers are easy to spot and in skirmish it can be considered defending rather than camping. I'd actually argue there isn't enough (tactical) camping, the amount of times I've been able to simply stroll up to a enemy null cannon and hack it completely unopposed is unreal! To prove my earlier point, I have trouble doing this if there's a turret around! True but that is due to lack of comms and because of the low amounts of players in a match. Not a hit just a reason. Good point, never thought of it that way. Still, I'd like to think someone would take the initiative now and then, regardless of comms etc.

Tiluvo Digital Mercs 36	Posted - 2013.03.14 00:02:00 - [21] - Quote Scipio Falconius wrote: Good point, never thought of it that way. Still, I'd like to think someone would take the initiative now and then, regardless of comms etc. It's probably because winning or losing has very little, if any, effect on your rewards. People just want to pad their k/d or get a few more WP's than win the battle.
Thumb Green Starship Troppers 38	Posted - 2013.03.15 18:32:00 - [22] - Quote Tiluvo wrote: Thumb Green wrote: The game itself seems to encourage camping. As a former member of [CKA] (of the quake & tribes era) it drives me crazy to see so many campers; I'm slowly adjusting to it and am becoming more tolerate of camping in this game. If only because campers are easy to spot and in skirmish it can be considered defending rather than camping. Sorry dude, if my side has 3/5 cannons, I'm not running to the other two to take them unless it's absolutely necessary. If we have three and they have two, they need our cannons more than we need theirs; and we need to keep ours more than we need to take theirs. Throwing bodies at the last cannon is how you clone out with 2-3 hits left on the enemy MCC. Also, Tribes 2 is awesome. Dust reminds me of it at nearly every turn. like I said, it can be considered (well actually it is) defending not camping; nothing wrong with defending which is half the point of objective gameplay to begin with.
semperfi1999 Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 367	Posted - 2013.03.15 19:52:00 - [23] - Quote AI controlled railgun never misses if it fires at something.
Vermaak Doe SVER True Blood Unclaimed. 471	Posted - 2013.03.15 20:05:00 - [24] - Quote No


Pages: 1 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.