| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cerebral Wolf Jr
Immobile Infantry
876
   |
Posted - 2013.04.06 15:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
Currently tanks and instillation's seem a little jack of all trades to me, has anyone at any point considered specialising them somewhat more?
Reduce range considerably on blaster turrets and improve damage even more:
This would make them pivotal in holding choke points as an instillation or decimating infantry or tanks in very close quarters on a tank, not like they currently are where they can murder everything at range.
Improve Rail range and damage even more:
Making them very hard to use against infantry but exceptional anti vehicle/long range sniping turrets.
The above is not really much of a change i think and keeps things pretty much as they are, maybe some minor tweaks, the big change i'd like to see is to missle turrets.
Making them lock on only weapons and indirect fire.
This would allow missile tanks to sit back far from the front lines and work as artillery in game and the same for the turrets.
Allow them to lock onto any vehicles or instillation's that are on radar and in range (With a considerable range buff done to them) and take away their dumb fire mode so they are not a threat to infantry. It could also be used as a dedicated AA weapon.
|
DeadlyAztec11
One-Armed Bandits
Atrocitas
23
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 15:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
Less effective against infantry? No -1
As an AV guy I can tell you that nerfing tanks even more would be unsporting. |
Cerebral Wolf Jr
Immobile Infantry
876
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 15:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Less effective against infantry? No -1
As an AV guy I can tell you that nerfing tanks even more would be unsporting.
Nothing would be less effective against infantry other than missile tanks which are not meant to be anti infantry anyway.... they would be sat back from the front lines to boot and just killing **** on the other side of the map, indirectly.
Some type of laser designator could be brought in so missiles can do AOE damage against infantry but not dumb fire. |
REMNANCY 1
Opus Arcana
Orion Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 17:01:00 -
[4] - Quote
If anything what should happen is that since they are entirely immobile they should have their damage reduced and made several times more durable they are currently |
Bojo The Mighty
Bojo's School of the Trades
815
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 17:31:00 -
[5] - Quote
I like where it's going but buffing rail damage is overboard for me.
Let's have large railguns act like snipers, so there's no reticule unless you zoom, forcing you to zoom to properly aim. |
Psychotic Shooter
Opus Arcana
Orion Empire
24
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 17:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
One do not nerf tanks Two Nerf AV it is to powerful three all are weapons are just right |
Cerebral Wolf Jr
Immobile Infantry
879
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 18:58:00 -
[7] - Quote
Psychotic Shooter wrote:One do not nerf tanks Two Nerf AV it is to powerful three all are weapons are just right
They dont have specific roles so no they are not ok. |
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
682
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 00:13:00 -
[8] - Quote
Gonna go full pilot here, what sense would it make for a handheld rifle to out do what is essentially a larger version of it (this doesn't apply to rail vs forge arguments because the forge is a further hybrid between rails and blasters with a shorter range. As for railguns even the militia does fine and it's damage is tiny compared to the upper tiers. |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
2675
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 03:28:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sorry but read the tank feedback both myself and caeli did
rails already output 2x more than they should thanks to broken skills which leads to the CoD of tankin with 2 shot kills on any tank
Dont need any more ezmode lock on weaponry tbqh.
Fixing missiles is quite easy and something i mentioned in my 4 part series and making them lock on is not a good fix |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
2676
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 03:39:00 -
[10] - Quote
Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote:Psychotic Shooter wrote:One do not nerf tanks Two Nerf AV it is to powerful three all are weapons are just right They dont have specific roles so no they are not ok.
neither do dropsuits if u wanna get picky.
seeing as u can fit out an assault suit to be a logi
or fit out a logi to be a combat assault
this is a fps not a turn based strategy game so a line still has to be drawn when "roles" are taken into account
someone should not win a fight automatically just because u dropped X and someone dropped Y. That takes away from the skill which fps are based on.
Blaster range is already short and they dont need more dmg
Missiles dont need to be lockon, terrible idea.
Rails will be brought back to their original dmg lvls once passive skills are fixed.
that way u now have ur roles, Rails are long range AV and Anti-Installation but not an iWin against other turrets automatically like it is now.
Blaster is close - mid range , but has to get in close in its optimal to stand a chance against a rail fit (currently doesnt matter cuz rails win at all distances)
and missiles could be low dmg long range or high dmg close range variants with decent splash radius for area denial and the shield hav cqc - mid range turret to counter armor tanks since shields will not win a blaster brawl |
|
|
Charlotte O'Dell
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
Noir. Mercenary Group
91
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 05:00:00 -
[11] - Quote
I'm all for buffing rail gun range and damage in turn for requiring zooming in to use crosshairs, providing I get a variable (4,8,12x) scope.
Good idea for the missiles
Blasters...not a bad idea but their range is pretty terrible already.... |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
2677
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 05:17:00 -
[12] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:I'm all for buffing rail gun range and damage in turn for requiring zooming in to use crosshairs, providing I get a variable (4,8,12x) scope.
Good idea for the missiles
Blasters...not a bad idea but their range is pretty terrible already....
rails already output 5000-6000 per shot due to broken skills and ppl want MORE dmg?
did these ppl even tank when tanking actually took some skill?
this cod tanking where 1st to shoot wins and 2 shot kills everything deaths takes 0 skill |
0 Try Harder
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
Noir. Mercenary Group
199
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 21:52:00 -
[13] - Quote
I think all installations should be nerfed, but player skills should affect them. The range bit seems iffy to me. Blaster turrets can already tear up the infantry I have seen in pub matches, and railgun installations can damage tanks. I think they should make missile turrets better, and add minimatar artillery turrets.
Mavado V Noriega wrote:this cod tanking where 1st to shoot wins and 2 shot kills everything deaths takes 0 skill
So that's why all shield tank players are the same, and there's little better than a 50/50 chance of any shield tanker winning against another shield tanker. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but players like caeli and slap seem to be able to continuously win most of the time in tank v tank fights. Just because you cannot consistently win railgun fights does not mean that no one else can.
I thought caeli also showed you that if CCP nerfs railgun damage, armor tanks will be the best at everything? Wait, don't you drive an armor tank?
I also do not understand why you think the marauder class of tank is not worth it. Don't tell me you were using a madrugar against a Sagaris, no wonder you're having problems. So you think damage skills are currently OP, and the marauder class is UP. You know that if you skill up your marauder skill, your Surya will get 20% extra damage to blasters, right?
-.- I just hope that CCP does a good job with the new system and tanks in terms of balancing. Changing just a few small things will screw everything up. Right now everything has a counter, and the counter to an armor tank is a shield tank with damage mods and a railgun.
But back to the installations, like I said before, they should be affected by the skills of the person using them. Perhaps adding another skill might make it so that they are not "OP". For instance, there can be a skill that applies 5% of your turret skills to installations per level.
I suppose there could even be a completely different set of skills for installations. You could reduce the SP required to affect the turrets, so that you can compensate for their lack of mobility. That way an expensive HAV should still come out on top, but players can skill up installations faster. I'd also be fine with making the installations have medium turrets instead of large turrets. I guess that way you can make it so that players can skill up medium turrets before large just like they do for small turrets already.
All in all, I do believe that installations should be changed a bit.
oh btw, I forgot to mention that a Surya with marauder skill and 1x damage mod can basically one shot almost all proto infantry. Three shots can take out even the best of heavies. That thing is a MONSTER.
>> Even more (sorry, kind of sick and on cold medicine so... lol)
but I did think about a skill to improve the range of turrets, like sharpshooter. My only problem with that was when I thought of blaster turrets. Giving range increase to the blaster turrets on a Surya T_T It's already by far the highest DPS weapon in the game.
So I like the idea of reducing the range of blaster turrets, but giving a large turret sharpshooter skill to increase their range back to where it is now. Railgun turrets currently have a nice 599m range. Right now positioning and approaches are what make railgun fights hard, so removing that will make it easier for a noob to dominate tank v tank fights. On most maps I'm going to be that most tankers know almost exactly where the 599m railgun range is from their tank and from certain points.
I watched a tank v tank duel between slap and caeli, and they basically were able to roam around the field in arcs keeping between 599 and 625m between them. When they wanted to decrease the distance, they'd maneuver under cover at that point. After doing more tank fights myself, there are many usual patterns and approaches HAV operators take. I have memorized most of those patterns, and have strategies to get the best position on them. Inaccurately judging the distance between objects, terrain and enemy HAVs can end terribly. The Compressed railgun only gets a few shots, so tricking an enemy HAV to spool up and fire a shot or two without hitting your HAV gives you a huge advantage.
Mavado is right about the damage railguns can do, and that it does make for relatively short firefights, but the time and strategy that goes into that firefight is huge. 99% of the time if you die in a tank, it is because you did something stupid, or made a mistake. The margin for error is unforgiving. Removing the hard set limits like the range of a railgun significantly reduces the difficulty, planning and strategy of tank on tank fights. |
Cerebral Wolf Jr
Immobile Infantry
884
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 22:12:00 -
[14] - Quote
It's not small blasters that i have an issue with, they probably need a range buff if anything, but large blaster range is too far. They can be used against anything really... |
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
686
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 22:37:00 -
[15] - Quote
What do railguns have to do with shield tanks when only the advanced armor gets a rail bonus? |
0 Try Harder
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
Noir. Mercenary Group
199
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 22:56:00 -
[16] - Quote
Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote:large blaster range is too far. They can be used against anything really...
idk o.o I thought so too when I was running infantry, but:
80GJ Scattered Ion Cannon
Max Range: 199m
Optimal Range: 1 - 85m
Meta Level: 9
'Codewish' Duvolle Tactical Assault Rifle
Max Range: 122m
Optimal Range: 1 - 80m
Meta Level: 9
All Forge Guns
Max Range: 300m
Optimal Range: 1 - 300m
Meta Level: x
I think what would help is if CCP adds maps that have long range fights. Right now Manus Peak is the only map with open spaces between objectives that HAVs can cover well. It is true that every other map puts AV within range of a large blaster turret.
When I see tanks with blaster turrets in Manus Peak, I see an easy target. There are so many places that I can be with my AV that an enemy tank cannot get to. Blaster tanks are exceptionally juicy targets for railgun tanks on Manus Peak.
In pub matches, I hate using a blaster turret because I'm always worried about enemy armor which can out range and destroy me. Infantry is chewed up by blaster turrets at a surprisingly long range, but that same infantry can mess up a railgun tank. I think the best example is the four-point map (I forget the name of it). I can use my blaster to hit guys on the sides of the mountains, rooftops, the tabletop, from one objective to another, and enemy installations.
If I bring in a railgun instead of a blaster on that four point map, all of the AV in the mountains, on rooftops and the tabletop are a tremendous threat. A skilled forge gunner can be almost impossible to hit, especially if there is nothing I can hit around him for splash damage.
I can see nerfing the range of LBTs for the current corp battle maps, minus Manus Peak. Once CCP adds more maps like Manus Peak with open spaces, I think that nerf might be too much.
What would you change the range of large blaster turrets to? Even though the max range is 199m, around 150m or a little more there is a lot of dispersion, so placing a shot is harder to do and requires more luck. What do you think of making it so HAVs have to skill into range to be the same or close to what it is now?
> Also, there is some cool artillery in Unreal Tournament 3. What about something like that? D:
Even if we did not get that, it would be really awesome if we could use a camera mounted to the bottom of a dropship for targeting, or let the DS pilot do the targeting for us. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |