DUST Search - Two things Plasma Launchers need to be good

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Two things Plasma Launchers need to be good

» 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)
Godin Thekiller Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 164	Posted - 2013.06.21 08:49:00 - [1] - Quote 1: bigger Blast radius. 2: burning effect Discuss. Peace, Godin
True Adamance PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 211	Posted - 2013.06.21 09:06:00 - [2] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: 1: bigger Blast radius. 2: burning effect Discuss. Peace, Godin Agreed though one of this things I would have said was to be more predictable in it arc trajectory. People have shot Plasma Launchers at me before and often missed horribly because of odd shot patterns. Don't know how to do burning effect unless it either deals damages to armour beneath shields or consistently damages shields at a low rate for a set period of time (which to me makes more sense because the Gallente develop weapons to fight the Caldari)
Godin Thekiller Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 164	Posted - 2013.06.21 09:17:00 - [3] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: 1: bigger Blast radius. 2: burning effect Discuss. Peace, Godin Agreed though one of this things I would have said was to be more predictable in it arc trajectory. People have shot Plasma Launchers at me before and often missed horribly because of odd shot patterns. Don't know how to do burning effect unless it either deals damages to armour beneath shields or consistently damages shields at a low rate for a set period of time (which to me makes more sense because the Gallente develop weapons to fight the Caldari) Damages both shield and armor
WeapondigitX V7 Planetary Response Organization 14	Posted - 2013.06.21 09:24:00 - [4] - Quote Plasma cannon might need 0.4 increase in blast radius but not an increase in damage of any sort. I find it easy to use most of the time if target is within 25m.
Syther Shadows The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 148	Posted - 2013.06.21 09:31:00 - [5] - Quote in all honesty it would be cool if the plasma cannon became more of a Molotov so people who use it has a semi crowd control and anti vehicle weapon
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY 189	Posted - 2013.06.21 09:48:00 - [6] - Quote I did not try the Plasma Launcher yet, but i think it should have 2 different fire modes. Normal fire mode Like now ( with all the buff/nerf you are suggesting, idk , i had never use it) Mortar like fire mode When you crouch, you lay your weapon on the field and you use it like a mortar, the reload mechanics are the same of a mortar and splash radius should be increased when you shoot in mortar mode.
Godin Thekiller Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 165	Posted - 2013.06.21 09:55:00 - [7] - Quote shaman oga wrote: I did not try the Plasma Launcher yet, but i think it should have 2 different fire modes. Normal fire mode Like now ( with all the buff/nerf you are suggesting, idk , i had never use it) Mortar like fire mode When you crouch, you lay your weapon on the field and you use it like a mortar, the reload mechanics are the same of a mortar and splash radius should be increased when you shoot in mortar mode. It's for CQ engagements, so that makes no sense at all.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY 189	Posted - 2013.06.21 10:13:00 - [8] - Quote They must have failed in something, if it's for CQ engagements... I've never been killed by one, they should change this weapon from CQ to a mortar to be useful.
Godin Thekiller Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 165	Posted - 2013.06.21 10:28:00 - [9] - Quote shaman oga wrote: They must have failed in something, if it's for CQ engagements... I've never been killed by one, they should change this weapon from CQ to a mortar to be useful. It's because nobody who uses them does it right.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY 189	Posted - 2013.06.21 10:35:00 - [10] - Quote or because they are quite useless the way they are now?

Godin Thekiller Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 165	Posted - 2013.06.21 10:36:00 - [11] - Quote shaman oga wrote: or because they are quite useless the way they are now? highest I've gone is 21/0, and 4 of those kills were vehicle kills.
pegasis prime The Shadow Cavalry Mercenaries DARKSTAR ARMY 313	Posted - 2013.06.21 10:58:00 - [12] - Quote I havent tryed the plasma launcher yet but two of them abushed me in my gunlogi and striped aprox 3500 shields in two blasts they were working in sync and almost gor me . I do think a larger clip size (possibly an ammo augmentation skill specific to the wepon +1 round in the clip per levle.) Tis would make it more viable . And yes I do agree with improving the blast radius maby to 2.5 m or so . Im not sure what it is at just now but if its any more than 2.5 m then its exploitable as an anti infantry dumfire one shot kill machien. If they either gave them a biger clip or increased the dammage by25% then im sure we would see allot more of them and less tank nerf threads.
Midas Fool Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 42	Posted - 2013.06.21 18:14:00 - [13] - Quote Nope. Plasma Cannons are perfect the way they are More splash would be nice, but OHKing everything but the tankyest of protoheavies is a trade. Very rewarding for accurate shots. It does solid damage against vehicles too, you just trade raw power for the ability to twitch shoot it. Burning effect does not sound fun. "Got away from a crazy fight with only 10 armor left...oh well nevermind..." The splash radius is fine...just like the mass driver. Stop giving incentive to not place shots accurately or correctly.
Scheneighnay McBob Bojo's School of the Trades 1715	Posted - 2013.06.21 18:20:00 - [14] - Quote Doesn't need bigger blast radius- it's meant for AV. It just needs more damage per shot, and to increase in damage more every tier
ZDub 303 TeamPlayers EoN. 454	Posted - 2013.06.21 19:54:00 - [15] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: Doesn't need bigger blast radius- it's meant for AV. It just needs more damage per shot, and to increase in damage more every tier I guess that's the real question here isn't it... is the plasma cannon meant for anti infantry or anti vehicle? At the moment it seems like its only meant for anti infantry. Sounds like the weapon needs some tweaking one way or another to better fulfill its purpose.
Samuel Zelik D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 5	Posted - 2013.06.21 20:07:00 - [16] - Quote Plasma Cannon is a hybrid that can be used for both infantry and vehicles. It'd be hard to categorize it as just one because there are a couple ways to use it. I wouldn't mind a slightly larger blast radius, and maybe a bigger difference in damage between the Advanced And Proto Plasma Cannon, but even at those points, the weapon is still fine and doesn't really need to be changed.
Godin Thekiller Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 172	Posted - 2013.06.22 05:31:00 - [17] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: Doesn't need bigger blast radius- it's meant for AV. It just needs more damage per shot, and to increase in damage more every tier Nowhere in the desc. does it say that it is a AV weapon. It is a decent weapon, but it`s not fine. Peace, Godin
Pseudogenesis Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 32	Posted - 2013.06.22 09:55:00 - [18] - Quote First of all there needs to be some form, ANY form of distinction between the standard tier plasma cannon and the higher tiers. As of now there's absolutely no benefit to investing in higher plasma cannon skills apart from the passive benefits. Then they could focus on sorting out their role.
Samuel Zelik D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 8	Posted - 2013.06.22 16:40:00 - [19] - Quote I'm still left wondering why you think the Plasma Cannon is not fine. The blast radius may be a little small, but it's not completely unmanageable. As long as you can aim with the thing, it's not all that hard to get splash and even direct hits. I agree that damage-wise, there may not appear to be a significant difference between the tiers, but it is a noticeable difference in practice; especially the splash damage. I know when I tried the Standard Plasma Cannon, the splash damage wasn't nearly as effective as the higher tiers. Like I said about the role before: there is no set role; the user chooses how to use it, whether that be for AV, suppression, or infantry hunting.
Pseudogenesis Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 32	Posted - 2013.06.22 21:38:00 - [20] - Quote Samuel Zelik wrote: I'm still left wondering why you think the Plasma Cannon is not fine. The blast radius may be a little small, but it's not completely unmanageable. As long as you can aim with the thing, it's not all that hard to get splash and even direct hits. I agree that damage-wise, there may not appear to be a significant difference between the tiers, but it is a noticeable difference in practice; especially the splash damage. I know when I tried the Standard Plasma Cannon, the splash damage wasn't nearly as effective as the higher tiers. Like I said about the role before: there is no set role; the user chooses how to use it, whether that be for AV, suppression, or infantry hunting. I skilled into the prototype cannons on my alt. There is little to no difference between the standard and prototype tiers.

Scheneighnay McBob Bojo's School of the Trades 1727	Posted - 2013.06.23 00:46:00 - [21] - Quote Projectiles also need to travel more quickly- very difficult to hit an LAV, even if it's moving at "shooting" speed (slow enough for the gunner to kill you)
Medic 1879 Tritan's Onslaught 467	Posted - 2013.06.23 01:27:00 - [22] - Quote Just firing when I click R1 would be a nice start seems allot of the time you charge, fire nothing comes out but you must reload.
Texs Red SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 39	Posted - 2013.06.23 02:24:00 - [23] - Quote To be honest I really don't know where CCP is trying to go with the plasma cannon. It says it is a close quarters AV weapons but it's DPS is absolutely horrible that it fails to function as an AV weapon. period. I have several ideas: Close quarters, rapid fire: Make the damage increase of at least 100 between each tier, increase the clip size to about 6 with 18 spare and a long reload time. This offers an ability to shoot a bunch of moderately damaging shots in quick succession resulting in a total large amount of damage limited by a long reload. Close quarters, super shot: Embrace the single shot, have it deal 3-4k damage. If the plasma cannon is going to be difficult to hit with and have only a single shot then that single shot better count. AV bombardment: Go with the super shot idea then make it as such that the farther the shot travels the damage decrease but splash radius increases significantly. So say at max range it's dealing only 1k damage on a direct hit but deals splash damage over 10 meters+. This would allow it to harry a vehicle at range but retain its close quarters feel. Secondary effects, Burning: If you get hit by the plasma launcher the burning effect is say around 100 for a standard cannon over 10 seconds with the burning effect being 20% more effect vs armor. Vs shields it prevents passive recharging and adds a notable damage to the cannon. Vs armor it does a bit more damage which balances out against the shields loss in recharge rate. In addition to this it also adds a burning effect to the vehicle drivers view (you have plasma burning you, it messes with sensors and stuff). Providing the plasma cannon a tactical advantage despite having low damage vs other AV.
Artificer Ghost Bojo's School of the Trades 146	Posted - 2013.06.23 02:31:00 - [24] - Quote shaman oga wrote: or because they are quite useless the way they are now? Godin is right. If you pay attention, the Gallente/Caldari build weapons to fight the opposing side. Missiles/Railguns (In DUST, that means those installations, Sniper Rifle, Forge Gun, etc.) are all Long Range Caldari Weapons. The Gallente have the Shotgun, Plasma Cannon, Blasters, and all that. Those all are amazing in CQC. EDiT: Have the Gallente made anything but Hybrid weapons? O.o
Texs Red SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 39	Posted - 2013.06.23 02:34:00 - [25] - Quote Artificer Ghost wrote: Have the Gallente made anything but Hybrid weapons? O.o They make drones, however that factor isn't in dust as of right now so no they haven't.
Artificer Ghost Bojo's School of the Trades 146	Posted - 2013.06.23 02:38:00 - [26] - Quote Don't the drones use Hybrid weapons though? I've played EVE before, and I thought they were using Blasters... Or do they supply drones for all the other races?
Godin Thekiller Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 172	Posted - 2013.06.23 04:03:00 - [27] - Quote Artificer Ghost wrote: Don't the drones use Hybrid weapons though? I've played EVE before, and I thought they were using Blasters... Or do they supply drones for all the other races? Because I know in EVE I ran an Amarrian Tormentor with 2 Medium Scout Drones. Might've been Light Scout though, I'm not sure. It was the Amarrian variant of the Gallente Hobgoblin, I think. EDIT: Ok, yea, I looked it up and I had the Acolyte I. Gallente made Drones, and everybody (Amarr in particular) copied them. Best idea ever: Drone turrets and a DCD for Dropsuits. I want Amarr drones to troll Caldari Logi`s Peace, Godin


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