|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 24 post(s) |
XxGhazbaranxX
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
165
   |
Posted - 2013.07.24 10:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
TBH I thuoght Flaylock only needed the RPM down to 50 like the sniper rifle. Eliminating possible spam and giving people a chance to fight back. After all the weapons problem was the it's RoF was too high permitting enormous amounts of damage in a small time frame. The Splash radius nerf does seem warranted but going from 1.25 strd ->1.5 adv -> 1.5 proto seems like they did not know what to do at proto tier. It would have been ok with 1.75 at proto level to keep in line with the advancement of the weapon. This weapon, just as the mass driver is going to be grounded till further notice because of this harsh fix. They should have done the fixes slowly like with the tac AR where they did not nerf it's damage but only it's RoF and clip size. A slower rate of fire (50RPM sniper RoF) and a diminished clip (2 at proto levels) would have sufficed in letting this weapon still exist in the hands of the players. But not be as overwhelming as it is in it's current form where there is mostly no time to fight back, just death. Instead CCP will nerf it to extinction just like they did with most weapons that where not AR. Their aproach with the TAC AR was a sound one. Clip and RoF reduction did the trick. I think CCP should have taken a note from that change instead of taking a note from the mass driver nerf that nearly made it extinct.
Summary
CCP should have taken a point or two from the TAC AR rebalance and diminished the flaylock RoF and lowered the clip count to 1 at strd and adv levels and 2 at proto levels, to keep the weapons mechanics in tact. Instead they are giving it very harsh changes that will make it somewhat underwhelming in comparison to other side arms.
P.S.
I know I might be being harsh about CCP's decision and, I want to establish that these are just my first thoughts on the subject but, I think they have taken to hammering weapon nerfs unto any weapon hastily but are being very light if any issues arise out of Assault rifles. Examples of heavily nerfed weapons; Laser Rifles (nerfed almost to extinction), HMG (Nerfed to levels where Heavies are using Assault rifles because of the better damage), Mass Drivers ( Nerfed to almost extinction; change they later had to fix)
P.S.S.
I hope this really does fix the weapon and does not cause it to be useless in the future. I just think CCP is being a bit to rash when it comes to these type of things. |
XxGhazbaranxX
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
165
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 10:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Wolfman wrote:J-Lewis wrote:From what I understand, the LAV changes being tested for 1.4 are to how much damage infantry receives on impact - not the LAV taking damage proportional to what suit it hits.
So I'm wondering if this will manifest as rag-dolling (or pushing) and ~reasonably~ damaging infantry, and letting the LAV keep driving unimpeded.
It could also be as simple as increasing the amount of LAV speed required to kill, though I don't think that would solve the problem by itself.
We'll see.
Oh, and I suspect the Pilot suit will make it for 1.4 considering it's a vehicle specific suit, and 1.4 is mainly about vehicles.
So that makes sense. What color will it be? I wonder. The updated collision system will push infantry to the side of the vehicle rather than just pushing them along in front of it. The vehicle will be able to carry on going. Now you will have to be going very fast to do serious damage.
What speeds does it take to have a kill... just to know when to cross the road ^^
P.S. Does serious damage mean kill or just that, damage? |
XxGhazbaranxX
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
165
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 10:26:00 -
[3] - Quote
PsychoLogiKal PsyDrei wrote:My take on the collision damage is that I believe it should not be the eHP (As wolfman stated it won't be already so kudos)that is transferred as damage to the LAV and that it should be armor left on the suit that is done as damage to the LAV. would bring a new meaning to having a high armor. I mean honestly shields have no mass and therefore shouldn't transfer that as damage to something that does have mass.
makes sense
|
|
|
| |
|