We've been over there as well. In most other shooters average TTK is 0.3-0.4, not 2 seconds and optimal shooting distance is greater then 20 meters. Can you see the difference of OHK weapons between games with 5-6 times shorter TTK then EC? You know, there is a reason why stalker bolter needs at least 2 headshots to down someone and lascannon doesn't down you, it evaporates you. And how the hell do I sound like I want easy mode? This whole thread exist, SPECIFICALLY because people want easy mode with lascannon. Huge burst damage on turrets and vehicles isn't easy mode enough?
No.. People just want a fighting chance, and dont understand why they have to run when they hold a big friggin laser. You HAVE to spend a loadout slot on a lascannon, because the other weapons are so much worse at the job. If they could change the preset loadouts to have a lascannon, I would shut up, as you dont need any armor or trinkets for it, if you get attacked you just die, unless you can redeploy faster.
I personally don't mind if heavy weapons get to actually use their weapons in a practical way. The only people who should really ever be hit by a lascannon are the ones who aren't moving. In Halo, the sniper is semi-autocamtic, two direct hits to kill at the most, one if a headshot. In Call of Duty, snipers are also semi-automatic or bolt-action and generally put targets down in a single shot. In Planetside 2, all snipers out targets down in two direct hits or one headshot. It's no different, the lascannon simply can't fire as often as a regular sniper rifle and has to charge, meaning you need to keep on your target longer and potentially lose them anyways. It mostly seems to me that the arguments against removing the lock-on are mostly from the standpoint of "how would this negatively affect me" rather than "how would it positively affect the lascannon's practicality in the game". A lot of people seem afraid of letting things be improved in a constructive manner for fear that it will make the game harder for them in one small area of the gameplay, which should honestly just be expected. In my opinion, the lock-on is an unnecessary and counter-intuitive feature of the lascannon that only realistically serves to restrict them, which makes no sense from any practical standpoint.
If we assumed the lock-on were removed, then the Starshot Missiles would have to get a serious Anti-Armour buff and the Eldar Vehicles would have to get their pre-nerf speed back or have their frontal weakspots removed, so they would only be 2HK when hit in the back.
I agree with you about the Starshot missile and even the frontal weakspot, which, whether the lore says it's there or not, shouldn't be a thing in the game due to balance reasons, especially on fortress. However, if Eldar vehicles are going to get that kind of armor buff, that means wave serpents are going to need a damage reduction, because as it stands, they do the highest anti-vehicle damage of any faction's vehicles, including the predator, along with the ability to outrun any non-eldar vehicles. So in that, you have to choose whether you want to be more survivable or keep your current anti-everything-transport's weapon damage.
I think reducing the damage taken in the frontal weakspot to just let you survive the second Lascannon shot with a 5-10% HP left on the vehicle would be enough, but maybe it would be better to reduce the accuracy, increase the bloom (spread increase per shot) or make it overheat a bit faster.
They could change the weakspot so the ekstra damage would only be applied once, or only if it had over 50% health. (covered by scrap or something) I also think letting the lascannon work like a long range melta would fix that too.
It functions as intended. Massive vehicle damage, ineffective on close enemies, and slow enough to fail and or get you killed if you dont surprise your enemy. Situational yes, but still very effective. You can always use a plasma cannon if you want more versatility.
Melee's TTK is too low, resulting in near instant death for many players. Head Shot modifier is +125% DMG, which is what allows range to soft counter melee. Power Fist attacks more slowly, should not ignore your D.Bash and your weapon should not break as clang should be replaced with Block. Spoiler Information located here. Combat Knife Basic Attack TTK: 2.4-sec, 8 Basic Attacks, 0.3-sec Attack Speed, 3.4% Stamina Drain Combat Knife Charge Attack TTK: 2.4-sec, 4 Charge Attacks, 0.6-sec AS, 0.1-sec Stun, 7.7% Stamina Drain Combat Knife Defensive Bash TTK: 3-sec, 4 D.Bashes, 0.75-sec AS, 0.25-sec Stun, +100% Block Break Stun Modifier, 7.7% Stamina Drain Power Fist Basic Attack TTK: 1-sec, 2 BAs, 0.5-sec AS, 0.15-sec Stun, 10% Stamina Drain Power Fist Charge Attack TTK: 1-sec, 1 CA, 1-sec AS, 0.3-sec Stun, 22.5% Stamina Drain Power Fist Defensive Bash TTK: 1.25-sec, 1 DB, 1.25-sec AS, 0.75-sec Stun, +20% Block Break Stun Modifier, 22.5% Stamina Drain Due to the much higher tier of the weapon the Power Fist does have a definitive advantage against the Combat Knife, including in Blocking. Both players should recoil when a Block is performed, unless a D.Bash is involved. Block should by default cost the same amount of Stamina of the attack that was Blocked. Differences in weapon Strength should modify the Stamina Drain by 25% per point. Weapons with higher Armor Penetration than the Blocker should deal damage through the Block, simulating the Blocking player giving to the blow to prevent their weapon from being damaged in the first place. D.Bash should be able to break through Block for an increased Stun. For example: Combat Knife(S4, AP-) vs Power Fist(S9*, AP2) Because of the AP2 the Power Fist would be able to deal 83.5% of its damage through the Combat Knife's Block, which would cause; PF BA TTK: 1.85-sec, 3 BAs PF CA TTK: 1-sec, 1 CA PF DB TTK: 2.5-sec, 2 DBs Because of the 5 higher Strength, each 10% cost Basic Attack of the Power Fist would cost the Combat Knife 22.5% Stamina to Block; however, the amount of Stamina lost could be decreased when Armor Penetration is taken into account. For instance, because 83.5% of the damage can bypass the Knife's defense the Stamina increase(+125%) could be reduced by 83.5%(20.6%), which would change the PF BA Stamina Drain from the CKnife to 12.1%. A player with a Knife receiving healing could last longer against a PF, possibly long enough for the ally healing them to reach melee range and help them fight the enemy with the PF. In contrast, the Power Fist Blocking the Combat Knife's BA would cause the Knife to lose an additional 0.9%(3.4 - 125%) Stamina as the hit was reflected back. Charge and Sprint Attacks should increase the Strength modifier for Blocking by 1 and 2 respectively, causing the Knife to lose no additional Stamina when its Charge Attack is Blocked by the Power Fist and causing the Knife's Sprint Attack to drain some Stamina from the Power Fist when Blocked. So, really the Knife's best bet is to stay at range from the PF, time Charge Attacks for the minor Stun or use a D.Bash to give you some breathing/killing room. *Power Fist, like most weapons, were given additional Strength to adjust their damage and thus TTKs. Combat Knife(S4, AP-)[TT S4, AP-] Basic Attack TTK: 2.4-sec, 8 BAs, 0.3-sec AS Chainsword(S5, AP-)[TT S4, AP-] BA TTK: 2.1-sec, 7 BAs, 0.3-sec AS Power Sword(S5, AP3)[TT S4, AP3] BA TTK: 2.1-sec, 7 BAs, 0.3-sec AS, 66.8% Block Penetration vs CKnife/Csword, 16.7% Armor Penetration vs Power Armour Frost Blade(S6, AP3)[TT S5, AP3] BA TTK: 1.5-sec, 5 BAs, 0.3-sec AS, same BP/AP as PSword Power Axe(S7, AP2)[TT S5, AP2] BA TTK: 2-sec, 4 BAs, 0.5-sec AS, 0.1-sec Stun, 83.5% BP vs CKnife/CSword and 16.7% BP vs PSword/Frost Blade Frost Axe(S8, AP2)[TT S6, AP2] BA TTK: 1.5-sec, 3 BAs, same as PAxe Power Fist(S9, AP2)[TT S8, AP2] BA TTK: 1-sec, 2 BAs, 0.5-sec AS, 0.15-sec Stun, same BP/AP as PAxe Thunder Hammer(S10, AP2)[TT S8, AP2] BA TTK: 1-sec, 2 BAs, 0.5-sec AS, 0.2-sec Stun, same BP/AP as PAxe, AoE Splash Agreements are splendid. The Lascannon should have a brief delay(I.E. 0.5-sec to 0.75-sec) before firing, during which time a targeting laser should appear and either the player's reticle should lock in place or their model's turn/aiming rate should decrease. It should have a brief recharge period(I.E. 1 to 1.5-sec) and also generate heat(I.E. 20%) per shot, which provides a fire rate decrease without directly decreasing its actual fire rate. Additionally, the weapon's damage could drop over range. The LC should only be able to 1-Hit-Kill a C/SM with a Head Shot or a Body Shot if they are wounded, while the reduced damage legs take should help against people trying to snipe feet. This is where failure starts. No one has ever asked for the Lascannon to "be made easy to use" vs infantry. We simply want it to "be made BETTER THAN IT CURRENTLY IS" against infantry because it is less effective than it should be. When something is wrong you should usually want to make it right. Eldar Vehicles should be more durable than Imperial ones. A Lascannon should destroy a Rhino with 5 shots to the rear or 6 to the sides/front, while a Wave Serpent should take 6 from any side; however, when employing their Serpent Shield, which should be default wargear or it, damage taken from the sides/front could be reduced, pushing the LC hit req. up to 7. In addition to being more durable and typically more heavily armed Eldar vehicles should also be more maneuverable, not only in strafing ability and/or forward boost speed but also with a "Jink Saves" mechanic. With a refilling resource the vehicle could quickly accelerate in any horizontal direction for the purpose of avoiding incoming shots. In return for their baseline superiority, Eldar vehicles should cost more to spawn, have a longer cooldown timer and a smaller number they can field at once. Spoiler I.E. Eldar Wave Serpent Transport Capacity: 12 Troops Requisition Cost: 175 Req Cooldown Timer: 6-minutes Field Limit: 5 Wave Serpents Rhino Transport Capacity: 10 Troops Requisition Cost: 150 Req Cooldown Timer: 5-minutes Field Limit: 6 Rhinos
