Forums » Suggestions
Give Gatling Cannon HVs some love... again...
This has been suggested a million times, but i will do after others again
HV gats are kinda useless now, both in pve, and pvp, due to their abysmal spread, basically zero autoaim compared to other gats, and just arent worth it at all.
I think HV gats should be better, as they are not found in every station, nor used by anyone nowdays, as gat2s are better in every way.
This should change.
So what I am suggesting is
- Increasing its damage to 420
Or reducing firing delay to 0.065 seconds, or keep it at what it is now, as possibly its dps would be too high (over 6400 if I calculated correctly)
- Lower their energy use to 8, or keep at 10 if ends up beeing too powerful
- increase velocity to 205 m/s
- Give them the same autoaim what gauss cannons/plasma devastators have
- increase their mass to 1200-1600 kg
- reduce spread to be somewhere halfway between a gatling mk2 and a queen gat
- license levels should be 8/-/5/-/-
Thats it.
This alone would make it a good late-game weapon, what requires some skill to use, and moderate license levels. Also it would be much better for both pve, and a rather unusual, but new type of long-range narrow spray weapon in pvp for players to try out, and even master, as using only mk2 gats gets kinda boring.
Would be an excellent close-ranged shredder paired with flechettes, even if the a/a of those wouldnt be increased.
HV gats are kinda useless now, both in pve, and pvp, due to their abysmal spread, basically zero autoaim compared to other gats, and just arent worth it at all.
I think HV gats should be better, as they are not found in every station, nor used by anyone nowdays, as gat2s are better in every way.
This should change.
So what I am suggesting is
- Increasing its damage to 420
Or reducing firing delay to 0.065 seconds, or keep it at what it is now, as possibly its dps would be too high (over 6400 if I calculated correctly)
- Lower their energy use to 8, or keep at 10 if ends up beeing too powerful
- increase velocity to 205 m/s
- Give them the same autoaim what gauss cannons/plasma devastators have
- increase their mass to 1200-1600 kg
- reduce spread to be somewhere halfway between a gatling mk2 and a queen gat
- license levels should be 8/-/5/-/-
Thats it.
This alone would make it a good late-game weapon, what requires some skill to use, and moderate license levels. Also it would be much better for both pve, and a rather unusual, but new type of long-range narrow spray weapon in pvp for players to try out, and even master, as using only mk2 gats gets kinda boring.
Would be an excellent close-ranged shredder paired with flechettes, even if the a/a of those wouldnt be increased.
Reducing the firing delay wouldn't help. As it is, it has a lower DPS than what's calculated on paper because shots aren't calculated at the given firing delay. If this problem alone is fixed it would be a decent capship v capship weapon.
Regarding your statement of "This has been suggested a million times":
Rule #7 - Search First, Bump Old Threads, or Post New ones with a Link.
Search the forum before posting a new thread.
If there are Suggestions of significant value, that have persistently been useful and well-defined ideas for years, which have not been implemented: then feel free to keep raising those ideas, every so often (but perhaps no more than once every few months).
Threads up to six months old can be "bumped" by a new post. And older threads can be directly linked from a new discussion of the same topic.
EXCEPTION: If the developer explicitly says "No" to a given Suggestion, then that should not be bumped or further advanced.
But, otherwise, lack of developer response is not an indicator of disinterest.
Rule #7 - Search First, Bump Old Threads, or Post New ones with a Link.
Search the forum before posting a new thread.
If there are Suggestions of significant value, that have persistently been useful and well-defined ideas for years, which have not been implemented: then feel free to keep raising those ideas, every so often (but perhaps no more than once every few months).
Threads up to six months old can be "bumped" by a new post. And older threads can be directly linked from a new discussion of the same topic.
EXCEPTION: If the developer explicitly says "No" to a given Suggestion, then that should not be bumped or further advanced.
But, otherwise, lack of developer response is not an indicator of disinterest.
"But, otherwise, lack of developer response is not an indicator of disinterest"
I didnt even thought that
I just forgot to link them, as I wrote it very quickly
These are the ones I could find
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37933
Similar, but not the same
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37934
again, similar
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37425
My old suggestion
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/36953
I didnt even thought that
I just forgot to link them, as I wrote it very quickly
These are the ones I could find
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37933
Similar, but not the same
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37934
again, similar
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37425
My old suggestion
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/36953
+1 to HV changes