151 replies to this topic

[AsianJoyKiller]

A lot of people aren't getting it. This isn't about dying to the turret or not being able to kill it.
If you've ever seen me or Beemann play, then you should know that turrets aren't one of the things that's actually a big problem for us.

This is about the fact that the MG turret does at least 80 DPS.
Do you know what else does 80 DPS_ The Submachine Cannon.

Now you may ask, "But AJK, doesn't the HE nade do at least as much damage as a grenade launcher_"
And yes, yes it does.
But like the grenade launcher, it also requires manual aim and timing to get a direct hit and do that damage.
On the other hand, the MG Turret is an aimbot. It doesn't miss.
That means when you're supported by a turret, it's similar to having a second mech supporting you. And while they don't move, they have perfect tracking.

So now you're thinking, "Why not just take it out before it shoots you_"
Well, because you won't notice a properly placed turret until you move right into it's position.
There's a reason that my turrets last half a match unattended and net me several kills and at least half a dozen assists. And I still really don't think it's that hard to place a turret smartly. In DM or TDM, find the high ground you want to hold and plop the turret down where it will cover your back, but can't be seen right away. In Siege or MA, put in a place that covers your objective and that has you being seen before it does. If that's not actually easy, then GA must have made me a turret placing genius, or I'm really overestimating the positioning skills of the general public.

You want the TL;DR version_ Here you go.

Why should an item, where the greatest skill requirement is deploying it in a good location, be doing as much damage as a primary weapon being used by an aimbotter_

[D20Face]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Why should an item, where the greatest skill requirement is deploying it in a good location, be doing as much damage as a primary weapon being used by an aimbotter_

Because it never lasts long enough to do the damage.

It gets two seconds, at most three, against an opponent. That is 240 damage MAXIMUM if the opponent is even half awake.

They get one of them. You get two HE charges. You know how much damage those HE charges will do_ Way more total. And, if that wasn't enough, you can pop one on the turret if you're really that worried about it. They've now more than likely only done less than 50 damage to you with the turret and you've still got a grenade with their name on it.

Burst is also king in Hawken. That damage spread over a prolonged period is worth way less than the 200+ instant face melting of the HE charge.

[defekt]

nonsiccus, on November 15 2012 - 07:33 AM, said:

defekt, on November 15 2012 - 02:40 AM, said:

What you’ve done there is construct a straw man argument.  That would be the fault of the spawn system abuse, not MG turrets.

Even if it is an abuse of the spawn system as you say, it is still the only weapon (type) that can do this.

Treat the cause of a problem, not a symptom of it.  In your scenario the cause is spawn point abuse and the dual MG turrets are merely a symptom of that.

[Zeshi]

D20Face, on November 15 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Why should an item, where the greatest skill requirement is deploying it in a good location, be doing as much damage as a primary weapon being used by an aimbotter_

Because it never lasts long enough to do the damage.

It gets two seconds, at most three, against an opponent. That is 240 damage MAXIMUM if the opponent is even half awake.

They get one of them. You get two HE charges. You know how much damage those HE charges will do_ Way more total. And, if that wasn't enough, you can pop one on the turret if you're really that worried about it. They've now more than likely only done less than 50 damage to you with the turret and you've still got a grenade with their name on it.

Burst is also king in Hawken. That damage spread over a prolonged period is worth way less than the 200+ instant face melting of the HE charge.

Turrets, if properly placed and especially in objective matches, typically last much much longer than what you have described.

Edit- My two cents, make it have some kind of a cooling off period, and maybe give them a time limit on how long they can last, something like 3 min

Edited by Zeshi, November 15 2012 - 09:32 AM.

[Immie]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

80 DPS

Heck, I'd say that's a very low estimate. My guess is that it's identical to the vulcan, a whopping 133 DPS. On an aimbot.

D20Face, on November 15 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

Because it never lasts long enough to do the damage.

If you immediately focus a turret down in close range (1 shot from secondary + ~2 seconds of primary fire) it can easily chew through 200 HP before it goes down, and considering the owner of the turret should be shooting you too, a light mech would be dead before he can even switch targets. A heavy mech will have their health advantage completely reversed, and still have to worry about reloading their secondary before they can fight back.

If you hit it with 2 secondary shots, ducking behind cover between them, you take 10 seconds to kill the turret, completely reveal your position to an aware opponent, and are completely exposed to a quick flank while your pants (secondary weapon) are down (reloading).

If you turn a corner into an engagement and don't even know the turret is there (most likely situation, since it doesn't have any radar signature), you are completely wuzzy fuzzied.



Basically, you should be right, but the turret's DPS is so unreasonably high that you're not.

Edited by Immie, November 15 2012 - 09:29 AM.

[PiVoR]

The ones who didnt seen 3 MG turrets placed next to each other shall not try to deny its OPness!
MG turrets used by well cordinated premade teams can cause alot of trouble when used right.




And i almost forgot, Sharpshooter is OP!

[AsianJoyKiller]

D20Face, on November 15 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Why should an item, where the greatest skill requirement is deploying it in a good location, be doing as much damage as a primary weapon being used by an aimbotter_

Because it never lasts long enough to do the damage.

It gets two seconds, at most three, against an opponent. That is 240 damage MAXIMUM if the opponent is even half awake.

If your turrets are only lasting that long, then you are not placing them well and/or not using them correctly.
If your using your turrets in a way that they only last a few seconds, it'd be like using a HE charge for its splash damage. Sure, it does something, but you're not getting the full potential out of it.

Immie, on November 15 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

80 DPS

Heck, I'd say that's a very low estimate. My guess is that it's identical to the vulcan, a whopping 133 DPS. On an aimbot.

80 DPS is my low-end estimate based on my observations (I meant to test it precisely with Bee, but never got to do that.).
On the high end, after spending over an hour last night review footage of videos where people are being shot solely by turrets and doing a few basic caculations, I'd say MG turrets don't do more than 120 DPS.

[Tezkat]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 10:06 AM, said:

Immie, on November 15 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

80 DPS

Heck, I'd say that's a very low estimate. My guess is that it's identical to the vulcan, a whopping 133 DPS. On an aimbot.

80 DPS is my low-end estimate based on my observations (I meant to test it precisely with Bee, but never got to do that.).
On the high end, after spending over an hour last night review footage of videos where people are being shot solely by turrets and doing a few basic caculations, I'd say MG turrets don't do more than 120 DPS.

Naw. 80 DPS is a good estimate. Looking over some of my videos, MG turrets get in up to 6 hits per second at 14 damage each. Slightly less against a distant or moving target.


Heck, here's some examples with hard numbers from the DM video I posted yesterday:



Now, I'll be the first to admit that I'm nowhere near as skilled as some of the folks here, but I do think that they showcase typical turret encounters.

At 2:30, I enter a room with a lone MG turret. I immediately turn and alpha strike it, sprint for a cover position, and finish off the turret from a safe location. During the 3 seconds of the initial engagement and rush for cover, the turret hits me 11 times for 14 damage apiece, plus 2 more hits in the fraction of a second when I step out to finish it off (182 total damage). That's probably something approaching a best case scenario unless you have the weapons, items, and/or optimizations to one shot a turret. Lone turrets are dangerous but rarely life threatening.

We see a straight up turret-assisted fight a few minutes later at 6:48. The guy I just killed respawns right behind me after I repair and immediately drops an MG turret. I engage before the turret is even fully deployed, but it hits me 18 times for a total of 252 damage in the 3 seconds during which I'm in range--I turn to flee halfway through. My opponent gets in a meagre 3 assault rifle hits during the initial engagement, plus a grenade and 4 more rifle rounds in the back during my escape, which leaves me very close to death.

Earlier, at 3:50, I engage an opponent and try to hunt him down after getting off an EMP. He retreats to the safety of his turret, which hits me 18 times over 8 seconds (again, 252 damage, which in this case kills me)--I'm a more distant, moving target this time, but I don't even notice the turret until it's almost killed me.

I was definitely being too greedy in that chase, and frankly I think that encounter presents a good way in which turrets should be used, but it still showcases their power--there wasn't really any cover available in that situation. That guy finally topped the killboards, leading me by a good 1k XP, and apparently just parked himself in the room with his turret to take out anyone that came by.




A MG turret is effectively a free, unlimited ammo HE/Detonator's worth of guaranteed damage. Is that really balanced compared to the other offensive consumables_

I'll agree that 2-3 seconds is the most they're likely to get against a skilled opponent. But that's still about 200 damage. Furthermore, your enemy will likely get a few shots off during the time required to reposition yourself. And then you're fighting at a disadvantage, with both an armour deficit and mobility limited by the turret zoning out a large chunk of the engagement area. Turning to focus the turret means the enemy gets maybe another 2-4 seconds of free fire against you. You're effectively fighting a 2v1.

With teammates backing you up, that's not so bad. On your own_ You're fuzzy bunnied...

Edited by Tezkat, November 15 2012 - 11:43 AM.

[GunsnButter]

The problem with MG turrets is that they take several grenades or other high powered ordnance to kill, which I am usually spending that time on killing the enemy mech. They are a ridiculous damage booster that doesn't go down until you have time to deal with it after the fact.

[3Jane]

Tezkat you could've saved a fair bit of your life in those fights by moving/dodging slightly differently, I won't bother explaining because its difficult to do so with text.

Anyway from what I've seen it may be that there was an accidental buff, which I could believe. They are about twice as strong in hp as before it feels like.

[Tezkat]

3Jane, on November 15 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

Tezkat you could've saved a fair bit of your life in those fights by moving/dodging slightly differently, I won't bother explaining because its difficult to do so with text.

Oh yeah, I know. With the perfect clarity of hindsight and replay analysis, I can see tons of things I could have done to win those fights, both with respect to mobility and tactical decision making. (Also, it was 2AM, I was distracted with commentating, and by that point I'd been playing/recording Hawken for 6 hours straight. )


In their current form, MG turrets are effectively stationary, radar stealthed allies unloading a primary weapon on passers by with impeccable aim.


There are two changes I'd like to see to the MG turret.

First, I think it needs a damage nerf. At close range, turrets are a serious threat, and it makes fortification of certain areas much too easy. Even if you dropped it all the way down to, say, 10 damage per shot (currently 14 damage 6 times per second), that's still 60 guaranteed DPS over at least a few seconds, which is more than enough to turn the tide of a battle, especially in FFA DM. It requires much less skill to use than HE Grenades or Detonators, and it never runs out of ammo if players use it to camp an area.

Second, it should be visible on radar. Maybe it could have a stealthy radar signature and only be visible at close range or when firing, but some of the most dangerous things about turrets right now are the surprise factor and not knowing where the fire is coming from.


If you combined both of those changes, I'd agree to buffing the turret in other ways to compensate--perhaps slightly improving accuracy at range, for instance.

As I mentioned earlier, I'm okay with their current armour levels; you don't want them to be completely useless in team fights. Actually, making them weaker but tankier might be an interesting option (say, halving damage but significantly increasing armour).

[3Jane]

Yeah don't look in to it too much. Its gotta be hard to play when commentating and recording for sure. The important thing is to assign turrets as even more a threat than the player right now haha.

Radar visibility is definitely needed yeah, a few people have mentioned that.

Damage currently might be a mistake though from what other have said about the dev comments on it. It is really sick damage at the mo.

[TheChaffeemancer]

It reminds Kiwi of how he used Sentry guns in TF2. Just hide it in an out of the way place (preferably inside a bush where people can't see it), and you'll do absurdly well. Kiwi has defeated everything short of Ubercharged people with the hidden level 1 sentry in TF2. The same principles apply with that tactic as they do in this game. Don't give the enemy time to focus your turret and if they try, you have an easy time punishing them for it.

Some people don't seem to get with these things is stuff like the time it takes to notice them (clever opponents can make it so that you don't really see them until it's too late) and the fact that it forces you to shoot/dodge the turret AND the player, turning it into a 2 on 1 fight.

[Beemann]

D20Face, on November 15 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

It gets two seconds, at most three, against an opponent. That is 240 damage MAXIMUM if the opponent is even half awake.

They get one of them. You get two HE charges. You know how much damage those HE charges will do_ Way more total. And, if that wasn't enough, you can pop one on the turret if you're really that worried about it. They've now more than likely only done less than 50 damage to you with the turret and you've still got a grenade with their name on it.

Burst is also king in Hawken. That damage spread over a prolonged period is worth way less than the 200+ instant face melting of the HE charge.

You know how easy it is to avoid H.E. charges_
And like Asian said, if your Turret can't last long enough to do about 400 damage, then you deployed it in the wrong place, or at the wrong time.

Quote

Whilst I agree that its sustained damage might be a tad on the hot side, to assert that it is comparable with a base A-class in terms of effectiveness is nothing short of alarmist tosh.

I've fought plenty of turrets that did more damage to me than several A mechs
I can 1v2 some A class pilots without taking damage
On a 1v1 against a turret, I'm guaranteed to go into the red on my infil, and that IS with cover usage and only really popping out to fire grenades
It's also assuming that nobody sees me attack it, and effectively turns the fight into a 1v2 where one of my opponents is a static aimbot

The MG turret just needs to go back to the way it was before. I still used it a ton then as a method of free enemy spotting and harassment. It's just too powerful for a potentially match-long device at this point, and I fear what will happen if they bring in the repair arm with turrets basically being A class aimbotters who don't know what RMB does

[Tezkat]

It's also important to point out that turrets are extremely strong against mechs with sustained DPS weapons. If you engage them directly with primary fire, then they're doing as much damage to you as you are to them. Popping in and out of cover to eliminate them with secondaries alone is dangerous and time consuming.

[RedVan]

Only problem ive seen with the turrets is how hard it is to hit them with assault rifle/smg.  As for how much damage they do and how much HP they have, not really a problem imo.  Especially if one could hit them with AR/SMG.

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Why should an item, where the greatest skill requirement is deploying it in a good location, be doing as much damage as a primary weapon being used by an aimbotter_

I do agree with that.  Although I will say, I generally fuzzy bunny about turrets in every game I play, and refuse to lower myself to the level of using them.  However in HAWKEN, they're really not a big issue.  I have no problem using them, because I know they're pretty dam easy to take out (with exception of AR/SMG, where you better hope nobody else is gunning for you, because you'll never hit the turret).

Edited by RedVan, November 15 2012 - 01:51 PM.

[defekt]

Beemann, on November 15 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

On a 1v1 against a turret, I'm guaranteed to go into the red on my infil, and that IS with cover usage and only really popping out to fire grenades

I'm not going to get bogged down in a slanging match over this because I broadly agree with you that they're a tad on the hot side at the moment but your continual use of exaggeration is beginning to undermine your argument.  Are you seriously expecting me to believe that you can't go 1-on-1 against an MG turret in a HEAT Infil without it taking you into the red_  Either I'm Kryptonite to turrets* or you're doing something very, very wrong.

* I'm not.

[AsianJoyKiller]

defekt, on November 15 2012 - 02:17 PM, said:

Beemann, on November 15 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

On a 1v1 against a turret, I'm guaranteed to go into the red on my infil, and that IS with cover usage and only really popping out to fire grenades

I'm not going to get bogged down in a slanging match over this because I broadly agree with you that they're a tad on the hot side at the moment but your continual use of exaggeration is beginning to undermine your argument.  Are you seriously expecting me to believe that you can't go 1-on-1 against an MG turret in a HEAT Infil without it taking you into the red_  Either I'm Kryptonite to turrets* or you're doing something very, very wrong.

* I'm not.

Beemann, for some strange reason, doesn't like the HEAT. He uses the AR.
It confuses and bewilders me.

Edited by AsianJoyKiller, November 15 2012 - 02:22 PM.

[defekt]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

defekt, on November 15 2012 - 02:17 PM, said:

Beemann, on November 15 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

On a 1v1 against a turret, I'm guaranteed to go into the red on my infil, and that IS with cover usage and only really popping out to fire grenades

I'm not going to get bogged down in a slanging match over this because I broadly agree with you that they're a tad on the hot side at the moment but your continual use of exaggeration is beginning to undermine your argument.  Are you seriously expecting me to believe that you can't go 1-on-1 against an MG turret in a HEAT Infil without it taking you into the red_  Either I'm Kryptonite to turrets* or you're doing something very, very wrong.

* I'm not.

Beemann, for some strange reason, doesn't like the HEAT. He uses the AR.
It confuses and bewilders me.

Well that does go some way to explain matters because those turrets do seem to be dog-hard to hit with high ROF weapons at middle to long range.  Even so, I ran an AR Infil for longer than I did with HEAT and although I did need to get a bit closer to make the AR hits count, I was still nowhere near being forced into the red; he must have been headbutting the damn thing!  

[TheChaffeemancer]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 15 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

defekt, on November 15 2012 - 02:17 PM, said:

Beemann, on November 15 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

On a 1v1 against a turret, I'm guaranteed to go into the red on my infil, and that IS with cover usage and only really popping out to fire grenades

I'm not going to get bogged down in a slanging match over this because I broadly agree with you that they're a tad on the hot side at the moment but your continual use of exaggeration is beginning to undermine your argument.  Are you seriously expecting me to believe that you can't go 1-on-1 against an MG turret in a HEAT Infil without it taking you into the red_  Either I'm Kryptonite to turrets* or you're doing something very, very wrong.

* I'm not.

Beemann, for some strange reason, doesn't like the HEAT. He uses the AR.
It confuses and bewilders me.

Kiwi opted for the AR over the HEAT when he played infiltrator, but that was more a "training wheels" thing then personal preference. Kiwi planned on switching to heat as he got some levels/skill with how the Infiltrator handles.