What's wrong with the gatekeeper [showcase] in under a minute

What you witness here is at least one (probably) max reload + max lockdown AP prowler with a little help from a gatekeeper. The gatekeeper did not do most of the damage.

You should try the harasser gatekeeper yourself again and report back here. "Sniping" and "accurately" looks different in my book.

To be fair, destroying deployed Sundies from 600m is nothing special to the GK.

This always reminds me to the old PPA Herasser`s.
When a weapon let´s say is 20% over the top why can´t SOE aka DayBreak do some small adjustment?

Anyway an empire specific AV weapon were needed for TR.

Fun fact: Gatekeeper and Gatekeeper-H perform worse than their counterparts Saron and Enforcer.

Gotta love all the obvious TR players trying to downplay how OP the Gatekeeper is.

The simple fact is NOTHING should be that easy to consistently land hits, at that rate of fire, from that extreme range.

End of discussion honestly.

I think the most hate comes from the range potential.

Even if each rocket only did 1 damage? Let's not end the discussion based on that silly argument there, thanks.

Well, first of all I feel there is a lot of animosity towards the GK for the same reasons there is animosity towards the Prowler, people don't know how to counter-play against such weapons. There are a number of ways to exploit the inherent weakness' of the GK. I'll list a few below:

• The GK relies on a steady stream of fire being unloaded towards the target. Find ways to break this steady stream of fire, and your advantage soars. A good example is utilizing cover between Halberd reloads.
• The GK has very poor DPS compared to similar weapons, so take advantage of that. The GK's advantage lies in increased ranged capabilities (although not as much for the Harasser). Close the range gap and utilize Saron/Aphelions (or just the Halberds) superior DPS.
• Simply out-repair the damage it deals and reset the fight. It deals quite low DPS, so assuming 2 Engineers you should be able to practically outrepair the damage even in a Harasser. If you are using tanks, 1 Engineer is almost enough to fully out-repair ALL the damage it deals.
• Low Alpha means less of a surprise/"Oh ****" factor
• The low damage per shot makes it harder to fully exploit mistakes made by the enemy, like them showing their weaker armor for a brief moment.
• Etc.

Now that that has been said, I'm of course not against changing the GK. Note, I'm saying changing, not nerfing, as I don't think the issue with the weapon is that it is too strong, at least in an experienced gunners hands. The weapon is too easy to use for inexperienced gunners though, at least compared to the similar weapons, and therefore I agree that it should be made harder to use. If it is nerfed I can almost guarantee that not many of the top crews will be using the weapon for anything other than trolling or taking rookie gunners for a spin.

I think changing the GK can be done in several ways, with different outcomes. I, for one, wouldn't like if it got the "Harasser" treatment that the GK-H did, as that would make it pretty unviable for the Prowler, even in skilled hands. Keep in mind that the Prowler received the GK in order to provide it with a long-range ES option.
Giving it recoil/bloom (in combination with the current bloom), renders it useless at long ranges regardless of skill, and invalidates the entire concept of the weapon. Over shorter ranges, other weapons are simply much more effective and should always be preferred (for obvious reasons). In short, with increased recoil:

• It would be less effective in the hands of the average Joe (which is a good thing).
• It would be like a lesser version of the Saron (since it cannot keep sustained fire over long range) whilst not having the CQC option for closer range.
• It won't ever be a viable weapon for skilled gunners due to the other options being far superior (Halberd trumps it pretty much in every situation, even with the CURRENT version of the GK, assuming a skilled gunner). Increasing recoil would just make it more unreliable.

I would prefer if the weapon wasn't nerfed per se (I don't use it at all myself, since I find other weapons far superior in experienced hands, but one of my gunners recently wanted to try it so I have it purchased ), but rather made harder to use. I would reduce the projectile speed slightly and give the projectile increased drop which would make it harder to use. Perhaps lower RPM slightly but increase damage a bit to compensate.
Reducing the projectile speed, increasing drop (and perhaps tweaking the rounds / minute - damage / shot ratio) would have the following outcomes:

• It would be less effective in the hands of the average Joe (which is a good thing).
• It would be a different weapon than the alternatives we currently have
• It would reward skill as it would still be pretty accurate over range if you are good enough to account for drop/lead like with any other weapon
• It would still retain its long-range niche compared to say the Halberd.

Also, the missing tracers (which by far isn't only relevant for the GK, but for many other weapons as well) should be fixed. I still despise being hit by something like rocketpods and it either sounds exactly like a nosegun plinking away at me, or I get no sound at all.

Not at all

If people want the gk to require a decent amount of skill to use then it needs it's damage buffed.

A lot of people go on like the Rtarded pilots who think AA should just slightly annoy and tickle.

If you want the gk to require a decent amount of skill, it needs it;s damage buffed

OR

Stop being nerftard communist shtters and we reduce the enforcer drop and make the saron a more effective long range weapon.

Most vs don't want that and prefer their identity crisis Saron lol...same old same old.

uh im not against that off hand id have to see the tradeoff first hand i think..

i mean i know the numbers says its not very powerful per round but have You Had YOUR *whatever* melted by One?(no where near as fast as the vulcan sure but That Distance!)

have You been picked off by one, as an Infantry running full out, from 200m?

the last thing it feels like is low DPS

"make the saron a more effective long range weapon."
also a decent trade imhVANUo

It isn't very powerful and there is no magic. I have yet to die to one on my alts and it doesn;t scare me because i don't ever hang around long enough to allow something like that to kill me.

If you FEEL like you're dying that quick, you might want to check that your net isn't chunking you or that you're getting shot from more than 1 or just more than you think.

There is no magic that makes it perform better than it says...just like everything in the game.

The only issue is that it can be hard or impossible to know where you are getting shot from

And with that explains the fallacy of "it killing so quickly"

Sorry folks but it has to at least be more than you think if it is killing that quick because it doesn't just magically surpass it's dps ability. Because it is so hard to know where you are getting hit from, none of you can even give proof of it killing quickly but we can look at weapon stats and the laws that define the game.

In short, stop being dishonest.

I agree that the Gatekeeper is broken as hell, but this is a case where you pull a C4 drifter and an ESF, bail, and destroy the user.
Lockdown Gatekeeper Prowlers and the increasingly-present solo GK Harassers are hilariously easy to C4 and it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside for bringing a slice of justice to Auraxis.

FIGHT CHEESE WITH CHEESE

Oddly enough the only time i seem to have trouble with GK, is at the same base in the video.
It may just have to do with that location being easy to counter with GK's with easily
available Tanks given the right circumstances.

Because of this you'll be surrounded by GK's very quickly.

It's a secondary gun. Hello? Secondary.

Right now the Gatekeeper is putting out more real-world DPS than main cannons!

No it absolutely does not get a damage buff under any circumstance.

Well, technically speaking the Enforcer, Saron, and Halberd all put out more DPS than the Vanguard's or Magrider's main cannon. Which actually makes the Prowler the only MBT in this game whose main cannon does more DPS than its secondary (but only because the main cannon DPS is so damn high).

What he's doing is pointing out that you're wrong. The Gatekeeper does less DPS than the Prowler main cannon already (the rapid destruction in the video was, more likely than not, *caused* by a Prowler main cannon). Though of course I pointed out that doing less DPS than a Prowler cannon isn't saying much, since the Prowler AP cannon is probably the highest-DPS ground weapon in the game.

Telling you that you are wrong is not trolling, especially when you actually are wrong.

A lot of weapons in this game have more dps than the main tank cannons, excepting the Prowler, which is weird no matter how you look at it. Looking at nothing but the raw dps of a weapon, however, is a poor yardstick.

The Kobalt (20000--15400 raw damage in 10.9s, or 1834.8--1412.8 dps) and the Basilisk (12500--8350.0 raw damage in 5.45s, or 2293.6--1532.1 dps) have more raw dps than the Gatekeeper (7350--5100 raw damage in 11.25s, or 653.33--453.33 dps). And let's not neglect the Saron HRB (2904.0--1704.0 raw damage in 1.2s, or 2420.0--1420.0 dps) or the Enforcer (6672.0--4000.0 raw damage in 8s, 834.0--500.0 dps). P2-120 AP, considered the pinnacle of monsterdom - puts out 3250--2500 raw damage in 1s, a dps that matches its damage more or less. (Note: I factored splash damage into the first number for weapons that have no damage degradation. Obviously, it does not apply against most Vehicular targets.)

What really matters are the Damage Resistance values.

(Edit: Is that what you mean by "real world?")

So a dedicated AV weapon does the same damage as dedicated anti infantry area suppression weapon, yes, nerf that **** to direct hits only.