Gatekeeper in a nutshell. Narrated by an ECUS player.

"In line" with 3 times the use time.

Guess what, a similar comparison was made with the PPA, where it performed somewhat even with the Marauder, but that was mostly because it was used in such quantities that there was less for each user to get. Bit of the same with the GK.
Also, the GK isn't niche. Vulcan would be niche since it's range restricted. GK has, relative to everything else no actual restrictions for range. All the while it maintains a comparable DPS over time to the Saron.
So to reitterate, it does comparable (roughly) damage to the Saron, which is a bit behind the enforcer (point blank values) - but it can keep doing so not only past the point where the saron has to let the CoF reset to maintain good accuracy, but way, WAY beyond that point thanks to the absurdly easy to use nature of the weapon, courtesy of 500 m/s and practically no drop or CoF.

Do you even check these things (me and Mongychops do), or do you try to spend all your time spouting nonsense 40K warp references that do little but distract any and all topics where it gets posted?

Ah wrong.

I see whats going on, and I seen how stupid people can be.

The Gatekeeper is the games only long range ES AV secondary.

Since the Saron & Enforcer are mid range ES AV for the most part.

True, for the Harasser variant it's used about 4 times as much as the Saron.
Tank variant is closer, that is true.

Problem lies in that it gets the range -and- comparable damage to the "mid range" weapons.
Doesn't matter if you consider it "long range", for overall balance's sake it should be inferior when at the "optimum" range of the "mid range" weapons, but it's not.

And it's absurdly easy to use, whereas to get the full mileage of a weapon like the Saron takes skill from the user.

Incidentally, the -exact- same arguments were made in the defense of the P.II PPA before the nerf (but it was nerfed regardless). Are you saying this nerf was unjustified? Sould it have been left -as is-? If it's ok for the GK to be alone in occupying the "long range" category, the same should have been true for the PPA. But, as it turns out it wasn't ok for the PPA to hold such a unique position, it isn't ok for the GK to occupy a similar one.
Note, I don't actually advocate that the PPA be restored to the pre-nerf state; It was simply too easy to use for how good it was - just like the GK is today.


TL;DR: Why is it ok for the GK to get such special treatment, but the PPA was slammed into the dust for the exact same reason?

The PPA got over nerfed.

The GateKeeper has no ES Equivalents(currently) since its a different ES AV class(long range),

We hit a similar storm as well for our feedback.

It sounds like the downvoters missed the point about why we were involved and what our point of view was: Being harasser people, we offered to host a playtest for DBG in which we did some testing in close to medium combat for the way we played the game. We agreed that for the type of player that the GK was created for, it was fine.

DBG wanted to put in an ES weapon that had no drop, was accurate, easy to use and good for long range. This was it.

What we didn't do is test it at long to extreme ranges and ask for a long range ES weapon that is easier to use than the vulcan. We also don't control what the dev team does with their product. Unfortunately, that last part was missed and it was somehow our fault that the GK was put on live in its state.

As an easymode weapon, it's fine, as is. I've even authorized replacing the Halberd with the GK for SS AV work. But SS isn't supposed to be fun. Hell Sunderer and Skyguard denial is absolutely boring, but that's not why ECUS goes to SS.

Anyways, welcome to Planetside. I will continue to host / be involved in PS2 playtests as long as I have the ability and capacity.

Then why does it have comparable damage output? Does it get the extra range for free "just because"? By comparison, the Vulcan compared to, say the Halberd (which used to be the long range option prior to the GK dethroning it quite hard) gets better damage at the cost of long range viability/accuracy. Similar comparisons can be made with the rest of the ESAV weapons. But the GK? It has comparable damage to the "mid range" weapons, even if the rest of the vehicle AV weapons are balanced around the idea of range <-> damage as two ends of a scale, the GK gets more than it should.

A hypothetical example from the VS could be if you took the current saron, then made a saron Mk.II that had less CoF bloom and higher velocity, but overall the same damage output. Why would you ever use the "medium range" one when the long range is just plain better? For balances sake the long range one should take a hit to the damage output to even out the extra range.

Yet no, the Gatekeeper doesn't actually make such a trade-off.

True. Although because of the infamy of ECUS other peoples valid arguments are ignored/downvoted, not because they're wrong but because they don't align with some vague interpretation of what you guys say or do.

As for the GK, my beef is that it's both easy and really strong. One of those two has to go.


What happened over on reddit that ended up with me getting chain-downvoted was that people took your outfits comments about the harasser weapons -when used by great players- as gospel for the weapons used by anyone on either platform (tank/harasser). And now we are here, where ECUS members comments weren't false, but the "assumptions" made by the masses for everything else regarding the weapon were.

Yeah. It's those assumptions that got people to where they were. And context means squat when you talk to the masses.

Anyway, Fallout 4 comes out soon. Populations in PS2 are dropping. Time for change?

Are you sure that's what was said? As someone who has also seen your outfit's playtest used to silence other opinions on reddit, I don't think this is the case.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/3jbd8u/ecus_n_friends_pts_showdown_pt_2/

You can even see in that thread, if you open them Flag's posts where he expresses concern about ease of use, and then is either ignored or patronised by ECUS members, including yourself.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/3jbd8u/ecus_n_friends_pts_showdown_pt_2/cunxzwm

A comment sitting at -6 with at least my upvote, you replied to with a one word non answer, and ignored his clarification, implying you were part of the silencing downvote train.

Of Flag must be responding to Scr1n, I was confused there for a moment. But better the confusion of seeing a one sided conversation than losing brain cells reading Scr1ns stupid.

Just replied to your post on reddit, but I'll do one here too.....

Yeah, Flag's post was not clear to me, hence my "one word answer" - but let's put the context back in here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/3jbd8u/ecus_n_friends_pts_showdown_pt_2/cunxueg

I didn't understand that statement, hence my one word answer. While my outfitmate could have been a little less salty, I agree with him, that if you can't hit a target, it is the gunner and not the weapon's fault. That being said, there are 4 issues here:

1) We did not shutdown criticism. We don't think it's OP. I still don't think it's OP. I think as TR it is boring to use and as VS/NC it requires some adaptation to fight, just like EVERYTHING ELSE in this game. The criticism we got during that play-test and the discussion after had to do with how we see the GK, given our experience in harasser combat and the play-test itself.

We did not do a long range test which probably could have answered a lot of questions and gotten different feedback. PTS is open to all players, so anyone could have done a test. We did it our way. We don't sit 3 hexes away shooting at stuff in our normal play, so we didn't think to test it that way. If we do this again, I'll add a long range test to the docket.

My personal opinion on the GK is to limit it's velocity so its range gets cut down considerably and it would make it more difficult to hit moving targets. I would also like an audio adjustment so that recipients can identify what is hitting them and from where. I have a method for engaging the GK when I'm in a Halberd or a Tank. It seems to be working. But I have had to adapt, just as I adapted to Ravens, Lancers and Hornets.

2) Our word is not Gospel. If players want to believe that, it is their choice.

3) As Flag said in an earlier post, and I'm paraphrasing here, but assumptions were made about what we do, our opinion on matters, what we did, and how and where other people's playstyles and understandings of this game fit in with that perspective. There is a lot of overlap. But the point is, that if the outfit that does close-range duels tests a long-range weapon and you have a problem with their findings, please test it yourself, or don't argue until you do.

4) Tone doesn't translate well or isn't well conveyed in text chat, so it is easy for people, like me and my outfit to respond to people, like the posters in that thread, in a salty way when they draw conclusions from our perspective about a subject matter that doesn't align with their assumptions.

TLR Welcome to Internet Discussions.

Lancer is range capped at 750 meters (it didn't used to be an issue, but now that vehicles can see one another from vast distances, I frequently fire at high-flying Liberators / Galaxies, and the projectiles despawn before reaching them.)

Ravens are Range capped even earlier, they pay for it by having much higher alpha. Prowlers can very easily outrange Ravens, and the distance at which Raven projectiles despawn is short enough that the invisible / silent projectile issue that the Gatekeeper (and sometimes Lancer) have simply doesn't exist.

The difference is that neither Lancers nor Ravens can be used as a MBT / Harasser weapon (Well, they can to an extent, but it's awkward in the extreme, and very fragile for the amount of nanites spent. Rear seat gunning seems to be awkward intentionally, to reduce potential effectiveness.) Lancer users cannot chase you at 50-100+ kph, nor fire a constant volley at you with minimal interruption (GK has an extremely fast reload, comparatively speaking.)

The Gatekeeper has 500m/s projectiles, which makes dodging as infantry nearly pointless against a gunner of even minimal skill, and the lack of recoil / bloom is superior to the massive recoil / bloom on the Lancer especially. Compare the 500m/s of the Gatekeeper to the 300m/s of the Saron / Enforcer. The Gatekeeper is closer to the ~650m/s projectile velocity of the high-range line of snipers (Parallax, RAMS .50, etc) then it is to the weapons it was designed to compete with.

Honestly, I can't think of a single mitigating factor that reigns in the Gatekeeper short of the fact that it occasionally needs to Re-arm. Its just as effective at 10 meters as it is at 800 meters, with the exception that you do need to lead fast moving targets slightly. The rapid, high-projectile-count that the GK has allows for extremely easy targeting at range. Firing a test shot on the Lancer eats a significant portion of your ammo pool, whereas the Gatekeeper only needs to tap the Fire button a few times to get a fairly good feel for how much they need to lead (at least in my experience with it.)

Another well fabricated video, and unsurprisingly filmed from the northern indar region. But Psst hey, titan AP can do the same thing at those ranges.

Bah just buff AP tank shells range and bullet speed again. Harassers will be put down so fast even at that distance no one will care about a measly secondary every again.

No it can't. It sports close to -half- the velocity and much more drop than the GK does.

Don't think so, it is more of a get more skillful at the game problem, like a lot of the players here like to point out.

GK & GK-H have 500 m/s velocity, Vanguard main gun is 275 m/s. If weapon velocity doesn't matter, why did the GK need to be buffed from 360 m/s to 500 m/s while on PTS?

The second fastest velocity vehicle AV weapon is the anchored Prowler (325 m/s), but that is also TR.

It's more like the user of -not GK- has to be skilled, and for the user of the GK it's not needed (by comparison).
When something is mostly boiled down to just holding down a mouse button and keep the crosshair/cursor on the target (no leading, no accounting for drop), that's not skill. That's braindead easy.

OK, slight exaggeration here. No leading at all? That isn't the case against moving targets, like esfs and harassers. You still have to lead, not as much as other weapon platforms.

Nice jump in logic here. Person doesn't actual downvote and does make a reply, whether or not the length is acceptable to others. Somehow they are downvoting others? Helping to silence people?

Wow!