[Vehicle] inb4 Gatekeeper gets nerfed into the ground

Gatekeeper is not OP, the TR is just freaking out because they're not used to having nice things.

Nerf Gatekeeper, his 0.75 ADS is OP !!!

TR is overusing them because they are new, the fact that it is useful is coincidence meanwhile anyone not TR is ether neutral or nerf crying because TR actually got something decent that isn't held down by the worst balancing mechanics there are in addition to poor damage.

to those that want to nerf the gatekeeper:

no drop and high velocity are balanced around the low damage (lower even then the saron), stop complaining just because we can slug you at long range consistently at last and that you can no longer just instantly charge to our base perimeter without real AV defense (which you couldn't do to NC or VS)

lancer and ravens do the exact same things to TR as the gatekeeper is doing to you (and they do far more damage the the gatekeeper) stop complaining because the devs were reasonable for a change to all three factions at the same time.

Except the Gatekeeper does everything better than the Lancer. It's Automatic for starters, can 1 clip a vehicle from any range, has a ammo pool of literally hundreds. Has zero downsides.

Your not going to get sniped using it, can take a Tank shell or 2. Its been given all the upsides of the Saron and Enforcer plus 500 m/s velocity . You can argue it has low damage per shell but it has same TK has a Vulcan from any range.

It wasn't okay for fractures to be like this, why is okay now?

I play VS pretty much exclusively.

My point is the fact that at close range the GK has lower DPS than the Saron HRB (in CQC) or Aphelion is irrelevant when the Prowler AP has even higher DPS and alpha than the FPC

I have no doubt the Gatekeeper will be nerfed in some way, theres just no reason to put a weapon in the game that requires almost no thought, you point at your target and you hit it, the velocity is too high and with no drop thats just crazy.

I expect a velocity nerf and drop to be added, i feel adding bloom would be too detrimental to the weapon.

lancer you can charge then fire and do more damage then the gatekeeper and avoid reprisal if you are quick enough you can do the same with enforcer and saron. for the gatekeeper to give out equivalent damage you have to be exposed longer (just like striker).

gatekeeper pays for the no-drop, rof and velocity by having low damage and having to remain exposed to put out equal damage to the saron and enforcer. let's not forget the red rockets screaming shoot me. essentially good for a well supported push.

what matters most is balance and fora long while TR has lacked decent AV other then the prowler itself. even if some people don't think the gatekeeper is balanced because it's similar to NC and VS versions and was made better in some way. remember mr vulcan? they cloned that and gave one to the VS that does the same damage per mag as vulcan with half the rounds.

It's balance and give and take.

i can say the exact same of every infantry gun in the game. what makes the gatekeeper different? because it's a TR weapon filling a void in AV for a change. (they said the same thing of vulcan and see how that is now)

TR needs something that can get a good hit rate at long range and the gatekeeper does that.

without accuracy increasing mechanics such as high velocity&no drop or user guidance&no-drop it will just end up as a fracture 2.0 mounted on MBTs and harrassers.

poor velocity, poor damage, drop, wobble all make for an extremely bad long ranged AV weapon.

the TR's inability to lead at range doesn't mean they should be given a EZnoskill weapon.
The little to no drop can stay, but the velocity has to come down to NC/VS "long range" counterparts, which is 300m/s.
There is no justification for 500m/s.

But you can ADAD, so its all rock, scissors and stones on that basis.

1. In the Training Area I tested the Gatekeeper and tested it against the side armor of a Vanguard with the full "extended magazine" buff. It could not one-clip the Vanguard. Not even against the side.

2. The whole "thing" about the Gatekeeper is the huge magazine size. So even if it could "one-clip" something, that's not really a huge mark in its favor. Other weapons can unload, reload, unload, and reload again in the time it takes the Gatekeeper to work through its magazine.

If I recall it take something like 12 seconds to unload the Gatekeeper. That's massive.
Compare that to Saron that can dump its whole load in 1-2 seconds.

You can one clip its back armor.

One dump (not accounting travel time) 2 seconds+3second reload+2 seconds+3second+2seconds+3seconds+2 seconds+3 seconds+2+3+2+3=30 seconds to fire the same rounds as one gatekeeper mag on a Saron, not accounting for a reload speed increase.

TTK wise, theres a massive difference even accounting a 30% miss rate in the gatekeepers favor

Of course, i am rounding the sarons mag size down to five, but thats really just a technicality that wouldnt make much of a difference in the end number

Heheheh. Funny 'cause it's true!

I'd be interested in seeing a straw poll or something of the numbers of people that think the Gatekeeper is fine as it is, and those who think it needs changing.

I've used it on both Prowler and Harasser, and whilst it is undoubtedly easy to use, its DPS is not overwhelming. However the non-existent CoF bloom, unusually high velocity and absolutely zero projectile drop are quite strong arguments... maybe it could see a reduction in one of those departments. All of them would be overdoing it though, so that's probably what's going to happen.

The difference is infantry weapons are meant to hit tiny erratic targets, not massive slow ones, lol. Theres 0 justification for an AV weapon with 500m/s velocity, no drop, and no bloom.

low damage, long exposure to do any significant damage. that is enough. rockets veering off due to CoF or bloom makes no sense, anytime TR gets weapons with drop the drop is extremely bad. if they add some drop to the gatekeeper i'll expect higher damage per shot for the decreased reliability.

It's past time the NC and VS tasted accurate, reliable long range TR AV fire that isn't AP. we get the gatekeeper and NC and VS are already complaining that TR has a comparable AV weapon so things will actually be balanced for a change.

the only time forumside complains about TR stuff these days is when it is good for it's job but not OP, the rest of the time it's nerf VS threads or nerf lancer/raven threads.

Hmm, looking at the stats on the wikia the only thing of concern is the Magazine size which someone here said it takes 12 seconds to unload. However, this is what concerns me is we only see the weapon damage vs infantry not its real damage vs vehicles as each vehicle has its own own damage resistance value which boosts the damage before the damage is reduced by directional armor. With out these values we can not see the real weapon damage. So there may be something here set far higher then it should be causing the issue.

Okay, comparing it to the Lancer is wrong.

Let's compare it to the Saron. Both have similar TK at close range, both have no drop, but that's where it ends.

While the Saron gets a worse TK the further away it gets because of bloom (Devs thought a no drop weapon would be op without a downside) the Gatekeepers TK stays the same at distances.

My big beef is the 500 m/s, it's ridiculous.

Enforcer dose not have COF either, so TR have HV low damage, NC medium velocity high damage, all balances out.
Vs Has COF, medium Velocity - medium damage, you can argue the VS need a buff on this basis, but you look at the stats and its the same as all 3 near enough.

But its low damage to counter that.

NC has a shield, you have ADAD, TR have glue on our tracks.

We wanted faction traits now we have then and your moaning?

You can't ADAD against 500 m/s.

I'm not sure I feel like the velocity is the only thing making it a little to unbalanced. A small bit of CoF my also do the job...perhaps if they give it a bloom effect like the Saron so you have to feather it at long range it might be more in line.