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

Looks more like a max lockdown max reload AP Prowler. Assisted by a GK.

When i play TR and my AMSs get sniped by Vanguards, it looks exactly like in the video. Just saying.

Awww you moaning now??? VS have weapons that are just as bad, its the NC side that needs boosting with its Harasser weapons! Then both VS & TR can start to moan and NC can get to troll your threads!

I think Gatekeeper rounds should act like Tracers

Then they work both ways

*sees the debate over gatekeeper balance that has erupted in this thread*

How bout someone records dps comparisons of faction equivalents taking down one vanguard from the front in the VR room? Not to mention important stat comparisons like muzzle velocity and projectile drop, so we have a much more clear picture of what the gatekeeper is doing to what the other faction weapons supposedly aren't.

This reasoning is of course including that each faction is different and some factions are and should be better at X than Y and vice versa.
Personally I prefer different but equally as useful, in terms of a top gun, that is too important of a weapon to overlook since vehicle play can shadow over air and infantry easily.

You died. Relax, and respawn.

Ok

GK MBT 450ms, Bloom per shot 0.05, Minimum CoF 0.15, Drop of 2, reload (before modifiers) of 1.75s, damage of 170.
Saron MBT 300ms, damage of 284, reload of 3s, no drop, cof and bloom unknown
Enforcer 300ms, damage of 500m, unknown drop (other then high).
Halberd 275ms Damage of 1000 (before modifiers) reload of 3.25

Hate using the gatekeeper, the halberd excels it in every way on the field.

Gatekeepers just easier to use as a shot missed from the gatekeeper is not the same as a shot missed from a halberd.

Not sure why people complain about it, it's horrible against infantry that are elevated above or the same height as you as you need 3 direct hits to kill one guy.

Halberd only needs 1.

Yours sincerely,
One of the best Prowler drivers on PS4 Ceres

I agree, in the hands of an experienced gunner (and crew as a whole), the Halberd simply suits the typical tanking playstyle/tactics that most experienced tankers employ. For such crews, the Halberd is simply so versatile that it trumps the other options unless you absolutely know you are going into a situation where a specific niché is needed (like CQC Vulcan/Aphelion/Mjolnir).

I think a good way to change the GK is to simply make it harder to use, for example by lowering its velocity, increasing projectile drop, and perhaps lowering RPM (whilst increasing damage / shot to compensate).

All they need to do is add in the CoF bloom as they did with the Harasser variant.

The truly frustrating issue with the Gakekeeper is the render-range shenanigans, it really is point-and-click easy to keep a constant rain of shells hitting their target at incredible distances.

The small CoF on the Harasser variant has greatly reduced the problem. Exactly why they didn't make the same change to the Prowler variant is beyond me.

(As to the video - although the GK contributed, something with much more oomph was also in play - the damage disappeared far too quickly for GK alone)

Halberd is very good but i'm personally not convinced the Halberd is better in every way. Yes Halberd can 1 shot infantry - and it is good AV - but you actually have to hit the target and in that respect, the GK is far superior.

If you have a dedicated/good Halberd gunner and especially if you like closer range engagements, the Halberd excels.

If you have a randomer or like extreme range engagements, the GK excels.

As to the general population ? Well the GK is pulled 4 times more than the TR Halberd. Overall KPU is very similar, vehicle KPU the GK wins, air KPU the GK wins.

I have both available to my Prowler and I always pull the GK. Super versatile - deadly accurate - as someone else said, like a Basilisk on steroids.

Does anyone want to look up how many Gatekeeper defenders cried about the old (and broken) PPA for just the same reasons they try to ignore now?

It is? Based on the numerous "GK OP NEFR!!!" threads (and comments for that matter) I've seen, it isn't only the super-long-range aspect people only have an issue with, but also that bad gunners can land the majority of their shots at medium ranges as well, which is significantly harder using some of the other weapons.

Wasn't the change they made to the -H version an addition of 2.0 increased recoil and not enlarged CoF/Bloom?

I'm not in favor of giving the weapon increased CoF/Bloom, as that wouldn't make it harder to use, it would just make the weapon itself worse, since skill wouldn't be able to make up for it. Recoil however, can be compensated for by player skill, which is a good thing (and the lack of a skill-requirement to be somewhat effective with the GK is what many people complain about). WHich is also why I suggested tweaking velocity, projectile-gravity, RPM (rounds/minute) / DPS (damage/shot) etc, which can all be adjusted for by player skill.

By giving the weapon increased CoF you are basically reducing its effective range, without giving any way of making up for it via player skill. This would make the GK as inefficient at long-range compared to the alternatives, and the alternatives are superior at the ranges where the GK should be capable. Depending on skill level, there might be a range of 50-100m where the GK would retain its niché, but it wouldn't be anything that would warrant ANY competent crew to use the weapon.

The Harasser was changed/nerfed due to the superior mobility, stealthiness/size, and terrain-traversability of the Harasser compared to the Prowler. It was so easy to set up the Harasser in an inconspicious location, and just shell away, whereas doing the same in a Prowler, is inherently more risky, as there is a larger risk of detection, and not quite as many effective hiding places for such a platform.

He is assuming competent gunners, which many tankers assume for their weapon-balancing discussions (myself included most often). With a competent gunner, the Halberd is better in at least 95/100 situations, unless you are doing stuff experienced tankers rarely do (shelling moving targets [without cover] at 350m+). The synergy of the Halberd with mostly everything concerning MBT's is just too good to pass up for a crew that can use it properly.

They are similar because the average tanker (and gunner) is generally pretty bad, and any weapon which enables poor gunners to perform adequately, will therefore improve the stats, without the weapon being stronger in experienced hands. What will happen if you nerf the GK (in its current state) like you proposed by making it more unreliable (which is what increased CoF does)? The experienced crews STILL won't use it (due to the weapon being unreliable at long-range, and the Halberd/CQC-option are flat out superior at closer ranges), and the inexperienced people will be equally effective with the GK and the alternatives (and that is an optimistic prediction knowing their nerf/buff history), meaning not many people are going to use it. All in all, resulting in a weapon that has no place on the battlefield.

Make it harder to use, and perhaps let it synergize a bit better with the typical tanking strategies, and the weapon itself would be decent. It's just the hordes of rookies, that still aren't that effective alone even WITH the GK, that make it out to be an issue, simply due to large numbers and ease of use.

TLDR: Make the weapon harder to use in order to make it more ineffective in the hands of rookies.
If you make the weapon unreliable through CoF changes, neither rookies nor experienced crews will ever use it.

...apologies - it was recoil not CoF that was added to the GK-H, just enough to hurt the long range accuracy. BUT not on the Prowler for whatever reason.

I've been on the receiving end of a GK many many times as NC and VS - by far the most frustrating is when you're getting hit and see no tracers, nothing, just see your health disappear in bite sized chunks with no hope of retaliation. Maybe it's just me who hates that particular aspect...

no you aren't the only one, the reason why there are so much complaints IMHO about the gatekeeper is that mentioned render bug which happens far more often as a victim of the gatekeeper then it does from getting hit by the saron for example.

they need to fix the render bug, i expect if they finally squash it or reduce the frequency complaints about the gatekeeper will reduce by the same margin more or less.

No problem, everyone makes mistakes

I already gave my 2 cents on why the GK-H was changed and not the Prowler version. I can repeat it if you like:

The Harasser was changed/nerfed due to the superior mobility, stealthiness/size, and terrain-traversability of the Harasser compared to the Prowler. It was so easy to set up the Harasser in an inconspicious location, and just shell away, whereas doing the same in a Prowler, is inherently more risky, as there is a larger risk of detection, and not quite as many effective hiding places for such a platform.

I'll then add that many people were using 1/3 GK-H's to just drive up onto a hill in the middle of nowhere and start shelling. Doing the same with a Prowler would be more difficult for various reasons, examples could be poorer terrain traversability or small hull (easier to hide & hull down).

Also, a nerf to the Gatekeeper by adding recoil won't make it harder to use for the rookies at medium ranges, where they wouldn't be able to land their shots with other weapons (which is also what many people are complaining about in my experience). I think fixing the render/tracer bug would go a long way to "fixing" the issues many people have with the GK. Also, make it slightly harder to use (perhaps via the suggestions I listed earlier), and I honestly think it would be in a decent spot. I won't be using it much personally due to the lack of alpha, but I'm sure many people aren't as spoiled with gunners as I am/was.

As Pelojian wrote, it is nothing special about the GK-itself, moreso the range at which it can potentially operate. It is an annoying bug yes, and I've had to deal with it from many sources. The most annoying source I've experienced of it to date, was the old pre-nerf Rocket Pods, being used at super-long ranges which made them sound like noseguns, even though they destroyed your tank in 2 seconds. Another weapon guilty is the Dalton, where (at least in olden times) it could directly impact your tanks hull without making more of a sound than a dull "plink" or something similar. At least the GK only tickles

When you say no hope of retaliation that makes me cringe. Can't you seek cover, repair, and then fire back at the enemy targetting you? I generally have no issues with enemy tanks at ranges where tracers aren't rendered as they simply aren't a threat, at least unless they are the top 0,1% of tankers (and again, that is only if you don't have available cover, which you should have if the enemy is so far away). And those people generally don't engage at such long ranges, due to the lessened kill-potential. I find Prowlers to be very easy to dislodge from their vantage points, especially at such ranges, as you are almost guaranteed to get in the first salvo (due to his FoV most likely showing a large area, and you are just a small "blimp" in that area.

A couple of times I've also taken a more laid-back route to countering GK-users at super long range. I simply stay exposed to their fire, and just repair away. Eventually they will either get bored, or realize they aren't doing anything. Or they run out of ammo I guess It's great if you can get to a spot and you have something to do near your computer. I've done it whilst rolling myself something to smoke personally.

That's definitely one of the problems with the gate keeper. Unlike any other weapon in the game it is not visible where it is coming from. You can be getting hit from the thing and you can't even see it hitting you let alone where it is coming from.

It has extreme range, no drop, and is viable weapon against all target types.

The Vulcan was OP so everyone got harasser in MBT top weapons. The DEVs felt bad that the Vulcan was having competition so they gave the TR the Gate Keeper?! What tha?!

Of course, it is someone with a TR avatar defending it.

You are wrong, it is not something special about the GK, but rather a bug related to weapons being used from very far away, especially if you are participating in large battles. The same thing happens with a myriad of weapons, like Fractures, Lancers, Enforcers, MANA-AV turrets, Dalton etc etc. But thanks for letting us know you haven't spent 2 seconds searching for similar issues, and just immediately thinks its only about the GK

They gave the TR the GK because the TR needed a long-range AV weapon, whilst the NC/VS needed a short-range AV weapon. Not because of the bullsheet you are spouting there Lets start talking about the Aphelion then, which is similar to a Vulcan at CQC, but has MUCH more utility.

Of course its someone who has never used the weapon, thinks a well-known bug is solely due to the GK, and comes up with ridiculous reasons as to why the GK was introduced, that attacks the GK

I'm not against changing it (making it harder to use), but I don't think it needs a nerf per se.

Nobody gives a ****. It's the only weapon that has this "feature" pretty much by default, that is consistently used at extreme ranges. You don't have to Q-spam the whole horizon line to find the source of the invis enforcers, most of the time they will be somewhere in plain view.

No, not to such a degree they did not and it's a ******* disaster they got the longest range of all, on top of the longest range prowler main cannon because now they rule open spaces uncontested. Btw, which secondary is the long range one in the NC shop? The enforcer with a trajectory of a brick?
Long range, easy mode weapons mean stretching out engagement range when scaled up, making the game unfun and boring, full ******* stop. Maneuvering? What maneuvering?

I don't know what the devs were smoking when they figured out that thinking **** they add to the game through is completely unnecessary.

Luckily your opinion doesn't change that it IS in fact the truth

Ah, so you mention only the Enforcer, which is the least capable of the lot I mentioned. But of course you aren't biased in your arguments It happens often with Lancers, Daltons, Fractures etc (which I also mentioned, but you of course ignored). I guess those other weapons didn't help your argumentation so you just ignored them and pretented I didn't mention them eh?

The degree (and implementation) is completely irrelevant to the point I was making. The TR needed an ES weapon with longer range than the Vulcan, which they got, just like the NC/VS needed an AV-CQC-weapon which they got, from a design point-of-view.

But of course you have to jump at me like I'm the one that chose the current implementation of the GK. Whether the GK was implemented right is a completely different discussion than the point I was making in the above quote (why they were implemented from a design point-of-view). I never commented upon the strength of the GK itself. If you are going to try to use my words against me, then at least try to stay on topic/point Otherwise I'm just going to ignore such comments from now on.

The Enforcer has much longer effective range than say, the Vulcan/Mjolnir have. Therefore, it is their long-range weapon, from a design point-of-view of course. Whether you aren't satisfied with the current Enforcer is irrelevant. If you aren't firing at ranges much longer than 300m the Enforcer does just fine with practice. Ranges further out than that, and your targets have to be idiots to die to you (even if you are in a AP/GK Prowler). If you are fighting Prowlers, the Enforcer does perfectly well at the ranges the GK excel at, due to the Prowlers generally being Anchored and thus immobile. If you cannot hit stationary targets at long range with the Enforcer, the problem lies with you, not the weaponsystem.

Well that was polite, what a nice way to butt into a discussion If only you could've stayed on topic to the points I was making, instead of trying to derail the discussion by going on tangents. I never commented upon the strength/power of the GK, so I don't see why you are replying to me like you are.

I've decided to ignore the remainder of your post as it was completely off-topic to my comment, which you replied to.