| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 |
421. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: I have no issue with escaping to recover. Vehicles should not easily recover in less time than it takes an AV Gunner to travel to a supply depot, repair and reload. Cover is OP, nerf cover.
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:33:00
|
422. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
shaman oga wrote: Shield Booster : the main problem with it, is that is only reliable if you are not uder attack, unlinke armor rep, shield is blocked by incoming fire, i have yet to find a balanced solution. The only thing i've thought is t...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:32:00
|
423. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Any chance you would be in favor of adding shield regen to the extenders (not a whole lot, just divide the hp by the regen time on the base hulls) just enough to maintain a shield recharge time, to provide a resemblance...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:29:00
|
424. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: I'm probably going to nerfhammer the plates because the difference between 120mm and 180mm is more than a 2x multiplier, which accounts for the Surya's Ungodly ability to soak fire. I've said before, the idiot-proof auto-...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:27:00
|
425. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Jack McReady wrote: dont you think this effort is futile without racial parity in terms of AV options? No
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:25:00
|
426. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: There was also the problem where MLT and STD swarms where so much worse than their older brothers that even when people picked them up, it couldn't do anything even against unskilled failfits (That problem has largely ...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:24:00
|
427. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: Surya. I'm well aware of how obnoxious the Surya was. Like I said, if I have my way that HAV's ability to soak fire is going to be dropped back near the sagaris into manageable. How many times do pilots have to say "Rat...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:22:00
|
428. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Jack McReady wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Part of the problem in Chrome was there was a cultural inertia where everyone REFUSED to load swarms or forges. "refused" is the wrong word. I remember it like it was yesterday when I had my trip...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:21:00
|
429. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: Maddies were dealable. That's because the idiot-proof auto-aim AV had a bonus against armor. Honesty the concern point I have is the Surya. An improved tank over the standard tank is OP, nerf the improved tank. Oh wa...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:20:00
|
430. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Monkey MAC wrote: And Infantry still hated it, because you would get that 1 guy (Spkr, Taki) who decided that enemy tanks weren't enough, so they went round going 20+ every match because no-one could stop them. Our aim was OP, nerf the abilit...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:15:00
|
431. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: before skills wiyrkomi swarm is 430 DPS if you include base reloads. All 4 missiles hitting in half a second is not 430. this is before skills and damage mods. See above Ishukone assault forge damage before anything...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 21:03:00
|
432. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr why do you bother talking when you know I think your attitude is toxic to the game. You consider my attitude toxic because I refuse to back down on the defense of vehicles, because I want that to be my chosen role, w...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 20:59:00
|
433. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: Chrome vehicles means chrome AV across the board. Of course, because that's what infantry wants. Easy, god-mode AV. which means that forges and av nades go back to beast mode Yeah, like 3 packed Lai Dai doing enough d...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 20:53:00
|
434. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: I want AV to be super potent if tanks are going back to the god-mode days of chromosome. Of course you want AV to be super potent. Might as well be able to call in a warbarge without requiring any WP at all. Tanks have...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 20:47:00
|
435. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: I will be altering passive mods to be viable but less efficient. That's how the vehicle modules were until 1.7, when they were all removed. 3 AV grenades stays. Of course you want those to stay. If I'm proposing chr...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 20:42:00
|
436. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Toobar Zoobar wrote: Not the 3 AV grenades. 3 packed Lai Dai = dead tank. I can't accept that. None of us can. They were OP before okay. 2 Packed Lai Dai against an armor tank with its shields down is still almost enough to destroy ...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 20:35:00
|
437. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Monkey MAC wrote: Isn't Chromosone considered the Dark Age? Glorious age, when tanks melted tanks and many millions of ISK was lost between pilots, per match. When tanks roamed the map near unkillable? If you're talking about MLT AV, then...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 20:30:00
|
438. HAV revamp proposal - in General Discussions [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: I am working on a proposal involving re-introduction of V/AV balance from chromosome and modify what has frequently been referred to as too short of a TTK in HAV vs. HAV engagements Of course, more damage for AV. Rattati ...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 20:25:00
|
439. CPM Disscussions - in General Discussions [original thread]
cris bleu wrote: I care too. Would love to hear Judge' s views again. He's one of the most decent people I've met in-game and I was sad when he disappeared. What, the guy who single-handedly had railgun range, damage, spool up and refire time...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 17:25:00
|
440. Daily Swarm Launcher Discussion - in General Discussions [original thread]
Atiim wrote: #2. Means nothing as it's 2 players against 1, therefore the 2 players should have a very easy time. To put this into laymens terms have 1 player jump out in the open while two other players start shooting at him, and then see how...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2015.01.17 08:24:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |