|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
683
   |
Posted - 2013.08.06 13:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
Lowratehitman crying?
Oh this is rich.
Please continue. |
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
683
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 13:24:00 -
[2] - Quote
lowratehitman wrote:
No crying.... just a RETORT to all the QQ ing I see everyday on this fourm over AV nades.
There are certain vehicle users who do indeed cry quite a lot. That is because, I assume, they are juvenile persons who struggle with some of the realities of vehicle vs AV balance, and also how to balance expectations with reality.
There are also those who have tried to have rational discussions with the AV users, to little or no avail, because of the same mentality affecting certain AV users.
Lets try and step above that type of behaviour, because quite frankly, the Devs need all the help they can get on producing an actually balanced vehicle vs AV dynamic.
We could try and have a real discussion on AV nades, but just like the other thread currently going on it, it eventually just turns into people pointing fingers and whining. I am really getting tired of even trying to get involved in those discussions.
|
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
683
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 13:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
lowratehitman wrote:
Im not dying by AV nades..and I understand that only things that KILLs players is the things they complain to be op
I just think it should be broke down into 3 skill trees and that would lower the av nade problem for a minute
Up the dmg on prox mines and fix the contact so that they are useable tools..i would use them.
I don't think proto AV nades are OP, but I do think standard and advanced are. I like people being compelled into spending SP to gain effectiveness.
I actually think that splitting the tiers of grenades would make proto AV grenades MORE common, as opposed to less, because people would be willing to invest SP just for what they perceive as a counter to logi LAV's.
Proximity mines could use a buff, but I also think their needs to be more flavours of them, with a heavy and light variant, people would need to equip for what they intended to destroy. |
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
684
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 13:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
lowratehitman wrote:
I agree with you, and I am sure you agree with me that this is a "squad" based game. How many "squad" based vehicle users do I see on the field, I know many tank driver that rambo the field, and the are my friends, and I tell them the same thing....
If I rambo into a squad of players I have a low chance of survivability, and that is the same for vehicles. Half the time my av nades dont even "hone" on its target or detonate on contact.... but I dont cry about that all day.
There are very few tankers who roll solo. Even fewer of the really good tankers roll solo consistently. I do it when I have time in the morning and my corp channel is pretty much vacant, but generally that means I play in an entirely defensive mindset, where I retreat at the first sign of AV. There are many games where the only method I have of self preservation is a wholesale retreat to the redline every time the enemy decides to focus any sort of interest on me. I don't have a problem with this.
The tankers you know who claim to rambo a whole team are either lying, or only tanking when they see an enemy team with no 6 man squads on it.
When a tank rambos a whole team and lasts through a match of PC, then we can talk about tanks being too strong, but right now, in a PC match, a tank that gets within throwing distance of a couple of infantry goes pop, even without them running dedicated AV, which is kind of garbage. |
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
684
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 14:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
lowratehitman wrote:
Last pc battle i fought aginst MAPLE...he had no threat from my av..nor did the other 3 tanks...
So if there is no problem with av nades in a PC battle...why such a problem in pub matches?
Its all about being 100% honest..... You do understand that I have rode and recoreded video with some of the best tank drivers that indeed do run rambo in pub matches.
So no one brought flux grenades? No disrespect to maple, but any of the upper tier armor tankers would have ripped him apart in short order, because of the imbalance of shields v armor. Just because you brought anti armor weapons to use against a shield tanker does not make them balanced, it just means you broke out the wrong tools for the job.
Also, using AV nades versus a shield tank is not the issue, it is mostly AV nades versus armor tanks, because of the bonuses versus armor that explosives get.
If you are riding and recording with a tanker, are you firing the turret? Are you hopping out to kill or hack something? If so they are not really riding solo are they?
But please, post a whole match video where you ride in a turret, don't get out, don't fire the gun, and are the only two guys in a squad versus some real opposition where the tanker runs rambo over the enemy. No LOL ambush though, that is scrub tanking. |
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
684
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 14:26:00 -
[6] - Quote
lowratehitman wrote:And it may sound that im doubting your word, which I promise im not. But You said 2 infantry throwing av nades. In your opinion, how many infantry should it take throwin nades when the "hardeners" have expired to "pop" a tank?
Without hardeners or reps, 4 AV grenades will pop any Madrugar that isn't built for hiding in the redline, but those wouldn't be out in the field anyway.
I think a better number would be six, but even five would be better, if only to prevent the whole bumrush with AV grenades thing that happens quite often. Where this breaks down though is that if you nerf AV grenade damage then you make them less effective against Logi LAV's which are already insanely durable, which would be counter productive.
This is why there needs to be that total rework of vehicles and AV that is currently in progress, there is too much disparity between the power needed to pop a Logi Lav and a well fit tank. If you turn down AV to make tanks more survivable, then LLAV's run amok, and if you bump tank HP to be more resilient, then they could pubstomp like you describe.
Overall, I think AV nade damage at proto could remain at its current level if there were a longer delay for restocking and a higher set of fitting requirements to use them. This would enforce the compromise that players should take for running an AV option on an anti-infantry suit.
There should be a push from CCP to make AV a role where it requires a complete spawn to be effective. You dedicate that clone to tank popping, instead of AR, Sidearm, and oh yeah, I also have these tank poppers in my back pocket. |
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
684
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 14:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
lowratehitman wrote:
I can do that, and I will...do you run a tank? I can ride with you! And I will not help fight av. But I will say that when you say "real" opposition, im not clearly understandin, cause all im hearing is that us "av" users have a "no" skill crutch.
I am not one of those who says that AV is no skill. I am one of the rational tankers who wants to find an enjoyable role for both sides of the equation. As a tanker, I don't want to be relegated to staying as far away from infantry as possible. I don't want god mode, I want engaging encounters with infantry that can destroy me, so that it becomes more of a test of both of our skills, not just my ability to survive while infantry chase me around with AV.
Yes, you can ride with me, just send me a message in game and we can set it up. |
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
688
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 17:31:00 -
[8] - Quote
lowratehitman wrote:
That sounds very logical and well thought. I agree a n av '"only" suit and more required skills can be a viable option, but perhaps that "suit/class" should be more powerfull due to the SP sink and dedication. My problem is not the tanker brother, its the lav's , and not being a problem where it is actually a headache, they are more tiresome if anything.
I perhaps should have been more clear. I don't think the AV nades should be toned down in strength, just that the AR user carrying them should have to give up some tank to fit them. Or Equipment if a logi, step down the sidearm if a heavy etc. Having to make a MEANINGFUL sacrifice to their anti-infantry role needs to be the drawback to equipping AV nades of proto level. The rewards are already up there, but the downside(not having a flux, or a core locus) is not enough.
Logi Lavs are going to be really tweaked in 1.5, I am reasonably confident of that. There needs to be changes made ot their resistances, modules, speed, and HP levels to make them more suited to their actual role, instead of being used offensively as battering rams. |
|
|
| |
|