DUST Search - lolswarm launcher

Needless Sacermendor wrote:

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

Your dropsuit should be able to take down more than one person. But I digress.

- Ok ... firstly you seem to have this the wrong way round ... yes my dropsuit should be able to kill more than one person, as should your vehicle, as should my AV fit. My point was it should no REQUIRE more than one opponent to take out my dropsuit, your vehicle or my AV fit, unless your vehicle REQUIRES more than one person to operate. If that were the case you'd have World of HAVs because who wouldn't spec something that could stand up to multiple enemies n laugh it off !?

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

A tank should take more than one AV person to kill, because they are supposed to be a massive threat. I would expect a tank to shred infantry left and right, assuming it goes unopposed. And it should take teamwork to bring it down. That's why they have such a massive price tag, because losing one is a big deal. The only thing that should be abe to solo a tank, is another tank. Either that, or keep the way it is and massively reduce tank and associated modules by 70-80% so I don't go bankrupt losing them all the time

- This paragraph offers nothing to support your argument other than they should be a massive threat ... well they are ... why do you think EVERYONE has some form of investment in AV.
- Why should 1 person be able to "shred infantry left and right" yet "take teamwork to bring down" ... that my friend would be the pinnacle of over powered !
- They have a massive price tag to try to deter them from being spammed in pub matches, the price has nothing to do with their survivability against individual AV ... it has more to do with the age old Eve saying ... I'm sure you've heard it by now ... it goes like this "don't fly what you can't afford to lose !". At the moment it's CCP deciding how much things cost, but at some point supply and demand will be the deciding factor and if there's high demand, prices will be high and if they're one man wrecking machines like you want, trust me, demand would be high.

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

Like I said, They shouldn't get a huge raw hp buff, because that indeed would make them overpowered. Instead, they should have some sort of countermeasures system so they can disrupt your AV, making them harder to kill. I described the system in my post (you did read the whole thing right? Shocked

) Which allows a tank to disrupt one form of AV, at the expense of being vulnerable to the others. For instance, if I put a swarm launcher countermeasure in there, then your swarm will be less effective (not totally ineffective, read the tooltip for swarms to see what I mean) but that means I still have AV nades and forge guns to kill me. If I equip countermeasures against AV nades, swarms and forge guns can still get me. I can be destroyed, but it isn't a simple matter of hopping into an AV suit and killing me, then hopping back. I shouldn't lose a million isk tank in 4 hits from a 20,000 isk suit.

- yes I read your post and I chose to discuss your reasoning behind wanting a HAV to require multiple specialists to counter.
- What would be the difference between countermeasures and a hp buff ... same end result, more shots to kill, more time to run away, more time to run repair modules, less effective AV weapons, it's all having the same effect, it's been discussed to death, but the hard facts are, you're facing proto AV in basic HAVs, but that's another discussion again.
- To be fair I like your idea of countermeasures being specific to AV types, I hope when they implement them they are set up like this, I say when because it has been acknowledged by devs they intend to, but in a balanced system that would be a direct nerf to AV so they would have to be rebalanced a small degree at the time anyway.

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

Imagine if the free militia suits could kill a proto suit in the time it takes for one person to kill a tank. There'd be screaming all over the forums. Vehicles should be no different.

- This analogy doesn't work as we currently don't have proto vehicles being killed by militia AV, what we have right now is quite the opposite !

In Summary - I believe HAVs should be a dominant force against infantry, which they are and they should be countered by the same number of people occupying it, leaving balance between the remaining infantry. Either that or they should be extreme end game assets requiring at least a years worth of training before you can even drive the hull, costing at least ten times the price and only be called in by big corporations when they need that edge over an opponent, since you're effectively taking an extra man off the other team to combat one man on yours.
Giving HAVs bonuses from occupants is the only reasonable solution to requiring more than one enemy counter, having skills for gunners to train to bonus your countermeasures, or supply added power to active or passive defensive modules increasing hp repaired or damage resist values. Do you not see the potential of this and how balanced it maintains 2 equal teams ?


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Xender17 Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 443	Posted - 2013.08.14 18:44:00 - [1] - Quote As a proto swarmer: They seem to cut corners by aiming at vehicle trails instead of the vehicle itself. They are also incredibly pointless against most DS pilots. As also a tanker: I do see all the glitches with them. To the target, swarms are usually invisible. Their ability to track also makes the damage direction sensor pointless. For armor vehicles the swarms do 120% (to my knowledge) and 80% to shields. To vehicles- Of course there is going to be a weapon that can track. You think there wouldn't be something thousand years in the future. Especially when 3-4 (5) unique races grew to develop deferent technologies. To swarms- You can do 2370+ damage to the best HAVs in the game. Though you may say that's deducted by the armor resistance... 15%+ 10% = 25% 2370 - 25%= 1777.5 If HAVs equip resistance mods... Equip damage mods. Don't complain about something you can fix. I am fairly certain armor havs don't usually equip resistance mods anyways. For shield HAVs... yeah they have greater resistance against you guys(a lot). But they also have less average HP than armor tanks and a lot less HP p/s regen too. Shields usually do equip resistance mods because that's one of their few best advantages. 2370 - 20% (natural shield resistance) - 30% (resistance mods) = 1327 + 17% (damage mods) = 1552 On average shield HAVs have around 5000 hp. 5000/1552= 31ish% per hit On average armor HAVs have around 6000 hp. 6000/1777= 29.%ish per hit To HAV's you kill infantry in less a second. To infantry your don't walk in the middle of the street. You also take out 700,000 - 1,000,000 when you kill a tank.
Xender17 Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 446	Posted - 2013.08.15 18:31:00 - [2] - Quote Needless Sacermendor wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Your dropsuit should be able to take down more than one person. But I digress. - Ok ... firstly you seem to have this the wrong way round ... yes my dropsuit should be able to kill more than one person, as should your vehicle, as should my AV fit. My point was it should no REQUIRE more than one opponent to take out my dropsuit, your vehicle or my AV fit, unless your vehicle REQUIRES more than one person to operate. If that were the case you'd have World of HAVs because who wouldn't spec something that could stand up to multiple enemies n laugh it off !? Alena Ventrallis wrote: A tank should take more than one AV person to kill, because they are supposed to be a massive threat. I would expect a tank to shred infantry left and right, assuming it goes unopposed. And it should take teamwork to bring it down. That's why they have such a massive price tag, because losing one is a big deal. The only thing that should be abe to solo a tank, is another tank. Either that, or keep the way it is and massively reduce tank and associated modules by 70-80% so I don't go bankrupt losing them all the time - This paragraph offers nothing to support your argument other than they should be a massive threat ... well they are ... why do you think EVERYONE has some form of investment in AV. - Why should 1 person be able to "shred infantry left and right" yet "take teamwork to bring down" ... that my friend would be the pinnacle of over powered ! - They have a massive price tag to try to deter them from being spammed in pub matches, the price has nothing to do with their survivability against individual AV ... it has more to do with the age old Eve saying ... I'm sure you've heard it by now ... it goes like this "don't fly what you can't afford to lose !". At the moment it's CCP deciding how much things cost, but at some point supply and demand will be the deciding factor and if there's high demand, prices will be high and if they're one man wrecking machines like you want, trust me, demand would be high. Alena Ventrallis wrote: Like I said, They shouldn't get a huge raw hp buff, because that indeed would make them overpowered. Instead, they should have some sort of countermeasures system so they can disrupt your AV, making them harder to kill. I described the system in my post (you did read the whole thing right? ) Which allows a tank to disrupt one form of AV, at the expense of being vulnerable to the others. For instance, if I put a swarm launcher countermeasure in there, then your swarm will be less effective (not totally ineffective, read the tooltip for swarms to see what I mean) but that means I still have AV nades and forge guns to kill me. If I equip countermeasures against AV nades, swarms and forge guns can still get me. I can be destroyed, but it isn't a simple matter of hopping into an AV suit and killing me, then hopping back. I shouldn't lose a million isk tank in 4 hits from a 20,000 isk suit. - yes I read your post and I chose to discuss your reasoning behind wanting a HAV to require multiple specialists to counter. - What would be the difference between countermeasures and a hp buff ... same end result, more shots to kill, more time to run away, more time to run repair modules, less effective AV weapons, it's all having the same effect, it's been discussed to death, but the hard facts are, you're facing proto AV in basic HAVs, but that's another discussion again. - To be fair I like your idea of countermeasures being specific to AV types, I hope when they implement them they are set up like this, I say when because it has been acknowledged by devs they intend to, but in a balanced system that would be a direct nerf to AV so they would have to be rebalanced a small degree at the time anyway. Alena Ventrallis wrote: Imagine if the free militia suits could kill a proto suit in the time it takes for one person to kill a tank. There'd be screaming all over the forums. Vehicles should be no different. - This analogy doesn't work as we currently don't have proto vehicles being killed by militia AV, what we have right now is quite the opposite ! In Summary - I believe HAVs should be a dominant force against infantry, which they are and they should be countered by the same number of people occupying it, leaving balance between the remaining infantry. Either that or they should be extreme end game assets requiring at least a years worth of training before you can even drive the hull, costing at least ten times the price and only be called in by big corporations when they need that edge over an opponent, since you're effectively taking an extra man off the other team to combat one man on yours. Giving HAVs bonuses from occupants is the only reasonable solution to requiring more than one enemy counter, having skills for gunners to train to bonus your countermeasures, or supply added power to active or passive defensive modules increasing hp repaired or damage resist values. Do you not see the potential of this and how balanced it maintains 2 equal teams ? You want 700,000 - 1.5-8 mil isk + at least 7-8 mil sp to be taken down by at most 200,000 isk +2 - 3,000,000 sp (Proto-ADV suit + proto swarms + AV nades + maybe proto nanohives.) You could equip damage mods. But overall that's what you're saying. Extremely high risk with a small chance of ok award.