|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Csikszent Mihalyi
DUST University
Ivy League
43
   |
Posted - 2013.08.15 22:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
Shokhann Echo wrote:Argon Gas wrote:Xender17 wrote:Argon Gas wrote:It's just such an amazing argument.
Imagine if there was a suit for 2m and I could go 60/0 while sneezing on some players.
Just imagine the uproar.
Edit:
I'm not saying tanks are capable of doing that now.
I'm saying they should never be able to, no matter how expensive your toy is. Except it doesn't exist and probably well never exist. Except is doesn't exist and never well. As it stands HAVs cost much more than any suit fitting. This combined with the AV that's become incredibly powerful causes HAVs to be an unviable career for each battle. I think most of us well agree that we worry more about being able effectively go into a career without the constant loss of ISK than KDR. Also no tanker wants to go 60 - 0. We aren't idiots that have no concept of overpowered. There are no OP vehicles (minus LLAV) in the game. The only OP things that exist and that are complained about are infantry based weaponry. We have to deal with the constant infantry only OP gear. So yeah we well complain about OP things. Complaining is to often put with QQ or cry baby. Complain: To make a formal accusation. ISK lost combined with the current state of AV is something to complain about The problem is when tankers say "Oh but militia stuff shouldn't be able to drive me away!". So what are newberries going to do? Hit you with rocks? "Or it should take 4 people to take me down!" So basically pub matches will be a nightmare, and PC matches will be tank514? if you want to fight vehicles, skill into AV, that's what its for, if you don't want to do that, not our problem. I have respect for those that kill me if they are skilled into AV. again COD is that way ==============>
Infantry kills infantry.
AV kills vehicles.
Tanks kill infantry and vehicles.
It's easy to be smug when you are the rock and the scissors. |
Csikszent Mihalyi
DUST University
Ivy League
43
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 22:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
Xender17 wrote:If a full team of AV went against a full team of HAVs who do you think would win?
It only takes 2 in a team to completely shut down the map on vehicles.
A team full of general death machines vs. a team full of the one thing that is designed to take out those death machines? Who do you think should win this? |
Csikszent Mihalyi
DUST University
Ivy League
43
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 23:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
Heathen Bastard wrote:Csikszent Mihalyi wrote:Xender17 wrote:If a full team of AV went against a full team of HAVs who do you think would win?
It only takes 2 in a team to completely shut down the map on vehicles. A team full of general death machines vs. a team full of the one thing that is designed to take out those death machines? Who do you think should win this? it should be an even match, determined by skill. but in reality, the invisoswarms and hadokens will kill every tank before they can leave the redline.
Aha... You do realise if one of those tankers steps out of his vehicle in a militia assault suit, he can probably solo the whole team of AV?
You are saying that a squad of tanks should be balanced against a squad of AV... While the squad of tanks wracks havoc against infantry and other vehicles alike, and the AV does **** all despite fighting the tanks? In what universe is that reasonable game design.
I do want tanks to be able to partake in a battle constructively, ideally without being popped out of nowhere with no chance of reacting to the situation. But some of the arguments that are being raised in favour of simply buffing tanks are just hair-raisingly strange. |
Csikszent Mihalyi
DUST University
Ivy League
43
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 23:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Heathen Bastard wrote:Csikszent Mihalyi wrote:Heathen Bastard wrote:Csikszent Mihalyi wrote:Xender17 wrote:If a full team of AV went against a full team of HAVs who do you think would win?
It only takes 2 in a team to completely shut down the map on vehicles. A team full of general death machines vs. a team full of the one thing that is designed to take out those death machines? Who do you think should win this? it should be an even match, determined by skill. but in reality, the invisoswarms and hadokens will kill every tank before they can leave the redline. Aha... You do realise if one of those tankers steps out of his vehicle in a militia assault suit, he can probably solo the whole team of AV? You are saying that a squad of tanks should be balanced against a squad of AV... While the squad of tanks wracks havoc against infantry and other vehicles alike, and the AV does **** all despite fighting the tanks? In what universe is that reasonable game design. I do want tanks to be able to partake in a battle constructively, ideally without being popped out of nowhere with no chance of reacting to the situation. But some of the arguments that are being raised in favour of simply buffing tanks are just hair-raisingly strange. right, because the AV can't do the militia switch at all, which they probably will as you only really need an AV squad to lock down an entire team's vehicle call downs.
Yes, but that wasn't the question. Should 1 AV win against 5 tanks? That's a more interesting question than "should an entire team of AV win against an entire team of tanks"? The answer to the latter question is an obvious yes. |
Csikszent Mihalyi
DUST University
Ivy League
46
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 13:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:But tanks are expensive, reduce the cost and you're welcome to blow me up, if I can actually have enough money at the end of the game to buy another.
Now we've come full circle, remember the thread title: "I just LOVE the argument that tanks are expensive".
This is why these discussions will always run in circles without leading to any kind of resolve. Before we talk about what's the best balance, we really all need to agree on whether it is okay for something to be really powerful but expensive, so that you have to grind a few matches before you can afford it again (or find another source of revenue).
Unsurprisingly I'm with the OP on the matter. I believe that no matter how expensive and powerful a tank is, it needs to have a good chance of being destroyed for the game to play out well. This means it's not going to be profitable by itself, and that this kind of power requires a bit of sacrifice in terms of ISK.
Also consider this: What's the point of making ISK in Dust, if not to occasionally afford gear that is powerful but not profitable? What _else_ would you do with all that ISK?
A tank would have to be pretty weak for it to be cheap enough to be able to buy a new one in every pub match. We could have a tank variant like that, but that would really deflate the fear-factor of seeing a tank on the battlefield. It makes more sense to me for this to be another category of vehicle, and we kind of already have that in the LAV. |
|
|
| |
|