|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2728
   |
Posted - 2013.08.24 07:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
Void Echo, I'm curious to know how you think it's balanced if it requires 3 people to take out 1 tanker. That effectively takes three people off the field to combat the one person in the tank. Why is it necessary that a solo tank requires multiple people to kill?
I would understand it if each person in the HAV roughly meant another AV specialist required, but only if they were specced into vehicles as well. (Side note on this - I can't believe CCP still aren't working on vehicle locks.)
So I have a question - Do you think it should take multiple AV specialists to destroy one HAV with one pilot in, or do you think that it should be reserved for when you have multiple people in the tank?
If you think it should take multiple AV per solo HAV, could you explain what balances that, in your eyes? |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2730
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 08:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Void Echo, I'm curious to know how you think it's balanced if it requires 3 people to take out 1 tanker. That effectively takes three people off the field to combat the one person in the tank. Why is it necessary that a solo tank requires multiple people to kill?
I would understand it if each person in the HAV roughly meant another AV specialist required, but only if they were specced into vehicles as well. (Side note on this - I can't believe CCP still aren't working on vehicle locks.)
So I have a question - Do you think it should take multiple AV specialists to destroy one HAV with one pilot in, or do you think that it should be reserved for when you have multiple people in the tank?
If you think it should take multiple AV per solo HAV, could you explain what balances that, in your eyes? yes I do, mainly because its a 50-ton or heavier vehicle that's over 3x larger than infantry is... and even irl it occasionally takes one brave person to toss in a grenade but it also more times takes multiple people with rockets to destroy one, and look t the statistics, NONE of the modern American tanks have been destroyed yet. (that was for you people wanting this game to be like real life which is plain stupid as hell). imho, size determines it all, look at eve (the game this game is MEANT to be made after), titans require multiple ships to destroy them, they can never be soloed.
I'm asking what the balancing gameplay factor is - "It's a 50 ton vehicle" doesn't really answer that, unfortunately.
Basing things in a game on how it works IRL is a silly way to do things, I agree - besides which shielding and armour systems are much much better than what we have right now.
I'm a little dubious about your example though - A titan can't really be soloed, no, but a battleship can be soloed by a frigate., for example. The titan is the edge case, much like the MCC. Do you mean to say that you think the cost is the balancing factor?
What do you think the balancing gameplay factor is to make tanks worth multiple AV to destroy? |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2731
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 08:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Void Echo, I'm curious to know how you think it's balanced if it requires 3 people to take out 1 tanker. That effectively takes three people off the field to combat the one person in the tank. Why is it necessary that a solo tank requires multiple people to kill?
I would understand it if each person in the HAV roughly meant another AV specialist required, but only if they were specced into vehicles as well. (Side note on this - I can't believe CCP still aren't working on vehicle locks.)
So I have a question - Do you think it should take multiple AV specialists to destroy one HAV with one pilot in, or do you think that it should be reserved for when you have multiple people in the tank?
If you think it should take multiple AV per solo HAV, could you explain what balances that, in your eyes? yes I do, mainly because its a 50-ton or heavier vehicle that's over 3x larger than infantry is... and even irl it occasionally takes one brave person to toss in a grenade but it also more times takes multiple people with rockets to destroy one, and look t the statistics, NONE of the modern American tanks have been destroyed yet. (that was for you people wanting this game to be like real life which is plain stupid as hell). imho, size determines it all, look at eve (the game this game is MEANT to be made after), titans require multiple ships to destroy them, they can never be soloed. I'm asking what the balancing gameplay factor is - "It's a 50 ton vehicle" doesn't really answer that, unfortunately. Basing things in a game on how it works IRL is a silly way to do things, I agree - besides which shielding and armour systems are much much better than what we have right now. I'm a little dubious about your example though - A titan can't really be soloed, no, but a battleship can be soloed by a frigate., for example. The titan is the edge case, much like the MCC. Do you mean to say that you think the cost is the balancing factor? What do you think the balancing gameplay factor is to make tanks worth multiple AV to destroy? since the beginning of the game, tanks are the biggest weapons able to be used by infantry, not the MCC thus making the tanks the largest sized assets in battle, im not saying that tanks will always be the biggest because CCP has mentioned things a lot bigger being brought into this game. but for now, tanks are the titans of dust.
That's not what I'm asking - size isn't really an effective gameplay factor. It certainly does have some bearing on things, but does raw size make it worth multiple people to take out? So bigger = better in this case?
I'm not trying to disagree with you here, but I'm trying to figure out why you believe a lone HAV is worth several AVers. |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2731
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 08:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:
I'm asking what the balancing gameplay factor is - "It's a 50 ton vehicle" doesn't really answer that, unfortunately.
Basing things in a game on how it works IRL is a silly way to do things, I agree - besides which shielding and armour systems are much much better than what we have right now.
I'm a little dubious about your example though - A titan can't really be soloed, no, but a battleship can be soloed by a frigate., for example. The titan is the edge case, much like the MCC. Do you mean to say that you think the cost is the balancing factor?
What do you think the balancing gameplay factor is to make tanks worth multiple AV to destroy?
well other than the obvios, what about the incentive to skill into vehicles in the 1st place, if they are **** like they are now, nobody will want them, and look at that. hardly anyone does.
Again, claiming tanks are **** (which again, I don't disagree with) doesn't suggest a valid reason for making tanks take multiple AV to destroy.
Can we try and have a productive discussion? I'm sure you're perfectly capable of suggesting actual gameplay factors, as an experienced tanker, but to do that we need to throw away ideas of 'This is how it should be' and come up with 'This is how it should be BECAUSE -reason-'. What is the gameplay reason for your suggestion? How can it be justified? |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2731
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 08:26:00 -
[5] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:
I'm asking what the balancing gameplay factor is - "It's a 50 ton vehicle" doesn't really answer that, unfortunately.
Basing things in a game on how it works IRL is a silly way to do things, I agree - besides which shielding and armour systems are much much better than what we have right now.
I'm a little dubious about your example though - A titan can't really be soloed, no, but a battleship can be soloed by a frigate., for example. The titan is the edge case, much like the MCC. Do you mean to say that you think the cost is the balancing factor?
What do you think the balancing gameplay factor is to make tanks worth multiple AV to destroy?
well other than the obvios, what about the incentive to skill into vehicles in the 1st place, if they are **** like they are now, nobody will want them, and look at that. hardly anyone does. Again, claiming tanks are **** (which again, I don't disagree with) doesn't suggest a valid reason for making tanks take multiple AV to destroy. Can we try and have a productive discussion? I'm sure you're perfectly capable of suggesting actual gameplay factors, as an experienced tanker, but to do that we need to throw away ideas of 'This is how it should be' and come up with 'This is how it should be BECAUSE -reason-'. What is the gameplay reason for your suggestion? How can it be justified? plus, this isn't my thread, i would do this on my own thread only.
I don't understand why this presents an obstacle to explaining your reasoning. You were apparently perfectly happy to do it earlier on, yet when I ask for clarification you say you won't explain it here?
Is there another thread you would like to continue this discussion?
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2734
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 08:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:
yeah, il make it tomorrow, il personally message you in game when i make it.
Alright, thanks. If you mail 'Arkenai Wyrnspire' that would be preferred, as I'm more likely to see it quickly then. |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2743
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 18:43:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ted Nugget wrote:Ok Ok Ok... here I am to tell you guys my story... lol... Duran Lex made a very good attempt to kill me, several times, My squad was even hating on me for "red line sniping" with my railgun with damage mods. I was just wanting to make some money and not lose a tank. I mean we all know how easy it is to lose a tank. This guy was dedicated to blowing me up. I mean he drove an LAV up to me on our red line jumped out and started shooting me. I am like you bastard! LOL. But seriously, I was just covering one Objective on the bridge map, E from under the mcc hill. There was this armor tank, some guy from TCD I don't remember his name, however he had missiles on his tank. I was like I am shield and he is armor I will just swap my fit around use missiles with damage mods and buffer fit and smack him around. Dude tanked my missiles but ran away. I hit him a lot and he didn't die. I was in shock, props to this guy, that he suvived and still had time to get to his red line and rep up and so I was a little low on HP from that battle so I go back to my "red line" spot. Never fear here comes the LAV down that long straight road. I am like you gotta be kidding me. This guy Duran Lex is on a relentless assault on me. I just run away, again, meanwhile my squad is like that tank is back at D. I am like this guy is gonna get it. I go to D, Duran Lex no where to be seen. I inform my squad he will be there soon to get me to be ready to help take him out. I see the tank. I make my flank start shooting him in the ass, weak point, watching HP just melt away. Of course he goes on his run away trip again. What is this, a forge gun again. DURAN LEX! He was on top of that hill by D. I am like you bastard leave me alone already. He hit me like 5 or 6 times. With whatever forge he had. I am begging my squad to take him out. Match ends! Now me being the tanker that I am. I had no reps on said tank. Close to 7000 shields and lose to about 40% resist. You can figure that fit out if you want. As for you Duran, I give you mad props as you were one of the only people on your team that was attacking me. Your little post just strokes me ego for me. Thanks. See you again sometime, and I am looking forward to it.
\o/
Props to you, especially for being reasonable and not jumping in and yelling "GO BACK TO COD SCRUB". |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2744
|
Posted - 2013.08.24 19:15:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ted Nugget wrote:oh yea, Duran Lex go back to COD, scrub.... sorry I had to lol 
 |
|
|
| |
|