| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Chances Ghost
Inf4m0us
488
   |
Posted - 2013.08.25 03:39:00 -
[91] - Quote
for instance lets take a look at tank gameplay now
its ability give it a shock trooper feel
you bring in tanks to give your infantry the power of push to take a well blockaded objective.
tanks currently dont have staying power, so it requires tactical choice on when you want to spend this is for the power of push and you have to assume they are dead the moment you call them out.
they are currently disposable frontal assault weapons that are used to remove infantry from well entrached positions and give your infantry a chance to move in and mop in the mess before the tanks bet blown to smithereens
THATS what i mean about creating a picture of gameplay.
and THATS PERFECTLY BALANCED in a game where thats the intended gameplay.
the problem is we have no idea what the inteded gameplay is so we just see something that costs 1mil isk and dies
so we assume its imbalanced, when in reality it could be perfectly balanced to create this gameplay
now since they are doing a rework of balance we can assume that this ISNT the intended gameplay and that in the developers mind they had a different idea in mind when they wanted tanks in the game.
|
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
753
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 14:28:00 -
[92] - Quote
Bittersteel the Bastard wrote:Void Echo wrote:with my version of it, if you have more than one tank on the field all you need is 3 AV guys on you team, they would be able to destroy each enemy tank in a 3 man group, your saying that AVers are too unreliable to take down more than one tank so you say it needs a full team...
why in your head does this mean that you need an entire team? in my head all you need is 3 people to kill us off, if 3 av = 1 tank, then those same 3 would be used to kill the others off.. You realize if you stay in AV you are disadvantaged to infantry on the other team? You'll still be 3 men down in infantry.
True, but it's not an absolute. I've done an awful lot of successful point defense/delay with a toxin smg.
They are gimped in range and lack of grenades, no argument there.
I think AV infantry are worth about half an AI infantry as long as they choose their battles correctly and don't try to be the superman. |
Chances Ghost
Inf4m0us
511
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 15:25:00 -
[93] - Quote
Vrain Matari wrote:
True, but it's not an absolute. I've done an awful lot of successful point defense/delay with a toxin smg.
They are gimped in range and lack of grenades, no argument there.
I think AV infantry are worth about half an AI infantry as long as they choose their battles correctly and don't try to be the superman.
they are still quality infantry
they can hack objectives, they trade infantry stopping power for vehicle stopping power (commandos dont even have to make that trade but ehy are a different can of worms lets not go there)
they dont even lose ALL their infantry stopping power, just some of it
and lets not forget they are still another target to shoot at, wich is a concept known as target saturation. aka the tactic in the invasion of normandy |
Needless Sacermendor
Red Fox Brigade
355
|
Posted - 2013.08.26 11:58:00 -
[94] - Quote
Our Deepest Regret wrote:I dunno, it just seems like the crux of the problem stems from Tanks having infinite ammunition. That's the most obvious reason they dominated so hard back in the dark ages. If Blaster tanks were penalized for their killing power by having to constantly resupply, there would never have been a need for AV grenades or overpowered swarm launchers.
Vehicle ammunition supply points would bring some much needed strategy to the tanking role, beyond the universally reviled "Park on a spawn point and squeeze the trigger" or the equally hated "run away when an av sneezes on you." High defense, limited ammo is the way to go. Take away easy gibs on both sides for god's sake.
This would go a long way to solving the problem of HAVs dominating where no AV exists, AND the problem of HAVs destroying Supply Depots that are easily being overun by blue infantry ready to hack and supply themselves with hives and switch from their AV fit they no longer need as there are 3 blue HAVs on the field (happened last night so I made it my purpose to deny them the CRU kills by hacking them early before the red dots were killed, lets face it, I couldn't switch to my AR and be useful cos they blew the Supply Depot we had secured already.)
If HAVs needed the supply depots as much as infantry did, we might see more balanced fights between nonAV skilled infantry and HAVs, if they could control the Supply Depots denying the enemy HAVs of ammunition would be a valid tactic. Obviously maps would need to be adjusted to account for vehicles dependancy and you could even incorporate vehicle ammo supply modules for logistics LAVs n dropships etc. ... give them a purpose too. |
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
Eternal Syndicate
703
|
Posted - 2013.08.26 12:03:00 -
[95] - Quote
Skyhound Solbrave wrote:Cosgar wrote: In Chrome, tanks were a force multiplier where pilots would throw their money on the field in hopes of turning the tide of a battle. With proper squad support, good gunners, and disorganized opponents they were invincible. Hell, anything can be invincible with proper teamwork. In Uprising, tanks have degraded to a liability and an afterthought. Think about it, when's the last time someone legitimately complained about tanks in Uprising? If people aren't complaining, something is obviously broken. Same with the laser, shotgun, HMG, and even the mass driver in earlier patches. Tanks need to be beefed up to **** people off again or there's no point in having the role at all. Are you kidding me? Chrome saw the rise of Tank514. Just call in one tank in an Ambush and go 24-0. It wasn't that long ago, not sure why you would think we would have forgotten about this. :| Also @VoidEcho okay Strawman, have fun with your straw. How to solve the problem in chronological order: Lower the cost of tanks > bring out matchmaking > bring out proto/adv tanks > ??? > Profit! There is no way we can pretend to know about AV/Tank balance at this stage because it's idiotic to compare STD Tanks to Proto AV. Believe it or not, compare a STD tank to MLT AV and you would see that it's just as unbalanced in favor of the tank.
The reason tanks seemd invinsible in previous builds was because not many folks skilled properly into av as many thought av nades were good enough. Now that we have many many proto av scrubs tanks are taking an unnessisary pounding. |
ThouArtGorey
Death in Two Strikes
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 13:00:00 -
[96] - Quote
1. What should tank/av/infantry gameplay be like?
2. One way of getting there.
Well so far no one even knows the true role of tanks, maybe because they have none. So ask any serious tanker or anyone who touches a tank why they'll call it down in a game. Or rather, keep reading and get my reasoning on this.
Why do I call down my tank? If it's not because I see another decent tank and get excited, It's to kill people. Granted, I'll bust out a rail and break some installations but those are threats to my tank, and as such I have justification for beaking them... and anyone can buy a sica and do the same, which they do. But like I said, main reason I'll ever call in my tank is to kill people, and I have special builds just for that. So as for the role of my tank or any tank? It's a situational super-slayer.
So now that we know the role of our tanks (and I'd bet people will actually agree) I'm gonna answer your question.
Tanks balanced against infantry and infantry av methods are just that, pretty well balanced. Although player behavior is what seems to throw off that balance. ie forge shots and swarm missiles raining from the heavens to the far reaches of the map. No matter what anyone says or how anyone tries to do this, no swarm launcher or forge gun will ever kill a well fitted tank (pilot skills don't matter) with just one shot/volley/salvo/burst. Never. Tanks aren't meant to die with one shot, and then we sit there and gun down every other dude and his mom.
That's what I see, and that's what tank/av/infantry gameplay should look like. Tanks can't be one shot killed, and have to be killed by building a ton of spike damage, which it can't handle. That implies that if you wanna kill a decent tank, you better grab a bud and use good ol' fashioned teamwork. Wanna hack an objective? Grab a bud. Wanna defend that objective? Grab a bud. Wanna take out that heavy? Grab a bud. Wanna be a heavy? Grab a LogiBro bud... Wanna take out that tank? You grab a bud. And just so there are no double standards tanks are better and more effective with designated gunners. Namely guys in assault suits packing av grenades. Those are the tanks that'll really get you worked up because you can never ever kill them because you always die first. Those tankers that run with squadmates and designated gunners, as I said. This game encourages teamwork (quite obviously) and that's why you shouldn't be able to solo a decent tank. Luck, situation, experience and player skill aside. Not that you ever can solo one anyway.
That's a good thing. Because that implies that tanks are working as intended. They're high power killing machines that won't die to an assault rifle. They're like the super heavy suits if you will. That's why people continue to skill into them and use them on a regular basis with no true role on the battlefield. Because no matter what game mode you play. People spawn in with guns and get shot up. So that's why you'll always keep seeing that "situational super-slayer" you love so much. Armor tanks need rebalancing against shield tanks, but only stat and number wise. Against av methods, they should reverse the 1.4 swarm buff as it's coming to be known. The tracking and damage on wiyrkomi swarms are 2 good enough strong points that they don't need unlimited range. One change I'd make to get there.
My piece. ^ |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |