| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
DJINN leukoplast
Hellstorm Inc
League of Infamy
1105
   |
Posted - 2013.08.25 22:15:00 -
[31] - Quote
Billi Gene wrote:why do i see all these threads claiming that all tankers want invincibility because their tanks cost so much?
Sure i've seen a few threads here and there spouting such crap, and for my part i've voiced my opinion that such logic is so full of fail that it doesnt bear much discussion.
And yet every time i come to the forums, there will be a new thread harping on about "all these tankers whining about how they should be invincible because they paid 1 mil for their crutch".
please enlighten me, where are all these tanker threads claiming such preposterous things?
It was about a week ago, all the tankers were whining about being so weak and feeble and that if somebody breathed on them their tank would wilt up and die. They wanted buffs and/or AV nerfs.
Tanks are already far too powerful, anytime they want a buff is because they want to be harder to kill then they already are, thus they are trying to reach the ultimate invincible status (quite a few are already near invincible).
|
Aizen Intiki
Ghost Wolf Industries
Alpha Wolf Pack
529
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 22:21:00 -
[32] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Another Heavy SOB wrote:I must admit I can kind of see where the sentiment comes from.
I have seen many tankers top 30 kills and No death's, Although admittedly they were smart and there was only a couple guys actually trying to take them down. Yet those same tankers claim their tanks are UP, where considering the same situation with a buffed tank the pilot may have gone 60-0.
Also there's the common tanker excuse of "well my tank costs more" as if it entitles them to an "I win" button. Now I'm not saying all tankers share this attitude but I see it frequently. And to most infantry that creates the perception that most tankers feel they should be able to solo the entire enemy team.
Finally when I see a decent tanker roll on the field causing Hell, and my squad plus another immediately clamoring to take out that tank and spending the next 15 minutes to do so thus losing objectives suggests that tanks are in No way UP, and those claiming they are UP are simply bad or really do expect to be near invincible.
It's not quite 'my tank costs more than your suit', it's 'my tank costs more than your suit and is extremely difficult to profit on'. I think most of us would be happy with cheaper vehicles.
This. It's impossible to profit if you lose a vehicle. That's where the problem lies. Which is why we complain. And making vehicles cheaper would mean that people would say that they are too cheap (if they make it to where throwing more than one out would allow us to still profit). But scrub infantry players don't get it. |
Aizen Intiki
Ghost Wolf Industries
Alpha Wolf Pack
529
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 22:22:00 -
[33] - Quote
DJINN leukoplast wrote:Billi Gene wrote:why do i see all these threads claiming that all tankers want invincibility because their tanks cost so much?
Sure i've seen a few threads here and there spouting such crap, and for my part i've voiced my opinion that such logic is so full of fail that it doesnt bear much discussion.
And yet every time i come to the forums, there will be a new thread harping on about "all these tankers whining about how they should be invincible because they paid 1 mil for their crutch".
please enlighten me, where are all these tanker threads claiming such preposterous things?
It was about a week ago, all the tankers were whining about being so weak and feeble and that if somebody breathed on them their tank would wilt up and die. They wanted buffs and/or AV nerfs. Tanks are already far too powerful, anytime they want a buff is because they want to be harder to kill then they already are, thus they are trying to reach the ultimate invincible status (quite a few are already near invincible).
Prime example of a dumbass scrub whom doesn't get it. |
Henchmen21
Planet Express LLC
151
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 22:31:00 -
[34] - Quote
DJINN leukoplast wrote:Billi Gene wrote:why do i see all these threads claiming that all tankers want invincibility because their tanks cost so much?
Sure i've seen a few threads here and there spouting such crap, and for my part i've voiced my opinion that such logic is so full of fail that it doesnt bear much discussion.
And yet every time i come to the forums, there will be a new thread harping on about "all these tankers whining about how they should be invincible because they paid 1 mil for their crutch".
please enlighten me, where are all these tanker threads claiming such preposterous things?
It was about a week ago, all the tankers were whining about being so weak and feeble and that if somebody breathed on them their tank would wilt up and die. They wanted buffs and/or AV nerfs. Tanks are already far too powerful, anytime they want a buff is because they want to be harder to kill then they already are, thus they are trying to reach the ultimate invincible status (quite a few are already near invincible).
Links or it didn't happen. |
Anmol Singh
the unholy legion of darkstar
DARKSTAR ARMY
282
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 22:50:00 -
[35] - Quote
Another Heavy SOB wrote:I must admit I can kind of see where the sentiment comes from.
I have seen many tankers top 30 kills and No death's, Although admittedly they were smart and there was only a couple guys actually trying to take them down. Yet those same tankers claim their tanks are UP, where considering the same situation with a buffed tank the pilot may have gone 60-0.
Also there's the common tanker excuse of "well my tank costs more" as if it entitles them to an "I win" button. Now I'm not saying all tankers share this attitude but I see it frequently. And to most infantry that creates the perception that most tankers feel they should be able to solo the entire enemy team.
Finally when I see a decent tanker roll on the field causing Hell, and my squad plus another immediately clamoring to take out that tank and spending the next 15 minutes to do so thus losing objectives suggests that tanks are in No way UP, and those claiming they are UP are simply bad or really do expect to be near invincible.
I guess nobody on your team had proto AV.... |
Anmol Singh
the unholy legion of darkstar
DARKSTAR ARMY
282
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 22:52:00 -
[36] - Quote
Aizen Intiki wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Another Heavy SOB wrote:I must admit I can kind of see where the sentiment comes from.
I have seen many tankers top 30 kills and No death's, Although admittedly they were smart and there was only a couple guys actually trying to take them down. Yet those same tankers claim their tanks are UP, where considering the same situation with a buffed tank the pilot may have gone 60-0.
Also there's the common tanker excuse of "well my tank costs more" as if it entitles them to an "I win" button. Now I'm not saying all tankers share this attitude but I see it frequently. And to most infantry that creates the perception that most tankers feel they should be able to solo the entire enemy team.
Finally when I see a decent tanker roll on the field causing Hell, and my squad plus another immediately clamoring to take out that tank and spending the next 15 minutes to do so thus losing objectives suggests that tanks are in No way UP, and those claiming they are UP are simply bad or really do expect to be near invincible.
It's not quite 'my tank costs more than your suit', it's 'my tank costs more than your suit and is extremely difficult to profit on'. I think most of us would be happy with cheaper vehicles. This. It's impossible to profit if you lose a vehicle. That's where the problem lies. Which is why we complain. And making vehicles cheaper would mean that people would say that they are too cheap (if they make it to where throwing more than one out would allow us to still profit). But scrub infantry players don't get it.
true.. if I lose my 2.6mil isk falchion- im back about 2-3 days in isk, and trust me when i say that i make about 150k isk a match because I suck at infantry and my basic suit that i use dies about 6-7 times a match which is about 90k isk loss of suits...
|
Billi Gene
Forty-Nine Fedayeen
Minmatar Republic
329
|
Posted - 2013.08.26 00:34:00 -
[37] - Quote
bravo peeps,
name calling at a minimum!
actual discussion, even heated discussion is a good thing.
So let's recount (without quotes because i just got up 
ISK management is a vital game strategy, but to be brutally honest, doesn't factor when talking about vastly outmatched tiers-standard vs proto.
Many tankers understand that they are piloting standard issue, and though committed to trying to keep their tanks alive for as many matches as possible, also understand the point above.
Many AV still feel that tanks, particularly tanks piloted by pilots with very deep tank skill trees are too hard to kill, but in reality, this is much the same as the first Point as well, with the added incentive of increased HAV cost acting upon pilots who understand Point 2
Some people feel that AV is too specialised in its damage spread vs Tank Type.
Much of the capabilities embedded into the vehicle core skills and how it relates to tank fits is not understood nor ingrained into Mercs using even Advanced+ AV systems.
just as a word of advice to AV, have a look over vehicle skills. You'll notice that with dedication, a Vehicle can have baseline passive 10% resists on both shields and armor.
Now go have a look thru the market, market/vehicle modules then look thru shield and armor categories, specifically at hardeners and resistance modules.
Shield resists go in high slots, armor into low slots. Vehicles can stack both Passive module and Active module resists.
Generally speaking Shield extenders and Armor plates will also be added.
The big +resist modules are all Active, this means that they have a cycle ON timer (module active)and a Cycle OFF timer (the cooldown). Knowing that a vehicle has turned its actives on should give pause to AV, particularly Armor Tanks as they can and do stack Active resists, and can cycle between 3 modules to always have only one on cooldown and two active.
The above for armor makes sense, shield is a minor buffer for armor, but the balance being that a minor majority of AV does more damage to Armor than Shields.
And for tankers:
iirc one of the founding tenets of Goonswarm, was that everyone counts: that if you bring enough knives to a gun fight, eventually you can win the fight... even with heavy losses.
"do not fly what you cannot afford to lose"
imho it should be feasible to take out a tank with any appropriate and concerted effort. Given enough time and numbers, a tank should be able to be killed by a knova knife wielding swarm of scouts. Doing so would take awhile, and I'm sure that given current numbers in matches it isnt Now, but if we see a massive upscaling in numbers..."why not?" ... if the tank can't outrun the scouts, and the scouts can maintain enough dps as a group, why shouldn't the tank fall?
Given that is an extreme example, and using militia swarms would hold truer, but then the gist of the scenario would be lost.
It is still my opinion and i hope discussion continues to debate and explore, that there is an imbalance between HAV and AV, and as to what this imbalance might be. Could it be as simple as Point 1?
Or as I have suspected for some time, the lack of Capacitor and capacitor boosting modules (stamina and biotics for vehicles, as well as methods for screwing with) is resulting in game systems that thru the inability to mesh could be considered broken. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |