DUST Search - Easy fix for tanks selfishly destroying Supply Depots

Operative 1171 Aajli wrote:

Lillica Deathdealer wrote:

Assert Dominance wrote:

Spkr4theDead wrote:

Assert Dominance wrote:

Buff the shields to 20,000 and armor to 100,000, gg selfish tanks. If the enemy team wants your tank gone they will destroy it whether the supply depot is there or not. Dont punish infantry because of your insecurities. Cool

Did you miss every single post made by tankers in the last few days?

Since you choose to miss everything, I'll say it again.

We blow up depots if we have to. We don't do it just because we want to. Lots of us run armor tanks, and do like the fact that we could visit a depot to top off our armor. However, if it looks like the enemy team has a ton of AV available, then we're going to take it out. If a match is really close, and a depot is the only thing standing between my team taking an objective and losing, I'll destroy it if the other team is spamming grenades and explosive weaponry.

We have our reasons, and they're good reasons. We get 100 WP for destroying installations. We get 50 WP for destroying a depot. Tell me, why would I spend the time putting 12-15 rail rounds into a depot when I could just put 2-3 into an installation, and get more WP?

You don't have a base for an argument.

Tankers act is if youre all one in the same, "you" may have your reasons, but not all tankers do. 90% of tankers are not what you would consider smart, read recent post for example ^

Bear in mind this argument of 90% dont act intelligently can absolutely backfire on you.
I've seen swarms try to kill supply depots for whatever reason. Should I say all scrub AV guys dont have a brain? No I shouldn't, because there are enough with the intelligence to get atop a spire and deny all vehicles on the battlefield. Also we can examine infantry. A good many wait for an objective to turn red before hacking it so they can get points. Does that make them wrong? Surely they could have aided the team more by counterhacking without a reward. Also performing logistics activities from a shield logi LAV gives no points, scanning gives no points, destroying equipment gives no points. Many people avoid doing things because it gives no points. In qa losing match many infantry that could bring out expensive, dare I say proto equipment switch to militia gear instead because they dont want to lose money. A tanker still bring in their tank, and it absolutely costs more than your suit. Where is the argument there? Combining your infantry with the tank might even be able to push an objective!
And then theres the choice of targets. Certainly, alot of infantry sooner kill the guy that can kill them than the guy that can kill the tank. If the infantry killed the AV guy, the tank could kill the other assault focused infantry and you'd have a wonderful world. But thats not how it goes is it?

Seems like if one is going to complain about stupid players in tanks then the problem is with the stupid players and not the tankers. The complaints on the forums however, refer to the tankers.

If the post would specify bad players in tanks rather than "tankers" we'd avoid a lot of confusion and bad blood.

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 1269	Posted - 2013.08.28 17:45:00 - [61] - Quote Solution: 1) Supply depots aren't destructable, but they are 'reinforcible' 2) Getting them into 25% armor or to 0 nanites makes them 'reinforced'. 3) Supply depots that are reduced to 25% armor lose all their nanites. 4) Nanite supplies slowly restore. 5) Redline supply depots have infinite nanites but can still be temporarily reinforced. 6) Frontline supply depots with depleted nanite reserves won't restore ammo/supply vehicles. 7) Nanites/supply depots can be restored via LLAVs and logi armor repair tool that doubles as a nanite transfer array. The available nanite pool would appear in the supply depot's target intel. So on one hand you could disable them, but have the possibility of restoring them.
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 1882	Posted - 2013.08.28 17:46:00 - [62] - Quote The real irony is that some installations on the field actually help protect the tanks since the swarms they are all scared of like to lock on to things that are farther from the center of the reticule so if a tank is near a depot or CRU the installation grabs the lock and not the tank And now with them getting limited ammo in the future tanks will just cry some more and keep blowing up installations that could resupply them
Jason Pearson Seraphim Auxiliaries 2872	Posted - 2013.08.28 17:55:00 - [63] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: The real irony is that some installations on the field actually help protect the tanks since the swarms they are all scared of like to lock on to things that are farther from the center of the reticule so if a tank is near a depot or CRU the installation grabs the lock and not the tank And now with them getting limited ammo in the future tanks will just cry some more and keep blowing up installations that could resupply them No, they really don't. Because people hide behind supply depots getting cover and constant ammo, along with the ability to change suits to get instantly healed. The only useful Installation in anyway is the CRU because it either gives us blue dots that might be useful or red dots that can die. Also, the idea for "reinforced" supply depots and such are dumb, once its destroyed it stays destroyed, just demand CCP put in the droppable installations that were intended to be in the game (You could buy Supply Depots, CRUs and Turrets and using the Installations section when you press the directional buttons, you were going to be able to call them in.). Make them any stronger and they'd have to be expensive pieces of equipment, keep them like they are and we can very easily see them going for cheap. King of the Forums // Seraphim <3 Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here! gbghg wrote: CCP Rejavik CCP Shanghia Same company different studios, one has near perfected the player feedback process, the other is still rolling on the floor after it fell over its first baby step.
Tebu Gan CrimeWave Syndicate 50	Posted - 2013.08.28 18:16:00 - [64] - Quote There are several things I find foolish with this post. Selfishly, hardly. -The time it takes to destroy a supply depot isn't usually worth it for one. -And they are only worth 50 points. - Destroying them can work strategically to your advantage. No, I don't go into a match and automatically start blowing supply depots up for points. Typically I will when they are held for most of the game by the enemy. How do you not understand blueberry, that by destroying those held by the enemy, and those that you cannot push and take, works to your advantage. There have been numerous times, I've taken out the ones closest to our GS/MC side that were held by the enemies and it allowed you blueberries to push up and take the objectives around them. Why is it you only see them as resupply. They are crucial spawn points as well. If you can't push and take it, which is often the case, I will destroy it rather then allow the enemy to hold an assest. When you guys do good, I do good. Nothing selfish about it, it's tactical. If there isn't any Av out or other tanks, I also always try to destroy the supply depots closest to the enemy ground spawn first. This could deny you an asses but seeing as they can always spawn closest to them, I see it as a smart tactical decision. You guys really make it seem like all the tanker out there are just running around blowing up supply depots, but I know this isn't the case. Most all of the time, none of your precious supply depots are touched. So many things said here, but tanks aren't easy, don't kid yourself. And understand, good tankers typically have more awareness of the entire battlefield and it's flow. It's what keeps us alive. Very very rarely do I ever get any type of help from blueberries, and you call me the selfish one, hardly. If you worked to keep us tankers alive we could help you push those depots. I mean sometimes I find it crazy that half the enemy team is running AV to kill my one little tank, and you still can't take a depot. How am I not doing something by pulling the focus off you infantry. A lot of the statements here were narrow minded and one sided. Tanks are not I win buttons. Open your minds and see the world from our point of view. And get the hell out of my tank and hack that freakin depot. And yeah, when they give me finite ammo, enemy supply depots become priority number one.
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 184	Posted - 2013.08.28 19:55:00 - [65] - Quote Lillica Deathdealer wrote: Assert Dominance wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Assert Dominance wrote: Buff the shields to 20,000 and armor to 100,000, gg selfish tanks. If the enemy team wants your tank gone they will destroy it whether the supply depot is there or not. Dont punish infantry because of your insecurities. Did you miss every single post made by tankers in the last few days? Since you choose to miss everything, I'll say it again. We blow up depots if we have to. We don't do it just because we want to. Lots of us run armor tanks, and do like the fact that we could visit a depot to top off our armor. However, if it looks like the enemy team has a ton of AV available, then we're going to take it out. If a match is really close, and a depot is the only thing standing between my team taking an objective and losing, I'll destroy it if the other team is spamming grenades and explosive weaponry. We have our reasons, and they're good reasons. We get 100 WP for destroying installations. We get 50 WP for destroying a depot. Tell me, why would I spend the time putting 12-15 rail rounds into a depot when I could just put 2-3 into an installation, and get more WP? You don't have a base for an argument. Tankers act is if youre all one in the same, "you" may have your reasons, but not all tankers do. 90% of tankers are not what you would consider smart, read recent post for example ^ Bear in mind this argument of 90% dont act intelligently can absolutely backfire on you. I've seen swarms try to kill supply depots for whatever reason. Should I say all scrub AV guys dont have a brain? No I shouldn't, because there are enough with the intelligence to get atop a spire and deny all vehicles on the battlefield. Also we can examine infantry. A good many wait for an objective to turn red before hacking it so they can get points. Does that make them wrong? Surely they could have aided the team more by counterhacking without a reward. Also performing logistics activities from a shield logi LAV gives no points, scanning gives no points, destroying equipment gives no points. Many people avoid doing things because it gives no points. In qa losing match many infantry that could bring out expensive, dare I say proto equipment switch to militia gear instead because they dont want to lose money. A tanker still bring in their tank, and it absolutely costs more than your suit. Where is the argument there? Combining your infantry with the tank might even be able to push an objective! And then theres the choice of targets. Certainly, alot of infantry sooner kill the guy that can kill them than the guy that can kill the tank. If the infantry killed the AV guy, the tank could kill the other assault focused infantry and you'd have a wonderful world. But thats not how it goes is it? Seems like if one is going to complain about stupid players in tanks then the problem is with the stupid players and not the tankers. The complaints on the forums however, refer to the tankers. If the post would specify bad players in tanks rather than "tankers" we'd avoid a lot of confusion and bad blood.
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 185	Posted - 2013.08.28 20:09:00 - [66] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: The real irony is that some installations on the field actually help protect the tanks since the swarms they are all scared of like to lock on to things that are farther from the center of the reticule so if a tank is near a depot or CRU the installation grabs the lock and not the tank And now with them getting limited ammo in the future tanks will just cry some more and keep blowing up installations that could resupply them A red depot resupplies the enemy tank. Hence, it will be no more.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 52	Posted - 2013.08.28 20:30:00 - [67] - Quote Operative 1171 Aajli wrote: Lillica Deathdealer wrote: Assert Dominance wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Assert Dominance wrote: Buff the shields to 20,000 and armor to 100,000, gg selfish tanks. If the enemy team wants your tank gone they will destroy it whether the supply depot is there or not. Dont punish infantry because of your insecurities. Did you miss every single post made by tankers in the last few days? Since you choose to miss everything, I'll say it again. We blow up depots if we have to. We don't do it just because we want to. Lots of us run armor tanks, and do like the fact that we could visit a depot to top off our armor. However, if it looks like the enemy team has a ton of AV available, then we're going to take it out. If a match is really close, and a depot is the only thing standing between my team taking an objective and losing, I'll destroy it if the other team is spamming grenades and explosive weaponry. We have our reasons, and they're good reasons. We get 100 WP for destroying installations. We get 50 WP for destroying a depot. Tell me, why would I spend the time putting 12-15 rail rounds into a depot when I could just put 2-3 into an installation, and get more WP? You don't have a base for an argument. Tankers act is if youre all one in the same, "you" may have your reasons, but not all tankers do. 90% of tankers are not what you would consider smart, read recent post for example ^ Bear in mind this argument of 90% dont act intelligently can absolutely backfire on you. I've seen swarms try to kill supply depots for whatever reason. Should I say all scrub AV guys dont have a brain? No I shouldn't, because there are enough with the intelligence to get atop a spire and deny all vehicles on the battlefield. Also we can examine infantry. A good many wait for an objective to turn red before hacking it so they can get points. Does that make them wrong? Surely they could have aided the team more by counterhacking without a reward. Also performing logistics activities from a shield logi LAV gives no points, scanning gives no points, destroying equipment gives no points. Many people avoid doing things because it gives no points. In qa losing match many infantry that could bring out expensive, dare I say proto equipment switch to militia gear instead because they dont want to lose money. A tanker still bring in their tank, and it absolutely costs more than your suit. Where is the argument there? Combining your infantry with the tank might even be able to push an objective! And then theres the choice of targets. Certainly, alot of infantry sooner kill the guy that can kill them than the guy that can kill the tank. If the infantry killed the AV guy, the tank could kill the other assault focused infantry and you'd have a wonderful world. But thats not how it goes is it? Seems like if one is going to complain about stupid players in tanks then the problem is with the stupid players and not the tankers. The complaints on the forums however, refer to the tankers. If the post would specify bad players in tanks rather than "tankers" we'd avoid a lot of confusion and bad blood. Bad players often cannot differentiate between the two, for that would mean acknowledging themselves alongside their statement, and they don't want to do that.
Tank Gorillarape Ancient Exiles 48	Posted - 2013.08.28 20:37:00 - [68] - Quote I do it to hear people complain about it
ladwar Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 1309	Posted - 2013.08.28 21:28:00 - [69] - Quote Assert Dominance wrote: Buff the shields to 20,000 and armor to 100,000, gg selfish tanks. If the enemy team wants your tank gone they will destroy it whether the supply depot is there or not. Dont punish infantry because of your insecurities. that would only take 2 minutes to blow up for a single tank.... it will still be removed by tanks. btw w/e guy said that it would take less time for a rail then blasters wrong!!! compressed proto rail dps 810~ scattered proto blaster 1100~
Henchmen21 Planet Express LLC 157	Posted - 2013.08.28 21:39:00 - [70] - Quote Blue tanks can't destroy blue depots. Simple as that.

CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 219	Posted - 2013.08.28 22:35:00 - [71] - Quote destroy that red cru first dont be a stupid idiot and blow up the supply depot when blue dots r near it..now if the supply depot could get its armor reped faster by a single player with a reptool that would be nice..but imagine this the supply depot is just a decent strategic area for running back and forth too for ammo... u cant switch from one suit of the same type to another suit of the same type for more hp any more that was takin out a long time ago... cru should be a priority to destroy for tanker because if a redbery sneaks in and hacks the cru the rest of the enemy team that might have been redlined can now go and spawn in and spread like a virus and hack all the objectives be4 u can do anything about it.. but if its a supply depot thats red and is currently being hacked plz dont be an idiot and blow it up... its not like we all have nanohives.... and if higher leveled nanohives could replenish lower leveled nanohives that would be nice.... although im not so sure about tanks getting ammo... i support the rocket and missile tanks for getting ammo.. but im just not sure about the blaster tank...
TunRa Gravity Prone EoN. 90	Posted - 2013.08.28 22:59:00 - [72] - Quote Assert Dominance wrote: Cody Sietz wrote: Wait, is this becoming a problem now? It takes like 45 mins for a tank to kill those things. Little under 30 seconds but good try I know for a fact this is a lie...
Henchmen21 Planet Express LLC 157	Posted - 2013.08.28 23:29:00 - [73] - Quote TunRa wrote: Assert Dominance wrote: Cody Sietz wrote: Wait, is this becoming a problem now? It takes like 45 mins for a tank to kill those things. Little under 30 seconds but good try I know for a fact this is a lie... Yep, seeing as it takes my tank alt three shots with proto rails with max turret skills just to kill a turret. I don't even bother with depots and CRU's I'd rather scan for enemy tanks during the time it would take to kill them.
Spkr4theDead International-Fleet 509	Posted - 2013.08.29 00:26:00 - [74] - Quote TunRa wrote: Assert Dominance wrote: Cody Sietz wrote: Wait, is this becoming a problem now? It takes like 45 mins for a tank to kill those things. Little under 30 seconds but good try I know for a fact this is a lie... Need to use better than a regulated railgun on a Sica.
THUNDERGROOVE ZionTCD 161	Posted - 2013.08.29 00:48:00 - [75] - Quote Assert Dominance wrote: Cody Sietz wrote: Wait, is this becoming a problem now? It takes like 45 mins for a tank to kill those things. Little under 30 seconds but good try If you really wanted that supply depot there you should just kill the tank, it only takes about 5 seconds with proto AV
Billi Gene Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic 363	Posted - 2013.08.29 00:51:00 - [76] - Quote calling in a tank will almost everytime, do one or more of the following: make a red call in a tank make a red switch out to an AV fit. Now If I have a rail tank, i can fairly much destroy most RDV drops before or after they hit the ground, smart tankers know how to get around this, but they will be using a rail tank as well... If red switch out the AV, then my purpose on the map is complete. I have just forced redberries to switch from killing blueberries to trying to kill me. If those redberries can switch in and out of AV and anti-infanty gear willy-nilly, then i have achieved nothing. If you can't take that resupply or CRU, i am going to end its strategic significance, for all of our benefits. Also any new news on how Vehicle resupply will work? or are we still trying for educated guesses?


Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page