DUST Search - super tank!...

MRBH1997 wrote:

CLONE117 wrote:

no they dont..

most tanks r sitting way back on a hill some where sniping.....this is an up close and personal tank..

fun for any match whether u r being pubstomped into the ground or not!..

the only tanks that may actually act as tanks is when they r 100% sure there r no enemy av on the battle field but with the super tank it wont matter!

Actually you are wrong, most tanks that are rail sniping are militia with good railguns or all aurum with the tank and its main turret. Rarely do people spec into tanks to rail snipe. What causes a majority of it is the problems that stand with tanks. Due to render glitches 1 guy can stand 2 feet in front of a tank and get 3 AV grenades off with a swarm volley before noticed and swarms and forge shots can be invisible until impact. Other small factors are if the enemy has swarms or forges on a skyscraper or other dropship only reachable locations and can see 90% of the map. I personally shun railgun snipers because it gives me a hard time being a tanker because all tankers are assumed to have some sort of railgun sniping fit. If you ever see my railgun tank it's always on the frontline with the infantry and I've put blaster tanks to shame doing so. You know a blaster tank doesn't have a good tanker when a railgun tank frontline it beats him in kills. So if these small problems that make a big difference were fixed then you'd see less rail snipers.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2013.09.01 01:09:00 - [1] - Quote a tank that has 20k shields 10k armor.. has no turrets... and must therefore drive over other tanks, lavs and infantry in order to destroy them... does this sound fun?....oh and it cant be fitted in any way and costs 150k isk..
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2013.09.01 01:10:00 - [2] - Quote all posts welcome!.... oh and it will also function as mobile cover for infantry!..
True Adamance PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 1471	Posted - 2013.09.01 01:13:00 - [3] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: all posts welcome!.... oh and it will also function as mobile cover for infantry!.. Tanks already do that.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2013.09.01 02:05:00 - [4] - Quote no they dont.. most tanks r sitting way back on a hill some where sniping.....this is an up close and personal tank.. fun for any match whether u r being pubstomped into the ground or not!.. the only tanks that may actually act as tanks is when they r 100% sure there r no enemy av on the battle field but with the super tank it wont matter!
PEW JACKSON Intara Direct Action Caldari State 14	Posted - 2013.09.01 02:35:00 - [5] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: a tank that has 20k shields 10k armor.. has no turrets... and must therefore drive over other tanks, lavs and infantry in order to destroy them... does this sound fun?....oh and it cant be fitted in any way and costs 150k isk.. So a LHAV?
MRBH1997 Knights Of Ender 17	Posted - 2013.09.01 08:32:00 - [6] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: no they dont.. most tanks r sitting way back on a hill some where sniping.....this is an up close and personal tank.. fun for any match whether u r being pubstomped into the ground or not!.. the only tanks that may actually act as tanks is when they r 100% sure there r no enemy av on the battle field but with the super tank it wont matter! Actually you are wrong, most tanks that are rail sniping are militia with good railguns or all aurum with the tank and its main turret. Rarely do people spec into tanks to rail snipe. What causes a majority of it is the problems that stand with tanks. Due to render glitches 1 guy can stand 2 feet in front of a tank and get 3 AV grenades off with a swarm volley before noticed and swarms and forge shots can be invisible until impact. Other small factors are if the enemy has swarms or forges on a skyscraper or other dropship only reachable locations and can see 90% of the map. I personally shun railgun snipers because it gives me a hard time being a tanker because all tankers are assumed to have some sort of railgun sniping fit. If you ever see my railgun tank it's always on the frontline with the infantry and I've put blaster tanks to shame doing so. You know a blaster tank doesn't have a good tanker when a railgun tank frontline it beats him in kills. So if these small problems that make a big difference were fixed then you'd see less rail snipers.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 262	Posted - 2013.09.02 01:38:00 - [7] - Quote in any case this is about super tank... i really think it would be fun driving something like this around and the best part is... any1 can use it....its slow and about as fast as regular havs but the main difference is that its very tough with no turrets what so ever it would effectively be a giant moving piece of cover that can also crush things like other tanks and lavs... and being that it cant be fitted with turrets or with other stuff means that it could possible play a great support role be functioning as a big, nearly indestructible piece of cover that can also crush stuff... and seeing how its slow only means it wont pose a significant threat. at range but it can do massive amounts of damage given that it can get close enough to drive over and flatten the enemy vehicle... id like to think of it as a slow heavily armored monster truck...
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 272	Posted - 2013.09.03 23:48:00 - [8] - Quote bump...
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 295	Posted - 2013.09.05 00:33:00 - [9] - Quote really? no one is else is going to post on on here? guess i ill bump my thread again..
KING CHECKMATE TEAM SATISFACTION 807	Posted - 2013.09.05 00:39:00 - [10] - Quote This type of tank COULD work, only when CCP provides us with bigger type of matches, 32 vs 32 or 64 vs 64.... As it is it would be a tad too OP considering having to take down that Behemoth PLUS other tanks, snipers , LAVs , assaults, heavies...etc.....

CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 295	Posted - 2013.09.05 00:44:00 - [11] - Quote but it has no turrets... its basically a giant brick of moving cover... plus it would be funny to try to run random ppl over with it...i dont see it as op because this would the the type of thing that could be used to assault an objective... like those maps with the open areas.. that tank would move out into the open and provide cover.. after all it lacks any ranged offensive capabilities so infantry would have to keep this thing alive...and i dont think av would mind shooting at something that cant shoot back... its still a great idea though..
WeapondigitX V7 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 90	Posted - 2013.09.05 01:15:00 - [12] - Quote + 1 for this idea, although I think the super HAV should have reduced max speed compared to militia HAVs and slower acceleration to max speed, but higher HP than you suggested. lower the cost to 140 000 ISK. make the amount of time needed to recall the vehicle a bit longer too. about 3 seconds longer.
Ku Shala Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 439	Posted - 2013.09.05 14:02:00 - [13] - Quote +1 but make it with no fitting slots limit to 1 per team and can carry only the driver.
jin foxdale Foxhound Corporation General Tso's Alliance 57	Posted - 2013.09.05 14:36:00 - [14] - Quote +1, because moving slowly behind cover firing at enemies is about as close to John Woo as dust is ever gonna get - unless CCP implements back to back reloading with a wall between us. "Oh well, plan B - lets just kill each other."
Draco Cerberus Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 274	Posted - 2013.09.05 15:24:00 - [15] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: a tank that has 20k shields 10k armor.. has no turrets... and must therefore drive over other tanks, lavs and infantry in order to destroy them... does this sound fun?....oh and it cant be fitted in any way and costs 150k isk.. Sounds too cheap, how about 750K isk? Seems fair as it would probably be able to squish at least that amount of isk value before being blown up.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 305	Posted - 2013.09.05 18:28:00 - [16] - Quote the super tank would have rely on infantry support in order to work thus the relatively cheap price. sure its super tough but it cant have any modules added to it to make it stronger.. 150k seems like a fair price for a tough tank that cant shoot back... sure it could squish that amount in isk if used correctly.. but seeing how it has no ranged offensive capability it would have to rely on infantry support.. it may have the power to squish a tank but its not op as it has to literally drive over that vehicle in order to squish it... and i dont see that being a major problem..raising the price to 750k isk would literally make this tank useless for many of the players.. losing 150k isk isnt as stress causing as losing something that costs 750k... 150k isk is easily affordable and this wouldnt really be able to dominate the battle field or suppress infantry it is designed to function as mobile cover for infantry. with the ability to crush vehicles... id also like to think of it as an expensive slow moving block of cover... it cant really play an assault role so its stuck in the support class for infantry to use...
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 5769	Posted - 2013.09.05 19:12:00 - [17] - Quote It should have the head of a mechanical dragon that breaths fire after every kill.
General Erick Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 91	Posted - 2013.09.05 20:41:00 - [18] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: a tank that has 20k shields 10k armor.. has no turrets... and must therefore drive over other tanks, lavs and infantry in order to destroy them... does this sound fun?....oh and it cant be fitted in any way and costs 150k isk.. Something that is about 3x (guestimate) more protected yet costs 10x less than any tanks we have now. Yeah no.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 306	Posted - 2013.09.06 00:09:00 - [19] - Quote r u forgetting the has no turrets part and that fact that it cant be fitted?... because i clearly quoted it and so nothing major to complain about a giant moving brick of cover.. it cant be fitted with modules or anything of the sort... if it does reach down into armor a repair tool will be required to repair it..
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 309	Posted - 2013.09.06 14:48:00 - [20] - Quote bump....again..

CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 310	Posted - 2013.09.06 18:44:00 - [21] - Quote i shall bump this thread once again...
General Erick Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 98	Posted - 2013.09.06 19:37:00 - [22] - Quote Nothing that powerful should be that cheap.Turrets or not.
General12912 Gallente Marine Corps Dark Taboo 10	Posted - 2013.09.06 19:42:00 - [23] - Quote MRBH1997 wrote: CLONE117 wrote: no they dont.. most tanks r sitting way back on a hill some where sniping.....this is an up close and personal tank.. fun for any match whether u r being pubstomped into the ground or not!.. the only tanks that may actually act as tanks is when they r 100% sure there r no enemy av on the battle field but with the super tank it wont matter! Actually you are wrong, most tanks that are rail sniping are militia with good railguns or all aurum with the tank and its main turret. Rarely do people spec into tanks to rail snipe. What causes a majority of it is the problems that stand with tanks. Due to render glitches 1 guy can stand 2 feet in front of a tank and get 3 AV grenades off with a swarm volley before noticed and swarms and forge shots can be invisible until impact. Other small factors are if the enemy has swarms or forges on a skyscraper or other dropship only reachable locations and can see 90% of the map. I personally shun railgun snipers because it gives me a hard time being a tanker because all tankers are assumed to have some sort of railgun sniping fit. If you ever see my railgun tank it's always on the frontline with the infantry and I've put blaster tanks to shame doing so. You know a blaster tank doesn't have a good tanker when a railgun tank frontline it beats him in kills. So if these small problems that make a big difference were fixed then you'd see less rail snipers. Ppl snipe with missile turrets too... So that's 2/3 of the cannon types
Godin Thekiller Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 524	Posted - 2013.09.06 19:57:00 - [24] - Quote General Erick wrote: Nothing that powerful should be that cheap.Turrets or not. It has no turrets, so it's just moving cover. Plus, pilots already break the bank after 1 loss over 3-10 matches, so problem?
General Erick Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 100	Posted - 2013.09.07 21:23:00 - [25] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: General Erick wrote: Nothing that powerful should be that cheap.Turrets or not. It has no turrets, so it's just moving cover. Plus, pilots already break the bank after 1 loss over 3-10 matches, so problem? No one would want to be a defenseless, mobile bullet sponge anyway. DOA.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 316	Posted - 2013.09.07 21:43:00 - [26] - Quote im pretty sure being that would be fun plus it isnt defenseless.. it has lots of shields and armor so why r u against this? because u have no reasons to point out on why this would be bad... i would really like to here them as its seems completely balanced already... and im sure lots of ppl would like a nice giant brick of moving cover for time to time... it would be very helpful to every1..
General Erick Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 101	Posted - 2013.09.08 01:03:00 - [27] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: 1. im pretty sure being that would be fun plus it isnt defenseless.. 2. it has lots of shields and armor so why r u against this? 3. because u have no reasons to point out on why this would be bad... 4. i would really like to here them as its seems completely balanced already... 5. and im sure lots of ppl would like a nice giant brick of moving cover for time to time... 6. it would be very helpful to every1.. 1. It is highly protected but completely defenceless. 2. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 3. I don't have any fun unless I am shooting something. 4. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 5. I like cover but I hate being the cover. 6. Helpful to everyone except the bullet sponge.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 318	Posted - 2013.09.08 03:03:00 - [28] - Quote well the game isnt about u now is it?.. u wont have to be forced into driving this.. and having lots of shields and armor doesnt say defences less.. more or like offenseless since its defences are the shields and armor.. of course it will act as a bullet sponge so whats wrong with a bullet sponge?
General Erick Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 104	Posted - 2013.09.08 21:26:00 - [29] - Quote Get me a list of 20 people that would actually drive this and I'll leave you alone. Deal?
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 321	Posted - 2013.09.09 14:51:00 - [30] - Quote im sure theres plenty of ppl who would like to drive something like this... and you still have not come up with any good reasons to go against my idea...

General Erick Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 107	Posted - 2013.09.09 15:31:00 - [31] - Quote I have four reasons why it is unfun and unrewarding. I'm still waiting for that list.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 323	Posted - 2013.09.09 18:16:00 - [32] - Quote dropships r unrewarding. and just because u cant shoot back doesnt mean it isnt fun.... im to lazy to list 20 names of players that would want to drive something like this.. dropships may be fun to do back flips in and land on ppl... but thats about it..... but this thread isnt about dropships.. its about my super tank idea... it seems completely balanced the way ive been trying to describe it.. and would try to provide more information and answer questions and so far you have been one of the only players to go against the thread with no good reason at all... you can state your reasons but it wont change the fact that you have no good reasons to go against my idea... i support your bumps to my thread.. but i would like to try and keep some of the spam down... .. and i thank every one who likes my idea...
Smooth Assassin Stardust incorporation 153	Posted - 2013.09.09 18:36:00 - [33] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: a tank that has 20k shields 10k armor.. has no turrets... and must therefore drive over other tanks, lavs and infantry in order to destroy them... does this sound fun?....oh and it cant be fitted in any way and costs 150k isk.. Caldari tech
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 325	Posted - 2013.09.09 21:22:00 - [34] - Quote bump....
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 328	Posted - 2013.09.10 15:30:00 - [35] - Quote again... another bump.. this having to post to bump the thread makes me think there should be a feature that allows us to bump the thread without having to post..
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 330	Posted - 2013.09.10 21:24:00 - [36] - Quote bump....yet again...
KalOfTheRathi Black Phoenix Mercenaries 693	Posted - 2013.09.10 22:45:00 - [37] - Quote First we have the MCC. It cost 120M ISK. And it has much more HP than your suggestion. Second the tanks that cost 150K are paper tanks currently, the Sica and Soma cost 138K (or so). Why would 12K buy that much more shield and armor. Total illogical. The marauder tanks cost 1.27M ISK have have less HP then the STD tanks. Nobody is responding because nobody cares about your idea. Tankers think it silly because of the numbers I just gave you. Infantry doesn't like the idea of an unkillable tank that cost less than many Fits. Finally, self promoting posts is actually against the forum rules. Please stop.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 330	Posted - 2013.09.10 22:58:00 - [38] - Quote its a giant moving block of cover with no turrets... and none of this involves the mccc.. or other tanks.. and havnt marauder tanks been taken out for rebalancing... this tank may have a little less total hp than a cru but its perfectly decent for a moving block of cover... so do u have any actual good reason on why this wouldnt work?.. plz tell me why my great idea would not work in game... yes the mlt tanks r paper thin but this is not about all the other stuff this is specifically about my super tank idea... so come up with something different next time...instead of trying to compare it to everything else....and shoot it down.. plus this wouldnt be a massive deadly threat to infantry.. in fact all it is is a very usefull moving block of cover.... and would add new tactics to use in the game...
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 334	Posted - 2013.09.11 15:26:00 - [39] - Quote .
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 342	Posted - 2013.09.12 22:15:00 - [40] - Quote .

General Erick Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 114	Posted - 2013.09.13 00:16:00 - [41] - Quote Holy ****! Give it up already! Bump this one more time and I'll report you.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 343	Posted - 2013.09.13 00:27:00 - [42] - Quote ok then thanks for bumping it for me! lol... i just dont want to see my thread die. because its such as great idea! plus i think its funny how no1 has come up with any good reason as to how it could be over powered in any way yet.. its the perfect idea and it would be fun to drive..lol


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]