|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ABadMutha13
Nihil-Obstat Mercs
General Tso's Alliance
5
   |
Posted - 2013.09.04 15:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
I use a tank every match, I think that question was asked. I skilled almost completely into vehicles and so I consider that my role on the battlefield. Quite frankly its not all doom and gloom when you get around 8-9 million in skills. I never use the expensive tanks on pub matches.
(I have a scout suit so if needed I scurry around the battlefield avoiding fire and hacking.)
I will go along with the fact that SOME matches they have no AV and I stomp around feeling invincible. Other matches I see advanced A/V and I am very timid making quick runs, waiting for all my cool downs.
A good tanker knows his exits and his angles, he uses them to maximize his lifespan. What I do not like is CCP using huge towers where infantry can sit and get 360 degree of the entire battlefield, but that has nothing to do with balancing that is a simply flaw in the map building.
Happy Hunting! |
ABadMutha13
Nihil-Obstat Mercs
General Tso's Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 14:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
Toby Flenderson wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:Toby Flenderson wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:Toby Flenderson wrote:
I'm glad to see that even tankers feel that they need to change play styles if the situation calls for it. I try running scout too sometimes when it makes sense. I think what's hard for me to grasp is the mindset of a player who is specialized into vehicles but then thinks that just because their tank is big it means it's appropriate for every situation. That was more or less what I'm getting at with some of the questions. I'm not criticizing anyone, I just have a lot more freedom with altering my roll on foot than someone who uses a tank I think.
Indeed, its not that therw aren't options its just some are much more powerful overall than othrs. For examp, e the blaster turret has a high dps, high accuracy, does plenty of damage to tanks as well as infantry, theres no need to use the other 2!! Turrets need more defined roles, anti infantry, anti tank, or anti air, at the base layer, one turret cant do it all!! That sounds interesting actually because I've heard someone in my corp mention something like that. I've always just seen either sniping tanks or blasters. It would be cool to see more variation so that it wasn't the same experience every game. It isn't our fault. We have 3 turrets, and 1 sucks, so what are we supposed to do? It isn't like we got 14 guns to use....... I apologize, I probably should've been more clear. I mean that it would be cool to see CCP come out with different turrets that allowed for more variation in tank strategies. I don't blame the tankers for using the turrets the way they currently are.
Great discussion here guys/gals!
I almost never loose tanks in a match unless I do something stupid and allow AV troopers to corner me (Or I have been drinking). Its a problem with the maps not exactly the damage being produced, in regards to tanks. If you put a spire that infantry can shoot 90% of the map then guess what, the tanks can only operate in 10% of the map. If you want a spire create it in the neutral area in the center and have it have angles on half of the map, this would create a vehicle bottle neck and add to the fun factor.
CCP until recently has the idea that all battles are to take place in a valley with mountains overlooking the middle. The last place an important installation would be is in the center of a valley surrounded by high places(Or deep underground but that feature is impossible due to tech limitations). You build important structures at the top of a mountain.
Here are my feelings on the current turrets and the complaints from my turret gunners.
Some of the problems with the small turrets are as follows(The gunners complaint not mine, mind you I run all proto turrets when I have dedicated gunners):
Small Turrets:
Missile - shooting WAY off mark randomly, making it way frustrating.
Railguns - gunners ALWAYS complaining they only get 3 shots then overheats.
Blaster - I do not do enough damage to infantry.
Large Turrets (Also only talking proto level):
Missle - I can see a guy 20 Meters in front of me shoot at him 5 times and not hit him. I can also shoot a guy halfway across the map and randomly one shot him. Too risky and seems too random, it needs to be tightened up to be worth it.
Railgun - Anti - Vehicle and Anti-Infantry, all at a distance and accurate. No real complaints here.
Blaster - I shoot infantry jumping around and do nothing to them, this weapon needs some splash damage added. If it was given even a small boost it would make it worth it.
To be fair the only thing I complain about is rooftop camping where the map has basically been totally geared for infantry dominance. The new maps do not appear to suffer this problem. |
ABadMutha13
Nihil-Obstat Mercs
General Tso's Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 15:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
Monkey MAC wrote:AbadMutha 13 wrote:
Great discussion here guys/gals!
I almost never loose tanks in a match unless I do something stupid and allow AV troopers to corner me (Or I have been drinking). Its a problem with the maps not exactly the damage being produced, in regards to tanks. If you put a spire that infantry can shoot 90% of the map then guess what, the tanks can only operate in 10% of the map. If you want a spire create it in the neutral area in the center and have it have angles on half of the map, this would create a vehicle bottle neck and add to the fun factor.
CCP until recently has the idea that all battles are to take place in a valley with mountains overlooking the middle. The last place an important installation would be is in the center of a valley surrounded by high places(Or deep underground but that feature is impossible due to tech limitations). You build important structures at the top of a mountain.
Here are my feelings on the current turrets and the complaints from my turret gunners.
Some of the problems with the small turrets are as follows(The gunners complaint not mine, mind you I run all proto turrets when I have dedicated gunners):
Small Turrets:
Missile - shooting WAY off mark randomly, making it way frustrating.
Railguns - gunners ALWAYS complaining they only get 3 shots then overheats.
Blaster - I do not do enough damage to infantry.
Large Turrets (Also only talking proto level):
Missle - I can see a guy 20 Meters in front of me shoot at him 5 times and not hit him. I can also shoot a guy halfway across the map and randomly one shot him. Too risky and seems too random, it needs to be tightened up to be worth it.
Railgun - Anti - Vehicle and Anti-Infantry, all at a distance and accurate. No real complaints here.
Blaster - I shoot infantry jumping around and do nothing to them, this weapon needs some splash damage added. If it was given even a small boost it would make it worth it.
To be fair the only thing I complain about is rooftop camping where the map has basically been totally geared for infantry dominance. The new maps do not appear to suffer this problem.
Yes your turrets definatly need improvements large and small alike, however like you said rail turretts at the moment can be both infantry and vechile centric, which I find a problem, this game is based on a rock, paper, sciccors mentality and should continue to be just so, there should be variations of your rail turret that make it infantry centric or vechile centric, and then a middle ground that is ok at both but not as good as a specilised variation. The missle turrets show ideally how it should work, some have mkre radius and splash damge which is clearly suited infantry, while others have less spread and more direct damage which clearly anti vechile, all turrets need this kind of definition! ,
I would agree with your rail-gun comment save the fact that its rate of fire is low and to really equip it properly you sacrifice armor and survivability. They are meant to be a glass cannon sort of tank, so they are balanced in the fact that they are usually not rolling around the battlefield.
|
|
|
| |
|