DUST Search - Its okay for infaintry to do well but not tanks?

Void Echo wrote:

Monkey MAC wrote:

pegasis prime wrote:

Void have some faith im personally looking forward to tge changes as we will see who can still cut it . I like the hit run hide pattern of tanking I.e. rush round tge redline to the enimys redline and destroy everything between you and your own redline whilst ploughing through the field and I think the changes in 1.5 will just emphasise the current tanking schools I.e. armour will be the stand and deliver tank abd shields the gurilla attack vehicles there supposed to be . Im looking forward to the acctive dammage mods Twisted

Finally someone who gets it, armour tanking is all about being more of a longer lasting presence, you might have to sacrifice power in order to stick around longer, but you're ability to commit your fire for a sustained period gives many pros!!

Sheild tanks are all about punching a hole then allowing infantry to finish the job, while armour is more of close infantry support, prepare for teamwork tankers, teamwork will be the flavour of the game!! Twisted

if youv never skilled into tanks, you don't know how they work.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 8499	Posted - 2013.09.16 01:53:00 - [1] - Quote Too many games are balanced on the concept of free vehicles.This is what make trying to make Dust 514 vehicles feel just 'right' extraordinarily difficult because they don't rain from the sky for free. Someone paid for those tanks, as does everything that tank can kill. This is why making the tank too good is considerably a bad thing because it can negate everyone's else's investments in both skill points in isk quickly to the point that the infantry interplay is non existent. Which is the current industry standard, From the call of duty expansion pack multiplayer games to halo, to unreal, to even more recently Plane Side 2 included. Earlier builds such as E3 had tanks that was designed stats wise on this model almost and they where largely obscurely very dangerous racking up nearly up to 40-70 kills by its lonesome. Matches quickly digested down to who can deploy the most tanks first and fastest. Once on field and one side did not have sufficient amount of HAVs on the field the match was by and large over. People couldn't spawn, people could call in other vehicles and of course the team insufficient of tanks couldn't call orbitals either to which might I add the old age tanks laughed off. During this age and time CCP Blam asserted that he believed that HAVs did not require infantry support, this drew quite a bit of ire from the infantry community at the time. As Dust 514 continued to develop the HAV nerfs began to roll in one after the other to the point its now the reverse being in play. Tanks are not worth the sufficient amount of isk and sp investments to be effective on the field. While the HAVs on the edge its vehicles like the standard dropship that have seem to fallen off the table in terms of isk per power projection. However not all is lost, its possible to dial it back a bit make the vehicles more worth their costs. As it stands now Team Kong, consisting of the likes of CCP Wolfman and CCP Remnant are in charge of everything you touch on the battlefield from your controllers to each gun and suit, to have them in charge of vehicles as well is an extraordinarily smart move as it gets the entire picture singing the same song. 1.5 will feature the first set of massive revisions with subsequent patches adding back in all that was nuked out of existence in 1.5.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 8503	Posted - 2013.09.16 02:52:00 - [2] - Quote You also have to remember we're primarily shooter first ,rpg second and shooter preferred mechanics over rpg ones.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 8522	Posted - 2013.09.16 18:35:00 - [3] - Quote As for my opinion as to what the HAVs should be doing on the field with Boiler applied. HAVs should either be Bursty Mobile Walls or Bursty Mobile Pwnagers, or a mix less effective between the two. Key word Bursty. LAVs should be akin to our scouts, quick nimble still flexible. I honestly believe its best role should be deployer, driving around and dropping off helpful or harmful tech down such as mines or nano hives. Our Dropships should be more akin to a flying logi bros. MAVs if ever added would be also their own kind of logi bro but much heavier tanked and more focused on vehicle affinity than infantry affinity. I would also like mass drivers, forge guns, swarm launchers, and plasma cannons as installable small turrets. Hell all guns. Just smaller they are the more barrels it gets.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 8523	Posted - 2013.09.16 19:10:00 - [4] - Quote Also to the guy brining in the real world example for who has the most money wins, you sir have just bought the worst and poorest argument ever in the history of warfare. I cannot recall once, not once, where an effective weapon system that passed prototyping and into mass manufacture was ever designed to take out something costs more (in use) than what it typically kills. Average soldier is about 15,000 USD to train and gear up and grind out, he can be easily killed by a 1$ bullet to the face. Average fielded tank these days depending where you are can run you anywhere from 250,000 USD (old war) to 15 million a pop (the M1-A1 Abrams) and the RPG 25 has been known for the last decade to be able to defeat said tank probably costs around 500 to 5k usd give or take (this is just a rough estimate there is really established price tag but the system is just a tube and rocket it cannot get that expensive, now with guidance you're talking about 5-20x the price, such as a stinger) The older RPGs that able to make mincemeat out of old world tank's crew are as cheap as 50 USD a rocket.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 8523	Posted - 2013.09.16 19:16:00 - [5] - Quote Void Echo wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: pegasis prime wrote: Void have some faith im personally looking forward to tge changes as we will see who can still cut it . I like the hit run hide pattern of tanking I.e. rush round tge redline to the enimys redline and destroy everything between you and your own redline whilst ploughing through the field and I think the changes in 1.5 will just emphasise the current tanking schools I.e. armour will be the stand and deliver tank abd shields the gurilla attack vehicles there supposed to be . Im looking forward to the acctive dammage mods Finally someone who gets it, armour tanking is all about being more of a longer lasting presence, you might have to sacrifice power in order to stick around longer, but you're ability to commit your fire for a sustained period gives many pros!! Sheild tanks are all about punching a hole then allowing infantry to finish the job, while armour is more of close infantry support, prepare for teamwork tankers, teamwork will be the flavour of the game!! if youv never skilled into tanks, you don't know how they work. I know there are quite a few people saying I don't pilot... But I have never seen either of the two mentioned close to being true. Shields HAVs seems to lend itself to hit and runs due to the nature of the shield recharge and innate fast speed. Armor HAVs is only fast once you get going but its more of a skirmisher and cannot sit around long waiting on infantry. As for HAVs in general I have never used them to punch holes in enemy formations nor sitting there and getting nailed, most anti-infantry guys ignore me anyways so the bullet sponge theory doesn't hold true at all. The most I ever use them to get infantry heads down and keep them from crossing the street or open areas and blowing up stuff that is near my size and yes I suck with blasters.