|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tech Ohm Eaven
L.O.T.I.S.
735
   |
Posted - 2013.09.16 05:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote:SgtDoughnut wrote:Anyone who says tanks do not need infantry support is a fool, I am so glad you took tanks out of the hands of Blam after he said that. Even the M1 abrams needs infantry support, the tank is designed to draw fire (by looking intimidating) but they either run in large colums or with a gaggle of infantry with them. Never solo. Agree. i wasent there to see how tanks wrecked face by themselfs but im glad they dont do that anymore
Bro it used to be only two predictable and permanent spawn points so all a Sagaris tanker had to do was park closeby and just glue down the R1 button to go 70+ game after game after game.
It was the days of ten proto AV infantry and one tank and it was infantry dies, dies, dies,dies....rage quit the game and hope for another match with no tanks. |
Tech Ohm Eaven
L.O.T.I.S.
735
|
Posted - 2013.09.16 05:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote:DJINN leukoplast wrote:Exmaple Core wrote:When a tanker gos 30-0, its OP and needs to be nerfed. When an infantry player gos 30-0 (i.e. AR assault), its perfectly balanced. Why does this phenomena happen? Also, wasent attacking the AR assault, but its the most common fit for it. Alpha 443-6732 wrote:I had averaged out with a 35/0 score during each of my previous 5 games. GOML faglords
Why is everyone but me in this game bad at videogames?
Bow to your lord nerds, I am the Pubstomping KING
#NERF TANKS If the infantry player going 30-0 required a special type of bullet and special type of weapon to kill him which was only useful against this one player, then I might agree with you. what does that have anything to do with a tank and an infaintry player getting the same score, but ppl saying the tank shouldent be able to do it but the infaintry soldier can?
Let me put it this way if a tanker goes 15 and 0 no problem and if an infantry goes 15 and 0 no problem since both are doable.
The problem is its easy to redline snipe to get 30 and 0 in a tank but its not as easy for most infantry to go 30 and 0.
Theres an imbalance there that is created by isk.
|
Tech Ohm Eaven
L.O.T.I.S.
735
|
Posted - 2013.09.16 05:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:SgtDoughnut wrote:Exmaple Core wrote:man... this community cant do anything right. I ask "why arent tanks allowed to be seccessful but infaintry is?"
and everyone answers with other complants about tanks. sucks Your answer is right there, the tankers want to be unstoppable killing machines cause well they wanna, and the infantry don't want to go back to chromosome days where it was all tanks and nothing else mattered. The attitude of both sides is what got tanks to their current position, both from the infatry side over whining and the tanker side not willing to make any concessions about how much of a mess they were creating on the battlefield. CCP put their foot down and said fine we are reworking it, heres some crappy tanks to play with in the mean time. No, we're in our current predicament because infantry couldn't solo a Surya with 8000 armor. Or a Sagaris with 7000 shield. We're in our current predicament because nobody on an opposing team could bother themselves to take down a tank as a team, a unit. Infantry continues to push for tanks to be made weaker, and AV stronger, so the best of fits and pilots can be soloed with no more than ADV AV gear. That is what infantry is pushing towards. Time and again we've adapted to the nerfs CCP has thrown as us, but every incremental nerf is just never enough for infantry, they always want us driving into the ground further. If, by a miracle 1.5 is the best thing CCP has done for tanks, then the amount of crying done now will pale in comparison to after 1.5 drops. If it's like firecrackers today, after 1.5 is deployed, it'll be like an asteroid shower.
NO!!
You are in your current predicament due to tankers seeing a bunch of randoms on the enemy team and then deciding that they posed such a "threat" that it needed not one, not two , not three but four yes FOUR TANKS!! to stomp on them for easy lol kills.
Well the tankers made the bed by lol pub stomping in ambush. |
Tech Ohm Eaven
L.O.T.I.S.
735
|
Posted - 2013.09.16 06:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote:Tech Ohm Eaven wrote:Exmaple Core wrote:SgtDoughnut wrote:Anyone who says tanks do not need infantry support is a fool, I am so glad you took tanks out of the hands of Blam after he said that. Even the M1 abrams needs infantry support, the tank is designed to draw fire (by looking intimidating) but they either run in large colums or with a gaggle of infantry with them. Never solo. Agree. i wasent there to see how tanks wrecked face by themselfs but im glad they dont do that anymore Bro it used to be only two predictable and permanent spawn points so all a Sagaris tanker had to do was park closeby and just glue down the R1 button to go 70+ game after game after game. It was the days of ten proto AV infantry and one tank and it was infantry dies, dies, dies,dies....rage quit the game and hope for another match with no tanks. Never was there for those days, i started in chrome. Tho in chrome there were set spawns i liked to park in front of and camp in ambush x) However, the proto forges could still solo me, but not as well as they do our standard tanks, i felt it was pretty balanced. stupid spawn system. BUT HERES ANOTHER EXAMPLE!! It wasent a promblem when infaintry spawn camped the **** out of those spawn traps. But its a promblem when tanks did it?
There were some tankers that directly parked on the spawn points and then left game a few minutes to get sodas, ciggs, etc. then came back to 40 and 0 games while being AFK.
I.e. A, B. C and D used to have fixed, predictable and unmoveing spawn points.
It was just a case of park there for free kills. |
|
|
| |
|