Its a FPS, Infantry is the blood that courses through this type of game.

You want to use vehicles? play EVE.

Ah no,but you people want to use VEHICLES to stomp on INFANTRY....Pfft... talk about EZ mode pricks....

I too saved up SP on a charicter got an advanced fit tank and killed everyone in a academy pub mach, and you all should base all your tank bias off that experiance... or not belive a word they say because i personaly never see a tank live trough an entire match.

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

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

Yup, LIKE TANKERS.

Exactly.

---

I agree tanks are UP on the FIREPOWER AREA,and pricing area is too expensive.

But please,tanks already take a LOT of damage,for a FPS to have a specialized AV soldier with Proto gear to have to shoot a tank 6+times with a proto swarm to destroy it is madness....Specially taking in consideration the low amount of players allowed in the game.Having to sacrifice 2-3 potential AI soldiers to try and drop a tank is already enough of a handicap.Now you add the fact that the enemy might drop up to 4 tanks ,and you ahve yourself a game breaker.

@soldiersaint, you are not even worth my time maggot. ;)

PPl say they are bad because they have invested around 11mill SP into an armor tank to survive that sort of punnishment but can be so easily destroyed by any mode of cooperation. Those are quality tankers you were attempting to solo, and if they took that much effort to kill they must have been full HP with their active mods ready to go. So yeah the very best tanks can get away from a single proto AV user, but they quickly die to 2 or more AV users. Wich is fair, i think. But it doesent change the fact that tanks are bad cuz their so easy to kill. A shield tank will get soloed in under 8 seconds by a proto forge as well, never mind any 2 ppl with forges.

But to keep my thread revilant about how this is about infaintry being alowed to do well and tanks are not allowed to do well or their OP, if an infaintry soldier wins a 2v1 or a 3v1 its fair, perfectly balanced and that guy is skilled. But if a skilled tanker kills 2 or 3 people armed with assualt rifiles then its OP. I... dont understand. Very biased

''I know it's frustrating to see a tanker go 25+ kills per match for 5-10 matches (suspect hyperbole) but thats what it takes for tankers to make a profit, dead serious a good fit runs a mill + a contract pays out 250 for topping the board these days, that's 5 matches to break even. if you want to see tankers get blowed up every match then petition CCP to scale the pay of vehicle operators so they can afford to lose one every match.''

Nope, i've already posted this before: Tanks and their specific modules/weapons etc, need a 1/3 price reduction to match their preformance.

Also, i top 350k-400isk per game so i dont really know how much redline sniping you guys are doing only earning 250k isk per match....

So for you, it just isn't satisfactory to merely suppress us and drive us away, you want it to be so incredibly easy to destroy tanks that you don't need to reload your Haywires to do it. That just simply should not be the case.

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.

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.

Relax, Every single module is going to go towards maximizing resistence and health. The tradeoff will be greatly lessened killing power. I'm literally going to be a moving barricade for my team. That's the playstyle I love. The ridiculous kill streaks as always will go to the AR users.

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.

Waiwait,what? its not a big deal for a tanker to do it.
If i can go 36-8 in a game, tanker should be able to go 25+ kills and not die once. Ok.

but im agains a tanker going the same kills as me,without dying, then we have imbalance....
Because im dying in order to get my kills,im taking objectives and being fronline soldier to help my team,being run over LAvs , shot by rail and missile tanks alike,, and i do die, and my ADV suits cost 85K each...
So if you die 1 time every 2 matches, it hurts ? but if i die 8 times in 2 matches then im equally f***,with around 1300000isk loss...So yeah.

I dont think a tank going 25-30 kills - 0 deaths in a match is OP.
I just think they are NOT UP EITHER.

And I think it's safe to say that you aren't going to be seeing a lot of small turrets on HAV's after 1.5 drops. Screw that noise. Anyone wanting to ride around in a tank can build their own. Parasites.

You want to truly balance a tank, then make it where the driver is only a driver, he still needs a gunner for even his main gun.

Recently no, but back in chromosome you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting at least 2 proto tanks. They were to the point where those who didn't spec into tanks would just sit in the tanks cause it was the only way to get WP at all. That was not tanker skill btw it was just pure imbalance leaning to the tankers.

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.

How was it imbalanced when the SP you earned went much further? Whose fault is it nobody in those games had PRO AV? Can you tell me why you think it was imbalanced? Nobody on the other team could field tanks? You're talking about the days when every tank was dead in 2 shots.

[b]OMG I GOT SUPRESSED ! TT..TT QQ MORE.
Im getting Killed here and you re whining because tankers get ''supressed''.

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.

Your idea of av is so twisted its sickening.
A tank is the game changer, a many thousand hp gun platform design to take punishment and kill us infantry caught out in the open. == a good TANKER is a game changer. the AV infantry is made to counter this game changer.Thats what they do. I havnt played a FPS still where a vehicle can take more than 3 AV rounds.This is the first one. TAking 5 PROTO AV ,IS taking punishment.


It should NOT take one merc even with proto swarms or forge gun to end a tank costing more than 5 times your suit cost.
The cost is excessive, i agree. But why not? You are paying 5 times to have 10 times my HP and have more firepower. We are playing 12 vs 12 matches and you want 3-4 players of a team to squad up to take down ONE tank? So what,if the enemy pulls down 3 tanks ? then,we might as well sit in the MCC because even if we take those tanks out,there will be no one left to take and protect the objectives,not to mention the amount of times we will get killed by enemy infantry. If a single tanker can be a game changer in a 24 man game,so should a single AV be able to counter him,because his is a team based game.And if something does something solo,then the counter should be able to be something solo.

I want tactical ambushing of the bastard with 2 -6 mercs raining hell and great vengeance. Right now its too simple its barely a challenge 90% of the time.
35-0 with no decent av good on you. 35-0 with people specced av in this build I tip my hat to you

ok.

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?

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.

Agree. i wasent there to see how tanks wrecked face by themselfs but im glad they dont do that anymore