DUST Search - No Turret removal :'(

All Channels

General Discussions

No Turret removal :'(

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Jason Pearson Animus Securities 2917	Posted - 2013.09.28 13:10:00 - [1] - Quote It was the only thing I wanted, am I bad for looking at the patch notes and not caring? Oh and I'm back now, prepare for many threads of QQ and rage until such the point that CCP decides to "remove" me for a terribad reason, again. King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
Crash Monster Snipers Anonymous 1483	Posted - 2013.09.28 13:11:00 - [2] - Quote Great, we don't get many QQ rage threads or anything... do you imagine we'll even notice?
Jason Pearson Animus Securities 2917	Posted - 2013.09.28 13:12:00 - [3] - Quote I am a sophisticated QQer, you'll notice I am sure. King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
Ansiiis The Trustworthy Robbing The Hood Public Disorder. 328	Posted - 2013.09.28 13:16:00 - [4] - Quote I know this is off topic but... Have you proven yourself yet?
Jason Pearson Animus Securities 2917	Posted - 2013.09.28 13:19:00 - [5] - Quote Prove myself my dear Ansiiis? I do so on a regular basis. King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
G Torq ALTA B2O 236	Posted - 2013.09.28 13:37:00 - [6] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: It was the only thing I wanted, am I bad for looking at the patch notes and not caring? No, I checked; you're generally bad ;) Anyways, not every patch can have something for everybody - accept that some are more directly interesting to you, and some are less so.
Jason Pearson Animus Securities 2917	Posted - 2013.09.28 13:48:00 - [7] - Quote G Torq wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: It was the only thing I wanted, am I bad for looking at the patch notes and not caring? No, I checked; you're generally bad ;) Anyways, not every patch can have something for everybody - accept that some are more directly interesting to you, and some are less so. :'( NO YOU! But, I could've been so happy, I could've supported my team without being a distraction for blues that wanted to jump into my vehicle and fire at the MCC King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY 717	Posted - 2013.09.28 13:58:00 - [8] - Quote Somebody posted the proof that the blue were right, they CAN damage the enemy MCC, if you can't beat them join them
Mortedeamor Internal Rebellion 290	Posted - 2013.09.28 15:37:00 - [9] - Quote really jason u weren't excited about them giving us a vehicle lock 2? hey they gave us wp for transport but no vehicle lock again ccp does nothing but exacerbate the issue with vehicles
Mortedeamor Internal Rebellion 290	Posted - 2013.09.28 15:45:00 - [10] - Quote G Torq wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: It was the only thing I wanted, am I bad for looking at the patch notes and not caring? No, I checked; you're generally bad ;) Anyways, not every patch can have something for everybody - accept that some are more directly interesting to you, and some are less so. 1 jason pearson is one of the few decent tankers in dust 2 ccp has never done anything good for the vehicle class so no we dont expect every patch to be for us..we expect 1 PATCH FOR THE MOST RUINED ASPECT OF DUST now for over a year ccp has done nothing but infantry changes..and vehicle nerfs the entirety of the vehicle av aspect of dust is 100% destroyed but they dont feel its necessary atm to do anything about it..i bet if you did a tally you would find that a majority of the missing vet playerbase amounts to the old vehicle specs. the changes they are making in 1.5 are minimal and not enough to pull any of the playerbase back ccp's epic fail continues in uprising 1.5 you cannot blame the vehicle specs of dust for being this worn out, and fed up with dust ccp has never done anything for them..i am an ex tanker and current aver. my aspect of this game is broken. it is no fun insta popping vehicles ccp no serious gamer could specc up av and enjoy this game. it's boringly easy and has only gotten easier the more you nerf tanks.

Jason Pearson Animus Securities 2922	Posted - 2013.09.28 18:10:00 - [11] - Quote Mortedeamor wrote: really jason u weren't excited about them giving us a vehicle lock 2? hey they gave us wp for transport but no vehicle lock again ccp does nothing but exacerbate the issue with vehicles Apparently if a turret was removed so was the seat, so the Vehicle Lock didn't bother me as I never call a vehicle in/get out near blue/green dots, so much can go wrong. I can't even say I'm mad, just disappointed in CCP's ability to make promises and then not keep to them, we ask for this, they say yes, then they give us something we begged for months ago and we still can't use it because we cannot kick people from the vehicle, even if we come to a full stop and try and recall. **** is ridiculous. King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
ladwar Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 1734	Posted - 2013.09.28 18:27:00 - [12] - Quote anything to do with vehicles was pushed...
Jason Pearson Animus Securities 2923	Posted - 2013.09.28 18:32:00 - [13] - Quote ladwar wrote: anything to do with vehicles was pushed... I knew the rebalance would be pushed back, but I always hoped they'd stick with allowing us to remove turrets, I truly looked forward to 1.5 for only that reason. King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
Lorhak Gannarsein Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 439	Posted - 2013.09.28 18:36:00 - [14] - Quote Yeah. That was the thing I was looking forward to... I could even have dealt with (yet) another nerf to go with it; the security the removal of turrets would give me would be worth it.
ladwar Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 1734	Posted - 2013.09.28 18:53:00 - [15] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: ladwar wrote: anything to do with vehicles was pushed... I knew the rebalance would be pushed back, but I always hoped they'd stick with allowing us to remove turrets, I truly looked forward to 1.5 for only that reason. that's a big mistake. always prepare for the worse and hope for the best. the armor damage wasn't mentioned in 1.4 patches notes but still made it in.
Jason Pearson Animus Securities 2925	Posted - 2013.09.28 18:55:00 - [16] - Quote ladwar wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: ladwar wrote: anything to do with vehicles was pushed... I knew the rebalance would be pushed back, but I always hoped they'd stick with allowing us to remove turrets, I truly looked forward to 1.5 for only that reason. that's a big mistake. always prepare for the worse and hope for the best. the armor damage wasn't mentioned in 1.4 patches notes but still made it in. Bah, I know the rules :/ Never expect anything from CCP, it's probably disappointment, but it was so close :'( King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
G Torq ALTA B2O 237	Posted - 2013.09.30 17:51:00 - [17] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: G Torq wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: It was the only thing I wanted, am I bad for looking at the patch notes and not caring? No, I checked; you're generally bad ;) Anyways, not every patch can have something for everybody - accept that some are more directly interesting to you, and some are less so. :'( NO YOU! But, I could've been so happy, I could've supported my team without being a distraction for blues that wanted to jump into my vehicle and fire at the MCC No worries, I think we'll both have reason to be happier sometime in the next 24 hours...
DUST Fiend OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6521	Posted - 2013.09.30 17:52:00 - [18] - Quote This patch genuinely makes me laugh. Not to say it doesn't contain good things, but just....elohel.
Spkr4theDead International-Fleet 925	Posted - 2013.09.30 17:54:00 - [19] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: Mortedeamor wrote: really jason u weren't excited about them giving us a vehicle lock 2? hey they gave us wp for transport but no vehicle lock again ccp does nothing but exacerbate the issue with vehicles Apparently if a turret was removed so was the seat, so the Vehicle Lock didn't bother me as I never call a vehicle in/get out near blue/green dots, so much can go wrong. I can't even say I'm mad, just disappointed in CCP's ability to make promises and then not keep to them, we ask for this, they say yes, then they give us something we begged for months ago and we still can't use it because we cannot kick people from the vehicle, even if we come to a full stop and try and recall. **** is ridiculous. King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here! Works even better for the seat to be removed.
Spkr4theDead International-Fleet 925	Posted - 2013.09.30 17:55:00 - [20] - Quote ladwar wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: ladwar wrote: anything to do with vehicles was pushed... I knew the rebalance would be pushed back, but I always hoped they'd stick with allowing us to remove turrets, I truly looked forward to 1.5 for only that reason. that's a big mistake. always prepare for the worse and hope for the best. the armor damage wasn't mentioned in 1.4 patches notes but still made it in. What armor damage in 1.4? I know explosive weaponry already had a bonus against armor.

THUNDERGROOVE ZionTCD 189	Posted - 2013.09.30 18:20:00 - [21] - Quote I already had my fit planned out for a domination CRU LAV too ;_;
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 379	Posted - 2013.09.30 18:46:00 - [22] - Quote hmmm imagine the small amount of isk, pg and cpu id save with out the requirement of having to fit 2 small turrets on my hav!!!!!!!!!!
Jason Pearson Animus Securities 2941	Posted - 2013.09.30 19:03:00 - [23] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: hmmm imagine the small amount of isk, pg and cpu id save with out the requirement of having to fit 2 small turrets on my hav!!!!!!!!!! Meh ISK isn't important but you'd save a minimum of 160PG (Which is a lot on a Gunnlogi), but the main reason it's wanted is because it apparently removes the seat, meaning you could role up as a SUPPORT HAV, moving with blue dots rather than having them all scramble to get in. Blue dots are bad :( They're more effective as AR players than using my Missile Turrets, and if I need to run away I'm taking an additional 2 players out of the fight, and even bad players can turn the table when it comes to zerging someone, so by letting us remove the seats, we'll be able to roll up next to them and even roll in front of them to stop them being hit by small arms fire (I try this so many times, yet the squad of Blue dots I'm trying to cover, they stop firing and all turn to try and get in my tank, and when they can't they just fire at the tank and get themselves kill.) :'( King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
The legend345 TeamPlayers EoN. 1004	Posted - 2013.09.30 19:22:00 - [24] - Quote All i know is ima fan of your spider tanking :).
Xender17 Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 694	Posted - 2013.09.30 19:47:00 - [25] - Quote This topic has turned into a blog.
DUST Fiend OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6528	Posted - 2013.09.30 19:49:00 - [26] - Quote Xender17 wrote: This topic has turned into a blog. This blog has turned into a taco.
Godin Thekiller Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 983	Posted - 2013.09.30 20:04:00 - [27] - Quote G Torq wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: It was the only thing I wanted, am I bad for looking at the patch notes and not caring? No, I checked; you're generally bad ;) Anyways, not every patch can have something for everybody - accept that some are more directly interesting to you, and some are less so. You really just typed that?
N1ck Comeau Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 1475	Posted - 2013.09.30 20:33:00 - [28] - Quote if rendering gets fixed thats a huge buff to all vehicles
G Torq ALTA B2O 237	Posted - 2013.10.01 09:22:00 - [29] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: G Torq wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: It was the only thing I wanted, am I bad for looking at the patch notes and not caring? No, I checked; you're generally bad ;) Anyways, not every patch can have something for everybody - accept that some are more directly interesting to you, and some are less so. You really just typed that? No, I typed it some time ago. Something on your mind?
ChromeBreaker SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 1320	Posted - 2013.10.01 09:29:00 - [30] - Quote Ha an extra 140+ pg and what... 80+ cpu... i would say thats quite a major balance change for tanks. Il be honest i doubt very much that CCP will do it. Lock your tanks by all means



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.