Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1963
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts? |
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2033
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1965
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think
har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically.
the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles.
vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis.
This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto |
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2034
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically. the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles. vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis. This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto
Yes balance is important but so far CCP hasnt really shown they can balance the tiers between similar play styles let alone two that play completely different from each other so if Im going to support removing tiers Im not going to say lets just remove the AV tiers so the tankers stop crying but lets gut the entire system and start from scratch with just one tier
Just that alone would drastically simplify balancing the system IMO |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1965
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically. the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles. vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis. This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto Yes balance is important but so far CCP hasnt really shown they can balance the tiers between similar play styles let alone two that play completely different from each other so if Im going to support removing tiers Im not going to say lets just remove the AV tiers so the tankers stop crying but lets gut the entire system and start from scratch with just one tier Just that alone would drastically simplify balancing the system IMO
I wasn't aware ground balance was that off. But if consensus points that it is, that'd be fine too. |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
607
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:45:00 -
[6] - Quote
you can remove them if I get a respec |
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2035
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically. the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles. vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis. This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto Yes balance is important but so far CCP hasnt really shown they can balance the tiers between similar play styles let alone two that play completely different from each other so if Im going to support removing tiers Im not going to say lets just remove the AV tiers so the tankers stop crying but lets gut the entire system and start from scratch with just one tier Just that alone would drastically simplify balancing the system IMO I wasn't aware ground balance was that off. But if consensus points that it is, that'd be fine too.
Well there will always be some who say its fine but if you take two people, one in a standard fit another in a proto fit, even the standard getting the drop on the proto does not necessarily mean a kill simply due to stats Imagine going against a tank with twice as much health as your own that does more damage on top of that, not unbeatable but the stats give enough of a cushion that even if the opponent isnt as good as you they might come out on top |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1965
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:you can remove them if I get a respec
It's obvious that anyone thing being changed as drastically as vehicles were, or having tiers removed temporarily will be getting a respec.
They'll prob do a full respec to keep things simple.
Also the AV-vehicle and vehicle-vehicle balance somewhat lies independent of ground-ground.
As there's not really a whole lot of consideration on light weapons vs vehicles.
So these systems Could be tested independently if needed, ie: vehicles and av stripped to standard this time. ground all stripped to standard later.
And with the ground-ground would balance AV weapon efficiencies vs ground units like forge or plasma cannon. |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine
1379
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1965
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:53:00 -
[10] - Quote
Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. do explain the term tiericide |
|
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
607
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:05:00 -
[11] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Jack McReady wrote:you can remove them if I get a respec It's obvious that anyone thing being changed as drastically as vehicles were, or having tiers removed temporarily will be getting a respec. They'll prob do a full respec to keep things simple. Also the AV-vehicle and vehicle-vehicle balance somewhat lies independent of ground-ground. As there's not really a whole lot of consideration on light weapons vs vehicles. So these systems Could be tested independently if needed, ie: vehicles and av stripped to standard this time. ground all stripped to standard later. And with the ground-ground would balance AV weapon efficiencies vs ground units like forge or plasma cannon. well I seriously hope there will be a respec, everyone would benefit from it.
Nguruthos IX wrote:Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. do explain the term tiericide tiercide means that all suits are about equal, they only differ in specialization. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1966
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Jack McReady wrote:you can remove them if I get a respec It's obvious that anyone thing being changed as drastically as vehicles were, or having tiers removed temporarily will be getting a respec. They'll prob do a full respec to keep things simple. Also the AV-vehicle and vehicle-vehicle balance somewhat lies independent of ground-ground. As there's not really a whole lot of consideration on light weapons vs vehicles. So these systems Could be tested independently if needed, ie: vehicles and av stripped to standard this time. ground all stripped to standard later. And with the ground-ground would balance AV weapon efficiencies vs ground units like forge or plasma cannon. I really hope there will be a respec, everyone would benefit from it. fresh air for everyone, testing and feedback can be speed up and new players can correct mistakes... Nguruthos IX wrote:Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. do explain the term tiericide tiercide means that all suits are about equal, they only differ in specialization.
Does that reflect Eve as of now?
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1108
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:15:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:you can remove them if I get a respec
Well they are removing our logi lavs and logi/assault dropships and sagaII and enforcers so what makes you think your av is safe?
If CCP is trying to create balance by nerfing the total hp of all vehicles and their loadouts right down to the std bone you would think they will be doing the same for av. If not then it really wont crwate balance only a greater rift. |
Toby Flenderson
research lab The Superpowers
66
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:18:00 -
[14] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts?
I think you have a good point and I would be willing to do this myself. The only problem is I'm sure it won't be a popular choice so my willingness to comply would be useless. Another thing to consider would be when the new dropsuits come out (whenever that may be); do we ask people to go back to using standard dropsuits? Or is the addition of dropsuits too subtle compared to reworking vehicles and do not require the same measures to be taken? |
Mortedeamor
Internal Rebellion
335
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:21:00 -
[15] - Quote
not in the least i would not mind in the least the removal of all av other than standard lets go fun fun time |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
2530
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
Definitely agree with the importance of adding Amarr and Minmatar vehicles early. How can you really balance out vehicles and get good data when half the vehicles are missing? |
Mortedeamor
Internal Rebellion
335
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:22:00 -
[17] - Quote
assuming proto and adv turrets were also removed of course...tanks currently deal proto dmg they just dont take it. |
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1108
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
Mortedeamor wrote:assuming proto and adv turrets were also removed of course...tanks currently deal proto dmg they just dont take it.
Yes we do proto dammage well sort of but after the removal of turret proficiency we had our dammage nerfed when av got to keep proficiency dammage. |
Vin Mora
Sanguis Defense Syndicate
163
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
Why are people forgetting that they are releasing vehicle and weapon rebalances at the same time? So AV will be rebalanced with the new vehicles. |
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1563
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:53:00 -
[20] - Quote
Only if you accept a temporary removal of you turrets. |
|
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:53:00 -
[21] - Quote
Toby Flenderson wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts? I think you have a good point and I would be willing to do this myself. The only problem is I'm sure it won't be a popular choice so my willingness to comply would be useless. Another thing to consider would be when the new dropsuits come out (whenever that may be); do we ask people to go back to using standard dropsuits? Or is the addition of dropsuits too subtle compared to reworking vehicles and do not require the same measures to be taken?
Suppose that is yet to be seen |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:56:00 -
[22] - Quote
Mortedeamor wrote:assuming proto and adv turrets were also removed of course...tanks currently deal proto dmg they just dont take it.
Well a small vehicle turret should be equal to or greater than any small arms fire.
And so moving from STD to proto wouldn't change much vs infantry but it does have MASSIVE implications for vehicle vs vehicle balance. I don't see how they could balance vehicles without considering proto turrets modules in a standard vehicle vs another vehicle |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:56:00 -
[23] - Quote
Vin Mora wrote:Why are people forgetting that they are releasing vehicle and weapon rebalances at the same time? So AV will be rebalanced with the new vehicles.
But how? Unless they start at the same rate and work up from there?
|
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
1174
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:57:00 -
[24] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:Mortedeamor wrote:assuming proto and adv turrets were also removed of course...tanks currently deal proto dmg they just dont take it. Yes we do proto dammage well sort of but after the removal of turret proficiency we had our dammage nerfed when av got to keep proficiency dammage.
Not to mention all infantry based weapons got that 10% buff at the start of Uprising. Tanks did not. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:00:00 -
[25] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:Only if you accept a temporary removal of you turrets.
I mean if that's what's best.
I'm not sure if it factors out the same way because if anything vehicle turrets would be balanced against infantry Suits.
So...see where this is going? We also going to strip out all suits to standard and work up from there?
If not the best dividing line is as I stated above. STD-AV dmg vs STD-vehicle HP. STD-vehicle(all modules) vs STD-vehicle(all moduels).
|
J Falcs
Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION
125
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:02:00 -
[26] - Quote
I am all for tiericide. Fantastic move on the EVE side. I was very very surprised when they kept the tiers in Dust 514 Uprising. It seemed archaic compared to the EVE model of all ships have a place/specialty.
I would like to see more suits with differing bonuses that encourages specialization. Based on layout and bonuses, suits can be more general, filling two roles in one, and on the other hand a suit that fills one role very well.
I would say same goes for vehicles, although I think vehicles lend themselves very well to the T3 model of eve ships. Base hulls but certain "parts" can turn the ship from assault to transport or to logistic (dropship example). |
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1563
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:03:00 -
[27] - Quote
This community is getting stupider by the hour....
I see tanks going 30-0 / 40-0 in regular basics, most AV weapons are useless against them... and you want to temporally remove the only weapons that can make them run for cover now and again ?
I have a better idea; Just remove Dropsuits altogether, and lets make Dust 514 a Vehicles only game.
|
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:03:00 -
[28] - Quote
J Falcs wrote:I am all for tiericide. Fantastic move on the EVE side. I was very very surprised when they kept the tiers in Dust 514 Uprising. It seemed archaic compared to the EVE model of all ships have a place/specialty.
I would like to see more suits with differing bonuses that encourages specialization. Based on layout and bonuses, suits can be more general, filling two roles in one, and on the other hand a suit that fills one role very well.
I would say same goes for vehicles, although I think vehicles lend themselves very well to the T3 model of eve ships. Base hulls but certain "parts" can turn the ship from assault to transport or to logistic (dropship example).
T3 seems to be what they're going for with vehicles |
Sgt Buttscratch
SLAPHAPPY BANDITS
872
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:09:00 -
[29] - Quote
I dont think they'd need to removed adv weapons, If the removed Proto and Officer AV it would be good, ADV is actually very well balanced versus tanks, if you stick around too long your going down, but its survivable. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:11:00 -
[30] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:This community is getting stupider by the hour....
I see tanks going 30-0 / 40-0 in regular basics, most AV weapons are useless against them... and you want to temporally remove the only weapons that can make them run for cover now and again ?
I have a better idea; Just remove Dropsuits altogether, and lets make Dust 514 a Vehicles only game.
QQ much?
any tank going 30 and 0 is when nobody goes AV because they're lazy and want easy infantry assist kills or they are terrible.
Av is cheap, costs little SP and I've never met a tank I couldn't put the finishing blow on with a militia forge and some AV nades.
A. "remove the only weapon". Are are impling you think the only weapon capable of killing a vehicle is (proto) forge? lawl? B. remove dropsuits. Ok QQ Queen. |
|
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1563
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:16:00 -
[31] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Banning Hammer wrote:This community is getting stupider by the hour....
I see tanks going 30-0 / 40-0 in regular basics, most AV weapons are useless against them... and you want to temporally remove the only weapons that can make them run for cover now and again ?
I have a better idea; Just remove Dropsuits altogether, and lets make Dust 514 a Vehicles only game.
QQ much? any tank going 30 and 0 is when nobody goes AV because they're lazy and want easy infantry assist kills or they are terrible. Av is cheap, costs little SP and I've never met a tank I couldn't put the finishing blow on with a militia forge and some AV nades. A. "remove the only weapon". Are are impling you think the only weapon capable of killing a vehicle is (proto) forge? lawl? B. remove dropsuits. Ok QQ Queen.
AV cheap ? Die 5 times in a row just to "scare" a tank away ? and then die another 5 times trying to hunt it down ?
I actually spent about 500,000 isk in battles just trying to "scare" a tank away from a position ...with not rewards... No WP, not kills... not ISK... NOTHING. Just helping my team to defend an area... that is it.
|
calisk galern
BurgezzE.T.F Public Disorder.
1058
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:18:00 -
[32] - Quote
to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have. |
Rogatien Merc
Red Star. EoN.
1366
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:21:00 -
[33] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically. the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles. vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis. This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto Yes balance is important but so far CCP hasnt really shown they can balance the tiers between similar play styles let alone two that play completely different from each other so if Im going to support removing tiers Im not going to say lets just remove the AV tiers so the tankers stop crying but lets gut the entire system and start from scratch with just one tier Just that alone would drastically simplify balancing the system IMO I wasn't aware ground balance was that off. But if consensus points that it is, that'd be fine too. Well there will always be some who say its fine but if you take two people, one in a standard fit another in a proto fit, even the standard getting the drop on the proto does not necessarily mean a kill simply due to stats Imagine going against a tank with twice as much health as your own that does more damage on top of that, not unbeatable but the stats give enough of a cushion that even if the opponent isnt as good as you they might come out on top The ******* with a std shotgun, plasma canon, knowledge of grenade cooking, or a hot 'burnstalk' laser sure as **** takes me down if he 'gets the drop' on me. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:27:00 -
[34] - Quote
calisk galern wrote:to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have.
I think you're missing the point
In other words let me get this clear:
You want vehicles to have half their roles stripped out, modules removed, and hulls all stuck at standard. While you Blap at them with a proto assault forge gun and Lai AV nades.
And you expect this will somehow give CCP a better picture of how to adjust balance against AV and vehicles? When no vehicle will last more than 2 seconds on the field?.
How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms?
This guy should be CPM. He's totally unbiased and sensible /s |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:29:00 -
[35] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Banning Hammer wrote:This community is getting stupider by the hour....
I see tanks going 30-0 / 40-0 in regular basics, most AV weapons are useless against them... and you want to temporally remove the only weapons that can make them run for cover now and again ?
I have a better idea; Just remove Dropsuits altogether, and lets make Dust 514 a Vehicles only game.
QQ much? any tank going 30 and 0 is when nobody goes AV because they're lazy and want easy infantry assist kills or they are terrible. Av is cheap, costs little SP and I've never met a tank I couldn't put the finishing blow on with a militia forge and some AV nades. A. "remove the only weapon". Are are impling you think the only weapon capable of killing a vehicle is (proto) forge? lawl? B. remove dropsuits. Ok QQ Queen. AV cheap ? Die 5 times in a row just to "scare" a tank away ? and then die another 5 times trying to hunt it down ? I actually spent about 500,000 isk in battles just trying to "scare" a tank away from a position ...with not rewards... No WP, not kills... not ISK... NOTHING. Just helping my team to defend an area... that is it.
That's funny. You sound terrible. All I have is lev-3 AV nades and I can kill any tank alone or with 1 team mate depending on enemy team's support. If you're spending that much ISK, dying that much, and only managing to 'scare vehicles' away then god help you that's just a reflecting of your almost unfathomable ineptness.
L2P |
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1564
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:30:00 -
[36] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:calisk galern wrote:to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have. I think you're missing the point In other words let me get this clear: You want vehicles to have half their roles stripped out, modules removed, and hulls all stuck at standard. While you Blap at them with a proto assault forge gun and Lai AV nades. And you expect this will somehow give CCP a better picture of how to adjust balance against AV and vehicles? When no vehicle will last more than 2 seconds on the field?. How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms? This guy should be CPM. He's totally unbiased and sensible /s
Let me get this straight.... you don't want Prototype weapons destroying you STD tank ? I am hearing this correctly ? |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:33:00 -
[37] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:calisk galern wrote:to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have. I think you're missing the point In other words let me get this clear: You want vehicles to have half their roles stripped out, modules removed, and hulls all stuck at standard. While you Blap at them with a proto assault forge gun and Lai AV nades. And you expect this will somehow give CCP a better picture of how to adjust balance against AV and vehicles? When no vehicle will last more than 2 seconds on the field?. How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms? This guy should be CPM. He's totally unbiased and sensible /s Let me get this straight.... you don't want Prototype weapons destroying you STD tank ? I am hearing this correctly ?
idk where you're hearing that, nobody ever said it. What exactly is wrong with you?
|
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1564
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:38:00 -
[38] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Banning Hammer wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:calisk galern wrote:to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have. I think you're missing the point In other words let me get this clear: You want vehicles to have half their roles stripped out, modules removed, and hulls all stuck at standard. While you Blap at them with a proto assault forge gun and Lai AV nades. And you expect this will somehow give CCP a better picture of how to adjust balance against AV and vehicles? When no vehicle will last more than 2 seconds on the field?. How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms? This guy should be CPM. He's totally unbiased and sensible /s Let me get this straight.... you don't want Prototype weapons destroying you STD tank ? I am hearing this correctly ? idk where you're hearing that, nobody ever said it. What exactly is wrong with you?
Dropship sorry.... but still ;
Quote:How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms?
How can you seriously complain about this with a straight face...You know how much SP and ISK proto swarm launchers cost ? |
Sgt Buttscratch
SLAPHAPPY BANDITS
872
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:42:00 -
[39] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:calisk galern wrote:to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have. I think you're missing the point In other words let me get this clear: You want vehicles to have half their roles stripped out, modules removed, and hulls all stuck at standard. While you Blap at them with a proto assault forge gun and Lai AV nades. And you expect this will somehow give CCP a better picture of how to adjust balance against AV and vehicles? When no vehicle will last more than 2 seconds on the field?. How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms? This guy should be CPM. He's totally unbiased and sensible /s Let me get this straight.... you don't want Prototype weapons destroying you STD tank ? I am hearing this correctly ?
When I saw his post I figured those with narrow minds would enter with the rawr rawr djibawr. IMO it would be a btter test of current vehicles to see their survivabilty versus MLT/STD/ADV, ADV is still very tricky for tanks, they catch you off guard or being cocky they can destroy you fast, also they are very good for getting a tank to retreat. What they don't have is patheticly OP abilities. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:45:00 -
[40] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:[quote=Nguruthos IX] Quote:How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms? How can you seriously complain about this with a straight face...You know how much SP and ISK proto swarm launchers cost ?
Sorry, now I know you're trolling. |
|
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:49:00 -
[41] - Quote
PS as it is 2 people with militia swarms or 1 person with a militia forge is area-of denial on penalty-of-death to any dropship.
Being on the ground means you're liable to be rushed by anyone with even basic AV nades.
|
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
608
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:50:00 -
[42] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:PS as it is 2 people with militia swarms or 1 person with a militia forge is area-of denial on penalty-of-death to any dropship.
Being on the ground means you're liable to be rushed by anyone with even basic AV nades.
except that swarms will not bring a dropship down... trololo afterburner. |
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1564
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:52:00 -
[43] - Quote
Sgt Buttscratch wrote:Banning Hammer wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:calisk galern wrote:to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have. I think you're missing the point In other words let me get this clear: You want vehicles to have half their roles stripped out, modules removed, and hulls all stuck at standard. While you Blap at them with a proto assault forge gun and Lai AV nades. And you expect this will somehow give CCP a better picture of how to adjust balance against AV and vehicles? When no vehicle will last more than 2 seconds on the field?. How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms? This guy should be CPM. He's totally unbiased and sensible /s Let me get this straight.... you don't want Prototype weapons destroying you STD tank ? I am hearing this correctly ? When I saw his post I figured those with narrow minds would enter with the rawr rawr djibawr. IMO it would be a btter test of current vehicles to see their survivabilty versus MLT/STD/ADV, ADV is still very tricky for tanks, they catch you off guard or being cocky they can destroy you fast, also they are very good for getting a tank to retreat. What they don't have is patheticly OP abilities.
I am narrow minded ? Seriously, do you know how much SP you have to invest in an AV weapon to get it to the point that does some "serious" damage ? Then to that add CPU and PG restrictions, which means that you will need Core skills too.. and most likely also a Proto suit to use it. Now... add all the SP and ISK.... done ? now.. talk me who is being narrow minded |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:56:00 -
[44] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:PS as it is 2 people with militia swarms or 1 person with a militia forge is area-of denial on penalty-of-death to any dropship.
Being on the ground means you're liable to be rushed by anyone with even basic AV nades.
except that swarms will not bring a dropship down... trololo afterburner.
failed reading comprehension again I see.
Area of denial = DS must flee any range within locking area (huge) OR it will die.
translation: new character with no SP or ISK can neutralize a whole vehicle for free. Don't even need proto swarms if it's annoying you. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:58:00 -
[45] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:Sgt Buttscratch wrote:Banning Hammer wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:calisk galern wrote:to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have. I think you're missing the point In other words let me get this clear: You want vehicles to have half their roles stripped out, modules removed, and hulls all stuck at standard. While you Blap at them with a proto assault forge gun and Lai AV nades. And you expect this will somehow give CCP a better picture of how to adjust balance against AV and vehicles? When no vehicle will last more than 2 seconds on the field?. How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms? This guy should be CPM. He's totally unbiased and sensible /s Let me get this straight.... you don't want Prototype weapons destroying you STD tank ? I am hearing this correctly ? When I saw his post I figured those with narrow minds would enter with the rawr rawr djibawr. IMO it would be a btter test of current vehicles to see their survivabilty versus MLT/STD/ADV, ADV is still very tricky for tanks, they catch you off guard or being cocky they can destroy you fast, also they are very good for getting a tank to retreat. What they don't have is patheticly OP abilities. I am narrow minded ? Seriously, do you know how much SP you have to invest in an AV weapon to get it to the point that does some "serious" damage ? Then to that add CPU and PG restrictions, which means that you will need Core skills too.. and most likely also a Proto suit to use it. Now... add all the SP and ISK.... done ? now.. talk me who is being narrow minded
Yeah because all of that sounds like absolute **** compared to the exact same arguements coming from vehicles with more merit.
AV takes a lot of SP to be effective? Are you kidding me? Know how much SP it takes to make any vehicle remotely viable? They're not even viable when maxxed.
Proto swarms are expensive? You don't even need them but if you wanted how can you justify that compared to the million isk DS that goes down when 2 militia forge train it?
Get outta here |
Skihids
Bullet Cluster
2226
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Not that we players haves say in it, but just consider the long term.
Whatever AV stays in is going to be balanced against STD vehicles, then ADV and PROTO vehicles will be added back.
If I were an AV player I would demand AV be striped down to STD for the balance pass against STD vehicles. |
Hellkeizer
The Avutora Complex
132
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:01:00 -
[47] - Quote
As long as I could evel my proficiency then sure, I use advance anyhow |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:01:00 -
[48] - Quote
Skihids wrote:Not that we players haves say in it, but just insider the long term.
Whatever AV stays in is going to be balanced against STD vehicles, then ADV and PROTO vehicles will be added back.
If I were an AV player I would demand AV be striped down to STD for the balance pass against STD vehicles.
That is unless they want proto AV balanced to kill STD vehicles so that ADV vehicles can finally do to them what proto Av has been doing to us for the last year.
Sure man, if that's what they want. Screw it I'm ok with that. Just thought it'd be better for, you know, the game and all to do this right.
lol |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:04:00 -
[49] - Quote
Side note:
They also need to balance militia vehicles and militia AV. Previously totally ignored.
I can be more effective than my entire team in any game with militia gear and ZERO ground SP
Try pulling that stunt with a militia dropship or militia tank. You'll be shat on by the first simple av nade that hits you or militia forge gun will 2 shot you before you could move after the first hit.
Militia vehicles as of yet have been completely worthless for anything other than suicide. This paradigm deserves to be looked at and changed.
|
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1564
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:04:00 -
[50] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Banning Hammer wrote:Sgt Buttscratch wrote:
When I saw his post I figured those with narrow minds would enter with the rawr rawr djibawr. IMO it would be a btter test of current vehicles to see their survivabilty versus MLT/STD/ADV, ADV is still very tricky for tanks, they catch you off guard or being cocky they can destroy you fast, also they are very good for getting a tank to retreat. What they don't have is patheticly OP abilities.
I am narrow minded ? Seriously, do you know how much SP you have to invest in an AV weapon to get it to the point that does some "serious" damage ? Then to that add CPU and PG restrictions, which means that you will need Core skills too.. and most likely also a Proto suit to use it. Now... add all the SP and ISK.... done ? now.. talk me who is being narrow minded Yeah because all of that sounds like absolute **** compared to the exact same arguements coming from vehicles with more merit. AV takes a lot of SP to be effective? Are you kidding me? Know how much SP it takes to make any vehicle remotely viable? They're not even viable when maxxed. Proto swarms are expensive? You don't even need them but if you wanted how can you justify that compared to the million isk DS that goes down when 2 militia forge train it? Get outta here
I'm not sure exactly how much it is... i look into it later. But a proper AV suit will cost you around 150,000 / 200,000 isk... and trust me.. you will die like a fly because you can't defend yourself against infantry. Even a decent ADV AV suit will cost you around 80,000 / 100,000 isk. |
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1112
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:04:00 -
[51] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:Sgt Buttscratch wrote:Banning Hammer wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:calisk galern wrote:to be clear you want to remove advanc and better in swarms, forge guns, grenades, and proximity mines?
i'd get a good laugh I guess with how easy of a time good tank pilots would have. I think you're missing the point In other words let me get this clear: You want vehicles to have half their roles stripped out, modules removed, and hulls all stuck at standard. While you Blap at them with a proto assault forge gun and Lai AV nades. And you expect this will somehow give CCP a better picture of how to adjust balance against AV and vehicles? When no vehicle will last more than 2 seconds on the field?. How the hell am I supposed to survive more than a moment in a STD dropship when everyone on the enemy team already has proto swarms? This guy should be CPM. He's totally unbiased and sensible /s Let me get this straight.... you don't want Prototype weapons destroying you STD tank ? I am hearing this correctly ? When I saw his post I figured those with narrow minds would enter with the rawr rawr djibawr. IMO it would be a btter test of current vehicles to see their survivabilty versus MLT/STD/ADV, ADV is still very tricky for tanks, they catch you off guard or being cocky they can destroy you fast, also they are very good for getting a tank to retreat. What they don't have is patheticly OP abilities. I am narrow minded ? Seriously, do you know how much SP you have to invest in an AV weapon to get it to the point that does some "serious" damage ? Then to that add CPU and PG restrictions, which means that you will need Core skills too.. and most likely also a Proto suit to use it. Now... add all the SP and ISK.... done ? now.. talk me who is being narrow minded
If your wanting to talk about sp investment it took 15 mill to max out everything on my falchions. I know it alsi dosent take any whare near that to run proto swarms as I run both proti swarm and proto forge as well as adv in every other wepon.
|
DS 10
Will Ring For Booze
1011
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:08:00 -
[52] - Quote
Give me a lower leveled Assault FG and I'm cool with it. The issue with removing FGs is they're also effective vs installations and infantry. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1968
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:12:00 -
[53] - Quote
DS 10 wrote:Give me a lower leveled Assault FG and I'm cool with it. The issue with removing FGs is they're also effective vs installations and infantry. decent point on the complication of weapon variants as tiers go up.
But what if that somehow ends up getting removed then you're right. It'd be ok.
"The issue with removing FGs is they're also effective vs installations and infantry." Well not removing them just keeping them to a basic level.
a militia FG+ militia damage mod 3 shots any installation currently. I believe it would direct shot any infantry as well. Like 1300+ dmg.
|
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1564
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:13:00 -
[54] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:Banning Hammer wrote:Sgt Buttscratch wrote:
Let me get this straight.... you don't want Prototype weapons destroying you STD tank ? I am hearing this correctly ?
When I saw his post I figured those with narrow minds would enter with the rawr rawr djibawr. IMO it would be a btter test of current vehicles to see their survivabilty versus MLT/STD/ADV, ADV is still very tricky for tanks, they catch you off guard or being cocky they can destroy you fast, also they are very good for getting a tank to retreat. What they don't have is patheticly OP abilities. I am narrow minded ? Seriously, do you know how much SP you have to invest in an AV weapon to get it to the point that does some "serious" damage ? Then to that add CPU and PG restrictions, which means that you will need Core skills too.. and most likely also a Proto suit to use it. Now... add all the SP and ISK.... done ? now.. talk me who is being narrow minded
Quote:If your wanting to talk about sp investment it took 15 mill to max out everything on my falchions. I know it alsi dosent take any whare near that to run proto swarms as I run both proti swarm and proto forge as well as adv in every other wepon.
AV players are sitting ducks, you have absolutely no defense against infantry....and even if you manage to kill "one" tank some how, you still losing lots of ISK because you died so many times in the process. |
Rogatien Merc
Red Star. EoN.
1367
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:15:00 -
[55] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:If your wanting to talk about sp investment it took 15 mill to max out everything on my falchions. I know it alsi dosent take any whare near that to run proto swarms as I run both proti swarm and proto forge as well as adv in every other wepon.
And It takes more than 25 mil SP to max out everything on a 250k ISK proto gal logi suit that gets taken out in <1sec by your tank.
Can wreck pubs with a 3-4mil SP and a <700k isk maddy with adv scattered blaster and the biggest thing to fear is just higher SP tanks. If no enemy tanks on the field and enemies switch to AV, I back off, move to other side of map, and/or let blue dots slaughter the AV. If i don't just SHOOT the AV guy. If blue dots were so bad that when I retreat they can't take out enemies who have switched to swarms and AV nades ... then guess what: I would have lots 1mil ISK in proto SUITS that match if I decide to keep charging in there too.
I have some sympathy for tanks, but also know that a lot of the is overly dramatic due to rage and frustration with lack of patches. |
DS 10
Will Ring For Booze
1012
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:19:00 -
[56] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:DS 10 wrote:Give me a lower leveled Assault FG and I'm cool with it. The issue with removing FGs is they're also effective vs installations and infantry. decent point on the complication of weapon variants as tiers go up. But what if that somehow ends up getting removed then you're right. It'd be ok. "The issue with removing FGs is they're also effective vs installations and infantry." Well not removing them just keeping them to a basic level. a militia FG+ militia damage mod 3 shots any installation currently. I believe it would direct shot any infantry as well. Like 1300+ dmg.
With a charge time and ammo nerf. |
CharCharOdell
Shining Flame Amarr Empire
1064
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 13:43:00 -
[57] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. do explain the term tiericide
there'd be no std, adv, or proto. basically, the same way we only have gunlogi and falchion, there'd only be amarr A-1 and Sential A-1 |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1411
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:06:00 -
[58] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote: Thoughts?
Hi Nine!
It depends on how the vehicle changes pan out. I've read the vehicle thread and share the concerns of experienced Tankers and Pilots who appear -- at first glance -- to have far fewer options at their disposal. That said, we can't yet assign a threat-level to upcoming vehicle-mounted weaponry. If tank-mounted missile turrets, for example, can decimate squads in seconds then I suspect Proto AV will still be needed to maintain ground-unit balance.
As for aerial balance, I suspect that Swarms will still pose little threat to Dropships. On Forge Guns, I'm inclined to agree with Pyrex's well-reasoned position: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc3TdcyHLTU
It is problematic that a single infantry unit can clear air-space for an entire match. That said, I feel for our fatties; it breaks my heart to see them running Duvolles over heavy weapons. A Forge Gun change should take into account the fact that the HMG is quite useless in half our maps.
Just my two cents.
- Shotty GoBang - Swarm Operation V / Proficiency III
|
RECON BY FIRE
Internal Rebellion
256
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:13:00 -
[59] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts?
Lol, no. You are obviously one of those few people who simply wants your tank to be as OP as possible instead of trying to create any sort of balance. A case can be made for the temporary removal of proto AV, but advanced? Youre just being a cry baby now. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1985
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:17:00 -
[60] - Quote
Shotty GoBang wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote: Thoughts?
Hi Nine! It depends on how the vehicle changes pan out. I've read the vehicle thread and share the concerns of experienced Tankers and Pilots who appear -- at first glance -- to have far fewer options at their disposal. That said, we can't yet assign a threat-level to upcoming vehicle-mounted weaponry. If tank-mounted missile turrets, for example, can decimate squads in seconds then I suspect Proto AV will still be needed to maintain ground-unit balance. As for aerial balance, I suspect that Swarms will still pose little threat to Dropships (unless I've missed something). On Forge Guns, I'm inclined to agree with Pyrex's well-reasoned position: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc3TdcyHLTUIt is problematic that a single infantry unit can clear the airspace for an entire match. That said, I feel for our fatties; it breaks my heart to see them running Duvolles over heavy weapons. A Forge Gun change should take into account the fact that the HMG is quite useless in half our maps. Just my two cents. - Shotty GoBang - Swarm Operation V / Proficiency III
of course.
Also I overheard in IRC some dev mention considering some buffs to the heavy Suit. I suppose that could be classified as rumor since it wasn't in some official capacity but I feel for heavies too and one area we could all agree on helping is their tankiness. I'll leave speculation for forge gun efficiency vs dropship till we have more data for an accurate picture. |
|
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1986
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:22:00 -
[61] - Quote
RECON BY FIRE wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts? Lol, no. You are obviously one of those few people who simply wants your tank to be as OP as possible instead of trying to create any sort of balance. A case can be made for the temporary removal of proto AV, but advanced? Youre just being a cry baby now.
well first of all I've never driven a tank and never want to. Second I'm a cry baby for thinking std should be balanced against std? Same as it is or should be with suits?
You might want to consider this:
If you leave in adv AV to fight std vehicles in testing, then you'll likely end up with a skewed picture of balance that results in AV REQUIRING advanced weapons to kill STD vehicles/tanks/what have you.
By clearing all the "noise" off the battle field CCP can make a proper scientific assessment of the status of AV and vehicle effectiveness. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1412
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:24:00 -
[62] - Quote
RECON BY FIRE wrote: Lol, no. You are obviously one of those few people who simply wants your tank to be as OP as possible instead of trying to create any sort of balance. A case can be made for the temporary removal of proto AV, but advanced? Youre just being a cry baby now.
IX is a famed dropship pilot (not a tanker). The Condors call him NG and here he is in Russia ^ Footage courtesy of Bojo |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1986
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:26:00 -
[63] - Quote
Shotty GoBang wrote:RECON BY FIRE wrote: Lol, no. You are obviously one of those few people who simply wants your tank to be as OP as possible instead of trying to create any sort of balance. A case can be made for the temporary removal of proto AV, but advanced? Youre just being a cry baby now.
IX is a famed dropship pilot (not a tanker). The Condors call him NG and here he is in Russia
owned that proto goat |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1412
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:31:00 -
[64] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote: owned that proto goat
Dragged toward precipice and certain demise, the proto medium squeals (roughly translated): "Not fair! I'm immortal! I have a Duvolle!" |
RECON BY FIRE
Internal Rebellion
256
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:32:00 -
[65] - Quote
I don't really give a **** what you actually operate, you obviously don't care about actual balance. Ill tell you this, if a standard tank can be taken out by a standard Swarm that tank is not worth even owning. There is a difference in levels between vehicles and AV weapons. Back when we had Marauders they were "proto" tanks, so obviously there was never really much of an intention for a dropsuit/weapon style progression with vehicles. |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
610
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:42:00 -
[66] - Quote
RECON BY FIRE wrote:I don't really give a **** what you actually operate, you obviously don't care about actual balance. Ill tell you this, if a standard tank can be taken out by a standard Swarm that tank is not worth even owning. There is a difference in levels between vehicles and AV weapons. Back when we had Marauders they were "proto" tanks, so obviously there was never really much of an intention for a dropsuit/weapon style progression with vehicles. if a std tank cannot be taken down by std AV there is inbalance creating artificial numbers advantage. if you dont understand that then do yourself a favor and dont post because you have no clue drive well and not brainless rambo then your tank will do fine. 99% of tank deaths can be avoided by just using the brain and not overextending. |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
2115
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:44:00 -
[67] - Quote
What are you really balancing though? Std AV vs Std tanks with std modules? Std av vs std tanks with proto modules?
What do you really expect ccp will learn from this? |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1988
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:46:00 -
[68] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:What are you really balancing though? Std AV vs Std tanks with std modules? Std av vs std tanks with proto modules?
What do you really expect ccp will learn from this?
Well from the looks if it now it would be to balance
STD vehicles -with proto modules
against
STD av -with proto modules
aka
basic forge gun + complex damage mods VS basic vehicle with complex shield extenders |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1988
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:48:00 -
[69] - Quote
RECON BY FIRE wrote:I don't really give a **** what you actually operate, you obviously don't care about actual balance. Ill tell you this, if a standard tank can be taken out by a standard Swarm that tank is not worth even owning. There is a difference in levels between vehicles and AV weapons. Back when we had Marauders they were "proto" tanks, so obviously there was never really much of an intention for a dropsuit/weapon style progression with vehicles.
one guy with one medium AV weapon should not be able to solo a vehicle in any quick amount of time.
That's for sure. Otherwise any time there's 2 AV on the field any vehicle would be ****ed.
Kinda like now with forge guns. |
Coleman Gray
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
744
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 14:54:00 -
[70] - Quote
Lets not be hastey here, fingers crossed, CCP have taken current AV into account and tanks can be made to match upto it. |
|
Rynoceros
Rise Of Old Dudes
837
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 15:10:00 -
[71] - Quote
They should be able to cover this in-house without touching the active game. Unless the Pilot suits are coming soon, then the entire vehicle balance is just a matter of changing some numbers here and there.
(Their obvious lack of opinion and not blue tagging Respec threads leads me to believe the real final respec is coming. CCP usually has no problem saying "No, we're not doing this/that. Not even SoonGäó" but have remained silent on those theeads.) |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
1017
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 15:11:00 -
[72] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts? I'd sign on for this. Let's get the testing/balancing out of the way ASAP. OP's proposal seems like a good place to start.
Also, CCP can re-intro weapons via streaming market updates, so can easily start stepping the AV tiers back up as resting progresses. |
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star. EoN.
1279
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 15:46:00 -
[73] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:ZDub 303 wrote:What are you really balancing though? Std AV vs Std tanks with std modules? Std av vs std tanks with proto modules?
What do you really expect ccp will learn from this? Well from the looks if it now it would be to balance STD vehicles -with proto modules against STD av -with proto modules aka basic forge gun + complex damage mods VS basic vehicle with complex shield extenders
|
RECON BY FIRE
Internal Rebellion
257
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 16:02:00 -
[74] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:RECON BY FIRE wrote:I don't really give a **** what you actually operate, you obviously don't care about actual balance. Ill tell you this, if a standard tank can be taken out by a standard Swarm that tank is not worth even owning. There is a difference in levels between vehicles and AV weapons. Back when we had Marauders they were "proto" tanks, so obviously there was never really much of an intention for a dropsuit/weapon style progression with vehicles. if a std tank cannot be taken down by std AV there is inbalance creating artificial numbers advantage. if you dont understand that then do yourself a favor and dont post because you have no clue drive well and not brainless rambo then your tank will do fine. 99% of tank deaths can be avoided by just using the brain and not overextending.
How did you ever come up with such flawless logic? "Either accept my viewpoint or gtfo." So we will go with your viewpoint for a second here, you basically just said Gunnlogis and Madrugers should be able to be taken down with a standard Swarm. Ok, cool. You heard the man! Buff the Swarms! |
Slightly-Mental
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 23:42:00 -
[75] - Quote
proximity mines need a buff
make swarms a heavy only weapon and maybe remove 1 missile from shot
forge guns need a total rework
my thoughts from playing AV
|
Godin Thekiller
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
1062
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 23:44:00 -
[76] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically. the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles. vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis. This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto Yes balance is important but so far CCP hasnt really shown they can balance the tiers between similar play styles let alone two that play completely different from each other so if Im going to support removing tiers Im not going to say lets just remove the AV tiers so the tankers stop crying but lets gut the entire system and start from scratch with just one tier Just that alone would drastically simplify balancing the system IMO
Agreed |
SgtDoughnut
Red Star Jr. EoN.
241
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 23:47:00 -
[77] - Quote
All things relating to vehicles should be stripped down to the same level, AV included, its the only way to make it balanced and make it where we don't require an AV specialist in every squad just in case someone pulls a tank/derpship |
Godin Thekiller
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
1062
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 23:48:00 -
[78] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. do explain the term tiericide
Picture if there was never a PROTO suit, and that all the suits were basically PROTO. That. Honestly, if that would have happened, and AV was left at advanced, I would be fine with that. Well, AV grenades would still need a nerf. |
Gallente Mercenary 08551380
The Vanguardians
45
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 00:23:00 -
[79] - Quote
I am a prototype forge gunner. Killing tanks is my special sauce
I just ran around in my LLAV trying to chase down this one tanker during a dominion for the entire match. He just shrugged off my shots like they were no big deal and proceeded to **** my face. The problem isint OP AV, its ******** tank drivers
If they removed proto AV, a well fit tank would be invincible. Even more so than they are now. |
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1116
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 00:56:00 -
[80] - Quote
Look at it this way. It is supposed to take team work to bring down a well specked hav not 1 merc with a proto win button. Now if CCPreleases std havs to be balanced against adv.and proto av then our proto and adv.vehicles will be incredably op. If any one who runs av thinks we should not be.allowd proto vehicles dosent want balance all.they want is a win button. And if you want to continue soloing vehicles battlefield/cod/anynother generic twich shooter is that way>>>>>>>.
Every one else ....lets just see what ccp.dose next. |
|
SgtDoughnut
Red Star Jr. EoN.
242
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 01:00:00 -
[81] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:Look at it this way. It is supposed to take team work to bring down a well specked hav not 1 merc with a proto win button. Now if CCPreleases std havs to be balanced against adv.and proto av then our proto and adv.vehicles will be incredably op. If any one who runs av thinks we should not be.allowd proto vehicles dosent want balance all.they want is a win button. And if you want to continue soloing vehicles battlefield/cod/anynother generic twich shooter is that way>>>>>>>.
Every one else ....lets just see what ccp.dose next.
Along that logic though why should 1 merc with a well specced tank take so many people to bring down? At that point you should have entire teams running tanks, only having 1 or 2 guys get out to hack objectives. If you have infantry in the game the vehicles need to be balanced against infantry not other vehicles. |
Alpha 443-6732
PEN 15 CLUB
88
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 01:06:00 -
[82] - Quote
fellow PEN 15 club member approves of this thread |
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1116
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 01:06:00 -
[83] - Quote
Some folks seem to have misconceptions aboit the levle of team work neede to bring down a hav and many times iv.said in many threads 3 mercs with the same tier av as the tank is balance as I often run with 2 co gunners so wheres the balance when 1 merc on a tower or somewhere beyond my rendering range can solo my extremely well.fitted tanks with 2 co gunners? Ill tell you whare the balance is ......its far far away in a distant galaxy. The verry reason pro havs were removed is because cod boys couldent solo them and done nothing but whine on here about it . |
Xocoyol Zaraoul
Superior Genetics
1204
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 01:14:00 -
[84] - Quote
As a die-hard HAV user... I hate to say it, but I am firmly against them removing any AV tiers, as we do need them to see how they perform against the "basic" vehicles.
Further gutting of the game would be just ridiculous, as painful as it may be to leave them in. |
Alpha 443-6732
PEN 15 CLUB
88
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 01:20:00 -
[85] - Quote
RECON BY FIRE wrote:Jack McReady wrote:RECON BY FIRE wrote:I don't really give a **** what you actually operate, you obviously don't care about actual balance. Ill tell you this, if a standard tank can be taken out by a standard Swarm that tank is not worth even owning. There is a difference in levels between vehicles and AV weapons. Back when we had Marauders they were "proto" tanks, so obviously there was never really much of an intention for a dropsuit/weapon style progression with vehicles. if a std tank cannot be taken down by std AV there is inbalance creating artificial numbers advantage. if you dont understand that then do yourself a favor and dont post because you have no clue drive well and not brainless rambo then your tank will do fine. 99% of tank deaths can be avoided by just using the brain and not overextending. How did you ever come up with such flawless logic? "Either accept my viewpoint or gtfo." So we will go with your viewpoint for a second here, you basically just said Gunnlogis and Madrugers should be able to be taken down with a standard Swarm. Ok, cool. You heard the man! Buff the Swarms!
This guy is the idiot of the day! Congrats!
Standard shouldn't be balanced against standard? Had you been dropped on your head as a child? |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |