| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Needless Sacermendor
Red Fox Brigade
537
   |
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:31:00 -
[31] - Quote
Justice Prevails wrote:I'm not a tanker, I actually hate them (kind of a respect,but love hate), so I'm no expert on what kind of sp they have to spend. But I do know they have to spend some good coin just to field the most basic tank( which can be solo killed with a basic swarm). Don't think a tanker just starting out can field them on a consistent basis without going infantry once in awhile. That will have to be the basic training.
Yeah I know in the current state they have to run with starter fits to support their basic low-sp vehicles.
But had it been done the way I'd have preferred it ... We'd have had our transport vehicles (LAVs n dropships) and the people who've now more or less maxed out a 'profession' would now be starting to skill into these basic offensive vehicles (the HAVs and Assault dropships n logistics vehicles etc.) ... AV could be readily available, so these basic vehicles would be balanced around a prominance of AV and as they were skilled up they'd achieve the more survivability and firepower scaled with the amount of investment into their modules and turrets etc.
I just think it would have been a cleaner progression and easier to balance provided matchmaking kept them competing against similar levels of players and co-ordination. |
Skihids
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
2307
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:36:00 -
[32] - Quote
Needless Sacermendor wrote:Justice Prevails wrote:Needless Sacermendor wrote:Skihids wrote:Piloting is a profession in any military and there is no reason to denigrate it in DUST. YEt I doubt you'll find a military in the world where vehicle operators don't complete at least basic infantry training ! I see what your saying, but basic training(for the navy) was only about 9 weeks. Then you were sent to your A school right after if you picked a rate when you joined. A very small percentage of your career would be basic. What your asking is for someone to spend 15 years of a 20 year career I basic. That what I got from your op. Only as the mighty capital ships require you to spend years training the smaller ships in Eve. I just see people joining the game and skilling straight into HAVs because they look like they should be an easy way to kill without being killed. My point is I'd be happy if they were like that, so long as you had to work your way up to them through the ranks of infantry, earning the right to drive such a vehicle, rather than what most do by just slogging it out in starter fits till they have the sp and isk to invest in them. Case in point ... I have a second account passive training since launch waiting for vehicles to be sorted out so I can jump in them myself when I feel like it.
That's more like progressing from STD, to ADV, to PROTO vehicles, not from infantry to vehicle.
What you proposed was more like needing to train manufacturing before piloting in EVE.
The rub with vehicles is that there are no starter fittings to fall back on and the SP and ISK requirements make them impossible to jump into as a new player. You would need to gather a lot of passive SP first and obtain a Corp or rich player as a sponsor. |
straya fox
CybinSect
56
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:38:00 -
[33] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Rogatien Merc wrote:I'd prefer they drop the SP requirements for everything vehicle-related to about 25% of current levels but keep/increase the ISK price. That way they end up being used as specialized equipment without gimping those who really like the vehicle experience when.
Also, I am slightly incapacitated right now so the above may or may not make sense when I re-read it later. if you were to do that, the only way to keep the class alive is to buff tanks a lot because they aren't worth their current cost and certainly not a future cost if they remain as weak as they are.
lol you are so full of it void, you just went 17/0 against me in a match 5 minutes ago, yet your tank is so underpowered, no one else out of both teams had no deaths, only you, and thats still not powerful enough for ya? I really dont understand what will make tankers happy 50/0, 60/0 mabe. I'm guessing your KDR is at least 3-5 i'll check tomorrow, but seriously man just think about it... |
Void Echo
Blades of Dust
1916
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:39:00 -
[34] - Quote
straya fox wrote:Void Echo wrote:Rogatien Merc wrote:I'd prefer they drop the SP requirements for everything vehicle-related to about 25% of current levels but keep/increase the ISK price. That way they end up being used as specialized equipment without gimping those who really like the vehicle experience when.
Also, I am slightly incapacitated right now so the above may or may not make sense when I re-read it later. if you were to do that, the only way to keep the class alive is to buff tanks a lot because they aren't worth their current cost and certainly not a future cost if they remain as weak as they are. lol you are so full of it void, you just went 17/0 against me in a match 5 minutes ago, yet your tank is so underpowered, no one else out of both teams had no deaths, only you, and thats still not powerful enough for ya? I really dont understand what will make tankers happy 50/0, 60/0 mabe. I'm guessing your KDR is at least 3-5 i'll check tomorrow, but seriously man just think about it...
I only got swarms fired at me 2 times the whole game, the rest of it I just fired at the objectives... not my fault your team failed to notice me. |
Needless Sacermendor
Red Fox Brigade
537
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
Skihids wrote:Needless Sacermendor wrote:Justice Prevails wrote:Needless Sacermendor wrote:Skihids wrote:Piloting is a profession in any military and there is no reason to denigrate it in DUST. YEt I doubt you'll find a military in the world where vehicle operators don't complete at least basic infantry training ! I see what your saying, but basic training(for the navy) was only about 9 weeks. Then you were sent to your A school right after if you picked a rate when you joined. A very small percentage of your career would be basic. What your asking is for someone to spend 15 years of a 20 year career I basic. That what I got from your op. Only as the mighty capital ships require you to spend years training the smaller ships in Eve. I just see people joining the game and skilling straight into HAVs because they look like they should be an easy way to kill without being killed. My point is I'd be happy if they were like that, so long as you had to work your way up to them through the ranks of infantry, earning the right to drive such a vehicle, rather than what most do by just slogging it out in starter fits till they have the sp and isk to invest in them. Case in point ... I have a second account passive training since launch waiting for vehicles to be sorted out so I can jump in them myself when I feel like it. That's more like progressing from STD, to ADV, to PROTO vehicles, not from infantry to vehicle. What you proposed was more like needing to train manufacturing before piloting in EVE. The rub with vehicles is that there are no starter fittings to fall back on and the SP and ISK requirements make them impossible to jump into as a new player. You would need to gather a lot of passive SP first and obtain a Corp or rich player as a sponsor.
It's nothing like needing to train manufacturing before ships ... it's more like needing to train manufacturing drones before manufacturing ships, before manufacturing T2 ships etc. ... which is exactly what you do have to do ... same as you have to train frigates before you can train cruisers before you can train battleships etc. ... the level of firepower and survivability scales up as it does from a dropsuit to a vehicle. |
straya fox
CybinSect
56
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:43:00 -
[36] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:straya fox wrote:Void Echo wrote:Rogatien Merc wrote:I'd prefer they drop the SP requirements for everything vehicle-related to about 25% of current levels but keep/increase the ISK price. That way they end up being used as specialized equipment without gimping those who really like the vehicle experience when.
Also, I am slightly incapacitated right now so the above may or may not make sense when I re-read it later. if you were to do that, the only way to keep the class alive is to buff tanks a lot because they aren't worth their current cost and certainly not a future cost if they remain as weak as they are. lol you are so full of it void, you just went 17/0 against me in a match 5 minutes ago, yet your tank is so underpowered, no one else out of both teams had no deaths, only you, and thats still not powerful enough for ya? I really dont understand what will make tankers happy 50/0, 60/0 mabe. I'm guessing your KDR is at least 3-5 i'll check tomorrow, but seriously man just think about it... I only got swarms fired at me 2 times the whole game, the rest of it I just fired at the objectives... not my fault your team failed to notice me.
were you in the red line? was a rail turret i know that and i was looking for ya but never saw you.
|
Xender17
MoIden Heath PoIice Department
EoN.
833
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:44:00 -
[37] - Quote
Probably no tankers have gone above 50-0
My highest is 37. But that was when only 1 person was using militia swarms and there were no enemy squads.
|
Needless Sacermendor
Red Fox Brigade
537
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:46:00 -
[38] - Quote
Xender17 wrote:Probably no tankers have gone above 50-0
My highest is 37. But that was when only 1 person was using militia swarms and there were no enemy squads.
I've had over 70/0 ... and there were people going over 100/0 ... you're probably talking about this build but you can't state sweeping facts like that without considering builds like E3.
Edit : "state sweeping facts" !!! ... that's not really right now is it lol ... "make sweeping statements" more like |
Needless Sacermendor
Red Fox Brigade
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:52:00 -
[39] - Quote
I'm off now anyway ... debate class dismissed ... was just the way I thought vehicles should have been developed from those early beta stages, rather than completely separating the skill trees. |
straya fox
CybinSect
56
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 18:54:00 -
[40] - Quote
Needless Sacermendor wrote:I'm off now anyway ... debate class dismissed ... was just the way I thought vehicles should have been developed from those early beta stages, rather than completely separating the skill trees.
g'night |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |