| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
medomai grey
WarRavens
League of Infamy
287
   |
Posted - 2013.10.26 01:13:00 -
[61] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Can you QQ some more please? Tears are worth more than gold! You missed the obvious sarcasm.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
367
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 01:22:00 -
[62] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Atiim wrote:Meeko Fent wrote:
Atiim, the reason tanks won't be OP as much as you whine about is this.
1. You can hide from tanks in the interiors of the outposts
2. You can get a militia rail tank and snipe them with the same effectiveness as before.
AV will just become less if a hard counter like it is now, and more of a deterrent as you wait for an allied AV tank to kill it for you
1.) Yeah and what about outdoor maps? Should I sit there and pray that the tank doesn't do anything? 2.) I shouldn't have to use a MLT railgun to deal with a tank And so yet again we have another person who believes that the best counter to a tank should be a tank? You clearly don't know what AV stands for, as it means ANTI-VEHICLE, not Temporary watergun untill another tank comes, and once again not everyone has a Tank. The best, strongest, and most absolute counter to Vehicles should be ANTI-VEHICLE. AV was designed to do just that, and when did CCP say that the best counter to a Tank should be a Tank? The fact that you believe that AV should just be "support waterguns" for tankers to use while in combat is ludicrous. It doesn't even follow the common rock paper scissors design. If the best counter to a tank is a tank then that would require everyone to have a tank to be effective, and will lead to this game becoming TANK 514, (hence the OP) Tanks should be the hardest hitting AV on the field. No handheld weapon should rival the power of a tank mounted turret. End of discussion.
Yep ANTI-VEHICLE is clearly not meant for ANTI-VEHICLE, it is meant for a poking stick.
Yep should definitely be the best ANTI-VEHICLE asset on the field, in fact this was clearly designed this way so let's replace Swarm Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Forge Guns, and AV grenades with tanks, as tanks are supposed to be the true ANTI-VEHICLE.
TANKS! TANKS! TANKS! WE NEED MOAR TANKS! TANKS SHOULD BE THE ONLY VIABLE AV CLASS AND AV SHOULD BE COMPLETLY USELESS!
SMH dude, even the description under Sentinels says that no other class can go toe to toe with enemy vehicles and survive.
Tanks should be the unltimate counter to tanks, and AV should do jack sh!t.
Solid logic dude  |
Vitharr Foebane
Blood Money Mercenaries
153
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 01:27:00 -
[63] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Tanks should be the hardest hitting AV on the field. No handheld weapon should rival the power of a tank mounted turret. End of discussion.
My FG politely disagrees... |
Justin Tymes
Dem Durrty Boyz
Public Disorder.
451
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 01:53:00 -
[64] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Justin Tymes wrote:
Does this account for the tanks shooting at you while you try to kill 1 of them? Pincer tanking is a very real and effective strategy.
Tanks getting a buff might not be a problem in Skirmish or Domination, but tanks in Ambush is already unbalanced. Buffing them more without removing them from Ambush will make the mode unplayable for new players and extremely tedious to the point where it's not worth playing for everyone else.
no tanks in ambush? remove AV from skirmish or domination, fair is fair
Logic has already been refuted before. Game mode balance > tanks. If tanks are getting a buff and they are overpowered in Ambush, it won't be fair at all. |
Harpyja
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
639
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 01:57:00 -
[65] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Yep ANTI-VEHICLE is clearly not meant for ANTI-VEHICLE, it is meant for a poking stick. Yep should definitely be the best ANTI-VEHICLE asset on the field, in fact this was clearly designed this way so let's replace Swarm Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Forge Guns, and AV grenades with tanks, as tanks are supposed to be the true ANTI-VEHICLE. TANKS! TANKS! TANKS! WE NEED MOAR TANKS! TANKS SHOULD BE THE ONLY VIABLE AV CLASS AND AV SHOULD BE COMPLETLY USELESS!
SMH dude, even the description under Sentinels says that no other class can go toe to toe with enemy vehicles and survive. Tanks should be the unltimate counter to tanks, and AV should do jack sh!t. Solid logic dude
I never said that infantry AV weapons should be ineffective. All I said was that a tank-mounted turret should be more powerful than any handheld weapon. A few handheld weapons would certainly be able to have more fire power than a turret.
You're just failing to realize that tanks should not be soloable unless of course the tank pilot is bad. And you're just one of those people that wants to be able to solo a tank and not require any teamwork at all. Well then, this is not the game for you, good-bye. |
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
367
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:04:00 -
[66] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Atiim wrote:Yep ANTI-VEHICLE is clearly not meant for ANTI-VEHICLE, it is meant for a poking stick. Yep should definitely be the best ANTI-VEHICLE asset on the field, in fact this was clearly designed this way so let's replace Swarm Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Forge Guns, and AV grenades with tanks, as tanks are supposed to be the true ANTI-VEHICLE. TANKS! TANKS! TANKS! WE NEED MOAR TANKS! TANKS SHOULD BE THE ONLY VIABLE AV CLASS AND AV SHOULD BE COMPLETLY USELESS!
SMH dude, even the description under Sentinels says that no other class can go toe to toe with enemy vehicles and survive. Tanks should be the unltimate counter to tanks, and AV should do jack sh!t. Solid logic dude I never said that infantry AV weapons should be ineffective. All I said was that a tank-mounted turret should be more powerful than any handheld weapon. A few handheld weapons would certainly be able to have more fire power than a turret. You're just failing to realize that tanks should not be soloable unless of course the tank pilot is bad. And you're just one of those people that wants to be able to solo a tank and not require any teamwork at all. Well then, this is not the game for you, good-bye.
I don't care about soloing tanks, but that idea violates the rock paper scissors ideal:
Infantry>Tank>AV>Infantry
Something designed to destroy something should be the best at it's job, no questions asked.
That's like saying heavies should be the best scouts ever |
Harpyja
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
640
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:22:00 -
[67] - Quote
Atiim wrote:I don't care about soloing tanks, but that idea violates the rock paper scissors ideal:
Infantry>Tank>AV>Infantry
Something designed to destroy something should be the best at it's job, no questions asked.
That's like saying heavies should be the best scouts ever
Here's the thing: infantry AV should beat tanks, but not in a 1v1. Teamwork should be required, so 2-3 skilled AV should be able to beat a skilled tank. And more AV if it's unskilled players with militia or standard AV.
So this idea doesn't violate the rock paper scissors ideal. Also, keep in mind that tanks can also fall under AV. With the turret changes, missiles will be the ultimate AV weapon and blasters will be the ultimate AI weapon. A missile tank will be strong against other tanks, but weaker to infantry, while a blaster tank will be stronger against infantry while being weaker to other tanks.
Dust isn't as simple as rock paper scissors. You have many classes that fall under rock, many that fall under paper, and many others that fall under scissors. Some classes are simply more powerful than others (a single tank vs a single AV infantry), but are still balanced (tanks are big and slow targets, while infantry is small and agile). |
medomai grey
WarRavens
League of Infamy
287
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:52:00 -
[68] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:(tanks are big and slow targets, while infantry is small and agile). Do we play the same game? The slowest tank is faster than the fastest infantry.  |
Justin Tymes
Dem Durrty Boyz
Public Disorder.
451
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 02:54:00 -
[69] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Atiim wrote:I don't care about soloing tanks, but that idea violates the rock paper scissors ideal:
Infantry>Tank>AV>Infantry
Something designed to destroy something should be the best at it's job, no questions asked.
That's like saying heavies should be the best scouts ever Here's the thing: infantry AV should beat tanks, but not in a 1v1. Teamwork should be required, so 2-3 skilled AV should be able to beat a skilled tank. And more AV if it's unskilled players with militia or standard AV. So this idea doesn't violate the rock paper scissors ideal. Also, keep in mind that tanks can also fall under AV. With the turret changes, missiles will be the ultimate AV weapon and blasters will be the ultimate AI weapon. A missile tank will be strong against other tanks, but weaker to infantry, while a blaster tank will be stronger against infantry while being weaker to other tanks. Dust isn't as simple as rock paper scissors. You have many classes that fall under rock, many that fall under paper, and many others that fall under scissors. Some classes are simply more powerful than others (a single tank vs a single AV infantry), but are still balanced (tanks are big and slow targets, while infantry is small and agile).
That entire scenerio completely goes against Skill > SP. What you're saying is that a player with "X" SP should be allowed to not only dictate the amount of players needed to kill him, but what tier weapons can actually kill him.
If it's not rock < paper < scissors, than it's SP > skill. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1115
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:08:00 -
[70] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Yeah Yea YEAH!
Nerf AV they are OP as heck, and they can kill me!
The best way to kill a tank should be a tank! AV is not meant for being ANTI-VEHICLE, it is meant for supporting tanks and we can't have anything counter tanks but tanks!
We should have tanks that have 25000 shields and 150000 armor, just like a CRU.
And we should solo infantry and go 55/0, but infantry shouldn't solo us.
AV scrubs should have to use 3 people to take out one tank, regardless of how many tanks are on the field at the same time, and after all, thier SMG should be able to save them from infantry with primary weapons, or we could just make them run commando suits!
TANKS! TANKS! TANKS!
Make them god please! Because that is clearly what they want
Just thought I'd compile the wishes of tankers into one thread.
You're joining the few elites on here that cannot accept any arguments or logic by tankers, and continue to post your nonsensical screechings on here against tanks, none of which are based in fact, or sound reasoning. |
|
|
TYR CAINE
Storm Wind Strikeforce
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:14:00 -
[71] - Quote
tanks tanks tanks blah blah blah . I like chasing after tanks with an advanced swarm and a grin on my face dont know why i grin as i get splatted like pudding out the truck window at 100 mph. BUT 175M lock on going after dropships is not fair .
1: load up with meat suits
2: they bail take target
3:CANT TOUCH THIS
4: people cry on forums while i decide what flavor i look like as tank rolls over me |
Arirana
Ancient Exiles
201
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 03:55:00 -
[72] - Quote
Atiim wrote:TechMechMeds wrote:Tanks are getting slots nerfed to that of their mlt counterparts concerning slot layout. Yes, Commander Tzu told me about this. BUT SOME PEOPLE WANT AV NERFED EVEN FURTHER!
Even further? When was AV nerfed before? |
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
369
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 04:52:00 -
[73] - Quote
Arirana wrote:Atiim wrote:TechMechMeds wrote:Tanks are getting slots nerfed to that of their mlt counterparts concerning slot layout. Yes, Commander Tzu told me about this. BUT SOME PEOPLE WANT AV NERFED EVEN FURTHER! Even further? When was AV nerfed before?
- Swarm Launchers now must face tanks directly to initiate the lock
- Swarm Launchers have had thier lock times nerfed, the only way to not notice it is if you are either not using a Specialist variant, and have Swarm Launcher Operation Lvl V (+3% reduction to lock times per level)\
Also not that I'm complaining, but they removed the Swarm Launcher exploit where you could empty your entire clip at once and all the swarms would still fire.
|
chase rowland
The Enclave Syndicate
Dark Taboo
51
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 13:34:00 -
[74] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Arirana wrote:Atiim wrote:TechMechMeds wrote:Tanks are getting slots nerfed to that of their mlt counterparts concerning slot layout. Yes, Commander Tzu told me about this. BUT SOME PEOPLE WANT AV NERFED EVEN FURTHER! Even further? When was AV nerfed before?
- Swarm Launchers now must face tanks directly to initiate the lock
- Swarm Launchers have had thier lock times nerfed, the only way to not notice it is if you are either not using a Specialist variant, and have Swarm Launcher Operation Lvl V (+3% reduction to lock times per level)\
Also not that I'm complaining, but they removed the Swarm Launcher exploit where you could empty your entire clip at once and all the swarms would still fire.
it was a glitch. you should be ashamed. i dont know know closed minded people like you even exist in dust anymore. and AV was never nerfed before. all i can say is your pitiful. why are you still here? go back to COD or get smart. sorry you cant 1HK 360 no-scope the best tankers in dust. |
Knight Soiaire
Mercenaries of Sunlight
2823
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 13:35:00 -
[75] - Quote
Cool!
AR 514 was getting boring anyway. |
Coleman Gray
GunFall Mobilization
Covert Intervention
877
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 13:55:00 -
[76] - Quote
Now ya gettin' it kid o7 see you on the battlefiled  |
Void Echo
Blades of Dust
1976
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 18:35:00 -
[77] - Quote
Justin Tymes wrote:Void Echo wrote:Justin Tymes wrote:
Does this account for the tanks shooting at you while you try to kill 1 of them? Pincer tanking is a very real and effective strategy.
Tanks getting a buff might not be a problem in Skirmish or Domination, but tanks in Ambush is already unbalanced. Buffing them more without removing them from Ambush will make the mode unplayable for new players and extremely tedious to the point where it's not worth playing for everyone else.
no tanks in ambush? remove AV from skirmish or domination, fair is fair Logic has already been refuted before. Game mode balance > tanks. If tanks are getting a buff and they are overpowered in Ambush, it won't be fair at all.
it wont be fair for us if you block us from getting in one game mode and not blocking our rival class from getting in our game mode. double standards |
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
425
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 18:38:00 -
[78] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Justin Tymes wrote:Void Echo wrote:Justin Tymes wrote:
Does this account for the tanks shooting at you while you try to kill 1 of them? Pincer tanking is a very real and effective strategy.
Tanks getting a buff might not be a problem in Skirmish or Domination, but tanks in Ambush is already unbalanced. Buffing them more without removing them from Ambush will make the mode unplayable for new players and extremely tedious to the point where it's not worth playing for everyone else.
no tanks in ambush? remove AV from skirmish or domination, fair is fair Logic has already been refuted before. Game mode balance > tanks. If tanks are getting a buff and they are overpowered in Ambush, it won't be fair at all. Hmm. Me agreeing with you? Maybe I am mental. But yes if we are going to have a gamemode with one class, then we have to include it's rival class. That's like playing Rock,Paper,Scissors but everyone picks rock and you aren't allowed to use Scissors. it wont be fair for us if you block us from getting in one game mode and not blocking our rival class from getting in our game mode. double standards
Soon my brothers shall see the light, free from the shackles of the Amarr Empire
Everyone will taste my Freedom SoonGäó
|
Operative 1171 Aajli
Bragian Order
Amarr Empire
670
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 18:40:00 -
[79] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Yeah Yea YEAH!
Nerf AV they are OP as heck, and they can kill me!
The best way to kill a tank should be a tank! AV is not meant for being ANTI-VEHICLE, it is meant for supporting tanks and we can't have anything counter tanks but tanks!
We should have tanks that have 25000 shields and 150000 armor, just like a CRU.
And we should solo infantry and go 55/0, but infantry shouldn't solo us.
AV scrubs should have to use 3 people to take out one tank, regardless of how many tanks are on the field at the same time, and after all, thier SMG should be able to save them from infantry with primary weapons, or we could just make them run commando suits!
TANKS! TANKS! TANKS!
Make them god please! Because that is clearly what they want
Just thought I'd compile the wishes of tankers into one thread.
This guy is really obsessing over tanks isn't he. Who the hell is having this big of a problem with tanks? Really, who? When I go infantry I really never have a problem with tanks. When I'm in a tank I don't cause that much devastation to warrant them being able to be taken out by one guy. AV can run me off just fine without having to go all the way to dead.
Chill out child! You're flogging a dead horse. |
DootDoot
Forty-Nine Fedayeen
Minmatar Republic
112
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 18:41:00 -
[80] - Quote
Tank's either need to be expendable... to the point of infantry suit costs... and their efficacy brought wayyyy down.... so we would have massive tank on tank battles all through the map.
Or make tanks hella more expensive and give infantry only the ability to disable the tank... Take out it's tracks... Take out the ability for the turret to rotate... or fire even... But not kill the tank... that's upto structures or other vehicles...
This middle of the road designed to Merc infantry.. tank concept is Re-tarded derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp |
|
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
426
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 18:42:00 -
[81] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Atiim wrote:I don't care about soloing tanks, but that idea violates the rock paper scissors ideal:
Infantry>Tank>AV>Infantry
Something designed to destroy something should be the best at it's job, no questions asked.
That's like saying heavies should be the best scouts ever Here's the thing: infantry AV should beat tanks, but not in a 1v1. Teamwork should be required, so 2-3 skilled AV should be able to beat a skilled tank. And more AV if it's unskilled players with militia or standard AV. So this idea doesn't violate the rock paper scissors ideal. Also, keep in mind that tanks can also fall under AV. With the turret changes, missiles will be the ultimate AV weapon and blasters will be the ultimate AI weapon. A missile tank will be strong against other tanks, but weaker to infantry, while a blaster tank will be stronger against infantry while being weaker to other tanks. Dust isn't as simple as rock paper scissors. You have many classes that fall under rock, many that fall under paper, and many others that fall under scissors. Some classes are simply more powerful than others (a single tank vs a single AV infantry), but are still balanced (tanks are big and slow targets, while infantry is small and agile).
Three rocks for one scissors.
Lol yeah ok that doesn't violate the rules at all
Soon my brothers shall see the light, free from the shackles of the Amarr Empire
Everyone will taste my Freedom SoonGäó
|
Void Echo
Blades of Dust
1976
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 18:43:00 -
[82] - Quote
DootDoot wrote:Tank's either need to be expendable... to the point of infantry suit costs... and their efficacy brought wayyyy down.... so we would have massive tank on tank battles all through the map.
Or make tanks the same price they are now and give infantry only the ability to disable the tank... Take out it's tracks... Take out the ability for the turret to rotate... or fire even... But not kill the tank... that's upto structures or other vehicles...
This middle of the road designed to Merc infantry.. tank concept is Re-tarded derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp
fixed
|
Gelan Corbaine
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
212
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 20:50:00 -
[83] - Quote
Arirana wrote:Atiim wrote:TechMechMeds wrote:Tanks are getting slots nerfed to that of their mlt counterparts concerning slot layout. Yes, Commander Tzu told me about this. BUT SOME PEOPLE WANT AV NERFED EVEN FURTHER! Even further? When was AV nerfed before?
I remember when my Forge Gun had infinite range ...... Then I remember the 150 meter Forge in the second part of the E3 build where we died ....alot and all vehicles ......even Dropships laughed at us during that dark time before CCP rasied it back too a sensible level. |
CharCharOdell
1349
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 20:55:00 -
[84] - Quote
You will never be on par with me, as King of QQ. I enraged the community enough to nerf all AV and the AR while buffing tanks. Basically, I'm OP and you are not.
Gùñ-é-º+¼+ò+¦GÖÑ+ú+ú+¡ GÖÑ'Ðe+ü+üGùÑ
Gùú -ä>-üð+++Ç++§<-¡<-¡ Gùó
Speaker of the Mangrove / King of QQ / Co-Founder of the Learning Coalition
|
CharCharOdell
1349
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 20:55:00 -
[85] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Harpyja wrote:Atiim wrote:I don't care about soloing tanks, but that idea violates the rock paper scissors ideal:
Infantry>Tank>AV>Infantry
Something designed to destroy something should be the best at it's job, no questions asked.
That's like saying heavies should be the best scouts ever Here's the thing: infantry AV should beat tanks, but not in a 1v1. Teamwork should be required, so 2-3 skilled AV should be able to beat a skilled tank. And more AV if it's unskilled players with militia or standard AV. So this idea doesn't violate the rock paper scissors ideal. Also, keep in mind that tanks can also fall under AV. With the turret changes, missiles will be the ultimate AV weapon and blasters will be the ultimate AI weapon. A missile tank will be strong against other tanks, but weaker to infantry, while a blaster tank will be stronger against infantry while being weaker to other tanks. Dust isn't as simple as rock paper scissors. You have many classes that fall under rock, many that fall under paper, and many others that fall under scissors. Some classes are simply more powerful than others (a single tank vs a single AV infantry), but are still balanced (tanks are big and slow targets, while infantry is small and agile). Three rocks for one scissors. Lol yeah ok that doesn't violate the rules at all
Then make my tank cost 150k isk fully fit and proto
Gùñ-é-º+¼+ò+¦GÖÑ+ú+ú+¡ GÖÑ'Ðe+ü+üGùÑ
Gùú -ä>-üð+++Ç++§<-¡<-¡ Gùó
Speaker of the Mangrove / King of QQ / Co-Founder of the Learning Coalition
|
Roofer Madness
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
418
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 20:59:00 -
[86] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Gunmouse wrote:chase rowland wrote:Atiim wrote:Yeah Yea YEAH!
Nerf AV they are OP as heck, and they can kill me!
The best way to kill a tank should be a tank! AV is not meant for being ANTI-VEHICLE, it is meant for supporting tanks and we can't have anything counter tanks but tanks!
We should have tanks that have 25000 shields and 150000 armor, just like a CRU.
And we should solo infantry and go 55/0, but infantry shouldn't solo us.
AV scrubs should have to use 3 people to take out one tank, regardless of how many tanks are on the field at the same time, and after all, thier SMG should be able to save them from infantry with primary weapons, or we could just make them run commando suits!
TANKS! TANKS! TANKS!
Make them god please! Because that is clearly what they want you know spamming posts wont get you any attention. your last one just got you humiliated Running a tank against my Plasma cannon AV fit will get you humiliated. Oh yeah I forgot about you, PLCs should be nerfed too!
I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.
The Dust 514 AFK song
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
2129
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 02:38:00 -
[87] - Quote
"I told you so. I bloody well told you so"
DUST 514 just went full COD.
Never go full COD.
|
Seymor Krelborn
DUST University
Ivy League
1570
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 02:39:00 -
[88] - Quote
yep you bloody well told em
CCp's newest joke, making setting off your own remote explosives in FW FF... awesome job ccp.
|
Burntface man112
Onikanabo Brigade
Caldari State
96
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 02:42:00 -
[89] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Yeah Yea YEAH!
Nerf AV they are OP as heck, and they can kill me!
The best way to kill a tank should be a tank! AV is not meant for being ANTI-VEHICLE, it is meant for supporting tanks and we can't have anything counter tanks but tanks!
We should have tanks that have 25000 shields and 150000 armor, just like a CRU.
And we should solo infantry and go 55/0, but infantry shouldn't solo us.
AV scrubs should have to use 3 people to take out one tank, regardless of how many tanks are on the field at the same time, and after all, thier SMG should be able to save them from infantry with primary weapons, or we could just make them run commando suits!
TANKS! TANKS! TANKS!
Make them god please! Because that is clearly what they want
Just thought I'd compile the wishes of tankers into one thread.
.... um AV means Anti Vehicle not Support Vehicle because it would be called SV than..... |
True Adamance
Scions of Athra
4914
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 02:42:00 -
[90] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Yeah Yea YEAH!
Nerf AV they are OP as heck, and they can kill me!
The best way to kill a tank should be a tank! AV is not meant for being ANTI-VEHICLE, it is meant for supporting tanks and we can't have anything counter tanks but tanks!
We should have tanks that have 25000 shields and 150000 armor, just like a CRU.
And we should solo infantry and go 55/0, but infantry shouldn't solo us.
AV scrubs should have to use 3 people to take out one tank, regardless of how many tanks are on the field at the same time, and after all, thier SMG should be able to save them from infantry with primary weapons, or we could just make them run commando suits!
TANKS! TANKS! TANKS!
Make them god please! Because that is clearly what they want
Just thought I'd compile the wishes of tankers into one thread.
CRU don't have 150000 armour do they?
Oddly enough now that tanks are good...... I haven't tanked meaningfully this build.
"Shudder. Again another smart idea from an Amarr..."- Forlorn Destrier (11/12/13) LAWL
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |