Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Absoliav
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
82
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 21:15:00 -
[31] - Quote
Heinz Doofenshertz wrote:If you are checking out the link right now, it might be a bit buggy, I'm actually redoing some of the pages to enable me to expand it.
Absoliav: I talk to Bgoat, who does Dustcharts, Chirbba, who does basicly anything eve, and Gritbreather who is also working on some things. I am planing on expanding this tool at some point to allow you to fully fit a vehicle, maybe dropsuits, maybe, but it will still be a compare tool in that the main use would be to tell you how long it would take to kill X. Cuase it falls within my interests and Bgoat and Gritbreather challeneged me to do it. also there was alot of rage about the changes, and all the math was wrong.
To Topic Atiim I don't think they are a watergun, while the range decrease is a bit much, I think the damage isn't too bad of a change. Some may disagree, which is their right, but I want to see how it plays out.
Thanks for the answer!
I hope you guys keep doing what you're doing, it's people like you all that helps keep this game going, I also hope that you guys can someday come together and make some sort of "hub site" for Dust tools and information, please don't make a wiki. |
Cy Clone1
Cy CL0Ne 1
299
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 21:18:00 -
[32] - Quote
Doc Noah wrote:The limited range makes dropships invincible to swarms. 175m is nothing compared to high and how fast dropships can fly.
I'm not gonna comment on AV's effectiveness since CPM mentioned that HAVs are getting nerfed as well so I'll need first hand experience to see the difference. Basic LAVs will now be able to take 3 volley of swarms before dying to basic unmodded swarm launcher.
The amount of time they fly is not being changed. Just now you can be situated on a tower near the operational ceiling and lock on to anything on the map. You'll just have to be closer before engaging and actually move yourself around the map |
Absoliav
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
82
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 21:27:00 -
[33] - Quote
Atiim wrote:hamual jackson wrote:Honestly if they took large blasters turrets away from tanks, tanker wouldn't complain about being destroyed by av grenades. Only the ones who run into a group of infantry have the av grenade problem. Tanks should vs vehicles not infantry. If thats what they call balancing game will continue to go down. If respect happen there will be nothing but tanks on a fps video game. Yep. In a world where all people with AV can do is "scare" off a tank, which won't work once they realize that you can't kill them with what your carrying and there is no reason for them to not try to attack you, tanks will become OP unless you have a tank. And some people want the best counter to a tank to be another tank? So when people get fed up with getting roflstomped and buttplugged by tanks, they are just gonna start using tanks too. Tanks will become the new FOTY, not month, but year because of how long CCP takes with their "balancing" updates. And some people called me stupid when I said that this game will go to hell and become Tank 514. It will become this, whether people realize it or not. The only way I could see this happening fairly would be to reduce the team quota to 2 tanks
I highly doubt tanks will go unrivaled, we still haven't even been given info on the changes to proxies or FGs, and with the advent of new weapons coming out, we might see more AV coming soon.
I think a vehicle quota is a fantastic idea, nothing right now is stopping a team from going "full-tank" other than their wallets, so even if AV were balanced we could still have a team of highly resistant, high powered, long range killing machine, a quota would help prevent that, it would also enforce some team thinking when it came to calling vehicles, so teams will start reserving slots for capable pilots instead of just any new guy with a BPO. |
TechMechMeds
Swamp Marines Kleenex Inc.
1006
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 21:44:00 -
[34] - Quote
Absoliav wrote:Thanks to CCP, we now have an idea of what AV will look like with the new vehicle changes, which is great news. Now the only thing we need to discus is how will the finalized result look, as it stands, Vehicles appear to be getting buffed in a big way, while also getting nerfed, the buff comes in the form of specialization, now vehicles will be rewarded for fitting towards one playstyle, while the nerf comes towards anyone who tries too many things at once, so jack-of-all-trades vehicles will suffer for their lack of focus. AV is also getting nerfed on the other hand, which is long over due, AV grenades are receiving a respectable damage reduction for their versatility, sadly no mention of any buffs for proxi mines, Swarm Launchers happen to be taking the biggest hit, the damage reduction isn't an issue, as it's an easy to use weapon, so it shouldn't get massive rewards for so little effort, the only issue I see is the lock on range, from 400 to 175 is a big number drop for a weapon with limited uses.
I personally like the changes to AV, with the exception of the range nerf, the issue I have with it is tanks, the reduced damage means that LAVs and Dropships now have a respectable chance of withstanding Swarm shots from even proto swarms, while allowing tanks a fair chance to deal with swarms. But reduced range means that swarm users now have to be closer to their target to fire, this doesn't really change much for tanks, since tanks generally move slowly, but LAVs and dropships tend to move a lot faster which allows them distance themselves from most threats. I'm assuming that this is some sort of pseudo fix for the rendering issues vehicles have at longer ranges, which doesn't make this a bad solution, but this is still a big hit for the SL's effectiveness, I think a way to help counter this is to increase the projectile movement speed would help, LAVs and DSs would still have the distance and speed advantage but it won't be too huge of an overpowering edge, without effecting the outcome of infantry-tanks battles.
From what I'm seeing, SLs will be more for lightly deafened vehicles and with teamwork, could takeout a tank, while AV grenades seem to be more of a vehicle deterrent, which is a good thing. Again, no word on where proxies stand, while forge guns are being reviewed according to CCP, hopefully the stay mostly the same except for the assault, that thing is too good at everything, I'm hoping the FG is stays as the solution to heavily deafened targets.
That's my feedback on the matter, I'm mostly optimistic for all these possible changes, I hope CCP continues to make more changes like these!
Please don't |
Absoliav
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
82
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 21:45:00 -
[35] - Quote
Cy Clone1 wrote:Doc Noah wrote:The limited range makes dropships invincible to swarms. 175m is nothing compared to high and how fast dropships can fly.
I'm not gonna comment on AV's effectiveness since CPM mentioned that HAVs are getting nerfed as well so I'll need first hand experience to see the difference. Basic LAVs will now be able to take 3 volley of swarms before dying to basic unmodded swarm launcher. The amount of time they fly is not being changed. Just now you can be situated on a tower near the operational ceiling and lock on to anything on the map. You'll just have to be closer before engaging and actually move yourself around the map
The best way to use SLs on a dropship or LAV is to fire long before they get close to you, the sooner you fired, the better. Having them farther way from you is better, it gives your swarms time to target and gives you more time to fire before they noticed your attack so you can fire the next volley before they escaped, ideally as this may sound it wasn't fair to pilots cause of the issues vehicles have with rendering. The new ranges were made to address these problems, but now the new problem is that SL users are made less effective against their intended targets, this makes SL users have to stick their necks out even further than even sniper users to even fire at a target that's going to be long gone before the first volley even starts tracking them.
I'm all for making SL user work harder, but this change severely reduces their effectiveness to an almost unnecessary degree. |
Absoliav
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
82
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 21:46:00 -
[36] - Quote
TechMechMeds wrote:Absoliav wrote:Thanks to CCP, we now have an idea of what AV will look like with the new vehicle changes, which is great news. Now the only thing we need to discus is how will the finalized result look, as it stands, Vehicles appear to be getting buffed in a big way, while also getting nerfed, the buff comes in the form of specialization, now vehicles will be rewarded for fitting towards one playstyle, while the nerf comes towards anyone who tries too many things at once, so jack-of-all-trades vehicles will suffer for their lack of focus. AV is also getting nerfed on the other hand, which is long over due, AV grenades are receiving a respectable damage reduction for their versatility, sadly no mention of any buffs for proxi mines, Swarm Launchers happen to be taking the biggest hit, the damage reduction isn't an issue, as it's an easy to use weapon, so it shouldn't get massive rewards for so little effort, the only issue I see is the lock on range, from 400 to 175 is a big number drop for a weapon with limited uses.
I personally like the changes to AV, with the exception of the range nerf, the issue I have with it is tanks, the reduced damage means that LAVs and Dropships now have a respectable chance of withstanding Swarm shots from even proto swarms, while allowing tanks a fair chance to deal with swarms. But reduced range means that swarm users now have to be closer to their target to fire, this doesn't really change much for tanks, since tanks generally move slowly, but LAVs and dropships tend to move a lot faster which allows them distance themselves from most threats. I'm assuming that this is some sort of pseudo fix for the rendering issues vehicles have at longer ranges, which doesn't make this a bad solution, but this is still a big hit for the SL's effectiveness, I think a way to help counter this is to increase the projectile movement speed would help, LAVs and DSs would still have the distance and speed advantage but it won't be too huge of an overpowering edge, without effecting the outcome of infantry-tanks battles.
From what I'm seeing, SLs will be more for lightly deafened vehicles and with teamwork, could takeout a tank, while AV grenades seem to be more of a vehicle deterrent, which is a good thing. Again, no word on where proxies stand, while forge guns are being reviewed according to CCP, hopefully the stay mostly the same except for the assault, that thing is too good at everything, I'm hoping the FG is stays as the solution to heavily deafened targets.
That's my feedback on the matter, I'm mostly optimistic for all these possible changes, I hope CCP continues to make more changes like these! Please don't
Would you kindly elaborate? |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1128
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:13:00 -
[37] - Quote
Doc Noah wrote:The limited range makes dropships invincible to swarms. 175m is nothing compared to high and how fast dropships can fly.
I'm not gonna comment on AV's effectiveness since CPM mentioned that HAVs are getting nerfed as well so I'll need first hand experience to see the difference. Basic LAVs will now be able to take 3 volley of swarms before dying to basic unmodded swarm launcher. That's the lock range, doesn't mean that's the whole range of swarms. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1128
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:16:00 -
[38] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:So a specialization is a buff? MLT hulls will have 2 HP tank slots, while STD hulls will have 3 HP tank slots. That's a buff? Active repair modules are being removed. That's a buff? math says that despite the low amounts of slots highest end tanks will have 20k ehp... that is actually a buff. the announced nerfed swarm would need half a minute of CONTINOUS shooting to kill the announced tanks. and this assumes the tank driver does not bother to actually move at all. yes you read it right, half a minute... you can be sure that these changes either wont go live or tanks will sooner or later get a nerf again you would be very naiv expecting those values to stay. LOLWUT
What math? I'm terrible in math and that seems impossible. Who "figured that out?" |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1129
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:19:00 -
[39] - Quote
Absoliav wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:So a specialization is a buff? MLT hulls will have 2 HP tank slots, while STD hulls will have 3 HP tank slots. That's a buff? Active repair modules are being removed. That's a buff? That is the nerf part of the vehicle changes, the buffs are in the modules, a lot of modules are receiving some nice number changes that increase their overall effectiveness compared to their current versions, while turrets are getting a much needed damage buff, the finite ammo trade-off will be worth it. There is more to the vehicle changes than just less slots, plus, with reduced slot values on the MLT and STD vehicles, it also leaves room for the development of ADV and maybe even PRO vehicles. The Devs have been saying that vehicles as they are don't leave much room for fitting improvement across the tiers, I believe IWS even dared the community to come up with a PRO tank design that didn't involve 5 highs and 5 lows. I might be getting a little too optimistic, but I feel these could open up some new opportunities for further vehicle development. CCP could've kept the Sagaris and Surya and told infantry to HTFU and get AV.
CCP is basically making them like suits now. I'm guessing ADV and PRO tier will have the same HP, with more slots and more CPU / PG. Or, something I wouldn't be surprised about, more modules while keeping the same CPU and PG through the tiers. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1129
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:21:00 -
[40] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Here is the big problem with things as a "deterrent" If I know for a fact that what you carry has no chance of killing me before I kill you and considering that I can heal all the damage I have taken what is the incentive for me to avoid attacking you? You simply cannot accept that you can't destroy every single vehicle no matter who is piloting it, and that makes them OP. |
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1129
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:24:00 -
[41] - Quote
Absoliav wrote: if tanks start becoming a problem, players will respond accordingly. Yeah, they'll cry OP on the forums and have them nerfed again because their ARs can't damage tanks. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1129
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:26:00 -
[42] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Well since Swarms are now gonna be waterguns and the exact opposite of Anti-Vehicle, I think i'm gonna skill into PLCs
And then lololol when ppl say that PLCs are OP. Do you not have a fully functioning brain? Swarms are being nerfed parallel to how tanks are being nerfed. If they were to keep swarms as is, nobody would tank, which as all pilots can figure out, is the ultimate goal. Work to make vehicles so completely useless that everybody stops using them for anything. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1129
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:27:00 -
[43] - Quote
Heinz Doofenshertz wrote:If you are checking out the link right now, it might be a bit buggy, I'm actually redoing some of the pages to enable me to expand it.
Absoliav: I talk to Bgoat, who does Dustcharts, Chirbba, who does basicly anything eve, and Gritbreather who is also working on some things. I am planing on expanding this tool at some point to allow you to fully fit a vehicle, maybe dropsuits, maybe, but it will still be a compare tool in that the main use would be to tell you how long it would take to kill X. Cuase it falls within my interests and Bgoat and Gritbreather challeneged me to do it. also there was alot of rage about the changes, and all the math was wrong.
To Topic Atiim I don't think they are a watergun, while the range decrease is a bit much, I think the damage isn't too bad of a change. Some may disagree, which is their right, but I want to see how it plays out. It's lock on range, they never said it was terminal range.
Lock on range =/= terminal range |
Patrick57
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
908
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:28:00 -
[44] - Quote
:/ I missed it, where are the said new stats for AV? LINK PLS |
Absoliav
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
84
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:33:00 -
[45] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Absoliav wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:So a specialization is a buff? MLT hulls will have 2 HP tank slots, while STD hulls will have 3 HP tank slots. That's a buff? Active repair modules are being removed. That's a buff? That is the nerf part of the vehicle changes, the buffs are in the modules, a lot of modules are receiving some nice number changes that increase their overall effectiveness compared to their current versions, while turrets are getting a much needed damage buff, the finite ammo trade-off will be worth it. There is more to the vehicle changes than just less slots, plus, with reduced slot values on the MLT and STD vehicles, it also leaves room for the development of ADV and maybe even PRO vehicles. The Devs have been saying that vehicles as they are don't leave much room for fitting improvement across the tiers, I believe IWS even dared the community to come up with a PRO tank design that didn't involve 5 highs and 5 lows. I might be getting a little too optimistic, but I feel these could open up some new opportunities for further vehicle development. CCP could've kept the Sagaris and Surya and told infantry to HTFU and get AV. CCP is basically making them like suits now. I'm guessing ADV and PRO tier will have the same HP, with more slots and more CPU / PG. Or, something I wouldn't be surprised about, more modules while keeping the same CPU and PG through the tiers.
I came to the same conclusion as you, it seems that CCP feels this is the best option. Only problem is, if vehicles start following this path, it might make tiercide more appealing in the long run, I can't really see this lasting too long, hopefully the whole "Fitting System" gets a major overhaul in the feature. |
Absoliav
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
84
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:34:00 -
[46] - Quote
Patrick57 wrote::/ I missed it, where are the said new stats for AV? LINK PLS
Here ya go!
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=117279&find=unread |
Patrick57
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
908
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:38:00 -
[47] - Quote
Thank you!
So, basically, there will be twice as many Rail Tankers as there are now? |
Absoliav
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
84
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 22:43:00 -
[48] - Quote
Patrick57 wrote:Thank you! So, basically, there will be twice as many Rail Tankers as there are now?
That is one of the potential outcomes, if nothing is done to counter this kind of situation from happening. I hope the FG will get something to help with this kind of problem, while not making them more FGs more of an issue, honestly, it's really hard to tell how any of this will play out until we get more finalized details. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1129
|
Posted - 2013.10.27 00:49:00 -
[49] - Quote
hamual jackson wrote:Honestly if they took large blasters turrets away from tanks, tanker wouldn't complain about being destroyed by av grenades. Only the ones who run into a group of infantry have the av grenade problem. Tanks should vs vehicles not infantry. If thats what they call balancing game will continue to go down. If respect happen there will be nothing but tanks on a fps video game. What on god's green Earth are you talking about? |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |