|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
   |
Posted - 2013.11.03 07:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
So all this talk talk about AV balance made me think that the main problem with the whole vehicle vs infantry set up is that large turrets serve as both anti personnel and anti vehicle, mean while the small turrets only roll is a small boost to anti vehicle damage.
add to this ccp wants tank fights to be more then all out brawls but both missile and blaster turrets track faster then any vehicle can out run and I think you start to get a really clear issue on the problems with vehicle balance, and that is that large turrets track to fast and small turrets are useless.
So I submit my suggestions to the community for discussion.
1) large blaster and missile turrets need to track at just about the speed that current large rail turrets do
2) large turrets should land 50% of rounds on a lav at its optimal and 100% on a tank at its optimal
3) small turrets should have negligible turn limitations and should maintain their angle relative to the map and not the vehicle and should receive some sort of movement stabilization.
4) small turrets should have the same optimals as the large variants.
5) small turrets should have the pinpoint accuracy that the large turrets now have.
6) small turrets could use a fire rate increase at small damage decrease(more shots prior to overheat for rails).
The effect of this would be that large turrets would be relegated to AV use, while small turrets would become that antipersonnel turrets they were meant to be. This means that tanks would be little threat to personnel and sitting ducks to AV with out gunners.
on the other hand tanks would be more dangerous to personal when fully manned then they are now, requiring a strong AV response.
Tankers want it to take more then one AV unit to take them down which is fair, but due to the small numbers of people on the team you can lock out an entire squad from combat with one or two guys in a tank, making the game unbalanced
Most every one else see this and screams nerf and suddenly tanks sever no purpose but to be an isk sink thus unbalancing the game.
If tanks require 3 people to be viable then a squad of AV is a fair trade to take down a tank or two.
Add to this the fact that small turrets will not be a requirement soon and you get an interesting bit of strategy where you have AV tanks that are vulnerable to people and AP tanks that are vulnerable to tanks.
and yes large turrets could be used at close ranges still but at that point personnel can duck behind cover drop a hive and spam nades. |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 02:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Yeah, no.
If there were some kind of AI, so that I'm still capable of soloing if I want (just like everyone else in this game -.-) and also a MASSIVE DPS buff to the small turrets, then maaaaaaaaybe.
But you'd really need to sell it to me...
no because the whole issue with tanks is that you want it to take a squad to take down a tank and your right it should, but that means every tank you call in is like adding 3-6 more people to your team, meaning the team that can spam more tanks wins(with in limits and depending on the map). Your team should have to lose some people to making that tank viable against personnel, and I understand that that sucks for the solo player but tanks are not meant to be used without support. |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 02:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mortedeamor wrote:
yeah..no ..no ..no ..NOOOO
not unless those mini turrets have ai when unmanned
DO YOU HONESTLY EXPECT TANKERS TO WILLINGLY WASTE PG AND CPU SO YOU AND YOUR SCRUBBY FRIENDS CAN AFK
oh and shoot the mcc and be useless ...shoot the tank with its own mini's?
the only thing bluedots do to tanks is prevent them from recalling..if a tanker wants 2 people manning the turrets and providing support..he DOES NOT WANT YOU. NOR DOES HE WANT YOU SCRUBY FRIENDS AND THEIR SHODDY GUNGAME...
IF tankers start running with turreters it wont be randoms it will be people they know and trust to
1 be able to land a shot
2 get out when the tank needs to be recalled
3 target av asa priority and not be afraid to use her/his suit to do so..
blue dots hide and shake like little dogs when given a chance to do so on the battlefield and thats all they are capable of..tankers deserve the right to refuse you entry to their tank..
i stopped tanking because i could not lock you dumb ass blue dots out of my havs and 80% of my losses once vehicle recall was enstated was due to bluedots afking in my tank shooting my turret at me..giving the drop to the enemy tank by trying to take it down with a MINI TURRET..only to give away my element of suprise..you guys suck ..it doesnt even matter that tanks suck because vehicle user mechanics are so ******* stupid..
in the military i would pull you out by your throat and have you flogged for your insubordination
oh for fucks sake this is not me crying that I want in your tank, trust me I hate blueberries in my vehicles as much as any one **** I championed locks on vehicles before you knew this god damn game existed!
This is me trying to balance tanks with out defanging them and this is the only way, tanks introduce an numerical imbalance and the only way to keep them as an assets that can last from match to match they have to cost your team support. If you really want tanks balanced and fixed you are going to have to find some good gunners to play with and give up your soloing, or only solo in an AV capacity only.
you ***** about my solution and then ***** about broken vehicle mechanics..... turret behavior is part of that and they are ******* broken as **** and half the reason that vehicles keep getting broken. |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 02:28:00 -
[4] - Quote
Soulja Ghostface wrote:No. the only way to kill tanks should be by using a tank. and i hate the finite ammo idea.
well then the only way to kill infantry should be with infantry, god are tankers really this ******* stupid???? Please let their somewhere be a tanker some where that is at least will to talk about this. |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 02:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
Atiim wrote:You shouldn't have said this. Because even though everyone here plays the same game, only tankers' opinions matter
And you said something other than tanks should be god and AV needs to go f*** itself, you are definitely not a tanker.
You SHUT THE **** UP!
you are just adding more fuel to the stupid fire.
god I wish I could mod my own threads. |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 02:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Atiim wrote:Soulja Ghostface wrote:No. the only way to kill tanks should be by using a tank. and i hate the finite ammo idea. Get your head out of your @$$ AV means Anti-Vehicle, meaning that AV should be a hard counter to HAVs (meaning they should be just as effective as tanks) Yep, the fact that you have infinite ammo and can spam rounds instantly with about 5s of overheat was definitely balanced. Do me a favor, when your saviors Void And Godin get here, remember that you said this, because apparently tankers don't want to make it to where only tanks are able to kill tanks and when I say that they do I am putting words in their mouth i already told you once, don't bring me into this **** anymore.
void thoughts please? godin as well. **** I'd love any response that's not flame bait at this point. I really do want to hear from tankers. |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 03:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:hgghyujh wrote:Void Echo wrote:Atiim wrote:Soulja Ghostface wrote:No. the only way to kill tanks should be by using a tank. and i hate the finite ammo idea. Get your head out of your @$$ AV means Anti-Vehicle, meaning that AV should be a hard counter to HAVs (meaning they should be just as effective as tanks) Yep, the fact that you have infinite ammo and can spam rounds instantly with about 5s of overheat was definitely balanced. Do me a favor, when your saviors Void And Godin get here, remember that you said this, because apparently tankers don't want to make it to where only tanks are able to kill tanks and when I say that they do I am putting words in their mouth i already told you once, don't bring me into this **** anymore. void thoughts please? godin as well. **** I'd love any response that's not flame bait at this point. I really do want to hear from tankers. if your wanting to make it where we need 2 others just to deploy the thing, then refund all of our tank SP so we can put it to good use. AV is a primary way to destroy vehicles BUT it shouldn't be the only way or the best way. Vehicles should be dominant in the vehicle destruction topic and AV should be the side class that's effective when the situation calls for it.
I'm saying that tanks would be the go to for AV as they could fight agaisnt vehicles without support, but against personnel tanks would need support and be weaker vs av tanks. |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 03:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:No. You know what? I'm sick of these ******* threads. I'm just going to talk about the future for now on. I guess I could slip this here and get started.
bleh fair enough teircide ho!!!???? |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 03:28:00 -
[9] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:hgghyujh wrote:I'm saying that tanks would be the go to for AV as they could fight agaisnt vehicles without support, but against personnel tanks would need support and be weaker vs av tanks. want a tank good at killing infantry? go blaster. want a tank good at killing infantry and slaughtering other tanks? go missile want a tank good for killing other vehicles (and infantry is you really know how to use it? go rail.
that's kinda the point im making actually you have this vehicle that should take a squad to take down to work right and you dont need support just add a blaster to it, so you have a tank that effectively increases the strength of you team by 6ish people. |
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 03:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:Atiim wrote:Soulja Ghostface wrote:No. the only way to kill tanks should be by using a tank. and i hate the finite ammo idea. Get your head out of your @$$ AV means Anti-Vehicle, meaning that AV should be a hard counter to HAVs (meaning they should be just as effective as tanks) Yep, the fact that you have infinite ammo and can spam rounds instantly with about 5s of overheat was definitely balanced. Do me a favor, when your saviors Void And Godin get here, remember that you said this, because apparently tankers don't want to make it to where only tanks are able to kill tanks and when I say that they do I am putting words in their mouth Eh, you are mixing up soft counter and hard counter. What we are saying is that infantry AV (forges, swarms, AV mines) should be the soft counter to vehicles, while vehicle AV is the hard counter (jets when they come, railguns, missiles). That's not saying vehicle AV should always be the better option, but from an offensive capability point of view, a vehicle mounted railgun should be more potent than a handheld one and a vehicle mounted missile launcher should be more effective than a handheld one. But that's not saying infantry AV should be bad, but since it is inexpensive and relatively easier to use, it should require a bit of teamwork to eliminate a tank. 3 proto AV working together should deny an entire area of tanks, but no more than three are needed because the same 3 proto AV can retarget another tank after the first is destroyed. In my opinion, infantry AV and standard infantry should be melded together, I feel the comparisons would be much fairer for the vehicle side. Everyone points out that if vehicles are made viable again, everyone will abandon infantry AV and hop into tanks, when that isn't the case. Tanks are big and clumsy to use, large targets and have many weapons that seek/track them. Infantrymen are more flexible in the sense that they can crawl around in places tanks cannot reach, use cover, play mind games with vehicles while out of sight, etc. It's like the age old argument of people running into heavies and complaining that they were able to kill them easily. People think that the only AV is infantry AV and that they are a class of their own, but it's a lot deeper than that. People need to consider that anti- anything doesn't automatically mean "utterly dominate to the point of uselessness," but merely means that it combats the object. So basically: 1 tank = 1 tank, but that doesn't mean tanks are the best. 1 tank = 3 infantry, but that definitely doesn't mean infantrymen are useless. Here is a situation where infantry AV should be a better solution than vehicular AV: 2 blaster tanks are being guarded from your team's tanks by 2 proto AV infantry. Your team has the potential to field an equal 2 blaster tanks and 2 proto AV infantry, but after considering the map dynamics (potential ambush spots only AV infantry can utilize) you decide to field 1 blaster tank and 3 AV infantry, with the AV infantry cleverly hidden out of sight, ready to strike. The blaster tank runs into the fray and baits the 2 armor tanks, 1 by 1, to come into your trap. Both enemy tanks follow, and with the help of the infantry AV hitting the enemy armor from seemingly unknown directions, you succeed in taking out both tanks. To be fair, your friendly tank was lost in the fight. After you are finished with the enemy armor, you easily finish off the enemy AV infantry, only losing 1 tank due to smart teamwork, while the enemy lost 2 tanks and 2 AV infantry. Also, I just wanna say I mean no harm with this post, just trying to be productive to the balance discussion.
you are right! but due to small team sizes 1 tank= 3infantry means thats 3 infantry that cant fight the ground war, frankly tanks should be worth at least a squad but they need to have a similar effect on the player count of team with the tank, that is the balance to a good solid tank.
also you make the mistake in assuming that that a team with two tanks will bother with AV (other then forge snipers which would be unaffected by the ground fighting and probably be protecting a point) instead they know they have the AV advantage and will instead use those two players to push objectives because in the end thats what drives this game, It would be nice if you could just rely on a AV squad and a tank squadron smartly place for maximum effectiveness but the maps and the teams just aren't big enough for that and every troop taken away from the infantry is a major loss, and tanks(or atleast what they should be) for the cost of one infantry can force a team to give up squad of infantry,
all I'm proposing is that in order to balance this is that for tanks to significantly harass infantry they should require infantry support. and not even a fair trade here 3 for 6, the ofset of this is that it costs more infantry to field an ap tank then a av tank. |
|
|
hgghyujh
Expert Intervention
Caldari State
151
|
Posted - 2013.11.04 04:23:00 -
[11] - Quote
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote:hgghyujh wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Yeah, no.
If there were some kind of AI, so that I'm still capable of soloing if I want (just like everyone else in this game -.-) and also a MASSIVE DPS buff to the small turrets, then maaaaaaaaybe.
But you'd really need to sell it to me... no because the whole issue with tanks is that you want it to take a squad to take down a tank and your right it should, but that means every tank you call in is like adding 3-6 more people to your team, meaning the team that can spam more tanks wins(with in limits and depending on the map). Your team should have to lose some people to making that tank viable against personnel, and I understand that that sucks for the solo player but tanks are not meant to be used without support. I really like posts that obviously haven't been thought through, because they're the easiest to absolutely wreck. For example, in this one... Once a team of 3 AV are done taking out a tank, he's assuming that AV team is too stupid to aim at the next one, and hence claims to "require 3 more AV" to take down a second tank... on up to however many tanks are fielded.. The practical limit for tanks is 3. More than that and an AV team of 3 can decimate the tank-spamming team.
you're right it was poorly written I made an unstated assumption that tanks would once again take a full squad to take down reliably. |
|
|
| |
|