| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MRBH1997
Knights Of Ender
Public Disorder.
25
   |
Posted - 2013.11.17 02:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
I do like the coming changes to vehicles except for ammunition in 1.7. I feel that it would be to much of a hassle for vehicles because once you run out and you need a supply depot, it will most likely be destroyed. Even now they are destroyed almost all the time even red line ones. Also CCP said that they were doing so due to the feeling that whoever can shoot without overheating will win. I both disagree and agree. Yes you can win if you don't overheat but only because you don't waste shots and hold R1 down and if you think that just not ever hearing makes you win you are wrong. It only works if the tank you are facing is either stupid or terribly fitted. Also infantry AV can kill you if it is able to coordinate well. Not overheating does help you win fights but I strongly disagree that it is the only thug that goes on in tank vs tank fighting. If ammo is added it would be nice if we vehicle specialists could at least have a supply depot in the redline that can not be destroyed by the enemy because of it being under or in a structure. Otherwise we will have to recall multiple times to refill ammo in a game.
CEO of Knights of Ender, Pro Jack of All Traits
|
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
113
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 02:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
Maybe now Tankers will not destroy non-blue supply depots on sight? |
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
5112
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 02:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
The vast majority of the supply depots that get destroyed (from what I keep seeing) are usually NEUTRAL supply depots because the often times the team that got to it first likes to get more points out it by destroying it so that no one else can have it.
By imposing a limit on ammo capacity for vehicles, this might actually increase the value of the supply depots significantly because then it will become counterproductive to destroy rather than take it for your benefit. I expect to see these key installations constantly being hacked so that one team's tank can benefit from it rather than that of the other team's tank.
CCP, thank you for hotfixing the knives. But please make sure they're at their full potential in 1.7.
|
Mobius Kaethis
Molon Labe PC
RISE of LEGION
937
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 03:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
I agree with Maken here. Making vehicle ammo limited should take care of your concern that there will be no place to reload. Now the decision to destroy the supply depot will be a much harder one for tankers, infantry already is reliant on them and typically won't kill them.
In the world of DUST/
The words are all in haiku/
Tweets are just too long
|
MRBH1997
Knights Of Ender
Public Disorder.
25
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 03:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
When ever I'm in a battle there is always a swarm launcher or forge destroying supply depots. Now I only destroy them if they are unreachable with a vehicle because I like to have them for their passive 100 armor repair a sec to vehicles. And usually if they can't be reached an AV can camp it with unlimited ammo to kill or annoy me with. I do see how it could change what people think about supply depots but I don't feel people will change their motives of destroying them whenever they can. If that changes then I will have little issues. But I would still like a supply depot the enemy can't hit within the redline just in case. If they at least did that I'd be content.
CEO of Knights of Ender, Pro Jack of All Traits
|
MRBH1997
Knights Of Ender
Public Disorder.
25
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 03:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
Actually this ammo for vehicles may require a buff to supply depots in some form. There will definitely need to be some changes with them in 1.7. I guess we'll have to wait and see what changes would work best after it comes out.
CEO of Knights of Ender, Pro Jack of All Traits
|
Azri Sarum
BurgezzE.T.F
Public Disorder.
122
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 03:51:00 -
[7] - Quote
I usually see vehicles being the ones destroying depots, so perhaps now you guys will need to work with us in securing them.
Infantry + vehicle cooperation ftw!
EVE - Victor Maximus
DUST - Azri Sarum
|
abarkrishna
The Elysian Knights
58
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 04:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
Blowing supply depots up is already counter-productive. Unfortunately I do not think that by simply adding limited ammo to HAV's will decrease the tactical daftness of some players. They are more concerned with getting Wp than using things for their tactical purposes. And with the horrible rending/ draw distance issue that's are going on combined with limited ammo and Bad vehicle hitbox detection I could see it severely impacting Vehicle drivers in a negative way. I Kind of like the idea but the practicality of it is very Iffy at best.
They call me the C.L.I.T commander.
|
Jrakraa5
ZilchmobZ Industries
22
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 04:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
MRBH1997 wrote:I do like the coming changes to vehicles except for ammunition in 1.7. I feel that it would be to much of a hassle for vehicles because once you run out and you need a supply depot, it will most likely be destroyed. Even now they are destroyed almost all the time even red line ones. Also CCP said that they were doing so due to the feeling that whoever can shoot without overheating will win. I both disagree and agree. Yes you can win if you don't overheat but only because you don't waste shots and hold R1 down and if you think that just not ever hearing makes you win you are wrong. It only works if the tank you are facing is either stupid or terribly fitted. Also infantry AV can kill you if it is able to coordinate well. Not overheating does help you win fights but I strongly disagree that it is the only thug that goes on in tank vs tank fighting. If ammo is added it would be nice if we vehicle specialists could at least have a supply depot in the redline that can not be destroyed by the enemy because of it being under or in a structure. Otherwise we will have to recall multiple times to refill ammo in a game.
i fly ADS and i'm not gonna lie, i go through a lot of rounds while flying my ship and so do my gunners. depending on the match we sometimes don't have the chance to take the time to get a good shot in. we usually end up strafing the enemy lines and this method can end up using a lot of rounds. and to try to stay around a supply depot to get more rounds is just stupid. this places us at the hands of blueberry lav drivers who can't drive and the chance to get hit by a AV grenade. it's a dropship. those are suppose to be in the air, not sitting on the ground.
Member of ZilchMobZ Industries. we have EVE pilots! join today! FacebookZilchmobz
|
Spectre-M
The Generals
EoN.
108
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 05:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
IMO nothing should have unlimited ammo. It just encourages people to be less tactical about their approach to everything.
I play with alot of tankers, and they destroy the enemy. I think the new changes will force tanks to roll with their teams, using infantry to handle AV ( anti-vehicle). Too often I see a tanker get cocky and engage 2 full squads, thinking they'll just roll through them. Then he realized there were forge guns and swarm launchers and rages when they plow him.
I want to see tanks become team oriented rather than just 1 man rolling turrets. They often just leave teammates to die, because there are more WP elsewhere.
I run a SCR and always hunt AV for my tankers. It keeps me alive longer and I can focus on charge shooting avers.
If any tankers wanna spotter, add me in game and I'll watch your back if you watch mine. |
|
|
Mobius Kaethis
Molon Labe PC
RISE of LEGION
939
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 06:40:00 -
[11] - Quote
Another side effect of the limited ammo mechanic is that we are going to see many vehicle drivers (especially DS pilots) simply returning to the redline at regular intervals during the battle and, if there isn't a supply depot in the red line, recalling their vehicle then deploying a new one. This will let them still kill all the supply depots they want, regardless of how it affects the rest of their team. CCP will have to do something to prevent this clear circumventing of the intended mechanics.
In the world of DUST/
The words are all in haiku/
Tweets are just too long
|
MRBH1997
Knights Of Ender
Public Disorder.
26
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 10:17:00 -
[12] - Quote
Spectre-M wrote:IMO nothing should have unlimited ammo. It just encourages people to be less tactical about their approach to everything.
I play with alot of tankers, and they destroy the enemy. I think the new changes will force tanks to roll with their teams, using infantry to handle AV ( anti-vehicle). Too often I see a tanker get cocky and engage 2 full squads, thinking they'll just roll through them. Then he realized there were forge guns and swarm launchers and rages when they plow him.
I want to see tanks become team oriented rather than just 1 man rolling turrets. They often just leave teammates to die, because there are more WP elsewhere.
I run a SCR and always hunt AV for my tankers. It keeps me alive longer and I can focus on charge shooting avers.
If any tankers wanna spotter, add me in game and I'll watch your back if you watch mine.
And sadly those tankers you see are the large majority which are completely stupid in tactical sense and in just plain general thinking and probably shouldn't be tanking. When I bring out a tank I always have my squad with me to hunt AV or I am supporting them while they hack something. I'm what seems to be the few smart tankers that knows that if I go AV hunting on my own I'm screwed unless its a militia or something else weak. Very few people using tanks can tell you how to best fit a tank for heavy hitting or high damage resistance or can tell when a vehicle is using 1 or 2 shield extenders or armor repairers. Most of ten just speced into then thinking hey I can just use this tank to destroy cause its a tank then rage when they realize there's more to it than that.
CEO of Knights of Ender, Pro Jack of All Traits
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |