Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1276
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 19:22:00 -
[61] - Quote
KenKaniff69 wrote: Run a tank in PC and then comment that HAV's require no teamwork to use. Try moving from one point to another without being hit by two proto maxed IAFG's and a side of proto swarms chasing you in an LLAV. The only ones who can help you are your teamates, while the FG mindlessly spams shots from an unseen location on a tower.
I don't spam FGs or SLs on high towers. That's basically asking for your missiles to crash into a wall. And with the travel time on Swarm Launchers, the closer you are to the target, the higher your DPS.
Done. Now let me comment and say that HAVs require no teamwork to use whatsoever.
Even if, it is ridiculously idiotic to balance this game around a game-mode that very few people actually participate in.
How many people does it take to operate a vehicle? Now how many people do LOLTank Brigadiers want it to take for the destruction of an HAV?
That's not balance. That's God mode.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Judge Rhadamanthus
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
770
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 22:17:00 -
[62] - Quote
Justice Prevails wrote:Judge, I am a scrub SL user, but that video made me ROFL. Thank you.
It was just for fun. Swarmers should be pushing CCP to make their role rewarding. Skill, positioning etc should give you kills, and WP. Too many try to hang onto the easy aspects of swarming. One should be proud to be a swarmer. Did you see the "best 10 swarmers" thread. The whole community treated it as a joke. This should concern you. YOu guys need to be rewarded too, Good skills should lead to WP. But atm the weapon is to unbalanced to help you prove your worth,
Everything Dropship youtube channel
my Community Spotlight
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1287
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:08:00 -
[63] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Justice Prevails wrote:Judge, I am a scrub SL user, but that video made me ROFL. Thank you. It was just for fun. Swarmers should be pushing CCP to make their role rewarding. Skill, positioning etc should give you kills, and WP. Too many try to hang onto the easy aspects of swarming. One should be proud to be a swarmer. Did you see the "best 10 swarmers" thread. The whole community treated it as a joke. This should concern you. YOu guys need to be rewarded too, Good skills should lead to WP. But atm the weapon is to unbalanced to help you prove your worth. You should be able to out think your enemy. Having game mechanics that only allow you to point and hit does not give you a chance to do this. Try to think of ways your weapon could change that would make it better. Not just range and damage but other aspects. How about missile types, or missiles that only hug the ground or ones that create smoke to blind pilots or ones that disable vehicle electronics and scanners. Is killing the Dropship the only rewarding thing? can WP from grounding it be better> or WP for lighting it up so others can hit it? Lets make the fight between vehicles and infantry vaired and interesting. I want to fight you. But fairly. I know how the HAV community treated my "Top 10 SL Users" thread/. But that's okay because I still have way more ammunition left for the next best pilot thread.
I am proud to be a Swarm Launcher user. Why? Because just like a good sniper, I don't always hide in the redline or go 350m away from a vehicle and start firing away. I don't see why so many people do this. It's horribly ineffective because the swarms are more likely to crash into a wall; plus with the travel time on SL swarms your DPS is much higher when you are closer to the vehicle.
I've been wanting things like dumbfire and separate missile types since I first starte using a CBR7.
I've always wanted a fair and balanced fight. That's why I started using these forums in the first place. That's why I wasted tons of SP skilling into every role in the game. It's also why I originally skilled into SLs to begin with.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:24:00 -
[64] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Swarms are going to be lame against tanks. Low damage, tanks will run away fast, bla bla bla. Ok then, how about dropships? Hmm... Damage is low, sounds like they're area denial... But wait. Swarms can't reach more than 175m up since that's the max range right? Does that mean that a dropship with an MCRU can just sit at top height and drop soldiers without being touched? Or an assault dropship that can rain down missiles with 300 splash without being damaged? Forge guns in 1.7 will basically be the only viable AV, so at least give swarms area denial of air. At least that, please? http://i.imgur.com/5U6GLvl.pngSo basically - Just change vertical range to be unlimited, and done. All I hear is "why are you giving AV any nerf at all everybody knows we need every crutch possible to destroy vehicles because if the game didn't take care of aiming swarms and AV grenades then no tanks would blow up and it would be Tank 514."
Go to Call of Duty so you don't have to worry about vehicles at all.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:24:00 -
[65] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Swarms can't reach more than 175m up since that's the max range right?. Wrong thats their max lock on range Cat Merc wrote:Forge guns in 1.7 will basically be the only viable AV, so at least give swarms area denial of air. At least that, please? At about 100 meters you guys on the ground are a single black pixel. Giving you 175 meter lock on is generous. You can see me approach clearly at over 400 meters while i cannot see you until 100. Your advantage is so huge I am confused at why you feel more is needed. Because infantry in general is just that bad.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:27:00 -
[66] - Quote
ACE OF JOKERS wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:
At about 100 meters you guys on the grond are a single black pixel. Giving you 175 menter lock on is generous. You can see me approach clearly at over 400 meters while i cannot see you until 100. Your advantage is so huge I am confused at why you feel more is needed.
Because of the EHP difference? Because the vehicle moves FASTER? And 75mts difference wont help me put any damage on a tank BEFORE he sees me. At most, 1 volley. Because with the low damage i will need like 10 volleys to even scare tanks ? while they can 2HKO me every time?
I dont know.... Maybe i'll ask around...
>..> How about, uh.......... you use your brain to destroy tanks, and bring friends along, too?
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:29:00 -
[67] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Iskandar Zul Karnain wrote:As a lock-on scrublet with proficiency 4 in swarms I'll hold back my QQ until I actually play 1.7.
Swarms are going to function differently that's for sure but with teamwork and creativity they will still be a threat. The bottom line on swarms? They can no longer 1v1 well fit vehicles and that's how is it should be IMO.
So I should be able to force people to work together to take me out as a single person? You do realize that HAVs require no teamwork right? So why should AV require teamwork? And no "because I paid more" Is not a valid argument. If it was a valid excuse then it would be perfectly logical to say that AUR AV weapons should OHK everything and AUR vehicles should have a base resistance of 99%. It would also be perfectly logical to say that AUR weapons should have a damage modification of +10%. There he is..........................
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1288
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:33:00 -
[68] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote: There he is..........................
Well if it isn't the co-chairman of the LOLTank Brigade.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1288
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:36:00 -
[69] - Quote
Hey Spkr4TheDead, I want you honest opinion on this one.
Should AV be forced to use teamwork to be successful, while HAVs require no teamwork whatsoever to be successful?
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:38:00 -
[70] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:ACE OF JOKERS wrote:...Because with the low damage i will need like 10 volleys to even scare tanks ? while they can 2HKO me every time? >..>[/b] Where are you getting the information that light AV weapons should be able to kill tanks? It's a thing called balance. Why would I ever use a Light weapon when only a heavy weapon is capable of destroying a tank? Balance to you is removing vehicles in their entirety.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:42:00 -
[71] - Quote
Eris Ernaga wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Swarms are going to be lame against tanks. Low damage, tanks will run away fast, bla bla bla. Ok then, how about dropships? Hmm... Damage is low, sounds like they're area denial... But wait. Swarms can't reach more than 175m up since that's the max range right? Does that mean that a dropship with an MCRU can just sit at top height and drop soldiers without being touched? Or an assault dropship that can rain down missiles with 300 splash without being damaged? Forge guns in 1.7 will basically be the only viable AV, so at least give swarms area denial of air. At least that, please? http://i.imgur.com/5U6GLvl.pngSo basically - Just change vertical range to be unlimited, and done. Railgun tanks another dropship Swarm launcher if the enemy drop ship gets close railgun instillation missile installation missile tank are all still good ways to counter dropships. But those require intelligence, and we can't have that, no way!
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1288
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:43:00 -
[72] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Atiim wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:ACE OF JOKERS wrote:...Because with the low damage i will need like 10 volleys to even scare tanks ? while they can 2HKO me every time? >..>[/b] Where are you getting the information that light AV weapons should be able to kill tanks? It's a thing called balance. Why would I ever use a Light weapon when only a heavy weapon is capable of destroying a tank? Balance to you is removing vehicles in their entirety. I've never once said or implied that I want vehicles nerfed or completely removed from the game.
Why do you and everyone else think I'm on a Anti-Vehicle crusade?
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:43:00 -
[73] - Quote
Atiim wrote:True Adamance wrote:Atiim wrote:Iskandar Zul Karnain wrote:As a lock-on scrublet with proficiency 4 in swarms I'll hold back my QQ until I actually play 1.7.
Swarms are going to function differently that's for sure but with teamwork and creativity they will still be a threat. The bottom line on swarms? They can no longer 1v1 well fit vehicles and that's how is it should be IMO.
So I should be able to force people to work together to take me out as a single person? You do realize that HAVs require no teamwork right? So why should AV require teamwork? And no "because I paid more" Is not a valid argument. If it was a valid excuse then it would be perfectly logical to say that AUR AV weapons should OHK everything and AUR vehicles should have a base resistance of 99%. It would also be perfectly logical to say that AUR weapons should have a damage modification of +10%. No tanking does require team work or you would be out of a job. You are constantly say how easy unsquadded tankers are to take down....well yes they are easy because they aren't using team work. If you are a good tanker you don't need it, I'm not good, just very lucky. Nobody has ever been able to supply a reasonable reply as to why they should be able to force people to use teamwork when I myself have no requirements to use teamwork. And I guess you won't either. Such a shame From my experience, using an HAV does not require teamwork. The presence and threat of an HAV is simply increased by teamwork. In 1.7 HAVs will require no teamwork whatsoever beyond directions to the nearest supply depot. Yet you want AV to require 3-6 people to be successful. Also, I wouldn't be out of a job because I'm not dumb enough to skill into one thing and then cry about how boring this game is when I get tired of running the exact same fittings and loadouts everyday. To rip a page out of my 3rd favorite Forum Punching Bag, Spkr4TheDead's book: Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me... Such is the motto of pilots. At least mine rhymes.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:46:00 -
[74] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Atiim wrote:True Adamance wrote:Atiim wrote: Nobody has ever been able to supply a reasonable reply as to why they should be able to force people to use teamwork when I myself have no requirements to use teamwork. And I guess you won't either. Such a shame
From my experience, using an HAV does not require teamwork. The presence and threat of an HAV is simply increased by teamwork. In 1.7 HAVs will require no teamwork whatsoever beyond directions to the nearest supply depot. Yet you want AV to require 3-6 people to be successful.
Also, I wouldn't be out of a job because I'm not dumb enough to skill into one thing and then cry about how boring this game is when I get tired of running the exact same fittings and loadouts everyday.
To rip a page out of my 3rd favorite Forum Punching Bag, Spkr4TheDead's book:
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me... Such is the motto of pilots.
What does any military try to reinforce amongst its soldiers? Comradery and Teamwork. However I understand this is a game and gamers are notoriously selfish and anti social recluses...but hell try to consider that you are playing a tactical shooter not a cod clone where one man makes himself and entire army because he can jack up his sensitivity and rock quick scopes all day. Balance>Gameplay If AV is FORCED to use teamwork to be successful, then HAVs should be FORCED to use teamwork to be successful. So answer the question already. Do you think that both HAV and AV should BOTH be forced to use teamwork and tactics to be successful? Or was I right when I said Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me... Such is the motto of pilots? I don't understand why you say I don't use team work. I very much so do. Scans, forward scouts, covering hacks, taking down marauding enemy HAV with AV support....why are you blindly assuming I am some soloist who spends his time trying to get tanks buffed into God mode. More often than not O have said that I wish the OP turret, that's what you are complaining about not tanks, is ruining tanking, more often than not have said I feel tanks are good where they are, but for some small modifications to how AV works. I believe tanks do require team work, however that is not very well emphasised because turret gunning is worthless. I almost all other games I have played where vehicles are present they are anti infantry weapons used by a single pilot with control of powerful Anti Infantry guns, only through massed fire can you bring them down. I also believe in the cycles of unit to unit interaction. AVer < Infantry Assault Infantry Assault < Tanks Tanks < AV barrage However there is no point in having HAV on the field at all if one single man with half the ISK investment can deny and entire facet of game play from some hidden crevice of the map....which at present AV can do. Dropships are not worth using Tanks barely useful in a fight LAV.... mobile and disposable...very useful Like in EVE I think that someone who invests ISK into something should be victorious unless they are poorly skilled. I don't really care what you say but no Frigate, Destroyer, Cruiser I believe at the moment is capable of beating my Armageddon, fully fitted and equipped. Much like in EVE or any other game when you hunt something bigger than you, you take as many men as you can, and the biggest guns you can find to go and kill it. Can you give me a reason to deploy vehicles to a battle? I cant think of one right now with the game the way it is? All it does is cost me ISK and, I wont say Im the top dog pilot, but I'm pretty damn good when I get going. Half the ISK investment? It takes less than 1mil SP to get PRO swarms. Proficiency is up to the user.
It takes a whole lot more to develop a tank with sufficient enough defense to survive 3 PRO swarm volleys.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1288
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:47:00 -
[75] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Eris Ernaga wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Swarms are going to be lame against tanks. Low damage, tanks will run away fast, bla bla bla. Ok then, how about dropships? Hmm... Damage is low, sounds like they're area denial... But wait. Swarms can't reach more than 175m up since that's the max range right? Does that mean that a dropship with an MCRU can just sit at top height and drop soldiers without being touched? Or an assault dropship that can rain down missiles with 300 splash without being damaged? Forge guns in 1.7 will basically be the only viable AV, so at least give swarms area denial of air. At least that, please? http://i.imgur.com/5U6GLvl.pngSo basically - Just change vertical range to be unlimited, and done. Railgun tanks another dropship Swarm launcher if the enemy drop ship gets close railgun instillation missile installation missile tank are all still good ways to counter dropships. But those require intelligence, and we can't have that, no way! Actually those methods require either another tank. (Oh wait that's right you think tanks should only be countered by tanks)
That one about the dropship getting close is rediculously situational. And rare.
The one about installations is invalid because we can't deploy them anywhere we want, thus requiring the dropship to come to a fixed location on the map. And even if, an ADS or HAV would never be dumb enough to let an installation live.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1305
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:48:00 -
[76] - Quote
Korvin Lomont wrote:Iskandar Zul Karnain wrote:As a lock-on scrublet with proficiency 4 in swarms I'll hold back my QQ until I actually play 1.7.
Swarms are going to function differently that's for sure but with teamwork and creativity they will still be a threat. The bottom line on swarms? They can no longer 1v1 well fit vehicles and that's how is it should be IMO.
The problem is scalability as long as you have maxed Team sizes this ratio will not work its pretty easy if I need 2 people to fight against 1 guy using a certain equipment there is a problem (this does not only refere to vehicles). What will happen if two are using the same Equipment or three or four or five all at the same time. Lets stick with the more extreme case 5 tanks by your logic it would take 10 guys from team A to counter 5 guys on team B, wheras the 10 from Team A can easily be countered from the rest of Team B (11). So the only Real Answer for Team A to Counter Team B would be to use the same Equipment and we get a scenario where the only viable counter to a rock is another rock and for this making paper a nonfactor... Well some will say you could take on one after another (which would only be true IF they were stupid enough to line up). But even then this still causes a small inbalance in teams. Why can't you use the same 2 guys to take out each tank?
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Wako 75
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
86
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:49:00 -
[77] - Quote
A'Real Fury wrote:If you do not want to mess with the swarm launcher itself then you could add a laser designator which massively extends the lock on range.
The designator could be a weapon attachment, piece of equipment or an 8x Skill.
that would be a viable solution target painters would be awesome but it should have a 5 sec cool down this i think would make tankers and swarms happy would increase team work av wise and swarms range should increase x3 with it.
It will survive!!!
|
MINA Longstrike
2Shitz 1Giggle
53
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 04:54:00 -
[78] - Quote
ACE OF JOKERS wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:
At about 100 meters you guys on the grond are a single black pixel. Giving you 175 menter lock on is generous. You can see me approach clearly at over 400 meters while i cannot see you until 100. Your advantage is so huge I am confused at why you feel more is needed.
Because of the EHP difference? Because the vehicle moves FASTER? And 75mts difference wont help me put any damage on a tank BEFORE he sees me. At most, 1 volley. Because with the low damage i will need like 10 volleys to even scare tanks ? while they can 2HKO me every time?
I dont know.... Maybe i'll ask around...
>..>
Vehicle EHP is going down significantly from what it currently is, swarm damage is being lowered appropriately as well. The only thing you might have to complain about is the lowered lock on range... which is a silly thing to ***** about as right now with a 400m lock on range you can deny the WHOLE MAP to a dropship user and quite a fair bit of it to a tank user as well.
Right now you are complaining because you won't be able to pull the same crap with the absolute impunity you currently have. |
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1289
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:01:00 -
[79] - Quote
MINA Longstrike wrote: Vehicle EHP is going down significantly from what it currently is, swarm damage is being lowered appropriately as well. The only thing you might have to complain about is the lowered lock on range... which is a silly thing to ***** about as right now with a 400m lock on range you can deny the WHOLE MAP to a dropship user and quite a fair bit of it to a tank user as well.
Right now you are complaining because you won't be able to pull the same crap with the absolute impunity you currently have.
I refuse to fire at a target that is not within an estimated 200m range. I find that to be highly broken. It's the same reason that I don't snipe from the redline with a Charge or Kaailikiotia Sniper Rifle. Why does everyone assume that me using a SL automatically means that I spam rockets from the redline or high ground. That's not even effective.
I find the 175m lock to be broken because it allows DS pilots to easily fly above our lock range with complete impunity.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY
36
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:05:00 -
[80] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Iskandar Zul Karnain wrote:As a lock-on scrublet with proficiency 4 in swarms I'll hold back my QQ until I actually play 1.7.
Swarms are going to function differently that's for sure but with teamwork and creativity they will still be a threat. The bottom line on swarms? They can no longer 1v1 well fit vehicles and that's how is it should be IMO.
OMG THERE IS REASON AMONGST YOUR PEOPLE. But yeah I agree. I still want AV to be a threat....just not a seemingly invisible omnipotent one.
Message from Godin: What the hell does that supposed to mean? |
|
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY
36
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:20:00 -
[81] - Quote
Atiim wrote:True Adamance wrote:Atiim wrote: Nobody has ever been able to supply a reasonable reply as to why they should be able to force people to use teamwork when I myself have no requirements to use teamwork. And I guess you won't either. Such a shame
From my experience, using an HAV does not require teamwork. The presence and threat of an HAV is simply increased by teamwork. In 1.7 HAVs will require no teamwork whatsoever beyond directions to the nearest supply depot. Yet you want AV to require 3-6 people to be successful.
Also, I wouldn't be out of a job because I'm not dumb enough to skill into one thing and then cry about how boring this game is when I get tired of running the exact same fittings and loadouts everyday.
To rip a page out of my 3rd favorite Forum Punching Bag, Spkr4TheDead's book:
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me... Such is the motto of pilots.
What does any military try to reinforce amongst its soldiers? Comradery and Teamwork. However I understand this is a game and gamers are notoriously selfish and anti social recluses...but hell try to consider that you are playing a tactical shooter not a cod clone where one man makes himself and entire army because he can jack up his sensitivity and rock quick scopes all day. Balance>Gameplay If AV is FORCED to use teamwork to be successful, then HAVs should be FORCED to use teamwork to be successful. So answer the question already. Do you think that both HAV and AV should BOTH be forced to use teamwork and tactics to be successful? Or was I right when I said Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me... Such is the motto of pilots?
Message from Godin: Since you so repeatly likes to say we never use team work, I'll prove that we do, and ISK can vouch for me that I do this, as We've played so many times together it's stupid:
1: bone rushes into a gruop of guysmadly shooting at everyrthhing in sight, and potentionally losing the HAV, to give me team about 10-20 seconds to do whatever they need to do
2: circling a base w/e sniper support to watch out for any ninja hackers
3: Me and Forge support to take out 2-3 HAV's
4:random fire into an obj. to cause mayhem and to allow my team to push on said obj.
5: Parking my HAV in a position so someone can hide behind me
6: (only outside of Pubs) Ferrying troops across the map instead of them running.
7: similar to #1, driving into the redline to save 2 DS's, taking out a rail turret, and a HAV, and somehow making it out
Every single one of these other than #7 I've done almost every time I take out a HAV. Don't tell me that I'm not supporting my team, otherwise, you're a ******* lair. |
MINA Longstrike
2Shitz 1Giggle
53
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:21:00 -
[82] - Quote
Atiim wrote:MINA Longstrike wrote: Vehicle EHP is going down significantly from what it currently is, swarm damage is being lowered appropriately as well. The only thing you might have to complain about is the lowered lock on range... which is a silly thing to ***** about as right now with a 400m lock on range you can deny the WHOLE MAP to a dropship user and quite a fair bit of it to a tank user as well.
Right now you are complaining because you won't be able to pull the same crap with the absolute impunity you currently have.
I refuse to fire at a target that is not within an estimated 200m range. I find that to be highly broken. It's the same reason that I don't snipe from the redline with a Charge or Kaailikiotia Sniper Rifle. Why does everyone assume that me using a SL automatically means that I spam rockets from the redline or high ground. That's not even effective. I find the 175m lock to be broken because it allows DS pilots to easily fly above our lock range with complete impunity.
And we accomplish nothing from that range, and if you really, really want us dead that bad, its time to either bring in a forge gun, a rail tank or take to the skies yourself - hell if you wanted to be extra fancy you could get a squad of swarmlaunchers to stand on top of your dropship to hunt tanks from the air or other dropships - just catch them as they jump out of the mcc.
Tanks require teamwork to be effective - solo tanks die. Dropships require teamwork to get really anything at all done. Both of these vehicles are expensive enough that no one wants to leave them unattended for another 'teammate' to take. LAV's are really the only thing that a single swarmer should be able to take out by themselves, because LAV's are cheap, prone to being used to murdertaxi by a single individuakl and readily abandoned all the time. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1306
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:28:00 -
[83] - Quote
Pvt Numnutz wrote:1. you're an idiot cat merc 2. swarms are area denial, dropships guns have very little range. 3. dropships with mcru's have always been untouchable at max height 4. you're an idiot cat merc He's RND, what do they know about vehicles?
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1306
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:30:00 -
[84] - Quote
Racro 01 Arifistan wrote:compains about av nerf.........................
dosnt know how long tanks have been nerfed for.... Not like any of them care.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1306
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:33:00 -
[85] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Cat Merc wrote:....2. 250m, when compared to the swarms 175m range. ... Effective long missile range is about 80m. Very few kills happen above 100m range. Try it. Swarms do not have to aim. they can fire while jumping off a ledge or hopping like a fairy on skipping drugs. At the same time it am trying to hit their 3 pixel dot of a body that is the same colour as the ground; their hits are knocking me all over the place, yet my missiles do not hinder their aim one bit. I have never hit anyone from a dropship at 175m. Even if I did it would not OHK you unless it was a direct hit, and even then only if you are in a weak suit. You seem to like to spread misinformation Cat Merc yet never change what you say even after you have been corrected many times. We can see your agenda is a selfish one, which is something New Eden allows for but It would greatly help the community if you tried to be more honest and fair with other posters. You have already been corrected about the 175m being lock on not range, yet you keep saying range. Why do you keep trying to mislead people? "You have already been corrected about the 175m being lock on not range, yet you keep saying range. Why do you keep trying to mislead people?" Because that's EFFECTIVELY their range. Lock on range =/= max range.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1306
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:34:00 -
[86] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Cat Merc wrote:....2. 250m, when compared to the swarms 175m range. ... Effective long missile range is about 80m. Very few kills happen above 100m range. Try it. Swarms do not have to aim. they can fire while jumping off a ledge or hopping like a fairy on skipping drugs. At the same time it am trying to hit their 3 pixel dot of a body that is the same colour as the ground; their hits are knocking me all over the place, yet my missiles do not hinder their aim one bit. I have never hit anyone from a dropship at 175m. Even if I did it would not OHK you unless it was a direct hit, and even then only if you are in a weak suit. You seem to like to spread misinformation Cat Merc yet never change what you say even after you have been corrected many times. We can see your agenda is a selfish one, which is something New Eden allows for but It would greatly help the community if you tried to be more honest and fair with other posters. You have already been corrected about the 175m being lock on not range, yet you keep saying range. Why do you keep trying to mislead people? This is so idiotic that it hurts. The lock practically is their range. How is a Swarm Launcher going to fire at something if they can't lock? The only way this could happen is if someone gets hit by a SL while trying to evade them, which won't even be a concern when our PRO variants do as much damage as a STD swarm launcher. Stop trying to mislead people. (Also, if you get OHK'd by any SL, your mods either down, you are using MLT gear, or you are just plain awful.) Swarms lock on to my tank outside their terminal range. Where does that put your comments now?
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1306
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:35:00 -
[87] - Quote
Atiim wrote:jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:Atiim wrote:"Balance>Gameplay
If AV is FORCED to use teamwork to be successful, then HAVs should be FORCED to use teamwork to be successful.
So answer the question already. Do you think that both HAV and AV should BOTH be forced to use teamwork and tactics to be successful?
Or was I right when I said Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me... Such is the motto of pilots?" oh atim atim aim, why do you want it rediculously easy to destroy vehicles? i barely get killed by vehicles, as they cant go where i can, and vehicles use teamwork to defend objectives or assault with infantry. for my last point: it's okay for proto infantry to go 30-0 but vehicles cant go 10-0? it's okay for proto infantry using no teamwork but not vehicles? oh and my well fit suit solo's all day and profits. bottom line: it's okay for proto infantry to do well but not vehicles cuz your AR/ScR can't hurt it? pss, 1 forge gunner destroying well fit vehicles is BS from like 300M, high damage high rof high range isn't balanced. LOL PRO Infantry rarely go 30-0 without teamwork. I could care less if they use teamwork. The only problem here is that pilots want to be able to solo everyone and force everyone to use teamwork while they themselves are not required to use teamwork. Thanks for proving my point though. And why would I fire my AR/ScR at a vehicle when I can destroy it with a Wyrikomi and watch them QQ about how I destroyed their poorly fit vehicle. Tell that FG stuff to people like GeneralButtNaked, CharCharOdell, and Void Echo who think that FGs require skill. As if piloting anything other than a DS required skill So why don't you destroy tanks with your own tank?
Oh wait, a tank shouldn't be its own best counter. Better to use something in which the game takes care of aiming for you. At least you have to aim and time your forge gun shots. Much more than I can say for swarms.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1306
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:36:00 -
[88] - Quote
KenKaniff69 wrote:Atiim wrote:True Adamance wrote:Atiim wrote:Iskandar Zul Karnain wrote:As a lock-on scrublet with proficiency 4 in swarms I'll hold back my QQ until I actually play 1.7.
Swarms are going to function differently that's for sure but with teamwork and creativity they will still be a threat. The bottom line on swarms? They can no longer 1v1 well fit vehicles and that's how is it should be IMO.
So I should be able to force people to work together to take me out as a single person? You do realize that HAVs require no teamwork right? So why should AV require teamwork? And no "because I paid more" Is not a valid argument. If it was a valid excuse then it would be perfectly logical to say that AUR AV weapons should OHK everything and AUR vehicles should have a base resistance of 99%. It would also be perfectly logical to say that AUR weapons should have a damage modification of +10%. No tanking does require team work or you would be out of a job. You are constantly say how easy unsquadded tankers are to take down....well yes they are easy because they aren't using team work. If you are a good tanker you don't need it, I'm not good, just very lucky. Nobody has ever been able to supply a reasonable reply as to why they should be able to force people to use teamwork when I myself have no requirements to use teamwork. And I guess you won't either. Such a shame From my experience, using an HAV does not require teamwork. The presence and threat of an HAV is simply increased by teamwork. In 1.7 HAVs will require no teamwork whatsoever beyond directions to the nearest supply depot. Yet you want AV to require 3-6 people to be successful. Also, I wouldn't be out of a job because I'm not dumb enough to skill into one thing and then cry about how boring this game is when I get tired of running the exact same fittings and loadouts everyday. To rip a page out of my 3rd favorite Forum Punching Bag, Spkr4TheDead's book: Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me... Such is the motto of pilots. Run a tank in PC and then comment that HAV's require no teamwork to use. Try moving from one point to another without being hit by two proto maxed IAFG's and a side of proto swarms chasing you in an LLAV. The only ones who can help you are your teamates, while the FG mindlessly spams shots from an unseen location on a tower. He says he's a "tanker," that must mean he's pretty good, right? LOL!
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Iskandar Zul Karnain
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
2444
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:51:00 -
[89] - Quote
Roger Cordill wrote: Message from Godin: Since you so repeatly likes to say we never use team work, I'll prove that we do, and ISK can vouch for me that I do this, as We've played so many times together it's stupid:
1: bone rushes into a gruop of guysmadly shooting at everyrthhing in sight, and potentionally losing the HAV, to give me team about 10-20 seconds to do whatever they need to do
2: circling a base w/e sniper support to watch out for any ninja hackers
3: Me and Forge support to take out 2-3 HAV's
4:random fire into an obj. to cause mayhem and to allow my team to push on said obj.
5: Parking my HAV in a position so someone can hide behind me
6: (only outside of Pubs) Ferrying troops across the map instead of them running.
7: similar to #1, driving into the redline to save 2 DS's, taking out a rail turret, and a HAV, and somehow making it out
Every single one of these other than #7 I've done almost every time I take out a HAV. Don't tell me that I'm not supporting my team, otherwise, you're a ******* lair.
Confirming the legitimacy of this statement.
HellsGÇáorm, Director
Bringing the Wrath of God down on the Matari since YC114
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1306
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:53:00 -
[90] - Quote
Atiim wrote:KenKaniff69 wrote: Run a tank in PC and then comment that HAV's require no teamwork to use. Try moving from one point to another without being hit by two proto maxed IAFG's and a side of proto swarms chasing you in an LLAV. The only ones who can help you are your teamates, while the FG mindlessly spams shots from an unseen location on a tower.
I don't spam FGs or SLs on high towers. That's basically asking for your missiles to crash into a wall. And with the travel time on Swarm Launchers, the closer you are to the target, the higher your DPS. Done. Now let me comment and say that HAVs require no teamwork to use whatsoever. Even if, it is ridiculously idiotic to balance this game around a game-mode that very few people actually participate in. How many people does it take to operate a vehicle? Now how many people do LOLTank Brigadiers want it to take for the destruction of an HAV? That's not balance. That's God mode. If tanks required no teamwork at all, you'd be a beast tanker and everybody would be afraid of seeing you on the other team.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |