| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1306
   |
Posted - 2013.11.23 05:59:00 -
[91] - Quote
Atiim wrote: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.
Lol. At 350 away, you're reloading by the time the first volley hits. 4th is on the way if hit markers are being screwy.
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 06:01:00 -
[92] - Quote
Atiim wrote: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?
AV should be classified as support, but enough of it should down a tank. There's a reason that in the stats for swarms, they only need a light weapon slot, and forge guns need a heavy weapon slot. Swarms should be lesser damage over time, forge guns for high alpha damage.
It's really quite easy if you have an open, rational mind. You just go blind with rage at the sight or mentioning of tanks. That's not healthy.
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 06:02:00 -
[93] - Quote
Atiim wrote: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?
Because not once, not ever, have you ever said that tanks are hard to pilot and that AV is easy to use. Hence, you're on an anti-vehicle crusade.
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Thor McStrut
Reckoners
430
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 06:18:00 -
[94] - Quote
What if the main turret was basically useless against infantry? Thus requiring teammates in your small turrets to counter infantry/AV.  |
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
128
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 06:35:00 -
[95] - Quote
Thor McStrut wrote:What if the main turret was basically useless against infantry? Thus requiring teammates in your small turrets to counter infantry/AV.
i'd put 4 mil sp in infantry then, like really, wats the point of a tank JUST to destroy tanks?
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
128
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 06:48:00 -
[96] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:
There he is..........................
Well if it isn't the co-chairman of the LOLTank Brigade.
well if it isn't the CEO of "i want to destroy H.EAVY A.TTACK V.EHICLEs with LIGHT weapons"
hi
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
128
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 06:51:00 -
[97] - Quote
Atiim wrote: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?
if they see a HAV in the open where no teamates are, have proto AV, and skillful and not hiding around a corner spamming AV, then sure, but give good pilots a chance to escape, after all, it is to defend a position/detere?(IDK the spelling)the vehicle
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
128
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 06:55:00 -
[98] - 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?
Swarm launcher if the enemy drop ship gets too close missile installation missile tank. But those require intelligence, and we can't have that, no way!
railguns are actually easier to use than FG's, they **** me off just as much, pro rails do 1885 dmg, nothing should have extreme range and high damage really
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
Nova Knife
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
2147
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 07:01:00 -
[99] - Quote
Rather than take part in the debate, I'm just going to drop this :
Swarm launchers should behave like an assisted-lock TOW missile.
The lock-on box should appear on screen. You lock on. You fire. The box stays on the screen. You have to keep the locked target in the box until the missiles hit. If they leave the box or LOS, you have two seconds to re-acquire or the missiles lose tracking and detonate. You can re-fire from the same lock within the normal re-fire delay (With the normal lock delay added to it, to keep the fire rate the same as before) but you cannot reload while a lock is being maintained.
Range should be 250-350m for lock, flight distance max 500m (To prevent fleeting/skirting immunity)
|
Oswald Rehnquist
657
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 07:04:00 -
[100] - Quote
Nova Knife wrote:Rather than take part in the debate, I'm just going to drop this :
Swarm launchers should behave like an assisted-lock TOW missile.
The lock-on box should appear on screen. You lock on. You fire. The box stays on the screen. You have to keep the locked target in the box until the missiles hit. If they leave the box or LOS, you have two seconds to re-acquire or the missiles lose tracking and detonate. You can re-fire from the same lock within the normal re-fire delay (With the normal lock delay added to it, to keep the fire rate the same as before) but you cannot reload while a lock is being maintained.
Range should be 250-350m for lock, flight distance max 500m (To prevent fleeting/skirting immunity)
I like this, it makes it more skill based plus makes it effective
Below 28 dB
|
|
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
129
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 07:06:00 -
[101] - Quote
Nova Knife wrote:Rather than take part in the debate, I'm just going to drop this :
Swarm launchers should behave like an assisted-lock TOW missile.
The lock-on box should appear on screen. You lock on. You fire. The box stays on the screen. You have to keep the locked target in the box until the missiles hit. If they leave the box or LOS, you have two seconds to re-acquire or the missiles lose tracking and detonate. You can re-fire from the same lock within the normal re-fire delay (With the normal lock delay added to it, to keep the fire rate the same as before) but you cannot reload while a lock is being maintained.
Range should be 250-350m for lock, flight distance max 500m (To prevent fleeting/skirting immunity)
cool, but 250m lock, and 400m range or swarms are stupid again
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
38
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 07:18:00 -
[102] - Quote
Message from GOdin: I see what you're saying. Agreed. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1315
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 07:23:00 -
[103] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: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?
Swarm launcher if the enemy drop ship gets too close missile installation missile tank. But those require intelligence, and we can't have that, no way! railguns are actually easier to use than FG's, they **** me off just as much, pro rails do 1885 dmg, nothing should have extreme range and high damage really
Uh.............................. They don't do that much damage. When 1.7 comes, yeah. I guess you're in favor of removing the forge gun, charge sniper rifle and Thale's sniper rifle?
Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
|
Lynn Beck
Granite Mercenary Division
Top Men.
255
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 07:55:00 -
[104] - Quote
Isnt this the same logic that brought the heavy down?
"One class that needs focused fire to kill? Thats OP! We can't think! We lack brain-CPU to power that function! ccP pweez give us moar crutches!"
I find every single AVer and AR person to be ******* morons.
A single AVer SHOULD be a threat to a tank. But not an instantaneous WTFpwn to any tanker nearby. Making the swarmlauncher have reduced range that it needs to be closer to fire rockets is one way to look at it.
Another way we could've nerfed the swarm is 500m range, 110 damage a missile, and they're shootable.
Wht do we have then? A constant nuisance to every tank, but not a viable threat.
In it's to be nerfed state, tankers can avoid you guys, and you can be a deterrant singlehandedly. If you wish to instawtfpwn a goddamned tank, think.
Or just Zerg on it until it pops. Whichever one you deem fit enough for your faschist ways. And yes, i called EVERY GODDAMNED AVER A NAZ.I.
Tankers want their fun, as do avers i get that. But when you want it such that 1 aver can kill something with little patience, nor thinking, thats being selfish.
"Wahh CCP make my AR do 30% damage to vehicles, ooh ooh! And throw splash damage and seeker underbarrel ForgeGuns!" Is what you are in a sense asking.
-Newly proclaimed Lazor riffle specialist-
"You said yourself fantastically 'congratulations you are all alone.'"
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
3902
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 08:00:00 -
[105] - Quote
Lynn Beck wrote:Isnt this the same logic that brought the heavy down?
"One class that needs focused fire to kill? Thats OP! We can't think! We lack brain-CPU to power that function! ccP pweez give us moar crutches!"
I find every single AVer and AR person to be ******* morons.
A single AVer SHOULD be a threat to a tank. But not an instantaneous WTFpwn to any tanker nearby. Making the swarmlauncher have reduced range that it needs to be closer to fire rockets is one way to look at it.
Another way we could've nerfed the swarm is 500m range, 110 damage a missile, and they're shootable.
Wht do we have then? A constant nuisance to every tank, but not a viable threat.
In it's to be nerfed state, tankers can avoid you guys, and you can be a deterrant singlehandedly. If you wish to instawtfpwn a goddamned tank, think.
Or just Zerg on it until it pops. Whichever one you deem fit enough for your faschist ways. And yes, i called EVERY GODDAMNED AVER A NAZ.I.
Tankers want their fun, as do avers i get that. But when you want it such that 1 aver can kill something with little patience, nor thinking, thats being selfish.
"Wahh CCP make my AR do 30% damage to vehicles, ooh ooh! And throw splash damage and seeker underbarrel ForgeGuns!" Is what you are in a sense asking.
So...
Swarm launchers acting as a deterant is not ok?
k
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1293
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:19:00 -
[106] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Atiim wrote: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? AV should be classified as support, but enough of it should down a tank. There's a reason that in the stats for swarms, they only need a light weapon slot, and forge guns need a heavy weapon slot. Swarms should be lesser damage over time, forge guns for high alpha damage. It's really quite easy if you have an open, rational mind. You just go blind with rage at the sight or mentioning of tanks. That's not healthy.
AV should be what it's title is. ANTI-VEHICLE.
No class in this entire game should be able to force everyone to use teamwork while they themselves are not required to. That is imbalanced and a guaranteed FoTM creator.
I go blind with rage at the sight of anything. If it's red, it's dead. I don't care if it's an HAV, DS, ADS, LDS, LLAV, LAV, SLAV, INT, SDP, CRU, SCT, HVY, LOGI, or ASLT.
If it is red then I will do everything in my power to destroy it. Why would I do otherwise? Mercy?
Heavy Weapons should not ever be 100% better than Light Weapons. Everything needs its strength and weaknesses.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1293
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:27:00 -
[107] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:Atiim wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:
There he is..........................
Well if it isn't the co-chairman of the LOLTank Brigade. well if it isn't the CEO of "i want to destroy H.EAVY A.TTACK V.EHICLEs with LIGHT weapons" hi
I should be able to.
The Light Weapon vs Heavy Weapon slot ideal is idiotic. Every weapon in the game should be equally balanced to match one another. No weapon, class, suit, role, or module in this game should be 100% better in every aspect than it's counterpart. That leads to the most unbalanced weapon this game as of current, the 1.6 Assault Rifle.
The "Oh it requires you to be a heavy and not a medium frame", argument is even more idiotic. There are MLT Heavies as well as MLT Medium and Light Frames. Everyone starts of with Dropsuit Command Level 0.
Because of this, I could easily become a Heavy before becoming anything.
Why should any weapon in this game be 100% better at anything than another? Everything weapon needs its strength and weaknesses. That, or be equally well and capable at everything.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1293
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:33:00 -
[108] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:Atiim wrote: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? if they see a HAV in the open where no teamates are, have proto AV, and skillful and not hiding around a corner spamming AV, then sure, but give good pilots a chance to escape, after all, it is to defend a position/detere?(IDK the spelling)the vehicle
AV by spelling and title is Anti-Vehicle. Meaning it should decimate vehicles. Lets not go there.
I wish my swarms would let me lock and fire behind cover. But I have to keep a direct LOS on the vehicle until my rockets are fired. Even if I could I wouldn't.
Good pilots do have a chance to escape. It's called 2 hardners with F/45s and Nitrous.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
133
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:33:00 -
[109] - Quote
go use a pistol against a heavy, besides heavy's sacrifice speed, and thats like using a stinger against a tank, its not meant for it, its AA.
idk im tired
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
133
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:37:00 -
[110] - Quote
Atiim wrote:jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:Atiim wrote: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? if they see a HAV in the open where no teamates are, have proto AV, and skillful and not hiding around a corner spamming AV, then sure, but give good pilots a chance to escape, after all, it is to defend a position/detere?(IDK the spelling)the vehicle AV by spelling and title is Anti-Vehicle. Meaning it should decimate vehicles. Lets not go there. I wish my swarms would let me lock and fire behind cover. But I have to keep a direct LOS on the vehicle (BS) pilots do not have a chance to escape. It's called 2 hardners with F/45s and Nitrous.
yea, thats using alot of active modules, which in order to survive, you must have on before getting hit
ok my forge gun is Anti-Material, that means it should destroy/go through everything
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
|
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1293
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:38:00 -
[111] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Atiim wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:
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? Because not once, not ever, have you ever said that tanks are hard to pilot and that AV is easy to use. Hence, you're on an anti-vehicle crusade.
Vehicles are not hard to pilot.
The way good AV is used is very difficult. I don't go spamming AV from the redline or a high tower.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1293
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:42:00 -
[112] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:go use a pistol against a heavy, besides heavy's sacrifice speed, and thats like using a stinger against a tank, its not meant for it, its AA.
idk im tired
Done.
I just got a headshot with a TT-3.
+60 WP please
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
133
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:42:00 -
[113] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Atiim wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:
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? Because not once, not ever, have you ever said that tanks are hard to pilot and that AV is easy to use. Hence, you're on an anti-vehicle crusade. Vehicles are not hard to pilot. The way good AV is used is very difficult. I don't go spamming AV from the redline or a high tower.
im so 1337 i can spam diz swarm launcher anywhere in my redline or on a ladder or bunny hope in the open or hide im smal area im so leet i just got a free kill hurp derp.
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
133
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:44:00 -
[114] - Quote
Atiim wrote:jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:go use a pistol against a heavy, besides heavy's sacrifice speed, and thats like using a stinger against a tank, its not meant for it, its AA.
idk im tired Done. I just got a headshot with a TT-3. +60 WP please
headshots don't count, most AV hits normal spots
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1293
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 16:50:00 -
[115] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:Atiim wrote:jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:go use a pistol against a heavy, besides heavy's sacrifice speed, and thats like using a stinger against a tank, its not meant for it, its AA.
idk im tired Done. I just got a headshot with a TT-3. +60 WP please headshots don't count, most AV hits normal spots
Can I go dual pistols?
If I cant then I'll still kill him with a Carthum. I just have to get in my "optimal range" 
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1296
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 17:06:00 -
[116] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:
im so 1337 i can spam diz swarm launcher anywhere in my redline or on a ladder or bunny hope in the open or hide im smal area im so leet i just got a free kill hurp derp.
im so 1337 I can spam turrets with infinite ammo and monitor my hardners and make sure they still runnin. Ya gotta be hardcore to be able to use dem joysticks to move dat tank. And dem scanners yo.
Drivin a tank is for 1337s only.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Pvt Numnutz
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement
Caldari State
291
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 17:48:00 -
[117] - Quote
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?
Dropship pilots don't have the luxury of not using teamwork. The entire craft is built around teamwork. When I first looked at swarm launchers I thought the name meant you needed a few swarms to effectively swarm the target. I was surprised when 1 swarm launcher guy could destroy my dropship with ease. So yes vehicles and av should require teamwork to destroy each other. That would make fights very interesting. |
Sylwester Dziewiecki
203
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:09:00 -
[118] - Quote
Atiim wrote:
Still doesn't change the fact that LDSs and Dropships w/ Mobile CRUs can sit above our lock range and be untouched by SL users.
when I'm in blaster HAV at the middle of map, and I encounter railgun HAV at the edge of red line - i'm simple recalling it and calling in railgun HAV to kill him. Just because you doesn't have range at something it doesen't mean that you have to stop thinking how to kill it, just use another weapon/tactics or ask your team for help.
Atiim wrote:
You do realize that HAVs require no teamwork right? So why should AV require teamwork?
You are the biggest troll I ever seen for a while  . I even wanted to answer to this but after reading your next posts I came to the conclusion that you are indestructible in your way of thinking .
I'm here since may 2012, my EVE alter ego is Nosum Hseebnrido.
|
Sylwester Dziewiecki
203
|
Posted - 2013.11.23 18:55:00 -
[119] - Quote
Nova Knife wrote:Rather than take part in the debate, I'm just going to drop this :
Swarm launchers should behave like an assisted-lock TOW missile.
The lock-on box should appear on screen. You lock on. You fire. The box stays on the screen. You have to keep the locked target in the box until the missiles hit. If they leave the box or LOS, you have two seconds to re-acquire or the missiles lose tracking and detonate. You can re-fire from the same lock within the normal re-fire delay (With the normal lock delay added to it, to keep the fire rate the same as before) but you cannot reload while a lock is being maintained.
Range should be 250-350m for lock, flight distance max 500m (To prevent fleeting/skirting immunity)
I like the idea, I would add to that small things:
- Looking box is NOT statically set to the middle of the vehicle:
Player may choose with part of vehicle he want to lock on(one of DS engine, cockpit, or maybe interiors).
- Size of box determines the strength of detonation:
If player like challenges he may recalibrate his weapon, between 3-4 box-size-variants, so it is extremely harder for him to hit the target with the smallest box, but it gives biggest reward/damage.
- Size of box determines area of effect:
If player know that he is not able to kill vehicle with his set of 'skills' he may chose to try kill passengers with missile area of effect damage.
- If shooter die, missile is destroyed instantly.
(I like to see this weapon be anti-infantry but it would be to much )
I'm here since may 2012, my EVE alter ego is Nosum Hseebnrido.
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
135
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 06:15:00 -
[120] - Quote
Atiim wrote:jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:
im so 1337 i can spam diz swarm launcher anywhere in my redline or on a ladder or bunny hope in the open or hide im smal area im so leet i just got a free kill hurp derp.
im so 1337 I can spam turrets with infinite ammo and monitor my hardners and make sure they still runnin. Ya gotta be hardcore to be able to use dem joysticks to move dat tank. And dem scanners yo. Drivin a tank is for 1337s only.
tanks have finite ammo now AR/ScR noob
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |