| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
3838
   |
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
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.png
So basically - Just change vertical range to be unlimited, and done.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
|
Judge Rhadamanthus
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
749
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
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 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.
Everything Dropship youtube channel
my Community Spotlight
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
1016
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
I get what you're saying, but I don't really see how it makes sense that locking stuff above you has a longer range than locking stuff horizontally from you. I think there must be a more eloquent solution.
ADS Reports - Defining Racial Themes
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
3838
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:I get what you're saying, but I don't really see how it makes sense that locking stuff above you has a longer range than locking stuff horizontally from you. I think there must be a more eloquent solution.
If there is I don't see it.
It's not that big of a deal, say that swarms' tracking computer creates a tube around the user with limited range in which it can lock on to any target regardless of position inside the tube.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
3838
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:22:00 -
[5] - 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
Same **** for our purposes :P
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
1016
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
I mean swarms are pretty mindless, this could be CCP making a push for people to use more skill-oriented AV weapons and being less reliant on the noob-proof ones?
ADS Reports - Defining Racial Themes
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
1016
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote: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 Same **** for our purposes :P
And actually thats not very true at all. With the decreased delay between subsequent locks, one could lock onto a vehicle that gets too close and have multiple salvos in the air, and while the vehicle may move out of lock range in that time period the missiles very well might continue tracking for longer than 175m. You see this principle on some EVE ships where the missiles technically have a range of 160km but the ship itself can only lock onto targets around 90km away.
ADS Reports - Defining Racial Themes
|
Virtual Riot
The Vanguardians
75
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Umm... Dropships can already sit at the flight ceiling and be totally safe from all av
Don't fight me on this I'm a pretty dam good ADS pilot if I do say so myself, been doing it before it was cool |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
The Umbra Combine
2096
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:41:00 -
[9] - Quote
Virtual Riot wrote:Umm... Dropships can already sit at the flight ceiling and be totally safe from all av
Don't fight me on this I'm a pretty dam good ADS pilot if I do say so myself, been doing it before it was cool
Except we make ourselves absolutely useless up there. We need to come down, within 175m of the ground in fact, to be of use.
To be honest, this lock on restriction is a boon for noob ( )swarm users. Experienced users will know to let the vehicle get as close as possible so as not to lose the element of surprise and get whole clips in the air before the vehicle can back away. This encourages that sort of play.
Furthermore, what with vehicle reliance on supply depots, squads of swarms can camp enemy depots knowing vehicles will need to resupplying ammo there eventually, and gangbang them.
Sorry feline overlord but I'm inclined to disagree on this one.
"When nothing is going your way, go out of your way to do nothing."
|
ACE OF JOKERS
AMARR IMPERIAL CRUSADERS
165
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:49:00 -
[10] - Quote
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...
>..> |
|
|
A'Real Fury
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
433
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:50:00 -
[11] - Quote
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. |
Judge Rhadamanthus
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
751
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:
Same **** for our purposes :P
No. That makes no sense and you cannot just make your own reality. Saying 175 meter lock is the same as 400 meters range is wrong not the same, not whatever. It's just plain wrong. Why can you not just say. I was wrong? does misrepresenting the facts help your agenda more than the truth?
Everything Dropship youtube channel
my Community Spotlight
|
Judge Rhadamanthus
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
751
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 23:53:00 -
[13] - Quote
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?
Everything Dropship youtube channel
my Community Spotlight
|
Vulpes Dolosus
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
314
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 00:29:00 -
[14] - Quote
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 tanksGǪ EASILY?
Fixed that for you Judge.
I'm of the opinion that a single AV player should not be able to efficiently take out a well fitted tank/dropship alone. It's possible, but with bad piloting on the pilot's side. AV should be a team sport (2-4ish) to kill a well fitted, well piloted vehicles, and even then vehicles should have some chance to escape. Other than that, vehicles should just be threatened, but not killed.
Dropship Specialist: AKA Clinically Insane
Kills- Incubus: 2; Pythons: 0; Logistics: 0; Militia: 10
|
True Adamance
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
4211
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 00:34:00 -
[15] - 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...
>..>
Don't kid yourself if I come back the game I'll still be running from between 5-7K AV damage sources ever 6 seconds.
"All things were created by the Divine, and so the glory of our faith is inherent to us all"
|
Iskandar Zul Karnain
Hellstorm Inc
League of Infamy
2433
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:10:00 -
[16] - Quote
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.
HellsGÇáorm, Director
Bringing the Wrath of God down on the Matari since YC114
|
True Adamance
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
4212
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:17:00 -
[17] - Quote
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.
"All things were created by the Divine, and so the glory of our faith is inherent to us all"
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1246
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:20:00 -
[18] - 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 That doesn't matter. I can't fire at you unless I can lock on to you.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.
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.
Also, would it be inappropriate to say that I thoroughly enjoy your videos?
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1246
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:25:00 -
[19] - Quote
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%.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1246
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:27:00 -
[20] - Quote
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?
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
|
|
True Adamance
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
4213
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:27:00 -
[21] - 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%.
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.
"All things were created by the Divine, and so the glory of our faith is inherent to us all"
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1247
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:30:00 -
[22] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:I mean swarms are pretty mindless, this could be CCP making a push for people to use more skill-oriented AV weapons and being less reliant on the noob-proof ones?
Plasma Cannons are the only AV weapon that requires skill beyond rotating your joystick. Should we all be forced to use the same weapon?
Plasma Cannons are the only weapon within itself that requires skill beyond the rotation of your joystick. Not just AV but as a weapon in general.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
DeadlyAztec11
Gallente Federation
2181
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:31:00 -
[23] - Quote
All I know iI that I am speccing out of swarms the second I can.
Add another weapon to the useless pile.
A pile that includes:
-Breach AR
-Burst AR
-Breach Flaylock
-Assault Swarm Launcher
-Small Rail Turret
-AV mines
Madness is the emergency exit. You can just step outside, and close the door on all those dreadful things that happened.
|
DeadlyAztec11
Gallente Federation
2181
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:34:00 -
[24] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I mean swarms are pretty mindless, this could be CCP making a push for people to use more skill-oriented AV weapons and being less reliant on the noob-proof ones? Plasma Cannons are the only AV weapon that requires skill beyond rotating your joystick. Should we all be forced to use the same weapon? Plasma Cannons are the only weapon within itself that requires skill beyond the rotation of your joystick. Not just AV but as a weapon in general.
The Proto Allotek Plasma Cannnon is pretty good AV, as long as you use Complex Damage Mods and get the Damage Proficiency.
Saw a guy the other day one shotting Proto Gallante Logis with just splash 
Madness is the emergency exit. You can just step outside, and close the door on all those dreadful things that happened.
|
Eris Ernaga
State Patriots
732
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:37:00 -
[25] - 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.
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.
State Patriots a loyal Caldari based corporation is accepting all Caldari and Amarr to help fight on the front.
|
EternalRMG
KNIGHTZ OF THE ROUND
619
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:40:00 -
[26] - Quote
DeadlyAztec11 wrote:All I know iI that I am speccing out of swarms the second I can.
Add another weapon to the useless pile.
A pile that includes:
-Breach AR
-Burst AR
-Breach Flaylock
-Assault Swarm Launcher
-Small Rail Turret
-AV mines
Ehem
Burst AR IS AWESMOEEEEE
"Fight Togheter; Win Together"
Duster Since: July 2012
Best DropShip Pilot; Soon To be best Jet Fighter Pilot
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1248
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:40:00 -
[27] - Quote
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.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
EternalRMG
KNIGHTZ OF THE ROUND
619
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:41:00 -
[28] - 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.
Ill get a Railgun Incubus if CCP gives me a full respec (I BEG YOU CCP; I DONT WANT TO BE FORCE TO GO LOGI)
and ill just collect tears from all the vehicles in the field, who stand unchallenged
I can get them when they are on cooldown while others might not
"Fight Togheter; Win Together"
Duster Since: July 2012
Best DropShip Pilot; Soon To be best Jet Fighter Pilot
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1248
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:42:00 -
[29] - Quote
EternalRMG wrote:DeadlyAztec11 wrote:All I know iI that I am speccing out of swarms the second I can.
Add another weapon to the useless pile.
A pile that includes:
-Breach AR
-Burst AR
-Breach Flaylock
-Assault Swarm Launcher
-Small Rail Turret
-AV mines
Ehem Burst AR IS AWESMOEEEEE
It is, but it won't be when you are out ranged and out DPS'd by every other rifle in the game.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
True Adamance
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
4213
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:43:00 -
[30] - 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.
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.
"All things were created by the Divine, and so the glory of our faith is inherent to us all"
|
|
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1248
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:43:00 -
[31] - Quote
DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Atiim wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I mean swarms are pretty mindless, this could be CCP making a push for people to use more skill-oriented AV weapons and being less reliant on the noob-proof ones? Plasma Cannons are the only AV weapon that requires skill beyond rotating your joystick. Should we all be forced to use the same weapon? Plasma Cannons are the only weapon within itself that requires skill beyond the rotation of your joystick. Not just AV but as a weapon in general. The Proto Allotek Plasma Cannnon is pretty good AV, as long as you use Complex Damage Mods and get the Damage Proficiency. Saw a guy the other day one shotting Proto Gallante Logis with just splash
Any weapon is good when you have the PRO variant, Proficiency Level 3, and stacked complex damage mods.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1248
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 01:55:00 -
[32] - Quote
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?
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
True Adamance
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
4213
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 02:08:00 -
[33] - 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?
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.
"All things were created by the Divine, and so the glory of our faith is inherent to us all"
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
1018
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 02:12:00 -
[34] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I mean swarms are pretty mindless, this could be CCP making a push for people to use more skill-oriented AV weapons and being less reliant on the noob-proof ones? Plasma Cannons are the only AV weapon that requires skill beyond rotating your joystick. Should we all be forced to use the same weapon? Plasma Cannons are the only weapon within itself that requires skill beyond the rotation of your joystick. Not just AV but as a weapon in general.
Sad part is the Forge Gun requires more thought than the Swarm Launcher.
ADS Reports - Defining Racial Themes
|
Zero Harpuia
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
1218
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 02:37:00 -
[35] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:I mean swarms are pretty mindless, this could be CCP making a push for people to use more skill-oriented AV weapons and being less reliant on the noob-proof ones?
Unless they're adding something, there's the Forge Gun, the Forge Gun, or the Forge Gun. The AV nades and Plasma Cannon are both very short ranged due to their parabolic flight paths and projectile speeds as well as being shorter ranged than the Swarm Launcher. I'm just worried this will lead to more unfounded Anti-Forge smear campaigns because it'll be the only AV weapon to use beyond 100 meters.
Shields as Weapons
|
Rusty Shallows
526
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 02:54:00 -
[36] - 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.
snip
Wasn't the range nerf done for Dropships?
I'm almost willing to bet the kittens will get a velocity ninja buff. Vehicles out racing missiles has been an old issue. Now that SLs can't troll-la-la-la Dropships from seemingly everywhere the range defense for keeping them slow is gone. Unfortunately if they do get a speed boost life will get much more interesting in my LAV.
Semi-aside I'm glad dropships have the improved height. They need that added protection from rail weaponry. My only concern is if they end up become high altitude small rail sniping platforms or missile spammers. That could get bad or it could end up being hilariously useless, no clue here.
"She may not be Miss Right but she'll do right now." SR-71
310k+ SP for +0.05m/s (>2in) on a Heavy. Totally worth it.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
3860
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 11:31:00 -
[37] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:I mean swarms are pretty mindless, this could be CCP making a push for people to use more skill-oriented AV weapons and being less reliant on the noob-proof ones?
Then give me a light AV weapon that doesn't suck ass.
PLC is like the worst AV weapon in the game, even after the swarms nerf.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
3860
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 11:32:00 -
[38] - Quote
Vyzion Eyri wrote:Virtual Riot wrote:Umm... Dropships can already sit at the flight ceiling and be totally safe from all av
Don't fight me on this I'm a pretty dam good ADS pilot if I do say so myself, been doing it before it was cool Except we make ourselves absolutely useless up there. We need to come down, within 175m of the ground in fact, to be of use. To be honest, this lock on restriction is a boon for noob ( )swarm users. Experienced users will know to let the vehicle get as close as possible so as not to lose the element of surprise and get whole clips in the air before the vehicle can back away. This encourages that sort of play. Furthermore, what with vehicle reliance on supply depots, squads of swarms can camp enemy depots knowing vehicles will need to resupplying ammo there eventually, and gangbang them. Sorry feline overlord but I'm inclined to disagree on this one.
That's fine, you gave good reasoning and showed why not.
That's half the reason I make these threads 
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
|
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service
RISE of LEGION
255
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:01:00 -
[39] - Quote
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.
|
Pvt Numnutz
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement
Caldari State
280
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:10:00 -
[40] - Quote
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 |
|
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
3862
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:13:00 -
[41] - 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
1. Thanks
2. 250m, when compared to the swarms 175m range.
3. Well, uplinks yay. But now they can get closer allowing for better drop accuracy.
4. Thanks
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
123
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:34:00 -
[42] - Quote
Atim 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.
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
Racro 01 Arifistan
501st Knights of Leanbox
78
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:44:00 -
[43] - Quote
compains about av nerf.........................
dosnt know how long tanks have been nerfed for.... |
Judge Rhadamanthus
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
758
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:45:00 -
[44] - Quote
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?
Everything Dropship youtube channel
my Community Spotlight
|
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service
RISE of LEGION
257
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:49:00 -
[45] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:Atim 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.
The point is a Proto infantry can easily be killed by anyone using militia gear, you don't need teamwork you don't need to be smart for doing this. So when a Proto goes 30-0 its usually because he simply better or uses lots of teamwork in a squad not because he is nearly invincible to most weapons. |
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
EoN.
1747
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:50:00 -
[46] - 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 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.
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
The dyst0pian Corporation
Zero-Day
123
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 12:56:00 -
[47] - Quote
Korvin Lomont wrote:The point is a Proto infantry can easily be killed by anyone using militia gear, you don't need teamwork you don't need to be smart for doing this. So when a Proto goes 30-0 its usually because he simply better or uses lots of teamwork in a squad not because he is nearly invincible to most weapons.
yet when vehicles try to be effective, they die, besides the good-ones are unkillable, yet good vehicles die quick, btw, it takes teamwork to kill a heavy A.K0 for some reason, but thats just my GEK, but my point is infantry can go atleast 20-0 but vehicles cant do crap, besides if infantry die they can easily get thier suits back, in 1 game too, proto even...
recuruit link
5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
|
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service
RISE of LEGION
257
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 13:06:00 -
[48] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote:Korvin Lomont wrote:The point is a Proto infantry can easily be killed by anyone using militia gear, you don't need teamwork you don't need to be smart for doing this. So when a Proto goes 30-0 its usually because he simply better or uses lots of teamwork in a squad not because he is nearly invincible to most weapons. yet when vehicles try to be effective, they die, besides the good-ones are unkillable, yet good vehicles die quick, btw, it takes teamwork to kill a heavy A.K0 for some reason, but thats just my GEK, but my point is infantry can go atleast 20-0 but vehicles cant do crap, besides if infantry die they can easily get thier suits back, in 1 game too, proto even...
The cost IS a factor I admit but this counts for Protosuits as well right now the ISK payouts are to low to run expensive gear like Protosuits or good vehicles there I agree.
I do not agree on the heavy part heavies are not really hard to kill thanks to the low TTK they are annoying sometimes but thats it.
IMHO Vehicles suffer somewhat from the same problem like scouts they simply have no role on the battlefield but making them OP won't help as CCP sonner or later will nerf them again. So this leads just to another useless balancing cycle with lots of whining on both sides.
BTW even Vehicles can go 30-0 I have seen lost of tankers doing so. And most Tanks drop fast is when they face multiple AV. I have never really seen how a fully healthy well fitted tank gets truly soloed.
Yes a militia tank is easy pray but to bring down a Madrugar you already better use teamwork to be sure it goes down. The thing is lots of AV veterans remenber the Chromosone Tanks well and consider tanks still as priority targets so they get some focus (from multiple sources) once they are on the field.
Those tanks that run with infantry to cover them usually do well also those backed up by a LLAV... |
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
3862
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 13:14:00 -
[49] - Quote
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.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1255
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 13:20:00 -
[50] - Quote
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.)
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
|
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1255
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 13:27:00 -
[51] - Quote
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 
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
DeadlyAztec11
Gallente Federation
2189
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 13:53:00 -
[52] - Quote
Atiim wrote:DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Atiim wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I mean swarms are pretty mindless, this could be CCP making a push for people to use more skill-oriented AV weapons and being less reliant on the noob-proof ones? Plasma Cannons are the only AV weapon that requires skill beyond rotating your joystick. Should we all be forced to use the same weapon? Plasma Cannons are the only weapon within itself that requires skill beyond the rotation of your joystick. Not just AV but as a weapon in general. The Proto Allotek Plasma Cannnon is pretty good AV, as long as you use Complex Damage Mods and get the Damage Proficiency. Saw a guy the other day one shotting Proto Gallante Logis with just splash Any weapon is good when you have the PRO variant, Proficiency Level 3, and stacked complex damage mods.
Can't argue with that.
Madness is the emergency exit. You can just step outside, and close the door on all those dreadful things that happened.
|
KenKaniff69
Fatal Absolution
924
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 15:34:00 -
[53] - 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.
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.
So about those vehicle locks...
|
KenKaniff69
Fatal Absolution
924
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 15:37:00 -
[54] - 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 and missile termination range are different. If you lock on to me at 175 m and I go an additional 224 m, guess what happens? Your swarms, which are fire and forget, still hit me.
So about those vehicle locks...
|
Judge Rhadamanthus
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
763
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 16:15:00 -
[55] - Quote
Atiim wrote:...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.
Cat, Atiim you must use the correct words in a discussion. If you dont you cannot have a valid discussion. let me explain why range and lock on are important distinctions that are NOT effectively the same.
A drop ship hovers at 200m. No lock on. No missile range. No shot. It moves to 160 meters. It is now in lock on range. A swarm launcher fires a shot that hits the dropship, who then decides to move. the swarm meantime has another volly in the air before the first even hit, as is easily possible today, and the dropship is at 200m before the 2nd volley reaches it. That volly will chase and hit the dropship in most cases.
As you can see lock on and range are different and the difference greatly effects tactics. If a swarmer shoots at a dropship as soon as it enders LO range, it will move out of LO range before volley two can be fired. A smart swarmer will wait. This adds tactics to the easiest weapon in the game.
What you are complaining about is this :
"if I shoot at a target at the limit of my ability to hit it, I cant hit it it it runs away" This applies to all weapons. Shoot a guy at the limits of your ARs range and your ability to kill him is reduced. There is less damage, time for him to hide or just run from you. Scouts play now like swarms will in 1.7. Get into a good spot to shoot first before you act.
Swarmers are just to used to shooting anything they see and never having to think. just spam spam spam. It is the weakest playstyle with the lowest skill level. Watch this. that is what swarms are like. Replace stinger with swarm and this may as well be about dust.
So you are right. You cannot kill something when you shoot at the wrong time and it runs ways. Why are you even making this point?
Everything Dropship youtube channel
my Community Spotlight
|
Pvt Numnutz
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement
Caldari State
281
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 16:40:00 -
[56] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Atiim wrote:...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. Cat, Atiim you must use the correct words in a discussion. If you dont you cannot have a valid discussion. let me explain why range and lock on are important distinctions that are NOT effectively the same. A drop ship hovers at 200m. No lock on. No missile range. No shot. It moves to 160 meters. It is now in lock on range. A swarm launcher fires a shot that hits the dropship, who then decides to move. the swarm meantime has another volly in the air before the first even hit, as is easily possible today, and the dropship is at 200m before the 2nd volley reaches it. That volly will chase and hit the dropship in most cases. As you can see lock on and range are different and the difference greatly effects tactics. If a swarmer shoots at a dropship as soon as it enders LO range, it will move out of LO range before volley two can be fired. A smart swarmer will wait. This adds tactics to the easiest weapon in the game. What you are complaining about is this : "I can't hit something that is too far away for my weapon" This applies to all weapons. Shoot a guy at the limits of your ARs range and your ability to kill him is reduced. There is less damage, time for him to hide or just run from you. Scouts play now like swarms will in 1.7. Get into a good spot to shoot first before you act. Swarmers are just to used to shooting anything they see and never having to think. just spam spam spam. It is the weakest playstyle with the lowest skill level. Watch this. that is what swarms are like. Replace stinger with swarm and this may as well be about dust. So you are right. You cannot kill something when you shoot at the wrong time and it runs away. Why are you even making this point?
Well said judge, now sawrms aren't just spam, they will have to think for once in this game. Question is, will they be able to get some skill and use the weapon smart? Or will we be seeing more of these posts?
|
Iskandar Zul Karnain
Hellstorm Inc
League of Infamy
2436
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 16:42:00 -
[57] - 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.
I get what you're saying but that's assuming that one team tries to counter tanks with only AV, and more particularly only swarms, a tactic which would be completely stupid.
Swarms are such a nub friendly, fool-proof weapon that if they were competitive in a 1v1 AV role there would never be any need for diversity or more AV weapons. Swarms should stop being looked at as an end-game AV weapon and instead as a vehicle deterrent that has the potential to become devastating as their number increases. As it stands right now, with a couple proto nanohives, complex damage mods and proto swarms I can camp a tower and lock down most of the map. This is obviously broken, not to mention boring.
One swarm is a deterrent. Multiple swarms are a threat.
One forge gun is a threat. Multiple forge guns are a death sentence.
The best AV against tanks is another tank!
If you just scale up your weak AV against hoards of vehicles you aren't doing AV right.
HellsGÇáorm, Director
Bringing the Wrath of God down on the Matari since YC114
|
Xender17
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
933
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 16:59:00 -
[58] - Quote
Atiim wrote: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 That doesn't matter. I can't fire at you unless I can lock on to you.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. 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. Also, would it be inappropriate to say that I thoroughly enjoy your videos?
That still doesn't change the fact that they will get last place if that's all they do.
What the fox say?
|
Justice Prevails
103
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 17:04:00 -
[59] - Quote
Judge, I am a scrub SL user, but that video made me ROFL. Thank you.
Range never bothered me because I want to be close enough where I can do max damage before the vehicle runs. I like to have a direct LOS also so my babies don't hit a building or a hill.
Can't comment on the teamwork aspect because I'm usually a lone wolf. But I don't sit on some hill just spamming swarms.
There is risk because most of the time you have to be in the tanks visual to get a lock. When you do fire, you also let the enemy infantry know where you are and that you don't have a primary weapon.
I would actually prefer to aim and dumbfire(av only). The missiles would probably hit the target faster.
Great job, team. Head back to the MCC for debriefing and cocktails.
|
chase rowland
The Enclave Syndicate
Dark Taboo
77
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 17:09:00 -
[60] - 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.
really dude? they not OP enough for you? want to take out the MCC do you? |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Lynn Beck
Granite Mercenary Division
Top Men.
261
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 07:28:00 -
[121] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote: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
Theres a difference between 'threat' and 'HOLY ****! Get the ducknipples outta the...!'(explosion)
A swarm should take 2 clips average to kill a tank. Not 2 volleys.
Does the laser rifle kill within 12 shots of it's 100 clip? Does a SMG kill in under 10? Nor should swarms kill in .4 seconds.
3 swarmers should have the same danger level as 1 wyrkom of today.
That being, the point where 2 combined 'volleys' will kill a tank instantly.
So yes. I want swarms nerfed. And iMHO, it should be by about 40% damage potential.
But you guys would rage, wouldnt you? And you'd probably quit eh?
Good. Lets tankers have a breath of fresh air not having to run every time MLT hits them.
-Newly proclaimed Lazor riffle specialist-
"You said yourself fantastically 'congratulations you are all alone.'"
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1321
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 08:25:00 -
[122] - Quote
jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: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
Oh yes, because I don't want god mode tanks apparently the only thing I run are ARs and SCRs.
And SLs will no longer be able to be spammed from the redline turret n00b
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1321
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 08:35:00 -
[123] - Quote
Lynn Beck wrote:
Theres a difference between 'threat' and 'HOLY ****! Get the ducknipples outta the...!'(explosion)
A swarm should take 2 clips average to kill a tank. Not 2 volleys.
Does the laser rifle kill within 12 shots of it's 100 clip? Does a SMG kill in under 10? Nor should swarms kill in .4 seconds.
3 swarmers should have the same danger level as 1 wyrkom of today.
That being, the point where 2 combined 'volleys' will kill a tank instantly.
So yes. I want swarms nerfed. And iMHO, it should be by about 40% damage potential.
But you guys would rage, wouldnt you? And you'd probably quit eh?
Good. Lets tankers have a breath of fresh air not having to run every time MLT hits them.
Ah yet another crusader. Where does Void, Char, and Spkr find these idiots?
In it's optimal range and some damage mods, a LR has a TTK of about .5-1 second. Ishukone Assault SMG doesn't kill people in 10 rounds but is insanely powerful and has a TTK of 1-3 seconds in it's optimal range.
I have never had to run from MLT AV. Your clearly doing it wrong.
Stop exaggerating. 2 volleys of swarms will only take out a MLT Tank. (unless it magically hits the weakspot)
I say we give everyone a BPO Officer SL or something equally idiotic.
But you guys would rage, wouldn't you? And you'd probably quit eh?
Good. Lets infantry have a breath of fresh air and not run to a supply depot everytime an HAV hits them.
If one class is forced to use teamwork, then it's rival/counter should also be forced to use teamwork. Get this through your thick, 180mm skull.
Check out my corp's new website here :D
-HAND
|
Blaze Ashra
Ametat Security
Amarr Empire
31
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 11:44:00 -
[124] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Or was I right when I said Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me... Such is the motto of pilots?
The basic goal for us pilots is we want to be able to play as often as infantry. We want our investments to be seen as an asset rather than a liability. That's pretty much what it comes down to.
For tankers swarms are ridiculously overpowered, for fitted dropship pilots it's pretty balanced at the moment.
For dropships forge guns are ridiculously over powered, for tankers its pretty balanced as long as its not rooftop camping.
Large rail turrets are slightly under forges.
Plasma cannons are slightly underwhelming when it comes down to enough punch for vehicles beyond LAVs, but they should definitely do more than swarms. |
Blaze Ashra
Ametat Security
Amarr Empire
31
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 13:26:00 -
[125] - Quote
@atim
You should look at these
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZOTAdpFZpc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPSPIsdAtVs |
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
EoN.
1772
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 13:40:00 -
[126] - 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)
350m lock lolno
Its already at 400m and that is more than enough to cut 90% of the map of to all vehicles
Also 350m is out of the blaster/missile turret ranges
175m is fine
Also if this TOW missile was optional not many would use it since you cant lock on fire and forget, its anti scrub
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |