DUST Search - HAV & AV Chat Channels

Atiim wrote:

CharCharOdell wrote:

I don't hate you. I just don't want AV to do as much damage as it does now...well, swarms and yolonades, anyway. I miss the 4 v 4 tank battles of old and AV prevents that. I got into tanks to avoid the ARs and smash Madrugars, but now the madrugars are a rarity and i have nothing to do but bumble around in my scout shotgun nerd suit.

Please don't nerf my tanks. I love killing tanks more than anyone. I'm on your side in battle.

Back when I gave a **** about PC, big corps would hire me just to kill other tanks. So yeah, I don't want to shoot infantry, but there are no tanks left to kill. Honestly. You guys die to damn fast for me to enjoy.

I have no true side in the battle. All I've ever wanted was things to be perfectly balanced between the classes.

It's just that most of the ways people have come up with a way to "balance" this issue sounds good on paper, but the execution and effects would create the biggest FoTM this game has ever seen. Taking a spot right next to Flaylock Pistols and Contact Grenades.

I won't say that HAVs don't need a buff. I also won't say that I wouldn't like tanks to become stronger.

I love the good thrill of a tank fight, where one false move or mistake can lead to an instant defeat. I think these moments can be the most tense and thrilling ones DUST 514 has to offer.

Think about this though. When CCP was designing the Logistics class, they designed it to be a versatile support class. What they didn't design is a class better at Assault than Assaults, and with a built in complex armor repairer at that. We have a playerbase with the "Must stomp at all costs" mentality. Because of this playerbase mentality, we have people running Gallogi fits with 800-1k Armor and the ability to be repped at 840HP/s. That is disgustingly sick. And do you think CCP designed things to happen like this? No they didn't; but if it can happen, it will happen.

I understand that most tankers are only looking to fight another tank, but whats to stop people from deciding they want a quick stat pat and destroying scores of infantry with no resistance whatsoever. That is also why I don't agree with HAVs being the best counter to HAVs.

I would be fine with HAVs being the best counter to HAVs if HAVs weren't so effective at killing infantry at the same time. That would create a FoTM where the team to call in the most tanks wins the match. That FoTM is the nightmare that I like to call "Tank 514". This is also why I support the ideas of True Adamance on the modification of the Large Blaster Turret.

I love tanks, and vehicles in general. What I don't like is them becoming the Staples easy button where pressing the button 7 times will guarantee a win. I also don't like the idea of seeing nothing but tanks and everyone crouching down waiting for someone to recall a tank so they can bring in theirs. I just simply don't want to play Tank 514. Is that to much to ask?

AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Alpha 443-6732 224	Posted - 2013.11.26 02:32:00 - [1] - Quote Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: You already know Tankers R US don't you? Just like how a journalist can't interview only one source, I can't claim to compile everyone's opinion when I've only visited one chat channel. Also, I kinda +150'd that channel if you catch my drift.... "Honey Badger" is another tanker hideout, but you'd need an invitation from Charlotte O'Dell. AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
Alpha 443-6732 224	Posted - 2013.11.26 02:34:00 - [2] - Quote Atiim wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: You already know Tankers R US don't you? Just like how a journalist can't interview only one source, I can't claim to compile everyone's opinion when I've only visited one chat channel. Also, I kinda +150'd that channel if you catch my drift.... Honey badger is another tanker hideout, but you'd need an invitation from Charlotte O'Dell. Where would I contact him (or her)? I recommend you make an alt (he probably hates your guts) and PM him in game. AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
Alpha 443-6732 224	Posted - 2013.11.26 02:53:00 - [3] - Quote Just gonna leave this here... "What we are saying is that infantry AV (forges, swarms, AV mines) should be the soft counter to vehicles, while vehicle AV is the hard counter (jets when they come, railguns, missiles). That's not saying vehicle AV should always be the better option, but from an offensive capability point of view, a vehicle mounted railgun should be more potent than a handheld one and a vehicle mounted missile launcher should be more effective than a handheld one. But that's not saying infantry AV should be bad, but since it is inexpensive and relatively easier to use, it should require a bit of teamwork to eliminate a tank. 3 proto AV working together should deny an entire area of tanks, but no more than three are needed because the same 3 proto AV can retarget another tank after the first is destroyed. In my opinion, infantry AV and standard infantry should be melded together, I feel the comparisons would be much fairer for the vehicle side. Everyone points out that if vehicles are made viable again, everyone will abandon infantry AV and hop into tanks, when that isn't the case. Tanks are big and clumsy to use, large targets and have many weapons that seek/track them. Infantrymen are more flexible in the sense that they can crawl around in places tanks cannot reach, use cover, play mind games with vehicles while out of sight, etc. It's like the age old argument of people running into heavies and complaining that they were able to kill them easily. People think that the only AV is infantry AV and that they are a class of their own, but it's a lot deeper than that. People need to consider that anti- anything doesn't automatically mean "utterly dominate to the point of uselessness," but merely means that it combats the object. So basically: 1 tank = 1 tank, but that doesn't mean tanks are the best. 1 tank = 3 infantry, but that definitely doesn't mean infantrymen are useless. Here is a situation where infantry AV should be a better solution than vehicular AV: 2 blaster tanks are being guarded from your team's tanks by 2 proto AV infantry. Your team has the potential to field an equal 2 blaster tanks and 2 proto AV infantry, but after considering the map dynamics (potential ambush spots only AV infantry can utilize) you decide to field 1 blaster tank and 3 AV infantry, with the AV infantry cleverly hidden out of sight, ready to strike. The blaster tank runs into the fray and baits the 2 armor tanks, 1 by 1, to come into your trap. Both enemy tanks follow, and with the help of the infantry AV hitting the enemy armor from seemingly unknown directions, you succeed in taking out both tanks. To be fair, your friendly tank was lost in the fight. After you are finished with the enemy armor, you easily finish off the enemy AV infantry, only losing 1 tank due to smart teamwork, while the enemy lost 2 tanks and 2 AV infantry. Also, I just wanna say I mean no harm with this post, just trying to be productive to the balance discussion." AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
Alpha 443-6732 224	Posted - 2013.11.26 02:58:00 - [4] - Quote Atiim wrote: Thanks Alpha. I will use this when making my balance thread. But I don't dare try to quote that large sum of text and paragraphs. It's there for you to take excerpts from. Hopefully it'll be of some use. AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
Alpha 443-6732 226	Posted - 2013.11.28 03:43:00 - [5] - Quote Atiim wrote: CharCharOdell wrote: I don't hate you. I just don't want AV to do as much damage as it does now...well, swarms and yolonades, anyway. I miss the 4 v 4 tank battles of old and AV prevents that. I got into tanks to avoid the ARs and smash Madrugars, but now the madrugars are a rarity and i have nothing to do but bumble around in my scout shotgun nerd suit. Please don't nerf my tanks. I love killing tanks more than anyone. I'm on your side in battle. Back when I gave a **** about PC, big corps would hire me just to kill other tanks. So yeah, I don't want to shoot infantry, but there are no tanks left to kill. Honestly. You guys die to damn fast for me to enjoy. I have no true side in the battle. All I've ever wanted was things to be perfectly balanced between the classes. It's just that most of the ways people have come up with a way to "balance" this issue sounds good on paper, but the execution and effects would create the biggest FoTM this game has ever seen. Taking a spot right next to Flaylock Pistols and Contact Grenades. I won't say that HAVs don't need a buff. I also won't say that I wouldn't like tanks to become stronger. I love the good thrill of a tank fight, where one false move or mistake can lead to an instant defeat. I think these moments can be the most tense and thrilling ones DUST 514 has to offer. Think about this though. When CCP was designing the Logistics class, they designed it to be a versatile support class. What they didn't design is a class better at Assault than Assaults, and with a built in complex armor repairer at that. We have a playerbase with the "Must stomp at all costs" mentality. Because of this playerbase mentality, we have people running Gallogi fits with 800-1k Armor and the ability to be repped at 840HP/s. That is disgustingly sick. And do you think CCP designed things to happen like this? No they didn't; but if it can happen, it will happen. I understand that most tankers are only looking to fight another tank, but whats to stop people from deciding they want a quick stat pat and destroying scores of infantry with no resistance whatsoever. That is also why I don't agree with HAVs being the best counter to HAVs. I would be fine with HAVs being the best counter to HAVs if HAVs weren't so effective at killing infantry at the same time. That would create a FoTM where the team to call in the most tanks wins the match. That FoTM is the nightmare that I like to call "Tank 514". This is also why I support the ideas of True Adamance on the modification of the Large Blaster Turret. I love tanks, and vehicles in general. What I don't like is them becoming the Staples easy button where pressing the button 7 times will guarantee a win. I also don't like the idea of seeing nothing but tanks and everyone crouching down waiting for someone to recall a tank so they can bring in theirs. I just simply don't want to play Tank 514. Is that to much to ask? Don't worry Atiim, HAVs' weaknesses will become more apparent when E-War comes out. What I want to see for infantry to fight tanks a little more easily (but not solo them): AV nade variant that slows tank (maybe 60-75% but deals minor damage (500 or so)) WP for Avers (50 points for every 1k damage done to vehicles on top of the WP bounty) Vehicle mines that completely halt movement of the vehicle for 5-7 seconds (EMP mines, E-War) Swarms being redesigned as a medium range burst weapon like their future turret counterpart (run to vehicle, blow load, run to cover with a long reload time) Plasma cannon redesigned as the DPS light AV weapon (less damage per shot/volley, but considerably more over time when compared to swarm launcher) On a different note, I want the assault forge guns removed from the game or redesigned when 1.7 hits. Regular forge guns and breach forge guns are perfectly fine, but the assault forge gun's DPS needs to be tweaked down a bit (it's about 60% more than the regular forge gun). AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.