| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Alpha 443-6732
232
   |
Posted - 2013.12.01 03:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hecarim Van Hohen wrote:
Penetration (total annihilation) kills are not the only way to take out a tank.
A mobility kill: (or M-kill) in armoured warfare is a weapon or vehicle that is immobilized
A firepower kill: damage inflicted by a weapon on a vehicle that destroys its weapon systems, or substantially reduces its ability to deliver weapons accurately
A catastrophic kill, K-Kill or complete kill refers to damage inflicted on an armored vehicle that amounts to complete destruction of the vehicle, rendering it both permanently non-functional and unrepirable
(only option for AV atm besides harassing it)
So before infantry AV can harm tanks by disabling it's movement and/or hinder it's damage output
this is kinda out of the question but, as always, I might be wrong here.
Here's an idea, how about infantry have weapons that are better at disabling tanks in weak points than doing just straight armor/shield damage to them? It would even give them a niche, mines would be more useful and dumb tankers will get abused easily (even when they use the best of tanks) by smart AVers. The tracks, main gun, fuel tank/reactor would all have flat health values that could not be modified, so accurate fire from infantry could easily disable a tank without actually blowing it up and costing the tanker ISK (though they easily could, now that the tanker is immobilized and can't escape).
Maybe, what we need here is simply more mechanics instead of a competition on just who can do more damage to vehicles? Even webifiers would add a large balancing factor to infantry vs. tank combat (who cares if your swarm only does 1200 or so dmg, if the vehicle is immobilized, he's condemned!). Also, AVers would need WP for dealing critical hits to tanks, IN ADDITION to WP for doing straight up damage and destroying tanks.
So basically, the vehicle hitboxes are archaic, revamp them and add more mechanics to vehicle vs. vehicle/infantry combat.
Any other suggestions?
AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
639
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 12:48:00 -
[2] - Quote
As a tanker...
yes. I agree.
Look, I don't think this could just be added in; I'd want some buffs or mechanic changes before this sort of thing was inserted, but some tactical play to vehicles aside from killing it would be pretty cool. |
Mossellia Delt
Militaires Sans Jeux
700
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 12:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
I could see HUGE hit detectino problems arise
Running for CPM1
Scout, Pilot, Logi, AV'r
Vote Delt!
|
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
The Umbra Combine
2159
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 13:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
I'd like to see webifier mines, or a mass slow bomb as a WP reward. Besides that additional weakpoints will probably spawn more issues than it resolves.
"When nothing is going your way, go out of your way to do nothing."
|
Harpyja
DUST University
Ivy League
850
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 13:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
I don't think disabling parts of a vehicle fits the lore.
Armor repairers send out swarms of nanites to repair armor, so why can't they do that as well for tracks, turrets, etc? And for shields, well, you have to bring them down before you can start damaging armor. Also, shields cover every part of the vehicle.
"By His light, and His will"
- The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
|
Alpha 443-6732
236
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 19:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'd like to see webifier mines, or a mass slow bomb as a WP reward. Besides that additional weakpoints will probably spawn more issues than it resolves.
Webifiers would definitely be the better choice, now that I think about it.
AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
|
Alpha 443-6732
236
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 19:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:I don't think disabling parts of a vehicle fits the lore.
Armor repairers send out swarms of nanites to repair armor, so why can't they do that as well for tracks, turrets, etc? And for shields, well, you have to bring them down before you can start damaging armor. Also, shields cover every part of the vehicle.
Then why can people already score critical hits near the reactor of a vehicle?
AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
|
Tebu Gan
Dem Durrty Boyz
Renegade Alliance
250
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 21:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
I like it
Nuff Said
|
AP Grasshopper
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
30
|
Posted - 2013.12.02 00:31:00 -
[9] - Quote
You plan to make a well placed shot with a swarm launcher and vehicle seeking grenades? How about tracking disruptor, stasis webifiers, electronic counter measures that disrupt tacnet and sense vehicles don't use capacitor a vehicle module vampire that slowly drains module activation time instead.
Each faction would have there own EWAR, each EWAR would be a deploy able piece of equipment that penalizes a vehicle for standing inside it or within its range of effect. Of course there's a counter measure to each of the four EWARs as well so vehicles could resist some or all of the effects.
I'm absolutely against destroying a vehicles tracks, turret, fuel tank ect through damage as its not in keeping of eve game-play. Use what EVE has done so well by already.
OH they should remove critical hits from the reactor as well but keep the vulnerability of the vehicle rear as is. That being said the turret should be moved father to the front of the tank to closer resemble modern battle tanks. Tanks no longer have rear mounted turrets by design for obvious reasons that we learned sense WW1.
Vehicle models should be redesigned in my opinion. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |