DUST Search - Ok stop the raging , Tanks are ridiculously OP we all know it

All Channels

General Discussions

Ok stop the raging , Tanks are ridiculously OP we all know it

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 202	Posted - 2013.12.10 22:12:00 - [1] - Quote we all know it "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Alpha 443-6732 265	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:22:00 - [2] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
Pvt Numnutz Black Phoenix Mercenaries 408	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:24:00 - [3] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Fair enough but they go a little too fast
Alpha 443-6732 265	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:25:00 - [4] - Quote Pvt Numnutz wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Fair enough but they go a little too fast I can agree with that. I don't know why they buffed the acceleration that much, but everything else is fine. AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.
Jarod Garamonde Jr Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance 0	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:26:00 - [5] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: we all know it I killed, like, four of them with the noob anti-armor suit today. They're not OP, at all.... just some folks are better at using them than others.
Vulpes Dolosus SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 446	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:30:00 - [6] - Quote People just haven't adapted yet. Come back in a week or so. Dropship Specialist: AKA Clinically Insane Kills- Incubus: 3; Pythons: 0; Logistics: 0; Militia: 19; Tanks: 4
Pvt Numnutz Black Phoenix Mercenaries 408	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:31:00 - [7] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Fair enough but they go a little too fast I can agree with that. I don't know why they buffed the acceleration that much, but everything else is fine. Agreed. I was shocked to see that a tank with nos could almost match my python in a drag race lol If they made them a little slower they would be very balanced
Jason Pearson 3245	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:32:00 - [8] - Quote Speed is too much, but they're not "OP". King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Laugh at the idiots crying about four BPOs being removed erryday, lul
Cody Sietz Unkn0wn Killers Renegade Alliance 1762	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:33:00 - [9] - Quote The speed is the only thing that makes them hard to kill with the crap launchers we have now. "I do agree with you there though. shudders" -Arkena Wyrnspire
Alpha 443-6732 266	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:34:00 - [10] - Quote Pvt Numnutz wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Fair enough but they go a little too fast I can agree with that. I don't know why they buffed the acceleration that much, but everything else is fine. Agreed. I was shocked to see that a tank with nos could almost match my python in a drag race lol If they made them a little slower they would be very balanced I saw a friendly madrugar today with a speed mod and thought I was seeing someone activating their hyperdrive (or whatever it's called). AV =/= Completely dominate and render vehicles useless. AV = Counterpart of vehicles that combats vehicles.

gbghg L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 4125	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:37:00 - [11] - Quote my issue is that they keep getting spammed in FW, its pissing me off. Lv 4 forum warrior Bringer of Bacon Knight of AMV's
True Adamance Scions of Athra 4757	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:41:00 - [12] - Quote gbghg wrote: my issue is that they keep getting spammed in FW, its pissing me off. Shock horror vehicles are now viable and present in strategic FW matches? "Shudder. Again another smart idea from an Amarr..."- Forlorn Destrier (11/12/13) LAWL
Monkey MAC Lost Millennium 1178	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:41:00 - [13] - Quote Told you SL wouldn't need the Range AND Damage I Fcking told you! The pen is mightier than the sword* The gun is mightier than both Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
Disturbingly Bored The Strontium Asylum 1238	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:41:00 - [14] - Quote It's a good day when both the new FOTM and the new counter to it are figured out in a matter of hours. ¶Gêƒ__ Gò« Gû¿GûêGûêGûêGòáGëíGëíGëíGû¬ « GÇó GÇó GÇó GÇó GÇó GÇó GÇó GåÆFAT GATGåÉ pÇûGûôGûôGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæpÇùForum Warrior LV 1 (NEXT: 200/1000XP) ¯Gò¦pÇôpÇù
Joel II X Lo-Tech Solutions Ltd 309	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:42:00 - [15] - Quote gbghg wrote: my issue is that they keep getting spammed in FW, its pissing me off. This. No one uses AV and when they do,they only get one shot in due to the tanks' speed.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui KOBAYASHI MARU PROJECT 175	Posted - 2013.12.10 23:45:00 - [16] - Quote Now I know it's early but do you all like them better than the former tanks ???? Do you believe that the previous tanks could have been better with the same additions that were made to these current tanks i.e. : speed , durability , armor , shield increases , the deletion of some of the mods and the ammo mod addition ??? " BANE " of ALL vehicle users , Crush , Kill and Destroy ALL vehicles !!!!!
The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 1936	Posted - 2013.12.11 00:57:00 - [17] - Quote Dont need any Av to take out a tank. A lav with 6 remote explosives attached to it performs better then my 250k full proto AV suit. And it costs me only 30k instead of 250. I shall show you a world, a world which you cant imagine, a world full off butthurt n00bs at the other end of my gun
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 204	Posted - 2013.12.11 22:03:00 - [18] - Quote the Op side of tanks: Way to fast Railgun got to much DPS for that extreme range "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Kane Fyea DUST University 2356	Posted - 2013.12.11 22:16:00 - [19] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Why would I use that when my swarms do more damage and can shoot all three shots in a clip within 5 seconds?
Slag Emberforge Immortal Retribution 246	Posted - 2013.12.11 22:20:00 - [20] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Notice how this post completely ignores FGs, if only CCP had ignored them too we wouldn't be in this mess.

darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 206	Posted - 2013.12.11 22:22:00 - [21] - Quote Slag Emberforge wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Notice how this post completely ignores FGs, if only CCP had ignored them too we wouldn't be in this mess. What do you mean ignored FGs? they got a range nerf "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Kane Fyea Scions of Athra 2360	Posted - 2013.12.11 23:01:00 - [22] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: Slag Emberforge wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Notice how this post completely ignores FGs, if only CCP had ignored them too we wouldn't be in this mess. What do you mean ignored FGs? they got a range nerf No they got a splash nerf (That was in 1.6) and a damage nerf. (Not a big one either except for the breach which got nerfed into the ground) Only swarms got a range nerf.
Tac Com Sanguis Defense Syndicate 82	Posted - 2013.12.11 23:27:00 - [23] - Quote Having a good look at the tank changes and with respect to the AV balance, it's not 100% where it needs to be but it's mighty close. For dealing with tanks, it isn't really the alpha damage that's a major issue, it's getting those follow-up shots. You hit a tank before with a swarm and unless that tank was already moving in a clear path of escape, chances are you'll get another hit in. Same goes for any AV weapon really. Now though the tanks have enough power output to get up to speed really quickly and with a very high top speed too. But keeping with the follow up shots theme, I think the best fix is not to make big changes with the tank's new speed, but to have a very minor speed reduction but a slightly more impactful reduction to acceleration. This would still allow tanks to get to new theatres of battle like CCP intends, but if a tank is at a stand-still or trying to do a full reverse as it walks into an AV trap, it should take a fair bit longer then it does now to escape. That said, I do think it's not too bad where it sits. It's not so easy to kill a good tank but that's not just from the AV perspective, that's also from the HAV perspective too. The speed makes it difficult to get follow-up shots and if you don't ambush them or catch them in a dis-advantageous position, then you'll need more then 1 person to take them out. That said, one of the ways our group has overcome this in HAV vs HAV fights is having a small railgun fitted on a missile or blaster tank. These tanks typically work best at closer ranges so the medium range small railgun works well and the new fire-rate allows for rather respectable DPS. This has allowed us to turn a "scare them off" into a kill. This is also the case for AV. 1 guy can't reliably kill an HAV but can do enough damage to get them to back off. This will now be more of an area denial role and preventing the tank from getting in the fight and being useful. But catch the tank in an ambush or have multiple AV/HAV members, and you're much more sure to get that tank kill.
Slag Emberforge Immortal Retribution 253	Posted - 2013.12.11 23:37:00 - [24] - Quote Kane Fyea wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Slag Emberforge wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Notice how this post completely ignores FGs, if only CCP had ignored them too we wouldn't be in this mess. What do you mean ignored FGs? they got a range nerf No they got a splash nerf (That was in 1.6) and a damage nerf. (Not a big one either except for the breach which got nerfed into the ground) Only swarms got a range nerf. You guys can't read I guess: I wish CCP would of ignored them as in not made effing changes. 30% splash nerf 20% charge time (except nerf) 10% damage nerf (breach got 25%) All variants lost splash radius, and 33% damage DPS nerf, please clarify to me how this is not significant?
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 445	Posted - 2013.12.11 23:52:00 - [25] - Quote Their nitrous module is broken and no different between basic to proto. Makes their speed noticeably OP for some. which is true. Remotes need less penalties in FW so they are viable for AV in FW. When we start seeng 15/16 mercenaries with AV grenades like Chromosome was then tank's and vehicles will have something to think about more and more. Not many people have adapted to tank's actually not being infantry solo-able anymore.
Toby Flenderson research lab 144	Posted - 2013.12.12 00:13:00 - [26] - Quote Pvt Numnutz wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: darkiller240 wrote: we all know it "Why won't my heavily armor based weapon damage a shield based vehicle with his modules on??!???? :(" -you How about you try the PLC and REs instead of complaining. You can destroy (and solo) pretty much any distracted tank with 3 REs or a suicide LAV. PLCs should be the primary light AV weapon when fighting tanks, unless you are bad and cannot aim the weapon. But a tanker won't be mad at you for using the above items. He would respect you for using a tactic that actually involves a certain amount of skill to pull off. Fair enough but they go a little too fast Tanks could dodge PLC shots before. It's ridiculous trying to hit them with anything but a nerved forge gun now. I've given up on RE but I'll give the PLC another few tries before I give up on AV completely.
Galvan Nized Deep Space Republic 368	Posted - 2013.12.12 00:16:00 - [27] - Quote Ammo restrictions are meaningless right now. Just recall and call your tank back...no depot needed. I think it's time we can get rid of instant recall. Time for an RDV to come pick it up, risking the loss. Plus should have a cooldown before calling in a new tank that way ammo actually plays a role.
KING CHECKMATE Scions of Athra 2972	Posted - 2013.12.12 00:25:00 - [28] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: we all know it WE ALL DO. SCR User Since release. Charge shot / Aim to the head / Listen to QQ


Pages: 1 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.