|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
825
|
Posted - 2013.12.11 09:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
Justicar Karnellia wrote:I destroyed a tank last night. Well that's not entirely true - WE destroyed a tank, all six of us, including another tank. It took 4 players with swarms to get the tank to retreat, and by chance a Forge gunner was on the other side of the bridge firing with a clear line of sight on the retreating tank, and even after this, a blueberry tank gave chase and managed to finish it off. Six people - one tank.
First of all, this seems like a high ratio of AV / Tank.
If we start looking at numbers:
- opposing team deploys a tank -> you deploy 4 AV (assuming they are coordinated and well equipped) OR you deploy a tank of equal strength
- opposing team deploys two tanks -> you deploy 8 AV (if they are to be countered simultaneously) OR you deploy two tanks
Naturally, the side fielding AV now has a reduced anti-infantry capacity. To level this, they can either deploy tanks OR not deploy AV at all - but thereby losing their anti-vehicle capacity, leaving an unstoppable anti-infantry machine roaming the map faster than any infantry can cover.
What this has done has created a type of zero-sum game: If I can deploy more vehicles than you, then I have the advantage on the field.
So now my side races to deploy as many vehicles as is allowed before you can deploy yours, and capitalize on those gains with the massive speed these provide (I can transport small numbers of infantry too, which will be used for capturing objectives if necessary, but now the infantry are peripheral to the action).
This has effectively transformed an INFANTRY based game into a VEHICLE based game, which it isn't or else there would be no limit on the number of vehicles we could deploy and also the terrain isn't entirely optimised for vehicles (numerous indoor areas, although last night I saw creative driving that put them in areas they previously could not go).
It's clear the current situation isn't optimal. Admiringly, the community has come up with a sandbox solution to a design issue - attaching RE's to LAV's and using these as missiles. It's pretty inspiring to see people try it, but it's very touch and go (tank just speeds out of the way, LAV gets destroyed, etc.) Having said that, I think it shows there is a disparity when people are creating their own AV solutions when those that are exclusively meant to destroy vehicles just simply do not work.
I'll leave the community to suggest solutions that don't swing the pendulum back to the other extreme -> one man Anti-vehicle killing machines... this is not ideal either. I feel we haven't found the sweet spot yet, but feel free to suggest your fixes.
Keep it constructive please. :)
I mentioned this several times, as long a tank can be piloted by a single guy a single guy with AV should be able to hold a tank off otherwise you create artificial number advantage for the team with more tanks. this will turn the game into tanks 514 sooner or later. no one cared, only CoD kids responded with troll answers.
and to clear things up, pre patch tanks were not soloable in reasonable timeframe when driven by a nonscrub. the problem was that AV scaled too fast compared to tanks. tanks required massive SP investments to shine while you could skill up AV with damage mods in a week. tanks maybe lacked a slight hp boost to survive initial bursts of damage, thats it. I and several other people posted the math several times how long it takes to down a SP maxed tank with proper fit solo pre patch months ago and the question is, what was the tank driver doing in those 20 to 30 seconds while being shot by a single guy? masturbating? tank whines only serve a single thing, highlight which player is just bad at tank driving.
I am suprised that the devs went live with those changes, now we have tanks twice as tough, as fast as LAVs and AV that deals 30% less damage you have the complete opposite to before, and it is certain that history will repeat, sooner or later tanks will get nerfed again. I will just watch and again collect the tears from bad tank drivers.
and has anyone actually be able to kill a dropship with a pilot that is not afk masturbating with swarms now? just saying. |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
827
|
Posted - 2013.12.11 09:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bhor Derri wrote:I don't want to add more fuel to the flames right now but the changes have improved dust much more than any other point release to date, if I were to explain this with new eden logic (which I must because some of you are still unfamilliar with it) would look like this:
Let's take scout suits as frigs, lightest suits in the game that would make assaults,logis cruisers and heavies battlecruisers.
With the current skillset and modules vehicles in Dust resemble capitals in eve than anything else; different skills that affect differnt modules , separate command and core skills and vice versa, but the HAVs in dust seem to be like battleships now more than ever, the closed beta vets will remember the surya and the sagaris , they were supposed to have siege mods, but it was more like the bastion mod in the 'marauders' in EVE(!).
So you are saying than it is hard for you to take out a battleship/dread with inferior gear and tactics and claim that it is wrong somehow; this is in no way a personal attack but if you think you can take out a target several leagues above you without thought nor tactics you are gravely mistaken.
To, perhaps make it easier to deal with tanks, get a tank of your own. It will make life much better for you, unless you have not a notion of how different vehicles are to dropsuits and their different pros and cons don't incite discussions absent purpose.
If you have a proper reason to why you are right please let me know.
you are clearly missing the point.
also your points are null and void because: 1. you are comparing a f2p lobby shooter to a player driven MMO 2. even a frigate can solo a battleship in eve 3. Battleships are not immune to frigates, cruisers, or battlecruisers 4. Battleships are not faster than frigates, cruisers, or battlecruisers 5. as already mentioned, as long as a tank requires only 1 pilot a single suit with AV should be able to hold it off (note hold off not kill) otherwise dust will turn into world of tanks sooner or later when the best counter to tanks is a tank. the player bringing AV already is a small disadvantage to the team, beside vehicles he cannot deal with anything else effectively beyond 15m range and inside this sidearms optimal he still does less DPS than dedicated rifles. the tank driver gives up nothing, he basically wears a second suit with more EHP, immunity to the majority of weapons, more speed, damage, range and can deal with everyone.
I dont know if you were playing after the patch, but it is already happening, one team brings 3+ tanks, other teams dedicated AV players try to counter with AV with low outcome cause the tanks are too tough and can evade everything with their new speed. the risk vs. reward for the guy with AV is out of proportion. as a consequence people bring their own tanks to counter tanks or try to suicide bomb them with remote explosives. if you do not understand this BASIC balance problem then you simply have zero credibility. |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
830
|
Posted - 2013.12.11 09:56:00 -
[3] - Quote
Medic 1879 wrote: Hell yesterday I solo'd a Madrugar in a 59k swarm fit, do you want to know how? I watched it for a few seconds and as soon as the hardeners went down I started blapping it, TACTICs FTW! I bet the tanker was annoyed that he got solo'd by a much cheaper fit so its a 2 way street.
so you beat a bad tank driver that was currently masturbating and thus mentally not able to use his speed to get cover shortly before his hardeners ran out? seems like a a gud argument |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
830
|
Posted - 2013.12.11 10:01:00 -
[4] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:the AR is above all other small arms in all categories the good thing about the forum is that arguments like this highlight all the bad players with zero credibility |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
830
|
Posted - 2013.12.11 10:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Jack McReady wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:the AR is above all other small arms in all categories the good thing about the forum is that arguments like this highlight all the bad players with zero credibility What makes you think I'm a bad player? I never said you are, but you are doing it by yourself with such comments |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
831
|
Posted - 2013.12.11 10:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Jack McReady wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Jack McReady wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:the AR is above all other small arms in all categories the good thing about the forum is that arguments like this highlight all the bad players with zero credibility What makes you think I'm a bad player? I never said you are, but you are doing it by yourself with such comments And what's wrong with my comments?
everyone and their mother already pointed out what is wrong with it in this thread.
thanks for admitting that you dont even bother to properly read what others wrote, your can say goodbye to your credibility forever troll |
|
|
|