DUST Search - I killed a tank - the vehicle zero-sum game (Honeyed lamb inside)

All Channels

General Discussions

I killed a tank - the vehicle zero-sum game (Honeyed lamb inside)

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 213	Posted - 2013.12.11 07:57:00 - [1] - Quote 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. :)
T8R Raid BIG BAD W0LVES 50	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:05:00 - [2] - Quote 12 RE's, One LAV, One Supply Depot, Suit-swapping = one hilariously destroyed tank
xSir Campsalotx Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 81	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:06:00 - [3] - Quote Try syncing 2 breach forge gun rounds no tank can survive with his hardeners off, insta kill works quite nice interesting now that 1 av guy cant kill a tank. Teamwork the way it should be get a couple of proto av guys on a tower, no tank.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 214	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:08:00 - [4] - Quote T8R Raid wrote: 12 RE's, One LAV, One Supply Depot, Suit-swapping = one hilariously destroyed tank I admire your ingenuity. :)
crazy space 1 GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 2011	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:12:00 - [5] - Quote Hey! Didn't you read the dev blog? Quote: Quote: We felt that the HAVGÇÖs were simply not yet enjoyable enough to drive. They often felt heavy and unresponsive and this produced more frustration than it did convey a sense of weight and power. Aside from the pure fun aspect, their low speed and sluggish handling also made it hard for pilots to react to the changing pace of battle. This meant they were not fulfilling their most basic functionality. Namely, to help break through entrenched enemy positions by destroying installation turrets, scatter ground forces and support infantry assaults by forcing the enemy to react and bring in AV weaponry of their own. Overall, HAVs are now a little more nimble, can get to critical battlefield locations quicker, donGÇÖt take damage from every little bump, and, hopefully, more fun to drive.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 214	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:15:00 - [6] - Quote crazy space 1 wrote: Hey! Didn't you read the dev blog? Quote: Quote: We felt that the HAVGÇÖs were simply not yet enjoyable enough to drive. They often felt heavy and unresponsive and this produced more frustration than it did convey a sense of weight and power. Aside from the pure fun aspect, their low speed and sluggish handling also made it hard for pilots to react to the changing pace of battle. This meant they were not fulfilling their most basic functionality. Namely, to help break through entrenched enemy positions by destroying installation turrets, scatter ground forces and support infantry assaults by forcing the enemy to react and bring in AV weaponry of their own. Overall, HAVs are now a little more nimble, can get to critical battlefield locations quicker, donGÇÖt take damage from every little bump, and, hopefully, more fun to drive. I don't think they support infantry assaults anymore - I believe the infantry support the vehicle assaults.
crazy space 1 GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 2011	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:20:00 - [7] - Quote more fun to drive
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2557	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:20:00 - [8] - Quote Even surprising a tank with none of its modules available and no retreat, they can still survive me bearing down upon them with a militia fit. It's ridiculous. I just played a domination in which a madrugar rolled around the field with impunity. Its armour lasted long enough to retreat from anything thrown at it. The only time it was destroyed was when two Sicas were used to physically pin it in place, and even then it often just mounted them and carried on regardless. No.
crazy space 1 GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 2011	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:20:00 - [9] - Quote I love how we don't have webs yet
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 819	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:25:00 - [10] - Quote Justicar Karnellia wrote: crazy space 1 wrote: Hey! Didn't you read the dev blog? Quote: Quote: We felt that the HAVGÇÖs were simply not yet enjoyable enough to drive. They often felt heavy and unresponsive and this produced more frustration than it did convey a sense of weight and power. Aside from the pure fun aspect, their low speed and sluggish handling also made it hard for pilots to react to the changing pace of battle. This meant they were not fulfilling their most basic functionality. Namely, to help break through entrenched enemy positions by destroying installation turrets, scatter ground forces and support infantry assaults by forcing the enemy to react and bring in AV weaponry of their own. Overall, HAVs are now a little more nimble, can get to critical battlefield locations quicker, donGÇÖt take damage from every little bump, and, hopefully, more fun to drive. I don't think they support infantry assaults anymore - I believe the infantry support the vehicle assaults. Lol, "a little more nimble". Do your part. Join the revolution. Sabotage FW. Help this game burn! BURN DUST 2014

daishi mk03 BLACK-GUARD Die Fremdenlegion 498	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:29:00 - [11] - Quote We tried some fun builds yesterday. 3 complex repair madrugar: 540 hp/s, can outtank one adv forger to infinity, can outtank most tanks, even some missiles, dies to burst damage of 2 missile tanks or 1 tank + 2 AV synch'ed 2 complex repair / 1 hardener: indestrucible, hardener brings your armor to 6666 ehp and your rep to 600 ehp/s ... sick yeah, tanks are fun now To know the true path, but yet, to never follow it. That is possibly the gravest sin. The Scriptures,Book of Missions
Vell0cet SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 701	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:35:00 - [12] - Quote Vehicle capacitors. Balance them around cap. Quick/Dirty Test Range Idea
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 215	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:37:00 - [13] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: Vehicle capacitors. Balance them around cap. Interesting idea. Or maybe longer cooldowns on the modules? I don't know why, but it seems that shields regenerate passively even though hit by swarms.... not sure if this was intended or not?
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 18	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:47:00 - [14] - Quote crazy space 1 wrote: more fun to drive BROKEN! There is no balance with vehicles at all anymore. I say anymore because with the previous changes to SL you could at least make a tank run for cover with a pair (2) of AVers. Now its an impossibility! Likewise with DS having to be hovering over an installation for you to be able to reach them with a strike. CHRIST! I'll take a single fire PlsmCannon that will target 250m if it'll lock, and hit a tank/DS for 3000. Give me a 5 sec reload to keep it "balanced" if you have to. In the real world a $3,000 rocket launcher can kill a $1,000,000 jet or armor. If there's an economy at work sell us hardware that'll kill what we're aiming at! "May the gods place the burden upon us"
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 08:53:00 - [15] - Quote Justicar Karnellia wrote: This has effectively transformed an INFANTRY based game into a VEHICLE based game, This was never an infantry-only or vehicle-only game. That kind of mindset poisoned the whole playerbase, and led to the near lifetime of nerfs that tanks suffered. Also, how is it unfair to force you to take out AV? That's a childish thing to say. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 215	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:00:00 - [16] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Justicar Karnellia wrote: This has effectively transformed an INFANTRY based game into a VEHICLE based game, This was never an infantry-only or vehicle-only game. That kind of mindset poisoned the whole playerbase, and led to the near lifetime of nerfs that tanks suffered. Also, how is it unfair to force you to take out AV? That's a childish thing to say. Hey there. I don't think it's unfair to force infantry to change to an AV build. What I do find unfair is even with 3-4 of them switching to an exclusively AV build, it still doesn't nullify the one vehicle (manned by usually one person). There should be a natural counter, it probably wasn't a natural counter when it was one AV vs one tank (although some might argue this is fair), but 4 or more AV is a bit much don't you think? Also, there's nothing wrong with having a hybrid infantry/vehicle game - battlefield balances this perfectly, but Dust hasn't found that sweet spot. I didn't say it was infantry only or vehicle only. To me, Dust is infantry based with vehicles in a support role, as CCP themselves say (again, if they played a central role, why limit them). Anyway more fuel for the fire. :)
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 313	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:01:00 - [17] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Justicar Karnellia wrote: This has effectively transformed an INFANTRY based game into a VEHICLE based game, This was never an infantry-only or vehicle-only game. That kind of mindset poisoned the whole playerbase, and led to the near lifetime of nerfs that tanks suffered. Also, how is it unfair to force you to take out AV? That's a childish thing to say. I have no problem with beeing forced to take out AV, but currently the best AV options is remote Explosives and thats stupid. Tanks can outrun swarms (a tank faster than missiles). Instead of creating some kind of balance CCP just flipped the coin now vehicles are overpowerd again. And the only reason smart AV is still able to kill them is they either pay no attention or aren't smart at all (well or both). Once a smart tanker hit the field there is nothing AV can do about it, well except fitting a LAV with remotes but this works not so well in FW. AV should always be able to fight of Vehicles (thats why its called AV and thats why AV sacrifices 90% of their AI capacity) currently there is no reason to take your swarm or god beware the PLC to fight tanks and even the forge gun works better against the slower infantry. Even militia tanks are able to throw of proto AV or simply drive away.
Medic 1879 Forsaken Immortals Top Men. 1389	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:17:00 - [18] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: Even surprising a tank with none of its modules available and no retreat, they can still survive me bearing down upon them with a militia fit. It's ridiculous. I just played a domination in which a madrugar rolled around the field with impunity. Its armour lasted long enough to retreat from anything thrown at it. The only time it was destroyed was when two Sicas were used to physically pin it in place, and even then it often just mounted them and carried on regardless. Wait maybe I am reading this wrong but are you complaining you couldn't solo a tank in a milita fit? TEST signature please help me think of a better one.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 102	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:24:00 - [19] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Justicar Karnellia wrote: This has effectively transformed an INFANTRY based game into a VEHICLE based game, This was never an infantry-only or vehicle-only game. That kind of mindset poisoned the whole playerbase, and led to the near lifetime of nerfs that tanks suffered. Also, how is it unfair to force you to take out AV? That's a childish thing to say. So since tanks are immune to ground based infantry, the same infantry they are meant to slaughter... Can I get an anti-tank option that is immune to tanks but can be killed by infantry? Wouldn't that be fair? You know, rock paper scissors?
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 102	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:25:00 - [20] - Quote Medic 1879 wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Even surprising a tank with none of its modules available and no retreat, they can still survive me bearing down upon them with a militia fit. It's ridiculous. I just played a domination in which a madrugar rolled around the field with impunity. Its armour lasted long enough to retreat from anything thrown at it. The only time it was destroyed was when two Sicas were used to physically pin it in place, and even then it often just mounted them and carried on regardless. Wait maybe I am reading this wrong but are you complaining you couldn't solo a tank in a milita fit? I know, especially when a militia tank can solo proto suits that cost more than it ALL DAY LONG.

Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 825	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:26:00 - [21] - 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.
Yagihige Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 451	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:27:00 - [22] - Quote crazy space 1 wrote: I love how we don't have webs yet I'm hoping this was designed with webs in mind and hopefully they're being worked on and deployed into the game soon enough. Those things could play a major part in AV tactics. em ta kool t'nod
Bhor Derri Legion of Eden Covert Intervention 138	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:31:00 - [23] - Quote 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.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:38:00 - [24] - 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. That is a horrible analogy. Battleships are not immune to frigates, cruisers, or battlecruisers Battleships are not faster than frigates, cruisers, or battlecruisers Battleships have an incredibly difficult time hitting frigates and fast cruisers Battleships are incredibly slow moving and turning A battleship is a sitting duck to 2 of anything (unless specifically fit for those two, and even then its a toss up) In eve 2 assault frigates can easily destroy, a battleship. In eve 1 EAS can take 2 battleships out of the battle. I could keep going and going...
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:39:00 - [25] - Quote Chesyre Armundsen wrote: crazy space 1 wrote: more fun to drive BROKEN! There is no balance with vehicles at all anymore. I say anymore because with the previous changes to SL you could at least make a tank run for cover with a pair (2) of AVers. Now its an impossibility! Likewise with DS having to be hovering over an installation for you to be able to reach them with a strike. CHRIST! I'll take a single fire PlsmCannon that will target 250m if it'll lock, and hit a tank/DS for 3000. Give me a 5 sec reload to keep it "balanced" if you have to. In the real world a $3,000 rocket launcher can kill a $1,000,000 jet or armor. If there's an economy at work sell us hardware that'll kill what we're aiming at! Upset your crutch doesn't work as well anymore? Maybe you should squad with a competent tanker. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:43:00 - [26] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Chesyre Armundsen wrote: crazy space 1 wrote: more fun to drive BROKEN! There is no balance with vehicles at all anymore. I say anymore because with the previous changes to SL you could at least make a tank run for cover with a pair (2) of AVers. Now its an impossibility! Likewise with DS having to be hovering over an installation for you to be able to reach them with a strike. CHRIST! I'll take a single fire PlsmCannon that will target 250m if it'll lock, and hit a tank/DS for 3000. Give me a 5 sec reload to keep it "balanced" if you have to. In the real world a $3,000 rocket launcher can kill a $1,000,000 jet or armor. If there's an economy at work sell us hardware that'll kill what we're aiming at! Upset your crutch doesn't work as well anymore? Maybe you should squad with a competent tanker. Maybe 1 person in a tank should be countered by 1 person in an anti-tank role. 1 tank can take out a squad of infantry easily, with little to no fear for its own safety because that is it's role. Lets keep that logic shall we.... 1 AVer should be able to take out a squad of tanks, with little or no fear for its own safety because that is it's role. Make AV'ers immune to tanks!
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:44:00 - [27] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Medic 1879 wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Even surprising a tank with none of its modules available and no retreat, they can still survive me bearing down upon them with a militia fit. It's ridiculous. I just played a domination in which a madrugar rolled around the field with impunity. Its armour lasted long enough to retreat from anything thrown at it. The only time it was destroyed was when two Sicas were used to physically pin it in place, and even then it often just mounted them and carried on regardless. Wait maybe I am reading this wrong but are you complaining you couldn't solo a tank in a milita fit? I know, especially when a militia tank can solo proto suits that cost more than it ALL DAY LONG. Let's see... you're complaining that MLT costs less than PRO? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
IraqiFriendshipExplosive Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 28	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:44:00 - [28] - Quote I just came out of a match where I killed about 3 tanks by myself. A 4th tank was taken out easily with the help of someone else. Heavy suit , 2 complex heavy damage mods and a militia forge gun. 3 shots and those tanks die easily. I guess I could have been very lucky with the module timings but I was hidden away popping up where they least expected me.
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 19	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:44:00 - [29] - 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. Simply put this is not EVE. This is not space navy, ship to ship combat. Dust was pitched as the ground component In New Eden, but was never supposed to be EVE with suits instead. You cannot compare a straight vehicle combat situation to one which is varied between the vehicles available and infantry. Its ridiculous. Limiting the game to "bring out a tank to counter a tank" is a surefire way to kill this game as it would become Tank 514. "May the gods place the burden upon us"
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:45:00 - [30] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: 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. Or, you know, you could squad with a competent tanker. (why do I have to keep saying this?) Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.

Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:46:00 - [31] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Medic 1879 wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Even surprising a tank with none of its modules available and no retreat, they can still survive me bearing down upon them with a militia fit. It's ridiculous. I just played a domination in which a madrugar rolled around the field with impunity. Its armour lasted long enough to retreat from anything thrown at it. The only time it was destroyed was when two Sicas were used to physically pin it in place, and even then it often just mounted them and carried on regardless. Wait maybe I am reading this wrong but are you complaining you couldn't solo a tank in a milita fit? I know, especially when a militia tank can solo proto suits that cost more than it ALL DAY LONG. Let's see... you're complaining that MLT costs less than PRO? Man you are thick. ISK is not a balancing force for gear. CCP knows this all to well from the supercapital debacle in eve.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:47:00 - [32] - Quote IraqiFriendshipExplosive wrote: I just came out of a match where I killed about 3 tanks by myself. A 4th tank was taken out easily with the help of someone else. Heavy suit , 2 complex heavy damage mods and a militia forge gun. 3 shots and those tanks die easily. I guess I could have been very lucky with the module timings but I was hidden away popping up where they least expected me. Pics or it didn't happen
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:47:00 - [33] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Chesyre Armundsen wrote: crazy space 1 wrote: more fun to drive BROKEN! There is no balance with vehicles at all anymore. I say anymore because with the previous changes to SL you could at least make a tank run for cover with a pair (2) of AVers. Now its an impossibility! Likewise with DS having to be hovering over an installation for you to be able to reach them with a strike. CHRIST! I'll take a single fire PlsmCannon that will target 250m if it'll lock, and hit a tank/DS for 3000. Give me a 5 sec reload to keep it "balanced" if you have to. In the real world a $3,000 rocket launcher can kill a $1,000,000 jet or armor. If there's an economy at work sell us hardware that'll kill what we're aiming at! Upset your crutch doesn't work as well anymore? Maybe you should squad with a competent tanker. Maybe 1 person in a tank should be countered by 1 person in an anti-tank role. 1 tank can take out a squad of infantry easily, with little to no fear for its own safety because that is it's role. Lets keep that logic shall we.... 1 AVer should be able to take out a squad of tanks, with little or no fear for its own safety because that is it's role. Make AV'ers immune to tanks! Or, like I said, you could squad with a tanker. Are you really suggesting that AV have the HP of a CRU? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 827	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:47:00 - [34] - 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.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:50:00 - [35] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Medic 1879 wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Even surprising a tank with none of its modules available and no retreat, they can still survive me bearing down upon them with a militia fit. It's ridiculous. I just played a domination in which a madrugar rolled around the field with impunity. Its armour lasted long enough to retreat from anything thrown at it. The only time it was destroyed was when two Sicas were used to physically pin it in place, and even then it often just mounted them and carried on regardless. Wait maybe I am reading this wrong but are you complaining you couldn't solo a tank in a milita fit? I know, especially when a militia tank can solo proto suits that cost more than it ALL DAY LONG. Let's see... you're complaining that MLT costs less than PRO? Man you are thick. ISK is not a balancing force for gear. CCP knows this all to well from the supercapital debacle in eve. How nice of you to ignore the rest of the post. There wasn't any point. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
IraqiFriendshipExplosive Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 28	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:50:00 - [36] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: IraqiFriendshipExplosive wrote: I just came out of a match where I killed about 3 tanks by myself. A 4th tank was taken out easily with the help of someone else. Heavy suit , 2 complex heavy damage mods and a militia forge gun. 3 shots and those tanks die easily. I guess I could have been very lucky with the module timings but I was hidden away popping up where they least expected me. Pics or it didn't happen Ask them yourselves. I have no reason to lie. They dont half move fast but slap them on the bottom and they go down like sacks of ****. I would try it again and try and take some pics but every time I finish a match the PS3 tells me a "Fatal Error has occurred" so I'm pissed off with this broken game.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:51:00 - [37] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Chesyre Armundsen wrote: crazy space 1 wrote: more fun to drive BROKEN! There is no balance with vehicles at all anymore. I say anymore because with the previous changes to SL you could at least make a tank run for cover with a pair (2) of AVers. Now its an impossibility! Likewise with DS having to be hovering over an installation for you to be able to reach them with a strike. CHRIST! I'll take a single fire PlsmCannon that will target 250m if it'll lock, and hit a tank/DS for 3000. Give me a 5 sec reload to keep it "balanced" if you have to. In the real world a $3,000 rocket launcher can kill a $1,000,000 jet or armor. If there's an economy at work sell us hardware that'll kill what we're aiming at! Upset your crutch doesn't work as well anymore? Maybe you should squad with a competent tanker. Maybe 1 person in a tank should be countered by 1 person in an anti-tank role. 1 tank can take out a squad of infantry easily, with little to no fear for its own safety because that is it's role. Lets keep that logic shall we.... 1 AVer should be able to take out a squad of tanks, with little or no fear for its own safety because that is it's role. Make AV'ers immune to tanks! Or, like I said, you could squad with a tanker. Are you really suggesting that AV have the HP of a CRU? Obviously not. Tanks are immune to small arms. Make AV immune to large arms. Get this, tanks should not be the counter to tanks. This is the very basis for balanced gameplay. 1 role CANNOT be above the rest. 1 person should be strong against one thing and weak against another. Infantry are strong against AV, but weak against tanks. Tanks are strong against..... well everything. That is not balance.
Medic 1879 Forsaken Immortals Top Men. 1390	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:51:00 - [38] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Medic 1879 wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Even surprising a tank with none of its modules available and no retreat, they can still survive me bearing down upon them with a militia fit. It's ridiculous. I just played a domination in which a madrugar rolled around the field with impunity. Its armour lasted long enough to retreat from anything thrown at it. The only time it was destroyed was when two Sicas were used to physically pin it in place, and even then it often just mounted them and carried on regardless. Wait maybe I am reading this wrong but are you complaining you couldn't solo a tank in a milita fit? I know, especially when a militia tank can solo proto suits that cost more than it ALL DAY LONG. Do you know what I do when a MLT tank tries to kill me all the time either 1. Get killed by it, respawn away from it and notify all AV and tankers to its location allowing them to kill or run it off or 2. Survive get in cover and notify all AV and tankers to its location allowing them to kill or run it off. 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. TEST signature please help me think of a better one.
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 19	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:52:00 - [39] - Quote IraqiFriendshipExplosive wrote: I just came out of a match where I killed about 3 tanks by myself. A 4th tank was taken out easily with the help of someone else. Heavy suit , 2 complex heavy damage mods and a militia forge gun. 3 shots and those tanks die easily. I guess I could have been very lucky with the module timings but I was hidden away popping up where they least expected me. My argument still stands that the current state of AV is broken and no longer fills the role it was intended for.... so then everyone fits heavies with forge guns and things shift again. Why is it so bad to say there should be a light AV weapon with appropriate damage, which leaves its user vulnerable? An infantry member should never be given the power to be invincible. That's stupid. So is a weapon that doesn't work. Also stupid. "May the gods place the burden upon us"
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:56:00 - [40] - Quote Medic 1879 wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Medic 1879 wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Even surprising a tank with none of its modules available and no retreat, they can still survive me bearing down upon them with a militia fit. It's ridiculous. I just played a domination in which a madrugar rolled around the field with impunity. Its armour lasted long enough to retreat from anything thrown at it. The only time it was destroyed was when two Sicas were used to physically pin it in place, and even then it often just mounted them and carried on regardless. Wait maybe I am reading this wrong but are you complaining you couldn't solo a tank in a milita fit? I know, especially when a militia tank can solo proto suits that cost more than it ALL DAY LONG. Do you know what I do when a MLT tank tries to kill me all the time either 1. Get killed by it, respawn away from it and notify all AV and tankers to its location allowing them to kill or run it off or 2. Survive get in cover and notify all AV and tankers to its location allowing them to kill or run it off. 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. Oh you mean the 1000 km/hr tank was still within firing distance when cooldown happened? LOL

Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 830	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:56:00 - [41] - 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
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:58:00 - [42] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: 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. Battleships have an incredibly difficult time hitting frigates and fast cruisers 6. Battleships are incredibly slow moving and turning 7. 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. Limiting the game to "bring out a tank to counter a tank" is a surefire way to kill this game. I am also sure history will repeat and CCP will realize the changes was too much and nerf tanks here and there. I will just watch and again collect all the tank driver tears when this happens. What's wrong with a tank being its own best counter? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 09:59:00 - [43] - Quote With all of these horribly cheap suits solo'ing tanks, you would wonder what all the hub-bub is about. Why don't you tankers stop posting with your alts about you solo'ing tanks? Enough with the astroturfing. Either prove it or get out. TLDR; "I just killed 74 tanks with my starter gear" <---- tanker's alt.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:00:00 - [44] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Obviously not. Tanks are immune to small arms. Make AV immune to large arms. Get this, tanks should not be the counter to tanks. This is the very basis for balanced gameplay. 1 role CANNOT be above the rest. 1 person should be strong against one thing and weak against another. Infantry are strong against AV, but weak against tanks. Tanks are strong against..... well everything. That is not balance. Get this, this isn't Call of Duty: Space Edition. If you want no vehicles, go play Call of Duty. Guess what.................. the AR is above all other small arms in all categories, except for range, in which only the sniper rifle has it beat. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 20	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:00:00 - [45] - Quote Then you have a game where only tanks get deployed... its not Tanks 514 "May the gods place the burden upon us"
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 830	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:01:00 - [46] - 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
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:02:00 - [47] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Jack McReady wrote: 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. Battleships have an incredibly difficult time hitting frigates and fast cruisers 6. Battleships are incredibly slow moving and turning 7. 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. Limiting the game to "bring out a tank to counter a tank" is a surefire way to kill this game. I am also sure history will repeat and CCP will realize the changes was too much and nerf tanks here and there. I will just watch and again collect all the tank driver tears when this happens. What's wrong with a tank being its own best counter? Whats wrong with infantry being their own best counter? Whats wrong with AV being their own best counter? Whats wrong with the assault rifle being it's own best counter? You can spot the pattern right? Variation in gameplay suffers when one role is the defacto best. Being it's own counter (i.e. nothing else will beat it) limits gameplay and makes for a boring game.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 217	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:03:00 - [48] - Quote Yagihige wrote: crazy space 1 wrote: I love how we don't have webs yet I'm hoping this was designed with webs in mind and hopefully they're being worked on and deployed into the game soon enough. Those things could play a major part in AV tactics. Yeah, this would be interesting... slowing the tank down would at least mitigate the "speed tanking" part which negates most AV now.
Chesyre Armundsen Thanes Of Dust 20	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:03:00 - [49] - Quote How about an AV fit that costs the same ISK and SP as a comparable HAV and CAN kill it? Anyone? "May the gods place the burden upon us"
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:04:00 - [50] - Quote Chesyre Armundsen wrote: Then you have a game where only tanks get deployed... its not Tanks 514 We don't want it to be Tank 514, it can't be Tank 514 for the sole fact you can't deploy 16 vehicles per side. But, it can still easily be Cal Logi with a Duvolle TAR or Core Flaylock 514. You simply cannot understand the rush of a tank battle. Don't ruin it for us because you don't have the intelligence or people to squad with to destroy us. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.

Bhor Derri Legion of Eden Covert Intervention 138	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:05:00 - [51] - Quote To all the people saying that a frig can solo a BS , they can because they are skilled and the BS pilot got ambushed or he was a complete noob who skilled only the reqs to fly it. You can't solo a tank because you don't have skills and expect to go chuck norris on every tank and expect it to blow up. End of discussion.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:05:00 - [52] - Quote 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? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:05:00 - [53] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Obviously not. Tanks are immune to small arms. Make AV immune to large arms. Get this, tanks should not be the counter to tanks. This is the very basis for balanced gameplay. 1 role CANNOT be above the rest. 1 person should be strong against one thing and weak against another. Infantry are strong against AV, but weak against tanks. Tanks are strong against..... well everything. That is not balance. Get this, this isn't Call of Duty: Space Edition. If you want no vehicles, go play Call of Duty. Guess what.................. the AR is above all other small arms in all categories, except for range, in which only the sniper rifle has it beat. What??? So.... ARs can be destroyed from range by the laser, scrambler, combat rifle, sniper rifle, rail rifle, and forge gun. Of course the AR does impede on the CQC weapons too much for my liking. I want vehicles very much, but I want them to be scissors: strong against paper, but weak against rock. You want this to be tanks 514. If you want tanks > all, go play world of tanks.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:06:00 - [54] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Jack McReady wrote: 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. Battleships have an incredibly difficult time hitting frigates and fast cruisers 6. Battleships are incredibly slow moving and turning 7. 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. Limiting the game to "bring out a tank to counter a tank" is a surefire way to kill this game. I am also sure history will repeat and CCP will realize the changes was too much and nerf tanks here and there. I will just watch and again collect all the tank driver tears when this happens. What's wrong with a tank being its own best counter? Whats wrong with infantry being their own best counter? Whats wrong with AV being their own best counter? Whats wrong with the assault rifle being it's own best counter? You can spot the pattern right? Variation in gameplay suffers when one role is the defacto best. Being it's own counter (i.e. nothing else will beat it) limits gameplay and makes for a boring game. Can vehicles hack objectives? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 217	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:06:00 - [55] - Quote Chesyre Armundsen wrote: Then you have a game where only tanks get deployed... its not Tanks 514 Yes, this is quite important. If the tank is the only best counter to another tank, and the tank in general wipes out infantry AND counter tanks, then it's a race to get all your tanks out before the opponent.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 103	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:07:00 - [56] - Quote Chesyre Armundsen wrote: How about an AV fit that costs the same ISK and SP as a comparable HAV and CAN kill it? Anyone? I would be perfectly fine with an AV fit that was immune to tank fire, and could quite easily solo 6-7 tanks at once, that cost alot, that would also get absolutely owned by infantry. Thats because I am all about balance, something most tankers couldn't give a crap about.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1463	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:07:00 - [57] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Obviously not. Tanks are immune to small arms. Make AV immune to large arms. Get this, tanks should not be the counter to tanks. This is the very basis for balanced gameplay. 1 role CANNOT be above the rest. 1 person should be strong against one thing and weak against another. Infantry are strong against AV, but weak against tanks. Tanks are strong against..... well everything. That is not balance. Get this, this isn't Call of Duty: Space Edition. If you want no vehicles, go play Call of Duty. Guess what.................. the AR is above all other small arms in all categories, except for range, in which only the sniper rifle has it beat. What??? So.... ARs can be destroyed from range by the laser, scrambler, combat rifle, sniper rifle, rail rifle, and forge gun. Of course the AR does impede on the CQC weapons too much for my liking. I want vehicles very much, but I want them to be scissors: strong against paper, but weak against rock. You want this to be tanks 514. If you want tanks > all, go play world of tanks. See, I don't understand the logic of handheld weapons having been so much more powerful than vehicle-mounted turrets. Stop lying, you want vehicles removed. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Bhor Derri Legion of Eden Covert Intervention 138	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:07:00 - [58] - Quote Whenever CCP releases a good patch leave it to the forums to ruin it.
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 830	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:07:00 - [59] - 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
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:08:00 - [60] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Chesyre Armundsen wrote: How about an AV fit that costs the same ISK and SP as a comparable HAV and CAN kill it? Anyone? I would be perfectly fine with an AV fit that was immune to tank fire, and could quite easily solo 6-7 tanks at once, that cost alot, that would also get absolutely owned by infantry. Thats because I am all about balance, something most tankers couldn't give a crap about. You have no valid points and you're blinded by illogical rage. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.

Medic 1879 Forsaken Immortals Top Men. 1390	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:09:00 - [61] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: 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 No I ambushed a well fit tank that was doing very well in the game with a glass cannon AV fit with proto swarms and complex damage mods, I purposefully waited for the tank to be in an area where is speed advantage was largely nullified by lack of room to maneuver. Yes the tank's speed is absolutely ridiculous right now but it is still possible to solo high end tanks if you use your brain. TEST signature please help me think of a better one.
hgghyujh Expert Intervention Caldari State 187	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:09:00 - [62] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Justicar Karnellia wrote: This has effectively transformed an INFANTRY based game into a VEHICLE based game, This was never an infantry-only or vehicle-only game. That kind of mindset poisoned the whole playerbase, and led to the near lifetime of nerfs that tanks suffered. Also, how is it unfair to force you to take out AV? That's a childish thing to say. oh no you don't, while you are right, this isn't a vehicle or infantry game, OP is spot on saying that tanks as they are turning this into a vehicle game. not to mention that the op is saying that a well coordinated full squad is required to have a CHANCE to take down a tank driven by one man, and you are telling him off for bitching about fighting tanks??? hell the OP states that he doesn't want it to be one person with AV to take down tank and you call him childish look in the ******* mirror.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 218	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:09:00 - [63] - Quote waves honeyed lamb about desperately for CCP wolfman
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:10:00 - [64] - Quote 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? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 104	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:11:00 - [65] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Can vehicles hack objectives? I can play this too Can infantry travel at 1000km/h ? Can infantry be immune to tank rounds while out in the open? Can infantry solo squads of tanks? Can infantry swap suits to save isk ANYWHERE ON THE BATTLEFIELD? I love your signature, it is hilarious because thats exactly what you want for tanks. Tanks require no teamwork to destroy squads, but squads require teamwork and positioning to destroy a single tank.
George Moros Area 514 214	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:11:00 - [66] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: What's wrong with a tank being its own best counter? He already answered that question: if the only effective counter to a tank is another tank, DUST will soon turn in to World of Tanks (in space!). I'm no expert in vehicles, but based on a few matches I played yesterday, after 1.7 was deployed, I too get the impression tanks are OP now. Every match I played, the team that deployed (more) tanks won. When I first saw a Madrugar speeding at, what looked like 200 MPH, I though this was some issue with lag. Also, I read here on the forums that tanks are now considerably cheaper than before. If this is true, it will only further aggravate the problem. Not good. Pulvereus ergo queritor.
Bhor Derri Legion of Eden Covert Intervention 139	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:11:00 - [67] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Chesyre Armundsen wrote: How about an AV fit that costs the same ISK and SP as a comparable HAV and CAN kill it? Anyone? I would be perfectly fine with an AV fit that was immune to tank fire, and could quite easily solo 6-7 tanks at once, that cost alot, that would also get absolutely owned by infantry. Thats because I am all about balance, something most tankers couldn't give a crap about. You have no valid points and you're blinded by illogical rage. Did he just .... Well he is right we need a gun that fires 20000rpm , deals 250dmg and has infinite ammo
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:11:00 - [68] - Quote hgghyujh wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Justicar Karnellia wrote: This has effectively transformed an INFANTRY based game into a VEHICLE based game, This was never an infantry-only or vehicle-only game. That kind of mindset poisoned the whole playerbase, and led to the near lifetime of nerfs that tanks suffered. Also, how is it unfair to force you to take out AV? That's a childish thing to say. oh no you don't, while you are right, this isn't a vehicle or infantry game, OP is spot on saying that tanks as they are turning this into a vehicle game. not to mention that the op is saying that a well coordinated full squad is required to have a CHANCE to take down a tank driven by one man, and you are telling him off for bitching about fighting tanks??? hell the OP states that he doesn't want it to be one person with AV to take down tank and you call him childish look in the ******* mirror. Amazing how infantry isn't happy with the vehicle change they forced on CCP. GO TO CALL OF DUTY ALREADY! Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:13:00 - [69] - Quote George Moros wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: What's wrong with a tank being its own best counter? He already answered that question: if the only effective counter to a tank is another tank, DUST will soon turn in to World of Tanks (in space!). I'm no expert in vehicles, but based on a few matches I played yesterday, after 1.7 was deployed, I too get the impression tanks are OP now. Every match I played, the team that deployed (more) tanks won. When I first saw a Madrugar speeding at, what looked like 200 MPH, I though this was some issue with lag. Also, I read here on the forums that tanks are now considerably cheaper than before. If this is true, it will only further aggravate the problem. Not good. If you have 4 competent tankers on each side, they're ignoring infantry and going after each other. Unless they decide on a truce beforehand and troll each other's teams by getting in the way of AV. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 831	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:15:00 - [70] - 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

Bhor Derri Legion of Eden Covert Intervention 139	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:15:00 - [71] - Quote This is unbelieveable take the option to camp on top of a tower fire away blindly and destroy vehicles and make them use some logic and you get insta QQ. Just HTFU already
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:18:00 - [72] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: 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 Because what other people post is insane. Nuclear baseballs? Mining equipment more powerful than a gun that has a range measured in miles? Homing AV that still has rendering issues? I know who's biased, and it's not us. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Medic 1879 Forsaken Immortals Top Men. 1391	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:20:00 - [73] - Quote Also based on my experiences yesterday I hardly ever saw anyone switch to swarms when tanks appeared, in 1.6 the second a tank appeared people would switch to proto swarms thinking oh goody 150WP (I did this as well) yesterday I have seen very few people switch to AV now this could be due to a few reasons, maybe people are too busy playing with the new rifles to switch to AV, or people have seen the swarm nerf and decided swarms are useless now and don't even try. TEST signature please help me think of a better one.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 220	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:23:00 - [74] - Quote Medic 1879 wrote: Also based on my experiences yesterday I hardly ever saw anyone switch to swarms when tanks appeared, in 1.6 the second a tank appeared people would switch to proto swarms thinking oh goody 150WP (I did this as well) yesterday I have seen very few people switch to AV now this could be due to a few reasons, maybe people are too busy playing with the new rifles to switch to AV, or people have seen the swarm nerf and decided swarms are useless now and don't even try. I admit I'm always one of the first to pull out AV whenever I see a tank/dropship, but by the end of last night I moved on into "not my problem" territory and just let the tank do its thing while I busied myself elsewhere with things I could actually kill. Like I said, the only kill of the night was the one described in the very first post , and it seemed more out of luck than any co-ordination.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 106	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:25:00 - [75] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Jack McReady wrote: 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 Because what other people post is insane. Nuclear baseballs? Mining equipment more powerful than a gun that has a range measured in miles? Homing AV that still has rendering issues? I know who's biased, and it's not us. Seriously? Ok so what do you think: Are tanks op now? Should tanks not require teamwork to use, but require tons of teamwork to counter? Should tanks have a counter (please for the love of god don't say tanks are the counter to tanks)? Your answers to these questions would prove how biased or not you are.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:28:00 - [76] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Jack McReady wrote: 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 Because what other people post is insane. Nuclear baseballs? Mining equipment more powerful than a gun that has a range measured in miles? Homing AV that still has rendering issues? I know who's biased, and it's not us. Seriously? Ok so what do you think: Are tanks op now? Should tanks not require teamwork to use, but require tons of teamwork to counter? Should tanks have a counter (please for the love of god don't say tanks are the counter to tanks)? Your answers to these questions would prove how biased or not you are. None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. What should CCP balance this game on? Ambush? Or Faction Warfare and Planetary Conquest? Should they balance this on the thought that each team will have tanks, or that one team will have 5 and the other none, plus no AV, and make them weak accordingly? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 220	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:31:00 - [77] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Jack McReady wrote: 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 Because what other people post is insane. Nuclear baseballs? Mining equipment more powerful than a gun that has a range measured in miles? Homing AV that still has rendering issues? I know who's biased, and it's not us. Seriously? Ok so what do you think: Are tanks op now? Should tanks not require teamwork to use, but require tons of teamwork to counter? Should tanks have a counter (please for the love of god don't say tanks are the counter to tanks)? Your answers to these questions would prove how biased or not you are. None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. What should CCP balance this game on? Ambush? Or Faction Warfare and Planetary Conquest? Should they balance this on the thought that each team will have tanks, or that one team will have 5 and the other none, plus no AV, and make them weak accordingly? Actually I think many posters did this - If the tank is best counter against another tank, then this will mean everyone will bring out as many tanks as possible (keeping in mind a tank can also destroy any and all type of infantry, regardless of fit, bar none). I don't believe this is in the best interests of the game, do you? (try and keep it constructive)
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 107	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:34:00 - [78] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Jack McReady wrote: 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 Because what other people post is insane. Nuclear baseballs? Mining equipment more powerful than a gun that has a range measured in miles? Homing AV that still has rendering issues? I know who's biased, and it's not us. Seriously? Ok so what do you think: Are tanks op now? Should tanks not require teamwork to use, but require tons of teamwork to counter? Should tanks have a counter (please for the love of god don't say tanks are the counter to tanks)? Your answers to these questions would prove how biased or not you are. None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. What should CCP balance this game on? Ambush? Or Faction Warfare and Planetary Conquest? Should they balance this on the thought that each team will have tanks, or that one team will have 5 and the other none, plus no AV, and make them weak accordingly? Yes we have: If one choice is clearly superior, it stiffles gameplay. Why choose anything else when one option is superior. You know all of the bitching about the ARs? Same stuff here, why use anything else? You just refuse to acknowledge it. It breaks the rock/paper/scissors mold that games require for varied gameplay styles. Let me phrase it another way. If something is it's own best counter... it doesn't have a counter.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:41:00 - [79] - Quote Justicar Karnellia wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Jack McReady wrote: 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 Because what other people post is insane. Nuclear baseballs? Mining equipment more powerful than a gun that has a range measured in miles? Homing AV that still has rendering issues? I know who's biased, and it's not us. Seriously? Ok so what do you think: Are tanks op now? Should tanks not require teamwork to use, but require tons of teamwork to counter? Should tanks have a counter (please for the love of god don't say tanks are the counter to tanks)? Your answers to these questions would prove how biased or not you are. None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. What should CCP balance this game on? Ambush? Or Faction Warfare and Planetary Conquest? Should they balance this on the thought that each team will have tanks, or that one team will have 5 and the other none, plus no AV, and make them weak accordingly? Actually I think many posters did this - If the tank is best counter against another tank, then this will mean everyone will bring out as many tanks as possible (keeping in mind a tank can also destroy any and all type of infantry, regardless of fit, bar none). I don't believe this is in the best interests of the game, do you? (try and keep it constructive) How is it a bad thing? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Bhor Derri Legion of Eden Covert Intervention 140	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:45:00 - [80] - Quote Oh please stop with all that Rock Paper Scissors bullshi* , the only purpose it serves is dumbing the game down, whenever QQers like you DEMAND a nerf the cult classic phrase comes in; "it should be like rock paper scissors." No it should not be like that at all however I'm no fan of FOTM but it should be much more complex than that , that's what dust offered that's what separates dust from other lobby shooters though dust shouldn't even be called a lobby shooter.

Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 220	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:48:00 - [81] - Quote Seriously? Ok so what do you think: Are tanks op now? Should tanks not require teamwork to use, but require tons of teamwork to counter? Should tanks have a counter (please for the love of god don't say tanks are the counter to tanks)? Your answers to these questions would prove how biased or not you are. [/quote] None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. What should CCP balance this game on? Ambush? Or Faction Warfare and Planetary Conquest? Should they balance this on the thought that each team will have tanks, or that one team will have 5 and the other none, plus no AV, and make them weak accordingly?[/quote] Actually I think many posters did this - If the tank is best counter against another tank, then this will mean everyone will bring out as many tanks as possible (keeping in mind a tank can also destroy any and all type of infantry, regardless of fit, bar none). I don't believe this is in the best interests of the game, do you? (try and keep it constructive) [/quote] How is it a bad thing?[/quote] You mean there is no problem with a tank that can kill everything in the game and can not be countered by anything else, apart from another tank?
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:49:00 - [82] - Quote Bhor Derri wrote: Oh please stop with all that Rock Paper Scissors bullshi* , the only purpose it serves is dumbing the game down, whenever QQers like you DEMAND a nerf the cult classic phrase comes in; "it should be like rock paper scissors." No it should not be like that at all however I'm no fan of FOTM but it should be much more complex than that , that's what dust offered that's what separates dust from other lobby shooters though dust shouldn't even be called a lobby shooter. If it's main way of pitting people against each other is matchmaking, then it's not a lobby shooter. SOCOM was a lobby shooter. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 108	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:49:00 - [83] - Quote Bhor Derri wrote: Oh please stop with all that Rock Paper Scissors bullshi* , the only purpose it serves is dumbing the game down, whenever QQers like you DEMAND a nerf the cult classic phrase comes in; "it should be like rock paper scissors." No it should not be like that at all however I'm no fan of FOTM but it should be much more complex than that , that's what dust offered that's what separates dust from other lobby shooters though dust shouldn't even be called a lobby shooter. You do realize that rock/paper/scissors is an analogy meaning that everything should have a counter right? That is actually the exact opposite of dumbing something down. Complex games require that there is no "best" style, otherwise you have a game for mouthbreathers. It doesn't mean boil down the gameplay to 3 things.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:52:00 - [84] - Quote Justicar Karnellia wrote: Seriously? Ok so what do you think: Are tanks op now? Should tanks not require teamwork to use, but require tons of teamwork to counter? Should tanks have a counter (please for the love of god don't say tanks are the counter to tanks)? Your answers to these questions would prove how biased or not you are. None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. What should CCP balance this game on? Ambush? Or Faction Warfare and Planetary Conquest? Should they balance this on the thought that each team will have tanks, or that one team will have 5 and the other none, plus no AV, and make them weak accordingly?[/quote] Actually I think many posters did this - If the tank is best counter against another tank, then this will mean everyone will bring out as many tanks as possible (keeping in mind a tank can also destroy any and all type of infantry, regardless of fit, bar none). I don't believe this is in the best interests of the game, do you? (try and keep it constructive) [/quote] How is it a bad thing?[/quote] You mean there is no problem with a tank that can kill everything in the game and can not be countered by anything else, apart from another tank? [/quote] You're not a tanker so you wouldn't understand. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 220	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:54:00 - [85] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Justicar Karnellia wrote: Seriously? Ok so what do you think: Are tanks op now? Should tanks not require teamwork to use, but require tons of teamwork to counter? Should tanks have a counter (please for the love of god don't say tanks are the counter to tanks)? Your answers to these questions would prove how biased or not you are. None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. What should CCP balance this game on? Ambush? Or Faction Warfare and Planetary Conquest? Should they balance this on the thought that each team will have tanks, or that one team will have 5 and the other none, plus no AV, and make them weak accordingly? Actually I think many posters did this - If the tank is best counter against another tank, then this will mean everyone will bring out as many tanks as possible (keeping in mind a tank can also destroy any and all type of infantry, regardless of fit, bar none). I don't believe this is in the best interests of the game, do you? (try and keep it constructive) [/quote] How is it a bad thing?[/quote] You mean there is no problem with a tank that can kill everything in the game and can not be countered by anything else, apart from another tank? [/quote] You're not a tanker so you wouldn't understand.[/quote] Tha'ts not really a coherent reply, but you've posted enough so we understand your position. thanks.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 108	Posted - 2013.12.11 10:54:00 - [86] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: You're not a tanker so you wouldn't understand. Thats the biggest line of crap you could have possibly laid down. Obviously a troll. Translation: "Your right and I am wrong but I am not going to admit it."
Bhor Derri Legion of Eden Covert Intervention 140	Posted - 2013.12.11 11:00:00 - [87] - Quote Ok let me get something clear... 1-AV is capable of killing tanks , it's just you who can't (got 2 tank kills with my plasma cannon) 2- Swarms are spam capable once I've seen 40 something missiles in the air killed 2 tanks that were next to a supply depot 3-If you are not using the range advantge of forges an just getting in to a knife fight to kill a tank chuck norris style you are doing it wrong 4-Stay indoors, most maps have the majority of objectives indoors (excluding Ambush) 5-Use your legs! Tanks have tracks , they might be fast but not as agile have you ever seen a tank trying to turn around? Battlefield has a similiar setup tanks are fast much faster than you think (See blitzkrieg and real tanks i.e. M1A1) 6-Patience, do you think tanking is just an easy win button? Unlike infantry vehicles actually need to manage modules. Figure the rest. 7-Coordination, tanks do require coordination judging by the fact that you can't get on other teams comms you don't know don't talk s**t about things you don't know. -Peace Edit for punctuation.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1464	Posted - 2013.12.11 11:01:00 - [88] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: You're not a tanker so you wouldn't understand. Thats the biggest line of crap you could have possibly laid down. Obviously a troll. Translation: "Your right and I am wrong but I am not going to admit it." I don't troll on here, people get me banned because I hurt their feelings. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect 341	Posted - 2013.12.11 11:16:00 - [89] - Quote The game is obviously broken as it is. Tanks are not only extremely hard to kill for infantry, but also extremely hard to avoid due to the ridiculous speed increase. It's true that you can suicide tanks with an LAV and REs. But when good players are aiming to die at most twice per ambush it's unreasonable to expect them to throw a life away just to counter a zero gungame scrub in their easy mode, dirt cheap killing machine. Not saying that all tankers fit that description, many are great players, but the fact is even a noob can dominate in a tank at the moment. We need a hotfix to nerf either tank speed or HP, probably both. Otherwise infantry are going to stop playing in large numbers.
Bhor Derri Legion of Eden Covert Intervention 141	Posted - 2013.12.11 11:21:00 - [90] - Quote Scrubs are the people who care too much about their K/D , has ego problems and confuse dust for just another lobby shooter , I think their exodus from dust would be a positive. But then again not all people who have k/d is a scrub , majority of them are.

The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 1943	Posted - 2013.12.11 11:26:00 - [91] - Quote forget AV get a Jihad jeep. 2 sets of remote explosives (6 RE'S) deal 9000HP explosive damage which means it deals 11700HP damage against armor. Not even a repair rate of 1000HP/s will save you from that insane high alpha damage. You can top it aswell with a 3rd set of remote explosives but thats overkill in my opinion. As it stands now you only need 1 player to take out any kind of tank and that with a low SP and ISK investment. 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
Parson Atreides Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 883	Posted - 2013.12.11 11:30:00 - [92] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. Let's play rock, paper scissors guys! Here are the rules: Rock beats scissors, paper and can only lose to Rock. Paper loses to scissors and rock, and ties paper. Scissors lose to rock, beat paper, and tie scissors. Who wants to play? I'll even give you a hint: I'm throwing Rock every time. "The unexamined life is not worth living." RNDclan.com
Sigberct Amni Goonfeet Top Men. 267	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:04:00 - [93] - Quote Parson Atreides wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. Let's play rock, paper scissors guys! Here are the rules: Rock beats scissors, paper and can only lose to Rock. Paper loses to scissors and rock, and ties paper. Scissors lose to rock, beat paper, and tie scissors. Who wants to play? I'll even give you a hint: I'm throwing Rock every time. I sure hope ccp relaxes the vehicle quota so everyone can call in rocks. I like WoT but its just missing that dust feel.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2560	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:10:00 - [94] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Justicar Karnellia wrote: This has effectively transformed an INFANTRY based game into a VEHICLE based game, This was never an infantry-only or vehicle-only game. That kind of mindset poisoned the whole playerbase, and led to the near lifetime of nerfs that tanks suffered. Also, how is it unfair to force you to take out AV? That's a childish thing to say. I think you're missing the point. It was unbalanced toward infantry. Now it's unbalanced toward vehicles. It isn't unfair to force us to pull out AV. But this current situation doesn't force that, because handheld AV is shite. No.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2560	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:13:00 - [95] - Quote The dark cloud wrote: forget AV get a Jihad jeep. 2 sets of remote explosives (6 RE'S) deal 9000HP explosive damage which means it deals 11700HP damage against armor. Not even a repair rate of 1000HP/s will save you from that insane high alpha damage. You can top it aswell with a 3rd set of remote explosives but thats overkill in my opinion. As it stands now you only need 1 player to take out any kind of tank and that with a low SP and ISK investment. A few stray bullets across the bonnet of your ride . . . This tactic works great, however it'll get you kicked from FW. Apparently destroying your own property counts as FF. No.
Monkey MAC Lost Millennium 1179	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:14:00 - [96] - Quote Linear Escalation Gameplay I told you, I F*KING TOLD YOU! Tanks 514* I told you, I bloody well told you. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
Jastad D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 316	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:16:00 - [97] - Quote I think this is CCP master plan!!! Make OP the tanks do drivers put SP back in Tanks/Drop and then nerf it. ...and may the FORGE be with you.
Terra Thesis HDYLTA Defiant Legacy 406	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:38:00 - [98] - Quote why are you guys wasting your breath talking about tank balance when there's (at least) one huge bug? you think tanks are supposed to just shoot off like the road runner when something spooks them? do you think it's intended design for tanks to out run AV grenades and swarms? quote the devs all you want, but do you really think they intentionally designed a MIL mod to provide 100% speed boost when the complex version gives 30%? or maybe.......... IT'S A BUG. HDYLTA - Freedom Delivered
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1465	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:41:00 - [99] - Quote Parson Atreides wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: None of you ever provide a reason as to why tanks shouldn't be their own best counter. Let's play rock, paper scissors guys! Here are the rules: Rock beats scissors, paper and can only lose to Rock. Paper loses to scissors and rock, and ties paper. Scissors lose to rock, beat paper, and tie scissors. Who wants to play? I'll even give you a hint: I'm throwing Rock every time. You're in RND, you know nothing of vehicle dynamics. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1465	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:42:00 - [100] - Quote Terra Thesis wrote: why are you guys wasting your breath talking about tank balance when there's (at least) one huge bug? you think tanks are supposed to just shoot off like the road runner when something spooks them? do you think it's intended design for tanks to out run AV grenades and swarms? quote the devs all you want, but do you really think they intentionally designed a MIL mod to provide 100% speed boost when the complex version gives 30%? or maybe.......... IT'S A BUG. What's wrong with a tank traveling faster than an AV grenade flies through the air. Do you mean to tell me that NOS modules are unfair and should be removed from the game, thus nerfing tanks and giving AV an easier time to kill us? Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.

Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1465	Posted - 2013.12.11 12:43:00 - [101] - Quote Bhor Derri wrote: Scrubs are the people who care too much about their K/D , has ego problems and confuse dust for just another lobby shooter , I think their exodus from dust would be a positive. But then again not all people who have k/d is a scrub , majority of them are. This isn't a lobby shooter. Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me, such is the motto of the anti vehicle infantry.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 1852	Posted - 2013.12.11 13:29:00 - [102] - Quote A tank to kill a tank Sounds fine by me
crazy space 1 GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 2015	Posted - 2013.12.11 13:31:00 - [103] - Quote Justicar Karnellia wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Vehicle capacitors. Balance them around cap. Interesting idea. Or maybe longer cooldowns on the modules? I don't know why, but it seems that shields regenerate passively even though hit by swarms.... not sure if this was intended or not? no cooldown on that 600hp/sec...
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 316	Posted - 2013.12.11 13:32:00 - [104] - Quote Medic 1879 wrote: Also based on my experiences yesterday I hardly ever saw anyone switch to swarms when tanks appeared, in 1.6 the second a tank appeared people would switch to proto swarms thinking oh goody 150WP (I did this as well) yesterday I have seen very few people switch to AV now this could be due to a few reasons, maybe people are too busy playing with the new rifles to switch to AV, or people have seen the swarm nerf and decided swarms are useless now and don't even try. Simply because RE are far more effective AND you can still deal with Infantry. Its pretty simple with all the new longrange weapons out there switching to AV is close to suicide maybe except for the roof forger. And if i can get the same result with RE why should I bother...
crazy space 1 GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 2015	Posted - 2013.12.11 13:34:00 - [105] - Quote Guys tanks can outrun LAVs, its awful and the game is a laughing stock right now. Don't defend them. I told people that tanks should roll slower uphill and everyone is like "no that's stupid" How can anyone see the speed of tanks as balanced. They are broken, it's not a case of balance, the devs messed up. They thought it would turn out better. They still don't want to admit anything about the remote mine change coming in unannounced...
IraqiFriendshipExplosive Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 29	Posted - 2013.12.11 13:52:00 - [106] - Quote Look im not saying there isnt balance issue. God dont get me started. All I am saying, hand on heart is that with my character - CommanderBolt , earlier this morning I joined into a random pub match and to begin with it was me and one other dude vs like 4 tanks. As the match progressed more people joined. I decided I needed something to deal with the tanks so i ran to the nearest supply depot and got out my forge gun suit. First tank was driving past my position, charge.... hit. 2nd charge..... hit, 3rd charge and he blew up. second tank was being called in (Might have even been the same guy) 1st and 2nd shots hit him while it was still being dropped off via RDV, 3rd hit blew him up just as he got in. Third tank was mobile, had no idea where I was, 3 shots ALL in his rear end, I was surprised I got this one as I thought he had pulled enough range. 4th tank I KNOW i had help from someone else as in-between my forge shots the tank was losing chunks of health. Forge gunning is the ONLY viable way to kill tanks as far as I can see. Then I have always thought forges are the bets weapon all round if I'm honest. I was obviously lucky, but if CCP can dig up the battle records I would be happy to prove I got the 3 tank kills with a 4th being shared. It is not impossible to kill tanks, HOWEVER if the tanker knows where you are he can probably just drive away with that crazy F1 car speed!!
knight of 6 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 815	Posted - 2013.12.11 14:11:00 - [107] - Quote more tanks = advantage... not really to many tanks is still a very bad thing. tankers are limited in where they can go and what they can do once they are there. most null cannons are very well protected from snipers and vehicles. this creates a problem in that while tankers are efficient slayers they can't hack objectives or use the whole map to their benefit. very often tankers can't even provide good cover fire for someone hacking an objective. "God favors the side with the best artillery" ~ Napoleon Ko6, scout, tanker. CLOSED BETA VET
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 228	Posted - 2013.12.11 14:34:00 - [108] - Quote IraqiFriendshipExplosive wrote: Look im not saying there isnt balance issue. God dont get me started. All I am saying, hand on heart is that with my character - CommanderBolt , earlier this morning I joined into a random pub match and to begin with it was me and one other dude vs like 4 tanks. As the match progressed more people joined. I decided I needed something to deal with the tanks so i ran to the nearest supply depot and got out my forge gun suit. First tank was driving past my position, charge.... hit. 2nd charge..... hit, 3rd charge and he blew up. second tank was being called in (Might have even been the same guy) 1st and 2nd shots hit him while it was still being dropped off via RDV, 3rd hit blew him up just as he got in. Third tank was mobile, had no idea where I was, 3 shots ALL in his rear end, I was surprised I got this one as I thought he had pulled enough range. 4th tank I KNOW i had help from someone else as in-between my forge shots the tank was losing chunks of health. Forge gunning is the ONLY viable way to kill tanks as far as I can see. Then I have always thought forges are the bets weapon all round if I'm honest. I was obviously lucky, but if CCP can dig up the battle records I would be happy to prove I got the 3 tank kills with a 4th being shared. It is not impossible to kill tanks, HOWEVER if the tanker knows where you are he can probably just drive away with that crazy F1 car speed!! I'd say well done - it does seem that way.... better go grab my forge gun...


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [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.