| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Long Evity
692
   |
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
Patrick57
Fatal Absolution
1996
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
You and Atiim have the same ideas.
*shudders*
When I'm depressed, I cut myself......A BIG SLICE OF CHOCOLATE CAKE!
|
Long Evity
692
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Patrick57 wrote:You and Atiim have the same ideas.
*shudders*
Everyone will come to this conclusion eventually.
We all agree tanks shouldn't be solo'd, but it's too much that one player can be so dominating without a hard counter.
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
Nocturnal Soul
Immortal Retribution
1262
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
No
"The trick to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources..." Albert Einstein
|
Anmol Singh
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
469
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
It makes no sense for one person to be powerful enough that a whole team has to dedicate a squad of tankers to win...
Sagaris lover!!!
|
Long Evity
692
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:34:00 -
[6] - Quote
Anmol Singh wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
It makes no sense for one person to be powerful enough that a whole team has to dedicate a squad of tankers to win...
wtf are you even talking about? What suit or situation requires 6 tanks to handle?
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
Anmol Singh
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
469
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:Anmol Singh wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
It makes no sense for one person to be powerful enough that a whole team has to dedicate a squad of tankers to win... wtf are you even talking about? What suit or situation requires 6 tanks to handle?
Sorry, I really have no clue, but what i mean to say was, It makes no sense for one player to take down a whole squad of tankers..
Sagaris lover!!!
|
Seigfried Warheit
99
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:36:00 -
[8] - Quote
Sounds like a interesting idea although there will a lot of slap fights as people try to get to the gunner seat first instead of driving. |
Patrick57
Fatal Absolution
1996
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:37:00 -
[9] - Quote
On-topic: I don't like it, personally. Giving up more than 1 person to operate 1 tank....no thanks. But there have been instances where a tanker I know needed people to get in his small turrets in order to take down an enemy tank, sort of teamwork.
When I'm depressed, I cut myself......A BIG SLICE OF CHOCOLATE CAKE!
|
True Adamance
Scions of Athra
4819
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
I've said this before buy HAV should have massively devastating and highly power main battle canon for anti tank combat, while small turrets are used by gunners to take down infantry.
"Shudder. Again another smart idea from an Amarr..."- Forlorn Destrier (11/12/13) LAWL
|
|
|
Patrick57
Fatal Absolution
1996
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:37:00 -
[11] - Quote
Anmol Singh wrote:Sorry, I really have no clue, but what i mean to say was, It makes no sense for one player to take down a whole squad of tankers..
If they're competent tankers, that wouldn't have worked even before 1.7
When I'm depressed, I cut myself......A BIG SLICE OF CHOCOLATE CAKE!
|
Seigfried Warheit
99
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:38:00 -
[12] - Quote
Anmol Singh wrote:Long Evity wrote:Anmol Singh wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
It makes no sense for one person to be powerful enough that a whole team has to dedicate a squad of tankers to win... wtf are you even talking about? What suit or situation requires 6 tanks to handle? Sorry, I really have no clue, but what i mean to say was, It makes no sense for one player to take down a whole squad of tankers..
That isnt what he is saying..he is saying tanks should work like lavs kinda.. have a driver and a gunner..not drive and gun at the same time |
Long Evity
695
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:41:00 -
[13] - Quote
Bolded the part some seem to of missed when reading OP. Hopefully that helps. 
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
Patrick57
Fatal Absolution
2000
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:43:00 -
[14] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
And wins every engagement at that.
When I'm depressed, I cut myself......A BIG SLICE OF CHOCOLATE CAKE!
|
Son-Of A-Gun
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
625
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:44:00 -
[15] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
Didn't have to read much of the OP. when you infantry start paying the price of three proto dropsuits to bring one clone to the battle then I will be ok with infantry soloing tanks. ISK is the balance factor here. Someone (one person out of they're own pocket) is paying to bring in the value of three protos for one death. Team work should be required.
{:)}{3GÇó>
HTFU: adapt or die
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1873
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:45:00 -
[16] - Quote
So this is your thread.
DUST 514 just went full COD.
Never go full COD.
|
Long Evity
695
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:47:00 -
[17] - Quote
Son-Of A-Gun wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
Didn't have to read much of the OP. when you infantry start paying the price of three proto dropsuits to bring one clone to the battle then I will be ok with infantry soloing tanks. ISK is the balance factor here. Someone (one person out of they're own pocket) is paying to bring in the value of three protos for one death. Team work should be required.
If you read the OP you'd feel dumb for posting this. I even highlighted the part I knew scrubs like you would miss.
EDIT: ah, in your quote it wasn't highlighted. So you're excused for missing it. 
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
Roger Cordill
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
204
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:49:00 -
[18] - Quote
Message from Godin: No. Quiet. |
Anmol Singh
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
471
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
Seigfried Warheit wrote:Anmol Singh wrote:Long Evity wrote:Anmol Singh wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
It makes no sense for one person to be powerful enough that a whole team has to dedicate a squad of tankers to win... wtf are you even talking about? What suit or situation requires 6 tanks to handle? Sorry, I really have no clue, but what i mean to say was, It makes no sense for one player to take down a whole squad of tankers.. That isnt what he is saying..he is saying tanks should work like lavs kinda.. have a driver and a gunner..not drive and gun at the same time
That is the worst idea ever, i payed for the tank, the noob in the turret gets the kills, this is going to turn out like dropships.
Sagaris lover!!!
|
Flix Keptick
Red Star.
EoN.
1528
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 01:51:00 -
[20] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:I've said this before buy HAV should have massively devastating and highly power main battle canon for anti tank combat, while small turrets are used by gunners to take down infantry.
Now that's an idea (sort of). We already have that, rail and missiles are meh vs infantry. But then, what would tanks be used for? I they are not effective vs infantry than who would bother bringing in another tank to counter it?
"HP needs no buff, certain weapons need nerf. Or else all other become obsolete."
GÿåForum warrior lvl.1Gÿå
|
|
|
Stinker Butt
Ostrakon Agency
Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 02:00:00 -
[21] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
I've posted the same thing multiple times over the past year.
Math from a Tankers perspective (remember, most of them flunked kindergarten):
1. 3v1 is balance - it should require at least 3 AVers to take a solo tanker
2. 1 tank dominating an entire team for 5+ matches before dieing is balance.
3. Advance tank should always trump proto anti-vehicle
With this new crap update, I've spent more sp on my suit than a tanker, more isk on my lav+suit than a tank, and yet they will still argue that they deserve to win every time in 1v1. Don't try to speak logic to them. They'll only cry and try to bring you down to their level of stupidity.
CCP will always listen to the people that cry the most. I used to think that they had good customer service, but now I know they lack any real common sense of creating a competitive fps. I don't think the devs even play their own game before updates are released. I refuse to believe they actually thought 1.7 was good while playing it. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
4129
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 02:02:00 -
[22] - Quote
Tanks are primarily designed to fight against other tanks.
Missiles and Railguns are both MUCH better as AV weapons than they are at hitting infantry. Blaster Tanks are murderous against infantry, but die really fast against other tanks, which they can't hurt anywhere near as effectively.
So the best AV against Rail and Missile tanks is infantry AV, and the best AV against Blaster tanks is another tank. It's like how AV infantry struggle at best when fighting other infantry, but they do a lot of damage to vehicles.
Is the balance perfect as-is? No. Do some kinks need working out? Yes. Is there a bug that a LOT of players are exploiting for magical flying tanks? Yes.
A lone AV guy may not kill a tank, but unless it's fitted for anti-infantry work, he should be quite capable of surviving as long as it does. Your goal as AV isn't necessarily to KILL the tank - you just need to keep pressure on it so that it can't kill your teammates. In honour of this EXTREMELY important role, I'm bringing back the suggestion that they need to revive vehicle damage WP, because that was really helpful. |
Patrick57
Fatal Absolution
2005
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 02:03:00 -
[23] - Quote
Stinker Butt wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
I've posted the same thing multiple times over the past year. Math from a Tankers perspective (remember, most of them flunked kindergarten): 1. 3v1 is balance - it should require at least 3 AVers to take a solo tanker 2. 1 tank dominating an entire team for 5+ matches before dieing is balance. 3. Advance tank should always trump proto anti-vehicle With this new crap update, I've spent more sp on my suit than a tanker, more isk on my lav+suit than a tank, and yet they will still argue that they deserve to win every time in 1v1. Don't try to speak logic to them. They'll only cry and try to bring you down to their level of stupidity. CCP will always listen to the people that cry the most. I used to think that they had good customer service, but now I know they lack any real common sense of creating a competitive fps. I don't think the devs even play their own game before updates are released. I refuse to believe they actually thought 1.7 was good while playing it.
+1 for flunking kindergarten.
And +infinity for everything else.
When I'm depressed, I cut myself......A BIG SLICE OF CHOCOLATE CAKE!
|
Tau Lai
Isuuaya Tactical
Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 02:05:00 -
[24] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
I bolded the part some of you may of skipped over.
This. |
Son-Of A-Gun
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
625
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 02:09:00 -
[25] - Quote
Patrick57 wrote:Stinker Butt wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
I've posted the same thing multiple times over the past year. Math from a Tankers perspective (remember, most of them flunked kindergarten): 1. 3v1 is balance - it should require at least 3 AVers to take a solo tanker 2. 1 tank dominating an entire team for 5+ matches before dieing is balance. 3. Advance tank should always trump proto anti-vehicle With this new crap update, I've spent more sp on my suit than a tanker, more isk on my lav+suit than a tank, and yet they will still argue that they deserve to win every time in 1v1. Don't try to speak logic to them. They'll only cry and try to bring you down to their level of stupidity. CCP will always listen to the people that cry the most. I used to think that they had good customer service, but now I know they lack any real common sense of creating a competitive fps. I don't think the devs even play their own game before updates are released. I refuse to believe they actually thought 1.7 was good while playing it. +1 for flunking kindergarten. And +infinity for everything else.
I'd be just fine with AV soloing tanks if completely fit tanks cost as much as a completly fit drop suit. I'd have absolutly no problem with that.
{:)}{3GÇó>
HTFU: adapt or die
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1879
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 02:17:00 -
[26] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Tanks are primarily designed to fight against other tanks.
Missiles and Railguns are both MUCH better as AV weapons than they are at hitting infantry. Blaster Tanks are murderous against infantry, but die really fast against other tanks, which they can't hurt anywhere near as effectively.
So the best AV against Rail and Missile tanks is infantry AV, and the best AV against Blaster tanks is another tank. It's like how AV infantry struggle at best when fighting other infantry, but they do a lot of damage to vehicles.
Is the balance perfect as-is? No. Do some kinks need working out? Yes. Is there a bug that a LOT of players are exploiting for magical flying tanks? Yes.
A lone AV guy may not kill a tank, but unless it's fitted for anti-infantry work, he should be quite capable of surviving as long as it does. Your goal as AV isn't necessarily to KILL the tank - you just need to keep pressure on it so that it can't kill your teammates. In honor of this EXTREMELY important role, I'm bringing back the suggestion that they need to revive vehicle damage WP, because that was really helpful.
No, our only goal as AV is to KILL the tank. If it wasn't our goal, CCP wouldn't have changed it to where we no longer receive points for damaging a vehicle, but only when the vehicle is destroyed. We also wouldn't be titled "ANTI-Vehicle.
If you can supply a quote and link from a CCP developer saying that the role of AV is to simply "suppress" a vehicle, then you can feel free to say otherwise.
The role of AV is important how? I can grab a Sica or Soma that's better at AV than my Wyrikomi Swarm Launcher, Allotek Plasma Cannon, and Ishukone Assault Forge Gun could ever hope to possibly become.
DUST 514 just went full COD.
Never go full COD.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1879
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 02:20:00 -
[27] - Quote
Son-Of A-Gun wrote:
I'd be just fine with AV soloing tanks if completely fit tanks cost as much as a completly fit drop suit. I'd have absolutly no problem with that.
They already do.
The hull itself costs 97,500 ISK. That's nearly half the cost of my best AV fit and is waaay less than my PRO logi fit.
If the price of HAVs were reduced anymore, they'd be spammed infinitely with little to no concern or consequence whatsoever.
Oh wait 
DUST 514 just went full COD.
Never go full COD.
|
Kuroiokami Tsukinaku
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
Renegade Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 02:35:00 -
[28] - Quote
I've suggested similar in the past too. Let the tank owner drive and tank (it's their dime)... But reduce his combat ability unless he has two gunners. -10% dmg, -20% scan for each empty seat. Sure, it can still live as long, but an equal tank with 2 gunners will win a duel.
And the isk argument is so silly. First, isk does not scale to survivability. A proto scout can still die to a militia assault. If I spend more I increase my chances.. I don't buy a gauretee that a sqd is required to kill me.
Does this game require teamwork or not? Or is that just an empty banner to talley behind. |
Stinker Butt
Ostrakon Agency
Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 13:30:00 -
[29] - Quote
Son-Of A-Gun wrote:
I'd be just fine with AV soloing tanks if completely fit tanks cost as much as a completly fit drop suit. I'd have absolutly no problem with that.
And that is the way it should be. Of course the tanker has probably already killed 10+ infantry before the proto AV player has gotten to him, but whatever. it'll never be perfect.
As someone else pointed out, paying more isk shouldn't give you any guarantees. But that sense of entitlement that tankers get by paying more should go away with cheaper prices. |
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service
RISE of LEGION
328
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 13:38:00 -
[30] - Quote
Son-Of A-Gun wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
Didn't have to read much of the OP. when you infantry start paying the price of three proto dropsuits to bring one clone to the battle then I will be ok with infantry soloing tanks. ISK is the balance factor here. Someone (one person out of they're own pocket) is paying to bring in the value of three protos for one death. Team work should be required.
ISK was never a balancing factor otherwise starter fits would never be able to bring down a proto suit...you pay ISK for flexibility on the battlefield and for better protection but thats it.
Believe it or not you are better protected in a tank and you this was true in 1.6 as well although I admit tanking was too expensive in 1.6... |
|
|
Jack McReady
DUST University
Ivy League
853
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 13:43:00 -
[31] - Quote
Son-Of A-Gun wrote:
I'd be just fine with AV soloing tanks if completely fit tanks cost as much as a completly fit drop suit. I'd have absolutly no problem with that.
tanks are now cheaper than full proto fits |
knight of 6
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
826
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 13:48:00 -
[32] - Quote
this thread has been around since closed beta, your idea isn't new nor original. it has been answered 1000s of times conclusively.
NO
why? because tanking is expensive not only isk wise but SP wise as well. why should it take two people to operate a machine that I could literally have all my SP in, if I don't have a gunner I can't play. I'll burn in hell before another blueberry gets in my tank(offence intended blueberry gunners you are like cancer, I could gun better with only my feet).
"AVers should be able to solo tanks but it should take 2 people one person operating the legs and the other the av weapon"
"logis don't need a nerf but one person should operate the legs and another should aim and shoot"
no, why? what if I don't have my better half? should I just sit and twiddle my thumbs? OH wait I can't sit I just stare at my couch thinking how comfy it looks. *glares at CCP*
"God favors the side with the best artillery" ~ Napoleon
Ko6, scout, tanker.
CLOSED BETA VET
|
Long Evity
708
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 13:51:00 -
[33] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:this thread has been around since closed beta, your idea isn't new nor original. it has been answered 1000s of times conclusively.
NO
why? because tanking is expensive not only isk wise but SP wise as well. why should it take two people to operate a machine that I could literally have all my SP in, if I don't have a gunner I can't play. I'll burn in hell before another blueberry gets in my tank(offence intended blueberry gunners you are like cancer, I could gun better with only my feet).
"AVers should be able to solo tanks but it should take 2 people one person operating the legs and the other the av weapon"
"logis don't need a nerf but one person should operate the legs and another should aim and shoot"
no, why? what if I don't have my better half? should I just sit and twiddle my thumbs? OH wait I can't sit I just stare at my couch thinking how comfy it looks. *glares at CCP*
Did you read the post, or did you see keywords and your brain went numb?
And tank costs have been reduced.
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
knight of 6
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
826
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 13:59:00 -
[34] - Quote
So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
it makes on sense that an armored vehicle shouldn't have a crew of operators.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
unoriginal Idea about separating driving and gunning
QQ,
no other vehicles do it why can you (bar ADS)
assault dropships suck so it's okay for them
read the OP!!!!!1!1! i bolded it for you!
"God favors the side with the best artillery" ~ Napoleon
Ko6, scout, tanker.
CLOSED BETA VET
|
Mobius Wyvern
Guardian Solutions
DARKSTAR ARMY
4072
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:01:00 -
[35] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
I bolded the part some of you may of skipped over.
The funny thing about this is that while the scrubby tankers would quit, people like me would turn into unkillable juggernauts far beyond your worst nightmare.
I'm far better at driving than shooting, and I've got a few friends that can lay down some serious pain in a turret. If I could keep the vehicle constantly mobile while my gunner could fire the main turret in all directions, you would never be able to stop me.
Amidst the blue skies
A link from past to future
The sheltering wings of the protector
|
Long Evity
709
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:05:00 -
[36] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
it makes on sense that an armored vehicle shouldn't have a crew of operators.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
unoriginal Idea about separating driving and gunning
QQ,
no other vehicles do it why can you (bar ADS)
assault dropships suck so it's okay for them
read the OP!!!!!1!1! i bolded it for you!
Is this your attempt or trolling - or is this how the world is seen through your eyes? Lol
Not that I didn't expect tankers to come in here and QQ about this idea - obviously it's an old one, you're talking to someone whose been on the forums for longer then your entire corp.
But if tankers get to spout there bad logic so do the rest of us.
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
trraacx
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:07:00 -
[37] - Quote
I'm dying at the same rate to tankers as I ever have. Nine time out of ten when it happens it is due to my not paying attention. When a tank comes around, you go somewhere else.
I don't play ambush, I can see how that might be an issue. |
RuckingFetard
Better Hide R Die
605
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:09:00 -
[38] - Quote
Stinker Butt wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
I've posted the same thing multiple times over the past year. Math from a Tankers perspective (remember, most of them flunked kindergarten): 1. 3v1 is balance - it should require at least 3 AVers to take a solo tanker 2. 1 tank dominating an entire team for 5+ matches before dieing is balance. 3. Advance tank should always trump proto anti-vehicle With this new crap update, I've spent more sp on my suit than a tanker, more isk on my lav+suit than a tank, and yet they will still argue that they deserve to win every time in 1v1. Don't try to speak logic to them. They'll only cry and try to bring you down to their level of stupidity. CCP will always listen to the people that cry the most. I used to think that they had good customer service, but now I know they lack any real common sense of creating a competitive fps. I don't think the devs even play their own game before updates are released. I refuse to believe they actually thought 1.7 was good while playing it.
Damn that flunking kindergarten bit still has me cackling like an idiot even after 5 minutes
The Last Of The BHD
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
EoN.
1866
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:11:00 -
[39] - Quote
OP number of problems with this idea
Who skills up what for the vehicle and turrrets and mods?
Would both players have to skill up excatly the same things to use it?
How would it effect a python?
Where is my vehicle lock so i dont get a bluedot in my turret or as a driver?
|
chase rowland
The Enclave Syndicate
Dark Taboo
112
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:12:00 -
[40] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
I bolded the part some of you may of skipped over.
if you hate vehicles then go to COD. this isn't COD, your posting in the wrong forums. |
|
|
Long Evity
712
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:20:00 -
[41] - Quote
chase rowland wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
I bolded the part some of you may of skipped over. if you hate vehicles then go to COD. this isn't COD, your posting in the wrong forums.
Yet another wild idiot appears.
"I DONT LIKE YOUR IDEA GO BACK TO COD!"
If you like tanks so ******* much how about you go play World of Tanks? Or better yet, break your console and PC and tell your internet company you don't need them anymore and do us all a favor so we don't get more posts from you screaming how ******** you are.
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1896
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:29:00 -
[42] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:this thread has been around since closed beta, your idea isn't new nor original. it has been answered 1000s of times conclusively.
NO
why? because tanking is expensive not only isk wise but SP wise as well. why should it take two people to operate a machine that I could literally have all my SP in, if I don't have a gunner I can't play. I'll burn in hell before another blueberry gets in my tank(offence intended blueberry gunners you are like cancer, I could gun better with only my feet).
"AVers should be able to solo tanks but it should take 2 people one person operating the legs and the other the av weapon"
"logis don't need a nerf but one person should operate the legs and another should aim and shoot"
no, why? what if I don't have my better half? should I just sit and twiddle my thumbs? OH wait I can't sit I just stare at my couch thinking how comfy it looks. *glares at CCP*
As expected.
Tanking is no longer Expensive. My best AV fit costs twice as much as most tanks on the battlefield. Any they aren't an SP sink either. You don't have to max out even half of the skills to be good against AV. Heck even MLT HAVs with MLT mods can withstand PRO AV try again.
AV can't solo a vehicle anymore. Try again.
If you have the ability to require an entire squad to destroy, then you should require more than 1 person to operate.
"Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me" Such is the motto of vehicle pilots. Now proven.
DUST 514 just went full COD.
Never go full COD.
|
HowDidThatTaste
Ancient Exiles.
Renegade Alliance
4167
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:31:00 -
[43] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:this thread has been around since closed beta, your idea isn't new nor original. it has been answered 1000s of times conclusively.
NO
why? because tanking is expensive not only isk wise but SP wise as well. why should it take two people to operate a machine that I could literally have all my SP in, if I don't have a gunner I can't play. I'll burn in hell before another blueberry gets in my tank(offence intended blueberry gunners you are like cancer, I could gun better with only my feet).
"AVers should be able to solo tanks but it should take 2 people one person operating the legs and the other the av weapon"
"logis don't need a nerf but one person should operate the legs and another should aim and shoot"
no, why? what if I don't have my better half? should I just sit and twiddle my thumbs? OH wait I can't sit I just stare at my couch thinking how comfy it looks. *glares at CCP*
Well a heavy has to run with a logi to be competitive so I believe there is precedence for this idea of needing two to run a tank. |
HYENAKILLER X
AGGRESSIVE TYPE
393
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:32:00 -
[44] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
I bolded the part some of you may of skipped over.
Oooooooooor just let me equip an ar with my missle luancher.
You are welcome for my leadership
*Proven Aggressive Type
|
Long Evity
712
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:33:00 -
[45] - Quote
HYENAKILLER X wrote:Long Evity wrote:So, I'm seeing a lot of responses from tankers replying to AV QQ, and it's mostly: It should always take team work to down a tank!
But, let's reverse that. It should also take teamwork to USE a tank.
It makes no sense for 1 player to be powerful enough that the other side needs to dedicate half a squad to deal with. Now, I'm not implying tanks should be solo'd, but the way they're used vs the way they're countered don't match up.
If it costs my team 3 AV'ers to push your tanks back - then it should cost the other side at least 2 players to use the tank properly.
So, my suggestion, is take away tanks ability to drive and shoot. They either pilot - or they shoot.
"If they implement this idea I'm quitting tanks!" Good, gtfo. Quitting tanks because you can't be a god on the field just proves you were only in it to be better then everyone else. Why are LAV and most DS limited to being the pilot or turret driver - but a tank, with more HP and power, doesn't?
"Assault dropships..." Still suck. Ever tried aiming with one? It's not as easy as it is a tank, so it's far more acceptable, not to mention how easy it is to push one off you or others, or just blow them up. 1v1, FG vs Assault DS - the FG still wins.
I bolded the part some of you may of skipped over. Oooooooooor just let me equip an ar with my missle luancher.
It's called a commando suit. You're welcome.
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
knight of 6
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
826
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 14:58:00 -
[46] - Quote
Atiim wrote:knight of 6 wrote:this thread has been around since closed beta, your idea isn't new nor original. it has been answered 1000s of times conclusively.
NO
why? because tanking is expensive not only isk wise but SP wise as well. why should it take two people to operate a machine that I could literally have all my SP in, if I don't have a gunner I can't play. I'll burn in hell before another blueberry gets in my tank(offence intended blueberry gunners you are like cancer, I could gun better with only my feet).
"AVers should be able to solo tanks but it should take 2 people one person operating the legs and the other the av weapon"
"logis don't need a nerf but one person should operate the legs and another should aim and shoot"
no, why? what if I don't have my better half? should I just sit and twiddle my thumbs? OH wait I can't sit I just stare at my couch thinking how comfy it looks. *glares at CCP* As expected. Tanking is no longer Expensive. My best AV fit costs twice as much as most tanks on the battlefield. Any they aren't an SP sink either. You don't have to max out even half of the skills to be good against AV. Heck even MLT HAVs with MLT mods can withstand PRO AV try again. AV can't solo a vehicle anymore. Try again. If you have the ability to require an entire squad to destroy, then you should require more than 1 person to operate. "Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me" Such is the motto of vehicle pilots. Now proven.
I have the ability to take an entire squad to destroy for 30 seconds, better tankers than me have that ability for a minute. stop trying to destroy tanks that are in cycle. could you destroy an armor tank that was in a rep cycle in 1.6? no, you waited for it to fall out of cycle then hit it out of cycle. maybe armor tanks are OP but I wouldn't know, I'm a shield tanker. CCP gave us "waves of opportunity" if you hit us during a "wave of opportunity" prepare to die.
also, if you're dead set on separating drivers and gunners. who needs the turret skills and who needs the driving skills? what happens if you don't get your usual gunner/driver and the replacement doesn't have the same skills?
"God favors the side with the best artillery" ~ Napoleon
Ko6, scout, tanker.
CLOSED BETA VET
|
Jack McReady
DUST University
Ivy League
866
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 15:02:00 -
[47] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:
also, if you're dead set on separating drivers and gunners. who needs the turret skills and who needs the driving skills? what happens if you don't get your usual gunner/driver and the replacement doesn't have the same skills?
isnt it already the case the the tank weapons benefit from the skills of all people in the vehicle ? |
knight of 6
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
826
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 15:06:00 -
[48] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:knight of 6 wrote:
also, if you're dead set on separating drivers and gunners. who needs the turret skills and who needs the driving skills? what happens if you don't get your usual gunner/driver and the replacement doesn't have the same skills?
isnt it already the case the the tank weapons benefit from the skills of all people in the vehicle ?
so, the partner needs no skill whatsoever as long as the owner of the tank has the skills required? as is currently the case...
next question what is there to prevent the wrong person from entering the vehicle?
"God favors the side with the best artillery" ~ Napoleon
Ko6, scout, tanker.
CLOSED BETA VET
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1896
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 15:21:00 -
[49] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:
I have the ability to take an entire squad to destroy for 30 seconds, better tankers than me have that ability for a minute. stop trying to destroy tanks that are in cycle. could you destroy an armor tank that was in a rep cycle in 1.6? no, you waited for it to fall out of cycle then hit it out of cycle. maybe armor tanks are OP but I wouldn't know, I'm a shield tanker. CCP gave us "waves of opportunity" if you hit us during a "wave of opportunity" prepare to die.
also, if you're dead set on separating drivers and gunners. who needs the turret skills and who needs the driving skills? what happens if you don't get your usual gunner/driver and the replacement doesn't have the same skills?
Swarm Launchers have a 20% damage bonus to armor. They are designed to devastate armored vehicles. An armor tanker complaining about Swarm Launchers is like someone in a Caldari suit complaining about Scrambler Rifles.
And anyone can destroy a vehicle in it's rep cycle. Now while it hardners are on is a whole other story.
"Waves of Opportunity"? Your vehicles even without NOS move way too fast to actually have a "wave of opportunity". And a dropship can literally fly above your lock range and still allow troops to spawn in. They can also fly 176m above you when their hardners die and be literally invincible to Swarm Launchers.
1.6? I find it hilariously ironic how I could easily survive volleys and clips of PRO AV, yet proclaimed "vets" couldn't. I find it hilarious how my corpmate, The True Inferno's ADS could even survive my PRO AV when I went against him, yet proclaimed "vets" couldn't. Either I was really good, or pilots just plain suck at their jobs.
And I've even seen these forum pilots in action before. You know what they do when they are being attacked by AV? Stand there.
Heck, even a MLT DS that was fitted properly could survive PRO AV.
Yet proclaimed "vets" couldn't.
DUST 514 just went full COD.
Never go full COD.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
1896
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 15:26:00 -
[50] - Quote
Also, knight of 6, we can easily make things work like turrets do now.
The person deploying the vehicle needs to have the skills to operate the turret, but anyone can operate it.
Done.
Now you can't be a 1 man squad and are forced to use teamwork against others who are forced to use teamwork.
"Teamwork for thee, so teamwork for me." -Such is the motto of Anti-Vehicle infantry.
(And SoTa PoP, though I'm not sure what he is)
DUST 514 just went full COD.
Never go full COD.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |