|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Commander Tzu
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
53
   |
Posted - 2013.12.12 07:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
So, I am making a serious thread about AV and tanks because it seems the forums have been flooded with QQ and sarcasm (I helped on that last one). Before I begin though, I would like to address two points that people have brought up that I don't believe are relevant to the question of are tanks balanced right now or not.
- First, fuel injectors. It seems CCP accidentally added an extra 0 somewhere and now tanks can move like the Galactica. I don't think anyone is saying these aren't bugged/glitched/OP and it seems an easy hotfix will bring these back in line with what they were intended to be (or maybe removed all together with the new speed of vehicles?).
- Second, the sheer number of tanks currently roaming the battlefields of New Eden. Again, this is probably going to get worked out in a week or two. Just like Combat and Rail rifles are filling my kill feed, in a week or two people will stop calling in militia and LP tanks just to try them.
Now, to the main point. People are complaining that their swarms and AV nades aren't affecting shield tanks while their hardeners are up. Well, that's kinda the point isn't it? For 30-45 seconds, a tank has a large bonus to damage resistance and can take a lot of damage, especially from AV weapons designed to kill armor instead of shield tanks, then it has a long cool down where it is vulnerable. Even with a hardener up, forge guns and flux nades can still hurt a shield tank. As soon as that hardener runs out, the 3-4k shield hp can get devoured by swarms and AV, not to mention single forge gun shots taking 45% or more shield hp off a Gunnlogi. Armor tanks, on the other hand have a slightly different setup, being vulnerable to swarms and av nades and being resistant to forge and flux. With armor tanks, same rules apply, swarms will WTFBOOM an armor tank without a hardener on and still do enough damage to put the hurt on the tank with it on. With hardeners having a VERY obvious effect, it seems AV has no excuse not to attack when the hardeners are down, or know when they will need to make sure they have plenty of firepower. As far as people complaining that tanks no longer need teamwork, the fact is it's not true. Assuming no fuel injector and the AV player makes the smart choice to get as close as possible (and equal meta levels and sp), the AV player can solo a tank by catching him with his hardeners on cool down or baiting him to use his hardeners and then getting in a position to do the former.
Well that's all I have for now, I need to get to bed as I have a final exam in a few hours. If you want to QQ or simply insult people from the other side of the argument go to my other thread that is markedly less serious than this. Join the discussion and DFTBA.
|
Commander Tzu
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
53
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 07:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Repe Susi wrote:One problem I saw yesterday:
When the tank starts getting swarms and other AV against it, it's hardener and fuel injector time. Dash away with that incredible speed where you can't be touched and when in full health, come back to the battlefield to wreak havoc.
Not good.
Read the first item in the original post's list please. |
Commander Tzu
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
62
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 13:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:Leovarian L Lavitz wrote:I believe that by design both teams are supposed to field a number of tanks, dropships, and lavs in addition to infantry. 10 infantry taking points with 6 vehicles doing vehicle things. it is way easier to camp a cru with a squad of sicas. And now its cheaper than protosuits. I wonder which game these blueberries will purchase instead of playing dust for free
There's a lot of people saying essentially this same thing, so instead of getting all of them in on this I will be lazy this morning and just quote you.
One thing comes to mind immediately, which is: why would you spawn on a CRU that is being camped, whether it is by tanks or infantry. I ran Dragonfly scouts and Ravens almost as much as my tanks before 1.7, and I have been in this situation before. Protip: Drop Uplinks and profile dampened scout suits are your friend in this scenario; just spawn in somewhere other than the CRU, if it is being camped by a full squad that means there is only ten people left to cover the rest of the map. People are saying that having to assign a whole squad of AV to kill tanks is lame because then you lose those 6 people and it becomes 14 v 10 or something near that. But, if they have 6 tanks on a CRU then you are in the same situation that AV people are complaining about being in; now your team has the advantage in suits for other areas of the map. You could have 3 people spawning on uplinks near the CRU hitting the tanks with AV and hiding; effectively taking a whole squad out of action for a little while and giving your team the +3 advantage. Now, if they have infantry then it is a slightly different story because then all I can say is ninja those other objectives out from under their whole team camping that one CRU. Militia tanks cost less than protosuits yea, but fully proto fitted AV suits can wreck militia tanks. Hardeners for militia tanks have a VERY long cool down. Of course, theoretically, you could always call in an equal amount of cheap militia tanks. Or one Gunnlogi or Madrugar who knows what they are doing. But honestly, go buy some militia tanks and fit them, I can even help to get you a really good militia fit, and run them for a few matches. I bet you will notice there is a lot less AV than before 1.7, and that when you actually find av it will be more potent than you think. |
Commander Tzu
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
63
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 17:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Designing vehicles to take advantage of "waves of opportunity" sounds great until you factor in that even without the glitch, tanks are insanely fast now, maps are wicked small, redlines exist, and we don't have E War.
If you want to be AV now, you need an AV vehicle. Otherwise, you're just tickling someones Elmo.
You forgot forge guns. Even with their charge time nerf they can do hella damage to tanks, and best of all they actually have to aim. On a related note the funniest thing about all this is people complaining how easy tanks are now. Really now, you have to literally be blind to miss the signs when to attack an enemy tank, and even with hardeners on swarms and forges can hit hard vs the type of tank they are designed to kill. I agree though we don't really need any fuel injectors, tanks are fast enough now they can get out of harms way in a timely manner but still take 2-3 hits depending on the range/type of weapon.
Also I would just like to point out how funny it is that before 1.7 AVers accused tankers of not being able to use teamwork and now 6 of us camp a CRU and AVers cry some more. =D |
Commander Tzu
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
64
|
Posted - 2013.12.12 19:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
Monkey MAC wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:Tanks working as intended.
Vehicle > infantry. And where did you get this? Vehicles should never be better than infantry, they should be equal! I have told you so many goddamn times, that's linear escalation game play and that is a bad thing!
I think it is pretty equal if you don't take into consideration the broken fuel injectors, which I think they should be removed entirely. I just ran a match where my Madrugar didn't have anything at all to fear from infantry, because out of 16 people none decided to go grab their swarms. Tanks have hardeners that make them very resilient for a limited period of time, in between being able to use hardeners even one person with militia swarms could have out damaged my armor repper and forced me to either commit to fighting or retreat. That's the trade off. Tanks are only at their max part of the time, AV is at their max ALL the time. This is a good thing, because tanks can be tanks sometimes, but have to decide when and where to use their modules. AV on the other hand is in a position to take advantage of any opportunity the tanks are weakened due to their modules being in cooldown. My proto Madrugar is pretty hopeless when my hardeners turn off and there are proto swarms near me. |
Commander Tzu
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
67
|
Posted - 2013.12.13 00:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
Summ Dude wrote:Commander Tzu wrote:Even with a hardener up, forge guns and flux nades can still hurt a shield tank. As soon as that hardener runs out, the 3-4k shield hp can get devoured by swarms and AV, not to mention single forge gun shots taking 45% or more shield hp off a Gunnlogi. Ya know forge guns are railguns, therefore doing more damage to armor than shields, right?
They still do more damage to shields than swarms do, they not only have a higher base damage but I believe they only have a -10 damage modifier as opposed to -20. This, coupled with the fact shield tanks have lower hp than armor tanks means forge guns are better than swarms against them. That being said, plasma cannons are pretty good with their 20% bonus, yes they only have one shot but as I said earlier shield tanks have rather low shield hp and when the hardeners are down a single shot can do quite a lot of damage.
Shijima Kuraimaru wrote:You know, I keep looking at the market place and I still can't find a tank. All I can find are those HAVs.
Just because it looks like a tank doesn't mean it is one. For example...
The BTR-T Heavy Armored Personnel Carrier. (Yes, I know the HAV isn't a personnel carrier, but that doesn't necessarily make it a tank either.)
Otherwise most of you are just falling into...
10. Thou shalt not claim that because a premise is popular, it must be true. (Bandwagon fallacy)
Well the marketplace only has Mass Drivers, these things launch grenades with a parabolic trajectory and, when they explode, send shrapnel and a concussion wave out to injure or kill. Occam's razor and a form of inductive reasoning sometimes called the "duck test" would seem to indicate that the Mass Driver is a grenade launcher, at least by our definition. We can use the same reasoning to reasonably conclude that HAVs are, in fact, tanks. Another thing to do is define "tank", which according to Merriam-Webster is: "an enclosed heavily armed and armored combat vehicle that moves on tracks." Enclosed? Check. Heavy? Well it is a Heavy Assault Vehicle, check. Combat vehicle that moves on tracks? Check and check. Other definitions include that it must have a cannon, which it does, and be designed for front-line combat as opposed to a more support role. Check the description and it is clear all the vehicles classified as HAVs by the game were designed for front-line combat.
As far as comparing the HAVs we have to a BTR, an infantry fighting vehicle, it actually is important that our HAVs aren't personnel carriers because that is one of the characteristics that make something an Infantry Fighting Vehicle. And while it doesn't MAKE it a tank, It is a characteristic that can prevent it from being a tank.
Lots of people agree that humans need oxygen to survive, and even though it's a popular idea it doesn't make it any less true. The bandwagon fallacy only works when your acceptance that a claim is true is based solely on the fact that it is possible.
I would also leave you with a quote from the ever insightful Bard: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." |
|
|
| |
|