DUST Search - to AVers

Slag Emberforge wrote:

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

Zero Harpuia wrote:

Stinker Butt wrote:

Ivy Zalinto wrote:

Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota.

Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough...

Why not? You have provided no arguement. Just one fools opinion.

so here is my response. One person should be able to solo a tank. Think much?

That sounds fair. There is only ONE person manning the HAV, so it should only take ONE person to remove him from play. Simple arithmetic.

Then the tanker has no motivation to play, since his tank can be canceled out by a single suit. He would be served just as well using a regular suit, and for cheaper.

This couldn't be more wrong. The tanker should be able to be taken out by an equally or better skilled and armed AV infantry,
This is not the same as stating its equivalent to a drop suit. Tankers encounter zero resistance and faceroll AI based infantry, and have the capacity to kill AV and V alike.

Meanwhile AV is seriously gimped at AI, giving up all of that power to focus on a support role. That is keeping their team alive by destroying vehicles, and stopping the literal infantry wrecking ball that is a tank.

Dropping extra ISK should never give you the ability skip teamwork. That's the point of this game. If you require teamwork to be destroyed you should require team work to be operated.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jastad D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 328	Posted - 2013.12.14 11:38:00 - [31] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Then according to your model, AV should not have sidearms, tanks shouldn't be allowed to shoot them, and infantry already can't hurt tanks. That's true rock paper scissors. And that model is asinine. A heavy vehicle should take a heavy weapon to solo. Light weapons should solo light vehicles, and take multiple light weapons to down heavy vehicles. Limiting the amount of HAVs that can deploy would give light weapons the ability to use said numbers to overpower a tank without worrying about a tanker swarm. In turn, tanks rely on infantry to keep the enemy AV at bay. Again, Iet's see if you understand, don't have MUCH hope in but let's give a try since you are a scrub tanker. NO ONE is asking for AV to be sure Kill. But tanks need some CONS. They simply don't have cons right now. 'Cause they only limit, the Cooldown time, is negated by their ABSURD speed. Once the FORGE was with me. Now i belong to the Dark side...My Forge is called Imperial Scrambler.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 283	Posted - 2013.12.14 11:48:00 - [32] - Quote Jastad wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Then according to your model, AV should not have sidearms, tanks shouldn't be allowed to shoot them, and infantry already can't hurt tanks. That's true rock paper scissors. And that model is asinine. A heavy vehicle should take a heavy weapon to solo. Light weapons should solo light vehicles, and take multiple light weapons to down heavy vehicles. Limiting the amount of HAVs that can deploy would give light weapons the ability to use said numbers to overpower a tank without worrying about a tanker swarm. In turn, tanks rely on infantry to keep the enemy AV at bay. Again, Iet's see if you understand, don't have MUCH hope in but let's give a try since you are a scrub tanker. NO ONE is asking for AV to be sure Kill. But tanks need some CONS. They simply don't have cons right now. 'Cause they only limit, the Cooldown time, is negated by their ABSURD speed. CCP Remnant said they hotfixed the militia overdrive bug, and are looking at turning speed on HAVs down some. I suggested limiting HAV to one or two, because then their power is limited by a lack of mobility and tank backup. Hopefully you get that. Being scrub AV and all.
Our Deepest Regret The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 371	Posted - 2013.12.14 12:21:00 - [33] - Quote Tanks are performing to their uprising price tag. I love how cheap they are now, but in the name of balance, they require a price reflective of their performance to discourage mindless spamming. Now that they're truly worth a million isk, why are they being given away for next to nothing? I pugged against STB. Lost five or six tanks. LoL, so what? This is not good behavior to encourage...
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 933	Posted - 2013.12.14 13:04:00 - [34] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: A simple question. I've heard the argument that a sica costs 57k isk and your proto suit costs 200k+, which isn't fair. Didn't tankers say the same thing when tanks were upwards of a million isk, and yall said that wasn't a valid excuse? Be honest, yall know who you are that did this. another biased tunnelvision tank driver detected. point was, tanks already could survive AV for 20s from a single guy, if you could not you simply had a **** fit and/or not enough SP in tanks. that is why it was not a valid point. now you can hop into MLT tank with zero SP and low amounts of isk but be more effective than any suit on the field. that is why it is a valid point.
Our Deepest Regret The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 373	Posted - 2013.12.14 13:17:00 - [35] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: A simple question. I've heard the argument that a sica costs 57k isk and your proto suit costs 200k+, which isn't fair. Didn't tankers say the same thing when tanks were upwards of a million isk, and yall said that wasn't a valid excuse? Be honest, yall know who you are that did this. another biased tunnelvision tank driver detected. point was, tanks already could survive AV for 20s from a single guy, if you could not you simply had a **** fit and/or not enough SP in tanks. that is why it was not a valid point. now you can hop into MLT tank with zero SP and low amounts of isk but be more effective than any suit on the field. that is why it is a valid point. I had a good defensive fit on my madrugar back in 1.6. 2 hardeners, one heavy shield, pg expansion, One industrial heavy repper, and a nitro booster. I couldn't take AV shelling for 20 seconds straight, however. The pattern was: take a huge hit, watch my armor drop, panic, hit my hardener, nitro the hell out of there, turn a corner activate reps, run away if they're chasing me. There's nothing different about the current play style in that regard, except that tanks are faster off the bat, and you don't have to activate reps manually. I can't emphasize this enough, however: There were no invincible godzilla tanks, no secret indestructible fits, no nothing. Madruguars were the only game in town, swarm launchers had dumb fire to go with their bonus damage to armor, and the only ones having fun were the AV guys.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution 2519	Posted - 2013.12.14 13:33:00 - [36] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: A simple question. I've heard the argument that a sica costs 57k isk and your proto suit costs 200k+, which isn't fair. Didn't tankers say the same thing when tanks were upwards of a million isk, and yall said that wasn't a valid excuse? Be honest, yall know who you are that did this. Excellent point, but most people won't care. I'm primarily an AV guy and I understand the situation for what it is. Most people are too selfish to give tanks the right of way though. People dont want a david vs goliath fight. They want to just kick goliath in the nuts and be done with it.
Stinker Butt Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.12.14 14:19:00 - [37] - Quote Shokhann Echo wrote: Jastad wrote: The cost is not the problem, the problem is the balance. 2/3 guy needed to take down 1 guys with a Tank is not good. its a ******* vehicle dumbass, in the future too... infantry cannot be god, you cannot expect to be superscrub every time you feel like it I like arguing with you because youre clearly a child and you constantly make yourself look dumb. On a side note, I also love killing you in game and watching you rage quit. he's not talking about just any infantry. Unfortunately most of them are just free kills for a tank without any threat at all. He's talking about specialized infantry spec'd and equipped into anti-vehicle. Those last two hyphenated words at the end of that sentence are pretty important, so get a dictionary and look them up. To the OP, I am one of those who said isk should not guarantee that you will get kills or prevent you from getting killed. I always said it, and I still do. I even said that tanks should be cheaper. I am not worried about what I spend on my proto suit relative to anyone else. That's my choice. the tankers have used that as well as the sp cost to justify their cries for equality. Now that those things are gone with 1.7, they just say, "its supposed to be this way! Adapt!" And they really think everyone is going to sit back and let them do whatever they want. I did adapt. First I Jihad the basta*d then run him over in hell. and as others have pointed out, these cries clearly worked well for tankers, so it would be dumb if infantry didnt do the same.
Ivy Zalinto Lo-Tech Solutions Ltd 165	Posted - 2013.12.14 14:25:00 - [38] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Shokhann Echo wrote: Jastad wrote: The cost is not the problem, the problem is the balance. 2/3 guy needed to take down 1 guys with a Tank is not good. its a ******* vehicle dumbass, in the future too... infantry cannot be god, you cannot expect to be superscrub every time you feel like it Tanks should take 2-3 people to kill, yes. The issue is, with the amount of tanks that deploy each side (just saw 6 a few minutes ago) unless the entire team dedicates to AV, they will lose. I proposed making a limit to the amount of HAVs per side. Like only one per side, maybe two tops. Tanks get to keep our ridiculously awesome tanks, and AV doesn't have a tanker swarm to deal with. heavy vehicles should be soloed by heavy weapons only, and take multiple light weapons to down. but, there shouldn't be 5-6 tanks per ide on the field at a time. limit the amount deployable to one. Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota. Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough... This being said I would like to see a small rail turret on a light vehicle be a threat to a tank. This could honestly promote interesting gameplay if people started putting together tank buster cars. Anyone know off hand the stats on small rails per tier? Dedicated scout. New player tutor; scout instructor Scrambler Pistol dedication
Stinker Butt Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.12.14 14:39:00 - [39] - Quote Ivy Zalinto wrote: Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota. Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough... Why not? You have provided no arguement. Just one fools opinion. so here is my response. One person should be able to solo a tank. Think much?
Zero Harpuia Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 1360	Posted - 2013.12.14 22:54:00 - [40] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Zero Harpuia wrote: Shokhann Echo wrote: Jastad wrote: The cost is not the problem, the problem is the balance. 2/3 guy needed to take down 1 guys with a Tank is not good. its a ******* vehicle dumbass, in the future too... infantry cannot be god, you cannot expect to be superscrub every time you feel like it It's manned by one person, so it should be kill-able by one person. Stop being a douche. If a HAV comes across a standard infantryman, he should kill it. If an AV comes across a HAV, he should kill it. If a Infantry comes across an AV, he should kill it. It is a simple concept. AV, however, stand a chance against infantry, since they carry a sidearm, and you can kill indfantry with the forge gun. Therefore, the model breaks apart. It shouldn't be a predecided thing. Just like a shotgun shouldn't always win a cqc battle. IT should only give you the advantage. Yes, but an HAV is equally capable of killing any infantry no matter what gun they carry, so I fail to see the point of pointing out a sidearm on an AV. A fire-type Pokemon can kill a water-type under the right conditions, but it isn't a position you want to be in. It isn't a strict rock-paper-scissors, just an effective cycle. The only side of the cycle that is let down is the standard infantry, AV nades excluded. My firm position is that HAVs should be somewhat easily fended off or killed by a single AV unit, just like a single Infantryman is easily fended off or killed by an HAV. As long as HAVs are only manned by a single player anyway... and no, the extra turret seats don't count. They are passengers at best. Shields as Weapons

Zero Harpuia Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 1361	Posted - 2013.12.14 22:57:00 - [41] - Quote Stinker Butt wrote: Ivy Zalinto wrote: Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota. Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough... Why not? You have provided no arguement. Just one fools opinion. so here is my response. One person should be able to solo a tank. Think much? That sounds fair. There is only ONE person manning the HAV, so it should only take ONE person to remove him from play. Simple arithmetic. Shields as Weapons
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 904	Posted - 2013.12.14 23:34:00 - [42] - Quote Yup, isk/AUR balancing is never the way to balance battlefield. In absence of free market, that's the final thing in line for CCP to fix. Feeling the scanner is too simple and off balance? The fix:
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 290	Posted - 2013.12.14 23:36:00 - [43] - Quote Zero Harpuia wrote: Stinker Butt wrote: Ivy Zalinto wrote: Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota. Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough... Why not? You have provided no arguement. Just one fools opinion. so here is my response. One person should be able to solo a tank. Think much? That sounds fair. There is only ONE person manning the HAV, so it should only take ONE person to remove him from play. Simple arithmetic. Then the tanker has no motivation to play, since his tank can be canceled out by a single suit. He would be served just as well using a regular suit, and for cheaper.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 2024	Posted - 2013.12.14 23:39:00 - [44] - Quote Personally, I have no problem with this whole ISK aspect. (to an extent) It's the fact that HAVs are scrub weapons that are so easy to operate that even a handicap person wouldn't use them because they don't enjoy playing Crutch 514. It's also because of the fact that a MLT HAV is better at AV than any AV weapon in the entire game. Also, there needs to be an actual consequence for loosing an HAV. Their current prices do nothing but encourage massive amounts of spamming. Not that people wouldn't do that already. DUST 514 just went full COD. Never go full COD.
Slag Emberforge Immortal Retribution 286	Posted - 2013.12.14 23:51:00 - [45] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Zero Harpuia wrote: Stinker Butt wrote: Ivy Zalinto wrote: Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota. Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough... Why not? You have provided no arguement. Just one fools opinion. so here is my response. One person should be able to solo a tank. Think much? That sounds fair. There is only ONE person manning the HAV, so it should only take ONE person to remove him from play. Simple arithmetic. Then the tanker has no motivation to play, since his tank can be canceled out by a single suit. He would be served just as well using a regular suit, and for cheaper. This couldn't be more wrong. The tanker should be able to be taken out by an equally or better skilled and armed AV infantry, This is not the same as stating its equivalent to a drop suit. Tankers encounter zero resistance and faceroll AI based infantry, and have the capacity to kill AV and V alike. Meanwhile AV is seriously gimped at AI, giving up all of that power to focus on a support role. That is keeping their team alive by destroying vehicles, and stopping the literal infantry wrecking ball that is a tank. Dropping extra ISK should never give you the ability skip teamwork. That's the point of this game. If you require teamwork to be destroyed you should require team work to be operated.
Shokhann Echo Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 128	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:08:00 - [46] - Quote Slag Emberforge wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Zero Harpuia wrote: Stinker Butt wrote: Ivy Zalinto wrote: Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota. Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough... Why not? You have provided no arguement. Just one fools opinion. so here is my response. One person should be able to solo a tank. Think much? That sounds fair. There is only ONE person manning the HAV, so it should only take ONE person to remove him from play. Simple arithmetic. Then the tanker has no motivation to play, since his tank can be canceled out by a single suit. He would be served just as well using a regular suit, and for cheaper. This couldn't be more wrong. The tanker should be able to be taken out by an equally or better skilled and armed AV infantry, This is not the same as stating its equivalent to a drop suit. Tankers encounter zero resistance and faceroll AI based infantry, and have the capacity to kill AV and V alike. Meanwhile AV is seriously gimped at AI, giving up all of that power to focus on a support role. That is keeping their team alive by destroying vehicles, and stopping the literal infantry wrecking ball that is a tank. Dropping extra ISK should never give you the ability skip teamwork. That's the point of this game. If you require teamwork to be destroyed you should require team work to be operated. so in eve, a single fighter should be able to destroy a titan solo. Void Echo's Alt Back-up Profile Back on main 12-20-2013
Benjamin Ciscko The Generals General Tso's Alliance 340	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:16:00 - [47] - Quote Thorn Badblood wrote: It takes 1 guy to kill a tank, want proof? Here you go... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3xsMqHu56g What do you think the price difference is between the weapon and the tank? The M136 AT4 is the Army's primary light anti-tank weapon Unit Replacement Cost: US $1,480.64 M1A2 Abrams with prototype TUSK equipment US $6.21 million A. you call that a tank it had less armor than Hummer B. it is disposable so you have one shot C. I doubt you are strafing while holding that. Tanker/Logi Tanks almost fixed.
Smooth Assassin Stardust incorporation 455	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:19:00 - [48] - Quote IRL a tank would wipe out infantry with it's massive cannon with slow fire rate, a bazooka would probably take it out in 1 shot (you can tell i've never been in the army) so i don't see why blasters are in the game, its pointless with a rapid fire, high damaging weapon that can also kill a tank and infantry. *Assassination is my thing.*
Justin Tymes Dem Durrty Boyz Renegade Alliance 551	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:24:00 - [49] - Quote Shokhann Echo wrote: so in eve, a single fighter should be able to destroy a titan solo. Why are you bringing up Eve like that's relevant to Dust? Dust is a FPS. Eve doesn't even give a damn about Dust, and Dust's connection to Eve is paper-thin to non-existent.
Vance Alken Commando Perkone Caldari State 121	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:24:00 - [50] - Quote If they made tanks Planetside 1 style (separate driver/gunner) they'd be instantly perfectly balanced. You can't have something designed to take tons of damage be this spammable and this easy to use, it's possible for there to be more tanks than potential AV weapons FFS. Tanks are powerful, power should require teamwork. Multi-manned tanks are simultaneously a soft nerf and soft buff for them, not as spammable and, if the driver/gunner pair has poor chemistry, less powerful. But if they have good chemistry you can do so much more and be so much more effective. Either that or they make them Planetside 2/Battlefield style, a paperthin joke that can be taken out by any single player.

KING CHECKMATE Scions of Athra 3142	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:25:00 - [51] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: A simple question. I've heard the argument that a sica costs 57k isk and your proto suit costs 200k+, which isn't fair. Didn't tankers say the same thing when tanks were upwards of a million isk, and yall said that wasn't a valid excuse? Be honest, yall know who you are that did this. tank =/= dropsuit. By mere logic a tanks should always be more expensive than a dropsuit. Plus i was in favor of a Tank ISK cost reduction. But not this much.Their performance does not match their cost at all. SCR User Since release. Charge shot / Aim to the head / Listen to QQ
Monkey MAC Lost Millennium 1213	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:26:00 - [52] - Quote Im not making that point I don't care about the pfice! I care about the power-to-player ratio! Tanks 514 I told you, I bloody well told you. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 293	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:55:00 - [53] - Quote Slag Emberforge wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Zero Harpuia wrote: Stinker Butt wrote: Ivy Zalinto wrote: Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota. Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough... Why not? You have provided no arguement. Just one fools opinion. so here is my response. One person should be able to solo a tank. Think much? That sounds fair. There is only ONE person manning the HAV, so it should only take ONE person to remove him from play. Simple arithmetic. Then the tanker has no motivation to play, since his tank can be canceled out by a single suit. He would be served just as well using a regular suit, and for cheaper. This couldn't be more wrong. The tanker should be able to be taken out by an equally or better skilled and armed AV infantry, This is not the same as stating its equivalent to a drop suit. Tankers encounter zero resistance and faceroll AI based infantry, and have the capacity to kill AV and V alike. Meanwhile AV is seriously gimped at AI, giving up all of that power to focus on a support role. That is keeping their team alive by destroying vehicles, and stopping the literal infantry wrecking ball that is a tank. Dropping extra ISK should never give you the ability skip teamwork. That's the point of this game. If you require teamwork to be destroyed you should require team work to be operated. I would not be against .asking tanks a team vehicle. They need to be as powerful as they are, thats what makes them such a good force multiplier. I think tanks taking g more than one person to operate effectively is a good tradeoff for their power. I also envision that a light weapon should kill a light vehicle easily, and a heavy weapon should kill a heavy vehicle easily, and it should take multiple light weapons working in tandem to down a heavy vehicle.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 293	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:57:00 - [54] - Quote KING CHECKMATE wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: A simple question. I've heard the argument that a sica costs 57k isk and your proto suit costs 200k+, which isn't fair. Didn't tankers say the same thing when tanks were upwards of a million isk, and yall said that wasn't a valid excuse? Be honest, yall know who you are that did this. tank =/= dropsuit. By mere logic a tanks should always be more expensive than a dropsuit. Plus i was in favor of a Tank ISK cost reduction. But not this much.Their performance does not match their cost at all. Then my comment was not directed at you. There were some AV players, I don't care enough to memorize their names, who said tanks being more expensive than AV was no excuse to buff them, and are using the same logic to get a buff to AV. If you did not vouch this position, then I'm not poking fun at you in particular.
Zero Harpuia Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 1365	Posted - 2013.12.15 01:49:00 - [55] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Zero Harpuia wrote: Stinker Butt wrote: Ivy Zalinto wrote: Tanks shouldnt be able to be soloed by ANY player. That being said miltia tanks need to either be dropped or changed so you need to skill into them still. Its getting pretty bad when an actual tanker player cannot bring in a tank due to team quota. Nothing short of an orbital bombardment or another tank should be able to solo a tank. Well...maybe a mad bomber logi if they're sneaky enough... Why not? You have provided no arguement. Just one fools opinion. so here is my response. One person should be able to solo a tank. Think much? That sounds fair. There is only ONE person manning the HAV, so it should only take ONE person to remove him from play. Simple arithmetic. Then the tanker has no motivation to play, since his tank can be canceled out by a single suit. He would be served just as well using a regular suit, and for cheaper. In this system the Infantryman has no motivation to play, since his suits and the suits of those around him are canceled out by a single HAV. He would be served just as well using a Militia HAV, and for cheaper than his ADV suit. See what I did there? Shields as Weapons
Zero Harpuia Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 1365	Posted - 2013.12.15 01:53:00 - [56] - Quote Shokhann Echo wrote: so in eve, a single fighter should be able to destroy a titan solo. A Titan would never be able to HIT a fighter, and as such it is not a comparable equation. An HAV can easily peg a footsoldier, but a Titan's XL cannons and Doomsday Device could literally never hit the fighter unless he stopped for about ten solid seconds. If the fighter had strong enough guns or bombs, he could indeed kill a loltanked Titan... it'd take a year and a day but it would eventually get done. The Titan wouldn't be able to run away either because it's slow as space-molasses. Shields as Weapons
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 1501	Posted - 2013.12.15 02:17:00 - [57] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: A simple question. I've heard the argument that a sica costs 57k isk and your proto suit costs 200k+, which isn't fair. Didn't tankers say the same thing when tanks were upwards of a million isk, and yall said that wasn't a valid excuse? Be honest, yall know who you are that did this. I wasn't one of these people you speak of. but quick question. if it wasn't ok for them, then why is it ok for you? CCp's newest joke, making setting off your own remote explosives in FW FF... awesome job ccp.
Slag Emberforge Immortal Retribution 291	Posted - 2013.12.15 02:19:00 - [58] - Quote Shokhann wrote: so in eve, a single fighter should be able to destroy a titan solo. 1. I don't play EVE 2. This is not EVE 3. See #2 Anti-Vehicle Weaponry is the intuitively named counter to vehicles, a player focuses on vehicles, my focus is devoting as much power and capacity of my character into dealing damage and destroying vehicles. We should be able to kill each other. One choice should not be superior to each other. The difference is I don't expect to kill a HAV in two seconds, even though it is perfectly acceptable for a HAV to kill me in the same timeframe.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 296	Posted - 2013.12.15 03:44:00 - [59] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: A simple question. I've heard the argument that a sica costs 57k isk and your proto suit costs 200k+, which isn't fair. Didn't tankers say the same thing when tanks were upwards of a million isk, and yall said that wasn't a valid excuse? Be honest, yall know who you are that did this. I wasn't one of these people you speak of. but quick question. if it wasn't ok for them, then why is it ok for you? When did I say it was okay for me?
dogmanpig black market bank 80	Posted - 2013.12.15 04:01:00 - [60] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Thorn Badblood wrote: It takes 1 guy to kill a tank, want proof? Here you go... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3xsMqHu56g What do you think the price difference is between the weapon and the tank? The M136 AT4 is the Army's primary light anti-tank weapon Unit Replacement Cost: US $1,480.64 M1A2 Abrams with prototype TUSK equipment US $6.21 million A. you call that a tank it had less armor than Hummer B. it is disposable so you have one shot C. I doubt you are strafing while holding that. they really didn't destroy the vehicle either. they kill personal inside. that's why its fire middle of them to hit the softer body rather then the engine or the ammo pack. btw none of them break over 500mm of armor(basic steel). abrams have over 600mm of armor on their weakest points. you know that would mean... its ineffective. and thats before you count in that its armor is made to deflect and reduce that type of damage. You hate me, I hate you. Lets keep it that way. Level 7 1/3 Forum alt. "Its worth half a penny and a reach around"



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page