DUST Search - Tanks are OP dont listen to tanks post threads ' Tanks are not OP'

Text Grant wrote:

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

Text Grant wrote:

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

Limit the amount of HAVs that can be deployed. Bam, balance. Tanks should take more than one infantry to destroy. Its a freaking TANK. But limit them to one oer side, and suddenly, AV can easily coordinate to kill that tank, because they aren't being swarmed by 5 HAVs.

Seriously people, it isn't that hard.

In war it has always taken one DEVOTED anti vehicle infantry to kill one tank. Heck one infantry can kill 6 tanks in under one minute today. AV should beat V or AV becomes pointless.

This is false. An AT-4 can penetrate the armor of a T-72 tank. 14 inches of armor penetration.

No lock on, dumb fire only
Single shot, then useless
Cannot be reloaded
Does not replace the main weapon.

Thats AV today. The LAW is the same in a smaller package. And neither can penetrate into the new Russian tanks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv7sBh5aMv0
This is AV that i know about today that sounds alot better than what you said. FGM-148 Javelin


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 279	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:39:00 - [1] - Quote Limit the amount of HAVs that can be deployed. Bam, balance. Tanks should take more than one infantry to destroy. Its a freaking TANK. But limit them to one oer side, and suddenly, AV can easily coordinate to kill that tank, because they aren't being swarmed by 5 HAVs. Seriously people, it isn't that hard.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 279	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:42:00 - [2] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Limit the amount of HAVs that can be deployed. Bam, balance. Tanks should take more than one infantry to destroy. Its a freaking TANK. But limit them to one oer side, and suddenly, AV can easily coordinate to kill that tank, because they aren't being swarmed by 5 HAVs. Seriously people, it isn't that hard. no not balance because then 3 lucky guys will destroy everyone Good. They should. Thats 3 infantry weapons off the field. Plus with the swarm lock on range Nerf, tanks can now be easily defended by infantry. Balance.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 279	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:50:00 - [3] - Quote Text Grant wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Limit the amount of HAVs that can be deployed. Bam, balance. Tanks should take more than one infantry to destroy. Its a freaking TANK. But limit them to one oer side, and suddenly, AV can easily coordinate to kill that tank, because they aren't being swarmed by 5 HAVs. Seriously people, it isn't that hard. In war it has always taken one DEVOTED anti vehicle infantry to kill one tank. Heck one infantry can kill 6 tanks in under one minute today. AV should beat V or AV becomes pointless. This is false. An AT-4 can penetrate the armor of a T-72 tank. 14 inches of armor penetration. No lock on, dumb fire only Single shot, then useless Cannot be reloaded Does not replace the main weapon. Thats AV today. The LAW is the same in a smaller package. And neither can penetrate into the new Russian tanks.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 280	Posted - 2013.12.14 10:12:00 - [4] - Quote Text Grant wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Text Grant wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Limit the amount of HAVs that can be deployed. Bam, balance. Tanks should take more than one infantry to destroy. Its a freaking TANK. But limit them to one oer side, and suddenly, AV can easily coordinate to kill that tank, because they aren't being swarmed by 5 HAVs. Seriously people, it isn't that hard. In war it has always taken one DEVOTED anti vehicle infantry to kill one tank. Heck one infantry can kill 6 tanks in under one minute today. AV should beat V or AV becomes pointless. This is false. An AT-4 can penetrate the armor of a T-72 tank. 14 inches of armor penetration. No lock on, dumb fire only Single shot, then useless Cannot be reloaded Does not replace the main weapon. Thats AV today. The LAW is the same in a smaller package. And neither can penetrate into the new Russian tanks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv7sBh5aMv0 This is AV that i know about today that sounds alot better than what you said. FGM-148 Javelin Javelins are almost used, mainly for operational reasons (the missiles can lose lock on and go anywhere) but mainly because of how expensive they are to run. A single Javelin command launch unit costs around $125,000, and each missile costs around $80,000. By comparison, the AT-4 costs about US $1500 A Javelin system would cost about the same as the tanks they are destroying in isk. This could be its balancing factor. eExtreme losses when killed. EDIT: also, the entire Javelin system weighs about 50lbs. Perhaps make it a heavy weapon, give heavies some new toys to play with. Remove swarm launchers, since according to AV players, they are useless anyway. now heavies have a role. Going toe-to-toe with vehicles. Just like their flavor text says.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 287	Posted - 2013.12.14 15:44:00 - [5] - Quote Text Grant wrote: Considering that tanks are VERY expensive (6 million dollars for an M1), 200K to kill one is not too much. It's 30 times cheaper. That means our current AV is very overpriced or tanks are very underpriced AND tanks are OP. I would be amenable to a price increase on tanks. I actually made a thread about the irony of AV saying that they have to spend more isk to kill tanks now. But tanks shouldn't have had such a radical drop in price. Some, but not THIS much. What are we at now, 25% of the price of pre-1.7 prices? I don't think CCP realized how it was going to play out, turbo bug aside. They don't have SiSi to test things like that out, so its basically bring it live and see what happens for a month. If we had SiSi, so much of the QQ would go away, because it would get caught before it hit the live server.