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

All Channels

General Discussions

Tanks are OP dont listen to tanks post threads ' Tanks are not OP'

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 208	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:07:00 - [1] - Quote Ho even postes those threads are annoying tankers tryingto take advantage of their current situation Tank need a nerf in speed and the railgun needs a damage nerf-simple "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 260	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:08:00 - [2] - Quote nerf the mods by 50%
Cosgar ParagonX 8672	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:10:00 - [3] - Quote What about infantry that say tanks aren't OP? I tried to put a level into Amarr Commando once, but got a server notification saying "Why?"
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 208	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:12:00 - [4] - Quote Cosgar wrote: What about infantry that say tanks aren't OP? they also play with tanks Everyone hates tanks "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Galvan Nized Deep Space Republic 380	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:12:00 - [5] - Quote Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart.
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 260	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:12:00 - [6] - Quote Cosgar wrote: What about infantry that say tanks aren't OP? They will be tarred and feathered
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 208	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:14:00 - [7] - Quote Galvan Nized wrote: Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart. Im not saying their heath is OP but they get out of a situation faster then a F&king dropship "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results*." - Albert Einstein
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 260	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:15:00 - [8] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: Galvan Nized wrote: Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart. Im not saying their heath is OP but they get out of a situation faster then a F*&king dropship Their active mods also last too long or have too short of a cool down
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 208	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:17:00 - [9] - Quote Text Grant wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Galvan Nized wrote: Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart. Im not saying their heath is OP but they get out of a situation faster then a F&king dropship Their active mods also last too long or have too short of a cool down nonono thay are tanks they are sposed to take damage but go really slow "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results*." - Albert Einstein
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 261	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:21:00 - [10] - Quote darkiller240 wrote: Text Grant wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Galvan Nized wrote: Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart. Im not saying their heath is OP but they get out of a situation faster then a F*&king dropship Their active mods also last too long or have too short of a cool down nonono thay are tanks they are sposed to take damage but go really slow Infantry < Tanks Anti Vehicle < Infantry Tanks <... nothing See where this all screws up?

demonkiller 12 G.L.O.R.Y Public Disorder. 289	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:23:00 - [11] - Quote Text Grant wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Text Grant wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Galvan Nized wrote: Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart. Im not saying their heath is OP but they get out of a situation faster then a F*&king dropship Their active mods also last too long or have too short of a cool down nonono thay are tanks they are sposed to take damage but go really slow Infantry < Tanks Anti Vehicle < Infantry Tanks <... nothing See where this all screws up? except the part where my militia forge gun with av nades still kills ever tank i find if i actually decided to go after the tank instead of having fun with the new rifles
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 208	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:24:00 - [12] - Quote Text Grant wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Text Grant wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Galvan Nized wrote: Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart. Im not saying their heath is OP but they get out of a situation faster then a F&king dropship Their active mods also last too long or have too short of a cool down nonono thay are tanks they are sposed to take damage but go really slow Dropship < Anti Vehicle Anti Vehicle < Infantry Infantry < Tanks Tanks <... nothing See where this all screws up? fixed it "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results*." - Albert Einstein
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 261	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:29:00 - [13] - Quote I honestly haven't seen a dropship this build to know. But I called in a soma and sat through 2 clips of a corp mates mlt forge gun without moving with 0 active mods
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 208	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:35:00 - [14] - Quote Text Grant wrote: I honestly haven't seen a dropship this build to know. But I called in a soma and sat through 2 clips of a corp mates mlt forge gun without moving with 0 active mods No dropships because they were not buffed just changed and now tanks are spammed and rail guns instakill everything "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
demonkiller 12 G.L.O.R.Y Public Disorder. 289	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:38:00 - [15] - Quote however they are still extremely annoying and why the **** dont we have an infantry only mode for skirmish/dom/ambush?
Michael Hyperthraz Vherokior Combat Logistics Minmatar Republic 17	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:39:00 - [16] - Quote Tanks are fine. But way too cheap.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 279	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:39:00 - [17] - 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.
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 208	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:41:00 - [18] - Quote 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 "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 279	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:42:00 - [19] - 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.
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 263	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:43:00 - [20] - Quote 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.

ALT2 acc The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 24	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:48:00 - [21] - Quote Text Grant wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Galvan Nized wrote: Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart. Im not saying their heath is OP but they get out of a situation faster then a F*&king dropship Their active mods also last too long or have too short of a cool down my shield hardener takes almost a minute to regen, tan hardener for me, 40 seconds CD
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 279	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:50:00 - [22] - 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.
ALT2 acc The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 24	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:51:00 - [23] - Quote Michael Hyperthraz wrote: Tanks are fine. But way too cheap. tanks take a good match to restock, if price goes any higher then we have 1.6 again
ALT2 acc The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 24	Posted - 2013.12.14 08:52:00 - [24] - 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. atim or checkmate, GTFO this isn't real life, we also die in 1-2 bullets in real life
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 264	Posted - 2013.12.14 09:25:00 - [25] - Quote 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
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 264	Posted - 2013.12.14 09:27:00 - [26] - Quote ALT2 acc 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. atim or checkmate, GTFO this isn't real life, we also die in 1-2 bullets in real life Yes we do. But I don't want the game to be like real life. I want the paper rock scissors like real life. When something is made with the purpose to do something it should do it.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 423	Posted - 2013.12.14 09:35:00 - [27] - Quote Text Grant wrote: I honestly haven't seen a dropship this build to know. But I called in a soma and sat through 2 clips of a corp mates mlt forge gun without moving with 0 active mods We don't have passive mods, and HP is around 6,000 so that's at most 6shots unless you were comparing with an armor plate on (which the hardener units don't use) to intentionally skew your results. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
CommanderBolt Isuuaya Tactical Caldari State 422	Posted - 2013.12.14 09:54:00 - [28] - Quote Its not that tanks are OP - Granted there speed is a little on the fast side. The real problem is were looking at it wrong. Railgun installations counter tanks splendidly well. Will we get to deploy our own turrets? Forge guns still put in work, RE equipped jihad cars kill tanks very easily. Swarms on the other hand are more of a deterrent than an actual counter, I think swarms need to be improved a little bit. GUYS - The main problem is we need all of the elements in the game before we can truly achieve balance. The other racial vehicles, the other racial heavy suits as well as being able to drop in our own installations and turrets. Then we can actually sit down and work out correct stats and stuff. It will always be a juggling act until we reach that point I think.
darkiller240 K-A-O-S theory 208	Posted - 2013.12.14 10:05:00 - [29] - Quote CommanderBolt wrote: Its not that tanks are OP - Granted there speed is a little on the fast side. The real problem is were looking at it wrong. Railgun installations counter tanks splendidly well. Will we get to deploy our own turrets? Forge guns still put in work, RE equipped jihad cars kill tanks very easily. Swarms on the other hand are more of a deterrent than an actual counter, I think swarms need to be improved a little bit. GUYS - The main problem is we need all of the elements in the game before we can truly achieve balance. The other racial vehicles, the other racial heavy suits as well as being able to drop in our own installations and turrets. Then we can actually sit down and work out correct stats and stuff. It will always be a juggling act until we reach that point I think. well for now we need balace with what we have "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 280	Posted - 2013.12.14 10:12:00 - [30] - 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.

ALT2 acc The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 24	Posted - 2013.12.14 10:18:00 - [31] - Quote Text Grant wrote: nerf the mods by 50% nerf infantry mods by 50%
ALT2 acc The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 24	Posted - 2013.12.14 10:22:00 - [32] - Quote CommanderBolt wrote: Its not that tanks are OP - Granted there speed is a little on the fast side. The real problem is were looking at it wrong. Railgun installations counter tanks splendidly well. Will we get to deploy our own turrets? Forge guns still put in work, RE equipped jihad cars kill tanks very easily. Swarms on the other hand are more of a deterrent than an actual counter, I think swarms need to be improved a little bit. GUYS - The main problem is we need all of the elements in the game before we can truly achieve balance. The other racial vehicles, the other racial heavy suits as well as being able to drop in our own installations and turrets. Then we can actually sit down and work out correct stats and stuff. It will always be a juggling act until we reach that point I think. swarms, if AV keep complaining, only needs a 20 damage buff, as proto swarms do wonders on my tank
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 265	Posted - 2013.12.14 14:41:00 - [33] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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 never used, 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. 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.
Jason Pearson 3359	Posted - 2013.12.14 14:44:00 - [34] - Quote Sigh. Tanks aren't OP, people are using two hardeners to have a minute of active resistance, and about 15 seconds total cooldown time, it's abuse of a module and should be fixed imo. Also, speed needs an adjustment and you need things like Webifiers to keep us in place so you can apply damage when our actives go out. Stop crying for a new and come up with solutions rather than buffing damage or decreasing something on the tank sides. King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Laugh at the idiots crying about four BPOs being removed erryday, lul
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 287	Posted - 2013.12.14 15:44:00 - [35] - 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.
Leonid Tybalt DIOS EX. 2	Posted - 2013.12.14 15:52:00 - [36] - Quote Text Grant wrote: [quote=Alena Ventrallis]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.[/quotAnd 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. Erm, you got some facts to back that up? Destroying World War 2 era tanks with modern infatry anti-tank weaponry is one thing. But there is no way in hell that one devoted anti-vehicle infantry could destroy 6 modern tanks (like a Leopard 2 or M1 Abrahms) in under one minute with anything short of a coodinated cruise missile strike, and most certainly not with any portable 1-man weaponsystem. And that's not counting the fact that the tanks in dust are probably superior to the modern tanks pf today in terms of materials and technology (they have shield projectors, railguns and other sci-fi **** that modern day armies could only dream of)
Flix Keptick Red Star. EoN. 1623	Posted - 2013.12.14 15:56:00 - [37] - Quote Text Grant wrote: darkiller240 wrote: Galvan Nized wrote: Tanks aren't THAT bad. AV just needs to be rethought. We need EWAR. Other things like Proxies need to be resurrected to be of some use. It's the lack of these things with the added AV Nerf that has made tanks too powerful, not the tanks themselves I feel. We need these added to AV quickly or else we will just buff damage and then the cycle will restart. Im not saying their heath is OP but they get out of a situation faster then a F*&king dropship Their active mods also last too long or have too short of a cool down You know that's with the skills maxed out right? 3mil sp just to reduce cooldown time and increase active time Making AV an actual role GÿåTank DriverGÿå
Skihids Unkn0wn Killers Renegade Alliance 2538	Posted - 2013.12.14 16:01:00 - [38] - Quote 1.7 is a radical philosophy change for vehicles, so things are going to be rough for a few months as we test things out and see how it all shakes out. More people are also trying them out and on top of that we don't have any eWar or other counters/defense like webiffiers or portable shield bubbles. There has been ZERO live testing before this was dropped on us because there is no test server. This is very much a BETA right now, a beta of an incomplete game. We've been here before several times, and it's going to take a lot more time to introduce all the essential elements and balance them out.
Coleman Gray GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 942	Posted - 2013.12.14 16:04:00 - [39] - Quote No, AV needs to get of their arses and actually play, or have you all been spoiled so much by the EZ gun known as Swarm Launcher rendered you all invalid? Used to be someone called in a tank, then one Proto guy would solo the tanks, killing upto over a million isk of tank using a max of what? 200k isk suit fitting? Now that it takes not one BUT two people it's all too much effort for you? Tanks or not OP, AV is just Lazy and to used to having it easy. If Preparation is half of the battle and knowing is the other half, Then there is no need to fight.
MetalWolf-Cell ROGUE SPADES 5	Posted - 2013.12.14 16:21:00 - [40] - Quote As I said in Pearson's post, Tanks are near the OP Borderline. I doubt AV guys are being lazy in tanking out HAVs, its just it's rare when you see one HAV on the field now, now they usually in almost every match have to deal with 4-6 tanks on the field...that's a lot missles to shoot with, since other factors play, there speed, and they may be in packs. On top of that, they are so cheap, even if you destroy one or two, they can just recall another. This is coming from a pilot who now sees barely any AV like 1.6. I will occasionally see one forge gunner or two, but now they gave up it seems, since they assume multiple tanks will spawn, which does happen slowly throughout the match. As long as I played dust, I never seen these much tanks... AV kind of gave up, not because of laziness, but because of the number of tanks being spawned and because of their cheapness, they can be called in throughout the match. Also their speed in getting away from AV.

Clips A'hoy The Generals General Tso's Alliance 97	Posted - 2013.12.14 16:24:00 - [41] - Quote I wouldn't say tanks are OP, but they definitely need to be looked at as they take too much time and effort to kill; I don't see how a tank needs +7 people to be destroyed. Getting hate mail by big corps makes my heart grow fonder.
Stinker Butt Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.12.14 16:54:00 - [42] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Tanks should take more than one infantry to destroy. Its a freaking TANK. Seriously people, it isn't that hard. That's the "I need an EASY WIN button so do what I say!" argument. Do you know how many mines it takes to destroy a tank? One! Tanks in war will never advance solo because they are too vulnerable. They require an entire team of infantry to advance in front of them and clear the path of threats. They are usually manned by a crew of 3-4 and the driver is never the same as the gunner. They are slow and if any significant threat is near, they are lucky if they can retreat. You should have left out any of your crap about "real" tanks in this argument. You are a spoiled little brat in a big tank and in your own little mind that gives you some sense of importance. Your mommy may have told you that you are the best, but I'll be honest with you, you suck. You have not achieved anything. And you certainly are not entitled to anything.
knight of 6 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 840	Posted - 2013.12.14 17:16:00 - [43] - Quote Look at the adorable CoD bois! shield booster: active duration: 1 second cooldown: 30 seconds shield hardener: active duration: 24 seconds cooldown: 60 seconds can you really argue that those times are bad? or for that matter acknowledge that the MLT NoS gives 100% boost rather than 10%? how can you reasonably say that tanks are OP when a module is that broken? shouldn't we wait until it's fixed to judge tanks? tanks ability to damage and be damaged feels really good right now, however they are to fast, but that is partially due to the broken mod so it would be best to wait until that is fixed before making adjustments to speed. "God favors the side with the best artillery" ~ Napoleon Ko6, scout, tanker. CLOSED BETA VET
Sarcastic Dreamkiller Northwind Alliance Dark Taboo 79	Posted - 2013.12.14 17:20:00 - [44] - Quote 1 tank is fine, 2 tanks are manageable, 6 tanks and you might as well leave the game 1 tank is not OP, groups of tanks are definitely OP
Stinker Butt Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.12.14 17:24:00 - [45] - Quote knight of 6 wrote: Look at the adorable CoD bois! shield booster: active duration: 1 second cooldown: 30 seconds shield hardener: active duration: 24 seconds cooldown: 60 seconds can you really argue that those times are bad? shield booster is instant. so you practically get a new tank every 30 seconds (24 if you have skill up) for hardener, with skills invested its active for 30 seconds and cool down for 45. So if you have 2, ...well, ...you can do the math.
Stinker Butt Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.12.14 17:38:00 - [46] - Quote knight of 6 wrote: or for that matter acknowledge that the MLT NoS gives 100% boost rather than 10%? how can you reasonably say that tanks are OP when a module is that broken? shouldn't we wait until it's fixed to judge tanks? tanks ability to damage and be damaged feels really good right now, however they are to fast, but that is partially due to the broken mod so it would be best to wait until that is fixed before making adjustments to speed. that mod was fixed days ago. So it's ok to judge now.
Shattered Mirage D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 362	Posted - 2013.12.14 17:39:00 - [47] - Quote Text Grant wrote: I honestly haven't seen a dropship this build to know. But I called in a soma and sat through 2 clips of a corp mates mlt forge gun without moving with 0 active mods Stop with the bullshit. That is not possible. There are no facts, only interpretations. I am a monument to all your sins


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.