Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The dark cloud
The Rainbow Effect
1950
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 10:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ah the joy of watching CCP making the same mistakes AGAIN. Back in the closed beta we had a patch that buffed tanks and nerfed all AV's by 25%. What was the result? Tank spam non stop like we experience now. What happend afterwards? Vehicles got nerfed into the ground and AV unerfed. And i can asure you that vehicles are going to be nerfed in the future due to the way how they are beeing used at the moment.
history repeats itself and CCP didnt learned from their mistakes in the past and there will be a high price to pay for the tank rampage thats going on now. Mark my words the next thing will be again a AV buff and a vehicle nerf.
I shall show you a world, a world which you cant imagine, a world full off butthurt n00bs at the other end of my gun
|
Long Evity
761
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 10:29:00 -
[2] - Quote
This seems to be how CCP handles everything. There's no middle ground - it's either all in or all out. They really need to fire whoever comes up with these ideas.
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
ALT2 acc
The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day
24
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 10:30:00 -
[3] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:Ah the joy of watching CCP making the same mistakes AGAIN. Back in the closed beta we had a patch that buffed tanks and nerfed all AV's by 25%. What was the result? Tank spam non stop like we experience now. What happend afterwards? Vehicles got nerfed into the ground and AV unerfed. And i can asure you that vehicles are going to be nerfed in the future due to the way how they are beeing used at the moment.
history repeats itself and CCP didnt learned from their mistakes in the past and there will be a high price to pay for the tank rampage thats going on now. Mark my words the next thing will be again a AV buff and a vehicle nerf. exept tanks using complex mods have around 40 second downtime, PLENTY of time for AV to kill, or tank can find cover/retreat when downtime/low hp like infantry, balanced, proto swarms still hurt |
Kasote Denzara
A Vulture
1352
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 10:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
They might of thought that people were able to handle the responsibility of it all, but (once again), it seems not.
"Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara
|
The dark cloud
The Rainbow Effect
1951
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 10:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
ALT2 acc wrote:The dark cloud wrote:Ah the joy of watching CCP making the same mistakes AGAIN. Back in the closed beta we had a patch that buffed tanks and nerfed all AV's by 25%. What was the result? Tank spam non stop like we experience now. What happend afterwards? Vehicles got nerfed into the ground and AV unerfed. And i can asure you that vehicles are going to be nerfed in the future due to the way how they are beeing used at the moment.
history repeats itself and CCP didnt learned from their mistakes in the past and there will be a high price to pay for the tank rampage thats going on now. Mark my words the next thing will be again a AV buff and a vehicle nerf. exept tanks using complex mods have around 40 second downtime, PLENTY of time for AV to kill, or tank can find cover/retreat when downtime/low hp like infantry, balanced, proto swarms still hurt Sure thing then the tank uses a fuel injector to drive far away from infantry. Tanking capability+speed combo makes them unbalanced. Plus the AV nerf was over the top. Tell me how many times does it happend that a tank has to fully retreat? Allmost never. And a madrugar with tripple large repairs (yes its possible) repairs faster then a swarm launcher can inflict damage to it.
I shall show you a world, a world which you cant imagine, a world full off butthurt n00bs at the other end of my gun
|
ALT2 acc
The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day
24
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 10:38:00 -
[6] - Quote
thatts a rep stacking problem and a nitrous problem, also i had to retreat before, a proto swarm guy i couldn't hit with a blaster when hardeners were down |
Acturus Galaxy
Lo-Tech Solutions Ltd
299
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 10:56:00 -
[7] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:This seems to be how CCP handles everything. There's no middle ground - it's either all in or all out. They really need to fire whoever comes up with these ideas.
True balance is impossible as we are all human beings and unpredictable. Tanks might be balanced if only 1-2 are deployed on each team but not when 6 are called in on a team. AV can be balanced if only a few have proto skilled on the team, but if everyone have skilled AV into proto it becomes an issue. Just like veryone rushed to proto AV when killer taxis where spammed.
Like heavies, they are fine if everyone are running heavy frames only on both teams how could they predict some would go for medium frames.
We will just have to accept that balance will forever change back and forth, which is making Dust dynamic, unpredictable, challenging and fun. It allmost becomes a new game whenever a major update is comming. |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance
6167
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 10:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP keep making these mistakes over, and over, and over. Breach assault rifle. Tanks. Laser rifle. TAR. Calogi. Flaylock. Logis in general.
Now tanks again. Every major patch CCP screws up. I really don't know how they manage it - they're very talented.
Level 6 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
Gallente FW - 'Turalyon'
|
Long Evity
762
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:01:00 -
[9] - Quote
Acturus Galaxy wrote:Long Evity wrote:This seems to be how CCP handles everything. There's no middle ground - it's either all in or all out. They really need to fire whoever comes up with these ideas. True balance is impossible as we are all human beings and unpredictable. Tanks might be balanced if only 1-2 are deployed on each team but not when 6 are called in on a team. AV can be balanced if only a few have proto skilled on the team, but if everyone have skilled AV into proto it becomes an issue. Just like veryone rushed to proto AV when killer taxis where spammed. Like heavies, they are fine if everyone are running heavy frames only on both teams how could they predict some would go for medium frames. We will just have to accept that balance will forever change back and forth, which is making Dust dynamic, unpredictable, challenging and fun. It allmost becomes a new game whenever a major update is comming. Hmm... except one thing: When trying to create balance, inevitably you hit a point where you must 'tweak' things, rather then make drastic changes. CCP doesn't 'tweak' much, they grab the biggest hammer and smash - which is usually accompanied by buffing the counter-part to what was nerfed.
It makes no logical sense, they even have a history to rely on for experience, yet it goes out the door for some odd reason.
I am not who you think I am, only but just a dream.
|
Rei Shepard
The Rainbow Effect
1320
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:07:00 -
[10] - Quote
ALT2 acc wrote:thatts a rep stacking problem and a nitrous problem, also i had to retreat before, a proto swarm guy i couldn't hit with a blaster when hardeners were down. ps. anything but swarms will take out a 3 rep tank, forges, rails, blasters
Because every infantry uinit carries, forges, rails and a blaster around eh ?
With 4 tanks on one side, those few why try at AV are either killed by one of the other 3 tanks, or the tank just warps off or heads underground below another one...its not like ive seen that happen ....oh wait ...i have...gotta love their upgrades to the physics...
Winner of the EU Squad Cup
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
"Accuracy"
|
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance
6169
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:08:00 -
[11] - Quote
Rei Shepard wrote:ALT2 acc wrote:thatts a rep stacking problem and a nitrous problem, also i had to retreat before, a proto swarm guy i couldn't hit with a blaster when hardeners were down. ps. anything but swarms will take out a 3 rep tank, forges, rails, blasters Because every infantry uinit carries, forges, rails and a blaster around eh ? With 4 tanks on one side, those few why try at AV are either killed by one of the other 3 tanks, or the tank just warps off or heads underground below another one...its not like ive seen that happen ....oh wait ...i have...gotta love their upgrades to the physics...
Don't forget that even if you do kill the tank, it can cost less than what you used to kill it.
Level 6 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
Gallente FW - 'Turalyon'
|
Jason Pearson
3348
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:14:00 -
[12] - Quote
It's not the same as last time, other than speed and the fact that using more than one hardener defeats the purpose of "waves of opportunity" that Wolfman spoke about, it's pretty balanced, I'm still losing tanks when I do something stupid and don't run away like a little girl when my hardener is down.
King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire
Laugh at the idiots crying about four BPOs being removed erryday, lul
|
RKKR
The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine
528
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:26:00 -
[13] - Quote
How can they repeat themselves if they didn't stop making stupid choices like this in the first place? |
Repe Susi
Rautaleijona Top Men.
832
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:30:00 -
[14] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:It's not the same as last time, other than speed and the fact that using more than one hardener defeats the purpose of "waves of opportunity" that Wolfman spoke about, it's pretty balanced, I'm still losing tanks when I do something stupid and don't run away like a little girl when my hardener is down.
I'm repeating myself and every AV`er here but. Tanks should be able to be destoyed without having to wait the tanker 'do something stupid' but now it takes too much concentrated effort.
On the other side, almost all the tankers I've seen after 1.7 are little pussies running away at once they get hit by some kind of AV.
Smeehf.
|
Baal Omniscient
L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder.
835
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:44:00 -
[15] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:Ah the joy of watching CCP making the same mistakes AGAIN. Back in the closed beta we had a patch that buffed tanks and nerfed all AV's by 25%. What was the result? Tank spam non stop like we experience now. What happend afterwards? Vehicles got nerfed into the ground and AV unerfed. And i can asure you that vehicles are going to be nerfed in the future due to the way how they are beeing used at the moment.
history repeats itself and CCP didnt learned from their mistakes in the past and there will be a high price to pay for the tank rampage thats going on now. Mark my words the next thing will be again a AV buff and a vehicle nerf. IIRC, it went:
Tank buff/AV Nerf
AV buff/slight vehicle nerf
MISSILE BUFF
Missile nerf/something close to AV/V balance
Uprising
Uprising 1.7
FIX TTK & MATARI SUITS
My Alts & Closed Beta Characters: Overlord Ulath, Overlord Bosse, Overlord Zero
|
DAMIOS82
ACME SPECIAL FORCES
68
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:46:00 -
[16] - Quote
Its not that tanks are OP or AV have become to weak now. Yes it seems that way now, but its the lack of the right equipment and vehicles that create this inbalance. A tank should be powerfull and feared by infantry. It does not mean it needs to be indestructable. AV should make an impact, that does not mean it should be able to take out tanks with one or two hits. The balance lies in what is available and what not. ATM the balance is right, it takes multiple AV to take out a tank, sure it needs some tweaking but this is the way it is meant to be, no one man army's. As a matter of fact when they decided to rebalance the vehicles they should have introduced other means of warfare.
Next coarse for CCP would be to introduce Anti-tank Tanks, that have less effect on infantry and more on vehicles. Also the introduction of the MTAC and MAV, would give more roles. Different types of vehicles can have different types of roles. The logi LAV was the right idea, but they made the lav so that it can do everything, what they should have done was make it module exclusive, meaning only surtain modules can go on it and work with it. This is what they need to do with many vehicles, specialize them into surtain roles.
Next would also be a new look at the mining system, There should be more new mines, with different effects. To counter HAV, yet not make them one hit wonders. Meaning they would damage them severly, but would still need a hit or two from a AV weapon to give the final blow. Futher the infantry missile launchers, should be expanded beyond the swarm launcher and the plasma cannon, each with its own effects, including a heavy version, that would have more of an effect then a normal swarm launcher. the grenades would need more variety offcourse and the RE or booby traps, should be expanded to give each trap its own function. Some would be for infantry, some would work as AV, some are triggered, others proximity, shields/armor/ bonusses and negatives, etc.
The next part to balance it out is the survival modes. How can you avoid or escape the slaughter. Like the socalled barriers, that has been mention alott earlier one. these could provide a means of escape, EWAR to counter surtain systems, like radar jamming and targeting, Regeneration disruptors, engine blokkers, etc. Offcourse every action needs a reaction, so tanks should be able to have means of countering these things with other modules, what would in turn mean that given the limited space they have, they would have to give up surtain things like, the extra damage modifier or armor, what again in turn would make them more vulnerable to AV, etc. In other words you can't have it all.
These things would be the right balance, but as long as CCP refuses to work on them or just release them one at a time, instead of a complete package of many different things together. All we will do is go in circles, untill CCP realises that they need to start introducing these things to actually balance out the game and then in its turn break the circle. |
CommanderBolt
Isuuaya Tactical Caldari State
423
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 11:51:00 -
[17] - Quote
As a tanker (Different character) I love the speed of tanks, but I agree. IF changes are to be made the Speed of tanks should be the area to investigate.
For instance, I roll with the blaster turret, missile turrets and rail gun turrets are a hard counter to my low HP but high regen tank ability. However with the railguns, I just get up close and they cannot track me :) - strafe around them!
Before, I always did this however it is SO much easier now because of the increased tank manoeuvrability. |
Jason Pearson
3349
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 12:01:00 -
[18] - Quote
Repe Susi wrote:Jason Pearson wrote:It's not the same as last time, other than speed and the fact that using more than one hardener defeats the purpose of "waves of opportunity" that Wolfman spoke about, it's pretty balanced, I'm still losing tanks when I do something stupid and don't run away like a little girl when my hardener is down. I'm repeating myself and every AV`er here but. Tanks should be able to be destoyed without having to wait the tanker 'do something stupid' but now it takes too much concentrated effort. On the other side, almost all the tankers I've seen after 1.7 are little pussies running away at once they get hit by some kind of AV.
That's what I mean, I die due to do something stupid like not running away, the issue is you need a way to stop us from running (webifiers) and a larger window of opportunity (unable to fit more than one hardener).
King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire
Laugh at the idiots crying about four BPOs being removed erryday, lul
|
Sir Petersen
Valhalla Nord
409
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 12:11:00 -
[19] - Quote
It-¦s weird because the game had a pretty good balance in 1.6. The forum was not ower flown with buff this or nerve that complains. Things looked like they were going in the right direction.
Then 1.7 comes and BOOOOOM. Everything goes haywire. Again..
You can bet your a** when 1.8 is released this forum will be flooding with tears when those tanks & new weapons get a nerve. Rinse & repeat and totally unnecessary.
|
DAMIOS82
ACME SPECIAL FORCES
69
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 12:16:00 -
[20] - Quote
Precise we need more means of warfare, its the only way to balance it out and stop the constant whining. I for one am hoping that by 2.0-2.5 we have finally reached the point where we can have our multitude in choice of destruction, where each is balanced out by something else. This unending whining about the AV and HAV needs to end. Choice is the only balance. |
|
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
933
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 12:58:00 -
[21] - Quote
DAMIOS82 wrote:Its not that tanks are OP or AV have become to weak now. Yes it seems that way now, but its the lack of the right equipment and vehicles that create this inbalance. A tank should be powerfull and feared by infantry. It does not mean it needs to be indestructable. AV should make an impact, that does not mean it should be able to take out tanks with one or two hits. The balance lies in what is available and what not. ATM the balance is right, it takes multiple AV to take out a tank, sure it needs some tweaking but this is the way it is meant to be, no one man army's. As a matter of fact when they decided to rebalance the vehicles they should have introduced other means of warfare.
Next coarse for CCP would be to introduce Anti-tank Tanks, that have less effect on infantry and more on vehicles. Also the introduction of the MTAC and MAV, would give more roles. Different types of vehicles can have different types of roles. The logi LAV was the right idea, but they made the lav so that it can do everything, what they should have done was make it module exclusive, meaning only surtain modules can go on it and work with it. This is what they need to do with many vehicles, specialize them into surtain roles.
Next would also be a new look at the mining system, There should be more new mines, with different effects. To counter HAV, yet not make them one hit wonders. Meaning they would damage them severly, but would still need a hit or two from a AV weapon to give the final blow. Futher the infantry missile launchers, should be expanded beyond the swarm launcher and the plasma cannon, each with its own effects, including a heavy version, that would have more of an effect then a normal swarm launcher. the grenades would need more variety offcourse and the RE or booby traps, should be expanded to give each trap its own function. Some would be for infantry, some would work as AV, some are triggered, others proximity, shields/armor/ bonusses and negatives, etc.
The next part to balance it out is the survival modes. How can you avoid or escape the slaughter. Like the socalled barriers, that has been mention alott earlier one. these could provide a means of escape, EWAR to counter surtain systems, like radar jamming and targeting, Regeneration disruptors, engine blokkers, etc. Offcourse every action needs a reaction, so tanks should be able to have means of countering these things with other modules, what would in turn mean that given the limited space they have, they would have to give up surtain things like, the extra damage modifier or armor, what again in turn would make them more vulnerable to AV, etc. In other words you can't have it all.
These things would be the right balance, but as long as CCP refuses to work on them or just release them one at a time, instead of a complete package of many different things together. All we will do is go in circles, untill CCP realises that they need to start introducing these things to actually balance out the game and then in its turn break the circle. tank pilot alt in disguise detected. I am sick to argue with all those biased tunnelvision kids. there are like one or two honest tank drivers posting in the forum.
sure, before all tank scrubs whined that tanks are too expensive, it should require more people to take one one. now 100k isk tank should require several proto suits costing 200k isk to defeat. that tank driver logic
I will just again watch and collect the tank driver tears from all those tank scrubs after the inevitable nerf |
The dark cloud
The Rainbow Effect
1956
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 13:58:00 -
[22] - Quote
Yes we need webifiers to slow down tanks. And they should come as some sort of grenade. Throw webifier grenade to slow down tanks by something like 60-70% for 15 secs per webifier grenade. This would give the Av players actually a time window to take out hostile tanks. As it stands now tanks with hardeners and a fuel injector just run off while their 2 hardeners are on cooldown. Then return to the battlefield and continue the rampage.
Or we could have fitting limitations like only 1 hardener aible to fit on a vehicle. The old damage control unit was restricted to 1 at a time. And lets be honest a gunnlogi with 3 hardeners and maxed skills is capable to run 1 hardener the whole time. And by the time where the 3rd hardener is about to run out you repeat with the 1st.
Another bug that i was aible to see is that while shield tanks run their hardener the shields keep recharging even while under AV fire. So the DT is way too high and thats espacially the case with swarms.
Swarms deal 220 HP damage per missile. So against shields that is 154HP damage, with a hardener running that gets cut down to 61,6HP. So a proto swarm launcher deals in total a whopping 369,6HP damage. But because the damage is not beeing done with a "single hit" the DT is below it allowing a shield tank to keep recharging his shields like under small arms fire from AR's etc.
I believe that the DT is set around 100HP anything below that gets ignored and shield recharge is going to continue. This is another bug like the militia fuel injector and needs to be adressed ASAP. i suggest that the DT should be lowered down to 50HP damage. And small arm fire will not stop your shields from recharging cause AR's etc do like only 10% damage against tanks. Which means they do like 3-5 HP damage per shot.
I shall show you a world, a world which you cant imagine, a world full off butthurt n00bs at the other end of my gun
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
3270
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 15:43:00 -
[23] - Quote
Actually, the build afterwards was pretty damn balanced, except TAC AR exploits (now can't be a problem) and godmode dropships.
We used to have a time machine
|
ResistanceGTA
Valor Tactical Operations Immortal Coalition of New-Eden
75
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 15:50:00 -
[24] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Rei Shepard wrote:ALT2 acc wrote:thatts a rep stacking problem and a nitrous problem, also i had to retreat before, a proto swarm guy i couldn't hit with a blaster when hardeners were down. ps. anything but swarms will take out a 3 rep tank, forges, rails, blasters Because every infantry uinit carries, forges, rails and a blaster around eh ? With 4 tanks on one side, those few why try at AV are either killed by one of the other 3 tanks, or the tank just warps off or heads underground below another one...its not like ive seen that happen ....oh wait ...i have...gotta love their upgrades to the physics... Don't forget that even if you do kill the tank, it can cost less than what you used to kill it.
Very true, hence why I'm using a Dragonfly Scout with REs.
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
3270
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 15:57:00 -
[25] - Quote
I feel like an assault DS with gunners would be able to take down an HAV.
I'll try to see if I can find some decent gunners today.
We used to have a time machine
|
J-Lewis
Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation
328
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 16:41:00 -
[26] - Quote
HAVs are the only vehicle type that do not inherently have the majority of their turret damage output separated from the driver. |
Paran Tadec
Imperfect Bastards
1744
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 16:51:00 -
[27] - Quote
ALT2 acc wrote:The dark cloud wrote:Ah the joy of watching CCP making the same mistakes AGAIN. Back in the closed beta we had a patch that buffed tanks and nerfed all AV's by 25%. What was the result? Tank spam non stop like we experience now. What happend afterwards? Vehicles got nerfed into the ground and AV unerfed. And i can asure you that vehicles are going to be nerfed in the future due to the way how they are beeing used at the moment.
history repeats itself and CCP didnt learned from their mistakes in the past and there will be a high price to pay for the tank rampage thats going on now. Mark my words the next thing will be again a AV buff and a vehicle nerf. exept tanks using complex mods have around 40 second downtime, PLENTY of time for AV to kill, or tank can find cover/retreat when downtime/low hp like infantry, balanced, proto swarms still hurt
plenty of time for tank to run back inside its redline after warping away...
Bittervet Proficiency V
thanks logibro!
|
DUST Fiend
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
8775
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 16:53:00 -
[28] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:I feel like an assault DS with gunners would be able to take down an HAV.
I'll try to see if I can find some decent gunners today. An assault dropship with gunners is a gimped fit at best. Try to fit just one extra gun and your fit is going to suffer quite a bit for it. Better to just be a good gunner yourself while having a better fit, or running a fully tanked standard dropship if you must have gunners.
Vids / O7
|
Lance 2ballzStrong
SyNergy Gaming EoN.
4621
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 16:56:00 -
[29] - Quote
CCP and balancing issues? ... never seen this before!
Seriously though, CCP should have waited till after the tank buff to balance AV, IF NEEDED. Buffing tanks + nerfing AV seemed a good idea to people? lol...
Thankful I don't have to play this unbalanced game, but seeing stuff like this makes me lose hope for a PS4 version being any good.
( ._.) <('.'<)
"There there Mr. Heavy, it's not your fault CCP doesn't care about you"
|
DAMIOS82
ACME SPECIAL FORCES
70
|
Posted - 2013.12.14 17:32:00 -
[30] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote: tank pilot alt in disguise detected. I am sick to argue with all those biased tunnelvision kids. there are like one or two honest tank drivers posting in the forum.
sure, before all tank scrubs whined that tanks are too expensive, it should require more people to take one one. now 100k isk tank should require several proto suits costing 200k isk to defeat. that tank driver logic
I will just again watch and collect the tank driver tears from all those tank scrubs after the inevitable nerf
Actuallly just to show how little you know about people, you immature punk. I'm 32 years young which is proberly alott older then you or well atleast more mature. Instead of beeing part of the problem, like you commenting on people without having anything usefull to say, i try and come up with solutions that would enhance the game, instead of feeding the nobrain answers like yours. So why don't you come back later when you've grown up. Perhaps then we can have a meaningfull conversation over solutions instead of problems, if your brain could handle it. Ow and yes to give your stupidity atleast some credit, your partially right i was a tanker before 1.7 and an AV user, dropship pilot/Assault/heavy/sniper/logi and many more, now i've chosen to be all infantry. But atleast i can talk about all these different aspects off the game and give the right opinion, unlike you. So how about you crawl back to what ever rock you crawled from underneath and don't come out when the grownups are talking....Ok.... |
|
CommanderBolt
Isuuaya Tactical Caldari State
426
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 13:59:00 -
[31] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:DAMIOS82 wrote:Its not that tanks are OP or AV have become to weak now. Yes it seems that way now, but its the lack of the right equipment and vehicles that create this inbalance. A tank should be powerfull and feared by infantry. It does not mean it needs to be indestructable. AV should make an impact, that does not mean it should be able to take out tanks with one or two hits. The balance lies in what is available and what not. ATM the balance is right, it takes multiple AV to take out a tank, sure it needs some tweaking but this is the way it is meant to be, no one man army's. As a matter of fact when they decided to rebalance the vehicles they should have introduced other means of warfare.
Next coarse for CCP would be to introduce Anti-tank Tanks, that have less effect on infantry and more on vehicles. Also the introduction of the MTAC and MAV, would give more roles. Different types of vehicles can have different types of roles. The logi LAV was the right idea, but they made the lav so that it can do everything, what they should have done was make it module exclusive, meaning only surtain modules can go on it and work with it. This is what they need to do with many vehicles, specialize them into surtain roles.
Next would also be a new look at the mining system, There should be more new mines, with different effects. To counter HAV, yet not make them one hit wonders. Meaning they would damage them severly, but would still need a hit or two from a AV weapon to give the final blow. Futher the infantry missile launchers, should be expanded beyond the swarm launcher and the plasma cannon, each with its own effects, including a heavy version, that would have more of an effect then a normal swarm launcher. the grenades would need more variety offcourse and the RE or booby traps, should be expanded to give each trap its own function. Some would be for infantry, some would work as AV, some are triggered, others proximity, shields/armor/ bonusses and negatives, etc.
The next part to balance it out is the survival modes. How can you avoid or escape the slaughter. Like the socalled barriers, that has been mention alott earlier one. these could provide a means of escape, EWAR to counter surtain systems, like radar jamming and targeting, Regeneration disruptors, engine blokkers, etc. Offcourse every action needs a reaction, so tanks should be able to have means of countering these things with other modules, what would in turn mean that given the limited space they have, they would have to give up surtain things like, the extra damage modifier or armor, what again in turn would make them more vulnerable to AV, etc. In other words you can't have it all.
These things would be the right balance, but as long as CCP refuses to work on them or just release them one at a time, instead of a complete package of many different things together. All we will do is go in circles, untill CCP realises that they need to start introducing these things to actually balance out the game and then in its turn break the circle. tank pilot alt in disguise detected. I am sick to argue with all those biased tunnelvision kids. there are like one or two honest tank drivers posting in the forum. sure, before all tank scrubs whined that tanks are too expensive, it should require more people to take one one. now 100k isk tank should require several proto suits costing 200k isk to defeat. that tank driver logic I will just again watch and collect the tank driver tears from all those tank scrubs after the inevitable nerf
To be honest with you mate he is not a tanker. He is usually in a heavy suit when I see him. |
Fire of Prometheus
DUST University Ivy League
1951
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 14:12:00 -
[32] - Quote
History always repeats itself.....
"It is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle
I'll take your Iskies
|
Mortedeamor
WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL Top Men.
999
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 14:14:00 -
[33] - Quote
lol yup just like the rr..its practically the tac ar from closed beta..everytime ccp puts a tac weapon in dust they forget to make it so its not equally effective all the way to 8 m you would think after the tac ar ..and then the scrambler they would have caught on and introduced the rr without this issue but nooooooo not ccp they cant learn from they're mistakes |
Alldin Kan
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
859
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 14:16:00 -
[34] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:Ah the joy of watching CCP making the same mistakes AGAIN. Back in the closed beta we had a patch that buffed tanks and nerfed all AV's by 25%. What was the result? Tank spam non stop like we experience now. What happend afterwards? Vehicles got nerfed into the ground and AV unerfed. And i can asure you that vehicles are going to be nerfed in the future due to the way how they are beeing used at the moment.
history repeats itself and CCP didnt learned from their mistakes in the past and there will be a high price to pay for the tank rampage thats going on now. Mark my words the next thing will be again a AV buff and a vehicle nerf. AV damage is somewhat ok, it's just the speed of HAVs that makes it so easy to get away.
CCP, promoting exploits with every update
LOL Commando
LOL Plasma Cannon
|
Alldin Kan
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
859
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 14:28:00 -
[35] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:Sure thing then the tank uses a fuel injector to drive far away from infantry. Tanking capability+speed combo makes them unbalanced. Plus the AV nerf was over the top. Tell me how many times does it happend that a tank has to fully retreat? Allmost never. And a madrugar with tripple large repairs (yes its possible) repairs faster then a swarm launcher can inflict damage to it. Solution:
Halve repair rate of all the armor modules by 40% The best Light Armor Rep will give 56.3 HP/s The best Heavy Armor Rep will give 108.8 HP/s
CCP, promoting exploits with every update
LOL Commando
LOL Plasma Cannon
|
karlossowen
WARRIORS 1NC
12
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 14:33:00 -
[36] - Quote
Sorry but tanks are a joke on this game it's just pure chaos on the battlefield's in this game if tanks were limited to 1-2 per team fair enough but since Tuesday I've been seeing on average a total of 7-8 tanks on the field at 1 time it's just chaotic and the speed of them is a joke in any reality what HEAVILY armoured vehicle moves faster than LIGHT vehicle the price on tanks is another level of stupidity why use a proto suit when I can use 3 tanks for less isk meanwhile back in reality it costs roughly -ú80,000 to fully kit out a spec ops soldier and about -ú2,500,000+ to fully kit out a tank the whole economy o |
karlossowen
WARRIORS 1NC
12
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 14:34:00 -
[37] - Quote
karlossowen wrote:Sorry but tanks are a joke on this game it's just pure chaos on the battlefield's in this game if tanks were limited to 1-2 per team fair enough but since Tuesday I've been seeing on average a total of 7-8 tanks on the field at 1 time it's just chaotic and the speed of them is a joke in any reality what HEAVILY armoured vehicle moves faster than LIGHT vehicle the price on tanks is another level of stupidity why use a proto suit when I can use 3 tanks for less isk meanwhile back in reality it costs roughly -ú80,000 to fully kit out a spec ops soldier and about -ú2,500,000+ to fully kit out a tank the whole economy o
Whoops unfinished
The whole economy of the game is messed up |
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
3277
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 14:57:00 -
[38] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:CCP keep making these mistakes over, and over, and over. Breach assault rifle. Tanks. Laser rifle. TAR. Calogi. Flaylock. Logis in general.
Now tanks again. Every major patch CCP screws up. I really don't know how they manage it - they're very talented. Lasers weren't OP, just one of the viziam's stats wasn't what it was intended to be, then CCP overnerfed them instead of fixing it.
We used to have a time machine
|
Poplo Furuya
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
727
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 15:21:00 -
[39] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:CCP keep making these mistakes over, and over, and over. Breach assault rifle. Tanks. Laser rifle. TAR. Calogi. Flaylock. Logis in general.
Now tanks again. Every major patch CCP screws up. I really don't know how they manage it - they're very talented. Lasers weren't OP, just one of the viziam's stats wasn't what it was intended to be, then CCP overnerfed them instead of fixing it. That was a a wonderful piece of work. "Whoops, we've given the Proto LR double the damage of the Advanced. The obvious thing to do here is nerf everything!"
Opposite extreme now. The most major difference between versions is that the more expensive models blow up in your face with greater intensity. |
Morathi III
Policeman of the Federation
83
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 15:36:00 -
[40] - Quote
Long Evity wrote:This seems to be how CCP handles everything. There's no middle ground - it's either all in or all out. They really need to fire whoever comes up with these ideas. Well easy to answer, poeple want to win and getting a better KD, CCP always create new stuff to be FOTM to make ppl spec into this FOTM and .... Use booster to get it quickly ;) , if the game was balanced no one will use booster after a time and having one specialisation, but making things OP or UP forces ppl to change specialisation because their old selection is now garbage |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |