|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Piraten Hovnoret
No Tax Scrubs
125
   |
Posted - 2013.12.15 18:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
lol yeah 3-4 players hunting one tank. Problem is that there is always like 6 tanks on the field now.... That's with your numbers 12-18 infantry needed to take em on.
I kind of liked the active-booster-making-tanks-weak-during-cooldown thing...
The problem is that they got ******** increase in speed and ******** decrease in cost also, and al av got nerfed to sh-ít on top of that.
Yeah tanks was crap in 1,6 but this is just a joke period.
2 wrong don't make 1 right CCP |
Piraten Hovnoret
No Tax Scrubs
125
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 18:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
Komodo Jones wrote:Piraten Hovnoret wrote:lol yeah 3-4 players hunting one tank. Problem is that there is always like 6 tanks on the field now.... That's with your numbers 12-18 infantry needed to take em on.
I kind of liked the active-booster-making-tanks-weak-during-cooldown thing...
The problem is that they got ******** increase in speed and ******** decrease in cost also, and al av got nerfed to sh-ít on top of that.
Yeah tanks was crap in 1,6 but this is just a joke period.
2 wrong don't make 1 right CCP That's why you don't only need infantry, you need tanks, and that makes sense, they got the concept right but there's not too much of a point for infantry to use AV except for support and helping tanks kill other tanks quicker. That's the only thing I have a problem with is that they managed to add another dimension to the combat and make vehicle more usable, but someone who is maxed out in forge guns or swarms should be able to kill a militia tank.
I understand what you are saying and respecting it, however I TOTALY disagree with you.
If the tanks are to be as they are now the cost if running them must increase like 10 times.
And the tank should be weak when in cool down, however no it's just runs away like a rabbit on speed. Where is the RISK running a tank?
When you are in combat you have crazy almost god mode resistance/rep etc, when you run out you just "fly away" and if you do loose the tank no big deal, cheep as F any way.
So 3 guys in proto gear where ONE cost more then your tank is not a issue ?
Failure to c al this is just ignorance.
Again tanks was crap in 1,6 but this is a bad joke in a try to balance them.
|
Piraten Hovnoret
No Tax Scrubs
125
|
Posted - 2013.12.15 20:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
I RL a infantry can take out a tank. I know I have done it in RL war.... Even with normal fu+ºking dynamite and a sling shoot.
Grrrrrr the RL example is mute I know... Just frustrated lol =ƒÿé=ƒÿé=ƒÿé=ƒÿé=ƒÿé |
Piraten Hovnoret
No Tax Scrubs
126
|
Posted - 2013.12.16 11:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
Wow
If you fail 2 c the current problem with the tanks you are ignorant.
Yes tankes should be powerful and I realy don't have a issue with them as they are now.
However the balance of " the more powerful gear the more expensive it gets" is TOTALY broken with the tanks.
Every one is compering tanks to infantry, that's a mute point sence infantry is inafactive against tanks. Again tanks are effective against everything ( tanks,lavs,infantry,dropship ) regardless. The infantry that turn AV is hamperd badly when going av against other infantry
Don't give me the rail/blaster etc talk in no way is a tanker hamperd on the same way when going anti personal or anti AV as infantry is.
Again tankes are fine as they are but WAY to cheep if you do t recognise this you jet again are ignorant.
One more thing that no one is talking about is the big fu+ºk you the av guys got.
Tankers (everyone ) got a respec on the armor carrier part of the game. But the dedicated AV got middle finger buy CCP and the community,., they also should have gotten a respec.
|
|
|
| |
|