DUST Search - Look, there's only one way to truly counter the "tank spam", and i...

All Channels

General Discussions

Look, there's only one way to truly counter the "tank spam", and i...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4105	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:12:00 - [1] - Quote As KAGEHOSHI and I were discussing last night, you need to incentivize playing to objectives more than just giving WP for hacking them. The example he gave was giving Offense and Defense bonuses for fighting near objectives. For a reference point, basically look at how Battlefield pretty much does just that for its Conquest mode. As I mentioned in my other thread, you would see 70+ people in tanks just sitting around a facility in Planetside 2 because given the choice between trying to push into a base as infantry or sit outside it in a tank blapping said infantry, many people would go with the tank, especially if they could get others to do the same. It all came down to farming infantry being the most effective means of gaining XP and thus Cert Points to get new gear. Dust has an additional factor of ISK, though, which prompted an idea of my own: Reward infantry playing the objectives in a match with extra ISK compensation. If you give the infantry a chance to earn not only more War Points, but more ISK to cover what they'll lose pushing the "frontline" in a match, you'll see the "tank spam" start to die away on it's own. If this were to be combined with a cost increase to fielding an HAV, the problem would self correct almost entirely. Note that I'm not saying it should be upwards of 2 million ISK to field one again, but the current cost is low enough that with a Militia tank you can earn enough to replace it in one match, in which case there's no reason not to constantly use one. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4105	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:24:00 - [2] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Reduce WP and ISK rewards for killing targets while in a vehicle. That could actually work, but even if you did reduce those, you could probably still blap enough of a team to cover the cost of our current HAVs, which is why I was suggesting a cost increase would also be necessary. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4107	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:52:00 - [3] - Quote Skihids wrote: So your scheme to reduce vehicle usage is to return to them to unprofitability? You want to reignite the whole "My tank costs so much that it must be strong enough to last X matches, therefore it must be indestructible." argument? You want to kill piloting as a viable full time profession? How about we give it a couple more weeks to settle down before swinging the nerf bat on a whole role. I'm sure a lot of new pilots are trying them out because militia is now viable and not outrageously expensive. I'm sure there are positive incentives to encourage mixed play and we don't need to use punishments. Hey, I'm a Dropship pilot. I know ALL ABOUT not being able to make a profit doing what I love. What I'm suggesting is that making an HAV profitable should require them to work at it more than it does now. I don't think you can argue that being able to fit an entirely militia HAV and waste entire teams if enough people on your team do the same is a bit broken. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4107	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:06:00 - [4] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Isk should have always been matched to kills/support/objectives taken/hacked - isk for objectives lost. Not split out across the team where pushing or playing the objective is punshed and tankspam / redline snipeing is rewarded. No arguments there. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4107	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:10:00 - [5] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: PS2 has no win or lose mechanic As for reward infantry? why reward just infantry? why cant we reward tanks for holding the line or a point? why is everything for infantry they already get points for uplink spawns MCRU do not, we only just get intel assists now after scan514 had it all along not too mention the other pieces of equipment they have to farm WP with and thus increase ISK reward Any vehicle right now can easily make enough WP and thus ISK to be profitable, which is evidenced by the ludicrous numbers of them. If you incentivize the use of infantry, people will play infantry. Those with a lot of SP invested in vehicles that are good enough with them will continue to make a profit, and those who are only using vehicles to grind more SP will go back to infantry and actually play the game to win. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4108	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:47:00 - [6] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Like I've said many times now, nerf militia vehicles and modules and increase the SP gap. It should require SP investment to make a good fit, not this 0 SP Sica/Soma crap that's as effective as a 10mil SP Gunnlogi/Madrugar. Yes, Militia vehicles and their equipment are stupidly good now. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4108	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:49:00 - [7] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Cat Merc wrote: Reduce WP and ISK rewards for killing targets while in a vehicle. Considering most tankers these days score less than 400 wps a match... and how people like myself will continue to deploy tanks even if there was 0 wps involved because its a needed role on the field? Again, the idea isn't to try and stop people who spec into HAVs from using them, but to combat this trend of dropping the bare minimum of points into them or even just rolling Militia HAVs for the sole purpose of trying to farm SP faster. The idea is to provide incentives to keep people playing the objectives and leave the tanking to people who spec into it. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4108	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:52:00 - [8] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Harpyja wrote: Like I've said many times now, nerf militia vehicles and modules and increase the SP gap. It should require SP investment to make a good fit, not this 0 SP Sica/Soma crap that's as effective as a 10mil SP Gunnlogi/Madrugar. Oh the difference between a 10 million sp hav and 0 million hav is markedly there no need to exacerbate proto stomping to tanks as well. Well, the truth is that it's less there than it was before, having now had the chance to try out the current balance for myself. A Soma being able to take down a Madrugar several times in a row is indicative of something being wrong, here. I mean, a Militia AR isn't expected to have the same stats as a STD AR, is it? Why should that then be the case with vehicles? Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4110	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:57:00 - [9] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Harpyja wrote: Like I've said many times now, nerf militia vehicles and modules and increase the SP gap. It should require SP investment to make a good fit, not this 0 SP Sica/Soma crap that's as effective as a 10mil SP Gunnlogi/Madrugar. Oh the difference between a 10 million sp hav and 0 million hav is markedly there no need to exacerbate proto stomping to tanks as well. Well, the truth is that it's less there than it was before, having now had the chance to try out the current balance for myself. A Soma being able to take down a Madrugar several times in a row is indicative of something being wrong, here. I mean, a Militia AR isn't expected to have the same stats as a STD AR, is it? Why should that then be the case with vehicles? Yet I had a madrugar annihilate 8 soma and sicas in a row in a single match. Next Match a soma splits my tank in half. See, though, that's the issue. If you run into someone who fits a Soma by conventional logic and maybe even slaps on a Militia damage mod or two, they can take down your Madrugar that you trained for with ease. Again, think about taking a Militia AR against a Duvolle, both using the same suit, both with the same ability to aim and move. The outcome is pretty easy to predict. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4115	Posted - 2013.12.17 18:12:00 - [10] - Quote Evolution-7 wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Cat Merc wrote: Reduce WP and ISK rewards for killing targets while in a vehicle. That could actually work, but even if you did reduce those, you could probably still blap enough of a team to cover the cost of our current HAVs, which is why I was suggesting a cost increase would also be necessary. Really? I expected better from you Mobius. Last I checked neither of us are dedicated tankers, and what I'm trying to do is propose a bi-Partisan solution that tries to make both sides happy, or at least happier than they are now. Dedicated vehicle users like you and I can like the current state of things, but what does that matter when infantry players don't and they stop playing or just don't really try? You still end up losing matches or not being able to find them at all. We want to grow this game, not leave some people feeling like their playstyle can't work. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector

Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4139	Posted - 2013.12.17 21:21:00 - [11] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: Listen, if the opposing team are tank spamming then you need to capitalize more on it. Lets say there are five tanks on the opposing team. That means that at LEAST five members of the opposing team are unable to engage in any kind of hacking (unless they want to expose themselves and risk losing their tank) In essence, they're five guys short. Their tanks might be a nuisance, but they are avoidable because tanks cant cover the entire map all at once. Also if its a pub match, then it is unlikely that the opposing tankers are coordinating their efforts but rather running their own shows. This drastically reduce their effectiveness, because if you have two or more tanks where the drivers are in the same squad talking to eachother its almost impossible to stop them. To put it in simpler terms: there are ways around tank spamming. Use and abuse them! That's actually a pretty good point. If you're playing Skirmish or Domination on a map with plenty of interior spaces, you can play cat-and-mouse with the things and keep hold of the objectives with superior numbers. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector

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.