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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

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
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 4755	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:15:00 - [2] - Quote Reduce WP and ISK rewards for killing targets while in a vehicle. Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives. Tuna > Tacos
Borne Velvalor Endless Hatred 1067	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:22:00 - [3] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: the current cost is low enough that with a Militia tank you can earn enough to replace four of it in one match, in which case there's no reason not to constantly use four. I'm stubborn and usually run Madrugars and Gunnlogis. The enemy often likes to fill the whole quota when squadded up with corp mates. I'm actually running negative ISK trying to pop the endless waves of tanks. I'd make money if I ate nachos in militia tanks and blapped everyone running around me like I did day one of 1.7, but the enemy tanks are too annoying for me to ignore at this point. Many suits I've worn, many burdens I've borne, for the oaths I've sworn. Panda.
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4105	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:24:00 - [4] - 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
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2552	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:41:00 - [5] - Quote 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.
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4107	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:52:00 - [6] - 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
steadyhand amarr Scions of Athra 2102	Posted - 2013.12.17 13:58:00 - [7] - Quote 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. "i dont care about you or your goals, just show me the dam isk" winner of EU squad cup GOGO power rangers
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 1962	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:01:00 - [8] - Quote 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
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4107	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:06:00 - [9] - 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
Anarchide Greedy Bastards 1655	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:08:00 - [10] - Quote Tank Spam Counter: Rig LAVs with RE. Ram Tanks. Hilarity ensue (and hatemail). Greedy Bastards' Hate Lord

Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4107	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:10:00 - [11] - 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
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2552	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:10:00 - [12] - Quote It's easy to me ISK running militia infantry gear so why should vehicles be any different? It's the only way to make piloting a viable full time role. It's that or it becomes an end game occupation indulged in occasionally only by old vets. They will come for dropships once they destroy tanks. Let's let it settle down some and let CCP do some balancing. 1.7 is a complete rewrite and will need several passes to balance.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 1962	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:23:00 - [13] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: 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. Last i checked its more of an FPS and requires infantry to win since i dont jump out of my HAV to hack stuff but my HAV defending a point is just an important as infantry doing the same thing
Harpyja DUST University Ivy League 918	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:45:00 - [14] - Quote 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. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 11303	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:46:00 - [15] - Quote 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... CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Rail and Combat Rifle =// Unlocked
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4108	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:47:00 - [16] - 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 - [17] - 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
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 11304	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:49:00 - [18] - 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. 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. Why if infantry enjoyed the same type of interplay between prototype and milita havs do go through today, the complaints of proto stomping would evaporate to a much smaller pool of complaints. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Rail and Combat Rifle =// Unlocked
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4108	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:52:00 - [19] - 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
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 11304	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:54:00 - [20] - Quote 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. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Rail and Combat Rifle =// Unlocked

Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4110	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:57:00 - [21] - 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
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2554	Posted - 2013.12.17 14:59:00 - [22] - Quote 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? As a matter of fact MLT weapons DO have the same damage as STD weapons. The difference comes in fitting costs.
Harpyja DUST University Ivy League 918	Posted - 2013.12.17 15:02:00 - [23] - 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. Why if infantry enjoyed the same type of interplay between prototype and milita havs do go through today, the complaints of proto stomping would evaporate to a much smaller pool of complaints. Sure there is, but it's limited to longer active times, shorter cooldown times, turret upgrades, and some PG/CPU reduction on modules. Everything else, like EHP and damage output, is the same. The reason why there's so many 0 SP tanks is because they have the same EHP as a dedicated tank and rival the firepower of a dedicated tank. People are complaining about militia tanks with 0 SP dominating the field, and this is how you fix the problem. Also by making skills affect more attributes, such as HP values and module efficacy. You can't really apply the same design for vehicles and infantry. Vehicles are inherently more powerful, so you might want to make their costs to entry higher. Otherwise you encounter the same problem of tank spam with 0 SP invested. Infantry is different, because everyone has to have a chance with infantry, with PRO offering only slight advantages but not enough such that PRO makes incompetent players win. Using economics, imagine infantry as perfect competition where everyone can choose to play infantry or back out. Vehicles, since they are more specialized roles, should err towards monopolistic competition. You'd want the dedicated players succeeding over the FOTMers with 0 SP. Sure this poses a problem with new aspiring pilots, but if they are dedicated enough they will go through the high costs of entry. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2554	Posted - 2013.12.17 15:10:00 - [24] - Quote Harpyja 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. Why if infantry enjoyed the same type of interplay between prototype and milita havs do go through today, the complaints of proto stomping would evaporate to a much smaller pool of complaints. Sure there is, but it's limited to longer active times, shorter cooldown times, turret upgrades, and some PG/CPU reduction on modules. Everything else, like EHP and damage output, is the same. The reason why there's so many 0 SP tanks is because they have the same EHP as a dedicated tank and rival the firepower of a dedicated tank. People are complaining about militia tanks with 0 SP dominating the field, and this is how you fix the problem. Also by making skills affect more attributes, such as HP values and module efficacy. You can't really apply the same design for vehicles and infantry. Vehicles are inherently more powerful, so you might want to make their costs to entry higher. Otherwise you encounter the same problem of tank spam with 0 SP invested. Infantry is different, because everyone has to have a chance with infantry, with PRO offering only slight advantages but not enough such that PRO makes incompetent players win. Using economics, imagine infantry as perfect competition where everyone can choose to play infantry or back out. Vehicles, since they are more specialized roles, should err towards monopolistic competition. You'd want the dedicated players succeeding over the FOTMers with 0 SP. Sure this poses a problem with new aspiring pilots, but if they are dedicated enough they will go through the high costs of entry. Vehicles aren't supposed to be more powerful than infantry overall. They are supposed to be more powerful for shorter periods of time and less powerful for the remainder to balance them out. That's where we need to put the effort.
Ryder Azorria Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 737	Posted - 2013.12.17 15:13:00 - [25] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: 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. Lets use your own example against you. In a straight shooting match a Duvolle will take out a militia AR easily, but if the militia AR outplays the Duvolle and attacks from behind the militia wins - this is essentially the same with militia and STANDARD tanks (militia and standard are meant to be pretty close, so your Duvolle analogy doesn't really hold any water anyway) in a straight shooting match, a standard tank will beat a militia tank, but if the militia tank is better fit, or outplays the standard tank, as per the AR example the militia SHOULD (and does) win.
trraacx Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 48	Posted - 2013.12.17 15:14:00 - [26] - Quote I could put this in about a hundred threads. Are tanks/lavs really a problem? I die a lot but rarely ever to tanks and that happens only when I'm not paying attention. They are hilarious to watch right now.
Naviticus OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 29	Posted - 2013.12.17 15:21:00 - [27] - Quote haha the funny part is.....you have to train to use a HMG but not a tank. ccp your silly. Just make a alt and jiihad jeep it up guaranteed tanks every match. Sadly i make money doing it
Evolution-7 The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 248	Posted - 2013.12.17 15:49:00 - [28] - Quote 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. Veteran Pilot "Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart."
CELTIC TARON Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 7	Posted - 2013.12.17 16:00:00 - [29] - 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 all because he brought equipment that I was not ready for. The issue isn't so much soma's as sicas. You must understand being destroyed from a redline sica with double damage mods before you can even get behind cover (with hardener on after first hit) is a bit out there. We can't keep the hardener on at all times and even with it on it buys us one extra hit before we are destroyed. Redline Sica's with rail turrets are the problem mostly because it makes it near impossible for a "tanker" to come in and combat other enemy tanks that are close. You even get the occassional sica running double damage mods and armor hardeners close and personal, and you're dead before you get to do much. Poof there goes 500,000 isk in the blink of an eye.
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2554	Posted - 2013.12.17 16:22:00 - [30] - Quote CELTIC TARON wrote: 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 all because he brought equipment that I was not ready for. The issue isn't so much soma's as sicas. You must understand being destroyed from a redline sica with double damage mods before you can even get behind cover (with hardener on after first hit) is a bit out there. We can't keep the hardener on at all times and even with it on it buys us one extra hit before we are destroyed. Redline Sica's with rail turrets are the problem mostly because it makes it near impossible for a "tanker" to come in and combat other enemy tanks that are close. You even get the occassional sica running double damage mods and armor hardeners close and personal, and you're dead before you get to do much. Poof there goes 500,000 isk in the blink of an eye. And that's a redline problem not limited to tanks.

CrotchGrab 360 609	Posted - 2013.12.17 16:44:00 - [31] - Quote i think there should be a way to "lock" certain areas out, like in Planetside 2. to stop tanks from farming their way through,
Xender17 Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 965	Posted - 2013.12.17 16:46:00 - [32] - Quote What about the infantry spam or rail rifle spam? Prt SL, SCR, SR . ADV FGs, MDs, LaZor, KNs. Gunnlogi, Falchion, Python, Caldari LDS. (+require) Prt L. Am, Adv HVY, LGS
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4115	Posted - 2013.12.17 18:12:00 - [33] - 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
Leonid Tybalt DIOS EX. 6	Posted - 2013.12.17 21:19:00 - [34] - Quote 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!
Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 4139	Posted - 2013.12.17 21:21:00 - [35] - 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
Fire of Prometheus DUST University Ivy League 1993	Posted - 2013.12.17 21:37:00 - [36] - Quote What makes your think the tanks will go away? The tanks would probably just move around more as apposed to sitting in one spot farming kills. If they can't die than they aren't losing anything so getting the extra isk doesn't matter, it's just a little bonus. I'm all for getting rid of tank spam but I don't think this is the way to do it. "It is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle <3 Commando AK.0


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.