DUST Search - if a tank should only be killed by a tank.....

All Channels

General Discussions

if a tank should only be killed by a tank.....

» 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)
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 1621	Posted - 2013.12.17 16:55:00 - [1] - Quote then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. CCp's newest joke, making setting off your own remote explosives in FW FF... awesome job ccp.
Talryn Vilneram SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 62	Posted - 2013.12.17 17:07:00 - [2] - Quote I was actually thinking the same thing. I think tanks are spammed because they are difficult to kill, they have a fairly low ISK investment and can kill ANYTHING. I think the main turrets should only be able to kill a suit standing still. You want to kill infantry? You have to fit 20GJ blasters or whatever and either switch seats and be immobile, or get your buddies to man the smaller turrets. Just like in EVE where the larger ships have a hard time hitting smaller ships that are moving fast. It makes that game very balanced.
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 330	Posted - 2013.12.17 17:09:00 - [3] - Quote I'm down for this. However, we would need for their to be more vehicles for them to shoot at. As of now, tanks have LAVs, the occasional drop ship, and each other.
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 1628	Posted - 2013.12.17 17:11:00 - [4] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: I'm down for this. However, we would need for their to be more vehicles for them to shoot at. As of now, tanks have LAVs, the occasional drop ship, and each other. don't forget turrets and other installations....with that, now they have all they need to shoot at. problem solved. CCp's newest joke, making setting off your own remote explosives in FW FF... awesome job ccp.
R F Gyro Clones 4u 853	Posted - 2013.12.17 18:18:00 - [5] - Quote From a game balance perspective I'd support this, but it would look a bit strange. You're strolling along and an enemy tank rolls round the corner. You yawn and continue sauntering past. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
TheBLAZZED VENGEANCE FOR HIRE 159	Posted - 2013.12.17 18:25:00 - [6] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: I'm down for this. However, we would need for their to be more vehicles for them to shoot at. As of now, tanks have LAVs, the occasional drop ship, and each other. don't forget turrets and other installations....with that, now they have all they need to shoot at. problem solved. Not every game mode has turrets and other installations... ntm, once they go boom.... no more things to make go boom. :( care to retry those excellent problem solving skills again?
TheBLAZZED VENGEANCE FOR HIRE 159	Posted - 2013.12.17 18:28:00 - [7] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. I like the idea.... few issues. What would stop a red dot from nonchalantly strolling up and slapping a bunch of remote explosives on you? I'd like the option of replacing my large turret with a small or remove it so I could be a logi tank (once remote reps come back)
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 1640	Posted - 2013.12.17 18:50:00 - [8] - Quote TheBLAZZED wrote: Seymor Krelborn wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: I'm down for this. However, we would need for their to be more vehicles for them to shoot at. As of now, tanks have LAVs, the occasional drop ship, and each other. don't forget turrets and other installations....with that, now they have all they need to shoot at. problem solved. Not every game mode has turrets and other installations... ntm, once they go boom.... no more things to make go boom. :( care to retry those excellent problem solving skills again? no, not really I still think that solves the problem.... after all its not all about the tanks... they have enough to shoot w/out murdering infantry. CCp's newest joke, making setting off your own remote explosives in FW FF... awesome job ccp.
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 1640	Posted - 2013.12.17 18:52:00 - [9] - Quote TheBLAZZED wrote: Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. I like the idea.... few issues. What would stop a red dot from nonchalantly strolling up and slapping a bunch of remote explosives on you? I'd like the option of replacing my large turret with a small or remove it so I could be a logi tank (once remote reps come back) well you have 2 other people in the tank... they could get out or use small turrets... or the rest of the team can protect the tank...everything needs a weakness... if a tank's is a merc on foot with re's... well, why not? CCp's newest joke, making setting off your own remote explosives in FW FF... awesome job ccp.
Yelhsa Jin-Mao PROTO RETRIBUTION 215	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:00:00 - [10] - Quote Talryn Vilneram wrote: I was actually thinking the same thing. I think tanks are spammed because they are difficult to kill, they have a fairly low ISK investment and can kill ANYTHING. I think the main turrets should only be able to kill a suit standing still. You want to kill infantry? You have to fit 20GJ blasters or whatever and either switch seats and be immobile, or get your buddies to man the smaller turrets. Just like in EVE where the larger ships have a hard time hitting smaller ships that are moving fast. It makes that game very balanced. Remove the Main Blaster Turret and make it so only a missile or rail gun is equipable as a main turret. Have the blaster turrets reserved for passenger turrets. Simples. I can has ISK

Cyzad4 Blackfish Corp. 64	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:06:00 - [11] - Quote TheBLAZZED wrote: I like the idea.... few issues. What would stop a red dot from nonchalantly strolling up and slapping a bunch of remote explosives on you? I'd like the option of replacing my large turret with a small or remove it so I could be a logi tank (once remote reps come back) nothing, that's why you would need infantry support. I totally like this idea, you would at least need to be able to squash people tho (Gò»°Gûí°n+ëGò»n+¦ Gö+GöüGö+ "fuck this I'm out"... ... ..."I'm back"
Onesimus Tarsus 723	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:11:00 - [12] - Quote I think we're on to something here, but let's go the whole nine: You can only kill or be killed by a fit that exactly matches yours. Hide n Seek 514 Big red button that respecs your SP on demand. Protos only get points from killing protos.
Onesimus Tarsus 723	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:11:00 - [13] - Quote Onesimus Tarsus wrote: I think we're on to something here, but let's go the whole nine: You can only kill or be killed by a fit that exactly matches yours. Hide n Seek 514 Or, Go Fish 514 Big red button that respecs your SP on demand. Protos only get points from killing protos.
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 563	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:20:00 - [14] - Quote Yelhsa Jin-Mao wrote: Remove the Main Blaster Turret and make it so only a missile or rail gun is equipable as a main turret. Have the blaster turrets reserved for passenger turrets. Simples. This would be ideal.
Abron Garr Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 684	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:33:00 - [15] - Quote Buff small rails and blasters so there is actually a reason to fit them on tanks.
The Attorney General 1686	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:37:00 - [16] - Quote Flawed premise. Only stupid tankers are arguing that the only way to take out a tank is with another tank. The most common argument made by tankers is one of efficiency. Namely, that it is better to attack a hardened tank with another tank than it is with AV weapons. You could try and have that debate, but no one does. There is far too much drama. Why should infantry based AV be the best option? What about balancing for (hopefully) soon to come aircraft? Is there a third tier we are awaiting? There are tons of places to take discussion on this matter, but you reach for the ridiculous. Thumbs down. Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 1653	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:45:00 - [17] - Quote The Attorney General wrote: Flawed premise. Only stupid tankers are arguing that the only way to take out a tank is with another tank. The most common argument made by tankers is one of efficiency. Namely, that it is better to attack a hardened tank with another tank than it is with AV weapons. You could try and have that debate, but no one does. There is far too much drama. Why should infantry based AV be the best option? What about balancing for (hopefully) soon to come aircraft? Is there a third tier we are awaiting? There are tons of places to take discussion on this matter, but you reach for the ridiculous. Thumbs down. ok well if infantry based AV shouldn't be an answer than swarms should be able to target infantry, after all forge guns can, and if swarms lose their place as the answer to vehicle kills, having them only be able to target vehicles makes no sense. stop the lol bans in FW.... instead make teamkillers purple! https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=129910&fi
True Adamance Scions of Athra 4984	Posted - 2013.12.17 19:48:00 - [18] - Quote The Attorney General wrote: Flawed premise. Only stupid tankers are arguing that the only way to take out a tank is with another tank. The most common argument made by tankers is one of efficiency. Namely, that it is better to attack a hardened tank with another tank than it is with AV weapons. You could try and have that debate, but no one does. There is far too much drama. Why should infantry based AV be the best option? What about balancing for (hopefully) soon to come aircraft? Is there a third tier we are awaiting? There are tons of places to take discussion on this matter, but you reach for the ridiculous. Thumbs down. That's not a bad way of looking at it. On my Soma I have 36 seconds where I might consider fighting...but if I get even two swarmers on me I need to think about backing off a little fit. Once that 36 seconds is up Tanks are still pretty flimsy trust me I have AVed, Tank rushed, remote explosive enough enemy HAV to know how to take them down this build with relative ease. To a Texan like you, a hero is some type of weird sandwich, not some nut who takes on three Gunlogi. Reference = ISK
cranium79 ZionTCD Public Disorder. 76	Posted - 2013.12.17 20:13:00 - [19] - Quote i think the problem ccp is having with this balance issue is that they are not looking at it logically. look at the history of the tank. look at it's role. look at the history of av and it's role. tanks were designed to break the enemy line and take out hardened emplacements. they were not designed to hold the line. see the Mark I from WWI through the M1 Abrams and the battle of 73 Easting. av has always been cheaper, more portable, and devastating. see the bazooka, panzerschreck, and panzerfaust. even av cannons like the german 88. in dust, there is really no "line to break". not yet anyway. so tanks hover around objectives. like a domination game i was in over the weekend. there were 3 tanks sitting in front of "A". the blues could not break in. av could not scare them away effectively enough. tanks need to be expensive. the balance is determining how expensive. i think any base militia tank should cost more than a full protosuit fit. tanks cheaper than suits are what's causing the tank spam. this does need to stop. av needs to be effective. not OHK effective (although a proto AV vs a militia tank seems reasonable for a OHK, at least a 2 hit kill), but effective enough to drive the tank off or kill it with a reasonable amount of hits. there needs to be a balance of reality (1 shot from a railgun emplacement killing a tank as it would in real life) vs making the game fun to play and not having tanks invincible (such as a tank taking 5 hits from a railgun emplacement and running away). another thing we need is larger matches. 16 vs 16 is too small. you need more players to give each role its opportunity to do what it was designed to do. there are times when it seems like there are only 10 vs 10 (or less) and the rest are in vehicles or sniping. leaving 10 people per side to hack (up to 5 objectives), cover the hack, and run av. it's not very fun when this happens. we will see several more tweaks over the next couple of patches. no doubt about that.
Naviticus OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 31	Posted - 2013.12.17 20:23:00 - [20] - Quote yap yap yap yap just make them more expensive again the cost is why people spam. Why spawn a 200k proto av suit when you could spawn a 60k militia tank and have more of a chance

R F Gyro Clones 4u 855	Posted - 2013.12.17 20:25:00 - [21] - Quote No, the basic problem is that solo tankers believe a solo tank should be fundamentally better than solo infantry: solo tank should kill infantry easily, solo infantry should not be able to kill tanks. In other words, a game of "scissors vs paper". They then use ISK or SP as a justification for this, forgetting that the key limiting factor in Dust battles is the 16 players per side limit. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
TranquilBiscuit ofVaLoR F.T.U. IMMORTAL REGIME 880	Posted - 2013.12.17 20:29:00 - [22] - Quote i like this idea. why the hell can a tank be invincible to all but a few people, but kill just about anything with ease? Tell me, how exactly DOES a biscuit gain Valor?
Naviticus OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 31	Posted - 2013.12.17 20:44:00 - [23] - Quote just make a new character with a stupid name suicide bomber, tank go boom, some *******, you deserved that anything basically so they know know its a troll name remote a lav and blow em up till they patch things. so you dont care about him get demolitions lvl 3 and start making tanks go boom. I've seen a substantial less amount of tanks when you blow one up with a suicide lav then blow up his tank again in the redline when he call another one in. Plus it never gets old! three arabs(died)three arabs three arabs(remote explosive)Someones Madrugar
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution 2520	Posted - 2013.12.17 21:05:00 - [24] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. If a tank couldnt kill infantry nobody would have bothered to build tanks in the first place, genius. It would serve literally no tactical purpose whatsoever. If you want to avoid tanks, you go to the city. And big ships in EVE still have drone bays to kill smaller ships, as well as the option to web down smaller ships enough to kill them.
Tiny Pineapple Army of 420's Lokun Listamenn 44	Posted - 2013.12.17 21:25:00 - [25] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. If a tank couldnt kill infantry nobody would have bothered to build tanks in the first place, genius. It would serve literally no tactical purpose whatsoever. If you want to avoid tanks, you go to the city. And big ships in EVE still have drone bays to kill smaller ships, as well as the option to web down smaller ships enough to kill them. If AV couldn't kill tanks nobody would have bothered to equip AV in the first place, genius. It would serve no tactical purpose whatsoever. It you want to avoid tanks, don't call it in. And big ships in EVE...oh wait, this isn't EVE, this a FPS where balance>reality.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution 2520	Posted - 2013.12.17 21:48:00 - [26] - Quote Tiny Pineapple wrote: If AV couldn't kill tanks nobody would have bothered to equip AV in the first place, genius. It would serve no tactical purpose whatsoever. It can kill tanks, if you hit them with enough of it. This means AV has the ability to drive tanks back, and take pressure off of an objective. It also helps your other tanks on the field get the edge on the enemy tank and kill them. Over-balance is garbage and the fastest way to kill a competitive game. Clear differences in power are necessary to create a consistently dangerous situation. And consistently dangerous situations are necessary for any kind of deception to manifest. Meh, screw it. I'm not going to get dragged into an argument with competitively low level gamers who understand nothing.
Our Deepest Regret L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 390	Posted - 2013.12.17 21:53:00 - [27] - Quote I dunno. I try to avoid fighting infantry, but they get so single-minded. It's like your tank becomes their step-dad telling them they'll never amount to anything. They get really weird. I'm ambivalent about AV. Forge gunners still tear me apart, which is why I avoid large glowing men. When they get me, I feel like they've earned it. Can't really be bothered to care the poor widdle swarm launchers, though. That weapon made my life miserable last build, and I'm quite satisfied with its current level of worthlessness.
Shion Typhon Intara Direct Action Caldari State 329	Posted - 2013.12.17 22:15:00 - [28] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Tiny Pineapple wrote: If AV couldn't kill tanks nobody would have bothered to equip AV in the first place, genius. It would serve no tactical purpose whatsoever. It can kill tanks, if you hit them with enough of it. This means AV has the ability to drive tanks back, and take pressure off of an objective. It also helps your other tanks on the field get the edge on the enemy tank and kill them. Over-balance is garbage and the fastest way to kill a competitive game. Clear differences in power are necessary to create a consistently dangerous situation. And consistently dangerous situations are necessary for any kind of deception to manifest. Meh, screw it. I'm not going to get dragged into an argument with competitively low level gamers who understand nothing. Clear differences in power??!? So a good game is one where the other side has overwhelming advantage and no danger and the other side faces all the danger, this causes some mystical effect which you can't explain that makes the game competitive. Sounds logical to me! You need to stop smoking that weed.
Our Deepest Regret L.O.T.I.S. Public Disorder. 391	Posted - 2013.12.17 22:19:00 - [29] - Quote Shion Typhon wrote: Clear differences in power??!? So a good game is one where the other side has overwhelming advantage and no danger and the other side faces all the danger, this causes some mystical effect which you can't explain that makes the game competitive. Sounds logical to me! You need to stop smoking that weed. When it's not tanks, it's proto-gear. The side with the best equipment always wins, and in ambush, it's very rarely a close match. I'm beginning to suspect this game has never been balanced, nor will it ever be. ' What can ye do? Just take it easy, I guess.
Jammer Jalapeno BIG BAD W0LVES 113	Posted - 2013.12.17 22:32:00 - [30] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. Hell NO! If a tank is trying to bite me I WILL HUNT YOU DOWN AND EAT YOU. If tanks can kill infantry than infantry should be able to fight back and take down that juicy piece of meat. MmMmMm TanKs....delicious TanKs

Leonid Tybalt DIOS EX. 6	Posted - 2013.12.17 22:38:00 - [31] - Quote Talryn Vilneram wrote: I was actually thinking the same thing. I think tanks are spammed because they are difficult to kill, they have a fairly low ISK investment and can kill ANYTHING. I think the main turrets should only be able to kill a suit standing still. You want to kill infantry? You have to fit 20GJ blasters or whatever and either switch seats and be immobile, or get your buddies to man the smaller turrets. Just like in EVE where the larger ships have a hard time hitting smaller ships that are moving fast. It makes that game very balanced. It would be incredibly stupid though. Theres a tangible real-world reason why larger ships have a hard time killing smaller ships in Eve. There is no such tangible reason as to why a tank should have a hard time killing infantry. Game-balance should not infrigne on plausibility.
Tiny Pineapple Army of 420's Lokun Listamenn 45	Posted - 2013.12.17 22:38:00 - [32] - Quote Jammer Jalapeno wrote: Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. Hell NO! If a tank is trying to bite me I WILL HUNT YOU DOWN AND EAT YOU. If tanks can kill infantry than infantry should be able to fight back and take down that juicy piece of meat. I expect nothing less of a response from a member of Big Bad Wolves. o7
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 1684	Posted - 2013.12.18 00:12:00 - [33] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: Talryn Vilneram wrote: I was actually thinking the same thing. I think tanks are spammed because they are difficult to kill, they have a fairly low ISK investment and can kill ANYTHING. I think the main turrets should only be able to kill a suit standing still. You want to kill infantry? You have to fit 20GJ blasters or whatever and either switch seats and be immobile, or get your buddies to man the smaller turrets. Just like in EVE where the larger ships have a hard time hitting smaller ships that are moving fast. It makes that game very balanced. It would be incredibly stupid though. Theres a tangible real-world reason why larger ships have a hard time killing smaller ships in Eve. There is no such tangible reason as to why a tank should have a hard time killing infantry. Game-balance should not infrigne on plausibility. actually no, there is no tangible real world reason...its just an eve mechanic...if eve were real world a small ship would eat a large ship for breakfast, how? firing at its thrusters, or landing on it and sending a spec ops team in to take out the engineering section... in real life tanks don't attack infantry... they attack positions they psh the line to give infantry a hole to take out infantry... when a tank does kill a person its do to splash damage from the turret (tanks in RL don't have Blasters) go learn something and come back.... stop the lol bans in FW.... instead make teamkillers purple! https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=129910&fi
Vrain Matari ZionTCD Public Disorder. 1382	Posted - 2013.12.22 15:34:00 - [34] - Quote Our Deepest Regret wrote: Shion Typhon wrote: Clear differences in power??!? So a good game is one where the other side has overwhelming advantage and no danger and the other side faces all the danger, this causes some mystical effect which you can't explain that makes the game competitive. Sounds logical to me! You need to stop smoking that weed. When it's not tanks, it's proto-gear. The side with the best equipment always wins, and in ambush, it's very rarely a close match. I'm beginning to suspect this game has never been balanced, nor will it ever be. ' What can ye do? Just take it easy, I guess. Not true. Your own corp, L.O.T.I.S., could prolly run STD gear and wipe the floor with the opposition in the majority of pub matches. I support SP rollover.
Mobius Wyvern Isuuaya Tactical Caldari State 4206	Posted - 2013.12.22 15:38:00 - [35] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. Only the morons no one should be paying attention to use that excuse. If some tank driver throws that at you when you talk about vehicle and infantry balance, just stop talking to them. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Paran Tadec Imperfect Bastards 1800	Posted - 2013.12.22 15:43:00 - [36] - Quote TheBLAZZED wrote: What would stop a red dot from nonchalantly strolling up and slapping a bunch of remote explosives on you? Support infantry Bittervet Proficiency V thanks logibro!
crazy space 1 GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 2119	Posted - 2013.12.22 15:56:00 - [37] - Quote Dropships If we should shoot out of thrm tanks be toast. Highspeed combat. COME ON BIG BATTLES
Crimson ShieId Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 10	Posted - 2013.12.22 16:31:00 - [38] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. Have you ever tried to hit a bunny suit with a tank? It's not easy, especially up close. Bunny hop more and your problem is solved. Works for me and just about everyone else, it can work for you too... unless you're a heavy, then you're SOL.
Harpyja DUST University Ivy League 947	Posted - 2013.12.22 16:33:00 - [39] - Quote I think large missile turrets are the most balanced Difficult to kill infantry with but are wonderful tankbusters. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 927	Posted - 2013.12.22 16:37:00 - [40] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. Which translates to make the blaster slower rate of fire with more damage. The other two turrets can kill small things as effectively as large turrets in EVE, which is to say not all that much. Do your part. Join the revolution. Sabotage FW. Help this game burn! BURN DUST 2014

Demel Derpovsky Derringer Defenses 39	Posted - 2013.12.22 16:39:00 - [41] - Quote That's kind of what is happening.... Your tank is fat, big, and bulky. Your dropsuit is fast, swift, and flexible. You don't kill tanks anymore, you run away from them, call in your own, use a charge, get an anti tank squad, and you survive like that.
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 352	Posted - 2013.12.22 16:51:00 - [42] - Quote Perhaps we should buff hardener resistance gain, and nerf tank total hp. Make the hardeners matter more. For instance, make hardeners give 80% increase instead of 60%, but reduce total vehicle hp so that we end up with the same ehp as we do now when hardeners are up. Make that window of opportunity mean more.
Vesago Ghostcore Rejected Clones 99	Posted - 2013.12.22 17:07:00 - [43] - Quote I think a lot of the issue isn't that tanks are invulnerable or a win button so to speak. Its more likely that having a field with 5 enemy tanks running around removes the ground games usual tactics. Tankers are happy to say that you should need to field teams of AV to destroy them, but in what situation is it tactically possible to have infantry deal with 5 tanks? In this situation all ability to capture objectives is removed in lieu of forcing everyone to run AV to deal with the massive amounts of Armor on the field. i Instant response from tankers will of course be field your own tanks. Sure. But in the situation i speak of, usually someone already has, and by the time a pile of tanks are on the ground how reasonable is it to call in 5 tanks. They will mostly be shot down before they hit the ground. But that's not the issue. The issue is that if your team does not field enough tanks, they will fail. Forcing a half a dozen members of a team to focus on AV loses the game. Asking your random 15 minute friends to bring tanks isn't possible. I offer 2 possible options to try and resolve the Tank 514 issue. Neither diminish the tank in any way. 1. Let flux grenades kill Tank buffs, and keep them dead for a reasonable amount of time. This allows infantry to have a real impact on supporting AV. 2. Limit each side to 2 or 3 tanks at any given time.
Flix Keptick Red Star. EoN. 1724	Posted - 2013.12.22 17:11:00 - [44] - Quote Why would anyone deploy tanks... Seriously, if the enemy team has a tank and it can't really do **** to my team then why would I even bother calling a tank in? Going to stay out of AV/V debates, better for my sanity. GÿåTank driverGÿå
4447 Resolution XIII 945	Posted - 2013.12.22 17:13:00 - [45] - Quote CCP should just do what every other FPS does, And that's Small arms damage Tanks. Troll, For lifeGÇª But maybe a dragon, uh a bigger dragon.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2020	Posted - 2013.12.22 17:19:00 - [46] - Quote OP go buy COD ghosts No vehicles for you to bother with Intelligence is OP
Seymor Krelborn DUST University Ivy League 1762	Posted - 2013.12.23 17:38:00 - [47] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: OP go buy COD ghosts No vehicles for you to bother with I haven't liked the cod series since 3... what was that, like 10 years ago? as far as vehicles go I love vehicles, I drive an LAV in dust, and in other games like GTA, HALO, and skyrim (do horses count as vehicles) vehicles are a lot of fun. but I could say to you if you love vehicles so much your willing to shun people part of this already tiny player base, maybe you should go play world of tanks. stop the lol bans in FW.... instead make teamkillers purple! https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=129910&fi
nakaya indigene 0uter.Heaven 105	Posted - 2013.12.23 20:30:00 - [48] - Quote Missile and rail turrets can't hit infantry that are moving. But kill tanks with ease. Blaster tanks on the other hand have a really good advantage against infantry but aren't able to kill tanks quite as effectivly as a rail. So yes tank combat is fine. The meat of this topic is that tanks are too fast and there are too many for AV to nail down. QQ all you want but this game will have vechile combat. Go play your call of duty. The Jove espier
Xender17 Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 965	Posted - 2013.12.23 20:54:00 - [49] - Quote Please keep in mind that no one person speaks on behalf of everyone or a group. I feel that tank should only get killed by tanks is a very stupid idea and quite the double standard. (By what you said) AV buffs needed in my opinion +50 dmg to each swarm. Increase damage bonus on armor to 130% (due swarm damage being less effective against a maddy than a gunny if both had there hardeners off.) +150-250 dmg to AV grenades (add explosive radius that applies to both vehicles and infantry just less to the latter.) Add A.V.S to Flux G description. They are extremely effective against un-active gunnys. Add a color change or flashing icon somewhere on the screen if a vehicle has a hardener active. While the weapon is on the vehicles. Apperently the vehicle lighting up isn't enough for infantry to get the picture. Prt SL, SCR, SR . ADV FGs, MDs, LaZor, KNs. Gunnlogi, Falchion, Python, Caldari LDS. (+require) Prt L. Am, Adv HVY, LGS
Tallen Ellecon KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1128	Posted - 2013.12.23 21:09:00 - [50] - Quote I like the EVE model. Large turrets stay so slow that they are impractical against infantry. Small turrets are perfect against infantry, so gunners are ideal, making the manpower imbalance less of an issue. Blasters focus on close range high damage and Rails have less damage but have a much longer range. Tarn chose peace. Tallen chose war. Where is my Gallente sidearm? SoonGäó514

DeathwindRising ROGUE SPADES 156	Posted - 2013.12.23 21:19:00 - [51] - Quote Naviticus wrote: yap yap yap yap just make them more expensive again the cost is why people spam. Why spawn a 200k proto av suit when you could spawn a 60k militia tank and have more of a chance dont make tanks expensive... make pilot suits expensive.
CommanderBolt ACME SPECIAL FORCES 485	Posted - 2013.12.23 21:56:00 - [52] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: then a dropsuit should only be killed by a dropsuit. I propose like in eve where larger ships have issue hitting smaller ships the same should apply here. before you tell me what a stupid idea this is... ask yourself if you are one of those people who think only a tank should kill a tank and tell yourself how stupid that idea is. I thought that would be the case when it came to weapons. I.E DUST weapons are similar to their space counterparts.... Example - Space Railgun - Longest range suffers up close with bad tracking DUST railgun - longest range yet does not suffer up close like its space counterpart. Space Blaster - Shortest range, highest DPS more like a shotgun, struggles to damage or hit anything NOT in close range DUST Blaster - does not act like a shot gun, has range and dps..... The list goes on but the weapons are nothing much like they are in EVE :(
Naviticus OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 36	Posted - 2013.12.24 18:09:00 - [53] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: Naviticus wrote: yap yap yap yap just make them more expensive again the cost is why people spam. Why spawn a 200k proto av suit when you could spawn a 60k militia tank and have more of a chance dont make tanks expensive... make pilot suits expensive. they need to make pilot suits in the first place. 2nd it wouldnt stop the militia tanks getting called in every match. Never before have I head people comparing what militia modules they have on their militia tank. You dont hear people setting up nasty op dropsuits with all militia gear... and 3rd people would just say ehh i dont feel like calling in my pilot suit so imma just call a tank


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.