|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
2522
   |
Posted - 2013.12.17 22:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tanks are pretty helpless against AV in the city.
Infantry are pretty helpless against tanks outside of the city.
How is this unbalanced again? And please try to keep broken game modes out of the equation. Skirmish is, and always has been, the only legitimate game mode for competitive play. |
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
2522
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 22:43:00 -
[2] - Quote
Mithridates VI wrote:Yeah, all those walls to hide behind make it really hard to tanks to avoid AV. You're right.
If a tank is in the city his movement is restricted and he can be hit from nearly any angle or elevation. He also has to deal with infantry cover that he has no way of driving around for a better angle.
Essentially, he is there to provide minimal support at great risk to himself.
KINDA LIKE INFANTRY ON THE OUTSIDE.
Game is balanced. |
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
2522
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 22:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mithridates VI wrote:Yeah, you say it's so, so it must be true!
Good, your learning.
Now kiss my ring. |
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
2522
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 23:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Yeah, exept the tanks have what's called "Active Scanners" to prevent themselves from being ambushed while in cities, and the cover and tons of walls easily allow tankers to escape without even trying. Not that they ever had to try. Also, I answered something very similar to this a while back, so here: Atiim wrote:I don't need your hints. I've been using both HAVs and AV for more than half a year now. And those tactics require a very bad pilot (*hint hint*) And tell me, what part of that are you required to do? I can (and have) run my tanks solo and still managed to do just as well solo as I would in a coordinated squad. And I find your reply questioning the legitimacy of my revised statement hilarious considering how tankers have even said in threads that vehicles shouldn't require teamwork, but AV should. So you either have a very biased perspective or you just lack competence. I assume both. Also take a look at this: You say that a majority of maps are in enclosed areas such as cities and complexes, meaning that infantry have lots of cover and can easily place a remote explosive onto the hull of an HAV. Yet the only maps that actually fit your description are Iron Delta and Impact Ridge. Please refrain from lying about map design to make your argument(s) credible. Please, wipe the windshield off of your tank and see things from a clear perspective. It usually helps.
Cover works both ways.
Tank sits down below, exposed to gunfire, accomplishing nothing. Or tank runs through the city and accomplishes nothing.
Either way, the tank accomplishes nothing. All threatening uplinks will be out of his reach, and he cannot hack objectives. Tank is nearly worthless there. |
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
2523
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 23:11:00 -
[5] - Quote
Keri Starlight wrote:Tanks are fine, but tank spam is not.
Outside, tank spam is fine.
Outside is the domain of vehicular combat.
Nearly everybody outside SHOULD HAVE a vehicle. There is nothing wrong with that. |
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
2527
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 23:21:00 -
[6] - Quote
Line harvest is the only broken map as far as im concerned.
One side gets a clear massive advantage, and its because it has two points with roof cover to block orbital pushes and the other side is entirely exposed. |
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
2527
|
Posted - 2013.12.17 23:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tech Ohm Eaven wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:Tanks are pretty helpless against AV in the city.
NO!! active scanners let me know where those red rabbits are.
Infantry are pretty helpless against tanks outside of the city.
YES!! and inside the city also!!
How is this unbalanced again? And please try to keep broken game modes out of the equation. Skirmish is, and always has been, the only legitimate game mode for competitive play. Its UNBALANCED when a 0SP militia tank can get plenty of kills and ZIIIIP !! AWAY!! with no way for the infantry to either catch them or kill them.
Full balance is for pussies.
What you want is contrast.
Besides that, who cares if you know where I am in the city because of your scanner? I know where you are too. And I can hit you. You can't hit me. The advantage is not yours. |
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
2527
|
Posted - 2013.12.18 01:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:
Cover works both ways.
Tank sits down below, exposed to gunfire, accomplishing nothing. Or tank runs through the city and accomplishes nothing.
Either way, the tank accomplishes nothing. All threatening uplinks will be out of his reach, and he cannot hack objectives. Tank is nearly worthless there.
Yes, but only two maps actually fit the description, and the two maps that do fit your description are rarely ever played on(well, maybe that's just my end). And because of the low chance of being in said situation, it borders irrelevance. It's like me complaining about being beaten by Plasma Cannons. And the tank is the best at everything in every other situation, including AV. Who needs infantry anymore? To hack Nullsec Cannons? All you have to do is butcher the 150 (450 in PC) clones to win. (Though if you shred through 450 clones, the opponent clearly needs to "get good".)
The maps that apply are the cargo hub, production facility, and research facility.
There is one spot in the production facility where a tank can shoot someone off a point, but he is exposed to tower forge fire the entire time. And in PC there is nearly always tower forge fire.
In the cargo hub, the tank is worthless inside the city unless it is the 3 point variation. Then he can play a bigger role, but again he is exposed to tower forge fire that he can't do anything about so its a death trap unless infantry have secured the high ground in his favor.
Research facility, tank is worthless. He has to stay outside.
All other maps? Who cares. They are pubs and were incredibly flawed to begin with. |
|
|
| |
|