Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
912
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
I love how experienced tankers are saying MLT tanks are the problem. It shows a lack of integrity. Many have taken the stance of claiming to not kill infantry. They are trying to pin the blame on the ability to call in cheap MLT tanks.
lets ask a few questions.
what do you think is going to happen to the price of STD tanks if MLT goes up?
How will nerfing MLT tanks help the fact that AV can't effectively counter tanks?
what are these crusaders going to shoot at when there are no MLT tanks?
if it takes 3 AV to deal with a tank and there are 3tanks, how many are left to fight the other 13 guys on the ground?
Do people honestly believe the smoke screen these skilled tankers are putting up?
Be honest here because I play both sides. How many rail tanks does it take to stop vehicles from coming in?
If you don't have a skilled tanker how will you deal with another skilled tanker?
IMO these guys are incapable of seeing anything beyond their own turret. Its the tanking mentality. I have it too. When another tank on my team gets popped in always thinking "better him than me". I think this is something like that. What they do not realize is it will be more like "first him then me".
one more question.
After you get rid of your scapegoat, what will you hide behind?
I personally believe we will then have a crusade against OP tanks and it will come down to buffing AV. Its obvious really. So we see the tankers care nothing for the infantry they are now painting as the victim. They are just buying time until CCP gives us the means to defend ourselves. Its all very short sighted.
a final question. Why wait for balance?
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
Mortedeamor
Wraith Shadow Guards D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
1015
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
as someone who waited for balance for over a year and a half now i stopped caring |
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
915
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
I moved this here because the other thread is doomed to obscurity. I hope to have a les biased discussion. The cycle will begin anew and we will be doomed to imbalance. If we cover a few issues we can take advantage of the progress that has been made.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
TranquilBiscuit ofVaLoR
F.T.U. IMMORTAL REGIME
1016
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
i wouldn't have a problem not being able to kill tanks if the it was the same the other way around. my biggest problem is the fact that a tank can kill ANYTHING with ease while infantry have to use all this"teamwork" to take out one tank that costs less than less than a proto scout suit. no matter how you look at it, that is WRONG and needs to be fixed. infantry can be killed by ANYTHING easily while there are only 4-5 weapons that can harm a tank, even if the tanker has ZERO sp into tanks.
most of what you're saying is actually true, or at least i believe it. but to be honest, i would rather deal with good tankers than this tank fest we have now.
Tell me, how exactly DOES a biscuit gain Valor?
|
DUST Fiend
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
9169
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
Why make a duplicate thread?
Vids / O7
|
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
915
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
TranquilBiscuit ofVaLoR wrote:i wouldn't have a problem not being able to kill tanks if the it was the same the other way around. my biggest problem is the fact that a tank can kill ANYTHING with ease while infantry have to use all this"teamwork" to take out one tank that costs less than less than a proto scout suit. no matter how you look at it, that is WRONG and needs to be fixed. infantry can be killed by ANYTHING easily while there are only 4-5 weapons that can harm a tank, even if the tanker has ZERO sp into tanks.
most of what you're saying is actually true, or at least i believe it. but to be honest, i would rather deal with good tankers than this tank fest we have now. we will get to that. I hope they poke their head in here.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
8213
BIG BAD W0LVES
1122
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
Some tankers have become delusional in 1.7... Maybe the answer is Miltia AV? Because everyone can use a tank with no investment, but requires investment still.
And when tanks finally getting dialed back, we can then focus on the HMG being OP again...
|
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
915
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:17:00 -
[8] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Why make a duplicate thread?
if you can't read I can't help you
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
DUST Fiend
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
9169
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:DUST Fiend wrote:Why make a duplicate thread? if you can't read I can't help you You're ********.
I obviously read it if I knew it was a duplicate thread
L2logic
Vids / O7
|
Goric Rumis
Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn
255
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tanks need to be less effective against infantry, which I think is best accomplished by re-designing many of the old maps to create more areas where going infantry is really the only way to get anything done, while still providing open spaces and key points that are tactically significant for vehicles to hold and fight over, and also adding some points from which AV have a tactical advantage over vehicles (but are still vulnerable to infantry), so that, for example, controlling a null cannon wins you the game, controlling a vehicle tactical point can influence the ability to control a null cannon, and controlling an AV tactical point can influence the ability to control a vehicle tactical point.
A re-design would take a long time, but I'm convinced it's the number one factor in vehicle/AV balance at this point. |
|
Toxxikcity
Trans Worlds Operations League of Infamy
23
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:31:00 -
[11] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:I moved this here because the other thread is doomed to obscurity. I hope to have a les biased discussion. The cycle will begin anew and we will be doomed to imbalance. If we cover a few issues we can take advantage of the progress that has been made. What progress... the only thing i've seen is regression |
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
916
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
Goric Rumis wrote:Tanks need to be less effective against infantry, which I think is best accomplished by re-designing many of the old maps to create more areas where going infantry is really the only way to get anything done, while still providing open spaces and key points that are tactically significant for vehicles to hold and fight over, and also adding some points from which AV have a tactical advantage over vehicles (but are still vulnerable to infantry), so that, for example, controlling a null cannon wins you the game, controlling a vehicle tactical point can influence the ability to control a null cannon, and controlling an AV tactical point can influence the ability to control a vehicle tactical point.
A re-design would take a long time, but I'm convinced it's the number one factor in vehicle/AV balance at this point.
multi layered maps could be great for infantry fighting infantry too.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
916
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:36:00 -
[13] - Quote
Toxxikcity wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:I moved this here because the other thread is doomed to obscurity. I hope to have a les biased discussion. The cycle will begin anew and we will be doomed to imbalance. If we cover a few issues we can take advantage of the progress that has been made. What progress... the only thing i've seen is regression
explain this. Your argument supports the death of the Nerf cycle. This would make a great game
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
NAV HIV
The Generals General Tso's Alliance
643
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:39:00 -
[14] - Quote
A militia tank should be slightly stronger than Militia AV or standard AV. Gives the sense of competition and achievement. A tanker spends a lot of SP, so does a proper AV user. So if a Proto AV user can't even fight a MLT tank, What are they supposed to when 2-3 decent tanks show up?! First it's the Forge gun. I know most were using it as an anti infantry weapon. But now it's not as great against Vehicles either. Proto Swarm nerfed to half of it's capabilities. If it was MLT, STD or ADV i would understand. But Even with Proto AVs with Prof 5 and some, i can barely keep up with Sicas and Somas. |
Alena Ventrallis
The Neutral Zone
340
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:40:00 -
[15] - Quote
I think the problem is not tanks, but the number of them that can be deployed at once. AV dealing with two tanks is manageable. 5-6, not so much.
The price increase makes spamming then much less profitable, and those who do spam them will quickly lose the isk to do so. Tanks should be powerful, but also costly if destroyed.
Nerfing tanks, especially nerfing their modules, nerfs LAVs and drop ships too. You can't make a vehicle vs AV thread and talk only about tanks. Thats like making a infantry balance thread and not talking about heavies and light suits. |
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
917
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:43:00 -
[16] - Quote
NAV HIV wrote:A militia tank should be slightly stronger than Militia AV or standard AV. Gives the sense of competition and achievement. A tanker spends a lot of SP, so does a proper AV user. So if a Proto AV user can't even fight a MLT tank, What are they supposed to when 2-3 decent tanks show up?! First it's the Forge gun. I know most were using it as an anti infantry weapon. But now it's not as great against Vehicles either. Proto Swarm nerfed to half of it's capabilities. If it was MLT, STD or ADV i would understand. But Even with Proto AVs with Prof 5 and some, i can barely keep up with Sicas and Somas.
I find myself pulling out a tank instead of my forge. Its cheaper and more effective. It is also causing people distress.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
Yelhsa Jin-Mao
PROTO RETRIBUTION
227
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:44:00 -
[17] - Quote
Remove Blaster Turrets from the main turret slot for tanks and have them reserved for the passenger turret slots only. INSTANT FIX.
I can has ISK
|
Toxxikcity
Trans Worlds Operations League of Infamy
23
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:46:00 -
[18] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:Toxxikcity wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:I moved this here because the other thread is doomed to obscurity. I hope to have a les biased discussion. The cycle will begin anew and we will be doomed to imbalance. If we cover a few issues we can take advantage of the progress that has been made. What progress... the only thing i've seen is regression explain this. Your argument supports the death of the Nerf cycle. This would make a great game As i have said in other posts... the balance was fine in 1.6, i ran a proto AV fit and alone could only manage to hold back a proto fit tank proto V proto = balance. My proto AV fit V militia tank = no contest. Proto fit tank V militia or advanced AV = no contest.... now we're back to 1.3 tank indestructability ie regression |
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
917
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:46:00 -
[19] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:I think the problem is not tanks, but the number of them that can be deployed at once. AV dealing with two tanks is manageable. 5-6, not so much.
The price increase makes spamming then much less profitable, and those who do spam them will quickly lose the isk to do so. Tanks should be powerful, but also costly if destroyed.
Nerfing tanks, especially nerfing their modules, nerfs LAVs and drop ships too. You can't make a vehicle vs AV thread and talk only about tanks. Thats like making a infantry balance thread and not talking about heavies and light suits.
agreed. There are overlooked aspects of AV/V which need attention too.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
NAV HIV
The Generals General Tso's Alliance
643
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:49:00 -
[20] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:Alena Ventrallis wrote:I think the problem is not tanks, but the number of them that can be deployed at once. AV dealing with two tanks is manageable. 5-6, not so much.
The price increase makes spamming then much less profitable, and those who do spam them will quickly lose the isk to do so. Tanks should be powerful, but also costly if destroyed.
Nerfing tanks, especially nerfing their modules, nerfs LAVs and drop ships too. You can't make a vehicle vs AV thread and talk only about tanks. Thats like making a infantry balance thread and not talking about heavies and light suits. agreed. There are overlooked aspects of AV/V which need attention too.
Can't nerf one and buff the other. Beats the purpose of balancing. Becomes one sided |
|
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
920
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:49:00 -
[21] - Quote
Toxxikcity wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:Toxxikcity wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:I moved this here because the other thread is doomed to obscurity. I hope to have a les biased discussion. The cycle will begin anew and we will be doomed to imbalance. If we cover a few issues we can take advantage of the progress that has been made. What progress... the only thing i've seen is regression explain this. Your argument supports the death of the Nerf cycle. This would make a great game As i have said in other posts... the balance was fine in 1.6, i ran a proto AV fit and alone could only manage to hold back a proto fit tank proto V proto = balance. My proto AV fit V militia tank = no contest. Proto fit tank V militia or advanced AV = no contest.... now we're back to 1.3 tank indestructability ie regression
careful here. This is a sensitive subject.
I used all forms of AV in 1.6. And I tanked. Swarms were stupidly OP when coupled with rendering issues.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides
1928
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:I love how experienced tankers are saying MLT tanks are the problem. It shows a lack of integrity. Many have taken the stance of claiming to not kill infantry. They are trying to pin the blame on the ability to call in cheap MLT tanks.
lets ask a few questions.
what do you think is going to happen to the price of STD tanks if MLT goes up?
How will nerfing MLT tanks help the fact that AV can't effectively counter tanks?
what are these crusaders going to shoot at when there are no MLT tanks?
if it takes 3 AV to deal with a tank and there are 3tanks, how many are left to fight the other 13 guys on the ground?
Do people honestly believe the smoke screen these skilled tankers are putting up?
Be honest here because I play both sides. How many rail tanks does it take to stop vehicles from coming in?
If you don't have a skilled tanker how will you deal with another skilled tanker?
IMO these guys are incapable of seeing anything beyond their own turret. Its the tanking mentality. I have it too. When another tank on my team gets popped in always thinking "better him than me". I think this is something like that. What they do not realize is it will be more like "first him then me".
one more question.
After you get rid of your scapegoat, what will you hide behind?
I personally believe we will then have a crusade against OP tanks and it will come down to buffing AV. Its obvious really. So we see the tankers care nothing for the infantry they are now painting as the victim. They are just buying time until CCP gives us the means to defend ourselves. Its all very short sighted.
a final question. Why wait for balance? We will not be able to effectively examine the balance between dedicated AV and dedicated tankers until this Militia tank spam is cleared up. Right now the Tanks often have the advantage of numbers on top of their other advantages.
I donGÇÖt think Militia tanks should be nerfed, at least not at this stage, beyond taking away things that can be added back in with skills. I donGÇÖt think we should look at increasing the price too much yet either. At least not yet. The fist priority is to bring back the skill distinction between dedicated pilots and people who have no skill points invested in vehicles.
This would also mean that an expensive fitted tank, called in by a tanker, would not be nearly as effective in the hands of a non tanker.
That and a bit of a Swarm Launcher buff should clear up the non-pilot tank spam. Then we could look at AV/Tank balance without all the clutter.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else, there is the Learning Coalition.
|
Cosgar
ParagonX
8891
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 17:57:00 -
[23] - Quote
ITT: People that don't remember the Segaris and Surya. These tanks are pushovers compared to those.
I tried to put a level into Amarr Commando once, but got a server notification saying "Why?"
|
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides
1928
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 18:01:00 -
[24] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Why make a duplicate thread? Because there was too much reasonable and considered discussion in the original thread. By starting the thread with a butt-hurt post he gets drama and excitement.
If anyone wants to join a reasoned discussion were both dedicated tankers and dedicated AV are having a civil and considered discussion, here is a link.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else, there is the Learning Coalition.
|
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
920
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 18:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:ITT: People that don't remember the Segaris and Surya. These tanks are pushovers compared to those.
it took a team of coordinated Av to bring one down. The other 4 were slaughtering infantry. Its like now but magnified exponentially.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides
1929
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 18:09:00 -
[26] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote: careful here. This is a sensitive subject.
I used all forms of AV in 1.6. And I tanked. Swarms were stupidly OP when coupled with rendering issues.
This could have easily been fixed by adding GÇ£LockingGÇ¥, GÇ£LockGÇ¥, and GÇ£Missiles InboundGÇ¥ warnings for vehicles. Could have been an icon on the HUD that starts blinking Yellow when someone is attempting to lock you, starts blinking Orange when you are locked, and starts blinking Red when missals have been fired. Accompany it will an audio warning. Then rendering issues would have not mattered when it came to the missals.
Now the fact that the infantry did not render would still have been a problem, but at least you would have had warning before the first missal hit.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else, there is the Learning Coalition.
|
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides
1929
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 18:15:00 -
[27] - Quote
NAV HIV wrote:A militia tank should be slightly stronger than Militia AV or standard AV. Gives the sense of competition and achievement. A tanker spends a lot of SP, so does a proper AV user. So if a Proto AV user can't even fight a MLT tank, What are they supposed to when 2-3 decent tanks show up?! First it's the Forge gun. I know most were using it as an anti infantry weapon. But now it's not as great against Vehicles either. Proto Swarm nerfed to half of it's capabilities. If it was MLT, STD or ADV i would understand. But Even with Proto AVs with Prof 5 and some, i can barely keep up with Sicas and Somas. It is not price or numbers. It is the fact that you donGÇÖt have to be skilled into vehicles to be effective in tanks. The answer is to nerf health by 25% and have the Shield and Armour skills bring it back 5% at a time, so that a dedicated pilot is 25% better than someone with no vehicle skills across the board. This would reduce the numbers in most matches, provided the AV were strong enough to make the no skill tankers easy pickings.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else, there is the Learning Coalition.
|
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
920
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 18:15:00 -
[28] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:Darken-Sol wrote: careful here. This is a sensitive subject.
I used all forms of AV in 1.6. And I tanked. Swarms were stupidly OP when coupled with rendering issues.
This could have easily been fixed by adding GÇ£LockingGÇ¥, GÇ£LockGÇ¥, and GÇ£Missiles InboundGÇ¥ warnings for vehicles. Could have been an icon on the HUD that starts blinking Yellow when someone is attempting to lock you, starts blinking Orange when you are locked, and starts blinking Red when missals have been fired. Accompany it will an audio warning. Then rendering issues would have not mattered when it came to the missals. Now the fact that the infantry did not render would still have been a problem, but at least you would have had warning before the first missal hit.
excellent idea. It would make the game more immersive too. I would like some counter measures implemented too.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
Toxxikcity
Trans Worlds Operations League of Infamy
23
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 18:17:00 -
[29] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:Toxxikcity wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:Toxxikcity wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:I moved this here because the other thread is doomed to obscurity. I hope to have a les biased discussion. The cycle will begin anew and we will be doomed to imbalance. If we cover a few issues we can take advantage of the progress that has been made. What progress... the only thing i've seen is regression explain this. Your argument supports the death of the Nerf cycle. This would make a great game As i have said in other posts... the balance was fine in 1.6, i ran a proto AV fit and alone could only manage to hold back a proto fit tank proto V proto = balance. My proto AV fit V militia tank = no contest. Proto fit tank V militia or advanced AV = no contest.... now we're back to 1.3 tank indestructability ie regression careful here. This is a sensitive subject. I used all forms of AV in 1.6. And I tanked. Swarms were stupidly OP when coupled with rendering issues. And i stand by what i've said... my first line states 'i ran a proto AV fit AND ALONE could only manage to HOLD BACK a proto fit tank' (this included 2 complex damage mods) it still took more than one of us to kill the said tank before he could retreat |
Darken-Sol
BIG BAD W0LVES
921
|
Posted - 2013.12.19 18:28:00 -
[30] - Quote
Saying "I was OP, but now I'm not, so make me OP again" is not what we are trying to accomplish here. That is also short sighted.
Watch my back does not mean look at my spine.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |