|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
609
   |
Posted - 2013.12.28 06:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:I try not to damn certain game tactics or weapons as broken unless it is desperate. But rail gun tanks are just so completely broken it has me wondering if they were properly tested.
They have Huge alpha, Huge Hp, Huge Range, Huge elevation and they can be immune in the redline. Not just in the redline but they can shoot an objective from 300m in the redline.
you are confusing issues.
The issue you are complaining about there, is that redline is broken, not that rail tanks are broken.
Quote:
This is monstrously stupid. I cannot move in any map, or any game mode without a rail tank or three that are up to 300 meters into the redline 1 or 2 shotting my dropship. It is absolutely broken. I have even been killed at the maximum flight ceiling. Exactly what is a flying vehicles advantage if a tank can kill it anywhere in the entire sky?
To make your point properly on this one, you need to post how you are fitting your dropship.
I will make the presumption that you are fitting your dropship well. however, ccp doesnt officially know that, unless you explicitly say so in your complaint.
also, as a side issue to you, in case ccp doesnt address your complaint (and I wouldnt expect them to)...
since you have a bounty on your head, so to speak... might i suggest you use afterburners more?
They cant hit you, if they cant track you. and railguns are terrible at tracking, after all.
|
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
614
|
Posted - 2013.12.30 00:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:
As regards fitting and movement. Map design is such that the rail tank can cover huge parts of the map including often every objective (airspace we are talking about here) from great distance. The issue this causes is that they can hit a dropship almost anywhere. This negates the design decision of active modules giving us a strong attack window. Dropships have no attack window. We can be hit so easily from so far that we have few retreat options.
Afterburners are not the solution. A variety of fits should be available and viable, scanners, CRUs etc. Forcing me to use a certain tactic because of a broken game element is a poor fix. not a proper solution.
Well.. you're entitled to your opinion. However, i respectfully disagree, having a different opinion.
Afterburners *are* *a* solution. They're not the solution you want... but that doesnt suddenly make them "not a solution".
Also, your wording isnt helping. If you replace it with more neutral language, ie:
"Forcing me to use a certain tactic, because of one specific game element", it becomes clearer, that this is not neccessarily a game breaking issue.
Even if you dont believe that, it is still a fact that a reasonably equipped dropship, should be able to survive at least one hit, and then be able to take some sort of appropriate action.
Unless of course, it is just gently floating in the air like a blimp saying "hit me hit me hit me!"
Now, there is an edge case, for triple stacked damage mods, making a single hit overly extreme.
I would suggest that this is not an issue of "rail tanks are broken", but rather, "damage mods are broken".
Perhaps you should lobby for damage mods not being stackable.
I for one, would be all behind that, since it would make infantry lives much better as well.
|
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
616
|
Posted - 2013.12.30 16:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Quill you keep repeating without stateing a definitive. So lets cut the waffle. Do you think that redline rail tanks with 600m rage and 1:1.2 elevation are balanced weapons?
okay...
I think the range is fine.
I think the elevation is fine.
I thnk REDLINE sucks. CCP needs to fix redline, not the tanks.
|
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
616
|
Posted - 2013.12.30 22:10:00 -
[4] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Cool. So where we disagree mainly is the elevation. What about map design having airspace that is too open?
Umm...
isnt airspace supposed to be... err, you know.. mostly... AIR?
Try thinking less like a flying tank, and more like a gunship pilot in Vietnam.
(after all, dropships are supposed to be "light" aircraft, arent they??)
From what I heard, they had to hug the ground, because otherwise, they'd be taken out with AA.
If you fly lower, you're going to be behind buildings most of the time,
There are a few really bad maps for that sort of thing. But ya know what? Too Bad.
There are some really bad maps for scouts, too. We dont get to say, "that map is too tough for us you have to remove it".
Neither do dropship pilots. Just use something else, or bail from the battle.
Also... it's unreasonable to make the assumption you seem to be making, of
"Dropships should ALWAYS have a way to win!!"
They shouldnt.
Sometimes they do... and sometimes they dont. Sometimes they should need to rely on infantry. Or tanks.
If you are complaining, "dropships used to be able to dominate on all maps, but now they cant"...
guess what? that means CCP has actually brought more balance into the game.
That's a *good* thing. So welcome to the party 
------------------------------------------
Edit: Tanks are a huge force against infantry, but they have a weakness, albeit a tough one: Remote Explosives.
Almost any tank can be surprised by remote explosives, and taken out in ONE SHOT.
Dropships cant be taken out by remote explosives usually. So it seems somewhat fair to me, that they have a different weakness: rail tanks.
And you're lucky: most of the time, it isnt a one-shot death either :) |
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
616
|
Posted - 2013.12.30 22:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Too many strawmen there Quill. I can't really respond to that.
Sounds like you have a rather locked mentality about this.
Do you believe, "Dropships should always have a way to win"?
or to put it another way,
"Dropships should be able to beat anything else"?
if no, then tell us what the balancing weakness for dropships is? |
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
665
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 17:45:00 -
[6] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:There is absolutely no reason why you should be able to bring a rail tank in CQC and be an iWin button against everything. Gunnlogi rail tanks can only be brought down by another Gunnlogi rail tank, and that is OP. I have been able to bring down only a few with my missile Gunnlogi because I had to be extremely crafty with my tactic in bringing them down. They, on the other hand, require no skill to use. All they do is charge like a mindless brute and destroy everything in their path.
Two things that are inaccurate or incomplete in your statements:
1. rail tanks arent very good at "Close Quarters Combat",as you claim. Their turret rotation speed makes it very difficult to hit something in motion closer than 20 meters, unless the thing you're aiming at is another tank.
2. They mow down everything in their path... their path being in front of them.
They are particularly vulnerable from behind.
A blaster tank with stacked damage mods, attacking from behind, should in theory, have a good chance of dealing with a gunlogi, even with hardeners. Because of two reasons:
2.1: If they're running multiple hardeners, they arent using those slots for shields
2.2 If they're NOT stacking hardeners... they're gonna hit cooldown at some point.
A blaster tank with damage mods can take out a base gunlogi VERY fast, if it lands all its shots: ie: too close to miss :D
Only way to avoid that, is for the rail tank to stay out of CQC
|
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
808
|
Posted - 2014.01.25 14:56:00 -
[7] - Quote
a brackers wrote:
2; the very concept of a rail gun is a high speed, low mass projectile which in general only deals damage to high mass stationery objects. Therefor the best solution is to obey the laws of physics and make the projectiles do very very little damage to dropship's,
Interesting point!
however, speaking of points... the type of tip on the projectile will make a huge amount of difference to this.
Also, inertia.
So, SHIELD dropships, might have a massive effective resistance to it, albeit atthe cost of being knocked around the sky. But armor based dropships? Not so much, if at all.
|
Quil Evrything
Triple Terrors
855
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alex Kaidou wrote:dude your making a good point there ive lost way to much of my incubus to that bs and when will tit even annoy people that you can hit something at 5 mph and still lose it ! and the proto forge guns are enough to deal with let alone things hitting you from the redline but also you guys should change with the effectiveness of things honestly if my dropship cost atleast 400k why should die just like any other milita LAV i depo , that's just wrong and it should be messed with and i also believe part time pilots should be involed!! (like this one .. i love the ADS but it dies way to quickly) and btw why did you guys remove the only good bonuses the vehicles have -2% damage per level , atleast make it for dropships only since they die quickly
Some people die in ADS really quickly. Some people seem to live forever.
Therefore, i conclude that the problem isnt intrinsic in the ADS, but rather that it requires certain playstyles+fittings to be durable.
You do have a point about the cost though.
IMO, the fix is not "make the ADS even more impossible to kill", but simply to lower the cost.
|
|
|
| |
|