DUST Search - Balancing Tanks with a nerf or AV buff

All Channels

General Discussions

Balancing Tanks with a nerf or AV buff

» 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)
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 746	Posted - 2013.12.29 13:27:00 - [1] - Quote Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build
Blaze Ashra Ametat Security Amarr Empire 58	Posted - 2013.12.29 13:31:00 - [2] - Quote How about we just buff the proxy mines to 1500 so we can set up perimeters and traps in order to stop the tank spam overnight.
Harpyja DUST University Ivy League 973	Posted - 2013.12.29 13:55:00 - [3] - Quote But blaster tanks die so easily to my missiles! Then everyone will be running railguns and you know how broken they are! "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Keri Starlight 0uter.Heaven 2351	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:01:00 - [4] - Quote What's the purpose of an AV tank if vehicles cannot be a real threat to infantry? 100% Achura "I load my gun with love instead of bullets"
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2055	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:09:00 - [5] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. Remove SL/PLC/AV nades/Proxy Mines Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork Everyone gets what they wants, infantry can still have there infantry battles and be infantry, tanks dont have to be that bothered by AV spam. FG are still good against tanks if the infantry is skilled, and since infantry want it to take a solo effort we will make them have to use 3 other players and teamwork OP stop asking for COD in space edition 514 Intelligence is OP
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 746	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:11:00 - [6] - Quote Keri Starlight wrote: What's the purpose of an AV tank if vehicles cannot be a real threat to infantry? Good rail tankers still wreck infantry and did you not read what i said about small blasters? STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 746	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:19:00 - [7] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. Remove SL/PLC/AV nades/Proxy Mines Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork Everyone gets what they wants, infantry can still have there infantry battles and be infantry, tanks dont have to be that bothered by AV spam. FG are still good against tanks if the infantry is skilled, and since infantry want it to take a solo effort we will make them have to use 3 other players and teamwork OP stop asking for COD in space edition 514 Ok so should CCP then add an infantry dropsuit that at militia and standard levels takes a coordinated effort by 2-3 using protogear infantry to kill me or another guys using the same suit. I know its a tank but there has to be balance or whats the point every one should just skill into tanks and make this world of tanks. STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2055	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:23:00 - [8] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. Remove SL/PLC/AV nades/Proxy Mines Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork Everyone gets what they wants, infantry can still have there infantry battles and be infantry, tanks dont have to be that bothered by AV spam. FG are still good against tanks if the infantry is skilled, and since infantry want it to take a solo effort we will make them have to use 3 other players and teamwork OP stop asking for COD in space edition 514 Ok so should CCP then add an infantry dropsuit that at militia and standard levels takes a coordinated effort by 2-3 using protogear infantry to kill me or another guys using the same suit. I know its a tank but there has to be balance or whats the point every one should just skill into tanks and make this world of tanks. Yea aslong as the infantry is the size of a house and is utterly useless in infantry areas If you cant solo a mlt tank with proto AV then your doing it wrong Intelligence is OP
Keri Starlight 0uter.Heaven 2353	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:31:00 - [9] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Keri Starlight wrote: What's the purpose of an AV tank if vehicles cannot be a real threat to infantry? Good rail tankers still wreck infantry and did you not read what i said about small blasters? I've read your thread carefully. A competent infantry unity has more offensive potential towards other infantry units than a rail tank, in my honest opinion. I might be just terrible with the railgun, but I can't get 20+ kills with it and I don't see other rail tanks stomping infantry that hard. This is just to say that I would rather jump out of my tank and kill people with a Rail Rifle. 100% Achura "I load my gun with love instead of bullets"
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 747	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:31:00 - [10] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. Remove SL/PLC/AV nades/Proxy Mines Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork Everyone gets what they wants, infantry can still have there infantry battles and be infantry, tanks dont have to be that bothered by AV spam. FG are still good against tanks if the infantry is skilled, and since infantry want it to take a solo effort we will make them have to use 3 other players and teamwork OP stop asking for COD in space edition 514 Ok so should CCP then add an infantry dropsuit that at militia and standard levels takes a coordinated effort by 2-3 using protogear infantry to kill me or another guys using the same suit. I know its a tank but there has to be balance or whats the point every one should just skill into tanks and make this world of tanks. Yea aslong as the infantry is the size of a house and is utterly useless in infantry areas If you cant solo a mlt tank with proto AV then your doing it wrong Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build

Ryder Azorria Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 764	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:39:00 - [11] - Quote Blaze Ashra wrote: How about we just buff the proxy mines to 1500 so we can set up perimeters and traps in order to stop the tank spam overnight. Lay down a proxie as a trigger, then lay down as much REs as you want - BIG bada-boom
jerrmy12 kahoalii Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic 198	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:42:00 - [12] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. Remove SL/PLC/AV nades/Proxy Mines Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork Everyone gets what they wants, infantry can still have there infantry battles and be infantry, tanks dont have to be that bothered by AV spam. FG are still good against tanks if the infantry is skilled, and since infantry want it to take a solo effort we will make them have to use 3 other players and teamwork OP stop asking for COD in space edition 514 Ok so should CCP then add an infantry dropsuit that at militia and standard levels takes a coordinated effort by 2-3 using protogear infantry to kill me or another guys using the same suit. I know its a tank but there has to be balance or whats the point every one should just skill into tanks and make this world of tanks. Yea aslong as the infantry is the size of a house and is utterly useless in infantry areas If you cant solo a mlt tank with proto AV then your doing it wrong Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. Real life example? In eve you pilot big ass ships by yourself so thats out the window recuruit link 5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
Kasote Denzara A Vulture 1695	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:42:00 - [13] - Quote Ryder Azorria wrote: Blaze Ashra wrote: How about we just buff the proxy mines to 1500 so we can set up perimeters and traps in order to stop the tank spam overnight. Lay down a proxie as a trigger, then lay down as much REs as you want - BIG bada-boom Ryder here gets it. It's literally been available in Dust 514 since FF was enabled. Anyone who has played Battlefield and took pleasure in popping tanks knows this trick. "Go ahead and dual tank. My Commando dual ganks." -Kasote Denzara Use the Commando A-I suit and show your worth.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2056	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:44:00 - [14] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. Remove SL/PLC/AV nades/Proxy Mines Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork Everyone gets what they wants, infantry can still have there infantry battles and be infantry, tanks dont have to be that bothered by AV spam. FG are still good against tanks if the infantry is skilled, and since infantry want it to take a solo effort we will make them have to use 3 other players and teamwork OP stop asking for COD in space edition 514 Ok so should CCP then add an infantry dropsuit that at militia and standard levels takes a coordinated effort by 2-3 using protogear infantry to kill me or another guys using the same suit. I know its a tank but there has to be balance or whats the point every one should just skill into tanks and make this world of tanks. Yea aslong as the infantry is the size of a house and is utterly useless in infantry areas If you cant solo a mlt tank with proto AV then your doing it wrong Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. This is the future Reloading is automatic The turret movement is by turning your head Driving is now using your mind Intelligence is OP
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 747	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:45:00 - [15] - Quote jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. Real life example? In eve you pilot big ass ships by yourself so thats out the window EVE pilots are captains of space ship crews, the crews just don't play a visible role in the game. STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 747	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:47:00 - [16] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: This is the future Reloading is automatic The turret movement is by turning your head Driving is now using your mind Please post the link where the Devs stated that I must have missed it, reloading isn't automatic the driver has to do it. STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build
Blaze Ashra Ametat Security Amarr Empire 58	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:48:00 - [17] - Quote Ryder Azorria wrote: Blaze Ashra wrote: How about we just buff the proxy mines to 1500 so we can set up perimeters and traps in order to stop the tank spam overnight. Lay down a proxie as a trigger, then lay down as much REs as you want - BIG bada-boom I do that already, It's just impractical for non logi's to do and proxies sole purpose is AV. It should be competent as is.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2056	Posted - 2013.12.29 14:51:00 - [18] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: This is the future Reloading is automatic The turret movement is by turning your head Driving is now using your mind Please post the link where the Devs stated that I must have missed it, reloading isn't automatic the driver has to do it. I press a button if the clip is not empty, if clip is empty its automatic Intelligence is OP
Harpyja DUST University Ivy League 974	Posted - 2013.12.29 16:14:00 - [19] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. Real life example? In eve you pilot big ass ships by yourself so thats out the window EVE pilots are captains of space ship crews, the crews just don't play a visible role in the game. You still have it wrong. EVE players are capsuleers, where their minds are linked with the entire ship controlling almost everything. A battleship without a capsuleer would require about a thousand crew to operate, if I remember correctly, while a battleship with a capsuleer would require just a few dozen crew. Be glad that we don't control the small turrets in addition to the large turret. Capsuleers in frigates don't require crew and they shoot multiple turrets. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
COHLE DUST University Ivy League 20	Posted - 2013.12.29 16:32:00 - [20] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. Remove SL/PLC/AV nades/Proxy Mines Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork Everyone gets what they wants, infantry can still have there infantry battles and be infantry, tanks dont have to be that bothered by AV spam. FG are still good against tanks if the infantry is skilled, and since infantry want it to take a solo effort we will make them have to use 3 other players and teamwork OP stop asking for COD in space edition 514 Ok so should CCP then add an infantry dropsuit that at militia and standard levels takes a coordinated effort by 2-3 using protogear infantry to kill me or another guys using the same suit. I know its a tank but there has to be balance or whats the point every one should just skill into tanks and make this world of tanks. Yea aslong as the infantry is the size of a house and is utterly useless in infantry areas If you cant solo a mlt tank with proto AV then your doing it wrong Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. We have inertial dampeners, lazer rifles, and an advanced cloning system, I fail to see how this game is, or should be like real life... That's arma's job. "I am the punishment of God. Had you not commited great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you."

Spartykins NECROM0NGERS Covert Intervention 6	Posted - 2013.12.29 17:13:00 - [21] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. You know how in Battlefield you have MBTs that have heavy cannons and high HP, but are harder to use against infantry? Then you have light tanks/APCs that have slightly less HP, but have weapons that are effective against infantry? Why not do that? Create a new type of light tank that only has turrets that are effective against infantry and give regular tanks turrets that work as AV. Then you have infantry tanks that need support from other tanks/AVers to be effective. (Insert witty phrase here)
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 2467	Posted - 2013.12.29 17:21:00 - [22] - Quote Stacking penalties need to be applied for hardeners until capacitors are introduced to vehicles. I keep seeing tankers saying stupid AVers need to wait for hardeners to stop. What about the tanks that are fit for constant hardening? In other words the ones that HAVE to be destroyed by another tank? Remove time in battle from ISK payout formula and provide a bonus to winning team... Watch battles become fun again.
Aizen Intiki Hell's Gate Inc 611	Posted - 2013.12.29 17:22:00 - [23] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Remove Large Blasters. Tanks should only be allowed railguns and missles so that they can focus on being AV and if a tank wants to be even more effective against infantry he has to put small blasters on his tank and get gunners. Everyone gets what they wants, tanks can still have their tank battles and be AV, infantry don't have to be that bothered by tank spam. Railguns are still good against infantry if the tanker is skilled, and since tankers want it to take a coordinated effort by 3 to take them down it would then take a coordinated effort by 3 to maximize the effective killing potential of the tank. Remove SL/PLC/AV nades/Proxy Mines Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork Everyone gets what they wants, infantry can still have there infantry battles and be infantry, tanks dont have to be that bothered by AV spam. FG are still good against tanks if the infantry is skilled, and since infantry want it to take a solo effort we will make them have to use 3 other players and teamwork OP stop asking for COD in space edition 514 Ok so should CCP then add an infantry dropsuit that at militia and standard levels takes a coordinated effort by 2-3 using protogear infantry to kill me or another guys using the same suit. I know its a tank but there has to be balance or whats the point every one should just skill into tanks and make this world of tanks. Yea aslong as the infantry is the size of a house and is utterly useless in infantry areas If you cant solo a mlt tank with proto AV then your doing it wrong Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. Yes, yes it does make sense. See, the hard work is automated. We sit in pods and tell the HAV what to do, just like the pods in the starships. Only difference is that we can't eject. Anyways, I've seen only 60 tech 1 HAV's since 1.7 launched over about 2000 or so HAV's. The rest were MLT HAV's. That's shows a clear problem. It's not the tech 1 HAV's. It's just the MLT HAV's (although the Gunnlogi is still OP, as well as missiles and rails, but that's a different story). "Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say Alt of the great Godin I like chocolate ^___^
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 748	Posted - 2013.12.29 17:39:00 - [24] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Stacking penalties need to be applied for hardeners until capacitors are introduced to vehicles. I keep seeing tankers saying stupid AVers need to wait for hardeners to stop. What about the tanks that are fit for constant hardening? In other words the ones that HAVE to be destroyed by another tank? Thank you, its also the fact that I see a tank and its not shiny I sneak up behind it start slamming it with AV, then hardeners on its drives away and I'm left standing there I just want vehicle balance, and tankers don't they want their tanks to be easy to operate, destroy infantry, difficult to kill with AV, and cheap. Tanks need to easily dominate infantry and vehicles, be hard to kill, and expensive as all hell OR Tanks need to easily dominate infantry and vehicles, be easy to kill, and cheap Right now tankers have the best of both worlds. STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build
ReGnYuM Imperfects 1632	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:01:00 - [25] - Quote Tankers just simply disgust me. There is a reason why players choose s a role like tanking, and its not gun game lol. Official Imperfect Title: Supreme Leader of the Endless Sunset To the Matari, I am the equivalent to the Boogie Man
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1595	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:19:00 - [26] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Keri Starlight wrote: What's the purpose of an AV tank if vehicles cannot be a real threat to infantry? Good rail tankers still wreck infantry and did you not read what i said about small blasters? Tankers are better than you. And we don't all snipe from a mountain. Infantry cries for tank changes, and they don't like them. Tell them to use vehicles, they complain, and use cars anyway
Aizen Intiki Hell's Gate Inc 611	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:28:00 - [27] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. Real life example? In eve you pilot big ass ships by yourself so thats out the window EVE pilots are captains of space ship crews, the crews just don't play a visible role in the game. In Cap's ships, the crew size is very small compared to normal ships, half of the time, there isn't even a crew. "Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say Alt of the great Godin I like chocolate ^___^
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 2468	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:31:00 - [28] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Thor Odinson42 wrote: Stacking penalties need to be applied for hardeners until capacitors are introduced to vehicles. I keep seeing tankers saying stupid AVers need to wait for hardeners to stop. What about the tanks that are fit for constant hardening? In other words the ones that HAVE to be destroyed by another tank? Thank you, its also the fact that I see a tank and its not shiny I sneak up behind it start slamming it with AV, then hardeners on its drives away and I'm left standing there I just want vehicle balance, and tankers don't they want their tanks to be easy to operate, destroy infantry, difficult to kill with AV, and cheap. Tanks need to easily dominate infantry and vehicles, be hard to kill, and expensive as all hell OR Tanks need to easily dominate infantry and vehicles, be easy to kill, and cheap Right now tankers have the best of both worlds. If you choose infantry hunting as a tanker it should come at a cost. It should be dangerous. Militia tanks should pop like a cherry to Proto AV. A high level tank with a good pilot should be hard to kill, it should require a bit of teamwork and a shift in strategy to remove the threat. But that's not what is going on here. Perhaps REs and AV nades need a buff. It doesn't hurt the rail tanks who are fighting other vehicles and it makes blaster tanks proceed with more caution. Same for missile tanks, but the infantry AV would take more risks going for the mid ranged missile tank. There's balance to be had. Remove time in battle from ISK payout formula and provide a bonus to winning team... Watch battles become fun again.
Aizen Intiki Hell's Gate Inc 611	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:52:00 - [29] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Stacking penalties need to be applied for hardeners until capacitors are introduced to vehicles. I keep seeing tankers saying stupid AVers need to wait for hardeners to stop. What about the tanks that are fit for constant hardening? In other words the ones that HAVE to be destroyed by another tank? You can't perma run hardeners on armor HAV's without giving up the reppers, and that means it'll have just over 12k eHP, which is what I used to have on my old HAV. chase the HAV around for a bit and it'll die. However, those Caldari HAV's are a problem, as you don't have to give up repping for the hardeners. They need longer cooldowns. "Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say Alt of the great Godin I like chocolate ^___^
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1597	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:54:00 - [30] - Quote ReGnYuM wrote: Tankers just simply disgust me. There is a reason why players choose s a role like tanking, and its not gun game lol. It's because they want something more difficult, but you can't understand that. Uprising hardened us against anything. Wanna defeat us completely? Have a petition started to remove vehicles from the game. Show you have a pair. Until then, stop being unhappy with the changes people like you forced on to CCP. Infantry cries for tank changes, and they don't like them. Tell them to use vehicles, they complain, and use cars anyway

Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1597	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:55:00 - [31] - Quote Aizen Intiki wrote: Thor Odinson42 wrote: Stacking penalties need to be applied for hardeners until capacitors are introduced to vehicles. I keep seeing tankers saying stupid AVers need to wait for hardeners to stop. What about the tanks that are fit for constant hardening? In other words the ones that HAVE to be destroyed by another tank? You can't perma run hardeners on armor HAV's without giving up the reppers, and that means it'll have just over 12k eHP, which is what I used to have on my old HAV. chase the HAV around for a bit and it'll die. However, those Caldari HAV's are a problem, as you don't have to give up repping for the hardeners. They need longer cooldowns. Do you tank? Why do you think you could dictate how tanks are to be run with any legitimacy? Infantry cries for tank changes, and they don't like them. Tell them to use vehicles, they complain, and use cars anyway
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1597	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:56:00 - [32] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Stacking penalties need to be applied for hardeners until capacitors are introduced to vehicles. I keep seeing tankers saying stupid AVers need to wait for hardeners to stop. What about the tanks that are fit for constant hardening? In other words the ones that HAVE to be destroyed by another tank? Why do you see that as a problem? Infantry cries for tank changes, and they don't like them. Tell them to use vehicles, they complain, and use cars anyway
Aizen Intiki Hell's Gate Inc 611	Posted - 2013.12.29 18:59:00 - [33] - Quote ReGnYuM wrote: Tankers just simply disgust me. There is a reason why players choose s a role like tanking, and its not gun game lol. What is this role you speak of? I chose it because it reminded me of flying in EVE. "Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say Alt of the great Godin I like chocolate ^___^
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 2468	Posted - 2013.12.29 20:44:00 - [34] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Thor Odinson42 wrote: Stacking penalties need to be applied for hardeners until capacitors are introduced to vehicles. I keep seeing tankers saying stupid AVers need to wait for hardeners to stop. What about the tanks that are fit for constant hardening? In other words the ones that HAVE to be destroyed by another tank? Why do you see that as a problem? Asking that question at all means there's not much for me to discuss with you. It sounds like you want a win button. Remove time in battle from ISK payout formula and provide a bonus to winning team... Watch battles become fun again.
Ensar Cael The Unit 514 74	Posted - 2013.12.29 20:52:00 - [35] - Quote Slow the tank speed another 5% , increase the prices and give AV a damage buff of 5 % or 10%. Otherwise leave tanks as they are.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 2756	Posted - 2013.12.29 21:06:00 - [36] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Keri Starlight wrote: What's the purpose of an AV tank if vehicles cannot be a real threat to infantry? Good rail tankers still wreck infantry and did you not read what i said about small blasters? Tankers are better than you. And we don't all snipe from a mountain. Tankers are the princesses of DUST. They are no better than the FoTM players or Slayer logis. And not all AV sniped from a mountain, yet you refused to admit that. I guess Spkr4TheDead logic doesn't work to well when it's actually applied to something. Here's an example. ...
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 2759	Posted - 2013.12.29 21:47:00 - [37] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Yea aslong as the infantry is the size of a house and is utterly useless in infantry areas If you cant solo a mlt tank with proto AV then your doing it wrong If your getting soloed by even officer AV while in a MLT tank your clearly doing it wrong. ...
MINA Longstrike 2Shitz 1Giggle 188	Posted - 2013.12.29 21:49:00 - [38] - Quote Following with the windows of opportunity thing the 'biggest' issue is that when hardeners are off light av weapons can't do enough damage to really scare a tank. I'm currently against light av (especially incorrect damage types) being 'super effective' against tanks with hardeners up - if you want to kill a tank while its hardeners are active you should have either overwhelming numbers, heavy av, or another tank. Now as for when av is down swarms should be getting +2 missiles per shot, and plc's 3 rounds in chamber + 18 max, allowing them to be very effective while hardeners are down. And the tanks need a cost increase on the hulls + large turrets bringing them to about 400k for standard + 700-900k for proto. Playing around with the rest of the modules affects costs of other vehicles too much with no real increase in efficiency (and I don't want to go back to 1.2m isk dropships that are twoshotted)
Everything Dies Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 384	Posted - 2013.12.29 21:56:00 - [39] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork By this logic, one side deploying three blaster tanks would require at least 9 players from the other team to counter. Yeah, good luck winning the battle when three players can tie up over half of your squad. Give me a break...given how cheap tanks are now, they should be living in fear of getting caught by a single AV user. Assuming, of course, that they don't have their hardeners up and are incapable of driving for the two or three seconds before escaping the SL lock-on range. Life is killing me.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 2759	Posted - 2013.12.29 21:59:00 - [40] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Do you tank? Why do you think you could dictate how tanks are to be run with any legitimacy? Do you AV? Why do you think you could (or should) dictate how AV is to be used with any legitimacy? ...

CharCharOdell 1868	Posted - 2013.12.29 22:02:00 - [41] - Quote Increasing tank hulls costs by 50% would actually curb the tank spam a lot. Gùñ-é-º+¼+ò+¦GÖÑ+ú+ú+¡ GÖÑ'Ðe+ü+üGùÑ Gùú -ä>-üð+++Ç++§<-¡<-¡ Gùó I like railguns.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 2759	Posted - 2013.12.29 22:06:00 - [42] - Quote CharCharOdell wrote: Increasing tank hulls costs by 50% would actually curb the tank spam a lot. While also making the vehicle class accessible for the rich only again, which is why many didn't tank pre 1.6. I believe there is a better way. ...
Freshticles Cobra Unit 410	Posted - 2013.12.29 22:10:00 - [43] - Quote ReGnYuM wrote: Tankers just simply disgust me. There is a reason why players choose s a role like tanking, and its not gun game lol. Regnum where do you get your throat lozenges, I can't believe you don't have throat pain after all the raging you do. Level 9001 Forum Wizard
Everything Dies Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 385	Posted - 2013.12.29 22:10:00 - [44] - Quote CharCharOdell wrote: Increasing tank hulls costs by 50% would actually curb the tank spam a lot. True, but I don't want to see a battlefield devoid of tanks...I want them to remain relatively cheap (as in you can lose two and still come out of the match with a profit) but more susceptible to counter-measures. The combination of increased speed + hardeners + reduction to SL lock-on range + reduction to SL damage resulted in a massive change to the basic game that rewards the tank spam we're currently seeing. Hell, at this point in time it's much more effective for me to hop in a militia rail tank than to throw on a my proto AV suit and try to hunt down tanks, particularly when they can high-tail it out of danger after the first swarm hits. It's even reached the point now that I consider "going sniping" to mean "calling in a rail tank and trying to pick off any approaching enemy tanks." Life is killing me.
MINA Longstrike 2Shitz 1Giggle 188	Posted - 2013.12.29 22:32:00 - [45] - Quote Everything Dies wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Infantry should only be allowed AR/SMG/HMG so that they can focus on being infantry and if infantry wants to be even more effective against tanks he has to get a 3man group with FG and use teamwork By this logic, one side deploying three blaster tanks would require at least 9 players from the other team to counter. Yeah, good luck winning the battle when three players can tie up over half of your squad. Give me a break...given how cheap tanks are now, they should be living in fear of getting caught by a single AV user. Assuming, of course, that they don't have their hardeners up and are incapable of driving for the two or three seconds before escaping the SL lock-on range. 3 players with av don't have their weapons stop working when they kill one tank.
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 755	Posted - 2013.12.29 23:28:00 - [46] - Quote Everything Dies wrote: CharCharOdell wrote: Increasing tank hulls costs by 50% would actually curb the tank spam a lot. True, but I don't want to see a battlefield devoid of tanks...I want them to remain relatively cheap (as in you can lose two and still come out of the match with a profit) but more susceptible to counter-measures. The combination of increased speed + hardeners + reduction to SL lock-on range + reduction to SL damage resulted in a massive change to the basic game that rewards the tank spam we're currently seeing. Hell, at this point in time it's much more effective for me to hop in a militia rail tank than to throw on a my proto AV suit and try to hunt down tanks, particularly when they can high-tail it out of danger after the first swarm hits. It's even reached the point now that I consider "going sniping" to mean "calling in a rail tank and trying to pick off any approaching enemy tanks." That is complete trash if I lose 2 of my proto dropsuits with proto weapons, I'll be lucky to break even and thats also with me leading the team in kills and WP. Bring out a tank in a pub match and losing it should result in a loss not profit. If tanks are going to be this cheap and effective they should be easily solo'd by proto AV considering that its proto AV vs militia and standard tanks. Miltia tanks should be great at killing infantry but easy to kill and cheap. Good proto tanks should absolutely wreck havoc and be extremely difficult to bring down, but so expensive that they are only affordable by corps for PC. STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build
Rusty Shallows 612	Posted - 2013.12.30 00:06:00 - [47] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Balancing Tanks with a Nerf or AV buff. 1.7 definitively proves the Devs do not work that way. A good many of us thought they learned the lesson and were beyond excessive nerfing and buffing at the same time. We were wrong. There is something fundamentally wrong with their current Design Processes and until that is addresses they will be unable to handle anything. The whole thing is very confusing since altering single variables and observing a change to a system is a more logical approach than jumbling everything at once. MCC Lounge Lizard Forums > Game Fix the game CCP
Jammeh McJam Robbing The Hood Public Disorder. 65	Posted - 2013.12.30 00:24:00 - [48] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: Thor Odinson42 wrote: Stacking penalties need to be applied for hardeners until capacitors are introduced to vehicles. I keep seeing tankers saying stupid AVers need to wait for hardeners to stop. What about the tanks that are fit for constant hardening? In other words the ones that HAVE to be destroyed by another tank? Thank you, its also the fact that I see a tank and its not shiny I sneak up behind it start slamming it with AV, then hardeners on its drives away and I'm left standing there I just want vehicle balance, and tankers don't they want their tanks to be easy to operate, destroy infantry, difficult to kill with AV, and cheap. Tanks need to easily dominate infantry and vehicles, be hard to kill, and expensive as all hell OR Tanks need to easily dominate infantry and vehicles, be easy to kill, and cheap Right now tankers have the best of both worlds. I vote expensive and powerful "We may be small and disorganized, but we're still gonna rape you" - Intergalactic Super Friends
jerrmy12 kahoalii Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic 200	Posted - 2013.12.30 07:31:00 - [49] - Quote stlcarlos989 wrote: jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: stlcarlos989 wrote: Right it makes sense that one guys can drive, operate the turret, and reload it at the same time Something that is done by a 4-man crew in real tanks. Real life example? In eve you pilot big ass ships by yourself so thats out the window EVE pilots are captains of space ship crews, the crews just don't play a visible role in the game. the pilots in tanks aren't visible either recuruit link 5 to 11 mil isk per 100k recuruit
CharCharOdell 1872	Posted - 2013.12.30 19:13:00 - [50] - Quote ReGnYuM wrote: Tankers just simply disgust me. There is a reason why players choose s a role like tanking, and its not gun game lol. That only applied in the early beta and right now. Chrome-1.6, tanks were too expensive and difficult to use for this who just wanted to get a high KDR. Why did real tankers stay with tanks through 1.0-1.6 IF they were so bad? Answer that question while supporting you previous statement and you get a cookie, if you don't then you look stupid. Note that I don't think tanks are balances right now. They're OP, but only OP for their price in terms of MLT tanks. Gùñ-é-º+¼+ò+¦GÖÑ+ú+ú+¡ GÖÑ'Ðe+ü+üGùÑ Gùú -ä>-üð+++Ç++§<-¡<-¡ Gùó I like railguns.



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.