Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
405
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 05:39:00 -
[31] - Quote
I love all the "no I don't want to be forced to play a role I don't want!" Replies by tankers. Who then tell everyone to suck up and play boring AV...
So vehicle users don't have to play roles they don't want but infantry do. Sounds fair.
|
Th3rdSun
L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
559
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 05:43:00 -
[32] - Quote
BobThe 844-1 CakeMan wrote:Th3rdSun wrote:BobThe 844-1 CakeMan wrote:Th3rdSun wrote:I first proposed an idea similar to this ages ago.Mine was more geared toward the then talked about Commander role,where one person on the team was essentially the field general stationed in the MCC and what ever WP was earn was used to deploy turrets,extra CRUs,Orbitals,and my idea,extra vehicles.Since the rumor o the Commander never came to fruition,none of this really works now,but something absolutely has to be done about tank spam.
I think the OP's suggestion is way to restrictive and just wouldn't work,but there is a much easier solution.
1)No SP free tanks,or any vehicles for that matter.This one simple thing has completely destroyed the balance of vehicle vs AV warfare.
2)Due to the fact that it's still 16 vs 16 matches,there's absolutely no reason in any game mode for there to be more than two tanks on the field per side at any given time.I couldn't care less if you feel entitled just because you skilled into them.The facts are that they have completely broken the game,and people don't play broken games for very long,so for now and for the sake of the playerbase,there needs to be stronger limits.
3)There needs to be a severe cooldown period for people calling in vehicles,taking massive damage then running away to recall them,only to call them in two seconds later.Whatever vehicle you recall,you should restricted from calling in that class of vehicle again for a minimum of 5 minute.If it gets blown up,that's a different story,and if you call in a DS,recall,then call and HAV,that's ok too,but think of it kind of like the rule in football where you can't call two timeouts back to back.
1- then how would u test it out before getting. so no milita is required but i s to effective 2- maybe for pubs but for PC and FW i should be able to spam it. i mean alls fair in love and war. 3- no i have a stockpile of tanks and i will bring them in when i feel like. :) 1-Do like anyone else does and make an alt to test stuff. 2-I'm fine with that. 3-You can use them,but the calling,recalling,then calling again is just stupid and gamebreaking. 1- by tht logic all infantry milita gear should be gone so they can make an alt and test it out. 2- ok 3- remind me about dem supply depos again and infantry?
1-much different circumstances between the cost of infantry gear both in SP and ISK compared to vehicles.To even suggest that a militia tank and a militia dropsuit of any kind is equal is ludicrous.
2-
3-People take damage without reppers and swap suits just to get back all or their health and ammo...
Just though of something! I'll throw out my third idea if instead it costs you a copy of a vehicle if you immediately deploy it after recalling it.No cooldown,just applies to if you call in,say and Soma,recall it,then call in the same Soma.
|
Th3rdSun
L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
559
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 05:44:00 -
[33] - Quote
Bones McGavins wrote:I love all the "no I don't want to be forced to play a role I don't want!" Replies by tankers. Who then tell everyone to suck up and play boring AV...
So vehicle users don't have to play roles they don't want but infantry do. Sounds fair.
I WAS GOING TO BRING UP THE EXACT SAME THING!!!! |
Aero Yassavi
Yassavi House
4318
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 06:03:00 -
[34] - Quote
Patrick57 wrote:wtf? This is the dumbest idea I've ever heard. This was actually the original design. Proof http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ED-YF-v7WCw&t=5m26s
It's a bird!
It's a plane!
No, it's Super Amarr!
|
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
1960
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 07:21:00 -
[35] - Quote
OR properly balance Vehicles and Infantry / stop QQing
A-Teams win Battles B-Teams win Campaigns C-Teams win Wars
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1639
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 07:38:00 -
[36] - Quote
Leovarian L Lavitz wrote:I feel that having a wp system for calling in vehicles would greatly balance vehicle play.
Just throwing numbers out there (these are squad WP) 0WP You can call in a militia Light Vehicle 50WP You can call in a Light Vehicle 125 WP You can call in a militia medium vehicle 250 WP you can call in a Medium Vehicle 500 WP you can call in a Militia heavy Vehicle 1250 WP You can call in a Heavy Vehicle
Using WP like this consumes your available warpoints (not earned warpoints), and orbitals are also purchased from the same wps. So you can call in two tanks or a war barge strike.
I feel this adds a balancing layer to vehicles.
EDIT: added a few more layers. EDIT 2: This also fixes the recall vehicle swap exploit. Make it cost 1200 WP to use a PRO suit.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1639
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 07:40:00 -
[37] - Quote
Leovarian L Lavitz wrote:Logi Bro wrote:This is an old idea that was scrapped long ago. If you look back at the beta footage of when devs played Crater Lake in a Fanfest one year, they said something along the lines of: "This vehicle requires WP to call in," as they were explaining how the vehicle drop system worked.
And if they decided to remove it a long time ago, then chances are they aren't going to bring it back, kind of like Crater Lake. Honestly, I believe they should bring it back. You just don't want to deal with tanks at all. Please proceed to Call of Duty.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1639
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 07:43:00 -
[38] - Quote
Atiim wrote:No, and then some.
Why would (or should) anyone be forced to play as a something they don't want to play as, especially for the simple sake of being able to use the thing that they spent SP on?
"Make people play as a tanker untill they have enough WP. then they can call in a dropsuit".
How idiotic does that sound? LOL you arguing logic. LOL
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
CommanderBolt
ACME SPECIAL FORCES
542
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 07:45:00 -
[39] - Quote
Guys keep moaning about how they think its not right that tankers can call in another tank, swap tanks, do it all over again etc....
Well guys - lets not even get started on swapping for a different role around the battlefield - MOST f**king maps dont even have vehicle access to any of the damn supply depots. So how are we meant to rearm?
(Just another ill thought out feature from CCP) |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star. EoN.
1639
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 07:46:00 -
[40] - Quote
CommanderBolt wrote:Guys keep moaning about how they think its not right that tankers can call in another tank, swap tanks, do it all over again etc....
Well guys - lets not even get started on swapping for a different role around the battlefield - MOST f**king maps dont even have vehicle access to any of the damn supply depots. So how are we meant to rearm?
(Just another ill thought out feature from CCP) They'll probably add in vehicle nanohives later, but only able to equip them on PRO pilot suits. And you'll probably need nanohive 5, which I already have.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
|
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe. Public Disorder.
1364
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 08:22:00 -
[41] - Quote
Logi Bro wrote:This is an old idea that was scrapped long ago. If you look back at the beta footage of when devs played Crater Lake in a Fanfest one year, they said something along the lines of: "This vehicle requires WP to call in," as they were explaining how the vehicle drop system worked.
And if they decided to remove it a long time ago, then chances are they aren't going to bring it back, kind of like Crater Lake.
Wasn't Crater Lake that map with the bowl on the hill and the resupply under the edge of the building? I had fun on that map and I miss it. There was a lot of fun battles on that map, back before fotm Gal logi and I lead squads all the time I pushed a triple complex rep Adv logi and ruined about 10 people before they got me. I suck at FPS so 10 is a big deal to me. After I died I dropped an OS on their whole team in the bowl, they did it to us and then our team did it again to them all in about 30 seconds. Everyone died a glorious death and the match ended. It has to be one of my favorite games.
GÇ£No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride."
Hunter S. Thompson
|
Joel II X
Dah Gods O Bacon
406
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 08:51:00 -
[42] - Quote
Why? I call in my LAV at the start of the match to get to an objective first.
How will I call it in without any WP?
I like the way you're trying to limit vehicle spam, but this is not the way to do so.
The was a guy who said that the whole team gets a point quota system. For example an LAV is 1 point, DS is 2, and HAV is 3 and you have a total of 10 points for the team. This was the best idea I've heard (even though the numbers I've posted here came out from a place where the sun doesn't shine, in casei didn't make that clear). |
Lt Royal
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
2274
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 08:55:00 -
[43] - Quote
Joel II X wrote:How will I call it in without any WP? It could put you into negative WPGÇÖs, this wouldn't stop vehicle spam in anyway but it would put a stop to GÇ£orbital spamGÇ¥.
I like this idea but it needs some tweaking and should also be submitted in the [Feedback/Requests] sections on the forums.
Gÿ£GÿàGÿP Subdreddit Recruitment Video Gÿ£GÿàGÿP
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star. EoN.
2150
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 11:15:00 -
[44] - Quote
Make protosuits cost WP to use
2500WP needed
Intelligence is OP
|
Blaze Ashra
Ametat Security Amarr Empire
75
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 11:38:00 -
[45] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:CommanderBolt wrote:Guys keep moaning about how they think its not right that tankers can call in another tank, swap tanks, do it all over again etc....
Well guys - lets not even get started on swapping for a different role around the battlefield - MOST f**king maps dont even have vehicle access to any of the damn supply depots. So how are we meant to rearm?
(Just another ill thought out feature from CCP) They'll probably add in vehicle nanohives later, but only able to equip them on PRO pilot suits. And you'll probably need nanohive 5, which I already have. I would love being able to drop supply packs(allotek nano hives) on you tankers and infantry from time to time. The vehicle repair was to short and cut into survival to much to fit on anything other than a gorgon. Heck, I would love to use my equipment from my dropship as well. |
Tebu Gan
Dem Durrty Boyz Renegade Alliance
362
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 13:18:00 -
[46] - Quote
Leovarian L Lavitz wrote:I feel that having a wp system for calling in vehicles would greatly balance vehicle play.
Just throwing numbers out there (these are squad WP) 0WP You can call in a militia Light Vehicle 50WP You can call in a Light Vehicle 125 WP You can call in a militia medium vehicle 250 WP you can call in a Medium Vehicle 500 WP you can call in a Militia heavy Vehicle 1250 WP You can call in a Heavy Vehicle
Using WP like this consumes your available warpoints (not earned warpoints), and orbitals are also purchased from the same wps. So you can call in two tanks or a war barge strike.
I feel this adds a balancing layer to vehicles.
EDIT: added a few more layers. EDIT 2: This also fixes the recall vehicle swap exploit.
Eh, sounds like a good idea, BUTTTT.
I put all my points into tanks.
Let's say you have all your points into an infantry role, but you can't spawn until someone earns enough WP for you to do so. Therefore, your ability to play your chosen role now lies in the hands of blueberries.
And 1250 for a tank! That thing had better be indestructible!
That leads me to wonder what a tank battle would be like if we were indestructible.
Wish tanks were like this
Nuff Said
|
Sextus Hardcock
0uter.Heaven
188
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 13:39:00 -
[47] - Quote
not a bad idea, maybe have to play with the WP numbers a bit.
I would be fine with paying WPs for ADV or Proto infantry gear.
Sorry Tankers but the 'But I don't wannaaaaa' doesn't wash. I don't like AV but I absolutely MUST when there are 6 maddies circling my bunker like sharks.
EDIT: Welcome to the new era of DUST where there are no 'tankers' and 'infantry' only Mercs. diversify MFers |
Mobius Wyvern
Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN.
4387
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 13:51:00 -
[48] - Quote
Leovarian L Lavitz wrote:Logi Bro wrote:This is an old idea that was scrapped long ago. If you look back at the beta footage of when devs played Crater Lake in a Fanfest one year, they said something along the lines of: "This vehicle requires WP to call in," as they were explaining how the vehicle drop system worked.
And if they decided to remove it a long time ago, then chances are they aren't going to bring it back, kind of like Crater Lake. Honestly, I believe they should bring it back. It got dropped because it was bad, man.
Amidst the blue skies
A link from past to future
The sheltering wings of the protector
|
Asha Starwind
VEXALATION CORPORATION Partners of Industrial Service and Salvage
56
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 14:03:00 -
[49] - Quote
I suggested this in a thread a couple days ago but even then I was thinking 100-150wp per HAV/DS and less for smaller vehicles. A couple hacks, or kills is understandable but 1250WP? |
Skihids
Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising
2645
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 15:55:00 -
[50] - Quote
We don't need artificial restrictions on vehicles, weapons, suits, or equipment.
What we need is balance.
Once we have that no fitting will have an overwhelming advantage and we will have a natural mix, not an artificialy induced one. 1.7 is the first drop of a complete vehicle rewrite. It's far from perfect and CCP admitted that it would take several updates to get it in a good place. I get that you want an immediate fix, but turning some fittings or play styles into kill streaks is not the answer. That's not DUST.
CCP said webifiers and other AV content is coming. Push for that rather than more restrictions. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |