DUST Search - Why Shouldn't Tanks Be Soloed?

All Channels

General Discussions

Why Shouldn't Tanks Be Soloed?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sirys Lyons Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 30	Posted - 2014.01.11 23:07:00 - [121] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I've posted this in multiple threads but my ideal scenario would be to make Tanks the Tech II MAV. This is more or less what I'm advocating, and I support it. Tanks that are AV. A middle tier that is real infantry support, and can really be killed by infantry.
True Adamance Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 5557	Posted - 2014.01.11 23:07:00 - [122] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: I solo tanks all the time with my forge gun. It requires planning, positioning, and at least one good opening hit to its weak point. Yup one guy with a damage modded DAU is a daunting prospect for any tanker. To a Texan like you, a hero is some type of weird sandwich, not some nut who takes on three Gunlogi. Reference = ISK
jerrmy12 kahoalii The Phoenix Federation 327	Posted - 2014.01.11 23:07:00 - [123] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: I solo tanks all the time with my forge gun. It requires planning, positioning, and at least one good opening hit to its weak point. a tank with 0 shields 4000 armor, i emptied my AFG into him unhardened, should have killed him I use a tablet so beware of typos
True Adamance Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 5562	Posted - 2014.01.11 23:47:00 - [124] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sirys Lyons wrote: True Adamance wrote: That or a redesignation of the role of tanks making them designed to deal with other vehicles on the map at costs to infantry killing power, coupled with making small turrets effective enough to encourage/ make worthwhile for tankers to want an Anti Infantry gunner to cover them. That's exactly it. Tanks should be primarily AV, but they can't be because there is no MAV. There's just tanks, or buggies. I've posted this in multiple threads but my ideal scenario would be to make Tanks the Tech II MAV. MAV being designed to transport troops like the dropship but across the ground and support those troopers with a Medium Turret (in my Mind the current blaster turret is removed from Large Turret designation and nerfed slightly to produce the medium Blaster) being a faster vehicle with less total armour and bonuses to resistance modules. Thus the MAV is designed to be a lightly armoured mobile troop transport and suppression vehicle with an anti infantry bent. HAV turrets are then replaced with more or less main battle cannon weapons with high alpha, moderate splash damage, and small magazine sized to encourage skill shotting and not spamming rounds down range. HAV are redesigned to deal directly and effectively with other vehicles on the map being the pinnacle of vehicle to vehicle combat on the ground at a high but reasonable and meaningful cost to the player in both ISK and SP making Spam of tanks less likely. Lack of massively and ridiculous effective Anti Infantry killing turrets like the Large Blaster means any infantry kills are the result of a well placed shot not just 30 rounds in their general direction. Also I never understood the role of HAV in dust, killing Infantry has been my role for a long time, but Tanks are designed to carry large ordinance and deliver it from behind solid armour and with reasonable mobility.....the rail gun essentially now is the only choice to really achieve that role. LAV < MAV < HAV < Orbital Strike or Other HAV, or AV (but of course the balance between numbers must be first implemented) just like in future I imagine Dropship < Assault Dropship < Fighter < AV, HAV, or OB In my mind, and feel free to point out any flaws in my reasoning, it would encourage escalation game play. LAV are used to quickly sweep to the points, MAV roll in carrying bigger guns and more infantry, tanks come in to deal with those MAV, and an OB will deal with that tank, or AV, or another Tank. You just made my mouth water. True Adamance for CPM1 Pfff that's the last thing I would want. To a Texan like you, a hero is some type of weird sandwich, not some nut who takes on three Gunlogi. Reference = ISK
Summ Dude OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 101	Posted - 2014.01.11 23:48:00 - [125] - Quote Glad to see the discussion moving along in a pretty constructive direction. Just thought I'd quickly add this video for everyone's viewing enjoyment. I think I've posted it at least twice before on these forums, but damn if it doesn't keep having relevance in these balance discussions. If you're not in the mood to watch it (although you totally should), the basic idea is just that in a competitive multiplayer game, any action/tactic/weapon/skill/ability/whatever used by one player should be engaging and interesting for both the player using it, and the player it's being used on.
ONE-I-BANDIT The Generals General Tso's Alliance 7	Posted - 2014.01.11 23:57:00 - [126] - Quote I-Shayz-I wrote: The balance should be on the players. 3 people in a tank should match 3 AV players. 3 AV players should be better than 1 person in a tank 3 people in a tank should be better than 1 AV player. I think that tanks need to rely more on infantry support than just their tank themselves, whether the infantry is in the tank or not. That's how it used to be...if you had two people in the tank who could jump out and kill AV players easily, then yeah, you should be able to take on more than one AV player. But a solo tank should not be able to take on 5 AV players by himself alone in a militia tank. EDIT: To answer your question... AV should be able to take out a tank solo if the tanker is running solo if they can catch the tanker off guard. I believe AV should have a slight advantage over tanks because that's what it is...AV. But when it comes down to it, a miltia tank should not take on proto AV easily. However a std tank with proto modules should. Well I find some of holes in your theory in a few things here 1. If I could hide behind walls like an troop then I could support ppl to tank ratio. Since most of the maps has places for you to run and hide then attack if you know what you are doing. Tanks are totally exposed. You can climb a ladder to get the advantage. 2. The part about using more troop support, I agree to an bit. When im called to engage an area its mostly to clear an area as much as possible so troops can come right behind me then im gone till needed to scare and make you hide then gone again. Big example was the Enforcer tank which were crap and very expensive and god so slow they were asking to get poped. I did not bring out that tank unless I was sniping other tanks. That should have been the case they should be able to sit there and destroy till the Proto AV arrived and not just one but at least several. 3. Now the last one would be the Militia tank taking out 5 AVers, Is that 5 Proto or Militia AVs? Again do they know how to AV or they standing in the road smiling at me and asking to get killed ? Well as im reading there are lots of ppl even tankers that agree that the milita tank is OP. Why get an Gunlogi if I can get something way cheaper to do the job just as good. Im sure CCP has to see this and for sure hear about this and will nerf it soon
Blaze Ashra Ametat Security Amarr Empire 111	Posted - 2014.01.12 00:04:00 - [127] - Quote I'll give this a shot. TL:DR . No one likes getting ROFL stomped and the only way to keep that from happening is though fair and balanced counters. Wall of text. When I'm fitting out my ADS, I do so with survival in mind. At it's base level it's easily wiped off the map. As it is right now I have to have use attack windows and keep track of where the blues are and do hit and run strikes. During the time I'm not dealing with infantry I'm scouting the perimeter for rail tanks or searching for swarm trails going to allied vehicles. This keeps me relatively busy throughout the match. Now my current fit is complex hardeners, complex after burners, enhanced shield extender and complex power grid upgrade. This gives me enough tank and cool down that I can usually survive 2 hits of a breach FG or 2 shots from rails. So basically you're using one weapon and I'm using 4 modules, 3 of which are meant to survive what you bring to the table. When I have my hardeners on I've got a sizable damage reduction but the collision still knocks me around and can get me killed easily. If hardeners are off, then I can be 1 or 2 shotted easily so I make sure to GTFO. Even with my hardeners going I can be 4 shotted but I have time to react. So basically all you have to do is score 4 hits on me no matter what and I am dead. Swarms get --80% damage reduction when I have my hardeners on top of the 33% damage nerf so they're trivialized at the moment. Though I can be burst down by 2+ proto swarm guys if they fire when my hardeners are off or if they cause me to crash into terrain. Our hardeners make it so we have logi LAV level resistance. I don't think they're the problem because without them we fold like paper, even to the nerfed AV, regardless of how our vehicles are fitted without them. Like I said, I fit to survive and I have 4 slots dedicated to staying in the game versus your one to take me out, and even with all that I can be 4 shotted. So basically most engagements I have a choice on whether to score kills or pull back. In regards to swarms, If I pull back neither of us are in direct danger. My hardeners and after burners are down you have the advantage. If either are not then the advantage goes to me. If my shields are less than 50% and my hardeners are off you will be able to finish me off with 2 volleys regardless of my after burners (Cant out run them from hovering or still). If I get the drop on you, I can take you out and if you track me and time your shots right you can take me out when the opportunity presents itself with 1 or 2 volleys. Thus we have a relatively balanced dynamic at the moment. Now if they increased the regular swarms to 330 and make the assault go back to 400 meters but at current damage levels balance would be achieved for swarms vs vehicles. Close range high risk gives a high pay off, long range low risk gives lower pay offs. This way swarms can be used to tell the tankers GTFO or die or you can use an assault swarm to finish off someone trying to recall after over staying there welcome(modules duration). if they didn't bother to find cover first. Now the reason I think swarms should be less powerful than the plasma cannon is that it is arguably the easiest weapon in the game due to auto acquiring the target, dealing massive damage, having the largest aiming reticule in the game and a very fast firing rate. The plasma cannon lacks all of that but still manages to be a ton of fun. Please note that I'm not saying nerf swarms, I'm saying if any weapon in this game deserves to be balanced against tanks it's the plasma cannon. Also prior to tankers using nitro, swarms owned tanks in nearly every situation.That feeling where the odds are stacked against you, everyone knows where you're at and you can't do anything when you're firing swarms while a blaster tank fires at you, that's exactly how tankers felt prior to 1.7. Only real difference is isk and AV is getting off cheap per death. Tables are turned and the other side doesn't feel very nice, does it.? So basically > 1.7 the balance was tipped to AV so much that the only option for vehicles was to run as fast as they could to survive, and even then it was only mistakes on the AV users part that mattered. Mostly it was overwhelmingly one sided. Now if we make the mistakes we die. For the most part we're not being insta gibbed and can react appropriately and if we don't do so we pay the price. This would be terrible to lose. Now as to why tanks shouldn't be soloed by AV I don't agree with that. I think they should be punished for mistakes they make rather than being vaporized without being able to react. There also is a huge lack of deterrents for tanks. Currently they're in the same race to get kills that AVers were to kill them in prior builds. Aside from bordom(hiding in cover) you can't really say hey, leave us alone or die. That used to be the AV grenades role and proximity mines could fill it perfectly if buffed because of the warning system in place. If they ignore it then the consequences are on them and I won't care for whining about that. What seems to be your problem is you're saying tank but disregarding the modules and playstyle of the driver. There problem is they are thinking they should be the focal point of all balance in the game. If you fire 3 - 6 volleys at an enemy tank as it's being deployed you will destroy it. The second the driver gets in you usually have more of a challenge. You're always assuming that everything is going to be best AV vs best Vehicles and think that the advantage should go to AV because you're more vulnerable to infantry but you're only more vulnerable to infantry because you main swarms. That's the main issue as far as I can see. So as long as nothing is one sided, everything else should be about playstyle and ability. The stuff that's not up to par should be adjusted to fit. It's not about isk, power, skill points or money, It's about fun.
Summ Dude OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 101	Posted - 2014.01.12 03:17:00 - [128] - Quote Blaze Ashra wrote: Wall of text. I...what? How disappointing that such a giant post would be so completely off topic and close with a bunch of random arbitrary junk.
Blaze Ashra Ametat Security Amarr Empire 113	Posted - 2014.01.12 07:25:00 - [129] - Quote Summ Dude wrote: Blaze Ashra wrote: Wall of text. I...what? How disappointing that such a giant post would be so completely off topic and close with a bunch of random arbitrary junk. Wasn't off topic and everything was addressing the current AV/ Vehicle balance, my views on it, and my perspective as a vehicle user. But I didn't really feel like simplifying it so much or leaving everything out.
Auris Lionesse SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 51	Posted - 2014.01.12 07:40:00 - [130] - Quote Until a militia swarm launcher with its base ammo can solo a militia tank av balance can't be achieved because the fundamental system is broken.

Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 391	Posted - 2014.01.12 07:45:00 - [131] - Quote Price difference. Who cares what some sniper has to say
Ludvig Enraga KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 795	Posted - 2014.01.12 08:09:00 - [132] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: well, an 80k isk sica should be soloed, yes, but my half million isk tank should be right about where it is bc i invested half my Sp in it. So, to answer your question, a very expensive, very well planned tank piloted by a high SP and highly skilled and seasoned pilot should be nigh invincible. A mlt tank piloted by a noob should get soloed every single time someone tries. The quickest fix would be to nerf mlt tank fitting power AND buff AV so that AV can actually punch through tanks when their hardeners are off. It usually takes 3 shots from a swarm or forge, but a bad tanker is gone by the time the second shot lands, and a good tanker will only let one hit. What do you mean 'nigh invincible'? I run scout suit and have ALL of my SP invested into it and I am skilled since it's the only suit I've been playing for nigh two years. It costs me 100K + at proto level - should not it be nigh invincible too? Oh, sht! I just learned you can make a signature! Thanks, CCP! Forums are getting better!
Qn1f3 Gallente Federation 33	Posted - 2014.01.12 14:01:00 - [133] - Quote Ludvig Enraga wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: well, an 80k isk sica should be soloed, yes, but my half million isk tank should be right about where it is bc i invested half my Sp in it. So, to answer your question, a very expensive, very well planned tank piloted by a high SP and highly skilled and seasoned pilot should be nigh invincible. A mlt tank piloted by a noob should get soloed every single time someone tries. The quickest fix would be to nerf mlt tank fitting power AND buff AV so that AV can actually punch through tanks when their hardeners are off. It usually takes 3 shots from a swarm or forge, but a bad tanker is gone by the time the second shot lands, and a good tanker will only let one hit. What do you mean 'nigh invincible'? I run scout suit and have ALL of my SP invested into it and I am skilled since it's the only suit I've been playing for nigh two years. It costs me 100K + at proto level - should not it be nigh invincible too? Or at least nigh invisible(which you probably are, and will be in a higher extent when cloaking comes into play)! The rest of this message endorses your vision, the joke aside. That way of reasoning clearly does'nt work, even a highly invested SP suit or vehicle should've to apply tactics and wits to survive and advance the team objectives in each individiual battleground. A low SP toon should stand a chance against a higly specialized SP invested toon, even though the chances should be slim. It should handle about skill in the end, but if to equally skilled players end up against eachother the one with higher SP should be the one rendered victorious in most engagements. For AV purposes I have a Skinweave Heavy Suit fitted with a DAU and Complex Damage Mod, it goes for 20k ISK or so and is able to put down most vehicles and or pose a serious threat to them. The nerfed range aside it's a near perfect AV build in my opinion. It's highly effective as long as your team is'nt getting stomped, which occurs in a much higher frequency then wished for(mainly because I solo queue all the time, I believe). I realize Skinweave is not attainable, but still that's just a ~10k ISK more per fitting. Also the main trouble with the HAV domination lies within the matches that are organized by our dear Scotty. As for the corporation matches involve a much higher degree of tactics(I hope, since I've never been to one).
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1335	Posted - 2014.01.12 14:50:00 - [134] - Quote How it ought to be: 1 AV vs. 1 HAV = difficult but still quite possible for AV if they prepare for the engagement. Should put HAV in redline for a few minutes. 2 AV vs. 1 HAV = takes a small amount of coordination on the AVs part, but fairly easy to do. If the HAV survives, it will be hurt badly. 3 AV vs. 1 HAV = AV will roll over the HAV. Only the most skilled tankers with a retreat strategy will survive this kind of attack, and even then, they won't be back into combat for a few minutes. Yours Truly, Reginald Fizzer94 Delafontaine III, Esquire
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3380	Posted - 2014.01.12 19:38:00 - [135] - Quote Glad to see all of the constructive posts here. "Keep 'em coming" CoD -----> <----- WoT Please AR Scrubs and Tank Spammers, go to your respective games. Leave DUST alone!
DJINNDicknoseturdwaffle Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 292	Posted - 2014.01.12 20:09:00 - [136] - Quote Atiim wrote: Title is Self-Explanatory Also: Atiim wrote: Please attempt to keep this constructive, as I don't want another troll thread being made out of this. -HAND. Sp/isk difference make it the same and yeah it'd be fine otherwise no, and I don't use tanks.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3422	Posted - 2014.01.13 20:50:00 - [137] - Quote Blaze Ashra wrote: 1. You're mainly using 1 slot on your suit to destroy me. 2. I'm using 4 slots of my vehicle to survive you and most tankers use 5. 3. You can destroy every vehicle without a driver in 3-6 shots. 4. If the driver has fit their vehicles badly or makes mistakes they can die easily. 5. Vehicles as they are right now are fine but AV should be buffed to be effective as a threat/deterrent. 6. No one likes getting ROFL stomped and the only way to keep that from happening is though fair and balanced counters. Only one slot? What AV fit are you using? 1 hardner can tank through every form of AV. Your using 2 slots at best (counting repair modules) What vehicle doesn't have a driver? 1=1 is fair. Atiim (Wyrikomi Swarm Launcher) Tank Spammer Tank Spammer (Soma - MLT 80GJ Blaster) Atiim And this is why I drink.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 1514	Posted - 2014.01.13 21:32:00 - [138] - Quote Atiim wrote: Only one slot? What AV fit are you using? they aren't.
deepfried salad gilliam Sanguine Knights 374	Posted - 2014.01.13 21:49:00 - [139] - Quote not opposed to soloing tanks. but it should take time they are very large thus making it a very easy target to hit making a coordinated assault (even if its hey jim lets shoot the maddy) easier if its too easy to solo a tank a simple pair could anhilate tanks making them useless but if their to hard no one tries to kill them so i think it would be best if a tank could hold its own (assuming no other variables) against 2 equally tiered av fits this meaning good av could solo tanks good tanks could take out av a few friends (3 or more) could absolutly demolish a tank or if its a tank getting hit by 2 people maybe die maybe live Proud Christian one of the most essential parts of eve is left out of dust: freedom, exploration, open-world gameplay.
Snagman 313 Carbon 7 CRONOS. 279	Posted - 2014.01.13 22:00:00 - [140] - Quote Blaze Ashra wrote: 1. You're mainly using 1 slot on your suit to destroy me. 2. I'm using 4 slots of my vehicle to survive you and most tankers use 5. 3. You can destroy every vehicle without a driver in 3-6 shots. 4. If the driver has fit their vehicles badly or makes mistakes they can die easily. 5. Vehicles as they are right now are fine but AV should be buffed to be effective as a threat/deterrent. 6. No one likes getting ROFL stomped and the only way to keep that from happening is though fair and balanced counters. 1. You are using 1 slot on your vehicle to destroy me, unless you have turrets in which case you have 3 and I have to give up my primary anti infantry weapon whereas yours is dual purpose. Also I have to mount Dmg mods to be effective vs your large hp and high resist so no extra shields for me thereby reducing my survivability. 2. All low slots will be equipped to increase survivability vs intended HAV between 1 and 4 depending on level of suit. 3. If you are equipped with a Railgun you can kill me in 1 shot and a blaster can do it in 1 to 15 shots depending on suit type, suit damage, infantry support, level of blaster and headshot damage. 4. If the AV player has their suit fitted badly or makes mistakes they can die easily from the HAV or infantry. 5. Std vehicles are fine Mlt vehicles need a tone down or price increase to make them less affordable to spam. AV needs a slight buff but this could also be given by decreasing the effectiveness of certain modules and preventing the stacking of hardeners to the current Iron curtain mode that can be achieved on certain fits. 6. Agreed. Closed Beta AV veteran I drink because I play Dust

Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3569	Posted - 2014.01.17 04:09:00 - [141] - Quote Anyone else got an answer? Creator of The AV Registry The Pilot's Whipin' Boy // DJINN Lukeoplast's alleged sock *FORGE MASTER RACE*
Goric Rumis Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 319	Posted - 2014.01.17 05:13:00 - [142] - Quote Let me take a crack at the balancing factors. Because it's not just one person to one person. Sorry in advance for making this so long. I'm not taking the time to make it short. Listing balancing factors off the top of my head (each a function of several individual statistics): targeted killing effectiveness (how efficient you are at killing a single target) group killing effectiveness (how efficient you are at killing a group of targets) suppression strength (how efficient you are at softening/dispersing targets, lowering their effectiveness) defensive strength (how hard it is to kill you--this can be a function of health, speed, suppression, etc.) evasive capability (how easily you can avoid fire and/or escape) ubiquity (your ability to get to places on the map quickly and efficiently) stealth (the ability to avoid conflict, or choose the circumstances of conflict) range (the radius of your optimal area of engagement) circumstantial effectiveness (strengths particular to your class, such as high ground, narrow corridors, cover, etc.) So what we're debating is what I've just labeled "targeted killing effectiveness" or "TKE" in consideration of all other balancing factors. The question is, should AV be strong enough to match vehicles 1:1? Group killing effectiveness is a non-factor for swarms, and requires pretty extreme luck on the part of forge guns. I would call it effectively nil. For tanks, missiles and blasters have some nominal capability to kill groups. Let's call this roughly even. Suppression strength is effectively nil for swarms, and nominal for forge guns (with its long charge time and difficulty hitting moving targets). Tanks with missiles and blasters have very high suppression strength, arguably the highest in the game. Defensive strength is low for swarmers. Higher for forgers, although it is mitigated somewhat by movement--I've always had a much easier time not getting shot in a faster suit. Between health, speed, suppression capability, and the ineffectiveness of most weapons, defensive strength of tanks is unparalleled in the game. Evasive capability is moderately high for swarmers, depending on the suit but there is the ability to duck in and out of cover--however, they are still highly susceptible to infantry. Lowest for forgers, especially while they're charging or holding a charge, particularly with breach--these are always susceptible to infantry. Tanks have moderate evasive capability, in consideration of the distance that often exists between tanks and AV, and also in consideration of its ability to escape combat quickly if necessary; however, they lack the ability to duck in and out of cover easily, so I will rank them moderately low. Ubiquity is a complicated one to debate. Inherent to the role, forge gunners have very, very low ubiquity, however there is an ability to call in a vehicle. I would argue that the inability to operate the vehicle and forge gun at the same time limits the legitimacy of this argument, but even I can admit it would be a technicality. So we can put both forge gunners and swarmers at moderate. For most maps at present, ubiquity for tanks is very high; this could be reduced with better map design. Stealth is relatively high for swarmers, depending on the suit and other modules and skills used. Forge guns are hard to hide, and giving chase always requires either the most direct route (which is rarely stealthy) or a vehicle (which is never stealthy). Tanks get a nominal amount of stealth because they don't show up on radar as easily as they should, but let's face it, it's hard to hide a tank. Range for swarms is moderate for the purposes of this conversation. Forge guns have more range, but come nowhere near rail turrets, so we must also consider them moderate. Because tanks can equip rails quite easily, for the purpose of this conversation we have to give tanks a "very high" for range. Circumstantial effectiveness isn't really a part of this argument. If the maps were more limiting to vehicles and provided more vantage points for AV to reach from within semi-enclosed areas, one could make a more compelling argument for circumstantial effectiveness. Oh, it might be worth mentioning tanks have some limits to their ability to aim, but that rarely seems to be a factor in practical combat. Given this list, I see tanks having an overall advantage in most of the other areas of balance. Therefore, if the ratio is one player to one player, I'm going to have to give them lower TKE relative to AV. This would apply only to killing vehicles. Now for counter-arguments. AV increases effectiveness overall if there are multiple people in a targeted vehicle, for example, destroying a full dropship. This is circumstantial at best, though, so I would rank it nominal. AV agility and target size relative to distance is very lopsided toward the dropsuit. However, this only helps to mitigate the weakness of the dropsuit against other infantry in the same situation. Hypothetically, a fight between an AV player versus one tank and one infantry could go any direction with respect to the tank but will almost inevitably result in the death of the AV player. One AV versus one infantry, all things being equal, is weighted toward the infantry. So in consideration of weighting toward AV, we must hold in consideration that the AV is already a smaller, more agile target than the tank. AV grenades are stupid and irrelevant. Everyone agrees? Good. My recommendation: AV should be more effective than tanks at destroying vehicles, though not necessarily via raw damage alone. Forge guns should be a little more effective than swarms (though less than I was expecting). Tanks should also be balanced by reducing effectiveness in some of these areas, especially rail turret range and ubiquity across the map. Thoughts? The Tank Balancing Factor No One Is Discussing
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 4917	Posted - 2014.02.21 14:16:00 - [143] - Quote Bumping to avoid thread-lock. Atiim (Gunnlogi - 80GJ Particle Cannon) Tank Scrub AFK No seriously. My lunch break's over now. :(
Crimson ShieId Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 80	Posted - 2014.02.21 14:46:00 - [144] - Quote I'm sure it's been said before, but one person CAN solo a tank quite easily. RE's are, after all, the leading cause of tank deaths coupled with scouts. As long as that tank doesn't have infantry support, said tanker is essentially a sitting duck, and the second he starts firing at your team mates, you shove 3 RE's up his tailpipe and tank go boom boom boom. On a side note, I don't think militia tanks should be debuffed, they just need the price raised. A proto suit isn't invincible to a militia suit, even though the person in the proto suit put a lot of SP into that suit. The person in the militia suit just needs to use tactics to kill the proto, it's the same with tanks. My militia tank will get ripped apart by anyone who put points into their tanks in a straight up fight, but if I flank around and come up behind them while their hardeners are on cooldown, I can usually kill them before they know what's up, no matter what kind of tank they're using. It's the same with dropsuits and aside from pricing, there's nothing that really needs to be changed. Militia tanks were a joke before 1.7, not even a threat and something a few AV grenades could tear apart, now they're a relative threat if the pilot is good, just as militia suits can be a threat if the player is good. Sometimes I miss never seeing tanks in a battle... then I remember the mystical flying soma, and I can't help but smile.
Ryme Intrinseca Fatal Absolution 767	Posted - 2014.02.21 15:00:00 - [145] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: well, an 80k isk sica should be soloed, yes, but my half million isk tank should be right about where it is bc i invested half my Sp in it. If a 150,000isk protosuit is soloable by a 10,000isk militia AR fit, a 500,000isk tank should be soloable by a 30,000isk standard AV fit.
CRYPT3C W0LF Vherokior Combat Logistics Minmatar Republic 386	Posted - 2014.02.21 15:01:00 - [146] - Quote If you're smart with AV, you can Solo Tankers (RE, Flux, Swarm) And for the love of god, all the people bring up the argument "An 80k soma killed my Proto Suit thats costs 240k" well, before 1.7, It was the opposite. 1 Proto Swarm could SOLO a 3 Million Isk tank quite easily, how fair is that? Now the deal with double hardeners, redline railing, and speed of each tanks needs to be looked at or fixed. Honestly I believe tanks are in a solid place if those above issues are fixed, I think It would create a balanced playing field if used/countered wisely. Should AV be able to Solo tanks? If you're smart and play tactically, then of course. Its not that the AV itself is to blame, its how people utilize it COOKIE MASTER RACE ^__^ Youtube, A Merc with a passion
Crimson ShieId Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 80	Posted - 2014.02.21 15:09:00 - [147] - Quote CRYPT3C W0LF wrote: If you're smart with AV, you can Solo Tankers (RE, Flux, Swarm) And for the love of god, all the people bring up the argument "An 80k soma killed my Proto Suit thats costs 240k" well, before 1.7, It was the opposite. 1 Proto Swarm could SOLO a 3 Million Isk tank quite easily, how fair is that? Now the deal with double hardeners, redline railing, and speed of each tanks needs to be looked at or fixed. Honestly I believe tanks are in a solid place if those above issues are fixed, I think It would create a balanced playing field if used/countered wisely. Should AV be able to Solo tanks? If you're smart and play tactically, then of course. Its not that the AV itself is to blame, its how people utilize it Hey, I remember you... Those Jihad LAV's were fun. Also, could you tone down the pwning of my blueberries? You're scaring the poor little guys! Also, agreed. Triple hardened Gunlogis can keep their hardeners on indefinitely I believe, though the current state of them is still probably a step down from what it used to be in terms of armor hardeners. Sometimes I miss never seeing tanks in a battle... then I remember the mystical flying soma, and I can't help but smile.
CRYPT3C W0LF Vherokior Combat Logistics Minmatar Republic 386	Posted - 2014.02.21 15:14:00 - [148] - Quote Crimson ShieId wrote: CRYPT3C W0LF wrote: If you're smart with AV, you can Solo Tankers (RE, Flux, Swarm) And for the love of god, all the people bring up the argument "An 80k soma killed my Proto Suit thats costs 240k" well, before 1.7, It was the opposite. 1 Proto Swarm could SOLO a 3 Million Isk tank quite easily, how fair is that? Now the deal with double hardeners, redline railing, and speed of each tanks needs to be looked at or fixed. Honestly I believe tanks are in a solid place if those above issues are fixed, I think It would create a balanced playing field if used/countered wisely. Should AV be able to Solo tanks? If you're smart and play tactically, then of course. Its not that the AV itself is to blame, its how people utilize it Hey, I remember you... Those Jihad LAV's were fun. Also, could you tone down the pwning of my blueberries? You're scaring the poor little guys! Also, agreed. Triple hardened Gunlogis can keep their hardeners on indefinitely I believe, though the current state of them is still probably a step down from what it used to be in terms of armor hardeners. hehe, I <3 Mercing people in my scout suit and Jihad jeeping I think you may have meant armor tanking maddys, gunnlogi's don't have 3 lows COOKIE MASTER RACE ^__^ Youtube, A Merc with a passion
Pisidon Gmen Ivory Vanguard 18	Posted - 2014.02.21 15:58:00 - [149] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: well, an 80k isk sica should be soloed, yes, but my half million isk tank should be right about where it is bc i invested half my Sp in it. So, to answer your question, a very expensive, very well planned tank piloted by a high SP and highly skilled and seasoned pilot should be nigh invincible. A mlt tank piloted by a noob should get soloed every single time someone tries. The quickest fix would be to nerf mlt tank fitting power AND buff AV so that AV can actually punch through tanks when their hardeners are off. It usually takes 3 shots from a swarm or forge, but a bad tanker is gone by the time the second shot lands, and a good tanker will only let one hit. the question is WHY a tank can't be soloed not why your tank cant b killed there is a crap load of cheep tanks ruling the field do to bs mods and the speed boost combined with the nurff to av weapons and if you get shot by a proto swarm u should take damage too not sit and grin about it and keep shooting when you consider the supply of ammo in any av weapon it seems stupid the damage they do now with out a tank kicking in a harder or shield / armor repair it takes most of the available ammo to account for the amount of hp on the tank . no add in hardeners ect and it makes tanks unkillable do to hp heal or simply running away. Current av weapons don't take more then 1 or 2 shots to kill a tank now lets talk about range what the hell was the nurrf to swarms range for 175m is bs a blaster tank can shoot a lot farther then that and rail tanks shoot across the map. we need the same range as a forge gun esp when u try to kill drop ships they can just fly too high to kill and that's bs
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 293	Posted - 2014.02.21 16:00:00 - [150] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: well, an 80k isk sica should be soloed, yes, but my half million isk tank should be right about where it is bc i invested half my Sp in it. So, to answer your question, a very expensive, very well planned tank piloted by a high SP and highly skilled and seasoned pilot should be nigh invincible. A mlt tank piloted by a noob should get soloed every single time someone tries. The quickest fix would be to nerf mlt tank fitting power AND buff AV so that AV can actually punch through tanks when their hardeners are off. It usually takes 3 shots from a swarm or forge, but a bad tanker is gone by the time the second shot lands, and a good tanker will only let one hit. Translation: "I should be nigh invincible." Your words, not mine. Also sums up your opinion on the matter, and your idea of "balance" as well. Mobius Wyvern wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: well, an 80k isk sica should be soloed, yes, but my half million isk tank should be right about where it is bc i invested half my Sp in it. So, to answer your question, a very expensive, very well planned tank piloted by a high SP and highly skilled and seasoned pilot should be nigh invincible. A mlt tank piloted by a noob should get soloed every single time someone tries. The quickest fix would be to nerf mlt tank fitting power AND buff AV so that AV can actually punch through tanks when their hardeners are off. It usually takes 3 shots from a swarm or forge, but a bad tanker is gone by the time the second shot lands, and a good tanker will only let one hit. See, that's the issue. Militia tanks can give a good fight to someone who actually invested time and skill into their asset and worked to get to where they are now. THAT is the problem with 1.7. Make Militia tanks inferior to STD ones like they used to be. The cost is fine, but they shouldn't be able to ** up someone who actually worked for their asset and put a lot of ISK into it. No, standard tanks are just as far above militia tanks as standard suits/gear is above militia suits/gear. This is balanced. DUST Fiend wrote:** You have to be careful with AV buffs or dropships will go right back to where they were. We're actually really close to a state of balance right now, of course there are issues left that need to be addressed, but overall, it's coming along nicely for a change. The QQ is about tanks. I don't think anyone thinks that dropships are OP right now. Of course swarms should do a bit more, but I think everyone agrees.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.