|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Attorney General
1825
   |
Posted - 2014.01.20 20:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
How is it that people are calling for buffs to AV nades?
Are you guys just that bad? Everytime I use AV nades they work great, how are you guys not able to use them?
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
The Attorney General
1828
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 20:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:The Attorney General wrote:How is it that people are calling for buffs to AV nades?
Are you guys just that bad? Everytime I use AV nades they work great, how are you guys not able to use them? This post is actually asking for peoples opinions on every weapon doing 100% damage to tanks. Or 90% or whatever it would be doing to shields/armor regularly.
And yet, in your second post you call for buffs to ALL AV, including AV nades.
You opened the door, I merely walked through it.
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
The Attorney General
1828
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 20:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:Buff plasma cannon, re's, proxies, swarms, av nades, and forge gun, but also make infantry weapons do 100%. Why wouldn't they do 100% in the first place?
So you want buffs to all AV weapons AND you want anti infantry weapons to do 100% damage to an armored vehicle?
Seems like a totally reasonable suggestion, but I assume you are going to make the blaster a one hit kill to compensate right?
Or are you just mad because you can't tackle a tank and think that because you are stupid CCP should cater to you?
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
The Attorney General
1832
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 21:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:
I kill tanks all the time. But the easiest ways to do it is with a tank or RE's. But that is NOT the point of this thread. Now you can insult me all day or make a viable argument as to why normal weapons would do 10% damage to tanks.
Because they are infantry weapons and vehicles are designed to be resistant to small arms fire.
Go and read the descriptions muppet.
Now, defend your statement about wanting all AV buffed to go along with having your rifle turn into a ****** AV weapon.
If you think it is easier to kil atank with RE's than a forge, you are really, really bad.
No wonder you need all this help to try and take out tanks. You must be awful.
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
The Attorney General
1834
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 21:11:00 -
[5] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:
It is easier to kill them with RE's than a forge. Because they are usually spammed all over the map by crap tankers that only use them because they are cheaper than their normal assault fit. If you can't admit there are many problems with vehicles in their current state then you are just trolling me.
Of course there are problems, however your solutions are absolutely horrible.
In fact, they are nothing more than the moanings of a scrub.
If the RE's trap is all you have, then become friends with a real AV'er and then you won't be complaining at being ineffective.
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
The Attorney General
1835
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 21:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:
Exactly. A tank should still not want to just run around without infantry support to kill all the reds by themselves. All I really am looking for is some way to make infantry still needed on the field. So 6 tanks are not guaranteed to be better than 6 infantry the way they currently are.
So in your opinion, five guys dumping rifle ammo into a tank should be the new av?
You can call me a troll, but you can't be serious.
There is no way this is a legitimate suggestion.
I am an infantry man, my rifle should work on everything.
Ok, so then we can take out all the AV to compensate for every infantryman now packing almost 1000 dps vs vehicles right?
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
The Attorney General
1848
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 23:04:00 -
[7] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:
Then please give a good idea for how to bring tanks more in line so having 3+ tanks on a map doesn't guarantee a win? I personally like having a little bit of a reason to be infantry in a FPS.
The only way having three tanks assures a win is if the other team has no consideration for the fact that every game has tanks in it.
If you don't have real AV in your squad at all times, that is just as much a faux pas as not having a logi. So either always roll with an AV guy, or always roll with a tank.
If you don't practice combined arms, then combined arms will wreck you. That is a choice you make at the start of every match.
If you don't think infantry has a place, then how do you figure that points get hacked, and matches get won?
Who fights it out in the interior of buildings and large sockets?
No there is a place for infantry, just like there is a place for tanks. I think that you just can't accept that something other than infantry owns the open spaces.
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
The Attorney General
1848
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 23:06:00 -
[8] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:
Although if you would rather... I'm perfectly okay with every tank and Anti tank weapon doing 10% damage to infantry.
OK, so you don't want balance, you just want tanks to leave you alone.
Just go play a game without vehicles if they bother you so much.
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
The Attorney General
1857
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 01:01:00 -
[9] - Quote
Text Grant wrote:
You make no valid points, and bring no discussion to the table. Everyone knows tanks are not in the right place, and just because you run tanks makes you want them to be kings of the battlefield does not warrant them being so.
Your argument is what? That every person with a rifle should be an AV troop?
That is your idea of balance? Where every person on the field can deal 800+ DPS to a vehicle?
Indeed I run tanks, but I also play as a heavy on an alt, that specializes in running AV. I have no problem destroying tanks at all.
That you struggle, and consequentially decide that tanks need to be nerfed is not a sign of tanks being OP, but rather that you are bad.
Now, could AV use certain buffs? Of course, as I have made plain when I have previously called for swarms to get 10% more damage, the PLC to get a series of buffs, and for the forge to get its charge time reduced.
I have also advocated for large blasters to have their range cut by at least 30%. Dropping top speed by 5% and acceleration by 10%.
See, those are compelling arguments, and balanced changes, but you see the difference between us is that I do not look at it from a single side. I understand both vehicular and anti-vehicle play.
So you keep being a crybaby, but don't think that you are actually putting forth a reasonable idea, because all you are doing is saying that because you are a scrub and can't take down a tank, that tanks shouldn't be a threat to you.
Stop saying things like "everyone knows"
You are not qualified to speak about what everyone wants. Do not make an appeal to the masses, it is a fallacious method of arguing. Now, if you cannot put forth a reasonable suggestion, why not just admit that you are a scrub and that you need CCP to make the game easy for you again.
Because that is all these posts make plain. You are not competent to handle things like thinking and tactics, so you need the developer to take them out of the equation so you don't feel bad about getting your **** pushed in match after match.
Mr. Hybrid Vayu.
|
|
|
| |
|