|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Happy Jack SD
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
54
   |
Posted - 2014.01.21 17:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
With all of the threads on tanks and railgun turrets of late, I'd like to summarize the nerf-the-railgun brigade's argument:
The [Large Railgun] is OP because it is too effective against [Vehicles]. The only way to effectively counter a [Large Railgun] is to bring out your own [Large Railgun], and that is not good game design as it denies different types of [Vehicles] from being used once a [Large Railgun] hits the field. The [Large Railgun] denies interesting gameplay for other [Vehicle] users with it's massive damage, range, hit and run ability, and it can often kill a [Vehicle] before they even know it's there.
NERF THE [Large Railgun]!!
Replace:
[Large Railgun] = Tanks
[Vehicles] = Infantry
OMG, it's the same Infantry has been trying to make against Tanks... but that seems to be working as intended, right?
"Have faith lest your unbelief consume you."
-The Bleeding Chalice
|
Happy Jack SD
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
55
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 17:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
Supernus Gigas wrote:"The [Tanks] is OP because it is too effective against [Infantry]. The only way to effectively counter a [Tanks] is to bring out your own [Tanks], and that is not good game design as it denies different types of [infantry] from being used once a [Tanks] hits the field. The [Tanks] denies interesting gameplay for other [Infantry] users with it's massive damage, range, hit and run ability, and it can often kill a [Infantry] before they even know it's there."
No, what you get is a poor argument with terrible grammar. Rail HAVs are a problem to HAVs, Dropships, and infantry. Re-balancing them would be a boon to everyone except those that red line snipe with them.
Oh, I'm sorry that the cut and paste didn't fit perfectly grammatically. It's good enough to get the point across 
Railguns [AV] are not a bane to infantry, as it takes a very skilled shot or a very still infantry to land a direct hit. Large Railguns also do not have the ammo to go out and slaughter infantry. With weaker Railguns we will see Tanks and Dropships become more durable while Infantry will continue to get pantzed. As it is the Blaster Turrets [Anti-Infantry] that are killing infantry in the 20's.
"Have faith lest your unbelief consume you."
-The Bleeding Chalice
|
Happy Jack SD
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
55
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 17:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote:No, that's what Proto spammers have been using against tanks.
Now that the spammers find that the Proto suits are No longer profitable...as they were never intended for profit... they complain about not being able to make money while running proto.
ADV and MLT users have little to no problems with tanks, because they can take a few losses and still make a good profit. In fact MLT users can just detonate tanks left and right suicide or otherwise, then get on with their games, while PRO's obsess about tanks because of their precious income.
So, you're not arguing balance but ISK profitability?
If so, the Large Railgun makes it unprofitable to use proto Vehicles, as it is an anti vehicle weapon.
Good enough?
"Have faith lest your unbelief consume you."
-The Bleeding Chalice
|
Happy Jack SD
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
56
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 18:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
Operative 1171 Aajli wrote:Nope, tanks and infantry are, with very few exceptions, not interchangable.
I personally have not made the argument that the only thing to counter a tank is another tank so I can certainly disagree with the power of a mil/standard rail turret with zero to no skill invested otherwise.
My argument wasn't that Tanks = Infantry, but that their QQ about eachother is the same.
To reverse your statement to show what my point is: the militia Blaster turret can kill Infantry with ease, with the same 0 SP investment.
"Have faith lest your unbelief consume you."
-The Bleeding Chalice
|
Happy Jack SD
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
56
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 18:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote:There will probably not be proto vehicles. Devs have stated they are side-grading vehicles instead giving different traits or stats in exchange for health or some such.
Proto Mods and Turrets are basically what I was getting at as that increases the cost of a tank by over 300k. As such, losing a couple of 77k MLT Tanks has probably never caused someone to sweat.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote:Well it seems that some of the members of those very Proto corps are the most vocal regarding tanks. I believe they've noticed their wallets start to decline and tried to find the source of the issue.
They might also play the game more, for longer, and have a better idea of how the changes have affected the way the game is being played. Not defending them, just pointing it out.
"Have faith lest your unbelief consume you."
-The Bleeding Chalice
|
|
|
| |
|