|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
37
   |
Posted - 2014.01.21 22:24:00 -
[1] - Quote
Today I watched my team, with swarm launchers, try to take down a tank while the tanker laughed in our faces and picked off our anti-armor one by one. We respawned time and again only to let off a single complement of rockets before being blown away again by the same tank.
Lock-on delay gives the tank enough time to pick off anti-armor, no problem.
I recommend giving tanks +5 for killing mercs due to the low risk of getting the kill.
Also, if I dive bomb a tank with a dropship, then it should destroy the tank.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
40
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 13:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
We need to vote this up.
Tankers face zero risk when killing infantry.
They don't deserve +50 for killing mercs.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
41
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 13:58:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mordecai Sanguine wrote:A kill is a Kill.
Outmatched firepower, and outmatched defensive value. There is no balance in a tank vs merc kill.
That's like saying, pay me $50 to swat this fly vs pay me $50 to box this guy. There is a different level of intensity involved.
I don't understand why you said this:
Mordecai Sanguine wrote:You account should be buried nothing else.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
45
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 16:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mordecai Sanguine wrote:
And a Tank cost millions of ISK and millions of SP to be effective.
But right now the militia tank cost too less.
And even std cost too less that's what is said to higher their price.
So, it seems that your position is that tankers should be rewarded for what they own, not skill on the battlefield.
One tank round will kill a merc, whereas thousands of bullets cannot stop a tank.
I stand by my request that tankers don't need much skill to kill infantry and therefore the payout should be much less than +50.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
46
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 23:46:00 -
[5] - Quote
Here are a handful of considerations:
Offensive differences: A tank can level a field of soldiers in a few seconds. How many infantry builds do you see that can do that? Infantry can fire bullets at a tank all day long to no avail.
Defensive differences: A tank can withstand thousands of HP damage and the shield regenerates faster than any number of bullets can inflict damage. Infantry perish after one or two tank rounds, not to mention that they can be run over.
Mobility differences: A tank can hunt down infantry due to velocity advantage. Infantry can fit into tight spaces. Tank can aim and move at constant velocity. Infantry slows down while aiming and moving.
Range differences: A tank's range is virtually unlimited. Swarm Launchers and Forge Guns have limited ranges.
Time to attack differences: A tank points and shoots. AV takes time to 1.) lock-on rockets 2.) set demo and detonate 3.) throw AV grenades timed well enough to detonate on target.
Exposure: In order to attack a tank, at some point infantry is somewhat exposed. Tanks are always exposed unless tucked away out of action.
It's not a one-to-one scaling. Tanks are gods compared to infantry and do not deserve +50 kills. Infantry must think quickly and react to the opponent foot-soldier's skill level. Tanks just point and shoot.
I'd say that tanks truly deserve a +5 for an infantry kill, +50 for a HAV kill, +5 for a LAV kill and +10 for a dropship kill.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
46
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 23:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
BobThe 844-1 CakeMan wrote:Lol then a sniper should get 5 per kill since it requires 0 skill.
Ur logic is flawed.
and trust me i have more skill than u. inside or outside of my tank.
What is the risk to a sniper?
What is the risk to a tank?
What is the risk to a ground soldier?
Each is situational, but the evidence is in what generally happens on the field.
Draw from you extensive field experience and apply what you know of how much skill is required in each situation in order to determine the amount of reward due for each. I'd like to hear your payout scale for a kill.
I think tanks have it easy since they don't have to worry about mercs who carry light weapons and side arms, which is the majority of soldiers on the field.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
46
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 23:58:00 -
[7] - Quote
Kigurosaka Laaksonen wrote:50 for a kill is 50 for a kill.
Not all kills are equal.
For instance, I wait until you are about to finish off a heavy, then I jump in and get the +50 kill and you get +25 kill assist. What if you just inflicted 1600 HP damage and I inflicted 88 damage? Whose effort was greater?
Does the payout reflect the effort or skill that went into the kill and kill assist? No.
Use your brain, kid.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
46
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 00:00:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ulysses Knapse wrote:This won't solve any balance problems, if that's what you're hoping for.
Not hoping to solve balance problems, just payout problems. The WP system is all jacked up, specifically when it comes to tank kills.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
48
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 00:51:00 -
[9] - Quote
Thermoris Togeras wrote:and if u think small arms fire should take out a tank then u really need to stop playing dust
I never said this.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
48
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 00:54:00 -
[10] - Quote
Henchmen21 wrote:All signs are pointing to you doing it wrong.
I am an observer and try various tactics. On a typical team where people are generally disorganized and don't work well together, tanks can tear through soldiers like tissue paper.
That's beside the point.
THE POINT IS
1 TANK ROUND is a merc KILL with NO RISK
Grundstein Automation
|
|
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
48
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 00:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
Eko Sol wrote:a reduced WP value for merc kills is stupid.
I agree that there are other ways to balance out gameplay, but this thread is concerning payout, not gameplay.
If you have experience with both foot-soldiering and tanking then consider the work that goes into soldier vs soldier kills. Now imagine the ease of getting a tank vs soldier kill. Feel the difference?
This thread is about payout. The effort exerted for a tank kill is minimal. It's like shooting equipment +5
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
51
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 01:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
Henchmen21 wrote:If one round is killing you ...
Whether it's because a merc doesn't have many skill buffs or because the merc is wearing light armor, or because the tank attack damage is buffed, it's possible for a tank to kill in 1 or very few rounds. Agreed?
Does it take the same skill to get a kill with a tank that it takes to get a kill as a foot soldier? No.
You are advocating that unequal work deserves equal pay. That is precisely why the entire WP system is broken beyond measure.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
51
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 02:08:00 -
[13] - Quote
Thermoris Togeras wrote:its all about ur skill level and ur skill at the game. the game is all about tactics come up with a tactic that takes out tanks its not hard unless u don't try or u just suck
This is an idea concerning payout. There's no need to insult my personal skill level. I am a master tactician and a skilled game player in general. I study game theory and economics. I have played both as a tanker and as soldier on the ground. I have tried many tactics and I'm not saying that there aren't ways to take down tanks.
I am compartmentalizing. That is when you separate concerns into their own scope and then discuss a particular point in isolation from other components, although they might be related.
Gameplay - Tanks are a problem. Read the forum entries.
Payout - Tank kills are lower risk than foot soldier kills. Why do they deserve +50? Even your mom could get kills in a tank easier than as a grunt.
Grundstein Automation
|
Clone D
Grundstein Automation
63
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 10:20:00 -
[14] - Quote
Cooper Eudaemon wrote:I think some variation in WP for kills in general is a good idea.
Yes, another variation would be:
WP = 10 * [ ( Opponent's Defensive Value / Your Defensive Value ) + ( Opponent's Offensive Value / Your Offensive Value ) ]
Example:
Opponent armor + shield = 1500 HP
My armor + shield = 184 HP
Opponent primary weapon = 425 HP per second
My primary weapon = 400 HP per second
If I get the kill, then WP = 10 * [ ( 1500 / 184 ) + ( 425 / 400 ) ] = 92
If opponent gets the kill, then WP = 10 * [ (184 / 1500 ) + ( 400 / 425 ) ] = 10
In other words, if it is hard to get a kill, then you get more WP, or if it is easy to get a kill, then you get less WP.
CHANGE KILL ASSIST. All players should get WP in a ratio equivalent to the amount of damage done to the target.
That would change the formula to:
WP = Contribution * 10 * [ ( Opponent's Defensive Value / Your Defensive Value ) + ( Opponent's Offensive Value / Your Offensive Value ) ]
Where Contribution = Amount of Damage You Inflicted / Total HP of Enenmy
Translation: if I did 50% of the damage to kill an opponent, then I get 50% the WP that I would get if I were to do 100% of the damage.
Grundstein Automation
|
|
|
| |
|