DUST Search - Should Vehicles Be Their Best Counter?

Eurydice Itzhak wrote:

Vitharr Foebane wrote:

Charlotte O'Dell wrote:

shut up atiim. everybody and their mother already explained their feelings on the subject and you're just being a drama queen at this point. move on and qq about combat/rail rifles like the rest of us.

By your logic tankers are the number one drama queens even after they get AV castrated they aren't satisfied and have turned on each other (looking at you rail tanks). Heck if i'm not mistaken,(and trust me I aint) most "tankers" hold the belief that militia tanks should pose zero threat to their precious gunnlogis and madrugars.

No tanker feels that way. However a mlt suit is probably 30% as effective as that same fit fully proto'd.

A mlt tank is 90% as effective. 100% if they use non mlt turrets.

Would like to see them float at more of a 70% capacity. You don't hardly see any returns on millions and millions of sp. Feels bad man.

Back before 1.7 I was always excited to squeeze out more hp, more ehp, more damage, more agility. All this i got when I unlocked a new skill.

After 1.7 your turrets can get ever so slightly "better" with 10m sp but everything else is unlocked with 0 sp.
I capped out shield skills and currently capping out armor skills. I see that 900k sp to get 10% more turnspeed on my turret and im like, Nah.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3777	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:18:00 - [1] - Quote Title is self-explanatory. Also: Atiim wrote: Please attempt to remain constructive. You trolls should be sated by now. -HAND Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1083	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:22:00 - [2] - Quote This would be the umpteenth whine thread by you about tanks. Yes, it really is always about tanks. Give it a rest. More whine threads are not going to make CCP fix things faster. There's a statue in Jita for that. Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!
DUST Fiend OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 10229	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:23:00 - [3] - Quote If we had a bigger player count in matches, everything would balance out much better, so long as vehicle cap remained the same Videos / Fiction Closed Beta Vet; Incubus Pilot
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3777	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:27:00 - [4] - Quote Operative 1171 Aajli wrote: This would be the umpteenth whine thread by you about tanks. Yes, it really is always about tanks. Give it a rest. More whine threads are not going to make CCP fix things faster. There's a statue in Jita for that. It's not a whine thread at all. It's just asking a question. Just me wanting to see people's opinion on the matter. And the thread isn't just referring to tanks either. I'm not whining about anything here, so I guess that would bring me right back to where I was before you made your irrelevant comment that seems like a bad attempt at trolling. Weren't you fed already? Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
BuTtHuRtPEepZ Raging Pack of Homosapiens 187	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:34:00 - [5] - Quote should be this order AV > Vehicles > Infantry > AV > Vehicles > Infantry > AV > etc...
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 3450	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:36:00 - [6] - Quote BuTtHuRtPEepZ wrote: should be this order AV > Vehicles > Infantry > AV > Vehicles > Infantry > AV > etc... Exactly. My alts: General John Ripper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Anarchide, Long Evity And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior
TunRa NEW OMENS 401	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:37:00 - [7] - Quote Sometimes I fell Atiim is intentionally trying to start flame wars....hmm... Thanks CCP Foxfour
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 314	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:40:00 - [8] - Quote BuTtHuRtPEepZ wrote: should be this order Vehicles > Infantry > Vehicles > Infantry > etc... Fixed that for you
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3780	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:41:00 - [9] - Quote Text Grant wrote: BuTtHuRtPEepZ wrote: should be this order Vehicles > Infantry > Vehicles > Infantry > etc... Fixed that for you But where does that leave the AV infantry? Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
Text Grant Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 314	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:43:00 - [10] - Quote Atiim wrote: Text Grant wrote: BuTtHuRtPEepZ wrote: should be this order Vehicles > Infantry > Vehicles > Infantry > etc... Fixed that for you But where does that leave the AV infantry? You didn't hear? They are for the bottom of the leaderboards with 0 kills 0 war points and 15 deaths

Maniak Madness Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:43:00 - [11] - Quote AV suffers from tiercide.... Nuff said.
Killar-12 The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2048	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:43:00 - [12] - Quote Kinda, Tanks whould be good at AV but poor at Anti infantry, wheras MAVs LAVs and DSes should be better v Infantry but slightly effective v Vehicles if properly fitted. Light Infantry AV needs to slightly be more effective. Heavy AV is pretty much fine atm. There's my opinions. Butt's system is pretty good at a basic level I just add a bit more A-Teams win Battles B-Teams win Campaigns C-Teams win Wars
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 3451	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:44:00 - [13] - Quote Atiim wrote: Text Grant wrote: BuTtHuRtPEepZ wrote: should be this order Vehicles > Infantry > Vehicles > Infantry > etc... Fixed that for you But where does that leave the AV infantry? Vehicle users don't believe there is a certain thing as AV specialty players. You should have seen the denial back in Open Beta. My alts: General John Ripper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Anarchide, Long Evity And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 3451	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:45:00 - [14] - Quote Maniak Madness wrote: All Dust balancing issues stem from tiercide.... Nuff said. Fixed. My alts: General John Ripper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Anarchide, Long Evity And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3780	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:47:00 - [15] - Quote Text Grant wrote: You didn't hear? They are for the bottom of the leaderboards with 0 kills 0 war points and 15 deaths Lol. Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3780	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:49:00 - [16] - Quote TunRa wrote: Sometimes I fell Atiim is intentionally trying to start flame wars....hmm... I don't intentionally start Flame Wars. They just usually become one whenever a vocal tanker enters the thread. Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
TunRa NEW OMENS 401	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:50:00 - [17] - Quote Atiim wrote: TunRa wrote: Sometimes I fell Atiim is intentionally trying to start flame wars....hmm... I don't intentionally start Flame Wars. They just usually become one whenever a vocal tanker enters the thread. But this is your what, tenth thread on this subject? Really? How many more will you make? Thanks CCP Foxfour
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3780	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:50:00 - [18] - Quote Killar-12 wrote: Kinda, Tanks whould be good at AV but poor at Anti infantry, wheras MAVs LAVs and DSes should be better v Infantry but slightly effective v Vehicles if properly fitted. Light Infantry AV needs to slightly be more effective. Heavy AV is pretty much fine atm. There's my opinions. Butt's system is pretty good at a basic level I just add a bit more What more would you propose adding to Butt's system?; if you don't mind of course. Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
MINA Longstrike 2Shitz 1Giggle 229	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:54:00 - [19] - Quote Yes, I just don't see infantry running around with 80gj railguns. That said it should not be the 'only' effective counter - no one sane wants to go back to 1.6 where vehicles were easy kills and unfun for everyone involved, but I'd like to see non mlt light av be a bit more effective. Heavy av seems to be pretty good right now and rail tanks are almost way too effective (perhaps cap damage mods to 1 active and lower rail turret damage by 250), missiles are really good and there's some nifty emergent gameplay in jihad jeeps as well as remote/proxy use. Overall the biggest problems I see with vehicles right now are MLT tanks being way too effective for cost, cost on tanks in general (fixed by increasing the cost of hulls & large turrets so we don't break everything for other vehicles), railguns more or less being fun ruiners and some forms of av being slightly underpowered (give swarms +2 missiles per volley and plc's an extra shot per reload and people would likely complain less).
BuTtHuRtPEepZ Raging Pack of Homosapiens 188	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:57:00 - [20] - Quote DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Atiim wrote: Text Grant wrote: BuTtHuRtPEepZ wrote: should be this order Vehicles > Infantry > Vehicles > Infantry > etc... Fixed that for you But where does that leave the AV infantry? Vehicle users don't believe there is a certain thing as AV specialty players. You should have seen the denial back in Open Beta. LOL so true

Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3782	Posted - 2014.01.22 03:57:00 - [21] - Quote TunRa wrote: But this is your what, tenth thread on this subject? Really? How many more will you make? How many more threads will people make about Scouts being underpowered? How many more threads will people make about when a piece of content will be released? How many more threads will be about the changes to suit bonuses? Shall I go further? Anyways, when every vehicle pilot on the DUST 514 Forum agrees to never make a thread involving Vehicles or Anti-Vehicle weaponry again, then I'll agree to never make a thread on the subject again. Until then; "Deal With It." Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
Aizen Intiki OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 728	Posted - 2014.01.22 04:17:00 - [22] - Quote Atiim wrote: TunRa wrote: But this is your what, tenth thread on this subject? Really? How many more will you make? How many more threads will people make about Scouts being underpowered? How many more threads will people make about when a piece of content will be released? How many more threads will be about the changes to suit bonuses? Shall I go further? Anyways, when every vehicle pilot on the DUST 514 Forum agrees to never make a thread involving Vehicles or Anti-Vehicle weaponry again, then I'll agree to never make a thread on the subject again. Until then; "Deal With It." Well, the only Scout (I'm talking 1.8) that's underpowered is the Amarr one. Also, that piece of content should've probably came out a long time ago. Lastly, all you're doing is poor ** posting and bitchin to the wind. And just because you said that, I'm going to make a post on how the pilot suit should work. Maybe. Probably. "Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say Alt of the great Godin I like chocolate ^___**^
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 3454	Posted - 2014.01.22 04:29:00 - [23] - Quote Aizen Intiki wrote: Atiim wrote: TunRa wrote: But this is your what, tenth thread on this subject? Really? How many more will you make? How many more threads will people make about Scouts being underpowered? How many more threads will people make about when a piece of content will be released? How many more threads will be about the changes to suit bonuses? Shall I go further? Anyways, when every vehicle pilot on the DUST 514 Forum agrees to never make a thread involving Vehicles or Anti-Vehicle weaponry again, then I'll agree to never make a thread on the subject again. Until then; "Deal With It." Well, the only Scout (I'm talking 1.8) that's underpowered is the Amarr one. Also, that piece of content should've probably came out a long time ago. Lastly, all you're doing is poor **** posting and bitchin to the wind. And just because you said that, I'm going to make a post on how the pilot suit should work. Maybe. Probably. The Pilot suit should get a bonus for equipping AV gear My alts: General John Ripper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Anarchide, Long Evity And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution Covert Intervention 1720	Posted - 2014.01.22 04:31:00 - [24] - Quote shut up atiim. everybody and their mother already explained their feelings on the subject and you're just being a drama queen at this point. move on and qq about combat/rail rifles like the rest of us. Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution Covert Intervention 1720	Posted - 2014.01.22 04:32:00 - [25] - Quote Atiim wrote: TunRa wrote: But this is your what, tenth thread on this subject? Really? How many more will you make? How many more threads will people make about Scouts being underpowered? How many more threads will people make about when a piece of content will be released? How many more threads will be about the changes to suit bonuses? Shall I go further? Anyways, when every vehicle pilot on the DUST 514 Forum agrees to never make a thread involving Vehicles or Anti-Vehicle weaponry again, then I'll agree to never make a thread on the subject again. Until then; "Deal With It." ok. i agree to never post about it again as long as you dont. i dont mind tanks that much right now. it's why Im #1 in every PC battle i play. Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Vitharr Foebane Living Like Larry Schwag 506	Posted - 2014.01.22 04:38:00 - [26] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: shut up atiim. everybody and their mother already explained their feelings on the subject and you're just being a drama queen at this point. move on and qq about combat/rail rifles like the rest of us. By your logic tankers are the number one drama queens even after they get AV castrated they aren't satisfied and have turned on each other (looking at you rail tanks). Heck if i'm not mistaken,(and trust me I aint) most "tankers" hold the belief that militia tanks should pose zero threat to their precious gunnlogis and madrugars. Thanks CCP for making the HMG Heavy viable again :3 That's no excuse to slack off on releasing a heavy laser though =.=
Eurydice Itzhak Providence Guard Templis CALSF 367	Posted - 2014.01.22 04:56:00 - [27] - Quote Vitharr Foebane wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: shut up atiim. everybody and their mother already explained their feelings on the subject and you're just being a drama queen at this point. move on and qq about combat/rail rifles like the rest of us. By your logic tankers are the number one drama queens even after they get AV castrated they aren't satisfied and have turned on each other (looking at you rail tanks). Heck if i'm not mistaken,(and trust me I aint) most "tankers" hold the belief that militia tanks should pose zero threat to their precious gunnlogis and madrugars. No tanker feels that way. However a mlt suit is probably 30% as effective as that same fit fully proto'd. A mlt tank is 90% as effective. 100% if they use non mlt turrets. Would like to see them float at more of a 70% capacity. You don't hardly see any returns on millions and millions of sp. Feels bad man. Back before 1.7 I was always excited to squeeze out more hp, more ehp, more damage, more agility. All this i got when I unlocked a new skill. After 1.7 your turrets can get ever so slightly "better" with 10m sp but everything else is unlocked with 0 sp. I capped out shield skills and currently capping out armor skills. I see that 900k sp to get 10% more turnspeed on my turret and im like, Nah.
Vitharr Foebane Living Like Larry Schwag 506	Posted - 2014.01.22 05:01:00 - [28] - Quote Eurydice Itzhak wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: shut up atiim. everybody and their mother already explained their feelings on the subject and you're just being a drama queen at this point. move on and qq about combat/rail rifles like the rest of us. By your logic tankers are the number one drama queens even after they get AV castrated they aren't satisfied and have turned on each other (looking at you rail tanks). Heck if i'm not mistaken,(and trust me I aint) most "tankers" hold the belief that militia tanks should pose zero threat to their precious gunnlogis and madrugars. No tanker feels that way. However a mlt suit is probably 30% as effective as that same fit fully proto'd. A mlt tank is 90% as effective. 100% if they use non mlt turrets. Would like to see them float at more of a 70% capacity. You don't hardly see any returns on millions and millions of sp. Feels bad man. Back before 1.7 I was always excited to squeeze out more hp, more ehp, more damage, more agility. All this i got when I unlocked a new skill. After 1.7 your turrets can get ever so slightly "better" with 10m sp but everything else is unlocked with 0 sp. I capped out shield skills and currently capping out armor skills. I see that 900k sp to get 10% more turnspeed on my turret and im like, Nah. No offence but people like spkr have cost tankers any semblance of respect I have for people who call themselves tanker. They say one bad apple spoils the bushel and I hold this to be very true, and in this bushel there are a lot of bad apples... Thanks CCP for making the HMG Heavy viable again :3 That's no excuse to slack off on releasing a heavy laser though =.=
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution Covert Intervention 1721	Posted - 2014.01.22 05:04:00 - [29] - Quote here is how powerful militia tanks should be: A standard tank hull should be as capable of fitting all complex modules and proto weapons as a std dropsuit is for similar things; at the same time, militia tanks should conform to the same std. Infantry and tanks should be on the same level. The biggest problem is that STD tanks are placeholders for prototype tanks. until we have proto tanks, how are we supposed to balance everything else vehicle-related!? WE CAN'T. Prototype tanks need to be introduced. they need to be the only tank hulls that can fit all complex modules and a prototype turret. Every hull below it should have less and less ability to do so until at the militia level, fitting 2 complex modules makes fitting anything more than basic impossible. Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
knight of 6 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 1197	Posted - 2014.01.22 05:09:00 - [30] - Quote yes vehicles should be their own best counter. but that doesn't mean that AV should be a bad option. and it certainly doesn't mean that a MLT tank should be a better option than proto AV "God favors the side with the best artillery" ~ Napoleon Ko6, scout. CLOSED BETA VET

Ludvig Enraga KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 835	Posted - 2014.01.22 05:25:00 - [31] - Quote It would be fine if they are but only if AV can also deal effectively with vehicles. I see ppl who otherwise are terrible at this game brag about their tank 'skills' a lot. Where is the window of opportunity CCP talked about? A tank is either running hardeners and is invincible or flips on speed modes so that no AV can catch up with it when it's running away except for assault FG. I hate hypocrisy - if half AV weapons don't do shyte for AV, just removed them from the game, admit that you could not balance things, don't pretend that things are 'fine' or 'as intended'. Oh, sht! I just learned you can make a signature! Thanks, CCP! Forums are getting better!
True Adamance Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 6057	Posted - 2014.01.22 05:45:00 - [32] - Quote I personally believe so. However I feel to compensate for this the HAV should loose its almost ludicrous capacity for anti infantry killing on its main turret. Since we HAV pilots are gifted with the massive, armoured, mobile hulls capable of fitting the largest guns and most deadly weaponry I feel the HAV should essentially become the end game, demolisher of vehicle vs vehicle combat. Being high skill sink, powerful anti armour, and above all weighty weapons with a moderate to high cost. That means we reserve the role of top vehicle and anti vehicle combatants as our primary role. However that is not to say I don't want AV to do its thing. I was Tanks to be fair game. A risky proposal to secure ground vehicle dominance but susceptible to high Alpha weapons like forges and Remotes as well as Plasma Cannon. IMO the MAV should be brought in as the main Anti infantry vehicle, able to fit small/medium turrets, and designed to roll as mobile bunkers or spawn points, while LAV become the fast movement rapid deployment units. Each vehicle needs a role. The biggest need to eat the smallest. HAV > MAV > LAV (Single skilled or multiple) Infantry AV > HAV > MAV > Infantry AV > etc Every unit with a role. If people want to take down infantry en masse and pad their KDR then they pick the lighter, more mobile, but of course more susceptible to AV in Medium Attack Vehicle. For this they sacrifice anti vehicle capacity, which is where the Heavy Attack Vehicles excel. Hmmm not sure if I conveyed this well. But I want tanks to be what tanks are. Mobile fire platforms, resilient, and carrying heavy bunker busting fire power, but not the point where we sit there with blasters farming infantry kills. Each infantry kill in a tank should require decent aim and risk. MAV would essentially be the Anti Infantry HAV but with lesser module slots, armour/shield, and more focus on say scanning, spawning, resists. LAV retain their role as early game rapid deployment and scout units, focused on speed, but with weaker armour and fire power options. AV as small, mobile, and powerful ranged units, susceptible to anti infantry fire, but able to access most parts of the map and dish out reasonable damage against vehicle units. To every vehicle/ AVer type a role, to every role a counter. "My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity."
Borne Velvalor Endless Hatred 2232	Posted - 2014.01.22 07:36:00 - [33] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Atiim wrote: TunRa wrote: But this is your what, tenth thread on this subject? Really? How many more will you make? How many more threads will people make about Scouts being underpowered? How many more threads will people make about when a piece of content will be released? How many more threads will be about the changes to suit bonuses? Shall I go further? Anyways, when every vehicle pilot on the DUST 514 Forum agrees to never make a thread involving Vehicles or Anti-Vehicle weaponry again, then I'll agree to never make a thread on the subject again. Until then; "Deal With It." ok. i agree to never post about it again as long as you dont. i dont mind tanks that much right now. it's why Im #1 in every PC battle i play. There's a certain screenshot floating around of you getting 2nd. Many suits I've worn, many burdens I've borne, for the oaths I've sworn. Panda.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3787	Posted - 2014.01.22 12:09:00 - [34] - Quote Aizen Intiki wrote: Well, the only Scout (I'm talking 1.8) that's underpowered is the Amarr one. Also, that piece of content should've probably came out a long time ago. Lastly, all you're doing is poor **** posting and bitchin to the wind. And just because you said that, I'm going to make a post on how the pilot suit should work. Maybe. Probably. Please, show me where I am complaining about tanks in this thread, or anything for that matter. Anyone else have something utterly irrelevant that in no way possible contributes to the thread? Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3787	Posted - 2014.01.22 12:17:00 - [35] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: shut up atiim. everybody and their mother already explained their feelings on the subject and you're just being a drama queen at this point. move on and qq about combat/rail rifles like the rest of us. Really? While AV vs. V has been discussed to death, I've seen about 1-2 comments total about whether or not vehicles should be their best counter. Please, link to a discussion where people talk about whether or not vehicles should be their best counter. For I see none Also. could you possibly be any more of a hypocrite? Or do I need to link your post history from Uprising 1.6 and back? You couldn't possibly QQ about anything involving a rifle, nor infantry; because your not good enough to do anything but sit in your tank (Your own words exactly). If your going to spew mindless banter everywhere, could you at least be bothered to put weight behind it? Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1086	Posted - 2014.01.22 12:27:00 - [36] - Quote Atiim wrote: Operative 1171 Aajli wrote: This would be the umpteenth whine thread by you about tanks. Yes, it really is always about tanks. Give it a rest. More whine threads are not going to make CCP fix things faster. There's a statue in Jita for that. It's not a whine thread at all. It's just asking a question. Just me wanting to see people's opinion on the matter. And the thread isn't just referring to tanks either. I'm not whining about anything here, so I guess that would bring me right back to where I was before you made your irrelevant comment that seems like a bad attempt at trolling. Weren't you fed already? It's a suggestion. Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]