DUST Search - If tankers insist that it should take 2+ ppl to kill them....

All Channels

General Discussions

If tankers insist that it should take 2+ ppl to kill them....

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Monkey MAC Lost Millennium 1657	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:07:00 - [91] - Quote Ok so we can see arguments from both sides quite well here, sonhere I go Tankers should be able to use their tank by thdm selves because > Tankerx invested their time and money < doesn't mean they should own everything on the field Tankers should be capable of sponging as significant amount of damage, but still be frightened of Infantry AV. So long as tanks are a one man operation, it should take no more than one man o equal skill to active suppressa tank with equal tier AV. (Suppress does not necessarily mean destroy). Tanks should be blowing up about 30% as often as infantry and priced accordingly. Tanks 514 I told you, I bloody well told you. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
hgghyujh Expert Intervention Caldari State 247	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:14:00 - [92] - Quote yea I've made this argument before, good luck with it, I've basicly just been satisfied by the fact that tanking is more about skill then proto god mode and so it really only takes one guy in a scrub tank to take out/distract that enemy tanker.
hgghyujh Expert Intervention Caldari State 247	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:17:00 - [93] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Ok so we can see arguments from both sides quite well here, sonhere I go Tankers should be able to use their tank by thdm selves because > Tankerx invested their time and money < doesn't mean they should own everything on the field Tankers should be capable of sponging as significant amount of damage, but still be frightened of Infantry AV. So long as tanks are a one man operation, it should take no more than one man o equal skill to active suppressa tank with equal tier AV. (Suppress does not necessarily mean destroy). Tanks should be blowing up about 30% as often as infantry and priced accordingly. the only reason this isn't happening right now is that their is no incentive to go tank hunting, going bearly break even with ** for WP, is a **** reward for playing AV. If ccp would return WP for damage you would see a lot more dedicated AV on the feild making those tanks irrelivent for infantry.
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 520	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:33:00 - [94] - Quote hgghyujh wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Ok so we can see arguments from both sides quite well here, sonhere I go Tankers should be able to use their tank by thdm selves because > Tankerx invested their time and money < doesn't mean they should own everything on the field Tankers should be capable of sponging as significant amount of damage, but still be frightened of Infantry AV. So long as tanks are a one man operation, it should take no more than one man o equal skill to active suppressa tank with equal tier AV. (Suppress does not necessarily mean destroy). Tanks should be blowing up about 30% as often as infantry and priced accordingly. the only reason this isn't happening right now is that their is no incentive to go tank hunting, going bearly break even with ** for WP, is a **** reward for playing AV. If ccp would return WP for damage you would see a lot more dedicated AV on the feild making those tanks irrelivent for infantry. This is questionable, because even if you get wp for damaging the tank won't be off the the field for long. And for this few seconds I should risk getting slaughered by infantry? The WP reward must be really great that the risk pays out in any way. My guess even with wp rewards we will see the same form of av (forges, RE's and jihad)...
Cooper Eudaemon DUST University Ivy League 149	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:37:00 - [95] - Quote What if you had to run a Pilot dropsuit to drive/fly a vehicle? Do you guys think that would balance things? You'd have to skill into the suit--to use advanced or prototype weapons or modules, you'd have to have an advanced or prototype suit. And it'd be a light suit, so you'd be paper thin outside of your vehicle. There could even be modules and equipment specific to the pilot suit, to provide a further ISK/SP sink. I need a break from Dust! I'll just go hop on the forums... I need a break from the forums! I'll just go hop on Dust...
Teilka Darkmist 76	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:41:00 - [96] - Quote OverIord Ulath wrote: Then shouldn't they require the same number of people to run their tanks? I mean... If you are taking 3 people's attention away from focusing on winning the match just to deal with you, shouldn't you require the same number of people to distract them? It should take more than one infantry to take out a tank, unless they're a heavy or have RE of course. ANd I agree that it should take more than one person to use a tank effectively. I even said so in a post a couple of days ago (which I can't find anymore as the forums don't have even such a basic function as a list of threads you've posted to). Cooper Eudaemon wrote: What if you had to run a Pilot dropsuit to drive/fly a vehicle? Do you guys think that would balance things? You'd have to skill into the suit--to use advanced or prototype weapons or modules, you'd have to have an advanced or prototype suit. And it'd be a light suit, so you'd be paper thin outside of your vehicle. There could even be modules and equipment specific to the pilot suit, to provide a further ISK/SP sink. Pilot suits are something that's going to happen eventually so I think this is something they're thinking of actually doing. And they will be light suits. Of course if they made it a requirement now, they'd have to rush out the pilot suits and the modules so that the vehicle drivers/pilots don't get (rightly) mad because they can't use their vehicles and the skills they've specced into. I think this will be a longer term goal rather than something we'll see soon. When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2298	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:41:00 - [97] - Quote Cooper Eudaemon wrote: What if you had to run a Pilot dropsuit to drive/fly a vehicle? Do you guys think that would balance things? You'd have to skill into the suit--to use advanced or prototype weapons or modules, you'd have to have an advanced or prototype suit. And it'd be a light suit, so you'd be paper thin outside of your vehicle. There could even be modules and equipment specific to the pilot suit, to provide a further ISK/SP sink. The pilot suit is a light suit and tbh im expecting it not to have a weapon and maybe have mods that improve the overall vehicle in diff ways like dmg/hp/cooldowns/speed etc But i dont think having a basic/adv/proto to use proto would be fair, it just means use a basic suit you can put as much on it maybe to enhance the vehicle But i do agree with that you have to use a pilot suit to pilot a vehicle Intelligence is OP
Monkey MAC Lost Millennium 1657	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:43:00 - [98] - Quote hgghyujh wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Ok so we can see arguments from both sides quite well here, sonhere I go Tankers should be able to use their tank by thdm selves because > Tankerx invested their time and money < doesn't mean they should own everything on the field Tankers should be capable of sponging as significant amount of damage, but still be frightened of Infantry AV. So long as tanks are a one man operation, it should take no more than one man o equal skill to active suppressa tank with equal tier AV. (Suppress does not necessarily mean destroy). Tanks should be blowing up about 30% as often as infantry and priced accordingly. the only reason this isn't happening right now is that their is no incentive to go tank hunting, going bearly break even with ** for WP, is a **** reward for playing AV. If ccp would return WP for damage you would see a lot more dedicated AV on the feild making those tanks irrelivent for infantry. Yes adding back WP for damage would be a big step, but it wouldn't be the be all and end all. Tankers aren't scared of AV anymore, when Im in a tank Im not scared, tne only time AV has got me is when Ive tried to fit a HAV through a LAV sized hole. Ive seen tanks stop slaughtering Infantry to go and kill the swarm launcher, they charge directly into AV fire because they know they can. Tanks 514 I told you, I bloody well told you. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
Monkey MAC Lost Millennium 1657	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:47:00 - [99] - Quote Cooper Eudaemon wrote: What if you had to run a Pilot dropsuit to drive/fly a vehicle? Do you guys think that would balance things? You'd have to skill into the suit--to use advanced or prototype weapons or modules, you'd have to have an advanced or prototype suit. And it'd be a light suit, so you'd be paper thin outside of your vehicle. There could even be modules and equipment specific to the pilot suit, to provide a further ISK/SP sink. Provided their is a mlt variant, I see no prolem with HAV's or HAAV's , MAV's or MAAV'S requiring a pilot suit to run. Light vehicle shouldn't need them otherwise you are unfairly stopping the use of personal transport. Tanks 514 I told you, I bloody well told you. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
Teilka Darkmist 76	Posted - 2014.01.26 12:55:00 - [100] - Quote Korvin Lomont wrote: Henchmen21 wrote: Yet it only takes 1 person to fly/fire a titan. The inability to control two aspects of something 1000x smaller makes no sense. All that has to happen is either slow tanks down, or make prox mines stop giving warnings. I alone can do enough damage to make a tank run away. If running away wasn't an easy out I'd be able to finish it off. Also I'd reduce blaster range so they had to fear AV nades. To my my knowlegde EVE ships have large crews of mortal humans on board, but capsuleers simply don't care for them... I've seen it both ways about crews on capsuleer controlled ships. It seems some have crews and some don't. It, unfortunatly, doesn't seem to have any effect on how the ship actually flies. Personally I think it would be great if you could chose to have a human crew on your ship which includes a slight recurring cost (We're talking tens or hundreds of isk depending on the size) whilst you're actually undocked but which improves your stats a small amount. This would take into account how automated systems can only react to problems as they happen or after they happen. With a human you have an ability to predict where problems are going to happen based on information an automated system can't detect and interpret as it would be highly situational. How this feeds into tanks is, I think a tank should be useable as a one-man, automated system, but it should be most effective when it has a crew onboard, communicating with each other. Dropships should be better when they have a pilot and a co-pilot/gunner than they are with just a pilot. It should apply even more in Dust than in EVE as you have less time to react to events as they happen. In space you usually have kilometres between you and your opponent. On the ground you have metres. When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.

R F Gyro Clones 4u 1092	Posted - 2014.01.26 13:31:00 - [101] - Quote All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason. Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Teilka Darkmist 77	Posted - 2014.01.26 14:37:00 - [102] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason. Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side. Eve also doesn't have such small grids (relative to the size of the individual) or the need for each side to be balanced out before a fight starts. It also doesn't have people complaining about how someone in a battleship can alpha their frigate or the ability to return to the battle within a couple of second, you have to clone (assuming you're podded) get in a new ship, undock then fly to the engagement zone. And that's the shortest version of it. When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
ADAM-OF-EVE Dead Man's Game 840	Posted - 2014.01.26 14:40:00 - [103] - Quote i made a huge post a while back suggesting this and how it could be implemented but it was trolled to death by the same 2 tankers who funnily enough on getting exactly what they wanted from tanks specced out of them https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=99075&find
Harpyja Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 1141	Posted - 2014.01.26 14:50:00 - [104] - Quote Rusty Shallows wrote: Harpyja wrote: I wish my standard suit can take on a sentinel solo I hate how it takes teamwork or tactics to bring down those fatties Seriously, this is how stupid you all sound. Use one of the big Four-Rifles, have the proficiency at 3, stack complex damage mods, and if possible rake the head (it's a large target and we are stupidly slow). Collect profit. Or with one buddy focus fire and melt the Fatty with center of mass shots. Do it with three or more to insta-gib him. Just an FYI 1.8 isn't going to change that. Just give people more options for a style of play. Killing Heavies is just as easy as killing unhardened vehicles with any Large Rail. Easier in most cases since. Now apply this to AV. Stack some complex damage mods, prof 3 on forge guns with an IAFG, and shoot the rear of the tank. Profit. Or you can get a friend, where both of you are using breach instead, and instapop that unhardened tank before it can do anything. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Harpyja Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 1141	Posted - 2014.01.26 14:57:00 - [105] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason. Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side. Dust has an artificial cap on team side. EVE has a real cap on fleet size. You only get as many people that show up. If 10 show up, you're limited to 10. If 500 show up, you're limited to 500. I don't see EVE pilots QQing when their fleet is destroyed 3:1. I don't see them QQing when the enemy fleet drops supercapitals and destroys all of their capitals because they didn't bring any supercapitals themselves. I find Dust and EVE similar. If you don't have sufficient AV but the enemy brought in tanks, then you should get screwed. This whole "balance on a 1v1 basis" is crap. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Teilka Darkmist 78	Posted - 2014.01.26 15:09:00 - [106] - Quote Harpyja wrote: R F Gyro wrote: All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason. Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side. Dust has an artificial cap on team side. EVE has a real cap on fleet size. You only get as many people that show up. If 10 show up, you're limited to 10. If 500 show up, you're limited to 500. I don't see EVE pilots QQing when their fleet is destroyed 3:1. I don't see them QQing when the enemy fleet drops supercapitals and destroys all of their capitals because they didn't bring any supercapitals themselves. I find Dust and EVE similar. If you don't have sufficient AV but the enemy brought in tanks, then you should get screwed. This whole "balance on a 1v1 basis" is crap. There is a cap you missed in EVE. The 'Too many people in system' cap. You only have to look back a week, or possibly two, to see that in effect. Of course that's one the of few times that I've seen that those involved are petitioning CCP for their stuff back as the destruction was caused by them not rezzing the grid in time to react to incoming fire. I have limited sympathy for them though. Everyone playing knows what happens when you keep piling into an already overloaded system. When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
Soldiersaint Deepspace Digital 693	Posted - 2014.01.26 15:45:00 - [107] - Quote OverIord Ulath wrote: Aizen Intiki wrote: We plug ourselves into the HAV, so we can control many of the functions at the same time. Degraging ourselves to mortal ways of life is silly. no. Pointless blanket excuse that means nothing. Actual, logical, gameplay balance response requested. Screw your flawed logic. lore is far more important. im sick and tired of games sucking because of this balance trash. im no tank driver but i know for a fact that in the future it is more than possible for a tanker to jack in to his tank and control all functions.
Monkey MAC Lost Millennium 1657	Posted - 2014.01.26 15:45:00 - [108] - Quote Harpyja wrote: R F Gyro wrote: All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason. Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side. Dust has an artificial cap on team side. EVE has a real cap on fleet size. You only get as many people that show up. If 10 show up, you're limited to 10. If 500 show up, you're limited to 500. I don't see EVE pilots QQing when their fleet is destroyed 3:1. I don't see them QQing when the enemy fleet drops supercapitals and destroys all of their capitals because they didn't bring any supercapitals themselves. I find Dust and EVE similar. If you don't have sufficient AV but the enemy brought in tanks, then you should get screwed. This whole "balance on a 1v1 basis" is crap. The reason EvE pilots don't QQ is because if you didn't bring the 200 frigates needed to take down a single captial, you make sure you do next time. But in dust if you didn't bring the 18 AV to a 16v16 match you need to bring down the 6 tanks you brought, that's not your fault. Until the game has a "real cap" on force strength anything where 1 unit has a higher force strength than another produces linear escalation battles. Which are no fun. In EvE if you don't need to a super captial to beet a super capital, because if you really want that win you can bring enough frigates to just swamp the enemy. Tanks 514 I told you, I bloody well told you. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 3956	Posted - 2014.01.26 15:52:00 - [109] - Quote Soldiersaint wrote: OverIord Ulath wrote: Aizen Intiki wrote: We plug ourselves into the HAV, so we can control many of the functions at the same time. Degraging ourselves to mortal ways of life is silly. no. Pointless blanket excuse that means nothing. Actual, logical, gameplay balance response requested. Screw your flawed logic. lore is far more important. im sick and tired of games sucking because of this balance trash. im no tank driver but i know for a fact that in the future it is more than possible for a tanker to jack in to his tank and control all functions. If lore is more important than balance, than shouldn't my Swarm Launcher have a max lock range of 600m? It is a Caldari weapon. Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons To create a vehicle free environment. There can only be one!
Harpyja Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 1142	Posted - 2014.01.26 15:57:00 - [110] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Harpyja wrote: R F Gyro wrote: All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason. Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side. Dust has an artificial cap on team side. EVE has a real cap on fleet size. You only get as many people that show up. If 10 show up, you're limited to 10. If 500 show up, you're limited to 500. I don't see EVE pilots QQing when their fleet is destroyed 3:1. I don't see them QQing when the enemy fleet drops supercapitals and destroys all of their capitals because they didn't bring any supercapitals themselves. I find Dust and EVE similar. If you don't have sufficient AV but the enemy brought in tanks, then you should get screwed. This whole "balance on a 1v1 basis" is crap. The reason EvE pilots don't QQ is because if you didn't bring the 200 frigates needed to take down a single captial, you make sure you do next time. But in dust if you didn't bring the 18 AV to a 16v16 match you need to bring down the 6 tanks you brought, that's not your fault. Until the game has a "real cap" on force strength anything where 1 unit has a higher force strength than another produces linear escalation battles. Which are no fun. In EvE if you don't need to a super captial to beet a super capital, because if you really want that win you can bring enough frigates to just swamp the enemy. It's still all the same. If you were the only AV in one match, then you'll ask a friend to join you next. Also, 18 AV for 6 tanks is flawed. Who ever told you we were asking for three unique AV per individual tank? Even if there are 6 tanks, just get three AV and concentrate fire on one tank. Then continue with the rest. Nobody told you that you had to destroy them all at once. You shouldn't have to have more than half of a squad dedicated to AV, regardless of how many vehicles are out there. Three people coordinating with breach forge guns will instapop any unhardened tank and send hardened tanks running for the redline. The latter currently isn't rewarding, but should be with WP for damage dealt. "But tanks don't need teamwork!" Neither do solo ratting battleships in null sec in EVE. But it does take either some very fancy skill to solo one with a frigate, or a small gang of frigates cooperating and using teamwork to bring down said battleship. Also, a tank without a squad dies rather easily. Without a squad to provide intel on enemy tanks and AV, you are more likely to get ambushed from behind while your hardeners aren't running. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32

Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1013	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:02:00 - [111] - Quote Harpyja wrote: I wish my standard suit can take on a sentinel solo I hate how it takes teamwork or tactics to bring down those fatties Seriously, this is how stupid you all sound. A standard suit CAN solo a heavy. With just about any weapon in the game. From just about any range in the game. All depending on player skill. When infantry can claim the same with tanks, then you can use this argument. To apply to L.O.T.I.S. or to squad with us, join our public chat channel: L.O.T.I.S.
Kierkegaard Soren Forsaken Immortals Top Men. 143	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:05:00 - [112] - Quote All I'm going to add is this observation for you all to consider: If it takes a minimum of two infantrymen to run an AV fit to kill one tank of any description, and you run into an ambush game that has six tanks deployed by the enemy within the first minute of initial deployment, then you're looking at twelve of your team giving up on anti infantry duties to deal with those six reds sitting in six red tanks. Now, we can argue all day about whether that's a good thing or not from a balance perspective, I simply want to add that when this scenario occurs (and it occurs a lot in pubs) then the team with the six tanks wins. Dominates, even. Not even close. Not even fun. And that is the key thing here. It's not fun to run AV anymore. Tanks are cheap, fast, hard. One of them is a pain. Two of them are a serious problem. Anything above that and you're looking at a total wipe out. I honestly don't know the solution to this. Buffing swarms back to the old damage specs but keeping the lock on range seems fair. Plasma cannons need a clear role definition, one way or the other, and forge guns...hmm. They're ok. You needs a proto one and the skills to use it to make it work, but it works. Make tank vs AV dynamic and fun for both sides. Reward individual skill and teamwork. Do something, CCP. Dedicated Commando. "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." -Paul Atreides.
Henchmen21 Planet Express LLC 473	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:06:00 - [113] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason. Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side. Considering all the tech in dust, is from EVE it is relevant, a civilization at that tech level wouldn't randomly make things more complicated for the sake of fairness to the enemy. Henchmen21: Infantry Gotyougood Ufkr: Vehicles
OverIord Ulath Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 75	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:09:00 - [114] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: More tank related QQ. Starting to get old. As long as the tank costs more than whatever dropsuit the other guy is using then they shouldn't be "equal". The tank should be superior. If you think the premise of this thread is QQ, then you either didn't read through the thread or you have horrific reading comprehension. Either way, you do not know that of which you speak. So please waste your time elsewhere, preferably somewhere that you actually understand what is going on.
Harpyja Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 1143	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:12:00 - [115] - Quote Kierkegaard Soren wrote: All I'm going to add is this observation for you all to consider: If it takes a minimum of two infantrymen to run an AV fit to kill one tank of any description, and you run into an ambush game that has six tanks deployed by the enemy within the first minute of initial deployment, then you're looking at twelve of your team giving up on anti infantry duties to deal with those six reds sitting in six red tanks. Now, we can argue all day about whether that's a good thing or not from a balance perspective, I simply want to add that when this scenario occurs (and it occurs a lot in pubs) then the team with the six tanks wins. Dominates, even. Not even close. Not even fun. And that is the key thing here. It's not fun to run AV anymore. Tanks are cheap, fast, hard. One of them is a pain. Two of them are a serious problem. Anything above that and you're looking at a total wipe out. I honestly don't know the solution to this. Buffing swarms back to the old damage specs but keeping the lock on range seems fair. Plasma cannons need a clear role definition, one way or the other, and forge guns...hmm. They're ok. You needs a proto one and the skills to use it to make it work, but it works. Make tank vs AV dynamic and fun for both sides. Reward individual skill and teamwork. Do something, CCP. Wrong. Who told you that you'd need to destroy all tanks at once? You only need two or three AV, concentrate on one tank, then move on. If it's ambush, stop running outside and find a defensible building. Force their 10 infantrymen to face your 13 infantrymen indoors where their tanks can't do anything but roll over each other. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
OverIord Ulath Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 77	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:22:00 - [116] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Rusty Shallows wrote: Harpyja wrote: I wish my standard suit can take on a sentinel solo I hate how it takes teamwork or tactics to bring down those fatties Seriously, this is how stupid you all sound. Use one of the big Four-Rifles, have the proficiency at 3, stack complex damage mods, and if possible rake the head (it's a large target and we are stupidly slow). Collect profit. Or with one buddy focus fire and melt the Fatty with center of mass shots. Do it with three or more to insta-gib him. Just an FYI 1.8 isn't going to change that. Just give people more options for a style of play. Killing Heavies is just as easy as killing unhardened vehicles with any Large Rail. Easier in most cases since. Now apply this to AV. Stack some complex damage mods, prof 3 on forge guns with an IAFG, and shoot the rear of the tank. Profit. Or you can get a friend, where both of you are using breach instead, and instapop that unhardened tank before it can do anything. 1. Getting behind a tank in a heavy suit requires either a really stupid tanker, luck or teamwork. 2. No one should have to specc into one type of fit (be that tank, DS, dropsuit, what-have-you) in order to take out something else. Any fit (or hull) should be vulnerable to any fit (or hull) if the proper weapons are used. Harpyja wrote: R F Gyro wrote: All the comparisons with Eve are essentially irrelevant from a gameplay perspective for one very simple reason. Eve doesn't have a cap of 16 players per side. Dust has an artificial cap on team side. EVE has a real cap on fleet size. You only get as many people that show up. If 10 show up, you're limited to 10. If 500 show up, you're limited to 500. I don't see EVE pilots QQing when their fleet is destroyed 3:1. I don't see them QQing when the enemy fleet drops supercapitals and destroys all of their capitals because they didn't bring any supercapitals themselves. I find Dust and EVE similar. If you don't have sufficient AV but the enemy brought in tanks, then you should get screwed. This whole "balance on a 1v1 basis" is crap. You don't see Eve pilots complaining because their space based MMO was built around the idea of uneven odds. Since CCP made Eve, it could determine those standards. However, CCP didn't invent lobby shooters or FPS games or even any of the concepts behind them, they basically followed the template that other shooters had left behind while adding their own flavor, lore and art style. That way, the already solidly established FPS playerbase would be able to transition here. For... well... probably not the last time.... GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD. You can supply lore, ideas, interaction, even some physics between two different games of two different genres, but you cannot balance them in the same way. It makes no sense to even attempt to balance them based on the same ideals, and attempting to do so is futile.
OverIord Ulath Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 77	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:27:00 - [117] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: OverIord Ulath wrote: Then shouldn't they require the same number of people to run their tanks? I mean... If you are taking 3 people's attention away from focusing on winning the match just to deal with you, shouldn't you require the same number of people to distract them? In my tank i have 2 drones working below decks for the reloading of turrets and activating modules, other than that its me doing all the work You cant prove otherwise As long as they count towards the total number of people allowed on your team, I'm fine with that.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Covert Intervention 4147	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:31:00 - [118] - Quote OverIord Ulath wrote: Aizen Intiki wrote: We plug ourselves into the HAV, so we can control many of the functions at the same time. Degraging ourselves to mortal ways of life is silly. no. Pointless blanket excuse that means nothing. Actual, logical, gameplay balance response requested. Actually lorewise he's correct as far as I know. Capsuleers can control ships mostly by themselves by inking them together. Should be a very similar thing going on in DUST. The thing I wish they had in this game is a animation, or at least some time to get into, and out of vehicles instead of this instant spawn in/spawn out crap.
OverIord Ulath Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 77	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:33:00 - [119] - Quote Ghosts Chance wrote: And this thread has become the reason why you dont ask this question on the forums, but like the hundred or so threads that came before it someone will simply refuse to use the search function and start this up all over again Dunno why you keep posting, you are being ignored because YOU refuse to use that search function you are so excited about and link me to one good solid reason that makes sense in a lobby shooter why if it takes 3 infantry to kill a vehicle, it should still only take 1 person to drive said vehicle. Until you do that, consider yourself invisible.
OverIord Ulath Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 77	Posted - 2014.01.26 16:34:00 - [120] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: OverIord Ulath wrote: Aizen Intiki wrote: We plug ourselves into the HAV, so we can control many of the functions at the same time. Degraging ourselves to mortal ways of life is silly. no. Pointless blanket excuse that means nothing. Actual, logical, gameplay balance response requested. Actually lorewise he's correct as far as I know. Capsuleers can control ships mostly by themselves by inking them together. Should be a very similar thing going on in DUST. The thing I wish they had in this game is a animation, or at least some time to get into, and out of vehicles instead of this instant spawn in/spawn out crap. I was not referring to the lack of lore accuracy, I was referring to lore being a blanket excuse for broken mechanics.



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: 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.