| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Monkey MAC
Lost Millennium
1663
   |
Posted - 2014.01.26 16:47:00 -
[121] - Quote
Harpyja wrote: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.
If 6 tanks all turn up together I would need 18 AV to take out said tanks, with 3 AV I would be incapable of destroying tanks at rate fast enough to fend them off as is AV job.
Its simple math if 1 HAV = 3 AV and 1AV = 1/2 AI then who ever fields the most tanks wins. Its linear escalation, just the Act of changing into an AV fit to counter of tank lowers my teams force strength.
This can be clearly evidenced when a team can win with 6 tanks and a few mlt scouts. Because tanks have a force strength greater than 1, therfore unless you deploy a tank you will be overwhelmed. Nyan San have seen this, What thenFrench have seen this, Ultimate Pwnage Servicd have seen this, every corp of old who people complained at for running proto brick tanked gallante logis now also run tanks.
Because mathematically you can win with 6 tanks.
1 team without 6 tanks = 16
1 team with 6 tanks = 22
1 team without 6 tanks and 3AV = 13
22 > 13
Tanks 514
I told you, I bloody well told you.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
|
Lynn Beck
Granite Mercenary Division
Top Men.
592
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 16:49:00 -
[122] - Quote
I din't think any of the halfway decent tankers wanted you to dedicate a squad to kill 1 tank...
We just wanted a fair fight.
In 1.3-1.6 the fight was 'my wyrrkomi swarm is a 2 shot kill, and if 1.5 seconds is too long, i throw 1 Lai dai AV nade!'
Even against 2 hardeners, 1 max skill rep going, AND a polycrystalline plate.
In 1.6 it took a MINIMUM of 5 mil to outrep a single militia swarm for 20 seconds. Does this NOT seem flawed to you? What us REAL tankers wanted was for 1 Aver to be a THREAT, but not a FUCKINGG IWIN BUTTON +200 WP.
Under 28db
Officially nerfproof (predicting CR nerf February '14)
I have a God, His name is Dakka.
|
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
1092
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 17:01:00 -
[123] - Quote
Henchmen21 wrote: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.
Err...... last time I checked, Dust was a computer game.
RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
|
Monkey MAC
Lost Millennium
1664
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 17:16:00 -
[124] - Quote
Lynn Beck wrote:I din't think any of the halfway decent tankers wanted you to dedicate a squad to kill 1 tank...
We just wanted a fair fight.
In 1.3-1.6 the fight was 'my wyrrkomi swarm is a 2 shot kill, and if 1.5 seconds is too long, i throw 1 Lai dai AV nade!'
Even against 2 hardeners, 1 max skill rep going, AND a polycrystalline plate.
In 1.6 it took a MINIMUM of 5 mil to outrep a single militia swarm for 20 seconds. Does this NOT seem flawed to you? What us REAL tankers wanted was for 1 Aver to be a THREAT, but not a FUCKINGG IWIN BUTTON +200 WP.
That exactly what halfway decent AV wants to, we don't just wanna go,
oh look a tank, boom.
We want, sh*t tank, get the AV guy. Hold of that tank as long as you can, Ill call in the cavalry.
we want comamders to go
GET THAT TANK THE HELL OFF MY MEN
not
HEY JOE 200 WP THERE IF YOU WANT IT
not
TANK, DROP WEAPONS LADS, SUICIDING WILL BE LESS PAINFUL
Tanks 514
I told you, I bloody well told you.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
|
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
1093
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 17:26:00 -
[125] - Quote
Lynn Beck wrote:I din't think any of the halfway decent tankers wanted you to dedicate a squad to kill 1 tank...
We just wanted a fair fight.
In 1.3-1.6 the fight was 'my wyrrkomi swarm is a 2 shot kill, and if 1.5 seconds is too long, i throw 1 Lai dai AV nade!'
Even against 2 hardeners, 1 max skill rep going, AND a polycrystalline plate.
In 1.6 it took a MINIMUM of 5 mil to outrep a single militia swarm for 20 seconds. Does this NOT seem flawed to you? What us REAL tankers wanted was for 1 Aver to be a THREAT, but not a FUCKINGG IWIN BUTTON +200 WP.
I'll pick up on "we just wanted a fair fight"; I'm not ignoring the rest of the post, but that is the heart of the disagreement I think.
The problem is agreeing what "fair" means.
For many tankers it means "my several million ISK should be equivalent to several million ISK in dropsuits". For most infantry it means "your one place in a team of 16 should be equivalent to anyone else's one space".
Now, no-one I respect is saying it was balanced and fair before. Cheap militia AV shouldn't destroy expensive tanks with expensive prototype modules. But one player with an unlimited budget for AV fittings should be able to go one-on-one against one player with an unlimited budget for tanks and fittings.
Beyond that, I'd love to see real tanks that require a crew of 3 to operate, and that require an AV team of three to counter. That would be just epic.
RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
|
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
511
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 17:27:00 -
[126] - 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? 
That's 2+ idiots, or one competent person.... for your clarification.
I blow tanks up solo quite often. On foot.
What then about Proto suits? Same thing. 2+ idiots or one competent player.
When tanks can perform just like a Proto suit, follow you inside of buildings, dodge behind all cover, and follow you through any terrain, is the day that tanks will require more than one person to pilot.
So far, any competent ground troop knows how to force tanks to only be able to engage them when they want to engage the tank.
If you can read this, it means you are reading.
Unless you are skimming
|
Lynn Beck
Granite Mercenary Division
Top Men.
593
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 17:56:00 -
[127] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Lynn Beck wrote:I din't think any of the halfway decent tankers wanted you to dedicate a squad to kill 1 tank...
We just wanted a fair fight.
In 1.3-1.6 the fight was 'my wyrrkomi swarm is a 2 shot kill, and if 1.5 seconds is too long, i throw 1 Lai dai AV nade!'
Even against 2 hardeners, 1 max skill rep going, AND a polycrystalline plate.
In 1.6 it took a MINIMUM of 5 mil to outrep a single militia swarm for 20 seconds. Does this NOT seem flawed to you? What us REAL tankers wanted was for 1 Aver to be a THREAT, but not a FUCKINGG IWIN BUTTON +200 WP. I'll pick up on "we just wanted a fair fight"; I'm not ignoring the rest of the post, but that is the heart of the disagreement I think. The problem is agreeing what "fair" means. For many tankers it means "my several million ISK should be equivalent to several million ISK in dropsuits". For most infantry it means "your one place in a team of 16 should be equivalent to anyone else's one space". Now, no-one I respect is saying it was balanced and fair before. Cheap militia AV shouldn't destroy expensive tanks with expensive prototype modules. But one player with an unlimited budget for AV fittings should be able to go one-on-one against one player with an unlimited budget for tanks and fittings. Beyond that, I'd love to see real tanks that require a crew of 3 to operate, and that require an AV team of three to counter. That would be just epic.
That would be a nice thing to have, as a secondary, super tanked tank with 20k base hp, and 2 med turrets, along with a main large turret.
We still need to think of the people who don't have their own dedicated squad, the people who don't have the 6 mill isk to field such a monstrosity.
We need a 1 man operated tank with minimal support required to operate.
Under 28db
Officially nerfproof (predicting CR nerf February '14)
I have a God, His name is Dakka.
|
Teilka Darkmist
82
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 18:13:00 -
[128] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Henchmen21 wrote: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. Err...... last time I checked, Dust was a computer game.
It's a computer game that's steeped in the lore of a ten year old persistent universe. That's based on it in fact. It has to fit in the lore of EVE, or it may as well remain separate from it. In fact if it isn't consistent with EVE lore. It should have nothing to do with it at all, not even use the name, never mind the races and concepts.
When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
|
True Adamance
Kameira Lodge
Amarr Empire
6174
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 18:23:00 -
[129] - 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?
Or instead of complaining in this manner you could consider redesigning tank to be top tier anti vehicle units, high cost, high SP, powerful anti tank/vehicle guns, while loosing the capacity to roll anti infantry.
This way they can remain powerful and do their assigned role.
"My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity."
|
Teilka Darkmist
82
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 18:25:00 -
[130] - Quote
True Adamance 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? Or instead of complaining in this manner you could consider redesigning tank to be top tier anti vehicle units, high cost, high SP, powerful anti tank/vehicle guns, while loosing the capacity to roll anti infantry.
Unless they roll over infantry. That should be pretty deadly still.
When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
|
|
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
6008
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 18:27:00 -
[131] - 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?
Sorry, tankers want to have their cake and eat it too.
Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives.
Tuna > Tacos
|
Onesimus Tarsus
964
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 18:38:00 -
[132] - Quote
Cat Merc 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? Sorry, tankers want to have their cake and eat it too.
Tankers want their cake and to blow your cake away with minimal effort and danger. I actually put down my controller and dance a little jig whenever I see a tank blow up.
Blue or Red.
Free, on-demand Respecs. Because it doesn't matter and no one should care.
Matchmaking by KDR proximity. :)
|
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
512
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 18:42:00 -
[133] - Quote
Onesimus Tarsus wrote:Cat Merc 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? Sorry, tankers want to have their cake and eat it too. Tankers want their cake and to blow your cake away with minimal effort and danger. I actually put down my controller and dance a little jig whenever I see a tank blow up. Blue or Red.
If you want to learn how to best blow up a tank, the best way to learn is... by driving one yourself.
If you can read this, it means you are reading.
Unless you are skimming
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
3958
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 18:44:00 -
[134] - Quote
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote:
If you want to blow up a tank, the best way to is... by driving one yourself.
Fixed.
Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
To create a vehicle free environment.
There can only be one!
|
True Adamance
Kameira Lodge
Amarr Empire
6175
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 18:56:00 -
[135] - Quote
Teilka Darkmist wrote:True Adamance 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? Or instead of complaining in this manner you could consider redesigning tank to be top tier anti vehicle units, high cost, high SP, powerful anti tank/vehicle guns, while loosing the capacity to roll anti infantry. Unless they roll over infantry. That should be pretty deadly still.
Yup I lament the fact my massive bulk and iron treads cannot simply crush infantry underfoot.
"My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity."
|
Rusty Shallows
910
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 19:28:00 -
[136] - 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.
A few points:- Headshots can happen in every direction. Rear HAV shots aren't even on all parts of the model. I'd CCP made all Large Turret hits count as critical damage then yes.
- A solo Forge Gun has never even come close to killing a HAV as a similarly fitted Slayer fit on Infantry Frames. The gap on TTK is huge even with the old assault Forge Guns and maxed skills.
- You are correct about the Breaches. Although again infantry are forced to jump through hoops for that rear shot and easily thwarted by enemy infantry or a HAV pilot who keeps mobile.
- Heavy Frames aren't even 1/10th as great as you make them out to be. HAVs can be God-Mode most of the time, Heavy Frame can at best be Ultra-Deadly-Mode against a Scout on open ground in from of him. At least the Scout has a chance. That isn't the case with Infantry facing HAVs.
Here, have some candy and a Like. :-)
Forums > Game
|
Rusty Shallows
910
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 19:45:00 -
[137] - Quote
Teilka Darkmist wrote: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
Under your posting Portrait to the left of your name is a Right Triangle. That's a hidden menu. Click on it and you can view your own posts. It also has a convenient Tea Party function that allows you to selectively ignore other people.
I also provide instruction on how to use the Three Seashells.
Here, have some candy and a Like. :-)
Forums > Game
|
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
1097
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 19:47:00 -
[138] - Quote
Lynn Beck wrote:That would be a nice thing to have, as a secondary, super tanked tank with 20k base hp, and 2 med turrets, along with a main large turret.
We still need to think of the people who don't have their own dedicated squad, the people who don't have the 6 mill isk to field such a monstrosity.
We need a 1 man operated tank with minimal support required to operate.
Yep, I agree. Medium Attack Vehicles. Slightly tougher and slightly slower than a LAV, with a single large turret.
Alternatively, allow the current HAVs to be operated in either solo or crewed mode. In solo mode they are fairly weak and slow; in crewed mode they are beasts.
RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
|
Teilka Darkmist
85
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 19:57:00 -
[139] - Quote
Rusty Shallows wrote:Teilka Darkmist wrote: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 Under your posting Portrait to the left of your name is a Right Triangle. That's a hidden menu. Click on it and you can view your own posts. It also has a convenient Tea Party function that allows you to selectively ignore other people. I also provide instruction on how to use the Three Seashells.
I started to work that out after I'd posted here. It would still be nice to have a user control panel that made it more obvious.
As to the three seashells go right ahead and explain. And the female variant please. It's useless for me to know about the male one.
When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
|
Rusty Shallows
910
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 19:59:00 -
[140] - 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
Takahiro are you really trying to use a Fluff Argument against a Team Player Count Argument? One position is based on competitive game balance and the other personalized game fiction.
At least the guys who went ape-$&@-Ñ over a typo on the Caldari Sentinel had documentation. You're just making stuff up to justify a position. Fluff is never a good reason for bad game design.
Here, have some candy and a Like. :-)
Forums > Game
|
|
|
Rusty Shallows
910
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 20:08:00 -
[141] - Quote
Teilka Darkmist wrote:As to the three seashells go right ahead and explain. And the female variant please. It's useless for me to know about the male one.
Calling my bluff, well played. Okay you win.
Here, have some candy and a Like. :-)
Forums > Game
|
Teilka Darkmist
85
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 20:11:00 -
[142] - Quote
Is that canon or just something she made up? Also, well played yourself, I didn't know that was out there.
When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
|
Rusty Shallows
910
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 20:27:00 -
[143] - Quote
Teilka Darkmist wrote:Is that canon or just something she made up? Also, well played yourself, I didn't know that was out there.
Demolition Man (1993). Sorry I keep forgetting each year that passes the movie become more of a cult classic.
Here, have some candy and a Like. :-)
Forums > Game
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
3968
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 20:50:00 -
[144] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:
In my tank i have 2 drones working blow decks for the reloading of turrets and activating modules, other than that its me doing all the work
You cant prove otherwise
With no DEV confirmation you can't even prove yourself correct.
Even if, these alleged drones are automated and their functions are still managed by 1 player, so that argument is both incorrect and irrelevant.
Next On To-Do List: Particle Cannons
To create a vehicle free environment.
There can only be one!
|
Teilka Darkmist
85
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 20:56:00 -
[145] - Quote
Rusty Shallows wrote:Teilka Darkmist wrote:Is that canon or just something she made up? Also, well played yourself, I didn't know that was out there. Demolition Man (1993). Sorry I keep forgetting each year that passes the movie become more of a cult classic.
I've seen Demolition Man. I was wondering if the explanation was canon.
When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
|
Rusty Shallows
914
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 00:17:00 -
[146] - Quote
Teilka Darkmist wrote:Rusty Shallows wrote:Teilka Darkmist wrote:Is that canon or just something she made up? Also, well played yourself, I didn't know that was out there. Demolition Man (1993). Sorry I keep forgetting each year that passes the movie become more of a cult classic. I've seen Demolition Man. I was wondering if the explanation was canon.
Sandra Bullock seems to have implied it without the dirty details, all bets off if the interview was a lie. That might be the closest "official" answer we'll get unless someone releases a biography. So much for my youthful hopes the shells had some high-end sci-fi element.
Here, have some candy and a Like. :-)
Forums > Game
|
Teilka Darkmist
105
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 00:29:00 -
[147] - Quote
Rusty Shallows wrote:Teilka Darkmist wrote:Rusty Shallows wrote:Demolition Man (1993). Sorry I keep forgetting each year that passes the movie become more of a cult classic. I've seen Demolition Man. I was wondering if the explanation was canon. Sandra Bullock seems to have implied it without the dirty details, all bets off if the interview was a lie. That might be the closest "official" answer we'll get unless someone releases a biography. So much for my youthful hopes the shells had some high-end sci-fi element.
Well, they were in the toilet and in the fairly near future, so I'm not sure how founded those hopes could have been in the first place really.
When I play as a sniper, I'm more likely to be nearer to the opponents redline than my own.
|
Aizen Intiki
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
771
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 00:39:00 -
[148] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:AP Grasshopper 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? Eve pilots can fly Titans entirely by themselves. Incase you didn't know, its a video game. A titan is not to subcaps as a tank is to infantry. For one, titans cost literally a thousand times as much as a subcap. When your tank costs 1000x more than an infantry suit, then we can compare them to titans. Oh, also - titans are laughably ineffective against subcaps. Tanks are very effective at killing infantry. This is a bad comparison and you should feel bad.
More like BS vs. Cruiser/destroyer/slow frigate.
and we all know who that will end. Well, everyone who plays EVE anyways.
Also, technically, we don't fly Titans all by oursleves. They do have a crew. But the Titan crew piloted by a Cap is far smaller than a non cap crew.
"Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say
Alt of the great Godin
I like chocolate ^___^
|
Aizen Intiki
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
771
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 00:40:00 -
[149] - Quote
Sam Booty wrote:Make tanks base cost 1 million ISK, dropships 2 million ISK. Decrease efficiency of all armor/shield hardeners. Improve swarm launcher at close range (if you are close to target they should do like 50% more damage) and improve AV grenades they are so useless now.
You could also develop new AV swarm launcher weapon which locks on to vehicles and allows delayed explosion.
If you leave the game as it is you will just continue to lose players.
So a return to 1.6. Obvious scrub is obvious.
"Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say
Alt of the great Godin
I like chocolate ^___^
|
Aizen Intiki
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
771
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 00:41:00 -
[150] - Quote
jordy mack wrote:Atiim wrote:Aizen Intiki wrote:Yes, I'm sure. Can I have DEV confirmation? :P No seriously, how do u know u jack in? Isn't that the reason we can never be pilots AND mercs. Also where do u plug the...  yer nevermind..
We can't plug into a ship because it's a different implant. We use a different kind of pod.
"Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say
Alt of the great Godin
I like chocolate ^___^
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |