DUST Search - Game is unbalanced

Atiim wrote:

Leonid Tybalt wrote:

No, that's pretty much an equal amount of isk. So you just shot your own "argument" in the foot.

Also what you neglect to mention is what that said AV:er will be killed by. The tank he tries to engage or some random redberry with an assault rifle. Getting gunned down by infantry doesn't prove that tanks would be overpowered, it only proves that AV-fits aren't versatile.

Also decent AV player doesn't open fire on a tank from a position where the tank can immediately retaliate, which harkens back to another real world example where infantry doing anti-armor duty never deploy any missiles or grenades right smack in the open (like you nooby, complaining AV-players do in the game). They ambush vehicles in a myriad of ways like firing from cover (why do you think they favor "fire and forget"-weapon systems?), hiding in ditches and roadsides before engaging, setting up explosives etc.

Back for more eh?

Leonid Tybalt wrote:

One person with a piece of significantly more expensive and armored piece of equipment against one person with significantly less expensive piece og of equipment.

Your argument was that the AV equipment was "significantly less expensive", which it isn't (in fact, AV actually costs more than the HAV). This negates your argument and makes it non-existent. There is no foot of mine being shot, as it is your argument that is incorrect, not mine. I'll give you about 1 ISK for attempting though.

You clearly don't AV, so I'll spell out the obvious fact that most of your deaths will come from a vehicle, not infantry. Along with this, I'm not using the fact that AV dies frequently as an argument for tanks being OP. I'm using it as an argument against your deluded thought that makes you believe that AVing is "significantly cheaper" than tanking. Quit shooting your foot, It already has enough bullet wounds as it is.

Considering how AV weapons can't fire without stepping out of cover, your argument about "never open firing on a vehicle where it can retaliate" is incorrect. Along with this, a vehicle with a good pilot is never in a spot where it can't retaliate back . Though you don't seem to realize this, so I guess it's safe to assume that you are a bad vehicle pilot.

What a real-life military favors is irrelevant. A real-life military would "favor" weapons that either 1HK vehicles, or destroy the entire crew inside. A real life military would "favor" Uprising 1.6 AV weaponry. Let's not go there.

You rely on 10k eHP to be competitive. Calling me nooby is like the pot calling the kettle black.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Scar Scrilla Cobra Kommando 80	Posted - 2014.01.27 16:11:00 - [31] - Quote Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. I think the situation has stabilized. By now ppl realized they have to work together to destroy tanks- in most cases, two profound forge gun users can handle one tank (depending on tank and forge gun type); also much props to ppl blowin up tanks solo with REs. Especially during last weeks grind fest , compared to the weeks before, I've destroyed a lot of tanks with Assault Forge gun and AV grenades and noticed an increased awarness of ppl towards how to handle the tank spam quite well. Adapt and destoy ahoi ;) "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses" Scar Scrilla - Proud Commando User & Cobra Kommander
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 370	Posted - 2014.01.27 16:13:00 - [32] - Quote Tau Lai wrote: "You need 3-4 people to bring down a tank IRL too. It's not "unbalanced" it makes sense unlike how it was before 1.7" This is a game, not real life. Real life is NOT balanced. Game SHOULD be balanced. But It is not. Face It. Real life is actually balanced ... it's the people who play the role of spoilers who make it seem otherwise ... which is a shame. This game is not going to be balanced. I was road killed by a jihad jeep that didn't blow up after it hit me .. that's beyond reasoning seeing as how one RE can destroy a jeep but I guess he found a bypass that saved him and his jeep but could blow me up. This was during a 4 against 10 game that started and ended with the same number of players. Hats off to the other 3 troops. Future Caldari Heavy so watch out for this Sumo Shinobi with a Caldari HMG .
Leonid Tybalt Dark Knightz Corp. 206	Posted - 2014.01.27 18:31:00 - [33] - Quote Atiim wrote: Aikuchi Tomaru wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. Does it make sense when one guy is able to bring down a ******* tank? I don't think so. Yes, it does. One Person = One Person. One person with a piece of significantly more expensive and armored piece of equipment against one person with significantly less expensive piece og equipment. Not a very good comparison. Your argument = sh!t
calisk galern BurgezzE.T.F Public Disorder. 1679	Posted - 2014.01.27 18:34:00 - [34] - Quote * <---- meet you opinionn on balance @ <--- this is tom's opinion on balance %<- this is **'s opinion on balance ^<--- this is harry's opinion notice how they aren't the same, well get used to it because every tom ** and harry has a different opinion on balance, and their is no such thing as balance that everyone will be happy with. in short this game is ever changing, tanks ruin the game this week, in 1.8 you won't even remember tanks exist because heavies are going to be tearing your ass up.
Espartoi Zero-Day Attack Zero-Day 36	Posted - 2014.01.27 18:47:00 - [35] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: Atiim wrote: Aikuchi Tomaru wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. Does it make sense when one guy is able to bring down a ***** tank? I don't think so. Yes, it does. One Person = One Person. One person with a piece of significantly more expensive and armored piece of equipment against one person with significantly less expensive piece og equipment. Not a very good comparison. Your argument = sh!t Topic = ** You think that everything must be like you want and all is unfair? the answer is simple as Deal with it or GTFO.
Derpty Derp Derpty Derp Derr Deerrr 6	Posted - 2014.01.27 19:07:00 - [36] - Quote Other than hiding in the redzone, my only problem with tanks are the armour repair stackers, Full armour between forge gun shots is annoying as hell... Shield tanks on the other hand, 2 flux nades and a forge blast or two... See how they run.
patches o'oullahang Quebec United The CORVOS 7	Posted - 2014.01.27 19:47:00 - [37] - Quote I think the game is now balanced ( and i don't use Tanks ) so in the real world, would you see 1 guy running after a Tank to destroy it ......... i don't think so. The cost of the Tanks is not expensive enough compare to a suit. That's the game !!!!!!
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p TRA1LBLAZERS 294	Posted - 2014.01.27 20:20:00 - [38] - Quote no tanks are completely balanced right now. They have the name "tank" so they should be >=3 infantry because i like stomping noobs and losing 50k isk once every three matches really pisses me off. I want to be able to kill every suit in the game without using any skill, and have no one to stop me, because thats only fair. Yes, I did kill Archduke Ferdinand. I used my nova knives. https://dust514.com/recruit/k3vMnb/
True Adamance Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 6225	Posted - 2014.01.27 20:23:00 - [39] - Quote Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. Stop bitching and make rational and constructive suggestions on how to fix the issue. You only sound weak and worth my trolling time right now, though its not as though I don't agree with you, however spend the time you do bitching considering valid, logical, and innovative suggestions for CCP to use. HTFU. "My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity."
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 4044	Posted - 2014.01.27 20:32:00 - [40] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: One person with a piece of significantly more expensive and armored piece of equipment against one person with significantly less expensive piece og equipment. Not a very good comparison. Your argument = sh!t Best HAV Setup Cost: 800k Best AV Suit Cost: 215k. Keep in mind, the typical AVer will die 3-4+ times while on AV. That's 645-860k. Which is more than 800k. Your in an armored piece of equipment against something designed to demolish armored equipment. Keep that in mind. Your argument (or lack thereof) = Non-existent. *PEANUT BUTTER COOKIE MASTER COOKIE* So when are we gonna get those Matari Vehicles? Please don't be SoonGäó

Vance Vyth State Covenant AQ 33	Posted - 2014.01.27 20:33:00 - [41] - Quote Are you guys seriously relating dust to real life?! LOL go into a real war then come back and tell me if your view points change. no war can be expressed in a game or movie. War is most terrifying thing you'll ever experience. (a¦ê+ä-£a¦ê) n++Gö¦pâçGòÉGÇö _ - (a¦Ñ_a¦Ñ) "60+"
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 4044	Posted - 2014.01.27 20:34:00 - [42] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. Stop bitching and make rational and constructive suggestions on how to fix the issue. You only sound weak and worth my trolling time right now, though its not as though I don't agree with you, however spend the time you do bitching considering valid, logical, and innovative suggestions for CCP to use. HTFU. Play nice. He's new here. At least wait until he has 100 Likes. Then you can eat him up as much as you want. *PEANUT BUTTER COOKIE MASTER COOKIE* So when are we gonna get those Matari Vehicles? Please don't be SoonGäó
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 526	Posted - 2014.01.27 20:36:00 - [43] - Quote Korvin Lomont wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. 3-4 idiots or 1 decently intelligent player... ...And a stupid tanker Have you ever stopped to actually watch a tank in battle? If you pick a target to destroy on foot, knowing what the tank is running is kind of essential to killing it. Just like you can't run a scout suit with a smg up to any old suit on the field. Such as, if it's a med frame, you could probably kill it, but if it's a heavy with a HMG you have to bait it a bit before you can kill it. After watching the target for a bit, it's just a matter of knowing what to use in what situation. There are differences between hunting shield tanks and armor tanks, as well as those that use 1 or 2 hardeners... but I doubt you would know that, since you just jumped to a very stupid conclusion as a whole. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 537	Posted - 2014.01.27 21:31:00 - [44] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Korvin Lomont wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. 3-4 idiots or 1 decently intelligent player... ...And a stupid tanker Have you ever stopped to actually watch a tank in battle? If you pick a target to destroy on foot, knowing what the tank is running is kind of essential to killing it. Just like you can't run a scout suit with a smg up to any old suit on the field. Such as, if it's a med frame, you could probably kill it, but if it's a heavy with a HMG you have to bait it a bit before you can kill it. After watching the target for a bit, it's just a matter of knowing what to use in what situation. There are differences between hunting shield tanks and armor tanks, as well as those that use 1 or 2 hardeners... but I doubt you would know that, since you just jumped to a very stupid conclusion as a whole. Oh I know how to destroy most tanks, I have only encountered one or two that were fittet in a way they could with stand my "AV Wepon of choice" (RE's no not a Jihad jeep). The forge is still more or less usefull against most HAVs but if the HAV Pilot pays attention and uses his modules smart its really hard for proto Forges to bring them down. WIth swarms you need more than one or an ignorant HAV pilot. When used in two (three) vs one situations AV still works but is it worth the risk or afford? IMHO no just grab a Jihad jeep or use RE's this is more effective and you don't loose your AI capability.
Leonid Tybalt Dark Knightz Corp. 206	Posted - 2014.01.28 01:29:00 - [45] - Quote Atiim wrote: Leonid Tybalt wrote: One person with a piece of significantly more expensive and armored piece of equipment against one person with significantly less expensive piece og equipment. Not a very good comparison. Your argument = sh!t Best HAV Setup Cost: 800k Best AV Suit Cost: 215k. Keep in mind, the typical AVer will die 3-4+ times while on AV. That's 645-860k. Which is more than 800k. Your in an armored piece of equipment against something designed to demolish armored equipment. Keep that in mind. Your argument (or lack thereof) = Non-existent. No, that's pretty much an equal amount of isk. So you just shot your own "argument" in the foot. Also what you neglect to mention is what that said AV:er will be killed by. The tank he tries to engage or some random redberry with an assault rifle. Getting gunned down by infantry doesn't prove that tanks would be overpowered, it only proves that AV-fits aren't versatile. Also decent AV player doesn't open fire on a tank from a position where the tank can immediately retaliate, which harkens back to another real world example where infantry doing anti-armor duty never deploy any missiles or grenades right smack in the open (like you nooby, complaining AV-players do in the game). They ambush vehicles in a myriad of ways like firing from cover (why do you think they favor "fire and forget"-weapon systems?), hiding in ditches and roadsides before engaging, setting up explosives etc.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 4055	Posted - 2014.01.28 02:02:00 - [46] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: No, that's pretty much an equal amount of isk. So you just shot your own "argument" in the foot. Also what you neglect to mention is what that said AV:er will be killed by. The tank he tries to engage or some random redberry with an assault rifle. Getting gunned down by infantry doesn't prove that tanks would be overpowered, it only proves that AV-fits aren't versatile. Also decent AV player doesn't open fire on a tank from a position where the tank can immediately retaliate, which harkens back to another real world example where infantry doing anti-armor duty never deploy any missiles or grenades right smack in the open (like you nooby, complaining AV-players do in the game). They ambush vehicles in a myriad of ways like firing from cover (why do you think they favor "fire and forget"-weapon systems?), hiding in ditches and roadsides before engaging, setting up explosives etc. Back for more eh? Leonid Tybalt wrote: One person with a piece of significantly more expensive and armored piece of equipment against one person with significantly less expensive piece og of equipment. Your argument was that the AV equipment was "significantly less expensive", which it isn't (in fact, AV actually costs more than the HAV). This negates your argument and makes it non-existent. There is no foot of mine being shot, as it is your argument that is incorrect, not mine. I'll give you about 1 ISK for attempting though. You clearly don't AV, so I'll spell out the obvious fact that most of your deaths will come from a vehicle, not infantry. Along with this, I'm not using the fact that AV dies frequently as an argument for tanks being OP. I'm using it as an argument against your deluded thought that makes you believe that AVing is "significantly cheaper" than tanking. Quit shooting your foot, It already has enough bullet wounds as it is. Considering how AV weapons can't fire without stepping out of cover, your argument about "never open firing on a vehicle where it can retaliate" is incorrect. Along with this, a vehicle with a good pilot is never in a spot where it can't retaliate back . Though you don't seem to realize this, so I guess it's safe to assume that you are a bad vehicle pilot. What a real-life military favors is irrelevant. A real-life military would "favor" weapons that either 1HK vehicles, or destroy the entire crew inside. A real life military would "favor" Uprising 1.6 AV weaponry. Let's not go there. You rely on 10k eHP to be competitive. Calling me nooby is like the pot calling the kettle black. *PEANUT BUTTER COOKIE MASTER COOKIE* So when are we gonna get those Matari Vehicles? Please don't be SoonGäó
Patrick57 Fatal Absolution Covert Intervention 4324	Posted - 2014.01.28 02:04:00 - [47] - Quote Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. Yes, let's make it where one person can take down even the best tanker in Dust without even trying, see how many people leave the game. It's fun to destroy tanks, you just have to (and this may be a new concept to you) try. Winner of at least 11 King ThunderBolt hate videos :D
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 4055	Posted - 2014.01.28 02:09:00 - [48] - Quote Patrick57 wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. Yes, let's make it where one person can take down even the best tanker in Dust without even trying, see how many people leave the game. It's fun to destroy tanks, you just have to (and this may be a new concept to you) try. Has anybody ever said that they want to destroy tanks without effort? I think people confuse the term "solo" with "easy." Why exactly should a tanker be able to survive the best AV without trying again? Because that's what 1.7 is. Yes, dumping 600+ ISK per match is really fun. *PEANUT BUTTER COOKIE MASTER COOKIE* So when are we gonna get those Matari Vehicles? Please don't be SoonGäó
Patrick57 Fatal Absolution Covert Intervention 4327	Posted - 2014.01.28 02:13:00 - [49] - Quote Atiim wrote: Has anybody ever said that they want to destroy tanks without effort? I think people confuse the term "solo" with "easy." Why exactly should a tanker be able to survive the best AV without trying again? Because that's what 1.7 is. Yes, dumping 600+ ISK per match is really fun. sigh NO ONE should be able to take out a tank solo or easily, unless they use remote explosives and AV grenades. I was hoping you wouldn't reply, I'm not getting into an argument with the biggest tank hater since Leukoplast. Winner of at least 11 King ThunderBolt hate videos :D
Leonid Tybalt Dark Knightz Corp. 208	Posted - 2014.01.28 02:16:00 - [50] - Quote Atiim wrote: Patrick57 wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. Yes, let's make it where one person can take down even the best tanker in Dust without even trying, see how many people leave the game. It's fun to destroy tanks, you just have to (and this may be a new concept to you) try. Has anybody ever said that they want to destroy tanks without effort? I think people confuse the term "solo" with "easy." Why exactly should a tanker be able to survive the best AV without trying again? Because that's what 1.7 is. Yes, dumping 600+ ISK per match is really fun. Because the tanker paid more isk for his tank and invested more skillpoints in it to be as effective as he is with it than your typical AV:er did for his proto forge gun. /thread

Leonid Tybalt Dark Knightz Corp. 208	Posted - 2014.01.28 02:22:00 - [51] - Quote Atiim wrote: Leonid Tybalt wrote: No, that's pretty much an equal amount of isk. So you just shot your own "argument" in the foot. Also what you neglect to mention is what that said AV:er will be killed by. The tank he tries to engage or some random redberry with an assault rifle. Getting gunned down by infantry doesn't prove that tanks would be overpowered, it only proves that AV-fits aren't versatile. Also decent AV player doesn't open fire on a tank from a position where the tank can immediately retaliate, which harkens back to another real world example where infantry doing anti-armor duty never deploy any missiles or grenades right smack in the open (like you nooby, complaining AV-players do in the game). They ambush vehicles in a myriad of ways like firing from cover (why do you think they favor "fire and forget"-weapon systems?), hiding in ditches and roadsides before engaging, setting up explosives etc. Back for more eh? Leonid Tybalt wrote: One person with a piece of significantly more expensive and armored piece of equipment against one person with significantly less expensive piece og of equipment. Your argument was that the AV equipment was "significantly less expensive", which it isn't (in fact, AV actually costs more than the HAV). This negates your argument and makes it non-existent. There is no foot of mine being shot, as it is your argument that is incorrect, not mine. I'll give you about 1 ISK for attempting though. You clearly don't AV, so I'll spell out the obvious fact that most of your deaths will come from a vehicle, not infantry. Along with this, I'm not using the fact that AV dies frequently as an argument for tanks being OP. I'm using it as an argument against your deluded thought that makes you believe that AVing is "significantly cheaper" than tanking. Quit shooting your foot, It already has enough bullet wounds as it is. Considering how AV weapons can't fire without stepping out of cover, your argument about "never open firing on a vehicle where it can retaliate" is incorrect. Along with this, a vehicle with a good pilot is never in a spot where it can't retaliate back . Though you don't seem to realize this, so I guess it's safe to assume that you are a bad vehicle pilot. What a real-life military favors is irrelevant. A real-life military would "favor" weapons that either 1HK vehicles, or destroy the entire crew inside. A real life military would "favor" Uprising 1.6 AV weaponry. Let's not go there. You rely on 10k eHP to be competitive. Calling me nooby is like the pot calling the kettle black. Wow, the amount of bullshit coming out of you is staggering. There's no sense in debating the issue with you any further. Your reality is vastly seperate from the one the rest of us inhabits. You'll desperstely remain butthurt regardless. So im just gonna take some extra satisfaction in rolling around in my tank (which im gonna do more often thanks to you), knowing that my behaviour scares whiney noobs like you away from the game entirely. :)
sixteensixty4 CAUSE 4 C0NCERN 145	Posted - 2014.01.28 02:28:00 - [52] - Quote As a tanker with 13 mil sp in tanks, id be content to leave tanks as they are, and bring back the old AV stats and see where that leaves us we've (I've) gone from spending the match running from av all game to the other end of the spectrum where im just stacking hardeners and ignoring it personally i feel the tank buffs are enough on there own and all that was needed
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 4057	Posted - 2014.01.28 02:58:00 - [53] - Quote Patrick57 wrote: sigh NO ONE should be able to take out a tank solo or easily, unless they use remote explosives and AV grenades. I was hoping you wouldn't reply, I'm not getting into an argument with the biggest tank hater since Leukoplast. I don't hate tanks. Heck, I even tank sometimes. It's the mindset of most of the people driving them that irks me. If I can't solo then why should the tanker be able to solo? And I really hope you are mistaken when you said that HAVs should be easily soloed by AV Grenades. That's bad. *PEANUT BUTTER COOKIE MASTER COOKIE* So when are we gonna get those Matari Vehicles? Please don't be SoonGäó
hgghyujh Expert Intervention Caldari State 251	Posted - 2014.01.28 03:34:00 - [54] - Quote Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. no it was far worse before you want to take out a tank put together a noskill tank and kill it, before their were tanks that were harder to kill then these and their was no counter to them what so ever. 1.7 made tanking viable with out being elitest op, the only reason tanks are OP is because people want to run around in FOTM god mode suits and believe that that should be all that is required for victory. seriously put together a no skill tank and use that next time, at the very least you will keep the enemy tanks busy long enough for your teammates to do what they need to.
Kira Takizawa 2Shitz 1Giggle 118	Posted - 2014.01.28 06:17:00 - [55] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. You need 3-4 people to bring down a tank IRL too. It's not "unbalanced" it makes sense unlike how it was before 1.7. Also a tank driver can't hack objectives. They can't go everywhere infantry can go, and thus can't engage infantry on equal terms. They can't engage dropships unless the dropship is just lifting off or is being piloted by an idiot. A decent tank usually costs way more than the dropsuits used by those 3-4 people do. Etc. You're not taking the full picture into account. Hence im gonna disregard your thread as nothing but more tank related QQ... Dropped an orbital(nuke) on a tank and it survives does that happen IRL?
2100 Angels The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 297	Posted - 2014.01.28 06:31:00 - [56] - Quote The crux of the issue is that tanks should never have been introduced into the game. They won't be balanced until we have games big enough to make them or AV tactically relevant. At the moment, it's currently not worthwhile deploying AV in sufficient numbers to actually be effective at the expense of achieving other objectives (deploying 4 people as a dedicated AV squad means having 4 people less to kill other infantry, which instantly means the enemy has 3 units more at their disposal in the case of 1 tank on the enemy team) In order to be balanced, each role has to be completely countered by another role. At the moment I would suggest that the only real counter to tanks currently is tanks. Which breeds more tanks. And more tanks. I played a game earlier today in which there was 8 tanks. Tanks > Tanks, Tanks > Infantry. What the hell is the point in playing as infantry? We should call this game Tanks 514 and everyone can be in a tank and be happy. If we had no tanks in this game, it would be a hell of a lot more balanced, and enjoyable.
Tallen Ellecon KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1316	Posted - 2014.01.28 06:34:00 - [57] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. You need 3-4 people to bring down a tank IRL too. It's not "unbalanced" it makes sense unlike how it was before 1.7. Also a tank driver can't hack objectives. They can't go everywhere infantry can go, and thus can't engage infantry on equal terms. They can't engage dropships unless the dropship is just lifting off or is being piloted by an idiot. A decent tank usually costs way more than the dropsuits used by those 3-4 people do. Etc. You're not taking the full picture into account. Hence im gonna disregard your thread as nothing but more tank related QQ... One person with a TOW missile can take down a tank which requires multiple operators. Your argument is invalid. Where is my Gallente sidearm? 1.8? When is that? SoonGäó514
TechMechMeds Swamp Tempo Canis Eliminatus Operatives 2478	Posted - 2014.01.28 07:46:00 - [58] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. You need 3-4 people to bring down a tank IRL too. It's not "unbalanced" it makes sense unlike how it was before 1.7. Also a tank driver can't hack objectives. They can't go everywhere infantry can go, and thus can't engage infantry on equal terms. They can't engage dropships unless the dropship is just lifting off or is being piloted by an idiot. A decent tank usually costs way more than the dropsuits used by those 3-4 people do. Etc. You're not taking the full picture into account. Hence im gonna disregard your thread as nothing but more tank related QQ... And these 3-4 morons are lucky enough to be able to do this strafing in front of it. To the thread Its not that hard seriously, even high sp tanks, you just have to think and be patient about it and if all else fails then 2 sicas blow up any tank. If you run solo then your point of view is invalid, dust is all about teamwork. Level 2 forum warrior. Swamp iz on dat welevant flex fam I sold my family to the Amarr for isk, its a valid tactic
PADDEHATPIGEN BurgezzE.T.F Public Disorder. 122	Posted - 2014.01.28 08:00:00 - [59] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. You need 3-4 people to bring down a tank IRL too. It's not "unbalanced" it makes sense unlike how it was before 1.7. Also a tank driver can't hack objectives. They can't go everywhere infantry can go, and thus can't engage infantry on equal terms. They can't engage dropships unless the dropship is just lifting off or is being piloted by an idiot. A decent tank usually costs way more than the dropsuits used by those 3-4 people do. Etc. You're not taking the full picture into account. Hence im gonna disregard your thread as nothing but more tank related QQ... Your an idiot. My madrugar cost 109.395 ISK. To build and it is way OP. My av suit cost 117.930 ISK. To build and i can't kill a militia tank whit it solo, so please shot the fu.k up. IDIOT. EDIT: btw. I am fully trained to lvl 5 pro 5 in all the weapons i use.
Leonid Tybalt Dark Knightz Corp. 215	Posted - 2014.01.28 10:59:00 - [60] - Quote PADDEHATPIGEN wrote: Leonid Tybalt wrote: Tau Lai wrote: It doesn't make sense you need 3 or 4 people to bring down a tank (one player, >1<) . 1.7 ruined this game. And that is It. You need 3-4 people to bring down a tank IRL too. It's not "unbalanced" it makes sense unlike how it was before 1.7. Also a tank driver can't hack objectives. They can't go everywhere infantry can go, and thus can't engage infantry on equal terms. They can't engage dropships unless the dropship is just lifting off or is being piloted by an idiot. A decent tank usually costs way more than the dropsuits used by those 3-4 people do. Etc. You're not taking the full picture into account. Hence im gonna disregard your thread as nothing but more tank related QQ... Your an idiot. My madrugar cost 109.395 ISK. To build and it is way OP. My av suit cost 117.930 ISK. To build and i can't kill a militia tank whit it solo, so please shot the fu.k up. IDIOT. EDIT: btw. I am fully trained to lvl 5 pro 5 in all the weapons i use. I'm starting to have the same problem with dropships, yestoday I fired my swarms 12 times in a row at a dropship, 3 shots and reload 4 times while standing right below it, and when i had no more ammo the dropship was at FULL HP. That dropship simply tanked 12 shots from proto swarm with pro lvl 5 and that is just SO WRONG. Haha, you use a 100k madrugar, calls it OP and then call ME and idiot? Oh the irony! Trust me, your maddy is hardly OP. If you and I went head to head, your marry would get crushed like a tin can.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page