DUST Search - The fix for MLT tanks, as said by a tanker

All Channels

General Discussions

The fix for MLT tanks, as said by a tanker

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2772	Posted - 2014.01.29 15:22:00 - [31] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Increase heat buildup for MLT mods, because as is the case with all things MLT, they're clunky and require more resources. So, make them build up more heat when they're activated. I don't use missiles too often, very situational, and I don't have the game on, so I dunno if there's MLT missile damage mods, but make whatever missile turret is being modified fire slower. With the blaster, the faster heat buildup is enough. No reason to hold it back in two ways, just the one is good enough. Why do us tankers always have to figure things out? They aren't clunkier, the difference is mlt uses a modified instruction set, to make it easier to use. Which is reflected in the fitting costs. Mlt tanks aren't the problem, the cheap price of tanks isn't the problem, the power per person ratio for someone in a tank, any tank is the problem. Only nerfing mlt tanks creates a vaccum where not only tanks in general are overpowered but then standard hull tanks become overpowered versus other tanks, making the problem worse. Either you are too dumb to see this, or you are only doing this because you aren't happy enough being the king tier of warfare, you want to be the be all and end all. So I offer a solution that affects only MLT tanks, and that's not good enough for you, because it doesn't nerf tanks as a whole. It's not taking away blasters, it's not making turrets cost 1mil ISK again, it's not yet again making them cost more SP, or easier to kill, or buffing AV. It's changing something that only effects the MLT tag, and that's not good enough for you. Stuff yourself Of course it's not good enough, as it removes one of the FEW COUNTERS TANKS HAVE LEFT! Oh look a swarm turns on hardener guns av down Oh look a forge turns on hardeners guns av down jihad jeeps mlt tanks, and oh another std tank are the only hard counters left for tanks as they wonder around butchering infantry with impunity and YOU WANT TO CASTRATE MILITIA HAVS NEXT?! We don't need a militia tank nerf to end tank spam we need AV TO DO IT'S D*MN JOB. Please tell me how many militia HAVs you see versus standard HAVs. For about every 10 militia HAVs I destroy, I destroy one standard HAV. If only some good investment was needed for an effective HAV, the majority of the tank spammers out there will be gone and only the few dedicated tankers will remain. Though I disagree with Spkr and agree with Tebu that it's more or less the railguns that are too powerful. They are the counter for everything. I want there to be more thought going into vehicle based AV: take a missile tank and destroy that rail tank at CQC (regardless if it's shield or not) or snipe that enemy tank at range with a railgun (it's intended use). Right now railguns win 80% of the time at CQC. See, that's the issue. Absent militia tanks very few folks will have the opportunity to try out that play style due to the huge barrier to entry, leaving a few beta vets all alone at the top. Every class needs a relatively cheap way to get started.
Jake Diesel BIG BAD W0LVES 74	Posted - 2014.01.29 15:58:00 - [32] - Quote They aren't clunkier, the difference is mlt uses a modified instruction set, to make it easier to use. Which is reflected in the fitting costs. Mlt tanks aren't the problem, the cheap price of tanks isn't the problem, the power per person ratio for someone in a tank, any tank is the problem. [/quote] And I thought I was the only one who noticed this. In a game of 16 vs 16, it blew me away when I found out that each team can call in 7 tanks in a match. That's more than half of a team! In my opinion, the max tanks that should be allowed per team at one time is 3-4. Too much has been focused on "solo" tanking that there's no need for infantry to support them on an assault. And no one uses the small turrets anymore. Pretty much non-existent. I back in 1.6, a well fitted tank could roll into a hotzone and take 7 Ishukone forge gun hits and roll away with 30% armor before reps kicked in. It took two forgers to take these types of tanks out because they were that strong. And it didn't need fast speed to survive. Tanks need to be slow, powerful, and expensive. But not $2,000,000 expensive! If they brought back the tanks of 1.6, made them around $700,000 to $1,000,000 per tank, maybe slightly cheaper, lower the amount of tanks available to call in, we'd be closer to where it should be. Tanks would rely on infantry for support!
Vitharr Foebane Living Like Larry Schwag 559	Posted - 2014.01.29 16:05:00 - [33] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Increase heat buildup for MLT mods, because as is the case with all things MLT, they're clunky and require more resources. So, make them build up more heat when they're activated. I don't use missiles too often, very situational, and I don't have the game on, so I dunno if there's MLT missile damage mods, but make whatever missile turret is being modified fire slower. With the blaster, the faster heat buildup is enough. No reason to hold it back in two ways, just the one is good enough. Why do us tankers always have to figure things out? They aren't clunkier, the difference is mlt uses a modified instruction set, to make it easier to use. Which is reflected in the fitting costs. Mlt tanks aren't the problem, the cheap price of tanks isn't the problem, the power per person ratio for someone in a tank, any tank is the problem. Only nerfing mlt tanks creates a vaccum where not only tanks in general are overpowered but then standard hull tanks become overpowered versus other tanks, making the problem worse. Either you are too dumb to see this, or you are only doing this because you aren't happy enough being the king tier of warfare, you want to be the be all and end all. So I offer a solution that affects only MLT tanks, and that's not good enough for you, because it doesn't nerf tanks as a whole. It's not taking away blasters, it's not making turrets cost 1mil ISK again, it's not yet again making them cost more SP, or easier to kill, or buffing AV. It's changing something that only effects the MLT tag, and that's not good enough for you. Stuff yourself Of course it's not good enough, as it removes one of the FEW COUNTERS TANKS HAVE LEFT! Oh look a swarm turns on hardener guns av down Oh look a forge turns on hardeners guns av down jihad jeeps mlt tanks, and oh another std tank are the only hard counters left for tanks as they wonder around butchering infantry with impunity and YOU WANT TO CASTRATE MILITIA HAVS NEXT?! We don't need a militia tank nerf to end tank spam we need AV TO DO IT'S DMN JOB. Please tell me how many militia HAVs you see versus standard HAVs. For about every 10 militia HAVs I destroy, I destroy one standard HAV. If only some good investment was needed for an effective HAV, the majority of the tank spammers out there will be gone and only the few dedicated tankers will remain.* Though I disagree with Spkr and agree with Tebu that it's more or less the railguns that are too powerful. They are the counter for everything. I want there to be more thought going into vehicle based AV: take a missile tank and destroy that rail tank at CQC (regardless if it's shield or not) or snipe that enemy tank at range with a railgun (it's intended use). Right now railguns win 80% of the time at CQC. Therein lies the problem if only MLT tanks get changed then it doesn't solve the issue it will only A) make it impossible to get into tanking and B)maintains skilled into tanks as invincible. The only option is to nerf ALL TANKS or buff AV so that it is capable of taking on post 1.7 Tanks Thanks CCP for making the HMG Heavy viable again :3 That's no excuse to slack off on releasing a heavy laser though =.=
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1107	Posted - 2014.01.29 16:05:00 - [34] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Increase heat buildup for MLT mods, because as is the case with all things MLT, they're clunky and require more resources. So, make them build up more heat when they're activated. I don't use missiles too often, very situational, and I don't have the game on, so I dunno if there's MLT missile damage mods, but make whatever missile turret is being modified fire slower. With the blaster, the faster heat buildup is enough. No reason to hold it back in two ways, just the one is good enough. Why do us tankers always have to figure things out? There is a mil missile mod but no mil large turret. The mil version though for missiles should be slower reload. That is the biggest catch that does me inis the damn reload time. I'd like to see the small missiles fire the same as a large mis turret also. Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1107	Posted - 2014.01.29 16:15:00 - [35] - Quote Vitharr Foebane wrote: Therein lies the problem if only MLT tanks get changed then it doesn't solve the issue it will only A) make it impossible to get into tanking and B)maintains skilled into tanks as invincible. The only option is to nerf ALL TANKS or buff AV so that it is capable of taking on post 1.7 Tanks I don't recall it being impossible to get into tanks before and it is no more impossible now. Militia anything should be there as a test run item. If you want a char to be a tanker then it is quite easy to get up and running. Do ppl realize that you can create multiple accounts on the Platstation? Cook a tank char off on a second account. Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!
Thumb Green Titans of Phoenix Legacy Rising 706	Posted - 2014.01.29 16:18:00 - [36] - Quote Another wonderfully asinine idea from spkr. Militia tanks with a militia fit isn't that much of a problem because a militia fit isn't that good and is greatly restricted (sure it's harder to take down than it should be). Your idea only addresses noobs for the first week or two of being in a tank. The only modules that take time to get into are the damage mods and the only thing that benefits is a tanks performance against.... tanks. I see people saying nerf the rail turret when it's the only real hard counter to tanks and I see people complaining about the redline when it's the most effective place to kill a tank when the enemy spams them with a rail turret. I see people complaining about being 2-shotted by double modded rail tanks when their hardeners obviously were down. I see pansies in panzers complaining about their tanks being destroyed and demanding that the things that can destroy them to be nerfed. Support Orbital Spawns
Soldier Sorajord Subsonic Synthesis RISE of LEGION 38	Posted - 2014.01.29 16:19:00 - [37] - Quote Bump Soma up to 100k in price and take away the modules that come with them, but leave the turrets. Problem solved. People aren't gonna blow 100k per tank, lol Sora's the name. Gallente is my game. Yup! Gallente Specialist Here :) *Subsonic.*
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1108	Posted - 2014.01.29 16:20:00 - [38] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: Another wonderfully asinine idea from spkr. Militia tanks with a militia fit isn't that much of a problem because a militia fit isn't that good and is greatly restricted (sure it's harder to take down than it should be). Your idea only addresses noobs for the first week or two of being in a tank. The only modules that take time to get into are the damage mods and the only thing that benefits is a tanks performance against.... tanks. I see people saying nerf the rail turret when it's the only real hard counter to tanks and I see people complaining about the redline when it's the most effective place to kill a tank when the enemy spams them with a rail turret. I see people complaining about being 2-shotted by double modded rail tanks when their hardeners obviously were down. I see pansies in panzers complaining about their tanks being destroyed and demanding that the things that can destroy them to be nerfed. I see Somophobes (tm). And Sicaphants (tm). Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!
REDBACK96USMC Chaotic-Intent General Tso's Alliance 2	Posted - 2014.01.29 16:51:00 - [39] - Quote [/quote] And I thought I was the only one who noticed this. In a game of 16 vs 16, it blew me away when I found out that each team can call in 7 tanks in a match. That's more than half of a team! In my opinion, the max tanks that should be allowed per team at one time is 3-4. Too much has been focused on "solo" tanking that there's no need for infantry to support them on an assault. And no one uses the small turrets anymore. Pretty much non-existent. I back in 1.6, a well fitted tank could roll into a hotzone and take 7 Ishukone forge gun hits and roll away with 30% armor before reps kicked in. It took two forgers to take these types of tanks out because they were that strong. And it didn't need fast speed to survive. Tanks need to be slow, powerful, and expensive. But not $2,000,000 expensive! If they brought back the tanks of 1.6, made them around $700,000 to $1,000,000 per tank, maybe slightly cheaper, lower the amount of tanks available to call in, we'd be closer to where it should be. Tanks would rely on infantry for support! [/quote] I havent seen a skirmish game where 7 tanks on the field won the game yet. We all know they arent there for winning though. We were actually discussing the concept of vehicle type limitations per match. 2-3 tanks, 2-3 dropships, 4 max LAV's. Couple this with a slight boost back to Handheld AV and Advanced level and up AV Weapons and it should be fairly balanced. Throw in a Remote Explosive with a little more ooomphh that auto detonate around Vehicles (Read AV Mine) and it should be pretty well balanced. The modules should also scale accordingly in attributes, not just cooldown and duration timers. It is kind of silly that a militia booster and Complex Booster have the same stats save how long it runs and how long it takes for cooldown. Scale the Damage/Boost/Amplification just like you do with suits. I can fit a militia Railgun and run around taking out Mads & Gunni's with the same ease as my full complex/proto rail half the time. That just isnt right. RoF, Range and Base damage stats really aren't a concern to me. Good route planning and use of cover negate those every time. I think the folly of most tankers is thinking they CAN just run up in the middle of a scrum or find a spot in the redline and SIT there. I appreciate you guys, makes it easy for me and the other guys. :)
Sextus Hardcock 0uter.Heaven Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 241	Posted - 2014.01.29 16:55:00 - [40] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Increase heat buildup for MLT mods, because as is the case with all things MLT, they're clunky and require more resources. So, make them build up more heat when they're activated. I don't use missiles too often, very situational, and I don't have the game on, so I dunno if there's MLT missile damage mods, but make whatever missile turret is being modified fire slower. With the blaster, the faster heat buildup is enough. No reason to hold it back in two ways, just the one is good enough. Why do us tankers always have to figure things out? In all honesty, I see the problem being the rails themselves coupled with damage mods to be the problem for vehicles. A milita tanker should not be able to 2 shot a 10 mil invested tanker. They should have to WORK for that kill. Rails are not balanced atm. For infantry, it's a blaster, coupled with hardeners. Basically, it's like a giant AR in a suit immune to conventional weapons. I think changes to the rails and blasters, would put milita tanks in their place. As an actual SP invested tanker, I really don't struggle with milita tanks, but every now and again, one will 2 shot me leaving me saying WTF. But that's an issue with the rails, and I don't think heat cost is going to fix that. All they need are 2 shots to begin with. And a blaster, depending on the suit it is hitting, only needs to roughly land 4 to 14 shots on a suit. So unless the heat cost limits them to a max of 20 shots, I don't think it will have the impact that is needed. Not to mention, you only need a few seconds to cool down before you start firing again. Of course it's immune to conventional weapons, it's a tank!!! It's like the Civil War, the Ironclads were a whole new animal. Wood hull ships went down easily. Regular dropships already easily outrun swarms, what do you think infantry will do when fighters are introduced, that will probably fly faster than dropships? "CCP, these fighters are too fast for my swarms, nerf their speed!" No reasonable infantryman will complain about fighters... Unless they are able to kill all vehicles and infantry with impunity. If tanks hunted tanks and other vehicles, and fighters hunted air vehicles we'd have no problem. a tank with a crew of one vs an infantryman is a fairly one sided match, with little to no drawbacks against the tanker. Something must be done to fix this imbalance. reduce AI effectiveness of tanks, and everybody is happy. I am the sixth son Chrome Vet

Rei Shepard The Rainbow Effect 1545	Posted - 2014.01.29 17:01:00 - [41] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Increase heat buildup for MLT mods, because as is the case with all things MLT, they're clunky and require more resources. So, make them build up more heat when they're activated. I don't use missiles too often, very situational, and I don't have the game on, so I dunno if there's MLT missile damage mods, but make whatever missile turret is being modified fire slower. With the blaster, the faster heat buildup is enough. No reason to hold it back in two ways, just the one is good enough. Why do us tankers always have to figure things out? They aren't clunkier, the difference is mlt uses a modified instruction set, to make it easier to use. Which is reflected in the fitting costs. Mlt tanks aren't the problem, the cheap price of tanks isn't the problem, the power per person ratio for someone in a tank, any tank is the problem. Only nerfing mlt tanks creates a vaccum where not only tanks in general are overpowered but then standard hull tanks become overpowered versus other tanks, making the problem worse. Either you are too dumb to see this, or you are only doing this because you aren't happy enough being the king tier of warfare, you want to be the be all and end all. His Win button isnt big enough yet Winner of the EU Squad Cup "Go Go Power Rangers!" "Accuracy"
straya fox Sad Panda Solutions 172	Posted - 2014.01.29 17:03:00 - [42] - Quote Atiim wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: Atiim wrote: Come on guys. Be gentle with Spkr. His idea may cause more problems than it fixes, but he at least admitted that MLT HAVs are broken. We're making progress here... Progress? More like he wants the last bits of resistance of non tankers removed so that he can fully enjoy his status as TANK MASTER RACE. But, he did admit that they were broken. Admittance is the first step... He only wants militia tanks nerfed cause he is a piece of sh*t who cannot handle anything taking him down. How many times has this cry baby stated a tank should be a counter to a tank, now they are countering him, lets nerf any tank not as big as mine.
NAV HIV The Generals General Tso's Alliance 938	Posted - 2014.01.29 17:14:00 - [43] - Quote straya fox wrote: Atiim wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: Atiim wrote: Come on guys. Be gentle with Spkr. His idea may cause more problems than it fixes, but he at least admitted that MLT HAVs are broken. We're making progress here... Progress? More like he wants the last bits of resistance of non tankers removed so that he can fully enjoy his status as TANK MASTER RACE. But, he did admit that they were broken. Admittance is the first step... He only wants militia tanks nerfed cause he is a piece of sh*t who cannot handle anything taking him down. How many times has this cry baby stated a tank should be a counter to a tank, now they are countering him, lets nerf any tank not as big as mine. LOL Even then he would hide on the redlines... apparently that's skill....
Jake Diesel BIG BAD W0LVES 74	Posted - 2014.01.29 17:39:00 - [44] - Quote REDBACK96USMC wrote: And I thought I was the only one who noticed this. In a game of 16 vs 16, it blew me away when I found out that each team can call in 7 tanks in a match. That's more than half of a team! In my opinion, the max tanks that should be allowed per team at one time is 3-4. Too much has been focused on "solo" tanking that there's no need for infantry to support them on an assault. And no one uses the small turrets anymore. Pretty much non-existent. I back in 1.6, a well fitted tank could roll into a hotzone and take 7 Ishukone forge gun hits and roll away with 30% armor before reps kicked in. It took two forgers to take these types of tanks out because they were that strong. And it didn't need fast speed to survive. Tanks need to be slow, powerful, and expensive. But not $2,000,000 expensive! If they brought back the tanks of 1.6, made them around $700,000 to $1,000,000 per tank, maybe slightly cheaper, lower the amount of tanks available to call in, we'd be closer to where it should be. Tanks would rely on infantry for support! [/quote] I havent seen a skirmish game where 7 tanks on the field won the game yet. We all know they arent there for winning though. We were actually discussing the concept of vehicle type limitations per match. 2-3 tanks, 2-3 dropships, 4 max LAV's. Couple this with a slight boost back to Handheld AV and Advanced level and up AV Weapons and it should be fairly balanced. Throw in a Remote Explosive with a little more ooomphh that auto detonate around Vehicles (Read AV Mine) and it should be pretty well balanced. The modules should also scale accordingly in attributes, not just cooldown and duration timers. It is kind of silly that a militia booster and Complex Booster have the same stats save how long it runs and how long it takes for cooldown. Scale the Damage/Boost/Amplification just like you do with suits. I can fit a militia Railgun and run around taking out Mads & Gunni's with the same ease as my full complex/proto rail half the time. That just isnt right. RoF, Range and Base damage stats really aren't a concern to me. Good route planning and use of cover negate those every time. I think the folly of most tankers is thinking they CAN just run up in the middle of a scrum or find a spot in the redline and SIT there. I appreciate you guys, makes it easy for me and the other guys. :) [/quote] I like this.
Vyuru Learning Coalition College 35	Posted - 2014.01.29 18:01:00 - [45] - Quote Quote: Though I disagree with Spkr and agree with Tebu that it's more or less the railguns that are too powerful. They are the counter for everything. I want there to be more thought going into vehicle based AV: take a missile tank and destroy that rail tank at CQC (regardless if it's shield or not) or snipe that enemy tank at range with a railgun (it's intended use). Right now railguns win 80% of the time at CQC. Speaking as a semi militia tanker..... The only reason I use railgun militia tanks is in a AV role because things I used to be able to use before, I simply cannot. Strictly speaking in a militia vs militia role, if I do win vs a blaster, I only win by less than 400hp typically. That is if we open fire at the same time almost nose to nose, see each other at the same time, etc etc. If I have any range on a blaster tank I will win with more health, obviously since the blaster can't shoot me from that far. I've beaten some blaster Soma's (Not a tanker, no clue what level they are) but those typically I have to get the first few shots off or else they will beat me. People with more experience may see something differently, but I see no problem with railgun militia tanks. Also, I tend to think that blaster tanks might be a bit too powerful just in the fact that they are good vs infantry and other tanks. Railguns are primarily AV in my opinion. I will say the elitism of some tankers astounds me. You sit there saying how you so easily destroy a minimum skilled militia tank with your top of the line fully specced out tank like that takes some kind of skill or something? I also see a number of people dissing militia tanks, and I will admit there are a number of people hopping onto tanks because they are kind of the new FoTM, however: Have any of you considered that right now, the best way to fight a tank is with another tank? Have any of you considered that right now, the best way to combat a DS is with another DS or a railgun tank or installation? Have any of you considered that right now, the best way to win on some maps is to gain air control by keeping the skies clear of dropships and taking out/damaging enemy vehicles as they are called in? Guess what I have found to be one of the best counters to all of the above? Railgun tank and railgun installations. Hmm, what are people wanting nerfed? Sorry, but you get little to no sympathy from me on this. If you want a railgun installation destroyed, use your own or bring a railgun tank and snipe it out. You've got an entire map to play with and ambush a stationary target. The only reason is you are too lazy. If I, as an unskilled tanker, can do that easily, you can too. If you want to cry because I shoved my militia tank's railgun up the backside of your tank and let loose, guess what? Have better situational awareness, don't let me sneak a tank up behind you, or do not let me trap you in a city. Oh, and don't panic, that will get you killed quick. Sorry, but this whole thing just boggles my mind. Swarms are almost useless, AV grenades are almost useless, forgeguns I don't know too much about, REs require you to get within spitting range and even then, most good tanks can take more than you can put on, and now railguns are being asked to be nerfed? Seriously?
Scout Registry Nos Nothi 1121	Posted - 2014.01.29 18:19:00 - [46] - Quote :: Sees Tank Thread :: :: Notes Author :: :: Walks Away Laughing :: Shouldn't you be out farming infantry with Taki? You guys are so good at this game.
NAV HIV The Generals General Tso's Alliance 942	Posted - 2014.01.29 18:32:00 - [47] - Quote Scout Registry wrote: :: Sees Tank Thread :: :: Notes Author :: :: Walks Away Laughing :: Shouldn't you be out farming infantry with Taki? You guys are so good at this game. Taki is 100 times better than spkr can ever hope to be...
trollface dot jpg The Bacon Corporation 144	Posted - 2014.01.30 04:55:00 - [48] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: Scout Registry wrote: :: Sees Tank Thread :: :: Notes Author :: :: Walks Away Laughing :: Shouldn't you be out farming infantry with Taki? You guys are so good at this game. Taki is 100 times better than spkr can ever hope to be... Just as terrible ideas for balancing tanks however. Last I saw, Taki was saying swarms shouldn't be able to kill tanks at all unless there's a forge backing it. RIP MAG, you will be missed. MAG Vet ~ Raven
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1710	Posted - 2014.01.30 07:25:00 - [49] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: Scout Registry wrote: :: Sees Tank Thread :: :: Notes Author :: :: Walks Away Laughing :: Shouldn't you be out farming infantry with Taki? You guys are so good at this game. Taki is 100 times better than spkr can ever hope to be... I did learn the fine art of vehicles by observing him in MAG. I also asked him for advice on tanking for Dust. But anything you have to say is invalidated because you're an ex-tanker. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1710	Posted - 2014.01.30 07:27:00 - [50] - Quote Jake Diesel wrote: REDBACK96USMC wrote: And I thought I was the only one who noticed this. In a game of 16 vs 16, it blew me away when I found out that each team can call in 7 tanks in a match. That's more than half of a team! In my opinion, the max tanks that should be allowed per team at one time is 3-4. Too much has been focused on "solo" tanking that there's no need for infantry to support them on an assault. And no one uses the small turrets anymore. Pretty much non-existent. I back in 1.6, a well fitted tank could roll into a hotzone and take 7 Ishukone forge gun hits and roll away with 30% armor before reps kicked in. It took two forgers to take these types of tanks out because they were that strong. And it didn't need fast speed to survive. Tanks need to be slow, powerful, and expensive. But not $2,000,000 expensive! If they brought back the tanks of 1.6, made them around $700,000 to $1,000,000 per tank, maybe slightly cheaper, lower the amount of tanks available to call in, we'd be closer to where it should be. Tanks would rely on infantry for support! I havent seen a skirmish game where 7 tanks on the field won the game yet. We all know they arent there for winning though. We were actually discussing the concept of vehicle type limitations per match. 2-3 tanks, 2-3 dropships, 4 max LAV's. Couple this with a slight boost back to Handheld AV and Advanced level and up AV Weapons and it should be fairly balanced. Throw in a Remote Explosive with a little more ooomphh that auto detonate around Vehicles (Read AV Mine) and it should be pretty well balanced. The modules should also scale accordingly in attributes, not just cooldown and duration timers. It is kind of silly that a militia booster and Complex Booster have the same stats save how long it runs and how long it takes for cooldown. Scale the Damage/Boost/Amplification just like you do with suits. I can fit a militia Railgun and run around taking out Mads & Gunni's with the same ease as my full complex/proto rail half the time. That just isnt right. RoF, Range and Base damage stats really aren't a concern to me. Good route planning and use of cover negate those every time. I think the folly of most tankers is thinking they CAN just run up in the middle of a scrum or find a spot in the redline and SIT there. I appreciate you guys, makes it easy for me and the other guys. :) [/quote] I like this.[/quote] How about PRO suits get their old price of over 300,000k ISK back? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim

Leonid Tybalt Dark Knightz Corp. 221	Posted - 2014.01.30 07:59:00 - [51] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Increase heat buildup for MLT mods, because as is the case with all things MLT, they're clunky and require more resources. So, make them build up more heat when they're activated. I don't use missiles too often, very situational, and I don't have the game on, so I dunno if there's MLT missile damage mods, but make whatever missile turret is being modified fire slower. With the blaster, the faster heat buildup is enough. No reason to hold it back in two ways, just the one is good enough. Why do us tankers always have to figure things out? They aren't clunkier, the difference is mlt uses a modified instruction set, to make it easier to use. Which is reflected in the fitting costs. Mlt tanks aren't the problem, the cheap price of tanks isn't the problem, the power per person ratio for someone in a tank, any tank is the problem. Only nerfing mlt tanks creates a vaccum where not only tanks in general are overpowered but then standard hull tanks become overpowered versus other tanks, making the problem worse. Either you are too dumb to see this, or you are only doing this because you aren't happy enough being the king tier of warfare, you want to be the be all and end all. This (excluding the insults) Nerfing the mlt tanks will only go back to a previous situation (where they completely sucked in comparison to standard tanks). The way militia tanks are now is good. It keeps me on my toes. If you reduce their firing speed and increase their heat build-up im gonna have too easy a time.
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 550	Posted - 2014.01.30 08:09:00 - [52] - Quote Vehicles should be limited to one hardener per type (allowing one shield and one armor, for those who dare dual tank) There should be a window where vehicles can shrug off AV. But there should also be a window for AV to retaliate, once the hardener is down. Tanks should be slower, by at least 25% if not more, because they are tanks. They are meant to sit there and deal out damage. So make them sit. Tiers shouldn't decrease cooldowns, but increase resistance given. Proto tier hardeners should shrug off anything and everything. When that hardener is off, AV should have plenty of time to get their kill, assuming the HAV hasn't killed them all. Tank militia gear needs their pg/cpu requirements increased dramatically. You should be able to fit one extra militia mod on your tank without needing to fit upgrade mods. After that, you better pony up some slots for cpu and pg upgrades, unless you are willing to invest in the skills to lower fitting requirements.
Obodiah Garro Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 597	Posted - 2014.01.30 08:15:00 - [53] - Quote Rails aint the problem, you are aware a missle tank will crush either rail/blaster in half a lol second right? The problem is the swarm launcher got nerfed to ******* hell. Bring that back to pre hyper nerf and the situation will balance itself out.
Leonid Tybalt Dark Knightz Corp. 222	Posted - 2014.01.30 11:50:00 - [54] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vehicles should be limited to one hardener per type (allowing one shield and one armor, for those who dare dual tank) There should be a window where vehicles can shrug off AV. But there should also be a window for AV to retaliate, once the hardener is down. Tanks should be slower, by at least 25% if not more, because they are tanks. They are meant to sit there and deal out damage. So make them sit. Tiers shouldn't decrease cooldowns, but increase resistance given. Proto tier hardeners should shrug off anything and everything. When that hardener is off, AV should have plenty of time to get their kill, assuming the HAV hasn't killed them all. Tank militia gear needs their pg/cpu requirements increased dramatically. You should be able to fit one extra militia mod on your tank without needing to fit upgrade mods. After that, you better pony up some slots for cpu and pg upgrades, unless you are willing to invest in the skills to lower fitting requirements. I can get behind this. Only noob tankers use dual hardeners anyway, because stacked dual hardeners are only really effective protection against infantry AV. I've lost count of all the times I've shot dual hardener users to pieces with my tank, because they just don't have enough of an hp buffer to stand up to all that damage that my missile launcher or railgun dishes out.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 4213	Posted - 2014.01.30 12:23:00 - [55] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vehicles should be limited to one hardener per type (allowing one shield and one armor, for those who dare dual tank) There should be a window where vehicles can shrug off AV. But there should also be a window for AV to retaliate, once the hardener is down. Tanks should be slower, by at least 25% if not more, because they are tanks. They are meant to sit there and deal out damage. So make them sit. Tiers shouldn't decrease cooldowns, but increase resistance given. Proto tier hardeners should shrug off anything and everything. When that hardener is off, AV should have plenty of time to get their kill, assuming the HAV hasn't killed them all. Tank militia gear needs their pg/cpu requirements increased dramatically. You should be able to fit one extra militia mod on your tank without needing to fit upgrade mods. After that, you better pony up some slots for cpu and pg upgrades, unless you are willing to invest in the skills to lower fitting requirements. I like this idea, but increasing hardener resistance anymore would completely break Tank vs Tank battles, because it would just involve two tanks just standing there looking at each-other until the hardeners die. Tank vs. Tank battles should be a "duel" of sorts. Not a waiting game. Want to know how to make a strike-through? [s[Example[/s] Now go my Forum Warriors. Use this new weapon for glory!
Leonid Tybalt Dark Knightz Corp. 222	Posted - 2014.01.30 12:31:00 - [56] - Quote Atiim wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vehicles should be limited to one hardener per type (allowing one shield and one armor, for those who dare dual tank) There should be a window where vehicles can shrug off AV. But there should also be a window for AV to retaliate, once the hardener is down. Tanks should be slower, by at least 25% if not more, because they are tanks. They are meant to sit there and deal out damage. So make them sit. Tiers shouldn't decrease cooldowns, but increase resistance given. Proto tier hardeners should shrug off anything and everything. When that hardener is off, AV should have plenty of time to get their kill, assuming the HAV hasn't killed them all. Tank militia gear needs their pg/cpu requirements increased dramatically. You should be able to fit one extra militia mod on your tank without needing to fit upgrade mods. After that, you better pony up some slots for cpu and pg upgrades, unless you are willing to invest in the skills to lower fitting requirements. I like this idea, but increasing hardener resistance anymore would completely break Tank vs Tank battles, because it would just involve two tanks just standing there looking at each-other until the hardeners die. Tank vs. Tank battles should be a "duel" of sorts. Not a waiting game. Oh, the irony that you of all people talk about how tank battles "should" be.... We know for a fact that you reject every real-life aspects of tanks. So what exactly do you base your views on aside from personal preference? I.e the very same personal preference that thinks it's completely okay that a 200.000 isk forge gun fit should be able to one-hit kill an 800.000 isk tank? How about you actually invest a few million skillpoints in vehicle skills and run with tanks or a month or so before "educating" the rest of us how tank battles "should" be? It would at least give some sort of credibility to your views, because we who have seen your previous butthurt-infantry tirages aren't very convinced...
Monkey MAC Lost Millennium 1739	Posted - 2014.01.30 12:37:00 - [57] - Quote Leonid Tybalt wrote: Atiim wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vehicles should be limited to one hardener per type (allowing one shield and one armor, for those who dare dual tank) There should be a window where vehicles can shrug off AV. But there should also be a window for AV to retaliate, once the hardener is down. Tanks should be slower, by at least 25% if not more, because they are tanks. They are meant to sit there and deal out damage. So make them sit. Tiers shouldn't decrease cooldowns, but increase resistance given. Proto tier hardeners should shrug off anything and everything. When that hardener is off, AV should have plenty of time to get their kill, assuming the HAV hasn't killed them all. Tank militia gear needs their pg/cpu requirements increased dramatically. You should be able to fit one extra militia mod on your tank without needing to fit upgrade mods. After that, you better pony up some slots for cpu and pg upgrades, unless you are willing to invest in the skills to lower fitting requirements. I like this idea, but increasing hardener resistance anymore would completely break Tank vs Tank battles, because it would just involve two tanks just standing there looking at each-other until the hardeners die. Tank vs. Tank battles should be a "duel" of sorts. Not a waiting game. Oh, the irony that you of all people talk about how tank battles "should" be.... We know for a fact that you reject every real-life aspects of tanks. So what exactly do you base your views on aside from personal preference? I.e the very same personal preference that thinks it's completely okay that a 200.000 isk forge gun fit should be able to one-hit kill an 800.000 isk tank? How about you actually invest a few million skillpoints in vehicle skills and run with tanks or a month or so before "educating" the rest of us how tank battles "should" be? It would at least give some sort of credibility to your views, because we who have seen your previous butthurt-infantry tirages aren't very convinced... Why I can just use a mlt, tank battles are ridiculous fun right now, I use a gunnlogi and run circles around my enemy, if they hardened I have to account for overheat and trying to keep out of their turret LOS, that's how it should be, and its pretty damn awsome. Tanks 514 I told you, I bloody well told you. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
bigbad bro Feral Outcast D.B. 6	Posted - 2014.01.30 12:48:00 - [58] - Quote Vitharr Foebane wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Increase heat buildup for MLT mods, because as is the case with all things MLT, they're clunky and require more resources. So, make them build up more heat when they're activated. I don't use missiles too often, very situational, and I don't have the game on, so I dunno if there's MLT missile damage mods, but make whatever missile turret is being modified fire slower. With the blaster, the faster heat buildup is enough. No reason to hold it back in two ways, just the one is good enough. Why do us tankers always have to figure things out? They aren't clunkier, the difference is mlt uses a modified instruction set, to make it easier to use. Which is reflected in the fitting costs. Mlt tanks aren't the problem, the cheap price of tanks isn't the problem, the power per person ratio for someone in a tank, any tank is the problem. Only nerfing mlt tanks creates a vaccum where not only tanks in general are overpowered but then standard hull tanks become overpowered versus other tanks, making the problem worse. Either you are too dumb to see this, or you are only doing this because you aren't happy enough being the king tier of warfare, you want to be the be all and end all. So I offer a solution that affects only MLT tanks, and that's not good enough for you, because it doesn't nerf tanks as a whole. It's not taking away blasters, it's not making turrets cost 1mil ISK again, it's not yet again making them cost more SP, or easier to kill, or buffing AV. It's changing something that only effects the MLT tag, and that's not good enough for you. Stuff yourself Of course it's not good enough, as it removes one of the FEW COUNTERS TANKS HAVE LEFT! Oh look a swarm turns on hardener guns av down Oh look a forge turns on hardeners guns av down jihad jeeps mlt tanks, and oh another std tank are the only hard counters left for tanks as they wonder around butchering infantry with impunity and YOU WANT TO CASTRATE MILITIA HAVS NEXT?! We don't need a militia tank nerf to end tank spam we need AV TO DO IT'S D*MN JOB. No we don't need pre 1.7 where AV'ers can kill a tank with 1 shot 1 kill we need balance to the game. Tank are my favorite red dots to kill. KILL, KILL, KILL, KILL............
KingBabar The Rainbow Effect 1689	Posted - 2014.01.30 13:23:00 - [59] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Increase heat buildup for MLT mods, because as is the case with all things MLT, they're clunky and require more resources. So, make them build up more heat when they're activated. I don't use missiles too often, very situational, and I don't have the game on, so I dunno if there's MLT missile damage mods, but make whatever missile turret is being modified fire slower. With the blaster, the faster heat buildup is enough. No reason to hold it back in two ways, just the one is good enough. Why do us tankers always have to figure things out? The militia tanks giving you a hard time? And you wana nerf the only viable non-fatsuit AV weapon? Sounds just like a thing you would say, I'm not surprised. I hope that you guys actually try and do something more than stay around Your home base protecting that ammo dump. Not only are you losing the game, (Well ES said he didn't care about the outcome as long as he managed to kill me once) but you're making it utterly boring for the rest of us aswell. As experienced "should-know-better" players, camping at the redline without hardly a joyride out on the Battlefield says something is very wrong With Your way of playing IMO. Adapting the vehicle playstyle from a dude geting a whole hill named after him in Beta due to constantly camping on top With a railtank is hardly the best tutor now is it? Despit being on the other side of the table, I've had a sort of weird respect for you guys cause, honestly, I have no idea how to drive a tank. Seeing how you actually play the game and all respect is lost. 3 Dom games and Your team couldn't even hack once, and on top of that Your team looked better on paper. (We had 2 or 3 butterflies raping Your entire team al game long while you were hiding in the redline) ES especially brags about how he uses teamwork etc but al I see is camping and farming "free" kills. Why would the two of you stay several dom games in or Close to the redline? Is it any fun? Am I missing something? Could you please elaborate on this and on why we as a community shall pay any attention to Your silly little antrums when all you seem to be doing is farm from afar? I'm sure more People here would like to know. Do you guys even play PC? I've played my share of Battles and some but I've yet to see any of you in any Battle, you know, where the competition is. http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/KingBabar/media/BannerKingbabarcopy.png.html
NAV HIV The Generals General Tso's Alliance 962	Posted - 2014.01.30 13:35:00 - [60] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: NAV HIV wrote: Scout Registry wrote: :: Sees Tank Thread :: :: Notes Author :: :: Walks Away Laughing :: Shouldn't you be out farming infantry with Taki? You guys are so good at this game. Taki is 100 times better than spkr can ever hope to be... I did learn the fine art of vehicles by observing him in MAG. I also asked him for advice on tanking for Dust. But anything you have to say is invalidated because you're an ex-tanker. Like i said earlier... I carry a Proto maddy in my pocket just for ***** and giggles...



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.