|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Monkey MAC
Lost Millennium
1737
   |
Posted - 2014.01.30 11:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
N1ck Comeau wrote:Auris Lionesse wrote:how many militia swarms should it take to kill a militia tank? 3-4 when not hardened.
And how many before the tanker retreats when hardened?
Tanks 514
I told you, I bloody well told you.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
|
Monkey MAC
Lost Millennium
1738
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 11:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
And as I said in every other tank thread, what do you do while you wait?
If you're defending a point do you just hide in a corner and hope the infantry don't mop you up?
Or do you somehow have to escape the onslaught of a hardened tank find a superior position where you know the tanker will not have hardeners can't escape and will eventually sucum to his demise? By which point, the battle is lost because the tankered slaughtered everyone at the letter and really your kill is worth nothing more than petty revenge on a tankers wallet?
Yes hardners are meant to be strong, strong enough that assaulting a position because viable, not so strong that it guarentees success. If we are to go along logical lines it is safe to say that the ROLE of AV (excluding its use in gorilla warfare tactics) should be to stave off an assault from a Heavy Attack Vehicle. It needs to be strong enough that tanker will be forced to pull out of the assault BEFORE his hardners run out.
So for example the shield hardner giving 40 secs, up time, it would be fair to assume that AV could make it pull out at maybe 20-30 secs, this is one AV user.
This is what the whole waves of opportunity philosophy is all about.
A wave of OPPURTUNITY
Not, A wave of slaughter everything that moves with very little chance of reprisal.
And for the love of god blasters don't need a buff, they kill faster than an AR, with magazine nearly 3 times the size, that should be enough.
Tanks 514
I told you, I bloody well told you.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
|
Monkey MAC
Lost Millennium
1739
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 11:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tailss Prower wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:And as I said in every other tank thread, what do you do while you wait?
If you're defending a point do you just hide in a corner and hope the infantry don't mop you up?
Or do you somehow have to escape the onslaught of a hardened tank find a superior position where you know the tanker will not have hardeners can't escape and will eventually sucum to his demise? By which point, the battle is lost because the tankered slaughtered everyone at the letter and really your kill is worth nothing more than petty revenge on a tankers wallet?
Yes hardners are meant to be strong, strong enough that assaulting a position because viable, not so strong that it guarentees success. If we are to go along logical lines it is safe to say that the ROLE of AV (excluding its use in gorilla warfare tactics) should be to stave off an assault from a Heavy Attack Vehicle. It needs to be strong enough that tanker will be forced to pull out of the assault BEFORE his hardners run out.
So for example the shield hardner giving 40 secs, up time, it would be fair to assume that AV could make it pull out at maybe 20-30 secs, this is one AV user.
This is what the whole waves of opportunity philosophy is all about.
A wave of OPPURTUNITY
Not, A wave of slaughter everything that moves with very little chance of reprisal.
And for the love of god blasters don't need a buff, they kill faster than an AR, with magazine nearly 3 times the size, that should be enough. That is true but you got to look at it from the way CCP made the game which some don't seem to do and that is the Teir system as ****** up a system it is they still made and use it militia is at the bottom of the bracket and therefor should be the weakest if you used adv or proto with dmg mods and prof at a decent lvl like say 3+ you will achive this goal quite easily as a tanker I've had it plenty of times where I was made to run by groups or even a single infantry hitting me with hardcore AV setups and have even killed me I've had to run many times i'm also a sniper and I normally use a railgun not a blaster hell I don't even got blasters lvled up so if I can I will snipe him otherwise I will run
Well that is true but also if you look at how CCP have done the game from my perspective.
There aren't any tiered hulls, yet their is tiered AV. So either a std a AV unit should be capable of combating a tank with std level mods or tiering with AV is pointless.
This doesn't happen as Im sure you are aware, so unless they are going to make the same mistake they did in chromosone amd give proto hulls, then balance tiered AV we would be better with just mlt and std AV.
For clarification on what I mean, back in chromo we had tiered hulls AND tiered AV, BUT anything less would get wrecked by both.
So proto AV was overpowered against std tanks, yet proto tanks were pretty damn overpowered.
So proto hulls were removed, but they lest in the proto AV. This created a vacuum, In the beginning of uprising, where everyone still had the overpowered AV but not the tanks.
In short tanks and AV needs a crude form of tiericed, in that their is no proto hulls and their is proto AV. Otherwise you would start needing to adjust hardner profiles and damage mods and that is just not needed.
Tanks 514
I told you, I bloody well told you.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
|
Monkey MAC
Lost Millennium
1739
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 12:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
Tailss Prower wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:Tailss Prower wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:And as I said in every other tank thread, what do you do while you wait?
If you're defending a point do you just hide in a corner and hope the infantry don't mop you up?
Or do you somehow have to escape the onslaught of a hardened tank find a superior position where you know the tanker will not have hardeners can't escape and will eventually sucum to his demise? By which point, the battle is lost because the tankered slaughtered everyone at the letter and really your kill is worth nothing more than petty revenge on a tankers wallet?
Yes hardners are meant to be strong, strong enough that assaulting a position because viable, not so strong that it guarentees success. If we are to go along logical lines it is safe to say that the ROLE of AV (excluding its use in gorilla warfare tactics) should be to stave off an assault from a Heavy Attack Vehicle. It needs to be strong enough that tanker will be forced to pull out of the assault BEFORE his hardners run out.
So for example the shield hardner giving 40 secs, up time, it would be fair to assume that AV could make it pull out at maybe 20-30 secs, this is one AV user.
This is what the whole waves of opportunity philosophy is all about.
A wave of OPPURTUNITY
Not, A wave of slaughter everything that moves with very little chance of reprisal.
And for the love of god blasters don't need a buff, they kill faster than an AR, with magazine nearly 3 times the size, that should be enough. That is true but you got to look at it from the way CCP made the game which some don't seem to do and that is the Teir system as ****** up a system it is they still made and use it militia is at the bottom of the bracket and therefor should be the weakest if you used adv or proto with dmg mods and prof at a decent lvl like say 3+ you will achive this goal quite easily as a tanker I've had it plenty of times where I was made to run by groups or even a single infantry hitting me with hardcore AV setups and have even killed me I've had to run many times i'm also a sniper and I normally use a railgun not a blaster hell I don't even got blasters lvled up so if I can I will snipe him otherwise I will run Well that is true but also if you look at how CCP have done the game from my perspective. There aren't any tiered hulls, yet their is tiered AV. So either a std a AV unit should be capable of combating a tank with std level mods or tiering with AV is pointless. This doesn't happen as Im sure you are aware, so unless they are going to make the same mistake they did in chromosone amd give proto hulls, then balance tiered AV we would be better with just mlt and std AV. For clarification on what I mean, back in chromo we had tiered hulls AND tiered AV, BUT anything less would get wrecked by both. So proto AV was overpowered against std tanks, yet proto tanks were pretty damn overpowered. So proto hulls were removed, but they lest in the proto AV. This created a vacuum, In the beginning of uprising, where everyone still had the overpowered AV but not the tanks. In short tanks and AV needs a crude form of tiericed, in that their is no proto hulls and their is proto AV. Otherwise you would start needing to adjust hardner profiles and damage mods and that is just not needed. I've been around for a long time so I knew what you mean't but it's always was unbalanced in some way thus is the reason they went back to the basics with tanks there will be more tier hulls just not until everything is sorted out right now it feels more balanced then it ever has when it comes to av and tanks I can't make these idiots use swarms or forge guns above std lvl if they not smart enough to go higher on the tier to take out tanks then even if there was a adv and proto tank they couldn't be helped while I get what you mean I feel it's more balanced now then it ever was not including blasters I'm even wondering what CCP wants from them they op to infantry which for a tank ain't to big a deal when you compare it to a gattling gun in real life and underpowered vs a tank so blaster overall is all ****** up
I agree, tanks are more balanced now then they have ever been, CCP has the right philosophy with this waves of opportunity its just a matter of implementing it correctly.
But I will agree to disagree when it comes to adding tiered hulls, I would prefer that they just add specilizations likd the assault and logi suits to the medium suit.
However lets move on to blasters, it is another interesting point you have brought up, personally I believe they should remain as anti-infantry afterall if you remove the ability for a tanker in his tank to effect the infantfy ground battle whats the point in having tanks at all? Instead what needs to happen is the blasters ability for continuous fire needs to be re adjusted. Increase heat buil up slightly, lower heat disapation., this allows it to still be devasting to infantry but in shorter waves, with longer times for repute.
Tanks 514
I told you, I bloody well told you.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
|
Monkey MAC
Lost Millennium
1739
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 12:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tailss Prower wrote:That is actually what I have been throwing around as an idear if blasters were to be anti-infantry make it over heat faster and right now I think it has to much ammo maybe lower dmg just a little and lower ammo clip like in half you over heat before even using like 30% of the clip
That could work, the problem with infantry vs tank warfare is the tanks ability to, just keep going.
The waves of opportunity is two tiered, an opportunity for tanks to attack, and lots of little pushes for infantry under seige.
This has probably the most level header discussion about tanks for a while, but alas I must dash, my Operating Systems lecture is starting.
Tanks 514
I told you, I bloody well told you.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl.1
|
|
|
| |
|