|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MINA Longstrike
802
   |
Posted - 2014.05.28 05:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
Brokerib wrote:As vehicles of all sorts are inherently 'noisier' that dropsuits, I would suggest that they be visible on passive scan at greater distances. It seems unbelievable that my scout, that can pick up a light suit (45dB, or the sound of a quiet conversation) at 16m, is unable to pick up a tank (~200dB) until it is within the same range.
Visibility should be based on the vehicle type (light/medium/heavy), and reducible through modules (for a stealth LAV for instance).
Suggested ranges for different vehicle types.
LAV: detectable at 70m
MAV: detectable at 90m
HAV: detectable at 120m (larger than the mini-map radius)
DS/ADS: detectable at 100m (vertical distance would need to be taken into account)
This would assist infantry with avoidance and counter of vehicles, within the current meta.
No. DB rating does not merely refer to sound.
Also, STOP RELYING ON YOUR PASSIVE SCANS FOR ****ING EVERYTHING. You want to 'see' a vehicle? find a safe spot and pull up the tactical map or actually ****ing look around and use your goddamned eyes. This thread screams "I want to have adequate time to hide like a ****ing coward any time a vehicle is around ever" at 100m in a dropship you haven't even RENDERED, and at 75m you are so small you can only be seen if you are moving.
Yes getting killed by vehicles with zero recourse is frustrating and I can sympathize as its not possible for my vehicle oriented character to fight 5 tanks or 5 dropships solo even with the abysmal vehicle TTK's, but that does not mean the vehicle role needs to be ripped to pieces by terrible ideas.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
MINA Longstrike
803
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 10:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
Profile/precision doesn't matter, scan range does, i apologize for ewar being utterly awful but that in no way excuses your demands that all infantry should always be able to passive scan vehicles within a 70-120m range.
In regards to 'avoidance' the vast majority of infantry see av as a chore - an unrewarding one at that - unless a vehicle is providing an insane level of hindrance to doing what you want to do the obvious logical choice is to avoid it, which everyone will do all the time now. It doesn't matter that most points are already indoors, elevated, surrounded by walls or obstructing objects already, no you want complete immunity from vehicles. All because a few mean tanks killed you.
This 'suggestion' doesn't fix things, it exacerbates problems and makes things much, much worse. I'm not sure if its out of ignorance or simply spite but you have suggested something so destructive that if it were implemented might as well remove vehicles from the game.
Have you ever tried to kill an infantry player determined to take cover behind a silo after they've noticed you while in a tank or dropship? It is not easy at all, you want to give this to *everyone on the ground without exception*. "But some tanks go 30-0" that takes insane amounts of effort and a lot of player skill it's easier to get k/d scores like that as an infantry player than it is as a vehicle.
Your suggestion is bad. Oh, and you referenced the volume of a conversation in regards to the Db measurement, when the Db measurement in this case refers to an electronic measurement, so don't backpedal on 'noisy'.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
MINA Longstrike
803
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 11:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
Vehicles give up slots for those modules and they don't catch everything, in fact most vehicles don't even fit them due to CPU restrictions and other modules outright being better.
Infantry already can avoid vehicles and do it with *incredible frequency*, you want to give *all* infantry the passive scanning range of a caldari scout or 80% better. If you cannot see how this would affect the game in a negative manner you'd have to be dumb. It isn't trolling to tell you that this is outright ****ing overpowered, and unnecessary HTFU and use your eyes.
Don't create a false dichotomy, logical fallacies don't win arguments or prevent this from being one of the most damaging suggestions I've ever seen.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
|
|
| |
|