|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1562
   |
Posted - 2014.02.17 18:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
Well logically the front and sides would have the highest and most likly the same ammount of dammage resistance as that is the sides you would expect to be engaging the enimy from.
Its gone from suck .....to blow
level 1 forum warrior
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1562
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 18:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
What I could dig would be weakspots like between the tracks next to the entry hatch or other specific parts but not a bonus to dammage right allong the sides for example as it is the part with the highest surface area and thusly the easyest bit to hit so giving it a dammage bonus would be a bit unfair and also verry illogical .
I allready think that dammage bonuses on any area of a shielded vehicle is quite illogical to start with.
Its gone from suck .....to blow
level 1 forum warrior
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1562
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 18:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
INFINITE DIVERSITY IDIC wrote:Zekain K wrote:Instead of just having the one fragule area in the back, what if the sides of a tank were also slightly less resistant then the front? Also, what if the back of the tank had slightly less resistance then the sides? Doing something like that could actually change the feel of tank warfare pretty drastically.
Flanking would actually matter more.
tankers would probably be hesitant to barge into crowded areas.
AV weapons could actually deal a reasonable amount of damage if the right area is hit.
We would still have the fragile weak spot at the back, but it wouldn't be a tanks only weak spot. Please show me the thread where a CCP dev has said there is a weak spot now, I see no evidence that one currently exists on tanks.
Take a forge gun and aim it at the back of a tank you will get a much mich higger efficiency rating whill shooting at the fuell celks at the back so yes there is weak spots.
Its gone from suck .....to blow
level 1 forum warrior
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1562
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 18:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
INFINITE DIVERSITY IDIC wrote:pegasis prime wrote:INFINITE DIVERSITY IDIC wrote:Zekain K wrote:Instead of just having the one fragule area in the back, what if the sides of a tank were also slightly less resistant then the front? Also, what if the back of the tank had slightly less resistance then the sides? Doing something like that could actually change the feel of tank warfare pretty drastically.
Flanking would actually matter more.
tankers would probably be hesitant to barge into crowded areas.
AV weapons could actually deal a reasonable amount of damage if the right area is hit.
We would still have the fragile weak spot at the back, but it wouldn't be a tanks only weak spot. Please show me the thread where a CCP dev has said there is a weak spot now, I see no evidence that one currently exists on tanks. Take a forge gun and aim it at the back of a tank you will get a much mich higger efficiency rating whill shooting at the fuell celks at the back so yes there is weak spots. Ya, I thought thats what you were going by, but nothing from devs on a weak spot?
Ok are you new or have you realised the devs dont confirm or deny verry much at all. Now if you shoot at a hav with 100% efficiency with a wepon that deals 1000 dammage you wil deall 1000 dammage before resistance now if you shoot at it with 204% efficiency like you get when you aim at the back of a tank you will deal 2400 dammage before resistance.
So lets recap when aiming at a tank and you get 100% efficiency at the front and 204% efficiency at the back id say the back is the weak spot ..... yes no?
Its gone from suck .....to blow
level 1 forum warrior
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1563
|
Posted - 2014.02.17 20:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
Smooth Assassin wrote:How about if hardeners will have no affected on the back of tanks?
*slap............."no .. no "........slap slap.
Its gone from suck .....to blow
level 1 forum warrior
|
|
|
| |
|