Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
423
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 23:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
ok, before the main area of the topic; give you some background so maybe what I say have some credibility. From the start of REPLICATION (that's May 2012), I have ran some form of proto AV (be sworms, FG w/ AV nades) from then through this build. Along w/ 2.5yrs worth of AV experience, I have also dabbled in tanks during differ builds on alts, etc; using both shield/armor (though my knowledge is less in that area). To help w/ this post, I even capped out this week for the first time in 8 months to have current ingame knowledge of the interaction b/t AV-vehicles. Now, on with the show
1). First and foremost, vehicles (both tank and dropships) are NOT OP. The problem isn't the vehicle themselves, but how the modules work, and what they do that make tanks OP at the moment. ex: other game, found a 1/2 hp (meaning only 2k armor) left Mady, rolling around. I get the postion and surprise advantage on the tank while it was dead stopped in middle of open terrain. I shot off all 6 rounds of my proto SL (w/ prof 5 & 3 complex damage mods). After the first hit of the SL, the tank activated its reps and 2nd hardener (in which the tank only have 1/4 armor left after first shot). The next 5 shots, kept putting the tank down to 1/4 armor, but no more b/c of the oo loop of reps and hardeners going about it. Yes some tankers will say you shouldn't be able to solo a tank, yet will say that is BS. Not b/c of me being an AV'er but for balance reason (get into more later). Just for those who care, w/ 6 full hitting vollies of my SL, that is 11.3k damage.
2). AV simply put is underpowered. Aside from the FG, which damage hasn't really changed to much, AV as a whole is underpowered. Fixes: a). SL: per damage rocket up to 275 (for a start to see how it works on balance) . With my setup that is an increase of 80 damage per rocket, so 480 per volley b). Increase SL mag size back to 4 (including change to Mini assault bonus to not have it do the increase); along w/ giving it a reserve of 8. Keeping it less then the total rounds of the FG, but more then PsC c). SL range increase to 300-350m. SL is a long range weapon. Yes they are fire and forget, but can be "dodged" easily after first volley is hit (even if locked), as missile will hit into objects/terrain. d). AV-nades need their pre 1.7 damage back; at least at proto level. A 1.2M skilled item should be OHK a free unskilled LAV e). Plasma Cannon damage increase. Simply put for a one & done shot it is to weak. It has a slow travel time, really short range, and arc. Damage from this need to give tanks the WTF OMG scene, as they have a low ammo count, along w/ a reload after each shot. Damage should be up to 1250/1500/1750 respectively. This gives a good counter to all the above listed negatives they have. This also allows non heavy suit user a possibly extra way of protection (like how people FG snipe or use as anti-infantry)
3). This goes back to #1, but vehicles as a whole need to have hardener modules looked into. The amount of reduction isn't the problem, its more along the time they last, and the cooldown they have. I have no real idea how to fix for balance on this atm; however REAL tankers plz comment on this one. Not sure if their are passive hardeners anymore; but if not, a 1 hardener limit might be needed (however, I rather see hardeners changed then make a limit on them)
4). ADD ADC & PROTO VEHCILES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This have been one of the biggest issues since Codex. Cant fully balance AV-vehicles when you don't have the adc/proto vehicles to see how AV affects them
5). Understand the tier balance. As it is, when I've played ive been one of the most outspoken on tier balance for AV-vehicles. As it is, AV should more or less have the advantage against vehicles, BECAUSE (as #4 says) you don't have adv/proto vehicles. It would/should only be natural that AV has the current advantage. a). As is, AV should be able to rip though Soma/Sica's and take a **** on their burnt up hulls no Q's asked. b). AV should have more of a difficult time against Gung/Mady however should still be able to solo, especially if using PROTO (not even adv. Adv should be a toss up at best, but maybe a 60% advantage to AV for tier advantage, but minimal advantage none less). Basic gear should be equal to, or even at disadvantage to Mady/Gung (55% adv for vehicles here).
So yeah, will have more when can think/focus. Let the discussion/flame/hatemail/etc begin .... GO
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Travis Stanush
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
23
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 00:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
+1 for a well thought out post.
|
Thumb Green
Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation
790
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 00:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
I can agree with all that.
I'd like to point out though that vehicle armor reps are passive now; if it's on there it's always running.
I'd also like to add that forge guns need their pre 1.7 charge time back. It's too easy for a tank to escape before you even empty a clip into them even with the assault forge gun; unless you're sitting up high with a clear long range view or the tanker is an idiot and just sits there.
Support Orbital Spawns
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
14
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 00:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
First of all I'm going to say I like your post, and (in general like what you're saying)
I'm a Support Logi, tanker, AVer...so not 100% true tanker...But I'll respond to point 3 as best I can. First off, there are no passive hardeners. The duration/effectiveness of active hardeners is something that needs looked at IMO...and this includes in relation with each other. The best fix to the overall vehicle problem would be to resurrect the idea of the vehicle capacitor...but I don't see that happening. So my thought is that hardeners need their individual effectiveness penalized for fitting multiple hardeners (since there is the absence of the capacitor to make up for duration problems)...this would be in addition to a stacking penalty for having multiple active at the same time
Ex. (numbers don't actually mean anything just here for example)
When fit and activated individually 1 hardener 60% resist 2 hardeners 50% resist each 3 hardeners 40% resist.
When fit an activated together 1 harder 60% 2 hardeners 50% + 25% (50% of the remaining 50%) = 75% 4 hardeners 40% + 24%(40% of remaining 60%) + 14.4% (40% of the remaining 36%)= 78.4%
This limits hardeners without limiting hardeners (creates a practical ceiling that you can only advance a few % above)That's just my thoughts...keep in mind that those are only the basic numbers, and there's probably more of a stacking penalty already built in (Like in eve).
Now for Miscellaneous points
Vehicle armor repairers are passive modules now. (and I'd like to see an active, charge based Ancillary Armor Rep) Swarm Damage and Flight speed both need slight buffs MLT (and by extension 'Dren') Swarms need to have the full magazine size of STD (to make them useful) even if that means even higher fitting cost to offset AV grenades need some sort of buff Swarm Launcher lock range was decreased (to my knowledge at least) to combat a draw distance bug...it was my understanding it was supposed to come back at some point anyway (getting killed by several salvos of invisible rockets...you couldn't dodge them because you couldn't see them) Plasma Cannon could benefit from a tracer round or other targeting interface to make it easier to use (currently, when Plasma Cannons hit shield tanks, they are devastating). People need to remember that the Flux Grenade is an awesome AV weapon |
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1668
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 00:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
My problem with vehicles is that no one tries. There will be four HAVs on the field and I will be the only one actually trying to kill them with AV. With an advanced PLC, prox mines and standard AV nades I can usually get HAVs in to low armor but without help killing them is difficult. A full sqaud of AV mercs will wreck any vehicle we have very quickly. Three PLCs in a squad would just about do it. I like the heavy armor the way it is because it actually take some teamwork to get things done. For the record I don't have 1 point of SP in any vehicle skill and I have ridden in about two HAVs in the past month or two. I find HAVs boring to be in.
"You people voted for Hubert Humphrey, and you killed Jesus."
Raoul Duke
|
DeadlyAztec11
Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation
4334
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 00:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
Proto Vehicles?
What, so like 30m ISK per Tank?
My alts: General John Ripper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Anarchide, Long Evity
And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
431
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:02:00 -
[7] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:My problem with vehicles is that no one tries. There will be four HAVs on the field and I will be the only one actually trying to kill them with AV. With an advanced PLC, prox mines and standard AV nades I can usually get HAVs in to low armor but without help killing them is difficult. A full sqaud of AV mercs will wreck any vehicle we have very quickly. Three PLCs in a squad would just about do it. I like the heavy armor the way it is because it actually take some teamwork to get things done. For the record I don't have 1 point of SP in any vehicle skill and I have ridden in about two HAVs in the past month or two. I find HAVs boring to be in.
I think at the moment people don't "try" b/c at a certain point, it is just ridiculous that a militia tank can "shrug" off proto AV and takes several people to destroy. Like I said in my post, im a "firm" believer in the tier balance, and there isn't any at the moment, so for someone to take out adv/proto AV in a pub game in hopes of something helping to take out the vehicle with slim chance of doing so isn't full worth it.
Once there gets some resemblance of balance b/t AV and vehicles I think it will be "easier"/better in terms of how the interaction works. But from my example in my original post, about a 1/2 hp Mady begin hit by my 11.3k damage worth of smarms, along w/ a Fg be4 me and after to still survive is a bit crazy
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
431
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:03:00 -
[8] - Quote
DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Proto Vehicles?
What, so like 30m ISK per Tank?
no, figure if keep hulls as it (though think should go back to the 200k hull. Have adv hull be 350-500k ; and proto hulls be 500800k. Yes, they are costly, but hopefully worth it as well if/when introduction
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p
TRA1LBLAZERS
684
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:04:00 -
[9] - Quote
inb4 spkr and tankahiro
Kills- Archduke Ferdinand
Balance!
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
431
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:06:00 -
[10] - Quote
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:inb4 spkr and tankahiro
LOLz , +1 for that. Though is good to see actual logical thinking so far; when they hit the thread all logical will go out the window
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
|
Otavio Martins
The Sound Of Freedom Renegade Alliance
208
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:11:00 -
[11] - Quote
give us tankers proposition number 4 and we can talk. i bet we will be much more flexible after this
RC-1087
Star Wars Fan.
Please gimme some ISK.
|
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p
TRA1LBLAZERS
684
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:11:00 -
[12] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:inb4 spkr and tankahiro LOLz , +1 for that. Though is good to see actual logical thinking so far; when they hit the thread all logical will go out the window I personally think there needs to be an "abandon thread" button for whenever they comment on anything, it would save a lot of anger and unnecessary illogical statements. Personally, you pretty much summed up how vehicles should be, and yeah limit of one hardener would be balanced.
This is my MLT tank fit, and i can kill other tanks and infantry with impunity, and I'm a miserable tanker
Shield tank (i dont remember which is which) 2x shield hardeners 1x armor hardener 1x armor plate 1x blaster
i don't get why i can be almost permahardened, 2 shot infantry, and 3x faster than the fastest unit in the game with maxed kin cats sprinting. All this with 0 sp invested
Kills- Archduke Ferdinand
Balance!
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
432
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:16:00 -
[13] - Quote
Otavio Martins wrote:give us tankers proposition number 4 and we can talk. i bet we will be much more flexible after this
gladly . Not because I wana be a masochist, but I think this will help the balance issue.
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Logi Stician
The Vanguardians INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS
254
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:inb4 spkr and tankahiro
Oh my. I get it now. tankahiro TANKER HERO!!!
"...and I'm the seventh out of seven sons, my pappy was a pistol, I'm a son of a gun. "
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
Science For Death
1715
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:40:00 -
[15] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:Otavio Martins wrote:give us tankers proposition number 4 and we can talk. i bet we will be much more flexible after this gladly . Not because I wana be a masochist, but I think this will help the balance issue.
The thing about proto vehicles is that if they're stronger than current STD objectively rather than situationally, like Dropsuits as opposed to Enforcers, AV will need to be buffed to be proportionately powerful.
If I can be bothered getting into a proper position with my FG (and I'm not r*tarded and unable to shoot that day) I can solo most MLT HAVs (except hardener stacked Sicas) and I can either kill or put a serious dent in STD hulls. I just don't think this is a good idea for improving the V-AV relationship. Removing hardener stacking, buffing light AV and reducing speed would do wonders, I think.
Forge on for great justice!
Defend the meek! Destroy the weak!
Q-sync breaches into the rectum of everyone else!
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
437
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:44:00 -
[16] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Berserker007 wrote:Otavio Martins wrote:give us tankers proposition number 4 and we can talk. i bet we will be much more flexible after this gladly . Not because I wana be a masochist, but I think this will help the balance issue. The thing about proto vehicles is that if they're stronger than current STD objectively rather than situationally, like Dropsuits as opposed to Enforcers, AV will need to be buffed to be proportionately powerful. If I can be bothered getting into a proper position with my FG (and I'm not r*tarded and unable to shoot that day) I can solo most MLT HAVs (except hardener stacked Sicas) and I can either kill or put a serious dent in STD hulls. I just don't think this is a good idea for improving the V-AV relationship. Removing hardener stacking, buffing light AV and reducing speed would do wonders, I think.
well the thing is, we wont really know how things will work unless they are there. it is easier for a [competent] developer to add items to then balance, then it would be to balance something against an imaginary object. if adv/proto vehicles are way to overpowered compared to what proto av can do (even if multiple) then theoretically it'd be easy to make some what that would balance things out.
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
4799
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:46:00 -
[17] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:ok, before the main area of the topic; give you some background so maybe what I say have some credibility. From the start of REPLICATION (that's May 2012), I have ran some form of proto AV (be sworms, FG w/ AV nades) from then through this build. Along w/ 2.5yrs worth of AV experience, I have also dabbled in tanks during differ builds on alts, etc; using both shield/armor (though my knowledge is less in that area). To help w/ this post, I even capped out this week for the first time in 8 months to have current ingame knowledge of the interaction b/t AV-vehicles. Now, on with the show
1). First and foremost, vehicles (both tank and dropships) are NOT OP. The problem isn't the vehicle themselves, but how the modules work, and what they do that make tanks OP at the moment. ex: other game, found a 1/2 hp (meaning only 2k armor) left Mady, rolling around. I get the postion and surprise advantage on the tank while it was dead stopped in middle of open terrain. I shot off all 6 rounds of my proto SL (w/ prof 5 & 3 complex damage mods). After the first hit of the SL, the tank activated its reps and 2nd hardener (in which the tank only have 1/4 armor left after first shot). The next 5 shots, kept putting the tank down to 1/4 armor, but no more b/c of the oo loop of reps and hardeners going about it. Yes some tankers will say you shouldn't be able to solo a tank, yet will say that is BS. Not b/c of me being an AV'er but for balance reason (get into more later). Just for those who care, w/ 6 full hitting vollies of my SL, that is 11.3k damage. Agreed, especially on the "AV should solo part."
If you are out-played by an AV'er, you deserve to die. No amount of SP, ISK, LP, nor AUR should allow anyone to purchase gear that makes it literally and/or theoretically impossible to be killed or destroyed by more than one person. Especially when you only have 16 players to your disposal.
This would also automatically make HAVs and other vehicles the best counter to themselves, which is also illogical. Nothing should ever become the best counter to itself; that creates both spam and a FoTM (which is exactly what we have now)
Berserker007 wrote:2). AV simply put is underpowered. Aside from the FG, which damage hasn't really changed to much, AV as a whole is underpowered. Fixes: a). SL: per damage rocket up to 275 (for a start to see how it works on balance) . With my setup that is an increase of 80 damage per rocket, so 480 per volley b). Increase SL mag size back to 4 (including change to Mini assault bonus to not have it do the increase); along w/ giving it a reserve of 8. Keeping it less then the total rounds of the FG, but more then PsC c). SL range increase to 300-350m. SL is a long range weapon. Yes they are fire and forget, but can be "dodged" easily after first volley is hit (even if locked), as missile will hit into objects/terrain. d). AV-nades need their pre 1.7 damage back; at least at proto level. A 1.2M skilled item should be OHK a free unskilled LAV e). Plasma Cannon damage increase. Simply put for a one & done shot it is to weak. It has a slow travel time, really short range, and arc. Damage from this need to give tanks the WTF OMG scene, as they have a low ammo count, along w/ a reload after each shot. Damage should be up to 1250/1500/1750 respectively. This gives a good counter to all the above listed negatives they have. This also allows non heavy suit user a possibly extra way of protection (like how people FG snipe or use as anti-infantry) Swarms may be "fire and forget" but the skill in using them comes from positioning and timing. Sure, anyone could fire Swarms from 400m away back then, but unless you were on Manus Peak there's no way in he!l you were gonna hit your target. Along with this, Swarm Launcher's high fitting requirements mean that it's impossible to have high HP, and even more so because you have to sacrifice "tank" for "gank" (Damage Mods)
Also, 300-350m is beyond it's rendering range, so I think it would only be fair to add an alarm system and give DSs flares once the swarms are beyond rendering distance.
I agree on the PLC buff, but 1750HP doesn't really give a WTF Just Happened?!" effect effect when I have about 3-4k Shields, and 2k Armor.. I believe that direct damage should be (1320/1650/1980) across respective tiers.
((I had to remove the rest as I reaced the Max. Character limit, but I do agree with your other points lol))
-HAND
Atiim (Gunnlogi - 80GJ Particle Cannon) Tank Scrub
|
Kigurosaka Laaksonen
DUST University Ivy League
324
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:49:00 -
[18] - Quote
"Swarms may be "fire and forget" but the skill in using them comes from positioning and timing."
Anything in there about coordinating volleys with other swarm launchers?
DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/
EVE Buddy Invite - Too damn long. Ask me for it.
|
Harpyja
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1162
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 01:52:00 -
[19] - Quote
I think AV grenades should stay as they are. It's the LAVs that need to lose HP.
"By His light, and His will"
- The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
|
Auris Lionesse
Capital Acquisitions LLC Renegade Alliance
235
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 02:15:00 -
[20] - Quote
Agreed but I don't see the point in plasma cannon. Just use forge. much faster and more accurate. Unless plasma wants to start at 2500 it'll still be worthless for WTF damage against tanks. |
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
439
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 02:26:00 -
[21] - Quote
Atiim wrote:
Also, 300-350m is beyond it's rendering range, so I think it would only be fair to add an alarm system and give DSs flares once the swarms are beyond rendering distance.
I agree on the PLC buff, but 1750HP doesn't really give a WTF Just Happened?!" effect effect when I have about 3-4k Shields, and 2k Armor.. I believe that direct damage should be (1320/1650/1980) across respective tiers.
((I had to remove the rest as I reaced the Max. Character limit, but I do agree with your other points lol))
-HAND
thanks for the post and agreement on stuff. In regards to the swarm range, that could work (the alert), or maybe the devs/programmers could do their job so swarms render at that range maybe.....
Also for the PLC, I figured 1750 would work, b/c you can then take 15% from prof 5, say 2 10% mods, and the nature 20% bonus to shield would make it very scary in its own right (as w/ example there, at this 2850 damage in 1 shot for proto)
Again, cool to see someone else taking time to read the post (and heck even agreeing to an extent), as I'd like to believe im being quite unbiased in my opinions/fixes/observations
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
439
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 02:29:00 -
[22] - Quote
Auris Lionesse wrote:Agreed but I don't see the point in plasma cannon. Just use forge. much faster and more accurate. Unless plasma wants to start at 2500 it'll still be worthless for WTF damage against tanks.
PLC is a 120/80% efficiency rating I believe, where FG is a 90/110. Granted with the"rof" of a FG it will out dps the PLC. Though I was being generous at the 1750 for proto PLC; I originally had it at over 2k, but figured it may of been to high when take damage efficiencies into account
Harpyja wrote:I think AV grenades should stay as they are. It's the LAVs that need to lose HP.
Simply, no . The problem isn't the hp of the lav's, its the damage output of the AV nades; b/c the av nades also need to be effective as well. At their current state, they are worthless against vehicles (even w/o hardeners active), which shouldn't be. One of the benefits of how AV nades worked, was it allowed players who weren't running with a SL/FG/PLC to have some impact against vehicles, as otherwise you had to run w/ your tail b/t your legs (even against militia lavs).
So yeah, the lav HP isn't the problem, its the AV-nade damage. It's simply to weak
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1670
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 02:36:00 -
[23] - Quote
Just got done with a match with a HAV killing everyone. Me and one other guy was trying to destroy the HAV. I had it to half armor by myself...just never mind.
"You people voted for Hubert Humphrey, and you killed Jesus."
Raoul Duke
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
439
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 02:47:00 -
[24] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:Just got done with a match with a HAV killing everyone. Me and one other guy was trying to destroy the HAV. I had it to half armor by myself...just never mind.
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1670
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 02:58:00 -
[25] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:The Robot Devil wrote:Just got done with a match with a HAV killing everyone. Me and one other guy was trying to destroy the HAV. I had it to half armor by myself...just never mind.
You bastard. I was trying to do some crying and you are going to laugh at me. Now I am sad.
"You people voted for Hubert Humphrey, and you killed Jesus."
Raoul Duke
|
noobsniper the 2nd
POISION ROSES Galactic Skyfleet Empire
165
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 03:04:00 -
[26] - Quote
Just specinto prof 5 forges all your problems will go away trust me
just call me scumbag noob
MAG vet raven ftw
|
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1670
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 03:33:00 -
[27] - Quote
noobsniper the 2nd wrote:Just specinto prof 5 forges all your problems will go away trust me
Anytime you see me in game drop me a line and I will support you all day.
"You people voted for Hubert Humphrey, and you killed Jesus."
Raoul Duke
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
442
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 03:34:00 -
[28] - Quote
noobsniper the 2nd wrote:Just specinto prof 5 forges all your problems will go away trust me
These ideas are the problem here. This isn't a crying about tanks being OP, this is a way to fix things. Saying spec into something else isn't fixing the issue of how other forms of AV are effective. The game NEEDS to be balanced.
So before you post here (or on any topic) that is actually a non-troll/legit topic of people pooling their idea/mind, think for a minute. If you think what you have to say is "trollish" then just let it go, read the topic and enjoy but don't give input
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
wait reloading
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 06:20:00 -
[29] - Quote
- limit hardner modules and give a hull more hp -Assault SL is also useless, who wants to lock onto 2 targets -Raise damage on standard SL, with a shorter lock-on range or missile flight time - Give Assault SL longer lock-on range and flight time at the cost of damage. Something to keep those DS back - Let the min assault get a suit bonus for projectile speeds
but shield tanks are fairly easy provided you can get close enough to them to flux, what will they harden if they have no shield
|
NK Scout
Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State
453
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 06:23:00 -
[30] - Quote
wait reloading wrote: - limit hardner modules and give a hull more hp -Assault SL is also useless, who wants to lock onto 2 targets -Raise damage on standard SL, with a shorter lock-on range or missile flight time - Give Assault SL longer lock-on range and flight time at the cost of damage. Something to keep those DS back - Let the min assault get a suit bonus for projectile speeds
but shield tanks are fairly easy provided you can get close enough to them to flux, what will they harden if they have no shield
Oh and reduce depleted delay to 6 seconds 20 Is too long
2 exiles assault rifles,
Skinweave caldari frame,
Staff recruiter mlt frame,
Templar set
Caldari Master Race
|
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
4806
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 14:47:00 -
[31] - Quote
NK Scout wrote:wait reloading wrote: - limit hardner modules and give a hull more hp -Assault SL is also useless, who wants to lock onto 2 targets -Raise damage on standard SL, with a shorter lock-on range or missile flight time - Give Assault SL longer lock-on range and flight time at the cost of damage. Something to keep those DS back - Let the min assault get a suit bonus for projectile speeds
but shield tanks are fairly easy provided you can get close enough to them to flux, what will they harden if they have no shield
Oh and reduce depleted delay to 6 seconds 20 Is too long 20s is fine. 6s? At what 200HP/s? No.
Gunnlogies are hit and run vehicles. If you find your shields gone then your are either fighting a tank, or you were caught by AV without your hardeners on; which should easily destroy you.
Atiim (Gunnlogi - 80GJ Particle Cannon) Tank Scrub
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
4806
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 14:49:00 -
[32] - Quote
wait reloading wrote: - limit hardner modules and give a hull more hp -Assault SL is also useless, who wants to lock onto 2 targets -Raise damage on standard SL, with a shorter lock-on range or missile flight time - Give Assault SL longer lock-on range and flight time at the cost of damage. Something to keep those DS back - Let the min assault get a suit bonus for projectile speeds
but shield tanks are fairly easy provided you can get close enough to them to flux, what will they harden if they have no shield
How about we create a Breach Swarm a Launcher instead?
-High Damage -Slightly Slower Swarm Speed -Shorter Lock Radius
Variety is always best.
Atiim (Gunnlogi - 80GJ Particle Cannon) Tank Scrub
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
4806
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 14:55:00 -
[33] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:Atiim wrote:
Also, 300-350m is beyond it's rendering range, so I think it would only be fair to add an alarm system and give DSs flares once the swarms are beyond rendering distance.
I agree on the PLC buff, but 1750HP doesn't really give a WTF Just Happened?!" effect effect when I have about 3-4k Shields, and 2k Armor.. I believe that direct damage should be (1320/1650/1980) across respective tiers.
((I had to remove the rest as I reaced the Max. Character limit, but I do agree with your other points lol))
-HAND
thanks for the post and agreement on stuff. In regards to the swarm range, that could work (the alert), or maybe the devs/programmers could do their job so swarms render at that range maybe..... Also for the PLC, I figured 1750 would work, b/c you can then take 15% from prof 5, say 2 10% mods, and the nature 20% bonus to shield would make it very scary in its own right (as w/ example there, at this 2850 damage in 1 shot for proto) Again, cool to see someone else taking time to read the post (and heck even agreeing to an extent), as I'd like to believe im being quite unbiased in my opinions/fixes/observations CCP has stated that they can't find the bug that's causing the SL rendering problems, so they won't be able to do their jobs for a while. (Assuming they do in the first place lol)
And I see what your going at. I kinda forgot about Proficency and Damage Mods. However CCP said that they were planing on nerfing Damage Modifers to address the TTK. I'd increase your direct damage model to reflect the changes.
You are being unbiased, and logical. That's why Spkr isn't here.
Atiim (Gunnlogi - 80GJ Particle Cannon) Tank Scrub
|
Harpyja
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1164
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 15:01:00 -
[34] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:Auris Lionesse wrote:Agreed but I don't see the point in plasma cannon. Just use forge. much faster and more accurate. Unless plasma wants to start at 2500 it'll still be worthless for WTF damage against tanks. PLC is a 120/80% efficiency rating I believe, where FG is a 90/110. Granted with the"rof" of a FG it will out dps the PLC. Though I was being generous at the 1750 for proto PLC; I originally had it at over 2k, but figured it may of been to high when take damage efficiencies into account Harpyja wrote:I think AV grenades should stay as they are. It's the LAVs that need to lose HP. Simply, no . The problem isn't the hp of the lav's, its the damage output of the AV nades; b/c the av nades also need to be effective as well. At their current state, they are worthless against vehicles (even w/o hardeners active), which shouldn't be. One of the benefits of how AV nades worked, was it allowed players who weren't running with a SL/FG/PLC to have some impact against vehicles, as otherwise you had to run w/ your tail b/t your legs (even against militia lavs). So yeah, the lav HP isn't the problem, its the AV-nade damage. It's simply to weak No AV grenades are just fine. Before 1.7, you gave up almost no AI capabilities while you got a significant AV capability. It was all about going YOLO, throwing down a nanohive, and spam those grenades at a tank until it blew up a few seconds later. I still remember that match where a couple squad members and I were running around in our anti-infantry suits with AV grenades, killing reds, then we decided to go YOLO on these two tanks on their redline and blew them up with nothing but AV grenades and some nanohives (I also only had standard AV grenades), then went back to killing some infantry on their redline.
"By His light, and His will"
- The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
4806
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 15:04:00 -
[35] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Berserker007 wrote:Auris Lionesse wrote:Agreed but I don't see the point in plasma cannon. Just use forge. much faster and more accurate. Unless plasma wants to start at 2500 it'll still be worthless for WTF damage against tanks. PLC is a 120/80% efficiency rating I believe, where FG is a 90/110. Granted with the"rof" of a FG it will out dps the PLC. Though I was being generous at the 1750 for proto PLC; I originally had it at over 2k, but figured it may of been to high when take damage efficiencies into account Harpyja wrote:I think AV grenades should stay as they are. It's the LAVs that need to lose HP. Simply, no . The problem isn't the hp of the lav's, its the damage output of the AV nades; b/c the av nades also need to be effective as well. At their current state, they are worthless against vehicles (even w/o hardeners active), which shouldn't be. One of the benefits of how AV nades worked, was it allowed players who weren't running with a SL/FG/PLC to have some impact against vehicles, as otherwise you had to run w/ your tail b/t your legs (even against militia lavs). So yeah, the lav HP isn't the problem, its the AV-nade damage. It's simply to weak No AV grenades are just fine. Before 1.7, you gave up almost no AI capabilities while you got a significant AV capability. It was all about going YOLO, throwing down a nanohive, and spam those grenades at a tank until it blew up a few seconds later. I still remember that match where a couple squad members and I were running around in our anti-infantry suits with AV grenades, killing reds, then we decided to go YOLO on these two tanks on their redline and blew them up with nothing but AV grenades and some nanohives (I also only had standard AV grenades), then went back to killing some infantry on their redline. That required a tanker to be both a scrub, and standing still.
If you find yourself in AV Grenades range, then you need to go back to the academy.
Atiim (Gunnlogi - 80GJ Particle Cannon) Tank Scrub
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star. EoN.
2635
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 15:22:00 -
[36] - Quote
Armor tank at 2k health activates its reps? armor reps are passive
Hardeners are supposed to cut down the damage dealt to the tank
2. 250, they at 220 already now, small changes to find the balance
2.b Dunno, see how it goes when you change the damage 1st, if you change too many variables then you can screw it all up
2 c. lolno 300-350? So how can i defend my tank from tower campers who can cover the entire map again and knowing CCP the missiles wont bloody render, so that means i cant use blaster because it cant shoot to 300-350m, i cant use missile because they stop at 250m and i can only use railgun but need a direct hit against a bunny hopper who wont lose lock on at all. If you say small turrets then get out because they cannot reach to 300-350m either and it means i need a sniper for every match - Thats asking for 1.0 all over again
2 d. Give it a bonus to LAV damage then, but it is not a primary AV weapon it is a secondary AV support weapon, infantry complained the nades are being used as primary and are able OHK infantry suits why should it be the same for vehicles?
2 e. PLC needs buff more than fire and forget weapon imho
3. We lost passive resistance modules, we only have active left, that said the difference between basic/adv/complex is cooldown time and fitting requirements not resistance given which i feel should be also tiered so its an incentive to skill up and maybe use them. Also i have the cooldown and active time skills maxed to level 5, if i have earned the right to put 3 on it and have a constant perma tank going then its my choice i do this in EVE and frankly i wanted vehicles to be copy & pasted from EVE with the mods to DUST
4. I agree - Infantry and tierciders complain about this but how can we balance proto AV against basic hulls, i may have a proto turret and mods but the hull is basic, you have proto suits where is my proto tank if you make proto AV instapop basic hulls again then be are back to pre 1.7 again
5.Proto should be able to rip through all vehicles right now but since we cannot improve our hulls we would be left with pre 1.7 situation and be useless in all modes yet again making it infantry514
Intelligence is OP
|
Harpyja
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
1164
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 15:27:00 -
[37] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Harpyja wrote:Berserker007 wrote:Auris Lionesse wrote:Agreed but I don't see the point in plasma cannon. Just use forge. much faster and more accurate. Unless plasma wants to start at 2500 it'll still be worthless for WTF damage against tanks. PLC is a 120/80% efficiency rating I believe, where FG is a 90/110. Granted with the"rof" of a FG it will out dps the PLC. Though I was being generous at the 1750 for proto PLC; I originally had it at over 2k, but figured it may of been to high when take damage efficiencies into account Harpyja wrote:I think AV grenades should stay as they are. It's the LAVs that need to lose HP. Simply, no . The problem isn't the hp of the lav's, its the damage output of the AV nades; b/c the av nades also need to be effective as well. At their current state, they are worthless against vehicles (even w/o hardeners active), which shouldn't be. One of the benefits of how AV nades worked, was it allowed players who weren't running with a SL/FG/PLC to have some impact against vehicles, as otherwise you had to run w/ your tail b/t your legs (even against militia lavs). So yeah, the lav HP isn't the problem, its the AV-nade damage. It's simply to weak No AV grenades are just fine. Before 1.7, you gave up almost no AI capabilities while you got a significant AV capability. It was all about going YOLO, throwing down a nanohive, and spam those grenades at a tank until it blew up a few seconds later. I still remember that match where a couple squad members and I were running around in our anti-infantry suits with AV grenades, killing reds, then we decided to go YOLO on these two tanks on their redline and blew them up with nothing but AV grenades and some nanohives (I also only had standard AV grenades), then went back to killing some infantry on their redline. That required a tanker to be both a scrub, and standing still. If you find yourself in AV Grenades range, then you need to go back to the academy. That's because you're a rail tank scrub who only sits up in the mountains. I prefer to get up close and personal with my missiles, but that's not my point.
"By His light, and His will"
- The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
|
Jake Diesel
BIG BAD W0LVES
92
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 15:55:00 -
[38] - Quote
Thumb Green wrote:I can agree with all that.
I'd like to point out though that vehicle armor reps are passive now; if it's on there it's always running.
I'd also like to add that forge guns need their pre 1.7 charge time back. It's too easy for a tank to escape before you even empty a clip into them even with the assault forge gun; unless you're sitting up high with a clear long range view or the tanker is an idiot and just sits there.
+1 on charge time.
It used to be 1.8 secs to fire an assault forge and now it's 2.25 secs. Some people may not think this is a difference at all but it is. More so against one medium suit attacking the forger in close proximity and you can only get one chance to fire off the weapon before having to switch to either grenades and hope he runs onto it, or your sidearm with no damage mods to try and kill him before he kills you.
In close proximity, the forger fit is the most vulnerable heavy since 1.7 just from the charge time increase. They've already nerfed the blast radius by a great deal. But I'm somewhat ok with that. It helps keep most wannabe forgers out there from skilling into it and makes it more of a specialized weapon. Don't want it to be FOTM. |
Assault Chileanme
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
47
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 17:08:00 -
[39] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Berserker007 wrote:Simply, no . The problem isn't the hp of the lav's, its the damage output of the AV nades; b/c the av nades also need to be effective as well. At their current state, they are worthless against vehicles (even w/o hardeners active), which shouldn't be. One of the benefits of how AV nades worked, was it allowed players who weren't running with a SL/FG/PLC to have some impact against vehicles, as otherwise you had to run w/ your tail b/t your legs (even against militia lavs).
So yeah, the lav HP isn't the problem, its the AV-nade damage. It's simply to weak No AV grenades are just fine. Before 1.7, you gave up almost no AI capabilities while you got a significant AV capability. It was all about going YOLO, throwing down a nanohive, and spam those grenades at a tank until it blew up a few seconds later. I still remember that match where a couple squad members and I were running around in our anti-infantry suits with AV grenades, killing reds, then we decided to go YOLO on these two tanks on their redline and blew them up with nothing but AV grenades and some nanohives (I also only had standard AV grenades), then went back to killing some infantry on their redline. I strongly disagree. I think that if any vehicle gets close enough to infantry to be hit by grenades then they deserve to take a beating. Tanks have to have some disadvantages, and close quarters combat should definitely be one of them. Tanks should be scared to enter complexes and more urban areas for fear of AV nades raining down on them.
Regarding outside of complexes, if a tank that zips around 4 times faster than infantry lets them get close enough in open ground to use the nades then that's their fault. They should either kill them before they get that far or drive away. |
Zaaeed Massani
Zincress
8
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 17:31:00 -
[40] - Quote
Logi Stician wrote:Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:inb4 spkr and tankahiro Oh my. I get it now. tankahiro TANKER HERO!!!
|
|
Psychotic Shooter
149
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 17:57:00 -
[41] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:ok, before the main area of the topic; give you some background so maybe what I say have some credibility. From the start of REPLICATION (that's May 2012), I have ran some form of proto AV (be sworms, FG w/ AV nades) from then through this build. Along w/ 2.5yrs worth of AV experience, I have also dabbled in tanks during differ builds on alts, etc; using both shield/armor (though my knowledge is less in that area). To help w/ this post, I even capped out this week for the first time in 8 months to have current ingame knowledge of the interaction b/t AV-vehicles. Now, on with the show
1). First and foremost, vehicles (both tank and dropships) are NOT OP. The problem isn't the vehicle themselves, but how the modules work, and what they do that make tanks OP at the moment. ex: other game, found a 1/2 hp (meaning only 2k armor) left Mady, rolling around. I get the postion and surprise advantage on the tank while it was dead stopped in middle of open terrain. I shot off all 6 rounds of my proto SL (w/ prof 5 & 3 complex damage mods). After the first hit of the SL, the tank activated its reps and 2nd hardener (in which the tank only have 1/4 armor left after first shot). The next 5 shots, kept putting the tank down to 1/4 armor, but no more b/c of the oo loop of reps and hardeners going about it. Yes some tankers will say you shouldn't be able to solo a tank, yet will say that is BS. Not b/c of me being an AV'er but for balance reason (get into more later). Just for those who care, w/ 6 full hitting vollies of my SL, that is 11.3k damage.
2). AV simply put is underpowered. Aside from the FG, which damage hasn't really changed to much, AV as a whole is underpowered. Fixes: a). SL: per damage rocket up to 275 (for a start to see how it works on balance) . With my setup that is an increase of 80 damage per rocket, so 480 per volley b). Increase SL mag size back to 4 (including change to Mini assault bonus to not have it do the increase); along w/ giving it a reserve of 8. Keeping it less then the total rounds of the FG, but more then PsC c). SL range increase to 300-350m. SL is a long range weapon. Yes they are fire and forget, but can be "dodged" easily after first volley is hit (even if locked), as missile will hit into objects/terrain. d). AV-nades need their pre 1.7 damage back; at least at proto level. A 1.2M skilled item should be OHK a free unskilled LAV e). Plasma Cannon damage increase. Simply put for a one & done shot it is to weak. It has a slow travel time, really short range, and arc. Damage from this need to give tanks the WTF OMG scene, as they have a low ammo count, along w/ a reload after each shot. Damage should be up to 1250/1500/1750 respectively. This gives a good counter to all the above listed negatives they have. This also allows non heavy suit user a possibly extra way of protection (like how people FG snipe or use as anti-infantry)
3). This goes back to #1, but vehicles as a whole need to have hardener modules looked into. The amount of reduction isn't the problem, its more along the time they last, and the cooldown they have. I have no real idea how to fix for balance on this atm; however REAL tankers plz comment on this one. Not sure if their are passive hardeners anymore; but if not, a 1 hardener limit might be needed (however, I rather see hardeners changed then make a limit on them)
4). ADD ADV & PROTO VEHCILES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This have been one of the biggest issues since Codex. Cant fully balance AV-vehicles when you don't have the adc/proto vehicles to see how AV affects them
5). Understand the tier balance. As it is, when I've played ive been one of the most outspoken on tier balance for AV-vehicles. As it is, AV should more or less have the advantage against vehicles, BECAUSE (as #4 says) you don't have adv/proto vehicles. It would/should only be natural that AV has the current advantage. a). As is, AV should be able to rip though Soma/Sica's and take a **** on their burnt up hulls no Q's asked. b). AV should have more of a difficult time against Gung/Mady however should still be able to solo, especially if using PROTO (not even adv. Adv should be a toss up at best, but maybe a 60% advantage to AV for tier advantage, but minimal advantage none less). Basic gear should be equal to, or even at disadvantage to Mady/Gung (55% adv for vehicles here).
So yeah, will have more when can think/focus. Let the discussion/flame/hatemail/etc begin .... GO
Hey I'm a pro tanker and have been since closed beta I agree with your statement us tanks currently own the maps I don't think the av nades should be returned to pre 1.7 because they should not be used as a primary weapon but since av nades are ment to be used vs LAVs more than tank I think ccp should make them do 20% more toward since they are less armoured and have less resistance. On the hardener note shield ones should be bought down a notch since you can't scratch the tank armour ones are ok ATM the one thing is to reduce that active period one armour to about 25 second with as 35 second cool down and shield should last for 15 second and take 30 second to recharge this is because ahold are hit and run tanks while armour are endurance tanks I don't think that armour tanks should have a reduction in hp since that is the only way we survive vs shield tanks
Dust 514 Closed Beta Vet
Tanker for Hire Contact me in game
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
452
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 18:32:00 -
[42] - Quote
Psychotic Shooter wrote:
Hey I'm a pro tanker and have been since closed beta I agree with your statement us tanks currently own the maps I don't think the av nades should be returned to pre 1.7 because they should not be used as a primary weapon but since av nades are ment to be used vs LAVs more than tank I think ccp should make them do 20% more toward since they are less armoured and have less resistance. On the hardener note shield ones should be bought down a notch since you can't scratch the tank armour ones are ok ATM the one thing is to reduce that active period one armour to about 25 second with as 35 second cool down and shield should last for 15 second and take 30 second to recharge this is because ahold are hit and run tanks while armour are endurance tanks I don't think that armour tanks should have a reduction in hp since that is the only way we survive vs shield tanks
Is nice to see a realistic sensible tanker (as believe we were in IMP/IE together). As you said atm tanks rule the maps quite easily. As to av-nades, I think the basic/adv maybe need a tiny buff in their damage (like 10-20%); but the proto ones is where the damage really needs to be upped, especially for the Lai Dai's . For the cost of the skill required to unlock them, they are not SP/cost efficient as proto locus/flux. With people saying they are a secondary AV method; then then Grenadier skill should be changed to justify it. Have each grenade type be its own skill with each being a 1x, instead of all 3 combined as a 4x; as you'd save lots of SP for a secondary type AV method.
@ Takahiro
I understand that in skilling into your cooldown reductions to be of use; but for a balance aspect of the game, having an ~ oo loop of hardeners w/ passive reps; and faster speed then any infantry, MILITIA turrets that 3 shot dropsuit, it all just piles onto the imbalance's. If currently proto AV has difficultly in killing militia/basic hull tanks with these setups; how would their fair against adv/proto ... simple, they wouldn't. You'd be looking at requiring maybe 1/2 a team to take out one proto tank which isn't feasible.
Tanks need to have some weakness/counter; and another tank cant be the only one; as then that still leaves AV unbalanced. The biggest problem w/ tanks are the hardeners duration and cooldowns mostly; the resistence isn't the worst part (though ill need to look into the modules for a better answer on that). With the current setups you look at roughly a 5 second window of weakness which isn't feasible, as it take longer for an AV to register a hit at that point.
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Psychotic Shooter
149
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 18:41:00 -
[43] - Quote
I agree I think with vehicles it should be strong at the front and on top the sides should tank 20% more damage and the rear should take 50% more damage this is kinda what other games do bit if you hit the very small power pack / file cells on the rear they should take 70% more damage
Dust 514 Closed Beta Vet
Tanker for Hire Contact me in game
|
Godin Thekiller
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
1720
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 19:14:00 -
[44] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:ok, before the main area of the topic; give you some background so maybe what I say have some credibility. From the start of REPLICATION (that's May 2012), I have ran some form of proto AV (be sworms, FG w/ AV nades) from then through this build. Along w/ 2.5yrs worth of AV experience, I have also dabbled in tanks during differ builds on alts, etc; using both shield/armor (though my knowledge is less in that area). To help w/ this post, I even capped out this week for the first time in 8 months to have current ingame knowledge of the interaction b/t AV-vehicles. Now, on with the show
1). First and foremost, vehicles (both tank and dropships) are NOT OP. The problem isn't the vehicle themselves, but how the modules work, and what they do that make tanks OP at the moment. ex: other game, found a 1/2 hp (meaning only 2k armor) left Mady, rolling around. I get the postion and surprise advantage on the tank while it was dead stopped in middle of open terrain. I shot off all 6 rounds of my proto SL (w/ prof 5 & 3 complex damage mods). After the first hit of the SL, the tank activated its reps and 2nd hardener (in which the tank only have 1/4 armor left after first shot). The next 5 shots, kept putting the tank down to 1/4 armor, but no more b/c of the oo loop of reps and hardeners going about it. Yes some tankers will say you shouldn't be able to solo a tank, yet will say that is BS. Not b/c of me being an AV'er but for balance reason (get into more later). Just for those who care, w/ 6 full hitting vollies of my SL, that is 11.3k damage.
2). AV simply put is underpowered. Aside from the FG, which damage hasn't really changed to much, AV as a whole is underpowered. Fixes: a). SL: per damage rocket up to 275 (for a start to see how it works on balance) . With my setup that is an increase of 80 damage per rocket, so 480 per volley b). Increase SL mag size back to 4 (including change to Mini assault bonus to not have it do the increase); along w/ giving it a reserve of 8. Keeping it less then the total rounds of the FG, but more then PsC c). SL range increase to 300-350m. SL is a long range weapon. Yes they are fire and forget, but can be "dodged" easily after first volley is hit (even if locked), as missile will hit into objects/terrain. d). AV-nades need their pre 1.7 damage back; at least at proto level. A 1.2M skilled item should be OHK a free unskilled LAV e). Plasma Cannon damage increase. Simply put for a one & done shot it is to weak. It has a slow travel time, really short range, and arc. Damage from this need to give tanks the WTF OMG scene, as they have a low ammo count, along w/ a reload after each shot. Damage should be up to 1250/1500/1750 respectively. This gives a good counter to all the above listed negatives they have. This also allows non heavy suit user a possibly extra way of protection (like how people FG snipe or use as anti-infantry)
3). This goes back to #1, but vehicles as a whole need to have hardener modules looked into. The amount of reduction isn't the problem, its more along the time they last, and the cooldown they have. I have no real idea how to fix for balance on this atm; however REAL tankers plz comment on this one. Not sure if their are passive hardeners anymore; but if not, a 1 hardener limit might be needed (however, I rather see hardeners changed then make a limit on them)
4). ADD ADV & PROTO VEHCILES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This have been one of the biggest issues since Codex. Cant fully balance AV-vehicles when you don't have the adc/proto vehicles to see how AV affects them
5). Understand the tier balance. As it is, when I've played ive been one of the most outspoken on tier balance for AV-vehicles. As it is, AV should more or less have the advantage against vehicles, BECAUSE (as #4 says) you don't have adv/proto vehicles. It would/should only be natural that AV has the current advantage. a). As is, AV should be able to rip though Soma/Sica's and take a **** on their burnt up hulls no Q's asked. b). AV should have more of a difficult time against Gung/Mady however should still be able to solo, especially if using PROTO (not even adv. Adv should be a toss up at best, but maybe a 60% advantage to AV for tier advantage, but minimal advantage none less). Basic gear should be equal to, or even at disadvantage to Mady/Gung (55% adv for vehicles here).
So yeah, will have more when can think/focus. Let the discussion/flame/hatemail/etc begin .... GO
1: Problem with that argument is that repps are passive. He just turned on the hardener. ALso, you could have jus waited until the hardeners went down and took him out.
2: swarms don't need a damage buff, and that lock on range is way outside of the rendering distance (and almost covers the range of each point of pretty much any map) a better solution would be at 225-250m. swarms do need a projectile speed buff. Not sure about the mag size to 4. Never saw the point in having 4 imo. I wouldn't mind it being 4 however. AV nades should just be replaced with stasis grenades. Lastly, PLC needs a rework. just buffing its damage could have some unintended effect (keep in mind that it's also a good AI weapon).
3: Timing is fine, it's just the rediculous damage reduction hey have (this is coming from a active tanker). This is how I would fix it, along with bringing a better fitting style, as it was better before.
4: Hell no. Tiercide.
5: If I'm paying somewhere around 500k for a single hull, I expect to live through some ****, not die in 10 seconds; also, all tiers does is break ****. I'd rather it be one tier, and we have weapon rigging to further build on the weapon.
'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever!
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
453
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 20:41:00 -
[45] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:1: Problem with that argument is that repps are passive. He just turned on the hardener. ALso, you could have jus waited until the hardeners went down and took him out. 2: swarms don't need a damage buff, and that lock on range is way outside of the rendering distance (and almost covers the range of each point of pretty much any map) a better solution would be at 225-250m. swarms do need a projectile speed buff. Not sure about the mag size to 4. Never saw the point in having 4 imo. I wouldn't mind it being 4 however. AV nades should just be replaced with stasis grenades. Lastly, PLC needs a rework. just buffing its damage could have some unintended effect (keep in mind that it's also a good AI weapon). 3: Timing is fine, it's just the rediculous damage reduction hey have (this is coming from a active tanker). This is how I would fix it, along with bringing a better fitting style, as it was better before. 4: Hell no. Tiercide. 5: If I'm paying somewhere around 500k for a single hull, I expect to live through some ****, not die in 10 seconds; also, all tiers does is break ****. I'd rather it be one tier, and we have weapon rigging to further build on the weapon.
1). As said haven't played in months so was unsure of how some modules worked now. however, I am positive as I was shooting him, he was repping armor. As to waiting, that wouldn't b/c of the ~oo hardner loop tanks have atm
2). You are paranoid in believing this. Even tankers here have said swarms need a damage buff. As to the rendering range, a minimum increase would have to be 250. Swarms = a javelin type launcher those are LONG RANGE weapons
4). Sorry to say, but tanks need their adv/proto hulls as that is the only way to get to balance, it to see how proto deals w/ proto
5). Well if you look at current module layout; a proto tank hull in my mind would be 5/3 , 3/5 etc respectively for the faction you choose. That give you loads of possibilities to do for setups.
Try again plz
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Godin Thekiller
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
1720
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 20:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:1: Problem with that argument is that repps are passive. He just turned on the hardener. ALso, you could have jus waited until the hardeners went down and took him out. 2: swarms don't need a damage buff, and that lock on range is way outside of the rendering distance (and almost covers the range of each point of pretty much any map) a better solution would be at 225-250m. swarms do need a projectile speed buff. Not sure about the mag size to 4. Never saw the point in having 4 imo. I wouldn't mind it being 4 however. AV nades should just be replaced with stasis grenades. Lastly, PLC needs a rework. just buffing its damage could have some unintended effect (keep in mind that it's also a good AI weapon). 3: Timing is fine, it's just the rediculous damage reduction hey have (this is coming from a active tanker). This is how I would fix it, along with bringing a better fitting style, as it was better before. 4: Hell no. Tiercide. 5: If I'm paying somewhere around 500k for a single hull, I expect to live through some ****, not die in 10 seconds; also, all tiers does is break ****. I'd rather it be one tier, and we have weapon rigging to further build on the weapon. 1). As said haven't played in months so was unsure of how some modules worked now. however, I am positive as I was shooting him, he was repping armor. As to waiting, that wouldn't b/c of the ~oo hardner loop tanks have atm 2). You are paranoid in believing this. Even tankers here have said swarms need a damage buff. As to the rendering range, a minimum increase would have to be 250. Swarms = a javelin type launcher those are LONG RANGE weapons 4). Sorry to say, but tanks need their adv/proto hulls as that is the only way to get to balance, it to see how proto deals w/ proto 5). Well if you look at current module layout; a proto tank hull in my mind would be 5/3 , 3/5 etc respectively for the faction you choose. That give you loads of possibilities to do for setups. Try again plz
1: You can't perma run 2 hardeners without using complex. You can't fit 2 hardeners without using a weaker repairer and main turret. and even then, it's only 1 at a time. since he turned on 2, you could have just followed the HAV and took it down once they both went down.
2: damage increase isn't needed. I use them all the time (when I played, up to the time I stared my break a week ago); this is with only prof. 3 swarms, sometimes a CBR7 (when I was saving ISK), sometimes a wiki swarms. 250m is fine. As for your real life argument, swarms are pretty short range; they are more like rockets than missiles imo.
and even then, they still need to fix rendering before it gets more range.
3: You didn't say anything about #3.
4: I assume you don't understand anything about tiercide due to suits, do you? If adv. and PROTO vehicles came out, it would even worse than now. Hell no.
5: Like I said, tiercide.
You sir, need to try again.
'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever!
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Berserker007
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
453
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 21:11:00 -
[47] - Quote
hmm, cant argue with the illogical
For those who had logical thought-out opinions and ideas. I congratulate you on that, as it isn't often I see that on here, especially since the game went 'live"
Closed Beta Vet
Mordu's Trials Winner
Original IMP
|
Godin Thekiller
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
1720
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 21:16:00 -
[48] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:hmm, cant argue with the illogical
For those who had logical thought-out opinions and ideas. I congratulate you on that, as it isn't often I see that on here, especially since the game went 'live"
lol, maybe you need to try harder
'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever!
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
echo47
Minmatar Republic
189
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 21:43:00 -
[49] - Quote
noobsniper the 2nd wrote:Just specinto prof 5 forges all your problems will go away trust me
Prof 3 works just fine.
I would rather look bad and win, than look good and lose.
|
el OPERATOR
Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation
85
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 21:57:00 -
[50] - Quote
I'd love to see a buff to the PLC vs. vehicles, but think it shouldn't actually come from a damage increase, since after mods and prof bonuses it'd be super OP versus infantry, more super OHKOP than it is now. I'd rather it was just flat damage to shields and armor equally, no +/-%. 1300 dmg etc flat, then plus w/e with mods or prof bonus. It is supposed to be a high-speed projectile, launched in or with a huge glob of plasma, right?
Oh, and the vehicle hardener timer dialed back, that a tank is able to flip on a hardener and then just soak up damage for 30 seconds-a minute or more while their infantry (snipers) eat the AV holding opportunity positions alive is the reason tanks are as pugnacious as they are.
AV nade damage isn't too bad, IMO, but **** if nade toss physics/mechanics in here aren't goofy as hell. Or my clone is meant for underhand softball/shotput and not frisbee golf. 8/
Open-Beta Vet.
NPC Corp Independent Contractor.
Drunk Night Tree Burner.
This is my Main and Original.
|
|
YourDeadAgain76
Red Star. EoN.
179
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 22:16:00 -
[51] - Quote
^^^^ Up there is the main issue ive stated about AV/Tank debackle. ^^^^
Q= U sick of militia or our "std" tanks A= Spec into FG/AV/SL you get proto and proficiency 5 with complex damage mods and go after tankers. Then come in here and say our std Tanks are OP. CCP has stated to be patient and changes are coming. Most likely will screw something else up or make something else Op like always, same old crap just different build.
Q= Why cant i solo this tank worth 500,000 isk and caust 10-15 million sp to make it a beast, with my militia SL/FG/std AV nades. WA WA WA. A= Get 2 guys with ADV or Proto av like a fg or SL with Lia Dia Av /Nanohives for backup and attack the tank. Unless he's good you will win if you are smarter. Or Jihad Jeep them.(plus jihad jeeps are fun.)
You all expect it to be like 2 volleys from a militia Sl or 3 shots for a militia FG and you win like last build. We got our @sses kicked as tankers last build now its your turn.. HAHAHAHA Your fitting causts you like 30,000 isk if you are that cheep, TRY SPENDING MORE ISK ON YOUR FITTING AND YOU WILL BE MORE SUCCESSFUL.
I am also a Proto HVY on an alt and with FG prof 5, reload, optimization and ammo at lvls 3 to 4 each i can 3 shot militia tanks no problem unless they running hardners (3/4 of the sicas and somas are junk fittings) in anycase when the hardners gone there dead. |
Darken-Soul
BIG BAD W0LVES
898
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 22:19:00 -
[52] - Quote
Put the charge time back to what it was and I will deal with tank spam for you.
Who wants some?
|
Psychotic Shooter
152
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 10:44:00 -
[53] - Quote
Youdeadagain76 quit it last build it was a challenge to keep my tank alive now I roil unhindered and it ain't fair you think you a good tanker because you can stomp no I know I'm a good tanker cause I'm not a **** like you running every one down because av can't scratch yes last build I used to kill infantry and a lot of tanks as they come but now I kill all the scrubby tankers like you to protect the infantry
Dust 514 Closed Beta Vet
Tanker for Hire Contact me in game
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star. EoN.
2643
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 12:47:00 -
[54] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:
@ Takahiro
I understand that in skilling into your cooldown reductions to be of use; but for a balance aspect of the game, having an ~ oo loop of hardeners w/ passive reps; and faster speed then any infantry, MILITIA turrets that 3 shot dropsuit, it all just piles onto the imbalance's. If currently proto AV has difficultly in killing militia/basic hull tanks with these setups; how would their fair against adv/proto ... simple, they wouldn't. You'd be looking at requiring maybe 1/2 a team to take out one proto tank which isn't feasible.
Tanks need to have some weakness/counter; and another tank cant be the only one; as then that still leaves AV unbalanced. The biggest problem w/ tanks are the hardeners duration and cooldowns mostly; the resistence isn't the worst part (though ill need to look into the modules for a better answer on that). With the current setups you look at roughly a 5 second window of weakness which isn't feasible, as it take longer for an AV to register a hit at that point.
If and when adv/proto vehicles are actually added then you can up AV but also have to becareful of not completely killing off dropships
As for the 3 hardeners with a proto tank having 5 slots in its main tank expect 3 on it still with maybe a lolextender and booster on it but frankly the other mods are not good enough to use generally
They should have just copy and pasted from EVE
Intelligence is OP
|
MarasdF Loron
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
167
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 13:04:00 -
[55] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote: 3). This goes back to #1, but vehicles as a whole need to have hardener modules looked into. The amount of reduction isn't the problem, its more along the time they last, and the cooldown they have. I have no real idea how to fix for balance on this atm; however REAL tankers plz comment on this one. Not sure if their are passive hardeners anymore; but if not, a 1 hardener limit might be needed (however, I rather see hardeners changed then make a limit on them)
Current Militia level CD for all hardeners, tiering for the damage reduction %. Shields maybe 15%/30%/45%/60%. Armor 10%/20%/30%/40%.
R.I.P. Pre-1.7 tanks, you will be missed.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |