|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
69
   |
Posted - 2014.02.19 23:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:You know for the most part most anti vehicle weapons in this modern age, and please do correct me if I am wrong, are far to heavy just to slight across the back, with full combat gear, and a rifle, side arm, grenades, basic survival and medical equipment, etc.
AV does not need to be changed, it is sitting in a strong place. Vehicles have to be changed to be balanced against AV.
That's not true at all, but it is besides the point. Realistically, this game has no semblance of realism who has the technology to keep a mcc floating so close to the ground and yet lacks the auto targeting technology to wipe out everyone that gives off a signature. If we wanted realism, we wouldn't be using vehicles that could be detected and we would not be wearing suits that could be detected as all of this would be done in. The premise in general is absurd of fighting tiny land battles in this universe, if we wanted realism, this game would be small extraction teams centered around breaking into corporate offices for intel and such. Essentially it would be more realistic if this game looked like space counter strike, but realism doesn't make good games.
What we do need is balance, which I think the constant buff nerf cycles aren't going to help as much as we just need well defined roles. If it takes one aver to kill one tank, make tanks much cheaper, they are immune to most things but being soloed by av does make them weak gameplay wise if they aren't affordable. If it takes multiple av to effectively counter them like now, then just make the large turrets all anti vehicle forcing the tank to become the heavy weapons platform it was meant to be with a manned crew instead of a one man army.
Have one or the other. You can never fix the imbalance by making tanks soloable if they cost so much, and you can never fix the imbalance if 1 tank with 1 pilot= multiple infantry. |
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
69
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 23:31:00 -
[2] - Quote
Joel II X wrote:ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:Knight Solitaire wrote:No, AVing needs to be a role. If you want to keep your Rifle and Swarm Launcher, get a Commando suit. They're being buffed. this is precisely the point. in every other game av guy carries av weapon as a specialised piece of equipment meaning if he needs it he can go av but if not he can still be effective in combat. what dust has is balance which means av is not effective solo and anyone carrying it is not effective in normal combat either. this is the underlining issue with av Sidearms. You can still do decent against Infantry with them. Just don't expect to wipe out a whole squad.
you can, but it's not remotely optimal. Efficiency range is poor on side arms and rightfully so. Efficiency range is a big deal, that's why people spam rail rifles and combat rifles over assault rifles, because it is an advantage to be able to respond to multiple engagement ranges. Side arms don't need to be buffed, but saying they are optimal would be absurd. There is nothing they can do that one of the light weapons won't do better, as it should be gameplay wise.
Edit: It's redundant weapon mechanics that keep glossing over any diversity in this game. Not just vehicles but weapons should have defined roles. CQC weapons should be superior in hipfire engagements to medium and long range weapons. That's why CR and RR are so imbalanced right now, if they worked more like the plasma rifle tactical variant and mostly forced ADS firing, then the weapons would be balanced as is. That seems counter intuitive to CR weapons given minmitars style so personally I just believe the standard CR needs to have it's damaged dropped and the Assault variant needs to have it's rate of fire dropped to that of the smgs. The CR should just be a smg with a longer engagement range. Right now it is a smg with a longer engagement range + a greater ROF + DMG, which with an incoming smg nerf the devs already acknowledge that smgs are "too good" as a sidearm, it follows logic that likewise the CR is "too good" for it's intended role as a run and gun superior range smg. |
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
69
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 23:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:logi is a role
assault is a role,
heavy is a role,
scout is a role,
tank driver is a role,
dropship pilot is a role,
not sure what commando is
av is not a role. its a piece of equipment or a weapon just like hives or scanners. yet when you fit a piece of av you are automatically branded an av player and expected to die fast and do little damage.
its a situational piece of equipment. its not treated as such and thats a problem in itself
You are arguing semantics, the game uses the term role to define various suits and vehicles yes. But that isn't what the word role means.
Role: a part that someone or something has in a particular activity or situation. - Courtesy of Merriam-Webster. |
|
|
| |
|