| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Summ Dude
Direct Action Resources
247
   |
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:24:00 -
[1] - Quote
An idea I just suddenly had. Instead of all non-AV weapons doing some reduced percentage of their damage to vehicles, they would do full damage to everything. Then balance this by giving vehicles more base HP as needed. So with this, if you can get 5 HMGs to fire on a single tank in their optimals, they can actually pose a threat. If nothing else, it would at least marginally increase the options available to repel Tanks. Is there any specific reason that vehicles need need these resistances that I'm missing? Any thoughts?
Not just a laymen, but the laymen.
Winn Summ and lose Summ.
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
7369
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
An assault rifle doing 900+ damage to a tanks armour? That wholly defeats the purpose of AV, and the Armour tenetof modern tanking.
"Just know that though our enemies may only #YOLO, through God's grace we can #YOLF at his side." - Disciple of Kesha
|
TheAmazing FlyingPig
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
5821
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Summ Dude wrote: Is there any specific reason that vehicles need need these resistances that I'm missing?
Probably because tanks are not designed to shelter the occupants with warm butter, but with armor.
Never forget
More tiericide, less tieriphiles.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
EoN.
1854
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:46:00 -
[4] - Quote
Summ Dude wrote:An idea I just suddenly had. Instead of all non-AV weapons doing some reduced percentage of their damage to vehicles, they would do full damage to everything. Then balance this by giving vehicles more base HP as needed. So with this, if you can get 5 HMGs to fire on a single tank in their optimals, they can actually pose a threat. If nothing else, it would at least marginally increase the options available to repel Tanks. Is there any specific reason that vehicles need need these resistances that I'm missing? Any thoughts?
What kind of basis in reality is that?
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
DeadlyAztec11
Ostrakon Agency
Gallente Federation
4348
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:56:00 -
[5] - Quote
Used to be like that, but was obviously unbalanced.
My alts: General John Ripper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Anarchide, Long Evity
And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior
|
Summ Dude
Direct Action Resources
248
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
TheAmazing FlyingPig wrote:Summ Dude wrote: Is there any specific reason that vehicles need need these resistances that I'm missing? Probably because tanks are not designed to shelter the occupants with warm butter, but with armor.
I think you may have missed this line: Summ Dude wrote: Then balance this by giving vehicles more base HP as needed.
Not just a laymen, but the laymen.
Winn Summ and lose Summ.
|
Summ Dude
Direct Action Resources
248
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:56:00 -
[7] - Quote
DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Used to be like that, but was obviously unbalanced.
Why?
Not just a laymen, but the laymen.
Winn Summ and lose Summ.
|
N1ck Comeau
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
2170
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
just do 25% efficiency.
Not this crazy 2% damage.
No idea on my guns right now. Getting majority to level 3 at least, then deciding.
Proud member of RND
|
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
PAND3M0N1UM
Lokun Listamenn
188
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 22:58:00 -
[9] - Quote
Summ Dude wrote:TheAmazing FlyingPig wrote:Summ Dude wrote: Is there any specific reason that vehicles need need these resistances that I'm missing? Probably because tanks are not designed to shelter the occupants with warm butter, but with armor. I think you may have missed this line: Summ Dude wrote: Then balance this by giving vehicles more base HP as needed.
And maybe that's why they do partial damage, it represents them having relatively more hp to basic weapons. So AV doesn't do like 10k damage. Or Flux that do 5000. It makes more sense to have it how it is.
FAME
Click Here for Recruitment
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
9803
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 23:01:00 -
[10] - Quote
Having light weapons do full damage would be silly.
Having them do basically no damage is also silly, though. 25% efficiency would put them in a place where concentrated infantry fire -might- dissuade a tank on occasion.
ZATARA CARRIES US ALL
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
MAG Raven
|
|
|
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro
PAND3M0N1UM
Lokun Listamenn
190
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 23:05:00 -
[11] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Having light weapons do full damage would be silly.
Having them do basically no damage is also silly, though. 25% efficiency would put them in a place where concentrated infantry fire -might- dissuade a tank on occasion.
Or being able to grenade the hatch like in halo.
But I guess we can sticky the side so I shouldn't really be chiming in. BOOM BOOM
FAME
Click Here for Recruitment
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Learning Coalition College
4096
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 23:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
Well, if we buff vehicles and the existing AV weapons, we could do it.
I am your scan error.
|
Vrain Matari
Mikramurka Shock Troop
Minmatar Republic
1639
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 23:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
Summ Dude wrote:An idea I just suddenly had. Instead of all non-AV weapons doing some reduced percentage of their damage to vehicles, they would do full damage to everything. Then balance this by giving vehicles more base HP as needed. So with this, if you can get 5 HMGs to fire on a single tank in their optimals, they can actually pose a threat. If nothing else, it would at least marginally increase the options available to repel Tanks. Is there any specific reason that vehicles need need these resistances that I'm missing? Any thoughts?
As much as we're all collectively hating on tanks at the moment, you won't find many takers for that idea on these forums. And it may not even be the tanks we're hating, but related systems.
My feeling is we're narrowing in on the answers, prolly focusing on things like: recall, scanning, hardener duty cycles, relative velocities, entry/exit, weapon ranges.
Imo the forums have given CCP all the tools needed to balance tanks vs. infantry and to balance the various tanks tier vs. tier while still maintaining the original 'waves of opportunity' design.
I support SP rollover.
|
DeadlyAztec11
Ostrakon Agency
Gallente Federation
4349
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 23:24:00 -
[14] - Quote
Summ Dude wrote:DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Used to be like that, but was obviously unbalanced. Why?
Because, Three Guys could kill a tank in about 5 seconds.
My alts: General John Ripper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Anarchide, Long Evity
And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior
|
AP Grasshopper
Ancient Exiles.
Renegade Alliance
184
|
Posted - 2014.02.20 23:28:00 -
[15] - Quote
Not this again.... |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |