DUST Search - JLAV's needs to go

All Channels

General Discussions

JLAV's needs to go

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Meee One The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 539	Posted - 2014.03.17 19:49:00 - [271] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vrain Matari wrote: Godin. I'm willing to support you on getting rid of the JLAVs, although i really hate to see them go: it's the kind of sandboxy solution i love in New Eden. But this game is so fubared right now that CCP has got me into a state where i'm willing to give up my New Eden ideals just to get some good gameplay outta this piece of.....well, i'm sure you get the point. Here's what i want in return: Your support on my Tank balancing platform: 1) Web grenades. 2) Hardener stacking penalty to duty cycle. 3) LAV mounted swarms. Deal? FIrst one I completely gree with. The second one I assume you mean a stacking penalty on the time, in which I absolutely not agree with. Why? Because that heavily nerfs active tankers (like myself) who uses only uses hardeners. However, hardeners is still broken and needs to be looked at (as well as balanced with passive tanking, which is what I mostly covered here. As for your last request, I think missiles should work like that, and rockets be introduced. I dub the Troll King. As a reward for attention whoring a topic for 14+ pages,and intentionally ignoring facts while using broken logic ON PURPOSE just to keep this thread alive,congratulations. I game over like a boss.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1878	Posted - 2014.03.17 19:55:00 - [272] - Quote Meee One wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Vrain Matari wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Godin. I'm willing to support you on getting rid of the JLAVs, although i really hate to see them go: it's the kind of sandboxy solution i love in New Eden. But this game is so fubared right now that CCP has got me into a state where i'm willing to give up my New Eden ideals just to get some good gameplay outta this piece of.....well, i'm sure you get the point. Here's what i want in return: Your support on my Tank balancing platform: 1) Web grenades. 2) Hardener stacking penalty to duty cycle. 3) LAV mounted swarms. Deal? FIrst one I completely gree with. The second one I assume you mean a stacking penalty on the time, in which I absolutely not agree with. Why? Because that heavily nerfs active tankers (like myself) who uses only uses hardeners. However, hardeners is still broken and needs to be looked at (as well as balanced with passive tanking, which is what I mostly covered here. As for your last request, I think missiles should work like that, and rockets be introduced. I dub the Troll King. As a reward for attention whoring a topic for 14+ pages,and intentionally ignoring facts while using broken logic ON PURPOSE just to keep this thread alive,congratulations. There has been no logic at all in this. All I've seen so far is "WAAA I can't use AV so I want to use a crutch instead WAAA" or "WAAAA bring back OP AV and you can take away this crutch, as we'll have our old crutch back WAAAA" That's literally it. ALl the other one's are too odd to decipher, so I'll leave those to you, but they basically went into one or the other. All I'm saying isget rid of the bullshit. Also, I like how you sheep (as Mr. Pearson referrs to you dumbasses) are quick to criticize me, yet ignore all the other ideas I've put up to HELP with the AV vs. vehicle situation. But I'm a scrub and a troll. Yea, I swear some people really don't get what balance is here. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Meee One The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 539	Posted - 2014.03.17 20:11:00 - [273] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Meee One wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Vrain Matari wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Godin. I'm willing to support you on getting rid of the JLAVs, although i really hate to see them go: it's the kind of sandboxy solution i love in New Eden. But this game is so fubared right now that CCP has got me into a state where i'm willing to give up my New Eden ideals just to get some good gameplay outta this piece of.....well, i'm sure you get the point. Here's what i want in return: Your support on my Tank balancing platform: 1) Web grenades. 2) Hardener stacking penalty to duty cycle. 3) LAV mounted swarms. Deal? FIrst one I completely gree with. The second one I assume you mean a stacking penalty on the time, in which I absolutely not agree with. Why? Because that heavily nerfs active tankers (like myself) who uses only uses hardeners. However, hardeners is still broken and needs to be looked at (as well as balanced with passive tanking, which is what I mostly covered here. As for your last request, I think missiles should work like that, and rockets be introduced. I dub the Troll King. As a reward for attention whoring a topic for 14+ pages,and intentionally ignoring facts while using broken logic ON PURPOSE just to keep this thread alive,congratulations. There has been no logic at all in this. All I've seen so far is "WAAA I can't use AV so I want to use a crutch instead WAAA" or "WAAAA bring back OP AV and you can take away this crutch, as we'll have our old crutch back WAAAA" That's literally it. ALl the other one's are too odd to decipher, so I'll leave those to you, but they basically went into one or the other. All I'm saying isget rid of the bullshit. Also, I like how you sheep (as Mr. Pearson referrs to you dumbasses) are quick to criticize me, yet ignore all the other ideas I've put up to HELP with the AV vs. vehicle situation. But I'm a scrub and a troll. Yea, I swear some people really don't get what balance is here. A vehicle user saying others rely on crutches? Your title is well earned Troll King. I game over like a boss.
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 1821	Posted - 2014.03.17 20:22:00 - [274] - Quote The Attorney General wrote: Vrain Matari wrote: +1. This is almost a different game with headphones on. The only downside is that after every patch, the sound locations need to be double and triple checked to make sure they haven't made new deaf spots. Really getting pissed at the stripping out of game sounds in order to improve performance when we still have the useless drone of nanohives. Very true. That nanohive drone interferes with interesting cat-and-mouse gameplay and is overwhelmingly louder than most other sounds. Tho i suppose it works in favor of the damped assassin scouts. Stupid reason to put down a nanohive tho. Also, come to think of it, i want to ability to destroy my own nanohives. I support SP rollover.
Scout Registry Nos Nothi 1552	Posted - 2014.03.17 20:32:00 - [275] - Quote The Attorney General wrote: Paran Tadec wrote: But it's insanely fun to tell allahu akbar 20 times as the lav runs up your backside in a glorious explosion. Can't wait for someone to put their had jeep antics in YouTube format with al qaeda music over it. Its not arab music, but it is arab money: Jihad Jeep Lol. Those look more fun than mine.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1878	Posted - 2014.03.17 20:44:00 - [276] - Quote Meee One wrote: A vehicle user saying others rely on crutches? Your title is well earned Troll King. See? You proved my point; you, and the rest of the idiots know nothing of balance. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 1821	Posted - 2014.03.17 21:18:00 - [277] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vrain Matari wrote: Godin. I'm willing to support you on getting rid of the JLAVs, although i really hate to see them go: it's the kind of sandboxy solution i love in New Eden. But this game is so fubared right now that CCP has got me into a state where i'm willing to give up my New Eden ideals just to get some good gameplay outta this piece of.....well, i'm sure you get the point. Here's what i want in return: Your support on my Tank balancing platform: 1) Web grenades. 2) Hardener stacking penalty to duty cycle. 3) LAV mounted swarms. Deal? FIrst one I completely gree with. The second one I assume you mean a stacking penalty on the time, in which I absolutely not agree with. Why? Because that heavily nerfs active tankers (like myself) who uses only uses hardeners. However, hardeners is still broken and needs to be looked at (as well as balanced with passive tanking, which is what I mostly covered here. As for your last request, I think missiles should work like that, and rockets be introduced. Well, two outta three ain't bad. But the hardeners - this 'waves of opportunity'(hereafter known as WOOtanking) tanking model CCP's going for really only has two variables, mobility(turn rate, acceleration & velocity) and hardener duty cycle(time on/(time on + cooldown)). In the woo model these variables are intimately connected. In my list points 1 & 3 address the velocity/accn gap between vehicles and infantry. Point 2 modifies duty cycle down for super-hardened tanks. Nothing stops a tanker from cycling single hardeners until things get too hot at which point one could hit both and GTFO. The duty cycle of a single hardener could be made stronger than it is now, but with a significant stacking penalty on the duty cycle for running multiple hardeners simultaneously. This would keep WOO but not leave tankers defenseless unless they were coming off of an all-systems-active destroy/survive scenario. P.S. I did read your other post, and you make some good points. The reason i'm proposing this particular change to hardener stacking is that it fits into CCP's current woo model without having to change vehicles again. I support SP rollover.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1878	Posted - 2014.03.17 21:27:00 - [278] - Quote Vrain Matari wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Vrain Matari wrote: Godin. I'm willing to support you on getting rid of the JLAVs, although i really hate to see them go: it's the kind of sandboxy solution i love in New Eden. But this game is so fubared right now that CCP has got me into a state where i'm willing to give up my New Eden ideals just to get some good gameplay outta this piece of.....well, i'm sure you get the point. Here's what i want in return: Your support on my Tank balancing platform: 1) Web grenades. 2) Hardener stacking penalty to duty cycle. 3) LAV mounted swarms. Deal? FIrst one I completely gree with. The second one I assume you mean a stacking penalty on the time, in which I absolutely not agree with. Why? Because that heavily nerfs active tankers (like myself) who uses only uses hardeners. However, hardeners is still broken and needs to be looked at (as well as balanced with passive tanking, which is what I mostly covered here. As for your last request, I think missiles should work like that, and rockets be introduced. Well, two outta three ain't bad. But the hardeners - this 'waves of opportunity'(hereafter known as WOOtanking) tanking model CCP's going for really only has two variables, mobility(turn rate, acceleration & velocity) and hardener duty cycle(time on/(time on + cooldown)). In the woo model these variables are intimately connected. In my list points 1 & 3 address the velocity/accn gap between vehicles and infantry. Point 2 modifies duty cycle down for super-hardened tanks. Nothing stops a tanker from cycling single hardeners until things get too hot at which point one could hit both and GTFO. The duty cycle of a single hardener could be made stronger than it is now, but with a significant stacking penalty on the duty cycle for running multiple hardeners simultaneously. This would keep WOO but not leave tankers defenseless unless they were coming off of an all-systems-active destroy/survive scenario. P.S. I did read your other post, and you make some good points. The reason i'm proposing this particular change to hardener stacking is that it fits into CCP's current woo model without having to change vehicles again. The WOO model doesn't work in a FPS; never has (I've never seen it work anyways). It's always horrible, or it's always OP, but it's always broken.IT especially doesn't work in Dust since there's two tank types, and one gets more tank through the hardeners, so one tank will always win on a balanced playing field. That's a problem. A MAJOR problem. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Dunk Mujunk RestlessSpirits 632	Posted - 2014.03.17 21:36:00 - [279] - Quote uggh, who stired this pot of sht up again. unsubscribe* Switzerland is small and neutral. We're more like Germany. Ambitious and misunderstood. Futurama
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1878	Posted - 2014.03.17 21:40:00 - [280] - Quote Dunk Mujunk wrote: uggh, who stired this pot of sht up again. unsubscribe* not sure, the **** posting is continual 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-

Oxskull Duncarino 0uter.Heaven 493	Posted - 2014.03.17 21:48:00 - [281] - Quote Dunk Mujunk wrote: uggh, who stired this pot of sht up again. unsubscribe* Same as.
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 1821	Posted - 2014.03.17 21:51:00 - [282] - Quote @ Godin. Yeah the WOO model is a dynamic balance model and trying to balance all such models is like being thrown into a pit of pythons and having to wrestle your way out. Shion Typhon nailed this in a great post a while ago and made explicit the how's and whys of it. But with enough experimentation, trial-and-error, etc., such systems can be balanced - close enough for good gameplay, anyway. If the two types of tanks are fundamentally different, let's find a way to adapt the hardeners to that difference. I support SP rollover.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1878	Posted - 2014.03.17 22:03:00 - [283] - Quote Vrain Matari wrote: @ Godin. Yeah the WOO model is a dynamic balance model and trying to balance all such models is like being thrown into a pit of pythons and having to wrestle your way out. Shion Typhon nailed this in a great post a while ago and made explicit the how's and whys of it. But with enough experimentation, trial-and-error, etc., such systems can be balanced - close enough for good gameplay, anyway. If the two types of tanks are fundamentally different, let's find a way to adapt the hardeners to that difference. You know how long it would take to do such a thing? I'd rather go back to how it was before. Also, you're forgetting the fact that people who might not want to active tank is left in the dust, because active is just overall better. Many fits are not as good really on this system (where as the old system it was; for instance, passive tanking was actually a thing in repl.-1.6. Now, you're silly using passive tank, especially if it's on a HAV). It's just too much to do and too much time it would take, as well as extreme modifications and things added to make it work half way decently. It would be better to go down this route than keeping on forward. Sometimes things don't work, and you have to take a step back, as sometimes those things work out better. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 1824	Posted - 2014.03.17 22:13:00 - [284] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vrain Matari wrote: @ Godin. Yeah the WOO model is a dynamic balance model and trying to balance all such models is like being thrown into a pit of pythons and having to wrestle your way out. Shion Typhon nailed this in a great post a while ago and made explicit the how's and whys of it. But with enough experimentation, trial-and-error, etc., such systems can be balanced - close enough for good gameplay, anyway. If the two types of tanks are fundamentally different, let's find a way to adapt the hardeners to that difference. You know how long it would take to do such a thing? I'd rather go back to how it was before. Also, you're forgetting the fact that people who might not want to active tank is left in the dust, because active is just overall better. Many fits are not as good really on this system (where as the old system it was; for instance, passive tanking was actually a thing in repl.-1.6. Now, you're silly using passive tank, especially if it's on a HAV). It's just too much to do and too much time it would take, as well as extreme modifications and things added to make it work half way decently. It would be better to go down this route than keeping on forward. Sometimes things don't work, and you have to take a step back, as sometimes those things work out better. Agree. This is the heart of the argument. Where a person stands on it depends on how they assess the possibility of achieving balance in a dynamic model. It gets done successfully IRL engineering situations everyday. Solutions always depend on correctly identifying the driving dynamic variables and balancing solely on those. Imo the driving dynamic variables in woo are mobility and hardener duty cycle, end of story. If anybody can point out what variables i'm excluding, it would be appreciated. I support SP rollover.
TunRa D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 510	Posted - 2014.03.17 22:16:00 - [285] - Quote Since the OP mentioned lore, how would the lore explain the REs not attaching to friendly hulls? Thanks CCP Foxfour
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1881	Posted - 2014.03.17 22:52:00 - [286] - Quote TunRa wrote: Since the OP mentioned lore, how would the lore explain the REs not attaching to friendly hulls? I'm pretty sure if you do so you'll be quickly dispatched by the friendly forces for trying to destroy friendly equipment, as well as endanger friendly units. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1881	Posted - 2014.03.17 22:59:00 - [287] - Quote Vrain Matari wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Vrain Matari wrote: @ Godin. Yeah the WOO model is a dynamic balance model and trying to balance all such models is like being thrown into a pit of pythons and having to wrestle your way out. Shion Typhon nailed this in a great post a while ago and made explicit the how's and whys of it. But with enough experimentation, trial-and-error, etc., such systems can be balanced - close enough for good gameplay, anyway. If the two types of tanks are fundamentally different, let's find a way to adapt the hardeners to that difference. You know how long it would take to do such a thing? I'd rather go back to how it was before. Also, you're forgetting the fact that people who might not want to active tank is left in the dust, because active is just overall better. Many fits are not as good really on this system (where as the old system it was; for instance, passive tanking was actually a thing in repl.-1.6. Now, you're silly using passive tank, especially if it's on a HAV). It's just too much to do and too much time it would take, as well as extreme modifications and things added to make it work half way decently. It would be better to go down this route than keeping on forward. Sometimes things don't work, and you have to take a step back, as sometimes those things work out better. Agree. This is the heart of the argument. Where a person stands on it depends on how they assess the possibility of achieving balance in a dynamic model. It gets done successfully IRL engineering situations everyday. Solutions always depend on correctly identifying the driving dynamic variables and balancing solely on those. Imo the driving dynamic variables in woo are mobility and hardener duty cycle, end of story. If anybody can point out what variables i'm excluding, it would be appreciated. Well, I remember someone telling me a while back something that relates to this: there can be multiple right solutions: however, there's only one best solution. Basically, as I stated, simply going backwards 1 step would put us in a much better spot then going forward. It would be far more balanced than it is now for sure. Also, things that would be required to be added to even work on a level that's acceptable by all would be unnecessary by simply going backwards. Yes, I get that this can work, just that it would take far too long to do so, and it's not like there's nothing else the game needs; it's the exact opposite. There's lots of things that needs adding to it. the devs can't just focus on just vehicles. Also, this still doesn't solve the issue of 1 fit being above all others. Mine not only fixes the problems we have now, but it's easier on the devs. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Henrietta Unknown Sooper Speshul Ponee Fors Dropsuit Samurai 41	Posted - 2014.03.17 23:11:00 - [288] - Quote Often times the terrain and position of the tank makes it damn hard to reach (momentum). And I tried sticking it on the inside. The detonation is not as reliable if it's not on the bumper.
DootDoot Da Short Buss 275	Posted - 2014.03.17 23:19:00 - [289] - Quote Jihad Jeeps are one of the best un-intentional mechanics ever introduced into DUST 514... The diverse Gameplay, Game mechanics.. Cat and mouse tactics.. Use of assets to counter other assets... It's just beautiful in depth game play created by CCP completely un-intentionally.. And has brought so much Enjoyment, Pain and general frustration from every party... Which makes it a perfect piece to any CCP game... Jihad jeeps are DUST 514's Version of EVE online's Un-intentional jet-can mining game mechanics. If anything People should be fighting to make LAV's more of an effective anti vehicle platform all about risk and skill vs reward... Allowing LAV's turrets to have an "EVE like" lock on feature that would keep the turret always pointed in the general direction. Allowing the LAV driver to "Kite" the tank and the gunner to keep on target at that speed without the slightest bump sending your reticule into the air.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1882	Posted - 2014.03.17 23:21:00 - [290] - Quote Henrietta Unknown wrote: Often times the terrain and position of the tank makes it damn hard to reach (momentum). And I tried sticking it on the inside. The detonation is not as reliable if it's not on the bumper. Then put it on the side, and there's a point inside where if you stack them perfectly, it fits. ALso, still have not come across this terrain issue you speak of. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-

Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1882	Posted - 2014.03.17 23:23:00 - [291] - Quote DootDoot wrote: Jihad Jeeps are one of the best un-intentional mechanics ever introduced into DUST 514... The diverse Gameplay, Game mechanics.. Cat and mouse tactics.. Use of assets to counter other assets... It's just beautiful in depth game play created by CCP completely un-intentionally.. And has brought so much Enjoyment, Pain and general frustration from every party... Which makes it a perfect piece to any CCP game... Jihad jeeps are DUST 514's Version of EVE online's Un-intentional jet-can mining game mechanics. If anything People should be fighting to make LAV's more of an effective anti vehicle platform all about risk and skill vs reward... Allowing LAV's turrets to have an "EVE like" lock on feature that would keep the turret always pointed in the general direction. Allowing the LAV driver to "Kite" the tank and the gunner to keep on target at that speed without the slightest bump sending your reticule into the air. More like a exploit (so the infinity optimal), and from what I hear, it's getting removed in 1.8, as it was unintended. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
DootDoot Da Short Buss 275	Posted - 2014.03.17 23:33:00 - [292] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: DootDoot wrote: Jihad Jeeps are one of the best un-intentional mechanics ever introduced into DUST 514... The diverse Gameplay, Game mechanics.. Cat and mouse tactics.. Use of assets to counter other assets... It's just beautiful in depth game play created by CCP completely un-intentionally.. And has brought so much Enjoyment, Pain and general frustration from every party... Which makes it a perfect piece to any CCP game... Jihad jeeps are DUST 514's Version of EVE online's Un-intentional jet-can mining game mechanics. If anything People should be fighting to make LAV's more of an effective anti vehicle platform all about risk and skill vs reward... Allowing LAV's turrets to have an "EVE like" lock on feature that would keep the turret always pointed in the general direction. Allowing the LAV driver to "Kite" the tank and the gunner to keep on target at that speed without the slightest bump sending your reticule into the air. More like a exploit (so the infinity optimal), and from what I hear, it's getting removed in 1.8, as it was unintended. Your missing the point... EVE's jet can mining was an exploit. at one point Hilmar was going to remove it...... But It literally built the game.. and alot of corporation and friendships in the game.. Jihad jeeps in the Vehicle game does the same for DUST. Worse is it is ONLY ever an issue in un-competitive game modes like Public matches, where really.... is this what you want to attempt to make balance decisions from?.. Ask the PC corporations how rampant Jihad jeeps are in competitive game modes where both sides are fighting at a decent pairing for the win. Probably most players have never seen it... and on the rare occasion.. one side was beat into the red-line and didn't care anymore. After we nerf Jihad jeeps we should just nerf Ammo... If no one had ammo we couldn't kill anyone and then everyone would have nothing to complain about right?
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1886	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:08:00 - [293] - Quote DootDoot wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: DootDoot wrote: Jihad Jeeps are one of the best un-intentional mechanics ever introduced into DUST 514... The diverse Gameplay, Game mechanics.. Cat and mouse tactics.. Use of assets to counter other assets... It's just beautiful in depth game play created by CCP completely un-intentionally.. And has brought so much Enjoyment, Pain and general frustration from every party... Which makes it a perfect piece to any CCP game... Jihad jeeps are DUST 514's Version of EVE online's Un-intentional jet-can mining game mechanics. If anything People should be fighting to make LAV's more of an effective anti vehicle platform all about risk and skill vs reward... Allowing LAV's turrets to have an "EVE like" lock on feature that would keep the turret always pointed in the general direction. Allowing the LAV driver to "Kite" the tank and the gunner to keep on target at that speed without the slightest bump sending your reticule into the air. More like a exploit (so the infinity optimal), and from what I hear, it's getting removed in 1.8, as it was unintended. Your missing the point... EVE's jet can mining was an exploit. at one point Hilmar was going to remove it...... But It literally built the game.. and alot of corporation and friendships in the game.. Jihad jeeps in the Vehicle game does the same for DUST. Worse is it is ONLY ever an issue in un-competitive game modes like Public matches, where really.... is this what you want to attempt to make balance decisions from?.. Ask the PC corporations how rampant Jihad jeeps are in competitive game modes where both sides are fighting at a decent pairing for the win. Probably most players have never seen it... and on the rare occasion.. one side was beat into the red-line and didn't care anymore. After we nerf Jihad jeeps we should just nerf Ammo... If no one had ammo we couldn't kill anyone and then everyone would have nothing to complain about right? But see, it didn't affect anyone; actually, it created situations where people could steal from you. So doing so would bite you in the ass. That's why he changed his mind, because it really wasn't a exploit at all, just a hidden gem for thieves, (but it saved people time). This can't bite you in the ass; it's full proof. and it's very cheap. ALso, PC is full of scrubs who are too busy seeing who can out strafe each other, and the HAV's handle each other anyways. Your point backfired, try again. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
DootDoot Da Short Buss 277	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:30:00 - [294] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: DootDoot wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: DootDoot wrote: Jihad Jeeps are one of the best un-intentional mechanics ever introduced into DUST 514... The diverse Gameplay, Game mechanics.. Cat and mouse tactics.. Use of assets to counter other assets... It's just beautiful in depth game play created by CCP completely un-intentionally.. And has brought so much Enjoyment, Pain and general frustration from every party... Which makes it a perfect piece to any CCP game... Jihad jeeps are DUST 514's Version of EVE online's Un-intentional jet-can mining game mechanics. If anything People should be fighting to make LAV's more of an effective anti vehicle platform all about risk and skill vs reward... Allowing LAV's turrets to have an "EVE like" lock on feature that would keep the turret always pointed in the general direction. Allowing the LAV driver to "Kite" the tank and the gunner to keep on target at that speed without the slightest bump sending your reticule into the air. More like a exploit (so the infinity optimal), and from what I hear, it's getting removed in 1.8, as it was unintended. Your missing the point... EVE's jet can mining was an exploit. at one point Hilmar was going to remove it...... But It literally built the game.. and alot of corporation and friendships in the game.. Jihad jeeps in the Vehicle game does the same for DUST. Worse is it is ONLY ever an issue in un-competitive game modes like Public matches, where really.... is this what you want to attempt to make balance decisions from?.. Ask the PC corporations how rampant Jihad jeeps are in competitive game modes where both sides are fighting at a decent pairing for the win. Probably most players have never seen it... and on the rare occasion.. one side was beat into the red-line and didn't care anymore. After we nerf Jihad jeeps we should just nerf Ammo... If no one had ammo we couldn't kill anyone and then everyone would have nothing to complain about right? But see, it didn't affect anyone; actually, it created situations where people could steal from you. So doing so would bite you in the ass. That's why he changed his mind, because it really wasn't a exploit at all, just a hidden gem for thieves, (but it saved people time). This can't bite you in the ass; it's full proof. and it's very cheap. ALso, PC is full of scrubs who are too busy seeing who can out strafe each other, and the HAV's handle each other anyways. Your point backfired, try again. Hilmar has an entire speech he opens conferences with... Where he had time finally off running CCP... when he was having time off for his kid being born... Sat down with a new character and actually played EVE online... And the whole dynamics around using it... They really didn't understand the implications of jet can mining until Hilmar got to see it first hand.... Jet can mining blew apart all aspects of growth that was designed into EVE... and compressed it by a factor of 10... it was a massive thing to leave in the game and not because of theft... but im sure eventually you'll stumble across the 15-30 minute speech he makes frequently... I was actually through the beta process in EVE myself been with CCP for quite a while.... when there was only frigates and cruisers and everyone was mining in frigates flying back to the station each time their cargo was full... and getting a Cruiser made you a god... And calling the most competitive aspect of the game... so the extreme use of every aspect of the game to win... is not the process in which balancing should be based from? Then you are really letting the Hater-ade and jelly sandwiches get to you... Because that is the end game in DUST and what anyone truly aspiring to win and setup strategy and tactics on a DUST scale would aspire too... Most of the OP things used and taken advantage of are merely PC strategies in small scale.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1886	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:14:00 - [295] - Quote DootDoot wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: DootDoot wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: DootDoot wrote: Jihad Jeeps are one of the best un-intentional mechanics ever introduced into DUST 514... The diverse Gameplay, Game mechanics.. Cat and mouse tactics.. Use of assets to counter other assets... It's just beautiful in depth game play created by CCP completely un-intentionally.. And has brought so much Enjoyment, Pain and general frustration from every party... Which makes it a perfect piece to any CCP game... Jihad jeeps are DUST 514's Version of EVE online's Un-intentional jet-can mining game mechanics. If anything People should be fighting to make LAV's more of an effective anti vehicle platform all about risk and skill vs reward... Allowing LAV's turrets to have an "EVE like" lock on feature that would keep the turret always pointed in the general direction. Allowing the LAV driver to "Kite" the tank and the gunner to keep on target at that speed without the slightest bump sending your reticule into the air. More like a exploit (so the infinity optimal), and from what I hear, it's getting removed in 1.8, as it was unintended. Your missing the point... EVE's jet can mining was an exploit. at one point Hilmar was going to remove it...... But It literally built the game.. and alot of corporation and friendships in the game.. Jihad jeeps in the Vehicle game does the same for DUST. Worse is it is ONLY ever an issue in un-competitive game modes like Public matches, where really.... is this what you want to attempt to make balance decisions from?.. Ask the PC corporations how rampant Jihad jeeps are in competitive game modes where both sides are fighting at a decent pairing for the win. Probably most players have never seen it... and on the rare occasion.. one side was beat into the red-line and didn't care anymore. After we nerf Jihad jeeps we should just nerf Ammo... If no one had ammo we couldn't kill anyone and then everyone would have nothing to complain about right? But see, it didn't affect anyone; actually, it created situations where people could steal from you. So doing so would bite you in the ass. That's why he changed his mind, because it really wasn't a exploit at all, just a hidden gem for thieves, (but it saved people time). This can't bite you in the ass; it's full proof. and it's very cheap. ALso, PC is full of scrubs who are too busy seeing who can out strafe each other, and the HAV's handle each other anyways. Your point backfired, try again. Hilmar has an entire speech he opens conferences with... Where he had time finally off running CCP... when he was having time off for his kid being born... Sat down with a new character and actually played EVE online... And the whole dynamics around using it... They really didn't understand the implications of jet can mining until Hilmar got to see it first hand.... Jet can mining blew apart all aspects of growth that was designed into EVE... and compressed it by a factor of 10... it was a massive thing to leave in the game and not because of theft... but im sure eventually you'll stumble across the 15-30 minute speech he makes frequently... I was actually through the beta process in EVE myself been with CCP for quite a while.... when there was only frigates and cruisers and everyone was mining in frigates flying back to the station each time their cargo was full... and getting a Cruiser made you a god... And calling the most competitive aspect of the game... so the extreme use of every aspect of the game to win... is not the process in which balancing should be based from? Then you are really letting the Hater-ade and jelly sandwiches get to you... Because that is the end game in DUST and what anyone truly aspiring to win and setup strategy and tactics on a DUST scale would aspire too... Most of the OP things used and taken advantage of are merely PC strategies in small scale. I didn't say that you don't balance PC, I simply stated that you don't balance JUST OFF OF PC (because that's where scrubs live). Dude, I was kinda forced to do PC all the time, so I know how it is; you don't have to give me a ******* speech. I just stated that it's bullshit, and it should be removed, because all it causes is bullshit deaths. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
SgtMajSquish MLBJ Consolidated Dust 11	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:22:00 - [296] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: NOTICE: Several of you (pretty much over 95% Wants to critize me and label myself as a tanker scrub. note that I have also said numerous things about balancing on the vehicle side as well in terms of briging them back down to earth. Nobody was adressing this issue that neds to be fixed (ironically was quick to want to nerf them into the ground however ). If you want to have any smart comments after this, go ahead; you'll just be a idiotic troll. JLAV's have brung the same problem as the old AV, but far worse: to be able to easily counter HAV's on a far cheaper price point (somewhere between free and 50k ISK0. and all you have to do is ram the HAV's. People just say, "shoot at it, and it'll blow up". well, put the RE's on the side of the LAV, then slide into it, or better yet, put them inside of it, and then it becomes near impossible/impossible to kill. Also, from a lore stand point, the things are made to not be affected by outside force, so it makes even less sense. Simply put, the best way to fix it is to not allow in attaching to friendly hulls. You can still attach RE's to enemy hulls to kill them that way, but not put them on your own and smash into others and cause unnecessary rage. Lastly, saying, "But it's fun, so it should stay." Is not a argument. That's like saying "But the RR is fun, so it should stay as is.". Might be fun for you to be OP, but to the receiving end, it's not fun. At all. Peace, Godin What's this AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA this is the stupidest thing I've read all day. Here's the deal, you stop bringing in tanks, and I'll stop bringing in JLAVs. It is a part of the game now, and you should suck it up like all of us have sucked up the OP tanks for the longest time. Also, there is a solution. Its called a shield hardener. As far as how much it costs me to blow up your tank. 6,500ISK. The joy of costing you tens of thousands: Priceless NERF NERF NERF BUFF BUFF BUFF
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1886	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:43:00 - [297] - Quote SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: NOTICE: Several of you (pretty much over 95% Wants to critize me and label myself as a tanker scrub. note that I have also said numerous things about balancing on the vehicle side as well in terms of briging them back down to earth. Nobody was adressing this issue that neds to be fixed (ironically was quick to want to nerf them into the ground however ). If you want to have any smart comments after this, go ahead; you'll just be a idiotic troll. JLAV's have brung the same problem as the old AV, but far worse: to be able to easily counter HAV's on a far cheaper price point (somewhere between free and 50k ISK0. and all you have to do is ram the HAV's. People just say, "shoot at it, and it'll blow up". well, put the RE's on the side of the LAV, then slide into it, or better yet, put them inside of it, and then it becomes near impossible/impossible to kill. Also, from a lore stand point, the things are made to not be affected by outside force, so it makes even less sense. Simply put, the best way to fix it is to not allow in attaching to friendly hulls. You can still attach RE's to enemy hulls to kill them that way, but not put them on your own and smash into others and cause unnecessary rage. Lastly, saying, "But it's fun, so it should stay." Is not a argument. That's like saying "But the RR is fun, so it should stay as is.". Might be fun for you to be OP, but to the receiving end, it's not fun. At all. Peace, Godin What's this AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA this is the stupidest thing I've read all day. Here's the deal, you stop bringing in tanks, and I'll stop bringing in JLAVs. It is a part of the game now, and you should suck it up like all of us have sucked up the OP tanks for the longest time. Also, there is a solution. Its called a shield hardener. As far as how much it costs me to blow up your tank. 6,500ISK. The joy of costing you tens of thousands: Priceless I assume you are just a bad who knows nothing about balance? EDIT: furthermore, I assume you don't really know how JLAV's work, or how fitting a HAV works 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 3533	Posted - 2014.03.18 03:36:00 - [298] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: if someone is willing to kill themselves out of spite in order to have a chance at destroying an enemy tank, it just goes to show how overpowered tanks are, and that tank invincibility to any other tactic needs to go Dammit, why couldn't my post have been 1st. I've only seen more likes for devs and for Shotty's scout topic. No.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 3533	Posted - 2014.03.18 03:38:00 - [299] - Quote Holy sh*t Godin you're still here trying to defend your position!? Mate, it's over, give it up. No.
lok rark StealthSquad 31	Posted - 2014.03.18 03:47:00 - [300] - Quote Godin is right.... CCP nerfed all vehicles to hard. The new skill system makes no sense and the old system was... well broken, but worked 100 times better than now. With potential to be fixed. And more diverse Vehicles. Keep the Jlavs but bring back 1.6 vehicles/ modules. Buff the swarm range... slightly. YEA... none of that will ever happen... Instead of going back to whats known to work., they will keep going in some new aimless direction.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.