DUST Search - Why can't tanks just be another dropsuit?

All Channels

General Discussions

Why can't tanks just be another dropsuit?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2034	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:01:00 - [1] - Quote Consider this: A dropsuit, a good one, costs 150k to 200k. It is CAPEABLE of killing 40 people and not dying in a very good game, has significant advantages over a 10k dropsuit, but can still be killed by it. Vehicles should be approached the same way. A good vehicle should cost 200k and die to AV just as quickly as a dropsuit does. What does that mean? No more hardeners. None. Zero...or at least, they dont last more than 10 seconds for shields and 18 for armor. This means that current proto AV is more than capable of soloing any vehicles there is...And so is STD AV. Since the costs are equalized to with dropsuits, we can truly have the Infantry > AV > AV tank > AI Tank > Infantry balance that everyone wants. "Hey, wait, modules, as they are, mean any tank can be damage AND HP tanked at the same time...Easy fix=Change slot layout and fitting costs so it is impossible for a tank to have enough DPS to kill an HP-heavy tank without having any amount of HP capable of surviving >2 av rounds. AI Vehicle kills infantry in 3 seconds, but cannot survive vs AV Vehicle who fires first. Infantry kills AV in 3 seconds, but are helpless against vehicles. Av kills AV Vehicle in 3 seconds, but AI Vehicle in 15 seconds AV vehicle kills AI vehicle in 3 seconds, but cannot survive an engagement with AV infantry long enough to take on more than one IF he is a good shot. It's honestly the easiest balance system I can think of. When everyone is killed in 3 seconds by someone else, then nobody is OP. What does this mean for dropships and lavs>>>>? Well, it means a tank and a dropship have more or less, the same EHP and DPS. "So why use a tank that can't fly?" Stealthier (ironically). Try hiding as a dropship. It is almost impossible. Everyone knows where you are and every forge, rail, and swarm lock on to you the second they see you pop out of the redline. LAVs are fast and hav the same EHP as tanks and dropships (yeah, crazy). Their main weakness being they don't have a turret and have an open cockpit. So here's the breakdown: HAVs: Low Mobility. High DPS. "Stealthy" LAVs: High Mobility. No DPS. "Stealthy" Dropships: High Mobility. High DPS. "Missile Magnet" So...modules need to reworked completely. High slots: Shields/Turret Mods/Stealth Low slots: Mobility/Armor/Intelligence Shields- Super fast regen, but can barely take more than 1 hard hit. Hardeners give the vehicle 90% resistance for a few seconds. Just long enough to see an incoming threat and nullify it- once. Boosters instantly restore the shield. Regulators significantly reduce the recharge delay. Also remote boosters + hardeners. Turret Mods- Increases damage a ridiculous amount...so much that a full stack of these mods and a good tank firing for 6 seconds of sustained railguns, blasters, or missiles can score 8000 DMG...3HKing anything...ever. However, the effect is so short and the recharge so long that the 7 seconds of mind-shattering OPness better impact 100% of the time. Modules either increase ROF or DMG, but proportionally so both will give the same final DPS. After DMG mods, you've got your reload accelerators, scopes, and ammo bay expansions. Also remote DMG mods (like a leash that buffs DPS) Stealth- Cloaks- Spectral OR Radar. A spectral cloak renders the vehicle invisible for 20 seconds, however, no regeneration of HP or activation of other modules may take place until the cloak is turned off or runs out its timer. Activating the cloak also shuts down all other modules. Radar cloaks simply increase the time it takes for swarms to lock on to the vehicle by 400% and reduce the time that a spotted vehicle is lit up by 65%. (also available in remote variants) Mobility- In a world where vehicles are getting OHKd by AV and vehicle, speed is legit tank style. Modules give an extreme speed boost, rocketing a vehicle to 200% of their normal speed in 1 second and maintaining it for a good 10 seconds. (also available in remote variants) Armor- Capeable of surviving without hardeners for more than a few hits, but the hardeners are only meant to slightly extend life expectancy. They will not stop a DMG modded rail from destroying a vehicle at a whim, but they will allow it to take that one more hit that could be the difference between life and death OVER time, rather than nullifying one hit altogether. Reppers regenerate the vehicle extremely slowly compared to shields, but constantly. Plates also give a significant Hp bonus compared to extenders, so a decked out Armor plated vehicle could easily tolerate a good 8 AV rounds, though a dmg modded vehicle will still 3second-slaughter them. Remote reppers and hardeners also available Intelligence- Scanners...super duper scanners. 350m range, but with a 15' angle OR 50m scanners 360' that last for a good minute. So now we have logi vehicles, too. lol. CONT..... Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2034	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:01:00 - [2] - Quote reserved Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Tectonic Fusion 1222	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:05:00 - [3] - Quote No. Solo Player Squad status: Locked
SgtDoughnut Red Star Jr. EoN. 436	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:06:00 - [4] - Quote The tankers don't want balance, they want rolling death boxes that are nigh immortal except against other tanks.
Vegetation Monster KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 260	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:06:00 - [5] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: reserved TL;DR? B Double O T Y
Meeko Fent Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 1933	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:07:00 - [6] - Quote Can we please just say what we never thought we wanted to say? We want 1.6 back. We want 1.6, with these costs back. Give it up. Because you Wanted to be Something your Not.
Hakyou Brutor G0DS AM0NG MEN D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 61	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:10:00 - [7] - Quote Meeko Fent wrote: Can we please just say what we never thought we wanted to say? We want 1.6 back. We want 1.6, with these costs back. Give it up. Literally all they had to do was take 15-20% damage off of the swarms and av nades and fix blaster hit detection and it'd be fine, but no, they had to go and do the entire "rebalance" thing, and now is it really balanced... is it? G0DS AM0NG MEN Director - Fully Support a Respec for 1.8
bamboo x Eternal Beings Proficiency V. 154	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:18:00 - [8] - Quote I saw a post someone made a while back, about how tanks are used in real life. They're meant to break through enemy fortifications. So he said that turret installations should be much tougher, perhaps based on the skill of who's operating it, and should be more abundant to keep tanks away. And just like in real life, infantry just needs some RPGs, missle launchers, or bombs to clear tanks away. They shouldn't just be immortal infantry-slaying Gods. Hanging up the Min Logi, going full Amarr Sentinel with HMG, Ion Pistol, and Forge Gun. My record high KD about 47/14
Ludvig Enraga KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 935	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:20:00 - [9] - Quote BACAUSE if you get a team of proto suits or tanks, you are immortal. You can make the intellectual leap and see why this is bad for the game on your own. Nuff said. PLC, NK, Scout - before 1.8. That's right, I stack that OP Sh!t.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 7996	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:22:00 - [10] - Quote I disagree with you on this one Charlotte.....if tanks were reduced to the same play style as infantry units I honestly would give up on them....... infantry work is boring as hell..... tanks would then be boring as hell...... Just my opinion though..... I like the idea of tactically using modules and having to manage them..... "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum

Squagga The State Protectorate 282	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:26:00 - [11] - Quote I can't believe you're asking for more Reloading, the silent killer.
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2035	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:26:00 - [12] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I disagree with you on this one Charlotte.....if tanks were reduced to the same play style as infantry units I honestly would give up on them....... infantry work is boring as hell..... tanks would then be boring as hell...... Just my opinion though..... I like the idea of tactically using modules and having to manage them..... read part 2. Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2037	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:36:00 - [13] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I disagree with you on this one Charlotte.....if tanks were reduced to the same play style as infantry units I honestly would give up on them....... infantry work is boring as hell..... tanks would then be boring as hell...... Just my opinion though..... I like the idea of tactically using modules and having to manage them..... that's great, but you are what is wrong with tankers and you're just as bad as infantry wannabe tryhards like atiim. You want is us to be indestructible. You are enjoying tanks right now just like he enjoyed AV in 1.6 Tanks cant be expensive without being something only for the super rich tankers (maybe 15 guys total. lol) Tanks cant be cheap without being spammed. Tanks cant take hits without being hard to kill when piloted properly. So to please everyone, we need low HP tanks that can be killed by one guy with a swarm launcher, but can still kill 30 infantryu who dont fight back easily, and all for only 150k isk. Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1842	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:53:00 - [14] - Quote I swear you have never, and will probably will never have no sense of balance. Ever. Also, you're more fickle than y brother. One day you want tanks to be indestructible, the next over-sized dropsuits. Make up your damn mind. 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Meeko Fent Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 1935	Posted - 2014.03.08 04:59:00 - [15] - Quote Hakyou Brutor wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: Can we please just say what we never thought we wanted to say? We want 1.6 back. We want 1.6, with these costs back. Give it up. Literally all they had to do was take 15-20% damage off of the swarms and av nades and fix blaster hit detection and it'd be fine, but no, they had to go and do the entire "rebalance" thing, and now is it really balanced... is it? Or, perhaps it would be best to simply have Tanks EXACTLY like 1.6 and prior, with these slashed costs. In pubs they were fine, and in PC i can't imagine that they had no impact. Maybe just nurf the AV grenades, and balance the Armor v. Shield tanks, and boom. God enough. I'd much rather have a somewhat easy to counter tank then tanks that require tanks to kill. Because you Wanted to be Something your Not.
Spartykins NECROM0NGERS The CORVOS 46	Posted - 2014.03.08 05:08:00 - [16] - Quote I stopped reading at "tanks need to take three seconds to kill." I want to be able to kill things with my Swarm Launcher again, but seriously. (Insert witty phrase here)
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 1984	Posted - 2014.03.08 05:08:00 - [17] - Quote Why use vehicles for AV in this scenario? What is the point, when all a tank has become is an inexpensive, hyper-durable assault suit with no ability to hack? What purpose have missiles and railguns, when you can use a forge or a swarm inside your blaster tank? Assault ak.0 w/ScR+ScP 4LYFE
ONE-I-BANDIT The Generals General Tso's Alliance 38	Posted - 2014.03.08 05:12:00 - [18] - Quote Well all that sounds good in theory. O'Dell but what would be the SP involved in all that. Now I could be very wrong and some one can point it out to me but its easier to get full proto Av then its to get an full Proto tank meaning every thing at LvL 5. If they were to do your ideal I believe there would be no tanks used very much. While lots of PPL would say yay there gone then they would cry on the Heavy suits. I like the ideal that if an full proto swarm meet an full proto tank that one full volley meaning that all hit the target and not just 1 or 2 would be about 35% maby a bit more depending on the fit. I'm not including Hardeners just for the example. Meaning 3 volley may 4 volleys would do it and this is from only one person not an team of AV. I also think that there should be different launchers then what we have know because they are an armor base weapon so an anti shield launcher should be made. Yes we have the forge gun for shield but ppl dont want to spec. into heavy they want launcher so make an launcher for shield base tanks. Wait till they get a load of me Proto Logi /Big Bad Tanker/ Beginner Heavy HMG
Derpty Derp It's All Gone Derp 108	Posted - 2014.03.08 05:20:00 - [19] - Quote Drop hardeners time, good plan... Stop multiple hardener builds, So people can't be super tanky all the time. Nerf armour rep stacking... Please! Anything else is overkill. Also as a pilot, hiding a dropship is quite easy, just sit behind a building and no one see's you... Or fly low to the ground... It's kind of how we avoid swarms (not that swarms ever need avoiding in 1.7) and regen armour while being pew pewed by redline tanks.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8001	Posted - 2014.03.08 05:31:00 - [20] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: True Adamance wrote: I disagree with you on this one Charlotte.....if tanks were reduced to the same play style as infantry units I honestly would give up on them....... infantry work is boring as hell..... tanks would then be boring as hell...... Just my opinion though..... I like the idea of tactically using modules and having to manage them..... that's great, but you are what is wrong with tankers and you're just as bad as infantry wannabe tryhards like atiim. You want is us to be indestructible. You are enjoying tanks right now just like he enjoyed AV in 1.6 Tanks cant be expensive without being something only for the super rich tankers (maybe 15 guys total. lol) Tanks cant be cheap without being spammed. Tanks cant take hits without being hard to kill when piloted properly. So to please everyone, we need low HP tanks that can be killed by one guy with a swarm launcher, but can still kill 30 infantryu who dont fight back easily, and all for only 150k isk. Hell no I don't want us to be OP..... I hate Tanks as they are now, I want pre 1.7 tanks back tbh I liked having the control of fitting them and pimping them out. The last thing I want is for tanks to be OP. I want them to find their place.....and that place is not as a massive infantry killing machine. I would like tanks to become the premier ground based anti vehicle units, susceptible to infantry and AV units but able to combat one another and be a durable yet skill intensive unit on the field that is deployed as less of a sledge hammer and more of a spear. There is not satisfaction in mauling masses of infantry while being impenetrable, its boring and lacking in any real talent....and I have noticed since 1.7 hit a marked decline in my skill as a tanker because it is easy. I am actually rather upset you would lump me in with those FoTM bastards and "PRO TANKER screw infantry" ass holes. However personally I do like the idea of activating hardeners to lessen damage taken at specific times, I like feeling vulnerable when I have no hardeners, I like activating modules and micromanaging that mid game play..... But hell I am the last person you will find defending HAV in their current set up. Did you not post in my thread "I miss feeling vulnerable"? How the hell did you lump me in with the PRO 1.7 HAV crowd? "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum

Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1239	Posted - 2014.03.08 05:38:00 - [21] - Quote Meeko Fent wrote: Can we please just say what we never thought we wanted to say? We want 1.6 back. We want 1.6, with these costs back. Give it up. And current large missile turrets, current shield boosters, and current hardener durations. Don't forget that shield tanks and large missiles were UP pre-1.7 "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Meeko Fent Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 1937	Posted - 2014.03.08 05:56:00 - [22] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: Can we please just say what we never thought we wanted to say? We want 1.6 back. We want 1.6, with these costs back. Give it up. And current large missile turrets, current shield boosters, and current hardener durations. Don't forget that shield tanks and large missiles were UP pre-1.7 I know, but Whats worse, having tanks be "tots OP" and getting smashed into the ground, or getting our old way back, and being able to balance it off that? Because you Wanted to be Something your Not.
ZDub 303 TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 2336	Posted - 2014.03.08 06:42:00 - [23] - Quote I feel like there needs to be some amount of advantage for tanks considering they are not as maneuverable as infantry and have much much larger hitboxes. If any ol forge gun could two shot tanks... why would you ever use one? You would last seconds on the battlefield at any point in time considering the range on FGs and the hitboxes on tanks. I feel like you are asking for us to go back to when you made angry threads 4-5 times a day about how weak tanks are... I'm finding it very hard to take you seriously on this.
ONE-I-BANDIT The Generals General Tso's Alliance 38	Posted - 2014.03.08 06:57:00 - [24] - Quote Just thought about an 5% increase on all AV except Forge since they hit fairly hard already but that could be argued I guess. For the next to patches or until the majority of PPL on the forums feels like its an good fit against tanks. Oh and no increase on RE since they are pretty good for now. Just leave the tanks stats the way they are. What says you? Wait till they get a load of me Proto Logi /Big Bad Tanker/ Beginner Heavy HMG
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8004	Posted - 2014.03.08 07:07:00 - [25] - Quote ONE-I-BANDIT wrote: Just thought about an 5% increase on all AV except Forge since they hit fairly hard already but that could be argued I guess. For the next to patches or until the majority of PPL on the forums feels like its an good fit against tanks. Oh and no increase on RE since they are pretty good for now. Just leave the tanks stats the way they are. What says you? Its not just a matter of buff and nerfs when you consider that in future we will have other types of vehicles frames inclusive, possibly of Medium Ground, Light Air, and Heavy Air..... Just buffing or nerfing one doesn't bring about balance.... defining roles, ensuring strengths and weaknesses of all forms of AV and vehicles are what is going to be required to balance the two. If we are talking about small temporary fixes not only to AV damage models have to be addressed but also perhaps the resistances of hardener modules and all the module cool down timers..... frankly speaking of which some are too quick to recharge most notably the Nitrous Module which is often the primary cause of my escapes of untenable AV situations. Personally I would like to feel that when I activate a module it has weight and meaning, by this I don't mean that modules should be game changing, but for the short instance they are active I should feel like the module I activated has a purpose, unlike the current ones which are fire and forget. "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
ONE-I-BANDIT The Generals General Tso's Alliance 38	Posted - 2014.03.08 07:16:00 - [26] - Quote I understand what you are saying but those other fitting are a ways away I would have thought that this could be some thing to calm things down and give the Devs some time and figure out all that stuff so when they do come out they will have some data about how the game play is and the player feed back on how the AV to tank feeling is Wait till they get a load of me Proto Logi /Big Bad Tanker/ Beginner Heavy HMG
21yrOld Knight Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 532	Posted - 2014.03.08 07:25:00 - [27] - Quote Your plans make sense. 1.8 must be a porn star because it is taking a long time to come.
Hagintora Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 290	Posted - 2014.03.08 07:35:00 - [28] - Quote I think O'Dell has the right idea here, though I'm not sure about the implementation, I'll leave that to others more knowledgeable than I. Vehicles need to be thought of in terms of Dropsuits, not be their own special category. If you think in these terms it becomes a little easier to balance, because you no longer say "but it's a Tank!", because you realize that it's just the next step up in the Dropsuit size scale. Light Frame Dropsuits Medium Frame Dropsuits Heavy Frame Dropsuits Light Frame Vehicles Medium Frame Vehicles Heavy Frame Vehicles So a general example of HP spread would be something like this; if Light Frames had 100 HP's, then Medium Frames would have 200, Heavy Frames-300, LAV's-400, MAV's-500, HAV's-600. I think we would be better served if we thought in these terms, and I would bet that it wouldn't take more than a week for someone to come up with a balance that most would agree to.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8006	Posted - 2014.03.08 07:48:00 - [29] - Quote ONE-I-BANDIT wrote: I understand what you are saying but those other fitting are a ways away I would have thought that this could be some thing to calm things down and give the Devs some time and figure out all that stuff so when they do come out they will have some data about how the game play is and the player feed back on how the AV to tank feeling is Indeed I am fully supporting of that. The more info the Devs have the better informed decisions they can make, and with the level of knowledge many players and AVers have that should not be too hard to compile. As I say....I don't really mind removing hardeners but as a personal preference I like the function/ ultility I get from activating things....I suppose in other games those would be counter measures and such. "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
Mobius Wyvern Ahrendee Mercenaries General Tso's Alliance 4705	Posted - 2014.03.08 08:32:00 - [30] - Quote That's a lot of words. Also no. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector



Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.