|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ads alt
124
   |
Posted - 2014.03.08 21:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Not saying they should be removed, but why are they here?
They have no definitive purpose on the battlefield other than destroying other HAVs, which is circular.
Support infantry, kill, deatroy installations, lock down an objective/defend it...
1.8 will release...
|
ads alt
126
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 22:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
Admonishment wrote:It is because Stone Cold said so, and that's the bottom line!
Ha, nice sig, I get it.
Also, from now on im reporting every fotm remote after death scrub, already reported one from fa and he's a kid.
1.8 will release...
|
ads alt
126
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 22:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:
If a tank cant **** up infantry what do we have tanks for? could an LAV do it? lolno
So then we have tanks just for taking out tanks but if no tanks are out then we dont need tanks which makes them pointless and i get a 20mil respec and put it into FOTM suit and weapon for the rest of my days
I currently aim with my blaster, it actually works and so does hit detection, if i dont get that little dot to go red i dont get kills, how much more skill does it need? do you want me to have a swamr launcher turret which locks onto infantry and kills then around corners?
A Swarm Launcher is no longer capable of turning a corner. Swarm Launchers require the following:
- Timing
- Positioning
- Situational Awareness
- "Gun Game" (Unless you want to be insta-killed by a rifle user)
- Ability to predict flight / movement path of vehicles
80GJ Blasters however, are hit-scan weapons, and simply pressing R1 while the reticule is red guarantees that you will get a hit. Couple that with the fact that Hardners and Armor Repairers remove the need for almost all situational awareness, and you've got yourself a plentiful helping of EZ-Mode. In Uprising 1.7, Swarm Launchers literally require more skill than using an HAV. inb4 You going on a baseless tangent about how Swarm Launchers are actually EZ-Mode and how HAVs are the most talent intensive thing in DUST 514 
Swarms WERE easy mode
Now the s5d and adv swarms are up and blasters are op
1.8 will release...
|
ads alt
126
|
Posted - 2014.03.08 22:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:True Adamance wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:To breach defences
To **** up infantry if its built like that
To take out enemy vehicles if its built like that
To pin down the enemy
To provide a distraction
To assault objectives
To support ground troops I'm against the idea of our in game HAV being designed to **** up infantry..... as we often see a large blaster does unbalance gameplay hugely...however I wouldn't be against us having High Explosive rounds to eff up infantry providing it requires us to skill shot them. If a tank cant **** up infantry what do we have tanks for? could an LAV do it? lolno So then we have tanks just for taking out tanks but if no tanks are out then we dont need tanks which makes them pointless and i get a 20mil respec and put it into FOTM suit and weapon for the rest of my days I currently aim with my blaster, it actually works and so does hit detection, if i dont get that little dot to go red i dont get kills, how much more skill does it need? do you want me to have a swamr launcher turret which locks onto infantry and kills then around corners? I understand but I feel we can achieve a more balanced Anti infantry role without requiring a turret that spits our anti vehicle level projectiles froma 205 capacity magazine at a tremendous rate of fire. A weapon that more closely resembles a modern tank turret could suffice. There are a number of ways to alter the Blaster to make it more balanced from - Taking the Battelfield approach, and direct fire cannon with coaxial machinegun - PS2 where I believe they have fast firing explosives turrets - Or follow the EVE side model where blasters requiring a cycling time I agree that in terms of infantry vs Tank combat Tanks are resistant to small arms fire....but is not a tanks primary designation the delivery of large ordinance against a specific entrenched postion or enemy vehicle? I'm not going to deny Tanks have strong anti personell capacity but that is normally in the hands of secondary crew men.
Ps2 has rapid explosive turrets for tanks? Wth all I see is a 1 shot tank cannon
1.8 will release...
|
ads alt
129
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 00:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
ads alt wrote:True Adamance wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:True Adamance wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:To breach defences
To **** up infantry if its built like that
To take out enemy vehicles if its built like that
To pin down the enemy
To provide a distraction
To assault objectives
To support ground troops I'm against the idea of our in game HAV being designed to **** up infantry..... as we often see a large blaster does unbalance gameplay hugely...however I wouldn't be against us having High Explosive rounds to eff up infantry providing it requires us to skill shot them. If a tank cant **** up infantry what do we have tanks for? could an LAV do it? lolno So then we have tanks just for taking out tanks but if no tanks are out then we dont need tanks which makes them pointless and i get a 20mil respec and put it into FOTM suit and weapon for the rest of my days I currently aim with my blaster, it actually works and so does hit detection, if i dont get that little dot to go red i dont get kills, how much more skill does it need? do you want me to have a swamr launcher turret which locks onto infantry and kills then around corners? I understand but I feel we can achieve a more balanced Anti infantry role without requiring a turret that spits our anti vehicle level projectiles froma 205 capacity magazine at a tremendous rate of fire. A weapon that more closely resembles a modern tank turret could suffice. There are a number of ways to alter the Blaster to make it more balanced from - Taking the Battelfield approach, and direct fire cannon with coaxial machinegun - PS2 where I believe they have fast firing explosives turrets - Or follow the EVE side model where blasters requiring a cycling time I agree that in terms of infantry vs Tank combat Tanks are resistant to small arms fire....but is not a tanks primary designation the delivery of large ordinance against a specific entrenched postion or enemy vehicle? I'm not going to deny Tanks have strong anti personell capacity but that is normally in the hands of secondary crew men. Ps2 has rapid explosive turrets for tanks? Wth all I see is a 1 shot tank cannon
Oh perhaps the footage of the game that I have seen is not what is currently in the game now? My bad, I'll go and watch some PS2 tank gameplay and come back with a better suggestion.
Sorry about that.[/quote]
I will play pa2 soon (tm) sadly, tm
1.8 will release...
|
ads alt
146
|
Posted - 2014.03.09 17:58:00 -
[6] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Baal Roo wrote:If tanks were half as fast as they currently are, all of a sudden the entire vehicle/infantry dichotomy would all make sense and be fun for everyone. Oh, heaven forbid a tank should move faster than a heavy dropsuit.
Im gunna start a movie on the forums
Tanks are suoer overpowered, they need nerfing, blaster turrets need a damm huge nerf, and your a fotm tank scrub
Click here for 1.8 release date quote from devs
|
|
|
| |
|