DUST Search - Why Are HAVs In DUST?

All Channels

General Discussions

Why Are HAVs In DUST?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
ads alt 126	Posted - 2014.03.08 22:57:00 - [31] - 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...
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8023	Posted - 2014.03.08 22:58:00 - [32] - Quote Martyr Saboteur 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? Seriously fuckface. Nobody but you agrees with you. Go away. Dude don't be a goddamn ****. If we don't discuss this with knowledgible tankers like Takahiro then we wont get anywhere. You are honestly the one who needs to leave if you cannot have a reasonable or constructive thing to say. I can disagree with him, but I still want to hear what he has to say. "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum*
ads alt 126	Posted - 2014.03.08 22:59:00 - [33] - 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...
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2865	Posted - 2014.03.08 23:01:00 - [34] - 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. But the secondary crewman has a small turret of whatever which generally cant reach past 150m let alone AV which can be at 200m-300m away and plus they have to be able to see them and also deliver enough dmg to kill or prevent them from getting a shot on which frankly they cannot do If a tank is going to be mainly for vehicles yes you could stick on a LMG for the main gun but then is that really a small turret tbh which frankly isnt worth the slot anyways because of the above reasons To make the HAV more about keeping it clear from vehicles then we need more vehicles to shoot at but right now all i see is infantry and AV infantry which i have to shoot at because they pose a threat Intelligence is OP
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8025	Posted - 2014.03.08 23:01:00 - [35] - 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 Atiim you know for a fact swarms don't require the level of skill you claim they do. I am not trying to get into a discussion between AV and Tanks.....but you don't have a predict movement paths with a weapon that fires and locks the rounds for you, you also do not need gun game to make use of any weapon that is fire and forget. Don't presume additionally that these remaining "skills" are not universal to all weapons and aspects of FPS games. But I see your point and can accept that. "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8025	Posted - 2014.03.08 23:02:00 - [36] - 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. "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8025	Posted - 2014.03.08 23:04:00 - [37] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken 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. But the secondary crewman has a small turret of whatever which generally cant reach past 150m let alone AV which can be at 200m-300m away and plus they have to be able to see them and also deliver enough dmg to kill or prevent them from getting a shot on which frankly they cannot do If a tank is going to be mainly for vehicles yes you could stick on a LMG for the main gun but then is that really a small turret tbh which frankly isnt worth the slot anyways because of the above reasons To make the HAV more about keeping it clear from vehicles then we need more vehicles to shoot at but right now all i see is infantry and AV infantry which i have to shoot at because they pose a threat Indeed I suppose that is the case. There is not enough for Tanks to shoot at while on the field besides infantry units. You might see and enemy HAV and target that but its not really a satisfying game to be reliant on your opposition to deploy armoured units that require countering. "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2865	Posted - 2014.03.08 23:06:00 - [38] - 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 Timing? Basically instant lock time firing all 3 volleys in what 3 seconds? No timing needed Positioning - Only now do they require it Sit awareness - Due to reduced lock range Gun game? lolno auto lock on fire and forget, blaster requires more gun game than swarms because all you do is point at the big red box Ability - Goes with positioning I have to wait till my dot goes red or i wont get a kill and thats OP? thats working as intended because my exile BPO AR does that No i still use sit awareness i always will, 1 breach on the weakspot and your dead, ignore AV for long enough and its your own downfall Rep working as intended Swarms & skill does not belong in the same sentence, they have never required skill because you dont aim Intelligence is OP
Martyr Saboteur Amarrtyrs 211	Posted - 2014.03.09 00:10:00 - [39] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Martyr Saboteur 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? Seriously fuckface. Nobody but you agrees with you. Go away. Dude don't be a goddamn *****. If we don't discuss this with knowledgible tankers like Takahiro then we wont get anywhere. You are honestly the one who needs to leave if you cannot have a reasonable or constructive thing to say. I can disagree with him, but I still want to hear what he has to say. I've heard on what he has to say. Multiple times. He doesn't listen to reason. He is unwavering in his belief that HAVs are balanced. Even though the community is widely in the opinion that they are not balanced. I have yet to see anyone fully agree with his ideas and opinions. I have yet to agree with anything he says. Balance isn't what he wants. He doesn't want to discuss balance. He wants to sit there and defend HAVs in his hope that they will remain horribly unbalanced. He has this bent dream that CCP will agree with him and keep HAVs as they are right now. They won't. He needs to understand that HAVs will be nerfed. What he should be doing is negotiating a nerf, rather than saying that they shouldn't be nerfed. He should be trying to make sure the nerf isn't too strong, as it oftentimes is. To Takahiro: Seriously. You need to understand that HAVs will be nerfed, regardless of how much you say they shouldn't be. Your best course of action would to be negotiating a nerf, and how strong that nerf should be, instead of fervently fighting against a nerf. I can tell you right now that the more you try to convince that HAVs are balanced, they less they will believe you. You need to try and strike a middle ground, rather than doing what you are doing. Totally not Fizzer94's forum alt. Definitely just a random dude.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2869	Posted - 2014.03.09 00:17:00 - [40] - Quote Martyr Saboteur wrote: To Takahiro: Seriously. You need to understand that HAVs will be nerfed, regardless of how much you say they shouldn't be. Your best course of action would to be negotiating a nerf, and how strong that nerf should be, instead of fervently fighting against a nerf. I can tell you right now that the more you try to convince that HAVs are balanced, they less they will believe you. You need to try and strike a middle ground, rather than doing what you are doing. I dont have to do **** CCP will patch and change stuff and break the game more Infantry wont be happy until its COD 514 space edition Infantry wont be happy until vehicles are gone or at least OHK with militia AV I have no power with anything, i cant tell CCP what to do, i cant rely on CPM doing anything they wanted vehicles gone also, if i make a vehicle balance thread like ive done before infantry doesnt like it I use proto AV and have prof in it but to infantry im not AV because i can use a tank If i had it my way i would have copy and pasted everything from EVE with cap and infantry would hate that more if i was able to perma run a hardener because i had max cap skills and was able to do so But no COD Space edition here we come, get ready you might see DUST on mountain dew bottles Intelligence is OP

ads alt 129	Posted - 2014.03.09 00:21:00 - [41] - 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...
Martyr Saboteur Amarrtyrs 211	Posted - 2014.03.09 00:36:00 - [42] - Quote Anyhow. My opinion. I want HAVs to be part of a team, rather than the base a team is built on. I want them to perform crucial roles in a battle. I want them to have a certain synergy with infantry and other vehicles alike. I would like for HAVs to not be treated as something better than everything else, I would like them to be treated as just another player. I want to be able to work alongside HAVs, and provide them with support as much as they would provide me with support. I don't want to work around HAVs, I want to work with them (and against them). I believe that the should have the capability to provide a massive boon to any team that uses them. However, the word "capability" is key. They shouldn't be something that behaves like a powerup or killstreak reward, like they are right now. They should require a good amount of player skill and teamwork to fully utilize their strengths. If someone pilots an HAV like a fool, they should die just a fast as anyone else. However, if they play to their strengths, and work around or avoid their weaknesses, they can have a good game and be a huge part of any team. They should rely on their teammates just as much as their teammates should rely on them. How can we get to a point like this? Give HAVs something to do. Obviously their role is a destructive one. So, let's give them something to destroy. I'm going to take a page from MAG's book. Gates. Anyone that ever played Acquisition knows what I am talking about. Introduce gates in all the main entrances for large sockets. Another thing for them to destroy would be things like SATCOM stations that increase WP generation rates for the enemy team, or structures that make objectives harder to hack. Perhaps they could render the NULL cannot themselves unoperable... Totally not Fizzer94's forum alt. Definitely just a random dude.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 3028	Posted - 2014.03.09 00:39:00 - [43] - Quote 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.
Martyr Saboteur Amarrtyrs 213	Posted - 2014.03.09 00:48:00 - [44] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Martyr Saboteur wrote: To Takahiro: Seriously. You need to understand that HAVs will be nerfed, regardless of how much you say they shouldn't be. Your best course of action would to be negotiating a nerf, and how strong that nerf should be, instead of fervently fighting against a nerf. I can tell you right now that the more you try to convince that HAVs are balanced, they less they will believe you. You need to try and strike a middle ground, rather than doing what you are doing. I dont have to do **** CCP will patch and change stuff and break the game more Infantry wont be happy until its COD 514 space edition Infantry wont be happy until vehicles are gone or at least OHK with militia AV I have no power with anything, i cant tell CCP what to do, i cant rely on CPM doing anything they wanted vehicles gone also, if i make a vehicle balance thread like ive done before infantry doesnt like it I use proto AV and have prof in it but to infantry im not AV because i can use a tank If i had it my way i would have copy and pasted everything from EVE with cap and infantry would hate that more if i was able to perma run a hardener because i had max cap skills and was able to do so But no COD Space edition here we come, get ready you might see DUST on mountain dew bottles I too would like to see Capacitors and cap warfare added to the game. It would be nice to see a bit more depth added to the game. You should understand that not everything can be like it is in EVE. They are two completely different kinds of games, and things that work there simply won't work here. Many things can be adapted, but some things can't. If you expected DUST to be EVE copypasted into a shooter, you were bound to be disappointed from the word "go". Totally not Fizzer94's forum alt. Definitely just a random dude.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5446	Posted - 2014.03.09 00:56:00 - [45] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: 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 Atiim you know for a fact swarms don't require the level of skill you claim they do. I am not trying to get into a discussion between AV and Tanks.....but you don't have a predict movement paths with a weapon that fires and locks the rounds for you, you also do not need gun game to make use of any weapon that is fire and forget. Don't presume additionally that these remaining "skills" are not universal to all weapons and aspects of FPS games. But I see your point and can accept that. I have to disagree. You do have to predict the vehicle's movement paths, because the Swarms have significantly slow travel time, and again your Swarm won't turn a corner or evade obstacles, so once the pilot decides to take cover your Swarms are guaranteed to miss. You do need gun-game. Or would you like to explain how easy it is to fight people when your only defense is a sidearm with a range that's less than half someone's optimal? Those who use hitscan weapons should not be talking about fire and forget. Still yet to find another role that forces me into the eHP of a Light Frame, with less than half their AI capability. lolPLC [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
poison Diego NECROM0NGERS The CORVOS 322	Posted - 2014.03.09 01:00:00 - [46] - Quote Less than 10% of dust players are tankers and that is why so very few agree with us when we bring up something that would seem reasonable to tankers. Since you were arguing about the swarm luncher, let me tell you that they were always to powerful for an auto-locking weapon. I will agree that the range is ridiculously short right now but it used to be to long. I would settle on 275-300 meters but the damage must not be buffed. The SL has a lock-on and therefore should not be a high-powered weapon. The forge is where it should be. It packs a great punch and you actually need to aim with it. The plasma cannon should do 50% more direct damage. AV grenades are almost where they should be. Damage is fine. You should be able to carry 4-5 nades but not be able to resupply them by hives. Flux is fine. This is what I think is reasonable but you don't have to agree with me. WELCOME TO WORLDofTANKz514
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5447	Posted - 2014.03.09 01:08:00 - [47] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: 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 Timing? Basically instant lock time firing all 3 volleys in what 3 seconds? No timing needed Positioning - Only now do they require it Sit awareness - Due to reduced lock range Gun game? lolno auto lock on fire and forget, blaster requires more gun game than swarms because all you do is point at the big red box Ability - Goes with positioning I have to wait till my dot goes red or i wont get a kill and thats OP? thats working as intended because my exile BPO AR does that No i still use sit awareness i always will, 1 breach on the weakspot and your dead, ignore AV for long enough and its your own downfall Rep working as intended Swarms & skill does not belong in the same sentence, they have never required skill because you dont aim Nope. You can insta-lock and fire all 3 volleys, but that doesn't guarrantee a hit. Swarms have this nice feature called travel time that requires you to release at the right moment, or watch as all your Swarms miss. Doesn't make much of a difference. Yes, you need gun-game. Unless of course you'd like to be destroyed by people who have weapons with 3x your range while you have the AI ability of a Light Frame. Perhaps you shouldn't expose your weakspot? Please refrain from using your lack of competence in a discussion. It really makes you look bad. To who? People also said 1.6 AV was working as intended, and yet you didn't agree with that. Not really sure what makes you think that statement would hold merit. Such laughable amounts of hypocrisy. Not really sure why someone who uses a hitscan weapon is talking about a lack of skill. Hypocrite much? lolPLC [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
poison Diego NECROM0NGERS The CORVOS 322	Posted - 2014.03.09 01:15:00 - [48] - Quote Atiim what are you saying though? do you think that the SL needs a buff WELCOME TO WORLDofTANKz514
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5450	Posted - 2014.03.09 01:19:00 - [49] - Quote poison Diego wrote: Atiim what are you saying though? do you think that the SL needs a buff The majority of the playerbase is in an agreement when it comes to Swarm Launchers needing a buff. What I'm saying, is that Swarm Launchers require an immense amount of skill when compared to their counter; and those who say Swarms require no skill are either: A. Don't use SLs, and haven't experienced their drawbacks B. Hypocrites. C. Lying to themselves. lolPLC [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
poison Diego NECROM0NGERS The CORVOS 322	Posted - 2014.03.09 01:43:00 - [50] - Quote Atiim wrote: poison Diego wrote: Atiim what are you saying though? do you think that the SL needs a buff The majority of the playerbase is in an agreement when it comes to Swarm Launchers needing a buff. What I'm saying, is that Swarm Launchers require an immense amount of skill when compared to their counter; and those who say Swarms require no skill are either: A. Don't use SLs, and haven't experienced their drawbacks B. Hypocrites. C. Lying to themselves. Yes SL require skills but the skills req is just to be aware of your environment which you need for every role. I think SL should get longer range but no more damage(maybe 245 damage per missile). We want a balanced weapon, not a tear-bringer... WELCOME TO WORLDofTANKz514

SGT NOVA STAR Ahrendee Mercenaries 215	Posted - 2014.03.09 03:38:00 - [51] - Quote so i can show you how to tank like a man and not in your redline VAYU! I CHOOSE YOU!
Ivy Zalinto Bobbit's Hangmen 312	Posted - 2014.03.09 03:45:00 - [52] - Quote Their supposed to be to help infantry move up against the badly placed installations. But seeing as their health is so low, and they kill tanks just as quick, it doesnt really work that way. Dedicated Stealth Scout. Scout instructor; Learning Coalition Scrambler Pistol dedication
ROMULUS H3X research lab 74	Posted - 2014.03.09 03:48:00 - [53] - 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. Other than being Forge Gun Fodder..... i was actually thinking this same thing recently, at the moment they really serve no purpose, just easy targets for my Forge. FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS--NUFF SED YOU SHALL NOT CATCH ME FOR I AM THE GINGERBREAD FATMAN -Romulus H3X
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2001	Posted - 2014.03.09 03:51:00 - [54] - Quote Atiim wrote: Dauth Jenkins wrote: I believe what were getting at here is that tanks, right now, are doing their role.... they are just too good at it Not quite. HAVs don't really have a unique role, and from the responses I've gathered they are either: 1. A Mega Dropsuit 2. A Slayer Logi with 4 Wheels and an 80GJ Turret 3. Cosmetic. At first I thought it was just me, but I'm glad to see that others believe that the HAV needs a role change. :( I posted this thread a month ago I need more forum notoriety so people pay attention to my threads. (I will try to find a link if I can stop being too lazy ) Assault ak.0 w/ScR+ScP 4LYFE
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5478	Posted - 2014.03.09 03:57:00 - [55] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Atiim wrote: Dauth Jenkins wrote: I believe what were getting at here is that tanks, right now, are doing their role.... they are just too good at it Not quite. HAVs don't really have a unique role, and from the responses I've gathered they are either: 1. A Mega Dropsuit 2. A Slayer Logi with 4 Wheels and an 80GJ Turret 3. Cosmetic. At first I thought it was just me, but I'm glad to see that others believe that the HAV needs a role change. :( I posted this thread a month ago I need more forum notoriety so people pay attention to my threads. (I will try to find a link if I can stop being too lazy ) That forum notoriety comes with a heavy price in New Eden... lolPLC [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8030	Posted - 2014.03.09 04:07:00 - [56] - Quote Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: 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 Atiim you know for a fact swarms don't require the level of skill you claim they do. I am not trying to get into a discussion between AV and Tanks.....but you don't have a predict movement paths with a weapon that fires and locks the rounds for you, you also do not need gun game to make use of any weapon that is fire and forget. Don't presume additionally that these remaining "skills" are not universal to all weapons and aspects of FPS games. But I see your point and can accept that. I have to disagree. You do have to predict the vehicle's movement paths, because the Swarms have significantly slow travel time, and again your Swarm won't turn a corner or evade obstacles, so once the pilot decides to take cover your Swarms are guaranteed to miss. You do need gun-game. Or would you like to explain how easy it is to fight people when your only defense is a sidearm with a range that's less than half someone's optimal? Those who use hitscan weapons should not be talking about fire and forget. Still yet to find another role that forces me into the eHP of a Light Frame, with less than half their AI capability. I get the Gun game thing since I use a LR and CQC is impossible with it...but it aint hard to outplay someone with a side arm. "War is not hell, far from it. War is beautiful. War is divine." - Grand Admiral Mekioth Sarum
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2003	Posted - 2014.03.09 04:11:00 - [57] - Quote Atiim wrote: poison Diego wrote: Atiim what are you saying though? do you think that the SL needs a buff The majority of the playerbase is in an agreement when it comes to Swarm Launchers needing a buff. What I'm saying, is that Swarm Launchers require an immense amount of skill when compared to their counter; and those who say Swarms require no skill are either: A. Don't use SLs, and haven't experienced their drawbacks B. Hypocrites. C. Lying to themselves. 1.6 and prior I'd have vehemently (and probably abusively) disagreed with you. Right now swarms are the second best form of AV, after forges, but considering the states of PLC and AV nades (not that I mind this one) it's like coming second at the Special Olympics. Assault ak.0 w/ScR+ScP 4LYFE Forum Warrior Level Two. (GëºGêçGëª)/
Meeko Fent Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 1948	Posted - 2014.03.09 04:19:00 - [58] - Quote Because "future big maps", and Installations that need to be blapped by tanks to get your DS's to drop troops in an efficient manner Potential 514 again it seems... I just open a Steam Group for all the ex/current DUST players to enjoy good games with others from DUST.Named it Arkombine. Just to let you know. Please continue discussion. Because you Wanted to be Something your Not.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 2879	Posted - 2014.03.09 10:58:00 - [59] - Quote Atiim wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: 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 Timing? Basically instant lock time firing all 3 volleys in what 3 seconds? No timing needed Positioning - Only now do they require it Sit awareness - Due to reduced lock range Gun game? lolno auto lock on fire and forget, blaster requires more gun game than swarms because all you do is point at the big red box Ability - Goes with positioning I have to wait till my dot goes red or i wont get a kill and thats OP? thats working as intended because my exile BPO AR does that No i still use sit awareness i always will, 1 breach on the weakspot and your dead, ignore AV for long enough and its your own downfall Rep working as intended Swarms & skill does not belong in the same sentence, they have never required skill because you dont aim Nope. You can insta-lock and fire all 3 volleys, but that doesn't guarrantee a hit. Swarms have this nice feature called travel time that requires you to release at the right moment, or watch as all your Swarms miss. Doesn't make much of a difference. Yes, you need gun-game. Unless of course you'd like to be destroyed by people who have weapons with 3x your range while you have the AI ability of a Light Frame. Perhaps you shouldn't expose your weakspot? Please refrain from using your lack of competence in a discussion. It really makes you look bad. To who? People also said 1.6 AV was working as intended, and yet you didn't agree with that. Not really sure what makes you think that statement would hold merit. Such laughable amounts of hypocrisy. Not really sure why someone who uses a hitscan weapon is talking about a lack of skill. Hypocrite much? If you miss with a lock on weapon your doing it wrong Not really, majority of dust players have no gun game How can i not expose my weaksport when its always on my tank and infact smart AV players move around so they can see that weakspot even if i dont move Players liked popping a 2mil+ HAV with 20k worth of AV nades, of course it was working for them Blaster requires aim, like the exile, if it aint red i wont get a kill, its not like the never miss fire and forget swarms which require 0 aim Intelligence is OP
Obodiah Garro Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 803	Posted - 2014.03.09 11:14:00 - [60] - Quote Defo love the idea of no blaster and introducing heavy plasma cannon, it even sounds better ADS said it perfectly though, HAV is used to counter enemy HAV and hold points/ deny enemy advances. Its a shame a blaster turret can be used to break the game but thats on CCP, there are uses for the HAV outside of roflstomping. Nemo me impune lacessit



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.