DUST Search - With the current nerf to firge guns...

All Channels

General Discussions

With the current nerf to firge guns...

» 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)
Tectonic Fusion 1252	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:46:00 - [1] - Quote I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. Also buff swarm launchers. Solo Player Squad status: Locked
Christiphoros von Poe Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 203	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:50:00 - [2] - Quote Firge girns! Never used them.. So I don't know. (1) "Exile" Assault Rifle reserved for: Fire of Prometheus Uprising->Replication->E3->Codex->Chromosome->Uprising->???
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1835	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:50:00 - [3] - Quote Did they take yer jerb too? Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8340	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:54:00 - [4] - Quote Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ******* opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. " ..- -.- --. I wish I remembered morse code so I wasn't typing random letters" - Malleus Malificorum
THEAMAZING POTHEAD Nyain San Renegade Alliance 1049	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:54:00 - [5] - Quote they terk er jobs and tanks are broken OP. cus hardeners. Your post is making me facepalm very hard right now.
Joel II X Dah Gods O Bacon 1756	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:56:00 - [6] - Quote There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1835	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:58:00 - [7] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ******* opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. I agree with this post entirely. However, in order to do that, I am afraid that they would need to remove all Vehicles and AV until all (basic; i.e. ADS, DS, HAV, LAV) Vehicles were in the game. Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
Tectonic Fusion 1254	Posted - 2014.03.18 01:59:00 - [8] - Quote Joel II X wrote: DAY TUK YUR JAWB! ok Solo Player Squad status: Locked
RemingtonBeaver Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 231	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:01:00 - [9] - Quote der derp der deeeeeerrrrrrrrr!!! perberbably der ilerminerty We can pickle that.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8342	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:05:00 - [10] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ******* opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. I agree with this post entirely. However, in order to do that, I am afraid that they would need to remove all Vehicles and AV until all (basic; i.e. ADS, DS, HAV, LAV) Vehicles were in the game. I dont feel something that drastic is necessary. Yes I agree HAV are too powerful for what they are, high SP investments arent rewarded as well through the vehicle tiers. But in all honesty I feel AV is in a good place, however balance against HAV specifically is bad. I cannot stress to CCP that racial equality across all suits and vehicles is crucial in successfully balancing this games content. Once we can actually see how all aspects of Vehicles vs AV actually work then we can balance around that. Until then demanding ridiculous 10% or 20% buffs would only harm the game, causing more problems than solving. " ..- -.- --. I wish I remembered morse code so I wasn't typing random letters" - Malleus Malificorum

Tectonic Fusion 1254	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:07:00 - [11] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ***** opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. I agree with this post entirely. However, in order to do that, I am afraid that they would need to remove all Vehicles and AV until all (basic; i.e. ADS, DS, HAV, LAV) Vehicles were in the game. I dont feel something that drastic is necessary. Yes I agree HAV are too powerful for what they are, high SP investments arent rewarded as well through the vehicle tiers. But in all honesty I feel AV is in a good place, however balance against HAV specifically is bad. I cannot stress to CCP that racial equality across all suits and vehicles is crucial in successfully balancing this games content. Once we can actually see how all aspects of Vehicles vs AV actually work then we can balance around that. Until then demanding ridiculous 10% or 20% buffs would only harm the game, causing more problems than solving. Not really. The only reason it's good is because of double damage mods which equals approx. 18%. 15-20 is pretty fair if they make the FG crap. 5-6 shots to kill an unhardened tank? LOL Solo Player Squad status: Locked**
Temias Mercurial ANGEL FLEET 15	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:08:00 - [12] - Quote Forge guns really don't need buffing... they're powerful enough as is with a decent aim. I'm speced into AV, ADS, and partially into tanks (I don't really like using them). I would again be entirely unable to fly due to OP forges. They are in a very good place now... no need for buffs... absolutely none.
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 853	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:09:00 - [13] - Quote Because HAV are the only vehicle in dust. Nah, **** those LAV and drop ship guys. Best PVE idea I've seen.
Patrlck 56 12	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:13:00 - [14] - Quote Where can one find this Forge Gun nerf? :3
Dheez Kinsho Swords Caldari State 85	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:15:00 - [15] - Quote Fusion, are you from Washington? Swarm Launchers should also be given back their previous lock on range.
Kigurosaka Laaksonen DUST University Ivy League 644	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:15:00 - [16] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ******* opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. Thank you thank you thank you! It seems like everyday I post something about how we need to get the basic racial content out the door and the make meaningful balance efforts with a complete foundation. This brings a tear to my eye. EDIT: As I understand it, swarm launchers are actually broke, like literally. They don't actually do the damage in game that their attributes would lead you to believe. Fixing that problem would be an effective buff to swarms. Source is a Judge Rad video. Too lazy to look it up. Do it yourself. DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/ EVE Buddy Invite - Too damn long. Ask me for it.
jerrmy12 kahoalii 530	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:15:00 - [17] - Quote Joel II X wrote: DAY TUK YUR JAWB! Dey duk ur' jerbs! Closed beta vet Logi, Heavy, Python, Scout. Dark souls 2 new game plus.
Asha Starwind DUST University Ivy League 517	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:16:00 - [18] - Quote ERMAHGHERD FERGE GUNZ!! 32db Mad Bomber.
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1839	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:17:00 - [19] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ***** opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. I agree with this post entirely. However, in order to do that, I am afraid that they would need to remove all Vehicles and AV until all (basic; i.e. ADS, DS, HAV, LAV) Vehicles were in the game. I dont feel something that drastic is necessary. Yes I agree HAV are too powerful for what they are, high SP investments arent rewarded as well through the vehicle tiers. But in all honesty I feel AV is in a good place, however balance against HAV specifically is bad. I cannot stress to CCP that racial equality across all suits and vehicles is crucial in successfully balancing this games content. Once we can actually see how all aspects of Vehicles vs AV actually work then we can balance around that. Until then demanding ridiculous 10% or 20% buffs would only harm the game, causing more problems than solving. Swarms are a ***** joke now. They either need their damage rolled back or their lock range rolled back, both was one step too far. TBH, I'd rather they give the lock range back, I am fine with them being an area denial tool and opportunistic vehicle killer. I've gotten several HAV kills with swarms in 1.7 (no where near what I'd get in a week pre-1.7 though), however, each and every one of them was a kill stolen from a tanker. Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8345	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:17:00 - [20] - Quote Tectonic Fusion wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ******* opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. I agree with this post entirely. However, in order to do that, I am afraid that they would need to remove all Vehicles and AV until all (basic; i.e. ADS, DS, HAV, LAV) Vehicles were in the game. I dont feel something that drastic is necessary. Yes I agree HAV are too powerful for what they are, high SP investments arent rewarded as well through the vehicle tiers. But in all honesty I feel AV is in a good place, however balance against HAV specifically is bad. I cannot stress to CCP that racial equality across all suits and vehicles is crucial in successfully balancing this games content. Once we can actually see how all aspects of Vehicles vs AV actually work then we can balance around that. Until then demanding ridiculous 10% or 20% buffs would only harm the game, causing more problems than solving. Not really. The only reason it's good is because of double damage mods which equals approx. 18%. 15-20 is pretty fair if they make the FG crap. 5-6 shots to kill an unhardened tank? LOL As I said I agree balancing is required. But it is required on the part of the HAV not on AV. You are failing to consider the effects such buffs will have on lighter frame vehicles like LAV, Dropships, Assault Dropships and soon the MAV. You cannot make arbitrary decision to buff specific vehicles resistances to certain forms of AV, this would break immersion and balance. As such we must work off of the solid foundation of AV values, for example the current ones, and balance Vehicles and vehicle tiers around anti vehicle content. Additionally why do you AV solo? That's just plain counter intuitive. I dont make use of any forgeguns besides the basic Sturmborne and recently in squad I have seen exactly how flimsy most tanks really are. I'm not about to sit here and blindly defend HAV, they ARE powerful, possibly too powerful. Buffing AV is not going to fix that, only break the game from LAV, Dropshippers, and possibly make HAV soloable......that does not sound like an acceptable solution to me. " ..- -.- --. I wish I remembered morse code so I wasn't typing random letters" - Malleus Malificorum

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8345	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:20:00 - [21] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ***** opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. I agree with this post entirely. However, in order to do that, I am afraid that they would need to remove all Vehicles and AV until all (basic; i.e. ADS, DS, HAV, LAV) Vehicles were in the game. I dont feel something that drastic is necessary. Yes I agree HAV are too powerful for what they are, high SP investments arent rewarded as well through the vehicle tiers. But in all honesty I feel AV is in a good place, however balance against HAV specifically is bad. I cannot stress to CCP that racial equality across all suits and vehicles is crucial in successfully balancing this games content. Once we can actually see how all aspects of Vehicles vs AV actually work then we can balance around that. Until then demanding ridiculous 10% or 20% buffs would only harm the game, causing more problems than solving. Swarms are a ***** joke now. They either need their damage rolled back or their lock range rolled back, both was one step too far. TBH, I'd rather they give the lock range back, I am fine with them being an area denial tool and opportunistic vehicle killer. I've gotten several HAV kills with swarms in 1.7 (no where near what I'd get in a week pre-1.7 though), however, each and every one of them was a kill stolen from a tanker. That is because as I am led to understand the damage application is broken and swarms do not deal their full damage per salvo. Against Armour HAV swarms are pretty effective....but again the balance issues are not a result of AV doing too little damage but instead hardeners being able to be perma run and resisting too much damage. Pre 1.7 was a nightmare for tankers as we could never see the source of AV fire nor engage you. " ..- -.- --. I wish I remembered morse code so I wasn't typing random letters" - Malleus Malificorum
Tectonic Fusion 1256	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:27:00 - [22] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: True Adamance wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tectonic Fusion wrote: I think they need a 15-20% damage buff. Why will they not be OP? Because of the LOLcharge time and no ADS and blaster will still out DPS us. EDIT: Damage nerf is GEYYYYYYYY!!! Also buff swarm launchers. THAT is exactly the opposite of what we need in terms of Vehicle/AV balance. Exactly the ***** opposite. What we need is full content release. Then we need time. Time to establish static AV numbers, identify within the fully fleshed out Vehicle and AV sphere exactly what is what. Then balance vehicles around the static AV damage models. We cannot keep nerfing AV and buffing it from build to build. Or nerfing HAV from build to build. We need all core content for AV and then to balance vehicles around those models. I agree with this post entirely. However, in order to do that, I am afraid that they would need to remove all Vehicles and AV until all (basic; i.e. ADS, DS, HAV, LAV) Vehicles were in the game. I dont feel something that drastic is necessary. Yes I agree HAV are too powerful for what they are, high SP investments arent rewarded as well through the vehicle tiers. But in all honesty I feel AV is in a good place, however balance against HAV specifically is bad. I cannot stress to CCP that racial equality across all suits and vehicles is crucial in successfully balancing this games content. Once we can actually see how all aspects of Vehicles vs AV actually work then we can balance around that. Until then demanding ridiculous 10% or 20% buffs would only harm the game, causing more problems than solving. Not really. The only reason it's good is because of double damage mods which equals approx. 18%. 15-20 is pretty fair if they make the FG crap. 5-6 shots to kill an unhardened tank? LOL As I said I agree balancing is required. But it is required on the part of the HAV not on AV. You are failing to consider the effects such buffs will have on lighter frame vehicles like LAV, Dropships, Assault Dropships and soon the MAV. You cannot make arbitrary decision to buff specific vehicles resistances to certain forms of AV, this would break immersion and balance. As such we must work off of the solid foundation of AV values, for example the current ones, and balance Vehicles and vehicle tiers around anti vehicle content. Additionally why do you AV solo? That's just plain counter intuitive. I dont make use of any forgeguns besides the basic Sturmborne and recently in squad I have seen exactly how flimsy most tanks really are. I'm not about to sit here and blindly defend HAV, they ARE powerful, possibly too powerful. Buffing AV is not going to fix that, only break the game from LAV, Dropshippers, and possibly make HAV soloable......that does not sound like an acceptable solution to me.[/quote] Heavy AV = OP against Light Vehicles, good against Medium Vehicles, and decent against Heavy Vehicles. Solo Player Squad status: Locked**
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2017	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:28:00 - [23] - Quote Dheez wrote: Swarm Launchers should also be given back their previous lock on range. No, they need to add modules that improve AV and add a suit that is bonused towards AV. Similarly, vehicles need to be nerfed slightly and introduce a pilot suit to buff them back up. MORE everything is the answer not constant buff/nerf cycles. "One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production." Raoul Duke
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2017	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:29:00 - [24] - Quote Double post. Stupid smart phone. "One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production." Raoul Duke
jerrmy12 kahoalii 531	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:33:00 - [25] - Quote The Robot Devil wrote: Dheez wrote: Swarm Launchers should also be given back their previous lock on range. No, they need to add modules that improve AV and add a suit that is bonused towards AV. Similarly, vehicles need to be nerfed slightly and introduce a pilot suit to buff them back up. MORE everything is the answer not constant buff/nerf cycles. Not a buff like the logi stuff Get to level 5 just to have any effectiveness Closed beta vet Logi, Heavy, Python, Scout. Dark souls 2 new game plus.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8345	Posted - 2014.03.18 02:35:00 - [26] - Quote The Robot Devil wrote: Dheez wrote: Swarm Launchers should also be given back their previous lock on range. No, they need to add modules that improve AV and add a suit that is bonused towards AV. Similarly, vehicles need to be nerfed slightly and introduce a pilot suit to buff them back up. MORE everything is the answer not constant buff/nerf cycles. Indeed I see your point. However the issue with AV is that AV cannot be something that is abused by players to kill HAVers by ensuring that they never have to enter the Tanks engagement range. For example. Pre 1.7 a tanks engagement range was determined my rendering which was poor and stopped at 50-60m. Swarms had massive range over that threshold and were able to engage with high DPS auto locking, and home missiles which quickly would cripple any and all vehicles on the map, with no risk to the AVer. I prefer swarm engagement ranges this build. It ensure that my enemy has to be engageable, not a tiny figure on top of a mountain strafing for days. However I can appreciate that not all AVers like this. However I stand by and defend a need for overlapping zones of engagement. As such I disagree with increasing swarm locks back to 1.6 levels...however a slight change could be tastefully implemented and tested. " ..- -.- --. I wish I remembered morse code so I wasn't typing random letters" - Malleus Malificorum
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2017	Posted - 2014.03.18 03:44:00 - [27] - Quote True Adamance wrote: The Robot Devil wrote: Dheez wrote: Swarm Launchers should also be given back their previous lock on range. No, they need to add modules that improve AV and add a suit that is bonused towards AV. Similarly, vehicles need to be nerfed slightly and introduce a pilot suit to buff them back up. MORE everything is the answer not constant buff/nerf cycles. Indeed I see your point. However the issue with AV is that AV cannot be something that is abused by players to kill HAVers by ensuring that they never have to enter the Tanks engagement range. For example. Pre 1.7 a tanks engagement range was determined my rendering which was poor and stopped at 50-60m. Swarms had massive range over that threshold and were able to engage with high DPS auto locking, and home missiles which quickly would cripple any and all vehicles on the map, with no risk to the AVer. I prefer swarm engagement ranges this build. It ensure that my enemy has to be engageable, not a tiny figure on top of a mountain strafing for days. However I can appreciate that not all AVers like this. However I stand by and defend a need for overlapping zones of engagement. As such I disagree with increasing swarm locks back to 1.6 levels...however a slight change could be tastefully implemented and tested. The improvement to AV from modules don't need to be game breaking but they do need to reward the AV dedicated merc. To me the reward for specialization should be noticeable but not to the point where is discourages good pilots with well planned fits from calling in the vehicles. I don't pilot anything in DUST and I rarely enter vehicles because it is boring to me, I say that to say this, I like where vehicles are at right now. I don't want to be able to solo a vehicle easily, I can and have solo vehicles a good bit. Especially HAVs because the pilot is cocky and feels like they can run roughshod over infantry. When I soloed a HAV it is always because the pilot didn't make wise choices. I feel like it should take at least two mercs that are highly skilled in AV to be able to destroy a HAV before the pilot has a chance to escape. People act like the HAVs are too fast but show me a vehicle in a modern army that doesn't do at least 20-MPH over rough terrain. Scouts already run at almost 17 MPH so a vehicle should be faster. Vehicles are in a decent spot but I would recommend a 30% (just throwing out a number) nerf and add a pilot suit that buffs 25% at level five. I totally agree with you that if AV is too powerful then vehicles won't have a chance and we need to slowly tweak them to make work well for good pilots but be an ISK/SP sink to anyone else. I am not a game designer so it is difficult to for me to put forth an educated suggestion. My point is that specialization should be rewarding in both AV and piloting. Right now HAVs are OP to a single merc or a few unskilled mercs but not to two high skilled AV guys but I think it should be that way, maybe not for militia but ever other tier should be. CCP is trying to work it out but the variables involved are complex and it takes tons of data to arrive at a balanced solution. "One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production." Raoul Duke
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8349	Posted - 2014.03.18 03:54:00 - [28] - Quote The Robot Devil wrote: True Adamance wrote: The Robot Devil wrote: Dheez wrote: Swarm Launchers should also be given back their previous lock on range. No, they need to add modules that improve AV and add a suit that is bonused towards AV. Similarly, vehicles need to be nerfed slightly and introduce a pilot suit to buff them back up. MORE everything is the answer not constant buff/nerf cycles. Indeed I see your point. However the issue with AV is that AV cannot be something that is abused by players to kill HAVers by ensuring that they never have to enter the Tanks engagement range. For example. Pre 1.7 a tanks engagement range was determined my rendering which was poor and stopped at 50-60m. Swarms had massive range over that threshold and were able to engage with high DPS auto locking, and home missiles which quickly would cripple any and all vehicles on the map, with no risk to the AVer. I prefer swarm engagement ranges this build. It ensure that my enemy has to be engageable, not a tiny figure on top of a mountain strafing for days. However I can appreciate that not all AVers like this. However I stand by and defend a need for overlapping zones of engagement. As such I disagree with increasing swarm locks back to 1.6 levels...however a slight change could be tastefully implemented and tested. The improvement to AV from modules don't need to be game breaking but they do need to reward the AV dedicated merc. To me the reward for specialization should be noticeable but not to the point where is discourages good pilots with well planned fits from calling in the vehicles. I don't pilot anything in DUST and I rarely enter vehicles because it is boring to me, I say that to say this, I like where vehicles are at right now. I don't want to be able to solo a vehicle easily, I can and have solo vehicles a good bit. Especially HAVs because the pilot is cocky and feels like they can run roughshod over infantry. When I soloed a HAV it is always because the pilot didn't make wise choices. I feel like it should take at least two mercs that are highly skilled in AV to be able to destroy a HAV before the pilot has a chance to escape. People act like the HAVs are too fast but show me a vehicle in a modern army that doesn't do at least 20-MPH over rough terrain. Scouts already run at almost 17 MPH so a vehicle should be faster. Vehicles are in a decent spot but I would recommend a 30% (just throwing out a number) nerf and add a pilot suit that buffs 25% at level five. I totally agree with you that if AV is too powerful then vehicles won't have a chance and we need to slowly tweak them to make work well for good pilots but be an ISK/SP sink to anyone else. I am not a game designer so it is difficult to for me to put forth an educated suggestion. My point is that specialization should be rewarding in both AV and piloting. Right now HAVs are OP to a single merc or a few unskilled mercs but not to two high skilled AV guys but I think it should be that way, maybe not for militia but ever other tier should be. CCP is trying to work it out but the variables involved are complex and it takes tons of data to arrive at a balanced solution. Hmmmm weapon modifications are fine as I see it as long they do not drastically affect or modify a weapons intended role of natural characteristics. I will post here in more depth when I get back home.....but point is I am willing and supportive of discussion that allows us to develop a means of customising our weapons and altering their basic utilities as long as those do no drastically alter the functionality of that weapon, and as long as the modules come with draw backs. " ..- -.- --. I wish I remembered morse code so I wasn't typing random letters" - Malleus Malificorum
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2018	Posted - 2014.03.18 03:59:00 - [29] - Quote jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: The Robot Devil wrote: Dheez wrote: Swarm Launchers should also be given back their previous lock on range. No, they need to add modules that improve AV and add a suit that is bonused towards AV. Similarly, vehicles need to be nerfed slightly and introduce a pilot suit to buff them back up. MORE everything is the answer not constant buff/nerf cycles. Not a buff like the logi stuff Get to level 5 just to have any effectiveness The logi and equipment adjustment is good for the game. Logi equipment is very powerful as it is and there is little reason to skill into a different logi. We, the real #logilove mercs, should probably agree that something needed to be done and I for one like how the changes should change how we think about our role and use our suits. If you didn't see this coming then you either are a newer player or don't understand how New Eden works. Specialization is the backbone of New Eden and it should be rewarded and non specialization should not be. Racial specialization isn't anything new in New Eden and shouldn't be looked at like a punishment. The way it works currently is way more broken than the changes we are going to be getting. We shouldn't let our love of a broken fit dissuade us from what is good for the game. It will be better with the new bonuses and more fun. "One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production." Raoul Duke
Tectonic Fusion 1259	Posted - 2014.03.18 04:01:00 - [30] - Quote The Robot Devil wrote: [quote=True Adamance][quote=The Robot Devil][quote=Dheez]When I soloed a HAV it is always because the pilot didn't make wise choices. Also if it's a militia tank they are easy to kill. But if they are double or triple hardened they are European extreme mode even if you have 3 dedicated forge gunners. Solo Player Squad status: Locked



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.