DUST Search - What are your intentions for AV CCP?

All Channels

General Discussions

What are your intentions for AV CCP?

» 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)
Vespasian Andendare Subsonic Synthesis RISE of LEGION 677	Posted - 2014.03.19 20:45:00 - [31] - Quote Funkmaster Whale wrote: LOL. "Now you guys get to see pretty numbers appear on your screen for attempting to kill me! What a buff, amirite!? Oh, don't worry, I'll still be decimating your team every match in my now all-but-unkillable tank!." "Waves of opportunity." >> Play Dust 514 FREE! Sign up for exclusive gear today! <<
echo47 Minmatar Republic 238	Posted - 2014.03.19 20:45:00 - [32] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: The point of infantry av, when working solo, is to damage the vehicle enough to force it to retreat so infantry can continue on their way. When you have teamwork you take down vehicles quickly. This can be a combination of swarms forges plasma cannons or other vehicles. Put some av in a lav with a rail gun and you have a good vehicle hunter team. 3 AV players in a LAV chasing tanks amounts to nothing mor than 190wp for the first railtank that sees you. That is why you use three vehicles instead of one. A rail tank can only shoot one target at a time. Too bad everyone cried about LLAV's we all miss them now. I would rather look bad and win, than look good and lose.
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1268	Posted - 2014.03.19 20:53:00 - [33] - Quote I tried running AV this morning with 4 other people in my squad and first match we got was against 4 tankers. Just 4, but they did nothing but tank all match. We killed off the first couple of waves of tanks fairly quickly because they weren't expecting any resistance. After that things went down hill fast. I ended up killing 4 tanks, 5 LAV's and 1 dropship myself (with my squad supporting me) with proto swarms and Lai Dai's and went 9/8. Problem is that my AV fit costs 94,005isk (looking at it right now). I earned 178,000ish (don't recall the last 3 digits) ISK and lost 752,040isk in a pub match in order to fight militia tanks. I'm moving to Planetside 2 as soon as it hits ps4 and I'm staying there until this bullshit is fixed, end of story. MAG ~ Raven
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1269	Posted - 2014.03.19 21:00:00 - [34] - Quote echo47 wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: The point of infantry av, when working solo, is to damage the vehicle enough to force it to retreat so infantry can continue on their way. When you have teamwork you take down vehicles quickly. This can be a combination of swarms forges plasma cannons or other vehicles. Put some av in a lav with a rail gun and you have a good vehicle hunter team. 3 AV players in a LAV chasing tanks amounts to nothing mor than 190wp for the first railtank that sees you. That is why you use three vehicles instead of one. A rail tank can only shoot one target at a time. Too bad everyone cried about LLAV's we all miss them now. So if one get's through, the tank still gets 180wp, then the one AV guy who gets there can try to solo the tank and either die to infantry in the attempt or net the tank an additional 90wp, bringing his total to 270wp. Also giving the tank 3 RDV's to shoot at, worth 150 a piece. Great idea, but I think I'll pass. MAG ~ Raven
Nothing Certain Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 323	Posted - 2014.03.19 21:05:00 - [35] - Quote bamboo x wrote: To be blunt, anyone with real Forge Gun skill isn't going to have much of a problem, even against Caldari vehicles. Make that two Forge Gunners and they'll be able to take on almost any tank together. Four Forge Gunners will annihilate the enemy's vehicles altogether. Yet I see game after game after game dominated by tanks, why is that? I mean I personally may just suck at forge gunning but what is it about AV that makes nearly everyone who plays it incompetent and stupid and everyone who tanks so much more intelligent and skilled? Because, that's why.
Nothing Certain Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 323	Posted - 2014.03.19 21:10:00 - [36] - Quote I mean I've killed plenty of tanks but I die 4 or 5 times as much as if I just play against infantry. Because, that's why.
echo47 Minmatar Republic 238	Posted - 2014.03.19 21:13:00 - [37] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: echo47 wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: The point of infantry av, when working solo, is to damage the vehicle enough to force it to retreat so infantry can continue on their way. When you have teamwork you take down vehicles quickly. This can be a combination of swarms forges plasma cannons or other vehicles. Put some av in a lav with a rail gun and you have a good vehicle hunter team. 3 AV players in a LAV chasing tanks amounts to nothing mor than 190wp for the first railtank that sees you. That is why you use three vehicles instead of one. A rail tank can only shoot one target at a time. Too bad everyone cried about LLAV's we all miss them now. So if one get's through, the tank still gets 180wp, then the one AV guy who gets there can try to solo the tank and either die to infantry in the attempt or net the tank an additional 90wp, bringing his total to 270wp. Also giving the tank 3 RDV's to shoot at, worth 150 a piece. Great idea, but I think I'll pass. The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. I would rather look bad and win, than look good and lose.
Drapedup Drippedout 0uter.Heaven 603	Posted - 2014.03.19 21:39:00 - [38] - Quote echo47 wrote: The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. OH! now I get it. They are shifting the objective of matches from trying to defend the objective to who can farm the most war points off vehicles. That's what wins matches! Throwing ******* rocks at tanks. How could I have been so scrubby to think that the point was to hold those blue letters.... The point is not to apply pressure to vehicles, the point of AV is to be the ANTI vehicle. Not a vehicle repellant. The entire problem is that a STD tank is capable of "steamrolling" a team! Even YOU said it in your post. These tank "pilots" sit here and try to defend their crutch with things like, "well at least now you get points before you die" This is the entire problem, you have idiots that have no idea what balance is. They see balance as "anything that let's me not die". And what good is the WP generated from pew pewing tanks all day? To drop an orbital on a tank?! LMAO if you are in a tank and die to an orbital, you SUCK. Maybe the WP nets me a marginally higher pay out at the end of the match? What maybe 40k more isk? Great I can replace the 3 x complex dmg mods, what incentive! Pro-fit Prophet "Gimme yo lunch money"
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1270	Posted - 2014.03.19 23:44:00 - [39] - Quote Drapedup Drippedout wrote: echo47 wrote: The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. OH! now I get it. They are shifting the objective of matches from trying to defend the objective to who can farm the most war points off vehicles. That's what wins matches! Throwing ******* rocks at tanks. How could I have been so scrubby to think that the point was to hold those blue letters.... The point is not to apply pressure to vehicles, the point of AV is to be the ANTI vehicle. Not a vehicle repellant. The entire problem is that a STD tank is capable of "steamrolling" a team! Even YOU said it in your post. These tank "pilots" sit here and try to defend their crutch with things like, "well at least now you get points before you die" This is the entire problem, you have idiots that have no idea what balance is. They see balance as "anything that lets me not die". And what good is the WP generated from pew pewing tanks all day? To drop an orbital on a tank?! LMAO if you are in a tank and die to an orbital, you SUCK. Maybe the WP nets me a marginally higher pay out at the end of the match? What maybe 40k more isk? Great I can replace the 3 x complex dmg mods, what incentive! Well said. MAG ~ Raven
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5910	Posted - 2014.03.20 00:49:00 - [40] - Quote Ayures II wrote: You used a fit that costs maybe 10k and you're upset that you couldn't solo something that likely costs at least 10 times that? Am I the only one seeing this? That statement is a fallacy. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND

Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1905	Posted - 2014.03.20 00:51:00 - [41] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: calisk galern wrote: really....tanks still think av is fine...sigh...all right then -.- At least CharChar is on our side.... He knows nothing of balance (or rather, he will say anything but buffing vehicles is good, so any stupid idea is a good idea in his eyes). 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1905	Posted - 2014.03.20 00:53:00 - [42] - Quote I'll leave this here 'lights cigar' fuck with me, and I'll melt your face off. Gallente forever! Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Michael Arck Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu Lokun Listamenn 3588	Posted - 2014.03.20 00:53:00 - [43] - Quote I would like a response to these good, OP questions... Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Are you OUKH?
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5910	Posted - 2014.03.20 00:54:00 - [44] - Quote echo47 wrote: The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. This is New Eden. The worst case scenario is pretty much the only guaranteed one. You can't 'apply pressure' when you can't even break their regen, and I'll bet 50m ISK that you couldn't kill me with a Warbarge Strike. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8435	Posted - 2014.03.20 01:36:00 - [45] - Quote Atiim wrote: echo47 wrote: The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. This is New Eden. The worst case scenario is pretty much the only guaranteed one. You can't 'apply pressure' when you can't even break their regen, and I'll bet 50m ISK that you couldn't kill me with a Warbarge Strike. Warbarge general or Tactical Laser S? " ..- -.- --. I wish I remembered morse code so I wasn't typing random letters" - Malleus Malificorum
Bojo The Fantastic Bojo's Grand Bazaar 49	Posted - 2014.03.20 01:39:00 - [46] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: echo47 wrote: The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. This is New Eden. The worst case scenario is pretty much the only guaranteed one. You can't 'apply pressure' when you can't even break their regen, and I'll bet 50m ISK that you couldn't kill me with a Warbarge Strike. Warbarge general or Tactical Laser S? I am here to handle your gambling needs Gambling // Entrepreneur // Trade // LAV Racing // Bojo's Personal Accountant
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5912	Posted - 2014.03.20 01:46:00 - [47] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Warbarge general or Tactical Laser S? I'd be insta-ganked if it was Tactical Laser S. But you can't earn OBs that are dropped by Capsuleers, so that wouldn't serve to prove echo47's point at all. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Waiyu Ren Seeker of The Path 61	Posted - 2014.03.20 04:13:00 - [48] - Quote Ayures II wrote: Waiyu Ren wrote: I actually tried AV during the weekend. I only used Mlt Swarms so i wasn't expecting much, but seeing that Dropship take missiles until i had 0/0 without so much as losing 1/5 of it's shield... Man, that was an eye opener. Before, i used to think that HAV/DS were annoying, but not brokenly so. My apologies AV guys. You used a fit that costs maybe 10k and you're upset that you couldn't solo something that likely costs at least 10 times that? Am I the only one seeing this? You are making an awful lot of assumptions with your statement. To clarify: Assumption 1) That i was upset. Shocked yes, but upset? Self quote: "I wasn't expecting much". I don't AV, i avoid. It's way friggin easier. Assumption 2) That i was trying to solo kill a vehicle. Nope, just trying to actually damage it. It was a gorgon, ie; less shield, more armour. I didn't even get through its shield to scratch it's paintwork. I don't expect a cheapass gun to down an armoured vehicle. I do expect to make them acknowledge my existence... Not just ignore me and continue to hover in place. Assumption 3) That this is the way it should be. I don't really think so; Isk balance is not the same as SP balance. And now for the meandering text wall i was trying to avoid: Vehicles are faster, do more damage, have more HP, yet conversely cost more, require speccing into a skill tree that is in no way useful while NOT in a vehicle, and all have completely different control systems (one being ridiculously difficult for reasons no one understands and has never to my knowledge been explained). AV on the other hand is slower, squishy, requires multiple shots and often reloads even at proto level, plus in a lot of cases, the coordinated effort of several players, while conversely being cheaper. That's it. It's cheaper... Comparable SP levels for specialisation given that a pure Vehicleer need never don any suit beyond a starter fit should they so choose. But, if the AVer does specialise, they do not have any of the benefits a Vehicleer has to keep them alive. They are so, so vulnerable. Now, i'm going to do a 180 here and say that i think vehicles SHOULD be hard to kill. They are armoured to STOP asshats like me blowing them up as an afterthought on my way to cap a point. They SHOULD pack a serious punch, one, to scare the crap out of me and make me think twice about going that way, and two, to deal with the other armoury punchers out there. But i also think that weapons specifically designed to take down vehicles should actually be able to at a comparable level, or at the very least ** their ** up a little if not at a comparable level, not give them a pretty little fireworks show in honour of their awesomeness.... I don't mean one shot, three is the "sounds good" number i just pulled out of my backside, with swarms being light AV to tackle LAV and light DS, forge as heavy AV to tackle HAV and medium DS... It's a game not reality, one-shot AV would be just as lame as "don't even bother" AV. How that can be achieved while reconciling the disparate views of those for/against/wishywashy, i don't know. But whatever happens in the future, after i've built my Super-Scrub "Heavy with a Sniper Rifle in the Redline" Alt, you can bet your ass i'll be speccing it into a Rail Tank. Shouting doesn't make your opinion seem more valid, it just makes you seem more annoying.
Rusty Shallows 1170	Posted - 2014.03.20 04:56:00 - [49] - Quote Pvt Numnutz wrote: The point of infantry av, when working solo, is to damage the vehicle enough to force it to retreat so infantry can continue on their way. When you have teamwork you take down vehicles quickly. This can be a combination of swarms forges plasma cannons or other vehicles. Put some av in a lav with a rail gun and you have a good vehicle hunter team. The good tankers in non-militia HAVs identify your position and use a Blaster or Rail to settle the matter. That was true even pre-1.7 with the right armor-tanked blaster fit. When the SP HAV goes proactive the best I can do is expose myself as little as possible and tickle with the FG. If these war points aren't at least as much as an Assist it will be a total waste of resources. Here, have some candy and a Like. :-) Forums > Game
Omareth Nasadra The New Age Outlaws WINMATAR. 335	Posted - 2014.03.20 05:51:00 - [50] - Quote in before spkrforthetanks post and says he died to a swarm and that we need to get good Minmatar, In rust we trust!!! Omareth Nasadra/Erynyes

da GAND L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 539	Posted - 2014.03.20 05:55:00 - [51] - Quote Paran Tadec wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: You nerfed our swarms. You are nerfing them again when they are already borderline useless by changing their proficiency skill. Then you are double nerfing them by also nerfing damage mods. AV grenades, PLCs and forge guns are taking hits as well. Is your plan for vehicles to never die and AV players are to just farm vehicle damage points all match unless hit by JLAV's? Or is there something deeper that I'm not seeing? No you are seeing it right. Allahu jeepbar lolz dude , I gotta try it out one day if AV doesn't get buffed or have some kind of cool affect on vehicles. After Uprisings release the forums were a bad place, I'll never forget how CCP screwed up so badly.
echo47 Minmatar Republic 239	Posted - 2014.03.20 06:55:00 - [52] - Quote Drapedup Drippedout wrote: echo47 wrote: The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. OH! now I get it. They are shifting the objective of matches from trying to defend the objective to who can farm the most war points off vehicles. That's what wins matches! Throwing ******* rocks at tanks. How could I have been so scrubby to think that the point was to hold those blue letters.... The point is not to apply pressure to vehicles, the point of AV is to be the ANTI vehicle. Not a vehicle repellant. The entire problem is that a STD tank is capable of "steamrolling" a team! Even YOU said it in your post. These tank "pilots" sit here and try to defend their crutch with things like, "well at least now you get points before you die" This is the entire problem, you have idiots that have no idea what balance is. They see balance as "anything that lets me not die". And what good is the WP generated from pew pewing tanks all day? To drop an orbital on a tank?! LMAO if you are in a tank and die to an orbital, you SUCK. Maybe the WP nets me a marginally higher pay out at the end of the match? What maybe 40k more isk? Great I can replace the 3 x complex dmg mods, what incentive! The point is too apply pressure. Tanks can change the game to hold those points it takes pressure on tanks. You don't have to destroy tanks in order win a skirmish or dom match. If you can't pop it at least make the tanker think twice. I stand by what I said the only time tanks steam roll is when they are not challenged. The tank changes and massive number of people who have skilled into them shows, tanking takes very little skill. So if a couple of tanks come in and own your team or squad what does that say. Guess what forge guns work. AV grenades work. RE's work. Swarms are another story. The same way it takes more the one merc to hold an objective it sometimes takes more than one merc to kill a tank. And there is nothing wrong with that. They can keep their crutch as far as I am concerned. I would rather look bad and win, than look good and lose.
echo47 Minmatar Republic 239	Posted - 2014.03.20 06:57:00 - [53] - Quote Atiim wrote: echo47 wrote: The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. This is New Eden. The worst case scenario is pretty much the only guaranteed one. You can't 'apply pressure' when you can't even break their regen, and I'll bet 50m ISK that you couldn't kill me with a Warbarge Strike. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. I would rather look bad and win, than look good and lose.
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2054	Posted - 2014.03.20 08:22:00 - [54] - Quote I know this isn't EVE. I am not stating that AV/vehicles are balanced. I understand there is a problem with AV. I understand that you think CCP doesn't listen or know how to balance things. I understand that you may believe that another patch may not come for a year. I know that the game has problems. I am not trying to say anything about balance, timely releases, quality of released content, competence of CCP or players or anything other than the following: I hope that CCP's intention is to introduce an AV suit that buffs AV weapons and/or grenade count. I am trying to stay optimistic, they said that medium frames were being tweaked and I am hoping they will be adding an AV suit to the medium lineup. If that is the case then AV may become better soon and if they add webs that slow down vehicles then AV would be a lot more powerful and allow us to set traps and block areas off or at least make them think twice before entering. I am also hoping that they get smart and add a heavy laser weapon that kills shields on vehicles. The PLC works but need a weapon that works much like the LR to fight shield hardened vehicles, damage goes up over time and really strips shields. "One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production." Raoul Duke
straya fox Sad Panda Solutions 262	Posted - 2014.03.20 09:16:00 - [55] - Quote The Robot Devil wrote: I know this isn't EVE. I am not stating that AV/vehicles are balanced. I understand there is a problem with AV. I understand that you think CCP doesn't listen or know how to balance things. I understand that you may believe that another patch may not come for a year. I know that the game has problems. I am not trying to say anything about balance, timely releases, quality of released content, competence of CCP or players or anything other than the following: I hope that CCP's intention is to introduce an AV suit that buffs AV weapons and/or grenade count. I am trying to stay optimistic, they said that medium frames were being tweaked and I am hoping they will be adding an AV suit to the medium lineup. If that is the case then AV may become better soon and if they add webs that slow down vehicles then AV would be a lot more powerful and allow us to set traps and block areas off or at least make them think twice before entering. I am also hoping that they get smart and add a heavy laser weapon that kills shields on vehicles. The PLC works but need a weapon that works much like the LR to fight shield hardened vehicles, damage goes up over time and really strips shields. AV suit- 90% resistance to small arms fire cause balance.
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1307	Posted - 2014.03.20 09:48:00 - [56] - Quote straya fox wrote: The Robot Devil wrote: I know this isn't EVE. I am not stating that AV/vehicles are balanced. I understand there is a problem with AV. I understand that you think CCP doesn't listen or know how to balance things. I understand that you may believe that another patch may not come for a year. I know that the game has problems. I am not trying to say anything about balance, timely releases, quality of released content, competence of CCP or players or anything other than the following: I hope that CCP's intention is to introduce an AV suit that buffs AV weapons and/or grenade count. I am trying to stay optimistic, they said that medium frames were being tweaked and I am hoping they will be adding an AV suit to the medium lineup. If that is the case then AV may become better soon and if they add webs that slow down vehicles then AV would be a lot more powerful and allow us to set traps and block areas off or at least make them think twice before entering. I am also hoping that they get smart and add a heavy laser weapon that kills shields on vehicles. The PLC works but need a weapon that works much like the LR to fight shield hardened vehicles, damage goes up over time and really strips shields. AV suit- 90% resistance to small arms fire cause balance. This would unbalance it. I've suggested an AV suit in the past, but it was ignored for so long that I quit bumping the post. Basically you make light AV weapons not be a light, heavy or sidearm weapon but instead make it a ....."AV weapon". (AV weapons can still be fitted in a light weapon slot, but light weapons cannot go in an AV weapon slot. Meaning the AV suit can equip nothing but light AV, but other suits with light weapon slots can still run AV) You give the suit 2 AV weapon slots, one grenade slot, 2 equipment slots, no sidearm. Module slot layouts based on race. You give it scout-like speed so it is capable of avoiding infantry and keeping up some-what with vehicles. You give it commando~heavy tiered EHP so that it has the health to fight off vehicles and survive engagements with infantry (again, it can only fit light AV weapons). Finally, you give it a direct % damage buff for light AV weapons and a direct % damage resistance to turret damage based on race. MAG ~ Raven
straya fox Sad Panda Solutions 262	Posted - 2014.03.20 09:53:00 - [57] - Quote Baal,yeah i know it would be unbalanced, but at this stage in the tank stomping i really would not care at all.
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2055	Posted - 2014.03.20 10:20:00 - [58] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: Basically you make light AV weapons not be a light, heavy or sidearm weapon but instead make it a ....."AV weapon". (AV weapons can still be fitted in a light weapon slot, but light weapons cannot go in an AV weapon slot) You give the suit 2 AV weapon slots, one grenade slot, 2 equipment slots, no sidearm. Module slot layouts based on race. You give it scout-like speed so it is capable of avoiding infantry and keeping up some-what with vehicles. You give it commando~heavy tiered EHP so that it has the health to fight off vehicles and survive engagements with infantry (again, it can only fit light AV weapons). Finally, you give it a direct % damage buff for light AV weapons and a direct % damage resistance to turret damage based on race. I know this isn't EVE. I am not stating that AV/vehicles are balanced. I understand there is a problem with AV. I understand that you think CCP doesn't listen or know how to balance things. I understand that you may believe that another patch may not come for a year. I know that the game has problems. I am not trying to say anything about balance, timely releases, quality of released content, competence of CCP or players or anything other than the following: I like it, I don't agree with no infantry based weapons on the suit but at the same time it would give the suit some flavor and make them very unique and specialized. I say add the damn suits and let us work it out over time. "One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production." Raoul Duke
Nothing Certain Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 327	Posted - 2014.03.20 16:50:00 - [59] - Quote echo47 wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: echo47 wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: The point of infantry av, when working solo, is to damage the vehicle enough to force it to retreat so infantry can continue on their way. When you have teamwork you take down vehicles quickly. This can be a combination of swarms forges plasma cannons or other vehicles. Put some av in a lav with a rail gun and you have a good vehicle hunter team. 3 AV players in a LAV chasing tanks amounts to nothing mor than 190wp for the first railtank that sees you. That is why you use three vehicles instead of one. A rail tank can only shoot one target at a time. Too bad everyone cried about LLAV's we all miss them now. So if one get's through, the tank still gets 180wp, then the one AV guy who gets there can try to solo the tank and either die to infantry in the attempt or net the tank an additional 90wp, bringing his total to 270wp. Also giving the tank 3 RDV's to shoot at, worth 150 a piece. Great idea, but I think I'll pass. The point is to apply pressure to tankers. Not just let them steamroll you. I see you chose the worse case scenario, no confidence? Going forward you will also get war points for damage. Getting your squad closer to an orbital, and inflicting damage to ensure the orbital is successful. They way I see it you can fight back or come the forums and whine. I choose, both. Because, that's why.


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.