DUST Search - I think we can all agree 1.6 AV vs vehicles was way better

All Channels

General Discussions

I think we can all agree 1.6 AV vs vehicles was way better

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:14:00 - [1] - Quote shadow drake35 wrote: swarms are for lav and dropship forge guns are for tanks it is right how it is forge guns need a little buff Link a CCP quote or go home. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:16:00 - [2] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: lolno You only liked it because it was basic HAV/DS with a proto turret vs all proto AV fit which could kill you 400m out and you wouldnt even see it coming because lolrendering Also armor vs shield was unbalanced and lolenforcers were useless If you fired a salvo at 400m, you weren't hitting your target. Heck, the only time I've ever been killed by a swarm at 400m (392m tbe) was on lolManus Peak. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:28:00 - [3] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: Black SlaverX wrote: shadow drake35 wrote: swarms are for lav and dropship forge guns are for tanks it is right how it is forge guns need a little buff Nope. Well why not ? Swarms and plasma cannons are light AV . And forges are oh guess what heavy AV so why isn't this logic???? Light AV destroys light vehicles and heavy AV destroys heavy vehicles is that to hard a concept to understand or do you just wantto sit oon a tower and spam easy mode swarms like they are going out of fashion. This isn't logic simply because the power of weapons aren't balanced by their class (Heavy > Light > Sidearm). Otherwise, you'd petition to nerf Shotguns simply because Light Weapons shouldn't be taking out Heavies. You want actual logic? The Plasma Cannon should be the AV weapon that deals the most damage as it has a 1 round clip, a significantly slower travel time, a projectile arc, restricted to CQC, and is a Gallente weapon. The Forge Gun should deal more direct damage than the 80GJ Railgun, as it has a charge time which is significantly longer than the 80GJ Railgun's spool, and is not fully automatic. Did I forget to mention that the 80GJ Railgun has literally 2x the range of a Forge Gun? I find it quite funny how you have no problem with a Forger on a high tower, but as soon as a Swarmer does it, it's EZ-Mode. lolDouble Standards. Also, lolEZ-Mode Swarms: 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 Roll AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:33:00 - [4] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: Well then why are they light weapons ? Also swarms used to be a heavy weapon and insadently heavy suits are the only ones who brag about going toe to toe with vehicles and surviving , so where we going now . Swarms are a light weapon and are AV so they are light AV forges are a heavy weapon and are AV thusly heavy AV just because swarms are AV it doesn't mean you should be able to solo every vehicle on the map . Having addressed the "Heavy/Light AV" debate in a previous post, I'll cast those points aside for now. Descriptions are hardly anything to be taken seriously. Especially when you consider the fact that the SMG is labeled as Semi-Automatic in it's description. Sub-Machine Gun wrote: Favoring function over form, the SMG is a lightweight, semi-automatic weapon designed for close-quarters combat. What it lacks in stopping power and accuracy it grossly overcompensates for with quantity. Designed to injure and impede, the hailstorm of bullets the SMG produces is most effective in tight spaces against multiple targets. This original design is a paradigm of Minmatar construction. An inelegant, but reliable weapon solution that is simple to produce, easily repaired using almost any available materials, and provides comparable pound-for-pound performance with similar sub-automatic weapons. Although an unabashedly low-tech weapon, it excels at what it was designed for: killing anything right in front of you. Seen any Semi-Auto SMGs lately? No? Then your argument falls apart. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:48:00 - [5] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: Atiim I have just as many problem with tower forgers as I'm predominantly a front line forge gunner forge guns also require good aim at range whereas swarms are a lock on fire and forget weapons system (that was real easy back in 1.6 don't deny it you know they were op) I'm not really sure if someone using a hit-scan weapon should be talking about a "fire and forget" weapon. pegasis prime wrote: also i berry rarely run blasters (only when requested by my squad leaders) I mostly run missiles and rails . Yes tanking in thus game has been dumbed down a bit but I watch cap tankers with cap fits get blown up in every game tanks pre 1.7 were hard to operate and run successfully that made them elitist now they are accessible to all and every one can enjoy them without having to spend a **** ton of space and isk . Has any of you anti vehicle brigade not thought that what we have now is the type of gamely CCP wants? Watch some of the bids on the website and what you see in them is pretty much what we have now I.e. lots of vehicles with supporting infantry . If you did see these adds then what the hell is the QQ all about. If you haven't seen them then what you doing here because you obviously don't really like the game and didn't even bother to watch a few bids before downloading it. I believe that those promotional videos were there to be just that, promotional. If CCP truly wanted to create a game where vehicles were dominant, they would have increased the vehicle quota far beyond 7. But since we are basing things such as balance off of something as insignificant and arbitrary as a promotional video, Forge Guns need to be made a Light Weapon. When you get a quote from CCP saying that this is working as intended, and that they wanted vehicles to be dominant; your argument will actually hold merit. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:50:00 - [6] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: it's still what CCP seen fit to say and we'll they designed the game so what's your point. I've already made my point. Move FGs to the Light Weapon category, nerf Shotguns, and make SMGs Semi-Auto. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5955	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:06:00 - [7] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: so your saying that promo vids should be ignored when looking into playing a particular game as they don't represent what you are going to play........right of now I'm sure your just trolling . Also forges have travel time as well as a slight dispersion at long range I.e. 200 m plus I'd like to see you land 4 consecutive shots on a nitro muddy from 250m away that takes skill. Also find and link me to a post that is dated beyond the release of 1.7 stating that vehicles arnt working as intended after all the QQ you'd think they would say something . Well, if you believe that the promotional video should be the determining factor in balance, move Forge Guns to the Light Weapon Slot. I wasn't referring to Forge Guns, I was referring to Blaster Turrets, which you use and are indeed hit-scan. However I'd love to see you kill me with Swarm Launchers from any range and tell me that it requires no skill. Quote 1 \| Quote 2 All state that they realize that there is a problem with them, and have a fix pending. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5955	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:07:00 - [8] - Quote Poultryge1st wrote: I'm glad you are not developing this game. You mean your glad that pegasis prime is not developing this game? Because under his logic, all of those changes would be made. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:28:00 - [9] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Can you explain why they are not balanced ? Is it because you can't solo a HAV anymore and you finally need team work to take down a massive skill point sink like vehicles ( i.e. core content , turrets and the actual use of the vehicles themselves ) now come on ... can anyone really justify that seeing how you spend far less to put up a fight as far as a.v. is concerned and I'm just speaking about the fact that a.v. grenades are included so you don't have to spend additional skill points to access them . That statement is a fallacy. However for the sake of proving you wrong, I'll bite down. In order to be a competitive AVer, you need the following skills: Dropsuit Command II Minmatar Medium Frame III Minmatar Assault V Weaponry III Light Weaponry IV Sidearm Weaponry II Swarm Launcher Operation V Swarm Launcher Proficiency V Sub-Machine Proficiency Operation V Sub-Machine Gun Proficiency V Explosives III Grenadier V Remote Explosives II Dropsuit Upgrades II Dropsuit Core Upgrades III Dropsuit Electronics V Dropsuit Engineering V All of that requires a plentiful 11,037,640 SP. Most of the SP is something that will only be used when someone fields a vehicle, which is not a guarrantee. While you can use your vehicle anytime, I can only use my Swarms when someone brings out a vehicle. Because of this, AV needs to be less SP intensive. Though I wouldn't consider 11,037,640 SP as a laughing matter. HAVs should be soloed, as they are only operated by 1 person. I could list some more examples, but my laptop's about to die unfortunately. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:48:00 - [10] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I see what you are saying.....but tell me you needed skill in 1.6 to drop a tank with Swarm Launchers....you can't really because even I could do it...and as we know.....Tanker = Scru..... It honestly depends on the situation. Let's say, we have 1 Madrugar. But it's got 6 infantry units surrounded by it, and 2 gunners in it, you refuse to use things such as tower camping, there are buildings in the way that prevent locking from over 100m, and the only defense you have from the 6 infantry units is an Ishukone Assault SMG. The 6 infantry units are carrying Duvolle ARs and Imperial SCRs on PRO suits, and your using Assault mk.0 suits. Not saying that AV was balanced, but that doesn't seem so easy now does it? AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND

Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:53:00 - [11] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: yes I occasionally use blaster turrets say approx 1 time out of 10, but im primerally a rail or missile tanker i mentiond that erlyer but you probably just wanted to ignore that part as it dosent lye well with your statment . Also I do have proto prof 3 swarms but rarely need to use anything above adv (I often only use the den swarms) as when I'm running AV I'm supporting other avers or tanks and th I haven't had as bad a time as you (it's called team work you should probably look into it) RIght, and I use swarms about 1 out of 10 times as well. Doesn't mean I don't use it. I'm rolling in a Gunnlogi with 2 damage modifiers, a Particle Cannon, and as much armor as I can fit. Though since AV should require teamwork, I assume that you also want tanking to require teamwork as well? Insert revised Spkr4theDead sig here AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:55:00 - [12] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: So in your scenario are you going solo to attack the tank and supporting infantryor do you have a squad backing you up ? Your all by yourself. Oh, and they all have Duvolle Focused Scanners. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:55:00 - [13] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I already use 2 gunners to bust enemy HAV what more do you want from me? 200 WP AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5958	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:00:00 - [14] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: The bid with the forge gun isn't in game footage ..... but the vids that are heavy with vehicles are. If you can't even tell the difference then there is no helping you . Ah, but you said that it had to be a Promotional Video: pegasis prime wrote: so your saying that promo vids should be ignored when looking into playing a particular game as they don't represent what you are going to play........right of now I'm sure your just trolling . Though it doesn't really matter. The fact that you believe game balance should be based on something as arbitrary as a description or 2 year old video as opposed to actual game mechanics means that your view on balance is skewed, and therefore irrelevant. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5958	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:04:00 - [15] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: I think I'm beginning to sense the causation for your but hurt. I'm not really butthurt anymore, as V/AV imbalance no longer affects me. Though I do enjoy comments like those. It implies (or in your case, states) that you have no logical retort to the argument at hand, and therefore can only make statements such as "leul ur butthurt bruh". However, pointing out the logical fallacies in your posts and disproving your arguments is rather sad. It feels as if I'm beating a child. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5958	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:08:00 - [16] - Quote True Adamance wrote: You'd get more like 300....375 if you get that assist glitch. Point is it seems that I cannot make you happy with how I tank no matter what. I snipe enemy tank spammers, run 2 gunners to bust my stronger foes, transport and support my infantry squads...... any yet after doing all the things you tell me to....you still aren't happy that you convinced at least one HAVer to expand past the Ion Canon Maddy. Sure AV needs tweaks, the swarm needs a fix, and HAV need tweaks.........but I'll be damned if I watch anyone try to rebalance HAV back to those abominable 1.3 conditions. It's not really an issue with how you use your vehicle. As long as you realize there is a problem with them, and don't farm infantry I've got nothing against you. Though that statement is rather ironic. It's exactly what I said when I was discussing AV with one of the tankers in my corp back in 1.3. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5958	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:12:00 - [17] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: Well you produced a scenario in which you were attacking a tank and supporting infantry solo in a thread about balance ...wow just wow. Correct... Atiim wrote: It honestly depends on the situation. [...] Not saying that AV was balanced, but that doesn't seem so easy now does it? However I myself acknowledge (and stated) that this is not a typical situation, nor should it be primarily considered as balance. He asked a question, and I gave him a scenario. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5962	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:21:00 - [18] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I dont farm anyone, but if they present themselves in FW I do what I have to ensure the win. I don't play this game for ISK, SP, or the Circlejerk that is PC. I am here to further the goals of the Amarr Empire. Oh and **** yeah HAV are in a bit of a spot...thing is...too much negative tweaks in the wrong places and they are back to being UP. Simply buffing AV is a short sighted solution...but a return to pre 1.7 values might work for us, nerfing HAV too much in one specific location will harm them to the point of crippling them. More dialogue between HAver and AVer and less bitching and demands will do wonders to soothe hostilites between the groups and work towards better balance. My only problem with that is Dropships. I don't want them to be negatively affected by a Swarm Launcher buff. However, I do believe they need to deal more damage agaisnst them, as in all of my ADS fights I cannot sufficiently use my Swarms to do anything but drive them away for a few seconds. You can't please everyone, but I hope Charollete's think-tank idea will help bring the communities together. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5976	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:15:00 - [19] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: Also being the first to start insulting and degrading someone who me you are discussing with /debating just goes to show who is the child/troll/**** As opposed to being constructive or providing an actual argument, you said something as simple minded as "your butthurt"; which is indeed childish. No, you were actually the first to bring in the insults by calling me butthurt. What you did was childish, so don't be too surprised when I callled you one. pegasis prime wrote: puffy 2 dammage mods and stacked armour lol , my double hardened single dammage molded particle cannon build would bust your ass quicker than you could say me that's pegasis prime. Oh and yes almost all well all but 2 of my tank builds have Co gunners seats and I do encourage team work with hav's. Err... Not Quite. With your 2 hardeners and my 2 damage modifiers, it'd basically turn into a battle where the first to react wins. If I hit you before your hardeners are on, you won't have any shields left to harden. Even with stacked plates my dual damage modifiers would rip through em. If you turn your hardeners on before hand, then I wouldn't be able to apply enough damage to make an actual dent in your HAV. But, with my 1 hardener I should be able to negate a fair chunk of damage from your railgun long enough to make it to cover. Encourage, yes. Require? You'd never request such a thing. ((Also, damgage modifiers grant an extra 30%, while shield hardeners boast 60% resistance on top of the 10% resistance from Hybrid - Railgun weaponry, meaning I still have 40% resistance to my aid)) pegasis prime wrote:** I also like how you cut out the parts that make you look daft when re posting that actuallymakes me laugh. Your oopinions are nothing short of troll ish. I've yet to present anything that meet the standards of a "troll". You on the other hand, have yet to reply to anything I've said objectively. Hypocrite much? What have I cut out? AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5987	Posted - 2014.03.21 22:02:00 - [20] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: I remember almost every AV player crying about OP tanks before 1.7. [citation needed] AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND

Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5987	Posted - 2014.03.21 22:06:00 - [21] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: dear atiim, riddle me this... if "heavy," "light" and sidearm weapons should all be equal in power, why bother making the poor modern soldiers lug around the weight of an LMG when we could all be using handguns instead? I'm not really sure why people think that 1 weapon being better than another is okay. But I would have to say "because variety" Now riddle me this. If one [item] is better than another [item]. why use anything else? AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5990	Posted - 2014.03.21 23:13:00 - [22] - Quote deepfried salad gilliam wrote: because the better one has a. expensive b. requires more skill c. has some form of draw back. personally i think heavy weapons should have more firepower but cost more is (not terribly much more) and slow turn speed so its better but more expensive and has draw backs Ironically, both A, B, and C don't apply to vehicles. A and C are shared by all AV unit's. And B is debatable. Personally I believe that every weapon should be on par with one another, with every weapon having a stregnth and a drawback. That way people won't all flock to one weapon. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5990	Posted - 2014.03.21 23:15:00 - [23] - Quote deepfried salad gilliam wrote: why specificaly mimnatar medium frame? It's not specifically Minmatar Assault, it's just that I used that as an example because that's the suit I use. Though if your really looking for a strong AV frame, use Amarr Logistics. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5990	Posted - 2014.03.21 23:16:00 - [24] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: You guys are still bitchin? lol Says the guy with a 16 Page QQ thread trying to nerf an AV weapon. AV > HAV > INF > AV \| Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND

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.