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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Black SlaverX Seykal Expeditionary Group Minmatar Republic 63	Posted - 2014.03.20 17:39:00 - [1] - Quote 90% of the playerbase is infantry. Before: ~90% of the playerbase was not sh-t on by the vehicle balance Now 10% of the playerbase is content. You know what to do CCP. Watch your back because I might be there.
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1331	Posted - 2014.03.20 17:42:00 - [2] - Quote Shield tanks were crap though, and needed buffing regardless. I'm not saying that I'm fine with the 1.7 changes either though. All shield tanks needed were stronger missile turrets, more powerful shield boosters, longer lasting active hardeners, and slightly more acceleration. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Delanus Turgias Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 280	Posted - 2014.03.20 17:44:00 - [3] - Quote Pre 1.6, AV versus HAV balance was ****, one person could smash 3 tanks without even blinking, and tanks were horribly expensive. I personally want a return to Chromosome-era tanking. It was great on both sides, tanks took skill to use, but could be brought down quickly by coordinated AV. If you were a tanker, you were rewarded for playing smart, but if you charged into a group of reds and your hardener was down or you were waiting for your repper to recharge, you could get screwed by your bloodlust. Now that armor reps are passive and shields regen incredibly fast, tanking requires basically no skill or module management to be successful. I also would like the return of the whole panoply of vehicle modules, like nanofibre frames or overdrive modules, or heat pumps or passive damage mods. That would be nice. Closed Beta Vet since May, 2012 TEST Alliance Best Alliance Proud owner of essentially every BPO in Dust
Thumb Green THE STAR BORN 845	Posted - 2014.03.20 17:55:00 - [4] - Quote Delanus Turgias wrote: Pre 1.6, AV versus HAV balance was ****, one person could smash 3 tanks without even blinking, and tanks were horribly expensive. I personally want a return to Chromosome-era tanking. It was great on both sides, tanks took skill to use, but could be brought down quickly by coordinated AV. If you were a tanker, you were rewarded for playing smart, but if you charged into a group of reds and your hardener was down or you were waiting for your repper to recharge, you could get screwed by your bloodlust. Now that armor reps are passive and shields regen incredibly fast, tanking requires basically no skill or module management to be successful. I also would like the return of the whole panoply of vehicle modules, like nanofibre frames or overdrive modules, or heat pumps or passive damage mods. That would be nice. Yeah, chrome was the best AV vs tank balance we've had so far. The shitfits and even bad tankers with good fits could also be solo'ed without laying an elaborate trap or chasing them around the map for ever. Personally think if we keep tanks the way they are now and roll AV back to pre 1.7 then we might have some alright balance going on. Support Orbital Spawns
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1936	Posted - 2014.03.20 17:57:00 - [5] - Quote Black SlaverX wrote: 90% of the playerbase is infantry. Before: ~90% of the playerbase was not sh-t on by the vehicle balance Now 10% of the playerbase is content. You know what to do CCP. Because swarms were OP. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Malkai Inos Onikanabo Brigade Caldari State 1282	Posted - 2014.03.20 17:59:00 - [6] - Quote Black SlaverX wrote: 90% of the playerbase is infantry. [citation needed] You can take a benign object, -you can take a cheeseburger and deconstruct it to its source...
Zirzo Valcyn Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 255	Posted - 2014.03.20 17:59:00 - [7] - Quote RIP spider tanking u can ban the troll out of the forums but u can't ban the forums out of the troll. forum warrior .189
shadow drake35 The Third Day Galactic Skyfleet Empire 81	Posted - 2014.03.20 17:59:00 - [8] - Quote swarms are for lav and dropship forge guns are for tanks it is right how it is forge guns need a little buff MAG Raven, Valor, and S.V.E.R. Veteran
Black SlaverX Seykal Expeditionary Group Minmatar Republic 65	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:01:00 - [9] - 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 Nope. Watch your back because I might be there.
Johnny Guilt Algintal Core 601	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:06:00 - [10] - Quote Return AV damage values to 1.6's? That would balance the AV vs vehicle game in one move. A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. GalHeav E-vo

pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1597	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:10:00 - [11] - Quote 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. Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. Why bother running you'll only die tired.
Vulpes Dolosus SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 1070	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:11:00 - [12] - Quote Not for dropships. The way things are now (apart from the redline) is pretty much perfectly balanced in that respect (swarms are bugged though). Me in my ADS: 1,2
Lanius Pulvis Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 199	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:12:00 - [13] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: Delanus Turgias wrote: Pre 1.6, AV versus HAV balance was ****, one person could smash 3 tanks without even blinking, and tanks were horribly expensive. I personally want a return to Chromosome-era tanking. It was great on both sides, tanks took skill to use, but could be brought down quickly by coordinated AV. If you were a tanker, you were rewarded for playing smart, but if you charged into a group of reds and your hardener was down or you were waiting for your repper to recharge, you could get screwed by your bloodlust. Now that armor reps are passive and shields regen incredibly fast, tanking requires basically no skill or module management to be successful. I also would like the return of the whole panoply of vehicle modules, like nanofibre frames or overdrive modules, or heat pumps or passive damage mods. That would be nice. Yeah, chrome was the best AV vs tank balance we've had so far. The shitfits and even bad tankers with good fits could also be solo'ed without laying an elaborate trap or chasing them around the map for ever. Personally think if we keep tanks the way they are now and roll AV back to pre 1.7 then we might have some alright balance going on. Except of course the 2 other vehicle types would be screwed...again. Not new, just new to you.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3065	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:13:00 - [14] - Quote 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 Intelligence is OP
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:14:00 - [15] - 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 - [16] - 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
Black SlaverX Seykal Expeditionary Group Minmatar Republic 65	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:18:00 - [17] - 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. Bolded the established LIE. CCP said that AV is AV, there is not light/heavy/pullitoutofurass catagories. Watch your back because I might be there.
Cody Sietz Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2772	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:19:00 - [18] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Shield tanks were crap though, and needed buffing regardless. I'm not saying that I'm fine with the 1.7 changes either though. All shield tanks needed were stronger missile turrets, more powerful shield boosters, longer lasting active hardeners, and slightly more acceleration. I agree, they needed at least 50 hp a second for base to even be decent. And shield hardeners were awful. "I do agree with you there though. shudders" -Arkena Wyrnspire
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1598	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:23:00 - [19] - Quote Black SlaverX wrote: 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. Bolded the established LIE. CCP said that AV is AV, there is not light/heavy/pullitoutofurass catagories. 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 wepon 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 . Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. Why bother running you'll only die tired.
shadow drake35 The Third Day Galactic Skyfleet Empire 82	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:23:00 - [20] - 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. exactly MAG Raven, Valor, and S.V.E.R. Veteran

Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:28:00 - [21] - 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 - [22] - 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
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1598	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:39:00 - [23] - Quote 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) 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. Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. Why bother running you'll only die tired.
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1598	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:42:00 - [24] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. it's still what CCP seen fit to say and we'll they designed the game so what's your point. Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. Why bother running you'll only die tired.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5951	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:48:00 - [25] - 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 - [26] - 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
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1598	Posted - 2014.03.20 18:57:00 - [27] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. 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 . Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 405	Posted - 2014.03.20 19:06:00 - [28] - Quote Black SlaverX wrote: 90% of the playerbase is infantry. Before: ~90% of the playerbase was not sh-t on by the vehicle balance Now 10% of the playerbase is content. You know what to do CCP. 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 . I would like the exception for using grenades ( i.e. from three to two ) to be used for a.v. grenades because it's only right and they fill a complimentary role , much like equipment does for logi's but I have played matches where I really don't see anyone changing fits to combat tanks , all I see in the forums are QQing about them though and plenty of it . Old distance measures should be reinstalled and kill the hard locks for the assault class of SL's because the distance plus the hard lock time , practically kills anyone trying to SL a HAV . All of you vehicle users need to rebut these kill tank folks because the mods will kill you too . If anything will get nerfed it will be the mods and as I fly myself , ADS pilots will get KILLED if a nerf was to touch vehicle mods in anyway . Think you have problems now just wait til they touch those mods and ... " you will be sorry ". No one should be able to solo a tank unless it's a proto Forge or SL and the driver just sits there and is a glutton for punishment . That's just fact . There should be a noticeable difference in the performance of the vehicle and not just by placing points into the core but performance wise , while climbing the tiers of vehicles . Increase the range to pre 1.7 levels and kill the hard lock time and keep the A.V. grenades , to three and don't nerf the FG or SL , seeing as how it's going to by the damage mod nerf and you will notice a difference . Up to you CCP , hot fix for 1.8 - 1.9 ? Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 2811	Posted - 2014.03.20 19:07:00 - [29] - Quote I actually think that WP farming vehicle damage will help. It will make it worth running AV even if you donGÇÖt get very many kills. It will also make AV compete with Logi for top WP farming role. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
Lynn Beck Wake N' Bake Inc Top Men. 872	Posted - 2014.03.20 19:16:00 - [30] - Quote I don't like requiring multiple hardeners to keep a constant, albeit lower(lol) level of hardening. I want 1 hardener, providing about 30% resist and is constantly up, freeing 2 high slots for a nitrous and scanner, and then put a 10% dmg mod on my low, with a light armor rep on the other. Sadly LolRailguns, and AV vs unhardened tanks(lol)(lol @ no capacitor) 'Sorry Dakka, they're just so... Beautiful.' -cries- Tits are my new god, as the Galscout has enlightened me.

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8486	Posted - 2014.03.20 19:17:00 - [31] - Quote Black SlaverX wrote: 90% of the playerbase is infantry. Before: ~90% of the playerbase was not sh-t on by the vehicle balance Now 10% of the playerbase is content. You know what to do CCP. However vehicles were **** on by AV balance which was poor. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Poultryge1st Da Short Buss RISE of LEGION 44	Posted - 2014.03.20 19:33:00 - [32] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. I'm glad you are not developing this game.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1910	Posted - 2014.03.20 19:47:00 - [33] - Quote lolno I'll leave this here click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz Renegade Alliance 671	Posted - 2014.03.20 19:50:00 - [34] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Shield tanks were crap though, and needed buffing regardless. I'm not saying that I'm fine with the 1.7 changes either though. All shield tanks needed were stronger missile turrets, more powerful shield boosters, longer lasting active hardeners, and slightly more acceleration. And maybe a few adjustments to AV strength, slight adjustments at that. Not a complete overhaul. No sense living in the past though, cause this new version of "tanking" is what we got. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5955	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:06:00 - [35] - 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 - [36] - 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
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8490	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:08:00 - [37] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. 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..... "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1599	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:11:00 - [38] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. 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) Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1599	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:13:00 - [39] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. 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 . Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
Alpha 443-6732 General Tso's Alliance 363	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:16:00 - [40] - Quote ** thread full of ** people. move along anyone who says 1.6 had great balance is either looking through the nostalgia goggles or just plain ******. Uprising tanks were a big stepdown from the previous (much more balanced) versions of tanks from chrome. There is no discussing this.

Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1334	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:24:00 - [41] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: ** thread full of ** people. move along anyone who says 1.6 had great balance is either looking through the nostalgia goggles or just plain ******. Uprising tanks were a big stepdown from the previous (much more balanced) versions of tanks from chrome. There is no discussing this. Agreed. Even though I got into a Gunnlogi probably in the last month of Chromosome and I didn't have much experience, I'd like to give Chromosome another go. CCP, rollback vehicles and AV to Chromosome! "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8494	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:24:00 - [42] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: ** thread full of ** people. move along anyone who says 1.6 had great balance is either looking through the nostalgia goggles or just plain *****. Uprising tanks were a big stepdown from the previous (much more balanced) versions of tanks from chrome. There is no discussing this. Sure there is, and discussing it only helps the wider community. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"* -Dagger Two
Luna Angelo We Who Walk Alone 826	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:27:00 - [43] - Quote Alpha, that is the one thing everyone in this thread is in agreement on. Which is crazy, as the tankers and AV'ers don't agree on anything.... I don't need luck, I have ammo. Wolves don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep. CEO of We Who Walk Alone
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:28:00 - [44] - 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
Alpha 443-6732 General Tso's Alliance 364	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:46:00 - [45] - Quote Luna Angelo wrote: Alpha, that is the one thing everyone in this thread is in agreement on. Which is crazy, as the tankers and AV'ers don't agree on anything.... my apologies
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:48:00 - [46] - 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
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1599	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:49:00 - [47] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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? So in your scenario are you going solo to attack the tank and supporting infantryor do you have a squad backing you up ? Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:53:00 - [48] - 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
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8497	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:55:00 - [49] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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 I already use 2 gunners to bust enemy HAV what more do you want from me? "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5957	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:55:00 - [50] - 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 - [51] - 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
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1599	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:58:00 - [52] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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 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. Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1599	Posted - 2014.03.20 20:59:00 - [53] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. I think I'm beginning to sense the causation for your but hurt. Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5958	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:00:00 - [54] - 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
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8498	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:02:00 - [55] - Quote Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: I already use 2 gunners to bust enemy HAV what more do you want from me? 200 WP 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. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5958	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:04:00 - [56] - 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
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1599	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:06:00 - [57] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. Well you produced a scenario in which you were attacking a tank and supporting infantry solo in a thread about balance ...wow just wow. Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5958	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:08:00 - [58] - 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
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1599	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:09:00 - [59] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. 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. Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1599	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:11:00 - [60] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. 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/****** Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8504	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:12:00 - [61] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. 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. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5958	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:12:00 - [62] - 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 - [63] - 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
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1336	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:22:00 - [64] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: I already use 2 gunners to bust enemy HAV what more do you want from me? 200 WP 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. Same here. Except I got two small blasters to aid me against infantry while my missile turret takes out vehicles. Whatever tweaks happen, don't touch my large missile / 2x small blaster combo! Any nerfs should be directed at railguns, because those things are breaking the game. My powerful shield hardener gives me a chance at escaping a rail tank. Nerf the railgun first, then you can nerf the active hardeners so that AV isn't so weak. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Leonid Tybalt Heaven's-Gate 322	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:30:00 - [65] - Quote No we cannot. Back then an average decent tank cost a small fortune (if you didn't spend at least between 600k to 1 mil, it would be next to useless), and it could still get 1-shotted by a forger fit that cost only a fraction of that. Not saying that tanks are balanced now, but tanks vs AV sure as hell wasn't balanced during 1.6 either. Anyone who says so needs to put away his crackpipe for awhile.
Rusty Shallows 1175	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:39:00 - [66] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: snip 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 I already use 2 gunners to bust enemy HAV what more do you want from me? On that topic why are more people NOT running HAVs with Small Turrets? If the squad leader stays on foot and puts the donut on the HAV all four Mercs can farm the SP. Here, have some candy and a Like. :-) Forums > Game
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8510	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:45:00 - [67] - Quote Rusty Shallows wrote: True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: snip 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 I already use 2 gunners to bust enemy HAV what more do you want from me? On that topic why are more people NOT running HAVs with Small Turrets? If the squad leader stays on foot and puts the donut on the HAV all four Mercs can farm the SP. STFU...don't tell those idiots out there about this. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 2682	Posted - 2014.03.20 21:49:00 - [68] - 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 This is so wrong that it hurts I'll start my own war, with hookers, and blackjack! In fact forget the war and the blackjack.
Thumb Green THE STAR BORN 847	Posted - 2014.03.21 01:31:00 - [69] - 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. Man, fck that noise. There's nothing in the SL's or PC's descriptions to indicate that they are intended to only be able to take out light vehicles. They're not light AV, they are light weapons; meaning they can be carried by any infantry with at least a light weapon slot. Sh!t man, by your faulty logic no light weapon should be able to take out a heavy suit because it's light vs heavy. Support Orbital Spawns
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8543	Posted - 2014.03.21 01:37:00 - [70] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: 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. Man, fck that noise. There's nothing in the SL's or PC's descriptions to indicate that they are intended to only be able to take out light vehicles. They're not light AV, they are light weapons; meaning they can be carried by any infantry with at least a light weapon slot. Sh!t man, by your faulty logic no light weapon should be able to take out a heavy suit because it's light vs heavy. I think the general perceived difference is that heavier weapons are carried on heavier frames and thus a distinction can be made between those AV options that appear or will appear on the heavy frame, and those who appear on the medium and light frames. Whether or not that was CCP's intention I think a lot of people have taken that to heart. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two

J4yne C0bb Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 265	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:03:00 - [71] - Quote I think forges should get their direct damage and charge time back -- I think this would go a long way to AV/tank balance. The splash damage, CCP can keep that as is, since it requires more skill to forge snipe infantry. Min Logi \| aka Punch R0ckgroin, Fatsuit
Patrlck 56 72	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:07:00 - [72] - Quote Zirzo Valcyn wrote: RIP spider tanking ;_; No matter how hard I found it to take out two spider tankers who knew what they were doing (which is EXACTLY HOW IT SHOULD BE) that was always pretty cool. I remember trying out spider tanking with one of my friends. I got hate mail that match.
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5976	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:15:00 - [73] - 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
Arirana Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 463	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:29:00 - [74] - Quote Delanus Turgias wrote: Pre 1.6, AV versus HAV balance was ****, one person could smash 3 tanks without even blinking, and tanks were horribly expensive. I personally want a return to Chromosome-era tanking. It was great on both sides, tanks took skill to use, but could be brought down quickly by coordinated AV. If you were a tanker, you were rewarded for playing smart, but if you charged into a group of reds and your hardener was down or you were waiting for your repper to recharge, you could get screwed by your bloodlust. Now that armor reps are passive and shields regen incredibly fast, tanking requires basically no skill or module management to be successful. I also would like the return of the whole panoply of vehicle modules, like nanofibre frames or overdrive modules, or heat pumps or passive damage mods. That would be nice. Weapon balance was and is only downhill ever since chrome. I have an ego?! O.O The scales have fallen from my eyes.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8555	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:49:00 - [75] - Quote J4yne C0bb wrote: I think forges should get their direct damage and charge time back -- I think this would go a long way to AV/tank balance. The splash damage, CCP can keep that as is, since it requires more skill to forge snipe infantry. However it would unbalance AV vs Dropships....... its more than just about tanks dude. You need to consider all vehicles. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Bojo The Mighty L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 3580	Posted - 2014.03.21 02:53:00 - [76] - Quote Absolutely not I would hate to see scrambler pistol duels devolve into a suit and tie occasion allowing the winner to be determined by the suit they wear 68 inches above sea level...
J4yne C0bb Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 265	Posted - 2014.03.21 03:38:00 - [77] - Quote True Adamance wrote: J4yne C0bb wrote: I think forges should get their direct damage and charge time back -- I think this would go a long way to AV/tank balance. The splash damage, CCP can keep that as is, since it requires more skill to forge snipe infantry. However it would unbalance AV vs Dropships....... its more than just about tanks dude. You need to consider all vehicles. I disagree... mil dropships, maybe, but activating an afterburner at the right moment will keep you alive for the most part. ADS ships? Hell no, those things are pwning both tanks and infantry at the moment, and are pretty damn hard to kill. That's why we've been seeing them all over the place recently -- ADS pilots are regularly going 10/15-0 or more in all the matches I've played recently. My .02 isk, anyway. I'm not saying I should be able to 1-2 shot an ADS, but seriously, those buggers are getting to be as bad as tanks; most just stand there and take whatever hits you give them while pwning infantry, not even bothering to run anymore for the most part. Min Logi \| aka Punch R0ckgroin, Fatsuit
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 405	Posted - 2014.03.21 03:39:00 - [78] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. What ??? I a.v. not at prof 5 though but with RE's , A.V. Grenades , SLers , Vehicle Core , DropSuit Core , Weapons .. some maxed out with prof , Turrets .. large and small to advanced , Dropships and ADS and so on , so what your saying is mute to me because in order to compete you have to have skillpoints used properly and most vehicle users have A.V. skills and that's something that's not talked about but should be noted so when you speak about A.V. don't believe that your saying something that vehicle users don't already understand . I'm not a tanker I'm a Vehicle User . I don't need to bring up numbers and levels of prof , but I do have experience and balancing will come about threw hard work and cooperation from the community in getting info to the DEV's , not threw nerfs and buffs . Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 405	Posted - 2014.03.21 03:41:00 - [79] - Quote Also allow me to point out , all you do is speak ill of HAV's and there role on the battlefield . You are one of the BIGGEST opponents of vehicle users because most of what you write is propaganda and ill will so maybe you can dismiss what I'm saying but what I speak about you is true . Check the posts . Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8559	Posted - 2014.03.21 03:42:00 - [80] - Quote J4yne C0bb wrote: True Adamance wrote: J4yne C0bb wrote: I think forges should get their direct damage and charge time back -- I think this would go a long way to AV/tank balance. The splash damage, CCP can keep that as is, since it requires more skill to forge snipe infantry. However it would unbalance AV vs Dropships....... its more than just about tanks dude. You need to consider all vehicles. I disagree... mil dropships, maybe, but activating an afterburner at the right moment will keep you alive for the most part. ADS ships? Hell no, those things are pwning both tanks and infantry at the moment, and are pretty damn hard to kill. That's why we've been seeing them all over the place recently -- ADS pilots are regularly going 10/15-0 or more in all the matches I've played recently. My .02 isk, anyway. I'm not saying I should be able to 1-2 shot an ADS, but seriously, those buggers are getting to be as bad as tanks; most just stand there and take whatever hits you give them while pwning infantry, not even bothering to run anymore for the most part. ADS are already glass cannon..... what more do you want from them......they require probably 2-3x the isk a dropsuit requires to function, require more skill than infantry to use, and are the targets of weapons that 2-3 shot them. I would say HTFU and work to destroy them. Its what I do both in and out of my HAV either positioned with a Forge, in an ADS as a gunner, or missile/rail sniping them from within a Maddy. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two

J4yne C0bb Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 265	Posted - 2014.03.21 04:47:00 - [81] - Quote True Adamance wrote: J4yne C0bb wrote: True Adamance wrote: J4yne C0bb wrote: I think forges should get their direct damage and charge time back -- I think this would go a long way to AV/tank balance. The splash damage, CCP can keep that as is, since it requires more skill to forge snipe infantry. However it would unbalance AV vs Dropships....... its more than just about tanks dude. You need to consider all vehicles. I disagree... mil dropships, maybe, but activating an afterburner at the right moment will keep you alive for the most part. ADS ships? Hell no, those things are pwning both tanks and infantry at the moment, and are pretty damn hard to kill. That's why we've been seeing them all over the place recently -- ADS pilots are regularly going 10/15-0 or more in all the matches I've played recently. My .02 isk, anyway. I'm not saying I should be able to 1-2 shot an ADS, but seriously, those buggers are getting to be as bad as tanks; most just stand there and take whatever hits you give them while pwning infantry, not even bothering to run anymore for the most part. ADS are already glass cannon..... what more do you want from them......they require probably 2-3x the isk a dropsuit requires to function, require more skill than infantry to use, and are the targets of weapons that 2-3 shot them. I would say HTFU and work to destroy them. Its what I do both in and out of my HAV either positioned with a Forge, in an ADS as a gunner, or missile/rail sniping them from within a Maddy. My man, hardness is not my problem, I assure you -- my heavy name says it all :). A Kaalakiota or DUA-2/A + Prof V + damage mods is not lightweight gear, and they are barely put a dent in those things. I'm not expecting to be able to down every ADS I come across, but seriously, they don't even seem to run anymore. All I can say is that we evidently are experiencing different things on the battlefield. I'm not interested in a pissing contest, so I'm done qq'ing. We can just agree to disagree. Min Logi \| aka Punch R0ckgroin, Fatsuit
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1593	Posted - 2014.03.21 04:58:00 - [82] - Quote Apparently, 90% of the player base are FOTM chasing scrubs. The other 10% want skill and sp to matter for tanks. "Stay stealthy scouts." GÇô Ron Burgundy
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 220	Posted - 2014.03.21 05:00:00 - [83] - Quote Black SlaverX wrote: 90% of the playerbase is infantry. Before: ~90% of the playerbase was not sh-t on by the vehicle balance Now 10% of the playerbase is content. You know what to do CCP. I remember almost every AV player crying about OP tanks before 1.7. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 tanks, you will be missed.
Alpha 443-6732 General Tso's Alliance 367	Posted - 2014.03.21 21:59:00 - [84] - Quote 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?
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5987	Posted - 2014.03.21 22:02:00 - [85] - 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 - [86] - 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
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1915	Posted - 2014.03.21 22:10:00 - [87] - Quote You guys are still bitchin? lol click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 1425	Posted - 2014.03.21 22:13:00 - [88] - Quote The best tankers in the game where unkillable in 1.6... They would have to make a couple mistakes in a row to kill them... Or be up against another tanker with the same ability... And the good tankers rarely lost to another tank. Like could count on one hand the amount of times. Tanks for all their problems.. Are kill-able right now.. Is it easy? F* no! But seeing player tankers that have rarely died in a tank ever... Actually take a couple deaths in a Pub... Tells you something... They are strong but the capabilities that can be utilized by a pro tanker... Have been nerfed.. So there is a cap out where tanks enter an even playing field where everyone can compete now with the skills and isk... Instead of 15-20 player Tankers running the field indefinitely. In Chromosome everyone Had Av grenades on their fits... maybe 5-10% of players had Locus grenades.. So everytime a Tanker got close to 10 infantry there would be 10-30 Av grenades flying at them... Since they nerfed Av grenades... The ability to get kills and points with them... Are almost non existent.. So most players just dont put them on their suit because of their general uselessness Hopefully with Damage registering as Warpoints on Vehicles, players will see the usefulness of fitting AV grenades permanently And every time tankers get close there will be something that goes Boom waiting for them. Then add the Extra Commandos that will have an extra Light slot and potentially more PLC's and Swarm launchers in the infantry mixes will help to balance AV and Vehicle parity... But in general these tank changes Have Nerfed the Elite tanker in favor of more people picking up the vocation.
deepfried salad gilliam Sanguine Knights 542	Posted - 2014.03.21 22:23:00 - [89] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. why specificaly mimnatar medium frame? module poll stuff for alts
deepfried salad gilliam Sanguine Knights 542	Posted - 2014.03.21 22:30:00 - [90] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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? 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 module poll stuff for alts

Alex Kaidou Subsonic Synthesis RISE of LEGION 22	Posted - 2014.03.21 22:38:00 - [91] - Quote I completely disagree , do you have any idea how OP a forge gun is against a ADS ? swarms need a decent buff but the forge guns are just to nasty as they are now against ADS .I will admit they barely do anything to tanks unless you hit em' in the sweet spot :) Skill points doesnt define a soldier but his progress in battle does .Proto Scout/Logi/ADS pilot
Henchmen21 Planet Express LLC 778	Posted - 2014.03.21 23:04:00 - [92] - 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 Yea no forges don't need a buff, dropships are barely useful as it its Buff forges and there would be no hope at staying airborne. CCP you better nail 1.8, as it stands 1.7 is a total disaster. Henchmen21: Infantry Gotyougood Ufkr: Vehicles
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 5990	Posted - 2014.03.21 23:13:00 - [93] - 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 - [94] - 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 - [95] - 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


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.