Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Minor Treat
The Enclave Syndicate Dark Taboo
188
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 05:42:00 -
[31] - Quote
Operative 1171 Aajli wrote:Stop putting words in tankers mouths and baiting. Is that you Atiim?
FOTM mil tankers are the problem and tankers agree AV is not balanced to tanks. I don't know about you but I have seen many posts which has the title- AV vs Vehicle is balanced and here is way for these reasons.
The most common reason was it should take more than one person to destroy tanks |
Cody Sietz
Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising
2783
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 05:44:00 -
[32] - Quote
Yeah, me and 2 buddies were using mix if Proto AV(FG, swarms and AV) and we couldn't kill a few tankers that were kept camping a CRU. One of them was Dust Fiend iirc. It was pretty awful, i was hitting Sicas/Gunnys with no shields and 1500 armor buff they just wouldn't explode from my Proto swarms.
"I do agree with you there though. shudders"
-Arkena Wyrnspire
|
Charlotte O'Dell
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
2222
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 05:50:00 -
[33] - Quote
Crow Splat wrote:Ok so we're now onto saying that everything should be "balanced" so that one guy with a swarm launcher should be able to take out any vehicle alone.
So you're saying that a maybe 200k isk fit should be able to destroy an easy 500k isk vehicle every time.. But what you're really saying if eff you guys that fly dropships. You guys should have to pay more to be less effective then me because I don't like getting beat by someone who is willing to risk more isk than I am.
Yeah... Right....
a militia tank, yeah.
Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
|
Charlotte O'Dell
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
2222
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 05:51:00 -
[34] - Quote
Minor Treat wrote:Charlotte O'Dell wrote:Zahle Undt wrote:Crow Splat wrote:So OP is mad because he has to work as a team in a game that places you on a team by default and forces you to fight an opposing team in every game mode? Did I get that right?
Why is the concept of running in a group so offensive? Its not that it is offensive, its that if one side has to gang up to defeat one person. That is, by definition, unbalanced. He is also saying that even if you do gang up on a tank with swarm launchers it still doesn't work. it made more sense when a tank that wouldn't instapop cost 1.2 mil isk and like nobody was good enough to make it worth it But its not like that anymore so your point is void
what point? you just agreed with me and attempted to fit an awkward troll in there, stupid ****.
Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
|
SPESHULz
The Southern Legion
59
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 08:08:00 -
[35] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:
it made more sense when a tank that wouldn't instapop cost 1.2 mil isk and like nobody was good enough to make it worth it
lol the falchions were just slightly better red line rails when rails were useless and i dont remember anybody bothering with the armor ones or what the lame bonus was since you would lose 1.1 mil to swarms/turrets and infantry that werent rendering until it was too late.
Blood flows. Death comes. War rages
Maths is OP. Those numbers kill you
RedLineLove
|
Auris Lionesse
Capital Acquisitions LLC
488
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 09:13:00 -
[36] - Quote
Yeah we all know tankers are lying about swarms being useful because they want to remain indestructable.
Thank god patch 1.8 doesn't address it at all and instead we get useless weapons and suits we should already have while eve gets more customization because it's actually balanced lol.
Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles!
Heroes in a half Gank!
TURTLE POWER!!!
|
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION
788
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 09:18:00 -
[37] - Quote
Crow Splat wrote:So OP is mad because tankers suggested you work as a team in a game that places you on a team by default and forces you to fight an opposing team in every game mode? Did I get that right?
Why is the concept of running in a group so offensive?
I have asked the same question back in 1.6 because IF HAV pilots where running with infantry Av never seemed a problem and those Pilots who did run with infantry were doing fine in general...but for pilots running with infantry to cover them was never an option because they had a tank and it was expensive etc.
Funny how Pilots now asks to use teamwork...from AV...and even funnier as they know they still can beat AV with another HAV or two running with them... |
The dark cloud
The Rainbow Effect Negative-Feedback
2528
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 09:23:00 -
[38] - Quote
Not using swarms cannot be the answer. Its just mindblowing that tankers are justifying to have literally godmode from all forms of AV. Except for 15 proxy mines, forgeguns and jihad LAV's. AV is supposed to be a hard counter against vehicles. If swarms are not broken then most certainly the vehicles are. I say dumb down the resistance bonus from shield hardeners to 30% and armor hardeners down to 20%. And on top only 1 hardener fitted at a time on vehicles.
I shall show you a world, a world which you cant imagine, a world full off butthurt n00bs at the other end of my gun
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
8581
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 09:34:00 -
[39] - Quote
The dark cloud wrote:Not using swarms cannot be the answer. Its just mindblowing that tankers are justifying to have literally godmode from all forms of AV. Except for 15 proxy mines, forgeguns and jihad LAV's. AV is supposed to be a hard counter against vehicles. If swarms are not broken then most certainly the vehicles are. I say dumb down the resistance bonus from shield hardeners to 30% and armor hardeners down to 20%. And on top only 1 hardener fitted at a time on vehicles.
Quote in this thread where a Tanker said that. Please by all means do, either they are out of their damn minds of blatantly biased in which case their opinion cannot really hold any value.....similar to yours.....you seem rather biased yourself.
"Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"
-Dagger Two
|
Auris Lionesse
Capital Acquisitions LLC
489
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 09:40:00 -
[40] - Quote
We should just make it so all av can solo vehicles. Then all vehicles can solo infantry and all infantry can solo avers. That sounds fair. You should have to pay more for vehicles because your invincible to infantry. Tanks are pay to win.
Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles!
Heroes in a half Gank!
TURTLE POWER!!!
|
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
8585
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:02:00 -
[41] - Quote
Auris Lionesse wrote:We should just make it so all av can solo vehicles. Then all vehicles can solo infantry and all infantry can solo avers. That sounds fair. You should have to pay more for vehicles because your invincible to infantry. Tanks are pay to win.
No one disputes that HAV need to be soloable.....the ease at which they are soloable balanced against costs of vehicles, balanced against the costs of AV, balanced against the viability of this player style as well as the viability under any proposed changes of Dropships, LAV, in future MAV and MTAC.
Simply looking for a quick fix solution now doesn't solve anything and only puts off the thought and discussion we need to have about this topic until later.
And more importantly in this regard both sides need to be willing to give ground.
Personally I am interested in altering the functionality of the infamous hardener module rather than severely nerfing the module, or buffing AV.
Between 5-10% Av buffs being possibly quick fixes (preferably 5% in this quick fix case with progressive testing)
Increase in fitting costs of Hardeners Decrease of 10% to Shield, down to 50% resistance, and down 5% on armour hardeners to 35%,
Another thought is perhaps implementing a timer between when one hardener can be activated and the next made active, perhaps half the cool down of the intial hardeners allowing players to make use of dual one but no allowing them to follow one after the other, thus reinforcing waves of opportunity.
These amongst other things should be discussed by long term HAVers and AVers , civilly, until a conclusion has been reached and a formal, well presented series of community suggestions can be presented to the CPM1 or CCP directly.
"Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"
-Dagger Two
|
steadyhand amarr
TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback
2660
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:12:00 -
[42] - Quote
The argument that you need to work with more than 1 player to kill a tank is bad desgin as we have limited team sizes so all the other side has to do is field more tanks till the other side runs out of players.
A solo AV should be able kill a tank of the same teir what needs to be balanced then is the effort and isk costs required
"i dont care about you or your goals, just show me the dam isk"
winner of EU squad cup
GOGO power rangers
|
Charlotte O'Dell
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
2223
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:15:00 -
[43] - Quote
Auris Lionesse wrote:We should just make it so all av can solo vehicles. Then all vehicles can solo infantry and all infantry can solo avers. That sounds fair. You should have to pay more for vehicles because your invincible to infantry. Tanks are pay to win.
Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
|
Baal Omniscient
L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
1319
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:41:00 -
[44] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Auris Lionesse wrote:We should just make it so all av can solo vehicles. Then all vehicles can solo infantry and all infantry can solo avers. That sounds fair. You should have to pay more for vehicles because your invincible to infantry. Tanks are pay to win. No one disputes that HAV need to be soloable.....the ease at which they are soloable balanced against costs of vehicles, balanced against the costs of AV, balanced against the viability of this player style as well as the viability under any proposed changes of Dropships, LAV, in future MAV and MTAC. Simply looking for a quick fix solution now doesn't solve anything and only puts off the thought and discussion we need to have about this topic until later. And more importantly in this regard both sides need to be willing to give ground. Personally I am interested in altering the functionality of the infamous hardener module rather than severely nerfing the module, or buffing AV. Between 5-10% Av buffs being possibly quick fixes (preferably 5% in this quick fix case with progressive testing) Increase in fitting costs of Hardeners Decrease of 10% to Shield, down to 50% resistance, and down 5% on armour hardeners to 35%, Another thought is perhaps implementing a timer between when one hardener can be activated and the next made active, perhaps half the cool down of the intial hardeners allowing players to make use of dual one but no allowing them to follow one after the other, thus reinforcing waves of opportunity. These amongst other things should be discussed by long term HAVers and AVers , civilly, until a conclusion has been reached and a formal, well presented series of community suggestions can be presented to the CPM1 or CCP directly. I only dispute your first point. Taki and Spkr are two who immediately come to mind who dispute the fact that vehicles should be soloable.
Edit: ALso, an Idea just came to me.... perhaps to prevent permahardened tanks, and to prevent narrowing fitting options for tanks, let tankers fit multiple hardners. But make all fitted hardners activate as one module and apply a stacking penalty to the damage reduction. Meaning you can only have one hardner on, but it has the strength of however many you have fitted minus the stacking penalties applied for each additional module. This would stop back-to-back hardening and promote the "waves of oppertunity" idea that was sort of the point of 1.7 vehicle changes.
MAG ~ Raven
I GÖú puppies.
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
5979
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 13:48:00 -
[45] - Quote
Crow Splat wrote:Ok so we're now onto saying that everything should be "balanced" so that one guy with a swarm launcher should be able to take out any vehicle alone.
So you're saying that a maybe 200k isk fit should be able to destroy an easy 500k isk vehicle every time.. But what you're really saying if eff you guys that fly dropships. You guys should have to pay more to be less effective then me because I don't like getting beat by someone who is willing to risk more isk than I am.
Yeah... Right.... That statement is a fallacy.
AV > HAV > INF > AV | Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF
[s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Crow Splat
DUST University Ivy League
152
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 14:08:00 -
[46] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Crow Splat wrote:Ok so we're now onto saying that everything should be "balanced" so that one guy with a swarm launcher should be able to take out any vehicle alone.
So you're saying that a maybe 200k isk fit should be able to destroy an easy 500k isk vehicle every time.. But what you're really saying if eff you guys that fly dropships. You guys should have to pay more to be less effective then me because I don't like getting beat by someone who is willing to risk more isk than I am.
Yeah... Right.... That statement is a fallacy.
That's a terrible example.. So you let somebody get close enough to you to use a high alpha damage weapon with a range of pissing distance. Good job. Maybe that guy was good, maybe you were being an idiot. I don't know because I wasn't there.
But I can tell you that he doesn't have the same odds of killing you no matter what the circumstances of the engagement are.
You would propose that an individual who spends half as much isk as another should be evenly matched regardless of circumstance. That's just remedial thinking.
That said, there is something off about av and until it gets fixed, ganging up is the only solution. |
Humble Seeker
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
115
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 14:53:00 -
[47] - Quote
Bump.
Nothing I can say that Judge didn't.
"Surround yourself with the faithful, Stand together, for there is no strength like it under the heavens."
|
TechMechMeds
SWAMPERIUM
2880
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 14:58:00 -
[48] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Burntface man112 wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls7hOEdNgXE&feature=youtu.be
HERE IS PROOF THAT TANKERS HAVE BEEN LYING ABOUT SWARMS. YOU NEED TO GANG UP MY ASS Yeah we know swarms do not apply all of their damage. This was something I was only alerted to in the last few weeks. I hope they fix this. EDIT- I dont want to "Gang" up anyone's ass.
Lol on that edit.
And op, tanks are the most up evar, gif dem buffs and dat.
50% speed increase
50% turret damage buff but only on tanks
Ability for tanks to fly AND teleport
And lastly, blaster turrets should shoot ob rounds
That should be fine, then we can think about further buffs in the future.
Ps. Nerf swarms, that 150 metre range.
Level 2 forum warrior.
Dust on the ps4 asap please
I'll behave
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
5979
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 17:02:00 -
[49] - Quote
Crow Splat wrote: That's a terrible example.. So you let somebody get close enough to you to use a high alpha damage weapon with a range of pissing distance. Good job. Maybe that guy was good, maybe you were being an idiot. I don't know because I wasn't there.
So apparently a lone Forge Gunner shouldn't be able to kill vehicles either?
Crow Splat wrote: But I can tell you that he doesn't have the same odds of killing you no matter what the circumstances of the engagement are.
You would propose that an individual who spends half as much isk as another should be evenly matched regardless of circumstance. That's just remedial thinking.
That said, there is something off about av and until it gets fixed, ganging up is the only solution.
On a 1:1 ratio, yes. If there is any gear that makes 1v1 engagements completely impossible, then why use anything other than said gear?
That's terrible game design.
I supposed you agree with this then?
Atiim wrote: Why is this possible? My logi build costs 12 million SP and 254k ISk to run, and he spent at most 50k SP and 610 ISK. I'm spending about 200x more ISK and 240,000x more SP than him, so there's no way he should be able to solo me.
These Shotguns need to be nerfed. Someone who didn't even spend half of the ISK or SP that I spent should not be able to solo me.
AV > HAV > INF > AV | Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF
[s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Derpty Derp
It's All Gone Derp
175
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 17:11:00 -
[50] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:[quote=Burntface man112] tankers are gamers too, they want broken mechanics exactly as much as you do (not at all). I have a blaster gunnlogi that has been collecting dust because tanking isn't fun anymore. balance is fun imbalance isn't.
You're assuming everyone finds the same things fun...
A lot of tankers just want to be able to easily farm noobs because it's fun to feel like they're better than everyone else...
Only some of us like a challenge. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |