Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
darkiller240
WarRavens League of Infamy
606
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
so?
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
8581
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Balance between AV and HAV is not something you can easily hot fix just like that.....mitigating the effect of HAV on the map by allowing AV to be slightly buffed for a time could help......but could unbalance dropship gameplay......
Eventually AV will have to draw a line in the sand a say. These are our static values, now you go balance vehicles around those values......
"Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"
-Dagger Two
|
darkiller240
WarRavens League of Infamy
606
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Balance between AV and HAV is not something you can easily hot fix just like that.....mitigating the effect of HAV on the map by allowing AV to be slightly buffed for a time could help......but could unbalance dropship gameplay...... Eventually AV will have to draw a line in the sand a say. These are our static values, now you go balance vehicles around those values......
yes so the tank nerf its been 4 months
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
8581
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:47:00 -
[4] - Quote
darkiller240 wrote:True Adamance wrote:Balance between AV and HAV is not something you can easily hot fix just like that.....mitigating the effect of HAV on the map by allowing AV to be slightly buffed for a time could help......but could unbalance dropship gameplay...... Eventually AV will have to draw a line in the sand a say. These are our static values, now you go balance vehicles around those values...... yes so the tank nerf its been 4 months
And Vehicles suffered under OP AV for near of 6 months..... but lets not get into a game of tit for tat as that makes us both look stupid.
Fact of the matter is Tweaks need to occur......you use the term hot fix.....I assume you mean swing the nerfbat. To what end. You get 4 month of time ignoring vehicles only to have them buffed again when the other side of the community points out that vehicles are UP again.....
I would definitely like to hear your suggestions for a hot fix my personal favourites are
Reductions of Shield and Armour Hardener Resistances to 50% and 35% respectfully (a 10% nerf on shields since no current AV options allow for anti shield combat, and 5% initially on armour to test for future adjustments)
An increase in fitting costs of Hardener units to make stacking them less desireable.
Also a new favourite a timer between activations of hardeners equall to half that hardeners cool down period (usually allowing for between 25 and 45 seconds of harderner down time) reinforcing the waves of opportunity.
I am also discussing with Alena Ventraliss about balancing armour efficiencies on different faces of an HAV allowing for Mines and AV genades if tossed properly to serve better AV roles and allow for HAV to attack and defend in a more tactical manner.
"Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"
-Dagger Two
|
Broonfondle Majikthies
Dogs of War Gaming Zero-Day
973
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
Hotfix??
Your optimistic
"...where Bylothgar the Ill-postured was made King of the People With No Name But Decent Footwear"
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu Lokun Listamenn
3641
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:50:00 -
[6] - Quote
My swarms demand...
MORE POW WAH!!!
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
Are you OUKH?
|
darkiller240
WarRavens League of Infamy
606
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:56:00 -
[7] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:darkiller240 wrote:True Adamance wrote:Balance between AV and HAV is not something you can easily hot fix just like that.....mitigating the effect of HAV on the map by allowing AV to be slightly buffed for a time could help......but could unbalance dropship gameplay...... Eventually AV will have to draw a line in the sand a say. These are our static values, now you go balance vehicles around those values...... yes so the tank nerf its been 4 months And Vehicles suffered under OP AV for near of 6 months..... but lets not get into a game of tit for tat as that makes us both look stupid. Fact of the matter is Tweaks need to occur......you use the term hot fix.....I assume you mean swing the nerfbat. To what end. You get 4 month of time ignoring vehicles only to have them buffed again when the other side of the community points out that vehicles are UP again..... I would definitely like to hear your suggestions for a hot fix my personal favourites are Reductions of Shield and Armour Hardener Resistances to 50% and 35% respectfully (a 10% nerf on shields since no current AV options allow for anti shield combat, and 5% initially on armour to test for future adjustments) An increase in fitting costs of Hardener units to make stacking them less desireable. Also a new favourite a timer between activations of hardeners equall to half that hardeners cool down period (usually allowing for between 25 and 45 seconds of harderner down time) reinforcing the waves of opportunity. I am also discussing with Alena Ventraliss about balancing armour efficiencies on different faces of an HAV allowing for Mines and AV genades if tossed properly to serve better AV roles and allow for HAV to attack and defend in a more tactical manner. No your not getting me Tanks are OP they need to be slower and cost more
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
|
GHOSTLY ANNIHILATOR
Ahrendee Mercenaries General Tso's Alliance
1153
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 10:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
Let me point this out there does not need to be any hotfix, nerf , bufff / ETC You are the only one that chooses how you use ur tank / dropship/ suit / gun etc. The fact that ur dieing by a tank is because you let that happen I went inside a soma today with a militia blaster and went 19 - 1 The fact is that somebody got tired of me killing them and finally took out another tank and killed me Did i make the other team mad sure but did something happen in the end ? Yes U choose how u use ur vehicle so stop crying and adapt.
AMARR PROTO
DONUT PROFICIENCY 5
I MAKE DUST VIDEOS CLICK HERE FOR DONUTS :)
|
darkiller240
WarRavens League of Infamy
606
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:06:00 -
[9] - Quote
GHOSTLY ANNIHILATOR wrote:Let me point this out there does not need to be any hotfix, nerf , bufff / ETC You are the only one that chooses how you use ur tank / dropship/ suit / gun etc. The fact that ur dieing by a tank is because you let that happen I went inside a soma today with a militia blaster and went 19 - 1 The fact is that somebody got tired of me killing them and finally took out another tank and killed me Did i make the other team mad sure but did something happen in the end ? Yes U choose how u use ur vehicle so stop crying and adapt. well NOOB ALEART!
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
|
TranquilBiscuit ofVaLoR
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
1794
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:14:00 -
[10] - Quote
ok, darkiller240, i'll let you in on something. these replies that you're giving that take all of 5 seconds to think of make you look like an idiot. when you have people giving well constructed replies to your quite frankly pointless thread, then it's common sense to at least take the time to reply back properly.
with that being said, i agree that something needs to be done between AV and vehicle balance, more specifically SWARM and AV balance, but a simple hotfix is not the answer. i'm no AV / Vehicle expert, so i'm not going to try to suggest anything. i'll leave that to the people that have taken the time to seriously look into that stuff.
Anime > EVERYTHING
|
|
darkiller240
WarRavens League of Infamy
606
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:16:00 -
[11] - Quote
TranquilBiscuit ofVaLoR wrote:ok, darkiller240, i'll let you in on something. these replies that you're giving that take all of 5 seconds to think of make you look like an idiot. when you have people giving well constructed replies to your quite frankly pointless thread, then it's common sense to at least take the time to reply back properly.
with that being said, i agree that something needs to be done between AV and vehicle balance, more specifically SWARM and AV balance, but a simple hotfix is not the answer. i'm no AV / Vehicle expert, so i'm not going to try to suggest anything. i'll leave that to the people that have taken the time to seriously look into that stuff. A simple hotfix wont resolve? What other problems are there with the tanks balance? that as simple stat change wont fix?
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
|
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
2081
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:23:00 -
[12] - Quote
TranquilBiscuit ofVaLoR wrote:ok, darkiller240, i'll let you in on something. these replies that you're giving that take all of 5 seconds to think of make you look like an idiot. when you have people giving well constructed replies to your quite frankly pointless thread, then it's common sense to at least take the time to reply back properly.
with that being said, i agree that something needs to be done between AV and vehicle balance, more specifically SWARM and AV balance, but a simple hotfix is not the answer. i'm no AV / Vehicle expert, so i'm not going to try to suggest anything. i'll leave that to the people that have taken the time to seriously look into that stuff.
Pretty much how I see it also. I don't know the answer to AV but I think will end up being some type of fitting cost increase. The reason I say that is that a pilot should have to choose between high EHP, high damage or a low mixture of both. I don't want to see pilots screwed and I think that good fits and/or pilots should be reward with performance. We are very close to vehicles being in a good place but they need to be slowly tweaked until the right stats are determined.
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION
791
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:darkiller240 wrote:True Adamance wrote:Balance between AV and HAV is not something you can easily hot fix just like that.....mitigating the effect of HAV on the map by allowing AV to be slightly buffed for a time could help......but could unbalance dropship gameplay...... Eventually AV will have to draw a line in the sand a say. These are our static values, now you go balance vehicles around those values...... yes so the tank nerf its been 4 months And Vehicles suffered under OP AV for near of 6 months..... but lets not get into a game of tit for tat as that makes us both look stupid. Fact of the matter is Tweaks need to occur......you use the term hot fix.....I assume you mean swing the nerfbat. To what end. You get 4 month of time ignoring vehicles only to have them buffed again when the other side of the community points out that vehicles are UP again..... I would definitely like to hear your suggestions for a hot fix my personal favourites are Reductions of Shield and Armour Hardener Resistances to 50% and 35% respectfully (a 10% nerf on shields since no current AV options allow for anti shield combat, and 5% initially on armour to test for future adjustments) An increase in fitting costs of Hardener units to make stacking them less desireable. Also a new favourite a timer between activations of hardeners equall to half that hardeners cool down period (usually allowing for between 25 and 45 seconds of harderner down time) reinforcing the waves of opportunity. I am also discussing with Alena Ventraliss about balancing armour efficiencies on different faces of an HAV allowing for Mines and AV genades if tossed properly to serve better AV roles and allow for HAV to attack and defend in a more tactical manner.
Yeah but tanks where pretty op before more than once so CCP is moving in circles here. Not to forget even in 1.6 AV was not THAT op compared to the current HAV's Opness... |
Echo 1991
WarRavens League of Infamy
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:38:00 -
[14] - Quote
Am i the only person that thinks AV is fine (apart from Swarm range) and that the problem is tank speed and modules? That is the problem with tanks. |
darkiller240
WarRavens League of Infamy
606
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:39:00 -
[15] - Quote
Echo 1991 wrote:Am i the only person that thinks AV is fine (apart from Swarm range) and that the problem is tank speed and modules? That is the problem with tanks. no ur not i think they should be slower and cost more
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
|
Echo 1991
WarRavens League of Infamy
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:40:00 -
[16] - Quote
darkiller240 wrote:Echo 1991 wrote:Am i the only person that thinks AV is fine (apart from Swarm range) and that the problem is tank speed and modules? That is the problem with tanks. no ur not i think they should be slower and cost more Damage is gonna need to go up on swarms as they butchered dmg mods making AV even worse. |
darkiller240
WarRavens League of Infamy
606
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:44:00 -
[17] - Quote
Echo 1991 wrote:darkiller240 wrote:Echo 1991 wrote:Am i the only person that thinks AV is fine (apart from Swarm range) and that the problem is tank speed and modules? That is the problem with tanks. no ur not i think they should be slower and cost more Damage is gonna need to go up on swarms as they butchered dmg mods making AV even worse. well yes and no if you look at the efficiency rating on swarms on ground vehicles its always 80% while on dropships its always 55% so its more about increase the effective ratting then buff damage
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
|
KatanaPT
Tech Guard RISE of LEGION
604
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:49:00 -
[18] - Quote
GHOSTLY ANNIHILATOR wrote:Let me point this out there does not need to be any hotfix, nerf , bufff / ETC You are the only one that chooses how you use ur tank / dropship/ suit / gun etc. The fact that ur dieing by a tank is because you let that happen I went inside a soma today with a militia blaster and went 19 - 1 The fact is that somebody got tired of me killing them and finally took out another tank and killed me Did i make the other team mad sure but did something happen in the end ? Yes U choose how u use ur vehicle so stop crying and adapt.
Dude...lol... what are you smoking?
Tech Guard Recruiting Spot
|
Echo 1991
WarRavens League of Infamy
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:55:00 -
[19] - Quote
darkiller240 wrote:Echo 1991 wrote:darkiller240 wrote:Echo 1991 wrote:Am i the only person that thinks AV is fine (apart from Swarm range) and that the problem is tank speed and modules? That is the problem with tanks. no ur not i think they should be slower and cost more Damage is gonna need to go up on swarms as they butchered dmg mods making AV even worse. well yes and no if you look at the efficiency rating on swarms on ground vehicles its always 80% while on dropships its always 55% so its more about increase the effective ratting then buff damage so a proto swarm is gonna only do 726 dmg to a dropship and 1056 dmg to ground vehicles per salvo. then you have to take into account hardeners shields take 60% less so:726 - (726 x 0.6) = 290.4 dmg to a Shield dropship with a shield hardener and 1056 - (1056 x 0.6) = 422.4 dmg to a shield tank with a shield hardener. Proficiency will not increase damage to shields with swarms, the bonus will be to armour. Swarms will be useless against any shield based vehicle next patch unless damage is increased or shield hardeners get nerfed like crazy. |
Gavr1Io Pr1nc1p
235
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:04:00 -
[20] - Quote
GHOSTLY ANNIHILATOR wrote:Let me point this out there does not need to be any hotfix, nerf , bufff / ETC You are the only one that chooses how you use ur tank / dropship/ suit / gun etc. The fact that ur dieing by a tank is because you let that happen I went inside a soma today with a militia blaster and went 19 - 1 The fact is that somebody got tired of me killing them and finally took out another tank and killed me Did i make the other team mad sure but did something happen in the end ? Yes U choose how u use ur vehicle so stop crying and adapt. poor thing. you died to an enemy OP machine. infantry AV should be=tank AV
Kills-Archduke Ferdinand
Balance!
|
|
Idye Lotz
xCosmic Voidx Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
225
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:10:00 -
[21] - Quote
My opinion for what it is worth:
Counters: Everything should have a counter. A lot of talk about hardeners, one thing to look at is say Armor hardeners only effective against Forge, and Rail weapons, while Shield protect against swarms. Or whatever combination of those two make sense. One thing AVers tend to forget is other tanks make a great anti vehicle, and rail tanks are made mostly for that reason. I enjoy good tank battles as much (hey more than killing infantry when I am in a tank).
Rather than get the nerf bat out buff Forge, Rail VS Shields and Swarms VS Armor
Installation Drops: Remember when these where in the works? Have the gone away? I mean the player bought and place installations. Imagine if a tanker was dominating a match and then someone drops a well placed rail turret and all of a sudden that tank has new problems to worry about.
Cost I think it should currently stay as is. Seriously, when tanks where going for close to a million no one but the very best could tank, and that was reserved for those that got their starts early and had enough skill points invested. There was nothing wrong with that per say but it left the gate for new tankers as a long and boring journey (using militia fits with no SP invested in infantry for 10 matches to replace a militia tank that was destroyed before it hit the ground).
I play mostly as infantry, but my opinion is that Tanks were under powered and overpriced for a long time. I know ever once and a while a tanker would come along and do well, and everyone would say oh yeah tanks are so underpowered. But to truly see how much they are underpowered you needed to sit in one. Most matches you would get a few shots and retreat. I'am not saying they are underpowered now they were. Right now they are close to being balanced.
Sorry for shooting you in the back. Now please look elsewhere so I can continue.
|
Rynoceros
Rise Of Old Dudes
3216
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:13:00 -
[22] - Quote
They're fine. Everything is working as intended. They spent months balancing AV before we got 1.7 so surely they fully tested it and were happy with the outcome. They have given no indication that something went awry or that they messed up. That's what responsible companies like CCP do. They own their mistakes and learn from them because building a solid base of satisfied customers is how you build a business.
I GÖú Kittens.
|
Echo 1991
WarRavens League of Infamy
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:25:00 -
[23] - Quote
Idye Lotz wrote:My opinion for what it is worth:
Counters: Everything should have a counter. A lot of talk about hardeners, one thing to look at is say Armor hardeners only effective against Forge, and Rail weapons, while Shield protect against swarms. Or whatever combination of those two make sense. One thing AVers tend to forget is other tanks make a great anti vehicle, and rail tanks are made mostly for that reason. I enjoy good tank battles as much (hey more than killing infantry when I am in a tank).
Rather than get the nerf bat out buff Forge, Rail VS Shields and Swarms VS Armor
Installation Drops: Remember when these where in the works? Have the gone away? I mean the player bought and place installations. Imagine if a tanker was dominating a match and then someone drops a well placed rail turret and all of a sudden that tank has new problems to worry about.
Cost I think it should currently stay as is. Seriously, when tanks where going for close to a million no one but the very best could tank, and that was reserved for those that got their starts early and had enough skill points invested. There was nothing wrong with that per say but it left the gate for new tankers as a long and boring journey (using militia fits with no SP invested in infantry for 10 matches to replace a militia tank that was destroyed before it hit the ground).
I play mostly as infantry, but my opinion is that Tanks were under powered and overpriced for a long time. I know ever once and a while a tanker would come along and do well, and everyone would say oh yeah tanks are so underpowered. But to truly see how much they are underpowered you needed to sit in one. Most matches you would get a few shots and retreat. I'am not saying they are underpowered now they were. Right now they are close to being balanced. Swarms are explosive damage. armour hardeners help against that. The only shield AV weapon is the Plasma cannon and even that thing is terrible..
|
darkiller240
WarRavens League of Infamy
608
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:36:00 -
[24] - Quote
Echo 1991 wrote:Idye Lotz wrote:My opinion for what it is worth:
Counters: Everything should have a counter. A lot of talk about hardeners, one thing to look at is say Armor hardeners only effective against Forge, and Rail weapons, while Shield protect against swarms. Or whatever combination of those two make sense. One thing AVers tend to forget is other tanks make a great anti vehicle, and rail tanks are made mostly for that reason. I enjoy good tank battles as much (hey more than killing infantry when I am in a tank).
Rather than get the nerf bat out buff Forge, Rail VS Shields and Swarms VS Armor
Installation Drops: Remember when these where in the works? Have the gone away? I mean the player bought and place installations. Imagine if a tanker was dominating a match and then someone drops a well placed rail turret and all of a sudden that tank has new problems to worry about.
Cost I think it should currently stay as is. Seriously, when tanks where going for close to a million no one but the very best could tank, and that was reserved for those that got their starts early and had enough skill points invested. There was nothing wrong with that per say but it left the gate for new tankers as a long and boring journey (using militia fits with no SP invested in infantry for 10 matches to replace a militia tank that was destroyed before it hit the ground).
I play mostly as infantry, but my opinion is that Tanks were under powered and overpriced for a long time. I know ever once and a while a tanker would come along and do well, and everyone would say oh yeah tanks are so underpowered. But to truly see how much they are underpowered you needed to sit in one. Most matches you would get a few shots and retreat. I'am not saying they are underpowered now they were. Right now they are close to being balanced. Swarms are explosive damage. armour hardeners help against that. The only shield AV weapon is the Plasma cannon and even that thing is terrible.. yes but shields are terrible
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
|
Echo 1991
WarRavens League of Infamy
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:37:00 -
[25] - Quote
darkiller240 wrote:Echo 1991 wrote:Idye Lotz wrote:My opinion for what it is worth:
Counters: Everything should have a counter. A lot of talk about hardeners, one thing to look at is say Armor hardeners only effective against Forge, and Rail weapons, while Shield protect against swarms. Or whatever combination of those two make sense. One thing AVers tend to forget is other tanks make a great anti vehicle, and rail tanks are made mostly for that reason. I enjoy good tank battles as much (hey more than killing infantry when I am in a tank).
Rather than get the nerf bat out buff Forge, Rail VS Shields and Swarms VS Armor
Installation Drops: Remember when these where in the works? Have the gone away? I mean the player bought and place installations. Imagine if a tanker was dominating a match and then someone drops a well placed rail turret and all of a sudden that tank has new problems to worry about.
Cost I think it should currently stay as is. Seriously, when tanks where going for close to a million no one but the very best could tank, and that was reserved for those that got their starts early and had enough skill points invested. There was nothing wrong with that per say but it left the gate for new tankers as a long and boring journey (using militia fits with no SP invested in infantry for 10 matches to replace a militia tank that was destroyed before it hit the ground).
I play mostly as infantry, but my opinion is that Tanks were under powered and overpriced for a long time. I know ever once and a while a tanker would come along and do well, and everyone would say oh yeah tanks are so underpowered. But to truly see how much they are underpowered you needed to sit in one. Most matches you would get a few shots and retreat. I'am not saying they are underpowered now they were. Right now they are close to being balanced. Swarms are explosive damage. armour hardeners help against that. The only shield AV weapon is the Plasma cannon and even that thing is terrible.. yes but shields are terrible Really? funny they seem to be able to tank a lot better than armour.
|
Auris Lionesse
Capital Acquisitions LLC
496
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:48:00 -
[26] - Quote
Echo 1991 wrote:darkiller240 wrote:Echo 1991 wrote:darkiller240 wrote:Echo 1991 wrote:Am i the only person that thinks AV is fine (apart from Swarm range) and that the problem is tank speed and modules? That is the problem with tanks. no ur not i think they should be slower and cost more Damage is gonna need to go up on swarms as they butchered dmg mods making AV even worse. well yes and no if you look at the efficiency rating on swarms on ground vehicles its always 80% while on dropships its always 55% so its more about increase the effective ratting then buff damage so a proto swarm is gonna only do 726 dmg to a dropship and 1056 dmg to ground vehicles per salvo. then you have to take into account hardeners shields take 60% less so:726 - (726 x 0.6) = 290.4 dmg to a Shield dropship with a shield hardener and 1056 - (1056 x 0.6) = 422.4 dmg to a shield tank with a shield hardener. Proficiency will not increase damage to shields with swarms, the bonus will be to armour. Swarms will be useless against any shield based vehicle next patch unless damage is increased or shield hardeners get nerfed like crazy.
proto swarms are only doing 37-50 damage a missile against hardeners. So more like 300damage lol
Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles!
Heroes in a half Gank!
TURTLE POWER!!!
|
Drapedup Drippedout
0uter.Heaven
619
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:48:00 -
[27] - Quote
Rynoceros wrote:They're fine. Everything is working as intended. They spent months balancing AV before we got 1.7 so surely they fully tested it and were happy with the outcome. They have given no indication that something went awry or that they messed up. That's what responsible companies like CCP do. They own their mistakes and learn from them because building a solid base of satisfied customers is how you build a business.
Lol insert sarcasm ^ here
Testing, responsible and CCP all in the same paragraph. Now I've seen it all!
Pro-fit Prophet
"Gimme yo lunch money"
|
Echo 1991
WarRavens League of Infamy
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:52:00 -
[28] - Quote
Auris Lionesse wrote:
proto swarms are only doing 37-50 damage a missile against hardeners. So more like 300damage lol
290.4/6 = 48.4 dmg per missile 422.4/6 = 70.6 dmg per missile
The math is right. shields take 20% less damage and hardeners take 60% less damage from that. |
Auris Lionesse
Capital Acquisitions LLC
496
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:53:00 -
[29] - Quote
Drapedup Drippedout wrote:[quote=Rynoceros]They're fine. Everything is working as intended. They spent months balancing AV before we got 1.7 so surely they fully tested it and were happy with the outcome. They have given no indication that something went awry or that they messed up. That's what responsible companies like CCP do. They own their mistakes and learn from them because building a solid base of satisfied customers is how you build a business.
Lol insert sarcasm ^ here
Testing, responsible and CCP all in the same paragraph. Now I've seen it all![/quote Lol remember the tank speed at the start of 1.7 yeah they didn't test anything. They just don't want to come out and admit the whole vehicle redo was a giant leap in the wrong direction.
Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles!
Heroes in a half Gank!
TURTLE POWER!!!
|
calisk galern
BurgezzE.T.F General Tso's Alliance
2187
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 12:59:00 -
[30] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Balance between AV and HAV is not something you can easily hot fix just like that.....mitigating the effect of HAV on the map by allowing AV to be slightly buffed for a time could help......but could unbalance dropship gameplay...... Eventually AV will have to draw a line in the sand a say. These are our static values, now you go balance vehicles around those values......
- drastically increase stacking penalty to using multiple mods on vehicles i.e weapon/hardeners etc. - reduce weapon module bonus from 40% to 30% - increase heat build up of blaster turrets by about 10%. - rail guns should be nerfed as well but not until infantry av is in a good place. - reduce reload time on missles by 1 second - reduce shield depleted time on the gunlogi's
- fix swarm launcher bug - an increase to swarm damage is probably in order, but double buffes in the same patch should be avoided - increase to av grenade damage - increase to proximity mine damage and an increase to proximity mine splash range of about 6m - forge gun damage should be increased slightly in regards to the 1.8 changes. - plasma launcher should deal increased damage to vehicles only.
it's not perfect but i don't have any data to base real numbers on, just the direction i'd go. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |