|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Temias Mercurial
ANGEL FLEET
17
   |
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sigberct Amni wrote:Hey OP, you wrote all those words just to say
"My tank isn't OP, you guys just aren't playing it right lmao lol git good haha"
Actually, many people really don't know how take out vehicles properly with AV. I'm not saying "git good", but many people expect things to be hand fed to them. I'm an ADS pilot, the occasional tanker (to kill the bastard that 1-2-3 shots me out of the sky), and forger. Some tanks are laughably easy to kill, especially when they're arrogant. ADS missiles are avoidable as a heavy, if you know the perspective of the pilot and where they are shooting from (angle, rate of fire, and etc). It's not that difficult... but I'm not denying that militia tanks are OP and need to be nerfed, while regular tanks could use a few adjustments and not necessarily a nerf. |
Temias Mercurial
ANGEL FLEET
24
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:My Suggestion, make Large turrets pretty ineffective against infantry forcing the use of small turrets as anti infantry and here's how it can be done.
Large Missle Turret: Lower splash damage to 1 meter making near direct hits mandatory, that combined with a slow rotation it already has means it can direct hit other vehicles but be rough at taking out infantry.
Rail Turret: Lower splash to 1 meter as well making direct hits where it's useful for taking out vehicles.
Blaster Turrets: Give them a massive spread on their shots while upping their damage so that they can compete for damage on large targets like vehicles but again be fairly ineffective when trying to mow down infantry. Rail Turret could do even less than 1m splash and still be useful for its role. Missile Turrets I STRONGLY disagree with nerfing splash radius on, but I wouldn't object to the splash DAMAGE being reduced (not the radius). Make it so that Large Missiles deal high direct damage and a small amount of splash damage, but that splash still hits a wide radius. And Blasters are MEANT to be anti-infantry. There are two ways Blaster Turrets can be balanced. The first option is to define them into the anti-infantry role they seem to be filling at the moment by treating them the same way as any other anti-infantry weapons. Nerf them against vehicles, give them a damage reduction effect. It might not be as harsh as what Assault Rifles get, but they shouldn't be hitting full force on another tank if they're meant to be anti-infantry. The other option is to make them the close-range specialist weapons that Gallente are famous for. Let them remain powerful, but only within an EXTREMELY limited range. No one is saying, and I mean no one, that CCP doesn't make mistakes so it's moot to say what a blaster turret is meant for. Like I said and will say again, it has to be 1 to 1. If someone has an anti tank weapon it shouldn't require teamwork unless the tank requires teamwork. Making the Turrets Anti-vehicle was my suggestion to doing this but there are many others including making the large turret a weapon used by another occupant kind of like how the main guns in borderlands are not operated by the driver. Teamwork for Teamwork or no teamwork requirement, pick one and quit being douche bags. Edit: I know that last statement is harsh but it's true, there isn't a day that goes by where the major arguement for anti balance is the "The pendulum swung the other way give us our imbalance time nows!" Wreaks of douche bag and is universally used as a defense in this game for bad mechanics. This community is hands down why this game sucks so much and CCP can't get it together. It's full of selfish pricks that would rather the game die in obscurity then flourish without their exploits.
Tanks use to have higher sp sinks, but with overpowered militia tanks, there is no incentive to skill into them. With tanks having a higher sp sink, they should require at least two people to destroy it relatively easily. Tanks potentially cost more than AV, but again, with overpowered militia tanks, this is severely clouded. For a tank to be truly effective, they require higher sp investments, but again, militia offers no incentive due to being far to effective and efficient. The problem is, the moment vehicles are EASILY susceptible to AV again, the moment a vehicle appears, you'll see 3-4 AV players looking for easy points, destroy it, and go back to killing infantry. I know this a pilot. ADS were not that effective pre 1.7, yet you'd see 4 forge guns or swarmers after you, even though you haven't done anything to really provoke them, and get shot down within seconds of entering their air space. So I'm not for getting killed by 3 assault forges hunting me down... again.
|
Temias Mercurial
ANGEL FLEET
26
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 19:20:00 -
[3] - Quote
TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Temias Mercurial wrote:TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:My Suggestion, make Large turrets pretty ineffective against infantry forcing the use of small turrets as anti infantry and here's how it can be done.
Large Missle Turret: Lower splash damage to 1 meter making near direct hits mandatory, that combined with a slow rotation it already has means it can direct hit other vehicles but be rough at taking out infantry.
Rail Turret: Lower splash to 1 meter as well making direct hits where it's useful for taking out vehicles.
Blaster Turrets: Give them a massive spread on their shots while upping their damage so that they can compete for damage on large targets like vehicles but again be fairly ineffective when trying to mow down infantry. Rail Turret could do even less than 1m splash and still be useful for its role. Missile Turrets I STRONGLY disagree with nerfing splash radius on, but I wouldn't object to the splash DAMAGE being reduced (not the radius). Make it so that Large Missiles deal high direct damage and a small amount of splash damage, but that splash still hits a wide radius. And Blasters are MEANT to be anti-infantry. There are two ways Blaster Turrets can be balanced. The first option is to define them into the anti-infantry role they seem to be filling at the moment by treating them the same way as any other anti-infantry weapons. Nerf them against vehicles, give them a damage reduction effect. It might not be as harsh as what Assault Rifles get, but they shouldn't be hitting full force on another tank if they're meant to be anti-infantry. The other option is to make them the close-range specialist weapons that Gallente are famous for. Let them remain powerful, but only within an EXTREMELY limited range. No one is saying, and I mean no one, that CCP doesn't make mistakes so it's moot to say what a blaster turret is meant for. Like I said and will say again, it has to be 1 to 1. If someone has an anti tank weapon it shouldn't require teamwork unless the tank requires teamwork. Making the Turrets Anti-vehicle was my suggestion to doing this but there are many others including making the large turret a weapon used by another occupant kind of like how the main guns in borderlands are not operated by the driver. Teamwork for Teamwork or no teamwork requirement, pick one and quit being douche bags. Edit: I know that last statement is harsh but it's true, there isn't a day that goes by where the major arguement for anti balance is the "The pendulum swung the other way give us our imbalance time nows!" Wreaks of douche bag and is universally used as a defense in this game for bad mechanics. This community is hands down why this game sucks so much and CCP can't get it together. It's full of selfish pricks that would rather the game die in obscurity then flourish without their exploits. Tanks use to have higher sp sinks, but with overpowered militia tanks, there is no incentive to skill into them. With tanks having a higher sp sink, they should require at least two people to destroy it relatively easily. Tanks potentially cost more than AV, but again, with overpowered militia tanks, this is severely clouded. For a tank to be truly effective, they require higher sp investments, but again, militia offers no incentive due to being far to effective and efficient. The problem is, the moment vehicles are EASILY susceptible to AV again, the moment a vehicle appears, you'll see 3-4 AV players looking for easy points, destroy it, and go back to killing infantry. I know this a pilot. ADS were not that effective pre 1.7, yet you'd see 4 forge guns or swarmers after you, even though you haven't done anything to really provoke them, and get shot down within seconds of entering their air space. So I'm not for getting killed by 3 assault forges hunting me down... again. Well like I said my suggestion is to change the large turrets to force the use of the smaller turrets for anti infantry and therefor force teamwork. SP sinks alone should not justify a force multiplier. And no one is talking about dropships here, dropships are fine. Can they be soloed? Yes if the pilot doesn't disengage, which dropships are the most capable of disengaging from anything other than a rail turret which leads back to the OP nature of tanks. You have a vehicle that can zip around the map and literally drop squads on any target. Begging to be a killing machine is the same as Logis begging to be a killing machine. You are fully capable of killing especially in an ADS. You also are the best support vehicle available when utilized properly. Also, none of anything going on in this thread had anything to do with dropships so not sure why you brought them up. Edit: Also it sounds like you literally want to be able to fly around and kill all the infantry without them responding? You're in a flying ship harassing players, you are going to be a target. I don't whine when I'm in a dropship mowing people down and they respond. I feel bad when they don't, as obviously there team is very bad if they don't respond to threats. That's what you do in team based shooters. You shoot each other.
The reason I brought up dropships is because of my experience, which is no different from mine as a tank. The moment tanks can be soloed, is the moment they are simply easy prey for AV. Many players want things hand fed to them. Few want effort to be required to destroy vehicles. I see people complain about tanks. I'm not complaining about tanks, as I don't find them that difficult to destroy. I don't use Jihad LAVs either.
|
|
|
| |
|