I can agree with that . But militia tanks are cheep and a price increase needs to be in order also a change to the performance of militia vehicle mods . I don't wan't militia tanks to be glass cannons but they should not be able to compete if that same person has not invested a single skill point into vehicles , now that's just wrong .

A zero investment shouldn't be able to compete with a player who has invested millions and much less thousands of skill points into vehicle usage .

That's what I was getting at , just what you said and that's why I had to like what you had to say .
Speaking of burning , I need to myself .

Your inspiring Zahle .

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"

I can agree with that . But militia tanks are cheep and a price increase needs to be in order also a change to the performance of militia vehicle mods . I don't wan't militia tanks to be glass cannons but they should not be able to compete if that same person has not invested a single skill point into vehicles , now that's just wrong .

A zero investment shouldn't be able to compete with a player who has invested millions and much less thousands of skill points into vehicle usage .

I'm saying it's other people's problems by calling those with problems and thought out solutions to come to the table and discuss what could and should be done ???

I can't say that I like it when people see what they want to see because having sight but yet still being blind is a problem .

I like solving problems not contributing to them but let those who continue to believe the opposite continue .

I can agree with that . But militia tanks are cheep and a price increase needs to be in order also a change to the performance of militia vehicle mods . I don't wan't militia tanks to be glass cannons but they should not be able to compete if that same person has not invested a single skill point into vehicles , now that's just wrong .

A zero investment shouldn't be able to compete with a player who has invested millions and much less thousands of skill points into vehicle usage .

That's because some people aren't idiots who just want their role to dominate everything. It isn't counterproductive, it's recognizing that there is a problem.

So cheap tanks are currently part of our problem, but yet at the same time I don't think we need to return to overly expensive tanks either. I know a lot of my buddies that would run vehicles in beta were ALWAYS broke because vehicles were too expensive. So they would have to run a bunch of game as infantry (which they hated) to be able to afford to use tanks until one got blown up, and then the cycle would repeat.

I would like to see tanking be viable for someone who likes it to be able to do it every match, they just are too dang powerful right now. Unless their are other tanks or actual skilled AV players on the field even a vehicle scrub like me is OP in a militia tank.

So lets buff AV, then lets make it so the real tankers have a real advantage over scrub tankers. Until we have another viable option to tanks than other tanks we shouldn't mess too much with militia tanks, but after, then weaken the militia tanks so that people that invest into the role definitely have the advantage.

You avoided my first question completely and made yourself look like a hypocrite with the rest of your post
You say you want to solve problems and ask that people who have thought about the issue discuss it but then turn on those who have a different opinion than yours and rather than counter their actual arguments you say they are acting childish

How ironic

Swarms are broken, judge proves it in this video: https://youtu.be/ls7hOEdNgXE

As for forge guns, yeah, I can take out a single tank just fine by myself if their hardeners are down. Having another forge gunner makes it rather easy to take out a single tank...

But look, if there are 4+ tanks on the field with 12 infantry, that means that if we're not supposed to be able to solo tanks then our side has to have at least 8 of our 16 players running forge guns. That's almost impossible unless you have a dedicated squad of heavies that can all use forge guns.

The most I ever see is maybe 1-3 forges (one of them being me), and most of the time there's only one of us that is actually decent with a forge gun and smart enough to wait for hardeners to go down. AV also has to deal with the ENTIRE enemy team. We have to avoid RRs, snipers, shotguns, and the tank itself. Even if you have 3 proto forges going against a tank, some guy with a mlt AR can wipe us all out within seconds, or distract us enough to prevent us from actually killing the tank.
_____________________________________________________________________

The bigger issue is regenerationn of tanks. Before the tank update you could slowly chew at a tank's health (especially armor tanks) if they had already used their booster. Even if it took 10 shots, each hit was a small decrease to their health until you either killed them or they ran away to go heal.

But now armor tanks can sit there, hardened, with 200+ reps going every second, nullifying damage from swarms and out-repping forge gun hits. This is WRONG. The fact that an armor tank can rep faster than a forge can do damage is stupid.

I really want to see tanks have this "window of opportunity" where they are invincible for a short duration, and then must run away when unhardened. But as it stands right now there are ways to have hardeners cycle constantly where it's no longer a window, but instead a constant invulnerability.

I personally feel that tank vs tank is actually in a pretty good situation right now. Maybe a few issues with missiles and redline railtanking, but that's about it. It's hard to balance AV vs tanks because you can't offset the balance of tank v tank.

As a side note, why should a tank be able to solo an entire team instead of relying on infantry support and/or gunners, when an AV player MUST rely on other players to take on a solo tank? Also, why does it cost almost 70-80k per suit to take on a tank whereas that same militia tank costs the same amount? If multiple of these suits are required, shouldn't the isk value be relatively the same?
___________________________________________________________________________________

My last point: the main disadvantage of being in a tank is that you can't access the high-traffic areas of the maps like inside buildings and objectives. Further, you can't hack objectives while in a tank. On skirmish and domination this means that a tank is only useful as support to the infantry. The only other huge disadvantage a tank has is the inability to be sneaky. The problem is that passive scan range is only 10 meters, so as long as you're not in LOS (line of sight) you are completely invisible to radar except by scanners.

In ambush there are no objectives, and rarely do players fight in an area where there is no accessibility to tanks. The advantages are far greater for tanks...Larger passive scan, damage resists, insane repair, fast movement speed, 3rd person view (ability to see what's directly behind you, over walls out of LOS), guns that can shoot across the map...all for a very inexpensive cost. I never play ambush, but there seriously isn't any reason for tanks to be in that game mode

People complaining about tanks have started a mass wave of militia HAV deployment in a effort to have HAV's reduced in their place on the battlefield . Every other post is about tanks and now there are people who just start a " Rant " post ( which is not spotted by CCP for some reason ) just for the simple fact of " forcing the hand " of CCP in an attempt at killing HAV's so they won't provide any opposition on the battlefield .

I'm even noticing " Tankers " making comments , suggesting to nerf their own roles .. which to me is counterproductive . Asking to change the performance of mods is foolish and would effect a change in the vehicle core of the skill tree , seeing as how ... the more skill points placed in the core the better the results of mods , i.e. better functionality of vehicles . Notice I say vehicles and not just HAV's because mods effect more than just HAV's , they effect LAV's , Drop ships and what ever else CCP has plans for which probably would include Mech's , Fighter Ships and such .

Yes , something needs to be done but like CCP , it's a work in progress and writing twenty pieces a day about it will not make them work fast enough because it's safe to say that , they probably will not want to go threw this again .

I don't see to many people switching to A.V. to combat " tank spam " , in match after match I notice this but also notice the posts full of complaints about tank use . Most of these said people who flood the forum with post after post , instead of just placing all of their " issues " on one post and that mimic's propaganda . I play matches and notice not too many people breaking their necks to dedicate themselves to A.V. , much less switching if it's a noticeable problem during the match and if there are enough tanks to cause a distraction , wouldn't one believe that players would make such an effort because that's untold WP's to be had and also it really only takes a few times of destroying some of these players HAV's ( except those who are dedicated to HAV usage ) to make these same people swap out to something less taxing , even if militia HAV's are " dirt cheep " they would not want to risk isk's or clones .

The problem is not HAV users it's the wave of players using militia tanks to gank WP's , isk's and the fact that they know that players " DO NOT SWITCH FITS TO COUNTER TANKS " most of the time ... so they go unchecked and the QQ's rain down in the forums . That coupled with the fact that you have players who just hate to see others " out perform " them , even more so the fact that they believe that CCP has a " bullseye " on nerfing their role and you get the hate spam that is " en mass " in the forums

Something can be done but blurting out ignorant , role and skill point killing proposals just waste time . The best way to solve a problem is to act seriously about it and " come to the table " with some substantial fixes in mind and not just some , " You killed me now I'm going to kill your role " attitude because that's what the forum has been flooded with so far .

If serious discussions are undertaken then I'm sure that will bring about serious results .

People complaining about tanks have started a mass wave of militia HAV deployment in a effort to have HAV's reduced in their place on the battlefield . Every other post is about tanks and now there are people who just start a " Rant " post ( which is not spotted by CCP for some reason ) just for the simple fact of " forcing the hand " of CCP in an attempt at killing HAV's so they won't provide any opposition on the battlefield .

I'm even noticing " Tankers " making comments , suggesting to nerf their own roles .. which to me is counterproductive . Asking to change the performance of mods is foolish and would effect a change in the vehicle core of the skill tree , seeing as how ... the more skill points placed in the core the better the results of mods , i.e. better functionality of vehicles . Notice I say vehicles and not just HAV's because mods effect more than just HAV's , they effect LAV's , Drop ships and what ever else CCP has plans for which probably would include Mech's , Fighter Ships and such .

Yes , something needs to be done but like CCP , it's a work in progress and writing twenty pieces a day about it will not make them work fast enough because it's safe to say that , they probably will not want to go threw this again .

I don't see to many people switching to A.V. to combat " tank spam " , in match after match I notice this but also notice the posts full of complaints about tank use . Most of these said people who flood the forum with post after post , instead of just placing all of their " issues " on one post and that mimic's propaganda . I play matches and notice not too many people breaking their necks to dedicate themselves to A.V. , much less switching if it's a noticeable problem during the match and if there are enough tanks to cause a distraction , wouldn't one believe that players would make such an effort because that's untold WP's to be had and also it really only takes a few times of destroying some of these players HAV's ( except those who are dedicated to HAV usage ) to make these same people swap out to something less taxing , even if militia HAV's are " dirt cheep " they would not want to risk isk's or clones .

The problem is not HAV users it's the wave of players using militia tanks to gank WP's , isk's and the fact that they know that players " DO NOT SWITCH FITS TO COUNTER TANKS " most of the time ... so they go unchecked and the QQ's rain down in the forums . That coupled with the fact that you have players who just hate to see others " out perform " them , even more so the fact that they believe that CCP has a " bullseye " on nerfing their role and you get the hate spam that is " en mass " in the forums .

Something can be done but blurting out ignorant , role and skill point killing proposals just waste time . The best way to solve a problem is to act seriously about it and " come to the table " with some substantial fixes in mind and not just some , " You killed me now I'm going to kill your role " attitude because that's what the forum has been flooded with so far .

If serious discussions are undertaken then I'm sure that will bring about serious results .

To the OP, I apologize if I misrepresented your views, but your post did place the blame mostly on the lack of effort by AV while these issues have been thoroughly discussed. I admit that my knee has gotten a bit jerkyon this topic.

There have been many discussions and the consensus is: swarms are broken, the PC is gimped, forges are good as is, tanks are too fast and hardeners last too long and are too powerful. Your post does seem to be summarized by if only more people ran AV there would be no tank problems. I believe this is at least a partial answer and look forward to the damage points being awarded and seeing how that changes things.

Frankly, i think there has been lots of discussion and you simply haven't noticed it because you are one of those in the HTFU-get gud camp.

Most of the actual community knows me. Proto logi, almost proto tanker. in 1.5-6 i was a full proto tanker, even had a fit i called 'invinci vayu', the AV was OP by alot, yes. PRO swarms had 4 in the clip and did 3200 base to armor(YES it was broken, alot more than it said.) they could take out the usual PRO maddy fit in just 9 seconds, not to mention invisible swarms, in 1.7 it was super nerfed along with the FG, now it dose maybe 1/8 damage with a hardener. I want to see a 20/30% buff to swarms, a 15% buff to forge guns. MAKE RE's NOT STICK TO VEHICLES!!! and a small AV nade buff, maybe a 1.6 approach, just a nerf from those stats to be fair, well, comment this and tell me if it sounds viable for a possible fix.

Your tinfoil hat may be a bit tight man.

The reason nobody switches to AV because its safer to ignore and avoid.

I was running a militia forgegun fit today, and one thing I learned was that while proper assault derpships were at least managable in an area denial sort of way, a properly fit HAV ate the shots and asked for more.

HAVs really are OP, in that you would need multiple dedicated AVs vs a single dedicated tanker. When 4 tanks roam the map on one team, you simply cant have the manpower to keep them in check.

If vehicles were capped by type, this **** wouldnt happen.

2 LAVs, 2 HAVs, 2 DS max per team, problem solved.
Then HAVs are okay as they are, because in that case they arent spammable to kingdom come.

And I encourage this.

By doing so, they point out that there is an obvious problem with them. I've yet to see any AV claim that they want vehicles to provide no opposition on the battlefield.


Perhaps they are doing so because they realize there is an imbalance and know that if they keep brown-nosing people claiming HAVs are OP (despite all of the evidence presented against them) they will receive the nerf-hammer, which I can tell your afraid of.

However, everyone has acknowledged the fact that adjusting the modules will have a effect on LAVs and A/DSs as well. That is why I am pushing to separate all vehicle modules into light and heavy categories, so we can make the balancing process easier.


That statement is an antecdote, but I'll bite down anyways.

No, that is not "untold WP to be had. Killing an HAV only yields 200WP (assuming the driver doesn't jump out like a b!tch). Your working inside a suit that costs over 200k, while having minimal effectiveness against vehicles.

This is New Eden. With risk, comes reward. If you aren't being rewarded for your risk, (200WP is not rewarding when your dying multiple times in 235k ISK).


I switch to a fit when vehicles arrive. It's galled [Gunnlogi] 80GJ Particle Cannon.

Nobody is proposing something that kills a role, nor is there anyone (that I know of) who is calling for an eye-to-eye nerf. Though ironically you were one of the first ones to propose a nerf that would kill AV.

Would you like it if my Swarm Launcher outperformed your 80GJ Railguns?

---

Also, before you call me a child for disagreeing with you, I figured I should put this out in the open.

I am also a pilot. I've been using HAVs and LLAVs since Uprising 1.3, despite them being 'underpowered'. If you want to look at things time and SP wise, I'm actually more of a pilot than I am an AVer.

-HAND

Safer to avoid and ignore but you would like something done . You don't want to put up an effort but you would just like CCP to kill the role of vehicle users , while you sit back and laugh because you had a role killed with no effort on your part to combat the " problem " . This is the problem and most feel this way and that's a even bigger problem . Cap a role ??? So I could suggest that , no more than 2 logi's per match , 3 heavies and 2 scouts while the rest have to be assault's . Does that help ??? I don't think so . If your using a militia FG then that's part of the problem right there .

Some of you people just " fear monger " to the best of your abilities .

This is the weakest tanks have ever been, they have been nerfed every build since closed beta and AV wasn't so you had people in adv assaults with a few AV nades and a swarm soloing 1.2mill isk tanks, the old tankers adapted to OP AV and became deadlyer then ever, ccp finally took notace when all the tankers finnaly yelled louder then the ground pounders and had AV. roflnerfd to oblivion. There was a time where logi lava could run into shield tanks and blow them up even if they had hardeners.

Tanks don't need nerfed, av needs to be brought up to par, the second Av is ohk'ing tanks we loose this third dimension of the game and it becomes dull and boring again

How would limiting the number of tanks possible in a match kill the roll? It certainly didn't kill it in Battlefield. Tanks are deadly there, even with the limited number, they're still a force to be reckoned with. To get more than two or three on most maps though, you have to steal one from the enemy team. Is it the best fix... no. Would it work and solve most of the issues? Probably. All this would mean would be that those two tanks on the field have a lot more to do on their own, just like a pair of logi suits would if they were the only ones to heal on the field. In other words, more WP for them.

And that problem with running a militia forge fun... it doesn't really matter if you're alone. I've got a proto forge with maxed out proficiency and more often than not, I put three or four shots into tanks, only to watch them speed away into the sunset... or on city maps, just go around the next corner while their HP fills up. Dropships on the other hand usually just shoot away after the first shot or two, far our of my maximum range.

Most of the complaints on tanks are far from "fear mongering" There's just currently no way to effectively deal with tank spam short of hiding and hoping everyone on the enemy team who's not running a tank is a horrible player. Now, say, if the battles were larger (Perhaps 32vs32) a bit of tank spam might not be a problem, but with the tiny matches we have now, you have to take into account that not everyone has enough points into AV to effective deal with even a single tank. The amount of militia swarms I see fired at vehicles on a daily basis is hilarious. Even if half a team consisted of competent AV'ers, that leaves eight guys to defend those AV's against a larger infantry force, who, more likely than not, are not gimping their effectiveness against other infantry in order to kill a load of tanks that just got called in.

I can understand what your saying but a cap is like picking and choosing who plays what during a match and if newer players spawn faster and roll out with their militia .. while vets sit on the sidelines this would create more of a problem in my eyes because I would like those who could help the most to do that .

To elaborate on the BF comparison, there you got 2 tanks MAX per side on maps double as large with 32x32 players.
And in pub, you gotta live with the fact someone might spawn a ****** militia tank to be useless and/or die in a minute tops. Because its pub. There is zero point zero coordination in pubs. Nobody in a lifetime would be at a disadvantage if vehicle caps would be put in place. Ever.

And as a side note, your way of articulation hints at possibilty of paranoid schizophrenia. I mean no offense by that, Im just sayan.