| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
405
   |
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
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 .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Cotsy8
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
52
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: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 .
Many players have AV set ups, they just aren't effective against a 3x hardener tank. Furthermore, there's is no 7x tank who are running x3 hardeners AV tactic. This will only get worst when higher tier tanks are released and elite players gain more SP and are able to cap out their tank fittings. Add in a brutal auto spawn system and it leads to a brutal tank spawn trapping system. But elite players don't want this to go, so unless the community pushes hard for it then it won't happen. Tanks in 1.7 were broken yet 1.8 AV was neef'd that makes no sense at all, but when you consider the elite are mostly using the tactic then you can see why nothing constructive gets accomplished (it doesnt favor the elite).
|
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2688
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch
I'll start my own war, with hookers, and blackjack!
In fact forget the war and the blackjack.
|
Sigberct Amni
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
471
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:45:00 -
[4] - Quote
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" |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
405
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
Cotsy8 wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: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 .
Many players have AV set ups, they just aren't effective against a 3x hardener tank. Furthermore, there's is no 7x tank who are running x3 hardeners AV tactic. This will only get worst when higher tier tanks are released and elite players gain more SP and are able to cap out their tank fittings. Add in a brutal auto spawn system and it leads to a brutal tank spawn trapping system. But elite players don't want this to go, so unless the community pushes hard for it then it won't happen. Tanks in 1.7 were broken yet 1.8 AV was neef'd that makes no sense at all, but when you consider the elite are mostly using the tactic then you can see why nothing constructive gets accomplished (it doesnt favor the elite).
Point taken but you will always have those who have more SP's and assets than most , that's just the way it is and actually it makes the game interesting . That's why we should have a discussion though .
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 18:47:00 -
[6] - 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"
If that's what you have taken from what was written then so be it , but I won't correct you either ... I like to see self centered people swim in their own ignorance .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Crimson ShieId
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
240
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:49:00 -
[7] - Quote
There's currently one effective way to destroy a tank at the moment that isn't bringing in another tank, and that way is RE's. Good luck doing that when there are five tanks on the field. Forge guns have gotten too much of a nerf, even soloing a militia tank with a proto forge gun is nearly impossible unless that pilot is exceptionally bad. There's just not much point in trying to AV at this point. Tanks are far more effective than any AV you can pull out short of RE's, and if you're actually trying to use proto, you're risking way more than most tankers trying to kill what is likely a militia tank. At the same time, going with AV makes you nearly useless against infantry, while that tank you're shooting at has no problem tearing apart vehicles and infantry alike.
Fix AV and you fix the problem. Tanks won't be spammed as much because people will be able to kill all those pesky militia tanks with the proto fits they invested in instead of just starting another game of tank spam.
Nova Knives are OP! Nerf em before you lose all your proto suits!
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
405
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:49:00 -
[8] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch
And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion?
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Hecarim Van Hohen
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
651
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:50:00 -
[9] - Quote
I do like the fact that pretty much the only way for infantry to take out an HAV is a PRO FG
Edit
Oh wait, MLT HAV is cheaper to use, lol
BANGO SKANK WAS HERE
1.7 best match (HMG): 40/9/9 (K/A/D)
|
Zahle Undt
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
1046
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 18:56:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tankers who contribute to this debate with more than "Tanks are fine, quit crying and use coordinated AV" are very helpful to this ongoing discussion. They realize that tanks are OP right now and they try to suggest changes to tanks and/or AV that will make things more balanced without actually making tank too UP like they were previous to 1.7.
As an infantry player I actually want the same thing, I want tankers to be viable but I don't want them to be as strong as they are now. Maybe it is just rebuff and fix the swarm launcher, maybe its just a matter of fixing the modules. I don't know but I do know I would do one and then the other, but chances are CCP will do both at once and swing the imbalance the other way. 
Most tankers are like sand people. They frighten easily, but will quickly return...and in greater numbers.
|
|
|
xxwhitedevilxx M
Maphia Clan Corporation
1939
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:19:00 -
[11] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: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 .
True Adamance, as far as I remember, is a tanker and always suggest some kind of rebalance with vehicles.
Tanks are Overpowered, not because they instakill infantry from miles away, but because they hardly get destroyed by proto AV infantry. I had a quick chat with someone in Local stating he "always" destroy a lot of tanks with a PRO assault Forge Gun. From my personal experience with both a full dedicated AV (9 mln SP, Takami Masubi) alt and a full dedicated tank alt (12 mln SP, Sextus Iulius Cocles), I can say with no doubt that any kind of forge gun is easily oneshottable with a railgun (even easier considering only heavies can carry a Forge Gun).
I must say, CCP did a great job in vehicle vs vehicle engagements , but looks like they forgot about infantry, which is the spine of every FPS. It's not by chance if any other fps has a much lower vehicle/infantry rate: think about MAG or Battlefield. MAG had a "domination" APC hard cap of 2 per platoon (32 players) or, if you like, 8 APC on a total of 128 players.
Dust has a vehicle/infatry rate of 6/16.
So simple math: tanks have a great resistance over infantry (a) and they are spammable (b). a + b = broken game.
But it's not over yet: the tank resistance and engage time is proportional to its tier. The more complex modules you put on it, the more resistance you'll gain.
It happened to me only once, but that was enough: people use to complain about MLT tanks spam, but when the enemies spam well-fitted STD tanks, the problem is not only big, it is gigantic.
Considering it takes at least 3 Good AVs to destroy a decent tank, imagine what would happen if you had to face 5 well fitted tanks:
- You could say, call in a rail tank. Nope, there's another rail tank sniping your tank from their redline.
- Switch the entire team to AV. Not always possible, furthermore, you'll still lose the match.
- Jihad Jeeps, still does not guarantee you hit your target considering there are 5 tanks on the opposing team.
>Bastard I : "Cce me ne... futt! XD"
|
Aderek
HavoK Core
RISE of LEGION
70
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:20:00 -
[12] - Quote
I realy only sometimes use tanks. Militia tank cost nothink (in ISK) and every one can use that :)
Why i can kill only 1-2 tanks per battle? Because i cant buy proximity by AUR and i can drop only 9 proximity in trap (normal and adv proximity by ISK).
Fit: prox, nano, prox adv. Switch in depo, make trap, switch to normal suit and ...
SO, WHEN WILL I CAN BUY PROXIMITY BY LOYALITY POINTS AND AUR ? :)
And then, i will can make 3 traps at once ;)
Good hunting !
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
5982
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:22:00 -
[13] - Quote
Reserved.
AV > HAV > INF > AV | Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF
[s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Nothing Certain
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
330
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:27:00 -
[14] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion?
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.
Because, that's why.
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:30:00 -
[15] - Quote
Zahle Undt wrote:Tankers who contribute to this debate with more than "Tanks are fine, quit crying and use coordinated AV" are very helpful to this ongoing discussion. They realize that tanks are OP right now and they try to suggest changes to tanks and/or AV that will make things more balanced without actually making tank too UP like they were previous to 1.7. As an infantry player I actually want the same thing, I want tankers to be viable but I don't want them to be as strong as they are now. Maybe it is just rebuff and fix the swarm launcher, maybe its just a matter of fixing the modules. I don't know but I do know I would do one and then the other, but chances are CCP will do both at once and swing the imbalance the other way.
Sounds about right . I had to like the thought and feed back Zahle .
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
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:33:00 -
[16] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? 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.
Are you kidding me ? HTFU -get good ???
Nothing do you know about me because I dislike the type but if you consider me such then so be it . I won't correct you .
You really had me and I was about to give you a like because I liked what you said , up until that comment .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
I-Shayz-I
I-----I
2610
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:34:00 -
[17] - Quote
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.
___________________________________________
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
Links:
7162 wp with a Repair Tool!
I make logistics videos!
|
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
5982
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:37:00 -
[18] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion?
Insisting that you shouldn't be soloed is childish as well, simply because you belive that you should be better than anyone who's not like you.
That's also racism (in a sense).
You've also yet to supply a solid reason as to why you shouldn't be soloed.
AV > HAV > INF > AV | Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF
[s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:39:00 -
[19] - Quote
I-Shayz-I wrote:Swarms are broken, judge proves it in this video: https://youtu.be/ls7hOEdNgXEAs 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. ___________________________________________ 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
I'm starting to see you posting again and I'm grateful because the more sane , intelligent , thought provoking , true with reason and non biased voices that are in the community the better .
Yourself with a few others bring knowledge to light . Thanks for the feedback .
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
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:45:00 -
[20] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? Insisting that you shouldn't be soloed is childish as well, simply because you belive that you should be better than anyone who's not like you. That's also racism (in a sense). You've also yet to supply a solid reason as to why you shouldn't be soloed.
If that was so much a problem , so much so that CCP made that their mission but not just for HAV usage but for Drop Ships as well then I suppose that CCP is childish as well because they seen it being enough of a problem to address it .
You should not be able to solo a tank unless it's a proto SL or FG and the driver just sits there like a glutton for punishment and inhales the massive amount of damage , while the SL and FG reloads and re-fires . It should not be soloed in one clip and that's what was happening pre 1.6 ( even with militia swarms with damage mods ) so I believe that CCP is headed in the right direction .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
|
|
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2689
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:47:00 -
[21] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion?
Explain how requiring more than one player to kill one other player is good game balance
Also I love the irony of you acting like a child with your replies in this thread but saying its other peoples problem
I'll start my own war, with hookers, and blackjack!
In fact forget the war and the blackjack.
|
Darken-Soul
BIG BAD W0LVES
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
1524
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:48:00 -
[22] - Quote
How many forgers to kill double hardened gunnlogi? 2
For a rep Maddy? 2
triple hardened? 4
hardened Maddy with reps? 2
I can solo vehicles most times but I'm protomax and have been doing it since open beta. I can call in a sica rail and solo vehicles any time. If I start an alt its a tanker. Its guaranteed isk. Faster skill progression and a WPgoldmine. Tanks are still killable for those that don't mind losing money as AV. Just rail for cheap while you collect SP and ISK. AV is not the way to go when fighting vehicles.
Who wants some?
|
Squagga
The State Protectorate
307
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:50:00 -
[23] - Quote
It's not so much that tanks are OP it's that tanks are so cheap to not only aquire but be able to purchase over and over again. One big problem I have with AV is having to fight off the entire enemy team while I'm fighting off a tank. The only weapon I've never used to take down a tank is plasma launcher cause that weapon is fuuuuuucken broken. Not to mention it's Gallente. Also I have to put more points into AV when I'm already skilling into other things, most importantly assault, for me. Again the biggest problem, in my eyes, is the cost. It costs more for a dropsuit loadout than most tanks? The fucks up with that?
Reloading, the silent killer.
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:52:00 -
[24] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? Explain how requiring more than one player to kill one other player is good game balance Also I love the irony of you acting like a child with your replies in this thread but saying its other peoples problem
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 .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Zahle Undt
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
1051
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:55:00 -
[25] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Zahle Undt wrote:Tankers who contribute to this debate with more than "Tanks are fine, quit crying and use coordinated AV" are very helpful to this ongoing discussion. They realize that tanks are OP right now and they try to suggest changes to tanks and/or AV that will make things more balanced without actually making tank too UP like they were previous to 1.7. As an infantry player I actually want the same thing, I want tankers to be viable but I don't want them to be as strong as they are now. Maybe it is just rebuff and fix the swarm launcher, maybe its just a matter of fixing the modules. I don't know but I do know I would do one and then the other, but chances are CCP will do both at once and swing the imbalance the other way. Sounds about right . I had to like the thought and feed back Zahle .
Thanks man, we all sometimes become too self focused on our playstyles and what we run and then we post rage filled butt hurt posts in threads and it all becomes unproductive. We all do it sometimes, but I have friends who are tankers or heavies and while I'll argue on these forums about what is OP. I never want to see something nerfed to useless just so I can have my game easier or my KDR go up. Ideally all vehicles, suits, and weapons would be viable and everyone could play the role they want to play and have fun
Yeesh I am such a hippy today and I haven't even gotten high yet!
Most tankers are like sand people. They frighten easily, but will quickly return...and in greater numbers.
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 19:57:00 -
[26] - Quote
Squagga wrote:It's not so much that tanks are OP it's that tanks are so cheap to not only aquire but be able to purchase over and over again. One big problem I have with AV is having to fight off the entire enemy team while I'm fighting off a tank. The only weapon I've never used to take down a tank is plasma launcher cause that weapon is fuuuuuucken broken. Not to mention it's Gallente. Also I have to put more points into AV when I'm already skilling into other things, most importantly assault, for me. Again the biggest problem, in my eyes, is the cost. It costs more for a dropsuit loadout than most tanks? The fucks up with that?
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 .
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
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:00:00 -
[27] - Quote
Zahle Undt wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Zahle Undt wrote:Tankers who contribute to this debate with more than "Tanks are fine, quit crying and use coordinated AV" are very helpful to this ongoing discussion. They realize that tanks are OP right now and they try to suggest changes to tanks and/or AV that will make things more balanced without actually making tank too UP like they were previous to 1.7. As an infantry player I actually want the same thing, I want tankers to be viable but I don't want them to be as strong as they are now. Maybe it is just rebuff and fix the swarm launcher, maybe its just a matter of fixing the modules. I don't know but I do know I would do one and then the other, but chances are CCP will do both at once and swing the imbalance the other way. Sounds about right . I had to like the thought and feed back Zahle . Thanks man, we all sometimes become too self focused on our playstyles and what we run and then we post rage filled butt hurt posts in threads and it all becomes unproductive. We all do it sometimes, but I have friends who are tankers or heavies and while I'll argue on these forums about what is OP. I never want to see something nerfed to useless just so I can have my game easier or my KDR go up. Ideally all vehicles, suits, and weapons would be viable and everyone could play the role they want to play and have fun Yeesh I am such a hippy today and I haven't even gotten high yet!
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  .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Temias Mercurial
ANGEL FLEET
17
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:01:00 -
[28] - 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. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:03:00 -
[29] - Quote
Temias Mercurial wrote: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.
Another one that the light shines from .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Supernus Gigas
sNk Syndicate
531
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:03:00 -
[30] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: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...
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.
FIRE UP THE HEAVY MEAT GRINDER! WE'RE HAVIN' CLONE BURGERS TONIGHT, BOYS!
|
|
|
Crimson ShieId
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
242
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:04:00 -
[31] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Squagga wrote:It's not so much that tanks are OP it's that tanks are so cheap to not only aquire but be able to purchase over and over again. One big problem I have with AV is having to fight off the entire enemy team while I'm fighting off a tank. The only weapon I've never used to take down a tank is plasma launcher cause that weapon is fuuuuuucken broken. Not to mention it's Gallente. Also I have to put more points into AV when I'm already skilling into other things, most importantly assault, for me. Again the biggest problem, in my eyes, is the cost. It costs more for a dropsuit loadout than most tanks? The fucks up with that? 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 .
Gotta point out the flaw here, even if I "partially" agree with the argument. While SP investment is good, making militia tanks weak like they were before isn't necessarily the answer. Just because I'm using a militia starter frame doesn't mean proto suits should be invincible to my gunfire. Granted, I'll have to play tactically to kill them, a straight up fight is just going to leave me dead, but just because they have more invested doesn't mean they should be invincible to anything below them on the SP tier. The same should go for dropsuits as it goes for tanks. Right now, militia tanks are a bit much for their effectiveness, but they're no where near what an upgraded tank is. Double damage modded rail tanks are about the only argument otherwise, and those are mostly a problem because of the redline.
Nova Knives are OP! Nerf em before you lose all your proto suits!
|
Zahle Undt
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
1053
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:05:00 -
[32] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Zahle Undt wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Zahle Undt wrote:Tankers who contribute to this debate with more than "Tanks are fine, quit crying and use coordinated AV" are very helpful to this ongoing discussion. They realize that tanks are OP right now and they try to suggest changes to tanks and/or AV that will make things more balanced without actually making tank too UP like they were previous to 1.7. As an infantry player I actually want the same thing, I want tankers to be viable but I don't want them to be as strong as they are now. Maybe it is just rebuff and fix the swarm launcher, maybe its just a matter of fixing the modules. I don't know but I do know I would do one and then the other, but chances are CCP will do both at once and swing the imbalance the other way. Sounds about right . I had to like the thought and feed back Zahle . Thanks man, we all sometimes become too self focused on our playstyles and what we run and then we post rage filled butt hurt posts in threads and it all becomes unproductive. We all do it sometimes, but I have friends who are tankers or heavies and while I'll argue on these forums about what is OP. I never want to see something nerfed to useless just so I can have my game easier or my KDR go up. Ideally all vehicles, suits, and weapons would be viable and everyone could play the role they want to play and have fun Yeesh I am such a hippy today and I haven't even gotten high yet! 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 .
BS I'm no role model, I'm a cautionary tale 
Most tankers are like sand people. They frighten easily, but will quickly return...and in greater numbers.
|
Onesimus Tarsus
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
1682
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:06:00 -
[33] - 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"
All HAVs should have a bumper sticker that says, "Yes, I am that afraid of meeting infantry on an equal footing."
And yes, their bumpers are big enough to have that printed legibly.
Unless you're just addicted to wetsuit paperdolls...
|
Squagga
The State Protectorate
307
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:06:00 -
[34] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Squagga wrote:It's not so much that tanks are OP it's that tanks are so cheap to not only aquire but be able to purchase over and over again. One big problem I have with AV is having to fight off the entire enemy team while I'm fighting off a tank. The only weapon I've never used to take down a tank is plasma launcher cause that weapon is fuuuuuucken broken. Not to mention it's Gallente. Also I have to put more points into AV when I'm already skilling into other things, most importantly assault, for me. Again the biggest problem, in my eyes, is the cost. It costs more for a dropsuit loadout than most tanks? The fucks up with that? 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 .
While I do agree with that it shouldn't be just a tank that can take out another tank. What would be the point of having AV? You should't need PRO AV gear to take down a militia tank. Right now being an AV player is just a thankless thankless job. I can't recall who said this earlier in this thread but yes. REs are the only real effective way to take down a tank. Then the tank pilot is so upset because someone was able to knock them off their stupid perch of fighting everyone by themselves with little to no skill involved
Reloading, the silent killer.
|
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2691
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:10:00 -
[35] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? Explain how requiring more than one player to kill one other player is good game balance Also I love the irony of you acting like a child with your replies in this thread but saying its other peoples problem 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 .
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
I'll start my own war, with hookers, and blackjack!
In fact forget the war and the blackjack.
|
Zahle Undt
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
1055
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:12:00 -
[36] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Squagga wrote:It's not so much that tanks are OP it's that tanks are so cheap to not only aquire but be able to purchase over and over again. One big problem I have with AV is having to fight off the entire enemy team while I'm fighting off a tank. The only weapon I've never used to take down a tank is plasma launcher cause that weapon is fuuuuuucken broken. Not to mention it's Gallente. Also I have to put more points into AV when I'm already skilling into other things, most importantly assault, for me. Again the biggest problem, in my eyes, is the cost. It costs more for a dropsuit loadout than most tanks? The fucks up with that? 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 .
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.
Most tankers are like sand people. They frighten easily, but will quickly return...and in greater numbers.
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:13:00 -
[37] - Quote
Supernus Gigas wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: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...
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.
It's counterproductive to place the massive amount of skill points into vehicles , only to lobby to have that same role nerfed . There are other ways to deal with issues other than nerfs and buffs . It seems to not work so far because you have to keep following up with more additional nerfs/buffs in order to fix what was adjusted , which results in more lab work and fixing .
My problems are with killing mods because they effect much more than HAV's . I have ADS's and LAV's that I use to pass intel , combat other ADS's and Derps , as well as being one of those heavies who hop out the LAV MDing and HMGing the enemy also I use my LAV's to lay traps and A.V. so to effect mods in an attempt to quell HAV's will have an effect on all vehicles .
I keep saying I'm not a tanker but a vehicle user because I do it all .
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
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:16:00 -
[38] - Quote
Zahle , I keep saying what you just did about prices and I warn people about asking for price increases because we haven't even seen the ADV or PRO HAV's yet and the enforcers were in the millions of isk , now couple that with mods and turrets and if you loose a few of those you will go broke in one match , unless your one of these players with hundreds of millions of isk and that's truly not me .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Squagga
The State Protectorate
307
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:17:00 -
[39] - Quote
Zahle Undt wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Squagga wrote:It's not so much that tanks are OP it's that tanks are so cheap to not only aquire but be able to purchase over and over again. One big problem I have with AV is having to fight off the entire enemy team while I'm fighting off a tank. The only weapon I've never used to take down a tank is plasma launcher cause that weapon is fuuuuuucken broken. Not to mention it's Gallente. Also I have to put more points into AV when I'm already skilling into other things, most importantly assault, for me. Again the biggest problem, in my eyes, is the cost. It costs more for a dropsuit loadout than most tanks? The fucks up with that? 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 . 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.
I believe that people who invest the majority of their sp into something should be rewarded with their health and damage. This needs to be balanced, especially concerning the militia gear. This goes for tankers and AVers
Reloading, the silent killer.
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
406
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 20:20:00 -
[40] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? Explain how requiring more than one player to kill one other player is good game balance Also I love the irony of you acting like a child with your replies in this thread but saying its other peoples problem 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 . 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
It would be childish to allow myself to be baited into an argument and that's part of the reason why I didn't answer nor will I answer your questions . It's all about your approach .
So " you win " if that's what you want to hear .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
|
|
Nothing Certain
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 23:39:00 -
[41] - Quote
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.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 23:44:00 -
[42] - Quote
I-Shayz-I wrote:Swarms are broken, judge proves it in this video: https://youtu.be/ls7hOEdNgXEAs 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
I didn't want to quote the whole thing but phones make it hard to edit. The primary disadvantage to a PLAYER using a tank is not really a disadvantage since they can jump in and out of their tank and have every ability any other player has. This is something that should not be allowed as well.
Because, that's why.
|
Travis Stanush
GunFall Mobilization
30
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 23:59:00 -
[43] - Quote
Frankly I do believe tanks are OP but simply buffing AV will screw over every other vehicle. Judges vid showed that using multiple hard enters on a vehicle makes them mostly indestructible to everything but tanks with rails. They will have to put a cap on the # of hardeners they can use AND they will have to change the innate resistances they posses. Once they do that THEN we should be more closely balanced to where we need and WANT to be.
As a tanker during 1.6 I will tell you AV was too powerful. Now milita tanks can out preform most any AV. |
Atiim
Living Like Larry Schwag
5991
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 00:08:00 -
[44] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: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 .
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.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:
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 .
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.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:
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 .
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).
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:
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 .
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
AV > HAV > INF > AV | Not: HAV > AV GëÑ INF
[s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Skihids
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
3097
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 00:24:00 -
[45] - Quote
CCP will never balance things as long as they force tanks and infantry to compete for the same role.
That said, I'm going tanking in 1.8 since I've got so much tied up in Vehicle upgrades and redline rails are preventing me from flying so I need another outlet. I went road kill Logi LAV last time this happened, but that's no longer an option. By my rough calculation a perma hardened Maddy should cost less than my ADS so that looks like the way to go. |
Shadow Archeus
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
336
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 00:27:00 -
[46] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: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 .
OK.....r u done......the reason nobody switches fits to counter have is because av weapons are JUNK right now especially when tanks can have 3 hardeners on them....
Real heavies use lasers
|
Hynox Xitio
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
745
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 00:31:00 -
[47] - Quote
All this is false, this is the real reason.
Unleash the Fogwoggler
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
412
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 04:48:00 -
[48] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote: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.
It's cool . I wasn't placing blame on A.V. though as I have Proto swarms , use a.v. grenades and also PM's and RE's . I did say that I don't see players addressing tank spam by using A.V. but I see a lot of QQing on the forums .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Beeeees
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
468
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 05:46:00 -
[49] - Quote
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.
TOLD514
|
Rusty Shallows
1188
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 07:41:00 -
[50] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? 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.
There is no consensus on Forge Guns. Stop trying to whitewash it.
Here, have some candy and a Like. :-)
Forums > Game
|
|
|
bear90211
Nyain San
173
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 09:03:00 -
[51] - Quote
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.
Heavies are still squishy to my AR, just 5 rounds into them extra ;D
hmm, I want taco's...
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
414
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 14:54:00 -
[52] - Quote
bear90211 wrote: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.
I remember seeing you and yourself and a few others sparked my interest in HAV's ( so I thank you ) but that being said 1.6 A.V. grenades were a beast . I use to see players crush tanks with just grenades , not even having to fire a single SL salvo .. so that might be a little too much .
With the changes in 1.8 with damage mods ( thank god because a lot of players who talk about crutches are about to have one kicked out from under them ... I applaud you CCP ) I can see a buff to SL's and FG's but not much is needed . Too much of a tweaking could lead one down that road of buff / nerf for another year and that's not good because you would still have those in the forums complaining one way or another . I would leave FG's and SL's the way they are now for 1.8 , with an increase to SL's range and a slight reduction to lock times . See how that plays out for now and watch the results . The codes are already in now so they wouldn't have to change much .
Glad to have your input .
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
414
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 15:01:00 -
[53] - Quote
Beeeees wrote: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.
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 .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Sev Alcatraz
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
449
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 15:07:00 -
[54] - Quote
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
closed beta vet-E3
MAXIMUM ARMOR
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
414
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 15:16:00 -
[55] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: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 . 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. Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:
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 .
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. Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:
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 .
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
It seems by everything that you speak of , that this is by choice . You choose this or that but that doesn't constitute a solution , just " your solution or your choice to act or not to " and this doesn't equate to a problem . A problem is undeniable , while you choose how you react ... if you act at all . We could all play tit for tat all day ( well you can I won't waste my time ) while matters still do not get the attention deserved . I have yet to read ANYTHING constructive by yourself in concerns to vehicle use . Like I said before , " Say what you will about me but you have yet to contribute anything positive to this discussion or any about vehicles in general " .
Come with reasonable solutions , not your own ill will which isn't contributing in the least . Most of your post about vehicles and vehicle users , bash the role and their worth . I read your forum pieces and find nothing but propaganda and fear mongering .
Some people I just choose not to comment to given their track record .
All you do is choose to be disruptive and negative at every turn .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Crimson ShieId
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
255
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 15:16:00 -
[56] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Beeeees wrote: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. 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 .
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.
Nova Knives are OP! Nerf em before you lose all your proto suits!
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
414
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 15:20:00 -
[57] - Quote
Sev Alcatraz wrote: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
Understood and true . People seem to forget how easy it was to kill a tank , or better yet ... they remember and scream for those days again where they could make skill points less effective ( worthless role and SP sink ) and kill your isk account making you so broke that you can't field a tank .
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
414
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 15:30:00 -
[58] - Quote
Crimson ShieId wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Beeeees wrote: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. 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 . 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.
Understood but I see accomplished players in militia fits , it " saves them money " so when I see someone in militia .. I don't know if they just started or not so I for one , treat them all the same .
I have had run in's with these same players and then I write about it ( me being in the wrong ) believing them to be new players but their weapons would be way more effective then I remember militia being . I treat anyone using militia , like they are in prototype because of how most approach the game . You just can't write about how you use militia this or that and it's not having said effect because .. it is militia .
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 .
No knock to newer players .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Beeeees
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
471
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 22:20:00 -
[59] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:
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.
TOLD514
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
415
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 23:54:00 -
[60] - Quote
Beeeees wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:
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.
Understood . I have the right to be when every other post is about how tanks are killing the game and players are suggesting changes that would effect a role that most do not play . It's like me ... myself trying to tell CCP about scouts or scouting , I would be wrong for that because I'm totally out of my element .. so whatever I would suggest would more than likely do more harm than good .
Players who have very few skill points , if any .. trying to comment about the state of vehicles . Players who don't A.V. speaking about the problems with SL's and A.V. in general . Can you see where I'm going ??? What comes out of this scenario will do more harm than good .
I would not like my skill points locked into a useless role . I already have enough equipment that is useless ... items that I specked into from lack there of and needed to compete . Now with racial parity things will become more clear now .
No offense taken because it's partially true somewhat . Thank you for your feedback .
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
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 00:00:00 -
[61] - Quote
Also a cap might do more harm than good as well seeing as how , the enemies might spawn tanks ... while the team your on is calling for militia drop ships and LAV's . Can you tell me that would seem interesting to you , seeing as how a lot of players choose not to combat " tank spam " with A.V. also , like what was stated before .. some just don't have the skill points to speck or they just read the forums and decide that specking into SL's would be a waste .
You would just be stuck with no way out .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Crimson ShieId
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
263
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 04:09:00 -
[62] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Also a cap might do more harm than good as well seeing as how , the enemies might spawn tanks ... while the team your on is calling for militia drop ships and LAV's . Can you tell me that would seem interesting to you , seeing as how a lot of players choose not to combat " tank spam " with A.V. also , like what was stated before .. some just don't have the skill points to speck or they just read the forums and decide that specking into SL's would be a waste .
You would just be stuck with no way out .
I see where you're coming from. I know I've had a few games where I wanted to call in a LAV or dropship to get to the objective or set up a few drop uplinks around the map, but the quota had already been reached and I had to run all the way to the objective. It's annoying, to say the least. As for the cap, it would obviously need to be set on something like two or three tanks max per game, with dropships and LAV's sharing a different pool to avoid a bunch of LAV's being called in and completely disabling a team's tanking ability.
As for the militia bit, if they're that bad, they won't last long and you can then call in your vehicle after they die. Or be a douche and find a way to get them killed quicker
In the end though, CCP will likely go overboard like they usually do and nerf or buff things into oblivion. They really should take some tips from Dice when it comes to balancing, because as is, they can never seem to get it right (Though 1.6 was definitely better in terms of vehicles, assuming of course you had your fitting all worked out) 
Nova Knives are OP! Nerf em before you lose all your proto suits!
|
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
86
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 04:20:00 -
[63] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion?
He's mad that he can't solo another player 1 to 1. Russian Tanks were getting wrecked by German children at the end of world war 2, we have portable weaponry that will wreck tanks in modern warfare let alone in a space age universe like eve.
I don't mind tanks taking team work to kill if they would quit being hypocrites and require teamwork to operate.
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.
I'll call your av needs teamwork and raise you a tanks should require teamwork too.
I literally have a notepad doc saved as tank QQ for how often you guys completely ignore the hypocrisy and claim some bullshit realism that is in fact false. The only time tanks are deployed now is when the enemy can only throw spit wads. If Russia and the US went to war right now, tanks are going to be useless, they would only grow to be more obsolete in an era of Space Warfare, but in that respect this whole game is pointless just like EVE is using WW2 era naval tactics when warfare would have evolved far beyond such crude methods as blowing your opponents to pieces. You are in a hostile environment called space where your opponents are dependant on life support derp, you don't need to blow them apart conventionally. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 05:57:00 -
[64] - Quote
JLAV's are one v.s. one if done right and that method was not used until 1.7 .
HAV's should not be required to have multiple operators unless that is required for LAV's and Drop ships .
Not having to fit turrets was one of the best things that CCP could have done in their revamp of vehicles for 1.7 . I was a big opponent of that suggestion but now I see the light . I drove tanks that had PRO turrets during 1.6 and those who manned turrets were some of the problems of HAV users . Shooting at everything except other HAV's and threats , also they would bail in the middle of tank battles and troop engagements .... not knowing the outcome , knowing what mods were fitted and not trusting that said knowledge or experience of the HAV operator .
Having turrets shoot at friendly troops , buildings or the MCC more than the enemies was a big problem and actually it still is .. even with ammo exceptions . I hop out from time to time to deal with A.V. while driving and if HAV's are forced to have multiple users then vehicle robberies will become more of a problem , hell ... I fly I drop hives and uplinks , when I do I frequently have to worry about someone flying off with my Dropships and that's a problem that shouldn't be while trying to help that same team to victory .
You have selfish players who care nothing about winning ... why reward them and that's what would happen . It seems like most people that play this game make suggestions that are not well thought out in regards of others and that's no surprise when you have team killers in FW , players who hop in someone's vehicle .. waiting for them to jump out , so they can ride off leaving it's owner . These are known issues of vehicle users .
If I'm not a logi , then I shouldn't have to use my skill points to build up someone else's playing experience .
People who suggest such are not vehicle users because vehicle user know the problems that they face .
Why are players crossing lines trying to influence changes to roles that they do not play ?
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Crimson ShieId
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
265
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 08:57:00 -
[65] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:JLAV's are one v.s. one if done right and that method was not used until 1.7 .
HAV's should not be required to have multiple operators unless that is required for LAV's and Drop ships .
Not having to fit turrets was one of the best things that CCP could have done in their revamp of vehicles for 1.7 . I was a big opponent of that suggestion but now I see the light . I drove tanks that had PRO turrets during 1.6 and those who manned turrets were some of the problems of HAV users . Shooting at everything except other HAV's and threats , also they would bail in the middle of tank battles and troop engagements .... not knowing the outcome , knowing what mods were fitted and not trusting that said knowledge or experience of the HAV operator . Why hop in , for the ride ??? Or maybe it's the chance to ride off with the vehicle if the user hops out to deal with opposing troops .
Having turrets shoot at friendly troops , buildings or the MCC more than the enemies was a big problem and actually it still is .. even with ammo exceptions . I hop out from time to time to deal with A.V. while driving and if HAV's are forced to have multiple users then vehicle robberies will become more of a problem , hell ... I fly I drop hives and uplinks , when I do I frequently have to worry about someone flying off with my Dropships and that's a problem that shouldn't be while trying to help that same team to victory .
You have selfish players who care nothing about winning ... why reward them and that's what would happen . It seems like most people that play this game make suggestions that are not well thought out in regards of others and that's no surprise when you have team killers in FW , players who hop in someone's vehicle .. waiting for them to jump out , so they can ride off leaving it's owner . These are known issues of vehicle users .
If I'm not a logi , then I shouldn't have to use my skill points to build up someone else's playing experience .
People who suggest such are not vehicle users because vehicle users know the problems that they face .
Why are players crossing lines trying to influence changes to roles that they do not play ?
I'm not entirely sure whether you wanted this directed at a single person or everyone here, but eh...
There are always going to be selfish players in games, it's the internet (Poor excuse perhaps, but true) no matter what game you play, you're going to come across trolls and people who's who goal in the game is to try and ruin the experience of others. CCP knew it would happen when they introduced friendly fire in factional warfare. Heck, I had a tank try to run over a LAV I'd stolen earlier today in an attempt to kill me. He nearly succeeded too, and I've had a few cases of teamkillers (attempted and otherwise) in factional warfare. I've never intentionally shot someone there, but I have attempted to troll a few players, and I've gotten teamkills (accidental, like running over someone with a tank) as well as a few intentional road kills against friendly LAV's during moments of boredom. That can't be stopped, no matter how hard you try, it's going to happen, you can either rage or let it slide away, retaliate perhaps if that's your thing (Teamkilling works both ways) The vehicle thefts are annoying too, but until we get vehicle locks, that's going to remain as well, unfortunately...
So far in this thread alone, I've seen a few decent suggestions, and quite a few more as a whole among the community. Some good, some bad, but there have definitely been suggestions that could fix the current problem. The only thing left to do is see if CCP does the right thing and finds a way to balance things so both sides can enjoy themselves. People are going to complain no matter what though. Take 1.8 for example, everyone wants a respec, they get a dropsuit respec, now more complaints are going out for a full respec. You simply can't please everyone.
And, as for that last bit... I don't personally know how many people have spent time with HAV's (fighting them or otherwise) but I started tanking a few months before Uprising. I fell in love with it. When the respec hit, I still loved it, but I was always broke. Tanks were expensive and AV was powerful. A single person with a proto swarm or forge gun could send me running. On the other hand though, even though I didn't use hardeners, I could sit there and tank half the team if they were running militia swarms. Even advanced swarms didn't really phase me that much. It was only when the proto came out that I got worried, which technically made sense as I only had an advanced vehicle (Real shame that proto tanks weren't better or I would have invested in them) So, long story short, I've got a fair bit of experience with tanks. I specced out of them when 1.7 hit and haven't had an interest since, but that doesn't mean I don't want them to be balanced, just like the majority of players on here.
P.S. I believe CCP said that the JLAV thing was a mistake and I think they may be removing it come 1.8, though I'm not entirely certain. It's currently one of those things that I think should stay unless the prices of tanks go back up, but I doubt it will and I just hope things will be balanced before they remove it. Until then...
*Primes flux grenades and checks RE's* I'll see all you lovely rolling death machines on the battlefield.
Nova Knives are OP! Nerf em before you lose all your proto suits!
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 14:21:00 -
[66] - Quote
Crimson Shield I can comply with a lot of what you are saying and thanks for saying what you have about this thread .
Now that was my goal , be it not well written and put together but sometimes a start is all that is needed to get the ball rolling .
I really appreciate that comment . Yes there are some good ideals and suggestions from the community which for the most part , comes together when a real problem arises and I'm thankful for that .
Respec is another topic and I don't want this locked or moved as I can agree with those who call for a full infantry refund , seeing as how bonuses have changed , suits are introduced along with the side arms and play styles are changing as well and no one should be forced to have the experienced slighted by having SP's locked into items that they HAD to speck into from lack of want ( a short time ago we had just two types of AR's as an example ) and a willingness to compete to survive .
The players know who I'm speaking about in concerns of changing a role that they have zero experience in or knowledge of . There aren't that many players that are dedicated just to vehicles , where that's their main role . Most play an infantry role more than anything else , so I just would like to have consideration and thought placed into suggestions so you don't have players asking for a SP refund because their role has been nerfed to nothing .
I for one would not be one of those players who could " work around it " and to me that's just a selfish way of thinking and it stagnates competition from having SP's locked into a useless void . CCP should desire that their players have the " Best Gamming Experience allowed " and I believe that , you just cant do that with SP's locked into useless items and a useless role ( threw changes to the game and threw no fault of the player ) when there are others who enjoy their experience fully because of content issues .
Thanks again C.S. I really appreciate what was said .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Altus Nox
FACTION WARFARE ARMY
FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE
17
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 14:50:00 -
[67] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion?
I personally am not mad that I can't solo a tank. I'm mad that over multiple lives of nothing but dedicated attacks on a single tank. It WILL NOT DIE. There is no single piece of AV tech that can reliably kill a tank without millions of SP invested, which to a new player trying to get core upgrades finished, is impossible. Hell I managed to stick 3 REs on an oblivious tanker, all right on the weak point. 1/3rd of his health left. Just drove away. I had specifically wasted SP on getting into demolitions for this purpose. It is still a waste of time.
For some unknown reason militia HAVs are the only counter CCP feels the need to put into the game for new players right now. Top it all off it is only going to get worse come 1.8. That it was they are everywhere. People aren't going to roll over and let you stomp them forever.
-Omnes una manet Nox
(The same night awaits us all)
|
Crimson ShieId
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
268
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:04:00 -
[68] - Quote
Quote:I personally am not mad that I can't solo a tank. I'm mad that over multiple lives of nothing but dedicated attacks on a single tank. It WILL NOT DIE. There is no single piece of AV tech that can reliably kill a tank without millions of SP invested, which to a new player trying to get core upgrades finished, is impossible. Hell I managed to stick 3 REs on an oblivious tanker, all right on the weak point. 1/3rd of his health left. Just drove away. I had specifically wasted SP on getting into demolitions for this purpose. It is still a waste of time.
For some unknown reason militia HAVs are the only counter CCP feels the need to put into the game for new players right now. Top it all off it is only going to get worse come 1.8. That it was they are everywhere. People aren't going to roll over and let you stomp them forever.
Just gonna toss this out there, seeing as you brought up RE's. This is the one effective AV method at the moment, but you need to get a routine going when you do it. RE's don't do quite enough damage, even at the weak point on a tank (Which is kinda silly) to kill them with three alone. Next time you're going out, grab some flux grenades or packed AV (Lv 1 or 2 is grenadier is all you need, that's only a few thousand extra SP) and hit the vehicle with a grenade after you get your RE's. Make sure you've still got them out, and immediately after the grenade hits, detonate the RE's. Assuming you got all three on the weak point, a single flux will ensure that only two things survive (A hardened tank and a Gunlogi with a shield extender) and since most people run Madrugers and Somas, this is a cheap and nearly 100% effective way of dealing with tanks. Note that all this works best in a scout suit, but if you're not using a scout, I'd recommend a pair of complex dampeners to ensure they can't get you with their scanners.
Nova Knives are OP! Nerf em before you lose all your proto suits!
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:05:00 -
[69] - Quote
Altus Nox wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? There is no single piece of AV tech that can reliably kill a tank without millions of SP invested, which to a new player trying to get core upgrades finished, is impossible.
As a newer player you are always going to play catch up , just face it . There's no need in even stating that .
I'm in the same boat but I love it because it's a challenge and I know with hard work I will overcome that .
Vehicle user have many more skill points invested and before 1.7 , it took ... so it seems , a lot more only to have some one with a militia swarm and some basic A.V. grenades to come and kill that investment and role . Be happy that your not fighting to have your role nerfed . Players just started using PM's and RE's on a regular , except for those dedicated to A.V. which like now .. are very few . Hell before 1.7.. I can't recall seeing some die in the kill feed by a RE or PM .
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
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:10:00 -
[70] - Quote
Crimson ShieId wrote:Quote:I personally am not mad that I can't solo a tank. I'm mad that over multiple lives of nothing but dedicated attacks on a single tank. It WILL NOT DIE. There is no single piece of AV tech that can reliably kill a tank without millions of SP invested, which to a new player trying to get core upgrades finished, is impossible. Hell I managed to stick 3 REs on an oblivious tanker, all right on the weak point. 1/3rd of his health left. Just drove away. I had specifically wasted SP on getting into demolitions for this purpose. It is still a waste of time.
For some unknown reason militia HAVs are the only counter CCP feels the need to put into the game for new players right now. Top it all off it is only going to get worse come 1.8. That it was they are everywhere. People aren't going to roll over and let you stomp them forever. Just gonna toss this out there, seeing as you brought up RE's. This is the one effective AV method at the moment, but you need to get a routine going when you do it. RE's don't do quite enough damage, even at the weak point on a tank (Which is kinda silly) to kill them with three alone. Next time you're going out, grab some flux grenades or packed AV (Lv 1 or 2 is grenadier is all you need, that's only a few thousand extra SP) and hit the vehicle with a grenade after you get your RE's. Make sure you've still got them out, and immediately after the grenade hits, detonate the RE's. Assuming you got all three on the weak point, a single flux will ensure that only two things survive (A hardened tank and a Gunlogi with a shield extender) and since most people run Madrugers and Somas, this is a cheap and nearly 100% effective way of dealing with tanks. Note that all this works best in a scout suit, but if you're not using a scout, I'd recommend a pair of complex dampeners to ensure they can't get you with their scanners.
What your suggesting use to happen to me a lot pre 1.7 ( swarms with fluxes ) and it seems like most have forgotten to use that method because they became complacent by being use to easily killing HAV's .
I guess those who were dedicated knew what they were doing .
There is a method to the madness .
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
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:15:00 -
[71] - Quote
Another thing that I have a problem with is the fact that the map and passive scanners have a problem with picking up tanks at times , also looking with my eye .. it seems like they have a invisible mode , like the swarms pre 1.7 . Now I don't know if that has something to do with rendering , which has gotten much better but this needs to be addressed and has been brought up on several occasions .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Crimson ShieId
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
269
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:15:00 -
[72] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Altus Nox wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? There is no single piece of AV tech that can reliably kill a tank without millions of SP invested, which to a new player trying to get core upgrades finished, is impossible. As a newer player you are always going to play catch up , just face it . There's no need in even stating that . I'm in the same boat but I love it because it's a challenge and I know with hard work I will overcome that . Vehicle user have many more skill points invested and before 1.7 , it took ... so it seems , a lot more only to have some one with a militia swarm and some basic A.V. grenades to come and kill that investment and role . Be happy that your not fighting to have your role nerfed . Players just started using PM's and RE's on a regular , except for those dedicated to A.V. which like now .. are very few . Hell before 1.7.. I can't recall seeing some die in the kill feed by a RE or PM .
RE's, sadly, didn't stick before, so they were essentially only good for guarding an installation or two. 
I've gotta wonder though, what kind of tank were you using, dying to militia swarms? I only had about 4 million invested in tanks (Didn't even have hardeners) and I could tank militia swarms all day long. Two heavy reppers usually kept me going long enough to clear out any infantry. It was only when the advanced and prototype started coming along that I got worried... though... I did have at least one time where two people with militia swarms kept strafing in and out of cover behind a supply depot. I sat there too long like an idiot and they actually managed to wear me down and kill me. Probably one of the only times I ever died to anything that wasn't advanced or proto, but it really was my own fault in that case. I could have just driven away and waited for them to come after me instead of sitting there trying to hit a few strafers. 
Nova Knives are OP! Nerf em before you lose all your proto suits!
|
Crimson ShieId
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
269
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:18:00 -
[73] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Another thing that I have a problem with is the fact that the map and passive scanners have a problem with picking up tanks at times , also looking with my eye .. it seems like they have a invisible mode , like the swarms pre 1.7 . Now I don't know if that has something to do with rendering , which has gotten much better but this needs to be addressed and has been brought up on several occasions .
I believe someone stated this had to do to vehicles having their suit's scan profile.  It's something that I don't think CCP is even going to bother to address, but from what I've heard, every vehicle has the scan profile of the suit that's piloting it instead of its' own profile, so most suits can't detect them. I can see them fine on my scanning scout's passive radar, so I'm pretty sure this isn't a rumor. Why it hasn't been fixed yet, I have no idea.
Nova Knives are OP! Nerf em before you lose all your proto suits!
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:21:00 -
[74] - Quote
Crimson ShieId wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Altus Nox wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion? There is no single piece of AV tech that can reliably kill a tank without millions of SP invested, which to a new player trying to get core upgrades finished, is impossible. As a newer player you are always going to play catch up , just face it . There's no need in even stating that . I'm in the same boat but I love it because it's a challenge and I know with hard work I will overcome that . Vehicle user have many more skill points invested and before 1.7 , it took ... so it seems , a lot more only to have some one with a militia swarm and some basic A.V. grenades to come and kill that investment and role . Be happy that your not fighting to have your role nerfed . Players just started using PM's and RE's on a regular , except for those dedicated to A.V. which like now .. are very few . Hell before 1.7.. I can't recall seeing some die in the kill feed by a RE or PM . RE's, sadly, didn't stick before, so they were essentially only good for guarding an installation or two. I've gotta wonder though, what kind of tank were you using, dying to militia swarms? I only had about 4 million invested in tanks (Didn't even have hardeners) and I could tank militia swarms all day long. Two heavy reppers usually kept me going long enough to clear out any infantry. It was only when the advanced and prototype started coming along that I got worried... though... I did have at least one time where two people with militia swarms kept strafing in and out of cover behind a supply depot. I sat there too long like an idiot and they actually managed to wear me down and kill me. Probably one of the only times I ever died to anything that wasn't advanced or proto, but it really was my own fault in that case. I could have just driven away and waited for them to come after me instead of sitting there trying to hit a few strafers.
Man you wouldn't believe it . They use to come out of nowhere , much more than now . I use to have three and four players throwing Lai Dai's and fluxes while the SL's finished the job . I must have had bad luck running into A.V. squads ... unlike now .
It just seemed like back then players were amped up to take out tanks .
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
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:23:00 -
[75] - Quote
Crimson ShieId wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Another thing that I have a problem with is the fact that the map and passive scanners have a problem with picking up tanks at times , also looking with my eye .. it seems like they have a invisible mode , like the swarms pre 1.7 . Now I don't know if that has something to do with rendering , which has gotten much better but this needs to be addressed and has been brought up on several occasions . I believe someone stated this had to do to vehicles having their suit's scan profile. It's something that I don't think CCP is even going to bother to address, but from what I've heard, every vehicle has the scan profile of the suit that's piloting it instead of its' own profile, so most suits can't detect them. I can see them fine on my scanning scout's passive radar, so I'm pretty sure this isn't a rumor. Why it hasn't been fixed yet, I have no idea.
Wow . Now that I did not know . Thanks for the info and yeah that's crazy except for scouts .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Lanius Pulvis
Bullet Cluster
204
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 15:42:00 -
[76] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Delta 749 wrote:I like how you rant about people not using AV when AV is broken and I dont mean UP I mean some of it is fundamentally broken and then you whine about people using militia tanks instead of AV when tanks are better for tank busting and cheaper as well
But hey, blame everyone else, its not you using something broken as a crutch And it seems like your mad that you can't solo a tank anymore . Now does this sound like children arguing or can the adults come out to have a discussion?
Actually, even though I'm interested in a well reasoned discussion, Delta is correct, swarms at least are broken with respect to damage application. As far as changes to fix the problem, I would like to see the module tiers progress in both resistance and cooldown time. In addition militia heavy turrets should have their damage reduced slightly, I'm thinking 10%.
Currently militia modules don't give signifigantly different performance from proto, so the biggest difference between tankers and scrub-tankers (other than ability) is an extra module. This needs to change, but as long as it's more beneficial to stack hardeners, use of modules that do have a gradation to their performance, i.e. extenders or plates, will not change the dynamics of tanking. This is entirely leaving aside the issue of redline rails, I think most real tankers call bullshit on that tactic.
As to AV, I'm a dropship pilot and Assault FG user. Swarms = broken, FG = balanced against dropships, but tanks can typically use cover and speed to evade, PLC = not widely used and same issues versus tanks as FG. We have a mechanic that slows infantry while taking fire, and dropships typically lose some momentum as well, but I have seen no such issue in tanks. Can a tanker confirm this? Perhaps this could be a part of the AV/V balance fix, along with fixing swarms.
Not new, just new to you.
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
4592
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 16:11:00 -
[77] - Quote
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. |
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
96
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:09:00 -
[78] - Quote
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. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:14:00 -
[79] - Quote
Does it take teamwork to kill a heavy in most cases ??? Will it take teamwork to kill heavies and sentinels in 1.8 ??? Unless your a heavy I would think so for the most part , even more so the fact that damage mods will be changing .
But I guess come Monday we will see .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
96
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:21:00 -
[80] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Does it take teamwork to kill a heavy in most cases ??? Will it take teamwork to kill heavies and sentinels in 1.8 ??? Unless your a heavy I would think so for the most part , even more so the fact that damage mods will be changing .
But I guess come Monday we will see .
You need to infantry more bro, it doesn't take heavies or groups to kill heavies, if you blindside them they are dead before they can turn around, which is likely as they are slow moving and slow turning. Tanks though? I can blind side one of those with my proto forge gun and there's still a good chance that they can mow me down or one shot me before I kill them in the 20 seconds it takes with their hardeners up. You have to try to fail (IE sit there and not retreat or shoot them) in a tank to die to a solo av.
But you see that's why people hate tanks, because you guys are so disillusioned that you actually think a scout/assualt suit fighting a heavy is in the same ballpark as a swarm/plc/forge fighting a tank. Many weapons can insta gib a heavy and you can outrun them. You can't outrun tanks and the one weapon that can insta gib, the remote mine field, is immobile or requires the tank to sit there and let you stick explosives to them. In your analogy terms, that would be like a heavy suit letting an assault suit rifle butt them to death. You can jihad jeep but they are removing stickies in 1.8 because CCP won't stop listening to bad advice, because all it took was seeing the target and shooting it to blow them up. If jihad jeeps were OP then so are scouts with shotguns. |
|
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
416
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:24:00 -
[81] - Quote
TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Does it take teamwork to kill a heavy in most cases ??? Will it take teamwork to kill heavies and sentinels in 1.8 ??? Unless your a heavy I would think so for the most part , even more so the fact that damage mods will be changing .
But I guess come Monday we will see . You need to infantry more bro, it doesn't take heavies or groups to kill heavies, if you blindside them they are dead before they can turn around, which is likely as they are slow moving and slow turning. Tanks though? I can blind side one of those with my proto forge gun and there's still a good chance that they can mow me down or one shot me before I kill them in the 20 seconds it takes with their hardeners up. You have to try to fail (IE sit there and not retreat or shoot them) in a tank to die to a solo av. But you see that's why people hate tanks, because you guys are so disillusioned that you actually think a scout/assualt suit fighting a heavy is in the same ballpark as a swarm/plc/forge fighting a tank. Many weapons can insta gib a heavy and you can outrun them. You can't outrun tanks and the one weapon that can insta gib, the remote mine field, is immobile or requires the tank to sit there and let you stick explosives to them. In your analogy terms, that would be like a heavy suit letting an assault suit rifle butt them to death. You can jihad jeep but they are removing stickies in 1.8 because CCP won't stop listening to bad advice, because all it took was seeing the target and shooting it to blow them up. If jihad jeeps were OP then so are scouts with shotguns.
Can you defeat a heavy alone ... in a suit that's not bricked out or as a scout with a maxed out shotgun ??? If not then you have your answer and whatever you write truly has no merit .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
Temias Mercurial
ANGEL FLEET
24
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:28:00 -
[82] - 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.
|
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
96
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:39:00 -
[83] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Does it take teamwork to kill a heavy in most cases ??? Will it take teamwork to kill heavies and sentinels in 1.8 ??? Unless your a heavy I would think so for the most part , even more so the fact that damage mods will be changing .
But I guess come Monday we will see . You need to infantry more bro, it doesn't take heavies or groups to kill heavies, if you blindside them they are dead before they can turn around, which is likely as they are slow moving and slow turning. Tanks though? I can blind side one of those with my proto forge gun and there's still a good chance that they can mow me down or one shot me before I kill them in the 20 seconds it takes with their hardeners up. You have to try to fail (IE sit there and not retreat or shoot them) in a tank to die to a solo av. But you see that's why people hate tanks, because you guys are so disillusioned that you actually think a scout/assualt suit fighting a heavy is in the same ballpark as a swarm/plc/forge fighting a tank. Many weapons can insta gib a heavy and you can outrun them. You can't outrun tanks and the one weapon that can insta gib, the remote mine field, is immobile or requires the tank to sit there and let you stick explosives to them. In your analogy terms, that would be like a heavy suit letting an assault suit rifle butt them to death. You can jihad jeep but they are removing stickies in 1.8 because CCP won't stop listening to bad advice, because all it took was seeing the target and shooting it to blow them up. If jihad jeeps were OP then so are scouts with shotguns. Can you defeat a heavy alone ... in a suit that's not bricked out or as a scout with a maxed out shotgun ??? If not then you have your answer and whatever you write truly has no merit .
You should read what you quote, Spoilers I can, so can many people who infantry bro. A CR, RR, AR, LR (at a distance), SR, SMG, ScR, and ScP can, you just have to not be bad, which isn't likely if you only use tanks since 1.7. Heavies are easy to mag dump because they can't move. If you are trying to blow them up with anything less than a remote explosive though then there's your problem which will get worse in 1.8. Hell I say that, but I kill plenty of adv/proto hmg heavies with a std minnie assault and a std MD by simply not engaging the heavy in its very small effective range of like 0-40 meters, which most light weapons can outrange combined with the fact that even an Amarr med suit can outrun. Sorry if you only FOTM brick tank a gallente med suit and then wonder why you get cut down by the heavies. |
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
96
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:45:00 -
[84] - Quote
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. |
Temias Mercurial
ANGEL FLEET
26
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 19:20:00 -
[85] - 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.
|
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
97
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 19:28:00 -
[86] - Quote
Well like I said, I don't advocate soloing tanks I advocate 1 to 1. If tanks require teamwork to kill they should require teamwork to operate effectively. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
417
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 19:34:00 -
[87] - Quote
Most pilots do not equate themselves with HAV users . I fly and drive so I'm not bias . I say that I am a vehicle user because that's my role .. not just LAV's , HAV's or Drop Ships . I would have included drop ship pilots in this discussion and they are more than welcomed to anything that I am a part of .
They have a loud enough voice and I wish that HAV pilots stuck together like drop ship pilots do . Between drop ship pilots , scouts and somewhat heavies ... these also snipers included have made their presence known to the community . Heavies have a loud voice as well and they do stick together ... but I don't see it like I see it in drop ship pilots and scouts .
Anything that happens with HAV's eventually effect Drop ships because of the common use of the same mods ( small turrets as well ) and if changes are coming it will mostly be to the usage and performance of mods .
I can say this .. Drop ships need to be stronger as far as collision damage when hardeners are not applied . It's down right foolish for the fact that they cost so much and the SP's needed , that is they bump into most things without hardeners their HP's go straight to zero and they begin to smolder most of the time .
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
417
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 19:35:00 -
[88] - Quote
TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Well like I said, I don't advocate soloing tanks I advocate 1 to 1. If tanks require teamwork to kill they should require teamwork to operate effectively.
So your advocating soloing because you can't have it both ways .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
98
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 19:39:00 -
[89] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Well like I said, I don't advocate soloing tanks I advocate 1 to 1. If tanks require teamwork to kill they should require teamwork to operate effectively. So your advocating soloing because you can't have it both ways .
Do you ever read the posts you quote? This is the third time you quoted something from me where I distinctly said the opposite of what you claim. |
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
The Containment Unit
417
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 19:41:00 -
[90] - Quote
TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Well like I said, I don't advocate soloing tanks I advocate 1 to 1. If tanks require teamwork to kill they should require teamwork to operate effectively. So your advocating soloing because you can't have it both ways . Do you ever read the posts you quote? This is the third time you quoted something from me where I distinctly said the opposite of what you claim.
You can't have it both ways . HAV's are vehicles and if they need multiple users to operate then all vehicles should as well . You can't have it both ways . You said Drop ships are fine when we all know that they are not and could use some refortification . You come across as a HAV hater .
Leave all negative comments about tanks in the bin marked " TRASH " and we'll get to it as soon as possible . Thank You
|
|
|
TYCHUS MAXWELL
Sebiestor Field Sappers
Minmatar Republic
98
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 19:52:00 -
[91] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Well like I said, I don't advocate soloing tanks I advocate 1 to 1. If tanks require teamwork to kill they should require teamwork to operate effectively. So your advocating soloing because you can't have it both ways . Do you ever read the posts you quote? This is the third time you quoted something from me where I distinctly said the opposite of what you claim. You can't have it both ways . HAV's are vehicles and if they need multiple users to operate then all vehicles should as well . You can't have it both ways . You said Drop ships are fine when we all know that they are not and could use some refortification . You come across as a HAV hater .
Define both ways?
What do you mean by having it both ways?
Dropships are the most mobile thing in this game that can drop troops anywhere on the map. If they get more fortified they will be OP. Vehicles are about roles not being the best. Tanks are meant to be front pushers, right now they are solo killdozers. Dropships are harrasment/troop transport and that's exactly what they are. LAVs are harrasment ground transports and that's exactly what they are.
If by both ways you meant you can't have it take as many infantry to kill a tank as it takes for a tank to be operated efficiently..... WHY?! Why do you believe tanks should be one man armies?
Tanks were destroyed by children carrying panzerschrecks in WW2. Tanks now a days are obsolete in first world warfare and are only deployed by 3rd world countries or when 1st world countries are picking on 3rd world countries. Tanks today are not and have never been operated by one person.
Where is you justification for having a force multiplier in a lobby shooter, it's bad game design and it's not realistic so what is your defense other then "muh feelings"? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
4594
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 08:25:00 -
[92] - Quote
TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: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.
IT HAS TO BE 1 TO 1.
I agree.
1 vs. 1, Tank vs. AV. Looking at Blasters.
If they make Blasters an anti-infantry weapon, then 1 vs. 1 with a Blaster Tank against an AV Tank, the Blaster will lose. Against AV infantry, if they balance things RIGHT, the winner should be either the more skilled player or the one with the larger ISK investment. This means a fell-fitted Blaster Tank SHOULD have a slight edge over AV infantry, but not enough to negate skill.
If they make Blasters a range-limited weapon and slow Tanks down (faster than LAVs was a stupid idea), then AV, whether vehicle or infantry, will be able to win by simply keeping out of range.
Again, this is assuming other things are fixed, not just the balance on turrets specifically.
I just don't see how a rapid fire weapon could be nerfed against infantry without it being a completely arbitrary and lore-breaking change to Blasters. I also don't see why it should be when nerfing it against vehicles makes so much more sense and would quickly reduce their prevalence on the battlefield. I agree they need a change, I just don't agree that reducing their anti-infantry capability is the right way to change them. |
Jake Diesel
BIG BAD W0LVES
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
119
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 09:16:00 -
[93] - Quote
Quote:
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 .
True Adamance, as far as I remember, is a tanker and always suggest some kind of rebalance with vehicles.
Tanks are Overpowered, not because they instakill infantry from miles away, but because they hardly get destroyed by proto AV infantry. I had a quick chat with someone in Local stating he "always" destroy a lot of tanks with a PRO assault Forge Gun. From my personal experience with both a full dedicated AV (9 mln SP, Takami Masubi) alt and a full dedicated tank alt (12 mln SP, Sextus Iulius Cocles), I can say with no doubt that any kind of forge gun is easily oneshottable with a railgun (even easier considering only heavies can carry a Forge Gun).
I must say, CCP did a great job in vehicle vs vehicle engagements , but looks like they forgot about infantry, which is the spine of every FPS. It's not by chance if any other fps has a much lower vehicle/infantry rate: think about MAG or Battlefield. MAG had a "domination" APC hard cap of 2 per platoon (32 players) or, if you like, 8 APC on a total of 128 players.
Dust has a vehicle/infatry rate of 6/16.
So simple math: tanks have a great resistance over infantry (a) and they are spammable (b). a + b = broken game.
But it's not over yet: the tank resistance and engage time is proportional to its tier. The more complex modules you put on it, the more resistance you'll gain.
It happened to me only once, but that was enough: people use to complain about MLT tanks spam, but when the enemies spam well-fitted STD tanks, the problem is not only big, it is gigantic.
Considering it takes at least 3 Good AVs to destroy a decent tank, imagine what would happen if you had to face 5 well fitted tanks:
- You could say, call in a rail tank. Nope, there's another rail tank sniping your tank from their redline.
- Switch the entire team to AV. Not always possible, furthermore, you'll still lose the match.
- Jihad Jeeps, still does not guarantee you hit your target considering there are 5 tanks on the opposing team.[/quote]
What you've stated is pretty much the hard facts. I can drop the militia tanks with three shots from my proto assault forge but I've got to use at least an advanced dropsuit with two complex damage mods to do it. But even this cannot drop a standard well fitted tank.
I'm not complaining about not being able to solo standard well fitted HAV's. I'm complaining that these HAV's capabilities are letting them solo entire squads without fear and without any support from friendly infantry.
I've always believed that it should take two proto Forgers to take out one good HAV. But why the hell does it take a full proto forge to drop a militia tank is beyond me.
Tanks need to be slower and their hardeners decreased. This would help eliminate that solo mentality that many HAV's are soo used to and forces them to carefully approach a hotzone and rely on infantry support. |
Altus Nox
FACTION WARFARE ARMY
FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE
17
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 15:35:00 -
[94] - Quote
TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote:Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Does it take teamwork to kill a heavy in most cases ??? Will it take teamwork to kill heavies and sentinels in 1.8 ??? Unless your a heavy I would think so for the most part , even more so the fact that damage mods will be changing .
But I guess come Monday we will see . You need to infantry more bro, it doesn't take heavies or groups to kill heavies, if you blindside them they are dead before they can turn around, which is likely as they are slow moving and slow turning. Tanks though? I can blind side one of those with my proto forge gun and there's still a good chance that they can mow me down or one shot me before I kill them in the 20 seconds it takes with their hardeners up. You have to try to fail (IE sit there and not retreat or shoot them) in a tank to die to a solo av. But you see that's why people hate tanks, because you guys are so disillusioned that you actually think a scout/assualt suit fighting a heavy is in the same ballpark as a swarm/plc/forge fighting a tank. Many weapons can insta gib a heavy and you can outrun them. You can't outrun tanks and the one weapon that can insta gib, the remote mine field, is immobile or requires the tank to sit there and let you stick explosives to them. In your analogy terms, that would be like a heavy suit letting an assault suit rifle butt them to death. You can jihad jeep but they are removing stickies in 1.8 because CCP won't stop listening to bad advice, because all it took was seeing the target and shooting it to blow them up. If jihad jeeps were OP then so are scouts with shotguns.
Shinobi- You have mentioned a well reasoned discussion about tanks versus AV many time throughout this thread. Tychus hit the nail on the head though, all be it a little bluntly. What I have taken from everyone one of your posts is that you seem to think that there is nothing wrong with the current situation. Be willing to sacrifice something for the betterment of the Dust community then we can talk. They are nerfing y logi and I haven't complained because equipment spam is a problem for everyone.
There is no other direct comparison to AV and Tanks that even come close to AV and tanks. The closest I can think of currently is a butt naked min scout with a militia ScP against a fully brick tanked pro sentinel.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:As a newer player you are always going to play catch up , just face it . There's no need in even stating that .
I'm in the same boat but I love it because it's a challenge and I know with hard work I will overcome that .
Vehicle user have many more skill points invested and before 1.7 , it took ... so it seems , a lot more only to have some one with a militia swarm and some basic A.V. grenades to come and kill that investment and role . Be happy that your not fighting to have your role nerfed . Players just started using PM's and RE's on a regular , except for those dedicated to A.V. which like now .. are very few . Hell before 1.7.. I can't recall seeing some die in the kill feed by a RE or PM .
I understand that I will always be playing catch up. I came in in the middle of 1.7. I have no clue what the game was like prior to it. The current issues that need to be discussed are the actually playable state of the game. It is always going to be moving forward. What it was like in the past is in the past. No matter how much you wish it was like it was before it is no longer. Move on.
Things can not get better without some kind of change to the risk/reward system of AV and tanks: Swarms are broken, hardeners are OP, repair modules have to high of a rate, AV nades are to weak and being reduced, RE's are a counter but nearly impossible too use unless our spec'd into scout plus they take to long to place, Forges can be used it you are a dedicated AV heavy or have tens of millions of SP (where I am playing catch up plus I don't want to spec into them. Logi). This list problems is far to long for a vehicle that can 1 to 2 shot (rails) or 4 to 5 shot (blaster) any suit in the game.
This leaves JLAVs and mil HAVs. I won't JLAV because I am against dying whenever possible. This past weekend I surrendered to the mil Sica because tanks have gotten so bad. I kill the spammers and recall.
When Tankers stop going 30/0 and actually face reasonable risks again then Dust will be balanced.
-Omnes una manet Nox
(The same night awaits us all)
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |