DUST Search - A question to the community.

R F Gyro wrote:

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left.

Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions.

This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things.

Yep, I'd still have a problem with tanks if large blasters were removed, though it would in some ways be an improvement.

I'd consider it a loss to the game though: HAVs with large blaster turrets should be the ultimate anti-infantry platform, imho.

What the game needs is an effective counter that isn't another tank. Right now a player in a tank is worth more (as a generalisation) than a player not in a tank, and the justification for this imbalance is just "because its a tank". This needs to be fixed, because number of players is the primary constraint in a battle, because there are no limits on SP per side, no limits on ISK per side, no limits on player skill per side, but there is a limit of 16 players per side.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 935	Posted - 2014.03.22 10:22:00 - [1] - Quote Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Best PVE idea I've seen. Fixed link.
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1599	Posted - 2014.03.22 10:28:00 - [2] - Quote Tankophobes will hate no matter what. They just can't have a tank in the same match or it burns their biscuit. "Stay stealthy scouts." GÇô Ron Burgundy
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 936	Posted - 2014.03.22 10:30:00 - [3] - Quote Operative 1171 Aajli wrote: Tankophobes will hate no matter what. They just can't have a tank in the same match or it burns their biscuit. Of course there are those extremists on both sides. But I wonder where most of the community falls on this. I feel like people are generalizing all tanks together, when it is the one turret that they really don't like. Best PVE idea I've seen. Fixed link.
Mossellia Delt Militaires Sans Jeux 1073	Posted - 2014.03.22 10:54:00 - [4] - Quote Reduce speed, prevent more than two moduels of one type on the tank, Delt will be happy with tanks then Join the Channel - CPM1 Candidates - Get to know who's running. Delt for CPM1
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2221	Posted - 2014.03.22 10:56:00 - [5] - Quote Would stop whining but also kinda defeat the point in this games philosophy leading to all tanks being removed. What we want is to be able to fight back with equivalent tier AV without half the team having to drop what they are doing to deal with a single guy in a tank. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
jerrmy12 kahoalii 595	Posted - 2014.03.22 10:56:00 - [6] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Yea no one would have a problem Unless railgun damage vs infantry remains un nerfed 1 ahotting all forgers... Closed beta vet Tears, sweet delicious tears
Mossellia Delt Militaires Sans Jeux 1073	Posted - 2014.03.22 10:59:00 - [7] - Quote jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Yea no one would have a problem Unless railgun damage vs infantry remains un nerfed 1 ahotting all forgers... Strafe dam you strafe Join the Channel - CPM1 Candidates - Get to know who's running. Delt for CPM1
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries 7662	Posted - 2014.03.22 10:59:00 - [8] - Quote I would have no problem with tanks. They will have a clear role, installation busters and heavy fire support. Those railguns are NASTY against heavies Shield regeneration bonus for Gallente Assault is about as useful as Sharpshooter for Nova Knives. DUST514514
jerrmy12 kahoalii 596	Posted - 2014.03.22 13:37:00 - [9] - Quote Mossellia Delt wrote: jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Yea no one would have a problem Unless railgun damage vs infantry remains un nerfed 1 ahotting all forgers... Strafe dam you strafe Exept 1 forging as you are too slow 2 they suck and need to be 300m away or just camp a place Closed beta vet Tears, sweet delicious tears
RemingtonBeaver Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 263	Posted - 2014.03.22 13:47:00 - [10] - Quote It makes me curious. Hey CCP! For super funsies let's start removing entire parts from the game. Just lock them for a week. Week 1 No Blaster Turrets (not small or large or installation type) Then bring them back. You know for science. Then Week 2 No Scouts because they're all over these here forums and hahahaha that's why You know for lols. Week 3 no vision. Just darkness. You know for justice. We can pickle that.

CYRAX SERVIUS Death Firm. Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1459	Posted - 2014.03.22 13:54:00 - [11] - Quote Make Militia tanks more expensive, make tanks require 1mil sp investment to operate militia tanks, fix hardeners, return AV damage back to were it was, range is fine. Make the wannabe's spend sp to get into militia tanks as we have to skill into AV to take them out as militia swarms are a joke. Fixed... CEO Whiskey squad leader Official Dust 514 movie style popcorn manufacturer and distributor.
Drapedup Drippedout 0uter.Heaven 640	Posted - 2014.03.22 14:21:00 - [12] - Quote Honestly if blasters had a RoF nerf, but dmg buff I would be happy. Urging the blaster into a hybrid vehicle/infantry weap but making more effective against vehicles than it currently is and less effective against i+¦fantry than currently is. The intention being to shift HAVs anti infantry capabilities to small turrets as the primary infantry killer. If its supposed to take multiple AV to down a tank, it should take a coordinated effort on the tanks part to slaughter infantry while keeping the numbers balanced. 2-3 AV to wipe a tank with 2or 3 operators. Pro-fit Prophet "Gimme yo lunch money"
I-Shayz-I I-----I 2630	Posted - 2014.03.22 14:40:00 - [13] - Quote Most of the time as a forge I'm actually not getting shot at by the tank. Instead they just ignore me because they can rep faster than I can deal damage. That's the problem. Links: 7162 wp with a Repair Tool! I make logistics videos!
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1237	Posted - 2014.03.22 15:43:00 - [14] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Yep, I'd still have a problem with tanks if large blasters were removed, though it would in some ways be an improvement. I'd consider it a loss to the game though: HAVs with large blaster turrets should be the ultimate anti-infantry platform, imho. What the game needs is an effective counter that isn't another tank. Right now a player in a tank is worth more (as a generalisation) than a player not in a tank, and the justification for this imbalance is just "because its a tank". This needs to be fixed, because number of players is the primary constraint in a battle, because there are no limits on SP per side, no limits on ISK per side, no limits on player skill per side, but there is a limit of 16 players per side. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2231	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:11:00 - [15] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Yep, I'd still have a problem with tanks if large blasters were removed, though it would in some ways be an improvement. I'd consider it a loss to the game though: HAVs with large blaster turrets should be the ultimate anti-infantry platform, imho. What the game needs is an effective counter that isn't another tank. Right now a player in a tank is worth more (as a generalisation) than a player not in a tank, and the justification for this imbalance is just "because its a tank". This needs to be fixed, because number of players is the primary constraint in a battle, because there are no limits on SP per side, no limits on ISK per side, no limits on player skill per side, but there is a limit of 16 players per side. Until the player count is arbitrary (the amount of people you have to hand) nothing can be worth more than anything else without a hard counter, its why we need gunships. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1936	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:12:00 - [16] - Quote I like how people keep on saying this, when blasters got nerfed in 1.7 click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Jastad D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 649	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:18:00 - [17] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Reduce the Splash radius like the forge gun and for sure we are fine. Being oneshotted with a Rail or a Missile is a Skill-KILL. like being taken down by a ground forger or a PLC or a Nova. Kudos you deserve that kill. This or simply Blaster turret need to SUCK HARD vs other veich. With this you have a AI.TURRET and if you find a LAV or an ADS you are going to die. Give me back my old AFG charge time plz while we are at it. Amarr SCR user. Believe in the FORGE, young padawans C'èSoloDoloreSuCharlie
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 2347	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:20:00 - [18] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: I like how people keep on saying this, when blasters got nerfed in 1.7 Nerf it more. Fizzer94 // Forum Warrior Operation II // MAG Vet Gallente Neutron Rifle
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1936	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:21:00 - [19] - Quote Fizzer94 wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I like how people keep on saying this, when blasters got nerfed in 1.7 Nerf it more. and make it worse in fights? lolno. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
C Saunders Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 563	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:21:00 - [20] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: I like how people keep on saying this, when blasters got nerfed in 1.7 Lol blasters got nerfed but also got given god mode. CCP needs to get out the nerf sledgehammer for these tanks. // Fully Speced Mass Driver Expert // Closed Beta Vet // Tech Guards Sexy Beast //

xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Corporation 1974	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:24:00 - [21] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Personally, I'd be great >Bastard I : "Cce me ne... futt! XD"
Vicious Minotaur Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 734	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:24:00 - [22] - Quote I never have a problem with missiles or rails when I am using my infantry fits. If I get killed by them, yes I will be annoyed (no more than usual), but killing infantry with those actually requires a modicum of skill and/or luck. Blasters require no such thing. Put me in the camp that says that large HAV turrets should never be designed to kill infantry. They should be for inter-vehicular combat (which would be great if we had a full contingent of vehicles that fill a variety of roles, *hint hint CCP). However, if there is to be a large turret for killing infantry, then it stands to reason (from a balance perspective) that its platform should be more susceptible to the things that it is killing, namely, infantry wielded AV. Think of the relationship more like heavy vs. scout.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 8667	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:31:00 - [23] - Quote Vicious Minotaur wrote: I never have a problem with missiles or rails when I am using my infantry fits. If I get killed by them, yes I will be annoyed (no more than usual), but killing infantry with those actually requires a modicum of skill and/or luck. Blasters require no such thing. Put me in the camp that says that large HAV turrets should never be designed to kill infantry. They should be for inter-vehicular combat (which would be great if we had a full contingent of vehicles that fill a variety of roles, hint hint CCP). However, if there is to be a large turret for killing infantry, then it stands to reason (from a balance perspective) that its platform should be more susceptible to the things that it is killing, namely, infantry wielded AV. Think of the relationship more like heavy vs. scout. They should kill infantry...but not with the efficiency of the large blaster.... I wish my blaster fired Plasma cannon rounds, had mag of 12, and a slightly faster RoF than Railguns I could live with that. That would mean I could effectively 1 shot all but heavies with a directly hit, and wound with any splash but I would have to aim much more precisely. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"* -Dagger Two
Godin Thekiller OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1936	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:41:00 - [24] - Quote C Saunders wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I like how people keep on saying this, when blasters got nerfed in 1.7 Lol blasters got nerfed but also got given god mode. CCP needs to get out the nerf sledgehammer for these tanks. They need to melt it tbh. And no, there is such thing as godmode in Dust. You can still kill a hardened Maddy and Gunnlogi. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Kiriasis Draca Ultramarine Corp 130	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:45:00 - [25] - Quote To be honest, I don't have an issue with the tanks themselves so much as the sheer volume of tanks on a map. While it's entertaining to try and race around four tanks...or six if some moron jumps out of theirs and dies, it gets to the point where infantry has nothing else to do but just say fuk-it-ol and hide in the red line. I've seen it a few times and, while i am pretty stubborn and try to skirt around outside edges, it's difficult to do anything.
Kiriasis Draca Ultramarine Corp 131	Posted - 2014.03.23 20:49:00 - [26] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Vicious Minotaur wrote: I never have a problem with missiles or rails when I am using my infantry fits. If I get killed by them, yes I will be annoyed (no more than usual), but killing infantry with those actually requires a modicum of skill and/or luck. Blasters require no such thing. Put me in the camp that says that large HAV turrets should never be designed to kill infantry. They should be for inter-vehicular combat (which would be great if we had a full contingent of vehicles that fill a variety of roles, *hint hint CCP). However, if there is to be a large turret for killing infantry, then it stands to reason (from a balance perspective) that its platform should be more susceptible to the things that it is killing, namely, infantry wielded AV. Think of the relationship more like heavy vs. scout. They should kill infantry...but not with the efficiency of the large blaster.... I wish my blaster fired Plasma cannon rounds, had mag of 12, and a slightly faster RoF than Railguns I could live with that. That would mean I could effectively 1 shot all but heavies with a directly hit, and wound with any splash but I would have to aim much more precisely. That's a turret I would love to test running against
Vicious Minotaur Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 736	Posted - 2014.03.23 21:02:00 - [27] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Vicious Minotaur wrote: I never have a problem with missiles or rails when I am using my infantry fits. If I get killed by them, yes I will be annoyed (no more than usual), but killing infantry with those actually requires a modicum of skill and/or luck. Blasters require no such thing. Put me in the camp that says that large HAV turrets should never be designed to kill infantry. They should be for inter-vehicular combat (which would be great if we had a full contingent of vehicles that fill a variety of roles, hint hint CCP). However, if there is to be a large turret for killing infantry, then it stands to reason (from a balance perspective) that its platform should be more susceptible to the things that it is killing, namely, infantry wielded AV. Think of the relationship more like heavy vs. scout. They should kill infantry...but not with the efficiency of the large blaster.... I wish my blaster fired Plasma cannon rounds, had mag of 12, and a slightly faster RoF than Railguns I could live with that. That would mean I could effectively 1 shot all but heavies with a directly hit, and wound with any splash but I would have to aim much more precisely. That would put it more in the camp of the missile and railgun. They can also kill infantry, provided you are precise with your aim. But they are not designed* to kill infantry. Your idea seems to be more inline with that. Plus, provided the stats are right, your large plasma blaster would seem to be better at inter-vehicular warfare than infantry killing. Which, again, is in line with the other turrets. I take no issue with your idea. I'd welcome it.
echo47 Minmatar Republic 250	Posted - 2014.03.23 21:14:00 - [28] - Quote Personally the only problem I have with tanks is thier speed. If base speed is not reduced at least allow damage to reduce speed. It your tanks total HP is at 50%. Speed should be reduced 50%. The only other issues I have with tanks stems from the bitchassness of some of our playerbase, something CCP can't nerf. I would rather look bad and win, than look good and lose.
TYCHUS MAXWELL Sebiestor Field Sappers Minmatar Republic 100	Posted - 2014.03.23 21:20:00 - [29] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mainly to the infantry folks. Let's say we removed large blasters from the game. Hypothetical. Take them out completely. Only railguns and missiles are left. Would y'all still have a problem with tanks? Or would their removal be enough that you wouldn't call for a nerf bat? My personal opinion is that most of the frustration comes from blasters wrecking infantry with little reprisals available, but I don't want to make assumptions. This is to find out if it's tanks in general people are annoyed with, or the blaster tank. I know dropships have their things with railguns, but this is mainly directed to the infantry side of things. Incoming copy paste: It should be 1 to 1 if you are in a tank and the other guy is using an anti tank the footing should be relatively even. 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. So yeah, for myself at least, If blaster turrets were removed entirely I wouldn't mind if missle and rails and everything else was left the same, hell you can even keep your permahardeners as long as you aren't good vs. infantry like tanks are with a large blaster. Edit: Keep in mind tanks will still be good at killing infantry if they get one or two guys on their small turrets, yes those do exist, and no they aren't useless, you're turret operators in the past have just been bad.
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2283	Posted - 2014.03.23 21:22:00 - [30] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: I like how people keep on saying this, when blasters got nerfed in 1.7 You keep saying this, but they actually didn't. You lost about 200 DPS but your effective range basically doubled, and I don't know about you, but I noticed some huge improvements in hit detection since 1.6. I'm calling that a buff. ak.0 4 LYFE Large Missile Turrets: the real unicorns of DUST.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

C'èSoloDoloreSuCharlie