DUST Search - No more nerfing!

Atiim wrote:

Harpyja wrote:

Armor rep fits are perfectly fine! They make you invulnerable against DPS-oriented AV, but you are weak against alpha-oriented AV. A missile/railgun tank will make mince meat of a repping tank. Trade-offs.

I fixed that statement for you.

Yeah... What is the purpose of Anti-Vehicle weaponry again? Oh yes, it's to destroy vehicles. What sense would it make to have a fitting that can negate that balance?

An AV user sacrifices their defense and Anti-Infantry capabilities to effectively fight vehicles. That is one of the main reasons why AV can (and should) solo. We've made our sacrifice to kill vehicles, and expect our ability to kill vehicles to be proportionate to said sacrifice.

What if I made a fitting that could out DPS an 80GJ Ion Cannon, stacked 4 Complex Kinetic Catalyzers, and put an AV weapon on it? How balanced would that be to you?

Harpyja wrote:

Stop trying to remove the little variety that is left. You cannot just nerf repping fits to suit your basic infantry needs because then there will be no point to a repping fit if it doesn't improve one aspect of tanking with a trade-off from another.

No, but I can nerf repping fits on the basis that they allow immunity from the thing that was primarily that was designed to destroy it in the first place.

Shocked

"By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32 Atiim didn't agree with limiting tanks!

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Evolution-7 The Rainbow Effect Negative-Feedback 420	Posted - 2014.04.06 09:52:00 - [1] - Quote CCP, no more nerfing! AV vs Vehicles are at very good balance, although I do miss the old vehicles (pre 1.7) as fits were more diverse and custom made. Scouts are awesome just tweak brick tanking. Heavies are awesome! do not reduce EHP as they are finally real heavies! MAYBE when all racial heavy weaponry are out MAYBE limit them to heavy weapons only. The ONE thing that should be buffed is assault suits, after this CCP, your game will be at a very balanced state. Tank spam is very counterable now. Just fix the bugs (there is a bloody ton) and load in new content, such as AA HAV. And put up the Armour hardener up to 30% resist if you can. Otherwise I am pretty happy with balance, after AA HAV is introduced reduce elevation on large railguns and thats it. Veteran Pilot "Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart."
Victor889 The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 71	Posted - 2014.04.06 09:55:00 - [2] - Quote And make forge guns fire every time (Y) Part time Logi, Full time heavy.
Evolution-7 The Rainbow Effect Negative-Feedback 420	Posted - 2014.04.06 09:57:00 - [3] - Quote Victor889 wrote: And make forge guns fire every time (Y) Part of the bugs bro. Veteran Pilot "Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart."
Eddie Rio The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 102	Posted - 2014.04.06 10:00:00 - [4] - Quote Evolution-7 wrote: CCP, no more nerfing! AV vs Vehicles are at very good balance, although I do miss the old vehicles (pre 1.7) as fits were more diverse and custom made. Scouts are awesome just tweak brick tanking. Heavies are awesome! do not reduce EHP as they are finally real heavies! MAYBE when all racial heavy weaponry are out MAYBE limit them to heavy weapons only. The ONE thing that should be buffed is assault suits, after this CCP, your game will be at a very balanced state. Tank spam is very counterable now. Just fix the bugs (there is a bloody ton) and load in new content, such as AA HAV. And put up the Armour hardener up to 30% resist if you can. Otherwise I am pretty happy with balance, after AA HAV is introduced reduce elevation on large railguns and thats it. yea like evo says here, dropships are far to OP,, nerf there speed and tank to fall in-line with everything else! My YouTube
Taeryn Frost Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 216	Posted - 2014.04.06 10:02:00 - [5] - Quote We need constant nerfing to make us appreciate the futility that is war.
noob cavman Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 1133	Posted - 2014.04.06 10:07:00 - [6] - Quote Plasma cannon is op. Nerf it now I feel bad just saying that. I want to be a caveman! Ccp: DENIED YOU DRUNK Gö+GöüGö+ n+¦pâ+(`-ö´)n+ën+¦ Gö+GöüGö+ Jollys quirky inconsistent sidekick. dem spandex yo
Horizen Kenpachi Forsaken Immortals Top Men. 286	Posted - 2014.04.06 10:13:00 - [7] - Quote And make missile tanks viable fed up with rail and damage mods have 1 damage mod limit blasters should have a 100 meter optimal range stopping at 200 and make mlt tanks mlt not a op abused mechanic make there effectivness represent there price also av grenades are pants Hit me with your nerf bat.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 14139	Posted - 2014.04.06 10:27:00 - [8] - Quote We don't need power creep complex; especially if its going to start breaking barriers of the game. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked
Lance 2ballzStrong SyNergy Gaming EoN. 4819	Posted - 2014.04.06 10:38:00 - [9] - Quote Evolution-7 wrote: Just fix the bugs (there is a bloody ton) and load in new content, such as AA HAV. Otherwise I am pretty happy with balance, after AA HAV is introduced reduce elevation on large railguns and thats it. Is this... Anti Air HAV? If so... ... lol? Dropships are good in DUST now? If AA does not mean anti air, ignore my comment. ( ._.) <('.'<) "There there Mr. Heavy, it's not your fault CCP doesn't care about you"
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 8109	Posted - 2014.04.06 10:47:00 - [10] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: We don't need power creep complex; especially if its going to start breaking barriers of the game. Yes, however, pretty much everything beats an assault. So either everything needs a nerf, or the assault needs a buff. I know which one is easier, and won't contribute much to the power creep (that was already massive in 1.8) My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone. If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.

Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2610	Posted - 2014.04.06 11:14:00 - [11] - Quote Lance 2ballzStrong wrote: Evolution-7 wrote: Just fix the bugs (there is a bloody ton) and load in new content, such as AA HAV. Otherwise I am pretty happy with balance, after AA HAV is introduced reduce elevation on large railguns and thats it. Is this... Anti Air HAV? If so... ... lol? Dropships are good in DUST now? If AA does not mean anti air, ignore my comment. I think he's implying that we should buff DS ;) ak.0 4 LYFE je ne regrette rien
Ace Boone G0DS AM0NG MEN D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 93	Posted - 2014.04.06 11:16:00 - [12] - Quote Buff swarms, give a slight buff to the flaylock, buff the assault and balance that damn overpowered piece of trash called the railgun. meh.
Zelorian Dexter snr Vanguardian Remnant 188	Posted - 2014.04.06 11:39:00 - [13] - Quote I agree with the OP on this one 1.8 is bringing far better balance to the game. Even cloaked scouts aren't an issue if you use your eyes.
Orin the Freak The Solecism of Limitation 775	Posted - 2014.04.06 12:35:00 - [14] - Quote The game is close to balance, I would agree. but AV is NOT balanced, it needs a buff, at least until we get racial parity in heavy AV. the other issue is cloaks. They need a few drawbacks for the massive benefits they reap. For instance, when (no matter how) a cloak is disengaged, it is FULLY drained, and goes on CD... just like every other active module currently in the game. Also, flux grenades should drop a cloak. And for the love of pete, make the person at least FULLY de-cloak before they can fire. it's ridiculously fast currently. these things could very much balance the cloak. Also, shotguns need reworking, particularly at militia through advanced levels. they are just too powerful for those tiers.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2388	Posted - 2014.04.06 12:45:00 - [15] - Quote Almost a few things need to be 'tweaked' here and there, but since everyone considers any chamge to the tactics they use as a nerf there is gonna be a lot of 'nerfs' that still need to be done. 1) Add Dispersion to blaster turrets Won't change DPS, or effectiveness against other vehicles, but reduces the effectiveness against infantry. 2) Fix Quick-Swap on Cloaks Won't change function of cloaks, probably won't make much of a difference to operation either, but gives enemy time to go "oh ****" before being splattered to oblivion. 3)Equipment Spam fixes Won't reduce their effectiveness, won't reduce their use, but stops 500 nanohives beinng placed around a Supply Depot just for the purpose of farming WP Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Vell0cet Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 1375	Posted - 2014.04.06 13:36:00 - [16] - Quote Nerfs make more sense than buffing sometime. TTK is feeling much better, if you never nerf things, and only buff, then TTK will gradually get f*cked again. As IWS says, power creep. I think the CR/RR may still be a bit too strong and could use a -2% to damage nerf, Magsec as well seems like it could use a small nerf. There needs to be some refinement of the cloaking mechanics and AV/vehicles needs further attention. I'd like to see future changes generally made in the 2-3% magnitude. Keeping changes small will help dial in the balance. Best PvE idea ever!
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 6430	Posted - 2014.04.06 13:41:00 - [17] - Quote Well Armor Repair Modules need a stacking penalty, and the Swarm Launcher AI needs a buff.. There's no reason why the Swarms should crash into the ground the second an LAV or HAV travels on lower ground. The Snack That Smiles Back! "Swarmers" [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Evolution-7 The Rainbow Effect Negative-Feedback 426	Posted - 2014.04.06 13:48:00 - [18] - Quote Atiim wrote: Well Armor Repair Modules need a stacking penalty, and the Swarm Launcher AI needs a buff.. There's no reason why the Swarms should crash into the ground the second an LAV or HAV travels on lower ground. I thoroughly agree with this, the armour repair stacking needs to be fixed, also, ya the swarm launchers travels in lines which is stupid making its range limited by over travelling itself. Veteran Pilot "Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart."
Evolution-7 The Rainbow Effect Negative-Feedback 426	Posted - 2014.04.06 13:50:00 - [19] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: We don't need power creep complex; especially if its going to start breaking barriers of the game. Well the only true aspect of gameplay balance (not bugs) that needs to be fixed is the assault suit. Veteran Pilot "Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart."
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1522	Posted - 2014.04.06 14:30:00 - [20] - Quote Evolution-7 wrote: Atiim wrote: Well Armor Repair Modules need a stacking penalty, and the Swarm Launcher AI needs a buff.. There's no reason why the Swarms should crash into the ground the second an LAV or HAV travels on lower ground. I thoroughly agree with this, the armour repair stacking needs to be fixed, also, ya the swarm launchers travels in lines which is stupid making its range limited by over travelling itself. Armor rep fits are perfectly fine! They make you stronger against DPS-oriented AV, but you are weak against alpha-oriented AV. A missile/railgun tank will make mince meat of a repping tank. Trade-offs. Stop trying to remove the little variety that is left. You cannot just nerf repping fits to suit your basic infantry needs because then there will be no point to a repping fit if it doesn't improve one aspect of tanking with a trade-off from another. To Monkey MAC that said that blasters need dispersion, I say no. It will actually make it easier to kill infantry. It's actually hard to aim at moving infantry due to the precise nature of the blaster, and adding dispersion will no longer require precise aiming. Instead, blasters just need a flat 33% damage reduction. Balancing The Large Turrets "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32

Lt Royal Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2883	Posted - 2014.04.06 14:36:00 - [21] - Quote Would you say shield/armor hardeners need a slight buff too but that only applies to Derpships or that Derpships should have natural resistances tied to a skill? Gÿ£GÿàGÿP Lt RoyalGÇÖs Propaganda Competition - 1st place = Templar Code Gÿ£GÿàGÿP
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 6430	Posted - 2014.04.06 14:46:00 - [22] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Armor rep fits are perfectly fine! They make you invulnerable against DPS-oriented AV, but you are weak against alpha-oriented AV. A missile/railgun tank will make mince meat of a repping tank. Trade-offs. I fixed that statement for you. Yeah... What is the purpose of Anti-Vehicle weaponry again? Oh yes, it's to destroy vehicles. What sense would it make to have a fitting that can negate that balance? An AV user sacrifices their defense and Anti-Infantry capabilities to effectively fight vehicles. That is one of the main reasons why AV can (and should) solo. We've made our sacrifice to kill vehicles, and expect our ability to kill vehicles to be proportionate to said sacrifice. What if I made a fitting that could out DPS an 80GJ Ion Cannon, stacked 4 Complex Kinetic Catalyzers, and put an AV weapon on it? How balanced would that be to you? Harpyja wrote: Stop trying to remove the little variety that is left. You cannot just nerf repping fits to suit your basic infantry needs because then there will be no point to a repping fit if it doesn't improve one aspect of tanking with a trade-off from another. No, but I can nerf repping fits on the basis that they allow immunity from the thing that was primarily that was designed to destroy it in the first place. AV The Snack That Smiles Back! "Swarmers" [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1522	Posted - 2014.04.06 14:49:00 - [23] - Quote Atiim wrote: Harpyja wrote: Armor rep fits are perfectly fine! They make you invulnerable against DPS-oriented AV, but you are weak against alpha-oriented AV. A missile/railgun tank will make mince meat of a repping tank. Trade-offs. I fixed that statement for you. Yeah... What is the purpose of Anti-Vehicle weaponry again? Oh yes, it's to destroy vehicles. What sense would it make to have a fitting that can negate that balance? An AV user sacrifices their defense and Anti-Infantry capabilities to effectively fight vehicles. That is one of the main reasons why AV can (and should) solo. We've made our sacrifice to kill vehicles, and expect our ability to kill vehicles to be proportionate to said sacrifice. What if I made a fitting that could out DPS an 80GJ Ion Cannon, stacked 4 Complex Kinetic Catalyzers, and put an AV weapon on it? How balanced would that be to you? Harpyja wrote: Stop trying to remove the little variety that is left. You cannot just nerf repping fits to suit your basic infantry needs because then there will be no point to a repping fit if it doesn't improve one aspect of tanking with a trade-off from another. No, but I can nerf repping fits on the basis that they allow immunity from the thing that was primarily that was designed to destroy it in the first place. AV Wow, you must suck hard at AV. A breach forge gun will two-shot a repping Incubus. Now, what was that which you said about AV weapons unable to do their job? Seriously, git gud, scrub "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32 Atiim didn't agree with limiting tanks!
Evolution-7 The Rainbow Effect Negative-Feedback 427	Posted - 2014.04.06 19:29:00 - [24] - Quote Lt Royal wrote: Would you say shield/armor hardeners need a slight buff too but that only applies to Derpships or that Derpships should have natural resistances tied to a skill? Either are fine. Veteran Pilot "Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart."
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 6433	Posted - 2014.04.06 19:41:00 - [25] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Wow, you must suck hard at AV. A breach forge gun will two-shot a repping Incubus. Now, what was that which you said about AV weapons unable to do their job? Seriously, git gud, scrub Oh noes, a 3rd Rate Tanker in a 2nd (arguably 3rd) rate corporation who cries about people with MLT weapons being able to destroy him just told me to get gud. Whatever shall I do? The only Anti-Armor Infantry AV Weapon in this game (Swarm Launcher) is unable to destroy a Madrugar with 3 Armor Repairers. Or would you like to disprove that? Also, lolIncubus. If you get shot by a Breach Forge Gun and don't fly away in 9s that would take to happen (not accounting for having to aim your shot and/or the Fore Gun's travel time). you might be the scrub here. The Snack That Smiles Back! "Swarmers" [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Zirzo Valcyn Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 393	Posted - 2014.04.06 19:54:00 - [26] - Quote some guys i run with we make a great effort to destroy tanks usually a coordinated attack of dropships, tanks, proxies, and AV infantry that we fly around insert/extract. if it really calls for it we use jihad. there's nothing more rewarding for me than to see enemy tank panic and burn, dont really care who gets the final kill. the hardest thing was rallying others to fight back against tanks. running small proto turrets tho kept gunners happy and returning. after witnessing successful combined air assaults more joined in the cause. if anything the tank is kept under pressure and cannot fire as freely at the inf and point hackers. u can ban the troll out of the forums but u can't ban the forums out of the troll. forum warrior .189
Kn1qht Lords Prophets 46	Posted - 2014.04.06 20:14:00 - [27] - Quote Nerf yourself , happy now ? A$AP CUZ THIRDEYE \| PROPHET OR LEAVE \| BEAST COAST
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1527	Posted - 2014.04.06 20:21:00 - [28] - Quote Atiim wrote: Harpyja wrote: Wow, you must suck hard at AV. A breach forge gun will two-shot a repping Incubus. Now, what was that which you said about AV weapons unable to do their job? Seriously, git gud, scrub Oh noes, a 3rd Rate Tanker in a 2nd (arguably 3rd) rate corporation who cries about people with MLT weapons being able to destroy him just told me to get gud. Whatever shall I do? The only Anti-Armor Infantry AV Weapon in this game (Swarm Launcher) is unable to destroy a Madrugar with 3 Armor Repairers. Or would you like to disprove that? Also, lolIncubus. If you get shot by a Breach Forge Gun and don't fly away in 9s that would take to happen (not accounting for having to aim your shot and/or the Fore Gun's travel time). you might be the scrub here. The SL is more DPS-based than alpha-based, and a repping Madrugar is fit to withstand DPS-based AV. Also, don't forget that forge guns are specifically bonused for armor now. It only takes a little over 3 seconds to bring down the Incubus with the breach. Someone did the math in another thread. I say that the first charge doesn't count, because the pilot doesn't know that it's being charged. After the first shot, it's just a little over three more seconds before the fatal blow is delivered, and a good forger won't miss. Again, I'm surprised that not that many people use the breach forge gun. It's like AVers have a phobia of using proxies and breaches, then cry they can't do their jobs. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32 Atiim didn't agree with limiting tanks!
Evolution-7 The Rainbow Effect Negative-Feedback 430	Posted - 2014.04.07 08:35:00 - [29] - Quote Lance 2ballzStrong wrote: Evolution-7 wrote: Just fix the bugs (there is a bloody ton) and load in new content, such as AA HAV. Otherwise I am pretty happy with balance, after AA HAV is introduced reduce elevation on large railguns and thats it. Is this... Anti Air HAV? If so... ... lol? Dropships are good in DUST now? If AA does not mean anti air, ignore my comment. Yes I do mean AA HAV, as I mentioned in another thread, these would wield dual medium lock-on or dumbfire turrets. These would have the same range and other turrets on aircraft making it viable anti-air, of course this would have 2-3 small turrets for AP defence. The AA HAV has the biggest elevation of any turret, if you man the turret of a LAV and aim the entire way up while facing the front of the LAV, you can see it has a massive elevation, the AA HAV will also have this elevation but the whole way around the turret, it has to have a weak spot which is the very small area it can not aim at. Why should it have dual/ triple medium turrets and not a large turret. Because it requires large elevation to fulfill its role and large turrets veing intended to take out tanks would be too powerful. The medium turret would fulfill this role perfectly. With this in the game, CCP could reduce the elevation on 80gj railguns so they can be tank poppers and not be overpowered at killing aerial units. The range nerf means bs, they still maintain the same alpha damage and DPS, so doing what I said before will make the 80gj railgun more of a tank buster and the AA HAV Anti-Air. Also with the growing concern of very highly skilled (physically skilled) pilots making tank busting look easy, you need a viable tactic against them, the AA HAV otherwise these tanks will just call a railguns and sit in the redline popping us, making it hard to counter them and then throwing other things out of balance. "Lack of content makes things unbalanced" <~ The most important quote in Dust 514 development which the devs still can not get their heads around. Veteran Pilot "Fight on and fly on to the last drop of blood and the last drop of fuel, to the last beat of the heart."
Vaux Karn The Mercenary Collective 64	Posted - 2014.04.07 09:41:00 - [30] - Quote AV vs tanks is not balanced...std vehicles should be a challenge to 1 vs 1 with std AV, be easy to destroy with proto AV, and somewhere in between with adv AV. Now I get that this is not a good place for vehicles to be at when they only have std available, but eventually adv and pro will come out, and if there is no nerf or rebalance, then adv will be ungodly and pro will make the MCC look squishy. So that is something that needs to be kept in mind, unless of course tankers and pilots are content to never have more than std. That is about as likely as them being content to just stare at a blank pilot dropsuit tab in the market. Next...for the "RR/CR OP" crowd...I will agree that CR need a RoF reduction, just like the TacAR got, to prevent exploitation with modded/turbo controllers. Beyond that, if you are running armor tanked suits, then stop QQing. Their damage profiles are designed to rip through you. Shield tankers get ripped apart faster with lasers and blasters than you do with rails and projectiles, and to top it off we can only add half the extra HP that you can. As a Caldari, I love seeing a rail or projectile weapon shooting at me (with the exception insta-kill turbo controller CRs) because it means that my shields will last more than .5 seconds, on the other hand a laser or blaster and I will probably die if we are both full health and equally skilled. Just look at the numbers, max UPbonus for shield extenders is 66 with a penalty to recharge delay, for armor you can get 80 with no penalty just under double a movement penalty (skill bonuses provide same percentages so figure them out if you want the gap to widen). I think we need more variety in extenders and a narrower gap between shield and armor values, but armor also needs something for high slots. So enough with nerf cries, vehicles are inevitable if you ever want adv or pro, but in the meantime, infantry will have to suck it up and deal with it.



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