DUST Search - The Cost Of AV

All Channels

General Discussions

The Cost Of AV

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
tween tween UrAnus Air Service 1	Posted - 2014.04.07 13:34:00 - [121] - Quote Half of you should stop whining and g'et out Sica's. How hard can it Be.
Void Echo Total Extinction 2398	Posted - 2014.04.07 16:14:00 - [122] - Quote Duran Lex wrote: Void Echo wrote: so your choosing to ignore the fact that if a vehicle pilot exists their vehicle, they lose all efficiency because they invested in vehicles, not infantry? And what does getting out of your vehicle have to do with your capabilities while inside one? because your talking about sacrifices, the sacrifice that vehicle pilots pay is their ability to do combat outside the vehicle. basically making them a vehicle, and removing the infantry aspect of their character. if you take a pure vehicle pilot and place him in a situation where has no vehicle and must face a squad of infantry, the pilot will die immediately. Youtube Closed Beta Vet CEO: Total Extinction
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 6447	Posted - 2014.04.07 18:10:00 - [123] - Quote The Attorney General wrote: So now you are going to tell me what I need to run on my tank fits? Still, my 51,000,000 beats your SP amount by a huge margin, so your argument is void. Also, my good tanks are more expensive than your good AV fits, so there is that. Indeed I am. Also, the only way to reach that 51m SP ceiling would be to include every Small and Large Turret, and every passive skill they have. So by that logic, I would be able to include what; every AV weapon in the game, and all of the trees under it? It is also impossible to reach that 51m SP ceiling without skilling things to Level V that yield no bonus whatsoever, and aren't a prerequisite to anything (i.e, HAV Command V). The Snack That Smiles Back! "Swarmers" [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 6447	Posted - 2014.04.07 18:19:00 - [124] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Dude your assumptions that any one role in Dust requires any more "skill" than any other, in any FPS game ever made is one full of fallacies. How so? Would you say that the role of a Plasma Cannon user is as easy as the role of an Assault suit user? I didn't state that AV requires more skill than piloting an HAV (whether or not I believe that to be the case is another story). However, I did state that he is saying that the effort to destroy an HAV should be proportinate to the effort required to pilot one. Would you say that using an HAV with an 80GJ Blaster is difficult? True Adamance wrote: You aim you gun, so do I. You claim positioning is important, I position myself as well. You fight tanks, I fight tanks, you are threatened by infantry, and so am I. To an extent* You are only threatened by 4 (arguably 2-3) Infantry weapons in the game. And of those weapons, they can only threaten you if you allow yourself to be threatened. True Adamance wrote: By that logic is it fair to say you assume you are a better player than me because your arbitrarily place value on a role you personally prefer more, and that is in direct competition with mine? Since when do I place more value on AV than I do vehicles? True Adamance wrote: There is no value in discussing whether or not a role inherently makes you a better or worse player, its a weak argument, and ignorant and uninformed, and all together something I am not interested in. Please, point to where I was discussing this. The Snack That Smiles Back! "Swarmers" [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
ratamaq doc Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 497	Posted - 2014.04.07 18:46:00 - [125] - Quote The fitting I used in this video cost 71k plus the LAV. Just in this build did I swap it from my 143k proto amarr Logi fit. SP is about right though. http://youtu.be/XJh8Q2jGtRQ YouTube
Duran Lex Fraternity of St. Venefice Amarr Empire 661	Posted - 2014.04.07 19:52:00 - [126] - Quote Void Echo wrote: Duran Lex wrote: Void Echo wrote: so your choosing to ignore the fact that if a vehicle pilot exists their vehicle, they lose all efficiency because they invested in vehicles, not infantry? And what does getting out of your vehicle have to do with your capabilities while inside one? because your talking about sacrifices, the sacrifice that vehicle pilots pay is their ability to do combat outside the vehicle. basically making them a vehicle, and removing the infantry aspect of their character. if you take a pure vehicle pilot and place him in a situation where has no vehicle and must face a squad of infantry, the pilot will die immediately. Yea, the problem with that is everyone in the game makes that decision. We either choose to put SP into infantry, thus making us weak inside vehicles. Or we put SP in vehicles, thus making us weak walking around on foot. It's your decision whether or not to use what you are skilling into. If i go pure AV and nothing into any AP weapon, I'm going to **** when trying to combat infantry aren't I? If you want to be proficient in both play styles, you must put skill into it. Just like I would have to in the case of vehicles. I'm talking about the sacrifices that create a disparity between the two play styles. An HAV pilot has far more advantages that are FAR larger in magnitude then that of the infantry soldier. More HP, more speed, more ammo, more resistances, being efficient at AV and AP at the same time, and the ability to shrug off the majority of the weapons in the game, just for 200k more then a dropsuit and the inability to chase down your victims that do not have the proper tools to fend you off while on foot. So sure, you can't stomp people across the entire god damn map. Unless its a map that has mostly open terrain, you know, the majority of the fuckin maps. That's what you sacrifice. Not being the god's of all possible terrain, though you certainly come close. (Note -I'm leaving out being unable to hack objectives. Because until they remove the ability to clone someone for the win, it's entirely moot fuckin point.) Currently Infantry AV have to give up their rock to use paper. Infantry AP have to give up their paper to use rock. HAV's give up nothing, yet are the rock, paper and scissors from the get go, thus removing the entire concept of the game. When the best counter to combat a force is itself, then there's nothing that is balanced about it. Edit - I forgot to add something else. Once upon the time the Forge Gun, a weapon that was both able to kill infantry and vehicles alike...got nerfed towards AP because people thought it was unfair for a weapon to be proficient at killing both infantry and vehicles at the same time**. You aren't a fuckin exception to the overall balance of the game.
Void Echo Total Extinction 2400	Posted - 2014.04.07 19:58:00 - [127] - Quote Duran Lex wrote: Void Echo wrote: Duran Lex wrote: Void Echo wrote: so your choosing to ignore the fact that if a vehicle pilot exists their vehicle, they lose all efficiency because they invested in vehicles, not infantry? And what does getting out of your vehicle have to do with your capabilities while inside one? because your talking about sacrifices, the sacrifice that vehicle pilots pay is their ability to do combat outside the vehicle. basically making them a vehicle, and removing the infantry aspect of their character. if you take a pure vehicle pilot and place him in a situation where has no vehicle and must face a squad of infantry, the pilot will die immediately. Yea, the problem with that is everyone in the game makes that decision. We either choose to put SP into infantry, thus making us weak inside vehicles. Or we put SP in vehicles, thus making us weak walking around on foot. It's your decision whether or not to use what you are skilling into. If i go pure AV and nothing into any AP weapon, I'm going to ****** when trying to combat infantry aren't I? If you want to be proficient in both play styles, you must put skill into it. Just like I would have to in the case of vehicles. I'm talking about the sacrifices that create a disparity between the two play styles. An HAV pilot has far more advantages that are FAR larger in magnitude then that of the infantry soldier. More HP, more speed, more ammo, more resistances, being efficient at AV and AP at the same time, and the ability to shrug off the majority of the weapons in the game, just for 200k more then a dropsuit and the inability to chase down your victims that do not have the proper tools to fend you off while on foot. So sure, you can't stomp people across the entire god damn map. Unless its a map that has mostly open terrain, you know, the majority of the fuckin maps. That's what you sacrifice. Not being the god's of all possible terrain, though you certainly come close. (Note -I'm leaving out being unable to hack objectives. Because until they remove the ability to clone someone for the win, it's entirely moot fuckin point.) Currently Infantry AV have to give up their rock to use paper. Infantry AP have to give up their paper to use rock. HAV's give up nothing, yet are the rock, paper and scissors from the get go, thus removing the entire concept of the game. When the best counter to combat a force is itself, then there's nothing that is balanced about it. and when one play style is killed as easy as killing a scout with a heavy, then balance is non existent and thus kills off that play style and giving you nothing to use your equipment for, thus making your role useless as well because you want someone else's play style to be as easy as you want it. Rails should be anti-vehicle as primary, and anti-personnel only with a truly skillful pilot (I am an example of that from when I used to tank with a railgun) blaster should be anti-personal as primary, it does superb against infantry and poorly against other tanks. missiles, I really don't care about. Youtube Closed Beta Vet CEO: Total Extinction
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 430	Posted - 2014.04.07 20:12:00 - [128] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: I can suppress and sometimes take out (if they hang around like morons) proto fit tanks with my dren swarms. In fact, I find it is the most effective counter to the armour tanked sica/gunnloggi BS, as infantry AV can be concealed easier than a massive tank (also his railgod gun can't hit you effectively if you know how to strafe). Blaster tanks, I engage from dynamic directions from height to confuse them (cover is your friend). No compromises, since I use a commando. If they send infantry after me, I mow them down with my rail rifle and continue to gain points of of damaging tanks and sending them with their tails between their legs. The fit is only 10k isk. My double damage modded sica of vengeance costs me 79k isk and can easily be lost, if I don't get the jump on the enemy. TL;DR, standard swarms (and any light AV weapon for that matter) are OP (on the right commando) Try using a PLC as an AV weapon on a Galmmando, you'll be pleased. Please provide video of how well your swarms are doing against tanks. It would enlighten many here, including myself. I have a Min Commando Swarm fit with prof 2 in swarms, but only using advanced swarms. I can finish off the occasional tank, I am the cause of death of none in that fit. I only use ADV swarms because I am going to die many times. If I use a FG my effectiveness against tanks is much better. I still will die many times, sometimes to the tank, more often by a shotgun to the back of the head. Situational awareness? You think you can see 360 degrees in the 4 seconds it takes to charge a FG while also keeping track of the tank? In 4 seconds that scout can travel 40 meters, which is a long way, pretty much out of reach of my SMG. Because, that's why.
Duran Lex Fraternity of St. Venefice Amarr Empire 662	Posted - 2014.04.07 20:12:00 - [129] - Quote Void Echo wrote: Duran Lex wrote: Void Echo wrote: Duran Lex wrote: Void Echo wrote: so your choosing to ignore the fact that if a vehicle pilot exists their vehicle, they lose all efficiency because they invested in vehicles, not infantry? And what does getting out of your vehicle have to do with your capabilities while inside one? because your talking about sacrifices, the sacrifice that vehicle pilots pay is their ability to do combat outside the vehicle. basically making them a vehicle, and removing the infantry aspect of their character. if you take a pure vehicle pilot and place him in a situation where has no vehicle and must face a squad of infantry, the pilot will die immediately. Yea, the problem with that is everyone in the game makes that decision. We either choose to put SP into infantry, thus making us weak inside vehicles. Or we put SP in vehicles, thus making us weak walking around on foot. It's your decision whether or not to use what you are skilling into. If i go pure AV and nothing into any AP weapon, I'm going to **** when trying to combat infantry aren't I? If you want to be proficient in both play styles, you must put skill into it. Just like I would have to in the case of vehicles. I'm talking about the sacrifices that create a disparity between the two play styles. An HAV pilot has far more advantages that are FAR larger in magnitude then that of the infantry soldier. More HP, more speed, more ammo, more resistances, being efficient at AV and AP at the same time, and the ability to shrug off the majority of the weapons in the game, just for 200k more then a dropsuit and the inability to chase down your victims that do not have the proper tools to fend you off while on foot. So sure, you can't stomp people across the entire god damn map. Unless its a map that has mostly open terrain, you know, the majority of the fuckin maps. That's what you sacrifice. Not being the god's of all possible terrain, though you certainly come close. (Note -I'm leaving out being unable to hack objectives. Because until they remove the ability to clone someone for the win, it's entirely moot fuckin point.) Currently Infantry AV have to give up their rock to use paper. Infantry AP have to give up their paper to use rock. HAV's give up nothing, yet are the rock, paper and scissors from the get go, thus removing the entire concept of the game. When the best counter to combat a force is itself, then there's nothing that is balanced about it. and when one play style is killed as easy as killing a scout with a heavy, then balance is non existent and thus kills off that play style and giving you nothing to use your equipment for, thus making your role useless as well because you want someone else's play style to be as easy as you want it. Rails should be anti-vehicle as primary, and anti-personnel only with a truly skillful pilot (I am an example of that from when I used to tank with a railgun) blaster should be anti-personal as primary, it does superb against infantry and poorly against other tanks. missiles, I really don't care about. No it doesn't kill the play style because that's the entire concept of this game. You will ALWAYS have a weakness that can absolutely dominate you no matter what. Rock should almost always beats scissors, paper should almost always beats rock. You should get the idea now. In the case of the scout VS heavy. The Heavy is the rock, and the scout is paper. The scout will win if he's competent because he has the advantage before skill is even involved. So damn straight that is balanced. Your changes wouldn't do a damn thing to close the huge gap. What needs to happen is this : HAV main turrets deal zero damage to infantry. If you want to also kill infantry, equip small turrets that need to be manned by other personnel. This creates a scenario that actually justifies the need for multiple AV to coordinate and take it out. The HAV with no added turrets still gets to enjoy those tank battles, solo or squads of terrible AV will still barely make you notice their existence (if they even bother to try and take you out now since you aren't ruining their life every second of battle), and you can still easily wipe the floor with infantry if you decide to choose** that course of action. Yet this system actually makes you choose a role, instead of excelling at them all.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 430	Posted - 2014.04.07 20:55:00 - [130] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Also, need I remind you that proxies work very well? I'm surprised that proxies are rarely seen on the field. That means you don't even need to spend all that SP on SLs and stuff. The only SP's you need to invest for AV go into proxies. All of the other SP you have go where ever you want into whichever role you want. Because with proxies, you sacrifice next to nothing (aside from investing the SP that could've gone somewhere else). During one week of play, I got destroyed by proxies twice. The first time through 3975 shield and 1500 armor, the second time through 5300 shield and 1500 armor. The total amount of battles where I encountered proxies was probably no more than four. I'd say that that's a rather high success rate, wouldn't you agree? No. First you got killed twice in a week, I get killed twice in a game trying to kill tanks in a good game. Second, proxies work only if you are in a safe place to deploy them, meaning no tanks already there and no infantry shooting at you, then they have to be placed where the tank is most likely to go, but tankers know this as well. You got caught by proxies because they are seldom used because they are ineffective, I bet you won't get caught in the same place anytime soon and there are limited places to place them. Third, one or two proxies didn't do that much damage, you had to hit several, probably next to RE's. The odds of that are even worse. So no, not good odds, not effective. They are good at slowing a tank from rolling into an objective or against LAV's. That is it. Because, that's why.

Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 430	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:05:00 - [131] - Quote Atiim wrote: Void Echo wrote: because of the fact that adv and proto tank hulls haven't existed in dust since the uprising build came along, standard tanks have had to become the new proto tanks, STD tanks are the highest level of vehicles you can get for ground deployment, if you don't like that a std tank is more powerful than a std dropsuit you have balance issues. also, then you should advocate of adv and proto tank hulls being put back into the game so the std tanks you hate so much will go down almost as easy as you want them to without causing the vehicle community to slip into near extinction again. If we introduce ADV and PRO vehicles, then we'd either have to make both ADV/PRO AV either stupidly overpowered; which would make running anything other than PRO pointless and cause the V/AV roles to stagnate, as they would cost too much SP to actually be worth a d@mn. Or we'd have to make the difference minimal at best, which would negate the purpose of having tiers in the first place No, what we have now should be Proto and STD and ADV should be balanced from that. Because, that's why.
Rusty Shallows 1439	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:08:00 - [132] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: THEAMAZING POTHEAD wrote: Av no longer exists in this game. There is only railguns and blasters. Scrubs that can't do either use jihad jeeps. Forges are only good for rooftop support. Swarms and av nades are jokes and anyone using them should feel bad. Because they suck more than a sniper, at least a sniper gets a few kills and doesn't die. A swarmer does nothing except keep away uber crappy tankers for a half minute. Hardeners are still OP because of stacking 3 shield hardeners, while railguns are now even stronger because of the nerf, while having 300m range is almost helpful to them, because it let's rail tankers move up without getting redline railed or installation railed since they usually don't run hardeners. Ads's are probably the most well off though because of the range nerf. Nyain San opinion, disregarded. He made made several good points and you ignore him over corp bigotry? Forums > Game: So here is a cookie and a Like. Please keep posting. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! >>> GòÜ(GÇóGîéGÇó)Gò¥ >>>
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9306	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:14:00 - [133] - Quote Duran Lex wrote: No it doesn't kill the play style because that's the entire concept of this game. You will ALWAYS have a weakness that can absolutely dominate you no matter what. Rock should almost always beats scissors, paper should almost always beats rock. You should get the idea now. In the case of the scout VS heavy. The Heavy is the rock, and the scout is paper. The scout will win if he's competent because he has the advantage before skill is even involved. So damn straight that is balanced. Your changes wouldn't do a damn thing to close the huge gap. What needs to happen is this : HAV main turrets deal zero damage to infantry. If you want to also kill infantry, equip small turrets that need to be manned by other personnel. This creates a scenario that actually justifies the need for multiple AV to coordinate and take it out. The HAV with no added turrets still gets to enjoy those tank battles, solo or squads of terrible AV will still barely make you notice their existence (if they even bother to try and take you out now since you aren't ruining their life every second of battle), and you can still easily wipe the floor with infantry if you decide to choose that course of action. Yet this system actually makes you choose a role, instead of excelling at them all. I already do this.... you are talking to a tanker that has been doing this a long time.....not a 1.7 FoTM tanker...... I run fits for killing tanks, I have fits for killing infantry, I have fits to support assault on objectives..... AV is not barely noticeable..... it might be if I made use of a triple repping HAV...which cannot fit or fulfil my style of play. Regardless of how you nerf HAV I will always find a way to go 20+/0.... it doesn't matter that all AVers are willing to argue for nerfs to vehicles but give back no concessions..... there will always be those who make your infantry based lives a nightmare. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Berserker007 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 516	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:17:00 - [134] - Quote Void Echo wrote: and when one play style is killed as easy as killing a scout with a heavy, then balance is non existent and thus kills off that play style and giving you nothing to use your equipment for, thus making your role useless as well because you want someone else's play style to be as easy as you want it. Rails should be anti-vehicle as primary, and anti-personnel only with a truly skillful pilot (I am an example of that from when I used to tank with a railgun) blaster should be anti-personal as primary, it does superb against infantry and poorly against other tanks. missiles, I really don't care about. question, since when is a weapon the size of a human meant to be more powerful than a weapon the size of a vehicle? how is that possible? TO answer your Q : Javelin Missile. There your entire argument is nullified. A small shoulder fired weapon that is able to nullify tanks and air threats in a single use. Unfortunately Void, you are hitting into the area of both Speaker & Taka for your "desire"/ideas on how tank-av interactions should occur. As it is, it takes no skill investment (SP, don't mean personal skill) to tank and be effective in both AV and AP purposes; and if you even try to say otherwise you are lying and should leave the discussion. In the last week, I have been dicking around in tanks simply b/c I can, as have almost 200 sicas via salvage. Now I hate tanking, nor am I good at it; however when you can run up against ANY tank in the game w/ a rail you can pop it. No skill investment, no anything; simply 2-3 shots and its done (as ive done this to both sica/soma and Gung/Mady). However, if you then look at PROTO AV, it takes more SP investment, and 'skill' (term loosely here) to take out even militia/basic tanks, and in doing so you need to be away of not only tanks, but other infantry. This is a key important fact here. If you are AV, you need to watch out for the tank and 15 other infantry. Whereas if you are the tanker (assume both sides have a tank), you need to watch out for 1 tank and 1 AV. Thusly as player specifically spec'd into a certain role has the entire enemy team to look out for; whereas the tanker w/o no SP investment (and less isk investment) only has to worry about 2 players ... ??? I will still say and firmly promote the Tiercide needs to take affect; in just the AV-Vehicle interactions. As all other weapons in the game gain bonus attributes when leveled up, whereas AV does not. All that changes in damage nothing else. As it is, interactions should go back to how they were in Chromosone. Proto AV **** on militia/basic hull as they should (nor can u complain about disparity, as it has been reduce for tanking). When that occurs; tankers will need their ADV/Proto hulls to full aid in how AV interacts; but till that point; we will continue seeing AV being underpowered. And before Void or any other tanker complains about you are a tank and all that garbage; yes you are a tank, you are tanking in a BASIC HULL. You should not be that dominate in that type of situation; as that will only lead to further imbalance with higher tier hulls. As an ex of how you think balance is now: 2 rail shots, and 6 volleys of proto swarms to kill 1 triple rep mady .... Balanced? I think not @ person who said change main turrets for tank ... simply NO. Let them have their turrets. The turrets aren't the problem at all, it is simply how their fittings react with what the current AV potential is Flame On...... Closed Beta Vet Mordu's Trials Winner Original IMP
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 430	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:18:00 - [135] - Quote Void Echo wrote: Duran Lex wrote: Sorry dude, but those vehicles in BF are ****** when you first use em. Gotta level them up for them to be any good, I.E. personal investment. But that's moot point. The real discrepancy between the two is in BF the vehicles are free, as you pointed out in the end.. They are balanced, because they are free. In Dust, it costing money, brings out varying degrees of peoples opinions on "value". For instance, many people would agree that running MLT fits when you are low on money is the better thing to do. So why would you have a problem if HAV's cost the same as a dropsuit, where you can make throw away fits until you want to break your wallet. If in return, the only damn weapons in the game could actually kill you as easily as you can kill them. Are you saying that you don't want it to be just as easy to kill you as you can others? You want to play in a situation where it's noticeably harder to kill you for the sole justification of "I'm in a tank"? You want the game balanced around being the superior asset on the field at all times? with that said, I must remind you that I retired from tanking when 1.7 hit. what im saying is that when comparing HAVs to dropsuits, logically the HAV will have far superior killing and defensive power. if you make HAVs as strong and weak as dropsuits you effectively eliminate the want to use HAVs. since 1.7 iv been a gallente assault and when I return il have enough sp to expand over multiple fields of play styles. when im talking about balance, im not going to make ideas that suit infantry and just leave vehicles in the dark like everyone seems to do here. I talk about bringing in balance that would make both parties happy, thus keeping both sides from dying off whereas suggestions like yours will only benefit the infantry side and cause vehicles to go extinct, making you look bias towards vehicle pilots. Logically you can't create balance by assuming that one player will always have a vast advantage over another by virtue of one choosing the "X" option. There is no disadvantages to a tank, you can put on the exact same drop suit I am wearing, get in a tank and have huge advantages, jump out of the tank and now be equal to me. Temporarily losing a huge advantage and getting equality is not a "disadvantage". If you drop your preconceived notions about what a tank is and realize we are talking about players in both instances you will see how unfair this inherently is. ISK expenditure is the only valid argument for the strength of tanks, (MLT tanks ruin this argument completely) yet in DUST much greater ISK expenditure is subject to diminishing returns and doesn't linearly increase ability, except in the case of vehicles. Because, that's why.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 434	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:29:00 - [136] - Quote Void Echo wrote: Duran Lex wrote: Void Echo wrote: so your choosing to ignore the fact that if a vehicle pilot exists their vehicle, they lose all efficiency because they invested in vehicles, not infantry? And what does getting out of your vehicle have to do with your capabilities while inside one? because your talking about sacrifices, the sacrifice that vehicle pilots pay is their ability to do combat outside the vehicle. basically making them a vehicle, and removing the infantry aspect of their character. if you take a pure vehicle pilot and place him in a situation where has no vehicle and must face a squad of infantry, the pilot will die immediately. How much SP were necessary to get into that Soma again? I am pretty sure a starter fit has a weapon, a sidearm and a grenade. He is only helpless against a tank. Because, that's why.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9306	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:37:00 - [137] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Void Echo wrote: Duran Lex wrote: Void Echo wrote: so your choosing to ignore the fact that if a vehicle pilot exists their vehicle, they lose all efficiency because they invested in vehicles, not infantry? And what does getting out of your vehicle have to do with your capabilities while inside one? because your talking about sacrifices, the sacrifice that vehicle pilots pay is their ability to do combat outside the vehicle. basically making them a vehicle, and removing the infantry aspect of their character. if you take a pure vehicle pilot and place him in a situation where has no vehicle and must face a squad of infantry, the pilot will die immediately. How much SP were necessary to get into that Soma again? I am pretty sure a starter fit has a weapon, a sidearm and a grenade. He is only helpless against a tank. You telling me you can't kill a Soma? facepalms....... "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"* -Dagger Two
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 6452	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:39:00 - [138] - Quote True Adamance wrote: You telling me you can't kill a Soma? *facepalms....... MLT Swarm Launcher (Starter Fit) vs. MLT HAV (Soma). I know where my money is Ratamaq Doc: The Best Swarmer Who Ever Lived. [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1537	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:44:00 - [139] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Harpyja wrote: Also, need I remind you that proxies work very well? I'm surprised that proxies are rarely seen on the field. That means you don't even need to spend all that SP on SLs and stuff. The only SP's you need to invest for AV go into proxies. All of the other SP you have go where ever you want into whichever role you want. Because with proxies, you sacrifice next to nothing (aside from investing the SP that could've gone somewhere else). During one week of play, I got destroyed by proxies twice. The first time through 3975 shield and 1500 armor, the second time through 5300 shield and 1500 armor. The total amount of battles where I encountered proxies was probably no more than four. I'd say that that's a rather high success rate, wouldn't you agree? No. First you got killed twice in a week, I get killed twice in a game trying to kill tanks in a good game. Second, proxies work only if you are in a safe place to deploy them, meaning no tanks already there and no infantry shooting at you, then they have to be placed where the tank is most likely to go, but tankers know this as well. You got caught by proxies because they are seldom used because they are ineffective, I bet you won't get caught in the same place anytime soon and there are limited places to place them. Third, one or two proxies didn't do that much damage, you had to hit several, probably next to RE's. The odds of that are even worse. So no, not good odds, not effective. They are good at slowing a tank from rolling into an objective or against LAV's. That is it. What's up with this "proxies are hard to use and useless" mentality? It's just like in Chromosome where people didn't use adv or proto AV, then cried tanks were OP and got us nerfed and AV buffed. Your first statement has no value to it. Yeah I only got killed twice, because I only encountered proxies in only about 4 battles. I would've lost a lot more tanks if proxies were more common. Then you go on about how it's hard to place proxies and such. There are lots of locations to place proxies; you just have to get off your lazy ass and find them. There's got to be multiple spots where you can safely lay a series of proxies at any one given time. The whole point of proxies is to place them where they are least expected. One of the matches I was blown up in, the person kept placing the proxy trap in the same exact location each time, so I'd just go off the side of the road a little and earn some free WPs by blowing them up. So your claim that proxies are pointless because tankers will know where they are has no value, because there's always a new location for you to set up a proxy trap. And again, your mentality that "proxies aren't good at killing tanks" is what's keeping you down. I just don't understand why AVers seem to refuse to use proxies and breach forge guns, because they are the most effective at killing tanks now. Stop being so stubborn to realize that the method of AV has changed, or do I have to keep telling you how to blow me up? "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32 Atiim didn't agree with limiting tanks!
Atiim Living Like Larry Schwag 6452	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:49:00 - [140] - Quote Unfortunately, I haven't the time to sit through and make a detailed argument atm, but I will say one thing Haryja. Your signature. Have you ever though about using a line space? I'm pretty sure me not wanting to limit tanks is not part of the Amarrian Bible. Ratamaq Doc: The Best Swarmer Who Ever Lived. [s]Text[/s] <-------- That's how you make a strike-through -HAND

Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1537	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:56:00 - [141] - Quote Atiim wrote: Unfortunately, I haven't the time to sit through and make a detailed argument atm, but I will say one thing Haryja. Your signature. Have you ever though about using a line space? I'm pretty sure me not wanting to limit tanks is not part of the Amarrian Bible. Sorry, turns out I'm a noob when it comes to signatures I'm putting the two returns it asks for a line break, but nothing happens. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32 Atiim didn't agree with limiting tanks!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9307	Posted - 2014.04.07 21:56:00 - [142] - Quote Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: You telling me you can't kill a Soma? facepalms....... MLT Swarm Launcher (Starter Fit) vs. MLT HAV (Soma). I know where my money is You really have to consider Soma as STD HAV with all the benefits of MLT gear........terrible design of course....but hell what do you expect me to do about it? I hate MLT tanks as well. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"* -Dagger Two
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 2305	Posted - 2014.04.07 22:15:00 - [143] - Quote Atiim wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: My AV suit costs 50k, I have RE's and 3 nanohives, and I drive myself around in a LAV that costs 20k (so entire fit is 70k). You're doing it wrong. I had a tank that only cost 500k back in 1.6. The entire tanking community was doing it wrong. You aren't a tanker. You aren't good at AV. You aren't good at shooting. Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Rusty Shallows 1443	Posted - 2014.04.07 22:19:00 - [144] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Atiim wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: My AV suit costs 50k, I have RE's and 3 nanohives, and I drive myself around in a LAV that costs 20k (so entire fit is 70k). You're doing it wrong. I had a tank that only cost 500k back in 1.6. The entire tanking community was doing it wrong. You aren't a tanker. You aren't good at AV. You aren't good at shooting. There isn't any good "infantry" AV. Only what people make work under specific conditions. Forums > Game: So here is a cookie and a Like. Please keep posting. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! >>> GòÜ(GÇóGîéGÇó)Gò¥ >>>
Charlotte O'Dell Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 2306	Posted - 2014.04.07 22:24:00 - [145] - Quote Rusty Shallows wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Atiim wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: My AV suit costs 50k, I have RE's and 3 nanohives, and I drive myself around in a LAV that costs 20k (so entire fit is 70k). You're doing it wrong. I had a tank that only cost 500k back in 1.6. The entire tanking community was doing it wrong. You aren't a tanker. You aren't good at AV. You aren't good at shooting. There isn't any good "infantry" AV. Only what people make work under specific conditions. Its perfectly justified. A hand held weapon should never match the DPS of a turret because the infantry man can hide from a tank; a tank cannot hide from a tank. Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9309	Posted - 2014.04.07 22:24:00 - [146] - Quote Rusty Shallows wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Atiim wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: My AV suit costs 50k, I have RE's and 3 nanohives, and I drive myself around in a LAV that costs 20k (so entire fit is 70k). You're doing it wrong. I had a tank that only cost 500k back in 1.6. The entire tanking community was doing it wrong. You aren't a tanker. You aren't good at AV. You aren't good at shooting. There isn't any good "infantry" AV. Only what people make work under specific conditions. And yet when they do...... "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Alpha 443-6732 General Tso's Alliance 408	Posted - 2014.04.08 02:08:00 - [147] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: I'd love to see these tankers try and use av as an infantryman. You guys seriously dont know how hard it is to kill a tank with little to no help. Try use a standard fit with standard swarms and tell me that the skills he has listed dont have any use. Smg skill, hell any sidearm you like is necessary when your main weapon only hurts vehicles. The fit he has is a good av fit. You would not be able to make an adv fit as good as this. I do... and I kill tanks with my dren swarms. I also have a proto missile fit that I spent 20mil sp on that is invalidated by even the worst players using a militia railgun with damage mods.
Rusty Shallows 1448	Posted - 2014.04.08 02:19:00 - [148] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Rusty Shallows wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Atiim wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: My AV suit costs 50k, I have RE's and 3 nanohives, and I drive myself around in a LAV that costs 20k (so entire fit is 70k). You're doing it wrong. I had a tank that only cost 500k back in 1.6. The entire tanking community was doing it wrong. You aren't a tanker. You aren't good at AV. You aren't good at shooting. There isn't any good "infantry" AV. Only what people make work under specific conditions. And yet when they do...... True. Great for high organized competitive play. Terrible for pubs unless CCP does something to balance the weapons or matchmaking. Forums > Game: So here is a cookie and a Like. Please keep posting. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! >>> GòÜ(GÇóGîéGÇó)Gò¥ >>>
Echo 1991 WarRavens League of Infamy 201	Posted - 2014.04.08 03:07:00 - [149] - Quote Alpha 443-6732 wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: I'd love to see these tankers try and use av as an infantryman. You guys seriously dont know how hard it is to kill a tank with little to no help. Try use a standard fit with standard swarms and tell me that the skills he has listed dont have any use. Smg skill, hell any sidearm you like is necessary when your main weapon only hurts vehicles. The fit he has is a good av fit. You would not be able to make an adv fit as good as this. I do... and I kill tanks with my dren swarms. I also have a proto missile fit that I spent 20mil sp on that is invalidated by even the worst players using a militia railgun with damage mods. On your own or with something else shooting it? I refuse to believe that you can kill a tank on your own with a dren swarm. And about the rail. Dont complain about it here. If tankers didnt want everything about tanking to be cheaper this whole mess with tank spam and super dmg mods wouldnt have happened. It needs fixing yes but for now you have to deal with it. We had to deal with super tanks for near 4 months.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9314	Posted - 2014.04.08 03:12:00 - [150] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: Alpha 443-6732 wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: I'd love to see these tankers try and use av as an infantryman. You guys seriously dont know how hard it is to kill a tank with little to no help. Try use a standard fit with standard swarms and tell me that the skills he has listed dont have any use. Smg skill, hell any sidearm you like is necessary when your main weapon only hurts vehicles. The fit he has is a good av fit. You would not be able to make an adv fit as good as this. I do... and I kill tanks with my dren swarms. I also have a proto missile fit that I spent 20mil sp on that is invalidated by even the worst players using a militia railgun with damage mods. On your own or with something else shooting it? I refuse to believe that you can kill a tank on your own with a dren swarm. And about the rail. Dont complain about it here. If tankers didnt want everything about tanking to be cheaper this whole mess with tank spam and super dmg mods wouldnt have happened. It needs fixing yes but for now you have to deal with it. We had to deal with super tanks for near 4 months. Yeah even I'm disinclined to believe that..... "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.