|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10344
   |
Posted - 2014.04.08 00:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
The current state of vehicles is such that it requires at least 2 AV players to take down one tank. The current vehicle quota theoretically allows for 6 tanks from one side to to be out at once; I have experienced this occurrence at least twice in the past. In such cases, it would require at least 12 players on the other team to play AV to successfully stop them, since it takes about 2 AV players to stop 1 tank, and having 12 players on a team of 16 end up on AV duty means that the enemy will completely dominate on anti-infantry, and on capturing objectives. It should not be possible to have 6 tanks on a 16 player team.
Lowering the vehicle quota would solve this issue, but would be far too restrictive; LAVs and dropships would be needlessly restricted just to limit the amount of tanks on the battlefield. A smarter solution is needed, which is why I propose that there should be vehicle quotas specific to vehicle types. Example: HAV limit 2, dropship limit 3, LAV limit 4.
Seriously, 1 LAV is not as tactically valuable as a tank, yet they each draw equally from the same resource pool; that doesn't make sense to be for balance.
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIn++æ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10344
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 02:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
Any more thoughts?
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10345
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 02:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
EternalRMG wrote:In ambush its reasonable to have 2 vehicles, as there are no supply depots no installations and no other objective but to get kills.
In dom and skirmish the quota is good at 6 you know why? because most maps have indoor locations that the tanks cannot reach, have supply depots everywhere, have railgun installations and have objective that must be hacked
and normally in these gamemodes there is always counte-tankers, those who choose the Railgun to keep enemy tanks at bay.
these counter tankers make it really balanced
Turret installations an be destroyed in seconds by tanks, and cannot be replaced, while tanks can be replaced once destroyed.
You strongly underestimate the amount of open space on the maps. Click the stickied posts for images of the maps as reference https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=topics&f=1350 . Infantry shouldn't have to be cowering inside buildings the entire time anyway.
There is no justification why one team of 16 should be able to have 6 tanks out at once. Like I explained in the OP, it takes about 2 players to fight a single tank, having 6 tanks would force the other team to overextend themselves if they want to deal with the tanks, which ensures the victory of the team with the tanks.
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10346
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 03:02:00 -
[4] - Quote
Odigos Ellinas wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:The current state of vehicles is such that it requires at least 2 AV players to take down one tank. The current vehicle quota theoretically allows for 6 tanks from one side to to be out at once; I have experienced this occurrence at least twice in the past. In such cases, it would require at least 12 players on the other team to play AV to successfully stop them, since it takes about 2 AV players to stop 1 tank, and having 12 players on a team of 16 end up on AV duty means that the enemy will completely dominate on anti-infantry, and on capturing objectives. It should not be possible to have 6 tanks on a 16 player team.
Lowering the vehicle quota would solve this issue, but would be far too restrictive; LAVs and dropships would be needlessly restricted just to limit the amount of tanks on the battlefield. A smarter solution is needed, which is why I propose that there should be vehicle quotas specific to vehicle types. Example: HAV limit 2, dropship limit 3, LAV limit 4.
Seriously, 1 LAV is not as tactically valuable as a tank, yet they each draw equally from the same resource pool; that doesn't make sense to be for balance. Your are forgetting that the main AV in the game is a Vehicle. Your team can call 6 HAV as the enemy can.All hardeners are basically the same except the timers. And militia railguns are good enough to destroy gunlogis and madrugars. In the LP market you can get Madrugars and Gunlogis without SP. Today i he'd really great fun with a friend in a AV starterfit and my Federal Madrugar. We where driving around and hunting HAVs he popping out of my HAV with the swarms to finish them off and take my kills. The only problem i see with Vehicles are the armor repairs. They work like the reptool before 1.7. Reducing incoming damage and repairing without any delay.
Tanks being the main AV is inherently problematic, something shouldn't be so powerful and/or plentiful that the oly way to deal with them is more of that same thing.
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10354
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 20:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
elric the enchanter wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:The current state of vehicles is such that it requires at least 2 AV players to take down one tank. The current vehicle quota theoretically allows for 6 tanks from one side to to be out at once; I have experienced this occurrence at least twice in the past. You mean like this?
Damn, that's brutal 
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10364
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 20:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:The current state of vehicles is such that it requires at least 2 AV players to take down one tank. The current vehicle quota theoretically allows for 6 tanks from one side to to be out at once; I have experienced this occurrence at least twice in the past. In such cases, it would require at least 12 players on the other team to play AV to successfully stop them, since it takes about 2 AV players to stop 1 tank. Having 12 players on a team of 16 end up on AV duty means that the enemy will completely dominate on anti-infantry, and on capturing objectives. It should not be possible to have 6 tanks on a 16 player team. EDIT: I do realize that it could take far less than 12 players if they all focus on a smaller number of tanks at a time, but its still large reallocation of forces for the team with AV, which will cost them in objectives, and anti-infantry. Lowering the vehicle quota would solve this issue, but would be far too restrictive; LAVs and dropships would be needlessly restricted just to limit the amount of tanks on the battlefield. A smarter solution is needed, which is why I propose that there should be vehicle quotas specific to vehicle types. Example: HAV limit 2, dropship limit 3, LAV limit 4. Seriously, 1 LAV is not as tactically valuable as a tank, yet they each draw equally from the same resource pool; that doesn't make sense for balance. EDIT: example of why its needed. elric the enchanter wrote: Let me see if I can respond to this without showing my exasperation in quite so explicit terms. If it takes 2 AV to kill 1 tank that does not mean that it would take 12 AV to kill 6 tanks. In fact if 2 AV can kill 1 tank, they could in theory kill all 6 tanks, 1 at a time. Practically, 2 AV would usually not be able to kill 6 tanks because the tanks would gang up on them and kill the AV repeatedly. However, 5 AV can kill 1 tank in a second, each only needing to take a single shot. Then their second shot can take out a second tank. If the tanks are all within range and not behind cover, 5 AV can take out 6 Tanks with only 6 shots each. They would not even need a Nano Hive. You would never need to have 12 AV on one team. Even if the other team was able to have 16 tanks, you would not need more than 5 or 6 AV. I am sorry that I made disparaging comments about your intelligence earlier. I was in an excessive state of exasperation, having seen this argument made in the past, and when I saw your post my patience ran out.
Apology accepted, and I do see your point. The god-king KAGEHOSHI absolves your transgressions. I still think it should happen though.
Do you think there's ever such a thing as too many tanks? because I think there is, and its certainly less than 6. I would feel differently if this game was a true MMO with open worlds and massive player counts, but 6 tanks on a 16 player team is too much.
Do you think its fair that 6 LAVs and 6 tanks are equivalent in tactical value? because if not, I don't think it is right that they should draw from the same resource pool since it will mean there is one strategy (lots and lots of tanks) that is generally always preferable.
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
10404
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 18:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Do you think there's ever such a thing as too many tanks? because I think there is, and its certainly less than 6. I would feel differently if this game was a true MMO with open worlds and massive player counts, but 6 tanks on a 16 player team is too much.
Do you think its fair that 6 LAVs and 6 tanks are equivalent in tactical value? because if not, I don't think it is right that they should draw from the same resource pool since it will mean there is one strategy (lots and lots of tanks) that is generally always preferable. On most map/socket configurations having 6 tanks on a team actually weakens the team, because it does not leave enough infantry to control the points. It is almost as bad as having 6 sippers. There are of course some map configurations were enough of the objectives are in the open where tanks can defend the objectives directly and 6 tanks are advantageous. I have had to hoof it into town in my Sentinel suit on occasion because the vehicle limit had been reached, so I know as well as anyone how frustrating it can be when you canGÇÖt call in a LAV. I find that when a team has 1 or 2 tanks out, that Infantry mainly try to avoid them, except for the dedicated AV. Once you get to 4 tanks, large portions of the other team switch to AV and tanks start dying very quickly. This usually leads to tankers who also have skills in dropsuits switching to Infantry roles. I think this would be even more effective if Swarms got a 12% buff to range and damage, but otherwise Vehicles vs AV seem fairly well balanced now that Hardeners have been nerfed. It is also important to consider new tankers, who are specializing in tanks, and have no points in Infantry skills. If they canGÇÖt call in a tank they are sort of screwed, as they are not going to do very well in a Frontline or Medic starter suit.
I disagree with the assessment that 6 players in tanks become a liability. The maps are generally open enough for tankers to successfully act as infantry on steroids. I have experinced situations where there were many tanks on the battlefield, and a good amount of AV players willing to fight them, but the tanks were so spread out that it was hard for one person let alone the entire AV group to find them; its quite easy for tanks to stay away from AV if they want to considering their speed.
Personally I would not bother buffing swarms until the swarms damage application bug become fixed; the bug fix combined with a bug.
EDIT: I am having doubts on the idea, I think I'll let the thread die.
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
|
|
| |
|