DUST Search - Tanker KDR - What should it be?

All Channels

General Discussions

Tanker KDR - What should it be?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 517	Posted - 2014.04.23 02:43:00 - [1] - Quote Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? Because, that's why.
jerrmy12 kahoalii Proficiency V. 1145	Posted - 2014.04.23 02:44:00 - [2] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? 5.0 minimum I <3 girl gamers Tears, sweet delicious tears
Travis Stanush GunFall Mobilization 121	Posted - 2014.04.23 02:44:00 - [3] - Quote It's over 9000 No I will not show you where they touched me!!!
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1631	Posted - 2014.04.23 02:46:00 - [4] - Quote Mine's about 3.5. I run on foot sometimes, though it's just a basic Caldari medium so I tend to die a lot. I also run a missile Gunnlogi so it's never about the amount of kills for me; it's the amount of WP's I can earn and the amount of ISK I'm rewarded with at the end of the match. I tend to top the scoreboard with less than 10 kills. I believe my best such match was about 7 kills and 3500 WP. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 517	Posted - 2014.04.23 02:51:00 - [5] - Quote Just to clarify, I am not asking what a good tankers kdr would be, but what kdr would show tanks being balanced. Although I do like to hear how tankers actually fare and hear their views when we aren't in opposition. Because, that's why.
Gelhad Thremyr Quebec United Caps and Mercs 241	Posted - 2014.04.23 02:52:00 - [6] - Quote Each time i see a tank it rarely goes under 10, unless mercs organise and the map enables footmen to get proper shielding. We still have small maps in ambush that are really small with no cover, tanks when called simply dominates the ground, there should be a flag on some maps that when they are too small, no vehicles should be permitted, so yeah around 10, milkman is the worst most of the time i see him at around 25\0....
jerrmy12 kahoalii Proficiency V. 1146	Posted - 2014.04.23 02:52:00 - [7] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Just to clarify, I am not asking what a good tankers kdr would be, but what kdr would show tanks being balanced. Although I do like to hear how tankers actually fare and hear their views when we aren't in opposition. 2.50 I <3 girl gamers Tears, sweet delicious tears
Charlotte O'Dell Sooper Speshul Ponee Fors Dropsuit Samurai 2428	Posted - 2014.04.23 02:58:00 - [8] - Quote ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? Who even cares!? All a high KDR means is an ambush stomping tank noob. In Chrome we had a word for those people: Fags. But I digress, a railgun or missile specced tanker will have a lower KDR than a blaster specced pilot. Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
jerrmy12 kahoalii Proficiency V. 1147	Posted - 2014.04.23 03:00:00 - [9] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? Who even cares!? All a high KDR means is an ambush stomping tank noob. In Chrome we had a word for those people: Fags. But I digress, a railgun or missile specced tanker will have a lower KDR than a blaster specced pilot. Your getting banned, because in a post the only word I said was "feg" so be prepared for people to report I <3 girl gamers Tears, sweet delicious tears
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 517	Posted - 2014.04.23 03:06:00 - [10] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? Who even cares!? All a high KDR means is an ambush stomping tank noob. In Chrome we had a word for those people: Fags. But I digress, a railgun or missile specced tanker will have a lower KDR than a blaster specced pilot. Yes, which is why I am asking for averages, not individual kdr. Because, that's why.

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9647	Posted - 2014.04.23 03:16:00 - [11] - Quote I never play ambush, I won't ever play it if I can help it, and prefer to only play in FW where we get some good challengers. I sit on a 2.54 currently that grows whenever I play.... I just don't play very much now. Personally I think a long term "good tankers" should have about a 3.0 KDR. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Joseph Ridgeson WarRavens League of Infamy 1247	Posted - 2014.04.23 03:42:00 - [12] - Quote Balancing by KDR is a bad way to look at it. A Redline Sniper may have a lower KDR than a really good Assault player. Which one do people consider detrimental to the game and needs to be removed? "People that quote themselves in signatures confuse me." -Joseph Ridgeson
Denn Maell PIanet Express Canis Eliminatus Operatives 330	Posted - 2014.04.23 03:49:00 - [13] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Just to clarify, I am not asking what a good tankers kdr would be, but what kdr would show tanks being balanced. Although I do like to hear how tankers actually fare and hear their views when we aren't in opposition. I'd say it should be more in line (although a little higher) than an average 'Good' Assault player. I should mention that I would prefer if the HAV was a more dedicated anti-vehicle vehicle rather than a semi-invincible meat grinder, with Large turrets very difficult to hit infantryGÇªso I may be a little biased. The most OP weapon on the Dust Battle Field: One good logi, one rep tool, and a heavy.
Rusty Shallows 1630	Posted - 2014.04.23 03:54:00 - [14] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? snip It was used against "God Mode" Tower Forgers, who incidentally were getting lower KDRs than the current Blaster HAVs. Also back in Chrome the Proto-Laser and its safe ranged insta-gibbing. Last year there was broad agreement the death part of KDR meant vehicles needed to be fixed. Forums > Game: So here is a cookie and a Like. Please keep posting. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! >>> GòÜ(GÇóGîéGÇó)Gò¥ >>>
Seymor Krelborn L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 2075	Posted - 2014.04.23 04:02:00 - [15] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? I cant see how you put an avg KDR on tankers and balance them from that ideal.... really tankers should get it as good as they are at tanking, I don't even think you really need to touch tanks, what we need is better av, more balanced av.... and cloaks on jihadi jeeps. this game makes me sad....
Athena Sentinel SOE Knights Templar 278	Posted - 2014.04.23 04:55:00 - [16] - Quote CCP are game simulators. See EVE for details. Its amazing real science and math simulating space, Dust is a version of that. Lets not get hung up there. But themed with EVE is similar and hopeful soon joined. My point. In real life if a army had a tank there was clear unstoppable power. The other army had to deploy specialized tactics or deploy a tank... Before this horses on the battle field played the same unstoppable power. I don't use tanks, but if they get 40-0 and you QQ ... Bad on you. If you hate it so much specialise to blow them up - the gratification will be 10 fold fueled by revenge.
DUST Fiend OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 13051	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:01:00 - [17] - Quote Over nine thousand Travis Stanush wrote: It's over 9000 CURSE YOU NINJA!!!!! My Music Videos & Fan Fiction Mostly Solo ADS Pilot
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9659	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:05:00 - [18] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? I cant see how you put an avg KDR on tankers and balance them from that ideal.... really tankers should get it as good as they are at tanking, I don't even think you really need to touch tanks, what we need is better av, more balanced av.... and cloaks on jihadi jeeps. This thread has nothing to do with balance....its just a person asking TANKERS what they feel their KDR's should be to qualify as a "good tankers". Mine is 0.5 higher than my own, objectively speaking if a tanker can't kill at least 3 people for a single life, the same values I place on my Commando, then they aren't doing the best they can. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Denn Maell PIanet Express Canis Eliminatus Operatives 330	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:05:00 - [19] - Quote Athena Sentinel wrote: CCP are game simulators. See EVE for details. Its amazing real science and math simulating space, Dust is a version of that. Lets not get hung up there. But themed with EVE is similar and hopeful soon joined. My point. In real life if a army had a tank there was clear unstoppable power. The other army had to deploy specialized tactics or deploy a tank... Before this horses on the battle field played the same unstoppable power. I don't use tanks, but if they get 40-0 and you QQ ... Bad on you. If you hate it so much specialise to blow them up - the gratification will be 10 fold fueled by revenge. A good attitude to have, to be sure. But Eve and Dust both have strong elements of team play involved. In Eve a well built fleet is superior in every way to a solo player. In Dust, a well equipped squad working together will dominate against randomns. Tanks require 1 operator and usually don't equip small turrets. It is also not uncommon to witness a squad raining down "specialized retaliation" against a tank and they get away before being destroyed. The most OP weapon on the Dust Battle Field: One good logi, one rep tool, and a heavy.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9659	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:07:00 - [20] - Quote Denn Maell wrote: Athena Sentinel wrote: CCP are game simulators. See EVE for details. Its amazing real science and math simulating space, Dust is a version of that. Lets not get hung up there. But themed with EVE is similar and hopeful soon joined. My point. In real life if a army had a tank there was clear unstoppable power. The other army had to deploy specialized tactics or deploy a tank... Before this horses on the battle field played the same unstoppable power. I don't use tanks, but if they get 40-0 and you QQ ... Bad on you. If you hate it so much specialise to blow them up - the gratification will be 10 fold fueled by revenge. A good attitude to have, to be sure. But Eve and Dust both have strong elements of team play involved. In Eve a well built fleet is superior in every way to a solo player. In Dust, a well equipped squad working together will dominate against randomns. Tanks require 1 operator and usually don't equip small turrets. It is also not uncommon to witness a squad raining down "specialized retaliation" against a tank and they get away before being destroyed. To many benefits for players who put emphasis on fitting their HAV selfishly and not enough for those who choose to do it otherwise. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two

Auris Lionesse Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 749	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:07:00 - [21] - Quote Balanced would be 1. Av should blow up tanks and tanks should kill infantry. the whole a good tanker can survive thing is bs. Tankers can kill avers infantry can't kill tanks like they used to. Meaning tanks need to be as vulnerable to av as infantry is to vehicles now Balance is 1:1:1 Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Heroes in a half Gank! *TURTLE POWER!!!*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9660	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:11:00 - [22] - Quote Auris Lionesse wrote: Balanced would be 1. Av should blow up tanks and tanks should kill infantry. the whole a good tanker can survive thing is bs. Tankers can kill avers infantry can't kill tanks like they used to. Meaning tanks need to be as vulnerable to av as infantry is to vehicles now Balance is 1:1:1 Debateable. A Good infantry man can kill 2-3 clones of every one they loose. Some who are very skilful and lucky never die. Why is it unfair that I can kill 2-3 for every vehicle I loose, and if I player well and carefully I never die? "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Athena Sentinel SOE Knights Templar 279	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:15:00 - [23] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Denn Maell wrote: Athena Sentinel wrote: CCP are game simulators. See EVE for details. Its amazing real science and math simulating space, Dust is a version of that. Lets not get hung up there. But themed with EVE is similar and hopeful soon joined. My point. In real life if a army had a tank there was clear unstoppable power. The other army had to deploy specialized tactics or deploy a tank... Before this horses on the battle field played the same unstoppable power. I don't use tanks, but if they get 40-0 and you QQ ... Bad on you. If you hate it so much specialise to blow them up - the gratification will be 10 fold fueled by revenge. A good attitude to have, to be sure. But Eve and Dust both have strong elements of team play involved. In Eve a well built fleet is superior in every way to a solo player. In Dust, a well equipped squad working together will dominate against randomns. Tanks require 1 operator and usually don't equip small turrets. It is also not uncommon to witness a squad raining down "specialized retaliation" against a tank and they get away before being destroyed. To many benefits for players who put emphasis on fitting their HAV selfishly and not enough for those who choose to do it otherwise. You both make very good points. I can't argue that. Still I guess if I had any issue with them it would be that they are invisible on my map. Heavies are easier to see then tanks lol. If the balance is really off, I have not witnessed it. But the favor should go to the tank or often the more costly item. I don't believe 2 or 3 guys with swarm launchers at lvl 3 should take out a tank - I suspect this is what is happening now. But it should limit the tanks ability to combat effectively.. It will not be getting 40-0!
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 619	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:23:00 - [24] - Quote Auris Lionesse wrote: Balanced would be 1. Av should blow up tanks and tanks should kill infantry. the whole a good tanker can survive thing is bs. Tankers can kill avers infantry can't kill tanks like they used to. Meaning tanks need to be as vulnerable to av as infantry is to vehicles now Balance is 1:1:1 How can you equate a hard armor infantry support ... anti-vehicle " Machine " against a " Meat-Bag " ??? That's like saying , " A car should be as strong as a person or the person that's driving it . " and if that was the case ... there would be way more vehicular homicide's . People that say that just don't make much since to me but what do I know ??? Comparing a vehicle machine to a person slash " Meat-Bag " just doesn't seem like sound reasoning or balance . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
DozersMouse XIII Ultramarine Corp 487	Posted - 2014.04.23 05:45:00 - [25] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? clarify a better question would be what is a blaster tanker kdr Vs a rail tankers kdr also I don't tank much but I have an alt with over 10 mill I put all in to rails and gunnlogi I never used this acc for anything it just accumulated SP for months I have a 6+ kdr on this account but less then 300 kills Bacon pancakes makin' bacon pancakes Take some bacon and I'll put it a pancake Bacon pancakes thats what it's gonna make
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 12639	Posted - 2014.04.23 06:07:00 - [26] - Quote 70 Duna is the only tanker who makes tanks actually work, it's really sad. They need more buffs, especially blaster turrets against infantry. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake. EUrobro
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 518	Posted - 2014.04.23 06:35:00 - [27] - Quote Joseph Ridgeson wrote: Balancing by KDR is a bad way to look at it. A Redline Sniper may have a lower KDR than a really good Assault player. Which one do people consider detrimental to the game and needs to be removed? Again, individual performance isn't the issue or the gauge, what is important is how ALL snipers do against X, or in this case all tankers. I am interested in the bell curve, not the outliers. Because, that's why.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 518	Posted - 2014.04.23 06:40:00 - [28] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? I cant see how you put an avg KDR on tankers and balance them from that ideal.... really tankers should get it as good as they are at tanking, I don't even think you really need to touch tanks, what we need is better av, more balanced av.... and cloaks on jihadi jeeps. As i stated, kdr doesn't capture all the variables, but how many you kill and how often you die are both the easiest and most important measures of how you fare against others. Do you have another objective metric that is better? I can't think of one. Because, that's why.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 518	Posted - 2014.04.23 06:42:00 - [29] - Quote Athena Sentinel wrote: CCP are game simulators. See EVE for details. Its amazing real science and math simulating space, Dust is a version of that. Lets not get hung up there. But themed with EVE is similar and hopeful soon joined. My point. In real life if a army had a tank there was clear unstoppable power. The other army had to deploy specialized tactics or deploy a tank... Before this horses on the battle field played the same unstoppable power. I don't use tanks, but if they get 40-0 and you QQ ... Bad on you. If you hate it so much specialise to blow them up - the gratification will be 10 fold fueled by revenge. So your answer is that the tanker kdr average should be 40-0? Because, that's why.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 518	Posted - 2014.04.23 06:45:00 - [30] - Quote Athena Sentinel wrote: True Adamance wrote: Denn Maell wrote: Athena Sentinel wrote: CCP are game simulators. See EVE for details. Its amazing real science and math simulating space, Dust is a version of that. Lets not get hung up there. But themed with EVE is similar and hopeful soon joined. My point. In real life if a army had a tank there was clear unstoppable power. The other army had to deploy specialized tactics or deploy a tank... Before this horses on the battle field played the same unstoppable power. I don't use tanks, but if they get 40-0 and you QQ ... Bad on you. If you hate it so much specialise to blow them up - the gratification will be 10 fold fueled by revenge. A good attitude to have, to be sure. But Eve and Dust both have strong elements of team play involved. In Eve a well built fleet is superior in every way to a solo player. In Dust, a well equipped squad working together will dominate against randomns. Tanks require 1 operator and usually don't equip small turrets. It is also not uncommon to witness a squad raining down "specialized retaliation" against a tank and they get away before being destroyed. To many benefits for players who put emphasis on fitting their HAV selfishly and not enough for those who choose to do it otherwise. You both make very good points. I can't argue that. Still I guess if I had any issue with them it would be that they are invisible on my map. Heavies are easier to see then tanks lol. If the balance is really off, I have not witnessed it. But the favor should go to the tank or often the more costly item. I don't believe 2 or 3 guys with swarm launchers at lvl 3 should take out a tank - I suspect this is what is happening now. But it should limit the tanks ability to combat effectively.. It will not be getting 40-0! Could you explain your reasoning why 2 or 3 players using advanced fits shouldn't be able to kill one player? Because, that's why.

Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 519	Posted - 2014.04.23 07:03:00 - [31] - Quote Auris Lionesse wrote: Balanced would be 1. Av should blow up tanks and tanks should kill infantry. the whole a good tanker can survive thing is bs. Tankers can kill avers infantry can't kill tanks like they used to. Meaning tanks need to be as vulnerable to av as infantry is to vehicles now Balance is 1:1:1 My reasoning mirrors your own. It needs to be remembered that we are talking about players, whether they are in a vehicle or not, they are still just 1 player and the balance needs to be made between players, not an emotional pre - conceived idea about what tanks should be. Two players with the same SP, same ISK investment and same skill should have equal chances of killing each other. 1:1 is balanced, I have a hard time understanding how giving one player a huge advantage is balanced, which is why I ask the question I did. I really would like to hear a sound reason other than "its a tank". I understand that tankers can spend much more ISK and the should gain advantage from that, but it should, in my mind, be commensurate with ISK expenditure/advantage in the rest of the game. A proto CR costs 30X what a STD one does yet only does 10% more damage. A good tank may cost 10X an equivalent dropsuit so what should it's advantage be? 10%? 25%? Why is it 200% or so? Anyway, I really just want to hear people's opinions about this one metric, because I think it boils down the argument to how you view the tanks position in this game. It is academic, no one will stand for the kind of changes needed to achieve the balance I describe, and even I prefer not to have it. Because, that's why.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2628	Posted - 2014.04.23 07:06:00 - [32] - Quote If tanks are balanced, around about the same KDR as anyone on an equal skill level who isn't a Logi or AV. You shouldn't be getting hundreds of kills, tanks have a much more tactical advantage than just kills. I would EXPECT considerably more WP by being a tanker. Transport Assists Vehicle Spawns Suppression Assists Vehicle Damage Triage/Guardian Points Intel Kill Assists A tanker should be rewarded for more actions than just killing. Say he roles into an enemy line at high speed kills 3-4 infamtry before retreating, the actions of pushingnthat line will cause more units than just the ones he kills to open fire on him. He has therefore distracted the enemy and should be given a small reward. As it stands there are only 3 things you get WP for in a tank, Kills, Vehicle damage/destruction, you gunner killing someone. So you are only rewarded for doing those actions, tankers need rewards for action that currently not a lot of them do. A tank can and should be a hell of a lot more of a team asset then it currently is. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2628	Posted - 2014.04.23 07:19:00 - [33] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Auris Lionesse wrote: Balanced would be 1. Av should blow up tanks and tanks should kill infantry. the whole a good tanker can survive thing is bs. Tankers can kill avers infantry can't kill tanks like they used to. Meaning tanks need to be as vulnerable to av as infantry is to vehicles now Balance is 1:1:1 How can you equate a hard armor infantry support ... anti-vehicle " Machine " against a " Meat-Bag " ??? That's like saying , " A car should be as strong as a person or the person that's driving it . " and if that was the case ... there would be way more vehicular homicide's . That's in the physical since and not mentally , a good driver is a strong driver like a good anti-vehicle trooper is a strong one , but again that's mental . People that say that just don't make much since to me but what do I know ??? Comparing a vehicle machine to a person slash " Meat-Bag " just doesn't seem like sound reasoning or balance . Its pure and simple algebra actually. 1man = 1man 1 tank > 1man therfore in order for a balanced statement, something must be > than tank, but < than man. This is AV 1man < 1tank < 1AV < 1man That is balance, however as you are probably aware A tank can kill an AVer An AVer can kill infantry This is fair, because it is required for defence and you (should) be much less effective at doing so, thus you have a reduced chance of fighti g back against your counter, but you can at least fight back. Infantry cannot fight a tank, so instead we give supply depots which allows infamtry to swap out for AV, this is balanced because you can kill them before they get to the supply depot. In addition if they respawn, they already died once so baalnce is maintained. If however it requires multiple people to destroy/reasonably suppress (as in for a significant enough time to allow an infantry to make a push) then tank becomes greater than infantry and you end up with pure unbalance. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 457	Posted - 2014.04.23 08:07:00 - [34] - Quote I don't think it should be anything, it depends on how you use it and how good you are but against infantry it can range from 6.0 to 100+ however if you are someone who only does tank v tank I think anything above 2 is good, 3 is "you're pretty good", 4 is awesome and 5 is godlike. Tanker all time kdr usually is somewhere slightly above the best slayers. Total kill count per match is however considerably lower for a tanker than it is for the best slayers in a single match, ambush is however completely random as it depends so much on the spawns. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
SGT NOVA STAR Ahrendee Mercenaries 234	Posted - 2014.04.23 09:06:00 - [35] - Quote 8.7+ is mine but im in DNS so i need it that hight :-P but for real i ran with dr spaz and zitro all the time (i heard he just started liking girls now). DONT GO BOOM...or don't go against me. VAYU! I CHOOSE YOU!
SGT NOVA STAR Ahrendee Mercenaries 234	Posted - 2014.04.23 09:08:00 - [36] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: I don't think it should be anything, it depends on how you use it and how good you are but against infantry it can range from 6.0 to 100+ however if you are someone who only does tank v tank I think anything above 2 is good, 3 is "you're pretty good", 4 is awesome and 5 is godlike. Tanker all time kdr usually is somewhere slightly above the best slayers. Total kill count per match is however considerably lower for a tanker than it is for the best slayers in a single match, ambush is however completely random as it depends so much on the spawns. 5 is godlike? k.... id say 10 would be godlike VAYU! I CHOOSE YOU!
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 457	Posted - 2014.04.23 09:16:00 - [37] - Quote SGT NOVA STAR wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: I don't think it should be anything, it depends on how you use it and how good you are but against infantry it can range from 6.0 to 100+ however if you are someone who only does tank v tank I think anything above 2 is good, 3 is "you're pretty good", 4 is awesome and 5 is godlike. Tanker all time kdr usually is somewhere slightly above the best slayers. Total kill count per match is however considerably lower for a tanker than it is for the best slayers in a single match, ambush is however completely random as it depends so much on the spawns. 5 is godlike? k.... id say 10 would be godlike I'm not talking about stomping wannabe tankers, I'm talking about going up against proper tankers. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 1902	Posted - 2014.04.23 09:22:00 - [38] - Quote At the end of 1.6 when my alt was a full time tanker and vehicle specialist i had 5, now idk. Tanking was good before, even if there was invisible swarms..... The unnamed new build it's so secret that nobody know what will be in it, even after patch notes.. \o/ summon me
SGT NOVA STAR Ahrendee Mercenaries 234	Posted - 2014.04.23 09:27:00 - [39] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: SGT NOVA STAR wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: I don't think it should be anything, it depends on how you use it and how good you are but against infantry it can range from 6.0 to 100+ however if you are someone who only does tank v tank I think anything above 2 is good, 3 is "you're pretty good", 4 is awesome and 5 is godlike. Tanker all time kdr usually is somewhere slightly above the best slayers. Total kill count per match is however considerably lower for a tanker than it is for the best slayers in a single match, ambush is however completely random as it depends so much on the spawns. 5 is godlike? k.... id say 10 would be godlike I'm not talking about stomping wannabe tankers, I'm talking about going up against proper tankers. well the question was TANKER KDR. OP didn't really say "it only counts if you kill an actual tanker" then you'll have to have that "Whos dusts tankers" convo again. it doesn't matter what you kill or how, just have a high KDR if your a tanker. your in a mobile fortress, were OP right now, aint no good tanker suppose to be going boom all the time. VAYU! I CHOOSE YOU!
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2628	Posted - 2014.04.23 09:29:00 - [40] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: SGT NOVA STAR wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: I don't think it should be anything, it depends on how you use it and how good you are but against infantry it can range from 6.0 to 100+ however if you are someone who only does tank v tank I think anything above 2 is good, 3 is "you're pretty good", 4 is awesome and 5 is godlike. Tanker all time kdr usually is somewhere slightly above the best slayers. Total kill count per match is however considerably lower for a tanker than it is for the best slayers in a single match, ambush is however completely random as it depends so much on the spawns. 5 is godlike? k.... id say 10 would be godlike I'm not talking about stomping wannabe tankers, I'm talking about going up against proper tankers. Depends though doesn't, if we want (and I can only assume we all do) to keep the regularity of tanks as near as damn it to now, I would expect AV Tanker to probably be as good (overall) as a Infantry Slayer. You can't really give a fixed value because there are too many variables. All the OP really wants to know is, do you think a tanker should have a higher or lower KDR than equivalent skill infantry? Wether you disagree with me or not, I believe that role dependant a tanker should be ABOUT the same as infantry, unless of course you are role that has a high tendancy to die (AV, Logi, Vanguard Scout, Vanguard Heavy). Although and I hope you do agree, there are considrably more actions that merit a warpoint reward that some tankers already do. MCRU spawn points, Intel Kill Assists, maybe even distraction and guardian bonuses (friendly infantry getting kills from within a certain proximty of your tank), stuff that encourages tighter play between vehicles and infantry. At the same time infantry should be rewarded for protecting your tank, such as warpoint commisions for killing AVers who are firing upon you tank, triage points for tank healing etc. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.

MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 458	Posted - 2014.04.23 10:04:00 - [41] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: SGT NOVA STAR wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: I don't think it should be anything, it depends on how you use it and how good you are but against infantry it can range from 6.0 to 100+ however if you are someone who only does tank v tank I think anything above 2 is good, 3 is "you're pretty good", 4 is awesome and 5 is godlike. Tanker all time kdr usually is somewhere slightly above the best slayers. Total kill count per match is however considerably lower for a tanker than it is for the best slayers in a single match, ambush is however completely random as it depends so much on the spawns. 5 is godlike? k.... id say 10 would be godlike I'm not talking about stomping wannabe tankers, I'm talking about going up against proper tankers. Depends though doesn't, if we want (and I can only assume we all do) to keep the regularity of tanks as near as damn it to now, I would expect AV Tanker to probably be as good (overall) as a Infantry Slayer. You can't really give a fixed value because there are too many variables. All the OP really wants to know is, do you think a tanker should have a higher or lower KDR than equivalent skill infantry? Wether you disagree with me or not, I believe that role dependant a tanker should be ABOUT the same as infantry, unless of course you are role that has a high tendancy to die (AV, Logi, Vanguard Scout, Vanguard Heavy). Although and I hope you do agree, there are considrably more actions that merit a warpoint reward that some tankers already do. MCRU spawn points, Intel Kill Assists, maybe even distraction and guardian bonuses (friendly infantry getting kills from within a certain proximty of your tank), stuff that encourages tighter play between vehicles and infantry. At the same time infantry should be rewarded for protecting your tank, such as warpoint commisions for killing AVers who are firing upon you tank, triage points for tank healing etc. There's few problems with your comparison of AV tanker vs infantry slayer. AV tanker has no way to get out of a no win situation, it's too big to hide and not agile enough to dodge enemy fire reliably while retreating and changing directions is slow so you cannot change your mind about which route to take in split second, all of which an infantry player can do. As a Slayer if you know you wont come out on top in a situation, most of the time you can run for cover. Also you as a Slayer will most likely have anywhere between 800-1000 EHP and the infantry that you stomp has 300-500 EHP (of course slayer vs slayer this doesn't apply) but tankers have only marginal EHP differences between fits and SP levels. That is why it is highly unlikely to kill 5 enemy tankers who know what they are doing one after another without dying. And it is almost impossible to engage in 1v2 and come out on top, where as infantry can do 1v5 and come out on top. Why is that? Time for arbitrary numbers: 5200 EHP and 800 DPS vs 5200+5200 EHP and 800+800 DPS, big enough targets to not miss. Or you could have 1000 EHP and 500 DPS vs 500+300+400+300+300 EHP and 300+400+350+400+300 DPS, small enough targets to miss if strafing. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2628	Posted - 2014.04.23 10:30:00 - [42] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: SGT NOVA STAR wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: I don't think it should be anything, it depends on how you use it and how good you are but against infantry it can range from 6.0 to 100+ however if you are someone who only does tank v tank I think anything above 2 is good, 3 is "you're pretty good", 4 is awesome and 5 is godlike. Tanker all time kdr usually is somewhere slightly above the best slayers. Total kill count per match is however considerably lower for a tanker than it is for the best slayers in a single match, ambush is however completely random as it depends so much on the spawns. 5 is godlike? k.... id say 10 would be godlike I'm not talking about stomping wannabe tankers, I'm talking about going up against proper tankers. Depends though doesn't, if we want (and I can only assume we all do) to keep the regularity of tanks as near as damn it to now, I would expect AV Tanker to probably be as good (overall) as a Infantry Slayer. You can't really give a fixed value because there are too many variables. All the OP really wants to know is, do you think a tanker should have a higher or lower KDR than equivalent skill infantry? Wether you disagree with me or not, I believe that role dependant a tanker should be ABOUT the same as infantry, unless of course you are role that has a high tendancy to die (AV, Logi, Vanguard Scout, Vanguard Heavy). Although and I hope you do agree, there are considrably more actions that merit a warpoint reward that some tankers already do. MCRU spawn points, Intel Kill Assists, maybe even distraction and guardian bonuses (friendly infantry getting kills from within a certain proximty of your tank), stuff that encourages tighter play between vehicles and infantry. At the same time infantry should be rewarded for protecting your tank, such as warpoint commisions for killing AVers who are firing upon you tank, triage points for tank healing etc. There's few problems with your comparison of AV tanker vs infantry slayer. AV tanker has no way to get out of a no win situation, it's too big to hide and not agile enough to dodge enemy fire reliably while retreating and changing directions is slow so you cannot change your mind about which route to take in split second, all of which an infantry player can do. As a Slayer if you know you wont come out on top in a situation, most of the time you can run for cover. Also you as a Slayer will most likely have anywhere between 800-1000 EHP and the infantry that you stomp has 300-500 EHP (of course slayer vs slayer this doesn't apply) but tankers have only marginal EHP differences between fits and SP levels. That is why it is highly unlikely to kill 5 enemy tankers who know what they are doing one after another without dying. And it is almost impossible to engage in 1v2 and come out on top, where as infantry can do 1v5 and come out on top. Why is that? Time for arbitrary numbers: 5200 EHP and 800 DPS vs 5200+5200 EHP and 800+800 DPS, big enough targets to not miss. Or you could have 1000 EHP and 500 DPS vs 500+300+400+300+300 EHP and 300+400+350+400+300 DPS, small enough targets to miss if strafing. While this is true you also have to consider positioning, a tanker can take much more advantage of getting behind there opponent, mainly that a turret takes time to turn. With AV you can use objects and sockets as soff cover, you can even use the lay of the land to you advantage. Also not meaning to be rude, but as a Slayer I typically run 480 EHP amd I slay suits with typically between 800-1000 EHP There are no doubt differences, but a skilled slayer is at no less a disadvantage in 1v5 fight than a tank, stealth kills are a whole different kettle of fish. Although I would like to refemce missile tanks as being the closest to a stealth kill on a tank. Im only saying when tanks are balanced both against AV and vehicles, a tanker taking on an Anti infantry role shouldn't really excel in KDR than an equivalent skilled infamtryman doing the same role. However there are more tactical advantages that will allow a team with a tank to excel more. 1tank = 1man but 1tank + 4men > 5men Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Ryme Intrinseca Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 961	Posted - 2014.04.23 10:35:00 - [43] - Quote Athena Sentinel wrote: CCP are game simulators. See EVE for details. Its amazing real science and math simulating space, Dust is a version of that. Lets not get hung up there. But themed with EVE is similar and hopeful soon joined. My point. In real life if a army had a tank there was clear unstoppable power. The other army had to deploy specialized tactics or deploy a tank... Before this horses on the battle field played the same unstoppable power. I don't use tanks, but if they get 40-0 and you QQ ... Bad on you. If you hate it so much specialise to blow them up - the gratification will be 10 fold fueled by revenge. If ccp are in the 'simulation' business, and an advanced rifle costs around 10,000isk, tanks should cost over 100 million isk apiece. That would reflect the real world ratio between the cost of a tank and the cost of a rifle. See for instance pricing of bulk purchases of M4s (a few hundred dollars each) versus M1 abrams (many millions of dollars each). Of course, tanks shouldnt really be priced at 100mil+ isk. That would be realistic, but stupid, just as tanks dominating infantry is realistic but stupid. The primary consideration should be game balance, which means moderately powerful tanks at moderate prices.
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 1340	Posted - 2014.04.23 10:39:00 - [44] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Its pure and simple algebra actually. 1man = 1man 1 tank > 1man therfore in order for a balanced statement, something must be > than tank, but < than man. This is AV 1man < 1tank < 1AV < 1man That is balance, however as you are probably aware A tank can kill an AVer An AVer can kill infantry This is fair, because it is required for defence and you (should) be much less effective at doing so, thus you have a reduced chance of fighti g back against your counter, but you can at least fight back. Infantry cannot fight a tank, so instead we give supply depots which allows infamtry to swap out for AV, this is balanced because you can kill them before they get to the supply depot. In addition if they respawn, they already died once so baalnce is maintained. If however it requires multiple people to destroy/reasonably suppress (as in for a significant enough time to allow an infantry to make a push) then tank becomes greater than infantry and you end up with pure unbalance. too bad CCP Shanghai logic does not work like that
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2628	Posted - 2014.04.23 10:41:00 - [45] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Its pure and simple algebra actually. 1man = 1man 1 tank > 1man therfore in order for a balanced statement, something must be > than tank, but < than man. This is AV 1man < 1tank < 1AV < 1man That is balance, however as you are probably aware A tank can kill an AVer An AVer can kill infantry This is fair, because it is required for defence and you (should) be much less effective at doing so, thus you have a reduced chance of fighti g back against your counter, but you can at least fight back. Infantry cannot fight a tank, so instead we give supply depots which allows infamtry to swap out for AV, this is balanced because you can kill them before they get to the supply depot. In addition if they respawn, they already died once so baalnce is maintained. If however it requires multiple people to destroy/reasonably suppress (as in for a significant enough time to allow an infantry to make a push) then tank becomes greater than infantry and you end up with pure unbalance. too bad CCP Shanghai logic does not work like that In time my friend, in time. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Django Quik Dust2Dust. 2948	Posted - 2014.04.23 10:46:00 - [46] - Quote Tankers KDR should be no different to anyone else's. If the advantage to rolling around in hulking great 4000ehp+ vehicles mean getting killed less, it should not be easy to get dozens more kills too. No one should be able to have tank and slay all in one set up, whether infantry or vehicle user. Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot Scout community is the nuts
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1637	Posted - 2014.04.23 13:41:00 - [47] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Auris Lionesse wrote: Balanced would be 1. Av should blow up tanks and tanks should kill infantry. the whole a good tanker can survive thing is bs. Tankers can kill avers infantry can't kill tanks like they used to. Meaning tanks need to be as vulnerable to av as infantry is to vehicles now Balance is 1:1:1 How can you equate a hard armor infantry support ... anti-vehicle " Machine " against a " Meat-Bag " ??? That's like saying , " A car should be as strong as a person or the person that's driving it . " and if that was the case ... there would be way more vehicular homicide's . That's in the physical since and not mentally , a good driver is a strong driver like a good anti-vehicle trooper is a strong one , but again that's mental . People that say that just don't make much since to me but what do I know ??? Comparing a vehicle machine to a person slash " Meat-Bag " just doesn't seem like sound reasoning or balance . Its pure and simple algebra actually. 1man = 1man 1 tank > 1man therfore in order for a balanced statement, something must be > than tank, but < than man. This is AV 1man < 1tank < 1AV < 1man That is balance, however as you are probably aware A tank can kill an AVer An AVer can kill infantry This is fair, because it is required for defence and you (should) be much less effective at doing so, thus you have a reduced chance of fighti g back against your counter, but you can at least fight back. Infantry cannot fight a tank, so instead we give supply depots which allows infamtry to swap out for AV, this is balanced because you can kill them before they get to the supply depot. In addition if they respawn, they already died once so baalnce is maintained. If however it requires multiple people to destroy/reasonably suppress (as in for a significant enough time to allow an infantry to make a push) then tank becomes greater than infantry and you end up with pure unbalance. It annoys me oh so much when all of you generalize tanks and basically ask for blanket nerfs. All tanks are NOT the same. So stop generalizing them. Balance should look like this: AI tank (blaster) > infantry > AV infantry > AV tank (missile/rail) > AI tank I'm already forced to retreat with my missile tank at the presence of AV so I think that part of the equation is balanced. Blaster tanks have too much AV potential so that part still needs balancing through a blaster damage nerf. There needs to be a trade-off between AI and AV. Any argument that says that it shouldn't take a tank to kill a tank (as evidenced by AV tank > AI tank) is just wrong to make. Tanks and vehicles in general are very much roles just like infantry. Why does it take a dropsuit to kill an AV dropsuit then? "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn 2303	Posted - 2014.04.23 13:46:00 - [48] - Quote jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? 5.0 maximum fixed. Right now, it can be easily 20+ if you know how / when to move -#Firmocosìperchènonhopersonalità
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 2912	Posted - 2014.04.23 13:51:00 - [49] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? Who even cares!? All a high KDR means is an ambush stomping tank noob. In Chrome we had a word for those people: Fags. But I digress, a railgun or missile specced tanker will have a lower KDR than a blaster specced pilot. Char's got a 2.5 or something :P By old standards that'd be appalling; most tankers I know these days have heavy infantry presence and have comparatively poorer KD as a result; there's also the fact that more time is spent killing tanks as opposed to infantry which results in a lower KD anyway (because tank kills = WP not KD). So to answer your question, I'd say a skirmish KD for AI focused tankers (which shouldn't exist IMO) of about eight at the top end (taking into account the top end of infantry players who typically have a six or thereabouts). Pure AV tankers should have a 3-4 KD in matches where they actually tank; most matches don't require dedicated AV to that degree, though. (I'm referring to pubs and high-skilled veteran players; this is not saying 'if you run an 0SP Sica you should kill six tanks for your one). Feel free to flame me if you disagree, though, people who are actually dedicated tankers these days. (I used to have 70% of my SP dedicated to vehicles, these days I have about 25%. The difference between 13M and 40M SP xD) ak.0 4 LYFE I am the Lorhak. I speak for the trees.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 519	Posted - 2014.04.23 14:11:00 - [50] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Auris Lionesse wrote: Balanced would be 1. Av should blow up tanks and tanks should kill infantry. the whole a good tanker can survive thing is bs. Tankers can kill avers infantry can't kill tanks like they used to. Meaning tanks need to be as vulnerable to av as infantry is to vehicles now Balance is 1:1:1 How can you equate a hard armor infantry support ... anti-vehicle " Machine " against a " Meat-Bag " ??? That's like saying , " A car should be as strong as a person or the person that's driving it . " and if that was the case ... there would be way more vehicular homicide's . That's in the physical since and not mentally , a good driver is a strong driver like a good anti-vehicle trooper is a strong one , but again that's mental . People that say that just don't make much since to me but what do I know ??? Comparing a vehicle machine to a person slash " Meat-Bag " just doesn't seem like sound reasoning or balance . Its pure and simple algebra actually. 1man = 1man 1 tank > 1man therfore in order for a balanced statement, something must be > than tank, but < than man. This is AV 1man < 1tank < 1AV < 1man That is balance, however as you are probably aware A tank can kill an AVer An AVer can kill infantry This is fair, because it is required for defence and you (should) be much less effective at doing so, thus you have a reduced chance of fighti g back against your counter, but you can at least fight back. Infantry cannot fight a tank, so instead we give supply depots which allows infamtry to swap out for AV, this is balanced because you can kill them before they get to the supply depot. In addition if they respawn, they already died once so baalnce is maintained. If however it requires multiple people to destroy/reasonably suppress (as in for a significant enough time to allow an infantry to make a push) then tank becomes greater than infantry and you end up with pure unbalance. It annoys me oh so much when all of you generalize tanks and basically ask for blanket nerfs. All tanks are NOT the same. So stop generalizing them. Balance should look like this: AI tank (blaster) > infantry > AV infantry > AV tank (missile/rail) > AI tank I'm already forced to retreat with my missile tank at the presence of AV so I think that part of the equation is balanced. Blaster tanks have too much AV potential so that part still needs balancing through a blaster damage nerf. There needs to be a trade-off between AI and AV. Any argument that says that it shouldn't take a tank to kill a tank (as evidenced by AV tank > AI tank) is just wrong to make. Tanks and vehicles in general are very much roles just like infantry. Why does it take a dropsuit to kill an AV dropsuit then? It doesn't take a dropsuit to kill an AV dropsuit, any tank can do it. The problem with your balance is that it takes a tank to kill a tank, therefore the team with the best tanker always wins. Infantry always dies to tanks also. Because, that's why.

Vell0cet Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 1435	Posted - 2014.04.23 14:20:00 - [51] - Quote KDR is completely meaningless. THE MOST IMPORTANT STAT FOR BALANCE IS ISK EFFICIENCY. Average of ISK value of assets destroyed by tanks - ISK value of tanks lost. That should be 0. In other words tanks should cost about as much as they damage other things (including tanks and other vehicles). If tanks are incredibly powerful, and guarantee you cause more financial damage to your opponents than they cost you, the only sane thing to do would be to run as many of them as possible (using alts in starter fits to farm as much ISK as possible to support the cost. EVE and DUST are both fought and won with ISK as much as with kills. Having a weapon that will likely destroy > 1 ISK for every ISK you spend is a ridiculously OP in the ISK war. Best PvE idea ever!
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2629	Posted - 2014.04.23 14:24:00 - [52] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Auris Lionesse wrote: Balanced would be 1. Av should blow up tanks and tanks should kill infantry. the whole a good tanker can survive thing is bs. Tankers can kill avers infantry can't kill tanks like they used to. Meaning tanks need to be as vulnerable to av as infantry is to vehicles now Balance is 1:1:1 How can you equate a hard armor infantry support ... anti-vehicle " Machine " against a " Meat-Bag " ??? That's like saying , " A car should be as strong as a person or the person that's driving it . " and if that was the case ... there would be way more vehicular homicide's . That's in the physical since and not mentally , a good driver is a strong driver like a good anti-vehicle trooper is a strong one , but again that's mental . People that say that just don't make much since to me but what do I know ??? Comparing a vehicle machine to a person slash " Meat-Bag " just doesn't seem like sound reasoning or balance . Its pure and simple algebra actually. 1man = 1man 1 tank > 1man therfore in order for a balanced statement, something must be > than tank, but < than man. This is AV 1man < 1tank < 1AV < 1man That is balance, however as you are probably aware A tank can kill an AVer An AVer can kill infantry This is fair, because it is required for defence and you (should) be much less effective at doing so, thus you have a reduced chance of fighti g back against your counter, but you can at least fight back. Infantry cannot fight a tank, so instead we give supply depots which allows infamtry to swap out for AV, this is balanced because you can kill them before they get to the supply depot. In addition if they respawn, they already died once so baalnce is maintained. If however it requires multiple people to destroy/reasonably suppress (as in for a significant enough time to allow an infantry to make a push) then tank becomes greater than infantry and you end up with pure unbalance. It annoys me oh so much when all of you generalize tanks and basically ask for blanket nerfs. All tanks are NOT the same. So stop generalizing them. Balance should look like this: AI tank (blaster) > infantry > AV infantry > AV tank (missile/rail) > AI tank I'm already forced to retreat with my missile tank at the presence of AV so I think that part of the equation is balanced. Blaster tanks have too much AV potential so that part still needs balancing through a blaster damage nerf. There needs to be a trade-off between AI and AV. Any argument that says that it shouldn't take a tank to kill a tank (as evidenced by AV tank > AI tank) is just wrong to make. Tanks and vehicles in general are very much roles just like infantry. Why does it take a dropsuit to kill an AV dropsuit then? I never said you can't kill a tank with a tank, but it should not be the only viable option, if you prefer it would be more like this. 1man < (1 AI tank < 1 AV tank) < 1AV < 1man Because an AV tank, even a Rail is better than infantry right now, because it's so damn survivable. I generalise tanks no more than I generalize AI infantry. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1641	Posted - 2014.04.23 18:14:00 - [53] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: I never said you can't kill a tank with a tank, but it should not be the only viable option, if you prefer it would be more like this. 1man < (1 AI tank < 1 AV tank) < 1AV < 1man Because an AV tank, even a Rail is better than infantry right now, because it's so damn survivable. I generalise tanks no more than I generalize AI infantry. That's what I'm trying to get at, thanks. AV infantry should have an easier time against AV tanks because those tanks can't fire back as effectively as an AI tank. AI tanks have the ability to shoot back at AV infantry, but there should be more factors involved than just simply saying that AV infantry > (AI) tank. If the AV infantry gets an appropriate drop on the AI tank, then the tank will either have to react quickly and tactically to engage and eliminate the infantryman, or retreat and not risk a loss. That's why I didn't place AV infantry and AI tanks next to each other, because it's not as easy as saying that one should beat the other. Personal skill and luck aside, the list generalizes how the counters should go. AV infantry should beat AV tanks, either by destroying them or forcing a retreat, though depending on how skilled the tanker is with their turret, they might be able to bring it to a stalemate. AV infantry against AI tanks should be about a stalemate, but depending on the situation and skill of both players, either side may get slightly favored. Basically, the list I brought up shows an order of effectiveness. AI tank > infantry > AV infantry > AV tank > AI tank. AI tanks are most effective against infantry and should be least effective against AV tanks. Similarly, AV infantry should be most effective against AV tanks, with reduced effectiveness against AI tanks and least effective against infantry. I consider infantry and AV tanks to be soft counters against themselves, because they can usually end up in a stalemate. Also, their hard counters (AI tanks and AV infantry, respectively) are much harder to engage and win against. I hope what I'm trying to say makes sense. Again, I'm not trying to say that AV infantry can only take out AV tanks, for example. They will just have an easier time against them instead of AI tanks. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
CRNWLLC Screwy Rabbit ULC 230	Posted - 2014.04.23 18:33:00 - [54] - Quote jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? Who even cares!? All a high KDR means is an ambush stomping tank noob. In Chrome we had a word for those people: Fags. But I digress, a railgun or missile specced tanker will have a lower KDR than a blaster specced pilot. Your getting banned, because in a post the only word I said was "feg" so be prepared for people to report Political Correctness is massively OP! Nerf that sh!t!!!! My other dropsuit is a Python.
Omega Black Zero Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation 21	Posted - 2014.04.23 18:42:00 - [55] - Quote jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? Who even cares!? All a high KDR means is an ambush stomping tank noob. In Chrome we had a word for those people: Fags. But I digress, a railgun or missile specced tanker will have a lower KDR than a blaster specced pilot. Your getting banned, because in a post the only word I said was "feg" so be prepared for people to report You're one of those kids who used to tell on the cool kids in school, eh? You should be a cop.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2635	Posted - 2014.04.23 18:51:00 - [56] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: I never said you can't kill a tank with a tank, but it should not be the only viable option, if you prefer it would be more like this. 1man < (1 AI tank < 1 AV tank) < 1AV < 1man Because an AV tank, even a Rail is better than infantry right now, because it's so damn survivable. I generalise tanks no more than I generalize AI infantry. That's what I'm trying to get at, thanks. AV infantry should have an easier time against AV tanks because those tanks can't fire back as effectively as an AI tank. AI tanks have the ability to shoot back at AV infantry, but there should be more factors involved than just simply saying that AV infantry > (AI) tank. If the AV infantry gets an appropriate drop on the AI tank, then the tank will either have to react quickly and tactically to engage and eliminate the infantryman, or retreat and not risk a loss. That's why I didn't place AV infantry and AI tanks next to each other, because it's not as easy as saying that one should beat the other. Personal skill and luck aside, the list generalizes how the counters should go. AV infantry should beat AV tanks, either by destroying them or forcing a retreat, though depending on how skilled the tanker is with their turret, they might be able to bring it to a stalemate. AV infantry against AI tanks should be about a stalemate, but depending on the situation and skill of both players, either side may get slightly favored. Basically, the list I brought up shows an order of effectiveness. AI tank > infantry > AV infantry > AV tank > AI tank. AI tanks are most effective against infantry and should be least effective against AV tanks. Similarly, AV infantry should be most effective against AV tanks, with reduced effectiveness against AI tanks and least effective against infantry. I consider infantry and AV tanks to be soft counters against themselves, because they can usually end up in a stalemate. Also, their hard counters (AI tanks and AV infantry, respectively) are much harder to engage and win against. I hope what I'm trying to say makes sense. Again, I'm not trying to say that AV infantry can only take out AV tanks, for example. They will just have an easier time against them instead of AI tanks. Yes of course, like we are both in agreement, an AI will always be better of than AV purely because of the AIs role, however that's down to the AVer Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Charlotte O'Dell Sooper Speshul Ponee Fors Dropsuit Samurai 2450	Posted - 2014.04.24 00:45:00 - [57] - Quote jerrmy12 kahoalii wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? Who even cares!? All a high KDR means is an ambush stomping tank noob. In Chrome we had a word for those people: Fags. But I digress, a railgun or missile specced tanker will have a lower KDR than a blaster specced pilot. Your getting banned, because in a post the only word I said was "feg" so be prepared for people to report I've been banned 14 times, already. Which alt do you think I should switch to? Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Scheneighnay McBob Nova Corps Marines Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 4904	Posted - 2014.04.24 00:50:00 - [58] - Quote KDR is a pretty damn useless statistic. It all depends on fitting cost and what they're doing. I'm from the weird side of the internet
Charlotte O'Dell Sooper Speshul Ponee Fors Dropsuit Samurai 2450	Posted - 2014.04.24 00:53:00 - [59] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: ait...are you suggesting we use KDR to gauge BALANCE!? Who even cares!? All a high KDR means is an ambush stomping tank noob. In Chrome we had a word for those people: Fags. But I digress, a railgun or missile specced tanker will have a lower KDR than a blaster specced pilot. Char's got a 2.5 or something :P By old standards that'd be appalling; most tankers I know these days have heavy infantry presence and have comparatively poorer KD as a result; there's also the fact that more time is spent killing tanks as opposed to infantry which results in a lower KD anyway (because tank kills = WP not KD). So to answer your question, I'd say a skirmish KD for AI focused tankers (which shouldn't exist IMO) of about eight at the top end (taking into account the top end of infantry players who typically have a six or thereabouts). Pure AV tankers should have a 3-4 KD in matches where they actually tank; most matches don't require dedicated AV to that degree, though. (I'm referring to pubs and high-skilled veteran players; this is not saying 'if you run an 0SP Sica you should kill six tanks for your one). Feel free to flame me if you disagree, though, people who are actually dedicated tankers these days. (I used to have 70% of my SP dedicated to vehicles, these days I have about 25%. The difference between 13M and 40M SP xD) Let's say someone runs nothing but blaster tanks - ever He would likely have a KDR of 8 The problem, however, is that if he wishes to survive when anything with a rail is called in, he'll need a tank fitting worth well over 400k. This means he is now risking, likely, more than he will make in a pub match even though he has a high chance of death if a true Tank Destroyer is brought to bear. So yes, a KDR focused tanker can easily have an 8:1, but he will also be poor. On the other hand, railgun fittings focus on vehicle kills and killing 4 tanks in a battle is pretty good and the fittings are much cheaper to be effective (80k for a decent sica) while also being much less likely to die, as a good rail tanker will be proactive about getting kills as he does not have the EHP to survive more than one person with a swarm launcher trying to kill him. This means he will have a much lower KDR, probably 2; 3 at the highest, but he will make more money. This is reflected in PC, as the richest and most in-demand tankers run Gunlogis with Particle Cannons. If you wanted to somehow use KDR to balance this, I'd say that armor-related modules should be extremely powerful when compared to shield modules, but blasters should be more of a suppression weapon vs infantry, and only effective vs tanks when a damager mod is applied. I suggest doing this by reducing ROF while increasing DMG, so the DPS remains the same but the ability to hit infantry is dramatically decreased. On the flip side, shield modules should become worse- not so much in turns of modifier values, but in duration, so they work only long enough to fire 3 rounds and back away. Railguns are fine where they are; in fact,they are a might bit too powerful, but my suggestion to fix this is to have the charge up of 0.30 apply to every round fired. TLDR: Rails too powerful vs vehicles Blaster too powerful vs infantry Armor hardeners and plates too weak Shield hardeners last too long Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution 2060	Posted - 2014.04.24 02:04:00 - [60] - Quote Does it matter my lifetime is 2.04 or so slowly rising I cared about K/D when it was Sh!tty (I still remember dat mail Adamance) but now meh. My weekly hovers around 6 Monthly hovers 5 if I purely ambush stomped I could achieve about 10-11 weekly with relative ease. K/D means nothing just because Duna's K/D is 17 times mine doesn't mean I won't beat him 5/4 times ISK Donuts are delicious Q_Q Moar

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9709	Posted - 2014.04.24 02:41:00 - [61] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Does it matter my lifetime is 2.04 or so slowly rising I cared about K/D when it was Sh!tty (I still remember dat mail Adamance) but now meh. My weekly hovers around 6 Monthly hovers 5 if I purely ambush stomped I could achieve about 10-11 weekly with relative ease. K/D means nothing just because Duna's K/D is 17 times mine doesn't mean I won't beat him 5/4 times Mail? Oh did I send hatemail? oh show me, please show me..... I love hatemail....kind of wish I could see into Pyrex's inbox. How long ago was it? Pre 1.6 when I thought I was good or in 1.7 when tanking was so easy I couldn't possibly have been good. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Enji Elric Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 229	Posted - 2014.04.24 02:42:00 - [62] - Quote Travis Stanush wrote: It's over 9000 no they said tankers not exmaple core
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution 2065	Posted - 2014.04.24 02:47:00 - [63] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Does it matter my lifetime is 2.04 or so slowly rising I cared about K/D when it was Sh!tty (I still remember dat mail Adamance) but now meh. My weekly hovers around 6 Monthly hovers 5 if I purely ambush stomped I could achieve about 10-11 weekly with relative ease. K/D means nothing just because Duna's K/D is 17 times mine doesn't mean I won't beat him 5/4 times Mail? Oh did I send hatemail? oh show me, please show me..... I love hatemail....kind of wish I could see into Pyrex's inbox. How long ago was it? Pre 1.6 when I thought I was good or in 1.7 when tanking was so easy I couldn't possibly have been good. post 1.6 wasn't techniquely hate mail and I suppose you were probably right. ISK Donuts are delicious Q_Q Moar
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9711	Posted - 2014.04.24 03:17:00 - [64] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: True Adamance wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Does it matter my lifetime is 2.04 or so slowly rising I cared about K/D when it was Sh!tty (I still remember dat mail Adamance) but now meh. My weekly hovers around 6 Monthly hovers 5 if I purely ambush stomped I could achieve about 10-11 weekly with relative ease. K/D means nothing just because Duna's K/D is 17 times mine doesn't mean I won't beat him 5/4 times Mail? Oh did I send hatemail? oh show me, please show me..... I love hatemail....kind of wish I could see into Pyrex's inbox. How long ago was it? Pre 1.6 when I thought I was good or in 1.7 when tanking was so easy I couldn't possibly have been good. post 1.6 wasn't techniquely hate mail and I suppose you were probably right. Damnit.... I'll send you some hate mail this evening and you can bring it up in 6 months. Also what did I say? Was it an "I beat you once so am better", "you're a proto stomping douche", or something else? "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Travis Stanush GunFall Mobilization 123	Posted - 2014.04.24 03:55:00 - [65] - Quote Enji Elric wrote: Travis Stanush wrote: It's over 9000 no they said tankers not exmaple core -_- Dragon Ball Z No I will not show you where they touched me!!!
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 465	Posted - 2014.04.24 04:10:00 - [66] - Quote SGT NOVA STAR wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: SGT NOVA STAR wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: I don't think it should be anything, it depends on how you use it and how good you are but against infantry it can range from 6.0 to 100+ however if you are someone who only does tank v tank I think anything above 2 is good, 3 is "you're pretty good", 4 is awesome and 5 is godlike. Tanker all time kdr usually is somewhere slightly above the best slayers. Total kill count per match is however considerably lower for a tanker than it is for the best slayers in a single match, ambush is however completely random as it depends so much on the spawns. 5 is godlike? k.... id say 10 would be godlike I'm not talking about stomping wannabe tankers, I'm talking about going up against proper tankers. well the question was TANKER KDR. OP didn't really say "it only counts if you kill an actual tanker" then you'll have to have that "Whos dusts tankers" convo again. it doesn't matter what you kill or how, just have a high KDR if your a tanker. your in a mobile fortress, were OP right now, aint no good tanker suppose to be going boom all the time. Read my post again then. And tanks haven't been OP ever since 1.6 anymore. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
KalOfTheRathi Nec Tributis 1248	Posted - 2014.04.24 04:15:00 - [67] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? Sorry, this is a dumb question. At least to me it is. I can play a game and go 2/4 because I am fighting single tank against two to three tanks working together. I have still called those good results. Not all the friends I play with run tanks, so I might well be the single tank or ADS on our side. At least the only non-MLT version. Normally I don't run double digits, because I mainly blow up vehicles and installations, all of which allow the operator to escape death. I only run high KD/R when I switch to blaster and focus on infantry. KD/R is useless in this game. While it might have purpose in other games this one it doesn't. Smart deploy will still drop you on the one remaining uplink that is being camped by Reds in ambush. Or within meters of it. There is No Matchmaking In Dust (tm) and thus KD/R will never truly show the balance of anything in the game. It is a metric that many like. In Dust SP counts first, then ISK and/or WP. Finally KD/R and win/loss. How you think a single metric can display balance is beyond me. It implies a simplistic view of a very complex and dynamic battle system that the players have absolutely no say in who or where they engage in battle except for being in a squad and setting the battle type. Welcome to Dust And so it goes.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2039	Posted - 2014.04.24 04:26:00 - [68] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? People like you are dangerous. Please leave. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 528	Posted - 2014.04.24 06:40:00 - [69] - Quote KalOfTheRathi wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? Sorry, this is a dumb question. At least to me it is. I can play a game and go 2/4 because I am fighting single tank against two to three tanks working together. I have still called those good results. Not all the friends I play with run tanks, so I might well be the single tank or ADS on our side. At least the only non-MLT version. Normally I don't run double digits, because I mainly blow up vehicles and installations, all of which allow the operator to escape death. I only run high KD/R when I switch to blaster and focus on infantry. KD/R is useless in this game. While it might have purpose in other games this one it doesn't. Smart deploy will still drop you on the one remaining uplink that is being camped by Reds in ambush. Or within meters of it. There is No Matchmaking In Dust (tm) and thus KD/R will never truly show the balance of anything in the game. It is a metric that many like. In Dust SP counts first, then ISK and/or WP. Finally KD/R and win/loss. How you think a single metric can display balance is beyond me. It implies a simplistic view of a very complex and dynamic battle system that the players have absolutely no say in who or where they engage in battle except for being in a squad and setting the battle type. Welcome to Dust I'm not sure you read my post. I agree individual kdr doesn't signify much, which is why I have repeatedly stated I am looking for the average. This means all tankers. What I really wanted to know was the kdr against different fits, such as infantry AV and tank AV and what people thought that metric SHOULD be. This is much harder to tease out though. Because, that's why.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 528	Posted - 2014.04.24 06:43:00 - [70] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: Obviously there are not enough threads about tanks or protostomping so I thought I would rectify that. When discussing balance there is no single metric that can encompass all the variables but kdr is probably the best one to compare. So what do you think the AVERAGE tanker kdr should be? Why? What do you think it is right now? People like you are dangerous. Please leave. If forums were important then yes, I would hope you would find me very dangerous. Facts and reason coupled with curiosity can be scary things. I doubt if I will leaving anytime soon. Because, that's why.

SgtMajSquish MLBJ Consolidated Dust 162	Posted - 2014.04.24 06:46:00 - [71] - Quote Tanks that run against me usually lose a tank or to. Jihad Jeeps FTW. JLAVs work best when you have a buddy watching the overview map for the tank All empires fall. We'll be watching, we'll be waiting, we'll be that spark that starts the fires of doom.


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.