|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7267
   |
Posted - 2014.04.26 16:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quote:
Oh, and lol @ two of the biggest anti-tankers on the forums trying to use tanks. You truly are terrible in all aspects of Dust.
Is this aimed at me?
Because if so, then lol at the fact that Morte sent you sprinting to the redline with a Blaster Maddy, lol at the fact that an AVer who was there for 10min got more kills than you as tanker the entire match
Also, lol at the fact that the only way you could kill me was by syncing Taka's Railgun and an OB.
How's the view from that redline btw?
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7270
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 16:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
Crimson ShieId wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the vehicle users that made up the majority of complaints towards redline rail tanks? Specifically, all the ADS pilots getting shot across the map by someone hiding in the redline?
Keep in mind, it was also the vehicle users who said 80GJ Railguns should have more direct damage than FGs despite being full-auto with a moderate ROF.
I wonder how well that turned out for them.
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7270
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 16:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Crimson ShieId wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the vehicle users that made up the majority of complaints towards redline rail tanks? Specifically, all the ADS pilots getting shot across the map by someone hiding in the redline? Who also never bothered to squad with a tanker, and left all AV work to randoms that they didn't know? AKA mostly Judge?
Did you squad with AVers to deal with AV back then?
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7276
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 17:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
This guy get's it.
We were having an issue where a man portable hand cannon was doing equal/more damage than our vehicle cannons, with the added benefit of being almost impossible to see (unlike a tank).
Also they were about a 1/20th the cost (iirc?).
Except that man portable hand cannon also has a capacitor, and is vulnerable to every weapon in the game, as opposed to the vehicle cannon being vulnerable to only 3.
1/20th the cost? If you were running a vehicle costing 3,726,300 ISK you deserved the ISK loss.
Size doesn't mean anything. Do you see heavies QQ when a Shotgun or Nova Knife kills them?
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7278
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:You are still saying unrelated and random things, but that's okay if you need someone to dish your tank hate out on. I can tank all that you throw at me  . Also, while you're at it, try rereading the post where I said I'd never mentioned any of that (specifically). Then, try posting again.
Well you've failed to disprove Duran's assertion, so he pretty much won the argument.
Though I kinda expected better from you Alpha. Usually you last a good 3-4 pages before failing.
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7281
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:11:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
You're in your own little world Atiim.
If size doesn't matter, then why does the military use SPGs when they could just spam man portable mortars instead?
Why don't snipers snipe with scoped pistols instead of rifles?
Your logic is stunning as usual, friend.
Well the military uses Javelins when they could simply use a tank themselves, and last time I checked the Javelin is much smaller than the tank itself; so I'm pretty sure size doesn't always matter to the military.
Snipers use rifles because it's the most practical, not simply because it's bigger.
My logic seems to be a lot better than someone who finds it logical to use real-life examples as an argument for video game balance.
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7281
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
There's nothing stopping real life mechanics from being transferable to a game.
Unless you poorly implement them.
Don't disregard possibilities because of some stupid fallacy you heard of on the forums.
So then why can't my Swarm Launcher OHK vehicles like it would in real life?
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7281
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:15:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
You really are a funny guy.
Self proclaimed credibility, just by forcing yourself at the forums with your loud mouthed pandering.
Your opinion means nothing to me, you pretentious whiner.
Well what I said was true. You haven't said anything that disproves Duran's assertion, so he won the argument.
Your a tanker who did nothing but QQ before 1.7. Not only is that statement hypocritical, it's meaning is less than nothing.
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7282
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
Because then we would have countermeasures to prevent that from happening.
Please think before you post.
Fair enough.
However, what about the giant cannon with a Micro-Capacitor firing kinetic slugs faster than 7m/s? How well do you think that would fare against a Dropship in real life?
Now let's take a look at infantry weapons, mainly the HMG. If we were balancing things around real life, then wouldn't the HMG have an effective range of 1800m?
And lets not get started on what an 80GJ Railgun would truly do...
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7284
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:35:00 -
[10] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
Did I QQ, or was I arguing for balance?
I don't consider someone credible when he thinks a weapon that's inherently flawed for being so easy to use, means it takes skill -> i.e. the swarm launcher.
Now **** off.
Man, it's hard tapping/holding R1 and managing my modules. And that Active Scanner that showed me where every infantry unit was within 50m? So difficult right?
- The life of a Tanker
Now compare that, to a weapon which has no AP capabilities, an AI about as reliable as my corpmates during drunk night, a stock of 2 clips, and leaves the user vulnerable to everything because he has to maintain his focus onto the target or risk having his shots miss completely.
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
|
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7286
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:46:00 -
[11] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
That's a problem with the game's lore. Lore can be changed to suit a logic. It shouldn't be the other way around.
Maybe some sort of Geneva convention stating that weapons cannot be above a certain power lest they flatten an entire planet in one blow.
There also isn't anything inherently wrong with an HMG having a long range. That's an engine performance concern more than anything.
You'd also expect the armour and shielding of a dropship to evolve to the point of being able to withstand such a blow.
CCP is not going to change it's lore, especially to break the balance of a game as irrelevant as DUST 514.
I'm pretty sure the problem the HMG having a longer range is the fact that it would remove the one drawback stopping it from becoming overpowered; not UE3 Performance.
Quote:[...] penetrate even augmented armor systems.
As you were saying?
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7286
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:48:00 -
[12] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
Very shortsighted of you. Clearly, there couldn't have been any other way to balance the HMG. Just make it a heavy peashooter until 1.8, that's all that could be done.
Some examples to balance the HMG with range
More recoil (since it's handheld after all)
Speed penalty while having the weapon equipped (making the suit more clumsy)
Speed penalty while firing (~50%)
More heat buildup
Just off of the top of my head
And then it looses it's CQC capabilities, which is what the weapon is designed for.
HAV > Infantry > AV < HAV
[s]Text[/s] <------ That's how you make a strike-through
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7335
|
Posted - 2014.04.27 16:01:00 -
[13] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Mojo XXXIII wrote:In real life, it takes a 4-person crew to operate most tanks.
Or are we only talking about "realism" that BENEFITS tankers? It's a video game. Show me one video game that has tanks that REQUIRES 4 people to operate the tank in that video game.
Right after you show me a 16v16 FPS that requires more than 1 person to destroy a tank, while also having AV as a primary.
Proposed Mobile CRU Changes
-HAND
|
Atiim
Heaven's Lost Property
Dirt Nap Squad.
7335
|
Posted - 2014.04.27 16:14:00 -
[14] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
Source?
Edit: No really, I have eyes and can see what goes on in the game I play.
I'm looking for a quote for that from CCP though.
Nice quips though, stay mad.
Here you go.
CCP Remnant wrote:[..]
The HMG's optimal range is up to 30m and max. effective range caps out at 50m. (This is currently a hard cap - all weapons stop doing any damage beyond their max range - but we're going to be fixing this soon. Like soon soon, not SOON(tm).) What it needs is not a damage buff (it kills just fine) but a gentler damage falloff curve so that it can be used as an effective suppression weapon in the 50-70m range. As an attacker, right now it's too easy to shrug off the hits and close the gap between yourself and the person wielding the HMG so that's something I'd like to address as soon as possible.
Now I'm not too familiar with the metric system, but when you compare the range of CQC weapons such as the Ishukone Assault SMG (50.4m effective range) to Long Ranged Weapons such as the Kaalakiota Rail Rifle (102m effective range); 50-70m is indeed CQC.
Proposed Mobile CRU Changes
-HAND
|
|
|
| |
|