|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
810
   |
Posted - 2014.04.26 17:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tebu Gan wrote:Atiim 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? 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. HAH, yes we did say that. But you take it out of context. What we were calling for was a reduction to forge damage, NOT AN INCREASE TO OUR OWN DAMAGE. Some used the argument that a rail should out dps a forge gun. But the idea all along was reducing forge damage, not the other way around.
Which is just as dumb as the former.
I bet you've used the catch phrase "because we are tanks" as well. |
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
810
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 17:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tebu Gan wrote:Duran Lex wrote:Tebu Gan wrote:Atiim 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? 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. HAH, yes we did say that. But you take it out of context. What we were calling for was a reduction to forge damage, NOT AN INCREASE TO OUR OWN DAMAGE. Some used the argument that a rail should out dps a forge gun. But the idea all along was reducing forge damage, not the other way around. Which is just as dumb as the former. I bet you've used the catch phrase "because we are tanks" as well. LoL, no. If you only knew. Here you take it out of context. This was before 1.6.
When it took 8 ishukone shots to kill a well fit tank, and 2 to kill any MLT tank.
I know, I was here, and you are still dumb. |
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
813
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 17:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:Tebu Gan wrote:Atiim 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? 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. HAH, yes we did say that. But you take it out of context. What we were calling for was a reduction to forge damage, NOT AN INCREASE TO OUR OWN DAMAGE. Some used the argument that a rail should out dps a forge gun. But the idea all along was reducing forge damage, not the other way around. 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?).
A forge gun was unlikely to wrack up 30 kills against infantry that had no counter each match. |
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
813
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 17:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:Duran Lex wrote:
When it took 8 ishukone shots to kill a well fit tank, and 2 to kill any MLT tank.
I know, I was here, and you are still dumb.
Depends whether or not the tanker prepared for this by having all his mods available before the first shot, which was rarely the case. No mods active = 3 shots to die (even with passive hardeners) with what, 1.6 second charge times? Combine that with invincible logi LAVs, you have an aver on your ass consistently that is almost invincible, Also hilarious considering the only time a tanker could engage was when he had his repper available, which lasted like 15 seconds tops (iirc). Funny how tanks before had more of a wave of opportunity gameplay
Funny how tankers seem to ignore the fact that math exists in the world.
How am I going to 3 shot a 20k ehp tank that has 40% passive resist?
Oh wait, it's literally impossible. |
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
814
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 17:50:00 -
[5] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Duran Lex wrote:Tebu Gan wrote:Atiim 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? 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. HAH, yes we did say that. But you take it out of context. What we were calling for was a reduction to forge damage, NOT AN INCREASE TO OUR OWN DAMAGE. Some used the argument that a rail should out dps a forge gun. But the idea all along was reducing forge damage, not the other way around. Which is just as dumb as the former. I bet you've used the catch phrase "because we are tanks" as well. Yes, because we have a huge power plant, opposed to a forge having its own, tiny by comparison, power plant.
I don't care if you had an entire nuclear power facility strapped to your back.
This a game where balance matters, not a science non - fiction movie. |
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
814
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 17:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:Duran Lex wrote:Alpha 443-6732 wrote:Duran Lex wrote:
When it took 8 ishukone shots to kill a well fit tank, and 2 to kill any MLT tank.
I know, I was here, and you are still dumb.
Depends whether or not the tanker prepared for this by having all his mods available before the first shot, which was rarely the case. No mods active = 3 shots to die (even with passive hardeners) with what, 1.6 second charge times? Combine that with invincible logi LAVs, you have an aver on your ass consistently that is almost invincible, Also hilarious considering the only time a tanker could engage was when he had his repper available, which lasted like 15 seconds tops (iirc). Funny how tanks before had more of a wave of opportunity gameplay Funny how tankers seem to ignore the fact that math exists in the world. How am I going to 3 shot a 20k ehp tank that has 40% passive resist? Oh wait, it's literally impossible. You really are throwing up numbers now aren't you. Notice how I didn't say whether or not it was fully passive, hybrid, shield or armour? Go back to the playground and cool your head off, kiddie.
This were pre 1.6 gunlogis.
Armor tanks had less ehp but still rocked 40% resists after 15 mil invested SP.
it's okay if you were unaware.
|
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
819
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:Atiim wrote: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. 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.
So an HAV is what?
Or does having the largest ehp in game, the most destructive power, with having the fewest weaknesses = skill now?
It was cute for awhile, but now you are simply grasping at straws. |
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
820
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:Atiim wrote: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... 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.
Yes, I'm sure when the HMG was dominating infantry at 60 meters out, it was complaints about the games performance that got it nerfed to a shorter optimal.
You lost all credibility with such a ridiculous statement. |
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
820
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 18:56:00 -
[9] - Quote
Alpha 443-6732 wrote:Atiim wrote: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. Source?
The game you claim to play.
I suppose I'm done. You are continuing to spout nonsense and disregard logic when it suits you.
Enjoy your menial intelligence. |
|
|
| |
|