|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
558
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 13:44:00 -
[1] - Quote
Minor Treat wrote:Vulpes Dolosus wrote:Ok, obviously it's broken and needs fixed and I'm not trying to defend it, but have you tried:
Similarly tiered forgeguns? What about Proto Min Commando w/ swarms? Rail/Missile Tanks? Teamwork?
Unrelated to the issue at hand, in all honestly, I'm really against a single player, no matter how dedicated to AV, being able to take on a fully proto-ed tank easily. Eventually yes, a dedicated AV should kill it eventually if not engaged or fled from, but not easily. I like this post. I agree a single AV should not be able to kill a Tank but I like to think that a single AV player should be a thorn in his side if he is spec into AVs Edit: i made a typo
I strongly disagree. One player should be able to kill another player, whether in a suit or a vehicle.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
558
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 13:54:00 -
[2] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:BIind Shot wrote:
He's just sitting there taking no evasive action what so ever.. you don't think that's a little op?
Not op at all. HE set up his Maddy to deal with the sustained DPS of swarms and to an extent, forges. He is very vulnerable to alpha damage. 3 shots from a double damage modded militia railgun, 3 RE, or some PE would destroy that fit. Whereas a setup with 2 hardeners and a plate would easily handle that same railgun and RE and PE, but would suffer against those swarms because of the inability to rep back that health. It isn't that repper tanks are OP, it's that the video doesn't show all possible tank counters.
You can not design balance when tanks play against infantry by balancing tank against tank, you have to balance tank against infantry and THEN tank v tank.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
559
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 14:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Nothing Certain wrote:Minor Treat wrote:Vulpes Dolosus wrote:Ok, obviously it's broken and needs fixed and I'm not trying to defend it, but have you tried:
Similarly tiered forgeguns? What about Proto Min Commando w/ swarms? Rail/Missile Tanks? Teamwork?
Unrelated to the issue at hand, in all honestly, I'm really against a single player, no matter how dedicated to AV, being able to take on a fully proto-ed tank easily. Eventually yes, a dedicated AV should kill it eventually if not engaged or fled from, but not easily. I like this post. I agree a single AV should not be able to kill a Tank but I like to think that a single AV player should be a thorn in his side if he is spec into AVs Edit: i made a typo I strongly disagree. One player should be able to kill another player, whether in a suit or a vehicle. And I strongly disagree with you. Why are all of you so hell-bent on destroying tanks? Is it not enough if you managed to make it activate its modules and retreat? That's how it should be. A dedicated AV vs a dedicated tank won't be able to kill the tank, but it will be a huge hindrance to the tank and limit its abilities. Though two or more dedicated AV and the dedicated tank should be in trouble.
Explain your reasoning WHY one player should not be able to kill another player. Please do not just make a version of "because it is a tank" or give me your vision of what a tank is but instead give me the justification in terms of game balance and dynamics. Seriously, I would really like to hear someone present an argument. The only argument I have seen presented is ISK expenditure and that is a valid argument for some advantage but not the degree of advantage conveyed.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
559
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 14:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
Cruor Abominare wrote:And buffing swarms will just create a new set of problems. The real problem is the actual design of Av in this game. All Av basically follows a simple slow firing huge burst design. This works in a lot of games because vehicles are free and losing one is of no consequence. In a game like dust there's a cost to running vehicles.
lets take a step back to dropships because they really expound on this problem. A python on a good day can last 3 forge blasts before dying. Now vs one forge this means as long as the python gtfos at first hit he can escape before the forger can kill him. He is largely unkillable unless stupid. Now lets say that we decide to buff forges because we have no good counter to dropships. Now it only takes 2 shots. If the pilot is smart with flying he will still be able to escape but a forger has an excellent chance to kill.
unfortunately this isn't always 1v1. Anything a drop ship pilot meets 2 forgers he's instantly dead without any chance to do anything. This doesn't create good game play especially when the risk in cost is to the tune of 400k vs potentially 2 free suits.
same thing can happen to tanks by having this style of weapon we run the risk of purely alpha striking tanks when more than one swarmer is around just for the cost of having Av be able to solo.(which I'm actually for)
the solution to this is to finally get of the pot and **** and ccp figure out what they want for vehicles. Either they become cheap as dirt glass canons or Av is designed in a manner with high dos, high rof, low dmg per shot weapons where a vehicle will certainly die faster to multiple Av but because the shots are spread over many than just one he can at least react and try to escape, not just be instantly blapped by the first shot.
Yes, the way to balance vehicles against infantry is to have their stats more closely matched to infantry and thus their costs should more closely match infantry. You can't achieve balance by making things more and more powerful while leaving other things unchanged.
However, I think it is clear we all want vehicles to be technically OP. We want them to be a challenge, even if it is a little unfair.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
560
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 15:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:MarasdF Loron wrote: I know a lot of people say AV shouldn't be able to solo a HAV "because it's a tank." I think AV should definitely kill a HAV alone if the rock-paper-scissors favor him and he is more skilled than the tanker or if he gets the tanker in a bad spot otherwise.
This does happen though but I guess not as frequently as some would like but I know that I'm not the only one witnessing it , I have even seen players chop up drop ships and HAV's with plasma cannons so I know it's just not as bad as many make it out to be . I just know that I'm not the only one seeing swarms and forge guns killing tanks and in the kill feed .
Of course tanks get killed but on that same killfeed you are seeing a lot more people killed by tanks than tanks killed. One poster said he and a friend killed 60 players in tanks, so they are probably pretty giod at AV and they did this over the course of 20 or 30 games probably. How many players do you think two decent tankers working together over that time period would kill? 600? 1000? That's balance?
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
561
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
MINA Longstrike wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Not a dev, just a player.
Someone said one AV guy shouldn't be able to solo a tank. Sure I see that. And I can scare one of those guys away in my proAV fit, maybe. But when it's three tanks, you need at least 6 guys to deploy in AV gear, to scare them away unless AV unites against one tank and instapops one at a time.
In a pub, that's never going to happen.
Every pub game I have played in maps where a tank can truly affect the battle, is won by the team with madrepper superiority. The balance is way better in non tanky maps right now. Sadly I don't see a lot of tank v tank battles either which is probably what tankers desire.
This is a difficult problem and I know we have spent a lot of time on this internally
1) KDR of tanker vs non-tanker 2) ISK efficiency vs elite tanker comparable to elite assault player 3a) proto AV vs proto tanker 3b) proto AV vs standard tanker 3c) average AV needed to rapidly destroy a tank without tank recourse (2v1, 3v1, 4v1) 4) measuring the best tankers who are in the spotlight (very few) versus normal tankers who don't so so well 5) efficiency against infantry 6) nades and re's requre non slayer specialization, so AV is pretty inaccessible to majority of players.
Instead of more tankers v nontankers, what are some simple ways to balance this?
1) KDR - I wouldn't actually address this as a 'metric' worth balancing around as a primary statistic. 2) Isk efficiency of vehicles vs infantry. This one is also quite tough, but I'd say that in their current state most vehicle users will acknowledge that they are (unless in a coordinated situation) extremely isk inefficient compared to infantry. This has a problem on both sides in that vehicles underperform when played solo, or overperform when played with a group. As it is, I think it's *mostly* fine right now, but I would like to see vehicles get slightly more isk efficient *without making them infantry murdering machines*. Isk efficiency could easily be boosted through WP for MCRU spawns, allowing tanks to replace a weapon turret with an active scanning station (functions like current infantry active scanners, instead of the giant pulsing scanner). 3a)Proto AV vs Proto tank should probably be at about a 2.5:1 ratio. I don't have any numbers to really support this idea, but I heavily feel that AV (even heavy av) should be a strong deterrent to equally fit vehicles, not instant death. 3b)Proto AV vs STD tank should be closer to a 1.5:1 ratio, where once again it's not instant death, but it is a big threat. 4) Start with the average players, then take a look at things where they might be overperforming and find out *why* things are like that. 5) Cant help you here. 6) Infantry don't like to use weapons that cannot kill other infantry, or put them at significant risk from other infantry. To take someone elses words : There are too many differences between the tiers of AV and Vehicle, things need to be brought much closer into line with each other - aka tiericide.
1. kdr is the best single measure we have to compare performance. Ambush is only about kdr and the other modes are strongly influenced by it.
2. ISK efficiency. Tanks are far too ISK efficient. Compare any other module or weapon in Dust and you will see a 10X ISK expenditure buys you very little advantage. Going from STD typically costs about 40X ISK and nets you about 20% advantage. Tanks, MLT tanks excluded, grant a 200-300% advantage for less than a 10X expenditure. MLT tanks give you that for 1X. This is compounded by the fact that you also can wear any dropsuit in a tank, leaving you with all the advantages of a dropsuit. You have to give up nothing.
3. a Proto player in AV should be give up a small, 25% advantage to a tanker who has invested more.
4. Two players with equal ISK and SP expenditure should be equal, with equal odds of killing each other. I t should come down to skill, not a huge inherent advantage to one.
5. Tankers don't seem interested in being balanced against infantry.
6. Tanks have complete immunity from the most prevalent class of player, yet can kill them. Tanks have a huge advantage over a player class designed to kill them. AV on the other hand i
s vulnerable to both infantry and tanks. Tanks should not be invulnerable to most without being vulnerable to something else. Tankers will say they are vulnerable to other tanks but this does nothing to address tank/infantry balance.
So actually balancing tanks sgainst infantry would be a huge change for them. What I want? Slow tanks a little, slow acceleration a lot, modify the blaster turret, small buff to swarm damage, range and speed, small buff to proximity mines. That's it.
Vehicles should require pilot suits with no way to leave the vehicle e cept supply depots or dying. They should then have more complex and diverse fittings and roles which they can devise better than I can.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
563
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
Atiim wrote:MarasdF Loron wrote: Every word I said was true and if you don't believe me, then.. well, that's your problem, not mine.
Be it true or false, it's anecdotal, and as such shouldn't be taken seriously.
Well, he did provide stats which could be confirmed or proven false. I find a 1 in 1000 death rate to tanks...implausible.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
564
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
In general it should be: AI tank (blaster) > infantry > AV infantry > AV tank (missile/railgun) > AI tank
*Going down the list decreases effectiveness*
Now, I think it's perfectly balanced how my missile tank is forced to retreat in the presence of AV infantry, that's why I should have infantry to counter them. On the flip side, infantry or AV infantry can't or have reduced efficiency against a blaster tank, which is why they should have an AV tank to counter it.
Infantry counter against the tank counter is thus similar to a tank counter against the infantry counter, and you get a nice mirrored balance.[/quote]
This might makes sense if infantry received complete invulnerability to AV tanks or if infantry AV was equally dangerous to tanks as tsnks are to infantry, but that isn't the case. ALL tanks are invulnerable to infantry. ALL tanks can kill infantry. ALL tanks have an advantage 1v1 vs. infantry AV. AV infantry can be killed by everything in your flowchart. That is not counters balancing each other, it is one lopsided class stomping the other class, and then finding balance within its own class.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
565
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 19:29:00 -
[9] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:Mojo XXXIII wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Atiim wrote:So I guess we shouldn't have to bring a friend either? Sure if you just happy at scaring it away or you really know how to solo a vehicle So you agree that, if an AV has enough SKILL, then he SHOULD be capable of SOLOING a vehicle, right? Nobody's asking for it to be EASY, just POSSIBLE. After all, why should something as limited and vulnerable as AV REQUIRE teamwork, if operating something as durable and powerful as a tank doesn't? ... and around and around and around and around we go! It should be possible only if AV has spent a comparable amount of SP in their AV weapons to counter a vehicle. Again, it takes 3.4 million SP to simply field a repper tank like the one in the video, but the swarm used to kill it only used at minimum 1.75 million, including getting complex damage mods. That's almost half the SP the tanker needs just to get one called out. If he spends 3.4 million on killing the tank, then yes he should stand a chance on killing the tank, but not before. This is why tanks were changed in the first place. Because 20 million SP tanks were going down in 3 shots to a 610k SP investment in swarms.
So how quickly should a militia tank go down? How much advantage should more SP or more ISK get you? I don't disagree that if you have to spend more you should get an advantage, but vehicles should be consistent with the rest of the game. A Proto CR costs 40X more ISK and requires much more SP than a STD but gets only a 20% advantage. This range is representative of all modules and weapons, except vehicles. Tanks get a 200-300% increase for a mere 10X ISK and at most, 2X SP. What is the justification for this differential treatment?
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
565
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 19:34:00 -
[10] - Quote
Mojo XXXIII wrote:Alena Ventrallis wrote:Mojo XXXIII wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Atiim wrote:So I guess we shouldn't have to bring a friend either? Sure if you just happy at scaring it away or you really know how to solo a vehicle So you agree that, if an AV has enough SKILL, then he SHOULD be capable of SOLOING a vehicle, right? Nobody's asking for it to be EASY, just POSSIBLE. After all, why should something as limited and vulnerable as AV REQUIRE teamwork, if operating something as durable and powerful as a tank doesn't? ... and around and around and around and around we go! It should be possible only if AV has spent a comparable amount of SP in their AV weapons to counter a vehicle. Again, it takes 3.4 million SP to simply field a repper tank like the one in the video, but the swarm used to kill it only used at minimum 1.75 million, including getting complex damage mods. That's almost half the SP the tanker needs just to get one called out. If he spends 3.4 million on killing the tank, then yes he should stand a chance on killing the tank, but not before. This is why tanks were changed in the first place. Because 20 million SP tanks were going down in 3 shots to a 610k SP investment in swarms. Tanks also enjoy a ton of benefits for those SP that AV doesn't. A tank is capable of killing both vehicles and infantry, has a ton more hitpoints, does a ton more damage, and is immune to a large percentage of other weapons in the game. It's really starting to seem like many of the tankers on here want all the benefits, but no weaknesses. Easy mode, if you will.
Add to that 3rd person view, the ability to call and recall tanks anywhere, not just supply depots and the ability to wear any dropsuit in their tank. They can be fitted with the exact dropsuit I am, so they give up nothing to wrap a tank around it.
Because, that's why.
|
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
565
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 19:53:00 -
[11] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Mojo XXXIII wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Atiim wrote:So I guess we shouldn't have to bring a friend either? Sure if you just happy at scaring it away or you really know how to solo a vehicle So you agree that, if an AV has enough SKILL, then he SHOULD be capable of SOLOING a vehicle, right? Nobody's asking for it to be EASY, just POSSIBLE. After all, why should something as limited and vulnerable as AV REQUIRE teamwork, if operating something as durable and powerful as a tank doesn't? ... and around and around and around and around we go! They do now It can be done now I use a proto breach FG to 1 shot tanks
No you don't.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
565
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 19:59:00 -
[12] - Quote
Gelhad Thremyr wrote:No its impossible number wise, especially with a breach FG which takes forever to charge up, unless you are high up, perched unseen by the tank, even then.... look at its damage, add 60% if you hit the tanks back if I remember correctly... maybe base milita tanks...
The math has been done and only a Sica can be OHK by a forge gun. This requires a maxed ou Breach hitting the tank in the sweet spot, no hardeners or additional shields or armor.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
571
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 19:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Foundation Seldon wrote:but at least when it comes to Armor Repairers they repair SIGNIFICANTLY more as a function of total health of the vehicle compared to their dropsuit counterparts.
As they should when a tank has at the least 10x more armor than a suit, and 4x more when you're talking about the sentinels. Which is sad, how a vehicle with a giant powerplant compared to a suit, has only 4000 armor.
What is sad is that a player gets 10X the armor as another and thinks that balance means that he should get 10X the repairing ability as well.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
571
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 19:22:00 -
[14] - Quote
Marcus Stormfire wrote:Zaaeed Massani wrote:Marcus Stormfire wrote:The triple rep Maddy is fun to run around with but it is a bit of a beast. I agree it can annoy the heck out of a lot of players and be near invulnerable to those on the receiving end who don't know how to deal with them. Perhaps lower the Rep amount if anything.
However before we all jump on the triple rep Maddy nerf bandwagon you guys should think of more interesting and unorthodox tactics to remove them from the battlefield. I just had loads of fun running solo and removing Madrugars including a few triple rep beasts (amongst many other tanks). Just think outside the box and do some theory crafting. Thinking of clever ways to turn the tide of battle is part of the fun of the game.
-Marcus How about you provide some of said tactics so that the rest of us may test them ourselves? At risk of giving up some some secrets (any AV'er who know what they are doing would know this anyways) The proper use of remote explosives can and will beat a triple rep Madrugar any day. I have yet to see one survive 7500 alpha damage. Also ambush them. Force the engagement on your terms running straight at them usually means you die. So basically, in my opinion no need for a nerf. If people keep dying to them all the time then they should really learn how to skill and use bonuses properly. Dust is unlike any other FPS out there and you absolutely need to learn how to adapt and overcome otherwise the game will eat you alive. -Marcus
Please join me in Ambush. I look forward to you teaching Duna a lesson.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
583
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 04:19:00 -
[15] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:Zaaeed Massani wrote:Marcus Stormfire wrote:The triple rep Maddy is fun to run around with but it is a bit of a beast. I agree it can annoy the heck out of a lot of players and be near invulnerable to those on the receiving end who don't know how to deal with them. Perhaps lower the Rep amount if anything.
However before we all jump on the triple rep Maddy nerf bandwagon you guys should think of more interesting and unorthodox tactics to remove them from the battlefield. I just had loads of fun running solo and removing Madrugars including a few triple rep beasts (amongst many other tanks). Just think outside the box and do some theory crafting. Thinking of clever ways to turn the tide of battle is part of the fun of the game.
-Marcus How about you provide some of said tactics so that the rest of us may test them ourselves? 1.REs. Three total will kill it, or two if they are next to/on the weak point. 2. A maxed out assault forge gun can dps it down in 4 shots. Less if one can hit the weakspot. 3. Large railgun. Particle Cannon takes 4 shots, damage mod reduces that to 3, and hitting the weakpoint with a damage mod reduces that to 2. 4. PEs. Lay an RE, switch to your PE, and lay the PE on top of the RE. The double combo does about 2700 damage. Two of these close together pops a repper tank easy. 5. Maxed out breach forge gun can two shot a repper tank, and maybe even one shot if you hit the weakspot. 6. Maxed out swarms, if you begin your attack from behind so the missiles hit the weakspot. There you go. Begin testing.
Wow, let's see, forge guns, swarms, RE/PE combo, railgun. You sir, are a genius. Why didn't anyone think of these before?
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
583
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 04:27:00 -
[16] - Quote
SeargentSAVAGE wrote:Okay that's only swarms, add proto av packed grenades with even a militia swarm helping, that tank would be done for. Not to mention rolling over Proximity Mines, that tank would be a lost memory. Here goes another pointless nerf. The problem is there is only 2 AV weapons and most people just whine about the tanks and never do anything about it and never spec into any AV what so ever. That tank is completely fair and needs no buffs/nerfs. what needs to happen is more AV weapons need to be put in the game. Oh and not to mention that tank would completely get obliterated by and OB, I have no idea how many times I have to say this STOP NERFING STUFF! People put a lot of time and effort into weapons/tanks, and for you to nerf it is ridiculous for the simple fact that after the nerf they completely hate it because it became completely useless, so they ask for a respec but then you guys say I'm sorry but you are supposed to spec into things you desire to always use so we cannot do this even though we nerfed it into oblivion. As my brother would say, " Oh that's a tank? Nothing a Ishakone Assualt Forge gun can't take care of!"
Tell your brother to join my channel Saturday night. I would really love all the people on the forums who say it is easy to kill a tank to show me how it is done. Seriously. That includes you Takahiro. I think the channel will be called Pop-a-Top. The purpose is twofold, to cause some tanker tears and to see if forum tank killers are really as formidable as they claim, and if they are, to learn from them.
Frankly, I'm not holding my breath for either one.
Because, that's why.
|
|
|
|