It just blows my mind that people cannot see how overpowered triple reps are...

I like the idea of active tanking, its good that gallente tanks are favoring this form of play... however.. a tank should not be completely invulnerable to any form of AV. Strong against it? Sure, but given sufficient time an AVer should be able to kill a tank standing still.

This is just complete nonsense that people are actually trying to argue this is okay...

smh...

There are no proto tanks and with tiercide there will never be proto tanks. So proto mods are the best thing you can do. That's all I'm gonna say.

3 complex damage mods, 3 proficiency proto swarms vs 2 complex 1 enhanced heavy repair with level 3 in repair proficiency.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v7AwrgVwNA&feature=youtu.be

First thing is that more than half of this quote is basically saying that the sideways tier comparisons are confusing you. Possibly, I wrote it in an awkward manner, and I'm not sure how to untangle what may already be there if you were not already following what I was saying, so instead I'll have to move forward a bit.

AV weapons deal with an entirely different tier of damage, the minimum being around 800 Damage per shot, which is a STD swarm, then upwards from there. Infantry weapons start at about 20 damage per shot and work upwards. The damage is scaled toward different targets, infantry having a max of about 400-1800 or so HP, and vehicles which can have 2000- 7000 HP. They therefore cannot be treated under the same balancing measures, because of the damage requirements each one holds. This in turn creates different tiers in damage output, but because they are on their own tiers, they have to be inspected separately. (This separation is the reason swarms need to lock-on, and AV grenades are generally only of use against vehicles.)

Assistant weapons generally have a concept of "wound" "maim" or "disable". For infantry such a weapon might be a net, poison, glue, or a weapon that might be able to damage muscle movement such as a taser, but for vehicles the category of "wound'' isn't really there because they aren't alive, but you can maim the ability of the repairs by inhibiting it a tad using swarms. In this particular example with the repairs tank, the swarms would be effective at assisting either one another, or a different type of AV because they would have to assist one another to overcome the repair ratios.

That's bullshit and you know it.
Min Commando skill is not enough to pack a punch through that kind of tank. Especially in the middle of the battlefield when the tank's active and moving and mowing down your team.

'I know from experience.'

It's not overpowering on a suit but it is on a vehicle , I know it's not the same thing but I keep reading that's what the Gal's are suppose to do and with the changes to the vehicle hardeners ... this should be expected , It's not undefeatable for a match but more so for a single encounter by someone with anything less than a FG .

Now that's one person but two to three with swarmer's can perform the task of destroying the tank .

I just don't see what's so hard to understand as well as the fact that there is a skill that increases the rep rate , so everyone's triple rep doesn't rep the same ... just like there is a skill for the recharge rate for the shield .

Some have put in the SP's to help to make their vehicle more effective .
The anti-vehicle situation has gotten much better since the changes to the rail range and the hardeners , if they changed the rest of the mods .. i.e. stacking penalties on everything and that's like rangers , dampeners and enhancers for the infantry skill tree like was suggested before .. then you would place this back into the 1.6 zone where as soon as any swarms were shot the tank had to retreat , where as this is still the case but not as exaggerated like in 1.6 with dam militia swarms even .

You have R.E's , P.M's , flux and anti-vehicle grenades , swarms and forge gun's .. plus to a lesser degree the plasma cannon .
Anti-vehicle has more than enough reliable options but yet , people act like there isn't because you can't on a constant .. take out a tank one on one .

To be honest , all you have to do is grab a forge gun and you will .

There will be proto tanks, they may be called something other than proto but they will exist and tiers will always exist in one form or another in Dust just as they continue to exist in Eve.

Wow... that is just redonkulous. So basically its bring another tank or get ****** at this point?

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?

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?

You could simply remove all tiers of AV and leave militia and basic than balance tanks vs AV

Removing tanks from ambush would also dwindle down much of the threads complaining about tanks

I agree with this.

Most AV issue revolve around prototype AV vs Basic Vehicle. I think that has a lot to do with current balance issues. You could still have Variants just with smaller values of damage and effectiveness compared to the current assault and breach variants of AVs.

For example:

Keep the Assault Forge Gun but bring it to a more balance AV level for Vehicles and remove prototype.
Than as you guy introduce Advance vehicles and prototype vehicles bring in the AVs of Advance and prototype at the same time.

I say this every time and I will say it again, fck that noise. There is absolutely no reason AV shouldn't be able to solo a tank, at least on the same tier. Here's the kicker about the video and what you said, that tank ain't any where near being proto. Sure it's likely got complex reps but it's still a standard tank being shot at by proto swarms.

Again, to anyone that says AV shouldn't be able to solo a tank up to it's tier, f u c k that noise. It should be a challenge for standard AV to take out a standard tank with basic or enhanced modules or but not fcking impossible and proto AV should be able to kick that same tank around like a tin can. Of course that last part is for when proto AV can be balanced against proto vehicles at which point it'll be as hard to properly fit complex modules on a std tank as it is to fit them on a std suit now.

Though I can agree that as it stands now with only std vehicles it should take effort to solo them with proto AV but standard AV should still actually stand a chance against a fcking standard vehicle.

Also in regards to tanks specifically, the "it's a tank" argument only works against weapons not designed to kill it; it does not and will never work against weapons specifically designed to kill it.

You're slowly becoming my forum hero

Not a dev, just a player.

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?

Keep the Assault Forge Gun but bring it to a more balance AV level for Vehicles and remove prototype.
Than as you guy introduce Advance vehicles and prototype vehicles bring in the AVs of Advance and prototype at the same time.

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.

He's just sitting there taking no evasive action what so ever.. you don't think that's a little op?

Infantry vs infantry is at the moment fair and i dont see any issues with that currently. However when i see that my Swarms do nothing at all against a tank like in the OP vid its just not motivating. Regardless if i get WP for damaging the vehicle or not. It just doesnt simply matter, even if i collect 2500WP for a orbital strike the tank just goes speedy gonzales and escapes from the effected area.

And this is aswell a issue that tanks are way too fast without a counter to that. On eve ya got webs and scrams to keep your opponent from running away. Something like a webifier grenade could help us out alot. Maybe slow down a vehcile by 60% for 12 secs when it gets hit by it?

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?

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?

I support the idea of webifiers and other ewar stuff but if that grenade is gonna last 12 seconds, how many should you be able to carry? 24 seconds of slowed down by 60% is quite a lot. Obviosly I think there should be options other than the grenade that are more effective, stuff that restricts your other options. Like webifier equipment you lay on the ground for permanent 60% reduction in ~30m radius until someone destroys that.. Or kind of a repair tool with longer range webifying your target instead of repairing it.

Okay, that makes a lot more sense of what your trying to say.

But I am going to be respectfully blunt, I just don't agree with it.

The concept of "wound" or disable to vehicle makes sense until you understand that wounding a triple rep tank basically means you wound him for only 1 second before he completely repped up. That window of opportunity is simply too small unless your using combined arms but that's still only 1 second opportunity.

Now the concept of disable is interesting if it actually disabled the vehicle from moving (disable is more appropriate term than wounding). Now I understand why you call it assistant weaponry but I think the term your mean to use is "Elusive Attacks" which basically means if you can't take them down by force you take them down by means of overcoming their defenses passively. For example attacks like Poison, gas, or anyway to cripple the enemy would be a elusive attack. Essentially engaging while enemy is in a continual weaken state.

Tasers are something else entirely called non-lethal. Used specially to put down targets but to keep them alive. Tasers are not used in warfare because the objective is to kill the enemy.


Now when it comes to Vehicles there is weapons that destroy or support destroying them. These supports are equipment based like the guided laser targets painters. They are passive aggressive. Aggressive weapons are essentially what you see in everyday shooters to take down vehicles like rocket launchers, RPGS, Javelin, Forge Guns, Ect.

So Swarms Launchers are aggressive weapons but offer only 1 second of opportunity to allow concentrated fire. This is not supporting nor is it elusive. Its simply aggressive which means that the weapons design is to destroy it target.

My thoughts. MLT tanks are overperforming compared to actual tanks (which themselves can situationally overperform) for their comparative cost, either raise the cost for MLT (and justify the durability with the cost) or lower the cost of STD tanks.

Damage mods are wildly overpowering right now, two damage mods on a particle cannon take you straight from about 1800 to ~ 3100 damage a shot. Damage modules *must be reverted to how they functioned in 1.6 and prior patches*, where they either let you turn your turret better, get more shots off before overheating for the active modules, or the lowslot passive ones provided the actual damage boosts. Currently a single MLT dmg mod provides greater benefit than the old systems two lowslot modules and a level five skill - on demand, with no sp investment.

Railguns if they're going to keep their rate of fire need to have their damage lowered by about 200-300 points as the 'amazing tank battles' many would like to see don't happen at all because they are killed in two shots to a 2x dmg mod sica / gunnlogi.

The reduced slot count has nixed a lot of the diversity that even 1.6 had in terms of vehicles, and is part of what is affecting vehicles so badly - as all hardeners are active and almost all reps are completely passive tanks exist in a binary state - you can either kill it or you can't. Things should happen on a gradual scale, where 'if a tank sits in one spot long enough he will die even to MLT swarms, it may take a pretty long time depending on the 'level' of AV being brought out, but it will happen' to a state where 3-4 coordinated AV'ers will instablap vehicles.

Now to actually address your points.

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.

My thoughts. MLT tanks are overperforming compared to actual tanks (which themselves can situationally overperform) for their comparative cost, either raise the cost for MLT (and justify the durability with the cost) or lower the cost of STD tanks.

Damage mods are wildly overpowering right now, two damage mods on a particle cannon take you straight from about 1800 to ~ 3100 damage a shot. Damage modules *must be reverted to how they functioned in 1.6 and prior patches*, where they either let you turn your turret better, get more shots off before overheating for the active modules, or the lowslot passive ones provided the actual damage boosts. Currently a single MLT dmg mod provides greater benefit than the old systems two lowslot modules and a level five skill - on demand, with no sp investment.

Railguns if they're going to keep their rate of fire need to have their damage lowered by about 200-300 points as the 'amazing tank battles' many would like to see don't happen at all because they are killed in two shots to a 2x dmg mod sica / gunnlogi.

The reduced slot count has nixed a lot of the diversity that even 1.6 had in terms of vehicles, and is part of what is affecting vehicles so badly - as all hardeners are active and almost all reps are completely passive tanks exist in a binary state - you can either kill it or you can't. Things should happen on a gradual scale, where 'if a tank sits in one spot long enough he will die even to MLT swarms, it may take a pretty long time depending on the 'level' of AV being brought out, but it will happen' to a state where 3-4 coordinated AV'ers will instablap vehicles.

Now to actually address your points.

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.