DUST Search - Proto swarms Vs 3 rep maddy (video)

All Channels

General Discussions

Proto swarms Vs 3 rep maddy (video)

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 186	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:24:00 - [1] - Quote 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 and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
jerrmy12 kahoalii Proficiency V. 1333	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:25:00 - [2] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 Not gunna watch right this sec, I already know that broken reprugar Dont be MADrugar I <3 girl gamers Tears, sweet delicious tears
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 394	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:26:00 - [3] - Quote Working as intended. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Alex-P-Keaton Kramer Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 129	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:26:00 - [4] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 ok so? i like to go to craigslist and look at the personal ad's transexuals put up
21yrOld Knight Pradox XVI Proficiency V. 840	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:27:00 - [5] - Quote Oh Damn! Mike Ruan Said I was Dust Famous *General John Ripper Said I was Dust Famous* Who else thinks I'm Famous?
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 186	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:29:00 - [6] - Quote Alex-P-Keaton Kramer wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 ok so? He's just sitting there taking no evasive action what so ever.. you don't think that's a little op? and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
ZDub 303 TeamPlayers Dirt Nap Squad. 2613	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:30:00 - [7] - Quote Gunnlogis are so UP :(
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 394	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:34:00 - [8] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: Alex-P-Keaton Kramer wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 ok so? He's just sitting there taking no evasive action what so ever.. you don't think that's a little op? More than a little. Unfortunately CCP has no ***** to give. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 394	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:35:00 - [9] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: Gunnlogis are so UP :( What's really sickening is that the same swarmer would have wrecked a shield tank in relatively short order, assuming all else remained the same (no evasive action, etc). And Swarms are supposed to be STRONGER against armor !!1!11!!11! Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Foundation Seldon Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 637	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:39:00 - [10] - Quote Yeah, having run this build myself on multiple occasions it's absolutely a problem. Right now a lot of the changes that went into vehicles going into 1.7 were to make them more analogous in X, Y, and Z ways to the way Dropship modules and balance were geared. ie. Much higher shield regen percentage and always on repairers 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. Right now I'd easily argue that Shield Regen rates are too high as a whole - the delay for when regen starts to kick up is too short - and individual armor repairers (across both Light and Heavy Reps.) heal far too much as a percentage of overall HP values of the vehicle. I'd urge for dissenters to look in the long term especially with the eventual return of logistics vehicle modules to the game, right now there's very little point in them with the current incarnation of vehicles as they repair their health pools ridiculously quickly with 0 assistance required. Saga v. Methana Balance

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9950	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:40:00 - [11] - Quote Lol that's why I don't use those broken as ***. Alpha damage would have wrecked that HAV but consisted damage can just be ignored. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!"* -Dagger Two
Vulpes Dolosus SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 1513	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:41:00 - [12] - Quote 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. Me in my ADS: 1,2
Guiltless D667 26	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:43:00 - [13] - Quote In perfect conditions one set of proto swarms cant kill this maddy tank,maybe 2 but not one:CONFIRMED forgeguns next please A Strange Game.
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 245	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:49:00 - [14] - Quote 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
Foundation Seldon Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 637	Posted - 2014.04.30 02:54:00 - [15] - Quote 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. This has nothing to do with killing though. Do you agree, at the very least, that AV should be considered a threat to a vehicle at any point? The triple rep maddy all but IGNORES anything but organized action made by at least half a squad of AV or another tank entirely and I find that unreasonable given that the Tanker himself is a solo, infantry slaughtering, death machine. If Proto AV can't even force a retreat then why the hell bother? Hook up a double damage modded sica and stop wasting your time. Saga v. Methana Balance
Arcturis Vanguard Red Star. EoN. 90	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:04:00 - [16] - Quote Well it does seem a little OP, doesn't it? The only thing I have to say is that Xhedos Prime and I absolutely destroyed over 60 tanks today. Just two dudes, one LAV and proto AV. Throw AV grenades, then expel 1-4 assault forges depending of tankers build and reaction. Rinse and repeat. The real question is should a single AV personnel destroy a tank? Maybe. I say maybe in regards to an AV specialist (full proficiency) against a militia tank. A single AV specialist should be able to inflict enough damage to make any tanker rethink his location and gtfo or risk losing serious isk. What that video shows is that a triple passive rep tank can have immunity and kill a single AV specialist without a single worry. Amarr Heavy_ Amarr Assault_ Caldari Scout
LittleCuteBunny 438	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:05:00 - [17] - Quote Maddies are supposed to be stand and deliver and 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. Damage over time does a better job against active tanks and burst damage is better against passive tanks. Retired.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 770	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:06:00 - [18] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 Swarms are an assistant AV. Who are you assisting? Also, if there had been 2 people, it would have gone from pestering to complete annihilation. That's a rather large toggle to be honest. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 246	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:07:00 - [19] - Quote LittleCuteBunny wrote: Maddies are supposed to be stand and deliver and 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. Damage over time does a better job against active tanks and burst damage is better against passive tanks. Out of curiousity... What do you mean Active Tanks, and passive Tanks? And What do you mean Damage over time, and burst damage? (when you describe these can you include the weapon as well please to clarify a little more.)
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 246	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:08:00 - [20] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Swarms are an assistant AV. Who are you assisting? What makes you think Swarms are Assistant AV? It does not say that in the description of the weapon.

Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 770	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:09:00 - [21] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: LittleCuteBunny wrote: Maddies are supposed to be stand and deliver and 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. Damage over time does a better job against active tanks and burst damage is better against passive tanks. Out of curiousity... What do you mean Active Tanks, and passive Tanks? And What do you mean Damage over time, and burst damage? (when you describe these can you include the weapon as well please to clarify a little more.) Active, hardeners, passive repairs. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 246	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:10:00 - [22] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: LittleCuteBunny wrote: Maddies are supposed to be stand and deliver and 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. Damage over time does a better job against active tanks and burst damage is better against passive tanks. Out of curiousity... What do you mean Active Tanks, and passive Tanks? And What do you mean Damage over time, and burst damage? (when you describe these can you include the weapon as well please to clarify a little more.) Active, hardeners, passive repairs. What about the burst damage and the damage over time?
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 506	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:11:00 - [23] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 Put that Swarm Launcher on Minmando (skill lv5) with 3 dmg mods and prof 5 and that Maddy doesn't stand a chance. I know from experience. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Awry Barux Ametat Security Amarr Empire 2372	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:11:00 - [24] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: 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. Why is that? Why should it be so much easier for a tank to kill AV than it is for AV to kill a tank? The TTK of the large blaster on a proto Cal Sentinel is less than the charge time of a max-skilled Assault FG, while the FG requires at least a full clip to kill the tank, more if there's even a second or two of down time in between firing one shot and charging the next. A fully proto Cal Sentinel is 173k ISK. Sentinel ck.0 57,690 Complex Heavy Damage Modifier 5,595 Complex Heavy Damage Modifier 5,595 Complex Heavy Damage Modifier 5,595 Complex Shield Energizer 5,925 Basic Armor Repairer 1,275 Ishukone Assault Forge Gun 47,220 Kaalakiota Magsec SMG 21,240 Lai Dai Packed AV Grenade 23,610 ISK Estimated Cost: ~ 173,745 A proto module Blaster Madrugar is 229k ISK. (note: this fit has 1CPU left over- no room for a nicer turret) 'AI-102' Madrugar 97,500 Complex Heavy Armor Repairer 39,465 Complex Heavy Armor Repairer 39,465 80GJ Blaster 24,000 Enhanced Heavy Armor Repairer 24,105 Basic Fuel Injector 4,500 ISK Estimated Cost: ~ 229,035 They're the same number of people. There's only a 50k ISK difference in cost between their gear. Again, why should it be easier for the tank to kill the AVer than for the AVer to kill the tank? If you have a well-reasoned justification, I'm all ears. Nerdier than thou
Miokai Zahou The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 216	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:13:00 - [25] - Quote Tanks don't belong on the battlefield as they are unless swarms, forges are buffed with a significant amount of bass damaged and the extra grenade slot is given back. I don't give a **** if we lose the 1 percent players as the are the ones ruining fun matches in ambush and domination, drop ships are fine to me though. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9952	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:14:00 - [26] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: LittleCuteBunny wrote: Maddies are supposed to be stand and deliver and 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. Damage over time does a better job against active tanks and burst damage is better against passive tanks. Out of curiousity... What do you mean Active Tanks, and passive Tanks? And What do you mean Damage over time, and burst damage? (when you describe these can you include the weapon as well please to clarify a little more.) An Active Tank is Tanking type that focuses on active player imput, choosing to activate modules when they are needed for brief instances of powerful module effects. Passive Tanking is using modules that apply static or passive buffs to a vehicle to allow it to perform at a stable level all the time. E.G- An Active tanked Madrugar used Hardeners, a passive tanked Madrugar uses these Heavy Repair Units. Damage over time is Damage that takes a set duration to apply I suppose DPS weapons fall into this category, whereas, burst, or Alpha as I consider it, apply massive amount of damage per strike. Now the weakness of the Triple Rep Madrugar is Alpha damage. damage that is applied massively in singlular strikes per round, like Forgeguns and Railguns. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 770	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:16:00 - [27] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Swarms are an assistant AV. Who are you assisting? What makes you think Swarms are Assistant AV? It does not say that in the description of the weapon. Light weaponry that any class can equip. That's like asking where it says a scrambler pistol is an assistant weapon. It says sidearm, but not assistant. Needless to say anyone who actually knows how to use the weapons and WHEN to use them can absolutely destroy. People who use the wrong weapon for the wrong time are the ones who complain the most. Triple repair tanks are the easiest thing in the world to solo. Here's a hint. It's not a tank, nor is it swarms. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 246	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:22:00 - [28] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Swarms are an assistant AV. Who are you assisting? What makes you think Swarms are Assistant AV? It does not say that in the description of the weapon. Light weaponry that any class can equip. That's like asking where it says a scrambler pistol is an assistant weapon. It says sidearm, but not assistant. Needless to say anyone who actually knows how to use the weapons and WHEN to use them can absolutely destroy. People who use the wrong weapon for the wrong time are the ones who complain the most. Triple repair tanks are the easiest thing in the world to solo. Here's a hint. It's not a tank, nor is it swarms. Well technically a pistol is what you call a sidearm because it on your side. I'm a marine and doesn't make any sense to call a weapon a assistant weapon. As for when weapons are used. Yes you are right, if used correctly the weapon should be devastating as each make and model of every modern weapon is designed for certain purposes. But my question revolved around "assistant weapons" So you would classify as rifle as a "assistant weapon" given its a light weapon. how does a rifle assist? Edit: I'm not trying to make you feel uncomfortable, I'm just trying to understand your logic and what your trying to say.
Arcturis Vanguard Red Star. EoN. 91	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:27:00 - [29] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Swarms are an assistant AV. Who are you assisting? What makes you think Swarms are Assistant AV? It does not say that in the description of the weapon. Light weaponry that any class can equip. That's like asking where it says a scrambler pistol is an assistant weapon. It says sidearm, but not assistant. Needless to say anyone who actually knows how to use the weapons and WHEN to use them can absolutely destroy. People who use the wrong weapon for the wrong time are the ones who complain the most. Triple repair tanks are the easiest thing in the world to solo. Here's a hint. It's not a tank, nor is it swarms. If your referring to a forge gun you are still mistaken. I'm full proficiency on an amarr sent with two complex damage mods and the video is much similar to what I experience. I take out more armor then the prof 3 swarms, but that build cannot destroy the maddy (not referring to critical hits). Amarr Heavy_ Amarr Assault_ Caldari Scout
Awry Barux Ametat Security Amarr Empire 2373	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:30:00 - [30] - Quote Arcturis Vanguard wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Swarms are an assistant AV. Who are you assisting? What makes you think Swarms are Assistant AV? It does not say that in the description of the weapon. Light weaponry that any class can equip. That's like asking where it says a scrambler pistol is an assistant weapon. It says sidearm, but not assistant. Needless to say anyone who actually knows how to use the weapons and WHEN to use them can absolutely destroy. People who use the wrong weapon for the wrong time are the ones who complain the most. Triple repair tanks are the easiest thing in the world to solo. Here's a hint. It's not a tank, nor is it swarms. If your referring to a forge gun you are still mistaken. I'm full proficiency on an amarr sent with two complex damage mods and the video is much similar to what I experience. I take out more armor then the prof 3 swarms, but that build cannot destroy the maddy (not referring to critical hits). He's referring to REs. Flux/AV nade/swarm to drop shields, blow triple REs, -> dead tank, 0 rep cycles. However, no even mildly competent tanker is going to sit still long enough for me to slap three remotes lethargically on it. Certainly, some do, but the competent ones don't. Nerdier than thou

Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 670	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:00:00 - [31] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Swarms are an assistant AV. A lot of people act like they do not understand this . Try forge guns . Always looking for the quick kill in this game , never wanting to work for something ...people have a spaz over the fact that they can not OKH something , if it's scouts , tanks or heavies and even drop ships . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 670	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:03:00 - [32] - Quote Arcturis Vanguard wrote: If your referring to a forge gun you are still mistaken. So your telling me that someone would sit there and can take a WBFG blast like a swarm launcher ??? I just know for a fact that's not true , I solo tanks with that gun . I can almost do it with a DCMA 5 . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
MINA Longstrike 608	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:03:00 - [33] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: Gunnlogis are so UP :( What's really sickening is that the same swarmer would have wrecked a shield tank in relatively short order, assuming all else remained the same (no evasive action, etc). And Swarms are supposed to be STRONGER against armor !!1!11!!11! Yes they are, but armor is also supposed to be enduring where shields are supposed to have to GTFO if they start taking fire. That said this completely fucks the 'waves of opportunity' crap that was spouted, I almost want to return to 1.6 tanks with improvements to shield recharge and most of the current changes to AV. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
jerrmy12 kahoalii Proficiency V. 1334	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:06:00 - [34] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: Gunnlogis are so UP :( What's really sickening is that the same swarmer would have wrecked a shield tank in relatively short order, assuming all else remained the same (no evasive action, etc). And Swarms are supposed to be STRONGER against armor !!1!11!!11! Yes they are, but armor is also supposed to be enduring where shields are supposed to have to GTFO if they start taking fire. That said this completely fucks the 'waves of opportunity' crap that was spouted, I almost want to return to 1.6 tanks with improvements to shield recharge and most of the current changes to AV. Exept armor should die faster to swarms, as its anti armor, shields have 40% less damage taken over armor... I <3 girl gamers Tears, sweet delicious tears
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 434	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:08:00 - [35] - Quote 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. Forge is still **** against this. Rail tanks are good... If you can call them in before they're wrecked. Teamwork... Lol, bot everyone squads, and try getting blueberries to join your cause. QQ? Boo Hoo [Q] <-- Drink Moar Quafe
Arx Ardashir Imperium Aeternum 819	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:11:00 - [36] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Minor Treat wrote: LittleCuteBunny wrote: Maddies are supposed to be stand and deliver and 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. Damage over time does a better job against active tanks and burst damage is better against passive tanks. Out of curiousity... What do you mean Active Tanks, and passive Tanks? And What do you mean Damage over time, and burst damage? (when you describe these can you include the weapon as well please to clarify a little more.) An Active Tank is Tanking type that focuses on active player imput, choosing to activate modules when they are needed for brief instances of powerful module effects. Passive Tanking is using modules that apply static or passive buffs to a vehicle to allow it to perform at a stable level all the time. E.G- An Active tanked Madrugar used Hardeners, a passive tanked Madrugar uses these Heavy Repair Units. It's quite the opposite in EVE Active tanks are tanks that rep damage to negate enemy damage for long enough for you to kill them. Passive tanks are buffer fits that are supposed to last long enough for you to kill the enemy through attrition. Amarr Master - All Amarr Dropsuits at lvl 5. Ghosts Chance's hero for 3/1/14. A manu dei et tet rimon.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9952	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:12:00 - [37] - Quote Arx Ardashir wrote: True Adamance wrote: Minor Treat wrote: LittleCuteBunny wrote: Maddies are supposed to be stand and deliver and 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. Damage over time does a better job against active tanks and burst damage is better against passive tanks. Out of curiousity... What do you mean Active Tanks, and passive Tanks? And What do you mean Damage over time, and burst damage? (when you describe these can you include the weapon as well please to clarify a little more.) An Active Tank is Tanking type that focuses on active player imput, choosing to activate modules when they are needed for brief instances of powerful module effects. Passive Tanking is using modules that apply static or passive buffs to a vehicle to allow it to perform at a stable level all the time. E.G- An Active tanked Madrugar used Hardeners, a passive tanked Madrugar uses these Heavy Repair Units. It's quite the opposite in EVE Active tanks are tanks that rep damage to negate enemy damage for long enough for you to kill them. Passive tanks are buffer fits that are supposed to last long enough for you to kill the enemy through attrition. Is that not what I said? IN my mind my description and yours line but perfectly... "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
stlcarlos989 SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 1293	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:15:00 - [38] - Quote People say that one AVer shouldn't be able to kill a tank but it only takes one guy to operate that tank. If it took one driver and one turret operator then sure it should take 2 AVers to take out a tank. Right now one guy with proto swarms can't beat a standard tank, (yes madrugars are STD tanks). That would be like a Boundless Combat rifle not being able to do enough DPS to kill basic gallente assault with stacked armor reps. STB Director, #1 in Warpoints E3 Closed Beta Build, Water Pipe Aficionado, Cannabis Sativa Connoisseur
Vitharr Foebane Living Like Larry Schwag 1081	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:15:00 - [39] - Quote I wish my dropsuit could self rep like that... Amarr: Sentinel V Scout V Assault IV Commando IV Logistics III I place my faith in my God, my Empress, and my Laz0r
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 771	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:32:00 - [40] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: Well technically a pistol is what you call a sidearm because it on your side. I'm a marine and doesn't make any sense to call a weapon a assistant weapon. As for when weapons are used. Yes you are right, if used correctly the weapon should be devastating as each make and model of every modern weapon is designed for certain purposes. But my question revolved around "assistant weapons" So you would classify as rifle as a "assistant weapon" given its a light weapon. how does a rifle assist? Edit: I'm not trying to make you feel uncomfortable, I'm just trying to understand your logic and what your trying to say. How would you use an Assault Rifle vs a tank? Light weapons typically don't work as well vs vehicles. Or were you trying to make some sideways statement regarding the class of weaponry instead of the relative targets? AV weaponry runs on a different tier than antipersonel. To my knowledge, there are no sidearm AV weapons, hence those are the lowest tier. it would be like having a gun that fires wide area flashbangs in infantry combat, that do little damage. VS a heavy, that damage is moot, but vs a scout, that would be devastating. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming

ZDub 303 TeamPlayers Dirt Nap Squad. 2616	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:32:00 - [41] - Quote 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 AVers 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...
calisk galern BurgezzE.T.F General Tso's Alliance 2431	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:35:00 - [42] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: Alex-P-Keaton Kramer wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 ok so? He's just sitting there taking no evasive action what so ever.. you don't think that's a little op? you should see how this does against my rail tank, hint it lasts 2 seconds. I love that repper maddies have become the current thing, it's practically like they are giving me free kills.
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1238	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:44:00 - [43] - Quote 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. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Thumb Green The Valyrian Guard 1036	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:44:00 - [44] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: 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 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. Support Orbital Spawns
ZDub 303 TeamPlayers Dirt Nap Squad. 2616	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:49:00 - [45] - 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. All i'm really seeing here is that it takes a double damage modded railgun, pretty much the pinnacle of anti-vehicle weaponry, to kill a triple rep madrugar. I have yet to see a maddy with any amount of hardeners and plates handle a double damage modded railgun 'with ease' maybe once those damage mods have gone on cooldown and the railgun is reloading.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9958	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:50:00 - [46] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: 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 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. However Thumb eventually the player base will develop to the point where every half ways intelligent players skills into at least OP 5 of AV...... now at that point every tank beneath proto tier is invalidated and made pointless....is would that be good balance? Where you AV stays at 300K ISK but my hulls are back over 1M ISK, and those are the only competitive hulls...... "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Cruor Abominare Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 124	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:53:00 - [47] - Quote 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.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 771	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:59:00 - [48] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: Of course that last part is for when proto AV can be balanced against proto vehicles There are no plans for ADV nor PRO tanks. :/ If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Awry Barux Ametat Security Amarr Empire 2383	Posted - 2014.04.30 05:03:00 - [49] - 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. Huh, this has actually never occurred to me, but now that I read, it seems obvious. This! So much this! +1000 Nerdier than thou
Thumb Green The Valyrian Guard 1037	Posted - 2014.04.30 05:09:00 - [50] - Quote True Adamance wrote: However Thumb eventually the player base will develop to the point where every half ways intelligent players skills into at least OP 5 of AV...... now at that point every tank beneath proto tier is invalidated and made pointless....is would that be good balance? Where you AV stays at 300K ISK but my hulls are back over 1M ISK, and those are the only competitive hulls...... It would be about as balanced as it is now except reversed. However that can easily be remedied by different game modes that restricted gear as well as the skill lvl applied (even if you have OP 5 it isn't applied in a std gear mode). Some people will say that the player base isn't big enough to support modes like that but maybe, just maybe the player base would fcking grow if the new guys weren't forced to play against us vets with proto gear and OP 5's every match. Support Orbital Spawns

Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 771	Posted - 2014.04.30 05:10:00 - [51] - Quote I'm mostly waiting for webifiers to come out.They will create vehicle hazard zones around any node or enclosed space. If vehicles stay as-is a lot of things will possibly balance out then. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Hakyou Brutor G0DS AM0NG MEN Dirt Nap Squad. 254	Posted - 2014.04.30 05:11:00 - [52] - Quote I'll volunteer to do the forge gun video... better watch your weak spots or else I'll one hit your 'OP' triple rep maddy with my Wyrimkomi Breach forge Director of G0DS Tanker, Logi, Heavy, and Scout... at your service!
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 247	Posted - 2014.04.30 05:15:00 - [53] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: Well technically a pistol is what you call a sidearm because it on your side. I'm a marine and doesn't make any sense to call a weapon a assistant weapon. As for when weapons are used. Yes you are right, if used correctly the weapon should be devastating as each make and model of every modern weapon is designed for certain purposes. But my question revolved around "assistant weapons" So you would classify as rifle as a "assistant weapon" given its a light weapon. how does a rifle assist? Edit: I'm not trying to make you feel uncomfortable, I'm just trying to understand your logic and what your trying to say. How would you use an Assault Rifle vs a tank? Light weapons typically don't work as well vs vehicles. Or were you trying to make some sideways statement regarding the class of weaponry instead of the relative targets? AV weaponry runs on a different tier than antipersonel. To my knowledge, there are no sidearm AV weapons, hence those are the lowest tier. it would be like having a gun that fires wide area flashbangs in infantry combat, that do little damage. VS a heavy, that damage is moot, but vs a scout, that would be devastating. Okay let me clarify what I am asking... First off you mentioned "Light weaponry that any class can equip. That's like asking where it says a scrambler pistol is an assistant weapon. It says sidearm, but not assistant." end quote. So, you said light weapons are considered assistant weapons. So that includes rifles, mass drivers, and basically anything that is light weaponry. So you were mentioning weapons not relevant to the targets, I just complied to it given the comment of sidearms and light weapons. So From what you said, "light weaponry that any class can equip" would include assault rifles, and ect. What I'm asking is how does one label a weapon an "assistant weapon"? Understand the reason we call weapons "weapons" is that they are designed to kill not to assist kills. That why they call it a weapon. Further more How does AV run on different tiers than anti-personal? We have tiers of milita, basic, advance, and proto. Edit: Also keep in mind, whats the purpose of having a assist weapons if another weapon is designed to kill the target better? You'd be better of having two Anti Vehicle weapons than 1 anti vehicle weapon and 1 assistant weapon.
lee corwood Knights Of Ender Galactic Skyfleet Empire 796	Posted - 2014.04.30 05:27:00 - [54] - Quote Eh as a proto swarmer myself, I almost never encounter any battle where I'm alone in tagging a tank. Any time I see any vehicle on the ground and a blue starts to tag it, its almost like everyone stands at attention and the teamwork is (most of the time, not always) phenomenal. I don't know if its the damage warpoints or all the blues hoping they'll be the last ones in for that crunchy kill, but it works. It's fun to see some tanks try to back out of their own ditches sometimes. That being said, I've had plenty of frustrating games against tanks but they are more related to matchmaking + (and mostly this) maps. There are some maps that no matter what you do, you can't find cover from these tanks fast enough, even in your default spawn points and calling in your own tank to try and create infantry space is completely negated by the reberry vehicle destroying the tank before the RDV lets it go. It's those situations where you can't say its the tank that's overpowered. In the right situations, it would be completely the opposite. Also matchmaking is sometimes to blame. Having a bunch of newberries who are both inexperienced and have nothing but Anti-Armor starter fits to their name will always have a difficult time working together to take down a tank, much less 2 or more depending on how heavy the tank spam is. Telling them to get a forge gun is a BS excuse if they're new and don't have the skillpoints to get it. Do I think its ironic that someone sitting in a tank going 30+/0 is complaining we shouldn't get a OHK weapon as a solo? Absolutely. However, I don't think that necessitates an overhaul or a complete nerfing. However, I would like to understand if there are stacking bonuses to these reppers. In my personal opinion, every single module in this game should have stacking penalties. Leaving anything without a penalty is just asking for an abuse in someway. If you need to stack something (of the same item) to be effective, then something else is wrong in the balance of the game. Minmatar Logisis \| Heavy lover. Ping for video services.
Dauth Jenkins Ultramarine Corp 513	Posted - 2014.04.30 05:27:00 - [55] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: 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. All i'm really seeing here is that it takes a double damage modded railgun, pretty much the pinnacle of anti-vehicle weaponry, to kill a triple rep madrugar. I have yet to see a maddy with any amount of hardeners and plates handle a double damage modded railgun 'with ease' maybe once those damage mods have gone on cooldown and the railgun is reloading. Actually, I can kill just about any triple rep tank with my gunnlogi missile tank. They get shredded by alpha damage. Even if I don't kill them first barrage and they rep back up to full, I can still kill them with the next burst. It's all about alpha damage when fighting rep tanks. That's why the forge gunners running proto breach do much better than swarms, because they do so much more damage. Swarms on the other hand, are quite efficient at murdering shield tanks, and tanks with fewer reps. My minmatar commando run proto swarms, and advanced swarms. I can kill most tanks with a full barrage (6 swarms). The risk is that I need someone to get my back while I lock swarms. Most people are just looking to kill tanks by batting an eyelash. I feel that with the nerf to hardeners, and the fix to the passive bonus application on forge Guns, that A.V. is in a good spot now. It could use some help at the standard tier, but even those aren't as bad as they were in 1.7 when every tank could shrug off the damage. -Sincerely --The Dual Swarm Commando
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation Top Men. 120	Posted - 2014.04.30 05:28:00 - [56] - Quote Yes swarms are broken, and by the time the swarms lock on again the tanker's armor is kicking back up . The regen is faster than a shield tank, which should be adressed. That being siad, a second swarm launcher looks like they would have popped him. With two complex and an enhanced heavy repper, i can only wonder at the turret? I can only assume its standard turret. Which would make that madrugar lunch for a rail tank. Those swarms would also annihilate any tank that didn't have triple reps. Proto fit vs Proto fit, no surprise how it turned out. Those swarms vs std or mlt ( which is the majority of tank spam) would be a more comprehensive test. My money would be on the swarms in that scenario. Considering balance, should prototype defenses vs prototype weapons cancel each other out? A highly defensive fit at the cost of offensive firepower. Also, i don't think a tank should be killed by a salvo from a swarm laucher. Swarms ( like tanks post 1.7) should not be the "i win" button from pre 1.7. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Repe Susi Rautaleijona 1255	Posted - 2014.04.30 06:25:00 - [57] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Put that Swarm Launcher on Minmando (skill lv5) with 3 dmg mods and prof 5 and that Maddy doesn't stand a chance. I know from experience. 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.' Life is pleasant. Death is peaceful. It's the transition that's troublesome. ~ Isaac Asimov
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 771	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:02:00 - [58] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: Well technically a pistol is what you call a sidearm because it on your side. I'm a marine and doesn't make any sense to call a weapon a assistant weapon. As for when weapons are used. Yes you are right, if used correctly the weapon should be devastating as each make and model of every modern weapon is designed for certain purposes. But my question revolved around "assistant weapons" So you would classify as rifle as a "assistant weapon" given its a light weapon. how does a rifle assist? Edit: I'm not trying to make you feel uncomfortable, I'm just trying to understand your logic and what your trying to say. How would you use an Assault Rifle vs a tank? Light weapons typically don't work as well vs vehicles. Or were you trying to make some sideways statement regarding the class of weaponry instead of the relative targets? AV weaponry runs on a different tier than antipersonel. To my knowledge, there are no sidearm AV weapons, hence those are the lowest tier. it would be like having a gun that fires wide area flashbangs in infantry combat, that do little damage. VS a heavy, that damage is moot, but vs a scout, that would be devastating. Okay let me clarify what I am asking... First off you mentioned "Light weaponry that any class can equip. That's like asking where it says a scrambler pistol is an assistant weapon. It says sidearm, but not assistant." end quote. So, you said light weapons are considered assistant weapons. So that includes rifles, mass drivers, swarm launchers, and basically anything that is light weaponry. So you were mentioning weapons not relevant to the targets, I just complied to it given the comment of sidearms and light weapons. But based on your response you want to focus on anti-vehicle weapons, which in that case I don't know why you brought up sidearms. What I'm asking is how does one label a weapon an "assistant weapon"? Understand the reason we call weapons "weapons" is that they are designed to kill not to assist kills. That why they call it a weapon. Further more How does AV run on different tiers than anti-personal? We have tiers of milita, basic, advance, and proto. Edit: Also keep in mind, whats the purpose of having a assist weapons if another weapon is designed to kill the target better? You'd be better of having two Anti Vehicle weapons than 1 anti vehicle weapon and 1 assistant weapon. 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. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 507	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:06:00 - [59] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: 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 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. 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. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 507	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:10:00 - [60] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: 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. All i'm really seeing here is that it takes a double damage modded railgun, pretty much the pinnacle of anti-vehicle weaponry, to kill a triple rep madrugar. I have yet to see a maddy with any amount of hardeners and plates handle a double damage modded railgun 'with ease' maybe once those damage mods have gone on cooldown and the railgun is reloading. I've heard of one, supposed to be nigh indestructible, the double hardener, 1 repper Madrugar. Well, that was in 1.7. I came across one in PC and he outrepped my single damage modded Particle Cannon. So I don't see why he couldn't have handled 2 damage mods with ease, just maybe wouldn't have been invulnerable against it but still... R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.

Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 672	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:10:00 - [61] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: 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... 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 . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Thumb Green The Valyrian Guard 1037	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:27:00 - [62] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: 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. 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. Support Orbital Spawns
Sourdough Muffins Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire 297	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:29:00 - [63] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 Wow... that is just redonkulous. So basically its bring another tank or get ****** at this point?
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 247	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:39:00 - [64] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: Well technically a pistol is what you call a sidearm because it on your side. I'm a marine and doesn't make any sense to call a weapon a assistant weapon. As for when weapons are used. Yes you are right, if used correctly the weapon should be devastating as each make and model of every modern weapon is designed for certain purposes. But my question revolved around "assistant weapons" So you would classify as rifle as a "assistant weapon" given its a light weapon. how does a rifle assist? Edit: I'm not trying to make you feel uncomfortable, I'm just trying to understand your logic and what your trying to say. How would you use an Assault Rifle vs a tank? Light weapons typically don't work as well vs vehicles. Or were you trying to make some sideways statement regarding the class of weaponry instead of the relative targets? AV weaponry runs on a different tier than antipersonel. To my knowledge, there are no sidearm AV weapons, hence those are the lowest tier. it would be like having a gun that fires wide area flashbangs in infantry combat, that do little damage. VS a heavy, that damage is moot, but vs a scout, that would be devastating. Okay let me clarify what I am asking... First off you mentioned "Light weaponry that any class can equip. That's like asking where it says a scrambler pistol is an assistant weapon. It says sidearm, but not assistant." end quote. So, you said light weapons are considered assistant weapons. So that includes rifles, mass drivers, swarm launchers, and basically anything that is light weaponry. So you were mentioning weapons not relevant to the targets, I just complied to it given the comment of sidearms and light weapons. But based on your response you want to focus on anti-vehicle weapons, which in that case I don't know why you brought up sidearms. What I'm asking is how does one label a weapon an "assistant weapon"? Understand the reason we call weapons "weapons" is that they are designed to kill not to assist kills. That why they call it a weapon. Further more How does AV run on different tiers than anti-personal? We have tiers of milita, basic, advance, and proto. Edit: Also keep in mind, whats the purpose of having a assist weapons if another weapon is designed to kill the target better? You'd be better of having two Anti Vehicle weapons than 1 anti vehicle weapon and 1 assistant weapon. 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. 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.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 507	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:59:00 - [65] - Quote Repe Susi wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Put that Swarm Launcher on Minmando (skill lv5) with 3 dmg mods and prof 5 and that Maddy doesn't stand a chance. I know from experience. 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 so much bullshit that Mejt0 or whatever his/her name was blew up mine and my friend's triple rep tank 3 times in total before either of us had any kind of chance to get to any cover. After I died I watched my friend get raped from the overview map and his reactions made it very scary to watch. And Mejt0 was just casually staying out in the open knowing that we wouldn't be able to kill him/her fast enough. Ever since that match I've had mad respect for his/her Swarms and I never wanna encounter him/her again. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 247	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:03:00 - [66] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: 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... 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 . Well here is the problem with this argument Tanks repair every 1 second with triple reps its alot of health back in a second. Essentially it removes the one Aver from the damage because each volley requires 2 seconds for each volley of swarms. So essentially That is two Prototype health repairs in each volley. The third Swarm Launcher is the only one really doing damage at all. Most tankers don't relize it but your usually not only getting hit by swarms but AV grenades too. The swarm launchers reload time is 4 seconds long. But AV grenades are not our focus. Now to take down 1 Tanks of triple reps requires 3 players with Swarms which mean that they essentially require 20% of the enemy team to take down one tank. Pull in two Tanks with the same fittings, and this will double the amount of AV players required to take down another tank which is 40% of the enemy team. By bring in two tanks you can force enemy combatants to require half of their forces to take down two players in tanks, while your forces are still 90% focused on infantry and objectives.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 507	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:06:00 - [67] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: 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. 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. There will at best be different variants of HAVs, but nothing that will be better than the basic HAV in every area. Specialization. They will give up something to gain something. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 507	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:09:00 - [68] - Quote Sourdough Muffins wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Wow... that is just redonkulous. So basically its bring another tank or get ****** at this point? Bring another tank? You mean like Blaster? There's 2 tank weapons that can beat triple rep. There's 2 ADS weapons that can beat it and 4 infantry weapons that can beat it. So.. Yeah, another tank seems like the smartest option. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 915	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:10:00 - [69] - Quote 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? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Vin Vicious Capital Acquisitions LLC Dirt Nap Squad. 582	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:16:00 - [70] - Quote 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? 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

ReGnYuM Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 2887	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:18:00 - [71] - Quote 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? You're slowly becoming my forum hero The Pathway to Hell, is paved with good intentions Total Molden Heath Domination Imminent: 97.51% Complete
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 247	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:19:00 - [72] - Quote Vin Vicious 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? 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.
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 247	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:26:00 - [73] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: Vin Vicious 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? 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. Currently your infantry Warfare is pretty spot on, at least infantry combat is improving a lot. Vehicle's have been reworked from the ground up but Anti-vehicles were not reworked which is probably why the current implementation of Vehicle vs Anti-vehicles warfare is constantly brought up in the community forums.
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1240	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:29:00 - [74] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: 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 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. Then give up your sidearm to run AV. If you want my tanks to always die to you, then you always need to die to my infantry character. There's balance for you. And until we get proto vehicles (HA!) then either balance proto weapons to standard vehicles, or remove proto and advanced AV. There's some balance for you too. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
ChromeBreaker SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 1703	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:31:00 - [75] - Quote You take a FG and kill the tank?... Its swarms that dont have the power. There have been a few occations where i have cleared the field of tanks either by killing them of driving them off by bring out my FG. That isnt bragging, 2 FG's on a bit of high ground will dominate every tank going. When people have issue with tripple rep maddi's, they arent your scrub militia tankers, theyre the peeps that have put time and points into tanks, why should they be driven off by every tom d*ck and harry who's put a point into swarms? The answer is "ForgeGun"... doesnt matter what the question is...
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 672	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:33:00 - [76] - Quote ReGnYuM 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? You're slowly becoming my forum hero IKR . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Aikuchi Tomaru Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2262	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:33:00 - [77] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Not a dev, just a player. But I see your posts under dev posts! So if you're marked as a dev, does that mean you only have something to do with Eve or Valkyrie as a dev, but not with Dust? Please give us some insight into this mystery! Sign up for Caldari FW and defeat the evil Gallente Overlords!
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 507	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:34:00 - [78] - Quote 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? 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. If he is less skilled than the tanker but the rock-paper-scissors favor him, he should be able to drive the tanker away. If he is more skilled, but the RPS doesn't favor him, he should still be able to drive the tanker away. Only if he isn't skilled at all and the RPS doesn't favor him should the tanker be able to ignore that solo AV guy to a degree. Now what RPS means is obviosly something designed to destroy armor should destroy armor. Same for shields. But currently swarms are very effective against shields and not so effective against armor. Should be the other way around. Shield tank should be able to ignore swarms to a degree. Dunno how to achieve that kind of balance tho. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 2941	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:35:00 - [79] - Quote 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? Head of public relations from The Rainbow Effect.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 672	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:37:00 - [80] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: 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. Leave the forge gun alone , that's what's wrong with this game the constant direction changing , leave tiericide out of the picture with the remove this and that tier and combine this and that ... just work with making what you have better than it is now and the forge guns are fine . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .

Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 672	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:42:00 - [81] - Quote 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 . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3746	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:43:00 - [82] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: Alex-P-Keaton Kramer wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 ok so? He's just sitting there taking no evasive action what so ever.. you don't think that's a little op? I don't think it's OP at all. A tank should not be easily solo'd by anyone, and swarms are the least player-skill intensive form of AV. If there were two proto swarms he would've been toast.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 507	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:48:00 - [83] - Quote The dark cloud wrote: 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? 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. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3748	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:50:00 - [84] - Quote 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? Well first, recognize the doctrine that Outside is ruled by vehicles, Inside is ruled by infantry. If you take a tank Inside, he is incredibly vulnerable from all angles and can't usually accomplish very much. If you take infantry outside, then they are incredibly vulnerable to tanks. They are different kinds of battlefields that have to be respected in different ways. The problem right now is pub mentality does not recognize this simple truth and instead goes for the lazy "infantry vs everything" approach. I don't personally think it's a good idea to reward lazy player behavior with an easy cop out like buffing AV when people are clearly playing incorrectly. What I DO think you should do is make it so that lopsided matches end faster. The only real depressing part of being roflstomped by a tank horde at the redline is the fact you are at the redline at all. If every objective is capped, why don't the null cannons synchronize and go into sort of a rapid-fire mode to end the match quicker? They do this in battlefield, they do this in WoW... it's pretty common practice to avoid player misery.
MINA Longstrike 618	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:52:00 - [85] - Quote 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? 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. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 672	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:55:00 - [86] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: 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. Sounds like something else to nerf like the hardeners had to be , unless it's thought out and done the closest to being spot on as possible so as to not go threw the ongoing nerf and buff episodes . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 771	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:56:00 - [87] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: 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. Tazers will be implemented into the game, if the game plan stays as-is. A class of equipment called webifiers may one day be put to the field, the purpose of such is to slow down enemies by slightly paralyzing them. Also, swarms can overcome any Tank that has 2 or fewer repair modules, so the issue with swarms is only for one variant of defense on the tank. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 200	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:57:00 - [88] - Quote I reviewed the vid and it would seem like the time to lock on and fire is longer than ccp intended. The lock on time for proto swarms is 1.05 seconds; I was firing on average every 3 seconds. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 672	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:59:00 - [89] - 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? 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. I can agree with most of what you say with the exception of the tiericide . Good options and opinions otherwise . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 509	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:03:00 - [90] - 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? 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. Great points here, awesome points. What I would like to add here is the acceleration buff for tanks was unnecessary. It needs to be reverted back to pre 1.7 levels. Agree? R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.

Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 247	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:04:00 - [91] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Minor Treat wrote: 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. Leave the forge gun alone , that's what's wrong with this game the constant direction changing , leave tiericide out of the picture with the remove this and that tier and combine this and that ... just work with making what you have better than it is now and the forge guns are fine . The reality comes down to Vehicles are forced to fit into a game where Prototype and advance Anti-Vehicles already exist. Either add in prototype Vehicles or remove variants to mainstream the game a little further. Vehicles were reworked from the ground up, So should the Anti-vehicles. To it top, the attempts to keep trying to fit Vehicles and anti-vehicles have been going on for months now. Expecting different results by doing the same thing over and over again is insane. AV's I think need to be reworked so they fit into vehicular warfare and infantry together.
Aderek HavoK Core RISE of LEGION 83	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:08:00 - [92] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 Try swarms with Minmatar Comando ;)
Minor Treat RisingSuns Dark Taboo 247	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:09:00 - [93] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Minor Treat wrote: 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. Tazers will be implemented into the game, if the game plan stays as-is. A class of equipment called webifiers may one day be put to the field, the purpose of such is to slow down enemies by slightly paralyzing them. Also, swarms can overcome any Tank that has 2 or fewer repair modules, so the issue with swarms is only for one variant of defense on the tank. I did see the Fanfest presentation. So I saw the webifiers and I saw the Energy drainers. If they introduce webifiers than a lot of the Anti-vehicle issue's would be changed in terms of variables. But I never saw anything about tazers though, you mind providing a link or a youtube video with the timestamp on it?
MINA Longstrike 620	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:12:00 - [94] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: Great points here, awesome points. What I would like to add here is the acceleration buff for tanks was unnecessary. It needs to be reverted back to pre 1.7 levels. Agree? They need to be slowed down a bit, but not to 1.6 levels. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 771	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:14:00 - [95] - Quote I'm a tanker and I can say that railguns do NOT need damage amplifiers. Even if the target tank is 2x hardened an ADV rail can still deal substantial damage, and the PRO versions are like a permanent damage amp that doesn't take a slot... If swarms and forge guns seem too risky, why not make an AV weapon that fits between the two? I still remember from playing Goldeneye 007 the remote controlled rocket launcher. Or looking at TF2, there's the tactical sticky launcher, that lets you detonate individual, or groups, of sticky grenades by looking at them, and pressing the detonate button. The ones that would blow up would preview with a blue outline that could be seen through walls to tell you the bomb was still there. Minor Treat wrote: I did see the Fanfest presentation. So I saw the webifiers and I saw the Energy drainers. If they introduce webifiers than a lot of the Anti-vehicle issue's would be changed in terms of variables. But I never saw anything about tazers though, you mind providing a link or a youtube video with the timestamp on it? Oh I meant the webifiers were the tazers. I seem to have worded that wrong. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
KingBabar The Rainbow Effect 2270	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:37:00 - [96] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga 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? Well first, recognize the doctrine that Outside is ruled by vehicles, Inside is ruled by infantry. If you take a tank Inside, he is incredibly vulnerable from all angles and can't usually accomplish very much. If you take infantry outside, then they are incredibly vulnerable to tanks. They are different kinds of battlefields that have to be respected in different ways. The problem right now is pub mentality does not recognize this simple truth and instead goes for the lazy "infantry vs everything" approach. I don't personally think it's a good idea to reward lazy player behavior with an easy cop out like buffing AV when people are clearly playing incorrectly. What I DO think you should do is make it so that lopsided matches end faster. The only real depressing part of being roflstomped by a tank horde at the redline is the fact you are at the redline at all. If every objective is capped, why don't the null cannons synchronize and go into sort of a rapid-fire mode to end the match quicker? They do this in battlefield, they do this in WoW... it's pretty common practice to avoid player misery. +1 I've mentioned this in several threads. You got it right the first time CCP. Remember Skirmish 1.0 and how the games would end shortly if the attacker couldn't manage to get the A + B Points before the MCC's Shields where Down? FU and FU Dust community, you're mostly a bunch of moronic carebear crybabies. Get good.
Seymor Krelborn L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 2255	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:39:00 - [97] - Quote 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? I really don't see how you can balance infantry vs vehicle in a 16 v 16 map, if the solution isn't going to be one av vs one tank... if we had large scale battles like eve on huge maps I could see how you could have dedicated infantry squads to deal with vehicles, or other vehicles to deal with them... but with 16 v 16 taking 3 people way to deal with one tank cripples your team when it only takes one of their's to drive a tank.... maybe that's the answer... determine how many infantry it should take in av gear to kill a tank and also make that many people a requirement to drive one.... this game makes me sad....
SirManBoy Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 504	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:50:00 - [98] - Quote A significant speed penalty needs to come with armor tanking and there needs to be some sort of structural damage threshold for vehicles that one cannot recover from with a mod. Think about the GTA series and how vehicle damage eventually slows vehicles down and causes other problems.
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1240	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:53:00 - [99] - Quote Repper tanks are set up to handle AV. They are vulnerable to alpha damage, such as rails (proto railgun kills then in 4 hits from full shield and armor, 3 if one or more hit the weak spot) RE (3 will kill it from full shield and armor, 2 if both are on the weakspot) And PE (lay a PE on top of an RE. 2 RE and 2 PE kills a repper tank instantly) This isn't about reppers being OP. This is about people being unwilling to field multiple counters for different setups, and wanting their weapon to kill all vehicles regardless. As well, that swarm fit given costs about 1.75 million SP to get. My repper tank costs 2.5 million SP to fit the two complex and one enhanced repper at repair rate 5 a militia blaster and nothing else. This does not include any skills outside of those needed to fit what is required to deploy your vehicle or dropsuit. However, I have not the CPU nor the PG to run a militia blaster. Since a large turret is required, in order to even call in this tank, I need to spend a total of 3.1 million sp, (large turret fitting skill to 5 plus prerequisite skills in order to have enough CPU, armor fitting optimization to 3 to have enough PG) just to have enough fitting to call in this tank. So you are expecting half of the skill investment I need to even field this tank to destroy it. You have another 1.35 million SP to spend before you can talk about wanting to solo my tank. This was the problem pre-1.7, and the reason tanks even were even touched to begin with. Because tankers were spending 20 million SP only to be killed in 3 swarms by someone who spent a total of 610k SP. I gladly concede that standard and advanced swarms are far too weaker than proto, although I find I can have some success running advanced swarms on my Calmanndo. I'm totally behind bring the lesser swarms up to proto's effectiveness.To fix this, I would have all swarms fire 6 missiles, and have damage per missile increase through the tiers: STD: 200 ADV: 210 PRO:220 This keeps proto swarms where they are now, but makes standard and advanced swarms much more viable. In conclusion to those upset over repper tanks, skill into more AV options besides your swarm/forge, or bring people along who have skilled into them. The AR wasn't supposed to be the best in every infantry situation pre-1.7, just as swarms and forges are supposed to be the best in every vehicle situation now. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Seymor Krelborn L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 2255	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:58:00 - [100] - Quote ChromeBreaker wrote: You take a FG and kill the tank?... Its swarms that dont have the power. There have been a few occations where i have cleared the field of tanks either by killing them of driving them off by bring out my FG. That isnt bragging, 2 FG's on a bit of high ground will dominate every tank going. When people have issue with tripple rep maddi's, they arent your scrub militia tankers, theyre the peeps that have put time and points into tanks, why should they be driven off by every tom d*ck and harry who's put a point into swarms? I have a more balanced question for you.... why should tanks be allowed to go 30/0 consistently? so what you put 20 mil sp into tanks, what about the mercs who have 20 mil in their fits? shouldn't there be more even ground between the tank and infantry? if we had larger maps with battles of 100 v 100 I don't think this would be an issue... but right now 1 tank can take out the whole other team! easily!..... isn't that a problem? this game makes me sad....

KatanaPT Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 719	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:04:00 - [101] - Quote 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? - Remove Vehicles from Ambush. - Ambush maps smaller, what we have now sometimes it takes minutes to find the enemy team. - Increase Db of Vehicles, sometimes i have literally a enemy tank by my side or a enemy Dropship hovering above my head and it doesnt show up on my radar, nowadays vehicles seem to be more stealthy than medium suits. - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. Tech Guard Recruiting Video
KatanaPT Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 719	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:18:00 - [102] - Quote Actually, honestly i think the whole problem would be solved with this: - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. I agree we should not be able to solo a tank, and i also agree to the current state of the tanks, they are hard to kill, fast, great tank killers and they can dominate the battlefield, the problem is that most of the tanks nowadays run a single large turret and can kill everything. What happened to small turrets? What happened to their original purpose? (vs infantry) Be it a blaster or a rail, the tank large turrets must be really effective against what they were designed to do, other tanks, installations, vehicles, etc. It maybe unrealistic, (try to think about a 120mm sabot from a M1 against a enemy soldier), but afterall this is a scifi game. --> Bring back small turrets role against infantry and delegate large turrets to their job. This would fix tanks. If the denizens of tankers who love to kill infantry want to continue doing it again, just equip 2 good small turrets, a good crew and let it rip. Tech Guard Recruiting Video
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 509	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:26:00 - [103] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: ChromeBreaker wrote: You take a FG and kill the tank?... Its swarms that dont have the power. There have been a few occations where i have cleared the field of tanks either by killing them of driving them off by bring out my FG. That isnt bragging, 2 FG's on a bit of high ground will dominate every tank going. When people have issue with tripple rep maddi's, they arent your scrub militia tankers, theyre the peeps that have put time and points into tanks, why should they be driven off by every tom d*ck and harry who's put a point into swarms? I have a more balanced question for you.... why should tanks be allowed to go 30/0 consistently? so what you put 20 mil sp into tanks, what about the mercs who have 20 mil in their fits? shouldn't there be more even ground between the tank and infantry? if we had larger maps with battles of 100 v 100 I don't think this would be an issue... but right now 1 tank can take out the whole other team! easily!..... isn't that a problem? Whenever I play with competent slayers, they score a lot more kills than I can even find people, let alone kill them all, in a match. And those slayers are using STD stuff most of the time. Most of the time they even get 0 deaths when they run with me. There is no way I can compete with their kills consistently or even inconsistently. Whenever I am running infantry, around 0.1% of my deaths are by tankers. 0.9% by ADSes and the rest is done by infantry. I don't fear or hate tanks but I respect them, maybe that's why I don't get killed by them. Whenever I see a tank I just laugh at it because I know it can do nothing to kill me if I don't let him. But slayers can easily get me anytime, anywhere. I am nowhere near the best infantry player, I am somewhere near average, but because I know what vehicles can and cannot do, I am not killed by them. Maybe everyone should learn how vehicles operate. And whenever I kill someone with my Blaster easily, I can only feel sorry for them because there is nothing anyone can do to improve their gameplay. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Shion Typhon Intara Direct Action Caldari State 517	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:29:00 - [104] - Quote 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? Your tanks suck because you insisted on using the EVE "regen-stable" model of tanking. you should have gone with a high HP, low regen model; ie a Mag has 50,000 HP but pretty much no regen. Binary success/fail systems suck, especially in combined arms games, you are much better using an attrition model. Your 6 points above demonstrate you guys aren't even considering the right level of meta, you are just fiddling with dials which will never work. I wrote a series of posts before the new vehicle changes and it dismays me you guys made almost every one of my predictions come true.
BMSTUBBY KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 668	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:37:00 - [105] - Quote 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? Tiercide Meh, F2P Lobby Shooter BattleDuty 514 Working as intended.
VALCORE72 NECROM0NGERS Caps and Mercs 168	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:38:00 - [106] - Quote just take out the over drives and boosters . lower cost of drop ships by 25%.. tanks are cheap now and av is almost there . its these things that upset us. fg dps is ok . still dont like large blasters since they are just used to kill ground guys 90% of the time
Patrick57 Fatal Absolution 7209	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:44:00 - [107] - Quote To counter a triple rep Madrugar, just get a Railgun... everyone has access to 70k ISK 0 SP Militia Tanks.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 934	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:54:00 - [108] - Quote KatanaPT wrote: Actually, honestly i think the whole problem would be solved with this: - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. I agree we should not be able to solo a tank, and i also agree to the current state of the tanks, they are hard to kill, fast, great tank killers and they can dominate the battlefield, the problem is that most of the tanks nowadays run a single large turret and can kill everything. What happened to small turrets? What happened to their original purpose? (vs infantry) Be it a blaster or a rail, the tank large turrets must be really effective against what they were designed to do, other tanks, installations, vehicles, etc. It maybe unrealistic, (try to think about a 120mm sabot from a M1 against a enemy soldier), but afterall this is a scifi game. --> Bring back small turrets role against infantry and delegate large turrets to their job. This would fix tanks. If the denizens of tankers who love to kill infantry want to continue doing it again, just equip 2 good small turrets, a good crew and let it rip. I have been thinking about this, and make the small vehicle turrets a bit more fun to use. Maybe swarm launchers and HMG's as options as well. I can't hit a damn thing using moving blasters :( "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

MINA Longstrike 620	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:03:00 - [109] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: KatanaPT wrote: Actually, honestly i think the whole problem would be solved with this: - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. I agree we should not be able to solo a tank, and i also agree to the current state of the tanks, they are hard to kill, fast, great tank killers and they can dominate the battlefield, the problem is that most of the tanks nowadays run a single large turret and can kill everything. What happened to small turrets? What happened to their original purpose? (vs infantry) Be it a blaster or a rail, the tank large turrets must be really effective against what they were designed to do, other tanks, installations, vehicles, etc. It maybe unrealistic, (try to think about a 120mm sabot from a M1 against a enemy soldier), but afterall this is a scifi game. --> Bring back small turrets role against infantry and delegate large turrets to their job. This would fix tanks. If the denizens of tankers who love to kill infantry want to continue doing it again, just equip 2 good small turrets, a good crew and let it rip. I have been thinking about this, and make the small vehicle turrets a bit more fun to use. Maybe swarm launchers and HMG's as options as well. I can't hit a damn thing using moving blasters :( Blasters are way too accurate they need more dispersal just like the HMG did. I'd love to see more ways to have people in my vehicle and have them be useful without necessarily giving them a weapon that they can use to waste ammo / screw up ambushes. As I said earlier I'd love to see a 'turret' that's a long range (150m 45degree) scanner - it probably doesn't have the best precision either but it helps out my teammates and generates a lot of WP to the people in my vehicle (as well as myself). I mean when I do have a friend in my tank this is what he's usually doing anyways - watching the map and letting me know where stuff is in relation to me, and occasionally firing the turret against called targets. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
KatanaPT Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 720	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:03:00 - [110] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: KatanaPT wrote: Actually, honestly i think the whole problem would be solved with this: - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. I agree we should not be able to solo a tank, and i also agree to the current state of the tanks, they are hard to kill, fast, great tank killers and they can dominate the battlefield, the problem is that most of the tanks nowadays run a single large turret and can kill everything. What happened to small turrets? What happened to their original purpose? (vs infantry) Be it a blaster or a rail, the tank large turrets must be really effective against what they were designed to do, other tanks, installations, vehicles, etc. It maybe unrealistic, (try to think about a 120mm sabot from a M1 against a enemy soldier), but afterall this is a scifi game. --> Bring back small turrets role against infantry and delegate large turrets to their job. This would fix tanks. If the denizens of tankers who love to kill infantry want to continue doing it again, just equip 2 good small turrets, a good crew and let it rip. I have been thinking about this, and make the small vehicle turrets a bit more fun to use. Maybe swarm launchers and HMG's as options as well. I can't hit a damn thing using moving blasters :( Dont want to pat myself on the back but,(ive been thinking about this for ages) and to please everyone, tankers and infantry alike, this would be the only reasonable solution to the problem we are having. Thank you for your reply. Also i suggested something similar to a vehicle mounted HMG ages ago, would love to see 2 on a Dropship, whats not to love: Gatling guns and dropships. Tech Guard Recruiting Video

BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 202	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:07:00 - [111] - Quote I feel like tanks would be balanced if they removed the large blaster from the game. They could still kill infantry with the missiles and even rails but they would be less efficient at it. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 1985	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:09:00 - [112] - Quote Imo tanking was better before 1.7 for certain aspects, i would take a step back, keep some good feature of post 1.7 tanks and go back to 1.6 system. Tanks stats are fine now, speed, manouverability, shield recharge values, etc... Modules and slot layout are not balanced or not satisfying, passive reppers takes no ability and they give a superfast repair rate. I would go back to old modules and slot layout with the new tank stats and old values of PG/CPU, i would add passive armor reppers but a heavy complex repper would give 50hp and i would add shield reg for tanks, energizers with the new stats are not needed. 1.7 has been a revolution for vehicles that was not needed imo. About large blaster: they just need more dispersion at more than 50 meters, a couple of days ago i was countersniping a sniper at 294 meters with around 14% efficiency but pinpoint accuracy. The unnamed new build it's so secret that nobody know what will be in it, even after patch notes.. \o/ summon me
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 203	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:13:00 - [113] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: I feel like tanks would be balanced if they removed the large blaster from the game. They could still kill infantry with the missiles and even rails but they would be less efficient at it. And this would force them to use 2 small torrents and 2 other gunners if they wish to be more proficient at killing infantry. See how that balances out? takes 3 Av guys to kill 3 guys in a tank. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Cardio Therapy Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 9	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:16:00 - [114] - Quote Many people said that to kill a tank you need an organized squad. That is true. But considering the Sp and isk of a full proto infantry and the same of a tank the tanks are overpowered because they are operated by only one person . The tanks must be strong but also in an organized squad and not solo. Organized squad with a thank will kill the AV infantry and protect the tank while the tank is killing everything else. Good strategy. A solo tank without infantry support killing every infantry in the battlefield should not exist. Even proto tank. Also it doesn't exist in the real life. The tank must be strong and fearsome with infantry support but not a big danger when solo. A non proto tank must be destroyed with a non proto AV. the infantry spawning with AV is as good as dead if encounter other infantries. If I spawn with AV the only thing I can do is to try to kill a tank. Than what???
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 509	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:22:00 - [115] - Quote KatanaPT wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: KatanaPT wrote: Actually, honestly i think the whole problem would be solved with this: - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. I agree we should not be able to solo a tank, and i also agree to the current state of the tanks, they are hard to kill, fast, great tank killers and they can dominate the battlefield, the problem is that most of the tanks nowadays run a single large turret and can kill everything. What happened to small turrets? What happened to their original purpose? (vs infantry) Be it a blaster or a rail, the tank large turrets must be really effective against what they were designed to do, other tanks, installations, vehicles, etc. It maybe unrealistic, (try to think about a 120mm sabot from a M1 against a enemy soldier), but afterall this is a scifi game. --> Bring back small turrets role against infantry and delegate large turrets to their job. This would fix tanks. If the denizens of tankers who love to kill infantry want to continue doing it again, just equip 2 good small turrets, a good crew and let it rip. I have been thinking about this, and make the small vehicle turrets a bit more fun to use. Maybe swarm launchers and HMG's as options as well. I can't hit a damn thing using moving blasters :( Dont want to pat myself on the back but,(ive been thinking about this for ages) and to please everyone, tankers and infantry alike, this would be the only reasonable solution to the problem we are having. Thank you for your reply. Also i suggested something similar to a vehicle mounted HMG ages ago, would love to see 2 on a Dropship, whats not to love: Gatling guns and dropships. The only problem, and I mean the only problem is that the day Large Turrets no longer work against infantry is the day when HAVs become obsolete. Until such a time that CCP adds MAVs and MTACs and stuff like that. Only thing HAVs can do is kill, and that will always be the case, but when there is nothing to kill, what's the point of having them? R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 509	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:23:00 - [116] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: BIind Shot wrote: I feel like tanks would be balanced if they removed the large blaster from the game. They could still kill infantry with the missiles and even rails but they would be less efficient at it. And this would force them to use 2 small torrents and 2 other gunners if they wish to be more proficient at killing infantry. See how that balances out? takes 3 Av guys to kill 3 guys in a tank. Haven't vehicles have had enough stuff removed yet? Wasn't the immense nerf to Blasters in 1.7 not enough? As it is now, it takes 1 guy to kill HAV, he just kills the HAV faster if there are more turrets in the HAV. So 1-man HAV is hardest to kill where as 3-man HAV is the easiest... makes no sense but whatever. IMO there should be different hulls for different amount of turret hardpoints. shaman oga wrote: About large blaster: they just need more dispersion at more than 50 meters, a couple of days ago i was countersniping a sniper at 294 meters with around 14% efficiency but pinpoint accuracy. This is GD, I thought logic was not allowed here? R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Heavenly Daughter the Aurum Grinder and Company 446	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:26:00 - [117] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 Why not try Minmando suit , your damage per clip is about 4520 proficiency 5 needed A proto minmando instead of scout will get 4735 proficiency 5 also needed Then redo the test, I guess you'll win that one. The Organ Grinder & Co. EVE Heavenly Daughter-Merc Records
G Torq ALTA B2O 770	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:26:00 - [118] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: . Sadly I don't see a lot of tank v tank battles either which is probably what tankers desire. HAH! Team Fairy DUST HTTP://Dust.Thang.DK/ - DUST514 Fitting Tool based on DUST SDE
Seymor Krelborn L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 2257	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:48:00 - [119] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: Seymor Krelborn wrote: ChromeBreaker wrote: You take a FG and kill the tank?... Its swarms that dont have the power. There have been a few occations where i have cleared the field of tanks either by killing them of driving them off by bring out my FG. That isnt bragging, 2 FG's on a bit of high ground will dominate every tank going. When people have issue with tripple rep maddi's, they arent your scrub militia tankers, theyre the peeps that have put time and points into tanks, why should they be driven off by every tom d*ck and harry who's put a point into swarms? I have a more balanced question for you.... why should tanks be allowed to go 30/0 consistently? so what you put 20 mil sp into tanks, what about the mercs who have 20 mil in their fits? shouldn't there be more even ground between the tank and infantry? if we had larger maps with battles of 100 v 100 I don't think this would be an issue... but right now 1 tank can take out the whole other team! easily!..... isn't that a problem? Whenever I play with competent slayers, they score a lot more kills than I can even find people, let alone kill them all, in a match. And those slayers are using STD stuff most of the time. Most of the time they even get 0 deaths when they run with me. There is no way I can compete with their kills consistently or even inconsistently. Whenever I am running infantry, around 0.1% of my deaths are by tankers. 0.9% by ADSes and the rest is done by infantry. I don't fear or hate tanks but I respect them, maybe that's why I don't get killed by them. Whenever I see a tank I just laugh at it because I know it can do nothing to kill me if I don't let him. But slayers can easily get me anytime, anywhere. I am nowhere near the best infantry player, I am somewhere near average, but because I know what vehicles can and cannot do, I am not killed by them. Maybe everyone should learn how vehicles operate. And whenever I kill someone with my Blaster easily, I can only feel sorry for them because there is nothing anyone can do to improve their gameplay. your post is dishonest at best... I've been around since the very beginning of open beta and I'm no slouch on the field, I also play sometimes as much as 8 hours a day.... and I don't run with an alliance notorious for proto stomping.... my experience is far more unbalanced than what you claim yours is when it comes to tanks, and the various squads I'm a part of have had a much more similar experience to me... you saw the video at the top of this thread.... that isn't rumor or conjecture... that is proof that tanks are unbalanced to av... when it only takes one to drive a tank and it takes 2 or more... usually 3 to kill a tank, that seriously gives the tanks team an infantry advantage since the other team must dedicate more than 1 to that tank... multiply the tanks you multiply the problem... 3 tanks on the field, theres 6-9 infantry now pulled away from dealing with other infantry for each tank to that teams 13 infantry that can not only support the tanker but take out the vulnerable avers with ease. this game makes me sad....
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 205	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:55:00 - [120] - Quote G Torq wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: . Sadly I don't see a lot of tank v tank battles either which is probably what tankers desire. HAH! I don't know if you guys have heard but duna actually has a rule in his corp. No tanks are allowed to fire at one another in pubs. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".

Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7487	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:55:00 - [121] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Swarms are an assistant AV. Who are you assisting? Link a DEV quote saying this or your entire argument falls apart. Though for arguments sake, why would anyone spec into Swarm Launchers if you have no realistic chance of destroying a vehicle, while also having to invest the same amount of ISK & SP as other AV options, and cannot use your AV weapon against infantry, like every other AV weapon in the game (bar AV Grenades & Proximity Explosives.) Not to mention the fact that the vehicle(s) your fighting with the Swarm Launcher only require 1 player to operate, and the fact a weapon that requires multiple people to use successfully is not a viable option in a competitive environment (ie, Planetary Conquest) while in a 16v16 engagement. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7487	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:05:00 - [122] - Quote Minor Treat wrote: What makes you think Swarms are Assistant AV? It does not say that in the description of the weapon. Weapon descriptions hardly mean anything in DUST, especially when you look at the SMGs description: Quote: Favoring function over form, the SMG is a lightweight, semi-automatic weapon designed for close-quarters combat. What it lacks in stopping power and accuracy it grossly overcompensates for with quantity. Designed to injure and impede, the hailstorm of bullets the SMG produces is most effective in tight spaces against multiple targets. This original design is a paradigm of Minmatar construction. An inelegant, but reliable weapon solution that is simple to produce, easily repaired using almost any available materials, and provides comparable pound-for-pound performance with similar sub-automatic weapons. Although an unabashedly low-tech weapon, it excels at what it was designed for: killing anything right in front of you. Anyone seen a Semi-Automatic SMG around? It's just flavor text. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 512	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:06:00 - [123] - Quote Seymor Krelborn wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: Seymor Krelborn wrote: ChromeBreaker wrote: You take a FG and kill the tank?... Its swarms that dont have the power. There have been a few occations where i have cleared the field of tanks either by killing them of driving them off by bring out my FG. That isnt bragging, 2 FG's on a bit of high ground will dominate every tank going. When people have issue with tripple rep maddi's, they arent your scrub militia tankers, theyre the peeps that have put time and points into tanks, why should they be driven off by every tom d*ck and harry who's put a point into swarms? I have a more balanced question for you.... why should tanks be allowed to go 30/0 consistently? so what you put 20 mil sp into tanks, what about the mercs who have 20 mil in their fits? shouldn't there be more even ground between the tank and infantry? if we had larger maps with battles of 100 v 100 I don't think this would be an issue... but right now 1 tank can take out the whole other team! easily!..... isn't that a problem? Whenever I play with competent slayers, they score a lot more kills than I can even find people, let alone kill them all, in a match. And those slayers are using STD stuff most of the time. Most of the time they even get 0 deaths when they run with me. There is no way I can compete with their kills consistently or even inconsistently. Whenever I am running infantry, around 0.1% of my deaths are by tankers. 0.9% by ADSes and the rest is done by infantry. I don't fear or hate tanks but I respect them, maybe that's why I don't get killed by them. Whenever I see a tank I just laugh at it because I know it can do nothing to kill me if I don't let him. But slayers can easily get me anytime, anywhere. I am nowhere near the best infantry player, I am somewhere near average, but because I know what vehicles can and cannot do, I am not killed by them. Maybe everyone should learn how vehicles operate. And whenever I kill someone with my Blaster easily, I can only feel sorry for them because there is nothing anyone can do to improve their gameplay. your post is dishonest at best... I've been around since the very beginning of open beta and I'm no slouch on the field, I also play sometimes as much as 8 hours a day.... and I don't run with an alliance notorious for proto stomping.... my experience is far more unbalanced than what you claim yours is when it comes to tanks, and the various squads I'm a part of have had a much more similar experience to me... you saw the video at the top of this thread.... that isn't rumor or conjecture... that is proof that tanks are unbalanced to av... when it only takes one to drive a tank and it takes 2 or more... usually 3 to kill a tank, that seriously gives the tanks team an infantry advantage since the other team must dedicate more than 1 to that tank... multiply the tanks you multiply the problem... 3 tanks on the field, theres 6-9 infantry now pulled away from dealing with other infantry for each tank to that teams 13 infantry that can not only support the tanker but take out the vulnerable avers with ease. Every word I said was true and if you don't believe me, then.. well, that's your problem, not mine. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7487	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:08:00 - [124] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: So your telling me that someone would sit there and can take a WBFG blast like a swarm launcher ??? I just know for a fact that's not true , I solo tanks with that gun . I can almost do it with a DCMA 5 . Unless your going against a Base Sica, a WBFG can't OHK any vehicle with a hit to the weak-spot. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7488	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:10:00 - [125] - Quote 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. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 94	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:11:00 - [126] - Quote Atiim wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Swarms are an assistant AV. Who are you assisting? Link a DEV quote saying this or your entire argument falls apart. Though for arguments sake, why would anyone spec into Swarm Launchers if you have no realistic chance of destroying a vehicle, while also having to invest the same amount of ISK & SP as other AV options, and cannot use your AV weapon against infantry, like every other AV weapon in the game (bar AV Grenades & Proximity Explosives.) Not to mention the fact that the vehicle(s) your fighting with the Swarm Launcher only require 1 player to operate, and the fact a weapon that requires multiple people to use successfully is not a viable option in a competitive environment (ie, Planetary Conquest) while in a 16v16 engagement. -åTHIS. If Swarm Launchers are supposed to be an "assistant AV", then I'd like at least half of the SP I've wasted on them refunded, please, because there's no way in hell that I should have to grind the same amount of SP as any other weapon just to be an "assistant". If I had known beforehand that I was speccing to be somebody's assistant, I would have spent those same SP on any other weapon that I'd actually be able to kill with by myself, or on a Logi and be much more useful to my team.
Vulpes Dolosus SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 1518	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:12:00 - [127] - Quote 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? That was probably me earlier in the thread. I'd just like to clarify what I said: AV should be able to kill similarity tiered vehicles, but it shouldn't be easy. I think vehicles should have a slight advantage over AV because I believe it would bring a nice teamwork element to the game. However, no vehicle should be immune to similarly tiered AV. Ideally, If a single AV player is not dealt with quickly, it should be able to threaten a tank, but again not easily. I realize this is just abstract idealism and would be rather difficult to balance, but this should be the ultimate goal. Another thing can tell you right now that that AV will currently destroy any Gunnlogi you could ever make. The nerf to shield hardeners I feel was unjustified, though one was needed. One thing I'd rather have changed is bringing back the old resistance but adding a stacking penalty to the active duration. Stacking penalties may also be applied to repair mods, idk. Me in my ADS: 1,2
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 512	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:15:00 - [128] - 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. 99% of everything on the forums is anecdotal and according to you, should not be taken seriously. Once I can get my ps3 back from repairs I can mail some of those slayers and surely they can confirm that they can easily score higher than any tank can. You can start by mailing California CatDog(e), I'm sure he'll confirm what I've said about slayers. What I've said about my own gameplay as infantry, well, like I said, I can only feel sorry for anyone dying to Blasters as infantry because I only die to them once in a blue moon. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3517	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:26:00 - [129] - Quote 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? But your trying to balance for pubs which in turn breaks PC which is the wrong way to go about it In pubs its squads vs academy players/solo players Try using that fit in a PC match and see what happens, it gets popped by another tank or a FG or both Pubs has no teamwork, 1 squad can wreck the entire enemy team Fix matchmaking 1st and put academy players in the academy for like 100games or something
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 207	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:36:00 - [130] - Quote The av weapons aren't too far from one another. Kaalakiota Forge Gun: 1440, 3 sec ROF, 5 sec reload time. Wiyrkomi Breach Forge Gun: 2100, 4.5 sec ROF, 5 sec reload time. Ishukone Assault Forge Gun: 1500, 2.25 sec ROF, 5 sec reload time. Wiyrkomi Swarm Launcher: 1320, 2-3 sec ROF, 4.5 sec reload. I'll talk to the tanker about shooting some vids with the forge guns. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".

BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 208	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:39:00 - [131] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: The av weapons aren't too far from one another. Kaalakiota Forge Gun: 1440, 3 sec ROF, 5 sec reload time. Wiyrkomi Breach Forge Gun: 2100, 4.5 sec ROF, 5 sec reload time. Ishukone Assault Forge Gun: 1500, 2.25 sec ROF, 5 sec reload time. Wiyrkomi Swarm Launcher: 1320, 2-3 sec ROF, 4.5 sec reload. I'll talk to the tanker about shooting some vids with the forge guns. I believe the forge guns will have better outcomes because they get more from the proficiency skill and damage mods. It being 1 lump sum of damage over 6 missiles dealing moderate damage. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
ZDub 303 TeamPlayers Dirt Nap Squad. 2619	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:42:00 - [132] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Instead of more tankers v nontankers, what are some simple ways to balance this? Introduce active armor repairs with similar stats (maybe even buffed some).... Make them 1:1 possibly, 30s up and 30s down. Then reduce passive rep modules by about 50% or so. You know... waves of opportunity and all that. This level of repair is fine as an active tank module but not sure its okay that tanks repair like this passively, we're talking 20-30% of their health every second indefinitely..
Asha Starwind 853	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:00:00 - [133] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Not a dev, just a player. -snip- Instead of more tankers v nontankers, what are some simple ways to balance this? For starters revert repair modules back to being active modules. That should probably kill the issue dead, with little or no follow up changes. Mad Bomber - 50% less profile Return dumbfire to Swarms
Vell0cet Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 1524	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:07:00 - [134] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Instead of more tankers v nontankers, what are some simple ways to balance this? Vehicle capacitors. Would be a good start. Also, adding Ewar would allow for more interesting balancing. I would be fine with making good vehicles have a long TTK, if there were ways (like in EVE) to cripple the vehicle by "tackling" it and applying ewar (webs, tracking disruption, neuting, etc.). This would make it very likely that the tank will die eventually, instead of being able to race off. The notion of being tackled in EVE is critical to game balance. It's why most intelligent players don't run around with very expensive ships/fits. If you combine this with a massive increase in price back to where they used to be then tanks will be very powerful, but something they're always nervous to loose. I have no problem with tankers having to run starter fits to bank up ISK to fund their tanking habit. I've had to mine in EVE to get nice things. The time invested required to buy a vehicle directly influences how reckless you're willing to be with it. I'd like tanks to be very strong, with high survivability (tank fights should play out like frigate fights in EVE), but with very high price tags, and the constant looming fear that there is an A/V guy out there who will tackle you and you'll be helpless. Best PvE idea ever!
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 279	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:21:00 - [135] - Quote The issue with making large blasters ineffective against infantry is that this removes the purpose of a tank. Removal of AI functionality of large blasters only works if a tanker can run a tank without a main turret and instead get a small turret. Otherwise tanks will be pointless for anyone who runs solo, except for counter tanking. Remember: Tanks are not infantry. They do not fullfill any function aside from killing.
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 208	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:31:00 - [136] - Quote Sole Fenychs wrote: The issue with making large blasters ineffective against infantry is that this removes the purpose of a tank. Removal of AI functionality of large blasters only works if a tanker can run a tank without a main turret and instead get a small turret. Otherwise tanks will be pointless for anyone who runs solo, except for counter tanking. Remember: Tanks are not infantry. They do not fullfill any function aside from killing. They should of gave infantry a full respec and told us they were going to switch game dynamics from FPS to 3rd person tank simulator. I'd like to play this game but I refuse if my only role is to be a cadaver for vehicle characters. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Gelhad Thremyr Quebec United Caps and Mercs 248	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:36:00 - [137] - Quote 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? Slow down turret rotations, will put all tankers at the same levels, and tanks wont be used as efficiently as they are now against infantry. Let tanks have the obligation to have a module used for turret speed, so they will not be able to tripple rep. You should also have stacking penalties on ALL modules, as infantry currently suffer. People dont use tanks to battle tanks as much as killing ground troops. Milkman being the best example this post exposeinfantry should be able to dodge a tank at 20 m easily. The advantage of infantry is mobility. Or change your level design to give more cover and remove old map !
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 947	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:37:00 - [138] - Quote Sole Fenychs wrote: The issue with making large blasters ineffective against infantry is that this removes the purpose of a tank. Removal of AI functionality of large blasters only works if a tanker can run a tank without a main turret and instead get a small turret. Otherwise tanks will be pointless for anyone who runs solo, except for counter tanking. Remember: Tanks are not infantry. They do not fullfill any function aside from killing. This is exactly the root cause to the current imbalances we have, you simply shouldn't give a 5000 ehp behemot the same role as infantry. Or you should give infantry a VERY powerfull weapon at hand to deal with such "monsters". This decision of CCP is one of the most...well lets say...unlucky ones in terms of balance. Havs need a role besides killing Infantry and killing oher Havs is not a suitable role as long as there is no reason to call in a Hav...it is quite sad that CCP either is not able or willing to understand that. And as long as this overlapping exist we will never achieve some sort of balance between AV and Hav's...
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 97	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:38:00 - [139] - Quote Sole Fenychs wrote: The issue with making large blasters ineffective against infantry is that this removes the purpose of a tank. Removal of AI functionality of large blasters only works if a tanker can run a tank without a main turret and instead get a small turret. Otherwise tanks will be pointless for anyone who runs solo, except for counter tanking. Remember: Tanks are not infantry. They do not fullfill any function aside from killing. So use teamwork. It's supposed to be a squad-based, team-centric game isn't it? Isn't that what tankers keep telling AV? Equip a small turret on your tank and bring a teammate to kill infantry, while the driver focusses on driving and counter tanking.
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1691	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:39:00 - [140] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: KatanaPT wrote: Actually, honestly i think the whole problem would be solved with this: - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. I agree we should not be able to solo a tank, and i also agree to the current state of the tanks, they are hard to kill, fast, great tank killers and they can dominate the battlefield, the problem is that most of the tanks nowadays run a single large turret and can kill everything. What happened to small turrets? What happened to their original purpose? (vs infantry) Be it a blaster or a rail, the tank large turrets must be really effective against what they were designed to do, other tanks, installations, vehicles, etc. It maybe unrealistic, (try to think about a 120mm sabot from a M1 against a enemy soldier), but afterall this is a scifi game. --> Bring back small turrets role against infantry and delegate large turrets to their job. This would fix tanks. If the denizens of tankers who love to kill infantry want to continue doing it again, just equip 2 good small turrets, a good crew and let it rip. I have been thinking about this, and make the small vehicle turrets a bit more fun to use. Maybe swarm launchers and HMG's as options as well. I can't hit a damn thing using moving blasters :( I think turret type should help to define role, not size. The blaster turret will still hit infantry far easier than the railgun or missile turret; even if you halve its RoF and double its damage, that will not improve anything. The blaster turret is and will always be an infantry killer. As such, it should have poor AV capabilities, of which it currently doesn't suffer from. Large blasters are too effective against other vehicles which upsets the balance. A single turret cannot both be an infantry killer as well as pose a threat to other vehicles. Remember the 1.6 blaster Maddy that was the be-all end-all to tanking? It both slaughtered infantry and vehicles alike, far outclassing the railgun and missile turret. I believe that any balance efforts should first make a pass through the large turrets. Any AV buffs or tank nerfs will only upset the balance that there is between AV and missile/railgun tanks, as those types of tanks can't fire back effectively and are forced to retreat. Just like the hardener nerf was a rather huge nerf for missile tanks but an indirect buff to blaster and railgun tanks, because they both now get a reduced number if shots required to destroy another tank, while I still need my average of one missile volley plus a portion of another volley to destroy a fair amout of tanks. I also had to get rid of my damage amplifier to make up for a loss in EHP against blaster/railgun tanks due to the hardener nerf. Balancing the Large Turrets "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32

Severus Smith Caldari State 507	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:42:00 - [141] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: KatanaPT wrote: Actually, honestly i think the whole problem would be solved with this: - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. I agree we should not be able to solo a tank, and i also agree to the current state of the tanks, they are hard to kill, fast, great tank killers and they can dominate the battlefield, the problem is that most of the tanks nowadays run a single large turret and can kill everything. What happened to small turrets? What happened to their original purpose? (vs infantry) Be it a blaster or a rail, the tank large turrets must be really effective against what they were designed to do, other tanks, installations, vehicles, etc. It maybe unrealistic, (try to think about a 120mm sabot from a M1 against a enemy soldier), but afterall this is a scifi game. --> Bring back small turrets role against infantry and delegate large turrets to their job. This would fix tanks. If the denizens of tankers who love to kill infantry want to continue doing it again, just equip 2 good small turrets, a good crew and let it rip. I have been thinking about this, and make the small vehicle turrets a bit more fun to use. Maybe swarm launchers and HMG's as options as well. I can't hit a damn thing using moving blasters :( Have large turrets for tanks / installations behave like the forge gun. Slow to aim and if you aren't exactly on your target then you miss. Just like a M1 vs a soldier. If the M1 can line up a direct shot on that soldier with it's slow moving turret then the soldier should die, but if the M1 is off by even a little bit then its a miss. Likewise, improve small turrets to be deadly. The blaster turret should do 1000 DPS minimum but run out of ammo, or overheat, if held down for long. This allows light vehicles to do support strafing runs (would be so awesome to see this with a dropship) while allowing tanks to counter light vehicles with their large turrets.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 558	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:44:00 - [142] - 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.
Scrub Zero Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 23	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:45:00 - [143] - Quote 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? Buff swarm launcher range. They are THE worst AV in the game. 75%* of players use swarms over forge. As a side note. Tankers are NO MATCH for my murder taxi! I LOVE tankers! They give me iskies. Seriously though, we ALL need a VEHICLE FREE MAP! This would make SO MANY happy.
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1692	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:49:00 - [144] - Quote 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. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 558	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:54:00 - [145] - 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.
lithkul devant Legions of Infinite Dominion Zero-Day 203	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:03:00 - [146] - Quote 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? Excuse me....but your analysis is well flawed in one aspect...THEIR ARE NO PROTO TANKS!!!!! What we have currently are basic tanks that fit Proto gear. Let me explain since you forgot how your own skill tree works, 1 is basic, 3 is advanced, 5 is proto. All tanks right now can currently be unlocked with 1 rank into HAV. This means that no proto tanks currently exsist. We only have one advanced vehicle in the entire game that I know of or can remember and that is an LAV.
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7495	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:05:00 - [147] - 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. Because that same vehicle is hell-bent on killing our team? No, it is not enough. If a vehicle doesn't/cannot die, then where is the risk involved i using one? You've also yet to list a valid reason as to why it should be that way, so I'll just write this off as bantering from a tanker who feels as if he should never die to another person. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Ryme Intrinseca Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 983	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:07:00 - [148] - Quote Vitharr Foebane wrote: I wish my dropsuit could self rep like that... Four complex reppers = 24hp/s 1 Compact hive = 50hp/s 2 K17/D = 40hp/s 2 Alloteks = 80hp/s 2 Wiyrkomi = 140hp/s This gets you to 334hp/s. Get your buddy to drop the same pile of hives and you have even more rep than a Maddy - as long as the hives last...
Meknow Intaki 150	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:08:00 - [149] - Quote And if you ever manage to get the upper hand the tanker will just run away....
Bubba Rector BR514 24	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:16:00 - [150] - Quote Leave AV and Vehicles where they are. No buff, no nerf. I feel if it is going to take 2+ players to to take out a tank, then it should take at least 2 people to operate a tank. 1 driving and 1 on a turret. My corp mostly plays factional and when we face big corps, there are at least 3 enemy tanks on the field. Which is fine, mind you. That is part of the game. My problem is 3 tanks only takes away 3 players from hacking objectives. If my corp busts out our AV, we only get maybe 1 shot off. If it takes 6 players to run that same amount of tanks, there will either be less tank spam, or more of an opportunity to use my AV.

Maximus Stryker Who Are Those Guys 935	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:19:00 - [151] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Some Good Stuff Instead of more tankers v nontankers, what are some simple ways to balance this? put AV nades back to 3 Buff proto AV only, not standard or advance: -slightly longer range -slightly more damage -slightly faster firing time -simply put, a slight buff to prototype level AV weapons and equipment *Faction Channels for FW Staging* PIE Ground Control \| Caldari Hierarchy \| Turalyon \| Chosen Matari
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1692	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:25:00 - [152] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. Because that same vehicle is hell-bent on killing our team? No, it is not enough. If a vehicle doesn't/cannot die, then where is the risk involved i using one? You've also yet to list a valid reason as to why it should be that way, so I'll just write this off as bantering from a tanker who feels as if he should never die to another person. Me? Hell-bent on killing your team? With missiles? Lol, Atiim, just shows how indifferent you are to the whole of tanking. If I wanted to kill your team I'd be crying for 4 meter splash radius while keeping everything bing else unchanged for missiles. You're thinking about blaster tanks. Yes, blasters need a damage nerf, but that is all. I agree, they aren't risking much if they can effectively counter other vehicles meant to destroy them. 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. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 409	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:27:00 - [153] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Put that Swarm Launcher on Minmando (skill lv5) with 3 dmg mods and prof 5 and that Maddy doesn't stand a chance. I know from experience. You can't fit 3 Damage mods on a Minmatar Commando... Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Kaminoikari DROID EXILES Proficiency V. 177	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:27:00 - [154] - Quote I wonder if anyone realizes that swarms aren't meant to solo a tank... I wonder if anyone realizes that Madrugars are Gallente vehicles, which translates to them being able to armor rep efficiently. I wonder if anyone realizes that a triple rep Madrugar actually takes teamwork to take down. I wonder if anyone realizes that any buffer to AV will give DS/ADS pilots an even bigger shaft. I wonder when we'll get our God damned Amarr tanks and DS/ADS so we can armor tank properly. I wonder... People keep spewing the same garbage over and over again about "O man, I'm so hurtbutt about that one-seater tank being able to take out my guy and others when my Light AV Swarm Launcher can't even dent him! It should take TWO(2) people in a tank to operate it!" I don't even need to tank to tell you how much of a dumbass excuse that is. This is a universe where a single pilot commands a Titan. I'm pretty damn sure a single tank driver should be operate and fire his tank, seeing as how we memory now. Any form of AV should require multiple (more than one (which means at least 2 (two))) people to take down any vehicle that isn't a LAV. This is not modern day where it takes 3-4 people to man a single tank. This is not reality. That's like saying my Dropship should take two people to fly because attack helicopters have 2 people; one to fly/shoot missiles and one to man the belly gun. If anything, the rest of the racial tanks need to be brought in to make it more of a change-up where you'll get more tank v. tank battles. My dropship is a medium vehicle. An RDV is a medium vehicle. Why does my dropship have 1/3 the total HP of an RDV? Why are tanks easier to pop than an RDV? Nobody has thought around those lines. An RDV has more eHP than any tank and it's a medium vehicle. That means tanks should have around ~8,000 eHP or more since it's a heavy vehicle. Meaning another rework... disregard this last segment because It's more of an idea than anything. Dropships need a buff. This way they can stop derping everywhere . ;_; >Tfw no Amarr dropship and laser turrets
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 514	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:29:00 - [155] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Instead of more tankers v nontankers, what are some simple ways to balance this? Introduce active armor repairs with similar stats (maybe even buffed some).... Make them 1:1 possibly, 30s up and 30s down. Then reduce passive rep modules by about 50% or so. You know... waves of opportunity and all that. This level of repair is fine as an active tank module but not sure its okay that tanks repair like this passively, we're talking 20-30% of their health every second indefinitely.. 12%-12.8% of their armor HP or 9.25%-9.84% of their total HP per second. Which I would agree is alot, if their base HP was enough to survive any kind of alpha damage. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 559	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:31:00 - [156] - 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.
Auris Lionesse Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 777	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:33:00 - [157] - Quote There are two ways of looking at this. 1. this is EVE dust 514, if ccp wants multiple players be required to kill vehicles ala small ships vs big ships, they need to completely rework the game and rebalance everything. Meaning it'd take 2-3 light suits to kill a medium, so on, A heavy would be able to stand and brawl with a tank for a short time, and if he's supported by a logi he'll win against the tank. Add in all our missing mods from eve like damage resistances and webifiers. then tanks can be permitted to require multiple people. 2. this is an fps and a good fps allows everyone to solo everyone else. meaning a militia swarm should be able to kill militia tanks, a basic swarm will solo a basic tank. Bring back the ability for infantry to kill tanks by emptying clips into them. And have 1:1 balance across the board. As it currently stands only 1 person in a tank can overpower multiple players, it's been broken like this since 1.7 av is the counter of v, av should never be unable to kill it's prey or it's by definition "broken" Furthermore the idea if a tank being able to utilize player skill to overcome it's predator is also broken as no amount if infantry skill will fix the numbers so that he can kill a tank with a non av light weapon such as a rail or assault rifle. So a tank should not be able to kill avers, they should require multiple tanks or webifiers/tracking mods to kill infantry as a large ship in eve requires to kill smaller ships if multiple avers are required to kill a single tank. Anyone saying a solo aver should not be able to kill a tank (with any form of av, it doesn't matter which) is saying the game should not be balanced because this is currently the case and it's in fact unbalanced. Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Heroes in a half Gank! *TURTLE POWER!!!*
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1692	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:35:00 - [158] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: 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. Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Tau Lai Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 80	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:38:00 - [159] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 Absolutely unbalanced nonsense. Working as intended. I can see you Buy a tank Buy an assault dropship
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2706	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:40:00 - [160] - Quote Atiim wrote: 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. Because that same vehicle is hell-bent on killing our team? No, it is not enough. If a vehicle doesn't/cannot die, then where is the risk involved i using one? You've also yet to list a valid reason as to why it should be that way, so I'll just write this off as bantering from a tanker who feels as if he should never die to another person. Uhmm, if I may interject here with some simple logic. Let's go with Harpyja first, you cannot force a tank to retreat if you cannot destroy it, with this current 'repdrugar' you effectively get the archimedies turtle, since the reps are both constant and high you get only a little bit closer to the tanks destruction with each hit, it was calculated as taking well over 12 volleys, any tanker with half a brain is aware of this and can become almost invincible. But let's look at the algebra 1infantry = 1 infantry now before I start this is a generalisation, Im not accounting for different tier of dropsuits. Now the above statememt is balanced because both sides are equal. So let's break it down a little. 1infantry + 1AR = 1infantry + 1RR in this case it is still balanced as they both have similar DPS and have attributes that both buff and debuff each other, so an infantry unit using an AR is no less disadvantaged than the RR (this may not be the case in reality, but you should catch my drift, the AR will exceed in some areas where the RR will not and vice versa) 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + 1RR this currently unbalanced, since as a tank you severly outclass infantry, HOWEVER to make a tank only as strong as infantry is unfair, a little pointless and altogther useless. So we need a way of balancing this equation, we need to create a circle, cue AV. So for balance we make standard infantry greater than AV, like so 1infantry + 1RR > 1infantry + 1SL then we do the same for AV vs tan. . . . oh, hold on, since AV should require teamwork that doesn't work out, since unless the tank is destroyed all the AV has effectively done is delay the enivetable, so instead you get 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + 1SL and 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + RR which compiled into a single statement becomes this. 1infantry + 1SL < 1infantry + tank > 1infantry + RR this can be further simplified to 1AV < 1tank > 1RR and now you have an unbalanced statement. You see the problem is a tank is only an extension of your unit, you are still only 1 person, it is in theoretical terms nothing more than a weapon for your unit. and as such it must be counterable by another weapon weilded by a single unit, to require more than 1 person to take you out, yet allow you to take out more than 1 person (to be more effecie t than) is entirely unbalanced. Think about everything else. How many people are compulsory to take down 1 brick tanked heavy? Just one with an RE How many people are compulsory to take dow a Proto Assault? Just one in the right place How many people are required to down a sniper? Just one who knows where he is Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.

Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 409	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:41:00 - [161] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? When tanks consider their job done by simply forcing infantry to retreat then we can discuss this. Until then, no. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
lee corwood Knights Of Ender Galactic Skyfleet Empire 799	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:42:00 - [162] - Quote I'd also like to state that we're having a discussion about the effectiveness of AV versus tanks (and right now a very specific type of tank). Right now, all AV affects all classes of vehicles the same and I don't think it should. CCP should approach HAVs and DS as completely separate entitles. Every time we do this number/stat shuffle you hear: tanks suck but DS is ok DS now sucks but this one tank is ok That seesaw effect is going to continue until you learn to treat them as completely separate entities that don't share static values and bonuses. Minmatar Logisis \| Heavy lover. Ping for video services.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 97	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:43:00 - [163] - Quote I'm curious: How, exactly would an AV be a thorn in the tanks side, if the tanker does not regard the AV as a serious threat? Without the capability of eventually doing enough damage to the tank, then the tank driver would quickly learn that the AV is NOT a threat, and we'd end up with the situation that you see in the OP's video, where the tanker simply disregards the AV player altogether. In order for the AV to be able to at least even chase a tanker away, the tanker must feel that, given enough time, that AV player WILL be able to destroy his vehicle. If the AV is not capable of even eventually destroying the tank, then the AV will never be a credible threat, and therefor will never be a hinderance to the tanker.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3523	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:47:00 - [164] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? When tanks consider their job done by simply forcing infantry to retreat then we can discuss this. Until then, no. Sometimes its enough You force the infantry away so your infantry can push up and take the point Sometimes im fine with this because the match goes on for longer so i can find kills later on Sometimes you just want to kill everything in sight
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 559	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:50:00 - [165] - 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.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 97	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:51:00 - [166] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? When tanks consider their job done by simply forcing infantry to retreat then we can discuss this. Until then, no. Sometimes its enough You force the infantry away so your infantry can push up and take the point Sometimes im fine with this because the match goes on for longer so i can find kills later on Sometimes you just want to kill everything in sight How long do you think that you would be able to force infantry away at all, if they knew that your weapons were ineffective against them?
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3525	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:54:00 - [167] - Quote Mojo XXXIII wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? When tanks consider their job done by simply forcing infantry to retreat then we can discuss this. Until then, no. Sometimes its enough You force the infantry away so your infantry can push up and take the point Sometimes im fine with this because the match goes on for longer so i can find kills later on Sometimes you just want to kill everything in sight How long do you think that you would be able to force infantry away at all, if they knew that your weapons were ineffective against them? They are ineffective if they use cover, i cant shoot through things I cant enter rooms I cant go down narrow corridors
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2706	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:57:00 - [168] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? When tanks consider their job done by simply forcing infantry to retreat then we can discuss this. Until then, no. Sometimes its enough You force the infantry away so your infantry can push up and take the point Sometimes im fine with this because the match goes on for longer so i can find kills later on Sometimes you just want to kill everything in sight So you'd be happy with tanks ONLY being capable of supresing infantry? Really? Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Thumb Green The Valyrian Guard 1041	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:59:00 - [169] - Quote MarasdF Loron wrote: Thumb Green wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: 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. 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. There will at best be different variants of HAVs, but nothing that will be better than the basic HAV in every area. Specialization. They will give up something to gain something. Please tell me what the Light Electron Blaster II gives up that is significant to gain what it does over the the Light Electron Blaster I. Or what the Zealot gives up that is significant to gain what it does over the Omen? Support Orbital Spawns
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1692	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:00:00 - [170] - Quote I want to make my point clear, and this guy pretty much summed it up lee corwood wrote: I'd also like to state that we're having a discussion about the effectiveness of AV versus tanks (and right now a very specific type of tank). Right now, all AV affects all classes of vehicles the same and I don't think it should. CCP should approach HAVs and DS as completely separate entitles. Every time we do this number/stat shuffle you hear: tanks suck but DS is ok DS now sucks but this one tank is ok That seesaw effect is going to continue until you learn to treat them as completely separate entities that don't share static values and bonuses. I hadn't said that triple rep Maddies are fine, or that blasters are fine. Those are two cases where AV vs tanks is not balanced. BUT, AV vs missile and railgun tanks is balanced. That's why I am against overall tank nerfs or AV buffs because where you achieve balance, you gain imbalance elsewhere. What I said before, that one AV should only force one tank to retreat, still holds merit, if everything is balanced appropriately. My missile and railgun are already forced to retreat when hit by AV. Now just make it more so for triple rep Maddies and blaster tanks. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32

Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3528	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:01:00 - [171] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? When tanks consider their job done by simply forcing infantry to retreat then we can discuss this. Until then, no. Sometimes its enough You force the infantry away so your infantry can push up and take the point Sometimes im fine with this because the match goes on for longer so i can find kills later on Sometimes you just want to kill everything in sight So you'd be happy with tanks ONLY being capable of supresing infantry? Really? Sometimes i do it in game Infantry can go where vehicles cant and if i have a scanner on i pick up assists too, depending on map vehicles cant even suppress and are mostly useless But vehicles can do other things too AV can suppress vehicles, but they can also kill them, OP video shows that 1 is not enough, get a 2nd tho and its dead
LittleCuteBunny 439	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:02:00 - [172] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: KatanaPT wrote: Actually, honestly i think the whole problem would be solved with this: - Penalty (OR inability to fire) to large tank weapons against infantry, make them into what they must be, tank and installation killers. Now we have a giant shotgun on top of a tank. If a tanker wants to go against infantry then install small turrets, because thats what they are for. I agree we should not be able to solo a tank, and i also agree to the current state of the tanks, they are hard to kill, fast, great tank killers and they can dominate the battlefield, the problem is that most of the tanks nowadays run a single large turret and can kill everything. What happened to small turrets? What happened to their original purpose? (vs infantry) Be it a blaster or a rail, the tank large turrets must be really effective against what they were designed to do, other tanks, installations, vehicles, etc. It maybe unrealistic, (try to think about a 120mm sabot from a M1 against a enemy soldier), but afterall this is a scifi game. --> Bring back small turrets role against infantry and delegate large turrets to their job. This would fix tanks. If the denizens of tankers who love to kill infantry want to continue doing it again, just equip 2 good small turrets, a good crew and let it rip. I have been thinking about this, and make the small vehicle turrets a bit more fun to use. Maybe swarm launchers and HMG's as options as well. I can't hit a damn thing using moving blasters :( People want large blasters (the anti infantry turret) to be useless against infantry, they want to be able to dance away from large turrets like they do with railguns and missile. Mass drivers have a bigger splash is better than large missiles, Forge guns have greater base damage and range than railguns and HMGs melt things faster than large turrets due to its dispersion and high RoF. CCP aleays listens to bad player after looking at their data, I debate if that's because they are bad at their own game or if that's because they never play it BUT don't worry comrades at this pace we will get those mean tankers at a worst place than what they were last year. :) Retired.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 99	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:02:00 - [173] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? When tanks consider their job done by simply forcing infantry to retreat then we can discuss this. Until then, no. Sometimes its enough You force the infantry away so your infantry can push up and take the point Sometimes im fine with this because the match goes on for longer so i can find kills later on Sometimes you just want to kill everything in sight How long do you think that you would be able to force infantry away at all, if they knew that your weapons were ineffective against them? They are ineffective if they use cover, i cant shoot through things I cant enter rooms I cant go down narrow corridors That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them?
Thumb Green The Valyrian Guard 1041	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:05:00 - [174] - Quote Harpyja wrote: 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. The fck it should be that way. It's not balance to require multiple people to take on and kill one person. It's not even fcking realistic if that's what you "it's a tank, it shouldn't be solo'd" dipshits are going for. Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? Because when you kill it, it takes longer for it to return than if it just runs around a corner. Support Orbital Spawns
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3528	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:11:00 - [175] - Quote Mojo XXXIII wrote: That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them? TBH id get a friend, 2 is always better than 1
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 100	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:15:00 - [176] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them? TBH id get a friend, 2 is always better than 1 Sure, no problem, then the tank driver should be limited to an AV weapon only, and should have to equip an AI turret and bring a friend to kill infantry. 2 is always better than 1, right? And around and around and around we go......
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 608	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:18:00 - [177] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them? TBH id get a friend, 2 is always better than 1 But when 10 sync mercenaries can't take down a single experimented tank, how are you supposed to take down 3 tankers with 16 players ? Only stupid noobs with noob tank which only run into ennemies like stupid 1960 IA die into a Tank. Any person which have a brain can't die into a tank if there is no other tank.
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 609	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:20:00 - [178] - Quote In the Video we can see the player can't even destroy the tank WHILE HE DON'T DO ANYTHING. In real games, the tank can shoot, run away and kill the whole team 50 time before his tank is destroyed. The tank will NEVER take that much rocket in a game, and still people defend tanks..... Their SP should be erased....
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3528	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:22:00 - [179] - Quote Mojo XXXIII wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them? TBH id get a friend, 2 is always better than 1 Sure, no problem, then the tank driver should be limited to an AV weapon only, and should have to equip an AI turret and bring a friend to kill infantry. 2 is always better than 1, right? And around and around and around we go...... No il sacrifice my AV abilitys by using the blaster that way i dont have to bring anyone or even have to rely on a bluedot if i fancy playing solo
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3528	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:23:00 - [180] - Quote Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them? TBH id get a friend, 2 is always better than 1 But when 10 sync mercenaries can't take down a single experimented tank, how are you supposed to take down 3 tankers with 16 players ? Only stupid noobs with noob tank which only run into ennemies like stupid 1960 IA die into a Tank. Any person which have a brain can't die into a tank if there is no other tank. If 10ppl cannot kill 1 tank then they should quit

Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7503	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:24:00 - [181] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them? TBH id get a friend, 2 is always better than 1 Sure, no problem, then the tank driver should be limited to an AV weapon only, and should have to equip an AI turret and bring a friend to kill infantry. 2 is always better than 1, right? And around and around and around we go...... No il sacrifice my AV abilitys by using the blaster that way i dont have to bring anyone or even have to rely on a bluedot if i fancy playing solo And AV sacrifices it's AP capabilities. So I guess we shouldn't have to bring a friend either? Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3528	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:30:00 - [182] - Quote Atiim wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them? TBH id get a friend, 2 is always better than 1 Sure, no problem, then the tank driver should be limited to an AV weapon only, and should have to equip an AI turret and bring a friend to kill infantry. 2 is always better than 1, right? And around and around and around we go...... No il sacrifice my AV abilitys by using the blaster that way i dont have to bring anyone or even have to rely on a bluedot if i fancy playing solo And AV sacrifices it's AP capabilities. 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
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 560	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:37:00 - [183] - 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.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 101	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:44:00 - [184] - Quote 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!
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1240	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:47:00 - [185] - Quote Mojo XXXIII wrote: I'm curious: How, exactly would an AV be a thorn in the tanks side, if the tanker does not regard the AV as a serious threat? Without the capability of eventually doing enough damage to the tank, then the tank driver would quickly learn that the AV is NOT a threat, and we'd end up with the situation that you see in the OP's video, where the tanker simply disregards the AV player altogether. In order for the AV to be able to at least even chase a tanker away, the tanker must feel that, given enough time, that AV player WILL be able to destroy his vehicle. If the AV is not capable of even eventually destroying the tank, then the AV will never be a credible threat, and therefor will never be a hinderance to the tanker. Because AV is not only relegated to forges and swarms. AV is Anti-Vehicle, and anything that kills them can fufill this role. Large railguns, PE, and RE all can fulfill this role extremely well, as can large blasters. Frankly, we need to make large blasters into AV, but not until we have all the vehicles in the game. Beyond blaster tanks and the occasional dropship, there really isn't much for AV to shoot at. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1240	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:51:00 - [186] - Quote 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. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 102	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:53:00 - [187] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: I'm curious: How, exactly would an AV be a thorn in the tanks side, if the tanker does not regard the AV as a serious threat? Without the capability of eventually doing enough damage to the tank, then the tank driver would quickly learn that the AV is NOT a threat, and we'd end up with the situation that you see in the OP's video, where the tanker simply disregards the AV player altogether. In order for the AV to be able to at least even chase a tanker away, the tanker must feel that, given enough time, that AV player WILL be able to destroy his vehicle. If the AV is not capable of even eventually destroying the tank, then the AV will never be a credible threat, and therefor will never be a hinderance to the tanker. Because AV is not only relegated to forges and swarms. AV is Anti-Vehicle, and anything that kills them can fufill this role. Large railguns, PE, and RE all can fulfill this role extremely well, as can large blasters. Frankly, we need to make large blasters into AV, but not until we have all the vehicles in the game. Beyond blaster tanks and the occasional dropship, there really isn't much for AV to shoot at. No, but if I devote a significant portion of my SP into swarms (comparable to what it takes to operate a vehicle, for example), which are a SPECIFICALLY AV ONLY weapon, and completely useless against infantry, I don't think it is unreasonable to expect to be able to use them for their intended purpose, without also having to spec into two or three other AV weapons (or team up with someone else who has).
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 102	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:57:00 - [188] - 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. 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.
danie braz Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 5	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:59:00 - [189] - Quote 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? 5-6 rounds in a magazine/clip. Shorter reload sequence. Boom bye bye in a tanker boy head.
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 517	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:01:00 - [190] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: BIind Shot wrote: 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 Put that Swarm Launcher on Minmando (skill lv5) with 3 dmg mods and prof 5 and that Maddy doesn't stand a chance. I know from experience. You can't fit 3 Damage mods on a Minmatar Commando... You are right, my bad. R.I.P. Pre-1.7 Vehicles & AV, you will be missed.

Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1240	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:07:00 - [191] - 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. A tank shouldn't be killing infantry easy unless he fits small turrets. So yes, we should have a ton more hitpoints, do a ton more damage, and only be vulnerable to certain weapons, and require either teamwork or heavy specialization into those weapons to threaten me. But I should be fitting small turrets in order to combat you on the ground effectively. Just as one shouldn't expect my Eve battleship to fall to a single frigate. It should take at least 3, and very possibly 4-5 frigates to down my battleship. But my battleship has trouble hitting those frigates unless I fit frigate drones to it. Same for small turrets. Those are my infantry defense, while my main turret is for killing other vehicles. However, other than blaster tanks there really isn't a threat on the battlefield beyond a very skilled dropship pilot. So until MAVs and heavy aircraft and a whole slew of vehicles for me to shoot at is released, I would see blasters remain as they are. Gives my large missiles something to hunt. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Awry Barux Ametat Security Amarr Empire 2401	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:15:00 - [192] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: So yes, we should have a ton more hitpoints, do a ton more damage, and only be vulnerable to certain weapons, and require either teamwork or heavy specialization into those weapons to threaten me. But I should be fitting small turrets in order to combat you on the ground effectively. Just as one shouldn't expect my Eve battleship to fall to a single frigate. It should take at least 3, and very possibly 4-5 frigates to down my battleship. But my battleship has trouble hitting those frigates unless I fit frigate drones to it. Same for small turrets. Those are my infantry defense, while my main turret is for killing other vehicles. Actually, in EVE, you can totally slay a battleship in a single frigate. An Ishkur can tank and kill the light drones, then just tackle and whittle down even the most expensive battleship until it's dead. Nerdier than thou
Autoaim Bot514 The Hetairoi 110	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:20:00 - [193] - Quote How to fix? Add target painter equipment.
Odigos Ellinas Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation 160	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:21:00 - [194] - Quote 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? Don't be a baby call in a HAV with a railgun or missile launcher and hunt the other HAVs down. Both sides can use equal number of vehicles? Why punch people who spend SP in vehicles. By the way militia Railguns can take on any HAV. This will help the game
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 609	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:24:00 - [195] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Mojo XXXIII wrote: That's not what I'm referring to, and you know it. If infantry realizes (as the tank in the video did with the swarm launcher), that your weapons are incapable of killing them when you DO shoot them, how long do you think they would continue to run away from you? How long before they stop taking cover altogether, and begin simply ignoring you, once they realize that you do not pose any threat to them? TBH id get a friend, 2 is always better than 1 But when 10 sync mercenaries can't take down a single experimented tank, how are you supposed to take down 3 tankers with 16 players ? Only stupid noobs with noob tank which only run into ennemies like stupid 1960 IA die into a Tank. Any person which have a brain can't die into a tank if there is no other tank. If 10ppl cannot kill 1 tank then they should quit Let me guess, you're a tanker right ? Oh sorry i said tanker ? I mean Noob.
Odigos Ellinas Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation 160	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:26:00 - [196] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 As you can see in the video the AV infantry can solo the 3ple rep maddy. He just forgotten to throw his AV grenades to finish the HAV. This will help the game
Gelhad Thremyr Quebec United Caps and Mercs 248	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:26:00 - [197] - Quote 1) Lets all agree on one thing, mechanized infantry (tanks) should have high HP and should be able to create opportunities for infantry. With that being said, if the level design of maps doesnt give enough possibilities to get behind cover let say 40-60% of the time (because no one would wage war in open spaces like we did 400 years ago) then tanks would naturally be less of a threat to infantry. 2) We want risk/reward to be balanced (because tanks cost alot, but with the data in hand a single tank can do easily 20 kills, if they are proto, than they netted a kill ISK value of 2 mil ISK alone if each proto infantry suit cost 100k) 3) Tank player alone in his vehicle should not add the equivalent of 2-3 more player in fire power alone. It causes imbalance in firepower on one side. This is clearly been demonstrated in TankBush with Nyain san and Milkman. 4) I would not touch the power of weapons has is, I think number wise the tripple rep madrugar is a kind of a fit, we should keep the customization of builds in this game. 5) If main turrets of tanks would be slower, engaging infrantry would be harder, and would require drivers to have small turrets to handle 20 meters or less infantry, throwing stuff at it. All tanks would suffer the turret slowness and it would make tank engagement better IMO. 6)Conclusion, do not touch the firepower but the hability to quickly kill all around a tank with a single driver, in BF3, tank turret do not allow you to be 100% effective against infantry !
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 211	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:28:00 - [198] - Quote Quote: 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. Because that same vehicle is hell-bent on killing our team? No, it is not enough. If a vehicle doesn't/cannot die, then where is the risk involved i using one? You've also yet to list a valid reason as to why it should be that way, so I'll just write this off as bantering from a tanker who feels as if he should never die to another person.[/quote] Uhmm, if I may interject here with some simple logic. Let's go with Harpyja first, you cannot force a tank to retreat if you cannot destroy it, with this current 'repdrugar' you effectively get the archimedies turtle, since the reps are both constant and high you get only a little bit closer to the tanks destruction with each hit, it was calculated as taking well over 12 volleys, any tanker with half a brain is aware of this and can become almost invincible. But let's look at the algebra 1infantry = 1 infantry now before I start this is a generalisation, Im not accounting for different tier of dropsuits. Now the above statememt is balanced because both sides are equal. So let's break it down a little. 1infantry + 1AR = 1infantry + 1RR in this case it is still balanced as they both have similar DPS and have attributes that both buff and debuff each other, so an infantry unit using an AR is no less disadvantaged than the RR (this may not be the case in reality, but you should catch my drift, the AR will exceed in some areas where the RR will not and vice versa) 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + 1RR this currently unbalanced, since as a tank you severly outclass infantry, HOWEVER to make a tank only as strong as infantry is unfair, a little pointless and altogther useless. So we need a way of balancing this equation, we need to create a circle, cue AV. So for balance we make standard infantry greater than AV, like so 1infantry + 1RR > 1infantry + 1SL then we do the same for AV vs tan. . . . oh, hold on, since AV should require teamwork that doesn't work out, since unless the tank is destroyed all the AV has effectively done is delay the enivetable, so instead you get 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + 1SL and 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + RR which compiled into a single statement becomes this. 1infantry + 1SL < 1infantry + tank > 1infantry + RR this can be further simplified to 1AV < 1tank > 1RR and now you have an unbalanced statement. You see the problem is a tank is only an extension of your unit, you are still only 1 person, it is in theoretical terms nothing more than a weapon for your unit. and as such it must be counterable by another weapon weilded by a single unit, to require more than 1 person to take you out, yet allow you to take out more than 1 person (to be more effecie t than) is entirely unbalanced. Think about everything else. How many people are compulsory to take down 1 brick tanked heavy? Just one with an RE How many people are compulsory to take dow a Proto Assault? Just one in the right place How many people are required to down a sniper? Just one who knows where he is [/quote] I did the math and came up with 12 volleys the other day but someone told me that the shields would of absorbed more than I had thought due to regen even when being damaged. Redoing the math came up with 15 volleys; This is a slightly different circumstance. I only had proficiency 3 and no rapid reload. The tank only had 3 in repair proficiency and as you can see in the video after I unloaded a clip his armor would be fully healed before I could finish reloading. It was completely impervious to my swarms, just sitting there not moving at all. It may be more than 15. I didn't take into account the animation for actually firing the swarms. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
iliel Capital Acquisitions LLC Dirt Nap Squad. 35	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:44:00 - [199] - Quote 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? Give us a way to (a) grab onto a tank and drop a bomb inside of it to kill the gunner. (perhaps add some kind of skill for grenades that increases the probability that the nade will make it inside? also perhaps add some sort of button combination for this task so that it is not as easy as L2, tanker down.) (b) grab onto and enter the tank and somehow fight the gunner (maybe some random sequence of buttons determines who wins). (c) shoot gunners/pilots out of tanks. Note that all of these should apply to dropships as well. LAVs already allow us to shoot and kill gunners. Also, I don't understand how the empty seats in Dropships, LAVs, and Tanks are restricted from enemy access? If a tank drives into the midst of 10 enemies without any backup, someone should be able to get into the tank - - this makes sense.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2709	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:47:00 - [200] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Harpyja wrote: Please tell me WHY you HAVE to destroy the tank to consider your job done. Again, let me ask you, is it not enough if you forced the tank to retreat? When tanks consider their job done by simply forcing infantry to retreat then we can discuss this. Until then, no. Sometimes its enough You force the infantry away so your infantry can push up and take the point Sometimes im fine with this because the match goes on for longer so i can find kills later on Sometimes you just want to kill everything in sight So you'd be happy with tanks ONLY being capable of supresing infantry? Really? Sometimes i do it in game Infantry can go where vehicles cant and if i have a scanner on i pick up assists too, depending on map vehicles cant even suppress and are mostly useless But vehicles can do other things too AV can suppress vehicles, but they can also kill them, OP video shows that 1 is not enough, get a 2nd tho and its dead And tanks can kill lots of infantry, by themselves. Your missing the point, you are saying 1 AV should only be capable of suppressing tanks. So we turned it on its head, would you be happy if, it took at least 2 tanks just kill someone, would that be fair? If you answered yes, I suggest you ask for blasters to be nerfed significantly. If you answered no, then why do you think it is fair to put this restriction on Anti-Vehicle weaponry? In wider sense it boils down to, why you as a single person in your tank should require multiple people to take down? Please bear in mind when answering the question. 1) SP is not accountable since AV must also sacrifice a lot of skill points Which by you count their AI fit, equipment training core upgrades, dropsuit upgrades is around about the same. 2)ISK is not a factor due to the fact a mlt tank now costs less than a Proto fit, therein mlt tanks should be incapable of killing proto dropsuits, (if ISK were a factor) 3) Real-Life is not a factor, first and foremost this is a game to be enjoyed by everyone, this meams guns don't kill in 1 shot at 300m and tanks don't become so powerful. However if you do wish to use real-life I would like to point you toward the Artybox-Globalhawk combo, which autonomously dispatches of enemy tanks and APC's without any human input. 4)Teamwork is not a factor, we play in fixed count matches, teamwork is optional, not compulsory. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.

BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 211	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:48:00 - [201] - Quote iliel 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? Give us a way to (a) grab onto a tank and drop a bomb inside of it to kill the gunner. (perhaps add some kind skill to grenades that increases the probability that the nade will make it inside? also perhaps add some sort of button combination for this task so that it is not as easy as L2, tanker down.) (b) grab onto and enter the tank and somehow fight the gunner (maybe some random sequence of buttons determines who wins). (c) shoot gunners/pilots out of tanks. Note that all of these should apply to dropships as well. LAVs already allow us to shoot and kill gunners. Also, I don't understand how the empty seats in Dropships, LAVs, and Tanks are restricted from enemy access? If a tank drives into the midst of 10 enemies without any backup, someone should be able to get into the tank - - this makes sense. That sounds so ******* cool but I don't see anyway to implement that. I'm pretty sure the 60+ metric ton tank has a lock on the hatch. lol and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2709	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:54:00 - [202] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: Quote: 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. Because that same vehicle is hell-bent on killing our team? No, it is not enough. If a vehicle doesn't/cannot die, then where is the risk involved i using one? You've also yet to list a valid reason as to why it should be that way, so I'll just write this off as bantering from a tanker who feels as if he should never die to another person. Quote: Uhmm, if I may interject here with some simple logic. Let's go with Harpyja first, you cannot force a tank to retreat if you cannot destroy it, with this current 'repdrugar' you effectively get the archimedies turtle, since the reps are both constant and high you get only a little bit closer to the tanks destruction with each hit, it was calculated as taking well over 12 volleys, any tanker with half a brain is aware of this and can become almost invincible. But let's look at the algebra 1infantry = 1 infantry now before I start this is a generalisation, Im not accounting for different tier of dropsuits. Now the above statememt is balanced because both sides are equal. So let's break it down a little. 1infantry + 1AR = 1infantry + 1RR in this case it is still balanced as they both have similar DPS and have attributes that both buff and debuff each other, so an infantry unit using an AR is no less disadvantaged than the RR (this may not be the case in reality, but you should catch my drift, the AR will exceed in some areas where the RR will not and vice versa) 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + 1RR this currently unbalanced, since as a tank you severly outclass infantry, HOWEVER to make a tank only as strong as infantry is unfair, a little pointless and altogther useless. So we need a way of balancing this equation, we need to create a circle, cue AV. So for balance we make standard infantry greater than AV, like so 1infantry + 1RR > 1infantry + 1SL then we do the same for AV vs tan. . . . oh, hold on, since AV should require teamwork that doesn't work out, since unless the tank is destroyed all the AV has effectively done is delay the enivetable, so instead you get 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + 1SL and 1infantry + 1tank > 1infantry + RR which compiled into a single statement becomes this. 1infantry + 1SL < 1infantry + tank > 1infantry + RR this can be further simplified to 1AV < 1tank > 1RR and now you have an unbalanced statement. You see the problem is a tank is only an extension of your unit, you are still only 1 person, it is in theoretical terms nothing more than a weapon for your unit. and as such it must be counterable by another weapon weilded by a single unit, to require more than 1 person to take you out, yet allow you to take out more than 1 person (to be more effecie t than) is entirely unbalanced. Think about everything else. How many people are compulsory to take down 1 brick tanked heavy? Just one with an RE How many people are compulsory to take dow a Proto Assault? Just one in the right place How many people are required to down a sniper? Just one who knows where he is I did the math and came up with 12 volleys the other day but someone told me that the shields would of absorbed more than I had thought due to regen even when being damaged. Redoing the math came up with 15 volleys; This is a slightly different circumstance. I only had proficiency 3 and no rapid reload. The tank only had 3 in repair proficiency and as you can see in the video after I unloaded a clip his armor would be fully healed before I could finish reloading. It was completely impervious to my swarms, just sitting there not moving at all. It may be more than 15. I didn't take into account the animation for actually firing the swarms. Edit: FFS![/quote] It actually takes somewhere around 18-21 volleys in total, assuming the tank does not move, and assuming a 2 second flight path, the tank simply moving backwards as each volley gets close actually requires upwards of another 6 volleys, still assuming your locking on the whole time, it also doesn't account for the hyper accuracy of turrets giving the tanker much easier time of killing you. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1241	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:55:00 - [203] - Quote Awry Barux wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: So yes, we should have a ton more hitpoints, do a ton more damage, and only be vulnerable to certain weapons, and require either teamwork or heavy specialization into those weapons to threaten me. But I should be fitting small turrets in order to combat you on the ground effectively. Just as one shouldn't expect my Eve battleship to fall to a single frigate. It should take at least 3, and very possibly 4-5 frigates to down my battleship. But my battleship has trouble hitting those frigates unless I fit frigate drones to it. Same for small turrets. Those are my infantry defense, while my main turret is for killing other vehicles. Actually, in EVE, you can totally slay a battleship in a single frigate. An Ishkur can tank and kill the light drones, then just tackle and whittle down even the most expensive battleship until it's dead. I'd like to see him try against my Geddon. I'll just cycle my reps through his damage. It'll be a stalemate, with both of us being unable to kill the other. Unless he brings in friends to neut me. In which case, my point is proven. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 211	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:56:00 - [204] - Quote If we're bring real life into this **** then a swarm launcher should be able to take out 6 tanks.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYiq8ardM-U and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Lynn Beck Wake N' Bake Inc Top Men. 1590	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:56:00 - [205] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 I am willing to test this tonight(or in a few hours) as a Prof 1 swarmer with Minmando 5. General John Ripper Like ALL the things!!!
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2709	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:58:00 - [206] - Quote Gelhad Thremyr wrote: 1) Lets all agree on one thing, mechanized infantry (tanks) should have high HP and should be able to create opportunities for infantry. With that being said, if the level design of maps doesnt give enough possibilities to get behind cover let say 40-60% of the time (because no one would wage war in open spaces like we did 400 years ago) then tanks would naturally be less of a threat to infantry. 2) We want risk/reward to be balanced (because tanks cost alot, but with the data in hand a single tank can do easily 20 kills, if they are proto, than they netted a kill ISK value of 2 mil ISK alone if each proto infantry suit cost 100k) 3) Tank player alone in his vehicle should not add the equivalent of 2-3 more player in fire power alone. It causes imbalance in firepower on one side. This is clearly been demonstrated in TankBush with Nyain san and Milkman. 4) I would not touch the power of weapons has is, I think number wise the tripple rep madrugar is a kind of a fit, we should keep the customization of builds in this game. 5) If main turrets of tanks would be slower, engaging infrantry would be harder, and would require drivers to have small turrets to handle 20 meters or less infantry, throwing stuff at it. All tanks would suffer the turret slowness and it would make tank engagement better IMO. 6)Conclusion, do not touch the firepower but the hability to quickly kill all around a tank with a single driver, in BF3, tank turret do not allow you to be 100% effective against infantry ! I would agree if it wasn't for the accuracy of the blaster. No recoil, no dispersion, no muzzle climb, no pre-fire charge time, nothing. Blasters either need a reduction in fire power, AT LEAST 30% or it needs to be given dispersion that is about the same as the HMG (scaled up obviously) This would allow blasters to be better at suppressing infantry yet give AV enough of an oppurtunity that it can at least lock on a swarm launcher without dying. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 561	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:04:00 - [207] - 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.
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 412	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:05:00 - [208] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: That sounds so ******* cool but I don't see anyway to implement that. I'm pretty sure the 60+ metric ton tank has a lock on the hatch. lol Mantling a tank shouldn't be that difficult to work into the game. Imagine the QQ... Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1693	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:07:00 - [209] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Gelhad Thremyr wrote: 1) Lets all agree on one thing, mechanized infantry (tanks) should have high HP and should be able to create opportunities for infantry. With that being said, if the level design of maps doesnt give enough possibilities to get behind cover let say 40-60% of the time (because no one would wage war in open spaces like we did 400 years ago) then tanks would naturally be less of a threat to infantry. 2) We want risk/reward to be balanced (because tanks cost alot, but with the data in hand a single tank can do easily 20 kills, if they are proto, than they netted a kill ISK value of 2 mil ISK alone if each proto infantry suit cost 100k) 3) Tank player alone in his vehicle should not add the equivalent of 2-3 more player in fire power alone. It causes imbalance in firepower on one side. This is clearly been demonstrated in TankBush with Nyain san and Milkman. 4) I would not touch the power of weapons has is, I think number wise the tripple rep madrugar is a kind of a fit, we should keep the customization of builds in this game. 5) If main turrets of tanks would be slower, engaging infrantry would be harder, and would require drivers to have small turrets to handle 20 meters or less infantry, throwing stuff at it. All tanks would suffer the turret slowness and it would make tank engagement better IMO. 6)Conclusion, do not touch the firepower but the hability to quickly kill all around a tank with a single driver, in BF3, tank turret do not allow you to be 100% effective against infantry ! I would agree if it wasn't for the accuracy of the blaster. No recoil, no dispersion, no muzzle climb, no pre-fire charge time, nothing. Blasters either need a reduction in fire power, AT LEAST 30% or it needs to be given dispersion that is about the same as the HMG (scaled up obviously) This would allow blasters to be better at suppressing infantry yet give AV enough of an oppurtunity that it can at least lock on a swarm launcher without dying. Blasters need a damage reduction of about 33%, but nothing else in terms of nerfs. That will not only reduce their AI effectiveness and make it more skill involved, but it will severely limit their AV effectiveness, something that must be done. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Gelhad Thremyr Quebec United Caps and Mercs 248	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:07:00 - [210] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Gelhad Thremyr wrote: 1) Lets all agree on one thing, mechanized infantry (tanks) should have high HP and should be able to create opportunities for infantry. With that being said, if the level design of maps doesnt give enough possibilities to get behind cover let say 40-60% of the time (because no one would wage war in open spaces like we did 400 years ago) then tanks would naturally be less of a threat to infantry. 2) We want risk/reward to be balanced (because tanks cost alot, but with the data in hand a single tank can do easily 20 kills, if they are proto, than they netted a kill ISK value of 2 mil ISK alone if each proto infantry suit cost 100k) 3) Tank player alone in his vehicle should not add the equivalent of 2-3 more player in fire power alone. It causes imbalance in firepower on one side. This is clearly been demonstrated in TankBush with Nyain san and Milkman. 4) I would not touch the power of weapons has is, I think number wise the tripple rep madrugar is a kind of a fit, we should keep the customization of builds in this game. 5) If main turrets of tanks would be slower, engaging infrantry would be harder, and would require drivers to have small turrets to handle 20 meters or less infantry, throwing stuff at it. All tanks would suffer the turret slowness and it would make tank engagement better IMO. 6)Conclusion, do not touch the firepower but the hability to quickly kill all around a tank with a single driver, in BF3, tank turret do not allow you to be 100% effective against infantry ! I would agree if it wasn't for the accuracy of the blaster. No recoil, no dispersion, no muzzle climb, no pre-fire charge time, nothing. Blasters either need a reduction in fire power, AT LEAST 30% or it needs to be given dispersion that is about the same as the HMG (scaled up obviously) This would allow blasters to be better at suppressing infantry yet give AV enough of an oppurtunity that it can at least lock on a swarm launcher without dying. Indeed, Tanks need to be seen as mobile cover also, now they are just dumb fast killing machine. I am not sure about the dispersion, looks kinda silly to have a tank not being able to accurately shoot to another tank because of dispersion, it only creates another problem. Still will hold on my idea about the turret speed as it does'nt create further imbalance, just modify the current game play of tanks. Also, Rail turrets are already a little bit slow, so why not make that the default. Like somebody pointed out, if the blaster is only for infantry suppression, than such a tank should be at a bigger risk against other tanks, and right now a tripple rep armor tank can evade rail tank easily enough so its turret speed will eventually gain advantage against the rail unless the combat is at a medium to long range, wich benefits the rail tank.

Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3531	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:08:00 - [211] - Quote 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
Awry Barux Ametat Security Amarr Empire 2403	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:09:00 - [212] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Awry Barux wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: So yes, we should have a ton more hitpoints, do a ton more damage, and only be vulnerable to certain weapons, and require either teamwork or heavy specialization into those weapons to threaten me. But I should be fitting small turrets in order to combat you on the ground effectively. Just as one shouldn't expect my Eve battleship to fall to a single frigate. It should take at least 3, and very possibly 4-5 frigates to down my battleship. But my battleship has trouble hitting those frigates unless I fit frigate drones to it. Same for small turrets. Those are my infantry defense, while my main turret is for killing other vehicles. Actually, in EVE, you can totally slay a battleship in a single frigate. An Ishkur can tank and kill the light drones, then just tackle and whittle down even the most expensive battleship until it's dead. I'd like to see him try against my Geddon. I'll just cycle my reps through his damage. It'll be a stalemate, with both of us being unable to kill the other. Unless he brings in friends to neut me. In which case, my point is proven. Okay, it doesn't apply to every battleship and every battleship fit. However, it's definitely possible. A few examples: http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=19931710 http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=20367042 Nerdier than thou
Awry Barux Ametat Security Amarr Empire 2403	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:10:00 - [213] - 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 I hear this OHK argument trotted out all the time by tankers on the forums. I have never once seen it happen in game. Vids or it didn't happen. Nerdier than thou
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3531	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:15:00 - [214] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: And tanks can kill lots of infantry, by themselves. Your missing the point, you are saying 1 AV should only be capable of suppressing tanks. So we turned it on its head, would you be happy if, it took at least 2 tanks just kill someone, would that be fair? If you answered yes, I suggest you ask for blasters to be nerfed significantly. If you answered no, then why do you think it is fair to put this restriction on Anti-Vehicle weaponry? In wider sense it boils down to, why you as a single person in your tank should require multiple people to take down? Please bear in mind when answering the question. 1) SP is not accountable since AV must also sacrifice a lot of skill points Which by you count their AI fit, equipment training core upgrades, dropsuit upgrades is around about the same. 2)ISK is not a factor due to the fact a mlt tank now costs less than a Proto fit, therein mlt tanks should be incapable of killing proto dropsuits, (if ISK were a factor) 3) Real-Life is not a factor, first and foremost this is a game to be enjoyed by everyone, this meams guns don't kill in 1 shot at 300m and tanks don't become so powerful. However if you do wish to use real-life I would like to point you toward the Artybox-Globalhawk combo, which autonomously dispatches of enemy tanks and APC's without any human input. 4)Teamwork is not a factor, we play in fixed count matches, teamwork is optional, not compulsory. 1 AV does have the power to kill a tank, it mostly depends on the user if they are skilled enough to do it 2 tanks to kill a meatbag? are we fighting the power rangers in a giant mechanical suit? sorry that takes 5ppl to operate 1. SP will cost more for vehicle pilots if we ever get pilot/proto vehicles 2. Not a factor, yet AV is crying about the price of proto AV to kill a tank where as pre 1.7 it used to be so what if my AV costs 20k it should be able to kill your 3mil vehicle 3. If its not a factor then stop going on about javilins and that it takes a 4man crew to operate a tank 4. If teamwork is optional then again stop asking for tanks to be operated by 2 ppl and not allowing a pilot to go solo when they want since AV can solo
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1672	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:19:00 - [215] - Quote Awry Barux wrote: 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 I hear this OHK argument trotted out all the time by tankers on the forums. I have never once seen it happen in game. Vids or it didn't happen. there are plenty of tankers who have died to ohk's from my breech forge I also don't have problems busting tanks with my ishy . I have lost tanks to AV as well as other tanks but mostly loose tanks to other tanks. Now I do run missiles or rails most of the time and I feel they are pretty balanced as they take skill to take down infantry but I will agree that blasters are slightly unbalanced simply because they are too good at both AV and Ai . I would say the solution would be to either nerf blasters ability to shred infantry or nerf their ability to combat vehicles one or the other and that would balance them out . Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3531	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:19:00 - [216] - Quote Awry Barux wrote: 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 I hear this OHK argument trotted out all the time by tankers on the forums. I have never once seen it happen in game. Vids or it didn't happen. Ask someone who can record then and go do it
Gelhad Thremyr Quebec United Caps and Mercs 248	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:20:00 - [217] - Quote 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...
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 563	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:21:00 - [218] - 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.
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 212	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:30:00 - [219] - Quote I think the sweet spot does like 210% damage for a whopping 5700. Could one shot this maddy in question; but hitting a tanks sweet spot is pretty uncommon depends really how lucky you are. Not to make the shot but for the tank to ass face you and stay still long enough. It might be 180% tho.. which is about 4900 which would not 1 shot any maddy. Edit: forgot the +10% to armor. It could 1 shot this maddy but not any maddy with an armor plate. Not sure tho. I've never really ran heavy. I have an alt but I only play on him ever blue moon or so.. If someone could confirm the numbers. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1672	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:38:00 - [220] - Quote The sweet spot grants a 204% efficiency on my forge gun....but not for my particle cannon. Proud Gunlogi pilot and forge gunner since August 2012. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.

Auris Lionesse Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 780	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:40:00 - [221] - Quote I'd like to add onto my previous post. If we go eve route and you say it should take multiple people to kill a tank we need to significantly increase cost and sp. Frigates are light suits Cruisers are medium suits Battleships are heavy suits So tanks are titans. They should cost several million isk per hull alone, and exponentially more sp. Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Heroes in a half Gank! *TURTLE POWER!!!*
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 212	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:46:00 - [222] - Quote Wiyrkomi Breach with proficiency 5 and 3 complex damage mods to the sweet spot does 5552. It would one shot the tank in question but like I said you would have to be pretty ******* lucky. You would have to be on a tower(not being sniped) and the tank would have to face away from you and sit there for a few seconds. Doable but very circumstantial. If I wanted to play a game of luck I'd go down to the seniors home and get in on an enthralling game of bingo.. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 564	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:59:00 - [223] - 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.
MockHolliday Ancient Exiles. Dirt Nap Squad. 6	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:03:00 - [224] - Quote 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? I encourage you to witness a competitive PC match. Tanks get checked very quickly by other tanks. Then dedicated purposed AV hit, and hit hard. A forge or proto swarm on a tower can work wonders in area of denial. I may get stoned for this but in a great PC match tanks are balanced. But this is with the highest of SP players and very highly skilled and strategic tankers/vehicle users. I know public matches are different.
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7505	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:04:00 - [225] - Quote Is that you Doc? Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 213	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:08:00 - [226] - Quote MockHolliday 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? I encourage you to witness a competitive PC match. Tanks get checked very quickly by other tanks. Then dedicated purposed AV hit, and hit hard. A forge or proto swarm on a tower can work wonders in area of denial. I may get stoned for this but in a great PC match tanks are balanced. But this is with the highest of SP players and very highly skilled and strategic tankers/vehicle users. I know public matches are different. We haven't used any forgers in any of the pc's I've been a part of in the last month. In the pc's I'm in the tanks check the tanks. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Scheherazade VII 436	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:13:00 - [227] - Quote LittleCuteBunny wrote: 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. BRILLIANT TANKER LOGIC No teamwork for me but teamwork for thee I think that's Spk4rs ****** thing he says now I'm turning it on it's head. You can't kill me solo but I can kill you solo, that's how it should be.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2713	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:39:00 - [228] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: And tanks can kill lots of infantry, by themselves. Your missing the point, you are saying 1 AV should only be capable of suppressing tanks. So we turned it on its head, would you be happy if, it took at least 2 tanks just kill someone, would that be fair? If you answered yes, I suggest you ask for blasters to be nerfed significantly. If you answered no, then why do you think it is fair to put this restriction on Anti-Vehicle weaponry? In wider sense it boils down to, why you as a single person in your tank should require multiple people to take down? Please bear in mind when answering the question. 1) SP is not accountable since AV must also sacrifice a lot of skill points Which by you count their AI fit, equipment training core upgrades, dropsuit upgrades is around about the same. 2)ISK is not a factor due to the fact a mlt tank now costs less than a Proto fit, therein mlt tanks should be incapable of killing proto dropsuits, (if ISK were a factor) 3) Real-Life is not a factor, first and foremost this is a game to be enjoyed by everyone, this meams guns don't kill in 1 shot at 300m and tanks don't become so powerful. However if you do wish to use real-life I would like to point you toward the Artybox-Globalhawk combo, which autonomously dispatches of enemy tanks and APC's without any human input. 4)Teamwork is not a factor, we play in fixed count matches, teamwork is optional, not compulsory. 1 AV does have the power to kill a tank, it mostly depends on the user if they are skilled enough to do it How many AVers do you know can get AT LEAST 15 straigjt volleys at a tank? 2 tanks to kill a meatbag? are we fighting the power rangers in a giant mechanical suit? sorry that takes 5ppl to operate Yet it should apparently take to people firing enough missiles to sink an aircraft carrier to destroy a tincan, hypocritical what? 1. SP will cost more for vehicle pilots if we ever get pilot/proto vehicles No you won't get proto, and pilot suits aren't a requirement. 2. Not a factor, yet AV is crying about the price of proto AV to kill a tank where as pre 1.7 it used to be so what if my AV costs 20k it should be able to kill your 3mil vehicle No we are annoyed about the ISK imbalance, I pay upwards of 40,000 for an AV fit, I can kill 1 tank, if im lucky, you pay 60,000 and, kill infantry, tanks amd AV. Also we wouldn't really bothered if an AV cost so much, if it did ITS BLOODY JOB 3. If its not a factor then stop going on about javilins and that it takes a 4man crew to operate a tank Tell Spkr to stop showing vulgar videos of tanks blowing up in infantry at 5m range, capiece. 4. If teamwork is optional then again stop asking for tanks to be operated by 2 ppl and not allowing a pilot to go solo when they want since AV can solo I've always been against that idea, though if it were to happen I would have no problem witn a 2man tank taking at least 2 AVers So Ill ask again why should you, 1 man, a single solitary player require multiple players to actually counter with any form of effeciency? As for your statememt of one shotting tanks, video or it didn't happen, also stationary tanks don't count. 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.. 2713	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:50:00 - [229] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Gelhad Thremyr wrote: 1) Lets all agree on one thing, mechanized infantry (tanks) should have high HP and should be able to create opportunities for infantry. With that being said, if the level design of maps doesnt give enough possibilities to get behind cover let say 40-60% of the time (because no one would wage war in open spaces like we did 400 years ago) then tanks would naturally be less of a threat to infantry. 2) We want risk/reward to be balanced (because tanks cost alot, but with the data in hand a single tank can do easily 20 kills, if they are proto, than they netted a kill ISK value of 2 mil ISK alone if each proto infantry suit cost 100k) 3) Tank player alone in his vehicle should not add the equivalent of 2-3 more player in fire power alone. It causes imbalance in firepower on one side. This is clearly been demonstrated in TankBush with Nyain san and Milkman. 4) I would not touch the power of weapons has is, I think number wise the tripple rep madrugar is a kind of a fit, we should keep the customization of builds in this game. 5) If main turrets of tanks would be slower, engaging infrantry would be harder, and would require drivers to have small turrets to handle 20 meters or less infantry, throwing stuff at it. All tanks would suffer the turret slowness and it would make tank engagement better IMO. 6)Conclusion, do not touch the firepower but the hability to quickly kill all around a tank with a single driver, in BF3, tank turret do not allow you to be 100% effective against infantry ! I would agree if it wasn't for the accuracy of the blaster. No recoil, no dispersion, no muzzle climb, no pre-fire charge time, nothing. Blasters either need a reduction in fire power, AT LEAST 30% or it needs to be given dispersion that is about the same as the HMG (scaled up obviously) This would allow blasters to be better at suppressing infantry yet give AV enough of an oppurtunity that it can at least lock on a swarm launcher without dying. Blasters need a damage reduction of about 33%, but nothing else in terms of nerfs. That will not only reduce their AI effectiveness and make it more skill involved, but it will severely limit their AV effectiveness, something that must be done. Well ACTUALLY tankers have asked that Blasters maintain or even improve their effeciency against other, they don't think rails should be quite so powerful at short range by comparison. So to fix this you give dispersion such that only 40-50% of shots hit an infantry unit square in their sights, yet will still get 100% accuracy on a tank at 40m-80m but at decent range blasters become less of disection tool for infantry and more for suppression. Let's everyone get what they want, I would even suggest boosting damagemper shot a little to compensate. 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.. 2713	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:52:00 - [230] - Quote Scheherazade VII wrote: LittleCuteBunny wrote: 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. BRILLIANT TANKER LOGIC No teamwork for me but teamwork for thee I think that's Spk4rs ****** thing he says now I'm turning it on it's head. You can't kill me solo but I can kill you solo, that's how it should be. Tanker hypocrisy at its best eh? Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.

Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 3016	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:57:00 - [231] - Quote 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? As the author of both a Swarm Launcher guide and a Tanking guide, I have looked at the problem from both sides. I still think that the Swarm Launcher needs a slight damage buff. I have been advocating a 12% buff to range and damage, resulting in 250 damage per missile and a range of 200m. The trick is not to buff them too much. We donGÇÖt want a Proto Swarm Launcher to solo a tank unless the tank is stuck, or the driver is extremely inattentive. But you also want a team of 3 Swarm Launchers to be a threat to any tank, even the triple rep Maddy. In Tank vs Tank the TTK is too short because when the Hardeners were nerfed, the Damage Mods were not. Vehicle Damage Mods need a corresponding nerf. In a Rail tank a 5 shot fight is fun and dynamic. A two shot fight is not fun, and is extremely frustrating to the victim because they have no time to react. One or two shotting should be left to Missile tanks which have to reload between volleys as a balance for their gank potential. Forge Guns are fine. As a tanker I really noticed the difference when the Forge Gun bugs were fixed, so Tankers have to consider them to be a serious threat now. A single player can solo a tank with Remote Explosives combined with AV Grenades, but this is balanced because they have to get very close to do it. (Balanced by range.) Jehad Jeeps make some tankers rage and other tankers laugh, but the driver of the LAV has to sacrifice a clone to do it, and the LAV can be destroyed or avoided by the tank, so I think it is balanced. Please print this out and tape it to the water cooler in the lunch room. Sticking it to the wall just above the urinal would be acceptable as well. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
Avinash Decker Seykal Expeditionary Group Minmatar Republic 113	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:00:00 - [232] - Quote 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? Most games that have ways of destroying vehicles either has classes or everyone has a way to destroy vehicles. BF,Ps2, Section 8, Halo, Starhawk, and UT are some of the games that does one or the other ,or a combination of. In Bf there are 4 classes and all classes have a way to assist in destroying vehicles, but the engineer class is dedicated in destroying vehicles and they are one of the most popular classes . I think one of the main reasons is that it doesn't sacrifice it's AI effectiveness to destroy vehicles and if you are skilled you can destroy a vehicle by yourself. The issue in Dust is that you lose your AI effectiveness if you go AV so most players just take the path of least resistance and avoid vehicles . On top of that it takes some time to invest in AV , but why spend that time to invest a build that only fights vehicles when I can use that time to invest in a build that fights infantry , is what I think goes in some peoples minds. Some solutions I see are separating gunners and pilots , nerfing aspects of tanks(mods, weapons, speed,etc) while keeping the price , slightly buffing AV and giving the ability for all suits to equip two primary weapon by having the second primary weapon using 2x the pg/cpu, and/or making some AV as a equipment slot. Each comes with there own pros and cons.
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 217	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:01:00 - [233] - Quote Fox Gaden 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? As the author of both a Swarm Launcher guide and a Tanking guide, I have looked at the problem from both sides. I still think that the Swarm Launcher needs a slight damage buff. I have been advocating a 12% buff to range and damage, resulting in 250 damage per missile and a range of 200m. The trick is not to buff them too much. We donGÇÖt want a Proto Swarm Launcher to solo a tank unless the tank is stuck, or the driver is extremely inattentive. But you also want a team of 3 Swarm Launchers to be a threat to any tank, even the triple rep Maddy. In Tank vs Tank the TTK is too short because when the Hardeners were nerfed, the Damage Mods were not. Vehicle Damage Mods need a corresponding nerf. In a Rail tank a 5 shot fight is fun and dynamic. A two shot fight is not fun, and is extremely frustrating to the victim because they have no time to react. One or two shotting should be left to Missile tanks which have to reload between volleys as a balance for their gank potential. Forge Guns are fine. As a tanker I really noticed the difference when the Forge Gun bugs were fixed, so Tankers have to consider them to be a serious threat now. A single player can solo a tank with Remote Explosives combined with AV Grenades, but this is balanced because they have to get very close to do it. (Balanced by range.) Jehad Jeeps make some tankers rage and other tankers laugh, but the driver of the LAV has to sacrifice a clone to do it, and the LAV can be destroyed or avoided by the tank, so I think it is balanced. Please print this out and tape it to the water cooler in the lunch room. Sticking it to the wall just above the urinal would be acceptable as well. I've started putting Re's on the side of my squad mates tank. He pulls up beside them and BOOM. No reason to kill myself. Probably should of kept this little trick to myself <.< >.> and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
A'Real Fury D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 743	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:25:00 - [234] - Quote The quickest solution is to remove ADV and Proto AV and ADV and Proto Modules from Vehicles. Then balance AV against vehicles. Finally look at PG and CPU to ensure when you do re-introduce ADV and Proto Modules that they do not un-balance things again i.e. it should be the rare STD vehicle that can fit multiple prototype modules and weapons. Once you have a reasonable balance you could even add vehicle specialisations e.g. light tanks, regular tanks and even heavy tanks etc. And to the guy who said give up your sidearm for AV because if a tanker has to give up something then AV should give up the ability to stand against other infantry I say "What?". That is like saying that if tankers want to kill infantry then they should not be able to damage other tanks. Also please remove tanks from Ambush and bring back the Chromosone maps for this game mode. Smaller maps but with each team spawning on different sides would help with this mode so long as vehicles are removed. You do not have to be crazy to play here but we are willing to train you.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 565	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:29:00 - [235] - 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.
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 414	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:30:00 - [236] - Quote A'Real Fury wrote: Once you have a reasonable balance you could even add vehicle specialisations e.g. light tanks, regular tanks and even heavy tanks etc. This can't happen until every racial variant of LAV, MAV, HAV, and DS are introduced. In addition to light and heavy aircraft, imho. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Raedon Vo-Graza Armored Dragon Corp 8	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:32:00 - [237] - Quote LittleCuteBunny wrote: Maddies are supposed to be stand and deliver and 1 AV player shouldn't solo a tank. Damage over time does a better job against active tanks and burst damage is better against passive tanks. not to mention this is meant as a team game. i laugh at the idiot that trys to take down my DS as a lone swarmer. play the team, coordinate with the team and things drop a lot faster. if you think one person should be able to do everything by himself then this might not be the game for you.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 565	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:34:00 - [238] - 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.
TechMechMeds SWAMPERIUM 3165	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:46:00 - [239] - Quote Aikuchi Tomaru wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Not a dev, just a player. But I see your posts under dev posts! So if you're marked as a dev, does that mean you only have something to do with Eve or Valkyrie as a dev, but not with Dust? Please give us some insight into this mystery! His job is a persona but he is a real human being as a player lol. If you know what a telefrag match is, then I love you. The tritanium I sell is more relevant than dust has ever been.
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 414	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:47:00 - [240] - Quote Raedon Vo-Graza wrote: i laugh at the idiot that trys to take down my DS as a lone swarmer. And I laugh at the DS that underestimates me and pays for it by losing his DS. More than once a DS will wait for me to fire my three swarms, and then when I start my reload they come in for a strafing pass... But DAT RELOAD...before they know it there are 2-3 more swarms in the air after them, and then they're flying for their life. Literally. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?

Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Vanguard of the Phoenix 571	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:51:00 - [241] - Quote Auris Lionesse wrote: I'd like to add onto my previous post. If we go eve route and you say it should take multiple people to kill a tank we need to significantly increase cost and sp. Frigates are light suits Cruisers are medium suits Battleships are heavy suits So tanks are titans. They should cost several million isk per hull alone, and exponentially more sp. Also, much larger ships have nearly impossible times hitting smaller ships. Battleships and above have a very hard time hitting frigates. "We are not ever going to respec weaponry and dropsuit command because the majority of our Aurum gear falls within those
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 565	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:53:00 - [242] - 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.
Alex-P-Keaton Kramer Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 153	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:54:00 - [243] - Quote 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? what the **** do you mean you dont see a lot of tank v tank battles? tanks are the only way to take out tanks, i see teams constantly calling in mlt railgun tanks and going back and forth killing each others tanks, its dumb i like to go to craigslist and look at the personal ad's transexuals put up
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 565	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:59:00 - [244] - 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.
Raedon Vo-Graza Armored Dragon Corp 8	Posted - 2014.04.30 20:01:00 - [245] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: Raedon Vo-Graza wrote: i laugh at the idiot that trys to take down my DS as a lone swarmer. And I laugh at the DS that underestimates me and pays for it by losing his DS. More than once a DS will wait for me to fire my three swarms, and then when I start my reload they come in for a strafing pass... But DAT RELOAD...before they know it there are 2-3 more swarms in the air after them, and then they're flying for their life. Literally. if those 2-3 swarms are coming from other individuals as well then i can understand that. but if it's only one person then my reps pretty much remove any damage given from the last set of volleys the last time i lost my DS was from a combined force from 2 swarmers 2 forge gunners and a mass driver. as i don't normally use turrets in my DS's it frees up a lot of resources for defensive purposes. also i don't sit still, a DS best defense is it's mobility. so when the swarms do hit only the splash damage is applied.
MockHolliday Ancient Exiles. Dirt Nap Squad. 6	Posted - 2014.04.30 20:37:00 - [246] - Quote Atiim wrote: Is that you Doc? yea its me good sir. I really enjoy a good tank fight...and are common in PCs today.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3754	Posted - 2014.04.30 20:50:00 - [247] - Quote I'll say it again, the balance is fine. The outside is SUPPOSED to be dominated by vehicles. The only problem is player stupidity and a refusal to put up with their own vehicles. You can't fix stupid, you can only treat the symptoms. End matches faster, don't wreck the game's balance because of stupid entitled assault players who want to be able to do everything with equal efficiency.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 109	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:21:00 - [248] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: I'll say it again, the balance is fine. The outside is SUPPOSED to be dominated by vehicles. The only problem is player stupidity and a refusal to put up with their own vehicles. You can't fix stupid, you can only treat the symptoms. End matches faster, don't wreck the game's balance because of stupid entitled assault players who want to be able to do everything with equal efficiency. Wow. Just... wow....
Thorin Avarice NECROM0NGERS Caps and Mercs 12	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:23:00 - [249] - Quote Do I think a triple rep tank is OP no they can be killed with team work. But to me it is a bait fit its hard to kill and you will get a few players with no SP into swarms to chase and allow the other time to get a chance to take points and what not.
CLONE117 True Pros Forever 774	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:25:00 - [250] - Quote the rep tank..built to withstand stupid idiots with swarm launchers. this is pretty spot on. also its even dumber to completely disregard av and say its not a threat to tanks. thats why ppl lose their vehicle in the first place. i would just love to have more ppl ignore me thinking im not an actual threat in game. because that means ill just have an easier time killing them as they would be completely caught of guard shitting their pants not knowing how to respond the second i start dishing out the damage... the rep build is fairly effective in the right hands though. but hardener cycling or stacked hardeners is more of a problem than anything else. with the rep tank. i take in that full damage. only to rep it all up the moment they have to stop firing and reload. or let their blaster turret cool down. any sort of big strike including a well placed orbital can kill this tank really fast. with stack hardeners however.i could quite possible survive a direct orbital strike.may be less likely now though with that nerf to hardeners. but still holds true in them shrugging off just about everything. passive tanking like the rep tank. has been designed to withstand the multiple attacks over time. in other words. bug bites wont work on this type of fit. which means ull have to use alpha strikes to take it down which works really well against the rep tank fit. or any sort of weapon that has a higher dps than the vehicles rep rate. which can be done quite easily. active tanking is what ccp specifically wanted to mess with for their waves of opportunity idea. vehicle active modules to be more specific. and the ability to cycle them goes against the idea and so on.. im pretty sure this is all old info that every1 should have known about by now though. in other words i believe bug bite are supposed to kill those with hardeners. mlt vets are eternal. they shall be the bane to proto scrubs everywhere...

Will Driver Krullefor Organization Minmatar Republic 38	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:26:00 - [251] - Quote 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. And I'm firmly against this position. A proto swarmer with 4/5 proficiency should be able to solo any Tank. Tanks should not be immune from a player that's specifically designed to fight tanks. The "teamwork" argument is so tiresome I can barely stand it. Having a tank soak up the attention of 3-4 or more ineffectual A/Vers completely unbalances the game. If only tanks can battle tanks, then that's TANK 514 and not something I'm interested in at all. Maybe we should have an infantry only game. I bet the vast majority would opt into it, leaving only tanker on tanker matches for you. I wonder how much you'll enjoy that, without any foot soldiers to slaughter? GÇ£Creativity is knowing how to hide your sourcesGÇ¥ GÇò Albert Einstein
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 673	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:32:00 - [252] - Quote Kaminoikari wrote: I wonder if anyone realizes that swarms aren't meant to solo a tank... I wonder if anyone realizes that Madrugars are Gallente vehicles, which translates to them being able to armor rep efficiently. I wonder if anyone realizes that a triple rep Madrugar actually takes teamwork to take down. I wonder if anyone realizes that any buffer to AV will give DS/ADS pilots an even bigger shaft. I wonder when we'll get our God damned Amarr tanks and DS/ADS so we can armor tank properly. I wonder... People keep spewing the same garbage over and over again about "O man, I'm so hurtbutt about that one-seater tank being able to take out my guy and others when my Light AV Swarm Launcher can't even dent him! It should take TWO(2) people in a tank to operate it!" I don't even need to tank to tell you how much of a dumbass excuse that is. This is a universe where a single pilot commands a Titan. I'm pretty damn sure a single tank driver should be operate and fire his tank, seeing as how we memory now. Any form of AV should require multiple (more than one (which means at least 2 (two))) people to take down any vehicle that isn't a LAV. This is not modern day where it takes 3-4 people to man a single tank. This is not reality. That's like saying my Dropship should take two people to fly because attack helicopters have 2 people; one to fly/shoot missiles and one to man the belly gun. If anything, the rest of the racial tanks need to be brought in to make it more of a change-up where you'll get more tank v. tank battles. My dropship is a medium vehicle. An RDV is a medium vehicle. Why does my dropship have 1/3 the total HP of an RDV? Why are tanks easier to pop than an RDV? Nobody has thought around those lines. An RDV has more eHP than any tank and it's a medium vehicle. That means tanks should have around ~8,000 eHP or more since it's a heavy vehicle. Meaning another rework... disregard this last segment because It's more of an idea than anything. Well said . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 673	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:34:00 - [253] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: the rep tank..built to withstand stupid idiots with swarm launchers. this is pretty spot on. also its even dumber to completely disregard av and say its not a threat to tanks. thats why ppl lose their vehicle in the first place. i would just love to have more ppl ignore me thinking im not an actual threat in game. because that means ill just have an easier time killing them as they would be completely caught of guard shitting their pants not knowing how to respond the second i start dishing out the damage... the rep build is fairly effective in the right hands though. but hardener cycling or stacked hardeners is more of a problem than anything else. with the rep tank. i take in that full damage. only to rep it all up the moment they have to stop firing and reload. or let their blaster turret cool down. any sort of big strike including a well placed orbital can kill this tank really fast. with stack hardeners however.i could quite possible survive a direct orbital strike.may be less likely now though with that nerf to hardeners. but still holds true in them shrugging off just about everything. passive tanking like the rep tank. has been designed to withstand the multiple attacks over time. in other words. bug bites wont work on this type of fit. which means ull have to use alpha strikes to take it down which works really well against the rep tank fit. or any sort of weapon that has a higher dps than the vehicles rep rate. which can be done quite easily. Thank you . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Eko Sol Strange Playings 239	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:43:00 - [254] - Quote 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? Personally, I think AV is relatively balanced and shouldn't be changed. I'd much rather see all of the current bugs fixed. That being said I think a couple of small things can balance AV vs V: 1) 20% to 25% reduction to heavy armor rep 2) A 3 second delay in exiting a vehicle and a 1 second delay in entering a vehicle 3) Move AV nades back to a clip size of 3. TBH, removing a nade for AV was the dumbest possible idea of 1.8 I can think of. 4) This one is based on a few other peoples input in game. Remove all damage mods for all tanks. Join the "Keep It Strange" channel We're recruiting, Contests and weekly ISK Giveaways for top dogs Play Strange
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 673	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:46:00 - [255] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: 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. Why the need to one shot everything ..??.. people stacking triple damage mods on their infantry suits or logi suits and trying to one shot , one button , insta-kill everything and that leads to this spoiled behavior which leads to QQing in the forum which leads to imbalance in the in-game material that effects the whole community but the community doesn't realize it because they are too busy exaggerating about what they are trying to have changed and hurt those who they are biased against . You can two to three shot a tank with a forge gun , just like you can two .. to three swipe / stab a heavy , sentinel even .. with a NK . What's the issue ??? I feel like not even commenting in the forums anymore because of such actions , it ruin's it for those in the community who are actually trying to get the " game " fixed and not one role that plays a dominate role . If your tying to do something positive , then why can't you just state the facts instead of exaggerating about topics and matters that are game related . It makes their intentions seems dishonest because they have to stoop to dishonest tactic's and the community will do nothing but be in the agreement for the most part because they feel like they are in the right because of the nature that this game or rather the community has adopted and it's tiresome to an extent having to go threw this song and dance for what it seems like eternity but I know it hasn't been that long because I haven't been playing that long . This is garbage and misinformation always does more harm than good . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2714	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:49:00 - [256] - Quote So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
iliel Capital Acquisitions LLC Dirt Nap Squad. 36	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:51:00 - [257] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: That sounds so ******* cool but I don't see anyway to implement that. I'm pretty sure the 60+ metric ton tank has a lock on the hatch. lol Well, then, we'll just have to shoot the lock off first.
Fleen Costell'o Vacuum Cleaner. LLC Steel Balls Alliance 375	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:55:00 - [258] - Quote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnfSwhzOvCo and no problems with HAV and LAV, one problem it is Assault Drop Ship's, Swarm luncher effectivity 55% to ADS armorr and shilds WTF CCP?
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3754	Posted - 2014.04.30 22:05:00 - [259] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 109	Posted - 2014.04.30 22:15:00 - [260] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank. Dude, seriously, go eat your paste and let the grown-ups talk.

Scheneighnay McBob T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan 4981	Posted - 2014.04.30 22:54:00 - [261] - Quote 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? As you somewhat said yourself- map balance. Some maps don't allow infantry to stay away from vehicles. Just keep the fighting areas relatively separate, but with advantages to having control of the "vehicle" area, primarily being more ways to attack from. The gallente research and communications outposts are good examples of where this is done well. /timetravel Best thread of all time
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 772	Posted - 2014.04.30 22:56:00 - [262] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I can't hit a damn thing using moving blasters :( That would be the wonky physics engine that is attatched to all vehicle weaponry. The bullets/missiles/rails do not actually originate Inside the guns. If you were to put a short stretchy rope, and attatch that to the barrel of the gun, then assume the rope has extremely nonsensical reactions to inertia, then you have an idea of how bullets from small weaponry currently work. If I'm moving forward, and hit a small bump when I fire, the bullets originate at a point above the gun, which the gun never passed through, likewise, if driving forward, the bullets originate from the behind vector, instead of inside the turret. Now add in the fact that the terrain has all kinds of wobbles, and the vertical motion on top of the forward backward motions, and you have to aim in highly anticipative patterns just to hit a target. You can't actually aim at the point the target is expected to be or where the target is currently at, because the bullets will not travel there. The bullets will travel at a parallel to the angle sighted, but from an extreme inertia vector against the motion of travel. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Rusty Shallows Caldari State 1717	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:19:00 - [263] - Quote 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 almost soloed a tripled ripped Maddy once. It was just outside the bridge farming blues during a domination match. Using the stairway in a building for cover I dropped an OB on it. Two iFG shots almost killed him but for some reason the third didn't connect. He was back to farming blues less than a minute later. If there was one other person using any AV other than Grenades then the HAV would died. Forums > Game: So here is a cookie and a Like. Please keep posting. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! >>> GòÜ(GÇóGîéGÇó)Gò¥ >>>
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3754	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:19:00 - [264] - Quote Mojo XXXIII wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank. Dude, seriously, go eat your paste and let the grown-ups talk. I made a number of valid, intellectual points about why infantry are not in a deserved position to do anything about tanks on the outside portions of maps. You have no such points, and instead acted angrily when they were brought up and you had no valid response. Out of that anger produced the quote you see above, which ironically is childish in and of itself. I suppose now that I've turned your own insult against you, it's a good time to point out that your corporation has never accomplished anything as a whole and you as an individual have basically zero experience on the competitive side of this game from which you can claim your own opinion holds any validity. I agree, let's let the grown ups talk. Failing that, let's let the people who know what they are actually speaking of. This, last I checked, did not include you.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2719	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:20:00 - [265] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank. Interesting, That guy usually plays in a tank I should probably start with my AV fit isn't foresight? The other team has a tank, I will need to deploy nearby, preferably behind said tank, with my AV fit probably find some cover in case the engagment goes pear shaped for one of numerous reasons. Isn't planning? 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? Above the turrets angle of attack (high ground) or behind a tank (flanking) isn't a geographical advantage? So umm what was that? Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3754	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:22:00 - [266] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank. Interesting, That guy usually plays in a tank I should probably start with my AV fit isn't foresight? The other team has a tank, I will need to deploy nearby, preferably behind said tank, with my AV fit probably find some cover in case the engagment goes pear shaped for one of numerous reasons. Isn't planning? 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? Above the turrets angle of attack (high ground) or behind a tank (flanking) isn't a geographical advantage? So umm what was that? No, 40k is not an investment. I switch to 78k suits when im ready to STOP losing money. Tanks cost half a million isk each if they are worth a damn, and there isn't a single form of AV out there that requires 25 million SP by itself.
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 611	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:26:00 - [267] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Dude (Monkey MAC) saw you in a game today, you were against me. (As a Gunship) WE DESTROYED A TRIPLE REP MADRUGAR !!!!!!!! We were like 10 agiant him and an another tnak but we destroyed it !!!!! I was personnally with Plasma Cannon and Proto Swarm (Commando) shooting contiunally on him with extra fast reload and unlimited ammo. (near to ammo installation) There was 2 Forge Gun (Breach). 2 blue dot Swarms. A Gunlogi with rail gun. 2 Scout with Remotes. And an Orbital Strike. And i finally got him with a critical hit from my Plasma Cannon. +150 But well....we sync 10 players and Orbital to destroy a tank....So we lose the objective, got crushed by infantry and your dropship and 1 min later his tank was back while it took us 10 min to destroy it..... Seems TOTALLY legit. 1 Tank Vs 10 ******* player, seems logic. It made us lose the game while we dominated you and your team the whole game.....
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 611	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:28:00 - [268] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank. Interesting, That guy usually plays in a tank I should probably start with my AV fit isn't foresight? The other team has a tank, I will need to deploy nearby, preferably behind said tank, with my AV fit probably find some cover in case the engagment goes pear shaped for one of numerous reasons. Isn't planning? 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? Above the turrets angle of attack (high ground) or behind a tank (flanking) isn't a geographical advantage? So umm what was that? No, 40k is not an investment. I switch to 78k suits when im ready to STOP losing money. Tanks cost half a million isk each if they are worth a damn, and there isn't a single form of AV out there that requires 25 million SP by itself. 40k suits will NEVER destroy a Tank alon, it needs at least a full proto squad and some OB or an another Tank. A tank will ALWAYS kill at least 20 ennemy before dying, making it destroy way more iSK than it cost. And a tank is CHEAP. Under Proto level AV can't do anything, so it cost the hell to buy some AV.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3754	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:30:00 - [269] - Quote Also let me add something else Monkey, AV can be produced anytime anywhere with no foresight. You get raped by a tank, you switch to AV instantly upon death or if you're at a supply depot. The same convenience is not true for tanks. If your team is redlined by an opposing group of tanks it is incredibly difficult to call new tanks in without them being shot down. If they ARE called in, they will be so far into the back of the redline they are are completely barricaded into a losing fight. Saying "oh herp derp there's a tank ima switch to forge" is not foresight. It's not planning. And even if you did plan for it in advance that isn't going to be any less than just changing to it after you recognize the threat.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3754	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:32:00 - [270] - Quote Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank. Interesting, That guy usually plays in a tank I should probably start with my AV fit isn't foresight? The other team has a tank, I will need to deploy nearby, preferably behind said tank, with my AV fit probably find some cover in case the engagment goes pear shaped for one of numerous reasons. Isn't planning? 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? Above the turrets angle of attack (high ground) or behind a tank (flanking) isn't a geographical advantage? So umm what was that? No, 40k is not an investment. I switch to 78k suits when im ready to STOP losing money. Tanks cost half a million isk each if they are worth a damn, and there isn't a single form of AV out there that requires 25 million SP by itself. 40k suits will NEVER destroy a Tank alon, it needs at least a full proto squad and some OB or an another Tank. A tank will ALWAYS kill at least 20 ennemy before dying, making it destroy way more iSK than it cost. And a tank is CHEAP. Under Proto level AV can't do anything, so it cost the hell to buy some AV. AV is priced and balanced at the luxury cost of being involved in a fight you have no business being a part of. You want to kill tanks, get a ******* tank or stop whining.

Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2719	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:45:00 - [271] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank. Interesting, That guy usually plays in a tank I should probably start with my AV fit isn't foresight? The other team has a tank, I will need to deploy nearby, preferably behind said tank, with my AV fit probably find some cover in case the engagment goes pear shaped for one of numerous reasons. Isn't planning? 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? Above the turrets angle of attack (high ground) or behind a tank (flanking) isn't a geographical advantage? So umm what was that? No, 40k is not an investment. I switch to 78k suits when im ready to STOP losing money. Tanks cost half a million isk each if they are worth a damn, and there isn't a single form of AV out there that requires 25 million SP by itself. Dropsuit AV weapon Core Upgrades Nanocircuitry Grenadier Demolitions approx 25mil SP read em weep. Don't believe me go to protofits and make the following fit. Ammar Logi Proto Proto Swarm Launcher Proto SMG (to get Proto Assault SMG requires prof 2, which I didn't do) Proto Packed AV grenade STD RE STD PE Proto Quantum Nanohive 1+ù Proto Plate 2x Proto Repper 1x Adv PG upgrade 2x Proto Dmg Mod 1x Advanced Dmg Mod Costs a hell of a lot more than 70,000 requires ~25,896,000 invested SP Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 613	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:46:00 - [272] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Also let me add something else Monkey, AV can be produced anytime anywhere with no foresight. You get raped by a tank, you switch to AV instantly upon death or if you're at a supply depot. The same convenience is not true for tanks. If your team is redlined by an opposing group of tanks it is incredibly difficult to call new tanks in without them being shot down. If they ARE called in, they will be so far into the back of the redline they are are completely barricaded into a losing fight. Saying "oh herp derp there's a tank ima switch to forge" is not foresight. It's not planning. And even if you did plan for it in advance that isn't going to be any less than just changing to it after you recognize the threat. What the ** are you saying ? As you said yourself the ONLY way for a tank to get raped is by an another group of tank, Daaaamn, go play World of tank and let us alone. -What you say is stupid, if a tank is stuck in the redline by AV players he jut pass trough easily. -If infantry are stuck in the redline by a tank they are DEAD. Because they can't escape and can't call any vehicules. You get raped by a tank, you take AV and THEN WHAT ? I remember you AV just CAN'T destroy tanks. Actually tanks rep faster than we makes damage.... Quote: The same convenience is not true for tanks. If your team is redlined by an opposing group of tanks it is incredibly difficult to call new tanks in without them being shot down. If they ARE called in, they will be so far into the back of the redline they are are completely barricaded into a losing fight. So you're telling tanks are not OP because tanks are OP against tanks ? WHAT THE ** IS YOUR LOGIC ?
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC Dirt Nap Squad. 134	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:48:00 - [273] - Quote AV improvements I'd like to see/simple balance ideas, in no particular order - 1. Fix the PE detection/setup time. Yes, I want and feel I should[i] be able to run in front of or behind a tank pitching out proxes and as it drives chasing me they should detonate under it immediately. And widen their detection range, as they are they don't "proximity" anything, they only detect direct contact. 2. Remove the warning detector for Proxes, if scanned they should light but there should be no audible tone. 3. Make Proxes "smart", in that friendly tanks can't, don't and won't detonate them just by driving over them. Splash/direct fire still can but they a friendly vehicle driving over doesn't. 4. Give me back my 3rd AV grenade. Hell, give me 4 of those albatrosses. 5. Remove the +/- bonuses on the PLC, make that thing do flat Alpha dumbfire to vehicles. 6. Set ALL vehicles to No pilot control of ANY turret, make them require a gunner (so TW) . IN ADDITION create a new module that WILL grant pilots remote control over a turret (1) when equipped, but at the loss of fitting space for other mods. (so balanced-ish) 7. Give the rep tools an offensive ability, maybe like a flux-discharge that'll smoke vehicle shields and melt infantry armor. 8. Return OMS to us in every gamemode, and have the items be [i]individuallypurchasable AND deployable, not just by a squad leader. Have these items be not just the Large Rail/Missile turrets and SDs or CRUs but Large and Small Barricades capable of withstanding the firepower HAVs carry. OMS deployed turrets should be already blue and not require hacking to activate. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2720	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:50:00 - [274] - Quote Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Dude (Monkey MAC) saw you in a game today, you were against me. (As a Gunship) WE DESTROYED A TRIPLE REP MADRUGAR !!!!!!!! We were like 10 agiant him and an another tnak but we destroyed it !!!!! I was personnally with Plasma Cannon and Proto Swarm (Commando) shooting contiunally on him with extra fast reload and unlimited ammo. (near to ammo installation) There was 2 Forge Gun (Breach). 2 blue dot Swarms. A Gunlogi with rail gun. 2 Scout with Remotes. And an Orbital Strike. And i finally got him with a critical hit from my Plasma Cannon. +150 But well....we sync 10 players and Orbital to destroy a tank....So we lose the objective, got crushed by infantry and your dropship and 1 min later his tank was back while it took us 10 min to destroy it..... Seems TOTALLY legit. 1 Tank Vs 10 ******* player, seems logic. It made us lose the game while we dominated you and your team the whole game..... Yeah saw that, was pretty darn good, though I would like to point out he did just sit there and take it, it took alot more effort for you to get me (I crashed in the end) and I was in a rather flimsy dropship by comparison. I rather enjoyed that match I believe we won, by a single clone! Still lost 700,000 ISK, but worth it when I now know my team of newberries beat a 10 stacked squad and I went positive. 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.. 2720	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:58:00 - [275] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Also let me add something else Monkey, AV can be produced anytime anywhere with no foresight. You get raped by a tank, you switch to AV instantly upon death or if you're at a supply depot. The same convenience is not true for tanks. If your team is redlined by an opposing group of tanks it is incredibly difficult to call new tanks in without them being shot down. If they ARE called in, they will be so far into the back of the redline they are are completely barricaded into a losing fight. Saying "oh herp derp there's a tank ima switch to forge" is not foresight. It's not planning. And even if you did plan for it in advance that isn't going to be any less than just changing to it after you recognize the threat. Have you ever called a tank in atop a tower? No? Well there goes your its difficult to call in a tank arguement. Step 1) Fit cheap mlt dropship Step 2) Afterburn it to flight ceiling Step 3) Find suitable tower to deploy tank (The caldari ones on line harvest, roof of the medium sockets on fractured road) Step 4) Camp on roof and blowup what you can from there Step 5) Drive off roof, recieve no fall damage, insta flank enemy Step 6) Profit/Watch hate mail roll in. Secondary Point, Assault Suit description is all about being able to change at a moments notice. Tertiary Point, if calling in a tank during a tank stomp is difficult that is reason to have more effective AV, to stop the tanks stomping in the first place. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Miokai Zahou The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 221	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:01:00 - [276] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: AV is priced and balanced at the luxury cost of being involved in a fight you have no business being a part of. You want to kill tanks, get a ******* tank or stop whining. Oh look how surprising to see a douchbag tanker telling us that 'You want to kill a tank bring another tank otherwise stop complaining and let me farm you in peace'. What an idiot response for an idiot tanker mentality. This is why they need to go. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 616	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:02:00 - [277] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Dude (Monkey MAC) saw you in a game today, you were against me. (As a Gunship) WE DESTROYED A TRIPLE REP MADRUGAR !!!!!!!! We were like 10 agiant him and an another tnak but we destroyed it !!!!! I was personnally with Plasma Cannon and Proto Swarm (Commando) shooting contiunally on him with extra fast reload and unlimited ammo. (near to ammo installation) There was 2 Forge Gun (Breach). 2 blue dot Swarms. A Gunlogi with rail gun. 2 Scout with Remotes. And an Orbital Strike. And i finally got him with a critical hit from my Plasma Cannon. +150 But well....we sync 10 players and Orbital to destroy a tank....So we lose the objective, got crushed by infantry and your dropship and 1 min later his tank was back while it took us 10 min to destroy it..... Seems TOTALLY legit. 1 Tank Vs 10 ******* player, seems logic. It made us lose the game while we dominated you and your team the whole game..... Yeah saw that, was pretty darn good, though I would like to point out he did just sit there and take it, it took alot more effort for you to get me (I crashed in the end) and I was in a rather flimsy dropship by comparison. I rather enjoyed that match I believe we won, by a single clone! Still lost 700,000 ISK, but worth it when I now know my team of newberries beat a 10 stacked squad and I went positive. Yep it was damn close !!!! (A single one ) I've been the last killed, the one who made us loss BUT i've maded a Triple kill just before so...and got revived In fact he wasn't "sitting here" our scouts simply blocked all the way out by 10 explosive remotes while our tank was blocking the other way We blocked him. Well....Have you ever try to get down a Dropship with a Plasma Cannon ? It's pretty Hard. And before playing with AV i was shooting you with Laser Rifle and Mass driver to make you shoot me instead of my teamates, they pass trought and then take the objectives Lost something about 400.000 ISK, was playing ADV but died 8 time. Hmm in fact we were not in a squad, i was playing solo to train me (didn't play since a months) we were also totally blueberries. Seems like we were just randomely set up to destroy this tank. Certainely Amarr gods who decided this destiny. (The 2 forge gunner was Amarr sentinel and our scouts were Amarr, i was Amarr....Funny fact )
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2720	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:04:00 - [278] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Because its a lazy counter that requires no foresight, planning, ISK investment, SP sink or geographical advantage. You're also on the wrong part of the map for killing things. Stick to the city. Basically, you dont deserve to kill a tank. Interesting, That guy usually plays in a tank I should probably start with my AV fit isn't foresight? The other team has a tank, I will need to deploy nearby, preferably behind said tank, with my AV fit probably find some cover in case the engagment goes pear shaped for one of numerous reasons. Isn't planning? 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? Above the turrets angle of attack (high ground) or behind a tank (flanking) isn't a geographical advantage? So umm what was that? No, 40k is not an investment. I switch to 78k suits when im ready to STOP losing money. Tanks cost half a million isk each if they are worth a damn, and there isn't a single form of AV out there that requires 25 million SP by itself. 40k suits will NEVER destroy a Tank alon, it needs at least a full proto squad and some OB or an another Tank. A tank will ALWAYS kill at least 20 ennemy before dying, making it destroy way more iSK than it cost. And a tank is CHEAP. Under Proto level AV can't do anything, so it cost the hell to buy some AV. AV is priced and balanced at the luxury cost of being involved in a fight you have no business being a part of. You want to kill tanks, get a ******* tank or stop whining. Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9987	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:06:00 - [279] - Quote 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? NOOOOO It's exactly what tankers desire.....I know I do. Sure it's enjoyable to massacre infantry but there is nothing better than putting yourself up against an enemy HAV to duke it out to see who is better. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9988	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:10:00 - [280] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Thats not such a bad statement as it sounds. AV should have its place tank busting but seriously...... Tanks are designed to blow up other tanks....... we have weapons 10x the size of those your carry, with understandably greater fire power......otherwise our weapons would be carried on foot......and not turret or vehicle mounted..... IMO a Tank should be an expensive high SP sink unit that is the highest a ground based vehicle user can escalate the fight to....... by this I mean the most durable ground vehicle and the best equipped to deal with other vehicles.......BUT NOT INFANTRY unless you sacrifice fitting capacity on small turrets and have crewmen. "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two

Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2720	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:11:00 - [281] - Quote Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Dude (Monkey MAC) saw you in a game today, you were against me. (As a Gunship) WE DESTROYED A TRIPLE REP MADRUGAR !!!!!!!! We were like 10 agiant him and an another tnak but we destroyed it !!!!! I was personnally with Plasma Cannon and Proto Swarm (Commando) shooting contiunally on him with extra fast reload and unlimited ammo. (near to ammo installation) There was 2 Forge Gun (Breach). 2 blue dot Swarms. A Gunlogi with rail gun. 2 Scout with Remotes. And an Orbital Strike. And i finally got him with a critical hit from my Plasma Cannon. +150 But well....we sync 10 players and Orbital to destroy a tank....So we lose the objective, got crushed by infantry and your dropship and 1 min later his tank was back while it took us 10 min to destroy it..... Seems TOTALLY legit. 1 Tank Vs 10 ******* player, seems logic. It made us lose the game while we dominated you and your team the whole game..... Yeah saw that, was pretty darn good, though I would like to point out he did just sit there and take it, it took alot more effort for you to get me (I crashed in the end) and I was in a rather flimsy dropship by comparison. I rather enjoyed that match I believe we won, by a single clone! Still lost 700,000 ISK, but worth it when I now know my team of newberries beat a 10 stacked squad and I went positive. Yep it was damn close !!!! (A single one ) I've been the last killed, the one who made us loss BUT i've maded a Triple kill just before so...and got revived In fact he wasn't "sitting here" our scouts simply blocked all the way out by 10 explosive remotes while our tank was blocking the other way We blocked him. Well....Have you ever try to get down a Dropship with a Plasma Cannon ? It's pretty Hard. And before playing with AV i was shooting you with Laser Rifle and Mass driver to make you shoot me instead of my teamates, they pass trought and then take the objectives Lost something about 400.000 ISK, was playing ADV but died 8 time. Hmm in fact we were not in a squad, i was playing solo to train me (didn't play since a months) we were also totally blueberries. Seems like we were just randomely set up to destroy this tank. Certainely Amarr gods who decided this destiny. (The 2 forge gunner was Amarr sentinel and our scouts were Amarr, i was Amarr....Funny fact ) That was you? Your damn laser rifle was getting on my nerves no end! As for the tank, well played indeed, from my (rather mobile) perspective all I saw each time I came for another strafing run, was that blue tank in the same damn place. I died 12 in total, but considering I RE'd 3 heavies and logi hacking the point twice, used a mass driver 25% of the time and confirmed 2 kills (kill then terminate) right at the end, I was damn happy, was a fun match by all accounts, was very proud of team I didn't know. Will have green up with you sometime, usually on around 8-10pm UTC+00 Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Trenix Keltron Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu Lokun Listamenn 187	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:19:00 - [282] - Quote I'm really liking this CCP Rattati guy. Sir, I don't know where you've come from but I'm glad you're here. This is a very informative video and it speaks volumes. I had no idea of this and the magnitude of it is staggering. I hope this will get looked into. I don't have the solutions but I still would like to see one. In my opinion, that shouldn't be happening. Right now, skilling up to proto swarms seems to be the wooden nickel. OUKH corporation recruitment active. Initiate enlistment protocols. The future is now
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2720	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:21:00 - [283] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Thats not such a bad statement as it sounds. AV should have its place tank busting but seriously...... Tanks are designed to blow up other tanks....... we have weapons 10x the size of those your carry, with understandably greater fire power......otherwise our weapons would be carried on foot......and not turret or vehicle mounted..... IMO a Tank should be an expensive high SP sink unit that is the highest a ground based vehicle user can escalate the fight to....... by this I mean the most durable ground vehicle and the best equipped to deal with other vehicles.......BUT NOT INFANTRY unless you sacrifice fitting capacity on small turrets and have crewmen. Oh by no means am I saying a tank shouldn't deal with a tank, that's like saying a HMG heavy shouldn't kill a HMG heavy, it just shouldn't be a requirement, you should be able to use othe methods. Personally I have no quarrell with a large turret killing infantry provided, it's not nearly as effective against infantry as it currently is. If I may reference titanfall which has done the whole infantry vs vehicle thing rather well. You can solo a titan as pilot, though a variety of methods, my favourite the lightning gun inflictsnearly a third of an atlases health in 1 shot, but it requires getting enough time to charge the shot, at the same time, titans will carve through grunts like there is no tommorow, but the mobile and fast pilots provide a relative challenge. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 9989	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:24:00 - [284] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: True Adamance wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Thats not such a bad statement as it sounds. AV should have its place tank busting but seriously...... Tanks are designed to blow up other tanks....... we have weapons 10x the size of those your carry, with understandably greater fire power......otherwise our weapons would be carried on foot......and not turret or vehicle mounted..... IMO a Tank should be an expensive high SP sink unit that is the highest a ground based vehicle user can escalate the fight to....... by this I mean the most durable ground vehicle and the best equipped to deal with other vehicles.......BUT NOT INFANTRY unless you sacrifice fitting capacity on small turrets and have crewmen. Oh by no means am I saying a tank shouldn't deal with a tank, that's like saying a HMG heavy shouldn't kill a HMG heavy, it just shouldn't be a requirement, you should be able to use othe methods. Personally I have no quarrell with a large turret killing infantry provided, it's not nearly as effective against infantry as it currently is. If I may reference titanfall which has done the whole infantry vs vehicle thing rather well. You can solo a titan as pilot, though a variety of methods, my favourite the lightning gun inflictsnearly a third of an atlases health in 1 shot, but it requires getting enough time to charge the shot, at the same time, titans will carve through grunts like there is no tommorow, but the mobile and fast pilots provide a relative challenge. But consequently a good pilot will never or very rarely die while wrecking the other team...... "Get thine Swag out of my face! Next you'll be writing #YOLOswagforJamyl in all your posts!" -Dagger Two
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2721	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:34:00 - [285] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: True Adamance wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Thats not such a bad statement as it sounds. AV should have its place tank busting but seriously...... Tanks are designed to blow up other tanks....... we have weapons 10x the size of those your carry, with understandably greater fire power......otherwise our weapons would be carried on foot......and not turret or vehicle mounted..... IMO a Tank should be an expensive high SP sink unit that is the highest a ground based vehicle user can escalate the fight to....... by this I mean the most durable ground vehicle and the best equipped to deal with other vehicles.......BUT NOT INFANTRY unless you sacrifice fitting capacity on small turrets and have crewmen. Oh by no means am I saying a tank shouldn't deal with a tank, that's like saying a HMG heavy shouldn't kill a HMG heavy, it just shouldn't be a requirement, you should be able to use othe methods. Personally I have no quarrell with a large turret killing infantry provided, it's not nearly as effective against infantry as it currently is. If I may reference titanfall which has done the whole infantry vs vehicle thing rather well. You can solo a titan as pilot, though a variety of methods, my favourite the lightning gun inflictsnearly a third of an atlases health in 1 shot, but it requires getting enough time to charge the shot, at the same time, titans will carve through grunts like there is no tommorow, but the mobile and fast pilots provide a relative challenge. But consequently a good pilot will never or very rarely die while wrecking the other team...... Very rarely, though you get those people in every game, after all we have ReG, also in titanfall you are not meant to encounter enemy pilots very often, you spend most of your time killing grunts, not a lot of deaths not a lot of pilot kills. The best I saw was a pilot with 1 death, excluding doomed titans, 3 pilot kills, 5 titan kills and 12 grunt kills. Hardly the 40/0 you can get round here. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
PLAYSTTION Universal Allies Inc. 102	Posted - 2014.05.01 01:11:00 - [286] - Quote Wow. R.I.P. swarms long live the maddy!!! -Open Beta Vet 20 mil sp- Laser+Flaylock Dust 514 recruitment link here.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3754	Posted - 2014.05.01 01:17:00 - [287] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Yes, it should NORMALLY require a tank to kill a tank because they are of equal power and brought into the game under equal restrictions. Deployment time, cost, danger of popping due to enemy rails, etc. It is for this very reason that tanks ruling the outside makes sense. They impose a greater threat than infantry and live in the open plains and mountains of Dust 514. Infantry dwell in the urban areas where vehicle movement is restricted. Dropships that dwell in such an area are also prone to an easy death from AV. When you leave the city they become the far greater threat you know currently because that is their domain. If we had it your way, they would be weak on the outside and worthless on the inside. There would be no need to ever field a tank and you would have one game mode -- Infantry 514. Tanks were not meant to be be the equal of infantry, they were meant to be greater than infantry. What equalizes them is where they are allowed to operate, and if you wish to dispatch a tank as an infantry on the tank's turf you should very well need to do so with another tank or with greater effort than the tank has to put out to kill you. You would not go swimming in the ocean and expect to slay a great white shark without putting out more effort than the shark does. What we have here is a problem of infantry entitlement. If you've been redlined, the match should take no longer than a minute to end. It is bad game design that it does not.
Shion Typhon Intara Direct Action Caldari State 522	Posted - 2014.05.01 01:58:00 - [288] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Yes, it should NORMALLY require a tank to kill a tank because they are of equal power and brought into the game under equal restrictions. Deployment time, cost, danger of popping due to enemy rails, etc. It is for this very reason that tanks ruling the outside makes sense. They impose a greater threat than infantry and live in the open plains and mountains of Dust 514. Infantry dwell in the urban areas where vehicle movement is restricted. Dropships that dwell in such an area are also prone to an easy death from AV. When you leave the city they become the far greater threat you know currently because that is their domain. If we had it your way, they would be weak on the outside and worthless on the inside. There would be no need to ever field a tank and you would have one game mode -- Infantry 514. Tanks were not meant to be the equal of infantry, they were meant to be greater than infantry. What equalizes them is where they are allowed to operate, and if you wish to dispatch a tank as an infantry on the tank's turf you should very well need to do so with another tank or with greater effort than the tank has to put out to kill you. You would not go swimming in the ocean and expect to slay a great white shark without putting out more effort than the shark does. What we have here is a problem of infantry entitlement. If you've been redlined, the match should take no longer than a minute to end. It is bad game design that it does not. On the outside, we have Tanks 514 and on the inside we have Infantry 514. They are very distinguished and fun games. Your solution would effectively make tanks the equals of infantry, and kill Tanks 514. The tank game does not work if infantry are as great a threat as tanks are. The entire dynamic breaks. Unfortunately "outside " equals 90% of the playable game space and similar spaces between null cannon capture points. There are 3 large sockets which approximate little islands of "city", which incidentally all have large roads right through the middle through which tanks can joyride. Your inside/outside world only exists in a very tenuous state.
RemingtonBeaver Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 774	Posted - 2014.05.01 02:05:00 - [289] - Quote STACKING PENALTIES. or reserved slots in a this/that fashion. They'll buff all the AV or debuff all the modules and ADSs (that are already easy as hell to take out) will become completely useless again. We can pickle that.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3754	Posted - 2014.05.01 02:16:00 - [290] - Quote Shion Typhon wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Yes, it should NORMALLY require a tank to kill a tank because they are of equal power and brought into the game under equal restrictions. Deployment time, cost, danger of popping due to enemy rails, etc. It is for this very reason that tanks ruling the outside makes sense. They impose a greater threat than infantry and live in the open plains and mountains of Dust 514. Infantry dwell in the urban areas where vehicle movement is restricted. Dropships that dwell in such an area are also prone to an easy death from AV. When you leave the city they become the far greater threat you know currently because that is their domain. If we had it your way, they would be weak on the outside and worthless on the inside. There would be no need to ever field a tank and you would have one game mode -- Infantry 514. Tanks were not meant to be the equal of infantry, they were meant to be greater than infantry. What equalizes them is where they are allowed to operate, and if you wish to dispatch a tank as an infantry on the tank's turf you should very well need to do so with another tank or with greater effort than the tank has to put out to kill you. You would not go swimming in the ocean and expect to slay a great white shark without putting out more effort than the shark does. What we have here is a problem of infantry entitlement. If you've been redlined, the match should take no longer than a minute to end. It is bad game design that it does not. On the outside, we have Tanks 514 and on the inside we have Infantry 514. They are very distinguished and fun games. Your solution would effectively make tanks the equals of infantry, and kill Tanks 514. The tank game does not work if infantry are as great a threat as tanks are. The entire dynamic breaks. Unfortunately "outside " equals 90% of the playable game space and similar spaces between null cannon capture points. There are 3 large sockets which approximate little islands of "city", which incidentally all have large roads right through the middle through which tanks can joyride. Your inside/outside world only exists in a very tenuous state. It exists on an even distribution as far as capturable points are concerned. The exceptions being 5 point maps where one map is clearly themed for outside or inside engagements, and more attention has to be focused on that kind of fight. Simply stating there is more landmass on the outside is a poor argument, because there is no reason to be out there.

deepfried salad gilliam Sanguine Knights 699	Posted - 2014.05.01 02:29:00 - [291] - Quote 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? i completely beleive that capacitors could do this, instead of cycling through timers to stay alive non stop his capacitor would drain 1 guy could harass him hurting him leaving him weak till cap recharges 2 guys could make him waste all cap pretty quick and ultimately die, or at least make him run 3 guys hes gone the capacitor works in many games wether its called mana power magicka the concept is the same make sure going all out has its costs It'll help define roles, i promise:)
The Tunski OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 37	Posted - 2014.05.01 02:38:00 - [292] - Quote I'm at work and on my phone so I'll make this quick. Also have not read every response so I may repeat someone. I don't believe that a single player should be able to kill a tank in the heat of a battle to the point where the tank will take damage and move along, rep, and reengage. That's the intent to my understanding how they are intended to be. It is laughable that a tank can sit there and just eat swarms like that. How you fix that?...well I don't have time for that ATM. I had proto swarms very early on, once I went forge, I've never gone back.
Gabriella Grey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 110	Posted - 2014.05.01 02:43:00 - [293] - Quote 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? The problem with HAV's CCP Rattati is they are in their own category when it comes to vehicles. HAV"s are far from balanced with other vehicles. First I don't know why this hasn't been addressed but why haven't HAV's been addressed similar to how Heavy Dropsuits are. 1. HAV's have insane acceleration. Why doesn't their top speed come about very slow? 2. Why something heavily armored is allowed to have speed boosters in the first place? (It's an interesting idea but they work way to well on tanks, and should work much better on LAV's. 3. Dropships/LAV modules and turrets are generalized.The modules are identical in the way they perform from each other even on an HAV. A great example would be using a missile turret from a dropship to using a missile turret on an LAV. Each one requires something different. arial vehicles with the current small turrets need to fly roughly 60 meters from the target they wish to kill. It's most of the time constantly moving and needs a better splash damage radius. But LAV's and HAV's with small turrets have not the same issue. Also keeping the talk on vehicles and not just one vehicle such as the HAV! People keep forgetting that HAV's are not the only vehicle on the battlefield that wants in on the action! The reason HAV's are the way they are now is because the lack of regard for the current 3 vehicle models. CCP Rattati, CCP Saberwing, get Wolfman back on the ball! His dev team can't afford to let these things get any sloppier from overlooking important things that keep this game from being as great as it was first envisioned by those who set out to make Dust 514 the way it is. *Always Grey Skies*
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1402	Posted - 2014.05.01 03:19:00 - [294] - Quote 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? The solution is based on which problem you want to focus on. If you focus on the tankers ability to mow down AVers before they even have a chance to fight back (the simplest fix in my mind), I think it should go something like this: Make the large blaster turret function like the Ion Pistol. Make the blaster turrets fire semi-auto, have a small clip, give each shot the ability to be charged, and let the turret overheat quickly. This makes the one really good anti-infantry turret crappy as AV while cutting it's ability to just roll through areas firing at random groups to pick up kills. You cut down the ability of a tanker to run roughshod over everything it sees and infantry will be more willing to mount an organized offensive against it. So say it takes about 3-5 rounds to kill just about anything with the blaster as of now, right? Since you have to place shots now and you have more heat build-up per shot, clip size would be around 15 and damage per round would be set around 170 (fully charged - 340). You can fire 9 rounds back-to-back without overheating, but the 10th shot overheats your turret. Regular cooldown is pretty fast but overheat cooldown is VERY slow. Obviously this would not 100% fix all AV vs all infantry, but it would be a simple fix that would take care of the biggest imbalance in the AV v V game, the large blaster turret. Large blaster users would either need two friends on small rail turrets to help them with vehicle threats or a second tanker to back them up, encouraging team work among tankers so they can survive against other tankers. And blaster tankers would need to attack strategically instead of rolling up to objectives and spamming shots at spawn areas to pick up random kills. Just my 2 cents. Good luck. MAG ~ Raven I GÖú puppies.
DarthJT5 12th Shadow Legion 27	Posted - 2014.05.01 03:25:00 - [295] - Quote Will Driver 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. And I'm firmly against this position. A proto swarmer with 4/5 proficiency should be able to solo any Tank. Tanks should not be immune from a player that's specifically designed to fight tanks. The "teamwork" argument is so tiresome I can barely stand it. Having a tank soak up the attention of 3-4 or more ineffectual A/Vers completely unbalances the game. If only tanks can battle tanks, then that's TANK 514 and not something I'm interested in at all. Maybe we should have an infantry only game. I bet the vast majority would opt into it, leaving only tanker on tanker matches for you. I wonder how much you'll enjoy that, without any foot soldiers to slaughter? Why should a swamer with 4/5 prof be able to easily slo my tank that requires more SP than everything in the swarm skill tree for JUST my large Proto missiles? Then, we can add in my shield upgrades up to 5, optimization 5, Small Proto missiles, all my vehicle Core skills up to five. This cost waay more sp and isk than anything an Av guy will call out. Hell, the turret alone costs 300k, much more than your suit. No, you should not be able to solo my tank EASILY. Possibly, sure. But not easily. I dont even go for infantry unless there arent any tanks to shoot at, my squad needs support, or enemy AV Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 772	Posted - 2014.05.01 03:40:00 - [296] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? I'm sorry, what? How the hell can you not blow up a tank with that much SP in AV? I only have about...... 1,000,000 SP in AV, and my suit costs around... 8,000 Isk per deploy.... Triple reps fall like rain to this suit. You are clearly trying to stretch the truth in your favor so far, that it doesn't even look true anymore. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Fleen Costell'o Vacuum Cleaner. LLC Steel Balls Alliance 375	Posted - 2014.05.01 03:45:00 - [297] - Quote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qFZPjLPDZo Kill HAV - no problem
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3755	Posted - 2014.05.01 03:52:00 - [298] - Quote The Tunski wrote: I'm at work and on my phone so I'll make this quick. Also have not read every response so I may repeat someone. I don't believe that a single player should be able to kill a tank in the heat of a battle to the point where the tank will take damage and move along, rep, and reengage. That's the intent to my understanding how they are intended to be. It is laughable that a tank can sit there and just eat swarms like that. How you fix that?...well I don't have time for that ATM. I had proto swarms very early on, once I went forge, I've never gone back. Space ships do it all the time in EVE. Vehicles in New Eden are good like that. I happen to enjoy that aspect of them. Why does this need to be a battlefield clone where vehicles are nothing more than steel coffins?
KalOfTheRathi Nec Tributis 1268	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:14:00 - [299] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 QQ Kittens make videos! Wow, I am so impressed. By the fact that a QQ Kitten will make a video, not by the abilities of the PRO Swarm using Merc. Just because they are using PRO AV they want to take out the best tank possible with the Weapon Of Their Choice, not what will work. One on one should mean the infantry will lose to any tank. Remotes balance that out quite well. Two squad members would have that tank dead or running to the Red Line! Learn To Play This Game. And so it goes.
PAXTON HAILFIRE Expert Intervention Caldari State 54	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:17:00 - [300] - Quote I think they could balance the problem with vehicle damage. Sure that proto swarmer cant kill the tank, but once the shield is gone the risk of vehicle damage begins. Broken track, blown turret motor, engine performance issue... then it becomes the choice of the tanker to risk continued battle with a limping tank, or get back to a mech depot for component repairs. Be kind of cool to see stuff broken on vehicles. Like an LAV three wheelin or a dropship with a missing engine flying cockeyed or an HAV with a missing track blowing smoke from its exhaust. Like blood in the water.

The Tunski OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 37	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:20:00 - [301] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: The Tunski wrote: I'm at work and on my phone so I'll make this quick. Also have not read every response so I may repeat someone. I don't believe that a single player should be able to kill a tank in the heat of a battle to the point where the tank will take damage and move along, rep, and reengage. That's the intent to my understanding how they are intended to be. It is laughable that a tank can sit there and just eat swarms like that. How you fix that?...well I don't have time for that ATM. I had proto swarms very early on, once I went forge, I've never gone back. Space ships do it all the time in EVE. Vehicles in New Eden are good like that. I happen to enjoy that aspect of them. Why does this need to be a battlefield clone where vehicles are nothing more than steel coffins? I don't want vehicles to be steel coffins, I just don't feel that a tank can just sit there and just laugh at those swarms like in that video. That video isn't news for me, I fully understand that this happens. I've AVed maddy's that had three complex reppers and it was a challenge. Not asking for easy mode just a way that we can close the SMALL gap that's there....
Ld Collins Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 135	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:21:00 - [302] - Quote Fleen Costell'o wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qFZPjLPDZo Kill HAV - no problem This is the coolest thing I've seen in dust so far.
Marcus Stormfire G.R.A.V.E INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS 21	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:30:00 - [303] - Quote 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 -I don't always kill Mercs with a sidearm, But when I do I use militia.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3756	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:46:00 - [304] - Quote The Tunski wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: The Tunski wrote: I'm at work and on my phone so I'll make this quick. Also have not read every response so I may repeat someone. I don't believe that a single player should be able to kill a tank in the heat of a battle to the point where the tank will take damage and move along, rep, and reengage. That's the intent to my understanding how they are intended to be. It is laughable that a tank can sit there and just eat swarms like that. How you fix that?...well I don't have time for that ATM. I had proto swarms very early on, once I went forge, I've never gone back. Space ships do it all the time in EVE. Vehicles in New Eden are good like that. I happen to enjoy that aspect of them. Why does this need to be a battlefield clone where vehicles are nothing more than steel coffins? I don't want vehicles to be steel coffins, I just don't feel that a tank can just sit there and just laugh at those swarms like in that video. That video isn't news for me, I fully understand that this happens. I've AVed maddy's that had three complex reppers and it was a challenge. Not asking for easy mode just a way that we can close the SMALL gap that's there.... They dont laugh at swarms though. They just can't be killed by a single swarmer to any incredible efficiency with that one very specific fit. The triple rep madrugar fit can counter a single swarmer very well, but what does he sacrifice to do this? If two AV get on him he dies instantly because no resists. In a rail vs rail engagement, the triple rep madrugar will always lose. He sacrifices his ability to stand toe-to-toe with other tanks in order to shrug off a single swarmer. Tanks are the bigger threat out there. That's a pretty bad tradeoff normally.
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 9154	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:52:00 - [305] - Quote ChromeBreaker wrote: You take a FG and kill the tank?... Its swarms that dont have the power. There have been a few occations where i have cleared the field of tanks either by killing them of driving them off by bring out my FG. That isnt bragging, 2 FG's on a bit of high ground will dominate every tank going. When people have issue with tripple rep maddi's, they arent your scrub militia tankers, theyre the peeps that have put time and points into tanks, why should they be driven off by every tom dck and harry who's put a point into swarms? Wouldn't call triple damage modded proto swarm + prof the.average tom *** and harry. Overlord of all humans CAT MERC
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3756	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:55:00 - [306] - Quote Swarms are the lazy mans AV anyway. Low risk garbage you don't even have to aim and can fire from cover. Basically, the absolute worst players use swarms and they should be rewarded with bad damage accordingly. If someone is going to make a legit complaint it should be for the forge gun. That weapon leaves you vulnerable as hell, moving slow, as an incredibly easy to hit target. At least in the heavy suits description it is said to be the only suit class capable of standing toe-to-toe with vehicles and surviving. I never heard any of the same said about crappy medium frame suits and their assortment of newb friendly ghetto weapons.
Starfire Revo DUST University Ivy League 213	Posted - 2014.05.01 06:11:00 - [307] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Instead of more tankers v nontankers, what are some simple ways to balance this? For starters you can fix the awful weapon scaling on AV weapons. At current, the difference between an advanced swarm launcher and a prototype swarm launcher is greater than the difference between a standard forge gun and a prototype forge gun. This results in the standard swarm launcher being a complete piece of trash that can only kill badly driven, badly fit LAVs. The plasma cannon has the opposite problem. It would probably work fairly well if it's direct damage scaled the same way that the forge gun does. Right now it's just a bugged mess that can't compete with other proto AV. Small turrets seem more effective at killing tanks than people give them credit for, but LAV gunners get almost no protection while gunning. Also hit detection on small rails can be terrible at times. I've had dead on aim at stationary infantry, LAVs and tanks where shots randomly don't hit. There's also the small issue of standard LAVs being almost as expensive as BPO fit militia tanks. There's also the issue that the game lacks a simpler mode so people can get a chance to learn the basics of the game. There's a great blog about this concept by David Sirlin. I also wrote a blog suggesting how those ideas could be implemented into Dust. At the end of the day, if tanks/dropships can't be balanced for random public games and organized 16v16 matches simultaneously, there should be a way to play public matches without them. Maybe the rewards for that kind of match would be limited compared to regular public contracts, but there's a place for low risk:low reward in Dust. I make videos of EVE and Dust http://www.youtube.com/mrgimbleb I write about EVE and Dust http://mrgimbleb.blogspot.com
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 772	Posted - 2014.05.01 07:56:00 - [308] - Quote The Tunski wrote: I don't want vehicles to be steel coffins, I just don't feel that a tank can just sit there and just laugh at those swarms like in that video. That video isn't news for me, I fully understand that this happens. I've AVed maddy's that had three complex reppers and it was a challenge. Not asking for easy mode just a way that we can close the SMALL gap that's there.... Let's say you're in an adventure MMO, and you build your character to have high Ice resistance. Typically, what this means is the character will then have low Fire resistance... A player tries to kill you using only Ice spells and effects, then he complains that the game is broken because Ice was not working on you. Most people would slap him across the face and tell him to start using Fire when Ice doesn't work. Now we have the same thing in a combat game... High resistance against swarm damage on a tank, but low resistance vs burst damage, and the player who uses only swarms complains that the swarms were not working on the swarm resistant tank... Now that I write it out this way.. if repairs were to decay at a rate of 100% 90% 40% 10% on vehicles, but modules were added specifically for damage types, such as 30% hybrid/rail/explosive damage reduction that have 100% 50% 20% 5% to that single type of damage (efficiency for stacking 2 explosive then 1 rail would be 100%-explosive1 50%-exploive2 20%-rail1) It would make different tanks with unique weaknesses. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
ChromeBreaker SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 1706	Posted - 2014.05.01 07:56:00 - [309] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: ChromeBreaker wrote: You take a FG and kill the tank?... Its swarms that dont have the power. There have been a few occations where i have cleared the field of tanks either by killing them of driving them off by bring out my FG. That isnt bragging, 2 FG's on a bit of high ground will dominate every tank going. When people have issue with tripple rep maddi's, they arent your scrub militia tankers, theyre the peeps that have put time and points into tanks, why should they be driven off by every tom dck and harry who's put a point into swarms? Wouldn't call triple damage modded proto swarm + prof the.average tom *** and harry. And i wouldnt call a complex rep Madi a no skill point tanker. The tripple rep is made, specifically, to resist a single swarm AV'er or another single blaster tank. Thats it. As soon as you bring any other combination of AV it is dead (ignoring the poor PC). 2 Adv swarms will destroy a tripple rep maddi in no time. My brother in his infinet wisdom, has a double swarm amarr commando... and just the CONSTANT damage can beat the reps. The answer is "ForgeGun"... doesnt matter what the question is...
ANON Cerberus Tiny Toons 515	Posted - 2014.05.01 08:24:00 - [310] - Quote Is the solution not really simple guys....? Remove self reps and make it so that logistics players are needed to repair tanks. (I.e - you want to dominate? Then get a repper logi or two to heal you on the fly.) Granted we would need better repair tools but yea this is the way Battlefield balances vehicles. If you want fast regen capability then you need team mates to actually actively repair you. Now I know having modules is the EVE thing, but we dont have modules with capacitor right now so I honestly think that having players provide the rep would solve many problems.

Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2728	Posted - 2014.05.01 10:12:00 - [311] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Shion Typhon wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Aah and so the truth comes out, it should require a tank to kill a tank? Where is the balance in that, please explain it to me After all if you are being redlined by a squad of tanks its game over right, you should just leave the match! Yes, it should NORMALLY require a tank to kill a tank because they are of equal power and brought into the game under equal restrictions. Deployment time, cost, danger of popping due to enemy rails, etc. It is for this very reason that tanks ruling the outside makes sense. They impose a greater threat than infantry and live in the open plains and mountains of Dust 514. Infantry dwell in the urban areas where vehicle movement is restricted. Dropships that dwell in such an area are also prone to an easy death from AV. When you leave the city they become the far greater threat you know currently because that is their domain. If we had it your way, they would be weak on the outside and worthless on the inside. There would be no need to ever field a tank and you would have one game mode -- Infantry 514. Tanks were not meant to be the equal of infantry, they were meant to be greater than infantry. What equalizes them is where they are allowed to operate, and if you wish to dispatch a tank as an infantry on the tank's turf you should very well need to do so with another tank or with greater effort than the tank has to put out to kill you. You would not go swimming in the ocean and expect to slay a great white shark without putting out more effort than the shark does. What we have here is a problem of infantry entitlement. If you've been redlined, the match should take no longer than a minute to end. It is bad game design that it does not. On the outside, we have Tanks 514 and on the inside we have Infantry 514. They are very distinguished and fun games. Your solution would effectively make tanks the equals of infantry, and kill Tanks 514. The tank game does not work if infantry are as great a threat as tanks are. The entire dynamic breaks. Unfortunately "outside " equals 90% of the playable game space and similar spaces between null cannon capture points. There are 3 large sockets which approximate little islands of "city", which incidentally all have large roads right through the middle through which tanks can joyride. Your inside/outside world only exists in a very tenuous state. It exists on an even distribution as far as capturable points are concerned. The exceptions being 5 point maps where one map is clearly themed for outside or inside engagements, and more attention has to be focused on that kind of fight. Simply stating there is more landmass on the outside is a poor argument, because there is no reason to be out there. Just about any FC who is active in PC right now plans for the inside and outside battle as two separate fights that need to be handled differently. If the outside battle fails, dropships start making it into the city which lets the enemy get to highground. When enemies get to high ground, whoever holds the points in the city begin to lose them unless they are absolutely amazing. To prevent this you have tanks on BOTH SIDES at a standoff. If they hold each other off, the defensive tanker can take care of airborn threats on either side and the city fight remains neutral without high ground advantage going to anyone. The problem you guys have now is that pub infantry is too stupid to stick to the city and put themselves in a battle they have no business being a part of. If its a bridge map, you take the city and hold one point on the outside conservatively if possible. If you try to take the entire outside your team becomes very spread out and its difficult to transition. In either case, your infantry is always supported by tanks and if they are not, they are dead. That's how the game is played. Don't wreck it. So if there is little point going outside the complexs, whh have tanks to dominate outside space it's an entirely redundant mechanic. As for tanks being useless in complexs, please don't lie through your teeth, we both know that's just not true. The problem, is YOU and YOUR entitlement. You are one person, a single player. No amount of ISK, SP or selfishness permits you to surpass the strength of anyome else, this why std can kill proto, why scouts can kill heavies. Sure there are places where someone is most effecient, but there is always a counter to it, you just need the right gear. You like everyone else should have a counter, that it isn't the original problem, that is a fundamental of balance. Your entire example is biased towards tanks, which is simply wrong. Infact your entire attitude is biased towards tanks, pray tell, if infantry isn't designed to go between complexs how do we capture outside points, since tanks can easily kill dropships and lavs. The Answer is you don't, the tanks dominate the outside before pushing in and dominating the inside. I would suggest you take a very long read of my earlier post on the algebra of the situation, all you are doing is creating is linear escalation, which is fundamentally poor balance for a game. 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.. 2729	Posted - 2014.05.01 10:21:00 - [312] - Quote Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? I'm sorry, what? How the hell can you not blow up a tank with that much SP in AV? I only have about...... 1,000,000 SP in AV, and my suit costs around... 8,000 Isk per deploy.... Triple reps fall like rain to this suit. You are clearly trying to stretch the truth in your favor so far, that it doesn't even look true anymore. Please share this mega suit then. The suitmI outlined requires getting behind the enemy sticking some RE to his weak spot, some PE on his retreat path and then lobbing 2 grenades + 2swarms then detonating the RE before he regens, requires your target to be stationery or poor at driving in enclosed spaces. Provided you can achieve this, the tank will fall 7/10 times. I would very much like to see your fit since afterall there is a video at the beggining of this thread showing standard AV tactics don't cut it. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 619	Posted - 2014.05.01 10:37:00 - [313] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? I'm sorry, what? How the hell can you not blow up a tank with that much SP in AV? I only have about...... 1,000,000 SP in AV, and my suit costs around... 8,000 Isk per deploy.... Triple reps fall like rain to this suit. You are clearly trying to stretch the truth in your favor so far, that it doesn't even look true anymore. Please share this mega suit then. The suitmI outlined requires getting behind the enemy sticking some RE to his weak spot, some PE on his retreat path and then lobbing 2 grenades + 2swarms then detonating the RE before he regens, requires your target to be stationery or poor at driving in enclosed spaces. Provided you can achieve this, the tank will fall 7/10 times. I would very much like to see your fit since afterall there is a video at the beggining of this thread showing standard AV tactics don't cut it. People just don't understand AV are supposed to COUNTER the ennemy Tanks. Actually they can,'t, it's broken, nerf vehicule OR buff AV but when the counter can't even kill it means there is a problem, a huge problem, anyway today is FanFest let's see the changes
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2731	Posted - 2014.05.01 10:39:00 - [314] - Quote Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Dovallis Martan JenusKoll wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: 40,000 ISK per suit isn't an ISK investment? 25,000,000 SP just for a decked out AV isn't an SP Sink? I'm sorry, what? How the hell can you not blow up a tank with that much SP in AV? I only have about...... 1,000,000 SP in AV, and my suit costs around... 8,000 Isk per deploy.... Triple reps fall like rain to this suit. You are clearly trying to stretch the truth in your favor so far, that it doesn't even look true anymore. Please share this mega suit then. The suitmI outlined requires getting behind the enemy sticking some RE to his weak spot, some PE on his retreat path and then lobbing 2 grenades + 2swarms then detonating the RE before he regens, requires your target to be stationery or poor at driving in enclosed spaces. Provided you can achieve this, the tank will fall 7/10 times. I would very much like to see your fit since afterall there is a video at the beggining of this thread showing standard AV tactics don't cut it. People just don't understand AV are supposed to COUNTER the ennemy Tanks. Actually they can,'t, it's broken, nerf vehicule OR buff AV but when the counter can't even kill it means there is a problem, a huge problem, anyway today is FanFest let's see the changes Would so have loved to have been there, maybe in 2yrs time. When I'm finish ed studying Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 227	Posted - 2014.05.01 10:40:00 - [315] - Quote It's funny isn't it? It's like they don't realize that AV stands for anti-vehicle. As in vehicle gone, not there gone bye bye. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Mordecai Sanguine What The French Red Whines. 619	Posted - 2014.05.01 10:42:00 - [316] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Mordecai Sanguine wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: So Takihiro, I'm calling you out, give me an answer. Why should it take multiple AV units to destroy a single player in a tank? What reason do you have that permits a single person to surpass more than multiplemof hos designated counter? Dude (Monkey MAC) saw you in a game today, you were against me. (As a Gunship) WE DESTROYED A TRIPLE REP MADRUGAR !!!!!!!! We were like 10 agiant him and an another tnak but we destroyed it !!!!! I was personnally with Plasma Cannon and Proto Swarm (Commando) shooting contiunally on him with extra fast reload and unlimited ammo. (near to ammo installation) There was 2 Forge Gun (Breach). 2 blue dot Swarms. A Gunlogi with rail gun. 2 Scout with Remotes. And an Orbital Strike. And i finally got him with a critical hit from my Plasma Cannon. +150 But well....we sync 10 players and Orbital to destroy a tank....So we lose the objective, got crushed by infantry and your dropship and 1 min later his tank was back while it took us 10 min to destroy it..... Seems TOTALLY legit. 1 Tank Vs 10 ******* player, seems logic. It made us lose the game while we dominated you and your team the whole game..... Yeah saw that, was pretty darn good, though I would like to point out he did just sit there and take it, it took alot more effort for you to get me (I crashed in the end) and I was in a rather flimsy dropship by comparison. I rather enjoyed that match I believe we won, by a single clone! Still lost 700,000 ISK, but worth it when I now know my team of newberries beat a 10 stacked squad and I went positive. Yep it was damn close !!!! (A single one ) I've been the last killed, the one who made us loss BUT i've maded a Triple kill just before so...and got revived In fact he wasn't "sitting here" our scouts simply blocked all the way out by 10 explosive remotes while our tank was blocking the other way We blocked him. Well....Have you ever try to get down a Dropship with a Plasma Cannon ? It's pretty Hard. And before playing with AV i was shooting you with Laser Rifle and Mass driver to make you shoot me instead of my teamates, they pass trought and then take the objectives Lost something about 400.000 ISK, was playing ADV but died 8 time. Hmm in fact we were not in a squad, i was playing solo to train me (didn't play since a months) we were also totally blueberries. Seems like we were just randomely set up to destroy this tank. Certainely Amarr gods who decided this destiny. (The 2 forge gunner was Amarr sentinel and our scouts were Amarr, i was Amarr....Funny fact ) That was you? Your damn laser rifle was getting on my nerves no end! As for the tank, well played indeed, from my (rather mobile) perspective all I saw each time I came for another strafing run, was that blue tank in the same damn place. I died 12 in total, but considering I RE'd 3 heavies and logi hacking the point twice, used a mass driver 25% of the time and confirmed 2 kills (kill then terminate) right at the end, I was damn happy, was a fun match by all accounts, was very proud of team I didn't know. Will have green up with you sometime, usually on around 8-10pm UTC+00 I know that if you're contiunually hit by my laser you can't see what's hitting you (Forge etcetc) making you an obligation to endless watch you Ehp, making you unable to see infantry at ground. It was you on the Roof with your Mass Driver ? I was also with Mass Driver (Commando POWER !) , throw like 8/9 grenads of it on your dropship to make it fall, but it didn't Yes was a really fun match, with the Commando Events i won 122 Proto Commando suits Let's wreck them together :D
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 115	Posted - 2014.05.01 11:04:00 - [317] - Quote I can't, off the top of my head, think of a single other game that I've ever played where a particular build or loadout can just sit and absorb damage, completely ignoring an enemy shooting at them. At least not without using some sort of hack or glitch. I'm not asking to be able to one-shot tanks all day with my swarm launcher. I don't even expect to solo every tank on the field, I know I'm not THAT good, and I understand that there are a lot of tankers out there with MUCH more skill than me. BUT... If all AV weapons require the same SP commitment, then they should all be equally effective. I haven't dumped the SP I have into Swarm Launchers just to be an "assistant". That's like saying ARs arent supposed to kill, they're just supposed to help CRs kill. If they aren't meant to solo tanks under any circumstances, then they should have their SP requirements reduced, and I'd like a full refund so I can spec into something that can, like FGs, or maybe I'll spec into vehicles myself. Either that, or allow me to "dumb-fire" them against infantry because, for a weapon that ONLY works against vehicles, they don't seem to be very effective against them. Again, and I cannot stess enough, I'm NOT looking to one-shot tanks or win every fight but, when I DO go up against an enemy vehicle it would be nice to know that, whatever the outcome, the victor will be decided by player SKILL, and not the quality or price of their gear. I just want a fair, fighting chance. Is that too much to ask?
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 807	Posted - 2014.05.01 11:13:00 - [318] - Quote BIind Shot wrote: 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 off - great job in making the video. I can appreciate the difficulty it takes to set up something like this in a live game whereby CCP could have easily done this test themselves on their own testing environment. We know there is a problem, and there are numerous ways to fix it. Are you planning on doing one with forge guns? :)
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 229	Posted - 2014.05.01 11:15:00 - [319] - Quote I am. The tanker I used with the recording equipment is a pretty busy guy with work and is a pastor at his church. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1244	Posted - 2014.05.01 11:36:00 - [320] - Quote I can contribute some tanks for testing if need be. That's what you get!! - DA Rick

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 10037	Posted - 2014.05.01 11:40:00 - [321] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: I can contribute some tanks for testing if need be. As can I if required. Luk Manag, the glorious individual who made me what I am today! LvL 10 Forum Warrior you scrubs!
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 421	Posted - 2014.05.01 13:01:00 - [322] - Quote 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? Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Silver Strike44 Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 40	Posted - 2014.05.01 14:37:00 - [323] - Quote I would just like to point out that the guy on the tank was me. (mom im famous) Filler
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2050	Posted - 2014.05.01 15:26:00 - [324] - Quote 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. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2050	Posted - 2014.05.01 15:52:00 - [325] - Quote 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? Add more intelligence to infantry, which is impossible for you. A tank destroys me, I figure out a way to take it out. I don't go on the forums shouting "A TANK DESTROYED MINE NERF IT." (I did finally make a thread about STD vs MLT tanks but that's different) I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Marcus Stormfire G.R.A.V.E INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS 22	Posted - 2014.05.01 17:27:00 - [326] - Quote 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. -Marcus -I don't always kill Mercs with a sidearm, But when I do I use militia.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 571	Posted - 2014.05.01 19:20:00 - [327] - 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 - [328] - 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.
IRON PATRIOT 1 Proficiency V. 145	Posted - 2014.05.01 19:30:00 - [329] - Quote Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution.
Auris Lionesse Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 784	Posted - 2014.05.01 19:37:00 - [330] - Quote Silver Strike44 wrote: I would just like to point out that the guy on the tank was me. (mom im famous) No wonder the tank didn't die with this scrub attacking it. Troll thread guys, nothing to see here. Move along. Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Gallente Heavy Ninja Turtles! Heroes in a half Gank! *TURTLE POWER!!!*

Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2736	Posted - 2014.05.01 22:04:00 - [331] - Quote DarthJT5 wrote: Will Driver wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Ok, obviously it's broken and needs fixed and I'm not trying to deniend 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. And I'm firmly against this position. A proto swarmer with 4/5 proficiency should be able to solo any Tank. Tanks should not be immune from a player that's specifically designed to fight tanks. The "teamwork" argument is so tiresome I can barely stand it. Having a tank soak up the attention of 3-4 or more ineffectual A/Vers completely unbalances the game. If only tanks can battle tanks, then that's TANK 514 and not something I'm interested in at all. Maybe we should have an infantry only game. I bet the vast majority would opt into it, leaving only tanker on tanker matches for you. I wonder how much you'll enjoy that, without any foot soldiers to slaughter? Why should a swamer with 4/5 prof be able to easily slo my tank that requires more SP than everything in the swarm skill tree for JUST my large Proto missiles? Then, we can add in my shield upgrades up to 5, optimization 5, Small Proto missiles, all my vehicle Core skills up to five. This cost waay more sp and isk than anything an Av guy will call out. Hell, the turret alone costs 300k, much more than your suit. No, you should not be able to solo my tank EASILY. Possibly, sure. But not easily. I dont even go for infantry unless there arent any tanks to shoot at, my squad needs support, or enemy AV Aah now you see your saying an AVer only has to spend SP on his swarms, wrong. Dropsuit Command 3 \| Amarr Medium Suit Command 3 \| Amarr Logistics Suit Command 5 Dropsuot Core Upgrades 5 \| Dropsuit Shield Upgrades (and associated) 5 \| Dropsuit Armoir Upgrades (and associated) 5 Dropsuit Biotic Upgrades (and associated ) 5 \| Dropsuit electronics 5 \| Dropsuit Engineering 5 \| Nanocircuitry 5 Weaponry 5 \| Handheld Weapon Upgrades \| Explosives (and associated) \| Light Weapons 5 \| Swarm Launcher (and associated) 5 \| Sidearm Weapons 5 \| Sidearm of choice (and associated) 5 Grand total of SP required = 25,000,000 for a FULLY decked AV proto fit By Comparison Grand total of SP required for a proto modded blaster tank = 22,000,000 3mil cheaper SP less for an all Proto fit, maths says what? If you don't believe me feel free to visit proto fits. And try it out, also bear in mind, I did not include electronic associated upgrades (scanning upgrades) which adds an extra ~2mill I also only maxed 1 equipment. On the tankers side I maxed 1 weapon plus associated, assuming a solo fit (no light turrets)and everytning else to the max, this includes HAV operation and ALL vehicle upgrades. As such, the statement Tankers put more SP into tanks than AV puts into Infantry Is busted! 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.. 2736	Posted - 2014.05.01 22:08:00 - [332] - 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. Considering the power of electricity powering a tank would in no way improve solid mass of metal, it makes perfect sense, unless your powerplant is creating a micro gravity well to increase the tanks mass to infintie, at which point yoj become incapable of moving. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 425	Posted - 2014.05.01 23:39:00 - [333] - Quote IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution. Respectfully, increasing the clip will be a lateral move at best. none of the major issues with Swarms will be solved by giving them a 4 round clip. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7567	Posted - 2014.05.01 23:49:00 - [334] - Quote @Monkey MAC When disproving the SP argument, it should also be noted that even if the AVer spent less SP (which has been proven false), the SP the AVer spent may only be used if the team has called out a vehicle; as opposed to the Pilot's SP that can be used at any time (albeit to a lesser extent due to maps such as Iron Delta). Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 10060	Posted - 2014.05.01 23:51:00 - [335] - Quote Atiim wrote: @Monkey MAC When disproving the SP argument, it should also be noted that even if the AVer spent less SP (which has been proven false), the SP the AVer spent may only be used if the team has called out a vehicle; as opposed to the Pilot's SP that can be used at any time. (Albeit to a lesser extent due to maps such as Iron Delta). Well even that is debatable. You can call in AV anytime....but it is worthless. You can call in a tank, but meaningful combat is inside socket or building...........tank is worthless. Luk Manag, the glorious individual who made me what I am today! LvL 10 Forum Warrior you scrubs!
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7567	Posted - 2014.05.01 23:54:00 - [336] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution. Respectfully, increasing the clip will be a lateral move at best. none of the major issues with Swarms will be solved by giving them a 4 round clip. Actually it would increase the Swarm Launcher's DPS, and sustained damage. Though the true problem lies in the 3x Rep Madrugar. Making these an active module would solve things, without unbalancing other V/AV in other areas (ie, AV vs. DS) Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7567	Posted - 2014.05.01 23:57:00 - [337] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: @Monkey MAC When disproving the SP argument, it should also be noted that even if the AVer spent less SP (which has been proven false), the SP the AVer spent may only be used if the team has called out a vehicle; as opposed to the Pilot's SP that can be used at any time. (Albeit to a lesser extent due to maps such as Iron Delta). Well even that is debatable. You can call in AV anytime....but it is worthless. You can call in a tank, but meaningful combat is inside socket or building...........tank is worthless. Isn't that what I just said? Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 10062	Posted - 2014.05.02 00:00:00 - [338] - Quote Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: @Monkey MAC When disproving the SP argument, it should also be noted that even if the AVer spent less SP (which has been proven false), the SP the AVer spent may only be used if the team has called out a vehicle; as opposed to the Pilot's SP that can be used at any time. (Albeit to a lesser extent due to maps such as Iron Delta). Well even that is debatable. You can call in AV anytime....but it is worthless. You can call in a tank, but meaningful combat is inside socket or building...........tank is worthless. Isn't that what I just said? Well that argument has no value if it applies to both sides. Just as subjectives like if, should, and could have no real value either..... Luk Manag, the glorious individual who made me what I am today! LvL 10 Forum Warrior you scrubs!
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 426	Posted - 2014.05.02 00:00:00 - [339] - Quote Atiim wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution. Respectfully, increasing the clip will be a lateral move at best. none of the major issues with Swarms will be solved by giving them a 4 round clip. Actually it would increase the Swarm Launcher's DPS, and sustained damage. Though the true problem lies in the 3x Rep Madrugar. Making these an active module would solve things, without unbalancing other V/AV in other areas (ie, AV vs. DS) There are more problems with swarms than just a triple rep maddy. Assault dropships hitting their burner and having a get-out-of-jail free card comes to mind. Simply increasing the SL clip size will do absolutely nothing for the SL meta-game. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7569	Posted - 2014.05.02 00:10:00 - [340] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: Atiim wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution. Respectfully, increasing the clip will be a lateral move at best. none of the major issues with Swarms will be solved by giving them a 4 round clip. Actually it would increase the Swarm Launcher's DPS, and sustained damage. Though the true problem lies in the 3x Rep Madrugar. Making these an active module would solve things, without unbalancing other V/AV in other areas (ie, AV vs. DS) There are more problems with swarms than just a triple rep maddy. Assault dropships hitting their burner and having a get-out-of-jail free card comes to mind. Simply increasing the SL clip size will do absolutely nothing for the SL meta-game. This thread is about HAV/AV, and that's what I was referring to when I said that was the where the true imbalance lies. If you'll look at my posting history (which I wouldn't recommend lol), you'll see that I've been pushing for faster Swarm Launcher speed. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND

Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1251	Posted - 2014.05.02 01:38:00 - [341] - Quote 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. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1251	Posted - 2014.05.02 01:40:00 - [342] - Quote IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution. Increasing it by 1 would have a single clip of a maxed out swarm killing a maxed out repper maddy. This would be an acceptable kill. That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 428	Posted - 2014.05.02 01:43:00 - [343] - Quote Atiim wrote: This thread is about HAV/AV, and that's what I was referring to when I said that was the where the true imbalance lies. If you'll look at my posting history (which I wouldn't recommend lol), you'll see that I've been pushing for faster Swarm Launcher speed. No I remember your support in my "Here's why Swarms need some love..." thread...that's why I was slightly confused when you said this lol. Point well taken. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
SeargentSAVAGE SMARTCREW Canis Eliminatus Operatives 8	Posted - 2014.05.02 02:18:00 - [344] - Quote 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!"
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 583	Posted - 2014.05.02 04:19:00 - [345] - 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 - [346] - 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.
SeargentSAVAGE SMARTCREW Canis Eliminatus Operatives 9	Posted - 2014.05.02 04:33:00 - [347] - Quote 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? Oh and hopefully you read this one DEV, you realize you're trying to solve a problem with the best tank in the game at the moment. If you buff AV or make swarms shoot faster or add another shot to the swarm you can't only think about what it would do to this tank you got to think about how it would almost make every other tank useless and just one easy kill. This is the best tank in the game at the moment until hit with REs or PEs. Like I said and I seen many others say this tank is completely fair seeing that 3 REs or 3 PEs could blow this thing sky high. Another thing to think about this tank is only a problem when its coming from DNS seeing that they have unlimited ISK at the moment once it gets blown up another will follow, then another, then another. That's the other true issue with tanking at the moment, I got a fully proto tanking alt but I've basically have been force in retirement with my tanker because these guys can pull out nonstop proto tanks when tankers outside of DNS can only pull out about 2-3 then are forced in the frontline which is just ridiculous honestly
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 234	Posted - 2014.05.02 04:38:00 - [348] - Quote SeargentSAVAGE 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? Oh and hopefully you read this one DEV, you realize you're trying to solve a problem with the best tank in the game at the moment. If you buff AV or make swarms shoot faster or add another shot to the swarm you can't only think about what it would do to this tank you got to think about how it would almost make every other tank useless and just one easy kill. This is the best tank in the game at the moment until hit with REs or PEs. Like I said and I seen many others say this tank is completely fair seeing that 3 REs or 3 PEs could blow this thing sky high. Another thing to think about this tank is only a problem when its coming from DNS seeing that they have unlimited ISK at the moment once it gets blown up another will follow, then another, then another. That's the other true issue with tanking at the moment, I got a fully proto tanking alt but I've basically have been force in retirement with my tanker because these guys can pull out nonstop proto tanks when tankers outside of DNS can only pull out about 2-3 then are forced in the frontline which is just ridiculous honestly 3 PE's would only do 2250 damage.. I'd like to see your ******** as math as to how that can pop a tank with ehp of 5200. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
IRON PATRIOT 1 Proficiency V. 147	Posted - 2014.05.02 04:45:00 - [349] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution. Respectfully, increasing the clip will be a lateral move at best. none of the major issues with Swarms will be solved by giving them a 4 round clip. I wasn't talking 4 I was thinking more of 8. Swarms have a good rof it seem to me he hit a wall everytime he emptied his clip. In no way would increasing clip size cause swarms to solo tanks but it would scare them away.
IRON PATRIOT 1 Proficiency V. 147	Posted - 2014.05.02 04:54:00 - [350] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: Atiim wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution. Respectfully, increasing the clip will be a lateral move at best. none of the major issues with Swarms will be solved by giving them a 4 round clip. Actually it would increase the Swarm Launcher's DPS, and sustained damage. Though the true problem lies in the 3x Rep Madrugar. Making these an active module would solve things, without unbalancing other V/AV in other areas (ie, AV vs. DS) There are more problems with swarms than just a triple rep maddy. Assault dropships hitting their burner and having a get-out-of-jail free card comes to mind. Simply increasing the SL clip size will do absolutely nothing for the SL meta-game. You can't get mad if someone is smart enough to know when to retreat and save them selves some isk. That's like saying someone ran into a room where he knew a enemy was, but when he got there it was a heavy with an HMG and he decided to retreat. Besides dropships are more vulnerable to av than tanks are, when I ads I retreat when I hit half shields, the only time I really die to av is when I'm hovering low surrounded by structures and get hit by a swarm or forge and smack into a wall or something.

BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 234	Posted - 2014.05.02 04:59:00 - [351] - Quote IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Atiim wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: IRON PATRIOT 1 wrote: Increasing swarm launcher clip size could be a possible solution. Respectfully, increasing the clip will be a lateral move at best. none of the major issues with Swarms will be solved by giving them a 4 round clip. Actually it would increase the Swarm Launcher's DPS, and sustained damage. Though the true problem lies in the 3x Rep Madrugar. Making these an active module would solve things, without unbalancing other V/AV in other areas (ie, AV vs. DS) There are more problems with swarms than just a triple rep maddy. Assault dropships hitting their burner and having a get-out-of-jail free card comes to mind. Simply increasing the SL clip size will do absolutely nothing for the SL meta-game. You can't get mad if someone is smart enough to know when to retreat and save them selves some isk. That's like saying someone ran into a room where he knew a enemy was, but when he got there it was a heavy with an HMG and he decided to retreat. Besides dropships are more vulnerable to av than tanks are, when I ads I retreat when I hit half shields, the only time I really die to av is when I'm hovering low surrounded by structures and get hit by a swarm or forge and smack into a wall or something. How are dropships more susceptible to AV? They get a passive 45% resistance to swarm; the swarms have a lock on distance of 175m and the missiles can't travel past 400 meters. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Alena Ventrallis PAND3M0N1UM Top Men. 1253	Posted - 2014.05.02 06:11:00 - [352] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Wow, let's see, forge guns, swarms, RE/PE combo, railgun. You sir, are a genius. Why didn't anyone think of these before? Clearly you needed someone to tell you. Nothing Certain wrote: How about you provide some of said tactics so that the rest of us may test them ourselves? That's what you get!! - DA Rick
Lynn Beck Wake N' Bake Inc Top Men. 1636	Posted - 2014.05.02 06:22:00 - [353] - Quote I've found it to be possible. Min commando Mk.0 Twin cx dmg mods Wyyrokomi swarm Prof 1 Reload2 Took 12 volleys against a tank (whom i paid) sitting still, about 75% of the missiles hit the weak point. General John Ripper Like ALL the things!!!
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3775	Posted - 2014.05.02 07:34:00 - [354] - 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. All of these tactics involve the use of human intelligence. You are asking these peasants for too much.
BIind Shot Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 236	Posted - 2014.05.02 08:06:00 - [355] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: 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. All of these tactics involve the use of human intelligence. You are asking these peasants for too much. Hara-kiri before you dishonor yourself and your family any further. and he said unto them, "Bring ye all your trolls, that they shall feed".
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3781	Posted - 2014.05.02 08:11:00 - [356] - Quote Nah.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 121	Posted - 2014.05.02 10:27:00 - [357] - Quote Lynn Beck wrote: I've found it to be possible. Min commando Mk.0 Twin cx dmg mods Wyyrokomi swarm Prof 1 Reload2 Took 12 volleys against a tank (whom i paid) sitting still, about 75% of the missiles hit the weak point. 2 questions about this: What kind of tank and how was it fitted? In an actual in-game encounter, do you really believe that any tanker (or his teammates, for that matter) would actually sit still and allow you to fire 12 volleys at their weak spot, without evading, repairing, or just shooting you after the first or second volley hit?
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7586	Posted - 2014.05.02 11:51:00 - [358] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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. 1. Requires a tanker with Mental Retardation 2. I'm pretty sure this thread is about balance between Infantry AV. Tagged as irrelevant 4. PEs have a alarm sound, and visible to the TACNET via Active Scanning. 5. Implies that a tanker sits through both volleys (9s) without taking evasive action; also requires mentally retardation, 6, Against the 3x Rep Madrugar, impossible. From visual experience, the Swarm Launchers don't even hit the weakspot. Need I remind everyone that player incompetence is not a valid argument when discussing balance? Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7586	Posted - 2014.05.02 11:53:00 - [359] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: All of these tactics involve the use of human intelligence. You are asking these peasants for too much. Then I challenge you to try all of them against me, and I'm willing to bet the entire contents of your wallet that only #3 would have even the slightest possibility of succeeding. Not that #3 is relevant. This is a discussion of Infantry AV. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Obodiah Garro Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 1012	Posted - 2014.05.02 11:55:00 - [360] - Quote This thread really escalated quickly Nemo me impune lacessit

Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7587	Posted - 2014.05.02 11:58:00 - [361] - Quote Obodiah Garro wrote: This thread really escalated quickly Yeah it's amazing what happens when people continually provide evidence to disprove the anecdotes of the (now proven) mentally challenged Pilot community. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3792	Posted - 2014.05.02 12:18:00 - [362] - Quote Atiim wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: All of these tactics involve the use of human intelligence. You are asking these peasants for too much. Then I challenge you to try all of them against me, and I'm willing to bet the entire contents of your wallet that only #3 would have even the slightest possibility of succeeding. Not that #3 is relevant. This is a discussion of Infantry AV. Son, I could punch your tank to death. Left handed.
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7587	Posted - 2014.05.02 12:23:00 - [363] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Son, I could punch your tank to death. Left handed. Then put your money where your mouth is. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3792	Posted - 2014.05.02 12:23:00 - [364] - Quote It's a bad business venture. You don't know how much I have, and you never offered anything. What's in it for me?
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7587	Posted - 2014.05.02 12:26:00 - [365] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: It's a bad business venture. You don't know how much I have, and you never offered anything. What's in it for me? About 60m. I've been ****-poor since I bought my bro a Templar Code. Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3792	Posted - 2014.05.02 12:27:00 - [366] - Quote Yeaaaaaa... if all you have is 60 mil I'm not going to wager my own stash which is noticeably bigger. Good hustle on trying to become not broke though. But I'll keep on a lookout for you so I can give your tin can a kinetic beatdown.
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7587	Posted - 2014.05.02 12:30:00 - [367] - Quote Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Yeaaaaaa... if all you have is 60 mil I'm not going to wager my own stash which is noticeably bigger. Good hustle on trying to become not broke though. But I'll keep on a lookout for you so I can give your tin can a kinetic beatdown. Well then I guess my assertion stands unopposed. \o/ Proposed Mobile CRU Changes -HAND
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Dirt Nap Squad. 3792	Posted - 2014.05.02 12:31:00 - [368] - Quote No, your tank is still going to explode. You just aren't going to have any hope of receiving a payday.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2743	Posted - 2014.05.02 21:00:00 - [369] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: @Monkey MAC When disproving the SP argument, it should also be noted that even if the AVer spent less SP (which has been proven false), the SP the AVer spent may only be used if the team has called out a vehicle; as opposed to the Pilot's SP that can be used at any time. (Albeit to a lesser extent due to maps such as Iron Delta). Well even that is debatable. You can call in AV anytime....but it is worthless. You can call in a tank, but meaningful combat is inside socket or building...........tank is worthless. Isn't that what I just said? Well that argument has no value if it applies to both sides. Just as subjectives like if, should, and could have no real value either..... To the contrary, even if 'meaningful' battles takes place inside a socket or a generally unreachable location by tank, you can still have an effective strength, since you can I effect set up a perimeter around said combat to reduce logistical support. In short if your tank can't be involved directly in the main push it can still be used for high value secondary targets. AV is only effective when the condition 'vehicle on field == true' as such the AV is by all intensive purposes useless without a target. A tank can change target to maintain effectiveness, AV cannot. This therin gives vehicle SP a higher net worth than AV specific SP. Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Cardio Therapy Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 10	Posted - 2014.05.04 05:47:00 - [370] - Quote Why we always discuss that we need 2-4 mercs with AV weapons to distroy a tank driven by inly 1 person??? Why we don't discuss that a tank to be a danger and to survive should need at least 2 mercs supporting it??? rep tools have higher rep rate on vehicles. Did anyone have ever seen a logi to repair a tank??? why not a commando with RR or lasor to move with the tank in order to snipe and fast kill the AV mercs. When we speak that we need 2-4 AV to destroy a tank we have to think the oposit - a tank to survive and to be a real danger needs at least 2 merks to support it.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 :: [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.

Mike Ruan Said I was Dust Famous