DUST Search - A question to the tanker community

All Channels

General Discussions

A question to the tanker community

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1693	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:53:00 - [1] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Give me a proto vehicles first Give me a Proto AV to Counter that Proto Vehicle First The current tanks become the proto tanks. Militia becomes advanced. Now we need a weaker new standard and a much weaker new militia. Bring back proper tiers for all active modules; they shouldn't provide the same buffs across all levels. Then I think everything should be balanced. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1694	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:12:00 - [2] - Quote Void Echo wrote: SoTa PoP wrote: Void Echo wrote: really, even one of the biggest trolls has gotten serious for once to talk about tanking? this issue has gotten worse than before is sota poop is putting his 2 cents in it. Has it not gone stupid? Tankers, you're hurting NPE. Quit your **** and pick one. I should of mentioned I only speak of lower tiered tank prices. That's what's harmful with tanks right now. There ratio of effectiveness with AV drastically goes higher at proto - but so what? That's the point. In strategic game modes they aren't a huge factor anyways, they can hold outside point 'sometimes' they're easily countered. So they're considered balanced. But MLT is NOT. Tankers aren't hurting the game, its the people that want them gone and to turn this into gall of duty that are hurting this game. the universe doesn't revolve around infantry. MLT tanks I couldn't care less about, they require nothing to use and should be treated and like such. they should have their effectiveness cut down because they are the lowest tier available. price remains the same but effectiveness is cut. Also bring back appropriate tiers for active modules. They shouldn't be providing the same buffs across all levels. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1694	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:13:00 - [3] - Quote SoTa PoP wrote: Tanks are completely fine regarding anything out of MLT. Besides rep tank maddys - that's a little dumb. Reps need to become active modules. Period. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1695	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:41:00 - [4] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: Operative 2511 Dajli wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: So... 1. You want tankers to give up Large Blaster Turrets or make them ineffective against infantry. 2. You want to be able to kill HAVs just as easily and fast as you kill other infantry. So, in return... 1. Can we tankers have the ability to fit small turrets as main turret for our HAVs? 2. Can we tankers have the ability to drive HAVs indoors and in tight spaces generally? 3. Can we tankers have the ability to hack points and deploy/use equipment with our HAVs? 4. Can we tankers have the ability to turn our turrets and hulls as fast as you can turn your dropsuits and aim to all directions? Or do you just want to take everything and give nothing in return? So, which thing do you want us to give up and what are you willing to give back in return? Pick 1-2 from each category (but the same amount of options from both). Yep, couldn't agree more. Nothing but QQing from infantry about tanks. Never a valid suggestion about balance. Always TANKOPHOBIA. Leave tanks the way it is right now... Fix AV as simple as that No, that will only create more imbalance. AV vs missile and railgun tanks is balanced, but fixing AV (and I assume you mean through buffs) will only create imbalance where we already have balance. It's this kind of attitude that keeps this game in a state of nerf/buff cycles. Only thing that needs fixing is that which lies at the core of the problem, not everything that it's associated with. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1697	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:37:00 - [5] - Quote True Adamance wrote: SoTa PoP wrote: MarasdF Loron wrote: So... 1. You want tankers to give up Large Blaster Turrets or make them ineffective against infantry. 2. You want to be able to kill HAVs just as easily and fast as you kill other infantry. So, in return... 1. Can we tankers have the ability to fit small turrets as main turret for our HAVs? 2. Can we tankers have the ability to drive HAVs indoors and in tight spaces generally? 3. Can we tankers have the ability to hack points and deploy/use equipment with our HAVs? 4. Can we tankers have the ability to turn our turrets and hulls as fast as you can turn your dropsuits and aim to all directions? Or do you just want to take everything and give nothing in return? So, which thing do you want us to give up and what are you willing to give back in return? Pick 1-2 from each category (but the same amount of options from both). Do you really believe this crap? I've been gone, away from the debates, but, really? You guys know you cost way too little for your effectiveness, what defense could you possibly say? If you want to stay cheap - then buff AV. One or the other, pick. Which is it? Somethings I agree with, others not so much. We do cost too little for too much efficiency. No a Tank should not go down too easily, or be too durable or their value diminishes and disappears, they become OP, respectively. But Tanks need a purpose on the field and I feel most players are simply too frustrated or biased to even begin considering more than "NERF IT". What I want HAV to be are proper tanks, with powerful main cannons designed to deal with other ground vehicles and HAV, with gunners, or co-axial turrets to engage infantry (can be split up into seats if required). Now HAV should be durable units either through passive armour/shield, or active modules, but solo-able none the less. I don't like large blasters, even though I like using them Tank Vs Tank, as they fundamentally unbalance infantry combat.....however let tanks keep their durability and shift their focus to anti vehicle combat I believe we will see much more diverse and skilled vehicle users, more lighter frame vehicles and in future MAV and MTAC. However if AV want to talk balancing tweaks they need to come to the table not demanding, or they get unreasonable response, they need to come saying "Tanks are fundamentally broken, however they do this right.... let them keep doing that, but instead of X they should now do Y" I still believe that all large turrets should have some form of "ratio" between AI and AV capabilities. There has to be trade-offs; if a turret is to be good for AI, it should be horrible at AV. Namely, the blaster turret should be AI, due to the way that it functions. As such its AV should be severely limited, but it doesn't suffer from that currently. The fact that people want to bring blasters into tank fights shows that they are imbalanced. A blaster should be outright horrible when it comes to fighting another tank or vehicle in general. The blaster needs something like a 33% damage nerf and see where that takes it. I believe that will take us much closer to finding balance. Balancing the Large Turrets "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32

Copyright © 2013-2024, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,01s, ref 20241218/0356
EVE-Online™/DUST514™ and EVE/DUST514 imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

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.