DUST Search - The problem with current vehicle versus foot soldier gameplay

Harpyja wrote:

Crimson Cerberes wrote:

If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout without an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have zero chance of competing. Your suit, wether it is 0 isk or 200k isk will melt in moments to any vehicle turret.

Only blaster turrets kill infantry with ease. Don't generalize all vehicles based on the one blaster tank that is effective at its role as AI.

Crimson Cerberes wrote:

If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout/commando with an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have next to no chance of competing with the vehicle. Your suit regardless of cost, will die in a blink of an eye if they see you.

Again, AV only has to fear AI (blaster) tanks the most. Railgun and missile tanks have to retreat with minimal effectiveness against the AV dropsuit.

Crimson Cerberes wrote:

If you are a tank/ADS and you see a ground soldier you hope there is no cover near. Unless they have AV, they have zero chance of fighting back and you have an easy kill. If they do have AV then you have a little while to kill them then you must retreat, to try to kill them again 30 seconds later.

Once more, only blaster turrets will have an easy kill. If you die to a missile/railgun turret, either the tanker has good aim and high skill and/or you made yourself an easy target (such as standing still).

Crimson Cerberes wrote:

Do you see the imbalance inherent in this?

Yes, blaster tanks are too powerful. I say, nerf their damage by about 33% and I think we are closer to balance. Their AI effectiveness gets nerfed (but seriously, I have yet to die to a blaster tank while running on foot) while their AV effectiveness is severely limited, which is something that should be done. There has to be a trade-off between AI and AV. Currently, there is no such trade-off in exchange for AI, while the railgun and missile turrets sacrifice AI for AV.

Balancing the Large Turrets

"We are not ever going to respec weaponry and dropsuit command because the majority of our Aurum gear falls within those

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Vanguard of the Phoenix 571	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:44:00 - [1] - Quote If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout without an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have zero chance of competing. Your suit, wether it is 0 isk or 200k isk will melt in moments to any vehicle turret. If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout/commando with an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have next to no chance of competing with the vehicle. Your suit regardless of cost, will die in a blink of an eye if they see you. If you are a tank/ADS and you see a ground soldier you hope there is no cover near. Unless they have AV, they have zero chance of fighting back and you have an easy kill. If they do have AV then you have a little while to kill them then you must retreat, to try to kill them again 30 seconds later. Do you see the imbalance inherent in this? "We are not ever going to respec weaponry and dropsuit command because the majority of our Aurum gear falls within those
Dauth Jenkins Ultramarine Corp 515	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:47:00 - [2] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout without an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have zero chance of competing. Your suit, wether it is 0 isk or 200k isk will melt in moments to any vehicle turret. If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout/commando with an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have next to no chance of competing with the vehicle. Your suit regardless of cost, will die in a blink of an eye if they see you. If you are a tank/ADS and you see a ground soldier you hope there is no cover near. Unless they have AV, they have zero chance of fighting back and you have an easy kill. If they do have AV then you have a little while to kill them then you must retreat, to try to kill them again 30 seconds later. Do you see the imbalance inherent in this? I'm going to guess you stopped using AV somewhere in 1.7? -Sincerely --The Dual Swarm Commando
Darken-Sol BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 1443	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:47:00 - [3] - Quote I would be scared of FGs if I couldn't kill them before they get a shot off. Crush them
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1693	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:51:00 - [4] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout without an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have zero chance of competing. Your suit, wether it is 0 isk or 200k isk will melt in moments to any vehicle turret. Only blaster turrets kill infantry with ease. Don't generalize all vehicles based on the one blaster tank that is effective at its role as AI. Crimson Cerberes wrote: If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout/commando with an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have next to no chance of competing with the vehicle. Your suit regardless of cost, will die in a blink of an eye if they see you. Again, AV only has to fear AI (blaster) tanks the most. Railgun and missile tanks have to retreat with minimal effectiveness against the AV dropsuit. Crimson Cerberes wrote: If you are a tank/ADS and you see a ground soldier you hope there is no cover near. Unless they have AV, they have zero chance of fighting back and you have an easy kill. If they do have AV then you have a little while to kill them then you must retreat, to try to kill them again 30 seconds later. Once more, only blaster turrets will have an easy kill. If you die to a missile/railgun turret, either the tanker has good aim and high skill and/or you made yourself an easy target (such as standing still). Crimson Cerberes wrote: Do you see the imbalance inherent in this? Yes, blaster tanks are too powerful. I say, nerf their damage by about 33% and I think we are closer to balance. Their AI effectiveness gets nerfed (but seriously, I have yet to die to a blaster tank while running on foot) while their AV effectiveness is severely limited, which is something that should be done. There has to be a trade-off between AI and AV. Currently, there is no such trade-off in exchange for AI, while the railgun and missile turrets sacrifice AI for AV. Balancing the Large Turrets "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Vanguard of the Phoenix 571	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:54:00 - [5] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout without an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have zero chance of competing. Your suit, wether it is 0 isk or 200k isk will melt in moments to any vehicle turret. Only blaster turrets kill infantry with ease. Don't generalize all vehicles based on the one blaster tank that is effective at its role as AI. Crimson Cerberes wrote: If you are a assault/heavy/logi/scout/commando with an AV weapon and you see a vehicle you have to hope cover is near by. You have next to no chance of competing with the vehicle. Your suit regardless of cost, will die in a blink of an eye if they see you. Again, AV only has to fear AI (blaster) tanks the most. Railgun and missile tanks have to retreat with minimal effectiveness against the AV dropsuit. Crimson Cerberes wrote: If you are a tank/ADS and you see a ground soldier you hope there is no cover near. Unless they have AV, they have zero chance of fighting back and you have an easy kill. If they do have AV then you have a little while to kill them then you must retreat, to try to kill them again 30 seconds later. Once more, only blaster turrets will have an easy kill. If you die to a missile/railgun turret, either the tanker has good aim and high skill and/or you made yourself an easy target (such as standing still). Crimson Cerberes wrote: Do you see the imbalance inherent in this? Yes, blaster tanks are too powerful. I say, nerf their damage by about 33% and I think we are closer to balance. Their AI effectiveness gets nerfed (but seriously, I have yet to die to a blaster tank while running on foot) while their AV effectiveness is severely limited, which is something that should be done. There has to be a trade-off between AI and AV. Currently, there is no such trade-off in exchange for AI, while the railgun and missile turrets sacrifice AI for AV. Balancing the Large Turrets That isn't really true now is it? An ADS with missiles doesn't even need to be that good of a shot thanks to ample splash damage and radius. Missile tanks can kill infantry just fine (although less effectively than small missiles). Railguns make better AI snipers than snipers do. "We are not ever going to respec weaponry and dropsuit command because the majority of our Aurum gear falls within those
Alex-P-Keaton Kramer Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 145	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:00:00 - [6] - Quote thank you for this enlightening thread you've made TC that i've never heard of before i like to go to craigslist and look at the personal ad's transexuals put up
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1693	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:04:00 - [7] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: That isn't really true now is it? An ADS with missiles doesn't even need to be that good of a shot thanks to ample splash damage and radius. Missile tanks can kill infantry just fine (although less effectively than small missiles). Railguns make better AI snipers than snipers do. For the ADS, true, but remember that it's also just made out of paper. It's rather close to the definition of a glass cannon with gank over tank. If you say missile tanks can kill infantry just fine, I'm sure you've never been in one. Go ahead, hop in one. Let me know how "easy" it is to kill infantry. You see the good missile tankers get infantry kills so you must assume that it's easy for everyone to do. If missile tanks could kill infantry just fine, then why is it that I have to run away from fatman with a forge gun? Railguns are meant to be used at range. Range makes tracking and hitting stuff easier, so if I were to have a say in large turret balance, railguns wouldn't excel in either AI or AV, but rather be all-rounded at range. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
CELESTA AUNGM Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 155	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:41:00 - [8] - Quote Alex, I agree with your point of view heavily... BUT, at the same time, Crimson I share some of your pain, and I haven't gotten tired of reading this kind of complaint. Not YET, anyway. Dust 514 is trying to keep advancing to the level that was (and still IS) intended: Ground capturing on a network-grid whose location is determined by an already established and stable base of PC players (Eve Online), on a "district" or sector sized map so large that vehicular support/transport is INDESPENSABLE. In that vast-map environment the HAV would be free to have jaw-breaking range and punch, but would be limited by it's slow speed when it comes to hunting sporadic dropsuit-ers. We saw that intended design in the 1.5 version of our HAVs. In that vast-map environment the Dropship would likely become the platform for delivering an instant fight, reinforcing and distributing, and givng corp-commanders a high place to watch the fight from and assess. The sheer DISTANCE that a DS can cover in seconds would compensate for it's native vulnerability whenever it hovers around too long. We see this sometimes in PC matches, where some corps will give their right arm to recruit a good DS player to join them for their upcoming match. Our troubles don't stem from these vehicles having been OP or broken in the past Patches, and needing to be tweaked around with... The trouble is we've been operating in these SMALL maps for SO long, becoming fully familiar with the vehicles' performance curves, that we can no longer co-exist in the tight confines of thees maps long enough to get anything done. Tweaking the vehicles between Patch 1.7 and 1.8 has only made them worse (COULD ONLY make them worse). --The HAV gets ruined by Rail Installations, so the range of the Rail weapons was halved to try to ease the pain. --We as infantry suffer frustration and suit losses from the HAVs and LAVs, where in the past the slower HAVs wisely travelled more frequently with infantry escort, making our encounters with vehicles a more "dropsuits defend the HAV" fight instead of a "surviving dropsuit RUN from the lone HAV" event. I won't fault CCP for this, not design-wise anyway. I liked the behavior and limitatiions of the vehicles in 1.3 through 1.6. Needing development, but not unsound behavior. It's the amount of TIME we've been trapped in small-maps and not released in large maps that are stable enough to make PC "the place we immediately jump on" when we play Dust. It's a kind of cabin fever. We're effectively no longer able to traverse maps of this tiny size without getting killed in "collision of the technologies" not killed by something being wrong with the technologies' design. Again, it's not a suggestion that CCP's got "broken" design of anything specifically. You weren't getting stomped so easily by the "six-wheeled Bop-Phaser Car" because it was wrongfully OP,... you were getting stomped so easily because the Bop-Phaser Car was rightfully designed to be used on the LARGER MAPS (the small map deprives you of all the advantages you could have over the darn Car). The current solution they're trying is to start RECDUCING the strength/range of those big toys... the RIGHT solution is to save the original killing strengths/ranges of those toys in an archives somewhere, and get us the BIGGER maps as soon as possible before we "nerf" every piece of machinery we have just to stay alive.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]