| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Apothecary Za'ki
Biomass Positive
23
   |
Posted - 2014.06.03 12:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Vehicals
we all whine about them we all hate them.. and some use them and cause tears.
they are not godly it just takes like 2 dedicated forge gunners to stand a chance vs any vehical, the problem is swarms and AV nades, have yet to test plasma cannons.
now as far as i see the LAVs are somewhat balanced except maybe caldari one needing a touch more ehp, the problem lies with HAV and dropships and their weaponry.
HAV
after hours on the battlefield i have seen that caldari tanks can be merc'd easily with flux nades and a well places forge/swarm/plasma. but this is countered with their speed but due to their weapon system and burst tank i think they are more designed for longer rage AV snipeing... some balance issues could be too fast (slow them down a little) and weapons.
the Gallante tank is quite powerful for frontlineing as its armor tanking is rather hefty but as iv seen their turning is slowslow and max speed is rather low so perhaps speed up turning and max speed somewhat but keep their roles as frontline brawler and rear sniper(caldari) defined.
Dropships
we infantry just fear when we see a dropship raining missiles down at us because missiles splash dmg and direct dmg is rather OP verses the rails and blasters which are just awful.
basic fact is caldari/missle dropships are overpowered as a combination vs vehicles and infantry, again blasters and rails hardly see the light of day same for gallente dropship, despite its ehp and rep ability its still sluggish and typically only used to ram the other dropships out of the air.
Weapon systems
on HAVs the small turrets seem fair and balanced, the large turrets are unbalanced, large railgun hits like a Doomsday vs infantry and best used against dropships and other tanks from distance, the blaster seems a little more balanced even though it rips inf and other tanks apart like a DU round through butter.
on Dropships the missiles need a bit of a nerf they are OP. blasters could do with a bit of a buff vs vehicles as could rails.
Possable Changes
the large turret systems VS infantry need to be calculated in such a way as we do in EVE.. like weapon system vs signature radius... meaning i can see people not being melted or OHK'd as easily but still close to the current rate but the damage received lowers some one as you go down the spectrum of vehicles-> heavy suits -> medium suits -> light suits.
so i could imagine YOLO scouts using remote explosives on tanks ( see Battlefield+C4 ) giving them a more open and risky combat role but also comes in useful with their cloaking ability's thus helping in the fight against vehicles even if the team had a few commandos with secondary light weapon being an anti vehicle weapon.
the small weapon system for vehicals seems fair with the exception of missiles.. again small missiles for HAV and dropship should have the VS signature radius dmg application while on LAV missiles remain the same as they are currently, this way LAVs have a role other then cheap disposable transport from spawn into the field and they still have some form of offensive capability other then ramming people.
my 2 isk.
Vehicles (Standard and above) are too isk efficient in the sense of isk vs risk compared to even proto suits/gear
TLDR:
nerf large turrets and dropship(missiles) VS infantry.
Slow down the caldari HAV,
speed up the gallente HAV.
general inf vs vehicle buff.
Nanite Injectors! Nanite Injectors Everywhere!
Minmatar Logibro in training. Rusty needles anyone?
|
Apothecary Za'ki
Biomass Positive
23
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 12:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
reserved temp.
Nanite Injectors! Nanite Injectors Everywhere!
Minmatar Logibro in training. Rusty needles anyone?
|
Godin Thekiller
shadows of 514
2516
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 22:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
1: your grammar is terrible.
2: every single one of your points is a swing and a miss with me:
Vehicles: There's dedicated pilots, so that is a lie. and no, none of the vehicles are anywhere near balanced. Every last one of them has its own problems, some of which can't even be easily fixed (ex. no protection for a gunner on a LAV).
HAV: Cal HAV's are already slow, and their turning radius is fine. Gal HAV's don't need any more speed or turning speed either.
Turrets: The turrets needs to go back to 1.6, yes. Damage mods needs to come back, and damage amps needs removing, yes. The signature system from EVE needs to be put in? lolno. If that's the case, remove all AV weapons from the game, and make the damage from the rest of the infantry weapons do jack **** to vehicles.
Logistics: Your rep doesn't work. See, percentages in EVE/Dust/Legion work off of whatever number it has. Therefore, it would rep off of whatever the hull has when it starts repping. So not only does it rep it varying levels (higher at higher shield/armor, lower at lower shield/armor HP), it'll never hit max (or it could get bugged to where it'll keep repping, so you could have infinite eHP). That's why it's based off of numbers. Also, no new items are going to be added to dust anytime soon (possibly forever), so if this came (which it most likely won't), then why even bother? just use a vehicle with remote reps (which will most likely come back for Legion), specifically (if they do it right) the LLV.
3: Well, that's kinda the point, because you know, my 500k ISK+ HAV should do better ISK efficiently than my 150k Scout, seeing as though it costs over over 3x is much?
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Apothecary Za'ki
Biomass Positive
23
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 22:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:1: your grammar is terrible.
2: every single one of your points is a swing and a miss with me:
Vehicles: There's dedicated pilots, so that is a lie. and no, none of the vehicles are anywhere near balanced. Every last one of them has its own problems, some of which can't even be easily fixed (ex. no protection for a gunner on a LAV).
HAV: Cal HAV's are already slow, and their turning radius is fine. Gal HAV's don't need any more speed or turning speed either.
Turrets: The turrets needs to go back to 1.6, yes. Damage mods needs to come back, and damage amps needs removing, yes. The signature system from EVE needs to be put in? lolno. If that's the case, remove all AV weapons from the game, and make the damage from the rest of the infantry weapons do jack **** to vehicles.
Logistics: Your rep doesn't work. See, percentages in EVE/Dust/Legion work off of whatever number it has. Therefore, it would rep off of whatever the hull has when it starts repping. So not only does it rep it varying levels (higher at higher shield/armor, lower at lower shield/armor HP), it'll never hit max (or it could get bugged to where it'll keep repping, so you could have infinite eHP). That's why it's based off of numbers. Also, no new items are going to be added to dust anytime soon (possibly forever), so if this came (which it most likely won't), then why even bother? just use a vehicle with remote reps (which will most likely come back for Legion), specifically (if they do it right) the LLV.
3: Well, that's kinda the point, because you know, my 500k ISK+ HAV should do better ISK efficiently than my 150k Scout, seeing as though it costs over over 3x is much?
naw cal tanks are fast in a stright line but turning is slower then a granny on a mobility scooter.
btw you DO know they are removing dust from ps3 and going to the mother platform(PC) so they can expand dust into the game it should be not this current "lite" version we have atm.
and yes i know my grammar is awful but i dont care as people who post about spelling and grammar mistakes are just padding the post with pointless bullcrap
Nanite Injectors! Nanite Injectors Everywhere!
Minmatar Logibro in training. Rusty needles anyone?
|
Godin Thekiller
shadows of 514
2516
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 22:55:00 -
[5] - Quote
Apothecary Za'ki wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:1: your grammar is terrible.
2: every single one of your points is a swing and a miss with me:
Vehicles: There's dedicated pilots, so that is a lie. and no, none of the vehicles are anywhere near balanced. Every last one of them has its own problems, some of which can't even be easily fixed (ex. no protection for a gunner on a LAV).
HAV: Cal HAV's are already slow, and their turning radius is fine. Gal HAV's don't need any more speed or turning speed either.
Turrets: The turrets needs to go back to 1.6, yes. Damage mods needs to come back, and damage amps needs removing, yes. The signature system from EVE needs to be put in? lolno. If that's the case, remove all AV weapons from the game, and make the damage from the rest of the infantry weapons do jack **** to vehicles.
Logistics: Your rep doesn't work. See, percentages in EVE/Dust/Legion work off of whatever number it has. Therefore, it would rep off of whatever the hull has when it starts repping. So not only does it rep it varying levels (higher at higher shield/armor, lower at lower shield/armor HP), it'll never hit max (or it could get bugged to where it'll keep repping, so you could have infinite eHP). That's why it's based off of numbers. Also, no new items are going to be added to dust anytime soon (possibly forever), so if this came (which it most likely won't), then why even bother? just use a vehicle with remote reps (which will most likely come back for Legion), specifically (if they do it right) the LLV.
3: Well, that's kinda the point, because you know, my 500k ISK+ HAV should do better ISK efficiently than my 150k Scout, seeing as though it costs over over 3x is much? naw cal tanks are fast in a stright line but turning is slower then a granny on a mobility scooter. btw you DO know they are removing dust from ps3 and going to the mother platform(PC) so they can expand dust into the game it should be not this current "lite" version we have atm. and yes i know my grammar is awful but i dont care as people who post about spelling and grammar mistakes are just padding the post with pointless bullcrap
1: No, they aren't. I think you have possibly confused the Gal HAV with the Cal HAV.
2: Yea, I said that in my post about Legion like 3 times. Do you know that it's called Legion, and that there's even a section for it?
3: It's not pointless; people get turned off by bad grammar, think you're an idiot, and don't listen to you (Ex. devs).
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |