|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
847
   |
Posted - 2014.06.14 20:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tebu Gan wrote:At least where a gunnlogi is concerned, a forge gun and a swarmer SHRED an unhardened gunnlogi. Mind you both were at proto level, but still, I have a hard time feeling any sympathy for those AVers that complain of unkillable tanks. AV played me, lured me in and eventually cut off my escape and surrounded me with their power. It was quite impressive.
AV really shined last night. While I may have only lost but a few tanks to AV, they proved that they are not nearly as underpowered as they claim to be where a gunnlogi is concerned. Hardeners, of course, makes a huge difference against swarms. Though when you throw a forge gunner into the mix, you WILL have to limit your engagements severely, even with the hardeners.
GG those AVers that actually try, and use tactics to overcome tankers on the field. It's amazing what you can do when you focus fire and coordinate. And it doesn't take half a team of AVers to do it!
I think the small changes that have been made have made a lot of difference in the tank-A/V game. Swarms still are gimped but I've been running an Assault Forge and I usually feel I have a chance to kill tanks and that they have to at least acknowledge me. I still get killed a lot but I kill quite a bit also. Glad to see AV'ers out there doing there thing and hurting tankers and on behalf of the AV'ers, thanks for recognizing their efforts.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
850
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 01:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
I've mostly given up trying to explain to tankers about balance.
You can only explain 1<2 so many times and have them reply 1=3 before you realize you aren't getting anywhere.
The logical inconsistency of the argument will probably always draw me in, but as far as enjoyable gameplay I am satisfied that Rattati is aware of the problems and has looked at possible solutions. Fixing the damage glitch and lowering vehicle reps is likely going to be enough to make me happy. Swarms will still need fixing, tanks will still have an unfair advantage but swarms will get fixed and I'm OK with the rest.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
850
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 01:26:00 -
[3] - Quote
Pvt Numnutz wrote:Atiim wrote:
-snip- long quote
It took 2 players to destroy you, and you weren't even using hardeners.
You state yourself that the outcome would not have been the same had your HAV been fit defensively
You allowed yourself to get trapped by AV; which is an issue of -gross incompetence-[/list]
Mind you that the first two points already state an imbalance, and the 3rd point isn't even a credible basis for determining balance.
On a slightly inflammatory note, perhaps you should pilot your HAV better? You know I want to ask you a question atiim. Should it take 2 players to destroy a well fit tank or just one? If one swarm launcher player is able to kill a tank or dropship then what happens when there is two? Or a swarm and a forge? If av was powerful enough to solo vehicles again vehicles would be pretty useless, especially dropships.
I think I see what you are getting at but I don't follow the logic. You are arguing that it should take 2 AV players to kill 1 vehicle player because otherwise 2 AV'ers will dominate vehicles, but you have that exact situation only reversed and think it is fine. Are you fine with the idea that it should take two tanks or a tank and a dropship to kill one well fitted forge gunner? If not, why not? It is the exact same argument.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
850
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 01:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
Winst0n W0lf wrote:Pvt Numnutz wrote:Atiim wrote:
-snip- long quote
It took 2 players to destroy you, and you weren't even using hardeners.
You state yourself that the outcome would not have been the same had your HAV been fit defensively
You allowed yourself to get trapped by AV; which is an issue of -gross incompetence-[/list]
Mind you that the first two points already state an imbalance, and the 3rd point isn't even a credible basis for determining balance.
On a slightly inflammatory note, perhaps you should pilot your HAV better? You know I want to ask you a question atiim. Should it take 2 players to destroy a well fit tank or just one? If one swarm launcher player is able to kill a tank or dropship then what happens when there is two? Or a swarm and a forge? If av was powerful enough to solo vehicles again vehicles would be pretty useless, especially dropships. It should take 2 people to kill a well fit tank with a good pilot. It should not, however, take 2 people with proto AV to take out a scrub tanker in a mlt tank, which is how it has been for, what, 6 months now? One competent AV player should also be able to at least do some area denial, which is not the case. Both the ISK and SP investments are horribly imbalanced. Alpha was a good step, but there's still more work to be done. Making tanks expensive again would be a pretty simple way to get there now.
I suggest going the other route and make the better tanks cheaper but easier to kill. If they are expensive they must either remain grossly OP to justify the cost or it is simply unfair to tankers.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
853
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 03:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Nothing Certain wrote:Pvt Numnutz wrote:Atiim wrote:
-snip- long quote
It took 2 players to destroy you, and you weren't even using hardeners.
You state yourself that the outcome would not have been the same had your HAV been fit defensively
You allowed yourself to get trapped by AV; which is an issue of -gross incompetence-[/list]
Mind you that the first two points already state an imbalance, and the 3rd point isn't even a credible basis for determining balance.
On a slightly inflammatory note, perhaps you should pilot your HAV better? You know I want to ask you a question atiim. Should it take 2 players to destroy a well fit tank or just one? If one swarm launcher player is able to kill a tank or dropship then what happens when there is two? Or a swarm and a forge? If av was powerful enough to solo vehicles again vehicles would be pretty useless, especially dropships. I think I see what you are getting at but I don't follow the logic. You are arguing that it should take 2 AV players to kill 1 vehicle player because otherwise 2 AV'ers will dominate vehicles, but you have that exact situation only reversed and think it is fine. Are you fine with the idea that it should take two tanks or a tank and a dropship to kill one well fitted forge gunner? If not, why not? It is the exact same argument. Because it only takes two competent AVers to kill any number of tanks. If I can organise another forge-gunner (or a swarmer willing to get in close for 'nades) if we can get organised (so probably not in ambush) we can kill all the tanks all the time. A BFG coupled with an AFG works exceedingly well, btw.
You didn't address my question. Two tankers can kill any number of AV'ers, so how does this further the logic of your argument?
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
853
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 03:20:00 -
[6] - Quote
Most of us AV'ers are arguing that two players with equal SP invested, equal ISK expenditure and equal skill should have equal chances of killing one another.
This seems not only reasonable, but obvious. If you don't agree with this, please explain why.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
854
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 13:06:00 -
[7] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:I find it amusing that you scrubs still talk as if vehicles vs. anything is a binary "If X goes against Y with Z, X wins no matter what".
We actually argue that it is a multifactorial continuum, with some factors weighing more heavily than others.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
858
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 07:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tebu Gan wrote:Nothing Certain wrote:Most of us AV'ers are arguing that two players with equal SP invested, equal ISK expenditure and equal skill should have equal chances of killing one another.
This seems not only reasonable, but obvious. If you don't agree with this, please explain why. And I have a question, how effective is my large railgun or missile setups against AV? Considering they are not very effective at all when it comes to killing infantry compared to the blaster counterpart, why is it so important that these types of tanks be denied an area? I have been a railgun user, with the intent to use them against vehicles AND infantry, for a very long time now. I consider my aim a cut above most railgun users that attempt to AI with it. And I can still say that I miss A LOOOOT. With missiles, it's just insane how much I miss. I do better with the splash damage of the railgun. So on average, in a game void of tanks, and light on competent AV, I can maybe get 10 to 15 kills, some of those being kills to an LAV driver or 2. I see proto suit heavies and scouts consistently get more kills than that. More often than not though, I get maybe 7 kills, and upwards to 2000 WP for my efforts. So please explain how a railgun or missile setup (somebody) needs to be destroyed as soon as it rears it's face. I will admit that running gunners (good ones at that) results in a much higher kill count for the tank as a whole, but I'm also removing 2 extra people from the field.
I get killed plenty by railtanks and often see them turn the tide in a battle all by themselves. They can kill everything; installations, infantry, LAV's, dropships, tanks while also providing cover and area denial for their team. So, I am not sure what you are getting at, an average railgun tanker has more impact than an average infantry. They are also much harder to kill than an average infantryman. I don't think this is really arguable.
Of course there are guys in dropsuits who can decimate an entire team but we aren't comparing players, we are comparing tools. We have to look at ALL examples of a given tool, not cherrypick ones that suit our purposes. The fact is that it is the tank, not the player, that creates the advantage tankers have. If the average kdr of tanks against infantry was around 1-1, then I would agree with your argument, but it isn't. The average kdr of infantry-infantry is exactly 1-1.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
858
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 07:26:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tebu Gan wrote:Alpha 443-6732 wrote:
Again, with this being said, I do believe that AV needs a slight tweak, but its getting to the right spot. AV should never compete with tanks for raw stats, because the nature of being an infantryman is that you have such a potential to be evasive and elusive, where vehicles struggle much of the time.
You make some very good points. Infantry can use terrain to their advantage in area a tank just can't. Cities, high elevations, obstructions, ect.
Tanks can't, but tankers can. You can wear the exact same dropsuit I am wearing inside of your tank. Pop out of your tank and you are at no disadvantage against me, pop into your tank and you once again have a huge advantage over me. So, no, tankers are not giving up anything.
Because, that's why.
|
|
|
| |
|