True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
11023
   |
Posted - 2014.06.23 01:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Taki?
If you don't like what you've got, no one is more to blame than you and your ilk. Rather than giving ear to the balance concerns, you guys openly mocked those who'd express them. Rather than looking for fixes for an obvious issue, you guys looked the other way and pretended everything was fine.
Now you wish to pitch fits and play the victim?
I don't really see how you can blame tankers in their entirety.
Marauders were wonderful back in the day, this being when I had no AV SP or Vehicle SP.
However CCP said they weren't being used right.
Then we had Uprising HAV and from 1.0- 1.6 HAV were not really that great..... however ironically this was the period most tankers refer to as a Golden Age.
Still HAV felt they needed to be more durable. I did as well.
What we got was a skewed and ultimately broken new build for HAV, something Tankers have been complaining about since introduction. Frankly now our Tanks have less EHP, less skill involved in their use, less SP sinks, less useful skills, less overall depth, and have not be built on or fleshed out.
Where infantry have 4 racial suits per role, there being now 5 roles...... 20 suits to use...... exclusive of there now being all milita basic frames, dozens of weapons, and modules.
HAV have 1 MLT hull per race, there only being 2 RACES ATM, and one basic Hull per race ....STILL ONLY 2.
3 Turrets, and less than 5 competitive modules worth using, resulting in little to no diversity.
Worst of all.....anything that appeared to make STD HAV special...this being nothing.... is negated by MLT HAV.
" Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well."
-Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
11056
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 22:59:00 -
[2] - Quote
Sequal Rise wrote:Ghost Kaisar wrote:
BF3 Vet here.
The problem with Vehicles right now (From an infantry standpoint) is our inability to DEFEND ourselves.
In BF3, you could attack infantry easily, but you still had to watch out for Engineers. SMAW's and RPG's would tear you to SHREDS if you stuck around with competent AV. (I used to love tag-teaming tanks with a buddy. We could distract him with RPG's and have another dude hit the sweet spot and disable. Once disabled, he was as good as dead. Smart Tankers would immediately get range and let the gunner do the work. Idiots would try to splash us with the main gun.)
Not the same here. I've seen tanks eat rounds all day, and due to Swarms requiring lock, you really only get 1-2 volleys off before he pins you down and stops you from firing another shot.
Now this in itself isn't really a problem. Just use more than one AV. Same in Battlefield.
HOWEVER, you have to spec into AV here. You have to have the Fit already made and ready to respond. In BF3, EVERYONE had access to an Engineer with all the tools ready. MLT Swarms are a joke in comparison. MLT tanks are FAR too powerful for their comparative AV.
Tanks and Infantry need a HEALTHY relationship in order to co-exist. Tanks need to be viable forms of both Anti-Infantry and Anti-Vehicle, but they cannot dominate both aspects. It creates inbalances.
Same for Infantry. We do not need to lord over tanks like we did in the past. 2 Swarmers shouldn't lock down the whole map, the same way that a Blaster and a Rail shouldn't prevent most infantry from being able to even leave the city.
Don't bother trying to make people change their mind. They weren't listening before, they won't listen after. Dust tankers think that because they are in a tank, they must be unkillable. And it has always been this way.
(Knee jerk rage to perceived ignorance redacted)
Please refrain from making sweeping generalist assertions about Tankers, most of us want balance more than you know.
" Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well."
-Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
|