DUST Search - {seriously} The vehicle life cycle

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

{seriously} The vehicle life cycle

» 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)
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11333	Posted - 2014.06.29 20:57:00 - [1] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Large blasters are so bad at taking out competent infantry, that your better off using a rifle. They cloak, run, dance in front of you with a forge, jihad jeep you, so on. The ISK gap is enormous. These tanks are laughable. All you can do is spray and pray hoping for a random head-shot....Its just not fun. So unresponsive. You can tell CCP dosent play test. They stare at charts all day and corse random militia noobs get farmed by tanks. Then you go up against a competent squad and your useless. No need for rail tanks if there's nothing killing off the infantry. CCP slaughtered tank specialists like never before. Ive spent 32 million SP in tanks and i never felt more useless in my entire DUST career. Im blessed to have a awesome corporation funding me, but i can only imagine what the average tank pilot must be dealing with. Return the blaster to where it was or at least introduce a skill that tightens the dispersion. I often overheat before killing the scout strafing and throwing AV grenades. Rattati ever drive a tank? Sad thing is that CCP never does anything in a sensible manner. You swing the pendulum from OP to UP and so on. Baby steps when it comes to balance. "uhm ya we better fuk the rai l overheat, the damage, and how bout the damage mods too"....."yep that sounds good"......."oh wait we better slow down its rate of fire too". Fukin blaster is like a little kid taking his first **** on his own. Cant control that thing and it sprays everywhere. When CCP introduces something, it will be the in its most OP state, then after a few full moons its rendered a lot more useless. Never in moderation with u ppl. End of Q.Q To be fair Large Turrets shouldn't be designed to takedown infantry...... I wish the Large Blaster was a Semi Auto plasma cannon. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11333	Posted - 2014.06.29 21:14:00 - [2] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Large blasters are so bad at taking out competent infantry, that your better off using a rifle. They cloak, run, dance in front of you with a forge, jihad jeep you, so on. The ISK gap is enormous. These tanks are laughable. All you can do is spray and pray hoping for a random head-shot....Its just not fun. So unresponsive. You can tell CCP dosent play test. They stare at charts all day and corse random militia noobs get farmed by tanks. Then you go up against a competent squad and your useless. No need for rail tanks if there's nothing killing off the infantry. CCP slaughtered tank specialists like never before. Ive spent 32 million SP in tanks and i never felt more useless in my entire DUST career. Im blessed to have a awesome corporation funding me, but i can only imagine what the average tank pilot must be dealing with. Return the blaster to where it was or at least introduce a skill that tightens the dispersion. I often overheat before killing the scout strafing and throwing AV grenades. Rattati ever drive a tank? Sad thing is that CCP never does anything in a sensible manner. You swing the pendulum from OP to UP and so on. Baby steps when it comes to balance. "uhm ya we better fuk the rai l overheat, the damage, and how bout the damage mods too"....."yep that sounds good"......."oh wait we better slow down its rate of fire too". Fukin blaster is like a little kid taking his first **** on his own. Cant control that thing and it sprays everywhere. When CCP introduces something, it will be the in its most OP state, then after a few full moons its rendered a lot more useless. Never in moderation with u ppl. End of Q.Q To be fair Large Turrets shouldn't be designed to takedown infantry...... I wish the Large Blaster was a Semi Auto plasma cannon. lol if tanks cant take out infantry, then there wont be a need for infantry to dial 911 and get a rail on the field. No need for rail then just play infantry. Your stupid sentence just killed a entire vehicle dynamic. I'm not saying tanks shouldn't take out infantry. That is why we have small turrets mounted. We can't just expect to be able to stack a main gun and destroy everything. HAV should be the top tier Anti Vehicle platform on the field, deployed sparsely with heavy SP and ISK investment ( 500K currently is a fair investment) to attain vehicle dominance and clear all enemy vehicles from the field. If HAV want to destroy infantry or be protected from them then we need to either work with our squads more closely or mount gunner slots. Perhaps We could ask CCP if we could cycle between out large and small turrets. I mean modern tanks fit co-axial machine guns and CROWS for a reason. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11333	Posted - 2014.06.29 21:34:00 - [3] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Large blasters are so bad at taking out competent infantry, that your better off using a rifle. They cloak, run, dance in front of you with a forge, jihad jeep you, so on. The ISK gap is enormous. These tanks are laughable. All you can do is spray and pray hoping for a random head-shot....Its just not fun. So unresponsive. You can tell CCP dosent play test. They stare at charts all day and corse random militia noobs get farmed by tanks. Then you go up against a competent squad and your useless. No need for rail tanks if there's nothing killing off the infantry. CCP slaughtered tank specialists like never before. Ive spent 32 million SP in tanks and i never felt more useless in my entire DUST career. Im blessed to have a awesome corporation funding me, but i can only imagine what the average tank pilot must be dealing with. Return the blaster to where it was or at least introduce a skill that tightens the dispersion. I often overheat before killing the scout strafing and throwing AV grenades. Rattati ever drive a tank? Sad thing is that CCP never does anything in a sensible manner. You swing the pendulum from OP to UP and so on. Baby steps when it comes to balance. "uhm ya we better fuk the rai l overheat, the damage, and how bout the damage mods too"....."yep that sounds good"......."oh wait we better slow down its rate of fire too". Fukin blaster is like a little kid taking his first **** on his own. Cant control that thing and it sprays everywhere. When CCP introduces something, it will be the in its most OP state, then after a few full moons its rendered a lot more useless. Never in moderation with u ppl. End of Q.Q To be fair Large Turrets shouldn't be designed to takedown infantry...... I wish the Large Blaster was a Semi Auto plasma cannon. lol if tanks cant take out infantry, then there wont be a need for infantry to dial 911 and get a rail on the field. No need for rail then just play infantry. Your stupid sentence just killed a entire vehicle dynamic. I'm not saying tanks shouldn't take out infantry. That is why we have small turrets mounted. We can't just expect to be able to stack a main gun and destroy everything. HAV should be the top tier Anti Vehicle platform on the field, deployed sparsely with heavy SP and ISK investment ( 500K currently is a fair investment) to attain vehicle dominance and clear all enemy vehicles from the field. If HAV want to destroy infantry or be protected from them then we need to either work with our squads more closely or mount gunner slots. Perhaps We could ask CCP if we could cycle between out large and small turrets. I mean modern tanks fit co-axial machine guns and CROWS for a reason. Modern tanks pack 120mm cannons with HE rounds that obliterate tha fuk out of anything within 15 meters. & in competitive setting there's just not enough manpower for small turrets to be effective enough to justify taking a rifleman out of the battle. Indeed so single shot AoE rounds make more sense that firing a giant machine gun that shoots plasma and does not adequately represent Gallente Blaster Tech at all. Remember of course that real tanks are crewed by numerous people. Lets be honest this isn't about what a tanker wants this is about achieving balance for everyone and HAV pilots like us cannot and should not be able to solo tank with impunity. Small turrets should be encouraged and incentivised over selfish solo tanking. The easiest way to do this is play on the concept of tracking speeds and turret sizes in EVE. A Battleships Large Lasers cannot easily target and cannot hit close range fast moving targets, but if that same battleship used small turrets it could more easily hit its target. TL;DR Large Turrets = Vehicle and Anti Vehicle turrets Small Turrets= Anti Infantry Turrets " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11333	Posted - 2014.06.29 21:47:00 - [4] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: I am all for sensible changes. 6 OP tanks in ambush was ridiculous and not fun for anyone, but having infantry in proto gear dance 40 meters in front of you while bombarding you with AV and your blaster cant seem to hit sh!t....that's not balance. Not 32 million SP and half a million ISK war machine gets outdone by one 150k infantry. Remember tanks are very situational. They cant take points or invade effectively in urban combat. I know..... I have been tanking for a very long time...... And I have in my mind a role for HAV since we currently don't have one. And it is what I has stated. However I think that an HAV pilot should be able to switch between control of a Large turret for AV fire, and a Light Turret for anti infantry fire (( basically finding reasons for HAV pilots to fill up turret slots and stop fitting HAV for pure tank)). " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11333	Posted - 2014.06.29 22:05:00 - [5] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Changes I would like to see A passive skill for tighter dispersion and/or nonstupid dispersion decay The rail range buffed and heat build up buffed so that it can fire 5 consecutive shots without overheat It would make vehicle pilots feel.....like specialists. Like SP investment mattered. Good points all around. There are actually a dozen skills we could add to the vehicle tree one of my personal favourites being Armour/ Shield (insert Damage type) Compensation which adds resistances % increases to resistance plating/ward fields and Hardeners. E.G- they only apply bonuses to the modules efficiecy not the hulls resistances. Also have you guys ever considered that the very notion than the hull itself, especially in the case of old assets like Marauders and Enforcers did not have inherant racial resistance profiles was odd? " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11338	Posted - 2014.06.29 23:18:00 - [6] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Changes I would like to see A passive skill for tighter dispersion and/or nonstupid dispersion decay The rail range buffed and heat build up buffed so that it can fire 5 consecutive shots without overheat It would make vehicle pilots feel.....like specialists. Like SP investment mattered. Good points all around. I miss meaningful core skills hell I don't even have damage mods to 5 because 3 was high enough for the longest time unless it was a complete glass cannon and I felt points into speed hacking and links was more useful now that their kinda pointless to run on most fits I might not even get that to 5. you dream big. CCP wont introduce new meaningfull skills. All i can hope for is a buff to blaster to create the demand for rail, and have rail rof back to where it was. With the games lifespan expected to end after DESTINY, i doubt they would spend much energy in creating skills. Keep your expectations realistic. Depends on how good Destiny is. So far is looks like a more detailed and pretty version of Borderlands....... if that's all it is it will never be able to retain an audience..... " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11345	Posted - 2014.06.30 00:49:00 - [7] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Harpyja wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Large blasters are so bad at taking out competent infantry, that your better off using a rifle. They cloak, run, dance in front of you with a forge, jihad jeep you, so on. The ISK gap is enormous. These tanks are laughable. All you can do is spray and pray hoping for a random head-shot....Its just not fun. So unresponsive. You can tell CCP dosent play test. They stare at charts all day and corse random militia noobs get farmed by tanks. Then you go up against a competent squad and your useless. No need for rail tanks if there's nothing killing off the infantry. CCP slaughtered tank specialists like never before. Ive spent 32 million SP in tanks and i never felt more useless in my entire DUST career. Im blessed to have a awesome corporation funding me, but i can only imagine what the average tank pilot must be dealing with. Return the blaster to where it was or at least introduce a skill that tightens the dispersion. I often overheat before killing the scout strafing and throwing AV grenades. Rattati ever drive a tank? Sad thing is that CCP never does anything in a sensible manner. You swing the pendulum from OP to UP and so on. Baby steps when it comes to balance. "uhm ya we better fuk the rai l overheat, the damage, and how bout the damage mods too"....."yep that sounds good"......."oh wait we better slow down its rate of fire too". Fukin blaster is like a little kid taking his first **** on his own. Cant control that thing and it sprays everywhere. When CCP introduces something, it will be the in its most OP state, then after a few full moons its rendered a lot more useless. Never in moderation with u ppl. End of Q.Q This guy gets it. Large Blasters need to be a threat to infantry, not a "suppressant" as Rattati puts it. Vehicles need some form of an effective counter to infantry, and large blasters are it. Blaster tanks get used to kill infantry and missile/railgun tanks are pulled out to eliminate the blaster tanks and AV does its best to push off or destroy these missile/railgun tanks. Now, there's little reason to run blaster tanks, if any at all, if there's any proto AV on the field. Blaster tanks cannot kill infantry beyond 30 meters and anything beyond that is just pure luck. If blaster tanks aren't used, then neither are missile/railgun tanks. All of my SP is into vehicles and I'm disappointed that blasters got the nerf, because most of my pay came from destroying blaster tanks with my missile Gunnlogi. The only time I encounter blaster tanks is because my blueberries don't have anything skilled beyond standard so they get stomped by protos and blaster tanks run unopposed. Otherwise, I feel like my Gunnlogi now acts as bait just so that another tank shows up so I have something juicy to shoot at. Blasters have 1 role....kill infantry. EZ Why do you assume that has to be their role?....when Dust Blasters don't resemble EVE Tech or are so game breakingly powerful against infantry that they have to be nerfed...... " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11345	Posted - 2014.06.30 00:51:00 - [8] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Im talking about PC and competitive scenarios. I have yet to see you on a competitive level so please refrain your irrelevant comments. Lol thinks PC corp gives him the right to talk down to other players........ " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11345	Posted - 2014.06.30 01:11:00 - [9] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Im talking about PC and competitive scenarios. I have yet to see you on a competitive level so please refrain your irrelevant comments. Lol thinks PC corp gives him the right to talk down to other players........ lol your being hyper sensitive. PC is balance in its purest form. Strategy, experience and prototype vs prototype hardware. Achieve true balance there and it will trickle down to the pub matches. If you have no PC experience, how can you provide valuable input? Been in PC, hated it as it was grenade spam, lack of valuable tactics as each team tried to our abuse the other with nade spams, CR's, and FOTM, watched PC footage....nothing special...... no different from how FW plays out between two stacked corps, no meaning in PC....... being is PC is one aspect of the game......it only a single view point no better or worse than any other......but that's besides the point. @ Tebu.... yeah I smacked around Tiberius when he tried to Tank...... just like he smacked me down when I tried to Commando him. Also have beaten OH teams every now and then, great fights all the time....but being in PC is not a reflection of skill, just that you have ISK want to regularly have organised fights. If you want a real war FW is where its at. All attrition, all the time......I just wish we could choose where we deployed. ANYWHO BACK TO HAV and how we disagree about their roles. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11347	Posted - 2014.06.30 01:36:00 - [10] - Quote The Black Jackal wrote: I played PC from Uprising 1.0 until now. Because YOU haven't seen me, doesn't mean I'm not in PC. That being aside... in PC, you're using a Tank to mow down infantry solo, you SHOULD be able to be killed solo by the very targets you are mowing down. If you are required to have 2 people in your tank to simultaneously deal with both Vehicles and Infantry, then the power of the HAV can be increased exponentially so that 1 AV cannot be as effective against you. Oh, and that guy in your turret, he's also fitted for battle, so you know, he can jump out, kill some guys, hack a turret, and get back in. You're talking as if he is completely confined within that zone, when he's not. Only the Commander is constrained to that extent to prevent enemies taking the HAV, or a team mate jumping into the wrong seat. In effect you are using your HAV to multiply his effectiveness too. He can move faster, do more damage without wasting his own weapon's clip, and be protected inside your hull. All for giving up some manoeuvrability. With the option to get out, shoot people in the face as required. Concerned about that pesky Dropship also? Hey, a Small Rail Turret on top actually deals with them very well. So a three-man HAV can have the ability to Take out other Tanks, Suppress Infantry, Kill infantry, and take out Aerial Targets in one package. And possibly require the use of multiple AV to eliminate the threat due to it's requirement of having 3 people inside. Been running my HAV like that for a long time. My particular build was nothing special against other tanks when it was just me...... but put Aero and Humble Seeker in my turrets and no enemy tank could take us down unless I did something utter ridiculous. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11347	Posted - 2014.06.30 01:45:00 - [11] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: The Black Jackal wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: are you pushing for a serious buff to small turrets? because that would make ADS OP. Not sure where I mentioned serious buff to Small Turrets... the current Small Railgun can take out an ADS, or at least make it go away. Current small turrets are too ineffective VS competent infantry. Buff the small turrets to make them more effective on a tank hull vs infantry, but that could create a imbalance when they are fitted to the ADS. Right now its impossible to justify the extra seat, ISK cost, SP cost, fitting cost and man power cost for a almost useless small turret. DPS dude. Small Railguns effectively nullify either Reps or Hardeners meaning I am applying the full damage of my main gun despite you using actives of heavy reps. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11348	Posted - 2014.06.30 01:50:00 - [12] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: The Black Jackal wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: are you pushing for a serious buff to small turrets? because that would make ADS OP. Not sure where I mentioned serious buff to Small Turrets... the current Small Railgun can take out an ADS, or at least make it go away. Current small turrets are too ineffective VS competent infantry. Buff the small turrets to make them more effective on a tank hull vs infantry, but that could create a imbalance when they are fitted to the ADS. Right now its impossible to justify the extra seat, ISK cost, SP cost, fitting cost and man power cost for a almost useless small turret. DPS dude. Small Railguns effectively nullify either Reps or Hardeners meaning I am applying the full damage of my main gun despite you using actives of heavy reps. opportunity cost dude, those 2 dudes in your tank are needed in the urban combat inside the city. Small rails have 200m range. Hostile tank has 100m in which your "advantage" is useless. & you gimped your tank fitting those 2 miny rails. GG If you can rapidly deploy those 2 men to an objective, destroy an HAV, and cover them as they hack..... " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11349	Posted - 2014.06.30 02:10:00 - [13] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Hypothetical, not battle proven concept. Been doing it for months now it rarely fails. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11351	Posted - 2014.06.30 02:19:00 - [14] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Hypothetical, not battle proven concept. Been doing it for months now it rarely fails. got proof? http://www.dustcharts.com/ cuz clearly 0.H's tank core has been doing something right. You like throwing that around a lot. I shall away to ask yon Tiberius if I could join OH if I wanted to...... probably could..... I have too much respect of Lea and Tiberius as Amarr FW buddies to make comments about OH though. In the end you either do or don't believe me. It does work, it wins matches before they even begin. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11353	Posted - 2014.06.30 02:29:00 - [15] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Hypothetical, not battle proven concept. Been doing it for months now it rarely fails. got proof? http://www.dustcharts.com/ cuz clearly 0.H's tank core has been doing something right. You like throwing that around a lot. I shall away to ask yon Tiberius if I could join OH if I wanted to...... probably could..... I have too much respect of Lea and Tiberius as Amarr FW buddies to make comments about OH though. In the end you either do or don't believe me. It does work, it wins matches before they even begin. Its called proof. I really don't believe you, and you really have no evidence. Therefore your point is invalid and small rail turrets as they are, become insufficient in their effectiveness in order to justify their cost. Point closed. You haven't disproved my statement though......only thrown fallacious logic at it....... " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11359	Posted - 2014.06.30 03:16:00 - [16] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Lol so you would reduce the HAV to a glorified taxi. Scrub move. I can see the headlines already! WANNABCPM Jackal deprives the community of a healthy vehicle dynamic! No he wants to make the HAV a powerful AV platform, and when manned, a powerful anti infantry platform. MAV will fulfil the role of APC. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11379	Posted - 2014.06.30 11:11:00 - [17] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: The Black Jackal wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Lol so you would reduce the HAV to a glorified taxi. Scrub move. I can see the headlines already! WANNABCPM Jackal deprives the community of a healthy vehicle dynamic! No, I want HAVs to have a role as well. HAVs are currently 'more focused' on Anti-Vehicle Duties due to their Large Turrets. The Smaller Turrets are a bit more varied with AI and AV turrets that can 'enhance' the roles of the guys inside. To outline an example, I run a Caldari assault with RR, Locus Grenades etc, but no AV capability.. but pair me with a HAV driver who fits a Large Blaster and a Small Rail, suddenly I have the capacity in addition to my Anti-Infantry Capabilities as an Infanrty, the ability to Effectively anti-vehicle as well, and have somewhere I can 'bunker' to repair / heal. Also, the ability to move faster from objective a to b to c. This isn't a glorified taxi, it's considered a 'Force Multiplier', same as a Logistics suit with a Repair Tool could be a 'Glorified Mechanic', but are actually force multipliers when paired with a Heavy Armor-Tanked Suit. Having a gunner the entire time in PC will not happen in PC. You can do raids with a gunner seat, But as far as 2 guys in one tank watching a point with the way tanks are these days, Its not happening. All the enemy has to do is 2v1 you with Sicas and its over and that is being nice about it. If you're going to have a gunner in anything, It would be best inside of a dropship. Sure tank gunners are nice, But they belong in pubs. The full-time use just isn't solid enough for PC. I've been tanking in PCs for awhile now, And I can point out that you don't need them to have vehicle dominance or to become any more tactically inclined. On another note though, Blasters do need a tweak. The dispersion is way too intense & for PCs they have become a no-go. Why? You can't kill seasoned PC players with them. The lack of blaster tanks means no real need for rail support. The only reason rails get called out today is to act as a AA for enemy ADS. THERE IS REALLY NO OTHER REASON. If there's no ADS then now, At this point, We just call rails to fight other rails. Its stupid and a waste of boots. So, I feel like if you feel you've made your rail tank have some better purpose, Thats awesome. For the changes made for rail tanks, CCP needs to unnerf something. Give us range back or give us RoF back. Having everything nerfed makes rail tanks almost absolutely pointless. If CCP did cut down the dispersion on blasters, I believe Rail tanks would be deemed null effectiveness for taking them out & only seasoned rail pilots will stand a chance. Lol PC arbitrary 16 vs 16 fights....... I'mma love when you guys are exposed to real New Eden conflict..... " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11453	Posted - 2014.07.01 20:45:00 - [18] - Quote Tanks in this game will never be balanced when their operators think its fine that their vehicles don't act like tanks. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11457	Posted - 2014.07.01 23:14:00 - [19] - Quote Atiim wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Apothecary Za'ki wrote: if you want anti personnel equip the small turrets too. the large ones are for AV only really so quite your belly aching silence peasant! In PC matches there is no available manpower to man the miny rails. Dont expect a noob to understand the complexities of PC however. Then fit a Mobile CRU and tell someone that they are relieved of their Uplink duty. For all intensive purposes Atiim and I'd honestly trust you more than this jack off...... is PC really that complex? I can understand if you said intense......but not any more or less complex than any other game mode. Mechanics are still the same, maps the same, etc. And lets be honest FPS players aren't that complex....... " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11460	Posted - 2014.07.01 23:44:00 - [20] - Quote CHANCEtheChAn wrote: True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: Apothecary Za'ki wrote: if you want anti personnel equip the small turrets too. the large ones are for AV only really so quite your belly aching silence peasant! In PC matches there is no available manpower to man the miny rails. Dont expect a noob to understand the complexities of PC however. Then fit a Mobile CRU and tell someone that they are relieved of their Uplink duty. For all intensive purposes Atiim and I'd honestly trust you more than this jack off...... is PC really that complex? I can understand if you said intense......but not any more or less complex than any other game mode. Mechanics are still the same, maps the same, etc. And lets be honest FPS players aren't that complex....... Yes PC is that complex MOST teams spend the ENTIRE 10 minutes in the warbarge planning for the PC, and get into the battle and have to plan even more Every map and every socket placement and every difference in how many points and which players are available to you and who your enemy is and who they bring dictate a different plan nearly every single PC you play, and I've played over 500 You have to have a set number of tanks, and ADS, and forgers for AV, but too much and your ground game suffers. Bring in too many slayers and you get pushed out of vital areas with lack of equipment and support. Too much support and you just get rolled over with Sentinel spam Tanks are busy and an ADS in the city? You have to make sure you have someone on standby with swarms or forge to counter or risk getting shredded Enemy team losing ground battle? They might counter by taking their 4 vehicle pilots and putting them on the ground, now your outnumbered. Lost high ground? Now you have to take players away from the fight to reset it. Do you risk removing your players and getting over in by numbers? Or do you risk the incoming rain? When you take high ground, do you keep it when the enemy moves away? Or leave it and risk a counter attack PC on DUST is probably the most competitive thing I've ever played. No other game has even come close in comparison. The best thing I can stress in PC intensity in a video game is sitting with 20 kills and the 25 Kill streak NUKE equipped on MW2 and not knowing whether to camp or proceed into the fight, to stay put and wait, or follow your team. All the while the timer has just hit 1 minute. Every last move you make in a PC match could mean a loss or a victory, and a loss could mean hundreds of millions of ISK loss. And a win can be a foothold for the future of an uprising star corp. TL&DR PC is the bees knees of competitive play You will not find thrill like this playing anything else Here, you will shape your future with the choices you make And as a corporation make If you have not played for your corp in PC I feel sorry for you GG Sounds no different from how our treat Factional Warfare....... issue with PC that there is no point to it. Holding a district in the arse end of Minmatar space? I'll pass.... I mean your districts only serve as much meaning as you attribute them. Just like our Temple which we set up on a planet, the POSes we own, the Capitals we station on...... etc " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11460	Posted - 2014.07.02 00:09:00 - [21] - Quote Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: For all intensive purposes Atiim and I'd honestly trust you more than this jack off...... is PC really that complex? I can understand if you said intense......but not any more or less complex than any other game mode. Mechanics are still the same, maps the same, etc. And lets be honest FPS players aren't that complex....... Imagine a 16v16 q-sync with everyone running full PRO (and FoTM) gear in Skirmish. That's about as complex as it gets. So the loudest entitled players masquerading and MLG circuit 1337 pro 5k1llz0rz " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11476	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:12:00 - [22] - Quote Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: For all intensive purposes Atiim and I'd honestly trust you more than this jack off...... is PC really that complex? I can understand if you said intense......but not any more or less complex than any other game mode. Mechanics are still the same, maps the same, etc. And lets be honest FPS players aren't that complex....... Imagine a 16v16 q-sync with everyone running full PRO (and FoTM) gear in Skirmish. That's about as complex as it gets. So the loudest, self entitled players masquerading and MLG circuit 1337 pro 5k1llz0rz? Yep. But, it also features "meta-game". Though most of the people in PC are terrible at meta and their plans are so blatantly obvious that it may as well be a cheesy American sitcom from the mid '90s. Yeah I remember Ghostt Shadow's "My hundreds of men will launch a surprise attack" announcement....or the "We want to make a league in Molden Heath"...or the always classic and most ridiculous of all the idiotics posts "We are locking our districts to enforce change". I would say to the Warroom get good at Meta.....but most of them probably don't understand what that actually entails. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11480	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:43:00 - [23] - Quote Argetlam Thorson wrote: Does Shadow of War even PC? I'm pretty sure I've never seen him in a PC...ever. Considering how often we fight OH, how often I'm fielded by my corp, and the fact that I didn't even know he existed before today, I'm curious as to how credible he is as an authority on PC gameplay. Anyway, moving on, Large Rails should not have a range greater than a FG. I should not be getting sniped from outside my absolute range by a vehicle that can do the same damage per shot, shoot much faster, move much faster, and on top of that, has 5x my HP. If anything, I should have the slight range advantage as they can one shot me but it takes me 3-4 shouts to take them down. That's 12-16 seconds of me shooting one guy who can one shot me and moves faster than I do and as such can escape my range without much difficulty, not to mention the fact that I have to worry about infantry. I don't say this to attempt to say Forges are UP, I'm just saying that if Rail Turrets get a buff to range, the forges need the same buff as well. As for the old "I win" tin can, you should not be able to solo god mode the other team, just because you are in a tank. Large turrets are should be good AV, small should be good AI. Nothing should be good against everything, just like my Forge is terribad up close usually (except when low HP scouts get owned by splash and scrub heavies take a forge round to the chest). Lol..... About shadow. But Argetlam my Rail Turret is 5x the size of your forge gun...why even mount it on an HAV if it is not simply better than a Forgegun? " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11482	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:56:00 - [24] - Quote Argetlam Thorson wrote: True Adamance wrote: But Argetlam my Rail Turret is 5x the size of your forge gun...why even mount it on an HAV if it is not simply better than a Forgegun? For the HP, the speed of transport, and the RoF. Maybe the Damage mods, but I don't know much about them since I don't use vehicles often. Active Damage Modules need to die a horrible death. What I wish to suggest should be done with HAV is that Large Turrets have their Anti Infantry power reduced consderably. They will, without the appropriate skills, track slowly, be the greatest part of any HAV's fitting requirements, and be primarily designed to hurt vehicles. Relatively slow RoF, Low Magazine Cap, with AoE effects to simulate the inherently greater fire power. HAV would have to rely on either superior targeting skills or small turrets to protect themselves from infantry. HAV power lies in their main guns being indisputably the best AV option (yes ideally call in tanks to deal with tanks resulting in large vehicle battles against one another), their armour is strong, and module use is based off capacitor. Their weaknesses lie in their inability to directly engage infantry and air targets, vehicle weak points (rear), and the fact their module activation is based of a depleting capacitor. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11486	Posted - 2014.07.02 06:23:00 - [25] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: I am all for sensible changes. 6 OP tanks in ambush was ridiculous and not fun for anyone, but having infantry in proto gear dance 40 meters in front of you while bombarding you with AV and your blaster cant seem to hit sh!t....that's not balance. Not 32 million SP and half a million ISK war machine gets outdone by one 150k infantry. Remember tanks are very situational. They cant take points or invade effectively in urban combat. I know..... I have been tanking for a very long time...... And I have in my mind a role for HAV since we currently don't have one. And it is what I has stated. However I think that an HAV pilot should be able to switch between control of a Large turret for AV fire, and a Light Turret for anti infantry fire (( basically finding reasons for HAV pilots to fill up turret slots and stop fitting HAV for pure tank)). As in the tanker switches seats, or the tanker loses control of his main gun to fire a side gun while still driving the tank? No no no I would like to think a pilot might be able to switch control of the main turret to a fitted small turret (just like switching to a side arm). Almost in the same way a tank in the battlefield series can cycle through to its coaxial machine gun. During that time the turret fires as if it was being manned. Perhaps that is one way to balance HAV without taking anti infantry away from them totally. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11497	Posted - 2014.07.02 21:38:00 - [26] - Quote CHANCEtheChAn wrote: Argetlam Thorson wrote: Hakyou Brutor wrote: I think he's on his infantry guy in PC a lot. Delta Bliztkrieg, I believe. I could be completely wrong though. That name doesn't sound familiar at all either. Lmao have you ever even PCed bro? D3lta blitzkrieg was a squad cup tourney winner And has been kicking ass since Chrome days But Shadow has like 4 alts he Switches between He is also I.H. CEO He hasn't played PC on shadow in a while because of recent tank changes But he, as lead tank, is the one that won us those 30/40 districts we now own and through his training has made the few 0.H./ I.H. tankers some of the best in the game Learn your place on the food chain Doesn't mean he can act like a ***. He's a CEO big deal you know I happen to know the CEO of Intermediate Purgatory.....I may or may not have an Alt in that corp. I.P > O.H and I.H combined " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11604	Posted - 2014.07.04 05:03:00 - [27] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: CHANCEtheChAn wrote: Learn your place on the food chain Can you please FFS leave your asinine pride in the WR, or at least out of the ******* feedback section? What a douchebag comment. He wasn't trying to be offensive or insulting. You gone dun it now Zatara. Defending the Publics and the FWers from PCers....... wins the vote (actually already prepared to vote for you) *"I watched you. From candle to a torch you grew. I'll always remember those days with great affection." - Satja Askarin
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11604	Posted - 2014.07.04 05:09:00 - [28] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: True Adamance wrote: You gone dun it now Zatara. Defending the Publics and the FWers from PCers....... wins the vote (actually already prepared to vote for you) What?! Really?? YAY! <3 And thank you! bows Zatara.....your back bone/ spine is showing...... *"I watched you. From candle to a torch you grew. I'll always remember those days with great affection." - Satja Askarin

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.