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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 71	Posted - 2014.07.01 15:28:00 - [91] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry wanted this Players like Atiim wanted this Its actually worse than 1.0 since vehicles now have less options in modules/hulls/skills/turrets And what did you want, Taki? Basically a copy and paste of EVE Capacitors and all the mods you see in EVE brought into DUST for vehicles and infantry use, same with the skills and bonuses Even without capacitors alot of the mods can be brought into DUST Also a return to a 5/2 slot layout, maraders and enforcers can always be tweeked like the ADS was
DontChimpOut Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2014.07.01 15:43:00 - [92] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry wanted this Players like Atiim wanted this Its actually worse than 1.0 since vehicles now have less options in modules/hulls/skills/turrets And what did you want, Taki? Not-useless vehicles that have been nerfed 10 times before they can be used. Not such useless vehicles that some nobody could say "YOLO" and run after it with nuclear baseballs and REs. That's just trash.
Tread Loudly 2 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 6	Posted - 2014.07.01 16:49:00 - [93] - 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 Finally someone understands my pain ;_; I may have never used damage mods because I didn't like them. However my rails are next to useless with the Militia 80GJ Railgun being able to do 7,830 HP of damage, while the Particle can only do 6,822 HP of damage before over heating. My blaster well I dumped a clip and a half into a forge gunning heavy and let's just say I didn't make it out (I tried bursting with it but the dispersion couldn't reduce itself fast enough). As for Missiles they are still relatively useless in terms of being able to fight infantry/shield tanks I understand the shield tank portion but infantry well c'mon it's a large missile with less blast radius than a flaylock which makes no sense. I Like Tanks, ADS's, and Ion Pistols!
Cyrius Li-Moody 0uter.Heaven 5952	Posted - 2014.07.01 17:09:00 - [94] - Quote Blasters both small and large are terrible. I'm not even a full time tanker and I know this. AV has made quite a come back infantry wise so tanks are not as ridiculous killing machines as they used to be. My Min commando can kill just about any tank after a single reload. My adv forge gun can kill a tank after a single reload. There's no more of this tanks repping through damage anymore. Tanks have plenty of viable counters now a days. There's just been too many nerfs, fixes, and buffs that happened at the same time. Youtuber. Your friendly neighborhood whiskey-fueled merc.
Shadow of War88 0uter.Heaven 378	Posted - 2014.07.01 18:01:00 - [95] - Quote Cyrius Li-Moody wrote: Blasters both small and large are terrible. I'm not even a full time tanker and I know this. AV has made quite a come back infantry wise so tanks are not as ridiculous killing machines as they used to be. My Min commando can kill just about any tank after a single reload. My adv forge gun can kill a tank after a single reload. There's no more of this tanks repping through damage anymore. Tanks have plenty of viable counters now a days. There's just been too many nerfs, fixes, and buffs that happened at the same time. I might pay you to make a video highlighting the ridiculous imbalance. I feel youtube would be a more powerful medium than the forums. & justice for all
Benjamin Ciscko The Last of DusT. General Tso's Alliance 2407	Posted - 2014.07.01 18:10:00 - [96] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Until CCP gives a definitive statement about what the purpose of large blaster turrets are, I feel like I can't assert that LBT's need less dispersion (whether through a skill or some other way). I spoke with a couple other tanks and they agreed with your sentiment that a scout can outstrafe blasters. But like I said, if blasters are supposed to be ineffective against infantry, then thats significant. However I do believe blasters need to be anti infantry effective. I think personally tanks need to have a purpose beyond destroying the the extremely effective anti infantry ADS and killing enemy tanks/lav's. I for one would not be opposed to tanks getting a major buff to DPS in exchange for them losing out on their ability to traverse the battlefield quickly. I for one do not know why rails need splash damage, at all. I have been VERY frustrated at times hacking a point only to be hit 4 times by spalsh damage that only required the ral to hit the point lazily. Min/maxing they don't do enough DPS IMO. And the range nerf was 2 strong, I hear tanks seriously concerned about the viability of rail tanking as opposed to forging, mobility being the only advantage. I personally view rails to be snipers of sorts. I've spoken with tank pilots they would prefer tanks required more skill required of them in order to obtain a greater advantage over easier to use fits. Specifically I spoke with a few that preferred when tankers were required to be responsible for a lot of diverse modules as opposed to hitting all the damage mods or hardeners and then recalling when they ran out. The biggest problem I see is that they are not effective enough at their roles. Blaster tanks are good for two things killing infantry up close and since infantry are not likely to stand around 5m from your tank it's only really good for point coverage but when you can sit 200m+ away on a hill and do this which is especially potent on both HP's on the bridge map. It's other niche is killing rails CQC if a blaster gets in close your pretty screwed. What their lacking effective area denial, past a certain range which is not that far it's useless for it's intended role and if it can't kill you then it can't suppress you (or at least suppression is what I assume it's role was meant to be) The rail is only really effective in point coverage which it shouldn't be and perhaps killing missile tanks. It has neither the damage nor the range or elevation to be truly effective at killing ADS because it takes around 2 at max 4 shots to kill one so if fit properly an ADS can just AB away after the first or second shot and if the ADS comes after you and you have no support your screwed. It needs to be a more effective ADS killer, because the forge gun does about the same damage with higher elevation and ability to get places tanks can't being more effective than an entire role.. The missiles niche is ROFL stomping armor tanks which they are good at and makes sense but the killing power it has on ADS doesn't it's arguably and in my opinion better at killing ADS's then rails. Missiles do all there damage in 2 seconds not giving the ADS pilot an opportunity to react and have the bonus of knocking it around a lot so if the 6,000+ burst damage doesn't kill it the collision damage from being knocked into a wall will. I don't even know for this one, though I would like to have more splash radius not less than a flaylock. If the intention was Rails>Missiles>Blasters>Rails>ADS and the rails are not effective enough at killing ADS and it revolves around the rails and there killing power of ADS and to some regard missiles then the whole premise crumbles. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
CHANCEtheChAn 0uter.Heaven 472	Posted - 2014.07.01 19:34:00 - [97] - Quote I agree and disagree with many of the points here But here are a few pointers Currently militia rails are glitched to out DPS particle cannons and need a drastic fix for pubs and PC. I can't tell you how many times in the last 8 PCs I've tanked that I've seen proto tankers using militia railguns. Currently I find their is little indifference between a 100k sica, and a 500k Gunloggi other than an extra module slot and slightly higher DPs. Militia tanks with 0 SP investment are just as troublesome as a 32 million SP tanker due to lack of SP sinking skills that will give you an advantage over people with little to no SP themselves in tanks. If the money and SP is sunk into it, you should be noticeably better, aka the difference between a 20k militia suit and a 150k proto suit (More modules, better modules, more health, stronger weapons, better equipment, better resistances). The difference in prices for large turrets is distasteful in that you have to pay over a 200k ISK difference between a basic to a proto Large turret, and the only advantage is damage (For handheld weapons it used to be range, less heat build up, damage, etc.). I believe that if you have the sp invested to use a proto turret, and equip something that cost that outrageous an amount on a tank, you should be a defining force on the battlefield. Using small turrets on a tank competitively is useless. Turrets can only shoot ahead of you (Where most engagements do not happen, and if you face your tank straight ahead you have little to no ability to strafe damage) and at reduced range than an actual other tanker can fight. If you want another player to hop out a tank to hack and lay things down, just bring a second tanker to hop out. Also, if your gunner happens to hop out and die or you get engaged while he is busy, look at losing your tank battle due to the reducing efficacy of your tank to fit those small turrets. Propose a per level (basic/militia, advanced, proto) advancement in statistics for Large turrets if no skills are going to be included to make tankers happy Closed Beta Vet/ Chromosome and Corp battle Vet/ Uprising 1.0-Now PC vet Ex D.F. Director Current Inner.Hell Director
CHANCEtheChAn 0uter.Heaven 472	Posted - 2014.07.01 20:16:00 - [98] - Quote PROPOSITION FOR LARGE TURRETS At all levels, damages should should stay the same to keep a good balance But because of recent nerfs, I think a few stats should be changed for large turrets due to DRASTIC increase in costs per level RAIL TURRETS Basic level- All stats should remain the same Advanced level- Railgun range should be increased up to 325-350 meters Proto level- Railgun range should be increased up to 350-400 meters BLASTER TURRETS Basic level- All stats should remain the same Advanced level- Blaster optimal range increased by 5-10 meters, and dispersion reduced 10%-25% from basic Proto level- Blaster optimal range increased 10-25 meters, and dispersion reduced 20%-40% from basic MISSILE TURRETS Basic level- All stats should remain the same Advanced level- Missile blast radius increased 25%-75% from basic, splash damage increased 10%-25% Proto level- Missile blast redius increased 75%-200% from basic, splash damage increased 20%-35% Let me be perfectly clear, I think that ALL base numbers are the MINIMUM increases that should be applied per level, and the 2nd set of numbers are the maximum amount that I believe should be applied, if ever need be This proposal gives all tankers what they want. Rails get more effective range to be anti AV and higher tiered rails have a definitive advantage over lower tiered rails at range Blasters get more range to be effective at suppression and less dispersion to be better at CQC of vehicles an infantry(Currently the dispersion is so bad, its hard to even hit tanks or drop ships at 60 m+) and give better turret users clear range improvements to engage over less equipped tanks Missile tanks get what they have ALWAYS wanted, and that is better splash, mainly to be somewhat of a anti-personel deterrent (Honestly when is the last time you saw a Missile tank as an infantry and ever been even the least bit frightened?) But since missile tanks are armor based killers, and have unlimited range, it is hard to give missile turrets a definitive increase in tank vs tank power With this new improvements, we will all be seeing more improved turret usage in pubs, for tankers to gain clear advantages over other vehicle pilots.Right now in pubs, killing militia tanks and basic turret basic tanks is customary, and makes no real progression in fending off tanks, as they will just call in more, but as tankers begin to call in better turrets to battle better turreted tanks, killing 250k-500k Gunloggi will be worthwhile as you watch those tankers lose huge helpings of cash and begin to stop using vehicles altogether for the remainder of the match. Also, this gives AV a clear target when fending off multiple tanks As of now it really doesn't matter, but if an adv blaster Maddy roles up, and a basic blaster Maddy is right behind him, the more threatening tank can obviously be identified by having better stats and costing more Essentially, "Mo money, mo fiapowa" Let the QQ begin Closed Beta Vet/ Chromosome and Corp battle Vet/ Uprising 1.0-Now PC vet Ex D.F. Director Current Inner.Hell Director
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11453	Posted - 2014.07.01 20:45:00 - [99] - 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."
CHANCEtheChAn 0uter.Heaven 472	Posted - 2014.07.01 21:21:00 - [100] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tanks in this game will never be balanced when their operators think its fine that their vehicles don't act like tanks. Depends on what your definition of "Tank" is If you go by real life definition, then tanks are used for Anti vehicle, running through or over terrain to fuel infantry pushes, troop transport, and blowing up environments Since dust has no terrain or environments to blow up, all that leaves is anti-vehicle and troop transport And because troop transport would require the tank to be less effective (less pg and cpu to use) without troops in the tank Your left with Anti-vehicle, in which this is not the case because their are three separate types of large turrets that some are better against infantry than certain types of vehicles Closed Beta Vet/ Chromosome and Corp battle Vet/ Uprising 1.0-Now PC vet Ex D.F. Director Current Inner.Hell Director

Poison Howl Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 142	Posted - 2014.07.01 21:34:00 - [101] - Quote You know I've seen people with their heads up their asses before, but this... the arrogance in this thread... kinda hard to believe I'm actually seeing this. For every point of happiness we gain in this game, our madness increases exponentially.
Atiim Fooly Cooly. 10109	Posted - 2014.07.01 21:43:00 - [102] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Large blasters are so bad at taking out competent infantry Working as intended. CCP Rattati wrote: Small Blaster ROF and dispersion were increased to make it easier to hit infantry, the intent was buff. How did Rail and dmg mod nerf change AV-Vehicle balance? The only change like Atiim says, PLC buff, AV grenade slight buff, two bugfixes and rep nerf. LB was never supposed to be anti-infantry. Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND
Atiim Fooly Cooly. 10109	Posted - 2014.07.01 21:48:00 - [103] - Quote 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. Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND
Atiim Fooly Cooly. 10110	Posted - 2014.07.01 22:27:00 - [104] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: 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? PC is a slideshow in it;s purest form. Balances and imbalances are determined by the statistics of items and how they correlate with others. Due to this, "balance for PC" and "balance for PUBs" is non-existent, and mostly used by players who participate in PC who wish for an excuse to either create or maintain an imbalance (something your doing right now). The PRO vs. PRO comment doesn't really hold merit, as balance is (and must) be achieved across all tiers, meaning even if [PRO vs. PRO] is balance, there needs to be a balance between [PRO vs. STD], [ADV vs. STD], etc. This is not to say however, that higher tiered items need to be superior to lowered tiered items. A good example of why "exclusive balance for highest tier" is not good,, is the Swarm Launcher vs. HAV. PRO Swarm Launcher vs Complex HAV is about a 60/40 situation ADV Swarm Launcher vs. Enhanced HAV is a 50/50 situation STD Swarm Launcher vs Basic HAV is a 25/75 situation This may seem good, because PRO and ADV (for the most part) is balanced right? Well, not quite. While a PRO or ADV Swarm user may have a decent chance against an equally tiered opponent, those using a STD or MLT Swarm Launcher against an equally tiered opponent will find that the target is nearly invincible. You may not care (as you most likely don't use STD gear), but do you not find that a player being able to take a STD/Basic HAV into the battle academy and be theoretically invincible? As for True Adamance being "overly sensitive", the term over-sensitive is defined as: Quote: excessively responsive to or aware of feelings, reactions, etc None of what he said meets that perquisite, so no he is not being "overly sensitive", he's actually providing criticism. Though perhaps I should be equally abrasive and condescending to you (after all, the tanker mentality is that you should only be able to fight fire with fire, right?). Q: "How could someone as uneducated and ignorant as you possibly provide meaningful feedback?" A: Your incapable of provide meaningful feedback in any way, condition, shape, or form. That's already been proven by the original post and your comments within this thread. Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND
SteelDark Knight Ancient Exiles. General Tso's Alliance 481	Posted - 2014.07.01 23:08:00 - [105] - Quote Shadow of War88 wrote: Its never changes in small portions with CCP. & is there a particular solution you would like to propose? First I want to state that I sympathize with what the new developer group is trying to accomplish. It is not going to be easy and the majority of the time when you get it wrong you are going to alienate a good portion of your player base depending on which side of the aisle you are on. I won't claim that I have all the answers. Obviously, the overpowered tanks of the recent past needed corrected and I think CCP has done that in its recent set of balance changes. They were "right" more than wrong in the recent update. With that said I think that perhaps they hit too many areas at once and may have tipped the scale to far the other way. In addition with the Large Blaster they did so in way that, while it generated the desired effect, is frustrating and feels unfair to players which is not something you want to do as a designer (and yes invincible tanks did this as well). I believe that any weapon in a FPS that by design doesn't hit were you aim the majority of the time and doesnGÇÖt give any ability to counter it is a poor design. They appeased one side of the player base by making it frustrating for the other. The player does everything he is supposed to but cannot defend himself because the random number generator decides his shot doesn't go where he aimed it. I have a long list of things IGÇÖd like to see done such as making pilot skills more relevant (i.e. someone whom skills heavily in the area should have bonuses that match) but for this conversation IGÇÖll keep it simple and ask a question. Would the blaster tank of the recent past have been anywhere near the issues it created if the AV buffs, Bug fixes, and defensive nerfs of tanks been in place then? To me that was the real problem all along and in breaking it and leaving it as it was for months a huge disservice was done to ALL players. There is nothing wrong with large blaster tanks killing infantry as long as the counters are viable and in the end tanks that kill infantry create a wide variety of counter roles and content. TL:DR: 1# LBT's killing infantry is o.k as long as viable counters are available. In fact it is needed to generate the need for those counter roles. This does not mean return blasters fully to prior state but it does mean they need to be better than where they stand now. 2# Excessive dispersion with no means to counter it is bad design for many reasons
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11457	Posted - 2014.07.01 23:14:00 - [106] - 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."
CHANCEtheChAn 0uter.Heaven 472	Posted - 2014.07.01 23:17:00 - [107] - Quote Atiim wrote: Shadow of War88 wrote: 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? PC is a slideshow in it;s purest form. A good example of why "exclusive balance for highest tier" is not good,, is the Swarm Launcher vs. HAV. PRO Swarm Launcher vs Complex HAV is about a 60/40 situation ADV Swarm Launcher vs. Enhanced HAV is a 50/50 situation STD Swarm Launcher vs Basic HAV is a 25/75 situation You may not care (as you most likely don't use STD gear), but do you not find that a player being able to take a STD/Basic HAV into the battle academy and be theoretically invincible? As for True Adamance being "overly sensitive", the term over-sensitive is defined as: Quote: excessively responsive to or aware of feelings, reactions, etc None of what he said meets that perquisite, so no he is not being "overly sensitive", he's actually providing criticism. Though perhaps I should be equally abrasive and condescending to you (after all, the tanker mentality is that you should only be able to fight fire with fire, right?). PC is a slideshow? Dont exactly know when is the last time you were in PC, but I haven't hard lagged or " Slideshowed" in roughly the last 80 PC matches I've played except for surface research lab. Yeah you get the occasional lag spike, or the server occasionally seems to crash, but what else is new on DUST Honestly anything under basic in swarm launchers on a HAV is a joke BUT not to other vehicles such as drop ships or LAVs. Even a militia swarm launcher can be detrimental to these other vehicles, thus they are balanced, as a SINGLE proto swarm launcher user can do enough DPS to send my Gunloggi scurrying to hide and kill it on the second reload if I get caught on something (Which all tankers do) Honestly the battle academy is a laugh and a joke and you know that, but its besides the point, the point being that militia HAVs should have a giant Nerf sticker put on them to prevent tank spamming and etc etc Don't get your panties in a bunch over what Shadow of War says to you. He speaks to most people that have not been battle tested like this. But he has been through every MH war and every cue and backstab for the last year and a half and has consistently shown to be one of the very best DUST has ever seen on the battlefield. Shadow is a war monger and speaks as one. If you feel as though you are "special" for being talked down to, don't be. If your with Shadow and it isn't done by the book and to the letter he gets pissed, a by-product of the caliber of play our players and corp have achieved through many battles. He is not being condescending to everyone, he takes the thrill of the battle seriously as do I and we laugh and have fun after mission accomplished. As of now, the mission is to get tanks changed for the better and better input on the matter for competitive play. If he has not seen you, or you do not compete competitively then he sees no reason for your input, or why you are even here to begin with Honestly if you are here for the people, there are 10,000 other games you could go play with them on. Otherwise pub matches are filled with trolls and academy scrubs. Why else be here if not for the meta and PC environment? Closed Beta Vet/ Chromosome and Corp battle Vet/ Uprising 1.0-Now PC vet Ex D.F. Director Current Inner.Hell Director
CHANCEtheChAn 0uter.Heaven 473	Posted - 2014.07.01 23:36:00 - [108] - Quote 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 Closed Beta Vet/ Chromosome and Corp battle Vet/ Uprising 1.0-Now PC vet Ex D.F. Director Current Inner.Hell Director
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11460	Posted - 2014.07.01 23:44:00 - [109] - 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."
Atiim Fooly Cooly. 10111	Posted - 2014.07.01 23:58:00 - [110] - Quote 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. Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND

Atiim Fooly Cooly. 10111	Posted - 2014.07.02 00:02:00 - [111] - Quote Reserved. Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11460	Posted - 2014.07.02 00:09:00 - [112] - 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."
Atiim Fooly Cooly. 10114	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:02:00 - [113] - Quote 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. Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11476	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:12:00 - [114] - 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."
Argetlam Thorson Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 79	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:31:00 - [115] - Quote 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). CPM1 Candidate Youtube
Hakyou Brutor G0DS AM0NG MEN 819	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:33:00 - [116] - Quote I think he's on his infantry guy in PC a lot. Delta Bliztkrieg, I believe. I could be completely wrong though. "I never pull out" ~Ace Boone, 2014.
Argetlam Thorson Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 79	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:38:00 - [117] - Quote 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. CPM1 Candidate Youtube
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11480	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:43:00 - [118] - 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."
Argetlam Thorson Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 79	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:49:00 - [119] - Quote 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. CPM1 Candidate Youtube
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11482	Posted - 2014.07.02 03:56:00 - [120] - 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."



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.