DUST Search - [REQUEST] JLAV removal.

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[REQUEST] JLAV removal.

» 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)
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3946	Posted - 2014.07.04 01:00:00 - [1] - Quote JLAVs were introduced in 1.7 as an apparently unintended byproduct of the change to REs. At the time the vehicle armour hardeners all but prevented dangerous damage being dealt to HAVs; this left the JLAV, usually stacked with prototype level equipment (because otherwise there just wasn't enough damage for success), as the only real viable means for AVing outside a tank. For that reason I, and many other members of the HAV community, accepted them as necessary for some form of balance. Time passed and hardeners were nerfed. Forge guns were now somewhat viable, but the power of the rep-tanked Madrugar meant that JLAVs were still the most effective tactic for dealing with those tanks, and so we bit our tongues. Now the armour repairers have been nerfed; as well as Large Blasters being less effective for attacking infantry, infantry AV is, as a general rule, in a very good place at the moment. Consequently, I think the time has come to formally request that they be removed. The JLAV is a low-ISK high-reward tactic; indeed, for much of the community it entails zero risk. It is difficult to counter short of hiding in the redline at the peak of a hill, owing to the speed and manoeuvrability of the LAV, and should it strike you there is no possible way to survive, short of a max-tank hardened Gunnlogi (the fittings being 2x Complex Heavy Extenders and 1x Hardener, and 1x Complex Heavy Extender and 2x Hardeners). It is akin to the much-reviled 'bumper dropship' in its near-zero investment reward, and is actually much higher reward owing to the enormous number of vehicle damage points it brings. It is also alike to the old 'murder taxi' of early Uprising, particularly considering the near-free reward those had, and to the current 'LAV Heavy', which is similarly low-investment, low-skill high reward. I hope you'll make the right decision. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
BLOOD Ruler The Lionheart Coalition 419	Posted - 2014.07.04 01:05:00 - [2] - Quote No you just suck I use it and love dying by it. Feel the pain of my knives and the piercing pain your skull has felt to my pistol.I am the Assassin.
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3946	Posted - 2014.07.04 01:13:00 - [3] - Quote BLOOD Ruler wrote: No you just suck I use it and love dying by it. How much do your fittings cost? I'll tell you what, next time I see you running infantry I'll pull a BPO LAV with a nitrous and an HMG and I'll murder-taxi you. Deal? Or if you're flying I'll pull out a Gorgon and ram you. Sound fun? CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 601	Posted - 2014.07.04 01:29:00 - [4] - Quote Considering AV actually affects vehicles properly (since the proficiency bug was fixed) and since the vehicle changes were made to render them mortal like everything else, JLAVs are entirely uncommon. Are they irritating for you? Yes. Are ramming dropships annoying? Yes. Do either of them need to go? No. JLAVs are no longer necessary, but that doesn't make them invalid.
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3948	Posted - 2014.07.04 01:43:00 - [5] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Considering AV actually affects vehicles properly (since the proficiency bug was fixed) and since the vehicle changes were made to render them mortal like everything else, JLAVs are entirely uncommon. Are they irritating for you? Yes. Are ramming dropships annoying? Yes. Do either of them need to go? No. JLAVs are no longer necessary, but that doesn't make them invalid. JLAVs are still nigh uncounterable, and while I might not see them every match, if I actually decide to perform with my HAVs one'll come out in every second match, at the very least. Perhaps if REs showed up on scans, or if red and blue LAVs had different audio, or if a direct hit actually guaranteed the kill, but none of these things are the case. As such, I want them gone. As for bumper dropships, they're beyond annoying. ADSes are entirely killable nowadays, and that bumper dropships are a tactic is total BS. Calling in RDVs to hit the ship is bad enough, but the bumper dropship implies a singularity of purpose that a defense mechanism like calling in an RDV just doesn't match. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Harpyja Legio DXIV 1991	Posted - 2014.07.04 02:29:00 - [6] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Considering AV actually affects vehicles properly (since the proficiency bug was fixed) and since the vehicle changes were made to render them mortal like everything else, JLAVs are entirely uncommon. Are they irritating for you? Yes. Are ramming dropships annoying? Yes. Do either of them need to go? No. JLAVs are no longer necessary, but that doesn't make them invalid. Until I can reliably run you over with my Onikuma (sorry, I got no BPOs) and instantly cause you to go ISK-negative for the entire battle, JLAVs shouldn't exist. Until I can reliably run over protosuits (without making them revivable) and make them go ISK-negative for two whole battles per protosuit, JLAVs shouldn't exist. Because that's what it's like for tanks. And it's not fun when there are other valid methods. Would you not get pissed every time an LAV ran over your 500k ISK protosuit? When they could've engaged you toe to toe with a rifle but instead decided to choose a murder taxi, would you not get pissed every time this happened once every few battles? Sure, you could jump to the side, but if you couldn't hide in a building but instead were forced to stay in the open with a big sign that says "I'm right here," the murder taxi would just come back again and have another shot, until it finally got you. Sure, let's give you a Flaylock that can one-shot said murder taxi. But you only got three shots and you can't even turn as fast as a heavy at 0 sensitivity. Even if you get the murder taxi, it'll be back again, with the only loss being time. It will get you when you least expect it. That's my life right now. Full of paranoia each time I bring out my Gunnlogi. Because I'm not nor was I ever from a rich corp where any losses don't matter other than on my KDR. So every ISK loss hurts. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
TheEnd762 SVER True Blood 527	Posted - 2014.07.04 03:29:00 - [7] - Quote If you're so worried about losing ISK, don't bring it out. A vehicle's/suit's ISK value shouldn't guarantee it's survivability. I run some expensive proto suits, and lose them to militia weapons wielded by militia suit-wearing enemies. You don't hear me crying for a nerf, and they don't even have to die to kill me.
Baal Omniscient Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 1902	Posted - 2014.07.04 03:30:00 - [8] - Quote TheEnd762 wrote: If you're so worried about losing ISK, don't bring it out. A vehicle's/suit's ISK value shouldn't guarantee it's survivability. I run some expensive proto suits, and lose them to militia weapons wielded by militia suit-wearing enemies. You don't hear me crying for a nerf, and they don't even have to die to kill me. Or MLT scouts with.... RE's..... PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 Cross Atu for CPM1 Winmatar Assault & Proficiency 5 Swarms Since Uprising 1.0
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3955	Posted - 2014.07.04 03:33:00 - [9] - Quote TheEnd762 wrote: If you're so worried about losing ISK, don't bring it out. A vehicle's/suit's ISK value shouldn't guarantee it's survivability. I run some expensive proto suits, and lose them to militia weapons wielded by militia suit-wearing enemies. You don't hear me crying for a nerf, and they don't even have to die to kill me. Tell you what, I'll pull out my BPO LAV, BPO sent and STD HMG and gib you a few times from there when I see you in match. Maybe I'll skip the HMG and just Roadkill you. Or if you're an ADS pilot... oh boy prepare to get Gorgon'd! I dunno if I'm remembering right, but I seem to recall BPO LAVs beig removed because they were OP roadkillers. But I suppose it was okay to complain about that, now, wasn't it? EDIT: So I also run some expensive proto suits. There is a vast difference between 'going ISK negative for two-three matches dying once' and 'dying twice and still going positive'. Especially when the HAV in question doesn't even have to be proto. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Racro 01 Arifistan 501st Knights of Leanbox 372	Posted - 2014.07.04 04:46:00 - [10] - Quote I hate both using and being jihaded. sometimes their my last resort or the enemy team has too many HAVs to tackle alone. if av dosnt work. resort to tank. if tank gets ganked. resort to free jihading with boundless explosives *Elite Gallenten Soldier*

Apothecary Za'ki Biomass Positive 134	Posted - 2014.07.04 04:51:00 - [11] - Quote AV weaponry is getting better so jihad jeeping is less common but people still do it for a nice big "F**K YOU!" to irritating tankers with major troll points Minmatar Logibro in training. Rusty needles anyone? No Mic and no time for "Squeekers" Nerf scout cloak+shotgun
Apothecary Za'ki Biomass Positive 134	Posted - 2014.07.04 04:52:00 - [12] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Considering AV actually affects vehicles properly (since the proficiency bug was fixed) and since the vehicle changes were made to render them mortal like everything else, JLAVs are entirely uncommon. Are they irritating for you? Yes. Are ramming dropships annoying? Yes. Do either of them need to go? No. JLAVs are no longer necessary, but that doesn't make them invalid. Until I can reliably run you over with my Onikuma (sorry, I got no BPOs) and instantly cause you to go ISK-negative for the entire battle, JLAVs shouldn't exist. Until I can reliably run over protosuits (without making them revivable) and make them go ISK-negative for two whole battles per protosuit, JLAVs shouldn't exist. Because that's what it's like for tanks. And it's not fun when there are other valid methods. Would you not get pissed every time an LAV ran over your 500k ISK protosuit? When they could've engaged you toe to toe with a rifle but instead decided to choose a murder taxi, would you not get pissed every time this happened once every few battles? Sure, you could jump to the side, but if you couldn't hide in a building but instead were forced to stay in the open with a big sign that says "I'm right here," the murder taxi would just come back again and have another shot, until it finally got you. Sure, let's give you a Flaylock that can one-shot said murder taxi. But you only got three shots and you can't even turn as fast as a heavy at 0 sensitivity. Even if you get the murder taxi, it'll be back again, with the only loss being time. It will get you when you least expect it. That's my life right now. Full of paranoia each time I bring out my Gunnlogi. Because I'm not nor was I ever from a rich corp where any losses don't matter other than on my KDR. So every ISK loss hurts. if a proto got roadkilled by a LAV they need to uninstall or stop proto-pubbing Minmatar Logibro in training. Rusty needles anyone? No Mic and no time for "Squeekers" Nerf scout cloak+shotgun
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3959	Posted - 2014.07.04 05:14:00 - [13] - Quote Apothecary Za'ki wrote: a proto got roadkilled by a LAV they need to uninstall or stop proto-pubbing It's easier than you suggest to Roadkill anyone let alone protos. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Jonny D Buelle Mors Effera 182	Posted - 2014.07.04 05:54:00 - [14] - Quote This has been discussed over and over. I think I'll just copy and paste my usual response: I don't think JLAVs should be removed at all. This is a sandbox (with very little sand) game thats involves risk and reward. I have myself done this type of strategy myself for shts and giggles and I found it to be fun. Yes it CAN be inexpensive to grab a milita suit, throw on some REs get a militia LAV and ram a proto fit tank. But as I stated before, this is a risk and reward game. You risked your 500k+ tank and you lost it. Yes I am aware that it is the way you lost it that is causing so much QQ over this. But you would be QQing just as hard if I was to use my forge gun to blow you up. "No! Because that is legit AV!" Well so is using REs! And if people want to attach them to an LAV and ram you let them or let them try. This argument just reminds me too much of a few new players in EVE QQing because their miners got suicide ganked in High-Sec. This *** happens in sandbox games. Much like how someone will come along and tear down your house in Minecraft because they wanted too. Yeah it pissed people off, but it is allowed. TL;DR Harden up bro and let us keep a little more sand in the sandbox. Legionhares Unite!
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3977	Posted - 2014.07.04 11:55:00 - [15] - Quote Jonny D Buelle wrote: This has been discussed over and over. I think I'll just copy and paste my usual response: I don't think JLAVs should be removed at all. This is a sandbox (with very little sand) game thats involves risk and reward. I have myself done this type of strategy myself for shts and giggles and I found it to be fun. Yes it CAN be inexpensive to grab a milita suit, throw on some REs get a militia LAV and ram a proto fit tank. But as I stated before, this is a risk and reward game. You risked your 500k+ tank and you lost it. Yes I am aware that it is the way you lost it that is causing so much QQ over this. But you would be QQing just as hard if I was to use my forge gun to blow you up. "No! Because that is legit AV!" Well so is using REs! And if people want to attach them to an LAV and ram you let them or let them try. This argument just reminds me too much of a few new players in EVE QQing because their miners got suicide ganked in High-Sec. This *** happens in sandbox games. Much like how someone will come along and tear down your house in Minecraft because they wanted too. Yeah it pissed people off, but it is allowed. TL;DR Harden up bro and let us keep a little more sand in the sandbox. No. Your post betrays an absolute failure of comprehension. In no possible way is dying the issue here. If you read my OP you would realise exactly what my attitudes to 'dying' are. They have nothing, and I repeat nothing to do with losing the ISK. I am fully aware that by bringing my vehicle onto the field I risk losing it. I have been insta killed by forge guns, I've misjudged my enemy and been destroyed, I've simply scrubbed up and lost a particle cannon to a Sica. REs are 'legit AV'. REs strapped to a LAV for zero investment should not be. Every time I pull my tank onto the field I risk between 250 and 600k. In the same way, every time I bring my AFG onto the battlefield I risk between 60 and 150k. If I was to use a JLAV it would be literally free, and have a far more definite outcome. You call this a 'risk and reward' game. This is bleedingly obvious. What should also be bleedingly obvious is that a JLAV skews that 'risk vs reward' enormously. But hey. "It's a sandbox". So how's about I get back my Charybdis and we return the collision damage to what it used to be? No? CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Brokerib Lone Wolves Club 1533	Posted - 2014.07.04 14:52:00 - [16] - Quote This answer is good enough that I think it bares repeating. Baal Omniscient wrote: This is silly. A prof 5 proto assault forge on a fully bpo'd out skinweave heavy can 3 shot a fully fitted, fully specced, massively expensive ADS out of the sky for under 80k..... and you guys are pissy that a 30k car loaded up with RE's by a guy who specced into them for that purpose and who can navigate close enough to you to RAM you without you noticing is blowing up your tank? Um... situational awareness much? Teamwork? Isn't that the drivel AV players have been hearing for the last 6-8 months? "Use Teamwork!" Well, have your squad let you know when there's a LAV in your vicinity. You're not with your squad? Well, you're not using teamwork. Sad day. Player ingenuity. It's a beautiful thing. Rail tankers could (and on some maps, do) camp the redline all match. They thought it up as an effective tactic. The only issue I have with it is that there's no effective way to counter it since OB's can't really drop decent tanks anymore. jLAV's ARE easy to counter. You can have teammates set up proxy's which will detonate the RE's on the LAV when they go off. You can have a teammate with a swarm on standby to hit the LAV's and either scare them off, kill them or tag their RE's with missiles, detonating them (along with the driver). Or you can have teammates spot LAV's for you. Or you can have situational awareness since you can hear LAV's from a long ways off. OR you can combine some of these ideas and do pretty well avoiding/killing 99% of them. Happy tanking, jLAV's are the least of your worries. ;) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2240587#post2240587 Knowledge is power
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 4007	Posted - 2014.07.04 16:03:00 - [17] - Quote Brokerib wrote: This answer is good enough that I think it bares repeating. Baal Omniscient wrote: This is silly. A prof 5 proto assault forge on a fully bpo'd out skinweave heavy can 3 shot a fully fitted, fully specced, massively expensive ADS out of the sky for under 80k..... and you guys are pissy that a 30k car loaded up with RE's by a guy who specced into them for that purpose and who can navigate close enough to you to RAM you without you noticing is blowing up your tank? Um... situational awareness much? Teamwork? Isn't that the drivel AV players have been hearing for the last 6-8 months? "Use Teamwork!" Well, have your squad let you know when there's a LAV in your vicinity. You're not with your squad? Well, you're not using teamwork. Sad day. Player ingenuity. It's a beautiful thing. Rail tankers could (and on some maps, do) camp the redline all match. They thought it up as an effective tactic. The only issue I have with it is that there's no effective way to counter it since OB's can't really drop decent tanks anymore. jLAV's ARE easy to counter. You can have teammates set up proxy's which will detonate the RE's on the LAV when they go off. You can have a teammate with a swarm on standby to hit the LAV's and either scare them off, kill them or tag their RE's with missiles, detonating them (along with the driver). Or you can have teammates spot LAV's for you. Or you can have situational awareness since you can hear LAV's from a long ways off. OR you can combine some of these ideas and do pretty well avoiding/killing 99% of them. Happy tanking, jLAV's are the least of your worries. ;) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2240587#post2240587 I responded to it in the same thread. There is a huge difference between a prof 5 IAFG and a JLAV. I imagine people would be complaining somewhat if a CRG SG could one-shot a max EHP proto Sentinel with a bodyshot. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Ace Mercenary Immortal Guides 0	Posted - 2014.07.04 18:14:00 - [18] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: JLAVs were introduced in 1.7 as an apparently unintended byproduct of the change to REs. At the time the vehicle armour hardeners all but prevented dangerous damage being dealt to HAVs; this left the JLAV, usually stacked with prototype level equipment (because otherwise there just wasn't enough damage for success), as the only real viable means for AVing outside a tank. For that reason I, and many other members of the HAV community, accepted them as necessary for some form of balance. Time passed and hardeners were nerfed. Forge guns were now somewhat viable, but the power of the rep-tanked Madrugar meant that JLAVs were still the most effective tactic for dealing with those tanks, and so we bit our tongues. Now the armour repairers have been nerfed; as well as Large Blasters being less effective for attacking infantry, infantry AV is, as a general rule, in a very good place at the moment. Consequently, I think the time has come to formally request that they be removed. The JLAV is a low-ISK high-reward tactic; indeed, for much of the community it entails zero risk. It is difficult to counter short of hiding in the redline at the peak of a hill, owing to the speed and manoeuvrability of the LAV, and should it strike you there is no possible way to survive, short of a max-tank hardened Gunnlogi (the fittings being 2x Complex Heavy Extenders and 1x Hardener, and 1x Complex Heavy Extender and 2x Hardeners). It is akin to the much-reviled 'bumper dropship' in its near-zero investment reward, and is actually much higher reward owing to the enormous number of vehicle damage points it brings. It is also alike to the old 'murder taxi' of early Uprising, particularly considering the near-free reward those had, and to the current 'LAV Heavy', which is similarly low-investment, low-skill high reward. I hope you'll make the right decision. lol 1.7.? I did Jihad Jeep before 1.7 and nobody quoted this is my ALT
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 295	Posted - 2014.07.04 18:42:00 - [19] - Quote why is it only dedicated tankers complain about this? when I stick 2 remotes on my lav and leave it somewhere to be hacked so I can blow it up with the hacker no one complains. when I stick remotes on my bumper and run up to an enemy lav with a drive by heavy, jump out and set the remotes off blowing them up... no complaints when I put a ton of remotes on my lav and drive right into a group of reds jump out, and blow everyone up... not a forum peep. when I run up to a tank and stick remotes on it and blow it up... no complaints. but I put remotes on the lav and run into a tanker and the tears ocean flows.... tell me how this is more than just an "I don't like being killed this way" thread. you talk about risk vs isk... but when I kill a proto in my dren fit no one cries... how is this different?
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 295	Posted - 2014.07.04 18:56:00 - [20] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Brokerib wrote: This answer is good enough that I think it bares repeating. Baal Omniscient wrote: This is silly. A prof 5 proto assault forge on a fully bpo'd out skinweave heavy can 3 shot a fully fitted, fully specced, massively expensive ADS out of the sky for under 80k..... and you guys are pissy that a 30k car loaded up with RE's by a guy who specced into them for that purpose and who can navigate close enough to you to RAM you without you noticing is blowing up your tank? Um... situational awareness much? Teamwork? Isn't that the drivel AV players have been hearing for the last 6-8 months? "Use Teamwork!" Well, have your squad let you know when there's a LAV in your vicinity. You're not with your squad? Well, you're not using teamwork. Sad day. Player ingenuity. It's a beautiful thing. Rail tankers could (and on some maps, do) camp the redline all match. They thought it up as an effective tactic. The only issue I have with it is that there's no effective way to counter it since OB's can't really drop decent tanks anymore. jLAV's ARE easy to counter. You can have teammates set up proxy's which will detonate the RE's on the LAV when they go off. You can have a teammate with a swarm on standby to hit the LAV's and either scare them off, kill them or tag their RE's with missiles, detonating them (along with the driver). Or you can have teammates spot LAV's for you. Or you can have situational awareness since you can hear LAV's from a long ways off. OR you can combine some of these ideas and do pretty well avoiding/killing 99% of them. Happy tanking, jLAV's are the least of your worries. ;) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2240587#post2240587 I responded to it in the same thread. but you're not being one shot.... it takes 6 remotes to kill you in a tank.... that's 6 shots. There is a huge difference between a prof 5 IAFG and a JLAV. I imagine people would be complaining somewhat if a CRG SG could one-shot a max EHP proto Sentinel with a bodyshot.

Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 4026	Posted - 2014.07.05 00:55:00 - [21] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: why is it only dedicated tankers complain about this? when I stick 2 remotes on my lav and leave it somewhere to be hacked so I can blow it up with the hacker no one complains. when I stick remotes on my bumper and run up to an enemy lav with a drive by heavy, jump out and set the remotes off blowing them up... no complaints when I put a ton of remotes on my lav and drive right into a group of reds jump out, and blow everyone up... not a forum peep. when I run up to a tank and stick remotes on it and blow it up... no complaints. but I put remotes on the lav and run into a tanker and the tears ocean flows.... tell me how this is more than just an "I don't like being killed this way" thread. you talk about risk vs isk... but when I kill a proto in my dren fit no one cries... how is this different? Dedicated tankers are the only one it happens to consistently. In the same way, pure HAV pilots didn't really understand the whole 'murder taxi' thing (until it really took off, of course). You'll also notice that it's the extraordinarily wealthy persons or those that use their tanks as joke characters among us that 'laugh when it happens' . Your LAV example is a passive use of them If you, say, drove up to a heavy, hopped put and detonated, people would complain. The difference is that it isn't happening match after match. On top of that, you still need to be in the same suit. It's not like you can detonate REs in an unaltered 'Frontline' suit, after all. As for why we're upset about it 'right now' well, it's happening with more frequency recently. I'm sick of it. And finally - the only guaranteed way I have ever found of killing a JLAV, even one running at me, was to one-shot it. It was rare I'd get the chance for a second shot. Splash damage on the remotes either doesn't work consistently or the REs are often placed so as to mitigate it. You're right, I don't like being killed this way. I think it's safe to say people don't much like being killed by HMGs right now, and it don't see the situation as much different in that sense. (It is obviously different in other senses. I'm just saying it's a case where the community has said 'I don't like to be killed this way'.) CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 4026	Posted - 2014.07.05 00:57:00 - [22] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Brokerib wrote: This answer is good enough that I think it bares repeating. Baal Omniscient wrote: This is silly. A prof 5 proto assault forge on a fully bpo'd out skinweave heavy can 3 shot a fully fitted, fully specced, massively expensive ADS out of the sky for under 80k..... and you guys are pissy that a 30k car loaded up with RE's by a guy who specced into them for that purpose and who can navigate close enough to you to RAM you without you noticing is blowing up your tank? Um... situational awareness much? Teamwork? Isn't that the drivel AV players have been hearing for the last 6-8 months? "Use Teamwork!" Well, have your squad let you know when there's a LAV in your vicinity. You're not with your squad? Well, you're not using teamwork. Sad day. Player ingenuity. It's a beautiful thing. Rail tankers could (and on some maps, do) camp the redline all match. They thought it up as an effective tactic. The only issue I have with it is that there's no effective way to counter it since OB's can't really drop decent tanks anymore. jLAV's ARE easy to counter. You can have teammates set up proxy's which will detonate the RE's on the LAV when they go off. You can have a teammate with a swarm on standby to hit the LAV's and either scare them off, kill them or tag their RE's with missiles, detonating them (along with the driver). Or you can have teammates spot LAV's for you. Or you can have situational awareness since you can hear LAV's from a long ways off. OR you can combine some of these ideas and do pretty well avoiding/killing 99% of them. Happy tanking, jLAV's are the least of your worries. ;) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2240587#post2240587 I responded to it in the same thread. There is a huge difference between a prof 5 IAFG and a JLAV. I imagine people would be complaining somewhat if a CRG SG could one-shot a max EHP proto Sentinel with a bodyshot. but you're not being one shot... it takes at least 6 remotes to blow up a tank.... that's 6 shots. EDIT: oh and 1 remote kills all but proto amar heavies so.... When I can hold all the charges from my AFG and simultaneously I'll call it 'six shots'. Until then it's 'one'. As for REs killing things, well, my ADV Amarr Sent can survive some, and a friend of mine tanks them in a bricked CalSent. Not that I see the connection. Especially since people complained and REs were nerfed. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 4026	Posted - 2014.07.05 01:00:00 - [23] - Quote Ace Mercenary wrote: lol 1.7.? I did Jihad Jeep before 1.7 and nobody quoted this is my ALT Either you don't know what JLAV is or what 1.7 is. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1109	Posted - 2014.07.05 01:33:00 - [24] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: OP post Duplicate thread. There's so many of those - and even recent ones. Won't repeat my posts here, go there instead: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2219142#post2219142 https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2223651#post2223651 https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2239961#post2239961 :-S
Benjamin Ciscko The Last of DusT. General Tso's Alliance 2432	Posted - 2014.07.05 02:48:00 - [25] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Brokerib wrote: This answer is good enough that I think it bares repeating. Baal Omniscient wrote: This is silly. A prof 5 proto assault forge on a fully bpo'd out skinweave heavy can 3 shot a fully fitted, fully specced, massively expensive ADS out of the sky for under 80k..... and you guys are pissy that a 30k car loaded up with RE's by a guy who specced into them for that purpose and who can navigate close enough to you to RAM you without you noticing is blowing up your tank? Um... situational awareness much? Teamwork? Isn't that the drivel AV players have been hearing for the last 6-8 months? "Use Teamwork!" Well, have your squad let you know when there's a LAV in your vicinity. You're not with your squad? Well, you're not using teamwork. Sad day. Player ingenuity. It's a beautiful thing. Rail tankers could (and on some maps, do) camp the redline all match. They thought it up as an effective tactic. The only issue I have with it is that there's no effective way to counter it since OB's can't really drop decent tanks anymore. jLAV's ARE easy to counter. You can have teammates set up proxy's which will detonate the RE's on the LAV when they go off. You can have a teammate with a swarm on standby to hit the LAV's and either scare them off, kill them or tag their RE's with missiles, detonating them (along with the driver). Or you can have teammates spot LAV's for you. Or you can have situational awareness since you can hear LAV's from a long ways off. OR you can combine some of these ideas and do pretty well avoiding/killing 99% of them. Happy tanking, jLAV's are the least of your worries. ;) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2240587#post2240587 I responded to it in the same thread. There is a huge difference between a prof 5 IAFG and a JLAV. I imagine people would be complaining somewhat if a CRG SG could one-shot a max EHP proto Sentinel with a bodyshot. but you're not being one shot... it takes at least 6 remotes to blow up a tank.... that's 6 shots. EDIT: oh and 1 remote kills all but proto amar heavies so.... Simultaneous shots so yes I am being 1 shot... dumbass ...and Gal heavies, and is heard being thrown as well as has a 3 second detonation delay so if you can't avoid 1 person throwing multiple and avoid it your doing something wrong. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 308	Posted - 2014.07.05 10:18:00 - [26] - Quote lorhak your rebuttals to my posts were lacking. I kill more people by sticking remotes to my lav in all the other ways I mentioned than I do tanks. I always stay in the same suit to JLAV as my remotes, because if I don't hit you hard enough I do need to get out and manually set them off. and you did not tell me how blowing you up with such little cost to me is any different than me being in a total bpo fit and taking out a proto. there is no risk for me there and I don't even die if when I kill protos so how is the moderate amount of isk I use JLAVing plus using up a clone worse than killing proto in bpos for that matter if you are in a militia tank and you kill protos who's suits cost more justified in your mind? see? this is the slippery slope you slide down when you try talking about risk vs isk.... what you are really asking for is a garaunteed "I win button" if you spend enough isk. furthermore... if it takes 6 remotes it is 6 shots even if they all go off together... I have been in a situation where I have had remotes shot off my lav or had to detonate a few before I get to the tank, and the tank doesn't blow up.... means I have to go back to a depot and get more to try again. you just need better situational awareness and run with a good squad...jlavs are easy to kill if you are working together.
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 4032	Posted - 2014.07.05 11:09:00 - [27] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: lorhak your rebuttals to my posts were lacking. I kill more people by sticking remotes to my lav in all the other ways I mentioned than I do tanks. I always stay in the same suit to JLAV as my remotes, because if I don't hit you hard enough I do need to get out and manually set them off. and you did not tell me how blowing you up with such little cost to me is any different than me being in a total bpo fit and taking out a proto. there is no risk for me there and I don't even die if when I kill protos so how is the moderate amount of isk I use JLAVing plus using up a clone worse than killing proto in bpos for that matter if you are in a militia tank and you kill protos who's suits cost more justified in your mind? see? this is the slippery slope you slide down when you try talking about risk vs isk.... what you are really asking for is a garaunteed "I win button" if you spend enough isk. furthermore... if it takes 6 remotes it is 6 shots even if they all go off together... I have been in a situation where I have had remotes shot off my lav or had to detonate a few before I get to the tank, and the tank doesn't blow up.... means I have to go back to a depot and get more to try again. you just need better situational awareness and run with a good squad...jlavs are easy to kill if you are working together. How about this: when I'm in proto (or BPO) fighting a BPO (or proto) we're on even territory. In the time it takes for me to kill him e could have killed me. Using up a clone is not a significant disadvantage. The only thing on which it had an actual effect, nine times out of ten, is your KDR. I can count on my fingers the number of times matches have ended with fewer than ten clones per side for me in the last week. If I'm in a Militia Tank and I kill a proto there's ABSOLUTELY something wrong with the equation. That something is MLT tanks, and I'm not trying to say they're in a good place, far from it. So that's not a valid point. I am in no way asking for a 'guaranteed I-win button'. To continue your comparison what you're saying is a BPO should be viable in PC. It is not. If it takes six remotes it is not six shots. It is six remotes. One does not 'shoot' remotes. It is foolish to compare the detonation method of a remote explosive to a forge gun's firing mechanic (in the sense that you're implicitly doing by suggesting the single impact of the 'manned cruise missile' that is a JLAV is multiple shots). It is a single source of damage all detonating within an irrelevantly short period of time of one-another. The fact that there are multiple devices involved is not relevant. I hardly think people would suggest that Ishukone Nova Knives are incapable of 'one-shotting' a heavy, despite the fact that it technically takes two swipes. EDIT: forgot the squad comment. Let's say I have a full squad of super-team-players all in FotM proto gear running 5+ KDRs and huge win/loss. There's a few LAVs on the field. They tell me every time a red LAV goes by, especially those headed in my direction (not that you can tell, but for the sake of argument I've got the defend order). Sometimes it happens that a blue LAV intersects the red one and it's just the blue one that goes by. Sometimes it goes by me and I shoot it. But there's only five of them and they can't cover the whole field. LAVs are quick and stealthy, and the presence of blue LAVs means audio alone is not a tell - visual confirmation is required. So I go tank hunting, or I prepare to push a point in advance, or I do something that takes me out of their immediate line of sight. I get AVed but I survive or kill them because I'm competent, and probably better than most AVers. All the while LAVs are driving around and the whine of the engines is constant. I can't activate my modules on reflex because there's no point. All of a sudden I explode. Or maybe I see him coming, and I shoot at him. And I score +75 Baloch, but the REs don't blow. How's that? Better? CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 4032	Posted - 2014.07.05 11:17:00 - [28] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: OP post Duplicate thread. There's so many of those - and even recent ones. Won't repeat my posts here, go there instead: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2219142#post2219142 https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2223651#post2223651 https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2239961#post2239961 A Godin post, a GD post and Racro's well-intentioned, poorly punctuated version. Sorry, I'm sticking to mine. To be more specific, the Godin post was almost intentionally derailed by Godin himself. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 311	Posted - 2014.07.05 17:09:00 - [29] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: lorhak your rebuttals to my posts were lacking. I kill more people by sticking remotes to my lav in all the other ways I mentioned than I do tanks. I always stay in the same suit to JLAV as my remotes, because if I don't hit you hard enough I do need to get out and manually set them off. and you did not tell me how blowing you up with such little cost to me is any different than me being in a total bpo fit and taking out a proto. there is no risk for me there and I don't even die if when I kill protos so how is the moderate amount of isk I use JLAVing plus using up a clone worse than killing proto in bpos for that matter if you are in a militia tank and you kill protos who's suits cost more justified in your mind? see? this is the slippery slope you slide down when you try talking about risk vs isk.... what you are really asking for is a garaunteed "I win button" if you spend enough isk. furthermore... if it takes 6 remotes it is 6 shots even if they all go off together... I have been in a situation where I have had remotes shot off my lav or had to detonate a few before I get to the tank, and the tank doesn't blow up.... means I have to go back to a depot and get more to try again. you just need better situational awareness and run with a good squad...jlavs are easy to kill if you are working together. How about this: when I'm in proto (or BPO) fighting a BPO (or proto) we're on even territory. In the time it takes for me to kill him e could have killed me. Using up a clone is not a significant disadvantage. The only thing on which it had an actual effect, nine times out of ten, is your KDR. I can count on my fingers the number of times matches have ended with fewer than ten clones per side for me in the last week. If I'm in a Militia Tank and I kill a proto there's ABSOLUTELY something wrong with the equation. That something is MLT tanks, and I'm not trying to say they're in a good place, far from it. So that's not a valid point. I am in no way asking for a 'guaranteed I-win button'. To continue your comparison what you're saying is a BPO should be viable in PC. It is not. If it takes six remotes it is not six shots. It is six remotes. One does not 'shoot' remotes. It is foolish to compare the detonation method of a remote explosive to a forge gun's firing mechanic (in the sense that you're implicitly doing by suggesting the single impact of the 'manned cruise missile' that is a JLAV is multiple shots). It is a single source of damage all detonating within an irrelevantly short period of time of one-another. The fact that there are multiple devices involved is not relevant. I hardly think people would suggest that Ishukone Nova Knives are incapable of 'one-shotting' a heavy, despite the fact that it technically takes two swipes. EDIT: forgot the squad comment. Let's say I have a full squad of super-team-players all in FotM proto gear running 5+ KDRs and huge win/loss. There's a few LAVs on the field. They tell me every time a red LAV goes by, especially those headed in my direction (not that you can tell, but for the sake of argument I've got the defend order). Sometimes it happens that a blue LAV intersects the red one and it's just the blue one that goes by. Sometimes it goes by me and I shoot it. But there's only five of them and they can't cover the whole field. LAVs are quick and stealthy, and the presence of blue LAVs means audio alone is not a tell - visual confirmation is required. So I go tank hunting, or I prepare to push a point in advance, or I do something that takes me out of their immediate line of sight. I get AVed but I survive or kill them because I'm competent, and probably better than most AVers. All the while LAVs are driving around and the whine of the engines is constant. I can't activate my modules on reflex because there's no point. All of a sudden I explode. Or maybe I see him coming, and I shoot at him. And I score +75 Baloch, but the REs don't blow. How's that? Better? you know I have been in countless matches myself, ones where tanks go unadulterated, ones where no one calls a jlav, ones where there are no lavs at all! you simply cant justify removing a mechanic simply because you find it difficult to adapt.... I mean how many tankers are there in dust? how many in comparison are complaining about this? by the looks of the forums is basically the same 5 people... so you don't like it. its not always easy to spot them. your tank costs a lot jlavs don't. so what? it isn't game breaking, it doesn't win matches, there are counters and consequences to using one. you still have not been able to articulate a good reason why they should be removed. personally I don't like tanks... they have no role in the game... the maps are too small for them, all they really contribute to is infantry suppression, but everything else in the game can do that plus has its own special contribution. you tankers have always been the red headed step children... you are either to OP or in your own opinions to UP. ever think the reason its so hard for ccp to balance you is because they didn't make a proper place for you? I say quit blaming everything else in the game for why tanking is hard and accept that tanks were just poorly thought out. the day I can go 40/0 with a jlav, I will be on your side of this issue. until then it really is just shameless QQ.
Zindorak CaUsE-4-CoNcErN 46	Posted - 2014.07.05 17:31:00 - [30] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: why is it only dedicated tankers complain about this? when I stick 2 remotes on my lav and leave it somewhere to be hacked so I can blow it up with the hacker no one complains. when I stick remotes on my bumper and run up to an enemy lav with a drive by heavy, jump out and set the remotes off blowing them up... no complaints when I put a ton of remotes on my lav and drive right into a group of reds jump out, and blow everyone up... not a forum peep. when I run up to a tank and stick remotes on it and blow it up... no complaints. but I put remotes on the lav and run into a tanker and the tears ocean flows.... tell me how this is more than just an "I don't like being killed this way" thread. you talk about risk vs isk... but when I kill a proto in my dren fit no one cries... how is this different? This +GêP

Harpyja Legio DXIV 2045	Posted - 2014.07.10 16:27:00 - [31] - Quote Bump "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 429	Posted - 2014.07.10 16:28:00 - [32] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Bump how quickly you forget all those matches you were in where tanks stomped you and there was not a JLAV in sight.... you sir have no credibility....
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2045	Posted - 2014.07.10 18:05:00 - [33] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Harpyja wrote: Bump how quickly you forget all those matches you were in where tanks stomped you and there was not a JLAV in sight.... you sir have no credibility.... No I haven't forgotten them. JLAVs shouldn't be the be-all end-all AV solution to tanks. Was I pulling JLAVs? No, I was pulling out swarms and AV grenades and even had some success at pushing back some tanks. I decided to skill into swarms, not remotes. JLAVs are low risk, low investment, high reward. If you have a BPO LAV, each attempt costs you 0 ISK. But you can destroy upwards of 700k ISK with a JLAV. What makes it even worse is that it's an unforeseeable OHK. I only played a few battles today so only one JLAV blew me up, but it was enough where I barely made any profits today. I only heard it a split second before I blew up. I reacted to the sound of the LAV and went to activate my hardener but I was already blown up. JLAVs are not a fair tactic. Until I can slaughter infantry (which I don't by the way with XT-201s) at little risk and with low investment (like 50k ISK, not 500k ISK), only then will I see JLAVs as an even AV tactic. It just makes me sad and annoyed when I blow up peoples' vehicles with my missiles (because that's what they were f***ing designed to do) that they switch to a JLAV and blow me up, because they couldn't win against me in a fair encounter. I still get JLAV'ed just for being on the field. I'm not any more dangerous to infantry than a militia free suit is against a full proto suit. Only if you're being stupid will you get killed, but then your stupidity isn't an excuse to use a JLAV against me. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 3865	Posted - 2014.07.10 19:50:00 - [34] - Quote This thread is going to get the anti infantry shrapnel LAV I use for clearing defenders off a point in Domination nerfed isnGÇÖt it? Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 434	Posted - 2014.07.10 20:11:00 - [35] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Harpyja wrote: Bump how quickly you forget all those matches you were in where tanks stomped you and there was not a JLAV in sight.... you sir have no credibility.... No I haven't forgotten them. JLAVs shouldn't be the be-all end-all AV solution to tanks. Was I pulling JLAVs? No, I was pulling out swarms and AV grenades and even had some success at pushing back some tanks. I decided to skill into swarms, not remotes. JLAVs are low risk, low investment, high reward. If you have a BPO LAV, each attempt costs you 0 ISK. But you can destroy upwards of 700k ISK with a JLAV. What makes it even worse is that it's an unforeseeable OHK. I only played a few battles today so only one JLAV blew me up, but it was enough where I barely made any profits today. I only heard it a split second before I blew up. I reacted to the sound of the LAV and went to activate my hardener but I was already blown up. JLAVs are not a fair tactic. Until I can slaughter infantry (which I don't by the way with XT-201s) at little risk and with low investment (like 50k ISK, not 500k ISK), only then will I see JLAVs as an even AV tactic. It just makes me sad and annoyed when I blow up peoples' vehicles with my missiles (because that's what they were f***ing designed to do) that they switch to a JLAV and blow me up, because they couldn't win against me in a fair encounter. I still get JLAV'ed just for being on the field. I'm not any more dangerous to infantry than a militia free suit is against a full proto suit. Only if you're being stupid will you get killed, but then your stupidity isn't an excuse to use a JLAV against me. I can also kill a 200k proto suit with a 0 isk dren suit... I can kill aproto with 1 1500 isk remote... I can run over a proto with a bpo lav I can blow up a tank, ads, and infantry with a 0 isk 0 investment stationary turret on a map.... should we remove all of these possibilities too? no? then why the JLAV? do you see how petty, shameless, and inconsistent this QQ request is?
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2048	Posted - 2014.07.10 23:08:00 - [36] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: I can also kill a 200k proto suit with a 0 isk dren suit... I can kill aproto with 1 1500 isk remote... I can run over a proto with a bpo lav I can blow up a tank, ads, and infantry with a 0 isk 0 investment stationary turret on a map.... should we remove all of these possibilities too? no? then why the JLAV? do you see how petty, shameless, and inconsistent this QQ request is? You can't compare killing proto suits cheaply to killing tanks with JLAVs. Free suit vs proto suit is more like militia fit Sica against proto fit Gunnlogi. If the Gunnlogi loses, well it got outplayed or it just sucked. Sure you can run over a proto with a BPO LAV. It probably wasn't enough to make him go negative for the next couple of matches though. And if he's smart he won't let you run over him again. Turret installations are well known. If it's red it's dead. Or yellow... it's still dead. It's a pilot's own fault if they leave a red turret installation. They should've known that it's red. You bring up weak arguments for the defense of JLAVs. I think you just don't want to have to actually work for it and risk an AV suit trying to blow up a tank. Risk vs reward. If you want to blow up tanks so easily, then you should probably invest in a full proto AV suit. A JLAV is the reverse equivalent of the murder taxi which could 'death tap' any infantry and instakill them, while being able to tank better than a tank and has much higher mobility. You infantry cried for their removal. I think it's only fair that JLAVs don't exist either. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 450	Posted - 2014.07.11 04:51:00 - [37] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: I can also kill a 200k proto suit with a 0 isk dren suit... I can kill aproto with 1 1500 isk remote... I can run over a proto with a bpo lav I can blow up a tank, ads, and infantry with a 0 isk 0 investment stationary turret on a map.... should we remove all of these possibilities too? no? then why the JLAV? do you see how petty, shameless, and inconsistent this QQ request is? You can't compare killing proto suits cheaply to killing tanks with JLAVs. Free suit vs proto suit is more like militia fit Sica against proto fit Gunnlogi. If the Gunnlogi loses, well it got outplayed or it just sucked. Sure you can run over a proto with a BPO LAV. It probably wasn't enough to make him go negative for the next couple of matches though. And if he's smart he won't let you run over him again. Turret installations are well known. If it's red it's dead. Or yellow... it's still dead. It's a pilot's own fault if they leave a red turret installation. They should've known that it's red. You bring up weak arguments for the defense of JLAVs. I think you just don't want to have to actually work for it and risk an AV suit trying to blow up a tank. Risk vs reward. If you want to blow up tanks so easily, then you should probably invest in a full proto AV suit. A JLAV is the reverse equivalent of the murder taxi which could 'death tap' any infantry and instakill them, while being able to tank better than a tank and has much higher mobility. You infantry cried for their removal. I think it's only fair that JLAVs don't exist either. we aren't playing the game by your rules... the points I laid out are similar to the jlav, low isk, low risk ways to kill expensive things... period... with in the rules ccp devised these things can happen and jlavs are just another type of these low isk high reward mechanics. no bpo is not like militia.. militia cost money you specifically pointed out that a bpo lav makes it a 0 isk investment... so is a dren... its the same. just like running over a proto with a bpo lav... it doesn't matter if he didn't lose as much money as you, it is a 0 isk item taking out a high isk item you speak of sp investment, and turrets cost none or isk and they kill everything as well.... just because you don't like my points you cant dismiss them simply because you feel that since it isn't exactly a tank vs a jlav it doesn't count.. you are absurd and you fail to see logic only because you don't like the tactic. but I countered every reason you think it should be removed with a similar mechanic in the game. stop embarrassing yourself...
JRleo jr Xer Cloud Consortium 31	Posted - 2014.07.11 05:01:00 - [38] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: JLAVs were introduced in 1.7 as an apparently unintended byproduct of the change to REs. At the time the vehicle armour hardeners all but prevented dangerous damage being dealt to HAVs; this left the JLAV, usually stacked with prototype level equipment (because otherwise there just wasn't enough damage for success), as the only real viable means for AVing outside a tank. For that reason I, and many other members of the HAV community, accepted them as necessary for some form of balance. Time passed and hardeners were nerfed. Forge guns were now somewhat viable, but the power of the rep-tanked Madrugar meant that JLAVs were still the most effective tactic for dealing with those tanks, and so we bit our tongues. Now the armour repairers have been nerfed; as well as Large Blasters being less effective for attacking infantry, infantry AV is, as a general rule, in a very good place at the moment. Consequently, I think the time has come to formally request that they be removed. The JLAV is a low-ISK high-reward tactic; indeed, for much of the community it entails zero risk. It is difficult to counter short of hiding in the redline at the peak of a hill, owing to the speed and manoeuvrability of the LAV, and should it strike you there is no possible way to survive, short of a max-tank hardened Gunnlogi (the fittings being 2x Complex Heavy Extenders and 1x Hardener, and 1x Complex Heavy Extender and 2x Hardeners). It is akin to the much-reviled 'bumper dropship' in its near-zero investment reward, and is actually much higher reward owing to the enormous number of vehicle damage points it brings. It is also alike to the old 'murder taxi' of early Uprising, particularly considering the near-free reward those had, and to the current 'LAV Heavy', which is similarly low-investment, low-skill high reward. I hope you'll make the right decision. Because I hate jlavs so much http://www.rocofilms.com/films/TACM/slides/2.jpg
Benjamin Ciscko General Tso's Alliance 2459	Posted - 2014.07.11 05:22:00 - [39] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: I can also kill a 200k proto suit with a 0 isk dren suit... I can kill aproto with 1 1500 isk remote... I can run over a proto with a bpo lav I can blow up a tank, ads, and infantry with a 0 isk 0 investment stationary turret on a map.... should we remove all of these possibilities too? no? then why the JLAV? do you see how petty, shameless, and inconsistent this QQ request is? You can't compare killing proto suits cheaply to killing tanks with JLAVs. Free suit vs proto suit is more like militia fit Sica against proto fit Gunnlogi. If the Gunnlogi loses, well it got outplayed or it just sucked. Sure you can run over a proto with a BPO LAV. It probably wasn't enough to make him go negative for the next couple of matches though. And if he's smart he won't let you run over him again. Turret installations are well known. If it's red it's dead. Or yellow... it's still dead. It's a pilot's own fault if they leave a red turret installation. They should've known that it's red. You bring up weak arguments for the defense of JLAVs. I think you just don't want to have to actually work for it and risk an AV suit trying to blow up a tank. Risk vs reward. If you want to blow up tanks so easily, then you should probably invest in a full proto AV suit. A JLAV is the reverse equivalent of the murder taxi which could 'death tap' any infantry and instakill them, while being able to tank better than a tank and has much higher mobility. You infantry cried for their removal. I think it's only fair that JLAVs don't exist either. we aren't playing the game by your rules... the points I laid out are similar to the jlav, low isk, low risk ways to kill expensive things... period... with in the rules ccp devised these things can happen and jlavs are just another type of these low isk high reward mechanics. no bpo is not like militia.. militia cost money you specifically pointed out that a bpo lav makes it a 0 isk investment... so is a dren... its the same. just like running over a proto with a bpo lav... it doesn't matter if he didn't lose as much money as you, it is a 0 isk item taking out a high isk item you speak of sp investment, and turrets cost none or isk and they kill everything as well.... just because you don't like my points you cant dismiss them simply because you feel that since it isn't exactly a tank vs a jlav it doesn't count.. you are absurd and you fail to see logic only because you don't like the tactic. but I countered every reason you think it should be removed with a similar mechanic in the game. stop embarrassing yourself... ROFL You do realize they nerfed LAV collision damage because it was OP and removed the infinite amount of LAVs they would give you because it was unfair that 0 ISK could easily flatten a proto suit. Da fug what game are you playing because in DUST 514 all turrets cost ISK and I have 6 mil sp split between the 3 turrets, I consider 20% of my sp an sp investment. You just want to protect an easy mode crutch. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
Doctor Day Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 315	Posted - 2014.07.11 10:25:00 - [40] - Quote RE's shouldnt be placeale to friend vechiles they should slide right off It wouldnt be fair if a blueerry scout in fw placed res on me and blew me up right?

Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 114	Posted - 2014.07.11 12:37:00 - [41] - Quote Wont happen Infantry wont allow it The removal of the JLAV is a buff to vehicles and also stops lazy players who have 0SP invested in AV Cant buff vehicles thats bad, only nerf
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2050	Posted - 2014.07.11 13:47:00 - [42] - Quote Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Wont happen Infantry wont allow it The removal of the JLAV is a buff to vehicles and also stops lazy players who have 0SP invested in AV Cant buff vehicles thats bad, only nerf Yep, infantry can't let vehicles be on equal footing. They cried to remove free murder taxis and nerf collision mechanics that would allow them and the nearly indestructible logi LAVs to road kill people with ease. Yet they insist on keeping JLAVs. Infantry has always had the most f***ed up double standards in Dust. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
medomai grey WarRavens Final Resolution. 851	Posted - 2014.07.11 13:51:00 - [43] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: No. Your post betrays an absolute failure of comprehension. In no possible way is dying the issue here. If you read my OP you would realise exactly what my attitudes to 'dying' are. They have nothing, and I repeat nothing to do with losing the ISK. I am fully aware that by bringing my vehicle onto the field I risk losing it. I have been insta killed by forge guns, I've misjudged my enemy and been destroyed, I've simply scrubbed up and lost a particle cannon to a Sica. REs are 'legit AV'. REs strapped to a LAV for zero investment should not be. Every time I pull my tank onto the field I risk between 250 and 600k. In the same way, every time I bring my AFG onto the battlefield I risk between 60 and 150k. If I was to use a JLAV it would be literally free, and have a far more definite outcome. You call this a 'risk and reward' game. This is bleedingly obvious. What should also be bleedingly obvious is that a JLAV skews that 'risk vs reward' enormously. But hey. "It's a sandbox". So how's about I get back my Charybdis and we return the collision damage to what it used to be? No? You people sure do love to contradict yourselves. Medium frame EHP is not medium
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2050	Posted - 2014.07.11 13:59:00 - [44] - Quote medomai grey wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: No. Your post betrays an absolute failure of comprehension. In no possible way is dying the issue here. If you read my OP you would realise exactly what my attitudes to 'dying' are. They have nothing, and I repeat nothing to do with losing the ISK. I am fully aware that by bringing my vehicle onto the field I risk losing it. I have been insta killed by forge guns, I've misjudged my enemy and been destroyed, I've simply scrubbed up and lost a particle cannon to a Sica. REs are 'legit AV'. REs strapped to a LAV for zero investment should not be. Every time I pull my tank onto the field I risk between 250 and 600k. In the same way, every time I bring my AFG onto the battlefield I risk between 60 and 150k. If I was to use a JLAV it would be literally free, and have a far more definite outcome. You call this a 'risk and reward' game. This is bleedingly obvious. What should also be bleedingly obvious is that a JLAV skews that 'risk vs reward' enormously. But hey. "It's a sandbox". So how's about I get back my Charybdis and we return the collision damage to what it used to be? No? You people sure do love to contradict yourselves. At least it's not double standards, which infantry always seems to have. Don't you remember when you cried to remove free murder taxis and nerf the collision mechanics? Yet, infantry is defending the use of JLAVs. Please just shut up. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
medomai grey WarRavens Final Resolution. 851	Posted - 2014.07.11 14:25:00 - [45] - Quote Harpyja wrote: At least it's not double standards, which infantry always seems to have. Don't you remember when you cried to remove free murder taxis and nerf the collision mechanics? Yet, infantry is defending the use of JLAVs. Please just shut up. Oh, I see. So only infantry have double standards eh? That's funny, because I do recall a bunch of vocal vehicle users claiming that it should require teamwork to kill them but dismissed any suggestion that it should require teamwork to make vehicle effective at killing infantry. Forgive me, my memory doesn't seem to be up to par. Please do remind me of that time "I" bitched and moaned about these murder taxis. And while you're at it, do tell me of these other things that you've assumed I've said. And because you asked soo politely, no. Poking people of your... intellect is too fun. And besides, you took your precious time to reply to me. It would be awfully rude not to do the same. Medium frame EHP is not medium
Benjamin Ciscko General Tso's Alliance 2461	Posted - 2014.07.11 14:35:00 - [46] - Quote medomai grey wrote: Harpyja wrote: At least it's not double standards, which infantry always seems to have. Don't you remember when you cried to remove free murder taxis and nerf the collision mechanics? Yet, infantry is defending the use of JLAVs. Please just shut up. Oh, I see. So only infantry have double standards eh? That's funny, because I do recall a bunch of vocal vehicle users claiming that it should require teamwork to kill them but dismissed any suggestion that it should require teamwork to make vehicle effective at killing infantry. Forgive me, my memory doesn't seem to be up to par. Please do remind me of that time "I" bitched and moaned about these murder taxis. And while you're at it, do tell me of these other things that you've assumed I've said. And because you asked soo politely, no. Poking people of your... intellect is too fun. And besides, you took your precious time to reply to me. It would be awfully rude not to do the same. Tell me when you're AV teamwork was nerfed because I can distinctly tell you when my teamwork got nerfed. And I still don't get why infantry feel that one FG on a roof should be able to deny most area's of the map for all tanks and the methods you infantry suggested of teamwork was impractical and would ruin tanking while you AV thought it should take teamwork for us not to be solo'ed. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
medomai grey WarRavens Final Resolution. 851	Posted - 2014.07.11 14:54:00 - [47] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: medomai grey wrote: Harpyja wrote: At least it's not double standards, which infantry always seems to have. Don't you remember when you cried to remove free murder taxis and nerf the collision mechanics? Yet, infantry is defending the use of JLAVs. Please just shut up. Oh, I see. So only infantry have double standards eh? That's funny, because I do recall a bunch of vocal vehicle users claiming that it should require teamwork to kill them but dismissed any suggestion that it should require teamwork to make vehicle effective at killing infantry. Forgive me, my memory doesn't seem to be up to par. Please do remind me of that time "I" bitched and moaned about these murder taxis. And while you're at it, do tell me of these other things that you've assumed I've said. And because you asked soo politely, no. Poking people of your... intellect is too fun. And besides, you took your precious time to reply to me. It would be awfully rude not to do the same. Tell me when you're AV teamwork was nerfed because I can distinctly tell you when my teamwork got nerfed. And I still don't get why infantry feel that one FG on a roof should be able to deny most area's of the map for all tanks and the methods you infantry suggested of teamwork was impractical and would ruin tanking while you AV thought it should take teamwork for us not to be solo'ed. ^ See double standards. Clearly argues that vehicles should not be taken out by a solo AV user, but not once did he mention that a lone vehicle user should be less effective at killing infantry. Thank you Benjamin for proving my point that even vehicle users have double standards. Medium frame EHP is not medium
Herrick Arcos BIG BAD W0LVES Canis Eliminatus Operatives 123	Posted - 2014.07.11 15:02:00 - [48] - Quote Tanking is the only reason I have stayed with dust for so long (aside from the many great people I have met) and to this day I love being killed by other tanks, well organized AV and skilled / squirrely players yet nothing irritates me note than Jlav's. There is no skill involved in crashing an lav, no sense of accomplishment from thwarting the attempts and no joy. Dying to this tactic is as bad as loosing a tank to a hill (back when the ground was made of broken glass). I would be happy with doubled cost of tanks if it meant Jlav's were eradicated.
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 455	Posted - 2014.07.11 15:51:00 - [49] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: I can also kill a 200k proto suit with a 0 isk dren suit... I can kill aproto with 1 1500 isk remote... I can run over a proto with a bpo lav I can blow up a tank, ads, and infantry with a 0 isk 0 investment stationary turret on a map.... should we remove all of these possibilities too? no? then why the JLAV? do you see how petty, shameless, and inconsistent this QQ request is? You can't compare killing proto suits cheaply to killing tanks with JLAVs. Free suit vs proto suit is more like militia fit Sica against proto fit Gunnlogi. If the Gunnlogi loses, well it got outplayed or it just sucked. Sure you can run over a proto with a BPO LAV. It probably wasn't enough to make him go negative for the next couple of matches though. And if he's smart he won't let you run over him again. Turret installations are well known. If it's red it's dead. Or yellow... it's still dead. It's a pilot's own fault if they leave a red turret installation. They should've known that it's red. You bring up weak arguments for the defense of JLAVs. I think you just don't want to have to actually work for it and risk an AV suit trying to blow up a tank. Risk vs reward. If you want to blow up tanks so easily, then you should probably invest in a full proto AV suit. A JLAV is the reverse equivalent of the murder taxi which could 'death tap' any infantry and instakill them, while being able to tank better than a tank and has much higher mobility. You infantry cried for their removal. I think it's only fair that JLAVs don't exist either. we aren't playing the game by your rules... the points I laid out are similar to the jlav, low isk, low risk ways to kill expensive things... period... with in the rules ccp devised these things can happen and jlavs are just another type of these low isk high reward mechanics. no bpo is not like militia.. militia cost money you specifically pointed out that a bpo lav makes it a 0 isk investment... so is a dren... its the same. just like running over a proto with a bpo lav... it doesn't matter if he didn't lose as much money as you, it is a 0 isk item taking out a high isk item you speak of sp investment, and turrets cost none or isk and they kill everything as well.... just because you don't like my points you cant dismiss them simply because you feel that since it isn't exactly a tank vs a jlav it doesn't count.. you are absurd and you fail to see logic only because you don't like the tactic. but I countered every reason you think it should be removed with a similar mechanic in the game. stop embarrassing yourself... ROFL You do realize they nerfed LAV collision damage because it was OP and removed the infinite amount of LAVs they would give you because it was unfair that 0 ISK could easily flatten a proto suit. Da fug what game are you playing because in DUST 514 all turrets cost ISK and I have 6 mil sp split between the 3 turrets, I consider 20% of my sp an sp investment. You just want to protect an easy mode crutch. I'm talking about the stationary turrets on the maps , my simple minded friend. and yes they did remove starter lavs but there are bpo lavs, and those are the ones I'm referring to, and you can still run people over with them....as a matter of fact all bpo items are 0 isk and can kill things that cost isk....
Talon Paetznick II Gallente Federation Resistance 32	Posted - 2014.07.11 15:52:00 - [50] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Jonny D Buelle wrote: This has been discussed over and over. I think I'll just copy and paste my usual response: I don't think JLAVs should be removed at all. This is a sandbox (with very little sand) game thats involves risk and reward. I have myself done this type of strategy myself for shts and giggles and I found it to be fun. Yes it CAN be inexpensive to grab a milita suit, throw on some REs get a militia LAV and ram a proto fit tank. But as I stated before, this is a risk and reward game. You risked your 500k+ tank and you lost it. Yes I am aware that it is the way you lost it that is causing so much QQ over this. But you would be QQing just as hard if I was to use my forge gun to blow you up. "No! Because that is legit AV!" Well so is using REs! And if people want to attach them to an LAV and ram you let them or let them try. This argument just reminds me too much of a few new players in EVE QQing because their miners got suicide ganked in High-Sec. This *** happens in sandbox games. Much like how someone will come along and tear down your house in Minecraft because they wanted too. Yeah it pissed people off, but it is allowed. TL;DR Harden up bro and let us keep a little more sand in the sandbox. No. Your post betrays an absolute failure of comprehension. In no possible way is dying the issue here. If you read my OP you would realise exactly what my attitudes to 'dying' are. They have nothing, and I repeat nothing to do with losing the ISK. I am fully aware that by bringing my vehicle onto the field I risk losing it. I have been insta killed by forge guns, I've misjudged my enemy and been destroyed, I've simply scrubbed up and lost a particle cannon to a Sica. REs are 'legit AV'. REs strapped to a LAV for zero investment should not be. Every time I pull my tank onto the field I risk between 250 and 600k. In the same way, every time I bring my AFG onto the battlefield I risk between 60 and 150k. If I was to use a JLAV it would be literally free, and have a far more definite outcome. You call this a 'risk and reward' game. This is bleedingly obvious. What should also be bleedingly obvious is that a JLAV skews that 'risk vs reward' enormously. But hey. "It's a sandbox". So how's about I get back my Charybdis and we return the collision damage to what it used to be? No? jihad is not risk free it is a 10,000 1 shot av almost guaranteed to take your life unless tank is stationary dust math: getting killed by ion pistol = dropping the soap,useful item= nerfhammer, protostomp= WHY GOD!!!

Harpyja Legio DXIV 2053	Posted - 2014.07.11 15:53:00 - [51] - Quote medomai grey wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: medomai grey wrote: Harpyja wrote: At least it's not double standards, which infantry always seems to have. Don't you remember when you cried to remove free murder taxis and nerf the collision mechanics? Yet, infantry is defending the use of JLAVs. Please just shut up. Oh, I see. So only infantry have double standards eh? That's funny, because I do recall a bunch of vocal vehicle users claiming that it should require teamwork to kill them but dismissed any suggestion that it should require teamwork to make vehicle effective at killing infantry. Forgive me, my memory doesn't seem to be up to par. Please do remind me of that time "I" bitched and moaned about these murder taxis. And while you're at it, do tell me of these other things that you've assumed I've said. And because you asked soo politely, no. Poking people of your... intellect is too fun. And besides, you took your precious time to reply to me. It would be awfully rude not to do the same. Tell me when you're AV teamwork was nerfed because I can distinctly tell you when my teamwork got nerfed. And I still don't get why infantry feel that one FG on a roof should be able to deny most area's of the map for all tanks and the methods you infantry suggested of teamwork was impractical and would ruin tanking while you AV thought it should take teamwork for us not to be solo'ed. ^ See double standards. Clearly argues that vehicles should not be taken out by a solo AV user, but not once did he mention that a lone vehicle user should be less effective at killing infantry. Thank you Benjamin for proving my point that even vehicle users have double standards. When was the last time you saw a missile/railgun tank slaughter infantry? We have gunners to combat infantry, AKA TEAMWORK "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 455	Posted - 2014.07.11 16:35:00 - [52] - Quote Harpyja wrote: medomai grey wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: medomai grey wrote: Harpyja wrote: At least it's not double standards, which infantry always seems to have. Don't you remember when you cried to remove free murder taxis and nerf the collision mechanics? Yet, infantry is defending the use of JLAVs. Please just shut up. Oh, I see. So only infantry have double standards eh? That's funny, because I do recall a bunch of vocal vehicle users claiming that it should require teamwork to kill them but dismissed any suggestion that it should require teamwork to make vehicle effective at killing infantry. Forgive me, my memory doesn't seem to be up to par. Please do remind me of that time "I" bitched and moaned about these murder taxis. And while you're at it, do tell me of these other things that you've assumed I've said. And because you asked soo politely, no. Poking people of your... intellect is too fun. And besides, you took your precious time to reply to me. It would be awfully rude not to do the same. Tell me when you're AV teamwork was nerfed because I can distinctly tell you when my teamwork got nerfed. And I still don't get why infantry feel that one FG on a roof should be able to deny most area's of the map for all tanks and the methods you infantry suggested of teamwork was impractical and would ruin tanking while you AV thought it should take teamwork for us not to be solo'ed. ^ See double standards. Clearly argues that vehicles should not be taken out by a solo AV user, but not once did he mention that a lone vehicle user should be less effective at killing infantry. Thank you Benjamin for proving my point that even vehicle users have double standards. When was the last time you saw a missile/railgun tank slaughter infantry? We have gunners to combat infantry, AKA TEAMWORK was in a match last night where a rail gun tanker in my squad took out a good 10 infantry with a rail... and I got taken out by a missle tank a few days ago.
Death Shadow117 Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 102	Posted - 2014.07.11 20:54:00 - [53] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: why is it only dedicated tankers complain about this? when I stick 2 remotes on my lav and leave it somewhere to be hacked so I can blow it up with the hacker no one complains. when I stick remotes on my bumper and run up to an enemy lav with a drive by heavy, jump out and set the remotes off blowing them up... no complaints when I put a ton of remotes on my lav and drive right into a group of reds jump out, and blow everyone up... not a forum peep. when I run up to a tank and stick remotes on it and blow it up... no complaints. but I put remotes on the lav and run into a tanker and the tears ocean flows.... tell me how this is more than just an "I don't like being killed this way" thread. you talk about risk vs isk... but when I kill a proto in my dren fit no one cries... how is this different? Its different because with your dren its just like a sica killing a proto tank. Wouldnt you be mad when you got insta killed by an sg and went isk negative for 3-4 matches. Putting RE's on a tank is like sneaking up on a tunnel visioned gatling gunner. If they know youre there your dead or they're gone. I dont bother that i lost my tank im pissed because it was lost to some retards tactics because he was to scared to shoot av at me. Destiny beta july 17th who wants to join my fireteam. PSN deathshadow117
Rowdy Railgunner Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 426	Posted - 2014.07.11 21:51:00 - [54] - Quote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIikqPmbgvI
Michael Epic The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 287	Posted - 2014.07.11 21:53:00 - [55] - Quote I actually disagree with you. I understand your side of the story and that a blueprint LAV loaded down with an entire suite of remote explosives that are rather cheap can blow your expensive tank sky high. But why shouldn't it? Tankers are generally cowardly players. I feel like that's half of the motivation behind skilling your character into a tank. Its people who are worried about their kill death ratio because they can't deal with losing (at a video game where everyone wins and loses on a consistent basis) I have zero tank skills. I have never had desire to have tank skills. I don't have dropship skills either because I want to be in the thick of it, up close and personal with you guys duking it out and seeing who the better man is. Sometimes its you, sometimes its me. Its fun. Flying in the sky and dropping death from above or rolling around in a big armored "look how big my shag-stick is" vehicle and going 70/0 in a game or camping objectives (both tank/dropship) is a cowardly move. So why not roll a Jihad LAV right up to the tank and blow it....want to know a really smooth tactic? Its one that I use...I get the LAV going as fast as I can make it go....I can judge how far it'll roll once I jump out...I hop out, watch it go...I can switch to my remote detonator quickly and POP! Tank goes bye bye. Tanks are annoying. They enable cowards to be cowards. I understand your call to arms to remove the jihad jeeps and I will support you on that when you also make a call to arms to remove the ability for players to be cowards. You can rip opponents out of Titans in Titanfall, but I can't hop on the tank, open the hatch and shoot you in the face like the cowardly little terd that you are? Oh but you can shoot me in the LAV while I'm driving (I personally love that lol) Do you see my point?
Zindorak CaUsE-4-CoNcErN 89	Posted - 2014.07.11 22:19:00 - [56] - Quote Michael Epic wrote: I actually disagree with you. I understand your side of the story and that a blueprint LAV loaded down with an entire suite of remote explosives that are rather cheap can blow your expensive tank sky high. But why shouldn't it? Tankers are generally cowardly players. I feel like that's half of the motivation behind skilling your character into a tank. Its people who are worried about their kill death ratio because they can't deal with losing (at a video game where everyone wins and loses on a consistent basis) I have zero tank skills. I have never had desire to have tank skills. I don't have dropship skills either because I want to be in the thick of it, up close and personal with you guys duking it out and seeing who the better man is. Sometimes its you, sometimes its me. Its fun. Flying in the sky and dropping death from above or rolling around in a big armored "look how big my shag-stick is" vehicle and going 70/0 in a game or camping objectives (both tank/dropship) is a cowardly move. So why not roll a Jihad LAV right up to the tank and blow it....want to know a really smooth tactic? Its one that I use...I get the LAV going as fast as I can make it go....I can judge how far it'll roll once I jump out...I hop out, watch it go...I can switch to my remote detonator quickly and POP! Tank goes bye bye. Tanks are annoying. They enable cowards to be cowards. I understand your call to arms to remove the jihad jeeps and I will support you on that when you also make a call to arms to remove the ability for players to be cowards. You can rip opponents out of Titans in Titanfall, but I can't hop on the tank, open the hatch and shoot you in the face like the cowardly little terd that you are? Oh but you can shoot me in the LAV while I'm driving (I personally love that lol) Do you see my point? Man you took the words right out of my mouth. The moral here is Tanker=Cowardly fool BTW you can get LAV BPO's?
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 460	Posted - 2014.07.11 22:44:00 - [57] - Quote Death Shadow117 wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: why is it only dedicated tankers complain about this? when I stick 2 remotes on my lav and leave it somewhere to be hacked so I can blow it up with the hacker no one complains. when I stick remotes on my bumper and run up to an enemy lav with a drive by heavy, jump out and set the remotes off blowing them up... no complaints when I put a ton of remotes on my lav and drive right into a group of reds jump out, and blow everyone up... not a forum peep. when I run up to a tank and stick remotes on it and blow it up... no complaints. but I put remotes on the lav and run into a tanker and the tears ocean flows.... tell me how this is more than just an "I don't like being killed this way" thread. you talk about risk vs isk... but when I kill a proto in my dren fit no one cries... how is this different? Its different because with your dren its just like a sica killing a proto tank. Wouldnt you be mad when you got insta killed by an sg and went isk negative for 3-4 matches. Putting RE's on a tank is like sneaking up on a tunnel visioned gatling gunner. If they know youre there your dead or they're gone. I dont bother that i lost my tank im pissed because it was lost to some retards tactics because he was to scared to shoot av at me. but I can fit remotes on my dren suit too and kill protos, even tanks... so again... how is this different from a jlav? which by the way I'm driving in my dren suit...
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 460	Posted - 2014.07.11 22:46:00 - [58] - Quote Zindorak wrote: Michael Epic wrote: I actually disagree with you. I understand your side of the story and that a blueprint LAV loaded down with an entire suite of remote explosives that are rather cheap can blow your expensive tank sky high. But why shouldn't it? Tankers are generally cowardly players. I feel like that's half of the motivation behind skilling your character into a tank. Its people who are worried about their kill death ratio because they can't deal with losing (at a video game where everyone wins and loses on a consistent basis) I have zero tank skills. I have never had desire to have tank skills. I don't have dropship skills either because I want to be in the thick of it, up close and personal with you guys duking it out and seeing who the better man is. Sometimes its you, sometimes its me. Its fun. Flying in the sky and dropping death from above or rolling around in a big armored "look how big my shag-stick is" vehicle and going 70/0 in a game or camping objectives (both tank/dropship) is a cowardly move. So why not roll a Jihad LAV right up to the tank and blow it....want to know a really smooth tactic? Its one that I use...I get the LAV going as fast as I can make it go....I can judge how far it'll roll once I jump out...I hop out, watch it go...I can switch to my remote detonator quickly and POP! Tank goes bye bye. Tanks are annoying. They enable cowards to be cowards. I understand your call to arms to remove the jihad jeeps and I will support you on that when you also make a call to arms to remove the ability for players to be cowards. You can rip opponents out of Titans in Titanfall, but I can't hop on the tank, open the hatch and shoot you in the face like the cowardly little terd that you are? Oh but you can shoot me in the LAV while I'm driving (I personally love that lol) Do you see my point? Man you took the words right out of my mouth. The moral here is Tanker=Cowardly fool BTW you can get LAV BPO's? not anymore....
medomai grey WarRavens Final Resolution. 852	Posted - 2014.07.11 23:47:00 - [59] - Quote Harpyja wrote: When was the last time you saw a missile/railgun tank slaughter infantry? We have gunners to combat infantry, AKA TEAMWORK Because large blaster turrets don't exist? And you are taking out of context the time period in which we were discussing. Claiming that solo tankers didn't dominate entire matches in the past would be BS. Further more your attempt to change the subject to a similar related subject to avoid the appearances of being wrong has failed. Thanks to that other tanker, whom did not understand what was really being argued, my point that vehicle users have double standards and not just infantry is proven. You can continue with the popular stupid man's debate tactic, but you'll only be wrong on even more subjects. Medium frame EHP is not medium
taxi bastard jihad taxi co. 140	Posted - 2014.07.12 06:53:00 - [60] - Quote As a AV scout - RE, AV grenades and swarm launcher ill explain why i jihad jeep at times. i fight close range to the tank - if i am looking like ill kill the tank quite often a heavy will simply pop out in the click of a button and mow me down with a HMG - that is broken as hell and very scrub like, if it was not for this i would never have taken up the hobby! is it legit that it takes the time to press of a button to jump out and have an overwhelming advantage over a 300EHP scout with a scrambler pistol, sure it is! it can be done and is done very commonly, its using the mechanics of the game to your best advantage. if your going to be cheap guess what so am i. tanks can dominate the battlefield and in pubs without everyone on coms - people talk about team work ect. but i play solo and most of the time looking at the list its my team with 16 different corps vs a squad on the other side of one corp and randoms. tell me to squad up - meh people need to face it that more people play solo than in a squad and there needs to be a counter. i get killed from starter fits which cost nothing and RE kill me to. i don't QQ about the relatively low cost or non cost in some cases i just accept that i either got outplayed or i got caught with my pants down and lost a significantly more expensive suit. it does not take teamwork to tank, but if you do fully man a tank you have significantly less chance of being jihad jeeped. As tankers preach teamwork as the solution to themselves ( when realistically 70% of the time for your team its not possible) i have a simple solution for them concerning jihad jeeps. fully man your tank and squad up with a dropship who can be your eyes in the sky for incoming threats. if you know where the LAV is coming from its easy to counter. tanks are still broken in so many ways - they do not come up on your tacnet until they are literally on top of you - you have more stealth than a gallente scout bar the noise quite often. terrain has little affect on tank speed and everything bar the most extreme angles seem to be not a problem when your in your tank. this leaves very little tank traps on alot of the maps to counter the treat. and yea you dont really take damage for doing it. where do we start on fuel injectors - tanks can disengage at lighting quick speed not tanking damage going up surfaces a scout could only dream of climbing up. infact its not much slower than a swarm launcher. 3rd person veiw means that unless a tank is zoomed in it can see 3/4 of itself - unless you put your remotes on when its zoomed he has a good chance of seeing you. but to help the tanker further he can hear you decloak and laying your remote explosives how much more help could one ask for? my next point is cost!!!!! lets say on average i make 300k isk per battle which is about right. if i tanked that would be about 4 militia tanks or 1 advanced tank per battle no? how many bad tanker can honestly say that they would loose 4 tanks a battle? at a basic level they are dirt cheap FFS and easy to make a proffit on. even if you fit a basic madruger or gunlogi you can still afford to loose 2 a battle at less 150k each and turn a proffit which even most bad tankers could do on average. now if you want a reasonably expencive fit its going to cost you 300k so you can afford one a match which most average tankers could do. and a good tanker will die once every few battles so can even afford to run a top of the range 600k tank. now for team work if you fully man your tank you should split the costs of losses? no? so even if your pretty bad your probably going to get over 600K for the 3 of you in the tank to go towards the tank losses. some groups of 3 will get over 1 million isk for a battle to replace the losses incured so 2 good tanks lost to break even. its simple learn how good you or your tank crew are and fit according to what you can afford. as an infantry player i know ill die some times and adjust my suits according to how the battle is going. yea sure some battles ill enjoy and make a loss on purpose because over time it will even itself out with profits from other games. don't ***** to me about loosing your 600k tank to a jihad jeep which you did not see coming. did i force you to run such and expensive tank? no ! its not get good scrub or L2P either you simply got beat and sometimes even using teamwork it will happen. i hack objectives and sometimes ill die 4 times or more because while hacking something spawns in behind me and i simply can't react to it in a suit costing the same as a sica. think how many times per match people die hacking? i don't hear them bitching. Also you notice alot of proto players will not hack and stand back because they are scared to loose their suits. If your scared of loosing your tank to a situation which you have more chance of surviving, then cower away like they do and give your self the best chance of surivival by minimizing your risk.

Leeroy Gannarsein Legio DXIV 434	Posted - 2014.07.12 13:34:00 - [61] - Quote Michael Epic wrote: I actually disagree with you. I understand your side of the story and that a blueprint LAV loaded down with an entire suite of remote explosives that are rather cheap can blow your expensive tank sky high. But why shouldn't it? Tankers are generally cowardly players. I feel like that's half of the motivation behind skilling your character into a tank. Its people who are worried about their kill death ratio because they can't deal with losing (at a video game where everyone wins and loses on a consistent basis) I have zero tank skills. I have never had desire to have tank skills. I don't have dropship skills either because I want to be in the thick of it, up close and personal with you guys duking it out and seeing who the better man is. Sometimes its you, sometimes its me. Its fun. Flying in the sky and dropping death from above or rolling around in a big armored "look how big my shag-stick is" vehicle and going 70/0 in a game or camping objectives (both tank/dropship) is a cowardly move. So why not roll a Jihad LAV right up to the tank and blow it....want to know a really smooth tactic? Its one that I use...I get the LAV going as fast as I can make it go....I can judge how far it'll roll once I jump out...I hop out, watch it go...I can switch to my remote detonator quickly and POP! Tank goes bye bye. Tanks are annoying. They enable cowards to be cowards. I understand your call to arms to remove the jihad jeeps and I will support you on that when you also make a call to arms to remove the ability for players to be cowards. You can rip opponents out of Titans in Titanfall, but I can't hop on the tank, open the hatch and shoot you in the face like the cowardly little terd that you are? Oh but you can shoot me in the LAV while I'm driving (I personally love that lol) Do you see my point? I actually don't. I three-shotted a Sica with my DAU today. If I wasn't a scrub and a terrible shot I'd have four-shotted a particle accelerator Gunnlogi. (I missed the kill-shot). When I really want to kill a tank I IAFG it. It dies. Sometimes I like to prox the main road and then camp it with a forge; that way when the tank comes past he can either stand still and die to my FG or move and die to my proxes. I would just like to point out, though, that tanking is not, as it undeniably was in 1.7-Bravo, a KD/ISK farm. It is easy to kill a tank now, and if you disagree I'd emphasise that there are greater problems than HAV EHP, such as you being terribad. It would seem like wisdom, but for the warning in my heart... CCP BLOWOUT FOR CPM1
Death Shadow117 Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 102	Posted - 2014.07.12 20:49:00 - [62] - Quote Michael Epic wrote: I actually disagree with you. I understand your side of the story and that a blueprint LAV loaded down with an entire suite of remote explosives that are rather cheap can blow your expensive tank sky high. But why shouldn't it? Tankers are generally cowardly players. I feel like that's half of the motivation behind skilling your character into a tank. Its people who are worried about their kill death ratio because they can't deal with losing (at a video game where everyone wins and loses on a consistent basis) I have zero tank skills. I have never had desire to have tank skills. I don't have dropship skills either because I want to be in the thick of it, up close and personal with you guys duking it out and seeing who the better man is. Sometimes its you, sometimes its me. Its fun. Flying in the sky and dropping death from above or rolling around in a big armored "look how big my shag-stick is" vehicle and going 70/0 in a game or camping objectives (both tank/dropship) is a cowardly move. So why not roll a Jihad LAV right up to the tank and blow it....want to know a really smooth tactic? Its one that I use...I get the LAV going as fast as I can make it go....I can judge how far it'll roll once I jump out...I hop out, watch it go...I can switch to my remote detonator quickly and POP! Tank goes bye bye. Tanks are annoying. They enable cowards to be cowards. I understand your call to arms to remove the jihad jeeps and I will support you on that when you also make a call to arms to remove the ability for players to be cowards. You can rip opponents out of Titans in Titanfall, but I can't hop on the tank, open the hatch and shoot you in the face like the cowardly little terd that you are? Oh but you can shoot me in the LAV while I'm driving (I personally love that lol) Do you see my point? True about like 80% of tankers probably started because they sucked at ground game but I started tanking to destroy other tanks not because i wanted to decimate infantry with a "shag stick" as you called it. Yes its true some tankers did it because they wanted to watch their kdr but thats not why all tankers started. Learn about ** before you go and start talking **. First proto tank weapon for me was the railgun and i still hate blasters so no that isnt why all tankers started. Destiny beta july 17th who wants to join my fireteam. PSN deathshadow117
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10426	Posted - 2014.07.13 04:04:00 - [63] - Quote Quote: low-risk adjective (also low risk) GÇ¦ likely to be successful , or unlikely to be connected with danger or problems : JLAVs can (and usually are) insta-killed by anything which happens to fire at the front part of the vehicle, creating a reasonable amount of danger for the Pilot. Most terrain in DUST 514 is rather bumpy, which can make hitting a vehicle at full speed difficult, creating a problem for the Pilot. Therefore, JLAVs cannot -definitively- be considered "low-risk" I won't even bother addressing the "low-effort" argument, as it's laughably hypocritical considering how "low-effort" piloting an HAV is. [/thread] The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2074	Posted - 2014.07.13 04:59:00 - [64] - Quote Atiim wrote: Quote: low-risk adjective (also low risk) GÇ¦ likely to be successful , or unlikely to be connected with danger or problems : JLAVs can (and usually are) insta-killed by anything which happens to fire at the front part of the vehicle, creating a reasonable amount of danger for the Pilot. Most terrain in DUST 514 is rather bumpy, which can make hitting a vehicle at full speed difficult, creating a problem for the Pilot. Therefore, JLAVs cannot -definitively- be considered "low-risk" I won't even bother addressing the "low-effort" argument, as it's laughably hypocritical considering how "low-effort" piloting an HAV is. [/thread] Most of the Earth is covered in water. So obviously that's where the majority of Earth's population lives, in water. Just because most of the terrain in Dust is bumpy doesn't mean that's where vehicles spend 90% of their time. Ground vehicles stick to the flat areas and main roads most of the time. It's rather easy to JLAV a HAV. Just push the left stick around until you run into a HAV, preferably from the rear so it doesn't notice you until it's already blown up. Even if you get blown up, your only setback is some time lost and one more death to your precious KDR. Your next attempt statistically will have a greater chance of success. And lol, "low-effort" my ass. I could probably say the same about running infantry. Just point and shoot to kill stuff, right? Oh and move your left stick to move around. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 477	Posted - 2014.07.13 05:30:00 - [65] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Atiim wrote: Quote: low-risk adjective (also low risk) GÇ¦ likely to be successful , or unlikely to be connected with danger or problems : JLAVs can (and usually are) insta-killed by anything which happens to fire at the front part of the vehicle, creating a reasonable amount of danger for the Pilot. Most terrain in DUST 514 is rather bumpy, which can make hitting a vehicle at full speed difficult, creating a problem for the Pilot. Therefore, JLAVs cannot -definitively- be considered "low-risk" I won't even bother addressing the "low-effort" argument, as it's laughably hypocritical considering how "low-effort" piloting an HAV is. [/thread] Most of the Earth is covered in water. So obviously that's where the majority of Earth's population lives, in water. Just because most of the terrain in Dust is bumpy doesn't mean that's where vehicles spend 90% of their time. Ground vehicles stick to the flat areas and main roads most of the time. It's rather easy to JLAV a HAV. Just push the left stick around until you run into a HAV, preferably from the rear so it doesn't notice you until it's already blown up. Even if you get blown up, your only setback is some time lost and one more death to your precious KDR. Your next attempt statistically will have a greater chance of success. And lol, "low-effort" my ass. I could probably say the same about running infantry. Just point and shoot to kill stuff, right? Oh and move your left stick to move around. every time you make a post you further display your poor grasp over this game....
Leeroy Gannarsein Legio DXIV 451	Posted - 2014.07.14 00:25:00 - [66] - Quote Atiim wrote: Quote: low-risk adjective (also low risk) GÇ¦ likely to be successful , or unlikely to be connected with danger or problems : JLAVs can (and usually are) insta-killed by anything which happens to fire at the front part of the vehicle, creating a reasonable amount of danger for the Pilot. Most terrain in DUST 514 is rather bumpy, which can make hitting a vehicle at full speed difficult, creating a problem for the Pilot. Therefore, JLAVs cannot -definitively- be considered "low-risk" I won't even bother addressing the "low-effort" argument, as it's laughably hypocritical considering how "low-effort" piloting an HAV is. [/thread] Did some JLAVing myself after I posted this thread. Wanted to see whether it was in fact as difficult as you were saying. Well, I stole a few kills from Jason and then decided to start experimenting with placement. It's not really a big deal to place them somewhere they won't be shot. I'd have thought it was pretty elementary. It took somewhat less time than pulling my FG, setting up and making the kill, so 'it takes you out of the battle' is BS. The presence of the nitrous means your LAV is as effective as a rifle at slaying. It could be argued as more effective. HAV piloting is expensive, and the power of AV as it stands makes it definitively 'high-risk' in the sense that 'you are risking a lot of ISK that is easy to kill'. All it takes is a brain. It is, at a high level of pilot skill, difficult to kill a HAV. I've dumped countless Sicas in matches to watch them get insta killed, while I roll around the rest of the match. I saw countless blues pull X-0 games in Somas back in 1.7-8, where X is lower than 5-10, and I'm comfortably pulling 20 kills off a stock fitting. That you suggest skill isn't important for HAV piloting is pretty out-there. If I wanted to play a 'no-skill' playstyle I'd be maining a cheap heavy. Doesn't die, doesn't matter when it does (sound familiar? Seems like those Somas I mentioned...). That you can honestly suggest that deploying a 500k fitting, as so many tankers do, is somehow low-risk shows a significant lack of understanding of tanking. There's a reason we're reimbursed at a high level. All I can say is this: if you're having issues killing a Gunnlogi, go get a forge. It would seem like wisdom, but for the warning in my heart... CCP BLOWOUT FOR CPM1
knight guard fury Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 1102	Posted - 2014.07.14 01:19:00 - [67] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: JLAVs were introduced in 1.7 as an apparently unintended byproduct of the change to REs. At the time the vehicle armour hardeners all but prevented dangerous damage being dealt to HAVs; this left the JLAV, usually stacked with prototype level equipment (because otherwise there just wasn't enough damage for success), as the only real viable means for AVing outside a tank. For that reason I, and many other members of the HAV community, accepted them as necessary for some form of balance. Time passed and hardeners were nerfed. Forge guns were now somewhat viable, but the power of the rep-tanked Madrugar meant that JLAVs were still the most effective tactic for dealing with those tanks, and so we bit our tongues. Now the armour repairers have been nerfed; as well as Large Blasters being less effective for attacking infantry, infantry AV is, as a general rule, in a very good place at the moment. Consequently, I think the time has come to formally request that they be removed. The JLAV is a low-ISK high-reward tactic; indeed, for much of the community it entails zero risk. It is difficult to counter short of hiding in the redline at the peak of a hill, owing to the speed and manoeuvrability of the LAV, and should it strike you there is no possible way to survive, short of a max-tank hardened Gunnlogi (the fittings being 2x Complex Heavy Extenders and 1x Hardener, and 1x Complex Heavy Extender and 2x Hardeners). It is akin to the much-reviled 'bumper dropship' in its near-zero investment reward, and is actually much higher reward owing to the enormous number of vehicle damage points it brings. It is also alike to the old 'murder taxi' of early Uprising, particularly considering the near-free reward those had, and to the current 'LAV Heavy', which is similarly low-investment, low-skill high reward. I hope you'll make the right decision. its a simple tactic that many people use, but its not that big of a deal. take a look at eve. they have suicide gankers and no one bitches about it. well they do at first but its not that big of a deal. even BF4 allows it. its not something that will be easily removed. ive even heard that people suicide gank even if there is no point. this is new eden bro. HTFU. also dont use the word jihading, it is offensive to a specific group of people. instead call it "pizza delivery" SP earned perday/week
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 504	Posted - 2014.07.14 01:19:00 - [68] - Quote Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Atiim wrote: Quote: low-risk adjective (also low risk) GÇ¦ likely to be successful , or unlikely to be connected with danger or problems : JLAVs can (and usually are) insta-killed by anything which happens to fire at the front part of the vehicle, creating a reasonable amount of danger for the Pilot. Most terrain in DUST 514 is rather bumpy, which can make hitting a vehicle at full speed difficult, creating a problem for the Pilot. Therefore, JLAVs cannot -definitively- be considered "low-risk" I won't even bother addressing the "low-effort" argument, as it's laughably hypocritical considering how "low-effort" piloting an HAV is. [/thread] Did some JLAVing myself after I posted this thread. Wanted to see whether it was in fact as difficult as you were saying. Well, I stole a few kills from Jason and then decided to start experimenting with placement. It's not really a big deal to place them somewhere they won't be shot. I'd have thought it was pretty elementary. It took somewhat less time than pulling my FG, setting up and making the kill, so 'it takes you out of the battle' is BS. The presence of the nitrous means your LAV is as effective as a rifle at slaying. It could be argued as more effective. HAV piloting is expensive, and the power of AV as it stands makes it definitively 'high-risk' in the sense that 'you are risking a lot of ISK that is easy to kill'. All it takes is a brain. It is, at a high level of pilot skill, difficult to kill a HAV. I've dumped countless Sicas in matches to watch them get insta killed, while I roll around the rest of the match. I saw countless blues pull X-0 games in Somas back in 1.7-8, where X is lower than 5-10, and I'm comfortably pulling 20 kills off a stock fitting. That you suggest skill isn't important for HAV piloting is pretty out-there. If I wanted to play a 'no-skill' playstyle I'd be maining a cheap heavy. Doesn't die, doesn't matter when it does (sound familiar? Seems like those Somas I mentioned...). That you can honestly suggest that deploying a 500k fitting, as so many tankers do, is somehow low-risk shows a significant lack of understanding of tanking. There's a reason we're reimbursed at a high level. All I can say is this: if you're having issues killing a Gunnlogi, go get a forge. so you went and did some JLAVing...how many games, how many days? would you say running a tank for a few days gives a person all the information they need to know about the intricacies of that role? if someone plays a couple games one day tanking and just mutilates the enemy team with it, and then came on the forums and said " tanks take no skill" wouldn't you tell that person they just went up against crappy teams? you got lucky? just because you had a few easy kills with a JLAV in your shallow diversion into that role makes you neither master or qualified educator of such.... furthermore I find it an interesting caveat that for all your QQ about JLAVs you admit to experimenting with them only recently... yet often in the past spoke of their lack of skill as if from 1st hand experiences. and as if this chicken dinner of a post wasn't already a winner, for desert you admit forges are more of a threat, further proving a point many of us have been trying to make that JLAVs aren't all that hard to deal with... /slow clap
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2078	Posted - 2014.07.14 02:24:00 - [69] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: so you went and did some JLAVing...how many games, how many days? would you say running a tank for a few days gives a person all the information they need to know about the intricacies of that role? if someone plays a couple games one day tanking and just mutilates the enemy team with it, and then came on the forums and said " tanks take no skill" wouldn't you tell that person they just went up against crappy teams? you got lucky? just because you had a few easy kills with a JLAV in your shallow diversion into that role makes you neither master or qualified educator of such.... furthermore I find it an interesting caveat that for all your QQ about JLAVs you admit to experimenting with them only recently... yet often in the past spoke of their lack of skill as if from 1st hand experiences. and as if this chicken dinner of a post wasn't already a winner, for desert you admit forges are more of a threat, further proving a point many of us have been trying to make that JLAVs aren't all that hard to deal with... /slow clap It doesn't take long to master that which requires little skill, if any... I'd consider a day's worth of JLAVing a fair amount of experience on the subject, because honestly, there's not that much to it. Just slap on some RE's (which are the only SP requirement of JLAVs) onto a militia LAV or a BPO (a militia fuel injector is optional for higher success). You could also perform some placement tests (like Lorhak did) to see where's the best place is to put them. I don't see how much there is to learn on how to better drive an LAV after a few games or attempts, you just have to make sure you catch the tank from the rear. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 505	Posted - 2014.07.14 02:27:00 - [70] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: so you went and did some JLAVing...how many games, how many days? would you say running a tank for a few days gives a person all the information they need to know about the intricacies of that role? if someone plays a couple games one day tanking and just mutilates the enemy team with it, and then came on the forums and said " tanks take no skill" wouldn't you tell that person they just went up against crappy teams? you got lucky? just because you had a few easy kills with a JLAV in your shallow diversion into that role makes you neither master or qualified educator of such.... furthermore I find it an interesting caveat that for all your QQ about JLAVs you admit to experimenting with them only recently... yet often in the past spoke of their lack of skill as if from 1st hand experiences. and as if this chicken dinner of a post wasn't already a winner, for desert you admit forges are more of a threat, further proving a point many of us have been trying to make that JLAVs aren't all that hard to deal with... /slow clap It doesn't take long to master that which requires little skill, if any... I could say the same about tanks....

Harpyja Legio DXIV 2079	Posted - 2014.07.14 04:03:00 - [71] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: so you went and did some JLAVing...how many games, how many days? would you say running a tank for a few days gives a person all the information they need to know about the intricacies of that role? if someone plays a couple games one day tanking and just mutilates the enemy team with it, and then came on the forums and said " tanks take no skill" wouldn't you tell that person they just went up against crappy teams? you got lucky? just because you had a few easy kills with a JLAV in your shallow diversion into that role makes you neither master or qualified educator of such.... furthermore I find it an interesting caveat that for all your QQ about JLAVs you admit to experimenting with them only recently... yet often in the past spoke of their lack of skill as if from 1st hand experiences. and as if this chicken dinner of a post wasn't already a winner, for desert you admit forges are more of a threat, further proving a point many of us have been trying to make that JLAVs aren't all that hard to deal with... /slow clap It doesn't take long to master that which requires little skill, if any... I could say the same about tanks.... lol. You know nothing... "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 512	Posted - 2014.07.14 04:29:00 - [72] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: so you went and did some JLAVing...how many games, how many days? would you say running a tank for a few days gives a person all the information they need to know about the intricacies of that role? if someone plays a couple games one day tanking and just mutilates the enemy team with it, and then came on the forums and said " tanks take no skill" wouldn't you tell that person they just went up against crappy teams? you got lucky? just because you had a few easy kills with a JLAV in your shallow diversion into that role makes you neither master or qualified educator of such.... furthermore I find it an interesting caveat that for all your QQ about JLAVs you admit to experimenting with them only recently... yet often in the past spoke of their lack of skill as if from 1st hand experiences. and as if this chicken dinner of a post wasn't already a winner, for desert you admit forges are more of a threat, further proving a point many of us have been trying to make that JLAVs aren't all that hard to deal with... /slow clap It doesn't take long to master that which requires little skill, if any... I could say the same about tanks.... lol. I know nothing... fixed that for ya.
Death Shadow117 Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 102	Posted - 2014.07.14 19:10:00 - [73] - Quote ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. Destiny beta july 17th who wants to join my fireteam. PSN deathshadow117
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10476	Posted - 2014.07.14 19:29:00 - [74] - Quote Death Shadow117 wrote: ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. "Real Tanker" is a fallacy. As for becoming proficient with tanking, it requires about 13m SP and assuming you aren't a scrub who needs their modules to carry yourself, 153-215k ISK. Though none of that has anything to do with this discussion, as SP and ISK are not valid arguments when discussing balance. The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND
Death Shadow117 Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 102	Posted - 2014.07.14 19:49:00 - [75] - Quote Atiim go back to GD where you belong. Do you even play the game anymore because i havent seen you in any matches. I know its not because you have pc's. So what is it are you staying on the oceana server? Destiny beta july 17th who wants to join my fireteam. PSN deathshadow117
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10477	Posted - 2014.07.14 19:58:00 - [76] - Quote Death Shadow117 wrote: Atiim go back to GD where you belong. Or, since you seem to be incapable of forming a valid argument pertaining to item balance, how about you leave the Features and Ideas Discussions sub-forum? Also The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND
knight guard fury Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 1103	Posted - 2014.07.14 21:35:00 - [77] - Quote Atiim wrote: Death Shadow117 wrote: Atiim go back to GD where you belong. Or, since you seem to be incapable of forming a valid argument pertaining to item balance, how about you leave the Features and Ideas Discussions sub-forum? Also Atiim's done it agian, ladies and gentleman. proving another thread INVALID. tune in next time to see who else he invalidates or trolls next. :) to be continued... SP earned perday/week
knight guard fury Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 1103	Posted - 2014.07.14 21:36:00 - [78] - Quote Atiim wrote: Death Shadow117 wrote: Atiim go back to GD where you belong. Or, since you seem to be incapable of forming a valid argument pertaining to item balance, how about you leave the Features and Ideas Discussions sub-forum? Also Atiim's done it agian, ladies and gentleman. proving another discussion INVALID. tune in next time to see who else he invalidates or trolls next. :) to be continued... SP earned perday/week
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 534	Posted - 2014.07.14 21:46:00 - [79] - Quote Death Shadow117 wrote: ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. yes I have tanked.... but that wasn't my point... I was trying to convey the frustration of non tankers who are told by tankers their means of anti tanking takes no skill, while tankers act like they are the only skill intensive role in the game. I'm sorry that went over your head... I'll try to type more slowly for you in the future....
taxi bastard jihad taxi co. 143	Posted - 2014.07.15 02:43:00 - [80] - Quote no idea why tankers QQ about remotes - tbh i think its because they want to run proto all the time and it hurts when they loose it. its alot easier and quicker to kill a proto infantry with RE than it is to run the gauntlet with a JLAV. if i get killed by a proto infantry player - ill either get out a dren heavy ( militia plates + enhanced sheild extender) with no rep but pure EHP and basic HMG or a suit with RE and bait them. its fun and there is no QQ about it. taking out a JLAV costs more money ....think its about 18k all in for my dren fit (it can do normal combat). and takes alot more time when tbh i would get more WP's doing my usual stuff. if there is one tank ill generally leave it ......unless it kills me with a proto gun, its too tasty to leave. 2-3+ tanks on the enemy side slaying infantry left right and center ill try ram them all !!! both are cost effective solutions to being stomped. kill them enough and they might put the toys away..... if they don't ill get lots of isk so i am not really all that bothered. if its the dren pack the tankers dislike then its tough!! i paid RL money to get that stuff and truthfully infantry is the biggest looser to dren items and suits but i don't hear them QQ. a non dren user will have to pay 18.3k for a LAV 2.7k for a fuel injector 8K in RE 400 on a nano hive and 3k for a basic logi suit 600 or a malitia gun. total 33k - considering the tank starts at under 60k its quite an investment considering the risk.

Leeroy Gannarsein Legio DXIV 467	Posted - 2014.07.15 05:52:00 - [81] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Death Shadow117 wrote: ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. yes I have tanked.... but that wasn't my point... I was trying to convey the frustration of non tankers who are told by tankers their means of anti tanking takes no skill, while tankers act like they are the only skill intensive role in the game. I'm sorry that went over your head... I'll try to type more slowly for you in the future.... How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. It would seem like wisdom, but for the warning in my heart... CCP BLOWOUT FOR CPM1
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 556	Posted - 2014.07.15 06:54:00 - [82] - Quote Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Death Shadow117 wrote: ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. yes I have tanked.... but that wasn't my point... I was trying to convey the frustration of non tankers who are told by tankers their means of anti tanking takes no skill, while tankers act like they are the only skill intensive role in the game. I'm sorry that went over your head... I'll try to type more slowly for you in the future.... How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. I never said jlav is my style of av... I use nades, swarms (proto) and forge too (at 3 atm) the point is to give another option, both effective and fun... and seriously... whats the point???? then I could say the same of rifles, why have more than one type... that's just a ridiculous thing to ask.... and it does take skill... its all about dodging fire sneaking into position maneuvering well and hitting the tank the right way and compensating afterward for a second try if it doesn't pan out... and yes HAV is sp intensive... but that doesn't mean it takes a lot of player effort... whether tanking does or doesn't take skil isn't even the point... the point is to respect the way other people play even if it is different than yours, so long as they aren't using exploits or other cheats.... in this whole thread you still haven't told me how jlavs break the game.... because you cant.... because they don't.
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2081	Posted - 2014.07.15 14:37:00 - [83] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Death Shadow117 wrote: ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. yes I have tanked.... but that wasn't my point... I was trying to convey the frustration of non tankers who are told by tankers their means of anti tanking takes no skill, while tankers act like they are the only skill intensive role in the game. I'm sorry that went over your head... I'll try to type more slowly for you in the future.... How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. I never said jlav is my style of av... I use nades, swarms (proto) and forge too (at 3 atm) the point is to give another option, both effective and fun... and seriously... whats the point???? then I could say the same of rifles, why have more than one type... that's just a ridiculous thing to ask.... and it does take skill... its all about dodging fire sneaking into position maneuvering well and hitting the tank the right way and compensating afterward for a second try if it doesn't pan out... and yes HAV is sp intensive... but that doesn't mean it takes a lot of player effort... whether tanking does or doesn't take skil isn't even the point... the point is to respect the way other people play even if it is different than yours, so long as they aren't using exploits or other cheats.... in this whole thread you still haven't told me how jlavs break the game.... because you cant.... because they don't. Dude, are you even hearing yourself? It takes absolutely no skill to come up behind a tank and crash into it. What more could you possibly learn from you first few attempts? Tanks on the other hand require a lot of time to learn and to get good. Being able to slay infantry doesn't mean you're good or skilled with tanks. Being skilled with tanks means that you can win vehicle engagements and successfully defend yourself from multiple AV. If you say that tanks require no skill, then how come (newb) Sicas and Somas get destroyed so easily? My alt with standard swarms and AV grenades has a fun time blowing them up. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10498	Posted - 2014.07.15 15:06:00 - [84] - Quote Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? JLAVs aren't ideal for every situation, because the terrain may be ridiculously bumpy, and you may be facing a tanker who's actually competent and destroys the JLAV every time. The point of Forge Guns and Swarm Launchers, would be long range AV Weaponry. Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. Swarm Launchers require that you have situational awareness, as you -typically- cannot see around you during engagements because your too focused on the vehicle. They also require that you make every shot count (resource management) due to the awful ammunition reserves, and they require patience in the sense that firing at the wrong time guarantees that your target escapes (the only other AV weapon actively requiring this skill is the Plasma Cannon). HAV Piloting is not as skill intensive as Forging. The FGer puts themselves at risk to far more items, and has a TTK far lower than that of an HAV. When you also consider the fact that an HAV can easily escape danger in most situations, they're quite literally the easiest item to use in DUST 514. The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2478	Posted - 2014.07.15 15:45:00 - [85] - Quote Atiim wrote: Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? JLAVs aren't ideal for every situation, because the terrain may be ridiculously bumpy, and you may be facing a tanker who's actually competent and destroys the JLAV every time. The point of Forge Guns and Swarm Launchers, would be long range AV Weaponry. Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. Swarm Launchers require that you have situational awareness, as you -typically- cannot see around you during engagements because your too focused on the vehicle. They also require that you make every shot count (resource management) due to the awful ammunition reserves, and they require patience in the sense that firing at the wrong time guarantees that your target escapes (the only other AV weapon actively requiring this skill is the Plasma Cannon). HAV Piloting is not as skill intensive as Forging. The FGer puts themselves at risk to far more items, and has a TTK far lower than that of an HAV. When you also consider the fact that an HAV can easily escape danger in most situations, they're quite literally the easiest item to use in DUST 514. If you know how to fit a Jihad LAV properly you will hardly ever fail. Lol Forging requiring skill lol sure it takes a great amount of skill to kill an ADS but lol I'm in such danger camping on this tower or High point where the tank cannot touch me and I can track him great distances. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
Zindorak CaUsE-4-CoNcErN 127	Posted - 2014.07.15 15:59:00 - [86] - Quote Actually you can lose alot of money if your running a proto suit and you have boundless re's. So we sacrifice alot doing this.
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 568	Posted - 2014.07.15 18:17:00 - [87] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Death Shadow117 wrote: ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. yes I have tanked.... but that wasn't my point... I was trying to convey the frustration of non tankers who are told by tankers their means of anti tanking takes no skill, while tankers act like they are the only skill intensive role in the game. I'm sorry that went over your head... I'll try to type more slowly for you in the future.... How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. I never said jlav is my style of av... I use nades, swarms (proto) and forge too (at 3 atm) the point is to give another option, both effective and fun... and seriously... whats the point???? then I could say the same of rifles, why have more than one type... that's just a ridiculous thing to ask.... and it does take skill... its all about dodging fire sneaking into position maneuvering well and hitting the tank the right way and compensating afterward for a second try if it doesn't pan out... and yes HAV is sp intensive... but that doesn't mean it takes a lot of player effort... whether tanking does or doesn't take skil isn't even the point... the point is to respect the way other people play even if it is different than yours, so long as they aren't using exploits or other cheats.... in this whole thread you still haven't told me how jlavs break the game.... because you cant.... because they don't. Dude, are you even hearing yourself? It takes absolutely no skill to come up behind a tank and crash into it. What more could you possibly learn from you first few attempts? Tanks on the other hand require a lot of time to learn and to get good. Being able to slay infantry doesn't mean you're good or skilled with tanks. Being skilled with tanks means that you can win vehicle engagements and successfully defend yourself from multiple AV. If you say that tanks require no skill, then how come (newb) Sicas and Somas get destroyed so easily? My alt with standard swarms and AV grenades has a fun time blowing them up. you cant always just come up behind a tank.... and in the case of a madrugar if you hit the back you you just jump over them cause of their ramp like backs...so you have to hit their sides or fronts sicas, somas are easier to hit, but not if they have gunners plus they are quicker so trying to hit them in the back can be a real challenge if they are also running from you because the impact of hitting their backside while they are also moving is not enough to blow up. trying to get them on uneven ground presnts a whole new challenge because lavs have no spped on rough terrain even with a fuel injector, so you have to try to sneak up on them get out and manually detonate... so theres a few tid bits for you right there... all of which I'm sure you knew nothing about judging from your ignorant post. furthermore I can tell you now why your such a bad tanker and have issues with jlavs.... don't just sit their firing your gun... you have to move around, just sitting in one place makes you an easy target... and certainly if you are stationary don't get tunnel vision in your first person mode, or you will not only get snuck up on by jlav but RE scouts as well... so I hope I have enlightened you a bit... though I doubt it, you see incapable of learning much of anything, may I suggest you return to D UNI and actually pay attention this time....
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2084	Posted - 2014.07.15 19:05:00 - [88] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Harpyja wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: yes I have tanked.... but that wasn't my point... I was trying to convey the frustration of non tankers who are told by tankers their means of anti tanking takes no skill, while tankers act like they are the only skill intensive role in the game. I'm sorry that went over your head... I'll try to type more slowly for you in the future.... How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. I never said jlav is my style of av... I use nades, swarms (proto) and forge too (at 3 atm) the point is to give another option, both effective and fun... and seriously... whats the point???? then I could say the same of rifles, why have more than one type... that's just a ridiculous thing to ask.... and it does take skill... its all about dodging fire sneaking into position maneuvering well and hitting the tank the right way and compensating afterward for a second try if it doesn't pan out... and yes HAV is sp intensive... but that doesn't mean it takes a lot of player effort... whether tanking does or doesn't take skil isn't even the point... the point is to respect the way other people play even if it is different than yours, so long as they aren't using exploits or other cheats.... in this whole thread you still haven't told me how jlavs break the game.... because you cant.... because they don't. Dude, are you even hearing yourself? It takes absolutely no skill to come up behind a tank and crash into it. What more could you possibly learn from you first few attempts? Tanks on the other hand require a lot of time to learn and to get good. Being able to slay infantry doesn't mean you're good or skilled with tanks. Being skilled with tanks means that you can win vehicle engagements and successfully defend yourself from multiple AV. If you say that tanks require no skill, then how come (newb) Sicas and Somas get destroyed so easily? My alt with standard swarms and AV grenades has a fun time blowing them up. you cant always just come up behind a tank.... and in the case of a madrugar if you hit the back you you just jump over them cause of their ramp like backs...so you have to hit their sides or fronts sicas, somas are easier to hit, but not if they have gunners plus they are quicker so trying to hit them in the back can be a real challenge if they are also running from you because the impact of hitting their backside while they are also moving is not enough to blow up. trying to get them on uneven ground presnts a whole new challenge because lavs have no spped on rough terrain even with a fuel injector, so you have to try to sneak up on them get out and manually detonate... so theres a few tid bits for you right there... all of which I'm sure you knew nothing about judging from your ignorant post. furthermore I can tell you now why your such a bad tanker and have issues with jlavs.... don't just sit their firing your gun... you have to move around, just sitting in one place makes you an easy target... and certainly if you are stationary don't get tunnel vision in your first person mode, or you will not only get snuck up on by jlav but RE scouts as well... so I hope I have enlightened you a bit... though I doubt it, you seem incapable of learning much of anything, may I suggest you return to D UNI and actually pay attention this time.... Lol. You're the ignorant one here. Only someone stupid enough will try to JLAV a tank in rough terrain. Vehicles don't spend the majority of their time in rough terrain so just make one more lap and the tank will most likely be out of the rough terrain. And I don't do any of the things you mentioned. I drive in 3rd person almost all of the time because missiles seem to hit things better in CQC from 3rd person (and also better situational awareness). I also hate stopping so I never stop for more than a few seconds, enough time to land a few accurate missiles to kill someone hacking something or someone that's just standing still. I'll just be driving around randomly when a JLAV just suddenly comes out of nowhere and rams me from the side or the back. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 575	Posted - 2014.07.15 19:18:00 - [89] - Quote when did I say vehicles spent most of their time in rough terrain? I said when they are..... I am not going to deign to respond to you anymore.... you are a scrub and I'm tired of arguing with you... if it wasn't obvious already to your pea brain ratati doesn't care about the tank QQ and jlavs are here to stay... I have made valid counters to all jlav QQ and my likes on this thread are proof of this... you and lorhak have run out of anything sensible to say and have strayed into the realm of ridiculousness and desperation.... tell me why jlavs break the game, until you can come up with a sensible reason... which you cant, cause they don't, I'm done entertaining your moronic perceptions of this dead game...
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11874	Posted - 2014.07.15 19:53:00 - [90] - Quote I do wish to point out that dealing with JLAVs when we had no dispersion was fine since a good tanker could pick off the remotes if they had the piece of mind....... now that the dispersion is atroscious...... half your shots will miss the LAV, 45% will miss your intended target on the LAV, and odds are even after a solid 3-4 seconds of firing your enemy will drive with impunity into the side of your vastly more expensive and SP invested vehicle...... "Your Faith stands as a shield for the Faithful, and you are one of His Angels." - Soren Tyrhannos to Templar Ouryon

Tread Loudly 2 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 9	Posted - 2014.07.15 20:00:00 - [91] - Quote Zindorak wrote: Actually you can lose alot of money if your running a proto suit and you have boundless re's. So we sacrifice alot doing this. This is false JLAV drivers simply put the re's on the vehicle then switch to a free/cheap suit to avoid a majority of expenses. I Like Tanks, ADS's, and Ion Pistols!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11875	Posted - 2014.07.15 20:09:00 - [92] - Quote Tread Loudly 2 wrote: Zindorak wrote: Actually you can lose alot of money if your running a proto suit and you have boundless re's. So we sacrifice alot doing this. This is false JLAV drivers simply put the re's on the vehicle then switch to a free/cheap suit to avoid a majority of expenses. BPO Suit BPO LAV unfit possibly 14K ISK Remote Explosives set as a hugely viable counter for 200,000 ISK hull 281,000 ISK turret 50-60,000 ISK in modules possibly 50-75,000 ISK on turrets Well when CCP releases a Soma or Sica BPO I'd be happy to keep having JLAV's exist. "Your Faith stands as a shield for the Faithful, and you are one of His Angels." - Soren Tyrhannos to Templar Ouryon
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10511	Posted - 2014.07.15 20:18:00 - [93] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Well when CCP releases a Soma or Sica BPO I'd be happy to keep having JLAV's exist. There used to be Sica and Soma BPOs. The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 577	Posted - 2014.07.15 20:25:00 - [94] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I do wish to point out that dealing with JLAVs when we had no dispersion was fine since a good tanker could pick off the remotes if they had the piece of mind....... now that the dispersion is atroscious...... half your shots will miss the LAV, 45% will miss your intended target on the LAV, and odds are even after a solid 3-4 seconds of firing your enemy will drive with impunity into the side of your vastly more expensive and SP invested vehicle...... put some small rail turrets on that tank and get a buddy to shoot for you, problem solved... also it literally takes one shot from the big turret to connect to make a jlav go poof...
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2084	Posted - 2014.07.15 20:26:00 - [95] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: when did I say vehicles spent most of their time in rough terrain? I said when they are..... I am not going to deign to respond to you anymore.... you are a scrub and I'm tired of arguing with you... if it wasn't obvious already to your pea brain ratati doesn't care about the tank QQ and jlavs are here to stay... I have made valid counters to all jlav QQ and my likes on this thread are proof of this... you and lorhak have run out of anything sensible to say and have strayed into the realm of ridiculousness and desperation.... tell me why jlavs break the game, until you can come up with a sensible reason... which you cant, cause they don't, I'm done entertaining your moronic perceptions of this dead game... Lol. Nobody's QQ'ing here. Though I do find it rather funny you wanted to remove frisbee remotes... you're the stereotypical infantry scrub that doesn't want anything to kill them other than another rifle. I'm done talking to you; your brain's the size of a grain of sand "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 577	Posted - 2014.07.15 20:28:00 - [96] - Quote Tread Loudly 2 wrote: Zindorak wrote: Actually you can lose alot of money if your running a proto suit and you have boundless re's. So we sacrifice alot doing this. This is false JLAV drivers simply put the re's on the vehicle then switch to a free/cheap suit to avoid a majority of expenses. I stay in my remote suit, incase I have to manually detonate... 10.5k isk in my dren suit.
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2481	Posted - 2014.07.15 20:41:00 - [97] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Tread Loudly 2 wrote: Zindorak wrote: Actually you can lose alot of money if your running a proto suit and you have boundless re's. So we sacrifice alot doing this. This is false JLAV drivers simply put the re's on the vehicle then switch to a free/cheap suit to avoid a majority of expenses. I stay in my remote suit, incase I have to manually detonate... 10.5k isk in my dren suit. Fail Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 577	Posted - 2014.07.15 20:50:00 - [98] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Tread Loudly 2 wrote: Zindorak wrote: Actually you can lose alot of money if your running a proto suit and you have boundless re's. So we sacrifice alot doing this. This is false JLAV drivers simply put the re's on the vehicle then switch to a free/cheap suit to avoid a majority of expenses. I stay in my remote suit, incase I have to manually detonate... 10.5k isk in my dren suit. Fail hardly... I have great success with it, and I live this way
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10514	Posted - 2014.07.15 21:12:00 - [99] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Fail +1 for creating a perfect synopsis of this thread, and the pilots inside. The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2482	Posted - 2014.07.15 22:17:00 - [100] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Tread Loudly 2 wrote: Zindorak wrote: Actually you can lose alot of money if your running a proto suit and you have boundless re's. So we sacrifice alot doing this. This is false JLAV drivers simply put the re's on the vehicle then switch to a free/cheap suit to avoid a majority of expenses. I stay in my remote suit, incase I have to manually detonate... 10.5k isk in my dren suit. Fail hardly... I have great success with it, and I live this way So you live ha then it's 0 ISK and 0 clone loss and in fact a K/D buff and if it's that effective then it's OP. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given

Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2482	Posted - 2014.07.15 22:18:00 - [101] - Quote Atiim wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Fail +1 for creating a perfect synopsis of this thread, and the pilots inside. It was a synopsis of you... Who has to defend a crutch and if you don't know how to properly jihad jeep for near 100% effectiveness then lol. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
Jack 3enimble Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 27	Posted - 2014.07.15 22:32:00 - [102] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: BLOOD Ruler wrote: No you just suck I use it and love dying by it. How much do your fittings cost? I'll tell you what, next time I see you running infantry I'll pull a BPO LAV with a nitrous and an HMG and I'll murder-taxi you. Deal? Or if you're flying I'll pull out a Gorgon and ram you. Sound fun? Since JLAV needs to go i think we should introduce seat switch delay. Say 4 seconds to prevent you from using your same coward like tactics. How about that. Hello Pot, meet Kettle...
taxi bastard jihad taxi co. 145	Posted - 2014.07.15 23:37:00 - [103] - Quote its not ok to JLAV, but its ok to be a tank scrub with a heavy and HMG to jump out the tank and mow down AV players if their loosing? JLAV is at least a realistic tactic.......instant poping in and out of tanks is not!
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2084	Posted - 2014.07.15 23:54:00 - [104] - Quote taxi bastard wrote: its not ok to JLAV, but its ok to be a tank scrub with a heavy and HMG to jump out the tank and mow down AV players if their loosing? JLAV is at least a realistic tactic.......instant poping in and out of tanks is not! No, it's not OK to hop out with a heavy and an HMG. I don't do it because 1) I don't have SP into HMGs or Heavies 2) I prefer to have a rep tool to rep my Gunnlogi's armor and 3) I personally consider it better to at least attempt to drive my Gunnlogi to safety rather than hop out and let it sit there for AV's pleasure while I attempt to kill them and risking dying with my rather squishy dropsuit anyways. But in the end, it seems that JLAV's don't care that I'm not a scrub and I get the same treatment at the end of the day "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2484	Posted - 2014.07.16 00:41:00 - [105] - Quote taxi bastard wrote: its not ok to JLAV, but its ok to be a tank scrub with a heavy and HMG to jump out the tank and mow down AV players if their loosing? JLAV is at least a realistic tactic.......instant poping in and out of tanks is not! Hopping out in a heavy is going to save you from that roof top forge gunner? A heavy tried to do that to me once he died by my RE's and then lost his precious aurum tank. If he's relying on his heavy he's also likely a scrub tanker. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 605	Posted - 2014.07.16 04:04:00 - [106] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Tread Loudly 2 wrote: Zindorak wrote: Actually you can lose alot of money if your running a proto suit and you have boundless re's. So we sacrifice alot doing this. This is false JLAV drivers simply put the re's on the vehicle then switch to a free/cheap suit to avoid a majority of expenses. I stay in my remote suit, incase I have to manually detonate... 10.5k isk in my dren suit. Fail hardly... I have great success with it, and I live this way So you live ha then it's 0 ISK and 0 clone loss and in fact a K/D buff and if it's that effective then it's OP.[/quote] you ever sit next to a guy on a bus and he strikes up a conversation with you, and at first you're like," ok this is a cool guy, I could have enjoyed this bus ride (or train or plane) in peaceful silence, watching the scenery go by, but I can get down with this conversation" and then little by little you start to realize this guy might not be playing with a full set so politely you try to exit the conversation hoping it isn't to late to do this without seriously offending this guy you have to sit next to for the next hour and at most least just making for an awful and uncomfortable ride? you're that guy... at first you seemed fine, but something definitely isn't right with you.... /slowly gets up and moves to another seat, backing away with a courteous smile.
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 117	Posted - 2014.07.16 07:14:00 - [107] - Quote The only thing that I want in a game is balance of which that requires skill, and not a bunch of winers who can't deal with it themselves or a small group of people. I can not believe people who speak of encounters of a single tank that is impervious with more than two players targeting it. To me that simply implies just how incompetent they are. When tanks were 'OP' all you had to do was ignore them or get two AV guys to get it to screw off... yet nearly every AV player I saw thought it was a great idea to stand in front of the damn tank... and it's the same thing with an ADS when some idiot thinks that standing out in the open to get a clear shot is absolutely brilliant, and then complains when they die to missiles. The other thing I don't understand is why AV players think that proto tier weapons and equipment are needed to take down one vehicle. I find adv gear more than sufficient, and it only costs around 32,000 isk, compared to a 250,000 isk fitting. Driving a LAV with remotes strapped to the front and ramming into a tank (a rather large target) requires no skill whatsoever, if you're a decent player that is... Also, kamikazi dropships ramming into other dropships requires no skill, nor investment, which is the exact opposite of what a balanced and invested game suggests. The current damage that dropships suffer from colliding into structures/vehicles is ridiculous, and should toned down to the point where it's simply not viable, but still inflicts damage on a scale that makes the process utterly worthless. If I wanted everything in this game to be cheap, then I'd have proxies detonate not only by vehicles, but infantry as well, and be free of all concerns of an actual fight. It just surprises me how many people simply don't want a fight, or a challenge at that, in this game, or any game for that matter. The fact is that when people are given a simple and exploitable tactic to use, they will abuse it to no end, and not give a damn about the consequence that arises from it. My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 614	Posted - 2014.07.16 19:26:00 - [108] - Quote Temias Mercurial wrote: The only thing that I want in a game is balance of which that requires skill, and not a bunch of winers who can't deal with it themselves or a small group of people. I can not believe people who speak of encounters of a single tank that is impervious with more than two players targeting it. To me that simply implies just how incompetent they are. When tanks were 'OP' all you had to do was ignore them or get two AV guys to get it to screw off... yet nearly every AV player I saw thought it was a great idea to stand in front of the damn tank... and it's the same thing with an ADS when some idiot thinks that standing out in the open to get a clear shot is absolutely brilliant, and then complains when they die to missiles. The other thing I don't understand is why AV players think that proto tier weapons and equipment are needed to take down one vehicle. I find adv gear more than sufficient, and it only costs around 32,000 isk, compared to a 250,000 isk fitting. Driving a LAV with remotes strapped to the front and ramming into a tank (a rather large target) requires no skill whatsoever, if you're a decent player that is... Also, kamikazi dropships ramming into other dropships requires no skill, nor investment, which is the exact opposite of what a balanced and invested game suggests. The current damage that dropships suffer from colliding into structures/vehicles is ridiculous, and should toned down to the point where it's simply not viable, but still inflicts damage on a scale that makes the process utterly worthless. If I wanted everything in this game to be cheap, then I'd have proxies detonate not only by vehicles, but infantry as well, and be free of all concerns of an actual fight. It just surprises me how many people simply don't want a fight, or a challenge at that, in this game, or any game for that matter. The fact is that when people are given a simple and exploitable tactic to use, they will abuse it to no end, and not give a damn about the consequence that arises from it. you have never jlaved or kamikaze derpshipped...so you don't know what you're talking about.... and personally I do want a fight... I want a bloody, dirty fight... your the type of carebear who wants everything clean and fair.... pfffft! you are playing the wrong game....
Bormir1r Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 524	Posted - 2014.07.16 22:56:00 - [109] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: JLAVs were introduced in 1.7 as an apparently unintended byproduct of the change to REs. At the time the vehicle armour hardeners all but prevented dangerous damage being dealt to HAVs; this left the JLAV, usually stacked with prototype level equipment (because otherwise there just wasn't enough damage for success), as the only real viable means for AVing outside a tank. For that reason I, and many other members of the HAV community, accepted them as necessary for some form of balance. Time passed and hardeners were nerfed. Forge guns were now somewhat viable, but the power of the rep-tanked Madrugar meant that JLAVs were still the most effective tactic for dealing with those tanks, and so we bit our tongues. Now the armour repairers have been nerfed; as well as Large Blasters being less effective for attacking infantry, infantry AV is, as a general rule, in a very good place at the moment. Consequently, I think the time has come to formally request that they be removed. The JLAV is a low-ISK high-reward tactic; indeed, for much of the community it entails zero risk. It is difficult to counter short of hiding in the redline at the peak of a hill, owing to the speed and manoeuvrability of the LAV, and should it strike you there is no possible way to survive, short of a max-tank hardened Gunnlogi (the fittings being 2x Complex Heavy Extenders and 1x Hardener, and 1x Complex Heavy Extender and 2x Hardeners). It is akin to the much-reviled 'bumper dropship' in its near-zero investment reward, and is actually much higher reward owing to the enormous number of vehicle damage points it brings. It is also alike to the old 'murder taxi' of early Uprising, particularly considering the near-free reward those had, and to the current 'LAV Heavy', which is similarly low-investment, low-skill high reward. I hope you'll make the right decision. I think JLAVs were the best indirect inventions CCP has made. I mean it's the closest thing there is to one of those scenes in an action movie where a guy sacrifices himself in order to save the group by using his vehicle as a way of destroying the enemy. Taking this capability away would be a shame. "One does not simply" run like a Raptor. Only mk.0 Scouts do ... wait... I'm still outclassed by Gal scouts.
Bormir1r Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 524	Posted - 2014.07.16 23:03:00 - [110] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Brokerib wrote: This answer is good enough that I think it bares repeating. Baal Omniscient wrote: This is silly. A prof 5 proto assault forge on a fully bpo'd out skinweave heavy can 3 shot a fully fitted, fully specced, massively expensive ADS out of the sky for under 80k..... and you guys are pissy that a 30k car loaded up with RE's by a guy who specced into them for that purpose and who can navigate close enough to you to RAM you without you noticing is blowing up your tank? Um... situational awareness much? Teamwork? Isn't that the drivel AV players have been hearing for the last 6-8 months? "Use Teamwork!" Well, have your squad let you know when there's a LAV in your vicinity. You're not with your squad? Well, you're not using teamwork. Sad day. Player ingenuity. It's a beautiful thing. Rail tankers could (and on some maps, do) camp the redline all match. They thought it up as an effective tactic. The only issue I have with it is that there's no effective way to counter it since OB's can't really drop decent tanks anymore. jLAV's ARE easy to counter. You can have teammates set up proxy's which will detonate the RE's on the LAV when they go off. You can have a teammate with a swarm on standby to hit the LAV's and either scare them off, kill them or tag their RE's with missiles, detonating them (along with the driver). Or you can have teammates spot LAV's for you. Or you can have situational awareness since you can hear LAV's from a long ways off. OR you can combine some of these ideas and do pretty well avoiding/killing 99% of them. Happy tanking, jLAV's are the least of your worries. ;) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2240587#post2240587 I responded to it in the same thread. There is a huge difference between a prof 5 IAFG and a JLAV. I imagine people would be complaining somewhat if a CRG SG could one-shot a max EHP proto Sentinel with a bodyshot. but you're not being one shot... it takes at least 6 remotes to blow up a tank.... that's 6 shots. EDIT: oh and 1 remote kills all but proto amar heavies so.... Proto Amarr Heavies are 3-4 shot at the least depending on they're configuration. Never one shotted. "One does not simply" run like a Raptor. Only mk.0 Scouts do ... wait... I'm still outclassed by Gal scouts.

Leeroy Gannarsein Legio DXIV 502	Posted - 2014.07.17 00:07:00 - [111] - Quote Bormir1r wrote: Proto Amarr Heavies are 3-4 shot at the least depending on they're configuration. Never one shotted. Mathematically speaking Amarr Sentinel maxes out at 595/1195, which is 991/1327 vs explosives (if my maths is correct). In other words, you are categorically, mathematically wrong. It would seem like wisdom, but for the warning in my heart... CCP BLOWOUT FOR CPM1
Leeroy Gannarsein Legio DXIV 502	Posted - 2014.07.17 00:11:00 - [112] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Death Shadow117 wrote: ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. yes I have tanked.... but that wasn't my point... I was trying to convey the frustration of non tankers who are told by tankers their means of anti tanking takes no skill, while tankers act like they are the only skill intensive role in the game. I'm sorry that went over your head... I'll try to type more slowly for you in the future.... How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. I never said jlav is my style of av... I use nades, swarms (proto) and forge too (at 3 atm) the point is to give another option, both effective and fun... and seriously... whats the point???? then I could say the same of rifles, why have more than one type... that's just a ridiculous thing to ask.... and it does take skill... its all about dodging fire sneaking into position maneuvering well and hitting the tank the right way and compensating afterward for a second try if it doesn't pan out... and yes HAV is sp intensive... but that doesn't mean it takes a lot of player effort... whether tanking does or doesn't take skil isn't even the point... the point is to respect the way other people play even if it is different than yours, so long as they aren't using exploits or other cheats.... in this whole thread you still haven't told me how jlavs break the game.... because you cant.... because they don't. It is not. It is about nothing more than sticking REs somewhere they won't get shot (I mean really, this should be obvious), driving somewhere you can see the tank, hitting nitrous and exploding. I tried it about ten-fifteen times, and I was exploded by infantry twice. My ram failed once. It is really not hard to JLAV, and you suggesting they are is ridiculous. And I have at no point suggested JLAVs are 'game-breaking'. Don't you be putting words in my mouth. At every point I have stated they are a BS, no-skill tactic and they should be removed. People defended SLs from outside render distance too. It would seem like wisdom, but for the warning in my heart... CCP BLOWOUT FOR CPM1
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11923	Posted - 2014.07.17 00:17:00 - [113] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: True Adamance wrote: I do wish to point out that dealing with JLAVs when we had no dispersion was fine since a good tanker could pick off the remotes if they had the piece of mind....... now that the dispersion is atroscious...... half your shots will miss the LAV, 45% will miss your intended target on the LAV, and odds are even after a solid 3-4 seconds of firing your enemy will drive with impunity into the side of your vastly more expensive and SP invested vehicle...... put some small rail turrets on that tank and get a buddy to shoot for you, problem solved... also it literally takes one shot from the big turret to connect to make a jlav go poof... Already do, I can give you that point......but you know as well as I that fitting small turrets is bloody hard even with fitting optimisation V. "Your Faith stands as a shield for the Faithful, and you are one of His Angels." - Soren Tyrhannos to Templar Ouryon
Leeroy Gannarsein Legio DXIV 503	Posted - 2014.07.17 00:24:00 - [114] - Quote Atiim wrote: Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? JLAVs aren't ideal for every situation, because the terrain may be ridiculously bumpy, and you may be facing a tanker who's actually competent and destroys the JLAV every time. The point of Forge Guns and Swarm Launchers, would be long range AV Weaponry. Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. Swarm Launchers require that you have situational awareness, as you -typically- cannot see around you during engagements because your too focused on the vehicle. They also require that you make every shot count (resource management) due to the awful ammunition reserves, and they require patience in the sense that firing at the wrong time guarantees that your target escapes (the only other AV weapon actively requiring this skill is the Plasma Cannon). HAV Piloting is not as skill intensive as Forging. The FGer puts themselves at risk to far more items, and has a TTK far lower than that of an HAV. When you also consider the fact that an HAV can easily escape danger in most situations, they're quite literally the easiest item to use in DUST 514. I'm a PRO FGer too. I am not a proficiency'd swarmer, so I am not using it for examples. The only times I have ever used a swarm was when they were OP and I wanted to annoy someone I knew. FGs are easy to kill with. Unlike HAVs, an FG is not an obvious target. Not being an idiot means your fatsuit (which is pretty defensible against anything except SGs and HMGs) is pretty safe. Hell, when I kill the tank in my ADV suit I usually go to town on people with my SMG. Being 'at risk to more items' is a red herring. So are snipers vs infantry, but I can guarantee that a dedicated sniper has a better ISK gained/lost margin than an infantry player. I would never suggest that a logi is 'at risk to more items' than an assault, but it sure as hell feels that way when I'm playing one. The number of things to which you are vulnerable is entirely irrelevant. My DAU 3-shots most Sicas. Considering the dramatically longer average TTK of vehicles vs infantry (particularly considering HAV's sluggish acceleration) this is practically an insta-kill. My 'investment' is about 50k, and it takes me about ten seconds from engaging to killing the target. Compare, then, to a Neutron blaster, which can take dramatically longer than the FG, which is a direct result of the Sica's pilot (and some low-tank Gunnlogis, for the record) often knowing the other vehicle is there. Now, I'm not trying to argue that MLT HAVs are balanced; far from it. I'd like their price to be increased. Maybe even doubled (with a commensurate increase to STD HAVs. Had some more to say, but I have to run - will edit post or respond further later. I also should probably subscribe to this thread. It would seem like wisdom, but for the warning in my heart... CCP BLOWOUT FOR CPM1
Leeroy Gannarsein Legio DXIV 503	Posted - 2014.07.17 00:26:00 - [115] - Quote Jack 3enimble wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: BLOOD Ruler wrote: No you just suck I use it and love dying by it. How much do your fittings cost? I'll tell you what, next time I see you running infantry I'll pull a BPO LAV with a nitrous and an HMG and I'll murder-taxi you. Deal? Or if you're flying I'll pull out a Gorgon and ram you. Sound fun? Since JLAV needs to go i think we should introduce seat switch delay. Say 4 seconds to prevent you from using your same coward like tactics. How about that. Hello Pot, meet Kettle... Sounds good. Also, what seat switch tactics? It would seem like wisdom, but for the warning in my heart... CCP BLOWOUT FOR CPM1
Leeroy Gannarsein Legio DXIV 503	Posted - 2014.07.17 00:27:00 - [116] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: True Adamance wrote: I do wish to point out that dealing with JLAVs when we had no dispersion was fine since a good tanker could pick off the remotes if they had the piece of mind....... now that the dispersion is atroscious...... half your shots will miss the LAV, 45% will miss your intended target on the LAV, and odds are even after a solid 3-4 seconds of firing your enemy will drive with impunity into the side of your vastly more expensive and SP invested vehicle...... put some small rail turrets on that tank and get a buddy to shoot for you, problem solved... also it literally takes one shot from the big turret to connect to make a jlav go poof... See, I JLAVed a little, I AV a lot, but clearly you don't ever tank. It would seem like wisdom, but for the warning in my heart... CCP BLOWOUT FOR CPM1
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 124	Posted - 2014.07.17 00:45:00 - [117] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Temias Mercurial wrote: The only thing that I want in a game is balance of which that requires skill, and not a bunch of winers who can't deal with it themselves or a small group of people. I can not believe people who speak of encounters of a single tank that is impervious with more than two players targeting it. To me that simply implies just how incompetent they are. When tanks were 'OP' all you had to do was ignore them or get two AV guys to get it to screw off... yet nearly every AV player I saw thought it was a great idea to stand in front of the damn tank... and it's the same thing with an ADS when some idiot thinks that standing out in the open to get a clear shot is absolutely brilliant, and then complains when they die to missiles. The other thing I don't understand is why AV players think that proto tier weapons and equipment are needed to take down one vehicle. I find adv gear more than sufficient, and it only costs around 32,000 isk, compared to a 250,000 isk fitting. Driving a LAV with remotes strapped to the front and ramming into a tank (a rather large target) requires no skill whatsoever, if you're a decent player that is... Also, kamikazi dropships ramming into other dropships requires no skill, nor investment, which is the exact opposite of what a balanced and invested game suggests. The current damage that dropships suffer from colliding into structures/vehicles is ridiculous, and should toned down to the point where it's simply not viable, but still inflicts damage on a scale that makes the process utterly worthless. If I wanted everything in this game to be cheap, then I'd have proxies detonate not only by vehicles, but infantry as well, and be free of all concerns of an actual fight. It just surprises me how many people simply don't want a fight, or a challenge at that, in this game, or any game for that matter. The fact is that when people are given a simple and exploitable tactic to use, they will abuse it to no end, and not give a damn about the consequence that arises from it. you have never jlaved or kamikaze derpshipped...so you don't know what you're talking about.... and personally I do want a fight... I want a bloody, dirty fight... your the type of carebear who wants everything clean and fair.... pfffft! you are playing the wrong game.... Why is it that you arrogantly assume that I myself have not partaken in this stupid act of suicide? Also, there is a difference between 'clean and fair' and following the rules of which this game was based on... investment... not exploitation, but CCP always leave so many holes in their work that questions their intelligence... My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 616	Posted - 2014.07.17 00:55:00 - [118] - Quote Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Death Shadow117 wrote: ^ Above poster isnt very smart. Have you ever even tried tanking? Do you even know how much sp/isk it takes to become a real tanker because im sure you dont. yes I have tanked.... but that wasn't my point... I was trying to convey the frustration of non tankers who are told by tankers their means of anti tanking takes no skill, while tankers act like they are the only skill intensive role in the game. I'm sorry that went over your head... I'll try to type more slowly for you in the future.... How about this, then: in a world of JLAVs, what is the point of FGs and SL vs. HAVs? Also, yeah, your method of anti-tanking takes no skill. HAV piloting is approximately as skill-intensive as FGing, and significantly more SP and ISK intensive. I never said jlav is my style of av... I use nades, swarms (proto) and forge too (at 3 atm) the point is to give another option, both effective and fun... and seriously... whats the point???? then I could say the same of rifles, why have more than one type... that's just a ridiculous thing to ask.... and it does take skill... its all about dodging fire sneaking into position maneuvering well and hitting the tank the right way and compensating afterward for a second try if it doesn't pan out... and yes HAV is sp intensive... but that doesn't mean it takes a lot of player effort... whether tanking does or doesn't take skil isn't even the point... the point is to respect the way other people play even if it is different than yours, so long as they aren't using exploits or other cheats.... in this whole thread you still haven't told me how jlavs break the game.... because you cant.... because they don't. It is not. It is about nothing more than sticking REs somewhere they won't get shot (I mean really, this should be obvious), driving somewhere you can see the tank, hitting nitrous and exploding. I tried it about ten-fifteen times, and I was exploded by infantry twice. My ram failed once. It is really not hard to JLAV, and you suggesting they are is ridiculous. And I have at no point suggested JLAVs are 'game-breaking'. Don't you be putting words in my mouth. At every point I have stated they are a BS, no-skill tactic and they should be removed. People defended SLs from outside render distance too. EDIT: so would you be okay with me having a BPO suit that suicide/insta kills on contact, is faster than a scout and tanky enough to survive more than two seconds' DPS? I'll just go running into heavies all day erry day for luls. 1KDR and infinite ISK destroyed/zero lost seems pretty legit, right? ok so basically you went 12/3 with JLAVs? and how many kills you get as a tanker? 20/0? 30/2? 40/6? 12/3 is a pretty average score for infantry, down right terrible for a tanker.... I'd say it's pretty balanced... thanks for once again proving my point that JLAVs are fine...
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 616	Posted - 2014.07.17 01:02:00 - [119] - Quote Temias Mercurial wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Temias Mercurial wrote: The only thing that I want in a game is balance of which that requires skill, and not a bunch of winers who can't deal with it themselves or a small group of people. I can not believe people who speak of encounters of a single tank that is impervious with more than two players targeting it. To me that simply implies just how incompetent they are. When tanks were 'OP' all you had to do was ignore them or get two AV guys to get it to screw off... yet nearly every AV player I saw thought it was a great idea to stand in front of the damn tank... and it's the same thing with an ADS when some idiot thinks that standing out in the open to get a clear shot is absolutely brilliant, and then complains when they die to missiles. The other thing I don't understand is why AV players think that proto tier weapons and equipment are needed to take down one vehicle. I find adv gear more than sufficient, and it only costs around 32,000 isk, compared to a 250,000 isk fitting. Driving a LAV with remotes strapped to the front and ramming into a tank (a rather large target) requires no skill whatsoever, if you're a decent player that is... Also, kamikazi dropships ramming into other dropships requires no skill, nor investment, which is the exact opposite of what a balanced and invested game suggests. The current damage that dropships suffer from colliding into structures/vehicles is ridiculous, and should toned down to the point where it's simply not viable, but still inflicts damage on a scale that makes the process utterly worthless. If I wanted everything in this game to be cheap, then I'd have proxies detonate not only by vehicles, but infantry as well, and be free of all concerns of an actual fight. It just surprises me how many people simply don't want a fight, or a challenge at that, in this game, or any game for that matter. The fact is that when people are given a simple and exploitable tactic to use, they will abuse it to no end, and not give a damn about the consequence that arises from it. you have never jlaved or kamikaze derpshipped...so you don't know what you're talking about.... and personally I do want a fight... I want a bloody, dirty fight... your the type of carebear who wants everything clean and fair.... pfffft! you are playing the wrong game.... Why is it that you arrogantly assume that I myself have not partaken in this stupid act of suicide? Also, there is a difference between 'clean and fair' and following the rules of which this game was based on... investment... not exploitation, but CCP always leave so many holes in their work that questions their intelligence... the way you talk about proves to me you haven't.... and yes I agree they are always leaving holes.... tanks have been a very big exploitive hole since the dawn of dust.... and yes this game is based off investment, but there are always flukes... a guy investing in apple in 1982 would not have been able to imagine the return on that investment... sometimes a small investment has big results, re working the game to make that possibility impossible would just make this game even more bland...
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2492	Posted - 2014.07.17 01:11:00 - [120] - Quote Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: True Adamance wrote: I do wish to point out that dealing with JLAVs when we had no dispersion was fine since a good tanker could pick off the remotes if they had the piece of mind....... now that the dispersion is atroscious...... half your shots will miss the LAV, 45% will miss your intended target on the LAV, and odds are even after a solid 3-4 seconds of firing your enemy will drive with impunity into the side of your vastly more expensive and SP invested vehicle...... put some small rail turrets on that tank and get a buddy to shoot for you, problem solved... also it literally takes one shot from the big turret to connect to make a jlav go poof... See, I JLAVed a little, I AV a lot, but clearly you don't ever tank. I know I can make an LAV that can tank 2 Particle Cannon shots with a Fuel Injector or possibly 3 w/ out a Fuel Injector considering the LAV's driving in a slolem down the road at you with a fuel injector I doubt anyone can hit an LAV 3 times as it's speeding at top speeds at you. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given

Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 124	Posted - 2014.07.17 01:28:00 - [121] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Temias Mercurial wrote: Seymour KrelbornX wrote: Temias Mercurial wrote: The only thing that I want in a game is balance of which that requires skill, and not a bunch of winers who can't deal with it themselves or a small group of people. I can not believe people who speak of encounters of a single tank that is impervious with more than two players targeting it. To me that simply implies just how incompetent they are. When tanks were 'OP' all you had to do was ignore them or get two AV guys to get it to screw off... yet nearly every AV player I saw thought it was a great idea to stand in front of the damn tank... and it's the same thing with an ADS when some idiot thinks that standing out in the open to get a clear shot is absolutely brilliant, and then complains when they die to missiles. The other thing I don't understand is why AV players think that proto tier weapons and equipment are needed to take down one vehicle. I find adv gear more than sufficient, and it only costs around 32,000 isk, compared to a 250,000 isk fitting. Driving a LAV with remotes strapped to the front and ramming into a tank (a rather large target) requires no skill whatsoever, if you're a decent player that is... Also, kamikazi dropships ramming into other dropships requires no skill, nor investment, which is the exact opposite of what a balanced and invested game suggests. The current damage that dropships suffer from colliding into structures/vehicles is ridiculous, and should toned down to the point where it's simply not viable, but still inflicts damage on a scale that makes the process utterly worthless. If I wanted everything in this game to be cheap, then I'd have proxies detonate not only by vehicles, but infantry as well, and be free of all concerns of an actual fight. It just surprises me how many people simply don't want a fight, or a challenge at that, in this game, or any game for that matter. The fact is that when people are given a simple and exploitable tactic to use, they will abuse it to no end, and not give a damn about the consequence that arises from it. you have never jlaved or kamikaze derpshipped...so you don't know what you're talking about.... and personally I do want a fight... I want a bloody, dirty fight... your the type of carebear who wants everything clean and fair.... pfffft! you are playing the wrong game.... Why is it that you arrogantly assume that I myself have not partaken in this stupid act of suicide? Also, there is a difference between 'clean and fair' and following the rules of which this game was based on... investment... not exploitation, but CCP always leave so many holes in their work that questions their intelligence... the way you talk about proves to me you haven't.... and yes I agree they are always leaving holes.... tanks have been a very big exploitive hole since the dawn of dust.... and yes this game is based off investment, but there are always flukes... a guy investing in apple in 1982 would not have been able to imagine the return on that investment... sometimes a small investment has big results, re working the game to make that possibility impossible would just make this game even more bland... The way I talk? That is painfully flawed reasoning for such an answer... My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Alena Ventrallis S0VER31GN 1453	Posted - 2014.07.17 01:38:00 - [122] - Quote JLAVs were good when av was broken and tanks did not fear them. Now that they fixed av, and then also noerfed tanks, we are back to where we were in 1.6, only now we have far less fitting options (there are only 3 options to put in low slots, and highs aren't much better), almost none of the vehicle skills give any bonus whatsoever, and we also have jlavs that require almost no isk to completely free, meaning there is no risk for high reward. They should be removed on this basis alone. Rattati has spoken. CalScout hitbox is fine. You're gun game is broken.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11927	Posted - 2014.07.17 01:50:00 - [123] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: JLAVs were good when av was broken and tanks did not fear them. Now that they fixed av, and then also noerfed tanks, we are back to where we were in 1.6, only now we have far less fitting options (there are only 3 options to put in low slots, and highs aren't much better), almost none of the vehicle skills give any bonus whatsoever, and we also have jlavs that require almost no isk to completely free, meaning there is no risk for high reward. They should be removed on this basis alone. Well were actually further back as Tanks back in 1.6 had more EHP and module selections.....and were more enjoyable. "Your Faith stands as a shield for the Faithful, and you are one of His Angels." - Soren Tyrhannos to Templar Ouryon
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2099	Posted - 2014.07.17 04:58:00 - [124] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: ok so basically you went 12/3 with JLAVs? and how many kills you get as a tanker? 20/0? 30/2? 40/6? 12/3 is a pretty average score for infantry, down right terrible for a tanker.... I'd say it's pretty balanced... thanks for once again proving my point that JLAVs are fine... Just shut up and stop embarrassing yourself further. Killing 12 tanks is the ISK equivalent of 840k (12 militia tanks at 70k each) to 8.4 million (12 proto fit tanks at 700k each). Now how much infantry do you need to kill to to destroy that much ISK? Destroying an equivalent amount of ISK from killing infantry requires a lot more effort and time. Tanks need to be a challenge and require more effort to destroy than infantry, but JLAVs skew the balance against tanks. JLAVs have high success rates and require little to no skill to be effective, being able to kill tanks as easily as infantry. Enemy tank being a problem? Just use a JLAV and save yourself the effort and risk of using an advanced/proto AV suit! And what's the problem with those KDRs? You haven't seen infantry go 20/0, 30/2, 40/6? I've actually gone 43/4 with my advanced Amarr assault with an advanced laser rifle; would you call that OP too? Please, I see a lot more infantry get such high KDRs than tanks. And let me point out again that tanks cost a lot more than infantry. I think it's fair to say that a good tank costs 10 times more than a good dropsuit. So even if a tanker goes 30/2 or 40/6, to put it equivalent to infantry, it'd be the same as an infantry KDR of 30/20 or 40/60 in terms of ISK efficiency, or an AV'er getting 3 tank kills and 2 deaths or 4 tank kills and 6 deaths, all of which are completely reasonable for an AV player. The infantry KDR equivalents are not reasonable, however; since most infantry that get that many kills get considerably less deaths. Be glad that tanks don't go 100/1 for an infantry equivalent of 10/1. I think you've exhausted your defense of JLAVs a long time ago, so save everyone the trouble and stop coming up with these bullshit replies. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10582	Posted - 2014.07.17 04:59:00 - [125] - Quote Harpyja wrote: I think you've exhausted your defense of JLAVs a long time ago, so save everyone the trouble and stop coming up with these bullshit replies. Oh the irony. The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND
taxi bastard jihad taxi co. 146	Posted - 2014.07.17 05:07:00 - [126] - Quote still QQing about a valid tactic which is used in real life. if we want fantasy land how about main gun turrets are AV only and only gunners can hurt infantry seems a fair trade. as i always say a well crewed tank makes it hard to JLAV - a tank without a crew should be easy to kill!
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 625	Posted - 2014.07.17 07:43:00 - [127] - Quote Atiim wrote: Harpyja wrote: I think you've exhausted your defense of JLAVs a long time ago, so save everyone the trouble and stop coming up with these bullshit replies. Oh the irony. he/she is cute isn't he/she? reading harp's posts are like watching kitten vids on youtube... every couple of moments I cant help but say "awww! how cute!!"
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 625	Posted - 2014.07.17 07:47:00 - [128] - Quote as a last word in this pitiful QQ thread, when tanks become a challenge to operate, and require a team to use, only then should they become a challenge to destroy and need a team to beat. until then gtfo ya scrub tanker k/d padding tryhards!
Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 134	Posted - 2014.07.17 13:29:00 - [129] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: when tanks become a challenge to operate, and require a team to use, only then should they become a challenge to destroy and need a team to beat. But that wont happen because infantry like you and atiim ask for nerfs all the time 3 tanks working together is teamwork, but infantry wont do the same 2 tanks and a DS is teamwork, but infantry wont do the same Even now AV is strong yet again, vehicles have been nerfed worse than 1.0-1.6 era and even if you use a 2/3man crew in 1 vehicle 1 AV can destroy it so even according to your quote its broken
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10592	Posted - 2014.07.17 13:55:00 - [130] - Quote Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Even now AV is strong yet again, vehicles have been nerfed worse than 1.0-1.6 era and even if you use a 2/3man crew in 1 vehicle 1 AV can destroy it so even according to your quote its broken If you have 2 gunners with 20GJ Railguns and still find yourself dying to AV, then you should probably uninstall DUST and go play something else, like World of Tanks. The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND

Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 134	Posted - 2014.07.17 14:18:00 - [131] - Quote Atiim wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Even now AV is strong yet again, vehicles have been nerfed worse than 1.0-1.6 era and even if you use a 2/3man crew in 1 vehicle 1 AV can destroy it so even according to your quote its broken If you have 2 gunners with 20GJ Railguns and still find yourself dying to AV, then you should probably uninstall DUST and go play something else, like World of Tanks. Small railguns, can only fit them by gimping the tank fit because it doesnt have enough cpu/pg Can barely see more than 100m, can barely hit more than 100m, OH when you use half a clip, have to wait for cooldown Vehicle hull has less PG/CPU, only 3/2 slot layout when it used to be 5/2, used to have useful skills, used to have alot more mods for variety, easier to kill in every way 300m AFG says hello and cannot be hit by the small turrets or the large Infantry players like atiim wanted this and think that vehicles are better now
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2099	Posted - 2014.07.17 15:03:00 - [132] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: as a last word in this pitiful QQ thread, when tanks become a challenge to operate, and require a team to use, only then should they become a challenge to destroy and need a team to beat. until then gtfo ya scrub tanker k/d padding tryhards! K/D padders? My missile tank is anything but a K/D padder. It's only best for killing vehicles and I only get a handful of infantry kills every battle. I average somewhere between 5 and 10 kills every battle but usually place at or near the top in terms of WP, because vehicles give a lot of WP, so I don't need infantry kills. Whenever I'm in tank hunting mode, I just simply drive past any enemy infantry. As an AV tank my damage application is best against vehicles, not infantry. I have gunners if I want any good infantry fighting capabilities. I also have strong defense as a result of being an AV tank so I can endure sustained fights, which also makes me a tougher nut against AV. So in either case, it should take effort and at least two people to bring me down. If it's just me and another AVer, he shouldn't be able to take me down fast enough. Two or more should have a much higher chance, since I need at least one more person in my Gunnlogi to be able to fight infantry, which makes it a fair 2 for 2. JLAVs simply screw this balance by allowing just one person to take out such a tank with little to no effort. It'd be the same as having an infantry alternative where any one person can easily kill a proto stomping squad with little to no effort and zero risk with an 80% success rate. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 3013	Posted - 2014.07.17 15:09:00 - [133] - Quote Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry players like atiim wanted this and think that vehicles are better now Nah, bro. You see what happened was ... AV was broken and HAVs were ridiculously overpowered. Pilots (in their infinite wisdom) insisted that everything was fine and refused to discuss the issues. In the end, Rattati and Logibro had to guess at solutions; I think they did a pretty good job. Atiim was in the right to point out balance problems; you (and many a bad player) were in the wrong to ignore those problems. Shoot scout with yes... - Ripley Riley
taxi bastard jihad taxi co. 149	Posted - 2014.07.17 15:52:00 - [134] - Quote Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Small railguns, can only fit them by gimping the tank fit because it doesnt have enough cpu/pg everything bar sentinals have fitting problem. my battle start fit runs 2 proto kincats, 1 advanced uplink, i basic cloak, 1 basic combat rifle - PG is gone on an advanced mini scout suit with all PG/CPU skills done. 213 EHP. what gimps your tank may acheive another purpose. i have 3 complex precion enhances to fill the loadout and they are handy. in your case - you get less EHP on your basic tank hull but have more defence - a logical and useful tradeoff sitiuational awareness is OP btw - thats why having those extra guns with a gunner is a far better trade off than you think.
Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 136	Posted - 2014.07.17 16:52:00 - [135] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry players like atiim wanted this and think that vehicles are better now Nah, bro. You see what happened was ... AV was broken and HAVs were ridiculously overpowered. Pilots (in their infinite wisdom) insisted that everything was fine and refused to discuss the issues. In the end, Rattati and Logibro had to guess at solutions; I think they did a pretty good job. Atiim was in the right to point out balance problems; you (and many a bad player) were in the wrong to ignore those problems in hopes of safeguarding a winbutton. Nah, bro. You see what happened was ... Vehicles was broken and AV were ridiculously overpowered. Infantry (in their infinite wisdom) insisted that everything was fine and refused to discuss the issues. In the end, Rattati and Logibro had to guess at solutions; I think they did a pretty good job. Vehicle pilots was in the right to point out balance problems; you (and many a bad player) were in the wrong to ignore those problems in hopes of safeguarding a winbutton Fixed for 1.0-1.7 and spanned a timeframe of at least 6+months and still was never fixed, CCP fixed it by completely changing vehicles and nerfing and removing skills, modules, vehicles and turrets
Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 136	Posted - 2014.07.17 16:52:00 - [136] - Quote taxi bastard wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Small railguns, can only fit them by gimping the tank fit because it doesnt have enough cpu/pg everything bar sentinals have fitting problem. my battle start fit runs 2 proto kincats, 1 advanced uplink, i basic cloak, 1 basic combat rifle - PG is gone on an advanced mini scout suit with all PG/CPU skills done. 213 EHP. what gimps your tank may acheive another purpose. i have 3 complex precion enhances to fill the loadout and they are handy. in your case - you get less EHP on your basic tank hull but have more defence - a logical and useful tradeoff sitiuational awareness is OP btw - thats why having those extra guns with a gunner is a far better trade off than you think. Everything has a advanced and proto frame to move to except vehicles of course
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 124	Posted - 2014.07.17 18:33:00 - [137] - Quote Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Bormir1r wrote: Proto Amarr Heavies are 3-4 shot at the least depending on they're configuration. Never one shotted. Mathematically speaking Amarr Sentinel maxes out at 595/1195, which is 991/1327 vs explosives (if my maths is correct). In other words, you are categorically, mathematically wrong. Have you calculated the 25% reduction to splash damage that a proto Sentinel would have, including all races, not just the Amarr Sentinel? My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 124	Posted - 2014.07.17 18:35:00 - [138] - Quote Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry players like atiim wanted this and think that vehicles are better now Nah, bro. You see what happened was ... AV was broken and HAVs were ridiculously overpowered. Pilots (in their infinite wisdom) insisted that everything was fine and refused to discuss the issues. In the end, Rattati and Logibro had to guess at solutions; I think they did a pretty good job. Atiim was in the right to point out balance problems; you (and many a bad player) were in the wrong to ignore those problems in hopes of safeguarding a winbutton. Nah, bro. You see what happened was ... Vehicles was broken and AV were ridiculously overpowered. Infantry (in their infinite wisdom) insisted that everything was fine and refused to discuss the issues. In the end, Rattati and Logibro had to guess at solutions; I think they did a pretty good job. Vehicle pilots was in the right to point out balance problems; you (and many a bad player) were in the wrong to ignore those problems in hopes of safeguarding a winbutton Fixed for 1.0-1.7 and spanned a timeframe of at least 6+months and still was never fixed, CCP fixed it by completely changing vehicles and nerfing and removing skills, modules, vehicles and turrets I can only hope you are being sarcastic, as we now have an incredibly boring vehicle system... that's not 'fixing it', that's simply removing the problem at hand and completely avoiding the issue. My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 139	Posted - 2014.07.17 21:41:00 - [139] - Quote Temias Mercurial wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry players like atiim wanted this and think that vehicles are better now Nah, bro. You see what happened was ... AV was broken and HAVs were ridiculously overpowered. Pilots (in their infinite wisdom) insisted that everything was fine and refused to discuss the issues. In the end, Rattati and Logibro had to guess at solutions; I think they did a pretty good job. Atiim was in the right to point out balance problems; you (and many a bad player) were in the wrong to ignore those problems in hopes of safeguarding a winbutton. Nah, bro. You see what happened was ... Vehicles was broken and AV were ridiculously overpowered. Infantry (in their infinite wisdom) insisted that everything was fine and refused to discuss the issues. In the end, Rattati and Logibro had to guess at solutions; I think they did a pretty good job. Vehicle pilots was in the right to point out balance problems; you (and many a bad player) were in the wrong to ignore those problems in hopes of safeguarding a winbutton Fixed for 1.0-1.7 and spanned a timeframe of at least 6+months and still was never fixed, CCP fixed it by completely changing vehicles and nerfing and removing skills, modules, vehicles and turrets I can only hope you are being sarcastic, as we now have an incredibly boring vehicle system... that's not 'fixing it', that's simply removing the problem at hand and completely avoiding the issue. CCP cant fix anything They just generally nerf it until the posts stop being made but this is how CCP tried to fix vehicles and again infantry were not happy and now we have 1.0 all over again except vehicles are actually worse off than 1.0 since vehicles have lost everything which was useful like skills, modules, hulls, turrets, slots so now there is no variety but infantry are happy and thats all CCP cater to
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10615	Posted - 2014.07.17 22:59:00 - [140] - Quote Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry players like atiim wanted this and think that vehicles are better now If your talking about the lack of Hull & Module variety, then no I didn't ask for this (neither did the Majority of Infantry Players). The changes to Vehicles in Uprising 1.7 were a direct result of constant campaign from the Pilot Community to nerf AV. Ironically, I remember you, Spkr, and the other Pilots talking trash on the forums while also exclaiming with joy and glee at the proposed changes for Uprising 1.7. Heck, I also remember you and the other Pilots saying that the Vehicles in Uprising 1.7 were "working as intended". You can bleat your chest until it's as red and sore as a Baboon's buttocks, it won't change the facts: YOU asked for these changes to be implemented. YOU stated that these changes were "working as intended". YOU wanted these changes to happen. These changes are a direct result of YOUR actions. Remember this next time you try to pin the blame on me for the current Vehicle mechanics. GG no RE. The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND

Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2498	Posted - 2014.07.17 23:23:00 - [141] - Quote Atiim wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry players like atiim wanted this and think that vehicles are better now If your talking about the lack of Hull & Module variety, then no I didn't ask for this (neither did the Majority of Infantry Players). The changes to Vehicles in Uprising 1.7 were a direct result of constant campaign from the Pilot Community to nerf AV. Ironically, I remember you, Spkr, and the other Pilots talking trash on the forums while also exclaiming with joy and glee at the proposed changes for Uprising 1.7. Heck, I also remember you and the other Pilots saying that the Vehicles in Uprising 1.7 were "working as intended". You can bleat your chest until it's as red and sore as a Baboon's buttocks, it won't change the facts: YOU asked for these changes to be implemented. YOU stated that these changes were "working as intended". YOU wanted these changes to happen. These changes are a direct result of YOUR actions. Remember this next time you try to pin the blame on me for the current Vehicle mechanics. GG no RE. Actually I asked for an AV nerf that is it I did not want a vehicle rework. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
Atiim Fooly Cooly. Anime Empire. 10617	Posted - 2014.07.17 23:24:00 - [142] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Actually I asked for an AV nerf that is it I did not want a vehicle rework. But you were also one of the main supporters of the proposed changes. The Snack That Smiles Back, Tankers! -HAND
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2498	Posted - 2014.07.17 23:33:00 - [143] - Quote Atiim wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Even now AV is strong yet again, vehicles have been nerfed worse than 1.0-1.6 era and even if you use a 2/3man crew in 1 vehicle 1 AV can destroy it so even according to your quote its broken If you have 2 gunners with 20GJ Railguns and still find yourself dying to AV, then you should probably uninstall DUST and go play something else, like World of Tanks. That FG on that tower that can kill me in one clip because I gimped my fitting who is insanely hard to hit with a small turret at that distance. Infantry wanted a 1 to 1 ratio for tanks if 1 person can drive a tank 1 AV can kill them well now we have 1 tank+1 gunner being soloed by a guy on a roof top with a Forge Gun. Yes Atiim I actually have tried both the gunning and driving aspect of tanks with gunners and even w/ maxed shield fitting op. maxed missile fitting op. lvl 4. armor fitting op. and lvl 3. fitting op. I can still barely fit 2 standard turrets on it. Yes if the FG is on the ground you can typically kill him but if he's properly positioned ut's much more difficult. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 2498	Posted - 2014.07.17 23:34:00 - [144] - Quote Atiim wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Actually I asked for an AV nerf that is it I did not want a vehicle rework. But you were also one of the main supporters of the proposed changes. Not really I like most other sane people at least at some point during that time admitted they were OP. Tanker/Logi 0 The number of 7ucks given
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 210	Posted - 2014.07.18 03:02:00 - [145] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Atiim wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Even now AV is strong yet again, vehicles have been nerfed worse than 1.0-1.6 era and even if you use a 2/3man crew in 1 vehicle 1 AV can destroy it so even according to your quote its broken If you have 2 gunners with 20GJ Railguns and still find yourself dying to AV, then you should probably uninstall DUST and go play something else, like World of Tanks. That FG on that tower that can kill me in one clip because I gimped my fitting who is insanely hard to hit with a small turret at that distance. Infantry wanted a 1 to 1 ratio for tanks if 1 person can drive a tank 1 AV can kill them well now we have 1 tank+1 gunner being soloed by a guy on a roof top with a Forge Gun. Yes Atiim I actually have tried both the gunning and driving aspect of tanks with gunners and even w/ maxed shield fitting op. maxed missile fitting op. lvl 4. armor fitting op. and lvl 3. fitting op. I can still barely fit 2 standard turrets on it. Yes if the FG is on the ground you can typically kill him but if he's properly positioned ut's much more difficult. If that forge gun is on a tower then that dropship put him there or put the uplinks that put him there. Complain about your teams lack of air superiority not AV. Not too mention that tower forge gunner is highly vulnerable to snipers from anywhere if he's shooting at you. Vehicles are in a good spot now, hell good tankers I can't kill with any of my proto forges in a single clip (The Wyrmikron can but if I can shoot you 4 times with a long charge time and no chance to move your bad and should feel bad.) If the balance is changed back towards the favor of making tanks more durable then real tankers will be unstoppable again. As it stands real tankers are hard to kill and smart ones will GTFO and only die if multiple and I mean multiple sources of AV hit them. What you want is a return to the days of 1.7 where half the team would be AV and still couldn't stop the tank from retreating repping in their redline for 10-20 seconds then coming right back.
taxi bastard jihad taxi co. 154	Posted - 2014.07.18 05:35:00 - [146] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: That FG on that tower that can kill me in one clip because I gimped my fitting who is insanely hard to hit with a small turret at that distance. Infantry wanted a 1 to 1 ratio for tanks if 1 person can drive a tank 1 AV can kill them well now we have 1 tank+1 gunner being soloed by a guy on a roof top with a Forge Gun. come on he has the high ground and as a result is doing area denial. be it a forge fun or sniper the result is the same unless dealt with.
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 124	Posted - 2014.07.18 05:59:00 - [147] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Atiim wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Even now AV is strong yet again, vehicles have been nerfed worse than 1.0-1.6 era and even if you use a 2/3man crew in 1 vehicle 1 AV can destroy it so even according to your quote its broken If you have 2 gunners with 20GJ Railguns and still find yourself dying to AV, then you should probably uninstall DUST and go play something else, like World of Tanks. That FG on that tower that can kill me in one clip because I gimped my fitting who is insanely hard to hit with a small turret at that distance. Infantry wanted a 1 to 1 ratio for tanks if 1 person can drive a tank 1 AV can kill them well now we have 1 tank+1 gunner being soloed by a guy on a roof top with a Forge Gun. Yes Atiim I actually have tried both the gunning and driving aspect of tanks with gunners and even w/ maxed shield fitting op. maxed missile fitting op. lvl 4. armor fitting op. and lvl 3. fitting op. I can still barely fit 2 standard turrets on it. Yes if the FG is on the ground you can typically kill him but if he's properly positioned ut's much more difficult. If that forge gun is on a tower then that dropship put him there or put the uplinks that put him there. Complain about your teams lack of air superiority not AV. Not too mention that tower forge gunner is highly vulnerable to snipers from anywhere if he's shooting at you. Vehicles are in a good spot now, hell good tankers I can't kill with any of my proto forges in a single clip (The Wyrmikron can but if I can shoot you 4 times with a long charge time and no chance to move your bad and should feel bad.) If the balance is changed back towards the favor of making tanks more durable then real tankers will be unstoppable again. As it stands real tankers are hard to kill and smart ones will GTFO and only die if multiple and I mean multiple sources of AV hit them. What you want is a return to the days of 1.7 where half the team would be AV and still couldn't stop the tank from retreating repping in their redline for 10-20 seconds then coming right back. It didn't take half a team of AV to kill a rep tank in 1.7... the most you might have need was three competent AVer's, or one guy placing remotes on them (not Jihad, but that's when they came into existence) and flux/AVnades to decimate tanks... please don't exaggerate. My apologies if I come off as an elitist, but I try to view things objectively, logically, and factually.
Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 149	Posted - 2014.07.18 12:14:00 - [148] - Quote Atiim wrote: Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Infantry players like atiim wanted this and think that vehicles are better now If your talking about the lack of Hull & Module variety, then no I didn't ask for this (neither did the Majority of Infantry Players). The changes to Vehicles in Uprising 1.7 were a direct result of constant campaign from the Pilot Community to nerf AV. Ironically, I remember you, Spkr, and the other Pilots talking trash on the forums while also exclaiming with joy and glee at the proposed changes for Uprising 1.7. Heck, I also remember you and the other Pilots saying that the Vehicles in Uprising 1.7 were "working as intended". You can bleat your chest until it's as red and sore as a Baboon's buttocks, it won't change the facts: YOU asked for these changes to be implemented. YOU stated that these changes were "working as intended". YOU wanted these changes to happen. These changes are a direct result of YOUR actions. Remember this next time you try to pin the blame on me for the current Vehicle mechanics. GG no RE. Wrong again 1.0 days i just wanted AV nerfed and to be able to see more than 50m in front of me, AV like yourself said it was fine and 'working as intended' CCP decided to change vehicles yet again, so they basically removed anything which offered variety Pilots again had to adapt and change unlike AV and we made the best out of a ** situation with nerfed vehicles,modsules, skills and turrets So when pilots did adapt and change fits and found some good fits infantry like yourself cried nerf again and when we said 'working as intended' you cried thats not fair even tho that is all what you said in the 1.0 days when pilots couldnt see swarms or the user and you could cover an entire map from a tower At least you could see the vehicle and see it firing at you, 1.0 days pilots didnt even have that But no everything eventually gets nerfed as usual because of infantry Now a tank cant defend itself with a blaster, fitting small turrets means you have to gimp the fit, variety is dead and gone, skills are next to useless, modules are nerfed and are useless, hulls are even more gimped and no adv/proto varients either Infantry wanted this Infantry wont even let us have adv/proto hulls but yet expect to be able to smash the ** out of a basic hull because they have proto weapons on a proto suit with proto modules The state of vehicles is down to infantry as usual, typical pub players like yourself are balancing for pubs, step into PC and see vehicles be useless ,maybe barring the ADS but you are a pub player and fighting scrubs is all you know You reap what you sow, now AV is easy and vehicles are back to 1.0 days and are actually worse that 1.0 which is quite a feat


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one 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.