|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3264
   |
Posted - 2014.08.11 12:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
dzizur wrote:DontChimpOut wrote:Thumb Green wrote:I was ramming a squad of FA ADS's earlier. Most fun I had in a while must have taken down 6 or 8 of them and ended up being the only target of an OB twice (was calling in DS behind redline). I just couldn't stop laughing the whole match, partially because I was doing the Jaws theme the whole time.
A ramming DS is already cheap enough for people to throw them away like trash so a price reduction isn't going to increase rammers. Hell, I'd wager it might decrease them cause it wouldn't be as fun if I'm not costing someone a bunch of ISK each time. People like you that make us deserve an asteroid to sterilize the planet. have you ever tried ramming? i'm serious, I did and found out it's not that easy as it sounds (well apart from those which are spawncamping :P)
It's actually rather easy to avoid in an ADS, even without afterburners, the thing is the only reason dropship ramming is seen as poor practice is because people have the vehement hatred of ADSes that suppressing them isn't seen as enough, people absolutely have to destroy them and it's simply not necessary.
Droping the price of Dropships will actually make ramming less of a problem, sure you've just rammed me, but I can afford to loose that dropship now, your not costing me my enjoyment of the game while have to put up with 2-4 pubstomps in frontline gear just so I can fly another.
They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank!
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3268
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 15:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:the thing is the only reason dropship ramming is seen as poor practice is because people have the vehement hatred of ADSes that suppressing them isn't seen as enough, people absolutely have to destroy them and it's simply not necessary. Actually, no. The reason people absolutely have to destroy them, is because you're playing an FPS, and you should die. If you aren't dying in a match, you need a nerf, so that you die more. Everyone should die. I don't go around not fully killing infantry because "well, I scared them off so that's good enough". No, I kill them. Because that's what you do. The idea that vehicle users shouldn't die and that AV should just be "suppressing" them is crazy.
It's not crazy, suppression is a big part of warfare, you suppress an enemy in an advantagoues position until such a point you are in a better posistion than them. It's warfare 101, while I'm all for the destruction of vehicles exactly how many times do you expect them to be dying per match?
You can't tell me you expect them to be as common as Infantry deaths, futhermore you can't expect me to believe that it should take more than 1 person to destroy a vehicle. Futhermore you can't tell me to elieve both statements simultaneously.
This game is not your standard FPS, death is more than just part of the game, every death every vehicle destruction, every revive has more consequences than simply your dead/or not.
1) You cannot expect vehicles to be destroyed as often as Infantry is, otherwise your average vehicle should cost as much as an equivalent tiered suit with appropriate mods and weapons.
2) You cannot expect vehicles to require more than 1 person in order to destroy, this creates a force strength imbalance and is something that we have been fighting to be rid of for a long long time.
3) Therefore you cannot expect vehicles to be dying at the same regularity as infantry WITHOUT teamwork. Yet at the same time teamwork should not be a necessity.
Vehicles and AV should be constants on the battlefield, people should be deploying straight into AV ready for the vehicles they know the other team are going to deploy. Vehicle warfare should be extensive, free flowing and important to the game as infantry otherwise theymwill never be balanced.
Futhermore you mean to tell me, you have never left an infantry unit behind cover while you shoot the next guy attempting to assault your point? You mean to tell me you've chased people and left your point to be capped by one of their teammates. You mean to tell me you have NEVER successfully retreated from an engagement you knew you were going to loose. You have never popped back into cover for repairs while the enemy continues to fire upon your posistion?
How exactly do you play? Do you run around like a headless chicken just killing everything you see? Are you one of these people that wolfpacks with whatever is the strongest weapon at the time? Do you have any regard for choke points, cover and higher ground?
Vehicles need to be capable of being destroyed byna single infantry person, but they should (as infantry does) have the opportunity to retreat when they realise the engagement is not going their way. That is balance.
They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank!
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3268
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 15:51:00 -
[3] - Quote
dzizur wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:something something. I don't know if I understood your post, but what I meant, was that ramming an ads with another dropship can be a very challenging task. I've tried it on few ocassions, failed most of the time (or just circled around). Why did I do it? Why not use the swarms to drive them away? Because he was pissing me off for 1/2 of the match, running away from my swarms with 300-400 armor. So I decided it will be much easier and cheaper to use a standard ds and try to ram him and make him lose ~300-500 k (which would probably made him go ISK negative in that match) or at least do similar work to what swarms did ( he had no time to shoot at infantry when trying to outmaneuver me trying to ram him). (I hope this is comprehensible. I'm having some problems with my english lately :P)
Yeah but there is my point, he is running away with 300-400 armour, if he is a python he now has return to his redline, put down his craft recall it and bring out another. If he is an incubus he has to wait in his redline outmof enemy fire until he is repped, in both circumstances he is effectively removed from battle, probably for a least a minute by the time you account for time to and from the redline, landing, taking off, so on and so forth.
Futhermore you can do this with an ADV swarm launcher and just one magazine each time. Which typically takes another 5 seconds before he scarpers of to his redline again and your 150 WP better off. Futhermore this entire minute is where their team is down a man, and your team isn't. He is effectively removed from battle, the only difference between him dying and him not dying is that he saves a bit of money, cause let's be honest if the pilot knows that what he is doingmis keeping his team in the running you can blow it up as many times as you like and he will still come back. Futhermore you actually gain more by letting him leave, if you destroy 2 dropships you earn 600,000 ISK to the salvage pot to be split between 16 players you will likely see no more than 20,000 of this yourself, probably less, but by letting him live you can pull in massive WP and get a larger share of the profit overall often jumping your pay by as much as 50-80,000 ISK
They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank!
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3275
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 19:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:I would totally be cool with vehicles being as cheap as an equivalent dropsuit if they weren't OP as sin. Players should expect to die in an FPS. There is a difference between dying and dying regularly, you do not come to an FPS to die regularly especially not one where dying actually penalises your player. In every other FPS game dying has no drawbacks, negatives etc, here in dust it has.
So yes you should expect to die, but if your are skilled you will not die often.Monkey MAC wrote:2) You cannot expect vehicles to require more than 1 person in order to destroy, this creates a force strength imbalance and is something that we have been fighting to be rid of for a long long time.
3) Therefore you cannot expect vehicles to be dying at the same regularity as infantry WITHOUT teamwork. Yet at the same time teamwork should not be a necessity. I think a dedicated anti-vehicle player should be able to take down and kill a vehicle player, yes. One player should roughly equal one player. If we don't have that, then vehicles are unbalanced, because they allow players to be inherently "better" than others. I'm actually entirely confused where this train of thought went. Are you sure you didn't phrase something incorrectly? I'm trying to figure out exactly how often you think a vehicle should be getting destroyed, if they are destroyed to easily AV won't be a dedicated role. As an AVer one who has been on these forums fighting for vehicle balance, their is a point where vehicles become to easy to destroy. We are at risk of reaching that point, especially of our CPM doesn't agree with us.Monkey MAC wrote:Futhermore you mean to tell me, you have never left an infantry unit behind cover while you shoot the next guy attempting to assault your point? You mean to tell me you've chased people and left your point to be capped by one of their teammates. You mean to tell me you have NEVER successfully retreated from an engagement you knew you were going to loose. You have never popped back into cover for repairs while the enemy continues to fire upon your posistion? I am not saying it should be impossible for a vehicle to escape. But it should not be a guarantee. Right now, the current hardener system and V/AV balance guarantees vehicles the ability to successfully retreat at least once. It's not a guarantee, especially since the nerfs. The whole point of hardeners is to create an uptime, where the vehicle can push futher than normal. Your ability to escape is not guaranteed only improved.
Futhermore most tankers (wrongly or not ) write off hardeners anyway.Monkey MAC wrote:How exactly do you play? Do you run around like a headless chicken just killing everything you see? Are you one of these people that wolfpacks with whatever is the strongest weapon at the time? Do you have any regard for choke points, cover and higher ground? I play a lot of different roles, in a lot of different positions. Both solo and with squads. Lately I'm somewhat fond of my forge gun. You didn't answer my question, do you o do you not run round with a rifle firing art anything you see like some kind of COD player, I'm not confartable with having a CPM who does not believe that suppression is a big thing in a track shooter.Monkey MAC wrote:Vehicles need to be capable of being destroyed byna single infantry person, but they should (as infantry does) have the opportunity to retreat when they realise the engagement is not going their way. That is balance. Sure, I can agree with that. But bear in mind, a significant amount of engagements, there is no way for infantry to retreat from a tank or dropship. But on the other hand, vehicles can almost always retreat from infantry AV. Particularly given the short range of swarms. There is plenty of oppurtunity for infantry to escape on regular basis. Swarm launchers need a velocity buff, but in terms of retreat the window to successfully retreat is very small. Typically the time taken to reload.
While in general we may singing of the same hymn sheet I suggest you reassess your view as to vehicles being overpowered. They are strong, but not overpowered.
They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank!
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3276
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 23:06:00 -
[5] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Atiim wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:
It's not a guarantee, especially since the nerfs. The whole point of hardeners is to create an uptime, where the vehicle can push futher than normal. Your ability to escape is not guaranteed only improved.
Futhermore most tankers (wrongly or not ) write off hardeners anyway.
If you use an Assault Dropship, then yes it is a guarantee. Assuming you're mildly competent, of course What idiot writes off hardeners?
Takihiro
They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank!
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3276
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 23:09:00 -
[6] - Quote
Atiim wrote:Monkey MAC wrote:
It's not a guarantee, especially since the nerfs. The whole point of hardeners is to create an uptime, where the vehicle can push futher than normal. Your ability to escape is not guaranteed only improved.
Futhermore most tankers (wrongly or not ) write off hardeners anyway.
If you use an Assault Dropship, then yes it is a guarantee. Assuming you're mildly competent, of course
You mean an afterburner, to which I have proposed and CCP have said they are considering improvements to Swarm Launchers operational parameters. Also even with an afterburner you aren't guaranteed to out run a forge gun.
Which is why I personally prefer a Shield Booster on my Incubus. Which may seem weird to alot of people but I get more uptime out of it to help out my team.
They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank!
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
|
|
|
| |
|