DUST Search - ADS=unescapable, uncounterable death for tanks

All Channels

General Discussions

ADS=unescapable, uncounterable death for tanks

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3838	Posted - 2014.08.18 12:14:00 - [1] - Quote OP you used to have a railgun that was able to hit harder, OH less, fire quicker and also have a 600m range until the lolcpm member in the thread got the railgun nerfed so he could hover in safety If it was upto him he would want the railgun removed so you would have 0 defence against an ADS https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1638265#post1638265
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3838	Posted - 2014.08.18 12:20:00 - [2] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: OP you used to have a railgun that was able to hit harder, OH less, fire quicker and also have a 600m range until the lolcpm member in the thread got the railgun nerfed so he could hover in safety If it was upto him he would want the railgun removed so you would have 0 defence against an ADS https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1638265#post1638265 Except it's missiles that fire up, not rails... Missiles require travel time before they even hit you, railgun is near instant
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3839	Posted - 2014.08.18 12:59:00 - [3] - Quote lol this thread Put small rails on, yea gimp your tank fit Jump into the small turret seat, yea so some bluedot can nick it aswell as gimping your tank Jump out with a FG, yea so some bluedot can nick it Basically all answers are use a FG so the tank isnt needed at all
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3841	Posted - 2014.08.18 15:07:00 - [4] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Step 1 Find a good hill Step 2 Park a Triple Damage Railgun Tank on the said hill Step 3 Fire. Wrong, wrong and wrong Thanks to a thread like this https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=130849 The rails got range nerfed, damage nerfed, refire time nerfed, elevation nerfed, OH increased and generally the hard counter to ADS got nerfed FG are capable but require 1 very good fg or 2 to make sure Any complaints about the ADS can be directed at number 1 bad pilot judge who somehow still gets shot down even tho hes trying his hardest to buff the playstyle
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3845	Posted - 2014.08.18 19:17:00 - [5] - Quote Alabaster Shinho wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: shaman oga wrote: Step 1. Mount little turrets on your HAV Step 2. Acquire a friendly forge (or two, the second is optional) Step 3. Harvest tears from DS pilots. Multiple tank crew should not be required to counter one ADS pilot. Multiple tank crew SHOULD be required. One person in a tank should not be able to take out it's counter by itself, otherwise it's not a counter. In fact, even WITH small turrets, a tank should not be able to take out a dropship that's above it. It needs to have other players supporting it to do so. This is not a game to be solo'd. But if i say this Multiple Anti vehicle crew SHOULD be required. One person with an AV weapon should not be able to take out it's counter by itself, otherwise it's not a counter. In fact, even WITH AV nades a AV crew should not be able to take out a tank that's infront ofit it. It needs to have other players supporting it to do so. This is not a game to be solo'd All i did was replace tank crew with AV crew and wait to see how many will say that it shouldnt take a crew to take out one pilot in a tank
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3847	Posted - 2014.08.18 21:10:00 - [6] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: lol this thread Put small rails on, yea gimp your tank fit Jump into the small turret seat, yea so some bluedot can nick it aswell as gimping your tank Jump out with a FG, yea so some bluedot can nick it Basically all answers are use a FG so the tank isnt needed at all Ah, so infantry having to switch to AV gear, or better switch to a tank, in order to fight a tank is a good thing but a tanker having to change something to fight an ADS is unfair? To put rails on you cimp your fit since you generally dont have enough PG/CPU since we are not allowed adv/proto hulls If you jump out with a FG bluedot nicks it and you are not in control of your tank which may have a module ready to activate Basically they are poor options, those options prove that you do not need a tank, just go around with a LAV instead
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3861	Posted - 2014.08.19 12:03:00 - [7] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: lol this thread Put small rails on, yea gimp your tank fit Jump into the small turret seat, yea so some bluedot can nick it aswell as gimping your tank Jump out with a FG, yea so some bluedot can nick it Basically all answers are use a FG so the tank isnt needed at all Ah, so infantry having to switch to AV gear, or better switch to a tank, in order to fight a tank is a good thing but a tanker having to change something to fight an ADS is unfair? To put rails on you cimp your fit since you generally dont have enough PG/CPU since we are not allowed adv/proto hulls If you jump out with a FG bluedot nicks it and you are not in control of your tank which may have a module ready to activate Basically they are poor options, those options prove that you do not need a tank, just go around with a LAV instead No it simply proves you need something other than one solution. Infantry doesn't have 1 solution to all it's problems. Even a commando needs protection from scouts, sentinels, explosives, Snipers, Mass Drivers, Plasma Cannons and so forth. Your tank, is not the be all and end all of combat But it isnt Missile is a ***** to kill infantry with, so i need small missiles Railgun rewards extreme accuracy to hit infantry but the turret turn too slow so its best against armored vehicles and installations so again i need small turrets Blaster used to be able to take care of infantry and vehicles to a lesser extent, 1.0 days you needed a heat sink when killing a vehicle at least but now the turret has problems hitting infantry and its dispersion can be quite big it will miss a LAV Problem is that the maddy barely has enough CPU to fit a proper tank let alone anything extra on it, small turrets aint great at range even if you can see the person and also we still dont have adv/proto hulls
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3861	Posted - 2014.08.19 13:41:00 - [8] - Quote lunatis orrak wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: OP you used to have a railgun that was able to hit harder, OH less, fire quicker and also have a 600m range until the lolcpm member in the thread got the railgun nerfed so he could hover in safety If it was upto him he would want the railgun removed so you would have 0 defence against an ADS https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1638265#post1638265 Actually the range was reduced because it outclassed blaster turrets and for the little fact that wwe used to have at least two tanks sitting on the red line hill rail sniping all the way to objective get your facts right. Blaster turrets were more AI than AV even so they turned alot quicker than a railgun and add in a nitro you could easily outgun a railgun in CQC but you had to know what you were doing They were nerfed because of DS complaints, good ADS pilots didnt have a problem and if hill sniping is a problem then move back the redline 500m problem solved Get your facts right
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3861	Posted - 2014.08.19 14:53:00 - [9] - Quote lunatis orrak wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: lunatis orrak wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: OP you used to have a railgun that was able to hit harder, OH less, fire quicker and also have a 600m range until the lolcpm member in the thread got the railgun nerfed so he could hover in safety If it was upto him he would want the railgun removed so you would have 0 defence against an ADS https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1638265#post1638265 Actually the range was reduced because it outclassed blaster turrets and for the little fact that wwe used to have at least two tanks sitting on the red line hill rail sniping all the way to objective get your facts right. Blaster turrets were more AI than AV even so they turned alot quicker than a railgun and add in a nitro you could easily outgun a railgun in CQC but you had to know what you were doing They were nerfed because of DS complaints, good ADS pilots didnt have a problem and if hill sniping is a problem then move back the redline 500m problem solved Get your facts right Actually no they weren't so your not just a scrub in game but on forum to its as simple as thinking when the rail was nerfed and searching that update discussions good job bud but just like a forum scrub you take everything out of context and try to flip it to pertain to your arguement. Wrong again The problem has always been the redline, not the range, if the redline is moved back then the hills are no good and even if they sit at the hills the redline is back 500m so they have a way to go when an ADS can swoop in from behind and nail em but no nerf the turret into the ground as usual instead of fixing the real problem

Copyright © 2013-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,02s, ref 20251010/0540
EVE-Online™/DUST514™ and EVE/DUST514 imagery © CCP.

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.