DUST Search - Alright tankers lets get serious. What do we want? [Feedback] AV gtf...

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Alright tankers lets get serious. What do we want? [Feedback] AV gtf...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 110	Posted - 2014.09.14 22:31:00 - [1] - Quote Here is my list Jihads out. (I love how in the description it says LAV inferior to other vehicles but yet nothing in the game can kill a tank faster than a car.) Better placed - better fitting/less SP to fit - turrets (small) More tank mods - If we are going to get nerfed and our counter part buffed after every hotfix can we have some advantages over that dude on the roof top with swarms the my blaster no longer phases. I should not drive a tank on an objective to drive and help out and get ganked by AV on a supply depot what happens If I get out with my heavy though? oh they instantly switch out of AV to heavy's of their own More large turrets? No. I think what we have now is fine. unless you want to bring back stabilized blasters which you can This is it. This is all that needs to be done to make tanks a viable asset on the battlefield instead of a liability. Does it look like to much? does not look that way to me. Unfair tactics removed. Rooftop camper counter Diversity. Oh one more thing vehicle locks as well. Maybe have like a kick button to just incase blues want to sit in and do nothing the while time so you cant recall? Thhhawnks ghuys. HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo
Crimson ShieId Psygod9 852	Posted - 2014.09.14 22:40:00 - [2] - Quote Rooftop camper, say hello to my little railgun~! Restore tanks to pre 1.7 status, yes, please, thank you. Jihaad LAV's... still funny... but pretty rare these days. Add these instead of removing them~ Nova Knives are best sidearm.
BL4CKST4R La Muerte Eterna Dark Taboo 3078	Posted - 2014.09.14 23:20:00 - [3] - Quote I want to kill everything without imposing a risk to myself and if I do die the isk destroyed to be worth 10x more than the cost of my vehicle. Balanced supercalifragilisticexpialidocious
iKILLu osborne Z PLATOON CALDARI STATE PEACEMAKERS 304	Posted - 2014.09.15 00:17:00 - [4] - Quote with the new ehp buff to installations , it takes a disturbing amount of time to destroy what is now considered the tank killer. I'm not asking for any change to the tanks turret damage/ehp or the installations damage/ehp however maybe decrease the heat build up on rail/blaster turrets or increase the cooldown rate that way the threat of the installations can be dealt with in a reasonable amout of time. missile turrets are getting their fix on this matter. "yeah i fought the redline it took it only 13 seconds....." fought scotty too but something went wrong
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 110	Posted - 2014.09.15 00:53:00 - [5] - Quote iKILLu osborne wrote: with the new ehp buff to installations , it takes a disturbing amount of time to destroy what is now considered the tank killer. I'm not asking for any change to the tanks turret damage/ehp or the installations damage/ehp however maybe decrease the heat build up on rail/blaster turrets or increase the cooldown rate that way the threat of the installations can be dealt with in a reasonable amout of time. missile turrets are getting their fix on this matter. I think the heat build up is fine it is the turret that is the problem all of them do not need 14kehp. Redline maybe. HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo
THE-PIMP-NAMED-SLICKBACK Intrepidus XI EoN. 213	Posted - 2014.09.15 01:13:00 - [6] - Quote Assault lavs with turret damage bonuses Planetside 2 Eventually Eh
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 67	Posted - 2014.09.15 01:37:00 - [7] - Quote You are a tank. You are not meant to be invincible. You are meant to be the biggest target in the field if you want to go one man army and you die no ones problem but yourself. Jihad jeeps? So what do you recommend? Removing LAV or RE because slamming a car into a tank with a bomb on it kills everyone? You have a BFG you should be killing them before they even get close to you at least thats what I'm doing in a puny little Sica. Rooftop campers. Those are a nuisance for everyone and the only counter is a dropship or a good sniper able to take out the uplinks do you want a mod to make your tank start flying around like its GTA:SA?
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 67	Posted - 2014.09.15 01:41:00 - [8] - Quote iKILLu osborne wrote: with the new ehp buff to installations , it takes a disturbing amount of time to destroy what is now considered the tank killer. I'm not asking for any change to the tanks turret damage/ehp or the installations damage/ehp however maybe decrease the heat build up on rail/blaster turrets or increase the cooldown rate that way the threat of the installations can be dealt with in a reasonable amout of time. missile turrets are getting their fix on this matter. I recall a while ago CCP saying that installations were meant to be a threat and not just free points to tanks. They are still free points to tankers judging by the Gunnlogi with a missile launcher that destroyed one before I could even cross a road last match I played. Pay attention to your surroundings and turrets are harmless even to a puny militia tanker.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 13278	Posted - 2014.09.15 01:46:00 - [9] - Quote Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: You are a tank. You are not meant to be invincible. You are meant to be the biggest target in the field if you want to go one man army and you die no ones problem but yourself. Jihad jeeps? So what do you recommend? Removing LAV or RE because slamming a car into a tank with a bomb on it kills everyone? You have a BFG you should be killing them before they even get close to you at least thats what I'm doing in a puny little Sica. Rooftop campers. Those are a nuisance for everyone and the only counter is a dropship or a good sniper able to take out the uplinks do you want a mod to make your tank start flying around like its GTA:SA? Of course HAV are not thats a given. But that does not mean they should not have the feeling of durability and power associated with Tanks. I mean the Tiger Tank (Panzer VI Ausf. M H1) was a tank that was slow, rock solid, and put the fear of God into infantry the world over..... weren't invulnerable. Personally I'd just like to see another tier of HAV with more purposes and a full HAV line up. Might even make me return to the game. "We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
Alabastor 'TheBlaster' Alcar Silver Bullet Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 793	Posted - 2014.09.15 02:37:00 - [10] - Quote i love kamakazi cars, so dont want them remover ever. i want my logi dropship and car back, and all of the modules that were removed in 1.7 reintroduced.

Atiim 12154	Posted - 2014.09.15 03:26:00 - [11] - Quote JLAVs are a valid tactic. The only way to get killed by one is if you aren't paying attention (incompetence), or if the LAV Pilot manages to out-smart and/or out-maneuver you, in which case he's simply better than you. All you have to do to stop them is either activate a NOS and then thrust in the opposite direction, causing them to miss their mark and allows you to destroy them; or shoot the REs and blow up the LAV. Heck, you can even shoot them out of the driver seat if you have a Missile Turret (AT-201 or better). As for rooftop campers, if Pilots weren't able to zoom in and insta-kill AVers with a Boundless or Six Kin HMG, you'd see far less tower camping. Though the short range of a SL (175m) makes tower camping rather redundant in most situations. Though if an AVer catches you by surprise, you should suffer the consequences. The first Matari Commando -HAND
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 13282	Posted - 2014.09.15 03:53:00 - [12] - Quote Atiim wrote: JLAVs are a valid tactic. The only way to get killed by one is if you aren't paying attention (incompetence), or if the LAV Pilot manages to out-smart and/or out-maneuver you, in which case he's simply better than you. All you have to do to stop them is either activate a NOS and then thrust in the opposite direction, causing them to miss their mark and allows you to destroy them; or shoot the REs and blow up the LAV. Heck, you can even shoot them out of the driver seat if you have a Missile Turret (AT-201 or better). As for rooftop campers, if Pilots weren't able to zoom in and insta-kill AVers with a Boundless or Six Kin HMG, you'd see far less tower camping. Though the short range of a SL (175m) makes tower camping rather redundant in most situations. Though if an AVer catches you by surprise, you should suffer the consequences. You know that's not true...... but hell what does it matter at this point. Only reason I hate JLAV's is because it utterly destroys immersion and spits on the values of New Eden on which this was designed. "We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2779	Posted - 2014.09.15 06:54:00 - [13] - Quote Jihad jeep embodies the new eden values. Costing the enemy the most while losing the least. This is right up there with Band of Brothers screaming their battleships should be utterly invulnerable to swarms of rookie frigates. If I cannot kill your tank with my forge gun because your Infantry are doing their job I will use the other way. BEEP BEEP CHUMP! By the way, your "AV gtfo" is like an engraved Invitation. One tank should be = to one AV gunner given similar SP levels. Your demand to return to the good old days of near invulnerability (which birthed the jihad jeeps) will be received with demands for the similar de-nerfing of all AV.
The True Inferno Myrmidon Syndicate 58	Posted - 2014.09.15 08:17:00 - [14] - Quote Dam, I miss my 180mm plates, Shield and Armour Resistance amplifiers and plates, Armour and Shield transporters, Damage control units, Shield regenerators, the Polarised and Efficient varieties of modules power grid Diagnostic systems and all the turret modules other than damage. ScP = GÖÑ If you like chiptune An Ace Pilot
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2132	Posted - 2014.09.15 12:22:00 - [15] - Quote Hello, I'm a vehicle newb here and I like them except for one thing.... They confuse me, why aren't they full crew served? "Heres the deal, in the 40s there was Normandy today you got punks, some need culling real bad." --Truth Logi for Hire
iKILLu osborne Z PLATOON CALDARI STATE PEACEMAKERS 309	Posted - 2014.09.15 12:29:00 - [16] - Quote Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: iKILLu osborne wrote: with the new ehp buff to installations , it takes a disturbing amount of time to destroy what is now considered the tank killer. I'm not asking for any change to the tanks turret damage/ehp or the installations damage/ehp however maybe decrease the heat build up on rail/blaster turrets or increase the cooldown rate that way the threat of the installations can be dealt with in a reasonable amout of time. missile turrets are getting their fix on this matter. I recall a while ago CCP saying that installations were meant to be a threat and not just free points to tanks. They are still free points to tankers judging by the Gunnlogi with a missile launcher that destroyed one before I could even cross a road last match I played. Pay attention to your surroundings and turrets are harmless even to a puny militia tanker. considering it takes 30+sec to destroy one, its a awful long time to be left vulnerable to av and other tanks. my request is valid "yeah i fought the redline it took it only 13 seconds....." fought scotty too but something went wrong
TechMechMeds KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 5669	Posted - 2014.09.15 15:39:00 - [17] - Quote Something that changes it from rail or gtfo and making mlt tanks considerably worse. So tired of the rambo rail sica spam. That was spiffing.
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 73	Posted - 2014.09.15 15:48:00 - [18] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Something that changes it from rail or gtfo and making mlt tanks considerably worse. So tired of the rambo rail sica spam. The times I've killed Madrugers with a Soma its because I had the drop on you, was close to another tank, , or the Madruger kept driving repeatedly into a wall and blew himself up.
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 74	Posted - 2014.09.15 15:50:00 - [19] - Quote iKILLu osborne wrote: considering it takes 30+sec to destroy one, its a awful long time to be left vulnerable to av and other tanks. my request is valid Then I guess you are a terrible tanker then.
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 110	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:02:00 - [20] - Quote Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: You are a tank. You are not meant to be invincible. You are meant to be the biggest target in the field if you want to go one man army and you die no ones problem but yourself. Jihad jeeps? So what do you recommend? Removing LAV or RE because slamming a car into a tank with a bomb on it kills everyone? You have a BFG you should be killing them before they even get close to you at least thats what I'm doing in a puny little Sica. Rooftop campers. Those are a nuisance for everyone and the only counter is a dropship or a good sniper able to take out the uplinks do you want a mod to make your tank start flying around like its GTA:SA? A counter for jihad LAV is to not be able to place RE on blue or green vehicles (such as your own) this would of course still apply to red so you could still blow up red tanks or cars. Your just one of the people that simply want tanks to be as crap as they are now. try harder with the speculation. comparing Tanks to GTA is not going to help you in this thread. HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo

Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 110	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:09:00 - [21] - Quote Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: iKILLu osborne wrote: considering it takes 30+sec to destroy one, its a awful long time to be left vulnerable to av and other tanks. my request is valid Then I guess you are a terrible tanker then. You really do know nothing about tanking stick with the AV buddy. Maddys driving up and down get them selves killed the most by any decent gunllogi it does not work for us. AS FOR YOUR COMMENT ABOUT A TANKER SHOULD BE EQUAL TO AN AV MAKES ME WANT TO PUKE. I HAVE 22MIL SP IN TANKS. YOU HAVE AT THE MOST WHAT 5MIL SP IN YOUR LITTLE AV? AND THAT COMES WITH ADVATAGES OF BEING ABLE TO DO INFANTRY CRAP. THATS LIKE SAYING MY MILTA SUITE WITH A BASIC RAIL RIFLE SHOULD KILL YOUR FULL PROTO HEAVY 1V1 AT LEAST ONCE IN A SINGLE GAME. HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Kyoudai Furinkazan 1189	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:29:00 - [22] - Quote I for one , don't care about jihad jeeps ... if they kill me then they earned it , my issue is that ground vehicles have more deterrent then air does and with the changes to swarms or will they create a more overpowered item against ground vehicles because of their closing speed in tight areas and short distances then creating a system where their able to fly for longer distances and having greater closing speed the longer their flight time is right now . Increasing the speed will make them overpowered to ground vehicles , the difference that most forget about is the fact that ground vehicles have a harder time running then airborne does . Vehicles have to make multiple turns and find items to use for cover while airborne vehicles can just speed away if their aware enough . Air has the speed , more maneuverability and open spaces to take advantage of that speed with the ability to use items for cover as well . Their the scouts of the air , only difference is they don't have a shotgun .. unless you want to count at-missiles but they do have nova knives . Delta should come with a SP or infantry SP refund so that a campaign for one is not needed .
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Kyoudai Furinkazan 1189	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:39:00 - [23] - Quote Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: I recall a while ago CCP saying that installations were meant to be a threat and not just free points to tanks. They are still free points to tankers judging by the Gunnlogi with a missile launcher that destroyed one before I could even cross a road last match I played. Pay attention to your surroundings and turrets are harmless even to a puny militia tanker. I can agree about that . I talked about missile tanks being too powerful and being able to unload a whole clip into a tank and decimate it . That's balance ??? Your finding more people using them , that's kind of a testimony to them being OP ... you didn't see this many people using missiles back when there was variety in turrets and the turrets seem to be more balanced back then , then they are now . I miss all of the old turrets . Delta should come with a SP or infantry SP refund so that a campaign for one is not needed .
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Kyoudai Furinkazan 1189	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:44:00 - [24] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Personally I'd just like to see another tier of HAV with more purposes and a full HAV line up. Might even make me return to the game. Stop playing , that's the only thing that your waiting for . I miss you playing , I can't lie ... your one of five tankers that I looked up to and it seems that all of them don't tank anymore and two just quit after FF . * SMH * Shame ... just a shame and I don't blame any of you . Delta should come with a SP or infantry SP refund so that a campaign for one is not needed .
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2133	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:51:00 - [25] - Quote You should really calm down. I have seen the same entitled attitude regarding vehicles before and it was just as laughable then too. Vehicles are OP if they are meant for single user operation. If they were crew served, it would be a different story. As for you spending so many SP on them, I would say that was your choice, though why you want to be a vehicle purist in an FPS, IDK why you chose dust when other games have implemented vehicles better. If you did it so you could own infantry from a "safe" place, why not go kick puppies instead? "Heres the deal, in the 40s there was Normandy today you got punks, some need culling real bad." --Truth Logi for Hire
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Kyoudai Furinkazan 1189	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:51:00 - [26] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Jihad jeep embodies the new eden values. Costing the enemy the most while losing the least. This is right up there with Band of Brothers screaming their battleships should be utterly invulnerable to swarms of rookie frigates. If I cannot kill your tank with my forge gun because your Infantry are doing their job I will use the other way. BEEP BEEP CHUMP! By the way, your "AV gtfo" is like an engraved Invitation. One tank should be = to one AV gunner given similar SP levels. Your demand to return to the good old days of near invulnerability (which birthed the jihad jeeps) will be received with demands for the similar de-nerfing of all AV. ^^^ This is not right , although I don't mind JJ's ... they only serve the purpose of the jeep driver and leaves them loosing close to nothing and gaining everything in return . That's B.S. but their here now so it's up to CCP if they want to clean their game of all the ganking methods and stop manipulation or will they continue to let the economy suffer for that reason , it's part of why you won't see any economy features of this game because of the exploits that exist and they would ruin the current economy in all of EVE , not just Dust if the two were tied . Delta should come with a SP or infantry SP refund so that a campaign for one is not needed .
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 80	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:51:00 - [27] - Quote The tanks are fine as is so long as you play with some caution. You are not meant to be invincible and just because it takes a little bit of time kill a turret doesn't mean they should lower the health and the reason CCP raised the health on turrets is to give them a little more life expectancy so that maybe infantry can use them to kill tankers without running half way across the map to a supply depot to change loadouts. And just because you put 22 million SP into vehicles doesn't mean you should be a god. AV are meant to kill vehicles and against infantry those same people are at a disadvantage. AV are meant to keep you from running rampant over the game. If you see a forge gun blast then its time to high tail it out of the area and take cover. Dust 514 is more then generous to you. Damage mods, armor and shield hardeners, shield boosters and an incredible shield and armor regen are your defenses and how many other games have those for you? You have near everything you could possibly want and yet you ask for more when the weapon meant to kill you succeeds. Use caution and don't drive blindly into the enemy and you are more powerful then anything. I haven't put a single point into vehicles and with some caution I rarely have to replace anything.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Kyoudai Furinkazan 1189	Posted - 2014.09.15 17:55:00 - [28] - Quote Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: The tanks are fine as is so long as you play with some caution. You are not meant to be invincible and just because it takes a little bit of time kill a turret doesn't mean they should lower the health and the reason CCP raised the health on turrets is to give them a little more life expectancy so that maybe infantry can use them to kill tankers without running half way across the map to a supply depot to change loadouts. And just because you put 22 million SP into vehicles doesn't mean you should be a god. AV are meant to kill vehicles and against infantry those same people are at a disadvantage. AV are meant to keep you from running rampant over the game. If you see a forge gun blast then its time to high tail it out of the area and take cover. Dust 514 is more then generous to you. Damage mods, armor and shield hardeners, shield boosters and an incredible shield and armor regen are your defenses and how many other games have those for you? You have near everything you could possibly want and yet you ask for more when the weapon meant to kill you succeeds. Use caution and don't drive blindly into the enemy and you are more powerful then anything. I haven't put a single point into vehicles and with some caution I rarely have to replace anything. I can agree with everything you said . Delta should come with a SP or infantry SP refund so that a campaign for one is not needed .
Atiim 12163	Posted - 2014.09.15 18:31:00 - [29] - Quote Shooter Somewhere wrote: AS FOR YOUR COMMENT ABOUT A TANKER SHOULD BE EQUAL TO AN AV MAKES ME WANT TO PUKE. I HAVE 22MIL SP IN TANKS. YOU HAVE AT THE MOST WHAT 5MIL SP IN YOUR LITTLE AV? AND THAT COMES WITH ADVATAGES OF BEING ABLE TO DO INFANTRY CRAP. Quote: Dropsuit Command III Minmatar Heavy Dropsuits III Minmatar Commando V Dropsuit Upgrades IV Dropsuit Biotic Upgrades V Dropsuit Armor Upgrades V Armor Plating V Armor Repairing V Dropsuit Shield Upgrades V Shield Extension V Dropsuit Core Upgrades V Dropsuit Engineering V Nanocircuitry V Dropsuit Electronics V Range Amplification V Profile Dampening V Precision Enhancement V Weaponry V Swarm Launcher Operation V Swarm Launcher Proficiency V Swarm Launcher Ammo Capacity V Swarm Launcher Rapid Reload V Swarm Launcher Fitting Optimization V [Secondary Weapon] Operation V [Secondary Weapon] Proficiency III [Secondary Weapon] Capacity V Total: 21,646,220 SP Congratulations, you've spent a whooping .35m more SP than a Semi-Maxed out Swarm Launcher user does. Sadly, I'm going to redact my congrats to you, as that amount is miniscule. Shooter Somewhere wrote: THATS LIKE SAYING MY MILTA SUITE WITH A BASIC RAIL RIFLE SHOULD KILL YOUR FULL PROTO HEAVY 1V1 AT LEAST ONCE IN A SINGLE GAME. A 5m SP investment is about 1/4 the investment of 22m SP, so it'd actually be: Quote: "That's like saying my STD Suit with an ADV Rifle should kill your PRO Sentinel at least once in a single game" Of course however, someone with a RR should be able to 1v1 a PRO Sentinel (or anything for that matter) if: The RR user is better than the Sentinel The Sentinel is lead into a trap by the RR user The Sentinel is inside the RR's Optimal Range The Sentinel is outside their Optimal Range However, I do thank you for revealing your motive, which apparently seems to be removing the HAV's ability to be killed at least once a match (see above). Now, I no longer need (nor should) take you seriously. Assuming I did in the first place, of course. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1745	Posted - 2014.09.15 18:47:00 - [30] - Quote As a pilot of both tanks and ADS, AV should not "gtfo" they are an integral part of the equation. However, I feel both groups are in this "if we give an inch, they'll take a mile" mentality. To Atiim: that amount of SP does give you a semi-maxed out swarmer. However, I ask you to look at your list once again. Quote: GÇó Dropsuit Command III GÇó Minmatar Heavy Dropsuits III GÇó Minmatar Commando V GÇó Dropsuit Upgrades IV GÇó Dropsuit Biotic Upgrades V GÇó Dropsuit Armor Upgrades V GÇó Armor Plating V GÇó Armor Repairing V GÇó Dropsuit Shield Upgrades V GÇó Shield Extension V GÇó Dropsuit Core Upgrades V GÇó Dropsuit Engineering V GÇó Nanocircuitry V GÇó Dropsuit Electronics V GÇó Range Amplification V GÇó Profile Dampening V GÇó Precision Enhancement V GÇó Weaponry V GÇó Swarm Launcher Operation V GÇó Swarm Launcher Proficiency V GÇó Swarm Launcher Ammo Capacity V GÇó Swarm Launcher Rapid Reload V GÇó Swarm Launcher Fitting Optimization V GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Operation V GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Proficiency III GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Capacity V Total: 21,646,220 SP All skills I have marked give you a bonus beyond unlocking tiers. For instance, Profile Dampening, in addition to unlocking tiers of dampener, also decreases your suit profilie on any suit you wear. There are a mere handful of skills that confer a bonus to vehicles. We do not even have a Vehicle Electronic/Engineering skill to give us more PG/CPU. This is part of the frustration vehicles feel. We cannot even begin to fit our vehicles as we wish, yet more nerfs to them are called for. Shoot Scout with yes.

Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 81	Posted - 2014.09.15 19:06:00 - [31] - Quote I'm not even trying to be rude about it and I haven't put a single point into AV weapons (that will change after the million clone event hopefully. I use militia forge guns or tanks for my AV and haven't killed anything but an unoccupied Baloch with the forge gun and the Sica gets destroyed quickly if I don't get the first hit in from behind.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2787	Posted - 2014.09.15 21:04:00 - [32] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: That's B.S. but their here now so it's up to CCP if they want to clean their game of all the ganking methods and stop manipulation or will they continue to let the economy suffer for that reason , it's part of why you won't see any economy features of this game because of the exploits that exist and they would ruin the current economy in all of EVE , not just Dust if the two were tied . what economy? And jihad jeeps wont even make the EVE economy burp. We're talking about an economy that engulfs the loss of over a thousand ships with a loud belch and says "no worries, more where they came from. Battleships generally cost 200m ISK. Eve players lose more ISK in assets getting ganked while taking a **** than any DUST player loses in a month. How exactly will jihad jeeps ruin that economy?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 13284	Posted - 2014.09.15 22:05:00 - [33] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: You should really calm down. I have seen the same entitled attitude regarding vehicles before and it was just as laughable then too. Vehicles are OP if they are meant for single user operation. If they were crew served, it would be a different story. As for you spending so many SP on them, I would say that was your choice, though why you want to be a vehicle purist in an FPS, IDK why you chose dust when other games have implemented vehicles better. If you did it so you could own infantry from a "safe" place, why not go kick puppies instead? I can understand the point of view but it simply is not possible to make an enjoyable aspect of the game if you require a minimum of two other players to operate (tank crews normals at 3+ if I remember correctly). It simply isn't possible to crew them, especially competitively, it isn't possible to have the co-ordination to function as a useful piece of machinery, and its not possible to make it and enjoyable aspect of gameplay with 3+ players required to operate a single vehicle. Plus tanks in Dust don't even work or feel like proper tanks. They have no weight, they move and fire on the fly, their cannon do not have AOE or powerful recoil, they do not one shot infantry, they do not have 1000+ m ranges like they should..... Tanks in Dust are pitiful. Their modules are in such a state of disrepair, their pilots filled with apathy and loathing for a simplified system that **** over skill and well invested players to ** away on a bunch of players who picked up a simplified system of OP monsters (1.7-1.8) and thought themselves good at what they did. Were is the Mass? The slow Acceleration? The Skilled active module activation? Where is the powerful ordinance that no other class/ role in the game to can bring to the battlefield? Where's the goddamned recoil! "We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
Jack 3enimble Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 385	Posted - 2014.09.15 22:32:00 - [34] - Quote Why be "constructive" (enter sarcasm here) on the forums when you've claimed countless times that you're done with Dust? On topic: - Scout suit scan should not work in vehicles - Add a timer to get back in your vehicle when you've hopped out
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 110	Posted - 2014.09.15 23:46:00 - [35] - Quote Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: The tanks are fine as is so long as you play with some caution. You are not meant to be invincible and just because it takes a little bit of time kill a turret doesn't mean they should lower the health and the reason CCP raised the health on turrets is to give them a little more life expectancy so that maybe infantry can use them to kill tankers without running half way across the map to a supply depot to change loadouts. And just because you put 22 million SP into vehicles doesn't mean you should be a god. AV are meant to kill vehicles and against infantry those same people are at a disadvantage. AV are meant to keep you from running rampant over the game. If you see a forge gun blast then its time to high tail it out of the area and take cover. Dust 514 is more then generous to you. Damage mods, armor and shield hardeners, shield boosters and an incredible shield and armor regen are your defenses and how many other games have those for you? You have near everything you could possibly want and yet you ask for more when the weapon meant to kill you succeeds. Use caution and don't drive blindly into the enemy and you are more powerful then anything. I haven't put a single point into vehicles and with some caution I rarely have to replace anything. This is of course coming from someone who is AV. lol HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 110	Posted - 2014.09.15 23:50:00 - [36] - Quote Atiim wrote: Shooter Somewhere wrote: AS FOR YOUR COMMENT ABOUT A TANKER SHOULD BE EQUAL TO AN AV MAKES ME WANT TO PUKE. I HAVE 22MIL SP IN TANKS. YOU HAVE AT THE MOST WHAT 5MIL SP IN YOUR LITTLE AV? AND THAT COMES WITH ADVATAGES OF BEING ABLE TO DO INFANTRY CRAP. Quote: Dropsuit Command III Minmatar Heavy Dropsuits III Minmatar Commando V Dropsuit Upgrades IV Dropsuit Biotic Upgrades V Dropsuit Armor Upgrades V Armor Plating V Armor Repairing V Dropsuit Shield Upgrades V Shield Extension V Dropsuit Core Upgrades V Dropsuit Engineering V Nanocircuitry V Dropsuit Electronics V Range Amplification V Profile Dampening V Precision Enhancement V Weaponry V Swarm Launcher Operation V Swarm Launcher Proficiency V Swarm Launcher Ammo Capacity V Swarm Launcher Rapid Reload V Swarm Launcher Fitting Optimization V [Secondary Weapon] Operation V [Secondary Weapon] Proficiency III [Secondary Weapon] Capacity V Total: 21,646,220 SP Congratulations, you've spent a whooping .35m more SP than a Semi-Maxed out Swarm Launcher user does. Sadly, I'm going to redact my congrats to you, as that amount is miniscule. Shooter Somewhere wrote: THATS LIKE SAYING MY MILTA SUITE WITH A BASIC RAIL RIFLE SHOULD KILL YOUR FULL PROTO HEAVY 1V1 AT LEAST ONCE IN A SINGLE GAME. A 5m SP investment is about 1/4 the investment of 22m SP, so it'd actually be: Quote: "That's like saying my STD Suit with an ADV Rifle should kill your PRO Sentinel at least once in a single game" Of course however, someone with a RR should be able to 1v1 a PRO Sentinel (or anything for that matter) if: The RR user is better than the Sentinel The Sentinel is lead into a trap by the RR user The Sentinel is inside the RR's Optimal Range The Sentinel is outside their Optimal Range However, I do thank you for revealing your motive, which apparently seems to be removing the HAV's ability to be killed at least once a match (see above). Now, I no longer need (nor should) take you seriously. Assuming I did in the first place, of course. Look another AV thinking he knows wtf hes talking about. My stance on AV HAD AND ALWAYS WILL be YOU CANT DO IT BY YOURSELF. I have a 22mil SP tank on an objective I should not get taken out by one dude with some swarms on a hill above me. You don't like it? Get a tank. (Oh wait no you want it to be COD mode nvm) HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 4131	Posted - 2014.09.16 00:20:00 - [37] - Quote Wait... This is a tanker thread asking for tank buffs? This is why a lot of people don't like tankers, because of this sense of entitlement. As if tanks are in a bad place right now and need some help. You can always tell a Millford Minja
Crimson ShieId Psygod9 858	Posted - 2014.09.16 01:58:00 - [38] - Quote Quote: Look another AV thinking he knows wtf hes talking about. My stance on AV HAD AND ALWAYS WILL be YOU CANT DO IT BY YOURSELF. I have a 22mil SP tank on an objective I should not get taken out by one dude with some swarms on a hill above me. You don't like it? Get a tank. (Oh wait no you want it to be COD mode nvm) If the tanker is an idiot, then yes, one skilled AV'er should be able to kill a tank by themselves. If that AV'er gets the drop (RE's) on the tank, then they should be able to solo it. And that's pretty much how it is right now. The only way a single person is going to kill a tank is if A: The above, the tanker is a complete moron. This is generally the case with most militia tanks, or B: The AV'er gets on top of a building or mountain and the tank has no cover to get to. This is rare, as most of the maps have some sort of hill or structure to use for cover. Just because you have a lot of SP invested in something doesn't mean you shouldn't get taken out by someone with less SP than you or someone who has the advantage in positioning over you. Proto suit users can't make that argument. Even the best suit can be killed by militia if the user makes a mistake or just doesn't pay attention. While I don't actually agree with it, if you're going to say "You should be able to solo tanks period" then the scales should balance both ways. You should be able to drive a vehicle solo if it takes multiple people to kill them. One person should be driving while the other shoots. Nova Knives are best sidearm.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 13288	Posted - 2014.09.16 02:05:00 - [39] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: Wait... This is a tanker thread asking for tank buffs? This is why a lot of people don't like tankers, because of this sense of entitlement. As if tanks are in a bad place right now and need some help. Tanks are in the bad place right now. Not Efficiency wise..... but in the sense that they are poor renditions of tanks with no role, no in depth skill tree, no technical skill as all modules are essentially passive, and do not function as proper armoured vehicles. They do not bear massive fire power and ordinance such as no infantry man would be able to carry alone, they do not have mass, do not accelerate slowly, not not skid to a halt when stopping. Hell they can fire away on the move. Their turrets do not fire single shot AOE Shells with incredible AV potential...... their turrets do not track slowly, do not fire more than 500m...... Yet another reason I walked away from Dust 514 and right into Battlefield 4 and War Thunder Ground Forces. Better renditions of tanks, better gameplay. "We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 85	Posted - 2014.09.16 02:30:00 - [40] - Quote Shooter Somewhere wrote: This is of course coming from someone who is AV. lol I am resisting the urge to be an ass and the only AV weapons I have are a militia forge gun, the standard AV grenade and standard level 1 Swarm Launcher which I haven't touched. And the only thing I've killed with those weapons are LAV, I usually end up running to a rail gun turret when I see a tank and it usually takes 3 or 4 shots to kill a tank (assuming it doesn't use any mods)

Atiim 12180	Posted - 2014.09.16 02:41:00 - [41] - Quote It disappoints me that this thread will never produce anything constructive, which is a shame because I'd like to see what Pilots can do when left to collaborate to themselves. Maybe I'll get to see that someday... Shooter Somewhere wrote: Look another AV thinking he knows wtf hes talking about. My stance on AV HAD AND ALWAYS WILL be YOU CANT DO IT BY YOURSELF. As seen by my breakdown of your argument, I indeed "know wtf I'm talking about". Though if you feel as if I don't, I'd be very interested to hear why in a well layed out, and constructive manner. As for your stance, it means nothing. You can feel whatever you want, your emotions can be whatever you wish, but it won't change the fact that (1x GëÑ 2y) is bad for gameplay, and creates a situation where X is always better than Y, leaving no reason to use X in the first place, in turn: Removes the purpose of X's existence. Removes the diversity DUST is supposed to have, as you need Y to remain competitive. Though I challenge you, to give me one period in time (barring Uprising 1.7 - Hotfix Bravo) where HAVs, ADSs, or any vehicle couldn't be soloed by a reasonably skilled AVer. Something I do need to point out however, is your blaring hypocrisy. You claim that AVers shouldn't be allowed to solo you, as you have invested a large amount of SP (which is another idiotic argument), but you want to solo AVers who've invested an equal or proportional amount of SP. "Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me". <--- Am I right? Shooter Somewhere wrote: I have a 22mil SP tank on an objective I should not get taken out by one dude with some swarms on a hill above me. You don't like it? Get a tank. (Oh wait no you want it to be COD mode nvm) If you're on an objective, and you're exposed, then I fail to see why you shouldn't get taken out by someone who brought a counter to your role. Perhaps if you weren't camping the objective and being stationary, you wouldn't have issues with a Swarm Launcher user. I want "COD Mode"? Surely you can refute my arguments with more than a Strawman, right? The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1752	Posted - 2014.09.16 04:24:00 - [42] - Quote Atiim wrote: It disappoints me that this thread will never produce anything constructive, which is a shame because I'd like to see what Pilots can do when left to collaborate to themselves. Maybe I'll get to see that someday... Shooter Somewhere wrote: Look another AV thinking he knows wtf hes talking about. My stance on AV HAD AND ALWAYS WILL be YOU CANT DO IT BY YOURSELF. As seen by my breakdown of your argument, I indeed "know wtf I'm talking about". Though if you feel as if I don't, I'd be very interested to hear why in a well layed out, and constructive manner. As for your stance, it means nothing. You can feel whatever you want, your emotions can be whatever you wish, but it won't change the fact that (1x GëÑ 2y) is bad for gameplay, and creates a situation where X is always better than Y, leaving no reason to use X in the first place, in turn: Removes the purpose of X's existence. Removes the diversity DUST is supposed to have, as you need Y to remain competitive. Though I challenge you, to give me one period in time (barring Uprising 1.7 - Hotfix Bravo) where HAVs, ADSs, or any vehicle couldn't be soloed by a reasonably skilled AVer. Something I do need to point out however, is your blaring hypocrisy. You claim that AVers shouldn't be allowed to solo you, as you have invested a large amount of SP (which is another idiotic argument), but you want to solo AVers who've invested an equal or proportional amount of SP. "Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me". <--- Am I right? Shooter Somewhere wrote: I have a 22mil SP tank on an objective I should not get taken out by one dude with some swarms on a hill above me. You don't like it? Get a tank. (Oh wait no you want it to be COD mode nvm) If you're on an objective, and you're exposed, then I fail to see why you shouldn't get taken out by someone who brought a counter to your role. Perhaps if you weren't camping the objective and being stationary, you wouldn't have issues with a Swarm Launcher user. I want "COD Mode"? Surely you can refute my arguments with more than a Strawman, right? I want it to take 2-3 AV in coordination to kill my tank. But I want it to take 2-3 people, in the form of small turrets, to be able to kill infantry. Tanks need a massive buff in HP and regen, a huge nerf to acceleration, and be unable to reliably kill infantry unless fitted with small turrets. Small turrets should be mandatory on tanks in the sense that it is suicide to not have them. This is balance. Tankers can survive multiple AV firing on them, but be unable to retaliate without fitting small turrets. Shoot Scout with yes.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2788	Posted - 2014.09.16 06:26:00 - [43] - Quote I'm detecting large concentrations of the element butthurtium 231. We need to get the collectors in here ASAP.
TheEnd762 SVER True Blood Public.Disorder. 627	Posted - 2014.09.16 08:34:00 - [44] - Quote I love it when tankers claim jihad jeeps and solo AVers "break immersion". What standard of immersion is this drawing from? It can't be reality, because in reality, guerrilla tactics like suicide bombers, and solo AV weapons like TOW and Javelin missiles are the number ONE killers of even the best armored vehicles. So the only "immersion" that is being broken is their entitled ideal world where tanks can roll around with reckless abandon, shrugging off all but the most high level, concentrated AV efforts, while mowing down infantry like some kind of god-possessed combine harvester.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2789	Posted - 2014.09.16 09:49:00 - [45] - Quote TheEnd762 wrote: I love it when tankers claim jihad jeeps and solo AVers "break immersion". What standard of immersion is this drawing from? It can't be reality, because in reality, guerrilla tactics like suicide bombers, and solo AV weapons like TOW and Javelin missiles are the number ONE killers of even the best armored vehicles. So the only "immersion" that is being broken is their entitled ideal world where tanks can roll around with reckless abandon, shrugging off all but the most high level, concentrated AV efforts, while mowing down infantry like some kind of god-possessed combine harvester. /thread. Care to try again with an eye for balance instead of outrage that filthy infantry can halt your rampages?
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 3523	Posted - 2014.09.16 10:10:00 - [46] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: JLAVs are a valid tactic. The only way to get killed by one is if you aren't paying attention (incompetence), or if the LAV Pilot manages to out-smart and/or out-maneuver you, in which case he's simply better than you. All you have to do to stop them is either activate a NOS and then thrust in the opposite direction, causing them to miss their mark and allows you to destroy them; or shoot the REs and blow up the LAV. Heck, you can even shoot them out of the driver seat if you have a Missile Turret (AT-201 or better). As for rooftop campers, if Pilots weren't able to zoom in and insta-kill AVers with a Boundless or Six Kin HMG, you'd see far less tower camping. Though the short range of a SL (175m) makes tower camping rather redundant in most situations. Though if an AVer catches you by surprise, you should suffer the consequences. You know that's not true...... but hell what does it matter at this point. Only reason I hate JLAV's is because it utterly destroys immersion and spits on the values of New Eden on which this was designed. What value? HTFU? I'd say devising a method to circumvent the OP tanks of what was 1.8 follows this one? Don't fly what you can't afford? Works here again. Welcome to New Eden MF! I'd say this almost perfectly describes the JLAV. Also which appears more immersion breaking out of the following options. An Immortal Mercenary sacrificing himself in giant ball of death to eliminate a tank? OR A tank out running Missiles and Jeeps? OR Infantry units standing in the open 'chop-strafing' against each other? 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.. 3523	Posted - 2014.09.16 10:17:00 - [47] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Atiim wrote: It disappoints me that this thread will never produce anything constructive, which is a shame because I'd like to see what Pilots can do when left to collaborate to themselves. Maybe I'll get to see that someday... Shooter Somewhere wrote: Look another AV thinking he knows wtf hes talking about. My stance on AV HAD AND ALWAYS WILL be YOU CANT DO IT BY YOURSELF. As seen by my breakdown of your argument, I indeed "know wtf I'm talking about". Though if you feel as if I don't, I'd be very interested to hear why in a well layed out, and constructive manner. As for your stance, it means nothing. You can feel whatever you want, your emotions can be whatever you wish, but it won't change the fact that (1x GëÑ 2y) is bad for gameplay, and creates a situation where X is always better than Y, leaving no reason to use X in the first place, in turn: Removes the purpose of X's existence. Removes the diversity DUST is supposed to have, as you need Y to remain competitive. Though I challenge you, to give me one period in time (barring Uprising 1.7 - Hotfix Bravo) where HAVs, ADSs, or any vehicle couldn't be soloed by a reasonably skilled AVer. Something I do need to point out however, is your blaring hypocrisy. You claim that AVers shouldn't be allowed to solo you, as you have invested a large amount of SP (which is another idiotic argument), but you want to solo AVers who've invested an equal or proportional amount of SP. "Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me". <--- Am I right? Shooter Somewhere wrote: I have a 22mil SP tank on an objective I should not get taken out by one dude with some swarms on a hill above me. You don't like it? Get a tank. (Oh wait no you want it to be COD mode nvm) If you're on an objective, and you're exposed, then I fail to see why you shouldn't get taken out by someone who brought a counter to your role. Perhaps if you weren't camping the objective and being stationary, you wouldn't have issues with a Swarm Launcher user. I want "COD Mode"? Surely you can refute my arguments with more than a Strawman, right? I want it to take 2-3 AV in coordination to kill my tank. But I want it to take 2-3 people, in the form of small turrets, to be able to kill infantry. Tanks need a massive buff in HP and regen, a huge nerf to acceleration, and be unable to reliably kill infantry unless fitted with small turrets. Small turrets should be mandatory on tanks in the sense that it is suicide to not have them. This is balance. Tankers can survive multiple AV firing on them, but be unable to retaliate without fitting small turrets. If you have good gunners it DOES take 2+ people to take out your tank. A top gunner will mean as an AVer I need to hang back and move from vantage point to vantage point. I can't approach close enough to RE's or Packed AV grenades, which are the main source of an AVers soloing power. The only way your HAV is dying to 1 guy with a Swarm Launcher is if your running a glass cannon fit. However I feel obligied to tell you, my 3800 Armour Dropship can survive 4 volleys. What are you doing whilst your getting hit? 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.. 3523	Posted - 2014.09.16 10:25:00 - [48] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: As a pilot of both tanks and ADS, AV should not "gtfo" they are an integral part of the equation. However, I feel both groups are in this "if we give an inch, they'll take a mile" mentality. To Atiim: that amount of SP does give you a semi-maxed out swarmer. However, I ask you to look at your list once again. Quote: GÇó Dropsuit Command III GÇó Minmatar Heavy Dropsuits III GÇó Minmatar Commando V GÇó Dropsuit Upgrades IV GÇó Dropsuit Biotic Upgrades V GÇó Dropsuit Armor Upgrades V GÇó Armor Plating V GÇó Armor Repairing V GÇó Dropsuit Shield Upgrades V GÇó Shield Extension V GÇó Dropsuit Core Upgrades V GÇó Dropsuit Engineering V GÇó Nanocircuitry V GÇó Dropsuit Electronics V GÇó Range Amplification V GÇó Profile Dampening V GÇó Precision Enhancement V GÇó Weaponry V GÇó Swarm Launcher Operation V GÇó Swarm Launcher Proficiency V GÇó Swarm Launcher Ammo Capacity V GÇó Swarm Launcher Rapid Reload V GÇó Swarm Launcher Fitting Optimization V GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Operation V GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Proficiency III GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Capacity V Total: 21,646,220 SP All skills I have marked give you a bonus beyond unlocking tiers. For instance, Profile Dampening, in addition to unlocking tiers of dampener, also decreases your suit profilie on any suit you wear. There are a mere handful of skills that confer a bonus to vehicles. We do not even have a Vehicle Electronic/Engineering skill to give us more PG/CPU. This is part of the frustration vehicles feel. We cannot even begin to fit our vehicles as we wish, yet more nerfs to them are called for. Armour Fitting Optimisation Armour Repair Modules Armour Composition Shield Fitting Optimisation Core Engine Management Core Energy Distrubution Just to name a few. I'd be all for giving you a little more fitting power if that's what you want, provided you take a hit to some of ykur modules to ensure they aren't spammed. 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
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2137	Posted - 2014.09.16 11:04:00 - [49] - Quote TheEnd762 wrote: I love it when tankers claim jihad jeeps and solo AVers "break immersion". What standard of immersion is this drawing from? It can't be reality, because in reality, guerrilla tactics like suicide bombers, and solo AV weapons like TOW and Javelin missiles are the number ONE killers of even the best armored vehicles. So the only "immersion" that is being broken is their entitled ideal world where tanks can roll around with reckless abandon, shrugging off all but the most high level, concentrated AV efforts, while mowing down infantry like some kind of god-possessed combine harvester. Vehicles not being crew served is the one immersion breaking thing about vehicles that totally breaks it for me. True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: You should really calm down. I have seen the same entitled attitude regarding vehicles before and it was just as laughable then too. Vehicles are OP if they are meant for single user operation. If they were crew served, it would be a different story. As for you spending so many SP on them, I would say that was your choice, though why you want to be a vehicle purist in an FPS, IDK why you chose dust when other games have implemented vehicles better. If you did it so you could own infantry from a "safe" place, why not go kick puppies instead? I can understand the point of view but it simply is not possible to make an enjoyable aspect of the game if you require a minimum of two other players to operate (tank crews normals at 3+ if I remember correctly). It simply isn't possible to crew them, especially competitively, it isn't possible to have the co-ordination to function as a useful piece of machinery, and its not possible to make it and enjoyable aspect of gameplay with 3+ players required to operate a single vehicle. Plus tanks in Dust don't even work or feel like proper tanks. They have no weight, they move and fire on the fly, their cannon do not have AOE or powerful recoil, they do not one shot infantry, they do not have 1000+ m ranges like they should..... Tanks in Dust are pitiful. Their modules are in such a state of disrepair, their pilots filled with apathy and loathing for a simplified system that **** over skill and well invested players to ** away on a bunch of players who picked up a simplified system of OP monsters (1.7-1.8) and thought themselves good at what they did. Were is the Mass? The slow Acceleration? The Skilled active module activation? Where is the powerful ordinance that no other class/ role in the game to can bring to the battlefield? Where's the goddamned recoil! <3 you True (despite the fact that you are Imperialist Amarr trash). I truly hope that (if not in Dust) in Legion we get vehicles just as you've described them, Crew Served and all. We need vehicles to be in a better way than they ever have been in Dust. Team Assets that help propel their side to victory only though internal coordination and teamwork. "Heres the deal, in the 40s there was Normandy today you got punks, some need culling real bad." --Truth Logi for Hire
Atiim 12186	Posted - 2014.09.16 11:18:00 - [50] - Quote I just realized that I forgot to put Handheld Weapon Upgrades on my list. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2792	Posted - 2014.09.16 11:53:00 - [51] - Quote One person running a tank is just as believable as one jerkass in a pod controlling, micromanagingvand operating every fubction on a seventeen kilometer titan while navigating it, firing the guns simultaneoudly while dropping a doomsdat on the second dreadnought that just jumped in and locked into siege mode. Comparatively running a tank would be trivial. Jump in, jack into the interface, light the reactor plant and go. The tech for neural interfacing is part of the lore. Thats why you can have the driver be the primary gunner. Secondary gunners exist because humans can only multitask so much in an FPS. In EVE lore excep for cursory functionality the crew is largely extraneous once the shooting starts. And none of those crew are players.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2792	Posted - 2014.09.16 11:57:00 - [52] - Quote Oh and Monkey MAC is entirely correct. Party tanks are much harder to kill without pulling a double backshot. Being in the front arc of the tank with two secondary gunners is pretty much a dropsuit writeoff. Respawn and attack from a different angle.
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 111	Posted - 2014.09.16 12:09:00 - [53] - Quote Atiim wrote: It disappoints me that this thread will never produce anything constructive, which is a shame because I'd like to see what Pilots can do when left to collaborate to themselves. Maybe I'll get to see that someday... Shooter Somewhere wrote: Look another AV thinking he knows wtf hes talking about. My stance on AV HAD AND ALWAYS WILL be YOU CANT DO IT BY YOURSELF. As seen by my breakdown of your argument, I indeed "know wtf I'm talking about". Though if you feel as if I don't, I'd be very interested to hear why in a well layed out, and constructive manner. As for your stance, it means nothing. You can feel whatever you want, your emotions can be whatever you wish, but it won't change the fact that (1x GëÑ 2y) is bad for gameplay, and creates a situation where X is always better than Y, leaving no reason to use X in the first place, in turn: Removes the purpose of X's existence. Removes the diversity DUST is supposed to have, as you need Y to remain competitive. Though I challenge you, to give me one period in time (barring Uprising 1.7 - Hotfix Bravo) where HAVs, ADSs, or any vehicle couldn't be soloed by a reasonably skilled AVer. Something I do need to point out however, is your blaring hypocrisy. You claim that AVers shouldn't be allowed to solo you, as you have invested a large amount of SP (which is another idiotic argument), but you want to solo AVers who've invested an equal or proportional amount of SP. "Teamwork for thee, but no teamwork for me". <--- Am I right? Shooter Somewhere wrote: I have a 22mil SP tank on an objective I should not get taken out by one dude with some swarms on a hill above me. You don't like it? Get a tank. (Oh wait no you want it to be COD mode nvm) If you're on an objective, and you're exposed, then I fail to see why you shouldn't get taken out by someone who brought a counter to your role. Perhaps if you weren't camping the objective and being stationary, you wouldn't have issues with a Swarm Launcher user. I want "COD Mode"? Surely you can refute my arguments with more than a Strawman, right? Arguing with AV is painful but im going to do it anyways because your a piece of **. You listed off EVERY POSSIBLE THING you going put into an AV role. Including stupid crap like ammo compacity for side arms and the swram launcher its self, all the Ewar skills you even claimed that maxing fitting opmt for sidearm and the swarm itself is also a must? are you a noob or just stupid? (oh and lets not forget basic to adv nano hives are not enough for you you HAVE TO HAVE PROTO.) Lol your a laugh. Now lets just assume a tanker Puts V in everything it needs. You know what I wont even go into that because I still have 5mil SP that need to go into vehicle upgrades alone not counting command or turrets which 5mil SP is more than enough SP to win again any Vehicle using AV and still stomp and infantry and ill show you soon enough. SO ON YOU LIFE. Do not come on here and Say 1 AV is worth 1 tank in this game or an any other because its bs and I have a feeling echo is going to be a really rude wake up call for you AV boys and your COD play style. Small Rail ROF - reduced on purpose, both on landed dropships, ADS rapid fire and long range LAV sniper platforms Rail efficiency (damage profile), reduced against infantry, increased against vehicles - intended Both damage profile changes apply to all vehicles and infantry, not just dropships Large blaster turret - reduced efficiency against infantry - intended Large Rail turret - stop console pummeling from a range, also the ease of which Large turrets (Blasters and Rails) can remove Proximity Mines with splash We need to stop vehicles overall, murdering infantry wholesale unless you dedicate your vehicle towards that. If you do so, you also must bring your vehicle closer so it is at risk, i.e. small blasters. Risk free playstyles are going the way of the dodo. We will look at LAV and HAV shield recharge delay and how it works with small blasters, maybe reduce it on LAV's specifically. We are also reducing small turret ISK prices across the board by 30%. I would like to revisit HAV engagement cycles in the future, especially if we try and bring back vehicle variants.** That includes damage, behaviour and range for all Large Turrets, still just tweaks but a holistic review. Second, we will look at aiming more upwards and downwards, and also look into the difference between the turrets and racial hulls themselves in that regard. An HAV shuold have a way to defend against dropships, I just wish we could have a swarm launcher small turret Proper placement of small turrets based on the fitting screen is also something on the backlog. Rotation speed and proficiency skills is also something we need to take a look at. Unmanned direction is killing me, it never seems to line up how I want it, sometimes I even try to get into the turret, line it up, and then drive into battle and hope it is looking in the right way. and this was all in CCP rattati words it was far in comments of some post though so not to make people say it. I hope you like what you see Mr. Cod AVer. (I suggest you go make a post refreshing every ones minds on tanker hate. You know you wouldn't want us having a role in the game again would you?) HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 4905	Posted - 2014.09.16 12:36:00 - [54] - Quote Shooter Somewhere wrote: Arguing with AV is painful ... Why do you think that is? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 111	Posted - 2014.09.16 13:52:00 - [55] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Shooter Somewhere wrote: Arguing with AV is painful ... Why do you think that is? Because they have never been a tanker or have used them before. Unlike them I know what its like to be in their shoes because I have an ALT in the best form of AV alive. Ill be posting a video of it after the event. I have been killed by tanks on ground just as much as you guys have and its nothing to blow up the forms about. You were caught in the open out of your redline what did you expect? stay on the point instead of trying to hunt kills for your kdr. Or do you want this game to be COD514? HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo
MarasdF Loron Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1061	Posted - 2014.09.16 13:59:00 - [56] - Quote I want pre-1.7 vehicles, modules, variations and AV back. And then balancing done from there. And some of the good new stuff implemented to those old things as well. I don't want Jihad LAVs gone.
Tebu Gan Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1200	Posted - 2014.09.16 18:39:00 - [57] - Quote I think I'm done til they actually address that making tanks AV focused only removes them from the game. Just started destiny, MUCH more fun, and the PVP isn't terribly skewed like it is with dust. I sure hope they wise up, but I have serious doubts they will. At the very least, if they are going to ruin tanking like they intend to do, at the very least reduce the price to match infantry on vehicles. Anyways till then, see ya dust, might sign on from time to time but all the people I know have already moved on over to destiny. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2139	Posted - 2014.09.16 19:15:00 - [58] - Quote If you want my honest opinion, vehicles as they currently exist in Dust should be scrapped entirely and reworked from the ground up. Do one vehicle class at a time and release them for all four races at the same time. Start with LAVs, get all of them to a nice balance (including small turrets for all four races and all applicable mods as well), then move forward to MAVs, rinse and repeat until we have all the vehicles. After a point it will become less work since you will just need to scale certain mods appropriately (all that would be needed is to determine how much more powerful and costly larger versions of mods developed earlier need to be). In the interim, vehicle operators can play as infantry or wait until their vehicle of choice is reintroduced. "Heres the deal, in the 40s there was Normandy today you got punks, some need culling real bad." --Truth Logi for Hire
Heimdallr69 Nyain San General Tso's Alliance 3578	Posted - 2014.09.16 19:31:00 - [59] - Quote Jihad is my only complaint.. Something free shouldn't be able to take out a 500k isk tank in a second. Especially with how good AV is now. Removed inappropriate content - CCP Logibro
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 116	Posted - 2014.09.16 20:43:00 - [60] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: I think I'm done til they actually address that making tanks AV focused only removes them from the game. Just started destiny, MUCH more fun, and the PVP isn't terribly skewed like it is with dust. I sure hope they wise up, but I have serious doubts they will. At the very least, if they are going to ruin tanking like they intend to do, at the very least reduce the price to match infantry on vehicles. Anyways till then, see ya dust, might sign on from time to time but all the people I know have already moved on over to destiny. R.I.P tebu gan. These hotfixes have claimed another fine tanker. Btw im going to like you so it messes up your gorgeous 1200 HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 13302	Posted - 2014.09.16 20:52:00 - [61] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: True Adamance wrote: Atiim wrote: JLAVs are a valid tactic. The only way to get killed by one is if you aren't paying attention (incompetence), or if the LAV Pilot manages to out-smart and/or out-maneuver you, in which case he's simply better than you. All you have to do to stop them is either activate a NOS and then thrust in the opposite direction, causing them to miss their mark and allows you to destroy them; or shoot the REs and blow up the LAV. Heck, you can even shoot them out of the driver seat if you have a Missile Turret (AT-201 or better). As for rooftop campers, if Pilots weren't able to zoom in and insta-kill AVers with a Boundless or Six Kin HMG, you'd see far less tower camping. Though the short range of a SL (175m) makes tower camping rather redundant in most situations. Though if an AVer catches you by surprise, you should suffer the consequences. You know that's not true...... but hell what does it matter at this point. Only reason I hate JLAV's is because it utterly destroys immersion and spits on the values of New Eden on which this was designed. What value? HTFU? I'd say devising a method to circumvent the OP tanks of what was 1.8 follows this one? Don't fly what you can't afford? Works here again. Welcome to New Eden MF! I'd say this almost perfectly describes the JLAV. Also which appears more immersion breaking out of the following options. An Immortal Mercenary sacrificing himself in giant ball of death to eliminate a tank? OR A tank out running Missiles and Jeeps? OR Infantry units standing in the open 'chop-strafing' against each other? As I often say it should not require one broken mechanic to counter another broken mechanic. Lets be honest here I've never claimed I was a good tanker through the 1.8 massacre of quality tankers...... worst period of balance in the game. However I stand by my statement. Personally I found JLAVS to be a **** poor casualised mechanic out of battlefield.... I was not against AV being buffed to make tanking more risky, in fact that and a combination of ISK increases for HAV across the board would do leaps and bounds to make tanking more enjoyable for me personally. But I'd rather be taken down by a forger, swarmer, plasma cannonier, than a douche in a complete in his BPO suit, lav, side arm, with remotes. It's poor design. Let proper AV do its job and not resort to poor mechanics like this. But lets be honest if I could strap a couple of those RE to a tormentor all you'd see me doing in EVE is suicidal battleships and Cruisers for an instant kill. "We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 4149	Posted - 2014.09.16 21:09:00 - [62] - Quote @ True I agree with your perspective overall. It seems balanced and reasonable. It assumes that there should be a role for both tanks AND AV. However, I do not agree with the perspective of the OP that tanks are weak and need to be made stronger, and that AV is just too tough. I would much rather see a thread that addresses the real issues instead of pretending that poor old tankers need a buffing to contend with the mean old AV. You can always tell a Millford Minja
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2139	Posted - 2014.09.16 21:49:00 - [63] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: One person running a tank is just as believable as one jerkass in a pod controlling, micromanagingvand operating every fubction on a seventeen kilometer titan while navigating it, firing the guns simultaneoudly while dropping a doomsdat on the second dreadnought that just jumped in and locked into siege mode. Comparatively running a tank would be trivial. Jump in, jack into the interface, light the reactor plant and go. The tech for neural interfacing is part of the lore. Thats why you can have the driver be the primary gunner. Secondary gunners exist because humans can only multitask so much in an FPS. In EVE lore excep for cursory functionality the crew is largely extraneous once the shooting starts. And none of those crew are players. The pod facilitates all of that and while the pod might be able to fit into an HAV, what about everything that allows the pod to interface with the ship proper? I'd imagine that there is a whole lot of stuff outside the pod but still inside the ship that allows the pod to perform its technomancy. In fact, I'd argue that the HAV is prohibitively small for pod tech to work. "Heres the deal, in the 40s there was Normandy today you got punks, some need culling real bad." --Truth Logi for Hire
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 13303	Posted - 2014.09.16 22:11:00 - [64] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: @ True I agree with your perspective overall. It seems balanced and reasonable. It assumes that there should be a role for both tanks AND AV. However, I do not agree with the perspective of the OP that tanks are weak and need to be made stronger, and that AV is just too tough. I would much rather see a thread that addresses the real issues instead of pretending that poor old tankers need a buffing to contend with the mean old AV. AV is.... or was pretty punchy when I left the game..... personally I am more for single shot high alpha AV (MOAR ROCKETRY/ Stinger type weapons)...... while I do appreciate DPS AV has its role...... I just don't see the point of it when alpha trumps it all. Tbh I just want to see a tank that is a tank. Not these skeet shooting light assault platforms that we have now. What is the purpose of a tank? To carry ordinance and other weapons bigger and more devastating than any weapon infantry mean to operate while remaining mobile. What is the side effects of a such a weapons system. Mass, time to target, inability to target small mobile units, etc. What we have now are not tanks. "We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2799	Posted - 2014.09.16 22:29:00 - [65] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: One person running a tank is just as believable as one jerkass in a pod controlling, micromanagingvand operating every fubction on a seventeen kilometer titan while navigating it, firing the guns simultaneoudly while dropping a doomsdat on the second dreadnought that just jumped in and locked into siege mode. Comparatively running a tank would be trivial. Jump in, jack into the interface, light the reactor plant and go. The tech for neural interfacing is part of the lore. Thats why you can have the driver be the primary gunner. Secondary gunners exist because humans can only multitask so much in an FPS. In EVE lore excep for cursory functionality the crew is largely extraneous once the shooting starts. And none of those crew are players. The pod facilitates all of that and while the pod might be able to fit into an HAV, what about everything that allows the pod to interface with the ship proper? I'd imagine that there is a whole lot of stuff outside the pod but still inside the ship that allows the pod to perform its technomancy. In fact, I'd argue that the HAV is prohibitively small for pod tech to work. I'd arge that comparatively a tank is easier to control and thusly not in need of a full pod. Think more "rigger" in shadowrun.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2799	Posted - 2014.09.16 22:31:00 - [66] - Quote True Adamance wrote: One Eyed King wrote: @ True I agree with your perspective overall. It seems balanced and reasonable. It assumes that there should be a role for both tanks AND AV. However, I do not agree with the perspective of the OP that tanks are weak and need to be made stronger, and that AV is just too tough. I would much rather see a thread that addresses the real issues instead of pretending that poor old tankers need a buffing to contend with the mean old AV. AV is.... or was pretty punchy when I left the game..... personally I am more for single shot high alpha AV (MOAR ROCKETRY/ Stinger type weapons)...... while I do appreciate DPS AV has its role...... I just don't see the point of it when alpha trumps it all. Tbh I just want to see a tank that is a tank. Not these skeet shooting light assault platforms that we have now. What is the purpose of a tank? To carry ordinance and other weapons bigger and more devastating than any weapon infantry mean to operate while remaining mobile. What is the side effects of a such a weapons system. Mass, time to target, inability to target small mobile units, etc. What we have now are not tanks. I miss marauders too. And I'm pretty sure Shooter's going to have an aneurysm trying to make a post that is coherent and founded in logic. Totally the only reason this thread is worth looking at.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2799	Posted - 2014.09.16 22:34:00 - [67] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: @ True I agree with your perspective overall. It seems balanced and reasonable. It assumes that there should be a role for both tanks AND AV. However, I do not agree with the perspective of the OP that tanks are weak and need to be made stronger, and that AV is just too tough. I would much rather see a thread that addresses the real issues instead of pretending that poor old tankers need a buffing to contend with the mean old AV. Mean old AV wants Chromosome AV/V with marauders again. I swear to God popping tanks was fun. Someone dropped a Mad and I'd go berserk till I killed it, popping militia tanks and poorly fit mid-grade tanks like after-dinner mints while hunting the real prize: A Marauder with a pilot with higher-than-lukewarm IQ.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 13304	Posted - 2014.09.16 22:40:00 - [68] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: One Eyed King wrote: @ True I agree with your perspective overall. It seems balanced and reasonable. It assumes that there should be a role for both tanks AND AV. However, I do not agree with the perspective of the OP that tanks are weak and need to be made stronger, and that AV is just too tough. I would much rather see a thread that addresses the real issues instead of pretending that poor old tankers need a buffing to contend with the mean old AV. Mean old AV wants Chromosome AV/V with marauders again. I swear to God popping tanks was fun. Someone dropped a Mad and I'd go berserk till I killed it, popping militia tanks and poorly fit mid-grade tanks like after-dinner mints while hunting the real prize: A Marauder with a pilot with higher-than-lukewarm IQ. Yeah it was. I was only using Standard Swarms back then and trying to Pop as Sagaris was hell...... but the feeling of destroying one was actively visible throughout the entire team of players. It was exquisite. "We were commanded to burn the system...We did. I mourn the loss of the innocents caught in our fires" -Kador Ouryon
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1765	Posted - 2014.09.17 01:06:00 - [69] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: As a pilot of both tanks and ADS, AV should not "gtfo" they are an integral part of the equation. However, I feel both groups are in this "if we give an inch, they'll take a mile" mentality. To Atiim: that amount of SP does give you a semi-maxed out swarmer. However, I ask you to look at your list once again. Quote: GÇó Dropsuit Command III GÇó Minmatar Heavy Dropsuits III GÇó Minmatar Commando V GÇó Dropsuit Upgrades IV GÇó Dropsuit Biotic Upgrades V GÇó Dropsuit Armor Upgrades V GÇó Armor Plating V GÇó Armor Repairing V GÇó Dropsuit Shield Upgrades V GÇó Shield Extension V GÇó Dropsuit Core Upgrades V GÇó Dropsuit Engineering V GÇó Nanocircuitry V GÇó Dropsuit Electronics V GÇó Range Amplification V GÇó Profile Dampening V GÇó Precision Enhancement V GÇó Weaponry V GÇó Swarm Launcher Operation V GÇó Swarm Launcher Proficiency V GÇó Swarm Launcher Ammo Capacity V GÇó Swarm Launcher Rapid Reload V GÇó Swarm Launcher Fitting Optimization V GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Operation V GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Proficiency III GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Capacity V Total: 21,646,220 SP All skills I have marked give you a bonus beyond unlocking tiers. For instance, Profile Dampening, in addition to unlocking tiers of dampener, also decreases your suit profilie on any suit you wear. There are a mere handful of skills that confer a bonus to vehicles. We do not even have a Vehicle Electronic/Engineering skill to give us more PG/CPU. This is part of the frustration vehicles feel. We cannot even begin to fit our vehicles as we wish, yet more nerfs to them are called for. Armour Fitting Optimisation Armour Repair Modules Armour Composition Shield Fitting Optimisation Core Engine Management Core Energy Distrubution Just to name a few. I'd be all for giving you a little more fitting power if that's what you want, provided you take a hit to some of ykur modules to ensure they aren't spammed. That is easily half the list. But my modules have no role, nor do my vehicles. If large turrets are supposed to be AV, then small rails need a buff to make them better at AP. But small rails are apparently AV weapons. Meanwhile, Rattati says that all large turrets are to be AV, but according to him there are non-AV tanks. This is the issue. Vehicles are just kind of... there. That's why balance is so hard, we have no purpose beyond slaying, and anything that hurts that makes our usefulness plummet. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
Shooter Somewhere Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 118	Posted - 2014.09.17 01:18:00 - [70] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: As a pilot of both tanks and ADS, AV should not "gtfo" they are an integral part of the equation. However, I feel both groups are in this "if we give an inch, they'll take a mile" mentality. To Atiim: that amount of SP does give you a semi-maxed out swarmer. However, I ask you to look at your list once again. Quote: GÇó Dropsuit Command III GÇó Minmatar Heavy Dropsuits III GÇó Minmatar Commando V GÇó Dropsuit Upgrades IV GÇó Dropsuit Biotic Upgrades V GÇó Dropsuit Armor Upgrades V GÇó Armor Plating V GÇó Armor Repairing V GÇó Dropsuit Shield Upgrades V GÇó Shield Extension V GÇó Dropsuit Core Upgrades V GÇó Dropsuit Engineering V GÇó Nanocircuitry V GÇó Dropsuit Electronics V GÇó Range Amplification V GÇó Profile Dampening V GÇó Precision Enhancement V GÇó Weaponry V GÇó Swarm Launcher Operation V GÇó Swarm Launcher Proficiency V GÇó Swarm Launcher Ammo Capacity V GÇó Swarm Launcher Rapid Reload V GÇó Swarm Launcher Fitting Optimization V GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Operation V GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Proficiency III GÇó [Secondary Weapon] Capacity V Total: 21,646,220 SP All skills I have marked give you a bonus beyond unlocking tiers. For instance, Profile Dampening, in addition to unlocking tiers of dampener, also decreases your suit profilie on any suit you wear. There are a mere handful of skills that confer a bonus to vehicles. We do not even have a Vehicle Electronic/Engineering skill to give us more PG/CPU. This is part of the frustration vehicles feel. We cannot even begin to fit our vehicles as we wish, yet more nerfs to them are called for. Armour Fitting Optimisation Armour Repair Modules Armour Composition Shield Fitting Optimisation Core Engine Management Core Energy Distrubution Just to name a few. I'd be all for giving you a little more fitting power if that's what you want, provided you take a hit to some of ykur modules to ensure they aren't spammed. That is easily half the list. But my modules have no role, nor do my vehicles. If large turrets are supposed to be AV, then small rails need a buff to make them better at AP. But small rails are apparently AV weapons. Meanwhile, Rattati says that all large turrets are to be AV, but according to him there are non-AV tanks. This is the issue. Vehicles are just kind of... there. That's why balance is so hard, we have no purpose beyond slaying, and anything that hurts that makes our usefulness plummet. Yeah... im going to max Side arm reload Side arm capacity Side arm fitting. (but wait im going to max engineering and electronics because im already having a hard time fitting all this on my proto suite) Prof dampening Prof enh Prof amp swarm reload Swarm capacity and swarm fitting Nanocictry (because basic or ADV just isn't enough to reload my swarm and sidearm) and all for what? so I can Swarm launch a tank and be sure I have enough ammo in my side arm just in case. Lol AV logic is stupid af. he claimed all those skills right there were 22mil SP? if you pit 15mil SP JUST IN RAIL TANKING. You would have a damn good rail and still have enough SP to do some proto stomping with you scouts or whatever. HEADSHOT! HEADSHOT!! HEADSHOT!!! HEADSHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=earCbU6vgAo

Vicious Minotaur 1124	Posted - 2014.09.17 01:22:00 - [71] - Quote As a AVer, you know what I want? Vehicles (all of them) to be completely redone. No half measures. No tweaking some variable or value. Rework EVERYTHING such that vehicles have an explicit role to fill, and more importantly, a reason to be fielded consistently throughout the entirety of the battle. But, that won't happen. LAVs are trash (awful design, who makes a WAR vehicle with no protection?). HAVs are in AV/AP state of limbo. DSs at least have something that resembles a role... But meaningful inter-vehicle warfare won't happen until ALL VEHICLES ARE REDONE ENTIRELY. *caps for borderline angry emphasis. I am a minotaur.
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1285	Posted - 2014.09.17 10:55:00 - [72] - Quote Jihads in. They are really a no issue and add flavor to game and - most importantly - are nowhere near OP. People would enjoy Dust a lot more if they accepted the fact that EVERYTHING is subject to change
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1285	Posted - 2014.09.17 10:56:00 - [73] - Quote True, no need for new large turrets. Small tweaks still to current ones please. People would enjoy Dust a lot more if they accepted the fact that EVERYTHING is subject to change
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1285	Posted - 2014.09.17 10:58:00 - [74] - Quote No - new tank tiers (marauders of old) meaning by all counts better models as they would create obsolete hulls no one would use out their sp training time. Yes - to new tank variationsin the future. Not yet, though, no need to rush. People would enjoy Dust a lot more if they accepted the fact that EVERYTHING is subject to change
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 3525	Posted - 2014.09.17 11:01:00 - [75] - Quote Shooter Somewhere wrote: Arguing with AV is painful but im going to do it anyways because your a piece of **. You listed off EVERY POSSIBLE THING you going put into an AV role. Including stupid crap like ammo compacity for side arms and the swram launcher its self, all the Ewar skills you even claimed that maxing fitting opmt for sidearm and the swarm itself is also a must? are you a noob or just stupid? (oh and lets not forget basic to adv nano hives are not enough for you you HAVE TO HAVE PROTO.) Lol your a laugh. Now lets just assume a tanker Puts V in everything it needs. You know what I wont even go into that because I still have 5mil SP that need to go into vehicle upgrades alone not counting command or turrets which 5mil SP is more than enough SP to win again any Vehicle using AV and still stomp and infantry and ill show you soon enough. SO ON YOU LIFE. Do not come on here and Say 1 AV is worth 1 tank in this game or an any other because its bs and I have a feeling echo is going to be a really rude for you AV boys. Snip and this was all in CCP rattati words it was far in comments of some post though so not to make people say it. I hope you like what you see Mr. Cod AVer. (I suggest you go make a post refreshing every ones minds on tanker hate. You know you wouldn't want us having a role in the game again would you?) It's clear you haven't actually done AV for a while, possibly ever. I don't know how easy you think it is but putting 50K SP just into swarms makes you a very bad AVer. As such here is the PRO AV fit I'm currently working on to combat PRO modded hulls. http://www.protofits.com/fittings/shared/0/7737 The total SP Investment is 26.8Mill SP and that isn't including other passive bonuses that would helpful to my suit. Weaponry 5 (for fitting power) Explosives 5 (for fitting power) Grenades 5 (for packed AV grenade) Demolitions 5 (for RE + PE) Light Weapon Operation 5 (for fitting power) Swarm Launcher 5 (for Primary weapon) Proficiency 5 (for Armour Damage) Fitting Optimisation 5 (for fitting power) Ammo Capacity 5 (for independence during combat) Rapid Reload 5 (for better DOT) Sidearm Weapon Operation 5 (for fitting power) Submachine Gun 5 (for secondry weapon) Profciency 5 (for additional protection) Fitting Optimisation 5 (for fitting power) Ammo Capacity 5 (for better independence during combat) Rapid Reload (to reduce chance of being caught with pants down) Weapon Modifier Operation 5 (for damage mods) Dropsuit Operation 2 (for medium suits) Amarr Dropsuits 3 (for speacilization) Amarr Logistics Operation 5 (for PRO variant suit) Dropsuit upgrades 3 (for all but biotic upgrades) Dropsuit Armour Upgrades (+25% Armour) Armour Plating 5 (for better Armour Plates) Armour Repping 5 (for better repper) Dropsuit Shield upgrades 5 (+25% Shields) Dropsuit Core Upgrades 5 (for fitting power) Dropsuit Electronics 5 (for fitting power) Dropsuit Engineering 5 (for fitting power) Nanocircutry 5 (for guaged hives - highest carrying capacity) Now even with all this I still need a PG + CPU upgrade and only have 520 eHP. I'm not even guaranteed to destroy the tank, and I'm weak to most Infantry. Now as for your statement of ' 1 AVer should never be worth the same as 1 HAV pilot', you are categorically wrong, so long as you are ONE MAN in a HAV (that is to say a HAV with no gunners) being equal to every other player on this field is all you SHOULD EVER be. Otherwise you get the 1.7 problem where every match comes down to who can get all 6 tanks on the map first. If you have 2 gunners, your force strength will increase at a faster rate than infantry. 3 men in 3 tanks should not be better than 3 men on the ground. 3 men in 1 tank should a darnsight better than 3 men on tne ground. You also seem to forget that you are meant to a force multiplier, you make troops around you fight better, an enemies aim and awerness take a huge dive when a tank is in his theatre. The amount of players I've been able to kill because their too busy kepping out the way of tanks, probably can't be counted anymore. As for the smorgasbord of Rattati comments, I as an AVer am looking forward to it, your getting some fixes which tankers have been wanting for a while, you may even be getting some variations back. But it also aims to bring HAV's in closer where, my AV is more effective and give me a better payout when your using expensive marurder class HAV's. Infact it my be yourself who gets the rude awakening when you realise Rattati still isn't going overpower vehicles for you or turn them into the Infantry Meat grinders of old. 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
Zindorak 1.U.P 910	Posted - 2014.09.17 11:56:00 - [76] - Quote make them slower Pokemon master! I suck at Tekken lol
Tebu Gan Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1200	Posted - 2014.09.17 16:41:00 - [77] - Quote Shooter Somewhere wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: I think I'm done til they actually address that making tanks AV focused only removes them from the game. Just started destiny, MUCH more fun, and the PVP isn't terribly skewed like it is with dust. I sure hope they wise up, but I have serious doubts they will. At the very least, if they are going to ruin tanking like they intend to do, at the very least reduce the price to match infantry on vehicles. Anyways till then, see ya dust, might sign on from time to time but all the people I know have already moved on over to destiny. R.I.P tebu gan. These hotfixes have claimed another fine tanker. Btw im going to like you so it messes up your gorgeous 1200 Please don't! It's so nice and even! Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Tebu Gan Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1200	Posted - 2014.09.17 16:43:00 - [78] - Quote Vicious Minotaur wrote: As a AVer, you know what I want? Vehicles (all of them) to be completely redone. No half measures. No tweaking some variable or value. Rework EVERYTHING such that vehicles have an explicit role to fill, and more importantly, a reason to be fielded consistently throughout the entirety of the battle. But, that won't happen. LAVs are trash (awful design, who makes a WAR vehicle with no protection?). HAVs are in AV/AP state of limbo. DSs at least have something that resembles a role... But meaningful inter-vehicle warfare won't happen until ALL VEHICLES ARE REDONE ENTIRELY. *caps for borderline angry emphasis. I've seen this requested twice in this thread and NO. This has already been done, and I pleaded back then to not go down that path. They don't need a complete rework, they just need to get their priorities straight. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Meee One Hello Kitty Logistics 1149	Posted - 2014.09.17 23:22:00 - [79] - Quote To all vehicle users,you are being deceived. All this "what do we want" is a waste. CCP has AV counters already. http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=365361 -Advanced Countermeasure "Countermeasures are employed to explicitly throw off munitions that are already locked-on and in pursuit of a target." Here is a full list of semi-missing modules.Some used to be in,same were created but never added. http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/inventory.php?group_id=351121 Prepared to be dumbstruck as you read through and see all the missing content. Was banned for fighting for logistics survival on 7/25/2014 02:11. Logistics will never be respected.


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.