DUST Search - Vehicles - How stale and stagnant you have become

True Adamance wrote:

Tebu Gan wrote:

True Adamance wrote:

I think Judge's fallacy

"The arguer claims that they can always recognize when something is present. This is likely a fallacy because the arguer is not aware of all of the times that he/she did not recognize it."

I so overly potent in this thread...... especially so between vehicle and AV users its not even funny.

Logical fallacies are not meant to be used to win arguments and add nothing to the discussion as it stands. You don't USE fallacies in an attempt to win an argument or prove your point. It's the understanding of fallacies that leads to deeper more meaningful discussions.

I know attim (and you since I've noticed you gang up with him to berate people, which in itself is a fallacy) is a big fan of trying to use them to further his argument. But when you go about bringing them up, you are no longer having a discussion on the topic, but a discussion on how to have an argument. Can you see the flawed logic in that?

You can either come up with rational and well thought out ideas or arguments to how others see the situation. Or you can be like attim, picking apart others postings, pulling things out of context, in an attempt to win what he sees as an argument (aka fight).

So how about some rational reason as to why a swarm is or isn't balanced in comparison to the AV they fight, and enough with changing the topic of discussion into an argument. Lay out your ideas, and I WILL listen. You don't have to agree with someone, just LISTEN and understand, attempt to see it through their eyes. There are no "winners or losers" in a discussion, quit making it out like there has to be.

So put on your big boy pants, wipe that snot off your nose, and add something meaningful to the topic. There is no right or wrong, just the meshing of ideas.

It's not about winning the argument. It's about you realising that you need to make concessions while you argue, as you are not looking at this impartially and like most Dropship Pilots are inclined to do exaggeration is very much so present in your previous posts when you discussed AV.

Atiim is in a similar position. Most of the time his feed back as an AVer (specifically Swarmer) should be considered carefully. He knows what he is talking about and if we as Vehicle users want meaningful balance have to listen to AV users and consider what they say.

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 14842	Posted - 2014.11.19 22:59:00 - [31] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: True Adamance wrote: I think Judge's fallacy "The arguer claims that they can always recognize when something is present. This is likely a fallacy because the arguer is not aware of all of the times that he/she did not recognize it." I so overly potent in this thread...... especially so between vehicle and AV users its not even funny. Logical fallacies are not meant to be used to win arguments and add nothing to the discussion as it stands. You don't USE fallacies in an attempt to win an argument or prove your point. It's the understanding of fallacies that leads to deeper more meaningful discussions. I know attim (and you since I've noticed you gang up with him to berate people, which in itself is a fallacy) is a big fan of trying to use them to further his argument. But when you go about bringing them up, you are no longer having a discussion on the topic, but a discussion on how to have an argument. Can you see the flawed logic in that? You can either come up with rational and well thought out ideas or arguments to how others see the situation. Or you can be like attim, picking apart others postings, pulling things out of context, in an attempt to win what he sees as an argument (aka fight). So how about some rational reason as to why a swarm is or isn't balanced in comparison to the AV they fight, and enough with changing the topic of discussion into an argument. Lay out your ideas, and I WILL listen. You don't have to agree with someone, just LISTEN and understand, attempt to see it through their eyes. There are no "winners or losers" in a discussion, quit making it out like there has to be. So put on your big boy pants, wipe that snot off your nose, and add something meaningful to the topic. There is no right or wrong, just the meshing of ideas. It's not about winning the argument. It's about you realising that you need to make concessions while you argue, as you are not looking at this impartially and like most Dropship Pilots are inclined to do exaggeration is very much so present in your previous posts when you discussed AV. Atiim is in a similar position. Most of the time his feed back as an AVer (specifically Swarmer) should be considered carefully. He knows what he is talking about and if we as Vehicle users want meaningful balance have to listen to AV users and consider what they say. "The moment passed in thunder and calamitous intent and yet no order was given to retreat or give their ground"
Tebu Gan molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 1237	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:10:00 - [32] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: True Adamance wrote: I think Judge's fallacy "The arguer claims that they can always recognize when something is present. This is likely a fallacy because the arguer is not aware of all of the times that he/she did not recognize it." I so overly potent in this thread...... especially so between vehicle and AV users its not even funny. Logical fallacies are not meant to be used to win arguments and add nothing to the discussion as it stands. You don't USE fallacies in an attempt to win an argument or prove your point. It's the understanding of fallacies that leads to deeper more meaningful discussions. I know attim (and you since I've noticed you gang up with him to berate people, which in itself is a fallacy) is a big fan of trying to use them to further his argument. But when you go about bringing them up, you are no longer having a discussion on the topic, but a discussion on how to have an argument. Can you see the flawed logic in that? You can either come up with rational and well thought out ideas or arguments to how others see the situation. Or you can be like attim, picking apart others postings, pulling things out of context, in an attempt to win what he sees as an argument (aka fight). So how about some rational reason as to why a swarm is or isn't balanced in comparison to the AV they fight, and enough with changing the topic of discussion into an argument. Lay out your ideas, and I WILL listen. You don't have to agree with someone, just LISTEN and understand, attempt to see it through their eyes. There are no "winners or losers" in a discussion, quit making it out like there has to be. So put on your big boy pants, wipe that snot off your nose, and add something meaningful to the topic. There is no right or wrong, just the meshing of ideas. It's not about winning the argument. It's about you realising that you need to make concessions while you argue, as you are not looking at this impartially and like most Dropship Pilots are inclined to do exaggeration is very much so present in your previous posts when you discussed AV. Atiim is in a similar position. Most of the time his feed back as an AVer (specifically Swarmer) should be considered carefully. He knows what he is talking about and if we as Vehicle users want meaningful balance have to listen to AV users and consider what they say. And I would do so, yet he chooses to belittle a post rather than contribute something meaningful. And the big point missed, I do AV, so I do understand well the issues AV might run into with other infantry (mitigated by using a commando). And I know swarms were the underdog for quite some time (still are against my gunnlogi, but that things harmless to infantry anyways). The whole point of my posting was that it really isn't as viable as it should be to make these so called "Strafe runs" given the availability of swarms, the changes to how they track, and the ease of use with them. I mean honestly, I went into a couple matches yesterday, and pulled out the ADS. One point missed is that swarms are a common part of the battlefield, it's something that you expect to be brought out. It's not a matter of if they swarms are coming out, but WHEN they are coming out. They are cheap and very easy to obtain in comparison to the ADS. The available window of engagement is far too short and in some cases non existent. If swarms are going to be a mainstay on the battlefield, then there needs to be a reasonable window to engage them in. Not what attim calls a HARD COUNTER as that doesn't exist for other classes out there. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 14843	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:16:00 - [33] - Quote To be fair the Minmatar Sentinel only increases each missiles damage by something like 31.2 @ proto level for a whopping total for 124.8 extra swarm damage per volley so there is not a huge difference between regular swarms and Min Commando swarms. "The moment passed in thunder and calamitous intent and yet no order was given to retreat or give their ground"
Finn Colman Immortal Guides 59	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:17:00 - [34] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: Finn Colman wrote: This is why I go play War Thunder instead of getting in my ADS most of the time that I want to fly. Unfortunately I lack ideas for how to fix this problem. The first statement is more relevant than it may first appear, as I usually use assault/attacker planes in War Thunder so in both cases I am firing on ground targets. No matter what turret you use, strafe runs are (sadly) impractical. I tried this with blaster turret, and I'm fairly certain that once some FGs spawned in they were either laughing at the thought process that made me think this could be effective at all, or swearing profusely as they could only hit me twice (both times with my hardner on) before I ran safely out of range. One bad maneuver and the addition of a red ADV swarmer was enough to stop this awful performance. I probably hit them twice as many times as they hit me, sadly this was with a turret that does about 39 damage per hit and probably didn't even do full damage due to distance from which it hit them, I don't use missile turrets out of simple refusal to do so and rail turret strafing is just a ridiculous idea to begin with. I wish strafe runs were viable, but they simply aren't. Oh, and a side point, blaster turrets still suck on the nose of an ADS, you might as well land on someone instead of shoot them with a blaster since it will be much more effective. That does stir up some ideas. What if you could lock in your reticule, as you swoop down from up high, actually making a strafe run without worry of attempting to aim and fire, WHILE flying. Simply swoop down, fly, and shoot. No worry of the up and down motion of aiming. Just side to side motion and control of your pitch. Making flying down, laying down shots, and moving along more viable. I feel that this is only one part of what would be needed to fix it, actually being able to see the target is an issue mostly because the ship itself entirely obstructs the pilot's view of the target unless they switch to the turret view, which completely disallows any independent movement that the turret may otherwise have, and this could help if the turret view actually is made to reflect the angle of the turret. Honestly, I rarely fit my ADS for practicality anymore, and it's more of an expensive toy, that I use to prod the enemy when they are in elevated positions. The little Min with the little voice.
Tebu Gan molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 1237	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:21:00 - [35] - Quote True Adamance wrote: To be fair the Minmatar Sentinel only increases each missiles damage by something like 31.2 @ proto level for a whopping total for 124.8 extra swarm damage per volley so there is not a huge difference between regular swarms and Min Commando swarms. While true, that isn't my point. The point is that they can carry an additional primary to deal with ground infantry, helping to mitigate the problem most swarmers run into of having no direct counter to the other infantry on the ground. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Tebu Gan molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 1237	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:25:00 - [36] - Quote Finn Colman wrote: I feel that this is only one part of what would be needed to fix it, actually being able to see the target is an issue mostly because the ship itself entirely obstructs the pilot's view of the target unless they switch to the turret view, which completely disallows any independent movement that the turret may otherwise have, and this could help if the turret view actually is made to reflect the angle of the turret. Honestly, I rarely fit my ADS for practicality anymore, and it's more of an expensive toy, that I use to prod the enemy when they are in elevated positions. I've always thought it would be helpful if the FPV of the ADS allowed for full movement of the turret. IE, being able to independently rotate the turret view downward to gain a clear picture of what's below without being obstructed by the dropship. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 982	Posted - 2014.11.20 00:06:00 - [37] - Quote True Adamance wrote: It's not about winning the argument. It's about you realising that you need to make concessions while you argue, as you are not looking at this impartially and like most Dropship Pilots are inclined to do exaggeration is very much so present in your previous posts when you discussed AV. What is exaggerated about this statement then: If an ADS is engaging infantry (or an HAV) and a Swarmer of STD or higher tier is pulled out, the ADS has a very small window (around 2-4s, depending on tier of the swarms) to attempt to kill the swarmer. If the target is more important (to the team, or to whoever) then you have that amount of time to finish them. If the target/Swarmer is not dealt with within that window, the ADS must disengage or face destruction at the hands of the Swarmer. I have swarmed all of my DUST career, and I have had Operation 3 only since about Uprising 1.1. As a tourist Swarmer I have no issues chasing off an ADS: they either get lucky and land a shot on me (lucky because of the insane impulse effects) or they have to run...after I've glutted myself on vehicle damage WP. Just yesterday I was in a battle and had two rail HAVs pinned down by me alone and got around 800-1000WP from them just spamming swarms at them. They could use cover to evade the occasional volley. Unlike almost any ADS. Quite simply, swarms have an incredibly easy time applying their damage to an ADS due to several factors: 1) Lock-on time, even at low tiers, is pretty fast 2) Swarms will very, very often have the first mover advantage: they will get their first volley off before the target is aware of their presence 3) Impulse effects will either substantially hamper/outright prevent the ADSs retaliation,allowing further volleys/reloads to be performed in relative security 4) With increased speed, the ADS has little to no chance to evade the swarms: using cover is untenable (you will be unlike to dodge behind cover, and they still go around; you might get propelled into said cover) Now, the ADS has a bevy of its own advantages (high damage per missile; the capacity to disengage) but the issue is the imbalance of engagements. My solution? - Introduction very rapid-firing variant turrets (with balanced damage application: so higher radius, but lower damage, for example) - Reduce the potential EHP ceiling of the ADS - Introduce a lock-on warning for swarms (as the only lock-on weapon present) - Introduce racial weapons to level the field (one of the biggest issues we have is the lack of reasonably effective anti-shield AV weaponry) With these four steps, we could actually see ADSs performing their role (strafing runs) against ground targets while being reasonably vulnerable to ground AV (Rails and FGs, plus whatever direct fire anti-shield weapons, would be able to bring them down in 1-2 shots is my thinking,but high speed makes that hard.) The further introduction of other vehicles would also help make for an interesting battlefield, though one of the other biggest issues we face is the tiny team size. True Adamance wrote: Atiim is in a similar position. Most of the time his feed back as an AVer (specifically Swarmer) should be considered carefully. He knows what he is talking about and if we as Vehicle users want meaningful balance have to listen to AV users and consider what they say. I do want to address this: probably every post I see of Atiim talking about an ADS from the pilot POV is utter nonsense. Almost everything he says about flying from his POV is entirely against what every ADS pilot I've spoken to or read about thinks. Meaningful balance doesn't come when one side is constantly demonized by the other,and that demonization is supported by the Devs: removal of the ROF bonus was a death sentence for any strafing run notions - Numnutz and I have performed dozens of strafing runs with the old ROF bonus. Now? Impossible, even with pilot stacking (which we only do because we enjoy flying together) with both maxed out. It is a requisite of an ADS to hover to engage: something which all AVers appear to find abhorrent,and with which Rattati agrees, apparently. We have a good half a dozen ADS rebalance/turret variant threads floating about that are trying to give feedback - my own had Atiim jump in shout, "OP!" with zero feedback. With that kind of 'meaningful' contribution, why must we try and pay attention? Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Draden Brohiem D3ATH CARD RUST415 12	Posted - 2014.11.20 21:23:00 - [38] - Quote I find it hard to tank cost efficiently. The price difference between AT's and XT's is crazy?! I grind in ambush for weeks just to build 20 proto tanks to save lol! They're not really proto, just the mods, but they feel epically priced enough?! XT's cost almost 300k for one!?! I got tanks that cost that much lol! I would add that we need advanced models now. Before definitely not, but now that swarms are buffed maybe it's time for the release of the advanced hulls? STOP! CCP, when I say this I in no way mean for you to drop super Uber OP tanks into the game!!! At most give it more CPU/PG to fit the turrets better, and maybe some bonuses like passive armor repair on armor tanks or speed bonus on shield. You have a knack for the OP. Don't do it! I would like to have the advanced tank option though. That would definitely justify the price tag. I doubt AV would mind now as they get points for damage, and the weapons actually take tanks out. Just my two cents. I like tanking, and all my points are into tanks.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 14898	Posted - 2014.11.20 21:46:00 - [39] - Quote Draden Brohiem wrote: I find it hard to tank cost efficiently. The price difference between AT's and XT's is crazy?! I grind in ambush for weeks just to build 20 proto tanks to save lol! They're not really proto, just the mods, but they feel epically priced enough?! XT's cost almost 300k for one!?! I got tanks that cost that much lol! I would add that we need advanced models now. Before definitely not, but now that swarms are buffed maybe it's time for the release of the advanced hulls? STOP! CCP, when I say this I in no way mean for you to drop super Uber OP tanks into the game!!! At most give it more CPU/PG to fit the turrets better, and maybe some bonuses like passive armor repair on armor tanks or speed bonus on shield. You have a knack for the OP. Don't do it! I would like to have the advanced tank option though. That would definitely justify the price tag. I doubt AV would mind now as they get points for damage, and the weapons actually take tanks out. Just my two cents. I like tanking, and all my points are into tanks. Tanks should always be expensive. We are those guys who roll onto the map loaded up to the eyes with SWAG! I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Tebu Gan Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1245	Posted - 2014.11.20 22:06:00 - [40] - Quote Draden Brohiem wrote: I find it hard to tank cost efficiently. The price difference between AT's and XT's is crazy?! I grind in ambush for weeks just to build 20 proto tanks to save lol! They're not really proto, just the mods, but they feel epically priced enough?! XT's cost almost 300k for one!?! I got tanks that cost that much lol! I would add that we need advanced models now. Before definitely not, but now that swarms are buffed maybe it's time for the release of the advanced hulls? STOP! CCP, when I say this I in no way mean for you to drop super Uber OP tanks into the game!!! At most give it more CPU/PG to fit the turrets better, and maybe some bonuses like passive armor repair on armor tanks or speed bonus on shield. You have a knack for the OP. Don't do it! I would like to have the advanced tank option though. That would definitely justify the price tag. I doubt AV would mind now as they get points for damage, and the weapons actually take tanks out. Just my two cents. I like tanking, and all my points are into tanks. You know, surprisingly, tanking is VERY cost efficient for me. Given I have used tanks pretty much exclusively for well over a year now, but it seems more so than ever before. Part of this is due to the fact that tanks pose very little threat to infantry on their own (hard to say with gunners, but I do run guns on all my tanks. Not often though that one would choose to use them, unless of course we are losing and they need free easy points.) and part due to my uber AV shield build. Additionally, due to tanks having limited impact on the field with changes done to them, you don't often see too many other tanks out, therefore there aren't too many things out there to kill me anyways, or for me to kill (assuming tanks have the easiest time in comparison to AV). For example, yesterday I played 3 matches I believe. In those I always start with an ADS, laying down links in the best positions to help my team make the pushes they need for the objectives. Then I proceed to see what damage I can do with the ADS. Usually the start of a match is the best time to use the ADS as most players in objective based game modes don't start with AV. But as soon as the swarms come out, I'll try for a bit to poke and prod, but when I notice I can no longer have any sort of impact on the outcome, I switch over to my tank, either my blaster or rail tank (generally rails as I can get more kills with it than my blaster) and further distract the AV, again dropping uplinks around (as blueberries tend to have no knowledge the things exist). I feel as long as I can force one or two people into an AV role, my team will stand a much better chance at winning. Though as I look at the end of match scoring, it becomes clear that often my blueberries need a miracle. It's amazing what has happened since they have changed tanks to become less infantry centric! Instead of tanks ruling the field, it's proto suits filling the void! I mean seriously, how do I go 3 - 0, with 2000 + WP, often times not just doubling the highest score on my side but tripling it. (Hint hint, uplinks because I'm the ONLY one that drops them, or actually places them in advantageous positions) Swarms though, I can well imagine, are more of a problem now than before when it comes to tanks. While the Devs claimed it would have very little impact on tanking and was meant for dropships (the changes to them that is), I can see a HUGE improvement to their effectiveness towards tanks. Namely, it's VERY difficult to cover from them, as they make some pretty nasty turns around corners and the such (much like they used to be). Now not to say they are ultra deadly, yet I also don't drive a maddie very often. Probably should huh just to check it out. Anyways, let's talk cost efficiency eh. Sure tanks are expensive, mine run upwards to 600 - 700K a pop (depending on the small guns), but you also need to consider that my payout runs around 300K on average, which mitigates the loss, that is if there is any. But the thing is, if I were to attempt to run tanks exclusively (which I do for the most part but I'm also all about layin out those uplinks), my payouts would drop drastically for many of my matches. Why? Because I'm not making the WP. There really isn't a whole lot to do for a tank on the field. Sure you can bring a blaster in, but blasters are VERY iffy on making any kills and most infantry can easily avoid them. But then you have things like AV and turret installations to worry about, the installations being nearly impossible for a blaster to take down efficiently. So that leaves you with a rail or missile, as the ones having the most versatility, that make larger contributions to the match. Blaster install got em pinned down, spend the next minute shooting it with your rail ( or like 20 seconds with missiles). Then enjoy that well earned 100 points for taking it out. If you are really lucky, they might call in a tank for you to fight, of which I strongly recommend not killing right away. Why do I say this, WAR POINTS! Often I find that killing them makes the player that called it in just give up with tanking all together (especially with the milita tanks), leaving you with NOTHING to do in your tank but attempt to snipe infantry down, maybe shooting the occasional dropship called in. Essentially, I really don't think that adding ADV or PRO hulls will make ANY amount of difference for the tank. They very much need a role on the battlefield. Currently it is one of AV, but they need vehicles to kill. Which is why I suggested (a LONG time ago) adding in AI turrets or medium vehicles into the equation, giving reason for an AV centric vehicle. Tanks - Balancing Turrets



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