DUST Search - 1 year of dust without HAV

All Channels

General Discussions

1 year of dust without HAV

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1200	Posted - 2014.11.30 23:04:00 - [31] - Quote True Adamance wrote: danthrax martin wrote: dreth longbow wrote: basicly HAV is not infantry and everybody wants infantry "shooter game" so they will spend time "fixing" infantry and other misc unimportant stuff for everybody else and leave HAV to be a mobile infantry shooter platform ie blaster or missile. there is so much wrong with tanks, the movement, the optics on the rails, etc. Fixes are easy, make turrets for tank battles ie remove blaster or slow it down, buff armour/sheilds so swarms and forge need reload to kill. This makes the tank a tank killer or area weapon and not an ant-personal weapon. This will allow tank battles and them to give some area denial. Fix zoom and sticky zoom give more slots to next level of tank with more cpu/ Basically have CCP or Ratti talk to and play with tankers and define their role and fix them to add depth and other game play to Dust. The only tanks destroyed by one clip of swarm/forge is an ill-fitted tank. Actually I would consider it the opposite now having been a swarmer. There is no reason any tank should be able to take more than 4 swarm volleys and keep trucking. I put six into a Gunlogi the other day and did not get a kill. No Standard HAV should be able to ignore Prototype AV. In fact one one shield tank should be able to do this where Armour cannot. Swarm-light weapon Tank-Heavy vehicle Swarm should be able to hurt tank but shouldn't really deal enough damage to kill it unless there are two swarmers. BTW- It takes almost 20x the SP to get a decent fit that can survive a proto AV, all the bull crap about needing a protosuit is just bull crap... I use ADV medium frame with my swarms and I wreck tanks with my proficiency 1 wiki swarms. Chocolate Juice
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1200	Posted - 2014.11.30 23:08:00 - [32] - Quote danthrax martin wrote: dreth longbow wrote: basicly HAV is not infantry and everybody wants infantry "shooter game" so they will spend time "fixing" infantry and other misc unimportant stuff for everybody else and leave HAV to be a mobile infantry shooter platform ie blaster or missile. there is so much wrong with tanks, the movement, the optics on the rails, etc. Fixes are easy, make turrets for tank battles ie remove blaster or slow it down, buff armour/sheilds so swarms and forge need reload to kill. This makes the tank a tank killer or area weapon and not an ant-personal weapon. This will allow tank battles and them to give some area denial. Fix zoom and sticky zoom give more slots to next level of tank with more cpu/ Basically have CCP or Ratti talk to and play with tankers and define their role and fix them to add depth and other game play to Dust. The only tanks destroyed by one clip of swarm/forge is an ill-fitted tank. go complex or go home is the current vehicles are especially ADS. Chocolate Juice
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15241	Posted - 2014.11.30 23:10:00 - [33] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: danthrax martin wrote: dreth longbow wrote: basicly HAV is not infantry and everybody wants infantry "shooter game" so they will spend time "fixing" infantry and other misc unimportant stuff for everybody else and leave HAV to be a mobile infantry shooter platform ie blaster or missile. there is so much wrong with tanks, the movement, the optics on the rails, etc. Fixes are easy, make turrets for tank battles ie remove blaster or slow it down, buff armour/sheilds so swarms and forge need reload to kill. This makes the tank a tank killer or area weapon and not an ant-personal weapon. This will allow tank battles and them to give some area denial. Fix zoom and sticky zoom give more slots to next level of tank with more cpu/ Basically have CCP or Ratti talk to and play with tankers and define their role and fix them to add depth and other game play to Dust. The only tanks destroyed by one clip of swarm/forge is an ill-fitted tank. Actually I would consider it the opposite now having been a swarmer. There is no reason any tank should be able to take more than 4 swarm volleys and keep trucking. I put six into a Gunlogi the other day and did not get a kill. No Standard HAV should be able to ignore Prototype AV. In fact one one shield tank should be able to do this where Armour cannot. Swarm-light weapon Tank-Heavy vehicle Swarm should be able to hurt tank but shouldn't really deal enough damage to kill it unless there are two swarmers. Of course a swarm launcher should hurt a tank. Offensive technologies are usually superior to defensive technologies. There more over is not reason a weapon designed to destroy vehicles should not be carried by the average infantry man, the only difference between "heavy" and "light" AV is perception. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1200	Posted - 2014.11.30 23:13:00 - [34] - Quote STYLIE77 wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: H0riz0n Unlimit wrote: Unless you consider this ****** vehicles HAV, i missed old madrugar and gunlogi, when the armor reps were passive and a missilistic couldnt 1 shot a madrugar, i missed turrepts variations, now a STD tank has the same layout of a sica/soma pre 1.7. Once was funny be a tanker, when you pick up blueberries and they started shooting to enemies MCC. It was fun but since one year the only thing CCP has done is buff AV and now, how many tankers are still calling a tank every match? Not only for kill infantry but as a team support? My last question is, will something change soon(tm)? Sorry for bad english same. There is nothing more depressing than having to bow down to one swarmer even with a proto complex fitted tank. Where are the real tanks CCP? The ones that ruled the plains at the same time cost a fortune? I think you are playing the wrong game. I suggest you play http://worldoftanks.com/ Now run along and have fun with that... Instead of helping to fix the problem, dumb players like you come here with witty comments to get likes. Seriously, grow up. Chocolate Juice
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 3142	Posted - 2014.12.01 00:52:00 - [35] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: H0riz0n Unlimit wrote: Unless you consider this ****** vehicles HAV, i missed old madrugar and gunlogi, when the armor reps were passive and a missilistic couldnt 1 shot a madrugar, i missed turrepts variations, now a STD tank has the same layout of a sica/soma pre 1.7. Once was funny be a tanker, when you pick up blueberries and they started shooting to enemies MCC. It was fun but since one year the only thing CCP has done is buff AV and now, how many tankers are still calling a tank every match? Not only for kill infantry but as a team support? My last question is, will something change soon(tm)? Sorry for bad english same. There is nothing more depressing than having to bow down to one swarmer even with a proto complex fitted tank. Where are the real tanks CCP? The ones that ruled the plains at the same time cost a fortune? Completely ignoring how that swarmer is fitted with proto gear as well but designed in a way thats only effective against a vehicle meaning that even the pre made front line suit has the advantage over him
Grimmiers 723	Posted - 2014.12.01 00:53:00 - [36] - Quote The current vehicles we have are a hot mess. In any game a turret on a vehicle would be useful for taking out other vehicles, but with the silly low ehp high repair rate and shields ignoring "small" damage you're restricted to using cheap tactics and high alpha weapons only. Basically all vehicle battles and turrets are balanced around stupidly high repair rates. This is why we have missile tanks that spam a barrage of missiles, railguns that do thousands of damage from a long range, and the oddball which is the blaster that has to do things like drive over tanks and chase them before they rep through the damage. Then you have small turrets which feel like they have no place in the game with the wonky aim if you're moving on a vehicle and not doing enough damage to even scare off anything with decent repair rate. The only way to fix vehicle gameplay is to lower and change repair mechanics, fix turret accuracy, let vehicles take small arms fire, take the alpha damage out of av focused weapons. So lets say a vehicle is getting hit by a forge gun that's doing 700 damage and it has 4000 armor. It would take 6 shots to kill this tank which would be fine in this situation. The tank would have an active repair module that would repair until the capacitor ran out of energy. The module while active could be repairing 40 armor every half a second to almost simulate a logi repair tool. So now we have a situation where if the tanker wants to dual or triple repair his tank in the heat of battle he has to risk running out of cap which could probably be recharged by an outside source. We can introduce logi vehices and make infantry with repair tools more useful to save a vehicle's cap. A logi vehicle should have a targeting mechanic that lets you choose what friendly vehicle you want to repair from a list before starting the module, while the module is active it should always repair the chosen target if it's in range which should be as far as 75 meters. You could even have a more energy intensive module that acts like a large mobile nanohive to give infantry and vehicles ammo and repairs in a smaller range. A lot of this stuff is based around eve and the numbers are random, just there to give an idea of how I'd like vehicles to behave. Once it's possible to destroy a vehicle with a small turret, including blasters, and infantry weapons can contribute damage without being instantly repaired away then we'll be in a better place. I'm talking about having niche weapons like lasers and mass drivers being able to strip shields and beat up armor vehicles. No more of this one shotting dropships and blaster tanks not being able to kill each other because they're both triple repping bs. TL:DR Fix the broken repair system,resistances to small arms fire, and introduce a proper vehicle logi system. Goal is to have vehicles sacrifice something to repair through all the damage you've done.
dreth longbow Bank of DUST 514 76	Posted - 2014.12.02 18:31:00 - [37] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: dreth longbow wrote: basicly HAV is not infantry and everybody wants infantry "shooter game" so they will spend time "fixing" infantry and other misc unimportant stuff for everybody else and leave HAV to be a mobile infantry shooter platform ie blaster or missile. there is so much wrong with tanks, the movement, the optics on the rails, etc. Fixes are easy, make turrets for tank battles ie remove blaster or slow it down, buff armour/sheilds so swarms and forge need reload to kill. This makes the tank a tank killer or area weapon and not an ant-personal weapon. This will allow tank battles and them to give some area denial. Fix zoom and sticky zoom give more slots to next level of tank with more cpu/ Basically have CCP or Ratti talk to and play with tankers and define their role and fix them to add depth and other game play to Dust. Infantry arent the problem. Tanks do need a buff, especially the armour tank, it cant fit small guns without gimping the fit. Tanks DO NOT need an ehp buff. If you decide not to put more hp dont complain when a triple dmg mod swarm kills you in 4 shots. actually they are, HAV's have 2 current roles tank to tank fighting or lets kill infantry. you get almost no wp for taking out turrents/spawn/etc not worth the time/effort/vulnerability so most tankers deploy the blaster to hunt infantry and so infantry needs to be able to kill tanks faster or they cry. FYI I use tanks as suppport against other tanks/DS not blaster to kill infantry that fit should be a MAV not HAV
dreth longbow Bank of DUST 514 76	Posted - 2014.12.02 18:36:00 - [38] - Quote I for one am against small arm damage, their I said it. Why you ask? oh lets see the other day I was in a HAV with a RR looking for other tanks, non to be found so I went off and decided to take out some depot's to prevent the red's from switching suits and while I was shooting at a depot with proto+20% I had to move 3x because of a scout with cloak and nova. He took my sheilds down faster than I could damage the depot. Lets see knifes vs tank, tank must run or die. just plain stupid.
RayRay James Titans of Phoenix 774	Posted - 2014.12.02 18:37:00 - [39] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Game Design has declared multiple times there will be no prototype HAVs ever (or vehicles for that manner) There can be specializations but that's it. I'd be fine with getting back some form of Logi vehicles
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15324	Posted - 2014.12.02 18:46:00 - [40] - Quote dreth longbow wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: dreth longbow wrote: basicly HAV is not infantry and everybody wants infantry "shooter game" so they will spend time "fixing" infantry and other misc unimportant stuff for everybody else and leave HAV to be a mobile infantry shooter platform ie blaster or missile. there is so much wrong with tanks, the movement, the optics on the rails, etc. Fixes are easy, make turrets for tank battles ie remove blaster or slow it down, buff armour/sheilds so swarms and forge need reload to kill. This makes the tank a tank killer or area weapon and not an ant-personal weapon. This will allow tank battles and them to give some area denial. Fix zoom and sticky zoom give more slots to next level of tank with more cpu/ Basically have CCP or Ratti talk to and play with tankers and define their role and fix them to add depth and other game play to Dust. Infantry arent the problem. Tanks do need a buff, especially the armour tank, it cant fit small guns without gimping the fit. Tanks DO NOT need an ehp buff. If you decide not to put more hp dont complain when a triple dmg mod swarm kills you in 4 shots. actually they are, HAV's have 2 current roles tank to tank fighting or lets kill infantry. you get almost no wp for taking out turrents/spawn/etc not worth the time/effort/vulnerability so most tankers deploy the blaster to hunt infantry and so infantry needs to be able to kill tanks faster or they cry. FYI I use tanks as suppport against other tanks/DS not blaster to kill infantry that fit should be a MAV not HAV The Armour HAV does need EHP buffs but this can be achieved artificial with a re-think of modules. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...

Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 487	Posted - 2014.12.02 19:45:00 - [41] - Quote My main man DELB0Y calls a tank every match. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15331	Posted - 2014.12.02 19:49:00 - [42] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: My main man DELB0Y calls a tank every match. Yup I watch the ol' videos. I used to do the same thing...... but I can't say I enjoy tanking these days. I always was an armour tanker through and through. I liked being slow and having high manageable HP values...... Pyrex actually described the Surya in one of his videos exactly how I like my Tanks. "Like a brick you leave in the middle of a situations to sort it out." But currently in this AV meta and in the current state of vehicle balancing the Armour HAV doesn't even compare to shield tanks. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 487	Posted - 2014.12.02 19:51:00 - [43] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: danthrax martin wrote: dreth longbow wrote: basicly HAV is not infantry and everybody wants infantry "shooter game" so they will spend time "fixing" infantry and other misc unimportant stuff for everybody else and leave HAV to be a mobile infantry shooter platform ie blaster or missile. there is so much wrong with tanks, the movement, the optics on the rails, etc. Fixes are easy, make turrets for tank battles ie remove blaster or slow it down, buff armour/sheilds so swarms and forge need reload to kill. This makes the tank a tank killer or area weapon and not an ant-personal weapon. This will allow tank battles and them to give some area denial. Fix zoom and sticky zoom give more slots to next level of tank with more cpu/ Basically have CCP or Ratti talk to and play with tankers and define their role and fix them to add depth and other game play to Dust. The only tanks destroyed by one clip of swarm/forge is an ill-fitted tank. Actually I would consider it the opposite now having been a swarmer. There is no reason any tank should be able to take more than 4 swarm volleys and keep trucking. I put six into a Gunlogi the other day and did not get a kill. No Standard HAV should be able to ignore Prototype AV. In fact one one shield tank should be able to do this where Armour cannot. Swarm-light weapon Tank-Heavy vehicle Swarm should be able to hurt tank but shouldn't really deal enough damage to kill it unless there are two swarmers. Of course a swarm launcher should hurt a tank. Offensive technologies are usually superior to defensive technologies. There more over is not reason a weapon designed to destroy vehicles should not be carried by the average infantry man, the only difference between "heavy" and "light" AV is perception. By that reasoning my offiensive, giant mounted blaster turret should cut through you like buttter. As in a one shot, a weapon designed to kill other 6.5 k hp tanks should make pretty short work of a 900K hp commando suit. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 487	Posted - 2014.12.02 19:58:00 - [44] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: My main man DELB0Y calls a tank every match. Yup I watch the ol' videos. I used to do the same thing...... but I can't say I enjoy tanking these days. I always was an armour tanker through and through. I liked being slow and having high manageable HP values...... Pyrex actually described the Surya in one of his videos exactly how I like my Tanks. "Like a brick you leave in the middle of a situations to sort it out." But currently in this AV meta and in the current state of vehicle balancing the Armour HAV doesn't even compare to shield tanks. He's one of my main squad mates, and he's never been a fan of armor or blasters. Even now AV meta is wearing a bit thin. I am more armor centric. Maybe you could try this fit. Since i've been tryint to get back in to maddys I fit it like 1 enh 1200MM 1 com. Armor rep 1 CPU upgrade Neutron blaster 1 com. fuel injector 1 light shield booster Get in, pop a few guys, take a hit, flip on the nitro and get the shields up straight away. Basically i treat it like my incubus. Definitly more survivable, but if you see a missile tank then GTFO. on a side note ignore my scarcasm in my previous post. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Vesta Opalus Bloodline Rebellion Capital Punishment. 212	Posted - 2014.12.02 20:10:00 - [45] - Quote STYLIE77 wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: H0riz0n Unlimit wrote: Unless you consider this **** vehicles HAV, i missed old madrugar and gunlogi, when the armor reps were passive and a missilistic couldnt 1 shot a madrugar, i missed turrepts variations, now a STD tank has the same layout of a sica/soma pre 1.7. Once was funny be a tanker, when you pick up blueberries and they started shooting to enemies MCC. It was fun but since one year the only thing CCP has done is buff AV and now, how many tankers are still calling a tank every match? Not only for kill infantry but as a team support? My last question is, will something change soon(tm)? Sorry for bad english same. There is nothing more depressing than having to bow down to one swarmer even with a proto complex fitted tank. Where are the real tanks CCP? The ones that ruled the plains at the same time cost a fortune? I think you are playing the wrong game. I suggest you play http://worldoftanks.com/ Now run along and have fun with that... Come on now, we all know tankers are just salty because they cant farm helpless infantry all day (just kidding, they can if they arent ******). A game where everyone else is in a tank that can kill them too is a nightmare.
Dauth Jenkins Titans of Phoenix 568	Posted - 2014.12.02 20:46:00 - [46] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: My main man DELB0Y calls a tank every match. Yup I watch the ol' videos. I used to do the same thing...... but I can't say I enjoy tanking these days. I always was an armour tanker through and through. I liked being slow and having high manageable HP values...... Pyrex actually described the Surya in one of his videos exactly how I like my Tanks. "Like a brick you leave in the middle of a situations to sort it out." But currently in this AV meta and in the current state of vehicle balancing the Armour HAV doesn't even compare to shield tanks. Yea. The question we have to deal with now is, do we think shields are OP and need to be nerfed, Or do we think Armour is underpowered, and needs to be buffed. I, for one, believe that armour is underpowered and needs to be buffed to competitive levels. -Sincerely --The Dual Swarm Commando
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1224	Posted - 2014.12.02 20:53:00 - [47] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: H0riz0n Unlimit wrote: Unless you consider this ****** vehicles HAV, i missed old madrugar and gunlogi, when the armor reps were passive and a missilistic couldnt 1 shot a madrugar, i missed turrepts variations, now a STD tank has the same layout of a sica/soma pre 1.7. Once was funny be a tanker, when you pick up blueberries and they started shooting to enemies MCC. It was fun but since one year the only thing CCP has done is buff AV and now, how many tankers are still calling a tank every match? Not only for kill infantry but as a team support? My last question is, will something change soon(tm)? Sorry for bad english same. There is nothing more depressing than having to bow down to one swarmer even with a proto complex fitted tank. Where are the real tanks CCP? The ones that ruled the plains at the same time cost a fortune? Completely ignoring how that swarmer is fitted with proto gear as well but designed in a way thats only effective against a vehicle meaning that even the pre made front line suit has the advantage over him 47k isk proto swarm launcher and roughly 700k sp (not including proficiency because it's not really needed) vs a 2.5 million isk millions upon millions of SP tank. Chocolate Juice
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1224	Posted - 2014.12.02 20:58:00 - [48] - Quote Dauth Jenkins wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: My main man DELB0Y calls a tank every match. Yup I watch the ol' videos. I used to do the same thing...... but I can't say I enjoy tanking these days. I always was an armour tanker through and through. I liked being slow and having high manageable HP values...... Pyrex actually described the Surya in one of his videos exactly how I like my Tanks. "Like a brick you leave in the middle of a situations to sort it out." But currently in this AV meta and in the current state of vehicle balancing the Armour HAV doesn't even compare to shield tanks. Yea. The question we have to deal with now is, do we think shields are OP and need to be nerfed, Or do we think Armour is underpowered, and needs to be buffed. I, for one, believe that armour is underpowered and needs to be buffed to competitive levels. YES! BUFF ARMOR! Chocolate Juice
Harkon Vysarii Intermediate.Purgatory 471	Posted - 2014.12.02 21:00:00 - [49] - Quote Dauth Jenkins wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: My main man DELB0Y calls a tank every match. Yup I watch the ol' videos. I used to do the same thing...... but I can't say I enjoy tanking these days. I always was an armour tanker through and through. I liked being slow and having high manageable HP values...... Pyrex actually described the Surya in one of his videos exactly how I like my Tanks. "Like a brick you leave in the middle of a situations to sort it out." But currently in this AV meta and in the current state of vehicle balancing the Armour HAV doesn't even compare to shield tanks. Yea. The question we have to deal with now is, do we think shields are OP and need to be nerfed, Or do we think Armour is underpowered, and needs to be buffed. I, for one, believe that armour is underpowered and needs to be buffed to competitive levels. That is a tough question. Personally I do not believe they are OP in he current scheme of things considering how an example of Anti Shield AV (the Plasma Cannon) utterly melts them to slag. But comparatively to Armour HAV I believe they are. They have better fitting capacity, regenerative potential, EHP potential, DPS potential, etc. Moreover their basic roles are reversed. It also depends on what we expect to see as basic HAV EHP values.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15343	Posted - 2014.12.02 21:01:00 - [50] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Dauth Jenkins wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: My main man DELB0Y calls a tank every match. Yup I watch the ol' videos. I used to do the same thing...... but I can't say I enjoy tanking these days. I always was an armour tanker through and through. I liked being slow and having high manageable HP values...... Pyrex actually described the Surya in one of his videos exactly how I like my Tanks. "Like a brick you leave in the middle of a situations to sort it out." But currently in this AV meta and in the current state of vehicle balancing the Armour HAV doesn't even compare to shield tanks. Yea. The question we have to deal with now is, do we think shields are OP and need to be nerfed, Or do we think Armour is underpowered, and needs to be buffed. I, for one, believe that armour is underpowered and needs to be buffed to competitive levels. YES! BUFF ARMOR! If we do not expect to see Marauder then yes buff armour. If we do then possibly nerf shield fitting capacity slightly. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...

TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 629	Posted - 2014.12.02 21:23:00 - [51] - Quote There are two reasons as to why the shield tank is better at the moment. The only infantry anti vehicle weapon that is shield profiled currently is the plasma cannon which reloads too slowly and has too limited of a range to be viable against anything but a foolish vehicle that hangs around too long. AV grenades, swarm launchers, and forge guns are all armor profiled. The second reason is that shield hardeners are 40% resistance while armor hardeners are 25%. If long range anti shield weapons like say a heavy Amarr weapon and armor hardeners go up to 40% then shields won't be as advantageous.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15345	Posted - 2014.12.02 21:31:00 - [52] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: There are two reasons as to why the shield tank is better at the moment. The only infantry anti vehicle weapon that is shield profiled currently is the plasma cannon which reloads too slowly and has too limited of a range to be viable against anything but a foolish vehicle that hangs around too long. AV grenades, swarm launchers, and forge guns are all armor profiled. The second reason is that shield hardeners are 40% resistance while armor hardeners are 25%. If long range anti shield weapons like say a heavy Amarr weapon and armor hardeners go up to 40% then shields won't be as advantageous. Hey I take issue with that..... I was trying my best to kill Ceej! But the smarmy bastard has a 52m radius and mad cannon skills. It's not just that though its that it has many inherent bonuses over armour that means it better fulfils the stand a deliver role with the benefits of its hull and modules. - 15% more effective hardeners - Shield Passive Pulsed Regen is 168rep/sec after a 4 second delay (better than a Hvy Repper and requiring no module) - Fitting Capacity and access to Fitting module without compromising primary tank type. - A mobility profile that makes up for the inherently slow tracking of Missiles and Railguns, instant acceleration. and outside of that - The Anti Kinetic/Explosive AV resistance profile you mentioned. Now if armour hardeners go up to 40%...... kinda meh.....could work..... but that still leaves armour tanking primarily passive and unable to manage crises like the shield HAV......more over damn boring to pilot. I'll do some EHP calc with a 40% modifier now. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Xocoyol Zaraoul Superior Genetics 2819	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:38:00 - [53] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: Come on now, we all know tankers are just salty because they cant farm helpless infantry all day (just kidding, they can if they arent ******). A game where everyone else is in a tank that can kill them too is a nightmare. As an OG tanker, I enjoy HAV matches, and matches where there are no other HAVs I hate. I have an HAV, it carries a Rail Gun, I want to hunt vehicles damnit. "You see those red dots over there? Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire**
H0riz0n Unlimit Dead Man's Game 217	Posted - 2014.12.03 11:37:00 - [54] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: My main man DELB0Y calls a tank every match. Yeah delboy is a tryhard, i have never squadded with him but i love how he try to support his squad. I call tanks or ads every game too, now i will not speak about ads, but its enough a FG on a tower or 1/2 swarmers and you got to start tryng to escape and when you are behind a wall, missiles turned around it, i m pissed off, most of all cuz now missiles has a greater speed than before. The KTM DuKe lives here, send a message after the "beep". TheD1ck is on the table fan club. MPRQ-MakingPeopleRageQuit


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

Chocolate Juice

Chocolate Juice

Chocolate Juice

Chocolate Juice

Chocolate Juice