DUST Search - [Discussion] Why do vehicles **** you off?

All Channels

General Discussions

[Discussion] Why do vehicles **** you off?

» 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)
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1004	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:26:00 - [1] - Quote So in the light of this question, what about vehicles pisses you off? 1. If you don't kill it, they go 30-0 and lose no ISK? 2. Is it because they instagank you? 3. Is it because all they're good for is camping CRUs? 4. Is it because they have no defined role? 5. Is it because they die too quickly to make a difference? 6. Other? And please explain what. I will also post a possible solution if my suspicions are correct in the second post, which shall be reserved. Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1004	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:27:00 - [2] - Quote RSVP Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Toobar Zoobar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 28	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:29:00 - [3] - Quote vehicles don't... annoy me. Swarms annoy me. Dust 514. A game about shooting people with super deadly sci-fi guns... and dancing.
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:30:00 - [4] - Quote Toobar Zoobar wrote: vehicles don't... annoy me. Swarms annoy me. Dam it! Forgot to do a vehicle one... EDIT: Got it Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Summa Militum Hidd3n Dragon 89	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:34:00 - [5] - Quote The only vehicles that ** me off are the dropships that can shoot you from head-on (not the ones that have turrets on the side of the drop ship, I am talking about the one with the turret in the front of the dropship facing forward) . I can be taking on a group of people single-handedly and kicking some serious ass and then the next thing I know the ground around me is being blown to hell and I die. I give props to the guy in the dropship who just saved his team but at the same time that guy can go ** himself.
Henrietta Unknown Kirjuun Heiian 577	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:36:00 - [6] - Quote I get annoyed if the vehicle was halting an advance or hampering a defense of an objective. Apparently, all hostiles that perform effectively are targeted. Or if it has killed me several times and/or seriously hampering team progress. Or if it's pricey and operated by a pretentious pilot. Goodbye Gunny with a Particle Cannon... Give the Magsex some love.
Henrietta Unknown Kirjuun Heiian 577	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:37:00 - [7] - Quote Summa Militum wrote: The only vehicles that ** me off are the dropships that can shoot you from head-on (not the ones that have turrets on the side of the drop ship, I am talking about the one with the turret in the front of the dropship facing forward) . I can be taking on a group of people single-handedly and kicking some serious ass and then the next thing I know the ground around me is being blown to hell and I die. I give props to the guy in the dropship who just saved his team but at the same time that guy can go ** himself. It's called an Assault Drop Ship, and it's very expensive - some 200K ISK. Give the Magsex some love.
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:39:00 - [8] - Quote Henrietta Unknown wrote: I get annoyed if the vehicle was halting an advance or hampering a defense of an objective. Apparently, all hostiles that perform effectively are targeted. Or if it has killed me several times and/or seriously hampering team progress. Or if it's pricey and operated by a pretentious pilot. Goodbye Gunny with a Particle Cannon... So, it pisses you off it it does its job as Infantry suppression? Do you think it should be just that, suppression, but not able to outright slay? Just hampering Infantry advance? This is good! My suspicions are leading someplace... Muahahaha! Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 636	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:42:00 - [9] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: So in the light of this question, what about vehicles pisses you off? 1. If you don't kill it, they go 30-0 and lose no ISK? 2. Is it because they instagank you? 3. Is it because all they're good for is camping CRUs? 4. Is it because they have no defined role? 5. Is it because they die too quickly to make a difference? 6. Do you feel that AV should be a more viable counter to HAVs and ADS than other HAVs or ADS? 7. Other? And please explain what. For pilots: 1. When a tank on the enemy team appears, are you reluctant to field your own in fear of death? 2. Do you feel AV should be a thorn on your backside, while other vehicles the real threat? 3. Should Forge Guns be more effective than swarms? 4. Should Plasma Cannons be more effective than swarms? 5. Do you think AV or Anti Infantry is your primary role as a HAV/ADS pilot? I will also post a possible solution if my suspicions are correct in the second post, which shall be reserved. They usually attract my attention because typically when I ignore vehicles the blueberries feed them corpses. If I didn't have to worry about being cloned out by Mcnobrain with 0/16 as their score I would just avoid vehicles. After all most are pretty easy to avoid and ignore, its just the hapless retards will lose the game for us if I don't get rid of them 9/10 times. Edit: Sorry as to any notion of balance, I currently think vehicles will be great as they are if advanced and proto modules drop significantly in price. The difference between a standard vehicle with standard modules and a standard vehicles with proto modules is not as profound as the difference between a proto with proto and a standard with standard infantry wise, I really don't see why a proto tank should cost 700+k hell anything higher then 300k when two 70-150k tanks can wreck them in a combined volley.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15354	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:43:00 - [10] - Quote As a Tank Operator (Aero keeps reminding me not to call them pilots) I feel its a matter of two things that irk me. 1.) A narrow and un-fufilling Skill tree that does not reward my SP investment, nor allow to me to specialise in specific types of tanking or racial groups tanks. It feels tacked on a poorly thought out. 2.) Lack of Vehicle Progression...... ever since 1.7 with the removal of Enforcers and prior to that the removal of Marauders...... tanks don't feel like they have an END GAME option. I put 20 Million SP into tanks and I'm done with what should be something like a 30 Million SP or higher role. E.G- I buy Vehicle Command V, LAV Command III (or something I dunno since I don't care), and HAV Command I........ (and I have end game tank hulls). No racial divisions into the role (each racial groups HAV should have its own separate skills to operate like drop-suits and ships in EVE. No in depth skill trees. Armour Upgrades is all of three skills (one for accesses Armour Reppers, one Plating and Hardeners, and one for reducing the speed penalties of Armour plates. Once upon a time Armour have 4 skills (Adaptation, Repair Systems, Plating, and Repairing) Shield had 5 skills (Adaptation, Boost Systems, Transporting, Extension, and Recharging), Vehicles also had core fitting skills and then more generic skills for scanners, Heat Sinks, Etc. One Good thing is that the Turret Operation Tree is nice and fleshed out. I honestly (and most will crucify me for saying this) loved HAV control when it was all about your skills investments, module selection, and plain tactical sense. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...

LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:44:00 - [11] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: They usually attract my attention because typically when I ignore vehicles the blueberries feed them corpses. If I didn't have to worry about being cloned out by Mcnobrain with 0/16 as their score I would just avoid vehicles. After all most are pretty easy to avoid and ignore, its just the hapless retards will lose the game for us if I don't get rid of them 9/10 times. So another who thinks it shouldn't be outright killing, but just a pain to infantry. OK! Nice! Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Xocoyol Zaraoul Superior Genetics 2819	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:45:00 - [12] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: For pilots: 1. When a tank on the enemy team appears, are you reluctant to field your own in fear of death? 2. Do you feel AV should be a thorn on your backside, while other vehicles the real threat? 3. Should Forge Guns be more effective than swarms? 4. Should Plasma Cannons be more effective than swarms? 5. Do you think AV or Anti Infantry is your primary role as a HAV/ADS pilot? I will also post a possible solution if my suspicions are correct in the second post, which shall be reserved. 1.) I yell out in glee and hunt the bastard down, hoping he'll call in yet another one so we may continue the dance until the match ends. 2.) AV should be a legitimate threat and capable of pulling off lethal ambushes in solos or concentrated obvious assaults in groups. 3.) Forge Guns should be more lethal then Swarms, it's a Heavy Weapon god damnit, all heavy weapons should be better then lights otherwise what's the point of using a dumb heavy? 4.) They should be a bit less effective then swarms since swarms CAN NOT engage infantry where as a PlC you can defend yourself with rather well, balance in all things. 5.) AV is my primary role as an HAV pilot, my last match I had 8 kills three assists and almost four thousand warpoints. I use a Large Railgun almost exclusively and I take it upon myself to clear rooftops via hills and deny the enemy of air support as well as transportation (And nothing in this game compares to murdering another HAV operator). I also reserve the right to take out any and all installations which my team is demonstrating an inability to capture. Sincerely yours, a Closed Beta Vet from the start. "You see those red dots over there? Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 14084	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:46:00 - [13] - Quote Vehicles don't make me angry. Their Pilots on the other hand, are just lol. Almost all of the ones I've faced are so terrible at DUST that they aren't even worth getting angry at. You'd think that being a Pilot during 1.0-1.6 would've taught them a few things eh? There are some exceptions to this, of course. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:46:00 - [14] - Quote True Adamance wrote: -stuff about unfulfilling SP stuffs- So a lack of customization and defined roles, right now they have little "fun", as it is nowadays mostly about staying alive than doing something for your team. Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 636	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:49:00 - [15] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: They usually attract my attention because typically when I ignore vehicles the blueberries feed them corpses. If I didn't have to worry about being cloned out by Mcnobrain with 0/16 as their score I would just avoid vehicles. After all most are pretty easy to avoid and ignore, its just the hapless retards will lose the game for us if I don't get rid of them 9/10 times. So another who thinks it shouldn't be outright killing, but just a pain to infantry. OK! Nice! The isk economy is too **** because CCP ignored district farming and locking for vehicles to be juggernaughts on the field at a high isk cost. It would ruin the game again as the head corps could just spam the best stupidly expensive vehicles to crush pubs because they have all dat moneh from a broken system that let beta players dominate and punished new players for not having stupid amounts of isk stockpiled. They work good now, the adv and proto fit ones just cost too much. They are far more then an annoyance as you put it. I used a tank earlier to completely turn the tables, if you are wise you can do a lot more to helping the team in a vehicle then on the ground. This isn't Eve. It has nothing outside of pvp, and a game that only favors the longest and richest will not have lasting appeal. Look at *** APEX, this was CCP trying to milk money because they knew ** was unfair for newcomers. Why anyone would buy into such manipulation is beyond me, but such is the nature of fremiums selling power as a business model. Kids stealing credit cards from their parents make fremiums work.
Henrietta Unknown Kirjuun Heiian 578	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:53:00 - [16] - Quote I'm annoyed that they are doing their job as infantry suppressors, so that means they are working as intended. Cocky and inexperienced infantry get the Blaster/Railgun rounds in their corpses; smart infantry and AV know when to back off, hide, re-engage, and ambush. Give the Magsex some love.
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:53:00 - [17] - Quote Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: LUGMOS wrote: For pilots: 1. When a tank on the enemy team appears, are you reluctant to field your own in fear of death? 2. Do you feel AV should be a thorn on your backside, while other vehicles the real threat? 3. Should Forge Guns be more effective than swarms? 4. Should Plasma Cannons be more effective than swarms? 5. Do you think AV or Anti Infantry is your primary role as a HAV/ADS pilot? I will also post a possible solution if my suspicions are correct in the second post, which shall be reserved. 1.) I yell out in glee and hunt the bastard down, hoping he'll call in yet another one so we may continue the dance until the match ends. 2.) AV should be a legitimate threat and capable of pulling off lethal ambushes in solos or concentrated obvious assaults in groups. 3.) Forge Guns should be more lethal then Swarms, it's a Heavy Weapon god damnit, all heavy weapons should be better then lights otherwise what's the point of using a dumb heavy? 4.) They should be a bit less effective then swarms since swarms CAN NOT engage infantry where as a PlC you can defend yourself with rather well, balance in all things. 5.) AV is my primary role as an HAV pilot, my last match I had 8 kills three assists and almost four thousand warpoints. I use a Large Railgun almost exclusively and I take it upon myself to clear rooftops via hills and deny the enemy of air support as well as transportation (And nothing in this game compares to murdering another HAV operator). I also reserve the right to take out any and all installations which my team is demonstrating an inability to capture. Sincerely yours, a Closed Beta Vet from the start. OK, now we're talking. So would you agree with the below statement: An HAV's primary role should be to destroy other vehicles and provide infantry suppression, only outright killing if the infantry stay in fire too long, but nothing ridiculously long. They would hamper enemy movement by destroying LAVs and possibly dropships, and by scaring the infantry to stay in cover. Or would you disagree with parts of it? Which parts? Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 636	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:54:00 - [18] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: LUGMOS wrote: For pilots: 1. When a tank on the enemy team appears, are you reluctant to field your own in fear of death? 2. Do you feel AV should be a thorn on your backside, while other vehicles the real threat? 3. Should Forge Guns be more effective than swarms? 4. Should Plasma Cannons be more effective than swarms? 5. Do you think AV or Anti Infantry is your primary role as a HAV/ADS pilot? I will also post a possible solution if my suspicions are correct in the second post, which shall be reserved. 1.) I yell out in glee and hunt the bastard down, hoping he'll call in yet another one so we may continue the dance until the match ends. 2.) AV should be a legitimate threat and capable of pulling off lethal ambushes in solos or concentrated obvious assaults in groups. 3.) Forge Guns should be more lethal then Swarms, it's a Heavy Weapon god damnit, all heavy weapons should be better then lights otherwise what's the point of using a dumb heavy? 4.) They should be a bit less effective then swarms since swarms CAN NOT engage infantry where as a PlC you can defend yourself with rather well, balance in all things. 5.) AV is my primary role as an HAV pilot, my last match I had 8 kills three assists and almost four thousand warpoints. I use a Large Railgun almost exclusively and I take it upon myself to clear rooftops via hills and deny the enemy of air support as well as transportation (And nothing in this game compares to murdering another HAV operator). I also reserve the right to take out any and all installations which my team is demonstrating an inability to capture. Sincerely yours, a Closed Beta Vet from the start. OK, now we're talking. So would you agree with the below statement: An HAV's primary role should be to destroy other vehicles and provide infantry suppression, only outright killing if the infantry stay in fire too long, but nothing ridiculously long. They would hamper enemy movement by destroying LAVs and possibly dropships, and by scaring the infantry to stay in cover. Or would you disagree with parts of it? Which parts? Isn't this what HAV do now? Or am I using my HAV wrong?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15357	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:56:00 - [19] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: For pilots: 1. When a tank on the enemy team appears, are you reluctant to field your own in fear of death? 2. Do you feel AV should be a thorn on your backside, while other vehicles the real threat? 3. Should Forge Guns be more effective than swarms? 4. Should Plasma Cannons be more effective than swarms? 5. Do you think AV or Anti Infantry is your primary role as a HAV/ADS pilot? 1.) When the enemy team appears I want to drive right into the middle of them and rely on my modules and skill to carry me through the engagement in a manner befitting my role....but I'd rather have a little chat with that Gunnlogi over there so get the ** out of my way infantrymen! 2.) Oh hell yeah. They should be powerful units that continually threaten vehicles on the map requiring us to make use of our modules and continually refine out fits....at the same time no one AVer should ever lock down entire maps from inaccessible locations. 3.) Yes and no. The Forgegun is an alpha weapon..... this it should hit damn hard vs all targets. The swarms by comparison are more like DPS weapon but have the benefits of automatic tracking which helps them pick off smaller more mobile targets. I really am not qualified to answer. 4.) I dunno? 5.) Anti Vehicle for sure. You don't stick an Anti Infantry Gun the equivalent of a .50 Calibre Machine Gun to a Main Battle tank and try to pass it off as a 120mm Cannon..... you just don't. What you do is fit an actual 120mm cannon that wrecks other ground based vehicles and shoots high explosive ammunition that wrecks static emplacements like a mutha ***. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...*
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:57:00 - [20] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: LUGMOS wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: They usually attract my attention because typically when I ignore vehicles the blueberries feed them corpses. If I didn't have to worry about being cloned out by Mcnobrain with 0/16 as their score I would just avoid vehicles. After all most are pretty easy to avoid and ignore, its just the hapless retards will lose the game for us if I don't get rid of them 9/10 times. So another who thinks it shouldn't be outright killing, but just a pain to infantry. OK! Nice! The isk economy is too **** because CCP ignored district farming and locking for vehicles to be juggernaughts on the field at a high isk cost. It would ruin the game again as the head corps could just spam the best stupidly expensive vehicles to crush pubs because they have all dat moneh from a broken system that let beta players dominate and punished new players for not having stupid amounts of isk stockpiled. They work good now, the adv and proto fit ones just cost too much. They are far more then an annoyance as you put it. I used a tank earlier to completely turn the tables, if you are wise you can do a lot more to helping the team in a vehicle then on the ground. This isn't Eve. It has nothing outside of pvp, and a game that only favors the longest and richest will not have lasting appeal. Look at *** APEX, this was CCP trying to milk money because they knew ** was unfair for newcomers. Why anyone would buy into such manipulation is beyond me, but such is the nature of fremiums selling power as a business model. Kids stealing credit cards from their parents make fremiums work. Soo... If tanks would have to make a conscious decision to kill or not to kill infantry, would you be satisfied? What if tanks could survive quite a while under fire, but couldn't really kill infantry? What I'm trying to get at is if people believe that I they should almost stay in their separate worlds, only intermingling if pushed to do so. Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15360	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:07:00 - [21] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: LUGMOS wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: They usually attract my attention because typically when I ignore vehicles the blueberries feed them corpses. If I didn't have to worry about being cloned out by Mcnobrain with 0/16 as their score I would just avoid vehicles. After all most are pretty easy to avoid and ignore, its just the hapless retards will lose the game for us if I don't get rid of them 9/10 times. So another who thinks it shouldn't be outright killing, but just a pain to infantry. OK! Nice! The isk economy is too **** because CCP ignored district farming and locking for vehicles to be juggernaughts on the field at a high isk cost. It would ruin the game again as the head corps could just spam the best stupidly expensive vehicles to crush pubs because they have all dat moneh from a broken system that let beta players dominate and punished new players for not having stupid amounts of isk stockpiled. They work good now, the adv and proto fit ones just cost too much. They are far more then an annoyance as you put it. I used a tank earlier to completely turn the tables, if you are wise you can do a lot more to helping the team in a vehicle then on the ground. This isn't Eve. It has nothing outside of pvp, and a game that only favors the longest and richest will not have lasting appeal. Look at *** APEX, this was CCP trying to milk money because they knew was unfair for newcomers. Why anyone would buy into such manipulation is beyond me, but such is the nature of fremiums selling power as a business model. Kids stealing credit cards from their parents make fremiums work. Soo... If tanks would have to make a conscious decision to kill or not to kill infantry, would you be satisfied? What if tanks could survive quite a while under fire, but couldn't really kill infantry? What I'm trying to get at is if people believe that I they should almost stay in their separate worlds, only intermingling if pushed to do so. Oh no no no...... If you get hit by a tank shell.... you gonna die mate. You get caught in one to many AoE explosions you gonna die mate. I already have a proposition in Feed back about altering the Blaster to better reflect Gallentean Heavy Battle Cannon. Instead of wasting time with 205 round magazines and only being able to fire 48 rounds consecutively why not stream line it and let if fire plasma cannon rounds. People talk all the time about how Plasma Cannoning takes skill and how Large Blasters do not........well now the ***** do. Direct Damage: 1092 Splash Damage: .25 of direct damage Round Chambering: 6 Maximum Ammuntion Stored: 78 RoF: 60 RPM Sustained DPS: 6552 (exactly the same as the current Ion Cannon...who'd have thunk it) 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 2820	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:10:00 - [22] - Quote Now let me tell you about what I hate about Vehicles... They are dumbed down, You see very few different types of vehicles now because for some ungodly reason they decided less modules and less slots would somehow make them more interesting. Less module skills that make a difference, again not interesting, though the new turret tree list is amazing balls and I love it. Racial parity is needed as currently we have too many anti-armor AV and not enough anti-shield for both infantry and turret weaponry. CPU is unfairly balanced, as if I drive a maddie then my CPU is so limited that I can barely fit secondary turretsGunnlogies on the other hand can without butchering the quality of their turrets and modules, also a gunlogie can fit an armor plate far easier then a maddie can fit a shield and this strikes me as grossely unfair. "You see those red dots over there? Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 636	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:13:00 - [23] - Quote If this thread was fishing for av vs. vehicle balance all I think should be changed is lowering adv/proto module costs on vehicles and increasing the effectiveness on Gallente vehicles. As it stands Gallente vehicles only outperform at the LAV level, their dropships would be okay if they didn't have giant princess Leah buns on their sides that take extra damage (Speaking of which can someone tell me where the hell the weakpoint on Caldari dropships is?) Also Gallente HAVs are getting wrecked I think armor hardeners performing like shield hardeners should help although they still will probably be boned as long as most av and long range vehicle AV favor wrecking armor. Right now if swarms get nerfed they run the risk of being thrown back in the closet of things no one ever uses. Being an all purpose player that feels the need to prove why his horribly spread stats are still good, I at least have extensive experience in all aspects of the gameish. With that self important statement out of the way, I have no fear av generally when I field a Gunnlogi at present unless there's some ******* in the red line with a proto rail gun. But again, that's vehicle vs. vehicle so I assume you aren't fishing for that... sorry. Madrugars blow in all situations but vs. Gunnlogis in a blaster showdown so that's where I think your desire to beg rattatai and the CPM to tweak things should lie. But because I assume this is what you really want with this thread here you go: NERF SWARM LAUNCHERZ DEY TO EZ AND DEY TOO GUD ERRYTIME I STAND STILL FOR A LONG TIME OR 3REE OF DEM FIRE AT ME I LOSE DAT NOT FAIR!!!!!!
Riptalis Horizons' Edge Proficiency V. 116	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:15:00 - [24] - Quote I hate how I don't have enough PG on my Python. Way too little and I die way too easily. Python pilot
Dust User KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1158	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:15:00 - [25] - Quote Vehicles **** me off because I'm a forge gunner.
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 636	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:18:00 - [26] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: LUGMOS wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: They usually attract my attention because typically when I ignore vehicles the blueberries feed them corpses. If I didn't have to worry about being cloned out by Mcnobrain with 0/16 as their score I would just avoid vehicles. After all most are pretty easy to avoid and ignore, its just the hapless retards will lose the game for us if I don't get rid of them 9/10 times. So another who thinks it shouldn't be outright killing, but just a pain to infantry. OK! Nice! The isk economy is too **** because CCP ignored district farming and locking for vehicles to be juggernaughts on the field at a high isk cost. It would ruin the game again as the head corps could just spam the best stupidly expensive vehicles to crush pubs because they have all dat moneh from a broken system that let beta players dominate and punished new players for not having stupid amounts of isk stockpiled. They work good now, the adv and proto fit ones just cost too much. They are far more then an annoyance as you put it. I used a tank earlier to completely turn the tables, if you are wise you can do a lot more to helping the team in a vehicle then on the ground. This isn't Eve. It has nothing outside of pvp, and a game that only favors the longest and richest will not have lasting appeal. Look at *** APEX, this was CCP trying to milk money because they knew was unfair for newcomers. Why anyone would buy into such manipulation is beyond me, but such is the nature of fremiums selling power as a business model. Kids stealing credit cards from their parents make fremiums work. Soo... If tanks would have to make a conscious decision to kill or not to kill infantry, would you be satisfied? What if tanks could survive quite a while under fire, but couldn't really kill infantry? What I'm trying to get at is if people believe that I they should almost stay in their separate worlds, only intermingling if pushed to do so. No, Tanks are a part of your team. But right now they can absolutely help infantry and chase of vehicles even if you fit them with a rail gun. They don't work in seperate worlds nor should they, everything should be balanced towards how things are and I must stress outside of Soma/Maddies I don't feel that infantry has an unfair advantage, Soma and Maddies are a resistance issue though, not anything to do with how AV vs. Vehicle is currently performing. Soma and Maddies underperform to Gunnlogis as well except as before mentioned when they are in a blaster showdown. When multiple AV wreck me with swarms, PLCs, and/or forges I look at the Clone count and decide if I should spawn more tanks. If we have more clones then them absolutely, if not I don't waste my time. Why? Because most infantry fits that have swarm launchers are ** against other infantry... so by acting as a distraction I can in fact help my team win indirectly if they are cloning them in turn.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2421	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:19:00 - [27] - Quote Atiim wrote: Nevermind. Just don't bother. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Xocoyol Zaraoul Superior Genetics 2821	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:20:00 - [28] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: OK, now we're talking. So would you agree with the below statement: An HAV's primary role should be to destroy other vehicles and provide infantry suppression, only outright killing if the infantry stay in fire too long, but nothing ridiculously long. They would hamper enemy movement by destroying LAVs and possibly dropships, and by scaring the infantry to stay in cover. Or would you disagree with parts of it? Which parts? An HAV's primary role should be to take out hard targets. Infantry are soft targets, installations and other vehicles are hard for clarification. HAVs should be slay-oriented as they can't hack or fit indoors or be stealthy or fast. The primary turret of an HAV should ideally be to take out hard targets and be longer-ranged then most infantry weaponry. I agree that HAVs should have a hard time taking out infantry, ignoring the morons who stay still (Like literally...) or run in perfectly straight lines towards the HAV at long range or decide to "Hug it out" with an HAV for extended periods of time with no legitimate counter-weapon. Suppression should be possible as they should have OHK weapons (More or less) to make infantry want to be wary, though again the OHK weapons should take skill to hit infantry with (Like our railguns right now, I love the spool-up time, gorgeous perfect Large Turrets). So in summary I would agree with your statement with my clarifying points above. I also want to go on the record and say I think Large Blaster Turrets need to be reworked, and that an HAV with operational small turrets should make infantry be very, very afraid. "You see those red dots over there? Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire
Zindorak G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1388	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:22:00 - [29] - Quote When im an infantry unit they are annoying cuz they run off like scrubs and come back with full health. Swarms are more annoying. Tthe most braindead weapon to use Pokemon master and Tekken Lord Give me da iskiez Gk0 Scout yay :)
Crimson ShieId Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 1518	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:25:00 - [30] - Quote The 1.7 hatred of tanks has died down for me, though while I don't hate tanks, what I do loathe are the good pilots. I'm not talking about the ones who can farm noobs with their squad of tanks all day long and never die because they've become masters of fleeing in their Cal scouts when their tank is threatened, I'm talking about the ones who are just so good you can't kill them on your own. At this point in the game, I usually see tanks as free warpoints, boundless RE's, packed Lai Dais, and a plasma cannon make short work of any tank... but those pilots who know what they're doing? Good luck even getting near them. So far, I've only encountered one of these in the entire game. Calypso (Few numbers in there, can't recall em though) This ****** is my bane so far and despite running into him in game about four times, I've never been able to kill him. Always runs small rails on his Sica and Gunlogi and he/she certainly knows how to use them to repel infantry where the large turret fails. I've yet to see him die in general, but I'm still hopeful. Things I dislike about tanking... True mentioned most of it. The role just doesn't feel all that rewarding anymore. Like scouts, it used to require a lot more skill. Activating modules at just the right times meant the difference between life and death, and while tankers were rare before 1.7, those who existed were exceptionally good. Tanks were generally more fun because of this, and due to their price tags, for most of the more casual players like myself, they were also more of a treat to run, a reward of sorts, like what proto was meant to be. The price tag drop though, as well as the low SP investment required to "tank" means that anyone can get in one and do alright if they don't suck completely. Militia tanks are perfectly viable if fit right and the pilot can back up the lack of modules and SP investment with skill, thus we see a lot more tanks on the battlefield and they become an annoyance rather than the great threat they were back in Chrome or even early Uprising. I want to punch.

TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:27:00 - [31] - Quote Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: LUGMOS wrote: OK, now we're talking. So would you agree with the below statement: An HAV's primary role should be to destroy other vehicles and provide infantry suppression, only outright killing if the infantry stay in fire too long, but nothing ridiculously long. They would hamper enemy movement by destroying LAVs and possibly dropships, and by scaring the infantry to stay in cover. Or would you disagree with parts of it? Which parts? An HAV's primary role should be to take out hard targets. Infantry are soft targets, installations and other vehicles are hard for clarification. HAVs should be slay-oriented as they can't hack or fit indoors or be stealthy or fast. The primary turret of an HAV should ideally be to take out hard targets and be longer-ranged then most infantry weaponry. I agree that HAVs should have a hard time taking out infantry, ignoring the morons who stay still (Like literally...) or run in perfectly straight lines towards the HAV at long range or decide to "Hug it out" with an HAV for extended periods of time with no legitimate counter-weapon. Suppression should be possible as they should have OHK weapons (More or less) to make infantry want to be wary, though again the OHK weapons should take skill to hit infantry with (Like our railguns right now, I love the spool-up time, gorgeous perfect Large Turrets). So in summary I would agree with your statement with my clarifying points above. I also want to go on the record and say I think Large Blaster Turrets need to be reworked, and that an HAV with operational small turrets should make infantry be very, very afraid. Small turrets are amazing at killing infantry though... and Blasters are the easiest to kill infantry with... I really don't want you guys to bring back the days of 1.7. I mean seriously, I see a lot of you blueberries blow at hitting ** in small turrets but they are exceptionally good if you aim and shoot at things. Pro-Tip: don't fire until the HAV/dropship stops/slows down, you aren't going to hit anything unless your lucky when moving/flying fast. Also sometimes the Rail turret doesn't exist, I figure this is a glitch but don't consider it a balance issue. For example, earlier I fired up close into a tank with another tank with a rail turret. The game didn't even show an explosion graphic and no damage was taken although I lost ammo. ** happens...
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:31:00 - [32] - Quote Crimson ShieId wrote: The 1.7 hatred of tanks has died down for me, though while I don't hate tanks, what I do loathe are the good pilots. I'm not talking about the ones who can farm noobs with their squad of tanks all day long and never die because they've become masters of fleeing in their Cal scouts when their tank is threatened, I'm talking about the ones who are just so good you can't kill them on your own. At this point in the game, I usually see tanks as free warpoints, boundless RE's, packed Lai Dais, and a plasma cannon make short work of any tank... but those pilots who know what they're doing? Good luck even getting near them. So far, I've only encountered one of these in the entire game. Calypso (Few numbers in there, can't recall em though) This **** is my bane so far and despite running into him in game about four times, I've never been able to kill him. Always runs small rails on his Sica and Gunlogi and he/she certainly knows how to use them to repel infantry where the large turret fails. I've yet to see him die in general, but I'm still hopeful. Things I dislike about tanking... True mentioned most of it. The role just doesn't feel all that rewarding anymore. Like scouts, it used to require a lot more skill. Activating modules at just the right times meant the difference between life and death, and while tankers were rare before 1.7, those who existed were exceptionally good. Tanks were generally more fun because of this, and due to their price tags, for most of the more casual players like myself, they were also more of a treat to run, a reward of sorts, like what proto was meant to be. The price tag drop though, as well as the low SP investment required to "tank" means that anyone can get in one and do alright if they don't suck completely. Militia tanks are perfectly viable if fit right and the pilot can back up the lack of modules and SP investment with skill, thus we see a lot more tanks on the battlefield and they become an annoyance rather than the great threat they were back in Chrome or even early Uprising. Is that Calypso guy the guy that always seems to have a small rail gunner? If so, yeah that guy ***** wrecks or at least that two man team. The large rail not such an issue but the guy on the small rail never seems to miss when I'm trying to forge him. It's a nightmare dealing with those two.
Vicious Minotaur 1432	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:41:00 - [33] - Quote Vehicles are awful. They need to be completely reworked from the ground up. No racial parity Lackluster customization/fitting options Unnecessarily expensive Worst vehicle interplay I have ever had the displeasure of experiencing Too threatening to infantry in some cases (large blaster turret needs to be completely redone) LAVs are horribly made and are completely unfit for any combat scenarios do to its moronic design. Physics are bad, handling is bad. Small turrets are death traps. Too expensive for what they give you. I have no idea about Dropships, so I will just say they are badly implemented and thought out. Look to real-world roles that aerial vehicles fill, and emulate those. HAVs are supposed to focus on large targets, not stupid soft infantry. Alas, there is a supreme lack of inter-vehicular combat due to LAVs being bad deathtraps, no MAVs, no MTACs, so really, there is little else for HAVs to target other than infantry and other HAVs. BORING. VEHICLES ARE LAME. I am a minotaur.
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:45:00 - [34] - Quote Vicious Minotaur wrote: Vehicles are awful. They need to be completely reworked from the ground up. No racial parity Lackluster customization/fitting options Unnecessarily expensive Worst vehicle interplay I have ever had the displeasure of experiencing Too threatening to infantry in some cases (large blaster turret needs to be completely redone) LAVs are horribly made and are completely unfit for any combat scenarios do to its moronic design. Physics are bad, handling is bad. Small turrets are death traps. Too expensive for what they give you. I have no idea about Dropships, so I will just say they are badly implemented and thought out. Look to real-world roles that aerial vehicles fill, and emulate those. HAVs are supposed to focus on large targets, not stupid soft infantry. Alas, there is a supreme lack of inter-vehicular combat due to LAVs being bad deathtraps, no MAVs, no MTACs, so really, there is little else for HAVs to target other than infantry and other HAVs. BORING. VEHICLES ARE LAME. LAVs are really good solo as the turrets are useless in motion but otherwise I agree. I'd love to see better engine physics with the LAVs so that turrets actually hit things (Halo 1, 2, 3, 7 etc. comes to mind on making our Warthogs combat effective.)
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:50:00 - [35] - Quote So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Crimson ShieId Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 1518	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:53:00 - [36] - Quote Quote: Is that Calypso guy the guy that always seems to have a small rail gunner? If so, yeah that guy ******* wrecks or at least that two man team. The large rail not such an issue but the guy on the small rail never seems to miss when I'm trying to forge him. It's a nightmare dealing with those two. Most of the time I've seen him, he's actually solo, he just swaps in between piloting and gunning, but yea, it is indeed a nightmare to try and take him out. One of the few I've come across that actually requires a two-three man team to down. I want to punch.
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:55:00 - [37] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I disagree with your general consensus. In all fairness, all roles outside of Logi's is a slayer role, by general consensus, and the general consensus of Logi's seems to be that Logi's should be able to slay too lol. People aren't generally creative, that doesn't mean you can't do many creative things with HAV's. Most people just think big tank me kill now, though.
Crimson ShieId Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 1518	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:55:00 - [38] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I'd say bring the old modules and hulls back, swap things back to active modules but allow that more advanced style of gameplay to be more rewarding. For those who don't know what they're doing though, AV likely sends the less skilled fleeing to the forums to complain, but for the pilots who have it together, it's a joke. I want to punch.
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:57:00 - [39] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I disagree with your general consensus. In all fairness, all roles outside of Logi's is a slayer role, by general consensus, and the general consensus of Logi's seems to be that Logi's should be able to slay too lol. People aren't generally creative, that doesn't mean you can't do many creative things with HAV's. Most people just think big tank me kill now, though. Shoot... I meant... I didn't clarify. Shouldn't have used that word. Vehicle slaying and infantry area support/denial/siege is better. Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:01:00 - [40] - Quote Crimson ShieId wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I'd say bring the old modules and hulls back, swap things back to active modules but allow that more advanced style of gameplay to be more rewarding. For those who don't know what they're doing though, AV likely sends the less skilled fleeing to the forums to complain, but for the pilots who have it together, it's a joke. I was thinking passive reps forever was a good idea, but there should be an option for sort of like a rep booster, an active module that boosts the rep rate of a vehicle for some amount of time, having a cool down. This would encourage smart module activation and would reward smarter gameplay. The overall module system as has been pointed out before generally lacks what it used to have in diversity; you had different modules to choose from that made your tank different from others'. Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15361	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:02:00 - [41] - Quote Crimson ShieId wrote: Quote: Is that Calypso guy the guy that always seems to have a small rail gunner? If so, yeah that guy ******* wrecks or at least that two man team. The large rail not such an issue but the guy on the small rail never seems to miss when I'm trying to forge him. It's a nightmare dealing with those two. Most of the time I've seen him, he's actually solo, he just swaps in between piloting and gunning, but yea, it is indeed a nightmare to try and take him out. One of the few I've come across that actually requires a two-three man team to down. That's how I do it as well, Main Anti Tank Gun and switch on hardeners and to a Small Rails if infantry presents itself. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15361	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:04:00 - [42] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: Crimson ShieId wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I'd say bring the old modules and hulls back, swap things back to active modules but allow that more advanced style of gameplay to be more rewarding. For those who don't know what they're doing though, AV likely sends the less skilled fleeing to the forums to complain, but for the pilots who have it together, it's a joke. I was thinking passive reps forever was a good idea, but there should be an option for sort of like a rep booster, an active module that boosts the rep rate of a vehicle for some amount of time, having a cool down. This would encourage smart module activation and would reward smarter gameplay. The overall module system as has been pointed out before generally lacks what it used to have in diversity; you had different modules to choose from that made your tank different from others'. EWWWWW please. Passive reps on Armour was the worst thing that was every done to HAV, and buffed pulsing Shield reps absolutely a big no no of shields where slow constant regen was acceptable. Passive reps on armour are also too ******* easy and doesn't require any thought. 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 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:05:00 - [43] - Quote Crimson ShieId wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I'd say bring the old modules and hulls back, swap things back to active modules but allow that more advanced style of gameplay to be more rewarding. For those who don't know what they're doing though, AV likely sends the less skilled fleeing to the forums to complain, but for the pilots who have it together, it's a joke. Never should something be a joke for others to attempt against you. In a competitive environment there is no such sure way to ensure Monotonous game play then by making one aspect god mode when mastered.
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:09:00 - [44] - Quote Crimson ShieId wrote: Quote: Is that Calypso guy the guy that always seems to have a small rail gunner? If so, yeah that guy ******* wrecks or at least that two man team. The large rail not such an issue but the guy on the small rail never seems to miss when I'm trying to forge him. It's a nightmare dealing with those two. Most of the time I've seen him, he's actually solo, he just swaps in between piloting and gunning, but yea, it is indeed a nightmare to try and take him out. One of the few I've come across that actually requires a two-three man team to down. It wasn't the same guy, but still I'd imagine quite hard to beat given how good and underestimated small turrets are. The guy I was thinking of kept turning the vehicle to face me as the gunner fired. It was a gunnlogi so my caldari heavy couldn't strafe faster then his turning and he'd just center me as I hit em with my proto forge. his gunner fired at me several times but it only takes like 3 hits for a proto small rail to wreck my caldari heavy.
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:34:00 - [45] - Quote OK, so what reasoning do you give that there are no real HAV battles anymore? I assure you, I'm definitely not Spkr 2.0 in any way. I just want HAVs to be something... More meaningful. And more fulfilling. Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:36:00 - [46] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: OK, so what reasoning do you give that there are no real HAV battles anymore? I assure you, I'm definitely not Spkr 2.0 in any way. I just want HAVs to be something... More meaningful. And more fulfilling. I can't answer a question that supposes something I don't agree with. HAV battles occur pretty much every time I enter a HAV. Only when the infantry AV dedicates hard to stopping me do I really get destroyed otherwise it takes another HAV to dominate me. And that's coming from someone that doesn't even have ADV/PRO modules.
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:38:00 - [47] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: LUGMOS wrote: OK, so what reasoning do you give that there are no real HAV battles anymore? I assure you, I'm definitely not Spkr 2.0 in any way. I just want HAVs to be something... More meaningful. And more fulfilling. I can't answer a question that supposes something I don't agree with. HAV battles occur pretty much every time I enter a HAV. Only when the infantry AV dedicates hard to stopping me do I really get destroyed otherwise it takes another HAV to dominate me. And that's coming from someone that doesn't even have ADV/PRO modules. So you think HAVs are perfect right now... I want to see where the community sees shortcomings with HAVs as they stand at the moment. Would you like to see more modules reintroduced? What would you like to see more in an HAV? Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:43:00 - [48] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: LUGMOS wrote: OK, so what reasoning do you give that there are no real HAV battles anymore? I assure you, I'm definitely not Spkr 2.0 in any way. I just want HAVs to be something... More meaningful. And more fulfilling. I can't answer a question that supposes something I don't agree with. HAV battles occur pretty much every time I enter a HAV. Only when the infantry AV dedicates hard to stopping me do I really get destroyed otherwise it takes another HAV to dominate me. And that's coming from someone that doesn't even have ADV/PRO modules. So you think HAVs are perfect right now... I want to see where the community sees shortcomings with HAVs as they stand at the moment. Would you like to see more modules reintroduced? What would you like to see more in an HAV? As to more modules being introduced its not that I don't want to see new content, its that no new content has come since 1.8 which was before CCP announced it was for less of a better term, pulling the plug. Granted we got some new sockets but I'm still skeptical that we will actually see the introduction of new content player wise (Weapons, equipment, modules, etc.) as much as I'd love to mind you. I mean those sockets could have been in the works already. God knows we know there exists place holders for a lot of other things like vehicles that haven't been introduced still over a year after the official release. As to balance. Armor HAV's need to be readdressed and I think raising armor hardeners to be on par with shield hardeners is a pretty good start. Given that they constantly regen and can do so on par or higher then shield tanks combined with their higher e/hp may be enough to rebalance them, although they may still be disadvantaged by the overwhelming amount of long range armor profiled AV. Not sure what to do about that but to add new content IE. adding Amarr shield based heavy weapon AV or something, but again I wouldn't hold your breath for that.
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1005	Posted - 2014.12.03 01:58:00 - [49] - Quote Perfect! I knew I could get more out of you! As for the introduction of different modules, it would not be difficult and most entirely possible. The only reason they still aren't in game is because of balancing, as Rattati doesn't believe there is true balance in vehicles ATM. The RE-introduction of modules wouldn't be difficult, as the assets exist and it would only be a matter of putting them back into the game code. Only numbers would be changed on them. I would totally agree with you on the armor vehicle bit. Its not even just HAVs. Its all armor vehicles. I had proposed an idea to temporarily remove AV weapon damage profiles, as there is only one shield based AV weapon at the moment, which is entirely unfair to armor vehicles. What's more is that their hardeners also have less strength in comparison. The original intent was for armor hardeners to reflect an armor tank's strength as a vehicle that could take constant hits, and for shield HAVs to be hit and run specialists. Its why the armor hardener doesn't have as much resistance but lasts longer. However, the armor tanks strengths isnt good against the alpha based rail and missile shield based tanks, as the resists won't do you much good. At least not as much as the shield tank's would... Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2421	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:06:00 - [50] - Quote Getting stuck on rocks, boxes and walls, and having to wait 3 whole seconds to get off of them. Going so slow over the slightest bumps (especially LAVs) that an old woman in a powered scooter can go faster. LAVs slow down going up the slightest incline. Dropships handle like an aircraft carrier trying to turn in the ocean. They're supposed to be the helicopter of the future. There should be a greater distinction between forward movement and upward movement. Turning radius on the regular STD dropships should be decreased. Definitely faster than they are now, but not as fast as the ADS. Fix the turret auto-correcting itself to look straight forward when it reaches a certain point. I've shot myself out as a side gunner more than once, and this needed to be fixed a long time ago. Large missile turrets aren't always full auto. When it's not full auto, it fires 2, 3 or 4 missiles at a time. Sometimes you need to be able to hold down the trigger and let them all loose in 2 seconds, instead of trying to quickly tap the trigger. Large railguns have been screwed up for a much longer time. I'll sometimes have a reload glitch where it can't finish reloading for a minute or more. When it won't fix itself, the only option is to recall. Another one, I'll be firing my rail, holding the trigger down, nothing will come out, then I'll release the trigger and one round will fire, as a delayed reaction. Much worse than that, I'll hold down for 2 rounds, then my rail starts to auto-fire, getting down to 2 rounds left before overheating. This has gotten me killed far too many times. Turret rotation speed is too slow. The change of the seasons happens faster than a 360-¦ rotation of a large rail or missile turret. Rarely when I switch from third to first person, my rail will be looking off to the side. Not good when I'm about to engage a vehicle. Rail spool up time needs to be reduced. Overheat needs to be reduced. Give us 350m or 400m range. (off topic, but move the spawns back a few hundred meters, probably the redline too - it'll prevent redline sniping from both infantry and railguns) There's no good reason to take infantry's advice on vehicles. They only ask for us to be nerfed. They had the armor reps, armor hardeners, shield hardeners, and afterburner nerfed. Why? because they don't want to reload to take out a vehicle. If they have to reload, that's not fair. Pilots should be consulted on a fair compromise. So far, it's been infantry having the sole voice in the direction vehicles take. Don't like the lack of variety as far as modules go. We had so much stuff before that we could fit a tank any way we wanted. We were actually able to fit a logi tank, because you could get shot out of the LAV. The main thing I don't like about vehicles? Pilots aren't asked what we want done to them. We never have been. That needs to change. My voice falls on deaf ears; infantry literally hates me because before, I never, ever compromised on the role I chose. I remember when I was able to shrug off while fighting a tank, because a tank should be the biggest threat to another tank. Have an annoying blaster tank that won't let you move out? Get a rail tank and vaporize it. But then with that, it comes down to rail fights. ADS ruining your day? Shoot it with a rail to instill the fear of god into the pilot. And last, infantry said the placeholder stats for the pilot suits were OP. We didn't know if they had module, equipment or weapon slots, or if they would have their own specialized modules to further improve the vehicle. Infantry declared them OP, and then they were forgotten about. This needs to change. Hear our voices, Rattati. We're not slobbering morons that so many on here will lead you to believe. It was pilots that pointed out the incredible buff to swarms when they were changed, because infantry couldn't do anything immediately after firing a volley. It worked out to 7000 damage before reloading. When the TAC ARs were OP, it was worked out that the damage they put out was on par with a large blaster, the neutron I believe. It's still possible to one-shot an armor tank in the sweet spot with the PRO breach forge, Caldari sentinel, proficiency 5 and 4 damage mods. I've nearly done it when I had the Minmatar sentinel and proficiency 3. If I had the Cal sentinel with 4 damage mods and proficiency 5, there's no doubt in my mind I would've been able to destroy armor tanks in one shot. That, obviously is all about positioning, aim, and the right timing. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim

TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 64	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:08:00 - [51] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: So in the light of this question, what about vehicles pisses you off? 1. If you don't kill it, they go 30-0 and lose no ISK? 2. Is it because they instagank you? 3. Is it because all they're good for is camping CRUs? 4. Is it because they have no defined role? 5. Is it because they die too quickly to make a difference? 6. Do you feel that AV should be a more viable counter to HAVs and ADS than other HAVs or ADS? 7. Other? And please explain what. For pilots: 1. When a tank on the enemy team appears, are you reluctant to field your own in fear of death? 2. Do you feel AV should be a thorn on your backside, while other vehicles the real threat? 3. Should Forge Guns be more effective than swarms? 4. Should Plasma Cannons be more effective than swarms? 5. Do you think AV or Anti Infantry is your primary role as a HAV/ADS pilot? I will also post a possible solution if my suspicions are correct in the second post, which shall be reserved. I'll try my best to answer your questions. 1. No but the biggest threat to me besides a well oiled AV squad and installations are another tank. I try to think what large turret they are using and how can I attack them to have an advantage? 2. Yes and No. One individual should with a skilled weapon should give me pause but I feel that an organized group should be a threat. 2 high level operators of a forge gun or swarm can have skills to push my back making them my immediate threat and put them in my crosshairs. Vehicles are typically the greatest threat to me. 3. I think forge guns should be more of a threat because heavies are slow enough I can back off versus swarmers that can move at higher speeds making it hard to disengage. 4. I'd say Plasma Cannons and Swarms are on the same playing field but swarmns are far easier to operate. All you do with swarms is lock-on, fire and forget. Plasma cannons need aim and adjustment for your distance to target. They tend to need skill or at least more so than swarms. Truthfully they should be about equal in performance. 5. I feel that my primary role is AV in that I remove vehicles/installations from hindering my infantry teammates. When all of those are removed I do my best to suppress advancing red berries so that my teammates can advance. I myself in my vehicle cannot take a point since I would need to get out in order to hack a point. CCP has stated the intent of vehicles was not to act as an anti infantry force. I would say however that should stop vehicles from posing a threat to infantry.
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:09:00 - [52] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: Perfect! I knew I could get more out of you! As for the introduction of different modules, it would not be difficult and most entirely possible. The only reason they still aren't in game is because of balancing, as Rattati doesn't believe there is true balance in vehicles ATM. The RE-introduction of modules wouldn't be difficult, as the assets exist and it would only be a matter of putting them back into the game code. Only numbers would be changed on them. I would totally agree with you on the armor vehicle bit. Its not even just HAVs. Its all armor vehicles. I had proposed an idea to temporarily remove AV weapon damage profiles, as there is only one shield based AV weapon at the moment, which is entirely unfair to armor vehicles. What's more is that their hardeners also have less strength in comparison. The original intent was for armor hardeners to reflect an armor tank's strength as a vehicle that could take constant hits, and for shield HAVs to be hit and run specialists. Its why the armor hardener doesn't have as much resistance but lasts longer. However, the armor tanks strengths isnt good against the alpha based rail and missile shield based tanks, as the resists won't do you much good. At least not as much as the shield tank's would... Only issue I see with the damage profile removal is that Forge guns and PLC's can still effect other infantry. You can certainly say I told you so when it happens but with as long as development has taken with this game I seriously doubt the re-introduction of anything has anything to do with balance. Armor having staying power just doesn't work in this game mechanic wise. Considering everything is sectioned off by SP walls and not say kill streaks or what have you, the only logical choice is always the power choice. If armor tanks or any tanks for that matter can sit there and take punishment there is no reason for all players not to spec and play with said things. People overplay hacking objectives if the entire team could field tanks, they would, and one guy would just walk out to cap the objective/s once they are surrounded. This game has a long history of ignoring obvious simple game abuses for months, that's just Rattatai's doing his job to say x is in the works. Don't take any company's word for it unless you want to be a sucker.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2421	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:13:00 - [53] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: Crimson ShieId wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I'd say bring the old modules and hulls back, swap things back to active modules but allow that more advanced style of gameplay to be more rewarding. For those who don't know what they're doing though, AV likely sends the less skilled fleeing to the forums to complain, but for the pilots who have it together, it's a joke. I was thinking passive reps forever was a good idea, but there should be an option for sort of like a rep booster, an active module that boosts the rep rate of a vehicle for some amount of time, having a cool down. This would encourage smart module activation and would reward smarter gameplay. The overall module system as has been pointed out before generally lacks what it used to have in diversity; you had different modules to choose from that made your tank different from others'. We used to have that. On a Madrugar in the old days, the only module you didn't have to activate was an armor plate. I've juggled a rep, 3 hardeners, a scanner and a NOS. On a Gunnlogi, I used to juggle a booster and 3 hardeners. Active modules are certainly not new, and there's a lot of us that perfected module management/activation in order to survive as well as take out vehicles. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15367	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:19:00 - [54] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: LUGMOS wrote: Crimson ShieId wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I'd say bring the old modules and hulls back, swap things back to active modules but allow that more advanced style of gameplay to be more rewarding. For those who don't know what they're doing though, AV likely sends the less skilled fleeing to the forums to complain, but for the pilots who have it together, it's a joke. I was thinking passive reps forever was a good idea, but there should be an option for sort of like a rep booster, an active module that boosts the rep rate of a vehicle for some amount of time, having a cool down. This would encourage smart module activation and would reward smarter gameplay. The overall module system as has been pointed out before generally lacks what it used to have in diversity; you had different modules to choose from that made your tank different from others'. We used to have that. On a Madrugar in the old days, the only module you didn't have to activate was an armor plate. I've juggled a rep, 3 hardeners, a scanner and a NOS. On a Gunnlogi, I used to juggle a booster and 3 hardeners. Active modules are certainly not new, and there's a lot of us that perfected module management/activation in order to survive as well as take out vehicles. Hmmm you had a very odd build? I remember my two armour fits being 2 hardeners and 1 repper or 2 reppers and one hardener. Damage Control II and a Heat Sink II in the highs I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2421	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:20:00 - [55] - Quote Henrietta Unknown wrote: Summa Militum wrote: The only vehicles that ** me off are the dropships that can shoot you from head-on (not the ones that have turrets on the side of the drop ship, I am talking about the one with the turret in the front of the dropship facing forward) . I can be taking on a group of people single-handedly and kicking some serious ass and then the next thing I know the ground around me is being blown to hell and I die. I give props to the guy in the dropship who just saved his team but at the same time that guy can go ** himself. It's called an Assault Drop Ship, and it's very expensive - some 200K ISK. That's not at all expensive. My current Gunnlogi missile fit is 455k ISK, which is 1/3 the price my PC-quality fit used to cost. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:24:00 - [56] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Henrietta Unknown wrote: Summa Militum wrote: The only vehicles that ** me off are the dropships that can shoot you from head-on (not the ones that have turrets on the side of the drop ship, I am talking about the one with the turret in the front of the dropship facing forward) . I can be taking on a group of people single-handedly and kicking some serious ass and then the next thing I know the ground around me is being blown to hell and I die. I give props to the guy in the dropship who just saved his team but at the same time that guy can go ** himself. It's called an Assault Drop Ship, and it's very expensive - some 200K ISK. That's not at all expensive. My current Gunnlogi missile fit is 455k ISK, which is 1/3 the price my PC-quality fit used to cost. In all fairness, currently a 200kish ADS will get swatted out of the sky in 2-3 swarm volleys aka a single load aka one person can shoot those things out of the sky. The good ADS cost far more. HAVs are only really more expensive than an ADS when you use 2 proto small turrets on the HAV. Because, turrets in general are ridiculously over priced.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15367	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:26:00 - [57] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Henrietta Unknown wrote: Summa Militum wrote: The only vehicles that ** me off are the dropships that can shoot you from head-on (not the ones that have turrets on the side of the drop ship, I am talking about the one with the turret in the front of the dropship facing forward) . I can be taking on a group of people single-handedly and kicking some serious ass and then the next thing I know the ground around me is being blown to hell and I die. I give props to the guy in the dropship who just saved his team but at the same time that guy can go ** himself. It's called an Assault Drop Ship, and it's very expensive - some 200K ISK. That's not at all expensive. My current Gunnlogi missile fit is 455k ISK, which is 1/3 the price my PC-quality fit used to cost. In all fairness, currently a 200kish ADS will get swatted out of the sky in 2-3 swarm volleys aka a single load aka one person can shoot those things out of the sky. The good ADS cost far more. HAVs are only really more expensive than an ADS when you use 2 proto small turrets on the HAV. Because, turrets in general are ridiculously over priced. Pfff not even. I loved it when Prototype turrets cost 981,000 ISK! I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15367	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:26:00 - [58] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Henrietta Unknown wrote: Summa Militum wrote: The only vehicles that ** me off are the dropships that can shoot you from head-on (not the ones that have turrets on the side of the drop ship, I am talking about the one with the turret in the front of the dropship facing forward) . I can be taking on a group of people single-handedly and kicking some serious ass and then the next thing I know the ground around me is being blown to hell and I die. I give props to the guy in the dropship who just saved his team but at the same time that guy can go ** himself. It's called an Assault Drop Ship, and it's very expensive - some 200K ISK. That's not at all expensive. My current Gunnlogi missile fit is 455k ISK, which is 1/3 the price my PC-quality fit used to cost. No tanks cost 1.5 Million ISK Spkr I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Mossellia Delt Militaires Sans Jeux 1927	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:29:00 - [59] - Quote What annoys me is tanks not setting off my proxies, not taking damage from my forge gun and having my av nades bounce off of tanks. What annoys me tanking is my gun constantly resetting to the middle of the screen every 2 seconds. Delt for CPM2 CPM1 MISSION : FAILED Moss-delt on skype
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:31:00 - [60] - Quote True Adamance wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Henrietta Unknown wrote: Summa Militum wrote: The only vehicles that ** me off are the dropships that can shoot you from head-on (not the ones that have turrets on the side of the drop ship, I am talking about the one with the turret in the front of the dropship facing forward) . I can be taking on a group of people single-handedly and kicking some serious ass and then the next thing I know the ground around me is being blown to hell and I die. I give props to the guy in the dropship who just saved his team but at the same time that guy can go ** himself. It's called an Assault Drop Ship, and it's very expensive - some 200K ISK. That's not at all expensive. My current Gunnlogi missile fit is 455k ISK, which is 1/3 the price my PC-quality fit used to cost. In all fairness, currently a 200kish ADS will get swatted out of the sky in 2-3 swarm volleys aka a single load aka one person can shoot those things out of the sky. The good ADS cost far more. HAVs are only really more expensive than an ADS when you use 2 proto small turrets on the HAV. Because, turrets in general are ridiculously over priced. Pfff not even. I loved it when Prototype turrets cost 981,000 ISK! That crap better shot rainbows at the MCC while spitting its own Null Missiles for that much isk...

TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 637	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:33:00 - [61] - Quote Mossellia Delt wrote: What annoys me is tanks not setting off my proxies, not taking damage from my forge gun and having my av nades bounce off of tanks. What annoys me tanking is my gun constantly resetting to the middle of the screen every 2 seconds. proxies really should go off instantly... I mean they freakin' beep warning people LAVs and injector tanks shouldnt be able to drive over them no matter how fast they are going...
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15367	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:35:00 - [62] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Mossellia Delt wrote: What annoys me is tanks not setting off my proxies, not taking damage from my forge gun and having my av nades bounce off of tanks. What annoys me tanking is my gun constantly resetting to the middle of the screen every 2 seconds. proxies really should go off instantly... I mean they freakin' beep warning people LAVs and injector tanks shouldnt be able to drive over them no matter how fast they are going... They do though. They just don't always kill the HAV. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Mossellia Delt Militaires Sans Jeux 1927	Posted - 2014.12.03 02:37:00 - [63] - Quote True Adamance wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Mossellia Delt wrote: What annoys me is tanks not setting off my proxies, not taking damage from my forge gun and having my av nades bounce off of tanks. What annoys me tanking is my gun constantly resetting to the middle of the screen every 2 seconds. proxies really should go off instantly... I mean they freakin' beep warning people LAVs and injector tanks shouldnt be able to drive over them no matter how fast they are going... They do though. They just don't always kill the HAV. I've seen tank right overtop of them and nothing. Usually these people are from countries on the other side of the planet from me. Delt for CPM2 CPM1 MISSION : FAILED Moss-delt on skype
LUGMOS YELLOW JESUS EXP FORCE 1006	Posted - 2014.12.03 03:07:00 - [64] - Quote True Adamance wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Mossellia Delt wrote: What annoys me is tanks not setting off my proxies, not taking damage from my forge gun and having my av nades bounce off of tanks. What annoys me tanking is my gun constantly resetting to the middle of the screen every 2 seconds. proxies really should go off instantly... I mean they freakin' beep warning people LAVs and injector tanks shouldnt be able to drive over them no matter how fast they are going... They do though. They just don't always kill the HAV. O they don't. It takes about a second to go off... Either that or every time I use them they lag. Quafe Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2424	Posted - 2014.12.03 04:58:00 - [65] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I disagree with your general consensus. In all fairness, all roles outside of Logi's is a slayer role, by general consensus, and the general consensus of Logi's seems to be that Logi's should be able to slay too lol. People aren't generally creative, that doesn't mean you can't do many creative things with HAVs. Most people just think big tank me kill now, though. Seriously though dude? Are you just Spkr 2.0? Do you just want everyone to say tanks should be stronger and kill dem!! 1. How would one make tanks more fun then the fact that they ignore the most weapons and can be used as CRUs? What do you want them to do sprout wings and summon orbital strikes around them every 3 minutes? Do you want them to give all players on the map passive armor and shield reps? More damage? What the hell are you fishing for? 2. If you're scared of AV infantry let me introduce you to freakin proto rail guns on enemy tanks. 3. If you make higher fit tanks its already been discussed to death only two scenarios will occur: a. Standard/militia tanks become useless while players have to fork out large amounts of isk and sp to make viable tanks b. ADV/PRO tanks become so powerful that nothing can compete, they just can't scale that kind of power, it takes ******* proto AV to scare STD/MLT tanks currently. 4. This links back to question one, what are you wanting that tanks can't perform? Laser beams that fire out of every square inch of the tank? The ability to cook toast for the MCC NPCs? 5. See 4 and 1, I'd like jetpacks for infantry that doesn't mean we need em. 6. Only for Armor tanks, shield tanks are fine, screw off with your whimsies of bringing back 1.7. These are the sorts of nonsensical posts that CCP has a habit of paying attention to. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2424	Posted - 2014.12.03 05:07:00 - [66] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Crimson ShieId wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I'd say bring the old modules and hulls back, swap things back to active modules but allow that more advanced style of gameplay to be more rewarding. For those who don't know what they're doing though, AV likely sends the less skilled fleeing to the forums to complain, but for the pilots who have it together, it's a joke. Never should something be a joke for others to attempt against you. In a competitive environment there is no such sure way to ensure Monotonous game play then by making one aspect god mode when mastered. So because I've mastered module management, that's not fair to everybody else? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2424	Posted - 2014.12.03 05:16:00 - [67] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: LUGMOS wrote: Crimson ShieId wrote: LUGMOS wrote: So, the general idea is that it is too unfulfilling and boring, with lack of actual skill in input from the operator. It is more about slaying, as its focus has been shifted from having to do multiple things at once, tank battles are generally nonexistent and bland. So, more food for thought: What would be the best way to bring in more fun to tanking? Is the power of AV scaring some tankers away from fielding tanks? Is it the lack of profit to be made? Is it the general lackluster in tank battle mechanics/modules? Would bringing in more diversity in modules and vehicles solve some puzzles? Should tank survivability versus AV be increased? Maybe just the Madrugar/Soma? I'd say bring the old modules and hulls back, swap things back to active modules but allow that more advanced style of gameplay to be more rewarding. For those who don't know what they're doing though, AV likely sends the less skilled fleeing to the forums to complain, but for the pilots who have it together, it's a joke. I was thinking passive reps forever was a good idea, but there should be an option for sort of like a rep booster, an active module that boosts the rep rate of a vehicle for some amount of time, having a cool down. This would encourage smart module activation and would reward smarter gameplay. The overall module system as has been pointed out before generally lacks what it used to have in diversity; you had different modules to choose from that made your tank different from others'. We used to have that. On a Madrugar in the old days, the only module you didn't have to activate was an armor plate. I've juggled a rep, 3 hardeners, a scanner and a NOS. On a Gunnlogi, I used to juggle a booster and 3 hardeners. Active modules are certainly not new, and there's a lot of us that perfected module management/activation in order to survive as well as take out vehicles. Hmmm you had a very odd build? I remember my two armour fits being 2 hardeners and 1 repper or 2 reppers and one hardener. Damage Control II and a Heat Sink II in the highs What odd build? I'm talking about during Chrome. Never needed PG or CPU enhancers, because the PG and CPU skills actually added to the tank. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2424	Posted - 2014.12.03 05:17:00 - [68] - Quote True Adamance wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Henrietta Unknown wrote: Summa Militum wrote: The only vehicles that ** me off are the dropships that can shoot you from head-on (not the ones that have turrets on the side of the drop ship, I am talking about the one with the turret in the front of the dropship facing forward) . I can be taking on a group of people single-handedly and kicking some serious ass and then the next thing I know the ground around me is being blown to hell and I die. I give props to the guy in the dropship who just saved his team but at the same time that guy can go ** himself. It's called an Assault Drop Ship, and it's very expensive - some 200K ISK. That's not at all expensive. My current Gunnlogi missile fit is 455k ISK, which is 1/3 the price my PC-quality fit used to cost. In all fairness, currently a 200kish ADS will get swatted out of the sky in 2-3 swarm volleys aka a single load aka one person can shoot those things out of the sky. The good ADS cost far more. HAVs are only really more expensive than an ADS when you use 2 proto small turrets on the HAV. Because, turrets in general are ridiculously over priced. Pfff not even. I loved it when Prototype turrets cost 981,000 ISK! That's when tanks were worth the cost. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 3114	Posted - 2014.12.03 05:19:00 - [69] - Quote I could never be mad at my babies. God and Empress kill me, I'm a level three forum warrior.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 447	Posted - 2014.12.03 06:24:00 - [70] - Quote Vehicles annoy me because they are hard to balance. Either they are super weak and die to every little AV, or they are stupid strong tank swarm/forge after swarm/forge and wipe the battlefield. Where is the trifecta of balance?

Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2425	Posted - 2014.12.03 06:56:00 - [71] - Quote Imp Smash wrote: Vehicles annoy me because they are hard to balance. Either they are super weak and die to every little AV, or they are stupid strong tank swarm/forge after swarm/forge and wipe the battlefield. Where is the trifecta of balance? There can't be any balance. Infantry wants to destroy them without having to reload. We want our best counter to be another vehicle. Infantry didn't like how a Soma built in a very specific way could 2-shot the Sagaris or Surya. That wasn't fair to them, so they campaigned to get them removed when Uprising dropped. One person would take out a MLT tank to stay low on ISK. Then someone would take out a Sica, also to stay low on ISK. Then STD tanks came into play to wipe them out. Then the Marauders were brought out, and it turned into all-out tank v tank warfare. But that wasn't fair to infantry, for tanks to fight tanks like that, so they had them nerfed and AV buffed. Rattati, I don't know how much of the history of the game and forums you know about, but it's been like this since tanks were first available. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Mortishai Belmont G.L.O.R.Y General Tso's Alliance 263	Posted - 2014.12.03 07:26:00 - [72] - Quote Vehicles and AV is just fine aside from the swarms. Need slower lock on time or slower projectiles. If you take all the skill of AIMING out of a weapon in a FPS game, it should have serious drawbacks. G.L.O.R.Y Soldier, I'm that Amarr heavy you warn your team about <3 -Heavy/Logi/Assault/Scout-
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15382	Posted - 2014.12.03 07:35:00 - [73] - Quote Imp Smash wrote: Vehicles annoy me because they are hard to balance. Either they are super weak and die to every little AV, or they are stupid strong tank swarm/forge after swarm/forge and wipe the battlefield. Where is the trifecta of balance? Well think about this. You know the Gunnlogi everyone talks about crushing easily right? Surely you have your fair share of Gunlogi kills? Imagine that..... with the same total EHP.....but 40% easier to kill..... I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...


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.

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Pokemon master and Tekken Lord

Give me da iskiez

Gk0 Scout yay :)

I am a minotaur.

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Quafe

Delt for CPM2

Delt for CPM2

Quafe