|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
13578
   |
Posted - 2014.12.08 13:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
So, scratching my head about trying to figure out a place for vehicles on the battlefield without making them super dropsuits that massacre infantry without a care in the world, I thought of something.
Vehicles need a role, a reason to exist on the field, and so I thought: "What would make vehicles extremely valuable to infantry without having them be extreme killing machines?"
And then I realized: "Support vehicles"
If tanks are to hunt tanks, those original tanks need a reason to exist in the first place.
That was originally wrecking infantry, but as evidence shows, that's only fun for the pilots.
So we are in a position where vehicles don't really do much but "exist", and nobody bothers to bring their own vehicles to hunt them down since they're either not worth bothering with, or dispatched quickly with AV.
Imagine if Logi vehicles were highly tanky, to the point where infantry AV would require a long time and a lot of concentrated fire to take down.
Now imagine if said Logi vehicles provided powerful bonuses in an AOE to infantry: 100hp/s armor and shield regen, damage amplification, ammo resupply, mobile CRU, mobile supply depot, scanning, etc'.
You would want a way to get rid of them - You would WANT killer vehicles, vehicles designed to hunt other vehicles.
You would WANT to have armored control on the battlefield, so you could bring support vehicles with impunity.
This gives vehicles a reason to exist initially, and provides a target that infantry can't easily dispatch of.
This gives vehicles a reason to hunt down other vehicles.
This gives people a reason to want armored control of the field.
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
13579
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 13:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
Skybladev2 wrote:Infantry can wear militia swarm and try to get rid of vehicle, but if they can not do that due to heavily tanked vehicle there can be situation, when support vehicle can dominate the battlefield if there is no pilots in opposite team. Or they have no money to bring even militia tank.
How will the support vehicles dominate the battlefield?
Rep them to death?
Besides, I meant that they have a large enough buffer that enemy infantry can hunt down those who hurt their Logi vehicles.
If you have strong enough AV power and enough infantry to cover them, you can take down the Logi vehicle after pounding it for a bit.
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
13579
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 13:36:00 -
[3] - Quote
Skybladev2 wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Skybladev2 wrote:Infantry can wear militia swarm and try to get rid of vehicle, but if they can not do that due to heavily tanked vehicle there can be situation, when support vehicle can dominate the battlefield if there is no pilots in opposite team. Or they have no money to bring even militia tank. How will the support vehicles dominate the battlefield? Rep them to death? Providing too much bonus to friendly infantry. I don't know how it should be properly balanced, but this could greatly shift the balance if not implemented properly. But, in general, I like this idea and always dream of it.
"Besides, I meant that they have a large enough buffer that enemy infantry can hunt down those who hurt their Logi vehicles.
If you have strong enough AV power and enough infantry to cover them, you can take down the Logi vehicle after pounding it for a bit."
Edited the post
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
13593
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 19:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Cat Merc wrote:So, scratching my head about trying to figure out a place for vehicles on the battlefield without making them super dropsuits that massacre infantry without a care in the world, I thought of something.
Vehicles need a role, a reason to exist on the field, and so I thought: "What would make vehicles extremely valuable to infantry without having them be extreme killing machines?"
And then I realized: "Support vehicles"
If tanks are to hunt tanks, those original tanks need a reason to exist in the first place.
That was originally wrecking infantry, but as evidence shows, that's only fun for the pilots.
So we are in a position where vehicles don't really do much but "exist", and nobody bothers to bring their own vehicles to hunt them down since they're either not worth bothering with, or dispatched quickly with AV.
Imagine if Logi vehicles were highly tanky, to the point where infantry AV would require a long time and a lot of concentrated fire to take down.
Now imagine if said Logi vehicles provided powerful bonuses in an AOE to infantry: 100hp/s armor and shield regen, damage amplification, ammo resupply, mobile CRU, mobile supply depot, scanning, etc'.
You would want a way to get rid of them - You would WANT killer vehicles, vehicles designed to hunt other vehicles.
You would WANT to have armored control on the battlefield, so you could bring support vehicles with impunity.
This gives vehicles a reason to exist initially, and provides a target that infantry can't easily dispatch of.
This gives vehicles a reason to hunt down other vehicles.
This gives people a reason to want armored control of the field. As I see it niche roles in HAV are required to made the role enjoyable. We need the fundamentals to produce things like Light Scout Tanks Heavy Infantry Tanks Tank Destroyers APC and from EVE comparisons Ewar or Support HAV Look I appreciate you've now come to realise the horror of HAV first hand and to placate you Pokey Dravon and IWS have compiled massive suggestions, models, numbers for vehicle rebalances including how to define specific tank roles through bonuses, etc, and I have my suggestions about taking the AI out of blasters and making it primarilyy (that mean first and foremost not wholly) an AV weapon. Keep Calm and Carry on.
It might be because it's late and I need to sleep, but I can't tell if you're for or against my suggestion?
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
13610
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 04:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Just to throw this out there one thing I would like to be able to do again in my HAV is if required to be able to "demolish" the map. Aka remove turrets, installations, etc in a meaningful manner.
Turrets once had roughly 750 Shields and 3015 Armour.....this is arguably too little. Currently they have 2500 Shields and something like 10000 Armour...... this is arguably too much.
I would say no.
When a tank wants to, turrets disappear quite quickly.
They're supposed to be a roadblock.
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
13711
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 15:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
Lazer Fo Cused wrote:Cat Merc wrote:True Adamance wrote:Just to throw this out there one thing I would like to be able to do again in my HAV is if required to be able to "demolish" the map. Aka remove turrets, installations, etc in a meaningful manner.
Turrets once had roughly 750 Shields and 3015 Armour.....this is arguably too little. Currently they have 2500 Shields and something like 10000 Armour...... this is arguably too much.
I would say no. When a tank wants to, turrets disappear quite quickly. They're supposed to be a roadblock. 1. A roadblock is supposed to stop a vehicle from using a road, installations do not hence they are not a roadblock 2. Installations have 12000 HP yet no one uses them or defends them, they are WP hacking points at best and at worst useless and pointless 3. Installations are destroyed 1st by pilots because they are not defended by blues, are a WP hub for enemy players who will hack and in the case of the blaster will auto shoot you 4. HAV of today cannot handle an installation shooting at them while AV and or another vehicle shoots at them, Chrome HAV could take on 2 other HAV and a FG at the same time and win because of a more indepth a useful skill tree, better skill bonuses, better slot layouts, more PG/CPU, more variety of useful modules - None of this exists in todays game hence why they need to removed automatically
1. Roadblock doesn't necessarily literally mean a block on a rode, it's an expression.
2. I use/defend installations when the battle calls for it. You can't expect me to guard a random turret 24/7.
3. Ditto
4. That's quite stupid. It really is. The difference between STD and PRO infantry isn't that large, and with vehicles it should be no different. I'm glad that they got rid of tiering anyway.
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
13713
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 16:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Lazer Fo Cused wrote:Cat Merc wrote:Lazer Fo Cused wrote:Cat Merc wrote:True Adamance wrote:Just to throw this out there one thing I would like to be able to do again in my HAV is if required to be able to "demolish" the map. Aka remove turrets, installations, etc in a meaningful manner.
Turrets once had roughly 750 Shields and 3015 Armour.....this is arguably too little. Currently they have 2500 Shields and something like 10000 Armour...... this is arguably too much.
I would say no. When a tank wants to, turrets disappear quite quickly. They're supposed to be a roadblock. 1. A roadblock is supposed to stop a vehicle from using a road, installations do not hence they are not a roadblock 2. Installations have 12000 HP yet no one uses them or defends them, they are WP hacking points at best and at worst useless and pointless 3. Installations are destroyed 1st by pilots because they are not defended by blues, are a WP hub for enemy players who will hack and in the case of the blaster will auto shoot you 4. HAV of today cannot handle an installation shooting at them while AV and or another vehicle shoots at them, Chrome HAV could take on 2 other HAV and a FG at the same time and win because of a more indepth a useful skill tree, better skill bonuses, better slot layouts, more PG/CPU, more variety of useful modules - None of this exists in todays game hence why they need to removed automatically 1. Roadblock doesn't necessarily literally mean a block on a rode, it's an expression. 2. I use/defend installations when the battle calls for it. You can't expect me to guard a random turret 24/7. 3. Ditto 4. That's quite stupid. It really is. The difference between STD and PRO infantry isn't that large, and with vehicles it should be no different. I'm glad that they got rid of tiering anyway. 1. Expression - Like a needle in a haystack 2. You should or the enemy will get it, if not why bother in the 1st place? 3. Same, use it or lose it 4. Yes it is, more PG/CPU/Slots but currently you are sat in your PROTO suit with PROTO weapon and PROTO modules while im in my BASIC suit since pilot suits do not exist with a BASIC hull and PROTO modules if i can fit all proto which sometimes i cannot and PROTO turret if it can be fitted - You really should say 'im happy they got rid of tiering for vehicles because i like COD in space' since obv tiering for infantry still exists since you can get PROTO and fit all PROTO on it
2. The enemy team too won't randomly get it until they have a use for it, in which case I have a reason to defend it
3. Ditto
4. Your "basic" hulls are balanced against proto weapons. Saying they're "basic" doesn't mean crap. Also, I am one of the earliest supporters of infantry tiercide.
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
13725
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 20:17:00 -
[8] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Cat Merc wrote:True Adamance wrote:Just to throw this out there one thing I would like to be able to do again in my HAV is if required to be able to "demolish" the map. Aka remove turrets, installations, etc in a meaningful manner.
Turrets once had roughly 750 Shields and 3015 Armour.....this is arguably too little. Currently they have 2500 Shields and something like 10000 Armour...... this is arguably too much.
I would say no. When a tank wants to, turrets disappear quite quickly. They're supposed to be a roadblock. Quickly? What quickly? An installation falls to a tank with XT-201 missiles on them in two volleys. Problem with the missile? 50m less range than the railgun. It takes 7 rounds from particle cannon to destroy an installation, and that's without any interruption. After resuming, could be from 8 to 10 rounds to finish it. No, they don't disappear quickly.
That's rather quick. 
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++
|
|
|
| |
|