DUST Search - On vehicles

Quasar Storm wrote:

True Adamance wrote:

Traditionally you do not make a technology that is designed to protect against your own weaponry..... you make one to protect yourself against your enemies technology.

Regardless he does say some valuable things even if a few are coloured by the bitterness of an old vet....but what both of you need to remember most of all is that any prospective vehicles we may have reintroduced must be balanced around the current PRO AV, and currently at this time there are some very obvious issues with the interplay between the two.

- Shield HAV are statistically superior in every respect to armour HAV
- Shield Hardeners are 15% more efficient than Armour Hardeners for no good reason, allowing for stacking abuse.
- Shield Passive Regeneration if far too effective for not having to fit a module allowing Shield HAV to fully regen in a matter of 20-30 seconds.
- Lack of Modules
- Explosive and Kinetic Heavy AV meta renders Armour HAV ineffective but means Shield HAV can ignore lesser AV.
- Fitting disparities between Shield and Armour HAV
- Shield HAV @ MLT and STD level have too much potential eHP for their tier.

Nerfing Shielded HAVs in not a solution. I think what should be better is buff armor HAVs.

I know you play with armor. So, I know you want armor to be good. I play with shields, So of course, I want them to be effective. I know how you feel.

The only issue I have with shields is the boosters don't work very well for HAVs in PC. The slightest nudge can dud them out.
The uneven terrain can rip your shields to nothing sometimes. That's not very nice. I can still even get armor damage sometimes if hit with something that has heavy Alpha. Shields have depleted recharge & recharge rates that take a moment to engage. Armor has passive all-around repair & shield recharge. Armor tanks also don't have to sacrifice most of their survival abilities to put on other modules like DMG mods, CRU, Scanners or Fuel Injectors. That's why armor was always the popular blaster. Don't have to trade all of your health for other things. I do think Armor HAVs could use some PG.

The LRG Blaster needs a skill for dispersion. It really is a circle of prayers after the first two shots. Plus, In PC, One of the things that was so enjoyable & fulfilling was when there was an enemy blaster covering an objective. What did your team do? Dial 911 for your Rail tank. The escalation was great.

Also, I just thought that Cal & Gal could get resistances to their own tech, Because when & if CCP reintroduces more of the Race variant turrets, You would come up with some specialized fits for targets. You would go try to remove a Caldari Rail tank off the field with Caldari Rail. You'd get a Gal Rail. Just thinking about more ways to put the "Special" back into Vehicle Specialist. Of course, This wouldn't even need to be remotely considered until those turrets were out. Wouldn't be fair, For the selection we have now already favors Caldari.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Draden Brohiem D3ATH CARD RUST415 22	Posted - 2014.12.14 20:09:00 - [1] - Quote Zepod wrote: You wrote so much text for someone who knows they won't be taken seriously. Though since we are balancing around Physics, I'd like to make 2 Propositions: 1. FGs Destroy Vehicles in 1 Hit; Sends DSs Into Orbit. Forge Guns are powered by a capacitor, which fires magnetic slugs traveling at 3000m/s. That would be enough to not only destroy any vehicle imaginable, but would also send what's left of the remains about 3km away from the impact, which is the size of about 2.5 maps. 2. Firing 20GJ & 80GJ Turrets Kills The Pilot 20 Gigajoules is enough force to turn a Metropolitan area into a parking lot, which would surely destroy the vehicle that it's mounted onto. If they're using an 80GJ? Well, lets just hope that those corporations have Planetary Insurance. Spkr4theDead wrote: Note to infantry: You should be a deterrent, not the nuclear option. We've been telling you for over a year how to destroy us, tailored to individual vehicles. You've never taken our advice, instead sticking to your idea that you should be the end-all solution. I've said many times that a Wiyrkomi Breach is able to destroy an armor with base HP in one shot, but you've never believed me. Actually, Pilots are supposed to be a deterrent. Back in the days of 1.1, Infantry have been telling you how to survive AV, and even supplied multiple methods of surviving different types of AV. You've never taken their advice, and simply stuck to the idea that you should be the god-mode class that goes 50/0 each-match. Spkr4TheDead wrote: It's called the rear end. You get 167% efficiency when you hit a tank in the power plant. The PRO breach at proficiency 5, on a Caldari sentinel could vaporize a tank in one shot. You all kept saying GÇ£you can't do that, it's impossible,GÇ¥ yet forget that infantry weapons have a headshot multiplier. Unless you're fighting a Sica with Base HP, that's not happening. Dispite you and ES's claims, this has been proven several times by multiple people. Then again you're both terrible tankers so I wouldn't be surprised if a MLT Swarm Launcher 1HK'd you. Spkr4TheDead wrote: Tanks have their multiplier in the back. But, you never wait for that perfect opportunity, choosing instead to engage it at the very first opportunity you get. That is when the pilot is aware, and more often than not has modules ready to go to prevent them from being destroyed. You cannot take out a tank in such a manner, unless it's a MLT tank, and the pilot has no clue as to what to do. Would you mind listing and presenting the data given to you by your multiple trials and tests you've performed to come to this conclusion? Surely someone who's calming to know the actions of a community as a whole would have evidence to back it up, right? How is he not taken seriously? This is a forum community not a proto dictatorship. His opinion is as valid as anyone else's! This is not a popularity contest. He has made true and valid points! Nothing he said about infantry or tanks is incorrect. Your corp you're in doesn't make or break your opinion. I bet CCP takes what he has written here into consideration long before your dumb forge gun suggestion.
Draden Brohiem D3ATH CARD RUST415 22	Posted - 2014.12.14 20:16:00 - [2] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: True Adamance wrote: Traditionally you do not make a technology that is designed to protect against your own weaponry..... you make one to protect yourself against your enemies technology. Regardless he does say some valuable things even if a few are coloured by the bitterness of an old vet....but what both of you need to remember most of all is that any prospective vehicles we may have reintroduced must be balanced around the current PRO AV, and currently at this time there are some very obvious issues with the interplay between the two. - Shield HAV are statistically superior in every respect to armour HAV - Shield Hardeners are 15% more efficient than Armour Hardeners for no good reason, allowing for stacking abuse. - Shield Passive Regeneration if far too effective for not having to fit a module allowing Shield HAV to fully regen in a matter of 20-30 seconds. - Lack of Modules - Explosive and Kinetic Heavy AV meta renders Armour HAV ineffective but means Shield HAV can ignore lesser AV. - Fitting disparities between Shield and Armour HAV - Shield HAV @ MLT and STD level have too much potential eHP for their tier. Nerfing Shielded HAVs in not a solution. I think what should be better is buff armor HAVs. I know you play with armor. So, I know you want armor to be good. I play with shields, So of course, I want them to be effective. I know how you feel. The only issue I have with shields is the boosters don't work very well for HAVs in PC. The slightest nudge can dud them out. The uneven terrain can rip your shields to nothing sometimes. That's not very nice. I can still even get armor damage sometimes if hit with something that has heavy Alpha. Shields have depleted recharge & recharge rates that take a moment to engage. Armor has passive all-around repair & shield recharge. Armor tanks also don't have to sacrifice most of their survival abilities to put on other modules like DMG mods, CRU, Scanners or Fuel Injectors. That's why armor was always the popular blaster. Don't have to trade all of your health for other things. I do think Armor HAVs could use some PG. The LRG Blaster needs a skill for dispersion. It really is a circle of prayers after the first two shots. Plus, In PC, One of the things that was so enjoyable & fulfilling was when there was an enemy blaster covering an objective. What did your team do? Dial 911 for your Rail tank. The escalation was great. Also, I just thought that Cal & Gal could get resistances to their own tech, Because when & if CCP reintroduces more of the Race variant turrets, You would come up with some specialized fits for targets. You would go try to remove a Caldari Rail tank off the field with Caldari Rail. You'd get a Gal Rail. Just thinking about more ways to put the "Special" back into Vehicle Specialist. Of course, This wouldn't even need to be remotely considered until those turrets were out. Wouldn't be fair, For the selection we have now already favors Caldari. Very true!