|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1314
|
Posted - 2014.12.14 18:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
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. 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. 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.
The previous Packed Lai Dai AV grenades did around 2000 damage each, after the armor damage bonus if they hit a vehicle with no shield. Those are nuclear baseball, and rightly deserved a damage nerf, and should get another one, to keep with AV being a deterrent. Swarms should do less damage, as they now travel faster than an assault dropship can fly, along with being able to travel 400m, avoiding obstacles, going around corners, and flying an inch above the ground to hit vehicles that are below the plane of a road. Forge guns are good in that they require aim, but again, should do less damage to vehicles in keeping with AV being a deterrent. The plasma cannon requires more aim and timing than the forge gun, and oddly is the only AV weapon that has a damage bonus against shields.
I'm not familiar with EVE lore, but that sounds odd to me.
General:
LAV: fast transport around the battlefield on the ground - lightly armored vehicle. - Logistics LAV: slightly slower than the STD LAV; remote shield booster for vehicles, remote shield transporter for infantry; remote armor repairs for infantry and armor, separate modules. The remote modules should be area of effect, as the old modules were very difficult to use, doubly so when there was enemy fire and a vehicle or infantry needed repairs. When first activated, the driver was able to freely move the direction to lock on to whatever needed shield/armor, then the direction was locked back forward; the driver was able to move once the lock was established.
HAV: hulking behemoths of the battlefield on the ground GÇô heavily armored vehicles, able to take a beating and dish out punishment, putting the fear of God into the enemy. - Marauder HAV: slight speed reduction from their STD level counterparts, able to throw higher damage at the cost of top speed. No more than a 75% reduction in speed when the siege module is active (infantry have called for them to stop moving completely, but there is no combat without movement). - Enforcer HAV: slight speed reduction from their STD level counterparts, able to take extreme punishment at the cost of top speed. No more than a 75% reduction in speed when the siege module is active.
Dropship: rapid air transport around the battlefield GÇô able to take enough punishment to drop troops on the field, then leave the area to pick up and drop off more troops where they're needed. - Assault Dropship: Fast flying, damage dealing ships with high agility. Missile variants for anti-infantry and anti-vehicle. Small railgun for strictly anti-vehicle work. - Logistics Dropship: Slow flying, heavily armored with the sole purpose of moving troops around the battlefield, able to remotely repair vehicles and infantry, with an on board mCRU, no side turrets. Remote armor repairs and shield boosting should be area of effect in a cone shape pointed towards the ground. Should be high enough that it doesn't have to scrape the ground in order to use the remote modules.
Modules, current and proposed modules to return:
Shield extenders, shield boosters, active shield hardeners, remote shield boosters (infantry and vehicle), passive shield hardeners, active armor repairs, active armor hardeners, passive armor hardeners, remote armor repairs (infantry and vehicle), active damage modules, active coolant modules, CPU expansion modules, active scanners, powergrid expansion modules, nitrous injectors, afterburners.
Proposed skills:
Marauder Operation: +2% duration to siege module per level Caldari Marauder Operation: +5% rotation speed to railgun/missile turrets per level Gallente Marauder Operation: +2% rotation speed to hybrid/blaster turrets per level
Assault Dropship Operation: +2% damage per level Caldari Assault Dropship Operation: +2% rate of fire and ammo capacity per level Gallente Assault Dropship Operation: +2% rate of fire and ammo capacity per level
Logistics Dropship Operation: - 10% reduction to mCRU spawn time per level, +5% remote module range per level Caldari Logistics Dropship Operation: +2% remote shield booster rate per level Gallente Logistics Dropship Operation: +2% remote armor repair rate per level
Logistics LAV Operation: +2% remote module range per level Caldari Logistics LAV Operation: +2% remote shield booster rate per level Gallente Logistics LAV Operation: +2% remote armor repair rate per level
Enforcer HAV Operation: +2% to duration of siege module per level Caldari Enforcer HAV Operation: +5% shield resistance per level Gallente Enforcers HAV Operation: +5% armor resistance per level
You mixed up Enforcer HAV's and Marauder
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1314
|
Posted - 2014.12.14 18:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:how can you expect physics to affect infantry but not vehicles. i shouldn't have been surprised to see a 1 sided argument from you
your examples are 1) a car hitting a soft unarmored target. if that was a statue made of steel the approx size and weight of a dropsuit that vehicle would be destroyed also. if that vehicle hit a wall it would be destroyed, if that vehicle hit another vehicle it would be destroyed. 2) as for the guy getting crushed. well its all all down to ground pressure. dust vehicles don't slowly run over a soft target exerting its whole weight on one spot. its spread out. this is the reason tanks don't just sink into the ground. you can run over someones legs with a tank and not break a single bone.
hit a reinforced object like a wall and that tank is going to take huge damage. i have seen it before in RL a tank hitting a rock and virtually splitting in 2. i know what you are going to say and that this is not rl and we have shields etc. well so do dropsuits and physics is real. you can't have real physics for 1 thing and make up the rest for yourself.
i say go for real physics for kills but you must have the same physics also affecting you in the same way.
so that means a swarm hitting a flying vehicle will violently shake it, a rail hitting a tank will slow it down and shake it throwing off its aim slightly. vehicles colliding will destroy each other or have them sustain hugh damage
also why do you feel the need to always blame the infantry. you reap what you sow. you constantly place vehicles above all other playstyles like they are the most important things and i know you will turn this into me being anti vehicle like you always do but i never have been. i'm anti players with your attitude in every role that that thinks they are something special and that every other players views are irrelevant.
When jumping from 400m to the ground you guys have inertia dampens. I propose you take those away because those don't exist and make infantry have real physics. I would also take away the stupid strafe as well. Any person strafing with that speed is gonna break those ankles on the first change in direction. Let's also make it say 2-3 bullets kll any suit because that is more realistic. Lets make it so a missile from a tank will kill any infantry within a 8m diameter of where it lands. You know, you might as well give tanks really really long range like they gave in real with range over 2+ miles and unherd of accuracy. We should also make it more realistic because is real, tanks moving at top speed of 50 mp/h can hit a target the size of a plate from 2 miles away.
We should also add the fact that infantry have weapons that can severely injure newer tanks are destroy older tanks in a shot.
Trust me, you don't want realistic conditions.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1317
|
Posted - 2014.12.15 20:01:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:I agree with OP that I enjoyed seeing and being a part of bigger tank battles, with escalation. I also agree that since we are having tanks in the game, there should be some variety, preferably some stone/paper/scissors. The entry point seems to be the most difficult, in "why do I need Tanks in my infantry game"
Maybe the Marauder can be that take and hold monster, that has small turrets and is incredibly difficult to dislodge and requires tank destroyer HAV's.
IT'S NOT STONE!!! IT'S ROCK!!!
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1317
|
Posted - 2014.12.15 20:09:00 -
[4] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:KING CHECKMATE wrote:Ghost Kaisar wrote:My view on the Tank vs. Infantry balance.
Large turrets should have little to no infantry slaying power. Suppressive abilities at best (Via splash damage that makes it harmful, but not lethal to any infantry that isn't an idiot.)
To counter, small turrets need to be more effective vs. infantry, so that we can see a pilot+Gunner as an effective combo.
In BF3, you never saw a good tanker without a gunner. The top gun was vital for deterring infantry from pull out SMAW after SMAW in an effort to take you down.
It was the gunners responsibility to get rid of C4 runners and to protect the tanks sides and flanks while engaging vehicles.
This is what I want. I can agree, taht if a tank is controlled by multiple players it has the right to be that many times effective. So i second Kaisar's idea. What im against is 1 Man uber tanks. Vehicles are far more SP intensive than the AV skills are.
I completely agree with this, my 40 million sp Vehicle ALT is not even closed to being maxed out anywhere in vehicles or turrets but he is completely useless as infantry because all sp is in vehicles and still get destroyed. I have been tanking since chromosome, that is what brought me into this game and have a lot of experience in almost every vehicle and still get ganked by one punk on a tower in is Minmatar commando and proto swarms. Probably a fit that costs 10 million isk sp max. Absolute max unless you're just a scrub that act's like "OMG I have swarm launcher proficiency to 5, I have kin cats to 5, micro fibs to 5." even though that makes no sense.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1317
|
Posted - 2014.12.15 20:11:00 -
[5] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Sir Snugglz wrote:I agree that vehicle pilots are a minority. But you have to admit the derpship pilots are the minority of the minority. While its always been tankers vs infantry.... we've had to struggle with derpships vs infantry and/or tankers.
I also agree that the ADS was nerfed too much. But it wasn't when the rate of fire or ab got nerfed.... It was long before that. Til this day I have yet to get a reason as to why the 2nd low slot was taken away. I can not stress how important that slot is for the Cal ADS or the 2nd high slot for the Gal ADS.
Yes they needed nerfs.. but now more than ever do they need that second slot. The OPness overshadowed that necessity... but now that the OPness is gone I hope that everyone can now see why I keep saying that we need that 2nd slot back. The 3rd volley from a swarm is now always guaranteed to hit. A dropship needs everything it can possibly get to increase survivability not only from AV, but from guys in tanks like me. As it stands now, with 2 damage mods, I can 2-shot any ADS out of the sky if I catch it cold.
As it stands now, either you're a max ADS pilot with a crap ton of sp and play skill involved in flying or you get dominated by my mediocre standard Caldari assault with an ADV swarms and two militia damage mods.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1317
|
Posted - 2014.12.15 20:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
Did I mention you messed up Marauder and Enforcer HAV skill.
Marauder should have resistances.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1317
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 02:02:00 -
[7] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:Did I mention you messed up Marauder and Enforcer HAV skill.
Marauder should have resistances. No, I didn't get them mixed up.
Yes, Yes you did.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1318
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 12:45:00 -
[8] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:Did I mention you messed up Marauder and Enforcer HAV skill.
Marauder should have resistances. No, I didn't get them mixed up. Yes, Yes you did. I deliberately swapped the skills. I didn't get them mixed up. Then you shouldn't have. There was no need to.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance
1318
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 22:32:00 -
[9] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote: Why not?
Because that is how it was in Chromosome. That is how it was in uprising.
CCP even said Marauder- Defensive tank Enforcer- Offensive tank
Why change it?
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
|
|
|