| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
duster 35000
Algintal Core
Gallente Federation
108
   |
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:20:00 -
[331] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:duster 35000 wrote:True Adamance wrote:duster 35000 wrote:
So would the marauders have 5/2 and 2/5?
And what would thier base hp be?
They could be depending on whether or not we here can come with a way to abuse 5 slots..... Old values aren't too bad. What were your thoughts? My thoughts on what exactly? marauders? Tanks? Slots? Well, marauders would be slower and less tracking, maybe 15% less damage on the hull for the turrets...I can make my fitting 2 extenders 1 booster 1 hardener for that tank...maybe marauders get no small turrets? Dunno really, tanking is kinda meh right now, it's too much ofna pain to use the large blaster...I swear killing competent players is very annoying because of the accuracy. Even when bursting. Unless of course the mlt blaster is less accurate. 15% less damage is unreasonable suggestion. Do we penalize sentinels with damage reduction because they have more HP and resistances over the normal heavy suits.. NO.. Then why marauders? Where is this logic coming from. You can't just simply take a weapon and reduce it's damage. For example- if you take a M16 from a soldiers hands and put it in the hand of a Terrorist, no matter what- that gun will still do the same amount of damage as it did in soldiers hands, it will travel same speed. ect.
Less power going to the turret?
Just saying if there has to a penalty, I mean people might say why use the std hav's?
Choo Choo
|
DarthJT5
12th Shadow Legion
160
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:20:00 -
[332] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Lazer Fo Cused wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Lazer Fo Cused wrote:
3. Problem is if you make the hull base HP too low it just means you will have to use a slot for a HP module anyways
That's kind of the idea. It makes the tank as good as what tier you fit on it, rather than innately good because it has high base HP with fewer slots. 3. It just makes it madatory to put on a HP module - Right now on my current gunlogi fit it has no extenders on it That is correct. However the difference is that a Gunnlogi fit with a Basic extender will have less HP than one fit with a Complex Extender. Currently it doesn't matter because you can rely on the Base HP. Under this concept, what you fit to the vehicle has more weight. In other words it establishes a deeper Risk/Reward architecture in terms of fitting. LAVs are a good example of this. LAVs currently have extremely high base HP and a low number of slots. This allows people who choose not to fit their LAV with anything, to enjoy a rather sizable pool of HP with very little (if any) investment. The base HP of the LAV should be decreased with additional slots added so players actually have to fit HP modules in order to obtain high levels of HP. Additionally if a player does not care about having a lot of HP, they can use the additional slots to fit a more unique and specialized fit. Added flexibility always a plus in my book. So while the HAV does not suffer as much as the LAV in terms of excessive base HP and lack of slots, it follows a similar line of design which I would like to see changed. Heavies have high HP, this allows them to choose modules other than extenders and plates. Why shouldn't this be same for HAV. Why must tanks be forced to tank, why not have scanners or CRU's or fuel injectors.
The whole point of changing the slot layout and base hp is so you ARENT forced to tank....... If you want to build a tank around utility, you can with these ideas. If you want hp, you can put on hp mods, but you don't have to. I'm sorry, but I don't understand what your arguing about.....
Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta.
Up and coming Python pilot.
The awnser is always XT missiles....
|
Bam Nutshot
Kaalmayoti Warzone Control
48
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:22:00 -
[333] - Quote
^ Scrub alert
Keep nerfing tanks Don't litsen to what he says i wan't tanks so nerfed i can one shot them with a python missile
For the State!
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law
General Tso's Alliance
1334
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:22:00 -
[334] - Quote
duster 35000 wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:duster 35000 wrote:True Adamance wrote:duster 35000 wrote:
So would the marauders have 5/2 and 2/5?
And what would thier base hp be?
They could be depending on whether or not we here can come with a way to abuse 5 slots..... Old values aren't too bad. What were your thoughts? My thoughts on what exactly? marauders? Tanks? Slots? Well, marauders would be slower and less tracking, maybe 15% less damage on the hull for the turrets...I can make my fitting 2 extenders 1 booster 1 hardener for that tank...maybe marauders get no small turrets? Dunno really, tanking is kinda meh right now, it's too much ofna pain to use the large blaster...I swear killing competent players is very annoying because of the accuracy. Even when bursting. Unless of course the mlt blaster is less accurate. 15% less damage is unreasonable suggestion. Do we penalize sentinels with damage reduction because they have more HP and resistances over the normal heavy suits.. NO.. Then why marauders? Where is this logic coming from. You can't just simply take a weapon and reduce it's damage. For example- if you take a M16 from a soldiers hands and put it in the hand of a Terrorist, no matter what- that gun will still do the same amount of damage as it did in soldiers hands, it will travel same speed. ect. Less power going to the turret? Just saying if there has to a penalty, I mean people might say why use the std hav's?
Well, why use heavy frames over sentinels? Why use light frames over scouts? Why use medium frames over Assaults? Same reason, because the STD HAV is there for you to get a taste of vehicles, if you want to go hard core you go for the specialized ones.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law
General Tso's Alliance
1334
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:28:00 -
[335] - Quote
DarthJT5 wrote:
The whole point of changing the slot layout and base hp is so you ARENT forced to tank....... If you want to build a tank around utility, you can with these ideas. If you want hp, you can put on hp mods, but you don't have to. I'm sorry, but I don't understand what your arguing about.....
Look, there is no point in choosing anything but tank ever. There is no point in anything because anything other than tank is not viable. When you see a gunnlogi- you most of the time (at least the successful ones) are running all tank modules. Not once do you ever see a Gunnlogi drive up with a freaking scanner and a dam fuel injector.
Nerfing base HP doesn't do anything. If that was your plan you are wrong.
Also, your LAV statement was bull crap, LAV's have about the same base HP of a sentinel and about one to two swarms worth of base HP. If you think lowering base HP but giving more slots is gonna make people choose other modules, they wont.
"A tank without tank is not a viable tank"
What I can see happening is keeping base HP or maybe even increasing it, and giving more slots. Let CPU/PG be the determining factor.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4051
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:39:00 -
[336] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:Heavies have high HP, this allows them to choose modules other than extenders and plates. Why shouldn't this be same for HAV. Why must tanks be forced to tank, why not have scanners or CRU's or fuel injectors.
I think you're missing what I'm going for here. I'll use your analogy if it makes it less confusing.
So currently the Gallente Sentinel has a 2/3 slot layout. A Complex armor plate is what, 135? So lets say I reduce the Gallente's Base Armor by 135, and give it a 4th low slot.
So what you can do now is stick an armor plate back into that 4th slot, raising its HP by 135 (yes I know there are skill bonuses and whatnot that wont line up perfectly but bear with me) back up to what it was before the change.
OR
If you dont care about that extra HP, you could put something else in there, like a Kinkat or another Armor Repairer.
I think we all agree that the current slot layout for HAVs is overly limited and lacks much room for creativity. So by adding a slot and reducing the base HP by similar value, you give people more fitting flexibility, but you also allow people who preferred the old way to simply fill that additional slot with an HP mod to counteract the decrease in base HP. I'd probably balance it against an Enhanced HP module, so fitting Enhanced would give you similar HP values, Complex would be a net increase.
Does that make sense? As I've said before Work + Holidays leaves me a little fried.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Tebu Gan
Dem Durrty Boyz
General Tso's Alliance
1250
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:46:00 -
[337] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Dear Players,
We have wanted to bring back variety for the Vehicle Users of DUST 514 for some time now.
Actually, you are finishing the job, not just bringing variety to tanking. Been well over a year since they stripped that that variety away, with promises that you guys would finish vehicles at a later date. Had I know that "later date" would be nearly 2 years down the road, I would have stopped playing then.
Too little too late for me I'm afraid, should have been a priority after they broke vehicles to begin with. GL, check my old postings for tips and pointers on the matter, if any are still around. I wrote quite a bit on this matter already, IE my sig is a great idea for turret variety.
Tanks - Balancing Turrets
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law
General Tso's Alliance
1335
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:55:00 -
[338] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:Heavies have high HP, this allows them to choose modules other than extenders and plates. Why shouldn't this be same for HAV. Why must tanks be forced to tank, why not have scanners or CRU's or fuel injectors. I think you're missing what I'm going for here. I'll use your analogy if it makes it less confusing. So currently the Gallente Sentinel has a 2/3 slot layout. A Complex armor plate is what, 135? So lets say I reduce the Gallente's Base Armor by 135, and give it a 4th low slot. So what you can do now is stick an armor plate back into that 4th slot, raising its HP by 135 (yes I know there are skill bonuses and whatnot that wont line up perfectly but bear with me) back up to what it was before the change. OR If you dont care about that extra HP, you could put something else in there, like a Kinkat or another Armor Repairer. I think we all agree that the current slot layout for HAVs is overly limited and lacks much room for creativity. So by adding a slot and reducing the base HP by similar value, you give people more fitting flexibility, but you also allow people who preferred the old way to simply fill that additional slot with an HP mod to counteract the decrease in base HP. I'd probably balance it against an Enhanced HP module, so fitting Enhanced would give you similar HP values, Complex would be a net increase. Does that make sense? As I've said before Work + Holidays leaves me a little fried.
well, why don't we just give all suits 0 ehp but a bunch of slots.
It just doesn't make sense. There is no point in how much base HP you take away slots you give, in the end, it will always go toward a tank modules unless you are trying to run around with at roll fit.
What you fail to understand is no matter what you do, anything but tanking makes a tank enviable.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4052
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:07:00 -
[339] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:
Look, there is no point in choosing anything but tank ever. There is no point in anything because anything other than tank is not viable. When you see a gunnlogi- you most of the time (at least the successful ones) are running all tank modules. Not once do you ever see a Gunnlogi drive up with a freaking scanner and a dam fuel injector.
I use Damage mods on my Gunnlogi's frequently. Back in the day I would often forgo main-rack defenses in exchange for specific utility if the situation dictated it. I used to have 5-10 different fits for each vehicle, all a little different and most not dedicated to 100% tank.
Let me present it to you in reverse. As you know, all dropsuits within a role and race have the same base HP, regardless of tier. So assume for a moment that a Standard Amarr Sentinel has 1000 base armor, and no slots. Advanced has 1000 base armor and 1 low, and Prototype has 1000 base armor and 2 lows. Now if you fit those lows with complex armor plates, you end up with a bit over 1300 armor.
Not only is this very boring in terms of fitting, but the difference between running an unfit standard suit, and running a fully fit Proto suit, is ~300 HP. So for the cost of a very cheap suit and no modules, you only gain 300 HP for the cost of a Proto suit and 2 additional modules. That's not a huge incentive to run more expensive stuff is it? Big benefit for nearly no cost.
So by my logic what would make sense is say "Hey, lets lower the base HP but offer up more slots so that at proto full fit you still get ~1300 armor, but an unfit standard suit, or even a standard suit with crappy modules, is significantly less effective than a proto suit. So you end up with a progression exactly like we have now for the Sentinels.
So for someone like you who prioritizes defenses over everything else, no its not going to offer much in terms of flexibility because you'll just fill it with HP anyways. That's fine. What it DOES do however is force you to spend the ISK on better modules to get a larger benefit, rather than relying on a substantial amount of base HP that just comes built in with the price of the hull.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4052
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:10:00 -
[340] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:
well, why don't we just give all suits 0 ehp but a bunch of slots.
It just doesn't make sense. There is no point in how much base HP you take away slots you give, in the end, it will always go toward a tank modules unless you are trying to run around with at roll fit.
Inversely would you support removing all slots and just buffing base HP like crazy? Because if HP is all that matters then why bother letting us fit things at all?
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law
General Tso's Alliance
1335
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:11:00 -
[341] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:
well, why don't we just give all suits 0 ehp but a bunch of slots.
It just doesn't make sense. There is no point in how much base HP you take away slots you give, in the end, it will always go toward a tank modules unless you are trying to run around with at roll fit.
Inversely would you support removing all slots and just buffing base HP like crazy? Because if HP is all that matters then why bother letting us fit things at all?
Yes I would. No joke.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4052
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:13:00 -
[342] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:
well, why don't we just give all suits 0 ehp but a bunch of slots.
It just doesn't make sense. There is no point in how much base HP you take away slots you give, in the end, it will always go toward a tank modules unless you are trying to run around with at roll fit.
Inversely would you support removing all slots and just buffing base HP like crazy? Because if HP is all that matters then why bother letting us fit things at all? Yes I would. No joke.
Well that's a pretty fundamental difference in opinion.
Then I guess this conversation is over because I would never support anything like that.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
Top Men.
2661
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:19:00 -
[343] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:
well, why don't we just give all suits 0 ehp but a bunch of slots.
It just doesn't make sense. There is no point in how much base HP you take away slots you give, in the end, it will always go toward a tank modules unless you are trying to run around with at roll fit.
Inversely would you support removing all slots and just buffing base HP like crazy? Because if HP is all that matters then why bother letting us fit things at all? Yes I would. No joke.
What in the absolute ****?
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Devadander
Woodgrain Atari
168
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:19:00 -
[344] - Quote
This discussion is moot without module variety.
All variants will be either hardened or bricked.... *yawn* (and of course the Scrublogi with dmg mods on his mlt rail)
Max effort I could drum up maybe 4 fits, but they would all feel the same.
An Enforcer without coolant mods is just a rail sica, a marauder without RoF mods is just a triple rep maddy.
Blaster vs blaster is boring because both run same blaster.
Rail vs rail is a joke at 300m.
Missile vs missile is just sad to watch.
Our vehicles are so watered down it will take more than reworking old hulls back in.
Give us some teeth, or just take them all out.
27 focused mil sp into tanks... respec is looking better and better 
"Tossin uplinks and runnin fer my life" ~ Gunny blownapart
"Lets group up and push an objective" ~ No blueberry ever
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4052
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:25:00 -
[345] - Quote
Devadander wrote: This discussion is moot without module variety. All variants will be either hardened or bricked.... *yawn* (and of course the Scrublogi with dmg mods on his mlt rail) Max effort I could drum up maybe 4 fits, but they would all feel the same. An Enforcer without coolant mods is just a rail sica, a marauder without RoF mods is just a triple rep maddy. Blaster vs blaster is boring because both run same blaster. Rail vs rail is a joke at 300m. Missile vs missile is just sad to watch. Our vehicles are so watered down it will take more than reworking old hulls back in. Give us some teeth, or just take them all out. 27 focused mil sp into tanks... respec is looking better and better
Totally agree. There is a list of modules that would do excellent if reintroduced. I miss my Nanofiber Speed fits =(
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
One Eyed King
Land of the BIind
6722
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 23:32:00 -
[346] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:True, I like the increase to slots but decrease to base HP. Puts more emphasis on WHAT You fit on your hull, not just what your base hull has naturally. It's a philosophy I want to apply to LAVs as well because 1. Their slot layouts are dismal, and 2. I'm tired of unfit LAVs being a pain in the ass to kill.
This.
Also, after reading through the whole thread, I like Pokey and True's ideas. Particularly about removing HP and adding the extra mod so that more variety can exist.
I also think it would be interesting if HAVs could have some sort of transport capacity. Essentially making LAVs a more risky option in terms of solo/small group transport, particularly keeping in mind that BPO LAVs sound like they are on their way, with Dropships being somewhat safer/faster/greater capacity, and HAVs being a slower and safer option.
I apologize if that last bit was a little out of the scope of discussion.
Thunderbolt. verb and noun.
"James thunderbolted in his pants."
"I lit a bag of thunderbolt on fire on CCP's doorway"
|
Sir Dukey
Murphys-Law
General Tso's Alliance
1335
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 23:46:00 -
[347] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:True, I like the increase to slots but decrease to base HP. Puts more emphasis on WHAT You fit on your hull, not just what your base hull has naturally. It's a philosophy I want to apply to LAVs as well because 1. Their slot layouts are dismal, and 2. I'm tired of unfit LAVs being a pain in the ass to kill. This. Also, after reading through the whole thread, I like Pokey and True's ideas. Particularly about removing HP and adding the extra mod so that more variety can exist. I also think it would be interesting if HAVs could have some sort of transport capacity. Essentially making LAVs a more risky option in terms of solo/small group transport, particularly keeping in mind that BPO LAVs sound like they are on their way, with Dropships being somewhat safer/faster/greater capacity, and HAVs being a slower and safer option. I apologize if that last bit was a little out of the scope of discussion.
The only idea that is good in this thread is returning tanks back to pre 1.7 and to chromosome levels.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
16170
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 00:20:00 -
[348] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:DarthJT5 wrote:
3. Problem is if you make the hull base HP too low it just means you will have to use a slot for a HP module anyways
5/3 is probably too much.
You admitted you don't use vehicles.
5/3 and 3/5 is just fine. [/quote]
They are too much mate.
*"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
16170
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 00:22:00 -
[349] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Devadander wrote: This discussion is moot without module variety. All variants will be either hardened or bricked.... *yawn* (and of course the Scrublogi with dmg mods on his mlt rail) Max effort I could drum up maybe 4 fits, but they would all feel the same. An Enforcer without coolant mods is just a rail sica, a marauder without RoF mods is just a triple rep maddy. Blaster vs blaster is boring because both run same blaster. Rail vs rail is a joke at 300m. Missile vs missile is just sad to watch. Our vehicles are so watered down it will take more than reworking old hulls back in. Give us some teeth, or just take them all out. 27 focused mil sp into tanks... respec is looking better and better Totally agree. There is a list of modules that would do excellent if reintroduced. I miss my Nanofiber Speed fits =(
Teach me how to create a google doc and I'll have a list of modules, stats, etc that were in the game, skills, etc all the goodies up within the day.
*"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4061
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 01:11:00 -
[350] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Devadander wrote: This discussion is moot without module variety. All variants will be either hardened or bricked.... *yawn* (and of course the Scrublogi with dmg mods on his mlt rail) Max effort I could drum up maybe 4 fits, but they would all feel the same. An Enforcer without coolant mods is just a rail sica, a marauder without RoF mods is just a triple rep maddy. Blaster vs blaster is boring because both run same blaster. Rail vs rail is a joke at 300m. Missile vs missile is just sad to watch. Our vehicles are so watered down it will take more than reworking old hulls back in. Give us some teeth, or just take them all out. 27 focused mil sp into tanks... respec is looking better and better Totally agree. There is a list of modules that would do excellent if reintroduced. I miss my Nanofiber Speed fits =( Teach me how to create a google doc and I'll have a list of modules, stats, etc that were in the game, skills, etc all the goodies up within the day.
Do you have a google account? Gmail? Anything?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/
Log in, click the (+) in the lower right to open up a new sheet. Fill out the spreadsheet with informational goodness.
When you're done look at the upper right for [SHARE] open that propt, look for the link "Create Share Link" and copy it back here. You can get me on skype too if you need help, name is leowen.dravon
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
Top Men.
2664
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 01:15:00 -
[351] - Quote
Oh, yea, shotgun blaster > PLC blaster. PLC blaster in my mind would be used like a rail..... only it would suck more.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Zindorak
G0DS AM0NG MEN
General Tso's Alliance
1424
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 03:18:00 -
[352] - Quote
*slides ads's aside*
oooOoooOooo im interested
Pokemon master and Tekken Lord
Give me da iskiez
Gk0 Scout yay :)
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
16171
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 03:29:00 -
[353] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Oh, yea, shotgun blaster > PLC blaster. PLC blaster in my mind would be used like a rail..... only it would suck more.
Personally I can only see it as a bettering of what we have.....which is mildly because the idea was mine..... but also because currently the large blaster is inappropriate as a tank turret.
Firstly it isn't one.
Secondly it does not fulfil the primarily role of the main gun of a tank.
*"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
|
DUST Fiend
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
15518
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 10:13:00 -
[354] - Quote
I dont like the sound of a long range tank that insta pops tanks. As a dropship pilot that just sounds like ill be getting one shot by redline tanks again :/
As if two shot isnt bad enough
Flight Academy coming soon(tm) to my YouTube
WoD 514
|
Lazer Fo Cused
Shining Flame
Amarr Empire
273
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 13:04:00 -
[355] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:
The only idea that is good in this thread is returning tanks back to pre 1.7 and to chromosome levels.
1. This
2. So far everything is trying to make it like it was in the past but somehow worse and yes im looking at ppl who want specalized HAVs to be 4/2 so then do we get another tank which has a 5/3?
3. Even Uprising 1.0 days the HAV vs HAV battles were fun between the STD HAVs, FG were in a good place aswell the only true AV problems were the broken AV nades and SL and the Enforcers had militia stats
4. Chrome was fun for the Marauders and Missile turrets which actually had splash damage |
75MPH LandShark
MarketHammer Directorate
6
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 17:04:00 -
[356] - Quote
The one thing I would like to note is,
when the vehicle respec happened, and the other tanks where pulled. You also pulled the speed mods. The tanks where initially faster so this wasn't an issue, now they have been slowed down and nerfed to the point where they seem slower then before the vehicle re spec. In both movement speed and turn ratio speed, Can we at least get the speed mods back?
The other thing that was pulled was the vehicle support system.
I was solely a Limbus driver and supported tanks with the Limbus. That was taken away too.
There is a nice array to support drop suits, healing nano hives, repair tool, but nothing for a tank or LAV support, you can't keep up on foot with a repair item, and repair nano hives do not effect/heal them,
Is it possible when/if they bring in more vehicle items that we can bring back vehicle support. It made the game much more fun and interesting with the Limbus supporting the tank.
I realize I was maybe the 1-5% that actually utilized the Limbus as a support vehicle instead of a "murder taxi". However I had a long list of players who would swear by my support in combat.
Please don't discount or disregard vehicle support when considering re adding/introducing new tank types.
And please bring back speed modules, it doesn't unbalance anything as one has to sacrifice armor, repair and shields to place a speed module. Just like scouts fast and soft. Heavy can take a punch but can't run from anything.
Even if you have to pay for the Limbus like a BPO item, I would happily pay for that to get vehicle support back into the game. I still don't fully understand why it was first nerfed and then removed completely. |
DarthJT5
12th Shadow Legion
162
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 17:07:00 -
[357] - Quote
75MPH LandShark wrote:
The one thing I would like to note is,
when the vehicle respec happened, and the other tanks where pulled. You also pulled the speed mods. The tanks where initially faster so this wasn't an issue, now they have been slowed down and nerfed to the point where they seem slower then before the vehicle re spec. In both movement speed and turn ratio speed, Can we at least get the speed mods back?
The other thing that was pulled was the vehicle support system.
I was solely a Limbus driver and supported tanks with the Limbus. That was taken away too.
There is a nice array to support drop suits, healing nano hives, repair tool, but nothing for a tank or LAV support, you can't keep up on foot with a repair item, and repair nano hives do not effect/heal them,
Is it possible when/if they bring in more vehicle items that we can bring back vehicle support. It made the game much more fun and interesting with the Limbus supporting the tank.
I realize I was maybe the 1-5% that actually utilized the Limbus as a support vehicle instead of a "murder taxi". However I had a long list of players who would swear by my support in combat.
Please don't discount or disregard vehicle support when considering re adding/introducing new tank types.
And please bring back speed modules, it doesn't unbalance anything as one has to sacrifice armor, repair and shields to place a speed module. Just like scouts fast and soft. Heavy can take a punch but can't run from anything.
Even if you have to pay for the Limbus like a BPO item, I would happily pay for that to get vehicle support back into the game. I still don't fully understand why it was first nerfed and then removed completely.
Oh the times we had when you would shield boost my Falchion and I could take on 2 tanks and a proto assault forge at once...
Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta.
Up and coming Python pilot.
The awnser is always XT missiles....
|
75MPH LandShark
MarketHammer Directorate
6
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 17:09:00 -
[358] - Quote
Those where indeed the days my friend |
duster 35000
Algintal Core
Gallente Federation
116
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 17:44:00 -
[359] - Quote
Does anyone haveba video of the old marauders and whatbwere thier bonuses?
Choo Choo
|
Vordred Knight
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
573
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 17:47:00 -
[360] - Quote
Why can't the Gallente Marauders have a bonus to reps?
Don't Do Drugs while playing Eve
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |