DUST Search - Just figured out that JLAV's are still a thing

True Adamance wrote:

Actually ISK balancing would be fantastic balancing.

The more useful something is, with the correct components the more valuable the components are the high the cost to field those items, thus reducing the access players have to them depending on their value on the Market.

For example- A T3 Cruiser is incredibly expensive because it is incredibly powerful and useful. However their use is restricted by their massive costs. It is not economical to take a 1 Billion + ISK vessel out to simply PvP.

A Dust comparison might be the Marauder. It could be a very difficult unit to destroy. But if a Marauder costs 3-4 Million ISK to field its use outside of controlled situations would be uneconomical to run.

Contrary to this ideal is the JLAV. It's cheap and dirty and immensely powerful. It's like ramming a 0SP toon in a rookie ship into a 100 million SP player in a Battleship for an instant kill and killmail and calling that fair.

It's frankly not fair. It would be fantastic instead if players could use the vehicles inertia to ram the jeep into the tank severely damaging but not destroying it and them following that up AV fire or grenades.

But being a 50,000 ISK solution requiring at best only the SP to use Remote Explosives vs a Player who has forked out 10x the ISK, 10x the SP and pretending like your broken mechanic is positive gameplay, possessed of some great skill, or fair is ridiculous.

Now I won't say "TAKE OUT JIHAD JEEP! MEH SALTY TEARS!" I'd say tone it down. Give HAVers a chance to react and not make this an instant kill. Hell most players hate the Scrambler Rifle charged shot claiming its and instant kill, or the HMG is OP cuz its TTK is too quick, or the shotgun scout is OP because you cannot react to it.....

People would enjoy Dust a lot more if they accepted the fact that EVERYTHING is subject to change


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1621	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:32:00 - [1] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Why. Why the hell does these things still exists. EDIT: Since some people thinks it's perfectly fine, a question to them: Would you say that DS crushing should be brung back to the game? It's quite literally on the same level of bullshit. It's good that JLAVs exist, if they wouldn't, New Eden would be slightly duller place to be. People would enjoy Dust a lot more if they accepted the fact that EVERYTHING is subject to change
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1623	Posted - 2014.12.24 07:50:00 - [2] - Quote I gotta say I like jihad jeeps, from both angles. Even the tankers'. There are a few reasons why they are okay. JLAVs are not that powerful as people with one sided experience would think. Easy to counter and even without using those counters they often just plain fail. JLAV success ratio is far less than 50%. Far. Why is that? It's not that LAVs can teleport next to you. Good tankers are aware of most vehicle deployments. LAVs can be heard and good tankers realise the risk of possible JLAV and prepare to face it. JLAV user has to do all the following: Respawn - or run - to a distant location (otherwise there is a chance LAV deplo gets busted) Vehicle quota must not be reached Has to have peaceful moment to prep REs Has to find where the tank has moved to (weak tankers stay put as turrets, good ones move) Has to approach tank preferably from rear (to avoid getting blown) Has to be lucky enough not to be blown by small arms (or sacrifice more prepping by using other player's remotes) And finally has to hit fast tank enough to detonate - easy on flat ground but very tricky on rolling terrain Above there's plenty of uncertainties or delaying factors. The whole process can take minutes, long time out of a 4-15 min matches. EDIT: Even bigger now as the bug 'unsuitable location' is here. Cheap isk-wise, yes, but isk balancing is worst balancing. The biggest thing is the price in sacrificing fight time on which you could be helping your team otherwise. People would enjoy Dust a lot more if they accepted the fact that EVERYTHING is subject to change
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1626	Posted - 2014.12.24 10:28:00 - [3] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Actually ISK balancing would be fantastic balancing. The more useful something is, with the correct components the more valuable the components are the high the cost to field those items, thus reducing the access players have to them depending on their value on the Market. For example- A T3 Cruiser is incredibly expensive because it is incredibly powerful and useful. However their use is restricted by their massive costs. It is not economical to take a 1 Billion + ISK vessel out to simply PvP. A Dust comparison might be the Marauder. It could be a very difficult unit to destroy. But if a Marauder costs 3-4 Million ISK to field its use outside of controlled situations would be uneconomical to run. Contrary to this ideal is the JLAV. It's cheap and dirty and immensely powerful. It's like ramming a 0SP toon in a rookie ship into a 100 million SP player in a Battleship for an instant kill and killmail and calling that fair. It's frankly not fair. It would be fantastic instead if players could use the vehicles inertia to ram the jeep into the tank severely damaging but not destroying it and them following that up AV fire or grenades. But being a 50,000 ISK solution requiring at best only the SP to use Remote Explosives vs a Player who has forked out 10x the ISK, 10x the SP and pretending like your broken mechanic is positive gameplay, possessed of some great skill, or fair is ridiculous. Now I won't say "TAKE OUT JIHAD JEEP! MEH SALTY TEARS!" I'd say tone it down. Give HAVers a chance to react and not make this an instant kill. Hell most players hate the Scrambler Rifle charged shot claiming its and instant kill, or the HMG is OP cuz its TTK is too quick, or the shotgun scout is OP because you cannot react to it..... Oh no, isk balancing the battlefield really is the worst there can be. Your T3 comparison is flawed because a) eve has no engagement limits and asymmetrical warfare. Dust has limited symmetrical 16 vs 16 matches. b) setting something to high price only delays it's full use. Battlefield HAS to be balanced with the most maximum effective combination in mind. People WILL use the most powerful tools available. Anything else creates a fotm or no-brainer situation. It's good to realise that some people are and always be that rich that they can run anything, and the number isn't that small. People would enjoy Dust a lot more if they accepted the fact that EVERYTHING is subject to change