Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6844
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 14:44:00 -
[1] - Quote
Tankers Want their tanks buffed. Its ll that i see here in the forums. Tankers this, ADS die way too quick, blabla..
In most other games, AV doesnt need to sacrifice Their Infantry Killing Capabilities in order to have good AV too.
Swarms should be a SIDEARM.
Yeah, you heard me.
When the chance exists that Infantry is equal to Vehicles (in the sense that they have both Anti infantry and AV capabilities alike) then the game will be easier to balance and vehicles could get the buff they need to be what their pilots / tankers want.
But while Infantry has to choose between being either AV or AI, then so should Vehicles. You cant have Blasters that are accurate enough to kill infantry easily while also being effective vs turrets and vehicles , you silly ppl...
Now...FLAME AWAY!
My Body is Ready.
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
Ripley Riley
Incorruptibles
6147
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 14:49:00 -
[2] - Quote
KING CHECKMATE wrote:Swarms should be a sidearm. Interesting approach. I find myself not hating this idea. It's not as if tanks worry about us firing rifles at them anyway so who cares if I fit a plasma rifle and a swarm launcher to my assault. Swarms can't lock on to infantry so they won't be negatively effected by this change.
Just call me Ripple. Ripple Riley.
@Ripley_Riley
|
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6845
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 14:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ripley Riley wrote:KING CHECKMATE wrote:Swarms should be a sidearm. Interesting approach. I find myself not hating this idea. It's not as if tanks worry about us firing rifles at them anyway so who cares if I fit a plasma rifle and a swarm launcher to my assault. Swarms can't lock on to infantry so they won't be negatively effected by this change.
The idea came since yesterday i was playing both Destiny And BF 3. I noticed that vehicles would obliterate my butt quite easily , but So could i. In destiny ALL weapons (not only Heavies) Can damage vehicles or easily kill its Pilot. In Bf3, Engineers are quite common with their Noob Tube + Carbine Combos... (or the delicious Javelin n.n)
Just saying. While Infantry has to choose, so do Vehicles. (I say this because vehicle drivers want to kill turrets, other vehicles and Infantry easily....so if Swarms were Sidearms, then I wouldnt mind them destroying Half the map, since they would have a common counter)
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
Atiim
Titans of Phoenix
14859
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:01:00 -
[4] - Quote
If you want Swarms to be a Sidearm, use a Commando.
The 1st Matari Commando
-HAND
|
Grimmiers
758
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:04:00 -
[5] - Quote
There could be an av flaylock pistol that can lock onto vehicles.
I'd like to see a blur between what's considered av and small arms fire. I also still think that swarms should only have a clip size of 4 where each missile is locked on separately.
I would like to see an actual repolish of turrets, vehicle models, physics, and roles before we add the other racial vehicles. |
Vell0cet
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
2748
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
The best way to buff vehicles is to add capacitors. This will have several benefits. The first is they could remove the long cool downs and allow players the option of running modules when they want. This adds much-needed flexibility to the system. Secondly, they could buff tank survivability a bit (by either nerfing AV some or buffing tank HPs), since they would now be vulnerable to neuts. This adds depth and interest to vehicle play.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6846
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
Atiim wrote:If you want Swarms to be a Sidearm, use a Commando.
I do.
(CAl Mando)
But its not the same.... I hate being so Big and weak....
Commandos are just like using a Specialized AV fit.
90% of the times , they are useless against other infantry XD
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6846
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:15:00 -
[8] - Quote
Vell0cet wrote:The best way to buff vehicles is to add capacitors. This will have several benefits. The first is they could remove the long cool downs and allow players the option of running modules when they want. This adds much-needed flexibility to the system. Secondly, they could buff tank survivability a bit (by either nerfing AV some or buffing tank HPs), since they would now be vulnerable to neuts. This adds depth and interest to vehicle play.
tru/
but im not a lot into EVE and dont understand Capacitors enough to make a thread about them.
So i just came out with this XD
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
ACT1ON BASTARD
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
406
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:22:00 -
[9] - Quote
Make a vehicle account play on it for awhile and tell me you still feel the same way. I have a maxed out ads account I used to love playing, after the repetitive nerfs it became unplayable If I'm not going balls to the wall every match. Also I had a friend that had maybe 6-10 months playing and all he had were tanks, and he quit the game because he couldn't go isk positive. Id quit too, there's nothing I hate more than getting on my assault drop ship account, Rattati sucked the life out of the assault drop ship, everything that was good/fun about it is gone. Gunner ships w rof, fast afterburners, no more av capabilities. Theyre still usable I guess if you're maxed out/top of your game but who wants to fly a washed down drop ship when you flew the good version? I get more kills, WP running my commando and don't have to run away from swarms half the match. 25 mil in pythons and incubi, 5 mil in tanks. |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1477
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:26:00 -
[10] - Quote
Of course pilots want to be buffed. Most of them believe that 1.7 was balanced. |
|
Harpyja
Legio DXIV
2239
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
Hmmm. I've heard about this idea a long long time ago and I wasn't open to it, but now I'm open to it. Even with a slight damage nerf you propose, moving swarms to be a sidearm would be a huge buff for AV in general since most people will probably have it equipped as a secondary and will be able to switch to it at a moment's notice instead of having to wait to respawn or visit a supply depot.
A lot more people being able to switch to AV at a moment's notice makes the risk for operating a vehicle much higher. Skilled pilots who can quickly identify and eliminate threats will be rewarded while unskilled pilots will quickly find themselves surrounded and obliterated.
I think the only buffs needed to HAVs in this kind of situation would be non-direct offensive buffs so that HAV v HAV combat is unaffected while giving HAVs a better fighting chance against an increased amount of AV. For example: large reduction or even complete removal of large blaster dispersion that was introduced, giving large railguns their splash damage back, and increasing large missile blast radius to 1.6 levels (3-4 meters). These changes will increase the effectiveness of these turrets against infantry without affecting any combat between vehicles.
I can't say anything for LAVs or dropships, except for maybe some small buffs to their base EHP.
I'd like to see vehicles (or at least HAVs) back into a high risk, high reward environment. Increasing the amount of AV that can be fielded at a moment's notice should in theory increase the risk, and an increase in AI effectiveness of the large turrets should also increase the reward equivalently.
I also want to comment on your BF3 findings and say that I've noticed that as well. I simply fear a MBT in BF3 much more than I fear a HAV in Dust when I run as infantry. I know I'm good as dead if a MBT spots me whereas I can most of the time bunny hop to safety in Dust (lol).
"By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
|
shaman oga
Dead Man's Game
3589
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 15:39:00 -
[12] - Quote
Tankers just want some choice, exactly what was given to infantry with fitting bonus and variety of modules, weapons and fittings.
Vehicle skill branches are a joke, i think the devs have completely miss the point when they released 1.7, the only interesting features are mobility, limited ammo and vehicle cost, the rest is all wrong.
Situational awareness also known as passive scan.
|
Leadfoot10
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
2836
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 16:55:00 -
[13] - Quote
I'm not sure I agree that a swarms should be sidearm -- that would make them too prevalent. But I do think there should be a more effective AV sidearm than knives or a flaylock. Perhaps a mini swarm or a mini forge or something.
That said, I'm of the opinion that vehicle/AV is out of balance in the favor of AV, and something should be done to equalize this. |
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6846
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 17:05:00 -
[14] - Quote
Leadfoot10 wrote:I'm not sure I agree that a swarms should be sidearm -- that would make them too prevalent. But I do think there should be a more effective AV sidearm than knives or a flaylock. Perhaps a mini swarm or a mini forge or something.
That said, I'm of the opinion that vehicle/AV is out of balance in the favor of AV, and something should be done to equalize this.
HAHAHAH, FLaylock is NOT an AV weapon XD HAHA ...ah... A tear in my eye...
I agree.
Yeah, im saying it: The balance between AV and Vehicles is in favor of AV. But its fair, because Vehicles have Both AV and A-Infantry capabilities , while the AV Specialists has almost NO Anti Infantry Capabilities. So its Only Fair he ''EXCELS'' in his specialization.
My idea was to remove AV as a Specialty, and more as a side job. While doing this it would be easier to BUFF Vehicles, since it wouldnt affect everyones playstyle to bring some AV to the Fight....
AV Would always be present (unlike now that if you are playing solo you can be redlined by to ADS because all AV we have in our side is MLT Anti-Armor fits XD) and Vehicles could take a LOT More damage, Making it that one infantry will never be able to destroy a Vehicle by himself...at least not without a prolonged time firing at said vehicle . (Except for LAV's// Forge Guns wouldn't apply to this teamwork killing thing since its a Heavy weapon)
That was the main idea...
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
shaman oga
Dead Man's Game
3590
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 17:06:00 -
[15] - Quote
Leadfoot10 wrote:I'm not sure I agree that a swarms should be sidearm -- that would make them too prevalent. But I do think there should be a more effective AV sidearm than knives or a flaylock. Perhaps a mini swarm or a mini forge or something.
That said, I'm of the opinion that vehicle/AV is out of balance in the favor of AV, and something should be done to equalize this. They only have to fix packed RE, no need for AV sidearm. Grow some balls and jump over dat tank!
Situational awareness also known as passive scan.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2681
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:18:00 -
[16] - Quote
More clinically insane drooling from someone with an irrational fear and hatred for vehicles.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6849
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:20:00 -
[17] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:More clinically insane drooling from someone with an irrational fear and hatred for vehicles.
Quick question SPKR. What other FPS games have you played , while using exclusively vehicles?
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2681
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:21:00 -
[18] - Quote
Vitantur Nothus wrote:Of course pilots want to be buffed. Most of them believe that 1.7 was balanced. Oh, yeah, we think removing hulls, turrets and modules to be balanced, along with slashing the amount of slots vehicles have. Yeah, that's balanced.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
RayRay James
Titans of Phoenix
871
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:29:00 -
[19] - Quote
I'm fairly certain that most vehicle users don't want to be buffed into OP status, they just want to be useful again.
Tanks took a big hit when they removed everything to "balance" them. ADS took a big hit with the burner nerf / swarm buff.
I enjoy using a forge gun, even after the splash damage removal (which I didn't agree with, it should still have some even if it's 1.0M). I can bring it out when tanks become a pain and then still snipe people for the guaranteed OHK. I've had plenty of matches with 10 kills on infantry with the forge gun post nerf. Maybe give the swarms a dumb fire option to give it the same bit of a chance against infantry. How people hit anything with the plasma cannon, I'll never know.
The biggest complaint people have against vehicles is "god-mode". If there was a proper AV sidearm, tanks and ADSs might become viable again in their pre-nefr state (I really don't remember the numbers that far back anymore). It would, at least, make it so some of the vehicle variants can come back into play.... (Come on LOGI DS! I want to fly you) |
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6849
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:37:00 -
[20] - Quote
RayRay James wrote:I'm fairly certain that most vehicle users don't want to be buffed into OP status, they just want to be useful again.
Tanks took a big hit when they removed everything to "balance" them. ADS took a big hit with the burner nerf / swarm buff.
I enjoy using a forge gun, even after the splash damage removal (which I didn't agree with, it should still have some even if it's 1.0M). I can bring it out when tanks become a pain and then still snipe people for the guaranteed OHK. I've had plenty of matches with 10 kills on infantry with the forge gun post nerf. Maybe give the swarms a dumb fire option to give it the same bit of a chance against infantry. How people hit anything with the plasma cannon, I'll never know.
The biggest complaint people have against vehicles is "god-mode". If there was a proper AV sidearm, tanks and ADSs might become viable again in their pre-nefr state (I really don't remember the numbers that far back anymore). It would, at least, make it so some of the vehicle variants can come back into play.... (Come on LOGI DS! I want to fly you)
I would take Dumb Fire....
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
|
Reign Omega
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
1055
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
Wanna buff vehicles? Reintroduce all variants, hull types and modules and then balance around current gameplay, not remove it all and try to balance on paper only to bring them back and find they're not balanced again. Hotfix/patch them in game just like the weapons, and slowly add racial variants. Also in other shooters, anti vehicle is a class unto itself just like the commando is here. Also...theres like, 1 scooter in destiny no reason to even bring that game up on discussion of av.
Mark a$$ tricks, and bags of dicks....
|
RayRay James
Titans of Phoenix
871
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:49:00 -
[22] - Quote
Reign Omega wrote:Wanna buff vehicles? Reintroduce all variants, hull types and modules and then balance around current gameplay, not remove it all and try to balance on paper only to bring them back and find they're not balanced again. Hotfix/patch them in game just like the weapons, and slowly add racial variants. Also in other shooters, anti vehicle is a class unto itself just like the commando is here. Also...theres like, 1 scooter in destiny no reason to even bring that game up on discussion of av.
I like the cut of your Jib young man.
Do you have a website or newsletter I can sign up for?
(BRING BACK THE LOGI DS!) |
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6850
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:50:00 -
[23] - Quote
Reign Omega wrote:Wanna buff vehicles? Reintroduce all variants, hull types and modules and then balance around current gameplay, not remove it all and try to balance on paper only to bring them back and find they're not balanced again. Hotfix/patch them in game just like the weapons, and slowly add racial variants. Also in other shooters, anti vehicle is a class unto itself just like the commando is here. Also...theres like, 1 scooter in destiny no reason to even bring that game up on discussion of av.
There are more vehicles in destiny.
But anyhow, in other games AV is not a Specialization. IS a Weapon you choose to equip or not.. Because most other games posses 3 weapons. MAin, Side, Special. Where special can be an RPG or AV weaponry of some sort. So you can AV while still having FULL Anti-Infantry capabilities.
And i disagree with this
''Wanna buff vehicles? Reintroduce all variants, hull types and modules and then balance around current gameplay,''
Buffing something to ''see what happens'' and THEN rebalance is what has us in the state we are in.
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
Fizzer XCIV
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
2021
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:52:00 -
[24] - Quote
Reign Omega wrote:Wanna buff vehicles? Reintroduce all variants, hull types and modules and then balance around current gameplay, not remove it all and try to balance on paper only to bring them back and find they're not balanced again. Hotfix/patch them in game just like the weapons, and slowly add racial variants. Also in other shooters, anti vehicle is a class unto itself just like the commando is here. Also...theres like, 1 scooter in destiny no reason to even bring that game up on discussion of av. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=184483&find=unread
They plan on doing just that. Discuss it there.
Home at Last <3
|
Buwaro Draemon
WarRavens Capital Punishment.
614
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
KING CHECKMATE wrote: Or Give them Dumb Fire.
*flashbacks back to Replication build*
No please. If you think Scouts running around and tossing RE's all over the place, would you want to see them jumping all over the place shooting dumb swarms at you? Especially with the changes to MyoStims that would allow the user of MyoStims jump higher? Yeah, no.
*shivers*
Changes to Damage mods!
|
KING CHECKMATE
Opus Arcana Covert Intervention
6850
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:58:00 -
[26] - Quote
Buwaro Draemon wrote:KING CHECKMATE wrote: Or Give them Dumb Fire.
*flashbacks back to Replication build* No please. If you think Scouts running around and tossing RE's all over the place, would you want to see them jumping all over the place shooting dumb swarms at you? Especially with the changes to MyoStims that would allow the user of MyoStims jump higher? Yeah, no. *shivers*
I play scout.
And yes. I would LOVE this. I've always been a Pro Noob tuber....
Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
|
Balistyc Farshot
Abandoned Privilege Top Men.
16
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:47:00 -
[27] - Quote
BTW - I think a great example of vehicle balance is Planet Side 2.
My belief is that they need to keep the swarms where they are. ADS drop fast because they are light attack dropships. The regular dropships can handle enough shots to do their job and get out. If you are mad because you really have to be on your game to slaughter the infantry with an ADS then I am sorry you didn't expect to have to try hard. The rest of us try hard every game or get beat.
To balance the fight I agree that blaster tanks are BS. Missile tanks need to be put in the middle so that they do less dmg than railgun tanks against vehicles but more than blasters and are in the same place with infantry.
Then make tanks able to take multiple swarm launcher shots. Lastly instead of sidearm swarms, turn the vehicle planted AV into a grenade and make it hurt way more. Now people bring those in without wasting a slot or bandwidth. Then make the planted mine's only able to be registered on a hand held scanners. This will enforce infantry accompanying tanks and logi support. Maybe even a space for logi LAVs with scanners and nano capability.
The main reason people rage against ADS and Tanks is because single handed, they can turn a battle. I don't care how proto your suit is, 1 infantry player can't turn a game. So tankers and ADS need to be aware this is the same for them. If you hate how going negative in isk works, then complain about cost, not your counters. Don't tell me about SP sinks because I have sunk way more SP into my Logi which you took down with one shot from you missiles and then you proceeded to mop up my team. Players leaving due to tank and ADS stomping is worse than players who left because they can't stomp with those vehicles.
This design is simple and uses the current mechanics. Ground vehicles will be wary of infantry who lure them into a trap
Air vehicles are wary of the swarms still (I don't think dropships need any.
Also go back to tanks being slow again. They shouldn't be able to chase down LAVs when they trigger a booster.
Rage aware tankers, but be aware I said to make you able to take a pounding from swarms.
Heavy with a massive bullet hose called Lola (Burst HMG).
|
Operative 1174 Uuali
Y.A.M.A.H
241
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:50:00 -
[28] - Quote
KING CHECKMATE wrote:Tankers Want their tanks buffed. Its ll that i see here in the forums. Tankers this, ADS die way too quick, blabla..
In most other games, AV doesnt need to sacrifice Their Infantry Killing Capabilities in order to have good AV too.
Swarms should be a SIDEARM. (Could have a slight damage tone-down if this was the case of course) Or Give them Dumb Fire.
Yeah, you heard me.
When the chance exists that Infantry is equal to Vehicles (in the sense that they have both Anti infantry and AV capabilities alike) then the game will be easier to balance and vehicles could get the buff they need to be what their pilots / tankers want.
But while Infantry has to choose between being either AV or AI, then so should Vehicles. You cant have Blasters that are accurate enough to kill infantry easily while also being effective vs turrets and vehicles , you silly ppl...
Now...FLAME AWAY!
My Body is Ready.
Greater contrast between offense and defense for tanks. Problem solved. I wrote up a whole big post on it in feedback. I'm going to attempt to write a shorter, better one. I want Rattati to consider my idea in a vehicle redesign.
I'm better than laser focused; I'm hybrid focused.
|
RayRay James
Titans of Phoenix
873
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 20:20:00 -
[29] - Quote
Buwaro Draemon wrote:KING CHECKMATE wrote: Or Give them Dumb Fire.
*flashbacks back to Replication build* No please. If you think Scouts running around and tossing RE's all over the place, would you want to see them jumping all over the place shooting dumb swarms at you? Especially with the changes to MyoStims that would allow the user of MyoStims jump higher? Yeah, no. *shivers*
Ever see Hunt for Red October?
Make it so the swarm's take 10-20M to arm while in dumb fire. (Combat tactics, Mr. Ryan. By turning into the path of the torpedo, the Captain closed the distance before it could arm itself.)
Try and arm while they're still in the tube? Fine (Right now Tupolev is removing the safety features on all his weapons. He won't make the same mistake twice.)
... but it's a guaranteed death for the user as well (You arrogant ass! You've killed us!) |
LUGMOS
Quafe Premium
1369
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 21:13:00 -
[30] - Quote
One thing I don't get...
Infantry doesn't have to necessarily sacrifice survivability (HP mods) if they fit a sidearm and grenade.
Vehicles, however, must sacrifice a slot (PG mods) and small turrets for survivability, and vice versa.
Why can't I fit enhanced mods and three advanced turrets on a standard hull, when infantry can fit all advanced gear on a standard dropsuit?
I don't get this "well, small turrets are anti-infantry" argument, if you can't even fit them and keep a decent tank...
Official QuafeGäó Advocate
Anti-FoTM Prof. V
Forum Scavenger Prof. V
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |