DUST Search - The Best Way To Buff Vehicles

All Channels

General Discussions

The Best Way To Buff Vehicles

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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 KING CHECKMATE wrote: 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: KING CHECKMATE 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

KING CHECKMATE Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 6858	Posted - 2015.01.05 21:28:00 - [31] - Quote LUGMOS wrote: One thing I don't get... Infantry doesn't have to necessarily sacrifice survivability (HP mods) if they fit a sidearm and grenade. . A Sidearm and a grenade wont save you from infantry vs Infantry if you are playing vs skilled players. Regardless of how skilled you are. So equipping a Swarm launcher in your Light slot already decreases your chances of surviving a firefight by at least 50%. If you dont believe me, Go against ANY gk-mk-ak-gk.0 Assault with a SIDEARM and a GRENADE only and taste the rainbow. Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1470	Posted - 2015.01.05 21:30:00 - [32] - Quote https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=186852&find=unread Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
TEBOW BAGGINS GREATNESS ACHIEVED THRU TROLLING 1510	Posted - 2015.01.05 21:43:00 - [33] - Quote no need to make SL sidearm just buff the flaylock dmg vs vehicle.. we don't need any lock on for that if you can't hit vehicle with FL then you need to practice hitting the side of a barn more. or make a flaylock variant for vehicle damage.. any more lock on weapons need to not be added. for whatever reason it was decided to buff the skilless SL when they could've given it to PLC or flaylock, they did buff the PLC but it wasn't enough so they everbuffed the SL next.. when they should have buffed the PLC dmg vs vehicle even more instead of SL.. or given more AV the power to the flaylock.. they chose to give it to the scrubiest weapon. AKA Zirzo Valcyn AFKing since 2012
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1844	Posted - 2015.01.05 22:43:00 - [34] - Quote KING CHECKMATE wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: KING CHECKMATE 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? I have to say that this is an incredibly loaded question, as no other FPS game that I'm aware of even allows vehicles to be a 'primary role', in fact they balance things around vehicles being temporary powerups and give infantry the ability to slaughter vehicles with ease otherwise vehicles would make them incredibly mad and frustrated. I personally feel that LAV's should be the 'infantry support / anti-infantry vehicle' with Logistics LAV's offering incredibly powerful temporary support bonuses to nearby infantry and standard lav's with turrets being a thing of nightmares. This puts MAV's in the position of slightly more generalized roles with different 'squad assisting' roles, and then it puts tanks in the position of being the 'vehicle remover'. This is something that you can even see in games like dawn of war 2 multiplayer (which is an RTS), where the light vehicles are the ones that are actually fairly lethal to infantry and provide huge support bonuses, but when the actual tanks come out their role is largely oriented around clearing the field of other vehicles. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Hynox Xitio Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1900	Posted - 2015.01.06 00:01:00 - [35] - Quote Remove all vehicles. The horror! The horror! ( -íº -£-û -íº)
KING CHECKMATE Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 6866	Posted - 2015.01.06 00:16:00 - [36] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: I have to say that this is an incredibly loaded question, as no other FPS game that I'm aware of even allows vehicles to be a 'primary role', BS. My BEst friend (Who i play most FPS with) Played exclusively Vehicles in BF3. Choppas, Jets , APC's and Tanks alike, Playing as : Calscout + Amarr Assault
TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 92	Posted - 2015.01.06 02:48:00 - [37] - Quote Hynox Xitio wrote: Remove all vehicles. No
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2939	Posted - 2015.01.06 02:51:00 - [38] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Personally Before any nerf or buff further of any vehicles or AV.. We should be asking for Racial parity with VEhicles.... We should ask for Minmatar and Amarrian vehicles.... Minmatar tanks With Giant HMG gattling guns on it... Artillery long range weapons... Amarr with just Pulse laser turrets and Beam laser turrets.... Logistic vehicles reworked and added... Actual Proto and Advanced Tanks added and prices readjusted... Even starting with Minmatar and Amarrian LAV's.... The Minmatar LAV is so sweet.... Balancing LAV's and bringing them more into use... Lets start at LAV's... Tanks and jumping straight to tank vs infantry... Needs to wait... We need to have all the pieces of the game then we can balance... Or we are just wasting time and effort for nothing. Vehicles need to be finished... This is what we need to be petitioning for.
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency 6873	Posted - 2015.01.06 02:59:00 - [39] - Quote KING CHECKMATE wrote: 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.... Why does everyone pretend like we couldn't just have a distance before arming? How hard would it be to prevent missiles from exploding before running thirty meters? Put your flags up in the sky. And wave them side to side. Show the world where you're from. Show the world we are one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16432	Posted - 2015.01.06 03:04:00 - [40] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Bethhy wrote: Personally Before any nerf or buff further of any vehicles or AV.. We should be asking for Racial parity with VEhicles.... We should ask for Minmatar and Amarrian vehicles.... Minmatar tanks With Giant HMG gattling guns on it... Artillery long range weapons... Amarr with just Pulse laser turrets and Beam laser turrets.... Logistic vehicles reworked and added... Actual Proto and Advanced Tanks added and prices readjusted... Even starting with Minmatar and Amarrian LAV's.... The Minmatar LAV is so sweet.... Balancing LAV's and bringing them more into use... Lets start at LAV's... Tanks and jumping straight to tank vs infantry... Needs to wait... We need to have all the pieces of the game then we can balance... Or we are just wasting time and effort for nothing. Vehicles need to be finished... This is what we need to be petitioning for. You should never ask for rapid firing Main Guns on HAV. Not only are they highly inappropriate but take little to no effort to use (and I'm not normally one to talk about in game "skillz" but ******* hell all the dust turret fire so rapidly). *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.



Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

Official QuafeGäó Advocate

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris