DUST Search - Why all vehicles should be removed..

All Channels

General Discussions

Why all vehicles should be removed..

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 97	Posted - 2015.01.06 05:52:00 - [1] - Quote Seriously.. What is their role? In a pc fight all vehicles ever do is drive around the map taking out all the turrets raking up points and avoiding the battle up to mid-end game and even then they are of not much help. They just farm wp safely in professional matches for an ob... In pubs? What is there role? Seriously? They have never been balanced at all... They are either OP or UP. No proto versions yet we have proto weapons. How the hell are we supposed to achieve true balance like that? Heavy suits = tanks. Primarily defensive guard units. Logi = Support players. They can range from medics to uplinkers to scanners ect. Assaults = your killers. Scouts = your speed kings. They can easily and quickly get from point to point to both attack or defend. They also favor a stealth style of gameplay. Commandos = good for av as you can hold another primary weapon. Also good for snipers to have another primary weapon. But also good for a variety of roles. Those who know how to play them to their potential are usually quite skilled. At least this is how I see it but tanks?? gets hit by one swarm launcher, goes to run and hide wastes time repping and waiting for modules to recover. Why not keep defending? "Because I dont wanna lose millions of isk QQ. So I am going to hide for half the game because I am risking so much and not really help out at all. I can't do much of anything to help out at the objectives unless I am OP and can destroy eveyrthing in my sights. Vehiclists are some of the biggest babies....But these are just my opinions. I am open to your thoughts. Are you a vehiclist? what is your role on the battlefield? What do you believe your role should be? Can you succesfully fill your role? How do you help the gameplay of an actual match? this is your one chance to prove me wrong. I am listening...
Cat Merc Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 14299	Posted - 2015.01.06 05:53:00 - [2] - Quote CCP wrote: Interesting my good sir! Very interesting indeed! Feline overlord of all humans Assault Conglomerate: Because we don't shave
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 441	Posted - 2015.01.06 05:56:00 - [3] - Quote Vehicles still have a role in PCs -- Fly Swatters. ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
da GAND Seykal Expeditionary Group Minmatar Republic 1095	Posted - 2015.01.06 05:56:00 - [4] - Quote Vehicles in this game really should be for huge maps with huge battles where vehicles are much more important and effective. Right now they are kind of meh and do provide support but with these small maps they don't have much to go to. There is no reason to remove then however lol. Should Legion be on the ps4?
Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 243	Posted - 2015.01.06 05:58:00 - [5] - Quote So, CCP nerfs vehicles because of vehicle haters crying. Then the vehicle haters say to remove them because they are useless? LogicGÇª swoosh! I'm better than laser focused; I'm hybrid focused.
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2673	Posted - 2015.01.06 05:58:00 - [6] - Quote I'm trying really hard to try to give a ** and explain how you're a ***** idiot, but I just can't. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 97	Posted - 2015.01.06 06:19:00 - [7] - Quote All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed.
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 4963	Posted - 2015.01.06 06:20:00 - [8] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: I'm trying really hard to try to give a ** and explain how you're a ***** idiot, but I just can't. OMG, Goldin can't even.... (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!!
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 442	Posted - 2015.01.06 06:25:00 - [9] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed. I would answer seriously, If I could take you seriously. Cause you're not Soul. ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 97	Posted - 2015.01.06 06:46:00 - [10] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed. I would answer seriously, If I could take you seriously. Cause you're not Soul. It doesnt matter who I am. CCP will probably read this and see that not one single person can provide one counter arguement. My questions are very simple and I answered them for every other role.

Ace Boone Capital Acquisitions LLC 658	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:09:00 - [11] - Quote ADS play a key in removing high-ground presence, keeping AV busy and being pesky as ** to deal with. LAVs get people from point to point in pubs. Tanks are pretty much useless. You only use tanks to kill other tanks or to help support homepoint. They have their small uses, but their not really..useful. The blasters need to be fixed. The dispersion rate just makes it..not fun. It needs to be very effective in CQC, but the dispersion rate needs to increase with range. It's a ***** tank for Chirst's sake, but it's like a spray gun in close quarters. And remove militia tanks. If tanks are good, they should be expensive. There shouldn't be a tank less expensive than a proto suit. Only loyal to the republic. I'm nothing more than bittervet without a PS3.
Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 244	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:14:00 - [12] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed. I would answer seriously, If I could take you seriously. Cause you're not Soul. It doesnt matter who I am. CCP will probably read this and see that not one single person can provide one counter arguement. My questions are very simple and I answered them for every other role. Good Lord, look up almost everything that has been said over the past year. Must we repeat the same stuff in yet another thread? It's beginning to sound like a broken record and I gave up records thirty years ago. It's all mp3 now baby! I'm better than laser focused; I'm hybrid focused.
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 97	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:15:00 - [13] - Quote Ace Boone wrote: ADS play a key in removing high-ground presence, keeping AV busy and being pesky as ** to deal with. LAVs get people from point to point in pubs. Tanks are pretty much useless. You only use tanks to kill other tanks or to help support homepoint. They have their small uses, but their not really..useful. The blasters need to be fixed. The dispersion rate just makes it..not fun. It needs to be very effective in CQC, but the dispersion rate increases with range. It's a ***** tank for Chirst's sake, but it's like a spray gun in close quarters. And remove militia tanks. If tanks are good, they should be expensive. There shouldn't be a tank less expensive than a proto suit. I agree with this 100%. They are useless. I don't see why tankers don't want to come here and answer my questions on what they believe their role should be and if they are able to do it right now. They are too raged because I said to remove them to provide any kind of feed back. Perhaps they know what I say is true but they should also know that this is their chance to tell CCP what should be done to tanks to give them an actual role.
Joel II X Bacon with a bottle of Quafe 5357	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:15:00 - [14] - Quote I dodged a few words here and there and just went for the bold words, and stopped when I read "vehiclists". Um, no. "Operative" should be used when speaking (or, in this case, typing) about different type of vehicle users.
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 97	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:15:00 - [15] - Quote Operative 1174 Uuali wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed. I would answer seriously, If I could take you seriously. Cause you're not Soul. It doesnt matter who I am. CCP will probably read this and see that not one single person can provide one counter arguement. My questions are very simple and I answered them for every other role. Good Lord, look up almost everything that has been said over the past year. Must we repeat the same stuff in yet another thread? It's beginning to sound like a broken record and I gave up records thirty years ago. It's all mp3 now baby! sounds like a simple copy and paste job. Too bad not one single person has still not provided one actual use for them.
Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 244	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:16:00 - [16] - Quote Ace Boone wrote: ADS play a key in removing high-ground presence, keeping AV busy and being pesky as ** to deal with. LAVs get people from point to point in pubs. Tanks are pretty much useless. You only use tanks to kill other tanks or to help support homepoint. They have their small uses, but their not really..useful. The blasters need to be fixed. The dispersion rate just makes it..not fun. It needs to be very effective in CQC, but the dispersion rate increases with range. It's a ***** tank for Chirst's sake, but it's like a spray gun in close quarters. And remove militia tanks. If tanks are good, they should be expensive. There shouldn't be a tank less expensive than a proto suit. Blasters are still very useful. All tanks as well as ADS still do a good job of one really useful thingGÇª they make people move! Best area of denial there is. I'm better than laser focused; I'm hybrid focused.
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 97	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:16:00 - [17] - Quote Joel II X wrote: I dodged a few words here and there and just went for the bold words, and stopped when I read "vehiclists". Um, no. "Operative" should be used when speaking (or, in this case, typing) about different type of vehicle users. The most constructive feedback I have received so far. +1
TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 92	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:25:00 - [18] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed. No desire to convince you. Take away something like this and its more of a watered down shooter.
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 97	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:31:00 - [19] - Quote TIGER SHARK1501 wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed. No desire to convince you. Take away something like this and its more of a watered down shooter. lol I really love how not one single tanker can defend themselves from a few simple questions.
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2749	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:58:00 - [20] - Quote CCP, remove the plasma cannon. No role in PC No role in pubs Maybe they're just there for fun and interesting content? Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~

Miokai Zahou WarRavens Capital Punishment. 443	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:58:00 - [21] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: CCP wrote: Interesting my good sir! Very interesting indeed! ^ this a millions times more. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16435	Posted - 2015.01.06 07:58:00 - [22] - Quote Sure tanks don't currently have a role. This doesn't mean they shouldn't have one. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
SgtMajSquish MLBJ Consolidated Dust 260	Posted - 2015.01.06 08:32:00 - [23] - Quote I wouldnt call myself a vehiclist but I have started to regularly fly a dropship that is outfitted to replace the logi DS of old. High Tank, High Rep, CRU, and decent guns. Plus its fun to squish people Rise and shine CCP. It's time to implement ping based match making.
sir RAVEN WING Kaalmayoti Warzone Control 2421	Posted - 2015.01.06 08:49:00 - [24] - Quote Surprised True hasn't came climbing out of his golden HAV dreams. Here, let me give you a reason. ADS: To destroy uplinks and those who will lay more. DS: To transport players from A to B and sometimes to R. (Rooftops :p) HAV: To suppress infantry, destroy vehicles that pester their team and such. LAV: To transport players from A to B. Also for fun. I am a Calscout Knifer so HAVs are kinda important to me. They help their team feel bulletproof and run into doorway where I wait, and when they fail, they become a tasty snack. Removing them would destroy this whole ecosystem. EDIT: He has... but was very disappointing. You better not cry. You'd better not pout, I'm telling you why. Raven Claws is coming to town! I <3 my Gû¼+¦GòÉGòÉn¦ñ
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2943	Posted - 2015.01.06 08:57:00 - [25] - Quote Soul \o/
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 97	Posted - 2015.01.06 08:57:00 - [26] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sure tanks don't currently have a role. This doesn't mean they shouldn't have one. That is also why I asked what tankers believe their role in the battlefield should be.
SgtMajSquish MLBJ Consolidated Dust 260	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:00:00 - [27] - Quote With their current low cost their role should be area denial and AV. Not area supremacy. If we went back to the old tanks worth 2mil+ ISK then i would agree that they should have supremacy over a battlefield Rise and shine CCP. It's time to implement ping based match making.
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 98	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:00:00 - [28] - Quote sir RAVEN WING wrote: Surprised True hasn't came climbing out of his golden HAV dreams. Here, let me give you a reason. ADS: To destroy uplinks and those who will lay more. DS: To transport players from A to B and sometimes to R. (Rooftops :p) HAV: To suppress infantry, destroy vehicles that pester their team and such. LAV: To transport players from A to B. Also for fun. I am a Calscout Knifer so HAVs are kinda important to me. They help their team feel bulletproof and run into doorway where I wait, and when they fail, they become a tasty snack. Removing them would destroy this whole ecosystem. EDIT: He has... but was very disappointing. Thank you for your response. Finally got someone who is trying. If HAV's role is to destroy other vehicles then do you think it should be easier for them to target dropships? I mostly just see take out other tanks or lavs.
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 98	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:03:00 - [29] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Soul \o/ Hi.
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2945	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:09:00 - [30] - Quote Turret Structures getting a health buff was a start... It lets tankers have a place of contention.. And some time and an actual need if a turret is manned as it can wreck an entire area... The problem? Turrets are put in some of the worst stupidest spots that could of been thought of..... It's like who put them there never really saw the game in action... If there was only a Few Static Turret Infrastructures on the map, but put in very very effective general high traffic locations... Then these turrets had relative decent A.I that tracked Vehicles primarily but otherwise infantry too..... Then infantry would be forced to use tankers or sacrifice significant Infantry to AV aspirations... Turrets should be check points in maps... For both Infantry and Vehicles... They should be points of contention just like a CRU or supply depot... Then have Turret Infrastructures Be able to be called in by players for a set amount of war points.... Allow Turret installations to have fittings and be purchasable on the market... This would cause a need in tactics for Tankers in general to properly push a majority of objectives.... Or points of interest... Also would allow them to have a cost reduction depending on how the performance is balanced. Give us Racial Large Weapons on Turrets... Amarr Giant Lasers, Minmatar Artillery... etc.

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16437	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:14:00 - [31] - Quote sir RAVEN WING wrote: Surprised True hasn't came climbing out of his golden HAV dreams. Here, let me give you a reason. ADS: To destroy uplinks and those who will lay more. DS: To transport players from A to B and sometimes to R. (Rooftops :p) HAV: To suppress infantry, destroy vehicles that pester their team and such. LAV: To transport players from A to B. Also for fun. I am a Calscout Knifer so HAVs are kinda important to me. They help their team feel bulletproof and run into doorway where I wait, and when they fail, they become a tasty snack. Removing them would destroy this whole ecosystem. EDIT: He has... but was very disappointing. I have but I'm starting to feel its mildly hypocritical to talk about tanks in a game I don't play anymore........ *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
SgtMajSquish MLBJ Consolidated Dust 260	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:15:00 - [32] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Turret Structures getting a health buff was a start... It lets tankers have a place of contention.. And some time and an actual need if a turret is manned as it can wreck an entire area... The problem? Turrets are put in some of the worst stupidest spots that could of been thought of..... It's like who put them there never really saw the game in action... If there was only a Few Static Turret Infrastructures on the map, but put in very very effective general high traffic locations... Then these turrets had relative decent A.I that tracked Vehicles primarily but otherwise infantry too..... Then infantry would be forced to use tankers or sacrifice significant Infantry to AV aspirations... Turrets should be check points in maps... For both Infantry and Vehicles... They should be points of contention just like a CRU or supply depot... Then have Turret Infrastructures Be able to be called in by players for a set amount of war points.... Allow Turret installations to have fittings and be purchasable on the market... This would cause a need for Tankers in general to push objectives.... Also would allow them to have a cost reduction depending on how the performance is balanced. Give us Racial Large Weapons on Turrets... Amarr Giant Lasers, Minmatar Artillery... etc. So maybe upgrading a turret that your team has using WP? Its getting into tower defense territory, but you could spend squad points for increasing the scan precision on a turret so that it could take out that pesky cloaker. Maybe for a limited amount of time. I have never give the turrets really all that much thought Rise and shine CCP. It's time to implement ping based match making.
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 101	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:32:00 - [33] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Turret Structures getting a health buff was a start... It lets tankers have a place of contention.. And some time and an actual need if a turret is manned as it can wreck an entire area... The problem? Turrets are put in some of the worst stupidest spots that could of been thought of..... It's like who put them there never really saw the game in action... If there was only a Few Static Turret Infrastructures on the map, but put in very very effective general high traffic locations... Then these turrets had relative decent A.I that tracked Vehicles primarily but otherwise infantry too..... Then infantry would be forced to use tankers or sacrifice significant Infantry to AV aspirations... Turrets should be check points in maps... For both Infantry and Vehicles... They should be points of contention just like a CRU or supply depot... Then have Turret Infrastructures Be able to be called in by players for a set amount of war points.... Allow Turret installations to have fittings and be purchasable on the market... This would cause a need in tactics for Tankers in general to properly push a majority of objectives.... Or points of interest... Also would allow them to have a cost reduction depending on how the performance is balanced. Give us Racial Large Weapons on Turrets... Amarr Giant Lasers, Minmatar Artillery... etc. I agree. This is the best and most unique response I have received by far. Turrets are even more worthless as they are now but all your suggestions are good.
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 101	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:33:00 - [34] - Quote SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: Bethhy wrote: Turret Structures getting a health buff was a start... It lets tankers have a place of contention.. And some time and an actual need if a turret is manned as it can wreck an entire area... The problem? Turrets are put in some of the worst stupidest spots that could of been thought of..... It's like who put them there never really saw the game in action... If there was only a Few Static Turret Infrastructures on the map, but put in very very effective general high traffic locations... Then these turrets had relative decent A.I that tracked Vehicles primarily but otherwise infantry too..... Then infantry would be forced to use tankers or sacrifice significant Infantry to AV aspirations... Turrets should be check points in maps... For both Infantry and Vehicles... They should be points of contention just like a CRU or supply depot... Then have Turret Infrastructures Be able to be called in by players for a set amount of war points.... Allow Turret installations to have fittings and be purchasable on the market... This would cause a need for Tankers in general to push objectives.... Also would allow them to have a cost reduction depending on how the performance is balanced. Give us Racial Large Weapons on Turrets... Amarr Giant Lasers, Minmatar Artillery... etc. I have never given the turrets really all that much thought Same here but perhaps it is time we start.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16438	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:42:00 - [35] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sure tanks don't currently have a role. This doesn't mean they shouldn't have one. That is also why I asked what tankers believe their role in the battlefield should be. With 0 suggestions or answers to this question... It just makes HAV's pointless. So what should be the point? If you ask me and my ideas wildly differ from other tankers..... I believe the HAV should be in practice on the field a heavily armoured vehicle with a slow firing, long range, high explosive (depending on your turret or its variation) main gun. Ideally tanks would be primarily an Anti Vehicle and Anti Installation (inclusive of CRU, Supply Depot, and other Game Mode specific Objectives) with a lesser focus on shooting at smaller more mobile infantry. On the field a Tank should be several things for its team. One is a mobile gun emplacement able to withstand small arms fire and some AV and deploy its ordinance against entrenched enemy positions so as to dislodge your opponents. Additionally this would encompass the idea of suppression through bombardment. The HAV as it is now has no main gun that is either appropriate or capable of establishing a suppressive presence on the field mainly as a result of the Large Turret mechanics. Only the Large Rail Turret somewhat resembles the main gun of a modern MBT however even then its fire's unquestionably too quickly and lacks any really presence on the field as it has no explosive or kinetic reaction when it's round impacts. I would like to see tanks be able to apply damage through splash as well with effect on infantry ideally being to cause them to seek cover. The second role it should fill is one that is dedicated to establishing ground vehicle control of the map by eliminating smaller vehicles (LAV, MAV, etc) so that infantry can freely move. I'd like to see the cementation of the HAV as the top tier ground based vehicle in the game something that can take a hit and dish it back out without weighting the gameplay to be tankcentric or AV centric. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Racro 01 Arifistan Simple Minded People Pty. Ltd. 488	Posted - 2015.01.06 09:52:00 - [36] - Quote ahhhhh. those times when that hmg heavy though he could cross the road......or that assault....or that logi.... or that scout. skirmish is where tanks shine. able to lock down a point from recivieng renfocments or beginning the assault at a target point. so many skirms I have played where a enemy squad thought they could get to point X only to be mowed down by a PROPERLY fitted tank. although infantry wernet happy with how blaster tanks worked and had our accuracy nefered to the point of uselessness and unfortuantley this also affects the blasters ability to engage opposing tanks....namely the all too common rail tank. some domination points can be defended by a tank ambush................... ambush oms.............. *Elite Gallenten Soldier*
Piraten Hovnoret Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 684	Posted - 2015.01.06 10:04:00 - [37] - Quote Troll thread. Tanks ads etc are a big part of dust PERIOD Rom for improvement? Yes Asking for them to be removed is just idiotic War never changes
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 4243	Posted - 2015.01.06 10:25:00 - [38] - Quote Okay, but adding proto vehicles equals one of two things: either AV balance remains the same and the vehicles receive an irrelevant increase in statistics making the proto not worth having, or proto AV is rebalanced to the dramatically more durable vehicles (I mean, proto infantry can have fully twice as much HP as STD) and STD vehicles get royally screwed. I suppose the answer is to do the latter, but make the PRO vehicles cost millions upon millions, and make proto AV cost a proportionate amount. Used to wonder why people'd hang out on the forums but wouldn't play the game...
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16438	Posted - 2015.01.06 10:37:00 - [39] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Okay, but adding proto vehicles equals one of two things: either AV balance remains the same and the vehicles receive an irrelevant increase in statistics making the proto not worth having, or proto AV is rebalanced to the dramatically more durable vehicles (I mean, proto infantry can have fully twice as much HP as STD) and STD vehicles get royally screwed. I suppose the answer is to do the latter, but make the PRO vehicles cost millions upon millions, and make proto AV cost a proportionate amount. I <3 MISS u LORHAK Leik if u crai evrytiem. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Yokal Bob Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 600	Posted - 2015.01.06 10:39:00 - [40] - Quote Militia tanks should not be removed but remain squishy, i mean they gotta practise in something. Proto turrets and hulls to match the AV. There should be a variety of turrets and hulls available for different purposes, whether it be area denial or to help defend an area or take out other vehicles. missile turrets need serious work. damage mods need to be removed entirely, spider modules need to be put back. i want to cloak in my vehicle dangit. turrets need to be able to reach the damn cowardly dropships that sit high and mighty in the sky. lavs need a delay to stop lav heavies, its sad. If its not anime, its not real

Timtron Victory Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 202	Posted - 2015.01.06 11:22:00 - [41] - Quote Correction this is a remove tanks thread. I really dont care either way, reduction of the vehicle quota so a rich team cannot overpower the other team simply because they can bring in more tanks or dropships Proud Christian Jesus Loves You
Niuvo NECROM0NGERS 1418	Posted - 2015.01.06 12:29:00 - [42] - Quote Riding dirty in a Bloodraider Saga with a bsc speed boost.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 683	Posted - 2015.01.06 12:32:00 - [43] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: I am open to your thoughts. Are you a vehiclist? what is your role on the battlefield? What do you believe your role should be? Can you succesfully fill your role? How do you help the gameplay of an actual match? this is your one chance to prove me wrong. I am listening... What exactly puzzles you about shooting people and vehicles with other vehicles being the prefered way of some to play? What about this confuses you litlle one? Scouts are fast, dropship is faster and carries more people. Heavies guard points, tanks guard points better, hell shut down entire sections of the map depending on the tanker. Sure you could waste 9 or 10 forge rounds at one installtion, a tank can take it down two missile clips. Sure, next PC you do, explicitly request no vehicles. See how far that gets ya. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
CrotchGrab 360 Yon Hyaku Nijuu Moyase 1853	Posted - 2015.01.06 12:34:00 - [44] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: Seriously.. [/b] I hate vehicles because they ruin my high kill games, scrubs always pull out vehicles when they're getting stomped. DUST VIDEOS
Niuvo NECROM0NGERS 1418	Posted - 2015.01.06 12:34:00 - [45] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Give us Racial Large Weapons on Turrets... Amarr Giant Lasers, Minmatar Artillery... etc. Racial Large Turrets for vehicles? Awesome.
Zindorak Nyain Chan General Tso's Alliance 1579	Posted - 2015.01.06 12:41:00 - [46] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: CCP wrote: Interesting my good sir! Very interesting indeed! Lol. Swarms are pretty good atm so that renders ADS's or Tanks useless Pokemon master and Tekken Lord Give me da iskiez Gk0 Scout yay :)
Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 249	Posted - 2015.01.06 12:46:00 - [47] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: TIGER SHARK1501 wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed. No desire to convince you. Take away something like this and its more of a watered down shooter. lol I really love how not one single tanker can defend themselves from a few simple questions. I did answer you childGÇª twice. Now hush up. I'm better than laser focused; I'm hybrid focused.
Cat Merc Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 14312	Posted - 2015.01.06 13:00:00 - [48] - Quote Zindorak wrote: Cat Merc wrote: CCP wrote: Interesting my good sir! Very interesting indeed! Lol. Swarms are pretty good atm so that renders ADS's or Tanks useless Have you seen what a properly fit Gunnlogi does to swarms? Answer: Eats them for breakfast and then has the swarmer as dessert. Feline overlord of all humans Assault Conglomerate: Because we don't shave
Lahut K'mar Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 9	Posted - 2015.01.06 13:46:00 - [49] - Quote Nah, dude. Tanks that know what they're doing are the heroes of the battlefield. I remember it like it was only two days ago. Objective C was yellow. I went it alone. I encountered little resistance. It was almost too easy. I hacked the CRU and went to C. But then an assault stepped from the shadows. He raised his gun to me and said "Any last words, Little Man?". I was cornered, and had not the time to raise my weapon.So I stood there and awaited my death. Then an explosion tore through my eardrums and when I looked up my executioner was gone. Glimmering majestically in the sun like an angel, an LMT Caldari tank. The tank spoke to me: "Hack the objective, child." That tank was bro as ****. It was always exactly where it needed to be, suppressing what needed to be suppressed. Horrifying? That's a strange way to spell "romantic".
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency 6882	Posted - 2015.01.06 13:49:00 - [50] - Quote This guy. 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.

Aqua-Regia 687	Posted - 2015.01.06 14:19:00 - [51] - Quote Yes remove drop ship, lav, mcc and tank. I'm down for the removing of all vehicles. GòöGòºGòºGòºGòºGòºGòºGòùGöÉGòôNo Longer a Collector Gòû Gòó *S00NGäó*GòPGò¼GòºGò¬GòñGòñGò¬GòñGòºGòºGòñGò¬GòñGòñGò¬GòñGòºGòºGòíHELLO GAMEGòPGûá GòÜGòñGòñGòñGòñGòñGòñGò¥Dust 514 GòPGò¢§GòÆGòú632554GòáGòòGòÆGòúRNDGòáGòò
Nirwanda Vaughns 1181	Posted - 2015.01.06 14:51:00 - [52] - Quote Just from Ambush, not the game. Why is it such a huge thing that us infantry just want a game mode we can go into without having to p*s about dodging a python missile spamming. the devs have said they can't split amb/oms and there was a vote which players voted for vehicles to be emoved yet CCP caved in and kept it as is. either that or Gallente Plasma Forge Cannon, somehting that gives a damage bonus towards shields as a viable anti shield vehicle weapon. hell give it the same stats as the caldari Forge guns but just the damage profile/proficiency of Plasma weapons (+10% shields -10% armour, +3% per level shield damage) Never argue with an idiot. they bring you down to their level and beat you through experience proud C-II bpo owner*
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 102	Posted - 2015.01.06 16:15:00 - [53] - Quote Nirwanda Vaughns wrote: Just from Ambush, not the game. Why is it such a huge thing that us infantry just want a game mode we can go into without having to p**s about dodging a python missile spamming. the devs have said they can't split amb/oms and there was a vote which players voted for vehicles to be emoved yet CCP caved in and kept it as is. either that or Gallente Plasma Forge Cannon, somehting that gives a damage bonus towards shields as a viable anti shield vehicle weapon. hell give it the same stats as the caldari Forge guns but just the damage profile/proficiency of Plasma weapons (+10% shields -10% armour, +3% per level shield damage) You make a good point. Just wish others could do the same for their counter arguments. 90% of the responses so far have just been QQ.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1224	Posted - 2015.01.06 17:17:00 - [54] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: At least this is how I see it but tanks?? gets hit by one swarm launcher, goes to run and hide wastes time repping and waiting for modules to recover. Why not keep defending? "Because I dont wanna lose millions of isk QQ. So I am going to hide for half the game because I am risking so much and not really help out at all. I can't do much of anything to help out at the objectives unless I am OP and can destroy eveyrthing in my sights. Vehiclists are some of the biggest babies....But these are just my opinions. The difference is that losing one vehicle is akin to losing 3+ Proto suits, depending on the fit, and is almost always going to cost you ISK (ie, force you to go ISK negative for that match and possibly multiple) making using vehicles in support of uncoordinated blueberries extremely unattractive. Used as part of a squad, a vehicle is more useful and the pilot, knowing that they have relatively reliable support, will be more likely to risk themselves. Djinn SouI wrote: I am open to your thoughts. Are you a vehiclist? what is your role on the battlefield? What do you believe your role should be? Can you succesfully fill your role? How do you help the gameplay of an actual match? this is your one chance to prove me wrong. I am listening... I'm an ADS pilot. My role is to be a WP pinata for any Swarmer to pull out any level of Swarmer. I don't help the gameplay of the match beyond removing uplinks/killing unaware/unequipped infantry, because my teeth were pulled when my ROF bonus was: my role is supposed to be area bombardment via strafing runs followed by troop deployment/extraction, but it is not possible due to having turrets incapable of supporting that role. No, I cannot successfully fulfil my role, because I don't have the tools to do so. Also because whenever anyone considers buffing vehicles in any way, shape or form, every scrub AVer comes out of the woodwork to defend AV/call for a vehicle nerf/call for an AV buff to compensate. Frankly, vehicles need to go back to the drawing board: 1.7 was the beginning of a whole vehicle overhaul that was entirely ignored after the first, massive change. We got some balance passes to make hardeners/reps less ridiculously OP, but that doesn't mean that the vehicles we have currently are worth a damn, because they were abandoned before the rebalancing could be completed. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2958	Posted - 2015.01.06 18:35:00 - [55] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: I am open to your thoughts. Are you a vehiclist? what is your role on the battlefield? What do you believe your role should be? Can you succesfully fill your role? How do you help the gameplay of an actual match? this is your one chance to prove me wrong. I am listening... What exactly puzzles you about shooting people and vehicles with other vehicles being the prefered way of some to play? What about this confuses you litlle one? Scouts are fast, dropship is faster and carries more people. Heavies guard points, tanks guard points better, hell shut down entire sections of the map depending on the tanker. Sure you could waste 9 or 10 forge rounds at one installtion, a tank can take it down two missile clips. Sure, next PC you do, explicitly request no vehicles. See how far that gets ya. Obviously you have no idea who you are talking too.. This is one of the fathers of PC strategy.... Most of what is ran and used for tactics today in PC... This guy directly had part in making it a thing in this game...
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2958	Posted - 2015.01.06 18:43:00 - [56] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: My role is to be a WP pinata for any Swarmer to pull out any level of Swarmer. I don't help the gameplay of the match beyond removing uplinks/killing unaware/unequipped infantry, because my teeth were pulled when my ROF bonus was: my role is supposed to be area bombardment via strafing runs followed by troop deployment/extraction, but it is not possible due to having turrets incapable of supporting that role. No, I cannot successfully fulfil my role, because I don't have the tools to do so. Also because whenever anyone considers buffing vehicles in any way, shape or form, every scrub AVer comes out of the woodwork to defend AV/call for a vehicle nerf/call for an AV buff to compensate. Frankly, vehicles need to go back to the drawing board: 1.7 was the beginning of a whole vehicle overhaul that was entirely ignored after the first, massive change. We got some balance passes to make hardeners/reps less ridiculously OP, but that doesn't mean that the vehicles we have currently are worth a damn, because they were abandoned before the rebalancing could be completed. No. Dropships where never supposed to be Glorified "Fighters" For the air.... With a Wet paper bag for defense to balance the offensive capabilities. This was never what this vehicle was for.... EVER. Dropships are the only thing in the game that can carry full squads... Dropships where supposed to be Equivalent to Military troop transport Helicopters. Dropships where supposed to be troop transport first.... Turrets where put on Dropships so that they could Provide cover and fire support for their squad... OR spawning in mercenaries that are then deploying out of the dropship. Dropships where supposed to be able to fly low(So the doors open) and Mercenaries could jump out without the need for Inertia Dampener.. Turrets on the dropship where meant to have Meaningful firefight exchanges with enemy's... Not kill every suit in the game in 1-3 shots... But sit there where the gunners and infantry have a fire exchange... that is somewhat evenly matched for damage and TTK... Just the Turrets have 3x larger clips so they can sustain fire longer... Dropship defense should be crazy high... They should be air tankers... That can sit there having meaningful exchanges with AV while supporting their squad and team before needing to retreat. ALL dropships should have built in Mobile CRU's.... This was ESSENTIAL to ending red-line matches ... Having mobile safe spawning platforms... Not blindly spawning into a CRU or an Uplink... Or even an objective to find 6 Red-berrys waiting for you... Dropships act like a Glorified Fighter with a wet paper bag for defense to balance it...... And all of DUST is robbed from a VITAL piece to balance and fast paced gameplay with purpose in DUST. Dropships should be a staple of DUST.... There should always be a few in the sky..... Instead their value and use has been squandered by CCP.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 683	Posted - 2015.01.06 18:53:00 - [57] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Obviously you have no idea who you are talking too.. This is one of the fathers of PC strategy.... Most of what is ran and used for tactics today in PC... This guy directly had part in making it a thing in this game... Like i give a crap. Also, PC being freely admitted the most broken thing in dust, so if you add that pile of ish to your CV, have at it. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1227	Posted - 2015.01.06 19:21:00 - [58] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Dropships where never supposed to be Glorified "Fighters" For the air.... With a Wet paper bag for defense to balance the offensive capabilities. So...we're (ADSs) supposed to have meh offensive capabilties (since the NDS can do pretty much the same) with bad defences (since the NDS can do far better) and still have less capacity for transport for a pretty small trade off in manoeuvrability? For a massive price increase? Bethhy wrote: This was never what this vehicle was for.... EVER. Except that it is what it was for. Rattati has said that ADSs should be performing strafing runs (which are currently impossible due to awful ROF) and since it is a dropship it is supposed to transport, either to deploy after strafing an area, or to extract them after strafing an area. Your personal assertion is utterly irrelevant in the face of Rattati's statements that ADSs should perform strafing runs. Can you post some evidence that Rattati has said that ADSs shouldn't be doing strafing runs? That they have another purpose? All you do, is the standard bitter vet procedure of shout No at everything that makes you unhappy. Bethhy wrote: Dropships are the only thing in the game that can carry full squads... Dropships where supposed to be Equivalent to Military troop transport Helicopters. Except that military helicopters have some of the better firepower projection in modern military forces. Certainly, we're not asking for ADSs to be full on attack helicopters, but we should definitely be capable of performing a strafing run as we deploy a group of mercenaries. The current ROF of the small turrets (for small missiles) or the application (for small blasters) that makes them difficult to use at anything vaguely approaching high speed. Have you ever flown? Do you ever speak to a pilot on your side? Do you understand the problems that ADS face with the carrying out with their role? Bethhy wrote: Dropships where supposed to be troop transport first.... Turrets where put on Dropships so that they could Provide cover and fire support for their squad... OR spawning in mercenaries that are then deploying out of the dropship. Yeah, because no military transport helicopter has a turret Dropships are troop transport first: the issue is not the ADS like you see to be insinuating. Simply, we have not nearly enough players on a team, nor do we have the necessary communication infrastructure nor do we have the map sizes and reasonable terrain to make good use of dropships and their capacity. How often do people use dropships for tiny hops up on top of buildings? Why? Because it's so easy to just call one in (in about five seconds) and put it away afterwards (or just let it die, if you're using a cheapo one) - why bother having a pilot, constantly in the air, who takes a good few seconds to get to you and who needs coordination to get your there together...when you can just call in a new one and have the pilot running on the ground. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1227	Posted - 2015.01.06 19:22:00 - [59] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Dropships where supposed to be able to fly low(So the doors open) and Mercenaries could jump out without the need for Inertia Dampener.. You're looking at that backwards: inertia dampeners mean you don't have to fly low. Sometimes a screaming fast pass utilising the inertia dampeners to help circumvent AV defences can net a lot more than flying low, getting the ** shot out of you which would probably cause you to scatter the drop anyway. Bethhy wrote: Turrets on the dropship where meant to have Meaningful firefight exchanges with enemy's... Not kill every suit in the game in 1-3 shots... But sit there where the gunners and infantry have a fire exchange... that is somewhat evenly matched for damage and TTK... Just the Turrets have 3x larger clips so they can sustain fire longer... In what way is a vehicle mounted turret, even a small one, only as powerful as an infantry weapon? The issue you have here is not with the ADS but with the turrets, yet you seem to be demanding that the ADS suffer nerfs to satisfy your hatred of vehicles. Vehicle mounted weapons are** more powerful than infantry weapons. Why wouldn't they be? Why would you use a vehicle if infantry were just as capable of fighting yet more flexible in everything...wait that's the current state of vehicles! Bethhy wrote: Dropship defense should be crazy high... They should be air tankers... That can sit there having meaningful exchanges with AV while supporting their squad and team before needing to retreat. Um...why? Frankly, why should aerial vehicles be resilient and sit around tanking damage? Aerial vehicles, by being more agile and mobile (well sort of) than ground vehicles should have that as their strength and maximise their time on target, not by increasing their time in the danger zone. You seem to be ascribing some really weird ideas on to dropships that don't align with pretty anything that Rattatti or anyone else wants. Bethhy wrote: ALL dropships should have built in Mobile CRU's.... This was ESSENTIAL to ending red-line matches ... Having mobile safe spawning platforms... Not blindly spawning into a CRU or an Uplink... Or even an objective to find 6 Red-berrys waiting for you... Really? Because in a redline situation we never see the winning team blowing the crap out of every vehicle called in because the redline is utterly awful at doing it's job. Oh wait, that's exactly what happens in a redline. Bethhy wrote: Dropships act like a Glorified Fighter with a wet paper bag for defense to balance it...... And all of DUST is robbed from a VITAL piece to balance and fast paced gameplay with purpose in DUST. Dropships should be a staple of DUST.... There should always be a few in the sky..... Instead their value and use has been squandered by CCP. I agree that dropships should be a staple, but frankly your ideas are pretty dumb. The issues with dropships mostly lie with bad map design, small maps and small team sizes. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2962	Posted - 2015.01.06 20:35:00 - [60] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Snipe Dude you hurt my ******* head..... And sad how much work you make for someone to even respond to your assumptions. Worse is the grasp of the big picture... Just a very very small picture completely situated around a small set of circumstances that directly affect you. Please show me where Rattati Said ADS's are supposed to be some gun platform of the sky that is never supposed to stop moving or it will die? It doesn't make any sense... Worse is this game concept that you are spouting where it is completely designed around Low time to kill on nearly EVERYTHING in DUST's existence... Everything has to die in less then 1-3 seconds... Which is stupid... Might aswell call this Battlefield.. ADS's where supposed to be a for a small squad of 4 quick infiltrating... Where the Pilot can solo support his/her small squad on quick infiltration... We Actually have HAD Fighter assets built for this game for over 5 years... There are actual FIGHTERS... That are supposed to fullfill this role... Not the troop transport vehicle... Period. -Military Troops transport Helicopters are Not giant Gun platforms that rule the sky and the ground... That Mere assumption makes my head hurt... I DOn't come on here without doing a little research about what i'm talking about. The average Troop transport Helicopter people would talk about would be...... The Chinook.. Even GTA 5 has a version... In DUST Military Helicopters that are picking and dropping troops off at the battlefield We aren't talking about a Mil Mi-24 Attack Helicopter "with" transport capabilities... Like your trying to play dropships should be. Everyone has flown... I Have played DUST since CLosed beta and have seen dropships since the start... At no point ever... Did they have a purpose in DUST.... And one thing is for sure.... Dropships where never made so that YOU could do strafing runs with a troop transport vehicle.... That mere assumption is sad... -Dropships are currently used only for slaying and getting ontop of buildings.... And anything you have purposed leaves them pigeon holed in a useless function that will never contribute to DUST 514 ever in that state. Obviously you have never used a Dropship in any competitive game setting in DUST 514... Dropships absolutely have to fly low enough so you DON't activate you Inertia Dampener... As soon as you touch that you are dead before you can gain control of your mercenary.. Any competent Mercenary would have nearly every target dead that jumped from a dropship with it's inertia dampener... Dead before they could even take control of their character... Inertia dampener deployment out of a dropship = death more then not.. period. You seem to think my post is about Nerfing the Dropship.... It isn't... It is about making the dropship have an actual role on the battlefield.... You seem perfectly content with a wet paper bag for defense aslong as they buff the offensive capabilities of a Dropship.... To me? ANd anyone that look at the big overall picture of DUST..... This sounds just straight up ignorant. Dropships Need 2x to 3x the defensive capabilities to Fullfill their role as troop transport and support... They DO NOT need to kill everysuit in the game with 1-3 shots to fullfill this.... They do NOT need a faster ROF to deliver that 1-3 shots.... They NEED to have the defense to stay in the air long enopugh to provide cover and support... While not being completely Overpowered Floating gunners of death. There NEEDS to be a reason for an AV mercenary to spawn AV every death because there are Vehicles too shoot at... Or a Dropship in the air... At the same time allowing the dropship or dropship gunners and the AV mercenary to have a meaningful exchange... Not 1-3 shots either way and the other is dead... The Fact that you claim dropships entire problem is a low rate of fire and bad map design just shows you completely oblivious you are to the game as a whole and ignorant to the original concepts of how Dropships where to even contribute to the game of DUST 514.

Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2677	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:03:00 - [61] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: All of these responses and I still have not received any answers to my questions... I bolded them for a reason. I am giving you guys a chance to state your case. If this is the best all of you can do then it only reinforces my belief that they should be removed. I would answer seriously, If I could take you seriously. Cause you're not Soul. It doesnt matter who I am. CCP will probably read this and see that not one single person can provide one counter arguement. My questions are very simple and I answered them for every other role. You do realize that nobody is giving you a answer because nobody is taking you serious, right? Damn, if Ripper says can't take you serious, you have issues. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2677	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:08:00 - [62] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sure tanks don't currently have a role. This doesn't mean they shouldn't have one. That is also why I asked what tankers believe their role in the battlefield should be. With 0 suggestions or answers to this question... It just makes HAV's pointless. So what should be the point? The problem is, I've already answered this question, several times over, and you claim that I haven't, or that anyone here hasn't, several times. You sound like a creationist, and it tickles me. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2677	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:10:00 - [63] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Okay, but adding proto vehicles equals one of two things: either AV balance remains the same and the vehicles receive an irrelevant increase in statistics making the proto not worth having, or proto AV is rebalanced to the dramatically more durable vehicles (I mean, proto infantry can have fully twice as much HP as STD) and STD vehicles get royally screwed. I suppose the answer is to do the latter, but make the PRO vehicles cost millions upon millions, and make proto AV cost a proportionate amount. Or **** tiers tiercide. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16447	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:24:00 - [64] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Okay, but adding proto vehicles equals one of two things: either AV balance remains the same and the vehicles receive an irrelevant increase in statistics making the proto not worth having, or proto AV is rebalanced to the dramatically more durable vehicles (I mean, proto infantry can have fully twice as much HP as STD) and STD vehicles get royally screwed. I suppose the answer is to do the latter, but make the PRO vehicles cost millions upon millions, and make proto AV cost a proportionate amount. Or **** tiers tiercide. Look where tiericide landed us Godin......... *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2963	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:36:00 - [65] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sure tanks don't currently have a role. This doesn't mean they shouldn't have one. That is also why I asked what tankers believe their role in the battlefield should be. With 0 suggestions or answers to this question... It just makes HAV's pointless. So what should be the point? The problem is, I've already answered this question, several times over, and you claim that I haven't, or that anyone here hasn't, several times. You sound like a creationist, and it tickles me. You have? I have yet to see anyone explain what Tanks are even for in DUST.... Or how they even fit in.. Other then rolling platforms of death and destruction... What has been their purpose throughout the history of DUST? Was their purpose always to be a force multiplier.. Giving a Mercenary 2x more power then if they where in a dropsuit? Then are tanks End game? Tanks in general have no role or purpose... There is nothing they are absolutely needed for.... And if we nerf AV... Is the only purpose to have a tank to counter another tank? Tanks and their role in DUST 514 has never been actually discussed with tankers... Because you ask them this question and they do two things... : Either Draw a blank and try and change the subject... Or : Explain that they should be rolling platforms of death and destruction. I Have yet to see on these forums a well thought out reason for WHY tanks are in DUST and what their role even is. When CCP CMDR Wang was still working for CCP Shanghai and was responsible for tanks.. His reasoning was there where end game platforms... Something you skill into AFTER you have worked out a basic infantry fitting. Tanks in the Original Concept in DUST... VEhciles in general where supposed to be end game.. You Had to spawn into match with your Infantry gear on and go score war points that you THEN could spend to call in a tank that your purchased and fitted off the market... At the same time having Battle commanders in Warbarges that selected what percentage of vehicles could even be called in... Choosing 2 AV's 3 tanks and 1 Dropship 2 Fighters... Or a combination of those in any order they choose... And that was the limit on the battlefield... Tanks where implemented into DUST with a COMPLETELY different concept to how they would be used by Mercenaries.. 3 years have gone by and nothing about tanks makes sense to why and what purpose they have as a main playstyle in this game.. What do you think Tanks should be for in DUST? Because this is a question that should be asked MONTHS ahead of any buff or nerf talks.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2686	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:37:00 - [66] - Quote Ace Boone wrote: ADS play a key in removing high-ground presence, keeping AV busy and being pesky as ** to deal with. LAVs get people from point to point in pubs. Tanks are pretty much useless. You only use tanks to kill other tanks or to help support homepoint. They have their small uses, but their not really..useful. The blasters need to be fixed. The dispersion rate just makes it..not fun. It needs to be very effective in CQC, but the dispersion rate needs to increase with range. It's a ***** tank for Chirst's sake, but it's like a spray gun in close quarters. And remove militia tanks. If tanks are good, they should be expensive. There shouldn't be a tank less expensive than a proto suit. So how are new people supposed to get into it if a tank costs 300k ISK? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 18200	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:39:00 - [67] - Quote Vehicles are a platform that brings to function and purpose to the game board that can never be found on an infantry scaled platform. Namely larger guns and means of movement. The compromise in bringing such large platforms to be able to bear such functions however is its own drawback unable to scale and traverse many things the still very capable infantry platform is able to provide. In terms of the DS it is basically flying and insertion and vertical harassment thus making the warfare in dust 514 3-D In terms of the LAV it is mobility and harassment and funnily enough stealth. You'd be amazed on how little attention is paid to an LAV and what its occupants are up to. In terms of the HAV they provide a mobile heavy weapons platform that is essentially a moving turret installation. CPM 1 Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior \\= Prototype Forge Gun=// Unlocked
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1227	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:39:00 - [68] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Please show me where Rattati Said ADS's are supposed to be some gun platform of the sky that is never supposed to stop moving or it will die? It doesn't make any sense... I didn't say that they weren't supposed to stop moving or they'd die, but the notion is that speed and manoeuvrability are the primary defences. What supporting reasoning do you have for them being flying tanks?! Bethhy wrote: Worse is this game concept that you are spouting where it is completely designed around Low time to kill on nearly EVERYTHING in DUST's existence... Everything has to die in less then 1-3 seconds... Which is stupid... Might aswell call this Battlefield.. You do realise that everything - everything - infantrywise dies in about 3 seconds tops, right? Even a maxed out PRO Amarr Sentinel (522.6/1344 armour) dies to a STD Scrambler Rifle in 3.25s (0.67s to kill shields/2.58s to kill armour.) Everything dies quickly, in fact only vehicles really survive for any length of time. Seriously, where do you get off on making outright and blatantly stupid assertions? Bethhy wrote: ADS's where supposed to be a for a small squad of 4 quick infiltrating... Where the Pilot can solo support his/her small squad on quick infiltration... We Actually have HAD Fighter assets built for this game for over 5 years... There are actual FIGHTERS... That are supposed to fullfill this role... Not the troop transport vehicle... Period. Again, why are you the one to make the decision about that? Rattatti has said that ADSs should perform strafing runs and an ADS does not infringe on the introduction of fighters later. But really, your issue is that you don't want ADSs to exist, for some reason, even though they are no more obnoxious than any specialist variant of anything. It [sic] means keep moving. <- that post even talks about how if you hover for long and get engaged by multiple people you should be boned. Completely counter to your idea: your idea is wrong according to Rattati, so stop peddling your wares. Bethhy wrote: -Military Troops transport Helicopters are Not giant Gun platforms that rule the sky and the ground... That Mere assumption makes my head hurt... I Don't come on here without doing a little research about what i'm talking about. The average Troop transport Helicopter people would talk about would be...... The Chinook.. Even GTA 5 has a version.. We aren't talking about a Mil Mi-24 Attack Helicopter "with" transport capabilities... Like your trying to play like dropships should be. Nobody is suggesting them being orbital death platforms, stop blowing things out of proportion. We already have Chinooks, that's the NDS, the Grimsnes/Myron. The Python/Incubus should be equivalent to the MH-60A, which has turrets and transport capacity. Another dropship entirely is the Hind/Apache type gunship. Let me make this clear for you, since you seem so boneheadedly ignorant of what people are actually saying: Most ADS pilots don't want to be unholy murder machines, but they want to be able to fight back and contribute using the role given to the ADS: mobile firepower and troop transport. Bethhy wrote: At no point ever... Did they have a purpose in DUST.... This is really the key: not having a purpose. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2686	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:39:00 - [69] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: Ace Boone wrote: ADS play a key in removing high-ground presence, keeping AV busy and being pesky as ** to deal with. LAVs get people from point to point in pubs. Tanks are pretty much useless. You only use tanks to kill other tanks or to help support homepoint. They have their small uses, but their not really..useful. The blasters need to be fixed. The dispersion rate just makes it..not fun. It needs to be very effective in CQC, but the dispersion rate increases with range. It's a ***** tank for Chirst's sake, but it's like a spray gun in close quarters. And remove militia tanks. If tanks are good, they should be expensive. There shouldn't be a tank less expensive than a proto suit. I agree with this 100%. They are useless. I don't see why tankers don't want to come here and answer my questions on what they believe their role should be and if they are able to do it right now. They are too raged because I said to remove them to provide any kind of feed back. Perhaps they know what I say is true but they should also know that this is their chance to tell CCP what should be done to tanks to give them an actual role. Do you even tank? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1227	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:40:00 - [70] - Quote Bethhy wrote: -Dropships are currently used only for slaying and getting ontop of buildings.... And anything you have purposed leaves them pigeon holed in a useless function that will never contribute to DUST 514 ever in that state. Pigeon holes them? With a specialist variant? The NDS is the transport vehicle you talk of: the ADS is a specialist variant based around higher firepower and lower resilience. Why do you feel this is unreasonable? As before, no-one (no-one reasonable anyway) is asking for a flying machine of uber death. Bethhy wrote: Obviously you have never used a Dropship in any competitive game setting in DUST 514... Dropships absolutely have to fly low enough so you DON't activate you Inertia Dampener... As soon as you touch that you are dead before you can gain control of your mercenary.. Any competent Mercenary would have nearly every target dead that jumped from a dropship with it's inertia dampener... Dead before they could even take control of their character... Inertia dampener deployment out of a dropship = death more then not.. period. You have such a skewed view of this game. I didn't say anything about dropping directly into the line of fire, but frankly you have displayed no intelligence around the role of dropships: high speed drops are one of the best methods of inserting troops into areas and avoiding AV fire. Quite often that kind of insertion will result in the use of inertial dampeners. Low flying, high speed dropship insertions are not very common, but they can be effective, I'm sure that's what you're trying to say, but frankly when you're dealing with entrenched AV, flying low at high speed has the great risk of being knocked straight down and killing everyone. Bethhy wrote: You seem perfectly content with a wet paper bag for defense aslong as they buff the offensive capabilities of a Dropship.... To me? ANd anyone that look at the big overall picture of DUST..... This sounds just straight up ignorant. Dropships Need 2x to 3x the defensive capabilities to Fullfill their role as troop transport and support... They DO NOT need to kill everysuit in the game with 1-3 shots to fullfill this.... They do NOT need a faster ROF to deliver that 1-3 shots.... Quite frankly, I'm all for looking at the small turrets. I have, in fact, made several threads about it: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=184362&find=unread https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=177189&find=unread Small turrets do need to be reworked - like many aspects of vehicles. But as far as dropships needing more health? Are you kidding me? 2x-3x the defensive capabilities puts them at around 1.5x-2x more resilient than HAVs - are you high?! Bethhy wrote: At the same time allowing the dropship or dropship gunners and the AV mercenary to have a meaningful exchange... Not 1-3 shots either way and the other is dead... What kind of meaningful exchange happens when one side is virtually invincible because you gave them twice as many HP?! That would turn into one side fires 4-6 times and the other has to fire 30-40! Do you not even comprehend the sheer idiocy of your own argument? How broken 2-3x more HP would be? Bethhy wrote: The Fact that you claim dropships entire problem is a low rate of fire and bad map design just shows you completely oblivious you are to the game as a whole and ignorant to the original concepts of how Dropships where to even contribute to the game of DUST 514. Tell me more about how you're so amazing and everyone should listen to you only . Frankly, you are stating things as if they are absolutes (such as the roles of certain things) when they are simply your opinions: opinions that conflict with the template that Rattati has decided he wants to go for. Bad map design is incredibly important: how is a dropship useful on a tiny map with little verticality? Or where they have no reasonable things to use as covers (ie, most maps)? Why do most people call in a LAV to get where they're going, unless it's a high place? Because dropships are pretty pointless considering the maps are so small and that, aside from otherwise inaccessible rooftops, there is little to no gain to be had from using one over a LAV. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.

Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2686	Posted - 2015.01.06 21:55:00 - [71] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: In a pc fight all vehicles ever do is drive around the map taking out all the turrets raking up points and avoiding the battle up to mid-end game and even then they are of not much help. They just farm wp safely in professional matches for an ob... About the only way to farm WP is to destroy installations. And what's a "professional match?" Do you mean planetary conquest, which is what the game should be balanced around? In pubs? What is there role? Seriously? They have never been balanced at all... They are either OP or UP. No proto versions yet we have proto weapons. How the hell are we supposed to achieve true balance like that? The game shouldn't be balanced around pubs. CCP listening to the whining infantry wanting the game balanced around ambush is why we're in this position. Heavy suits = tanks. Primarily defensive guard units. Heavies need a vehicle to cross open terrain. A tank with two small turrets attached gets people where they need to go in safety. Heavies are good for defending a position that a tank can't look at, ie. in buildings. Your argument isn't a good one. Logi = Support players. They can range from medics to uplinkers to scanners ect. Used to have logi dropships, which had a built-in mCRU. Provided rapid transportation and spawns across the whole battlefield. Easiest way to drop players off on a high point without having to jump out and drop links. What happens if an ADS is there and surprises you? If the pilot is lucky enough to get a body shot, you're dead and you lost your ship, as well as that crucial high point spawn. Assaults = your killers. Tanks are for that on open ground, along with forcing non-AV behind cover to allow your infantry to flank. You know, flanking, when you go around a position to attack the enemy from the side or behind. Scouts = your speed kings. They can easily and quickly get from point to point to both attack or defend. They also favor a stealth style of gameplay. Used to have scout LAVs, but they were useless. This role can be fulfilled by a LAV, and the driver isn't vulnerable to a sniper paying attention to cloaks, if the driver is in a heavy suit. Commandos = good for av as you can hold another primary weapon. Also good for snipers to have another primary weapon. But also good for a variety of roles. Those who know how to play them to their potential are usually quite skilled. More HP than a commando, as well as able to get damage out faster, which makes a big difference. At least this is how I see it but tanks?? Of course it's how you see tanks, because you don't tank. gets hit by one swarm launcher, goes to run and hide wastes time repping and waiting for modules to recover. That's because swarms ignore obstacles and hills while traveling to your position with the wrath of god behind them. Why not keep defending? Because a few thousand damage. "Because I dont wanna lose millions of isk QQ. So I am going to hide for half the game because I am risking so much and not really help out at all. I can't do much of anything to help out at the objectives unless I am OP and can destroy eveyrthing in my sights "Millions of ISK QQ? Are you insane? One of my fits costs nearly half a million ISK. I lose that, I've lost ISK for 3 matches. You die 5 times, you'll lose that much, vs my one death. Idiot. Vehiclists are some of the biggest babies....But these are just my opinions. No, it's AV, because they've successfully had vehicles nerfed for 3 years, while AV was consistently buffed in that same time frame. You're wrong. I am open to your thoughts. Are you a vehiclist? what is your role on the battlefield? What do you believe your role should be? Can you succesfully fill your role? How do you help the gameplay of an actual match? this is your one chance to prove me wrong. I am listening... I doubt you're open to listening to us, because you already have a pre-formed opinion, and a terrible opinion at that. You're not a pilot. Kindly find another game to ruin. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:02:00 - [72] - Quote CrotchGrab 360 wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: Seriously.. [/b] I hate vehicles because they ruin my high kill games, scrubs always pull out vehicles when they're getting stomped. Awwwwwwwwwwwww I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:03:00 - [73] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Zindorak wrote: Cat Merc wrote: CCP wrote: Interesting my good sir! Very interesting indeed! Lol. Swarms are pretty good atm so that renders ADS's or Tanks useless Have you seen what a properly fit Gunnlogi does to swarms? Answer: Eats them for breakfast and then has the swarmer as dessert. Properly fit Gunnlogi? You mean the swarms that halt the regen with 2 hardeners on? lol Stop using MLT and expect it to make a tank explode in one volley. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:08:00 - [74] - Quote Nirwanda Vaughns wrote: hell give it the same stats as the caldari Forge guns but just the damage profile/proficiency of Plasma weapons (+10% shields -10% armour, +3% per level shield damage) Wait, so you want a total of 25% against shield? Bugger off. Find another game to ruin. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16448	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:09:00 - [75] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Cat Merc wrote: Zindorak wrote: Cat Merc wrote: CCP wrote: Interesting my good sir! Very interesting indeed! Lol. Swarms are pretty good atm so that renders ADS's or Tanks useless Have you seen what a properly fit Gunnlogi does to swarms? Answer: Eats them for breakfast and then has the swarmer as dessert. Properly fit Gunnlogi? You mean the swarms that halt the regen with 2 hardeners on? lol Stop using MLT and expect it to make a tank explode in one volley. Except the Gunnlogi can eat those swarms for breakfast even with one hardener and regen through a portion of that damage at range or ideally if you are using cover properly whenever it wishes. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Hynox Xitio Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1916	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:15:00 - [76] - Quote salutes The horror! The horror! ( -íº -£-û -íº)
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:23:00 - [77] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Except the Gunnlogi can eat those swarms for breakfast even with one hardener and regen through a portion of that damage at range or ideally if you are using cover properly whenever it wishes. No, that's incorrect. Swarms stop my regen, no matter. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16449	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:41:00 - [78] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: True Adamance wrote: Except the Gunnlogi can eat those swarms for breakfast even with one hardener and regen through a portion of that damage at range or ideally if you are using cover properly whenever it wishes. No, that's incorrect. Swarms stop my regen, no matter. I never said they didn't only that 4 second delay is so manageable that you barely need pay it any heed. By the time you have left the combat zone you are already in the process of charging. By the time you reach cover (assuming you are not in it and why you wouldn't be I don't know) you are recharging or have recharged. Hell sometimes in between Swarm Volleys you might even get a pulse or two off..... *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1232	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:43:00 - [79] - Quote From Stuff514: minDamageToCauseShieldRechargePause102.0 STD/MLT Swarm: 260 base; 0.8 profile = 208 damage per missile; 0.6 hardener = 124.8: breaks regen threshold. ADV Swarm : 286 base: 0.8 profile = 228.8 damage per missile; 0.6 hardener = 137.28: breaks regen threshold. PRO Swarm: 312 base: 0.8 profile = 249.6 damage per missile; 0.6 hardener = 149.76: breaks regen threshold. Single Hardeners do not stop any level of swarms from breaking shield regeneration. Two hardeners: STD: 124.8 * 0.656 = 81.87: regen not broken. ADV: 137.28 * 0.656 = 90.06: regen not broken. PRO: 149.76 * 0.656 = 98.24: regen not broken. Two hardeners stop any level of Swarm. 1 ADV/PRO Damage Mod or 2+ levels of MinCom will prevent recharge with PRO Swarms, can't be bothered to do all the maths on every level Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2963	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:48:00 - [80] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: . https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2361400#post2361400 This is what your basing your entire argument on gameplay for a dropship.... And it is kinda misunderstood.. We have had dropships for years in this game... And they have acted exactly the same... Either with more offense or less defense. a tweak here and there with numbers... For years. We can tweak this all you want, it will change absolutely nothing with dropships or even the need for it to be on the battlefield other then being a slayer... Which is all your defending... The right to be a more effective slayer, No matter how you try and explain that you're not on several occasions... This is in essence where the heart of every response comes from you... And you find anyway to justify this. Then defend it. Throw that out of the window.... Dropships need to be fixed... Same as tanks... There is a Crisis of existence.... Why do they even exist... What are they even for... And doing exactly the same tweaks we have done for nearly 3 years is NOT the answer... Dropships need to be changed to what they even are and how they work... If a Dropship had 2x the Survivability.... And it took 1-2 extra Infantry or other vehicles/turrets To throw some fire on it before it is forced to retreat or die.... Does that sound like this GIANT deal your making it out to be? Specially if the Offensive capabilities aren't 1-3 shotting every suit in the game? Yes TTK is low right now in DUST... But also hitting those theoretical numbers with all shots landing accurately is a MUCH different scenario... Where Dropships consistently land their shots with ease... As they have the best vantage point that could be asked for in a majority of maps. Albeit terrible game mechanics to support it. Having High burst damage and small clip size on dropship weapons is a problem... It will always create a balance problem... Currently there are Infantry all over DUST 514 that love to be Infantry AV Specialists... They absolutely love it... It is their favorite playstyle... But there is not enough Vehicles and things to shoot to justify spawning as this in majority. Same as PC.... Vehicles in general just aren't a threat to holding and taking objectives Enough, To justify a Mercenary dedicated to fighting them.... Other then infiltrating and defending the only Strong stagnant safe spawn spot you can create.. in DUST...... Not a Dropship played by a Human.... But... Uplinks ontop of a roof... Uplinks on a roof shouldn't exist... There should always be Dropships in play as Mobile spawn platforms that facilitate this function 100x better, that removes and takes out roof uplink placements.. ADS have been around... And have had many developers inputs... Nothing Rattati ever said claimed a role on anything.. Just justified the reason why a Dropship shouldn't be able to sit ontop of everyone murdering with impunity until a forge gunner shows up. Which everyone agree's with... These are my opinions on the Dropship: Dropships should get large War-point rewards for transporting Troops from A->B.... It should be the main area the UI selects for a spawn point in maps.. When it is above an Objective defending it's squad mates and providing a safe spawn area for team mates... The opposing side should look to remove the dropship and safe spawn location first before assaulting the objective... There should be Mercenaries who are AV Infantry specialists.. Who run AV as their primary function.. And an entire gameplay shaped around Vehicle VS AV and a balanced exchange... It should be able to defend it's self but at the same time have it's gunners shot out if they are exposed to long... ADS's should be less defense but with the addition of a pilot gunner that can operate without being shot out or exposed to small arms fire... Between Tanks, Dropships, LAV's and Turret installations and gameplay around full time Infantry AV Specialists..... The entire system has to get reworked... And roles and actual Purpose to them put forward on the battlefield from that. Tweaks here and there will do nothing for the dropship... It has to get defined into a role and purpose. And being a competitive slayer that is in the air is not what a dropship was ever designed to do by CCP...

Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:52:00 - [81] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: True Adamance wrote: Except the Gunnlogi can eat those swarms for breakfast even with one hardener and regen through a portion of that damage at range or ideally if you are using cover properly whenever it wishes. No, that's incorrect. Swarms stop my regen, no matter. I never said they didn't only that 4 second delay is so manageable that you barely need pay it any heed. By the time you have left the combat zone you are already in the process of charging. By the time you reach cover (assuming you are not in it and why you wouldn't be I don't know) you are recharging or have recharged. Hell sometimes in between Swarm Volleys you might even get a pulse or two off..... By the time I've left the combat zone, they're almost ready to fire a 4th volley at me. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16449	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:52:00 - [82] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: True Adamance wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: True Adamance wrote: Except the Gunnlogi can eat those swarms for breakfast even with one hardener and regen through a portion of that damage at range or ideally if you are using cover properly whenever it wishes. No, that's incorrect. Swarms stop my regen, no matter. I never said they didn't only that 4 second delay is so manageable that you barely need pay it any heed. By the time you have left the combat zone you are already in the process of charging. By the time you reach cover (assuming you are not in it and why you wouldn't be I don't know) you are recharging or have recharged. Hell sometimes in between Swarm Volleys you might even get a pulse or two off..... By the time I've left the combat zone, they're almost ready to fire a 4th volley at me. And you are typically well on your way back to full HP. That's not how a tank should function. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:58:00 - [83] - Quote Bethhy wrote: blah It's his argument because it's Rattati's vision for it. He's tried justifying it to you several times, but you just won't accept it because you have your own biased view of it. Just stop, it makes you look bad. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 22:59:00 - [84] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: True Adamance wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: True Adamance wrote: Except the Gunnlogi can eat those swarms for breakfast even with one hardener and regen through a portion of that damage at range or ideally if you are using cover properly whenever it wishes. No, that's incorrect. Swarms stop my regen, no matter. I never said they didn't only that 4 second delay is so manageable that you barely need pay it any heed. By the time you have left the combat zone you are already in the process of charging. By the time you reach cover (assuming you are not in it and why you wouldn't be I don't know) you are recharging or have recharged. Hell sometimes in between Swarm Volleys you might even get a pulse or two off..... By the time I've left the combat zone, they're almost ready to fire a 4th volley at me. And you are typically well on your way back to full HP. That's not how a tank should function. What? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 2963	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:12:00 - [85] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Bethhy wrote: blah It's his argument because it's Rattati's vision for it. He's tried justifying it to you several times, but you just won't accept it because you have your own biased view of it. Just stop, it makes you look bad. Yah im wasting my freaking time I might aswell go play Battlefield 4 with apparently a "Vision".... That is around some small numbers tweak that has already happened and has been happening for years Your lost in the small details Spkr... Even for your tanks... Counting shots vs an AV.. I Still don't even know what you think tanks are for.... What are they for in PC?
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:16:00 - [86] - Quote Bethhy wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Bethhy wrote: blah It's his argument because it's Rattati's vision for it. He's tried justifying it to you several times, but you just won't accept it because you have your own biased view of it. Just stop, it makes you look bad. Yah im wasting my freaking time I might aswell go play Battlefield 4 with apparently a "Vision".... That is around some small numbers tweak that has already happened and has been happening for years Your lost in the small details Spkr... Even for your tanks... Counting shots vs an AV.. I Still don't even know what you think tanks are for.... What are they for in PC? lolwut Battlefield 4 =/= Dust 514 I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1233	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:29:00 - [87] - Quote Bethhy wrote: This is what your basing your entire argument on gameplay for a dropship Don't think that you understand me, and you clearly have little grasp on reality. I've flown since dropships came out, and I've been flying ADS since they came out and as a dedicated ADS pilot for well over a year and a half. Can you make that claim? Do you understand what flying requires? Do you know the best ways to react to coming under fire, how to manoeuvre to best avoid Forge Guns, how to drop altitude to break swarm locks? You think you're superior because you've been playing a long time? So have I, I joined in Beta on the back of a Merc Pack, I played on the weekends when that was all we were allowed. You've done everything? Great! But that means you're not a specialist, and you don't understand the roles like a specialist does. Bethhy wrote: We can tweak this all you want, it will change absolutely nothing with dropships or even the need for it to be on the battlefield other then being a slayer. Which is all your defending. The right to be a more effective slayer, No matter how you try and explain that you're not on several occasions. Let me ask you a question: what is not based around slaying in this game? Assaults are all about going in and killing to take it. Sentinels are all about sitting somewhere, killing to defend the point. Commandos are all about killing. Scouts have less focus on killing, but are still focused on finding enemies...so that they can be neutralised: either by killing or by circumventing. Logistics are about the denial of killing and supporting those who do the killing. What role does not involve killing? What purpose can something play that does not involve getting into the thick of things and killing? A LAV? - then what's the turret for? A HAV? - then why have bigger and more powerful guns? A Dropship? - then why transport people to go kill? Absolutely everything in this game revolves around killing. Some have different methods of killing, and some circumvent killing (like MinScouts hacking) so that pressure is eased elsewhere making the overall objectives easier to obtain. As much as you say you want to make dropships have a purpose, removing the ability to kill is not the way to do it - doing so is only going to render them short-term taxis. Answer another question then: why have variants? All variants are differences based on a similar base: Assault Scrambler Rifles are still anti-shield weapons, but they use full auto mechanics and a low damage per shot/better damage over time principle. The Assault Dropship, which you are so diametrically opposed to, is a variant: it has higher firepower and lower defences. Bethhy wrote: Where Dropships consistently land their shots with ease. You really show yourself as an incompetent when you make ridiculous claims. I fly with Pvt Numnutz, usually as a gunner but sometimes flying for him, and solo, and we do well, because we're both ADS pilots and have been for over a year each. We've also flown together for nearly as long and so we communicate and understand each other very well. Even with that coordination, we still struggle to fight off a solo AV player, because what you said above is simply not true. A good dropship pilot, who's been around and flown for a long time will do a lot of damage and will have a good damn aim, but saying that hitting consistently is easy? Go away, I think your bridge is getting cold without you under it. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1233	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:29:00 - [88] - Quote Bethhy wrote: (1) Dropships should get large War-point rewards for transporting Troops from A->B.... It should be the main area the UI selects for a spawn point in maps.. When it is above an Objective defending it's squad mates and providing a safe spawn area for team mates... The opposing side should look to remove the dropship and safe spawn location first before assaulting the objective... (2) There should be Mercenaries who are AV Infantry specialists.. Who run AV as their primary function.. And an entire gameplay shaped around Vehicle VS AV and a balanced exchange... (3) It should be able to defend it's self but at the same time have it's gunners shot out if they are exposed to long... (4) ADS's should be less defense but with the addition of a pilot gunner that can operate without being shot out or exposed to small arms fire... (5) Between Tanks, Dropships, LAV's and Turret installations and gameplay around full time Infantry AV Specialists. The entire system has to get reworked... And roles and actual Purpose to them put forward on the battlefield from that. (6) Tweaks here and there will do nothing for the dropship... It has to get defined into a role and purpose. And being a competitive slayer that is in the air is not what a dropship was ever designed to do by CCP. (1) That is an mCRU. As far as equipping an mCRU is concerned, I don't necessarily disagree, but unless there are better communication channels and uplinks are far less useful/prevalent, then mCRUs will remain as ill-forgotten as ever. People don't spawn on mCRUs for several reasons: 1, they don't know where they'll end up when they finally spawn; 2, they can get an uplink that's either faster, better positioned or both; 3, they simply can't because of bugs. But I definitely agree that transporting mercs should be much more rewarded. (2) Um...yeah. That is pretty much exactly what balance means. Currently, AV can either kill or drive off a DS in relatively short order. Even if they fail to kill them, they can reap a good 150 WP from them just for firing three volleys of swarms. AV is handsomely rewarded; piloting is not. Not to mention the incredible differences in ISK payouts/costs. Not everyone is a PC Farmer/Father like you, we don't all have bucketloads of ISK to spare on 577 Proto suits a day, or 100 ADSs/HAVs. I currently have about 30mil, and that's because I've been running mostly infantry because any AV on the field pretty much shuts me down entirely. (3) That is entirely the case right now. Except with the defending itself part. Actually identifying and killing AV is difficult, even as a gunner - unlike said AV, you need to account for your pilot's movements, current momentum and the fact that unlike infantry you can't aim with the motion of your body. As an ADS pilot, you need to account for most of that, plus actually flying and paying attention to everything around you: where is that AV coming from; are there any vehicles nearby; check up, in case there's a ramship randomly farting about just because. (4) Again...exactly what we have at the moment. (5) Well, I guess that depends on what you mean by an entire rework. Maps are small, no matter how much you try to deflect that as an issue, it really is. I can come and pick someone up from one side and take them to another, or they could have called in a LAV and gotten there already by the time we lift off. Just changing WP rewards isn't a rework, it's just as much of a tweak as anything else. (6) As I said, everything is about killing, no matter how you look at it. There's a reason not a single thing in the game has no guns, except for Ramship Grimsnes' and taxis, and the latter is about getting someone to a better position so they can kill better. Everything is about killing. ADS is about killing better than an NDS. Why do you think I'm trying to get a murder beast of unholy power? What I'm asking for is to be able to respond to threats as equally as anyone else is able, and to perform my role: performing fast attacks in prelude to deploying small teams of mercenaries. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
SgtMajSquish MLBJ Consolidated Dust 272	Posted - 2015.01.07 00:44:00 - [89] - Quote I like the WP cost for vehicles. It doesnt have to be much, but it would justify the buffing of vehicles as they would be more 'valuable'. LAVs and DSs would keep their 'free' cost as some people need the help traversing the field. ADSs and Tanks would cost WP so that it is clear that you are and infantryman first, then a pilot. Depending on the WP cost we could have the ISK cost of ADSs and Tanks go down Rise and shine CCP. It's time to implement ping based match making.
Hynox Xitio Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1919	Posted - 2015.01.07 01:06:00 - [90] - Quote This is what needs to be done. The horror! The horror! ( -íº -£-û -íº)

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1234	Posted - 2015.01.07 01:26:00 - [91] - Quote SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: I like the WP cost for vehicles. It doesnt have to be much, but it would justify the buffing of vehicles as they would be more 'valuable'. LAVs and DSs would keep their 'free' cost as some people need the help traversing the field. ADSs and Tanks would cost WP so that it is clear that you are and infantryman first, then a pilot. Depending on the WP cost we could have the ISK cost of ADSs and Tanks go down This is supposedly a sandbox game: why shouldn't someone be allowed to be a vehicle pilot first and foremost? Are fighter pilots, with all their training, supposed to fight as a riflemen before they can get in their planes and put that training to good use? Do tank commanders and gunners have to run around, get shot at a bunch before they're allowed to get in a tank and blow **** up? Essentially no. Most armies have basic training to give every the, well, basics and to get everyone into the chain of command: but a specialist is not treated the same as a generalist, they are used in the speciality first and foremost, because what's the point otherwise? In essence, why must someone be forced to run something they're not necessarily good at (some people just can't do FPS very well, but they might take to flying or tanking like a duck to water) in order to do what they want? What balance does this acheive, but potentially make those vehicles more powerful and make stomping even more severe? Need 1,000 WP before you can call down your tank? Good luck when you've got a squad and a half of proto stompers kicking your teeth in with their four, new and improved tanks! Let's flip the tables: why shouldn't you be forced to run Scout/Light suits until you've earned enough WP to be allowed to use a Medium? Then use that Medium to be allowed to deploy a Heavy? Quite frankly, if you've skilled into something and paid to own the suit, you shouldn't be restricted in whether you're allowed to use it. I have issues with allowing proto in Pubs (mostly because this seriously hurts NPE and also makes Pubs vastly less interesting) but considering we have the lowest tier of everything the notion still applies: why, if you've spent your SP on something you want to do, would you not be allowed to use it? If you can't balance it before needing WP to call it, it's most certainly not going to be balanced with a WP requirement! Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 94	Posted - 2015.01.07 04:02:00 - [92] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: CrotchGrab 360 wrote: Djinn SouI wrote: Seriously.. [/b] I hate vehicles because they ruin my high kill games, scrubs always pull out vehicles when they're getting stomped. Awwwwwwwwwwwww XD lol I must agree with Speaker. A proto stomper crying because they feel they're getting stomped on. That's comedy.
jane stalin Ametat Security Amarr Empire 82	Posted - 2015.01.07 09:03:00 - [93] - Quote Joel II X wrote: I dodged a few words here and there and just went for the bold words, and stopped when I read "vehiclists". Um, no. "Operative" should be used when speaking (or, in this case, typing) about different type of vehicle users. vehiclist does sound wrong but if it is acceptable to call someone who plays the violin a violinist then I accept the word vehiclist as someone thatuse vehicles. PS if you happen to be a child of mine that has not been born at the time of typing this and you are reading this in the distant future I completely retract the given statement above, I will disown you if you use such a stupid word.
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2681	Posted - 2015.01.07 11:01:00 - [94] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Okay, but adding proto vehicles equals one of two things: either AV balance remains the same and the vehicles receive an irrelevant increase in statistics making the proto not worth having, or proto AV is rebalanced to the dramatically more durable vehicles (I mean, proto infantry can have fully twice as much HP as STD) and STD vehicles get royally screwed. I suppose the answer is to do the latter, but make the PRO vehicles cost millions upon millions, and make proto AV cost a proportionate amount. Or **** tiers tiercide. Look where tiericide landed us Godin......... Tiercide hasn't happened yet for infantry, and has always existed for vehicles. I don't see what you mean by that. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Mobius Wyvern Sky-FIRE 5583	Posted - 2015.01.07 13:48:00 - [95] - Quote As someone that gets bored unless I'm flying my Assault Dropship through tons of AV and getting into the occasional 1v1 with a good Fore Gunner, I don't think I'd describe myself as a pansy. What pisses me off is that instead of dueling Forge Gunners, now all there is are scrubs with easymode Swarms just filling the sky with fire-and-forget no-skill seeker missiles. Bring skill back to AV. Nerf Swarms. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Jathniel G I A N T 1401	Posted - 2015.01.07 15:14:00 - [96] - Quote Bethhy wrote: (..properly gave a brief but accurate history of HAVS and DS...) You gotta understand probably most the guys playing Dust today, started in Uprising or at the very end of Chromosome. They're not familiar with what was envisioned or implemented before. They don't understand how big the maps really are, and that Dropships were going to be carrying players across very great distances (like in Arma 2 or 3). They don't understand that HAVs (especially old school Marauders), were END GAME HAVs, that had like 10x and 12x SP cost (and that's why they were lethal and hard to kill). They probably don't even know that MCCs were designed to move between objectives and theaters of operation. If Dust players today, KNEW what us closed beta "bitter vets" knew, they would not settle for Dust as it is right now, and they would take the OP's words more seriously. Retired
MetalWolf-Cell ROGUE RELICS VP Gaming Alliance 22	Posted - 2015.01.07 16:29:00 - [97] - Quote I see HAV's should be powerful support platforms. The reason I say this is because when you normally see tanks, They provide suppression and high dps shells. Infantry can take cover behind a tank as small arms fire bounce off their thick plating. Also, usually when someone sees a mammoth sized vehicle role into the battlefield, people tend to a) panic or b) focus all of their attention on said vehicle, leaving them vulnerable to infantry men. They are also the strongest AV available if fitted correctly to do so, can provide artillery fire to blast large amounts of people in one area, while small turrets can catch people if not treading the field carefully, and just become a big ol' wall to block people from going in one direction However like True and other vets say...They don't act like Tanks...more like a MAV. Marauders in chromosome, were TANKS. Overpowered? a little bit, but they were tanks. very hard to take out, and with coordinated effort, could be destroyed. They cost a ton of ISK, and a lot of SP. if you lost these 3.5 mil tanks, a hole in your pocket you had. But with them gone, and now stuck with these tanks with odd mechanics, they Don't really behave like one. The Gallente HAV has a large AR on top of it. Usually you see Rapid fire turrets on smaller, nimble vehicles that can provide constant DPS while remaining mobile. Most large vehicles have slow, High damaging shells that either scare the crap out of people on the end of it's muzzle, or surpress a particular area from advancing. Caldari vehicles sort of behave like tanks but even then, They just don't feel like a tank at all and more like a fast death machine. HAV's in my opinion, should be sort of slow but very hard hitting. Having cannons to fire from a distance to warn people of their presence on the battlefield and be wary to come across it as it's secondary turrets can easily kill you. Be hard to destroy without coordinated tactics from AV or another tank, and depending on how it is fitted, either a glass cannon, or extremely tanky. It's role on the battlefield I'm saying, could be a large supportive platform that can KILL with large shells. ANYTHING should have a potential to kill. If logic entails, a scout should only be Intel and very little killing and a logi should only heal and provide ammo and less of killing potential. But of course, they have a potential to be deadly as well, such as a HAV should kill as well. But like I said, Vets and myself, should see the HAV with a role. Currently it's like CCP is confused on what it should be, which is understandable since Tanks like these are a little complex since they use to have multiple roles among the modules they had. But due to tiercide, they are pigeon holed into large dropsuits with large forge guns and AR's. I would like to see them as a very strong artillery support vehicle that can help punch a whole in organized defenses and cause chaos if left without counter attacks. However, that is just my 0.02 ISK DUST 514/LEGION
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 110	Posted - 2015.01.09 17:24:00 - [98] - Quote Bump. This thread started off slow but It has really become quite interesting. I want the discussion to continue. Consider me intrigued.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2700	Posted - 2015.01.09 17:40:00 - [99] - Quote Jathniel wrote: Bethhy wrote: (..properly gave a brief but accurate history of HAVS and DS...) You gotta understand probably most the guys playing Dust today, started in Uprising or at the very end of Chromosome. They're not familiar with what was envisioned or implemented before. They don't understand how big the maps really are, and that Dropships were going to be carrying players across very great distances (like in Arma 2 or 3). They don't understand that HAVs (especially old school Marauders), were END GAME HAVs, that had like 10x and 12x SP cost (and that's why they were lethal and hard to kill). They probably don't even know that MCCs were designed to move between objectives and theaters of operation. If Dust players today, KNEW what us closed beta "bitter vets" knew, they would not settle for Dust as it is right now, and they would take the OP's words more seriously. I think the Marauders were 12x multipliers during Chrome. But I think that's also when SP gains were still pretty high per match. I imagine they'll be 8x now due to 10k SP being a pretty high gain in one match. If vehicles are worth it, I'm dumping all my 71mil SP into them. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Bone Doc Commando Perkone Caldari State 9	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:46:00 - [100] - Quote The only vehicles that dont have a role are tanks while LAV and dropships are pure transportation with minor firepower, the only time I ever seen a good role for tanks was back in closed beta when the massive installations had to be desroryed or captured in order for the game to proceed,everything since then has only made them death mahcines with no boundary outside of that. Maybe the game modes need to change in order to give the vehicles more purpose instead of changing the vehicle themselfs,idk just thinking to myself.

Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2694	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:59:00 - [101] - Quote SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: I like the WP cost for vehicles. It doesnt have to be much, but it would justify the buffing of vehicles as they would be more 'valuable'. LAVs and DSs would keep their 'free' cost as some people need the help traversing the field. ADSs and Tanks would cost WP so that it is clear that you are and infantryman first, then a pilot. Depending on the WP cost we could have the ISK cost of ADSs and Tanks go down Hell ***** no. Why should I have to pay a WP cost when my role ingame for the most ppart is to be a ***** pilot? click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Djinn SouI Molden Heath PoIice Department 113	Posted - 2015.01.14 19:16:00 - [102] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: I like the WP cost for vehicles. It doesnt have to be much, but it would justify the buffing of vehicles as they would be more 'valuable'. LAVs and DSs would keep their 'free' cost as some people need the help traversing the field. ADSs and Tanks would cost WP so that it is clear that you are and infantryman first, then a pilot. Depending on the WP cost we could have the ISK cost of ADSs and Tanks go down Hell ***** no. Why should I have to pay a WP cost when my role ingame for the most ppart is to be a ***** pilot? Maybe a wp cost for special types of vehicles with upgrades ontop of what is already available?
Mobius Wyvern Sky-FIRE 5664	Posted - 2015.01.18 15:13:00 - [103] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: I like the WP cost for vehicles. It doesnt have to be much, but it would justify the buffing of vehicles as they would be more 'valuable'. LAVs and DSs would keep their 'free' cost as some people need the help traversing the field. ADSs and Tanks would cost WP so that it is clear that you are and infantryman first, then a pilot. Depending on the WP cost we could have the ISK cost of ADSs and Tanks go down Hell ***** no. Why should I have to pay a WP cost when my role ingame for the most ppart is to be a ***** pilot? Maybe a wp cost for special types of vehicles with upgrades ontop of what is already available? No. You shouldn't be forced to play as infantry just to have access to the vehicle that you chose to specialize for. Imagine a squad of 6 Proto Scouts goes running around with shotguns until they have enough WP, then calls in their full vehicle quota and keeps any other players from getting enough WP to call in vehicles. Putting a WP cost on vehicles has the potential to make battles in Dust even more one-sided and pointless. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1298	Posted - 2015.01.18 15:20:00 - [104] - Quote SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: I like the WP cost for vehicles. It doesnt have to be much, but it would justify the buffing of vehicles as they would be more 'valuable'. LAVs and DSs would keep their 'free' cost as some people need the help traversing the field. ADSs and Tanks would cost WP so that it is clear that you are and infantryman first, then a pilot. Depending on the WP cost we could have the ISK cost of ADSs and Tanks go down Might as well throw a WP cost on spawning in a heavy suit considering how advantageous it is to run Dual tanking is for bad players. Come play a better game.
Hakyou Brutor Bad Intention 1927	Posted - 2015.01.18 15:55:00 - [105] - Quote remove av, it's the only reason tanks are so bad fixed you're welcome, world you might be talented, but you're not hak rekt
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 3052	Posted - 2015.01.18 16:15:00 - [106] - Quote Sometimes I worry about this community, I really do. You can all think what ever you want to think but in my opinion, vehicles used to be fine, fun and had a place in the game. Back in Chromosome..... remember those days? Blaster tanks dealt with infantry, Railgun tanks dealt with blaster tanks as well as being great vs installations and dropships. Now if your team doesn't make use of installations then that is your problem. Vehicles used to have variety and the pilots would regularly roll with gunners. Missiles needed a little adjustment but we did finally get that. Modules required management and judgement to use correctly. Everything got nerfed, changed, messed around with and look what happened.... tank useage has gone down the pan and we get posts like this calling for them to be removed. I have often read on these forums that people dont want to turn this game into an infantry only COD clone, however the reality is that we have slowly been doing this. What's the way to make things good again? Lets have some good ideas and discussion instead of absolute bullshit moaning. Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
Beld Errmon Nyain San 1818	Posted - 2015.01.18 17:26:00 - [107] - Quote The game was so much better in chromosome, except for a brief period when ADS became good (before everyone noticed atleast) and then the railgun on the incubus suddenly became awesome, best time ever to be an ADS pilot, so glad I left before that changed. Its funny to see after all this time, this debate hasn't changed much, except for which side is crying at the time. Retired bittervet.
Helghus Resther Heisen Republic 60	Posted - 2015.01.18 18:05:00 - [108] - Quote Tell you what Djinn, you and Soraya can cry about vehicles' existence while CCP tries to work on... things important. Good day. The winner of this war will not prove who's right; only, who's left.
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 305	Posted - 2015.01.18 19:03:00 - [109] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: Seriously.. What is their role? In a pc fight all vehicles ever do is drive around the map taking out all the turrets raking up points and avoiding the battle up to mid-end game and even then they are of not much help. They just farm wp safely in professional matches for an ob... In pubs? What is there role? Seriously? They have never been balanced at all... They are either OP or UP. No proto versions yet we have proto weapons. How the hell are we supposed to achieve true balance like that? Heavy suits = tanks. Primarily defensive guard units. Logi = Support players. They can range from medics to uplinkers to scanners ect. Assaults = your killers. Scouts = your speed kings. They can easily and quickly get from point to point to both attack or defend. They also favor a stealth style of gameplay. Commandos = good for av as you can hold another primary weapon. Also good for snipers to have another primary weapon. But also good for a variety of roles. Those who know how to play them to their potential are usually quite skilled. At least this is how I see it but tanks?? gets hit by one swarm launcher, goes to run and hide wastes time repping and waiting for modules to recover. Why not keep defending? "Because I dont wanna lose millions of isk QQ. So I am going to hide for half the game because I am risking so much and not really help out at all. I can't do much of anything to help out at the objectives unless I am OP and can destroy eveyrthing in my sights. Vehiclists are some of the biggest babies....But these are just my opinions. I am open to your thoughts. Are you a vehiclist? what is your role on the battlefield? What do you believe your role should be? Can you succesfully fill your role? How do you help the gameplay of an actual match? this is your one chance to prove me wrong. I am listening... Vehicles are stupid and boring right now, but they should be fixed, not removed. Games that get vehicles right like battlefield vietnam result in some of the most fun Ive ever had without your mom being in the room.
TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 120	Posted - 2015.01.19 00:36:00 - [110] - Quote Regardless to a vehicle's intended role if someone wishes to pilot one it us their choice. It's no different than if you choose to play an assault role.

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16667	Posted - 2015.01.19 00:49:00 - [111] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: Vehicles are stupid and boring right now, but they should be fixed, not removed. Games that get vehicles right like battlefield vietnam result in some of the most fun Ive ever had without your mom being in the room. Looks awesome..... love them single shot main guns. So satisfying to get kills with. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 533	Posted - 2015.01.19 02:39:00 - [112] - Quote To answer a bolded question from the OP: Well theoretically vehicles are the line breakers. Assume 2 squads of equal skill. One squad is defending an objective. One squad is assaulting. Due to the even match skill wise the assaulting squad may have trouble or be unable to break the defense. So in comes a tank. Either it A: Nabs a few kills, Suppresses a few defenders, and/or limits the defending team's ability to move around in their defensive positions allowing the attackers to get into more advantageous positions/drop artillery (MDs, Plasma cannons, Flaylocks, Fluxes, basically AE weapons) and break the line or B: diverts defensive manpower away from infantry defense to vehicles defense giving the attackers a window to break the line with temporarily superior numbers/efficient weapons. I'm not going to say it WORKS that way but that is how I think they are designed. Take that for what you will. /shrug
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders 2704	Posted - 2015.01.19 03:01:00 - [113] - Quote Djinn SouI wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: SgtMajSquish MLBJ wrote: I like the WP cost for vehicles. It doesnt have to be much, but it would justify the buffing of vehicles as they would be more 'valuable'. LAVs and DSs would keep their 'free' cost as some people need the help traversing the field. ADSs and Tanks would cost WP so that it is clear that you are and infantryman first, then a pilot. Depending on the WP cost we could have the ISK cost of ADSs and Tanks go down Hell ***** no. Why should I have to pay a WP cost when my role ingame for the most ppart is to be a *** pilot? Maybe a wp cost for special types of vehicles with upgrades ontop of what is already available? you, no. It makes ZERO sense, and on top that, it cuts off strategies where those are needed at any point. Just no. Also, powerup vehicles are a serious ** no. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Pvt Numnutz Prophets of the Velocirapture 2037	Posted - 2015.01.19 09:56:00 - [114] - Quote Comparing vehicle roles to dropsuit roles is like comparing apples to oranges. Because vehicles and dropsuits are very different and play differently. While I agree we could use more roles for vehicles, especially logistics vehicles, I don't agree taking them out completely would solve that. The way I see it, Tanks: main battle tanks good for making pushes to break enemy lines and eliminating enemy armor. Dropships: logistic vehicles that are very versatile able to fit mobile CRU's scanners etc. Can carry a full squad into battle. Assault dropships: close air support specializing in strafe runs and quick insertions. Not as versatile as dropships but are more maneuverable and pack more of a punch. Lavs: light ground transport and scouting vehicle, used to move small teams around the map quickly with a turret for support fire. Tanks are better suited for offense. Using their high HP with mods to force an advance with incredible firepower. They can be mobile cover for advancing infantry too. Think of them like German or american tanks, designed to blitz the enemy. Defending is more of a secondary role as they can't stay engaged forever. Dropships are incredibly fun when used with teamwork and can provide a multitude of roles. Anti vehicle and air superiority and close air/transport support. They can scout positions before the main force arrives, deliver troops to advantageous positions and deal with those pesky uplinks. They can provide close air support for shock troops and infantry. The only thing dropships would need to better their role is larger maps where rapid redeployment becomes vital, add larger team sizes so commanders can free up some troops from the ground. Those two changes would show how incredibly useful the transport role of the dropship is. Logistics vehicles need some love...and need to exist, but in a more useful way. The logistics dropship would be awesome for this. Add in a mobile supply depot mod that restocks ammo and such in a radius when landed (no switching suits tho) with a built in cru and fit some vehicle rep mods on it and boom you have a sweet logistics vehicle. As to your "I can't do anything cause I don't want to loose millions of isk QQ" for dropships and to a lesser degree tanks, we don't even know we are in combat until we have to run. I'll be flying along happy as a clam and then suddenly a third or more of my shields are gone. The hit detector is telling me the opposite direction and I have a few seconds to react before I'm hit again. Its much better to run and save your two games worth of isk than trying to find a target somewhere on the map that is invisible to you. Disengaging and locating the threat is first priority. I've said it before and I'll say it again, we need and early warning system for swarms. It doesn't have to give the direction, I don't need him to pop up on my screen. I just need to know there is a serious threat and that I am being engaged so that I can respond appropriately rather than running because I didn't know I was in a fight, I thought I was flying in a non contested air space. Pilots would be able to size up the situation and be more effective if we just knew what the situation was! A lot of the problems with vehicles can be solved rather easily with minor fixes. Master Skyshark rider Kaalaka dakka tamer


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [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.

Pokemon master and Tekken Lord

Give me da iskiez

Gk0 Scout yay :)

rekt

MY LIFE FOR AIUR!