DUST Search - Proposition: HAV vehicle limit.

All Channels

General Discussions

Proposition: HAV vehicle limit.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Onikanabo Brigade Caldari State 1658	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:25:00 - [31] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Limit all vehicles then this would be considered . You can't just single out one form , that's not balance more then bias . Go find another game if you want Infantry 514. Kinda what I'm saying but not so blunt , I'll match you if you have one though . Doubts are like flies and should be treated as such and crushed .
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2687	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:25:00 - [32] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Limit all vehicles then this would be considered . You can't just single out one form , that's not balance more then bias . Go find another game if you want Infantry 514. Lav's should not have a limit as they are primarily for transportation. Neither should DS. I am not sure about ADS limits. I believe that is an entirely other discussion.... Right now I am just focusing on HAV. So one team could have 16 LAVs/dropships flying around? Sounds like a WWI dogfight. Go away I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
The Noob Destroyer 1156	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:27:00 - [33] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: The Noob Destroyer wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Limit all vehicles then this would be considered . You can't just single out one form , that's not balance more then bias . Go find another game if you want Infantry 514. Lav's should not have a limit as they are primarily for transportation. Neither should DS. I am not sure about ADS limits. I believe that is an entirely other discussion.... Right now I am just focusing on HAV. So one team could have 16 LAVs/dropships flying around? Sounds like a WWI dogfight. Go away What team of blue berries is going to be driving around with 16 lavs/dropships??? They serve no purpose other than for transportation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_LxyhCJpsM
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2688	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:32:00 - [34] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: The Noob Destroyer wrote: Racro 01 Arifistan wrote: ok.................so then we have douche bags dropping mlt tanks in the redline and sitting there all match. and the fully skilled/speced tanker (me) gets pissed off that the broken pencil is using the only tank slot our team has........and our team is getting mauled by an opposing tank. I see a problem here. rather than having a 6 tank limit. make it 3. is that the limit? 6? that is still too much. Nobody wants an entire squad of tankers. 3 would be even better than 6. The total vehicle limit is 7 for each team. That's not 7 tanks, that's a combination of 7 tanks, dropships and LAVs. Do you even play? Then that should be changed.... Why should it be changed? Because you say so? 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. 2688	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:33:00 - [35] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: The Noob Destroyer wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Limit all vehicles then this would be considered . You can't just single out one form , that's not balance more then bias . Go find another game if you want Infantry 514. Lav's should not have a limit as they are primarily for transportation. Neither should DS. I am not sure about ADS limits. I believe that is an entirely other discussion.... Right now I am just focusing on HAV. So one team could have 16 LAVs/dropships flying around? Sounds like a WWI dogfight. Go away What team of blue berries is going to be driving around with 16 lavs/dropships??? They serve no purpose other than for transportation. It sounds too me like your just too upset about me wanting to limit HAV's only too even think clearly. Please stop trolling my thread. I'm not trolling the thread, it's an incredibly bad and not-thought-out idea. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Crimson ShieId Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 1690	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:35:00 - [36] - Quote @Destroyer: I think we'll mostly have to agree to disagree on this one as I'm getting the feeling you don't think tanks are good, not to mention we still don't have the full list of tiers for vehicles yet... again... so it really is difficult to get an unbiased set of arguments and counter arguments for something. I'd love to kill tank spam, but limiting has issues as we've seen in Ambush where one team will call out two or three good tanks and the other will have noobs driving around in LAV's or a couple of idiots in militia tanks. @Sprk: What build are you talking about? I remember when 1.7 first launched, tanks were so plentiful they hardly had time for infantry. Rarely saw tanks in Chrome and early uprising, but they were usually terrifying when they appeared because the pilots were invested and knew what they were doing. @Shinobi: The BPO thing really is wrong if they ever want to facilitate a real economy, but eh... it's about the only thing they seem to be able to make that can bring in any money. I'm hoping they never do tank BPO's though, it's just going too far either way. Even LAV's are stretching it... okay, so that's sort of a lie... I'd kill for a Quafe tank... But yea, it just doesn't work too well when it comes to balancing through Isk. I'd much rather see a paint tool or something, customization is fun, but paying for disposable suits isn't going to happen just to get a pretty color scheme. I want to punch.
The Noob Destroyer 1156	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:36:00 - [37] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: I'm not trolling the thread, it's an incredibly bad and not-thought-out idea. Are you sure? I have tried explaining myself and all you have been is rude to me. You seem incapable of having an adult dicussion. You may have valid points and ideas but your thoughts are annoying to read with your rudeness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_LxyhCJpsM
The Noob Destroyer 1156	Posted - 2015.01.06 23:53:00 - [38] - Quote Crimson ShieId wrote: @Destroyer: I think we'll mostly have to agree to disagree on this one as I'm getting the feeling you don't think tanks are good, not to mention we still don't have the full list of tiers for vehicles yet... again... so it really is difficult to get an unbiased set of arguments and counter arguments for something. I'd love to kill tank spam, but limiting has issues as we've seen in Ambush where one team will call out two or three good tanks and the other will have noobs driving around in LAV's or a couple of idiots in militia tanks. @Sprk: What build are you talking about? I remember when 1.7 first launched, tanks were so plentiful they hardly had time for infantry. Rarely saw tanks in Chrome and early uprising, but they were usually terrifying when they appeared because the pilots were invested and knew what they were doing. @Shinobi: The BPO thing really is wrong if they ever want to facilitate a real economy, but eh... it's about the only thing they seem to be able to make that can bring in any money. I'm hoping they never do tank BPO's though, it's just going too far either way. Even LAV's are stretching it... okay, so that's sort of a lie... I'd kill for a Quafe tank... But yea, it just doesn't work too well when it comes to balancing through Isk. I'd much rather see a paint tool or something, customization is fun, but paying for disposable suits isn't going to happen just to get a pretty color scheme. WE have no had a full list of tiers for vehicles since this game has been released so I am just trying to work with what we have. I remember 1.7 and I loved how tanks were at 1.7. However tanks were soo good that everyone used them. We had teams calling in 10 tanks and only 3 or 4 people actually going for objectives on each team. Tanks were good but it completely ruined the gameplay. I want to bring tanks from 1.7 back but without the constant tank spam (and the flying tank glitch lol). I think a universal vehicle limit sucks. Sometimes I want to call a LAV but vehicle limit is reached. Why? It was probably introduced when tanks were nerfed after 1.7. I was away from the game for a while so I probably missed the details on how the vehicle limit works but the way it works now sounds like it sucks to me. Why limit transportation vehicles too? If they can limit them then why can't they limit the HAV only and not the transport vehicles? Spkr is a tanker and I want them to be buffed but he is soo angry that he just can't see that I am on the tankers side. I don't ever see tanks going back to how they were in 1.7 without causing a panic and a bunch of QQ. It would just go back to how it was before and then it would be impossible for anyone to call a lav or dropship because of the universal limit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_LxyhCJpsM
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2360	Posted - 2015.01.07 01:03:00 - [39] - Quote Limit 16 "Vehicle Points" LAV cost 1 vehicle point DS cost 2 vehicle points ADS/HAV cost 3 vehicle points Each team can have any number of any vehicles out that they want so long as the total number of "vehicle points" for their team isn't exceeded. Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1483	Posted - 2015.01.07 01:45:00 - [40] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: One problem with HAV's is that once they are strong,, people abuse them and we see tank spam... which completely ruins it for everyone else. Yes I believe HAV should be powerful and it should take work to bring one down but if it takes work to bring them down they get spammed. With an HAV vehicle limit of just 1 then the first HAV called is the one used throughout the game until destroyed. This way Vehicle users can have their op tank, 2 or more AV users can chase around the tank, while the rest of the game continues as normal. No tank spam. No QQ. A tank does not need another tank as support either. They have their entire team to support them. What do you guys think?? Two HAV's a match.. problem solved. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 261	Posted - 2015.01.07 01:49:00 - [41] - Quote Again, simply have a greater contrast between an offensive and defensive equipped tank. You mount a proto turret, you can't fit anything better than basic mods and vice versa. The mid range equipped tank, or rather advanced turret tank would be closer to the basic turret tank which would be defensive with complex or enhanced mods. Also, the turrets would reflect different abilities. A basic blaster turret would be like now. A proto would be like they used to be. However, the proto blaster tank would be a paper tiger. Also, tank vs. tank combat would be balanced because a weak defensive, strong offensive tank tank would be inversely proportioned in power to a strong defensive, weak offensive tank. The difference would be in the minute differences in tank power created by module power skills and the possibility at level 4 fitting skills to fit some enhanced modules on a proto turret tank. And the most important thing GÇô DON'T MAKE THE MILITIA GRADE TANKS AND MODS AS GOOD AS THE REGULAR ONES! I'm better than laser focused; I'm hybrid focused.
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1692	Posted - 2015.01.07 01:58:00 - [42] - Quote The tank on field would still kill people. QQ would still follow. Pro-choice! For hazardous self-activated inertial dampeners! We want to live on the edge (((of MCC)))
Nirwanda Vaughns 1187	Posted - 2015.01.07 02:32:00 - [43] - Quote all we need to balance vehicles vs infantry is a Blaster forge. the proficiency bonus to shield damage will finally give equality to AV and help keep the gunloggis and pythons on their toes Never argue with an idiot. they bring you down to their level and beat you through experience proud C-II bpo owner
Sir Snugglz Red Star. 1100	Posted - 2015.01.07 02:40:00 - [44] - Quote Hynox Xitio wrote: Drastic measures need to be taken to ensure the quality of the game. This myriad of problems needs to be pulled up from the root. Remove all vehicles. ok but only if you remove all weapons as well. -Pro AFKing LVL 5 -Luck is just one of my skills -Just because I make flying look easy doesn't mean it is
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 236	Posted - 2015.01.07 02:51:00 - [45] - Quote Such a terrible idea... Should we limit the team to 1 proto suit? 1 heavy? If tanks are being geared towards AV and there is no V, then what's the point?
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2688	Posted - 2015.01.07 02:52:00 - [46] - Quote Juno Tristan wrote: Such a terrible idea... Should we limit the team to 1 proto suit? 1 heavy? If tanks are being geared towards AV and there is no V, then what's the point? We should limit both teams to 3 PRO suits in all pubs. Answering one terrible idea with another. Infantry just won't give up until vehicles get removed. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Sir Snugglz Red Star. 1101	Posted - 2015.01.07 03:06:00 - [47] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Juno Tristan wrote: Such a terrible idea... Should we limit the team to 1 proto suit? 1 heavy? If tanks are being geared towards AV and there is no V, then what's the point? We should limit both teams to 3 PRO suits in all pubs. Answering one terrible idea with another. Infantry just won't give up until vehicles get removed. That's the answer to all the problems!!!! infantry QQ.... if no infantry, then no qq. Remove all infantry -Pro AFKing LVL 5 -Luck is just one of my skills -Just because I make flying look easy doesn't mean it is
Crimson ShieId Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 1691	Posted - 2015.01.07 03:20:00 - [48] - Quote World of Tanks is thataway, Snugglz. I want to punch.
TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 95	Posted - 2015.01.07 04:18:00 - [49] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: One problem with HAV's is that once they are strong,, people abuse them and we see tank spam... which completely ruins it for everyone else. Yes I believe HAV should be powerful and it should take work to bring one down but if it takes work to bring them down they get spammed. With an HAV vehicle limit of just 1 then the first HAV called is the one used throughout the game until destroyed. This way Vehicle users can have their op tank, 2 or more AV users can chase around the tank, while the rest of the game continues as normal. No tank spam. No QQ. A tank does not need another tank as support either. They have their entire team to support them. What do you guys think?? Absolutely not. You wanna limit assaults or logis as well? I chose to put SP into vehicles with over 17 million into turrets alone and you want to prevent me from utilizing my play style and assets because you don't like it? Imagine limiting your class that you enjoy to utilize. Imagine how many people would be unhappy. Your suggesting preventing people from playing the game how they want based on their skill choices which is what Dust514 and Eve are about.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2688	Posted - 2015.01.07 05:09:00 - [50] - Quote TIGER SHARK1501 wrote: The Noob Destroyer wrote: One problem with HAV's is that once they are strong,, people abuse them and we see tank spam... which completely ruins it for everyone else. Yes I believe HAV should be powerful and it should take work to bring one down but if it takes work to bring them down they get spammed. With an HAV vehicle limit of just 1 then the first HAV called is the one used throughout the game until destroyed. This way Vehicle users can have their op tank, 2 or more AV users can chase around the tank, while the rest of the game continues as normal. No tank spam. No QQ. A tank does not need another tank as support either. They have their entire team to support them. What do you guys think?? Absolutely not. You wanna limit assaults or logis as well? I chose to put SP into vehicles with over 17 million into turrets alone and you want to prevent me from utilizing my play style and assets because you don't like it? Imagine limiting your class that you enjoy to utilize. Imagine how many people would be unhappy. Your suggesting preventing people from playing the game how they want based on their skill choices which is what Dust514 and Eve are about. Keep highlighting the insanity that is double standards. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim

TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 96	Posted - 2015.01.07 05:43:00 - [51] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Limit all vehicles then this would be considered . You can't just single out one form , that's not balance more then bias . Biased is necessary. Nobody LAV spams, DS are sometimes spammed but not really. Everytime tanks have been buffed to make vehicle users happy they have been spammed. Thus tank spamming occurred when 1.8 dropped along with the price tag on tanks. It also didn't help when putting more SP into your skills did not add to passive effectiveness such as range, damage or use. Doing so made militia tanks extremely cheap and beginning tankers more effective without having to put their SP into something to better their performance.
TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 96	Posted - 2015.01.07 05:45:00 - [52] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: The Noob Destroyer wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Limit all vehicles then this would be considered . You can't just single out one form , that's not balance more then bias . Biased is necessary. Nobody LAV spams, DS are sometimes spammed but not really. Everytime tanks have been buffed to make vehicle users happy they have been spammed. This prob happens because they see their SP's actually mean something now and for all the months of inactivity , they can now put their hard work and effort to good use . It's no different then scout spam once the role was changed and that still is an issue . People complain about heavy spam . People complain about everything in these forums instead of focusing on making this game better and eliminating mismatches and unbalancing issues , along with glitches and such . Your proposal is just not fair or balanced and no I hate FOX NEWS with a passion with their fear mongering ... somewhat like this post is and the anti-HAV crowd all together . All roles are important and none should be singled out and propagandized against unless necessary and this is jumping the gun . It's about time vehicles get the attention they deserved and the issues of a unfinished product be laid to rest . It's the only area besides glitches and such that is over and past due . Well said! Except for the Fox news part lol.
Gabriel Minutti Eternal Beings General Tso's Alliance 6	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:16:00 - [53] - Quote Nirwanda Vaughns wrote: all we need to balance vehicles vs infantry is a Blaster forge. the proficiency bonus to shield damage will finally give equality to AV and help keep the gunloggis and pythons on their toes Somebody put something in his mouth. My zipper's stuck. I just hate militia noob tank spamming. And I'm here to put an end to it.
Darken-Soul BIG BAD W0LVES 1957	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:18:00 - [54] - Quote Leovarian L Lavitz wrote: Set it to allow us to have 16 vehicles, 16 of which can be any form of vehicle. Wait till there are NO infantry to farm. Just 16 triple damaged modded sicas on both sides. That would be a sight. Especially because the sica only has enough slots for 2 damage mods Who wants some?
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7088	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:24:00 - [55] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: One problem with HAV's is that once they are strong,, people abuse them and we see tank spam... which completely ruins it for everyone else. Yes I believe HAV should be powerful and it should take work to bring one down but if it takes work to bring them down they get spammed. With an HAV vehicle limit of just 1 then the first HAV called is the one used throughout the game until destroyed. This way Vehicle users can have their op tank, 2 or more AV users can chase around the tank, while the rest of the game continues as normal. No tank spam. No QQ. A tank does not need another tank as support either. They have their entire team to support them. What do you guys think?? 1/10. REALLY? AV
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7088	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:25:00 - [56] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Juno Tristan wrote: Such a terrible idea... Should we limit the team to 1 proto suit? 1 heavy? If tanks are being geared towards AV and there is no V, then what's the point? We should limit both teams to 3 PRO suits in all pubs. Answering one terrible idea with another. Infantry just won't give up until vehicles get removed. So I see we are actually in agreement that the OP's proposal is terrible. I think it's a troll. AV
Gabriel Minutti Eternal Beings General Tso's Alliance 6	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:38:00 - [57] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: Crimson ShieId wrote: I hate tank spam with a passion, but it has less to do with how powerful vehicles are and more to do with the price. When a militia tank can function nearly as well as a fully fitted, fully specced Gunlogi and still easily kill said Gunlogi and all other infantry under the use of a skilled pilot while costing less than a fitted proto suit... there's a problem. You never saw this kind of crap in Chrome or early uprising, even when tanks were supposed gods of the game and no one had any AV, tank spam wasn't an issue... Why? Because a decent tank would usually run you over a million Isk. Cutting down the total number available would be a poor fix for tank spam and in this case, I think I'll follow the crowd in saying go play CoD if you want a game with few or hardly any vehicles... or go along with your proposal and limit the number of AV per team to one. If you want to fix this issue, make them expensive again and debuff militia tanks. Even the richer players aren't likely to spam something that costs over a million Isk, and the noobs that run militia tanks all day long won't be able to do so unless they're willing to fork up the Isk. And I'm sure someone will say "Well, we shouldn't balance around Isk, it's a poor feature to balance things around and blah blah blah" ... Then why do we have Isk? Why bother with something that serves no role in balancing? Why not just give everyone full proto suits, weapons, modules, etc...? A full balance around Isk might not work, but at least make it a factor. Ratatti seems to be determined to make everything in this game easily accessible to everyone and it's a real shame when things like tank spam become a factor because of those decisions. I would never say to not balance around isk. Nor would I say to balance soley because of isk. Isk is just one of many balancing factors and yes it is a factor. This game is about risk and loss so I agree with you about that. I just do not see tanks ever being truely good without a limit on tank spam. 6 tanks is still way too much. Are we fighting for the objectives or just screwing around driving in this game? If tanks become good people will abuse them no matter the price imo but the price should also reflect a sort of loss to the player. Sure you lose one tank and may go negative but have you really lost enough for that tank to be worth it? I would like to see 3 things happen. 1.Tanks get a buff, make them powerful. 2. Limit tank spam to 1-3 ont he field at any time. 0-1 for ambush. 3. increase the isk price to reflect the buff. But you forget that ISK won't affect all the tankers on this game. Some of them have lots of AUR tanks saved from the beggining of the game. And probably more now after the release of Quafe HAV's. I just hate militia noob tank spamming. And I'm here to put an end to it.
Xocoyol Zaraoul Superior Genetics 3199	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:42:00 - [58] - Quote https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=190861&find=unread "You see those red dots over there? Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 744	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:47:00 - [59] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: Racro 01 Arifistan wrote: ok.................so then we have douche bags dropping mlt tanks in the redline and sitting there all match. and the fully skilled/speced tanker (me) gets pissed off that the broken pencil is using the only tank slot our team has........and our team is getting mauled by an opposing tank. I see a problem here. rather than having a 6 tank limit. make it 3. is that the limit? 6? that is still too much. Nobody wants an entire squad of tankers. 3 would be even better than 6. Wanna limit heavies and av as well? I've already been in matches where 6 people are AV vs 2 tanks, one tank drops, then the next, there's no chance to kill all the avers hiding behind obstacles. Why should we limit the team comp on vehicles, but not on infantry?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17075	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:49:00 - [60] - Quote The Noob Destroyer wrote: One problem with HAV's is that once they are strong,, people abuse them and we see tank spam... which completely ruins it for everyone else. Yes I believe HAV should be powerful and it should take work to bring one down but if it takes work to bring them down they get spammed. With an HAV vehicle limit of just 1 then the first HAV called is the one used throughout the game until destroyed. This way Vehicle users can have their op tank, 2 or more AV users can chase around the tank, while the rest of the game continues as normal. No tank spam. No QQ. A tank does not need another tank as support either. They have their entire team to support them. What do you guys think?? In a supposed "Play your way game" where everyone and their mother screams about having their play-styles altered or charged in some manner people seem awfully quick to want to impose restrictions on other roles. Well okey dokey. Tank limit of 1. ADS limit of 1. Sentinel limit of 1. Logistics limit of 1. Scout limit of 1. Commando limit of 1. LAV limit of 1. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris