DUST Search - LAVS need a nerf

All Channels

General Discussions

LAVS need a nerf

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2849	Posted - 2015.01.09 06:35:00 - [1] - Quote Problem: As things are now LAVs enable too many scrubby playstyles. Solution: LAVS should blow up when any two light weapons empty a clip into them. Justification: LAVs are far too survivable, and we shouldn't have to bring out AV grenades or swarms or forges to destroy them. Do you agree?
Lac Nokomis The Evil Geniuses 23	Posted - 2015.01.09 06:38:00 - [2] - Quote Lai Dai my friend, Lai Dai.
E-Rock Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 16	Posted - 2015.01.09 06:39:00 - [3] - Quote but i think AV and vehicles should be far more expensive. everyone and their mother used proto swams to take out vehicles. if both were expensive, you would see far less of both which i would like The Japanese players call 'hate mail', 'fan mail'.pÇÇµùÑµ£¼F¬PsñºS+êsñ½ Founder of CKC and UCKC Molon Labe
Lupus Wolf Minmatar Republic 93	Posted - 2015.01.09 06:40:00 - [4] - Quote Tired of roadkill, I presume? Redundant usernames FTW Go home Damage Indicator, you're drunk Good, good... let the nanites flow through you
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound 2471	Posted - 2015.01.09 06:40:00 - [5] - Quote The only way a LAV is a viable threat is a HMG drive by, and this is a matter of the lack of enter/exit animations, not the LAV itself. They have literally zero presence in PC and you want them needed even more? Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
Vicious Minotaur 1775	Posted - 2015.01.09 06:46:00 - [6] - Quote They need to be removed from the game entirely. I hate LAVs. Replace them with a combat-ready vehicle, preferably one with a roof and armour to protect occupants. I am a minotaur. a+üa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa+üa¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça+üa+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+üa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa+üa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ë
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2764	Posted - 2015.01.09 06:59:00 - [7] - Quote Lol, not even. If anything LAVs need a buff or at least a better, more survivable T2 variant. My idea is this: all LAV BPOs are stripped of their slots and can only be used a paper thin transports (keeps turret for 3rd person). STD LAVs get slight bonuses to ehp/fitting including more slots. Also, new assault variant that isn't paper thin for actual combat. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 14949	Posted - 2015.01.09 07:34:00 - [8] - Quote LAVs should not be destroyable by conventional Light Weapons. On the other hand, it's Base HP is too strong, allowing it to take multiple hits without fitting anything. However, LAVs (at least where the Saga is concerned) is honestly terrible outside of Murder Taxis. So, I would suggest reducing their Base HP but at the same time making their layouts 1/3 or 3/1, allowing them to fit a better tank than before, but being easily destroyed if they don't fit their vehicle. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Mossellia Delt Militaires Sans Jeux 2129	Posted - 2015.01.09 07:46:00 - [9] - Quote Lol.... LAV's are two shotted by a forge and three shotted when fully tanked. LAV's are a bloody joke. Delt for CPM2 CPM1 MISSION : FAILED Moss-delt on skype
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6239	Posted - 2015.01.09 08:52:00 - [10] - Quote Mossellia Delt wrote: Lol.... LAV's are two shotted by a forge and three shotted when fully tanked. LAV's are a bloody joke. Spoken like someone who thinks they should have the EHP of an HAV. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.

Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2765	Posted - 2015.01.09 10:54:00 - [11] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Mossellia Delt wrote: Lol.... LAV's are two shotted by a forge and three shotted when fully tanked. LAV's are a bloody joke. Spoken like someone who thinks they should have the EHP of an HAV. This is what I think is wrong with Dust's AV vs V layout. There are only two types of AV, and both do tank level damage. As such, all the vehicles need tank-level defenses in order to survive. The best (or at least easiest) way to curb this would be to give AV different damage profiles against the different tiers of vehicles (just as an example, swarms do 75% damage to LAVs, 85% damage to DSs, and 100% to tanks). From here, CCP could tailor the ehp of each vehicle and the damage of AV to come up with an individual balance for each one. The only other options are to have all vehicles have similar ehp (and be too weak, too strong, or all the same) or to come up with different variants of weapons that are more effective on different targets (which I don't think AV would like too much). Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6239	Posted - 2015.01.09 10:59:00 - [12] - Quote One thing video games have generally stayed true to is when you shoot a jeep with an antitank weapon it explodes. There is no justification for making light vehicles less vulnerable to heavy weapon attack. Faster? Sure. More maneuverable? Absolutely. More able to weather heavy, incoming antitank battery fire? Only DUST tries to do this. The people who resist keeping jeeps fragile historically have been people using jeeps for easy bumper kills, HMG sentinel poptarts and jihad jeep drivers. Everyone else views them as expendable and cheap transportation. The exceptions to the last statement take the time to fit them properly and use them for mobile recon and fast attack truuet work. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
taxi bastard Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 288	Posted - 2015.01.09 11:00:00 - [13] - Quote i agree small arms should damage them also it should take no more than 3 launches of a basic swarms to kill a tanked LAV.
Flint Beastgood III Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 1257	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:14:00 - [14] - Quote According to the description, Mass Drivers should be able to deal with them. Guess they nerfed that back when I didn't pay attention to the forums. Skills - https://www.facebook.com/notes/flint-beastgood-iii/list-of-trained-skills/416505058477164
Flint Beastgood III Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 1257	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:15:00 - [15] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: One thing video games have generally stayed true to is when you shoot a jeep with an antitank weapon it explodes. There is no justification for making light vehicles less vulnerable to heavy weapon attack. Faster? Sure. More maneuverable? Absolutely. More able to weather heavy, incoming antitank battery fire? Only DUST tries to do this. The people who resist keeping jeeps fragile historically have been people using jeeps for easy bumper kills, HMG sentinel poptarts and jihad jeep drivers. Everyone else views them as expendable and cheap transportation. The exceptions to the last statement take the time to fit them properly and use them for mobile recon and fast attack turret work. +1 Skills - https://www.facebook.com/notes/flint-beastgood-iii/list-of-trained-skills/416505058477164
Fizzer XCIV Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 2104	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:16:00 - [16] - Quote inb4 Spkr Home at Last <3
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 1738	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:19:00 - [17] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: One thing video games have generally stayed true to is when you shoot a jeep with an antitank weapon it explodes. There is no justification for making light vehicles less vulnerable to heavy weapon attack. Faster? Sure. More maneuverable? Absolutely. More able to weather heavy, incoming antitank battery fire? Only DUST tries to do this. The people who resist keeping jeeps fragile historically have been people using jeeps for easy bumper kills, HMG sentinel poptarts and jihad jeep drivers. Everyone else views them as expendable and cheap transportation. The exceptions to the last statement take the time to fit them properly and use them for mobile recon and fast attack turret work. you are not driving a jeep. you are driving a vehicle with heavy armor and shields designed to attack and it is not even remotely as tough as the HAVs
Fizzer XCIV Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 2104	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:23:00 - [18] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: One thing video games have generally stayed true to is when you shoot a jeep with an antitank weapon it explodes. There is no justification for making light vehicles less vulnerable to heavy weapon attack. Faster? Sure. More maneuverable? Absolutely. More able to weather heavy, incoming antitank battery fire? Only DUST tries to do this. The people who resist keeping jeeps fragile historically have been people using jeeps for easy bumper kills, HMG sentinel poptarts and jihad jeep drivers. Everyone else views them as expendable and cheap transportation. The exceptions to the last statement take the time to fit them properly and use them for mobile recon and fast attack turret work. you are not driving a jeep. you are driving a vehicle with heavy armor and shields designed to attack and it is not even remotely as tough as the HAVs Its a jeep. Home at Last <3
MetalWolf-Cell ROGUE RELICS VP Gaming Alliance 24	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:32:00 - [19] - Quote Can we just agree that the reason lav's are murder taxi's is the poor execution of the turret? I mean, You can't do drive by's due to bad hit detection and the wonky turret mechanics. The only time it can work is if your motionless, but then you are vulnerable to all types of attacks. I say due what Atiim said and reduce base HP. So they are not Tanks and actual LIGHT attack vehicles. and fix the turret so it can actually hit enemies while still moving at a REASONABLE speed, not flying through everybody. Or make it a drone turret to where you can fit modules on it for it be to effective. leaving the LAV unfitted will make the turret respond to threats slow and unreliably. DUST 514/LEGION
Skullmiser Vulcansu 233	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:37:00 - [20] - Quote Before grenade count was reduced, I could take out an LAV with all of my AV grenades. Now... If I am lucky, High tier packed AV grenades will work, but I usually also need a nanohive to destroy one. I don't think it's that bad. The ones I can't destroy instantly are the ones who fit hit point modules, and I think they deserve to survive... unless they don't leave in time for my grenades to come back. If this game was fun, I wouldn't be playing it.

Bremen van Equis BASTARDS OF BEDLAM 113	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:46:00 - [21] - Quote I think LAVs are in a good place, that place being the crosshairs of my plasma cannon. One shot in the front, one when they're trying to make a getawayGÇª Buckle up, boysGÇªthis ramp leads to space. -Axe Cop
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 382	Posted - 2015.01.09 14:58:00 - [22] - Quote 1. LAV are fine - I fit mine up and it costs the best part of at least 70k
Colossus of Sardia Bragian Order Amarr Empire 13	Posted - 2015.01.09 15:23:00 - [23] - Quote lavs are crap as hell. driving them turns you into a handicapped child. every small rock will let you flip over. i had a game a week before were i tried to hunt a tank with a proto forge. then i tried to drive down a small hill only to suddenly roll sideways and causing to explode my lav in a blink of an eye -.-'' thank god i changed my mind and didnt used an officer forge...
Fizzer XCIV Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 2106	Posted - 2015.01.09 15:30:00 - [24] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. LAV are fine - I fit mine up and it costs the best part of at least 70k Fitted LAVs aren't the problem. Its that an Unfitted MLT LAV is still very viable at road killing, transport, and LAVHeavies(which are a problem by themselves)... My idea is to reduce base stats, but give them higher fitting resources. That way an unfitted MLT LAV is a deathtrap, but a fitted LAV will get the job done fine. Home at Last <3
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6245	Posted - 2015.01.09 15:54:00 - [25] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. LAV are fine - I fit mine up and it costs the best part of at least 70k You are not the intended target of my commentary this time, or the OP's if I understand correctly. A properly fitted HAV by someone who isn't a lazy git looking for a cheap ride should be rewarded with durability and survivability. The tourist driver who runs empty slots should not. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 5686	Posted - 2015.01.09 16:13:00 - [26] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Lol, not even. If anything LAVs need a buff or at least a better, more survivable T2 variant. My idea is this: all LAV BPOs are stripped of their slots and can only be used a paper thin transports (keeps turret for 3rd person). STD LAVs get slight bonuses to ehp/fitting including more slots. Also, new assault variant that isn't paper thin for actual combat. But wait until I can sell mine Low payouts ensure that only the best are running decent gear.
duster 35000 Algintal Core Gallente Federation 151	Posted - 2015.01.09 16:35:00 - [27] - Quote Leadfoot10 wrote: Problem: As things are now LAVs enable too many scrubby playstyles. Solution: LAVS should blow up when any two light weapons empty a clip into them. Justification: LAVs are far too survivable, and we shouldn't have to bring out AV grenades or swarms or forges to destroy them. Do you agree? Your ***** needs a nerf. you say it's been nerfed already? No wonder you made this thread. Choo Choo
Cat Merc Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 14372	Posted - 2015.01.09 16:56:00 - [28] - Quote Remember when AV grenades could pop them without anything having to finish them off? That was great. Feline overlord of all humans Assault Conglomerate: Because we don't shave
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6246	Posted - 2015.01.09 17:00:00 - [29] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Remember when AV grenades could pop them without anything having to finish them off? That was great. there were exceptions, you know, the weirdos who put actual SP into them and actually put proper fittings on? Fortunately they were in the minority. Most LAV drivers were stupid bumper kill farmers. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
SoTa PoP Titans of Phoenix 5556	Posted - 2015.01.09 17:01:00 - [30] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Remember when AV grenades could pop them without anything having to finish them off? That was great. Are you talking when AV nades worked like AV Land mines? You'd just toss them and they'd sit there on the floor waiting for a vehicle to drive ontop of them, lol. This was before they homed in on vehicles - instead of heat seekers, we used to get proximity AV grenades, lol. All LAV's would die to any AV nade OHK back then, lol. As for now - I do think it's unbalanced, but not for the people suffering from murder taxi's - It needs a drastic HP reduction and more slots with higher PG/CPU - make it a true skeleton vehicle that requires SP to do anything with. and btw - LAV's murder taxi's suck. Anyone crying about them is absolutely just refusing to put an AV grenade on there suit that completely counters it. n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++ I watch anime for the plot

Nirwanda Vaughns 1199	Posted - 2015.01.09 17:06:00 - [31] - Quote packed AV thrown on ground in front or wait til one gets stuck, flux and introduce it to your HMG. it makes a real mess of things Never argue with an idiot. they bring you down to their level and beat you through experience proud C-II bpo owner
Oswald Banecroft II Muteki Armati Virium 14	Posted - 2015.01.09 17:06:00 - [32] - Quote Mossellia Delt wrote: Lol.... LAV's are two shotted by a forge and three shotted when fully tanked. LAV's are a bloody joke. It actually takes two forge shots to blow them up? That is ridiculous.
SoTa PoP Titans of Phoenix 5556	Posted - 2015.01.09 17:37:00 - [33] - Quote Oswald Banecroft II wrote: Mossellia Delt wrote: Lol.... LAV's are two shotted by a forge and three shotted when fully tanked. LAV's are a bloody joke. It actually takes two forge shots to blow them up? That is ridiculous. yup, 2 forge or rail. Saga II can take up to 3 with booster and fully stacked. n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++ I watch anime for the plot
Ku Shala The Generals 1122	Posted - 2015.01.09 17:41:00 - [34] - Quote lav when running over infantry should receive damage based on the remaining hp of the infantries suit ie. my 750hp suit gets road killed by a LAV, the LAV loses 750 hp. the delay to enter a vehicle should be the same as a scouts decloak time *-¦a+ó a+ú-Æa+äla+ä (CK-0 Specialist)* Caldari Loyalist Burst RR should fire like a charge sniper
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 3589	Posted - 2015.01.09 18:01:00 - [35] - Quote Bit extreme? That said I have had it up to the gills with your stereotypical heavy, who gets in said LAV drives into your face, gets out and blaps you. And if you outskill them they jump back in drive and try again when you aren't ready. Vehicles need actual alightment animations where the driver can be shot throughout. Dropship passenger seats have the fastest times, while tanks have the slowest. They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank! Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4144	Posted - 2015.01.09 18:11:00 - [36] - Quote As much as I enjoyed using the murder taxi on people. I have to agree that something should be done to tone down the LAV. I agree with earlier posts though about targeting the change at unfitted LAVs though. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Banjo Robertson Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 401	Posted - 2015.01.09 18:13:00 - [37] - Quote Leadfoot10 wrote: Problem: As things are now LAVs enable too many scrubby playstyles. Solution: LAVS should blow up when any two light weapons empty a clip into them. Justification: LAVs are far too survivable, and we shouldn't have to bring out AV grenades or swarms or forges to destroy them. Do you agree? I disagree, LAVs are easy enough to blow up from any swarms, any plasma cannon, any turret installation, and any AV grenades.
Bethhy Ancient Exiles. 3026	Posted - 2015.01.09 18:30:00 - [38] - Quote Leadfoot10 wrote: Problem: As things are now LAVs enable too many scrubby playstyles. Solution: LAVS should blow up when any two light weapons empty a clip into them. Justification: LAVs are far too survivable, and we shouldn't have to bring out AV grenades or swarms or forges to destroy them. Do you agree? No. LAV's are just confused like most vehicles in this game. LAV's should be part of vehicle meta... They should be able to combat tanks and dropships but with unforgiving defenses... They should be the "Scout" of Vehicles... "Kite'ing" Tanks and returning fire... If an enemy lone tanker is giving your grief? 3 people call in LAV's... The Rear Turret should have an EVE like, "Locking" Feature that works on vehicles and allows the turret to stay rotated in the general direction of the "Locked on" Target... then the fine aiming could be done by the gunner as the LAV races around hitting bumps.. etc.. This would be amazing for all sorts of vehicle on vehicle combat. This would give more vehicles on the field for tanks to engage and compete with along with giving every player a chance to fit and create an LAV fitting to challenge a tanker. Legitimate without remotes involved. Along with having Logi LAV's added back to the game... And instead of an radius AOE effect heals... The Turret is turned into a Giant shield repair tool... that a "Gunner" must operate... Maybe a Double or triple rep with ADV and Proto. That way there will be Logi LAV's cruising around giving vehicles and infantry repairs and support... Probably driven by Medic suits themselves. The ultimate medic team. Turret Installations need to become more checkpoints for infantry and vehicles... Places you Need to take and defend to hold points of interest... They Need to become as important as a CRU or supply depot. Turret installations need to be placed in actual proper competent spots to help facilitate balanced gameplay where their involvement is crucial. We need to get Turret installations as a player asset... That can be bought from the market and fitted ... Then if a squad scores enough War points, they then could call into strategic locations. Eventually with the ability to do this with Supply depot and CRU's... So installation destruction is part of gameplay. Dropships need to be troop transport and main places of spawning for infantry... They need to have amazing tanking ability and support ability... Not amazing killing potential. Dropships should be hovering over objectives and points of interest deploying infantry... Having them land and Transport from A->B and gain considerable war-points as a reward. The safest spot in the game to spawn can never be a CRU, point or spawn pad... There is always a chance you can die... Not in a well deployed Dropship... Dropships when deployed should need AV infantry experts and Vehicle support to remove to then push. Tanks where supposed to be the main means to assault and push points of interest and or defend against pushes... They where supposed to be absolutely needed to remove turret installations and provide cover for ground infantry as they push enemy defenses. Along with assaulting objectives and helping to remove dropship deploymets and other enemy vehicles including tanks of course. Maps should support a defend and attack strategy.... Not a whatever the **** it does now. But this is what CCP sold us back in 2009, then 2010, then 2011, then 2012, then they got quiet in 2013.. and 2014 just passed.. Instead we got rolling platforms of destruction and doom with Tanks..... Then fast flying wet paper bags raining death from above...... And a 3 person max cheap vehicle as a troop transport throw away. That have been nerfed and buffed every way that someone could figure out.... CCP Shanghai Needs to sit down and figure out the entire vehicle concept.... LAV's are just a small part of the problem.
Summa Militum Hidd3n Dragon 134	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:17:00 - [39] - Quote Leadfoot10 wrote: Problem: As things are now LAVs enable too many scrubby playstyles. Solution: LAVS should blow up when any two light weapons empty a clip into them. Justification: LAVs are far too survivable, and we shouldn't have to bring out AV grenades or swarms or forges to destroy them. Do you agree? LAVs are only survivable when you invest skill points into them and rightfully so. If you want to take down an LAV relatively easily then invest skill points into the swarm launcher or the plasma cannon. This game provides ways for you to counter anything that kicks your ass so stop demanding things to be nerfed.
tander09 Paladin Survey Force Amarr Empire 226	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:27:00 - [40] - Quote I propose a better nerf, heavies should not be able to use them. "The feud shall not be forgotten. But those who forget, never witnessed the true horror." -Nexle Skimfuse

2Berries Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 529	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:29:00 - [41] - Quote My bacon ranch salad (blood raider saga) already loses to light weapons, a single clip from one swarm launcher does the trick. Have you considered a career in costumed aggression?
Omega Black Zero Pure Evil. Capital Punishment. 166	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:31:00 - [42] - Quote Vicious Minotaur wrote: They need to be removed from the game entirely. I hate LAVs. Replace them with a combat-ready vehicle, preferably one with a roof and armour to protect occupants. You want a MAV then
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6252	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:43:00 - [43] - Quote Summa Militum wrote: Leadfoot10 wrote: Problem: As things are now LAVs enable too many scrubby playstyles. Solution: LAVS should blow up when any two light weapons empty a clip into them. Justification: LAVs are far too survivable, and we shouldn't have to bring out AV grenades or swarms or forges to destroy them. Do you agree? LAVs are only survivable when you invest skill points into them and rightfully so. If you want to take down an LAV relatively easily then invest skill points into the swarm launcher or the plasma cannon. This game provides ways for you to counter anything that kicks your ass so stop demanding things to be nerfed. It wouldn't be a nerf. It would be increasing the fitting and lowering the base HP so people who actually bother to fit the tihings maintain their current survivability and the people who cheap them get burned. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2853	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:48:00 - [44] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: Leadfoot10 wrote: Problem: As things are now LAVs enable too many scrubby playstyles. Solution: LAVS should blow up when any two light weapons empty a clip into them. Justification: LAVs are far too survivable, and we shouldn't have to bring out AV grenades or swarms or forges to destroy them. Do you agree? Your ***** needs a nerf. you say it's been nerfed already? No wonder you made this thread. Where did I say it's been nerfed already? I don't believe I said anything of the sort.
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2853	Posted - 2015.01.09 19:52:00 - [45] - Quote Summa Militum wrote: Leadfoot10 wrote: Problem: As things are now LAVs enable too many scrubby playstyles. Solution: LAVS should blow up when any two light weapons empty a clip into them. Justification: LAVs are far too survivable, and we shouldn't have to bring out AV grenades or swarms or forges to destroy them. Do you agree? LAVs are only survivable when you invest skill points into them and rightfully so. If you want to take down an LAV relatively easily then invest skill points into the swarm launcher or the plasma cannon. This game provides ways for you to counter anything that kicks your ass so stop demanding things to be nerfed. LAVs and the srubby playstyle doesn't "kick my ass" -- they are more of an annoyance. Who is "demanding" anything? I simply posted this to induce some conversation. And so you know, I have proto swarms, forge guns, and nades -- and I'm perfectly capable of using them. The question I was hoping to answer is "Should I have to pull those out to kill an LAV?" I think not. You are, of course, free to disagree -- but there's no need to make stuff up in doing so. Take care....Leadfoot
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 687	Posted - 2015.01.09 22:28:00 - [46] - Quote Really, you AV guys (breaking sutff included in this one) look willing to cry aout anything. You want to start comparing LAVs to tanks, really now you are being a little too sissified. Unmodded LAV Saga 1200 shields 900 armor. Unmodded HAV Madrugar 1200 shields and 4000 armor. Basically, you are telling me with AV as it is right now, that you cannot break through the shields of an armor tank. If there was any a case to tell you lot to "git gud scrub" this is it. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 97	Posted - 2015.01.09 22:54:00 - [47] - Quote What, make them squishier to allow suicide on the battlefield?
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 7074	Posted - 2015.01.09 22:57:00 - [48] - Quote I agree. Especially with blueprint LAVs out/coming out. I once shot at a static LAV, with the driver in the gunner seat letting me shoot him, with my proto swarm launcher, and it took 4 shots to take him down. I am fine if that guy had spent lots of SP and ISK on the damn thing, but no one who did would sit there and let me shoot at them. I miss the days of std swarms taking out basic LAVs in one go. They should be high risk/high reward if basic and unfitted. Thunderbolt. verb and noun. "James thunderbolted in his pants." "I lit a bag of thunderbolt on fire on CCP's doorway"
DozersMouse XIII Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 915	Posted - 2015.01.09 23:06:00 - [49] - Quote I for one wish it was easier to shoot the driver out of the lav play smarter not harder
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2854	Posted - 2015.01.09 23:09:00 - [50] - Quote DozersMouse XIII wrote: I for one wish it was easier to shoot the driver out of the lav Good point. It's easy enough to shoot them in the face when they're coming at you, but once they get past you the back of the LAV gets in the way.

Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6254	Posted - 2015.01.09 23:55:00 - [51] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: Really, you AV guys (breaking sutff included in this one) look willing to cry aout anything. You want to start comparing LAVs to tanks, really now you are being a little too sissified. Unmodded LAV Saga 1200 shields 900 armor. Unmodded HAV Madrugar 1200 shields and 4000 armor. Basically, you are telling me with AV as it is right now, that you cannot break through the shields of an armor tank. If there was any a case to tell you lot to "git gud scrub" this is it. grow up. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

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

Redundant usernames FTW

I am a minotaur.

Delt for CPM2