DUST Search - The problem with Vehicles and lack of purpose..... and AV

All Channels

General Discussions

The problem with Vehicles and lack of purpose..... and AV

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Toobar Zoobar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 107	Posted - 2015.01.14 19:29:00 - [271] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: xavier zor wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: LOL. You didn't get past the first paragraph before admitting you think you should be immune to an AV. Nice job. You should never EVER be impossible to take down by a single other player. Ever. you should. A tank is a tank. A mercenary is a mercenary. Your view is so one-minded and skewed, just express your hate for tanks some other way. A single-repped madrugar should be able to withstand a constant swarmer Soraya Xel wrote: The first paragraph here is the key point. I used to commonly lose five or six 200k suits trying to kill a single ADS. And failing. But the reality is costs can be tweaked later, so they're irrelevant for balance. The point is making the gameplay engaging and fun. And vehicles not dying isn't actually fun for anyone. If you lose 5-6 suits, you are doing it wrong.... and besides, how fun is it to an ADS pilot who can get maybe 1-2 kills before a swarmer notices him, and he has to retreat? Don't forget the bloody redline railguns/railtanks that one-shot my python, 2 shot my incubus (as in, i get shot once, knocked around then by the time i stabilize and start thrusting upwards he has launched his second shot and i'm dead) So.... a single rep madruger should be able to withstand a swarmer? Madrugers can fit 3 reppers, so you are basically telling me it should take 4 players with AV to kill a madruger? Do you actually believe this? As to your "how fun is it to an ADS pilot yadda yadda": How much fun do you think that swarmer is having while hes scrambling around trying not to have his ass handed to him by all the other infantry? Hes already had his not-fun, now he sees a vehicle and its time for HIM to have fun, and time for the ADS to have not-fun. I dont know where this myth comes from that AV fits are some kind of ninja ghost assassin fit who can easily avoid all threats and kill vehicles by looking at them. The reality is that they spend the entire game dodging or fending off or dying to infantry all the while hoping some vehicle will stop by that he can shoot at. And he probably wont be able to kill it unless that vehicle makes alot of mistakes. Even if AVers have the freedom to actively pursue a vehicle across the map, the most likely event is that the vehicle will not die and will still make some kills, it will just be slightly limited in effectiveness by the threat the AV guy represents. When I play my vehicle alt, I am nearly never killed by anything but a tank, its just too easy to stay alive against anything else because mobility and killing power is so incredibly skewed toward the vehicle. If you are dying alot to AV and you are good it means there is a ton of AV, and if you are dying alot to single AV players, then you just ******* suck. "When an AVer sees an ADS it's time for him to have fun and the pilot to have not fun". This is why I have so little respect for so many of you AV fanatics. You keep throwing BS like this at the argument. No fight? No options for the ADS pilot? He just has to take some damage, give AV ass some easy points, then fly away? Ridiculous. And this is a point I have made before. It should NEVER be about the kill. How can you demand that you should be able to kill the 500,000isk 9000 HP HAV with ease? What the hell is the point of a tank if it can't be a tank?! It's just BS after BS after BS. You complain that they kill infantry to well. You complain that they can rep too fast. And now you complain that they have the ability to retreat and that prevents you from getting the oh so over rated kill. **** K/D. Specialization: Making typo's.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16578	Posted - 2015.01.14 19:53:00 - [272] - Quote Toobar Zoobar wrote: "When an AVer sees an ADS it's time for him to have fun and the pilot to have not fun". This is why I have so little respect for so many of you AV fanatics. You keep throwing BS like this at the argument. No fight? No options for the ADS pilot? He just has to take some damage, give AV ass some easy points, then fly away? Ridiculous. And this is a point I have made before. It should NEVER be about the kill. How can you demand that you should be able to kill the 500,000isk 9000 HP HAV with ease? What the hell is the point of a tank if it can't be a tank?! It's just BS after BS after BS. You complain that they kill infantry to well. You complain that they can rep too fast. And now you complain that they have the ability to retreat and that prevents you from getting the oh so over rated kill. **** K/D. But mate you cannot expect another player to be responsible for your own enjoyment of the game. It's not their responsibility. They are using established in game mechanics to achieve their desired goal which is ideally the destruction of the vehicle they are targeting. Just like an infantryman should never expect you to be responsible for their enjoyment of the game. It is likely that no matter what multiplayer game you play or how you are ruining someone's experience. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 300	Posted - 2015.01.14 20:18:00 - [273] - Quote Toobar Zoobar wrote: Vesta Opalus wrote: xavier zor wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: LOL. You didn't get past the first paragraph before admitting you think you should be immune to an AV. Nice job. You should never EVER be impossible to take down by a single other player. Ever. you should. A tank is a tank. A mercenary is a mercenary. Your view is so one-minded and skewed, just express your hate for tanks some other way. A single-repped madrugar should be able to withstand a constant swarmer Soraya Xel wrote: The first paragraph here is the key point. I used to commonly lose five or six 200k suits trying to kill a single ADS. And failing. But the reality is costs can be tweaked later, so they're irrelevant for balance. The point is making the gameplay engaging and fun. And vehicles not dying isn't actually fun for anyone. If you lose 5-6 suits, you are doing it wrong.... and besides, how fun is it to an ADS pilot who can get maybe 1-2 kills before a swarmer notices him, and he has to retreat? Don't forget the bloody redline railguns/railtanks that one-shot my python, 2 shot my incubus (as in, i get shot once, knocked around then by the time i stabilize and start thrusting upwards he has launched his second shot and i'm dead) So.... a single rep madruger should be able to withstand a swarmer? Madrugers can fit 3 reppers, so you are basically telling me it should take 4 players with AV to kill a madruger? Do you actually believe this? As to your "how fun is it to an ADS pilot yadda yadda": How much fun do you think that swarmer is having while hes scrambling around trying not to have his ass handed to him by all the other infantry? Hes already had his not-fun, now he sees a vehicle and its time for HIM to have fun, and time for the ADS to have not-fun. I dont know where this myth comes from that AV fits are some kind of ninja ghost assassin fit who can easily avoid all threats and kill vehicles by looking at them. The reality is that they spend the entire game dodging or fending off or dying to infantry all the while hoping some vehicle will stop by that he can shoot at. And he probably wont be able to kill it unless that vehicle makes alot of mistakes. Even if AVers have the freedom to actively pursue a vehicle across the map, the most likely event is that the vehicle will not die and will still make some kills, it will just be slightly limited in effectiveness by the threat the AV guy represents. When I play my vehicle alt, I am nearly never killed by anything but a tank, its just too easy to stay alive against anything else because mobility and killing power is so incredibly skewed toward the vehicle. If you are dying alot to AV and you are good it means there is a ton of AV, and if you are dying alot to single AV players, then you just ******* suck. "When an AVer sees an ADS it's time for him to have fun and the pilot to have not fun". This is why I have so little respect for so many of you AV fanatics. You keep throwing BS like this at the argument. No fight? No options for the ADS pilot? He just has to take some damage, give AV ass some easy points, then fly away? Ridiculous. And this is a point I have made before. It should NEVER be about the kill. How can you demand that you should be able to kill the 500,000isk 9000 HP HAV with ease? What the hell is the point of a tank if it can't be a tank?! It's just BS after BS after BS. You complain that they kill infantry to well. You complain that they can rep too fast. And now you complain that they have the ability to retreat and that prevents you from getting the oh so over rated kill. ** K/D. I don't care about K/D. I'm not an AV fanatic. I hate using AV because its and ineffective. I hate using vehicles because they are boring. I also dont care much about WP, so talking about how vehicles are win point pinatas doesnt really get alot of sympathy with me, and implying that firing swarm launchers at an ADS is somehow "easy points" when the ADS could kick the out of the swarmer if the pilot had any skill at all and ignoring the rest of the AV players experience where they constantly get on by other infantry also isnt going to get you any sympathy. As for no options for the ADS pilot, I'd love to see flare modules and ** like that, but Im not a developer, so when I talk about balance in this game I talk about how things are NOW, not how things are in some mythical magical fairy land where everything is fun and balanced already. The fact is that vehicles are way too hard to kill with an AV fit, and vehicles are way too expensive to engage in risky play. I'd love to see vehicles being more disposable. Lower ISK prices so they are comparable to dropsuits, rebalance so that AV is more effective, remove swarm launcher lock on crap and give me some AV that requires aim, and you have more fun for both sides. Now tanks and drop ships can be killed, but arent so expensive that you cant afford to lose them, now you have AV that works, and is actually able to kill the thing its designed to kill. More fun for everyone. P.S. "What the hell is the point of a tank if it can't be a tank?!" Quick aside to address this misconception: tanks are not invincible. In reality the main battle tank is a pretty fragile piece of equipment, it is largely immune to small arms fire, however weapons designed to destroy tanks exist and are incredibly effective unless there is a huge disparity in technology level (e.g. cold war era RPG vs. modern abrams tank). I'm not sure where this expectation of being stupidly resistant to damage, even damage coming from weapons that exist solely to kill vehicles comes from, but I dont think its a good expectation and its a horrible one from a balancing standpoint.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16578	Posted - 2015.01.14 21:15:00 - [274] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: I don't care about K/D. I'm not an AV fanatic. I hate using AV because its ** and ineffective. I hate using vehicles because they are boring. I also dont care much about WP, so talking about how vehicles are win point pinatas doesnt really get alot of sympathy with me, and implying that firing swarm launchers at an ADS is somehow "easy points" when the ADS could kick the out of the swarmer if the pilot had any skill at all and ignoring the rest of the AV players experience where they constantly get on by other infantry also isnt going to get you any sympathy. As for no options for the ADS pilot, I'd love to see flare modules and ** like that, but Im not a developer, so when I talk about balance in this game I talk about how things are NOW, not how things are in some mythical magical fairy land where everything is fun and balanced already. The fact is that vehicles are way too hard to kill with an AV fit, and vehicles are way too expensive to engage in risky play. I'd love to see vehicles being more disposable. Lower ISK prices so they are comparable to dropsuits, rebalance so that AV is more effective, remove swarm launcher lock on crap and give me some AV that requires aim, and you have more fun for both sides. Now tanks and drop ships can be killed, but arent so expensive that you cant afford to lose them, now you have AV that works, and is actually able to kill the thing its designed to kill. More fun for everyone. P.S. "What the hell is the point of a tank if it can't be a tank?!" Quick aside to address this misconception: tanks are not invincible. In reality the main battle tank is a pretty fragile piece of equipment, it is largely immune to small arms fire, however weapons designed to destroy tanks exist and are incredibly effective unless there is a huge disparity in technology level (e.g. cold war era RPG vs. modern abrams tank). I'm not sure where this expectation of being stupidly resistant to damage, even damage coming from weapons that exist solely to kill vehicles comes from, but I dont think its a good expectation and its a horrible one from a balancing standpoint. "In reality the main battle tank is a pretty fragile piece of equipment, it is largely immune to small arms fire, however weapons designed to destroy tanks exist and are incredibly effective unless there is a huge disparity in technology level" Now I'm not disputing this isn't true. Tanks CAN be very fragile depending on which sections they are hit in, from what angle, with what kind of explosive charge, and from what range since there are a huge number of variables that adjust armour penetration values. However I don't then think I'd be far wrong in suggesting that everything on a battlefield can and will kill and infantryman. I don't say this to play tit for tat since its pointless to do so but you do need to keep it in context. HAV in Dust are not tanks. They do not function in the same role and are not equipped with the same types of weapons. The High Explosive RPG Tandem HEAT warhead can penetrate up to 750mm of rolled homogenous armour with the SMAW HEAA rocket is thought to have roughly 600mm of penetrative power under the same circumstances. Even the TOW small variants of the TOW warhead are thought to have penetrative values of 430,630, and 900mm on their successive BGD-71 B-D designs. The Effective armour values on an Abrams varies depending on the round fired at it. HEAT rounds are less effective as compared to Discarding Sabot rounds and also vary on where the tank is hit. The turret in this case typically is less armoured than the hull and against HEAT rounds if I am not mistaken the Turret has an effective 600-650mm of Plating and the hull has an effective 800-900mm of plating. During testing of armour penetration values of APFSDS rounds an Abrams could resist shots to the forward hull and turret as well as the side of the turret, though suffered armour penetrations against the side and rear armour of their tanks. Comparatively the Armour Piercing Capabilities of a Discarding Sabot Round and an HEAT are vast. Again this does not suggest that infantry based anti tank guns cannot destroy tanks only that it's likely not as simple as you put it and is based on a much large number of factors than are accounted for in Dust 514 including the arbitrarily limited ranges of our turrets, the lack on actually main battle cannons with high explosive single shot rounds, coaxial turrets, etc. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 302	Posted - 2015.01.14 21:37:00 - [275] - Quote True Adamance wrote: However I don't then think I'd be far wrong in suggesting that everything on a battlefield can and will kill and infantryman. Everything except the swarm launcher can kill an infantryman on the dust battlefield, and the swarm cant only because of lock on requirement to fire, I have no problem with this fact and I dont think many people do, so Im not sure how this sentence informs dust balance or this discussion. True Adamance wrote: I don't say this to play tit for tat since its pointless to do so but you do need to keep it in context. HAV in Dust are not tanks. They do not function in the same role and are not equipped with the same types of weapons. In dust they seem to function either as mobile artillery, close infantry support (more similar to an APC without much carrying capacity with a cannon than an MBT), or as an actual tank (penetration of enemy lines and exploitation thereof). As mobile artillery they are extremely effective, as close infantry support they are very effective if used properly (if the pilot doesnt feed himself to AV they can sit there and support infantry all day), and as a MBT it isnt super effective because using it in this manner exposes you to a ton of risk (actively pushing into enemy AV and other tanks) and there are no supply lines/soft targets you can hit in the rear to really affect the battle and the front lines are rarely "lines" in any sense in the first place. True Adamance wrote: blah blah blah scooby doo where are youdly scoodly doo I deleted the rest and Ill just reply to it all saying it would be really cool having an accurate damage model of armor vs. incoming penetrators to play with in this game. If I could expect to take a plasma cannon and stuff it up a HAVs ass and kill it in one shot, I would be fine with the front end of those tanks being largely invincible. However with the mechanics in play today, the HAVs are way too hard to kill from any angle and it just makes AV feel absolutely worthless unless the HAV pilot is or is acting like a moron. And again I have experienced this from both sides, I use vehicles and AV, Im not trying to **** on one party or the other, Im trying to make a discussion/environment where both can have some actual fun. Right now vehicles are boring and AV is crap.
drop the ship Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.01.14 21:39:00 - [276] - Quote i thenk dat taynks r nt vary gud rite naow becuz thay kin di if taynks don di thay wud b gud
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16578	Posted - 2015.01.14 22:07:00 - [277] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: True Adamance wrote: However I don't then think I'd be far wrong in suggesting that everything on a battlefield can and will kill and infantryman. Everything except the swarm launcher can kill an infantryman on the dust battlefield, and the swarm cant only because of lock on requirement to fire, I have no problem with this fact and I dont think many people do, so Im not sure how this sentence informs dust balance or this discussion. True Adamance wrote: I don't say this to play tit for tat since its pointless to do so but you do need to keep it in context. HAV in Dust are not tanks. They do not function in the same role and are not equipped with the same types of weapons. In dust they seem to function either as mobile artillery, close infantry support (more similar to an APC without much carrying capacity with a cannon than an MBT), or as an actual tank (penetration of enemy lines and exploitation thereof). As mobile artillery they are extremely effective, as close infantry support they are very effective if used properly (if the pilot doesnt feed himself to AV they can sit there and support infantry all day), and as a MBT it isnt super effective because using it in this manner exposes you to a ton of risk (actively pushing into enemy AV and other tanks) and there are no supply lines/soft targets you can hit in the rear to really affect the battle and the front lines are rarely "lines" in any sense in the first place. True Adamance wrote: blah blah blah scooby doo where are youdly scoodly doo I deleted the rest and Ill just reply to it all saying it would be really cool having an accurate damage model of armor vs. incoming penetrators to play with in this game. If I could expect to take a plasma cannon and stuff it up a HAVs ass and kill it in one shot, I would be fine with the front end of those tanks being largely invincible. However with the mechanics in play today, the HAVs are way too hard to kill from any angle and it just makes AV feel absolutely worthless unless the HAV pilot is or is acting like a moron. And again I have experienced this from both sides, I use vehicles and AV, Im not trying to ** on one party or the other, Im trying to make a discussion/environment where both can have some actual fun. Right now vehicles are boring and AV is crap. Edited to add: RE: mobile artillery usage, it would be really cool if there was an indirect fire turret available, to lob some kind of explosive round into an area. Might be hell to balance though. Mobile Artillery? Tank Guns don't have noticeable splash damage so I'm not sure how can they bombard anything without considerable luck or ***** great aim. Certainly one of the things I like about BF4 (and I never thought I'd say this) is that they allow me to chose an Ammo type. That can be HEAT, AP, and Sabot which have varying muzzle velocities and explosive/AV profiles. I personally like Sabots for their high muzzle velocity and the HMG for any pesky infantry that gets too close. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Mex-0 304	Posted - 2015.01.14 22:35:00 - [278] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Vesta Opalus wrote: True Adamance wrote: However I don't then think I'd be far wrong in suggesting that everything on a battlefield can and will kill and infantryman. Everything except the swarm launcher can kill an infantryman on the dust battlefield, and the swarm cant only because of lock on requirement to fire, I have no problem with this fact and I dont think many people do, so Im not sure how this sentence informs dust balance or this discussion. True Adamance wrote: I don't say this to play tit for tat since its pointless to do so but you do need to keep it in context. HAV in Dust are not tanks. They do not function in the same role and are not equipped with the same types of weapons. In dust they seem to function either as mobile artillery, close infantry support (more similar to an APC without much carrying capacity with a cannon than an MBT), or as an actual tank (penetration of enemy lines and exploitation thereof). As mobile artillery they are extremely effective, as close infantry support they are very effective if used properly (if the pilot doesnt feed himself to AV they can sit there and support infantry all day), and as a MBT it isnt super effective because using it in this manner exposes you to a ton of risk (actively pushing into enemy AV and other tanks) and there are no supply lines/soft targets you can hit in the rear to really affect the battle and the front lines are rarely "lines" in any sense in the first place. True Adamance wrote: blah blah blah scooby doo where are youdly scoodly doo I deleted the rest and Ill just reply to it all saying it would be really cool having an accurate damage model of armor vs. incoming penetrators to play with in this game. If I could expect to take a plasma cannon and stuff it up a HAVs ass and kill it in one shot, I would be fine with the front end of those tanks being largely invincible. However with the mechanics in play today, the HAVs are way too hard to kill from any angle and it just makes AV feel absolutely worthless unless the HAV pilot is or is acting like a moron. And again I have experienced this from both sides, I use vehicles and AV, Im not trying to ** on one party or the other, Im trying to make a discussion/environment where both can have some actual fun. Right now vehicles are boring and AV is crap. Edited to add: RE: mobile artillery usage, it would be really cool if there was an indirect fire turret available, to lob some kind of explosive round into an area. Might be hell to balance though. Mobile Artillery? Tank Guns don't have noticeable splash damage so I'm not sure how can they bombard anything without considerable luck or ***** great aim. Certainly one of the things I like about BF4 (and I never thought I'd say this) is that they allow me to chose an Ammo type. That can be HEAT, AP, and Sabot which have varying muzzle velocities and explosive/AV profiles. I personally like Sabots for their high muzzle velocity and the HMG for any pesky infantry that gets too close. Apparently the Rail turrets used to have or currently have some splash damage, which didn't really make sense since rail weapons are precision weapons... Gû¼+¦GòÉGòÉn¦ñ How do ya like my knives on my minassault? Gû¼+¦GòÉGòÉn¦ñ
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2740	Posted - 2015.01.15 01:12:00 - [279] - Quote Mex-0 wrote: Apparently the Rail turrets used to have or currently have some splash damage, which didn't really make sense since rail weapons are precision weapons... You mean to tell me that something traveling at hypersonic speed hitting the ground shouldn't cause splash damage? 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 16585	Posted - 2015.01.15 01:49:00 - [280] - Quote Mex-0 wrote: Apparently the Rail turrets used to have or currently have some splash damage, which didn't really make sense since rail weapons are precision weapons... They did. Though I cannot recall the exact values for the splash though I do remember CCP Blam did want 4m splash zones which was vehemently opposed. Though I believe that the Railgun rounds used in New Eden fire shells with specific functions in a very similar manner as modern rounds might fire. The Javelin Hybrid Railgun Charge an example potentially of a Dust 514 Tank round that might have a reduced range or muzzle velocity with a larger AoE splash damage zone to represent those Iridium Felechets detonating upon round impact. "The Javelin charge consists of a cluster of Iridium Fletchets with a Graviton Pulse Detonator. This allows for much higher damage than can be achieved by a standard rail system. However, the inherent entropy of graviton pulses means that it is very hard to maintain accuracy at long range." The Spike Hybrid Railgun Chrage is an example using modern anti materiel concepts which could in Dust 514 fire the equivalent of a APFSDS round which would likely have greater muzzle velocity and a much greater penetrative potential. "The spike munition package is designed to deliver huge damage to targets at extreme distances. It consists of a superdense plutonium sabot mounted on a small graviton booster unit that provides a substantial boost to the sabots impact velocity. However, the charge is next to useless at close range. Assuming the other varied kinds of Hybrid charges which consist of various kinds of atoms suspended in a plasma state such as Anti Matter, Iridium, Uranium which are released on impact I cannot see why Railguns don't have a more pronounced splash damage upon detonation of the round. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.

Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 302	Posted - 2015.01.15 16:08:00 - [281] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Vesta Opalus wrote: True Adamance wrote: However I don't then think I'd be far wrong in suggesting that everything on a battlefield can and will kill and infantryman. Everything except the swarm launcher can kill an infantryman on the dust battlefield, and the swarm cant only because of lock on requirement to fire, I have no problem with this fact and I dont think many people do, so Im not sure how this sentence informs dust balance or this discussion. True Adamance wrote: I don't say this to play tit for tat since its pointless to do so but you do need to keep it in context. HAV in Dust are not tanks. They do not function in the same role and are not equipped with the same types of weapons. In dust they seem to function either as mobile artillery, close infantry support (more similar to an APC without much carrying capacity with a cannon than an MBT), or as an actual tank (penetration of enemy lines and exploitation thereof). As mobile artillery they are extremely effective, as close infantry support they are very effective if used properly (if the pilot doesnt feed himself to AV they can sit there and support infantry all day), and as a MBT it isnt super effective because using it in this manner exposes you to a ton of risk (actively pushing into enemy AV and other tanks) and there are no supply lines/soft targets you can hit in the rear to really affect the battle and the front lines are rarely "lines" in any sense in the first place. True Adamance wrote: blah blah blah scooby doo where are youdly scoodly doo I deleted the rest and Ill just reply to it all saying it would be really cool having an accurate damage model of armor vs. incoming penetrators to play with in this game. If I could expect to take a plasma cannon and stuff it up a HAVs ass and kill it in one shot, I would be fine with the front end of those tanks being largely invincible. However with the mechanics in play today, the HAVs are way too hard to kill from any angle and it just makes AV feel absolutely worthless unless the HAV pilot is or is acting like a moron. And again I have experienced this from both sides, I use vehicles and AV, Im not trying to ** on one party or the other, Im trying to make a discussion/environment where both can have some actual fun. Right now vehicles are boring and AV is crap. Edited to add: RE: mobile artillery usage, it would be really cool if there was an indirect fire turret available, to lob some kind of explosive round into an area. Might be hell to balance though. Mobile Artillery? Tank Guns don't have noticeable splash damage so I'm not sure how can they bombard anything without considerable luck or ***** great aim. Certainly one of the things I like about BF4 (and I never thought I'd say this) is that they allow me to chose an Ammo type. That can be HEAT, AP, and Sabot which have varying muzzle velocities and explosive/AV profiles. I personally like Sabots for their high muzzle velocity and the HMG for any pesky infantry that gets too close. You dont need splash damage to kill stuff, I don't know why people think its so hard to kill infantry with the large rail turret, unless someone is actively strafing to avoid you it doesnt take much skill to get them, and if you hit them at all you get a kill unless you have a crap turret and the target is a heavily tanked sentinel.
Toobar Zoobar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 109	Posted - 2015.01.15 16:46:00 - [282] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: You dont need splash damage to kill stuff, I don't know why people think its so hard to kill infantry with the large rail turret, unless someone is actively strafing to avoid you it doesnt take much skill to get them, and if you hit them at all you get a kill unless you have a crap turret and the target is a heavily tanked sentinel. 1 meter splash radius. 15% of direct hit damage. That's only reasonable. The railgun just doesn't feel right at the moment. Specialization: Making typo's.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2742	Posted - 2015.01.15 17:31:00 - [283] - Quote Toobar Zoobar wrote: Vesta Opalus wrote: You dont need splash damage to kill stuff, I don't know why people think its so hard to kill infantry with the large rail turret, unless someone is actively strafing to avoid you it doesnt take much skill to get them, and if you hit them at all you get a kill unless you have a crap turret and the target is a heavily tanked sentinel. 1 meter splash radius. 15% of direct hit damage. That's only reasonable. The railgun just doesn't feel right at the moment. That's because a single terrible ADS pilot had railguns nerfed by himself. 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 16598	Posted - 2015.01.15 19:40:00 - [284] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: You dont need splash damage to kill stuff, I don't know why people think its so hard to kill infantry with the large rail turret, unless someone is actively strafing to avoid you it doesnt take much skill to get them, and if you hit them at all you get a kill unless you have a crap turret and the target is a heavily tanked sentinel. The only reason I want splash damage is for the purposes of the turrets functionality and the immersion of the role. Tank's fire high calibre shells. Simple enough. Those shells usually have a high explosive charge to them so as to damage armour. I like the idea of driving vehicles that let you visually see the forces at work. The recoil on the main gun. The dust kicked up by your hull rocking from the force. The explosion as your round lands on target. The idea of splash isn't necessarily to get kills its to apply damage to the target. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Jack Galen Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 6	Posted - 2015.01.15 20:21:00 - [285] - Quote I may be late to the party, but I do have two things to add: The argument is made that vehicles should at least have to move away when AV shoots at them, such that if they linger, they burn. I have no problem with this whatsoever. However, with the state of AV (swarms particularly) at present, we don't even get the chance to run. I also wish that the community (CPMs incl.) would stop comparing the vehicles to infantry. It cannot be done. If I thought in that manner, I'd run a fully decked out assault suit for about 5-8mil SP less than I fly my python for, and in fact I'd be much more dangerous. It is a vehicle for crying out loud, not a suit! They don't need to be OP (there is no fun in that), but they really need to be thought of as VEHICLES - cost 5x more and have some perks as a result. You don't see cyclists getting mad that a motorcycle goes faster than them, but it does; yet, the motorcycle rider has to pay for insurance, fuel etc, so it balances. Food for thought. Having been away for a while, I can now see that it is this the over-nerfing culture that ruins this game. Shame really, as the game had such promise.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.