| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
5329
   |
Posted - 2015.01.13 04:49:00 -
[181] - Quote
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:Toobar Zoobar wrote:Soraya Xel wrote:Cost is irrelevant to balance, Vodar.
Game is 16v16. That means the game is balanced if 16 people equal 16 people.
Why do you think you're worth more than the AV player? (Hint: You're not, and you're wrong.) Cost. Is. Revelevent. Size. Is Relevant. Indeed what is the point in a currency if cost is irrelevant? Have a go at thinking about that for a second will you. And balance my friend is what makes games boring. Should I expect to be able to kill a titan in a frigate in EVE? No. No matter how much I shoot at it. I wouldn't even take on a battleship. The titan not only costs a few million times what a frigate costs, but is also several million times the mass. If someone who thinks a top end HAV shouldn't be able to tank a militia swarm launcher, started playing EVE, they would probably start whining that they can't kill all the battleships in their rookie ship. That's the analogy here. i.e. you Is EVE 16v16?
Nailed it. In EVE it's common for massive numbers of smaller ships to engage a larger ship or a small group of larger ships. In a 16v16 game, this asymmetrical balance methodology does not work. Either vehicles need to require multiple people to use (equivalent to their power), or they need to be equal in power to infantry. If vehicle users cannot except either of those options, vehicles should honestly just be removed. Because a 16v16 game cannot be balanced if one player is able to be as powerful as two or three other players combined.
CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
1460
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 05:06:00 -
[182] - Quote
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. I watched an infantry player kill 60 other infantry players, this is a kdr for all infantry of 1:1. This is the very definition of balance, although if we break it down each component if a fit may be imbalanced. The problem is not tankers going 30-0, the problem is when the tanker kills 30 infantry, there is no corresponding 30 tanker deaths, this is the very definition of imbalanced. Unfortunately, a 1:1 kdr between tankers and infantry is completely unacceptable to tankers, they believe that they are entitled to a much higher ratio. What do you think a fair KDR average for ALL tankers should be?
We really can't go much farther in reaching an agreement about balance until we have a common understanding of what that means.
Because, that's why.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
1460
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 05:10:00 -
[183] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Duke Noobiam wrote:The problem is not that a tanker goes 30-0. No one is saying Duna has a 50-1 kdr therefore nerf tanks. The problem is that almost all tankers can go 30-0. As a group vehicle users have the highest kdr by far aside from snipers. This is why when tankers come here and cry they get no sympathy. But tankers do not got 30/0 at the moment. Haven't seen someone/anyone do that since 1.7 when Triple Rep Maddies were the bane of this game. Even before that I can't remember ever seeing anyone besides myself barring maybe Lorhak or Jason Pearson who ever scored more than 25 kills a match in a tank. Chromosome was a different story though. Most of the community did not even have the SP for AV.
What is your KDR as a tanker? What is your WP/death as a tanker?
Because, that's why.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2735
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 05:14:00 -
[184] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote:
What is your KDR as a tanker? What is your WP/death as a tanker?
There's no separation between points as infantry and points in a vehicle.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
1460
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 05:19:00 -
[185] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Stupid Blueberry wrote:Stupid Blueberry wrote:Soraya Xel wrote:Thread is adorable. A coalescent of all of the worst arguments vehicle users use to justify being overpowered. <3 And a completely ignorant cpm who thinks they know everything, but in reality knows next to nothing because they spend all day on the forums instead of playing. Backing my point up here, I just looked and Soraya has 0 kills or wp for the month of January.... It's doesn't much matter if he has played or not recently. I'm waiting for his statistics to prove the legitimacy of his stand point.
Me too. I'd like to know some statistics rather than just guessing from what I observe. Before that though, what metrics should we use to determine balance and what are acceptable numbers for those metrics? Should a vehicle user be equal to an infantry player since they are both only one player? Does ISK matter and if so, how much?
I fear the disagreement for most runs deeper than faulty perception but lies rather in different expectations. When I read that "a single rep Madrugar should be able to rep right through constant swarms", well, I don't think we are going to agree.
Because, that's why.
|
Stupid Blueberry
Pure Evil.
Capital Punishment.
884
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 05:21:00 -
[186] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:It's embarrassing a thread with this much stupid still exists. Forums, I am disappoint. Stupid Blueberry wrote:Backing my point up here, I just looked and Soraya has 0 kills or wp for the month of January.... I've been moving. If you've ever had to buy a condo, move out, and then sell a condo in a short time, you'd be stunned to discover I'm managing to do it while maintaining a full time paid job, and a full time unpaid job (being CPM), and doing both jobs moderately well. Also, the desk where I want my PS3 has a miswired electrical outlet, and my electrician didn't call me back for two weeks in a row... Go figure. (The PS3 is plugged into the TV, but I can't play FPSes at a TV. Like, at all.) Also handling family matters since my parents are incapable of raising children (still amazed I survived their household long enough to be on my own), and I just signed up to be a mentor at my brother's high school, which hour-wise is like another part time job too. Half the things listed above are about twice as complicated as I feel like detailing on a public forum. And still, I manage enough time to put bad trolls like yourself in their place. Seriously, man, don't judge people you don't know anything about. I'm not going to feel shame for taking a few weeks off to get my life in order. Don't be afraid to come up out of mom's basement every so often. ;)
Again, hypocrite. You say don't judge people you don't know anything about, yet in the same paragraph you accuse me of being a basement dweller. Again, you have no business being a CPM if all you can do is insult others and run your mouth about things you clearly have no knowledge in.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
Haajakin Kalen.
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2735
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 05:56:00 -
[187] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote:True Adamance wrote:Stupid Blueberry wrote:Stupid Blueberry wrote:Soraya Xel wrote:Thread is adorable. A coalescent of all of the worst arguments vehicle users use to justify being overpowered. <3 And a completely ignorant cpm who thinks they know everything, but in reality knows next to nothing because they spend all day on the forums instead of playing. Backing my point up here, I just looked and Soraya has 0 kills or wp for the month of January.... It's doesn't much matter if he has played or not recently. I'm waiting for his statistics to prove the legitimacy of his stand point. Me too. I'd like to know some statistics rather than just guessing from what I observe. Before that though, what metrics should we use to determine balance and what are acceptable numbers for those metrics? Should a vehicle user be equal to an infantry player since they are both only one player? Does ISK matter and if so, how much? I fear the disagreement for most runs deeper than faulty perception but lies rather in different expectations. When I read that "a single rep Madrugar should be able to rep right through constant swarms", well, I don't think we are going to agree.
5mil infantry > 20mil pilot
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
Pocket Rocket Girl
Psygod9
247
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 06:07:00 -
[188] - Quote
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)
just saying that a AVer loosing 5-6 suit they must be doing it wrong is like some one sayinf loosing 2-4 tanks your doing it wrong, you dont know what he came up on, when i loose a suit its because i ran into inf. trying to catch up on to my squad or if im alone. for tanks it could be that they got jumped by AV or out tanked
second the last line you wrote instead of trying to stabilize roll with the hit if it knocks you to the left go with that direction you will get momentum and gain speed from it, instead of fighting against the force. its what i do and it works for me
Sir Dukey-
If one person is smart he should be able to keep vehicle at bay but not destroy it unless its a stupid driver
|
Ld Collins
Titans of Phoenix
VP Gaming Alliance
185
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 08:34:00 -
[189] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote:I am not sure what point you are trying to make. I watched an infantry player kill 60 other infantry players, this is a kdr for all infantry of 1:1. This is the very definition of balance, although if we break it down each component if a fit may be imbalanced. The problem is not tankers going 30-0, the problem is when the tanker kills 30 infantry, there is no corresponding 30 tanker deaths, this is the very definition of imbalanced. Unfortunately, a 1:1 kdr between tankers and infantry is completely unacceptable to tankers, they believe that they are entitled to a much higher ratio. What do you think a fair KDR average for ALL tankers should be? We really can't go much farther in reaching an agreement about balance until we have a common understanding of what that means.
It's pretty obvious to me that you have a problem understanding what you read. At a time where tankers were racking up 20 plus kills people came on the forum and begged ccp to nerf tanks. Even though if a tanker were to go 20+ or 30+ in killsthe tanker would not have made enough isk to cover 1 tank and if he died it would be a loss. Tanks were extremely expensive in there golden days now they are just coffins on wheels. If your team lets a tank get over 10 kills in a match its your teams fault its not that tanks are op. For tanks to make money they have to kill high vallue targets other tanks dropships because killing infantry does not pay the bills. You're flat out wrong to say that there is no balance there. 1-1 more like 20-1 if you blow up 4 tanks in a match with your tank you can make a profit tack on some installations and a few infantry then you've got a decient profit.
|
Ld Collins
Titans of Phoenix
VP Gaming Alliance
185
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 08:44:00 -
[190] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:Toobar Zoobar wrote:Soraya Xel wrote:Cost is irrelevant to balance, Vodar.
Game is 16v16. That means the game is balanced if 16 people equal 16 people.
Why do you think you're worth more than the AV player? (Hint: You're not, and you're wrong.) Cost. Is. Revelevent. Size. Is Relevant. Indeed what is the point in a currency if cost is irrelevant? Have a go at thinking about that for a second will you. And balance my friend is what makes games boring. Should I expect to be able to kill a titan in a frigate in EVE? No. No matter how much I shoot at it. I wouldn't even take on a battleship. The titan not only costs a few million times what a frigate costs, but is also several million times the mass. If someone who thinks a top end HAV shouldn't be able to tank a militia swarm launcher, started playing EVE, they would probably start whining that they can't kill all the battleships in their rookie ship. That's the analogy here. i.e. you Is EVE 16v16? Nailed it. In EVE it's common for massive numbers of smaller ships to engage a larger ship or a small group of larger ships. In a 16v16 game, this asymmetrical balance methodology does not work. Either vehicles need to require multiple people to use (equivalent to their power), or they need to be equal in power to infantry. If vehicle users cannot except either of those options, vehicles should honestly just be removed. Because a 16v16 game cannot be balanced if one player is able to be as powerful as two or three other players combined.
How about you remove all advanced and prototype av from the game since there are no advanced or prototype vehicles.
|
|
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6360
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 08:54:00 -
[191] - Quote
The distinguishing difference in your rather extreme examples is the 60/1 infantry is an extreme rarity.
My two absolute best matches were 53/2 and 43/13. That's twice in two years. No other match comes remotely close.
The tank drivers at one point were running 20-25/0 for match after match after match until they bumped into someone like me and exploded. Then they came on the forums to scream that AV needed to be nerfed because :reasons:
Most of the infantry hate comes from the latter portion where a tank driver wpuld explode in a marauder once every 4-8 matches and absolutely sh*t themselves.
That offensive ember has never died in the minds of AV players.
Now. On the other side of the coin, the elite infantry slayers were whiny little brats who openly stated that they should not have to change their fits to tackle and win against a tank.
They also cried hardest when I shot them with a forge gun.
The blame lies equally both ways, but whenever pilots start raging that their precious toys need to be able to be immune to dying to infantry AV it usually inspires AV hate and you see a sharp uptick of players who will run AV just to kill vehicles.
When the mad happens because of these forum rants infantry stop caring about winning and focus on annihilating your walkets one HAV at a time to punish your audacity.
You want balance and parity? You want to stop being the battlefield victims?
Stop making entitled and poorly considered rants like this.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
xavier zor
Rogue Instincts
396
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 09:01:00 -
[192] - Quote
Pocket Rocket Girl 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) just saying that a AVer loosing 5-6 suit they must be doing it wrong is like some one sayinf loosing 2-4 tanks your doing it wrong, you dont know what he came up on, when i loose a suit its because i ran into inf. trying to catch up on to my squad or if im alone. for tanks it could be that they got jumped by AV or out tanked second the last line you wrote instead of trying to stabilize roll with the hit if it knocks you to the left go with that direction you will get momentum and gain speed from it, instead of fighting against the force. its what i do and it works for me
Thanks for the tip, i will try it out :)
i am assuming that the vehicle is battling with the infantry, and no other infantry is around. Of course if other infantry were around, especially minjas.....
whole different story
well...i have nothing to say
|
Juno Tristan
Obscure Reference
249
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 09:13:00 -
[193] - Quote
xavier zor wrote:
Thanks for the tip, i will try it out :)
i am assuming that the vehicle is battling with the infantry, and no other infantry is around. Of course if other infantry were around, especially minjas.....
whole different story
but then it's 2 v 1, so of course you lose |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
16549
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 09:57:00 -
[194] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote:
Me too. I'd like to know some statistics rather than just guessing from what I observe. Before that though, what metrics should we use to determine balance and what are acceptable numbers for those metrics? Should a vehicle user be equal to an infantry player since they are both only one player? Does ISK matter and if so, how much?
I fear the disagreement for most runs deeper than faulty perception but lies rather in different expectations. When I read that "a single rep Madrugar should be able to rep right through constant swarms", well, I don't think we are going to agree.
It's a really tricky thing to balance. On one hand you might want an HAV to represent a Tank ( a heavily armoured grounding fighting vehicle with a large calibre gun) but on the other hand you cannot make and HAV impervious to enemy fire and still able to very efficiently engage and destroy infantrymen.
ISK I would say is a metric and factor despite what other might suggest as in previous builds the maintenance costs of redeploying vehicles was enormous. This was a good thing as I see it.
eHP is a metric or perhaps I should suggest resistance values on tanks bother their natural vs certain damage types and in terms of hardeners as those directly determine the total eHP of the vehicle.
SP perhaps is one as well. Previous builds saw tiered progression from the class unlike the current build which has standardised many type of modules.
If there are any other suggest them. They are all worth talking about.
One of the more radical Ideas I have about tanks is that I fundamentally believe that all HAV turrets should fire a small number 1-2 high explosive shells. Ideally good shots in Tanks will still have a means of defeating infantry and applying damage through splash but wont be able to use multiple consecutive shots without re-chambering a round.
*"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
16549
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 10:02:00 -
[195] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:The distinguishing difference in your rather extreme examples is the 60/1 infantry is an extreme rarity.
My two absolute best matches were 53/2 and 43/13. That's twice in two years. No other match comes remotely close.
The tank drivers at one point were running 20-25/0 for match after match after match until they bumped into someone like me and exploded. Then they came on the forums to scream that AV needed to be nerfed because :reasons:
Most of the infantry hate comes from the latter portion where a tank driver wpuld explode in a marauder once every 4-8 matches and absolutely sh*t themselves.
That offensive ember has never died in the minds of AV players.
Now. On the other side of the coin, the elite infantry slayers were whiny little brats who openly stated that they should not have to change their fits to tackle and win against a tank.
They also cried hardest when I shot them with a forge gun.
The blame lies equally both ways, but whenever pilots start raging that their precious toys need to be able to be immune to dying to infantry AV it usually inspires AV hate and you see a sharp uptick of players who will run AV just to kill vehicles.
When the mad happens because of these forum rants infantry stop caring about winning and focus on annihilating your walkets one HAV at a time to punish your audacity.
You want balance and parity? You want to stop being the battlefield victims?
Stop making entitled and poorly considered rants like this.
Honestly Breaking I can't really remember a time that was the case as a result of me being over powered though I will admit that at one point I was certainly aware of how powerful the double rep/ triple rep Madrugar was. Since 1.7's release I've personally (and this is purely my own anecdotal evidence not to misconstrued as me preaching "Fact") seen a decrease in my efficiency as a tanker.
Nearing the end of 1.6 when tanks were still relatively interesting to use I was doing as you said. Scoring 44/0, 52/1, 66/0, etc though even then those were very much so oddities for me as a player.
As for QQ well we have to admit that every group in Dust has complained about another play style incessantly. AV has done it before, tanks did it before, assaults did it, scout did it, heavies did it, etc. No point in throwing blame around as everyone is equally guilty.
*"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
|
Racro 01 Arifistan
Simple Minded People Pty. Ltd.
492
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 11:02:00 -
[196] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:Cost is irrelevant to balance, Vodar.
Game is 16v16. That means the game is balanced if 16 people equal 16 people.
Why do you think you're worth more than the AV player? (Hint: You're not, and you're wrong.)
if cost were irelvant then why is a proto suit so much more effective than adv/std/mlt grade suits?......
because it costs more and has literally better everything. hence you pay more for better suit and get a clear distinct advantage over another suit.
my PLC assault suit costs me 207k isk. and can not only take down vehicles but thanks to the sidearm can pose a threat to unprepared infantry.
now my ion cannon madruagrs can xt-201/particle cannon gunnlogis all cost at least double to triple my PLC/swarm suit fittings. and yet the av suits are more effective at bringing down an enbemys tank/dropsship/lav than my own fckn hulking death machines.
comeing from an AV point of view.....its simply still too powerful compared to the state of vehicles. just to give you an idea. my allotek plasma cannon with prof 5 and 3 complex lights and laidai pckeds can kill a gunnlogi quicker than my complex modded ion cannon madrugar can........and this is a suit costing half/third the price.
there is a problem when 1 measly assault suit can solo even the best fitted hulking death machines and bring it down.
assult dropships how ever................are utter fckn bulshit to deal with. I have seen plently shrug off my swarms and PLC only to either afterburn away/or shield boost/rep.
then if you get the real annoying pilots are capable of sitting over your tank and annoying the **** out of you with a apperntly never-ending or never having to reload their missile launcher. as it stands the assault drop ship is worth its isk for its bang.
LAVS...............fckn wheel charis for heavies
tanks. are currently laughable and when an assault dropship can last longer than a tank can theres an issue. I've seen some decent lavs recently being able to take some av but are still killable.
still. the more isk you pay for suit means you can kill quicker or take more damage or what ever you fit for.
tanks however......still need redoing. a 500k isk tank shouldn't be blown up by a 200k isk av suit. HOWEVER 2 of these 200k isk suits should be able to bring down the tank. now befor you call bullshit.......think of it this way. when theres a 200k isk suit it generally means hes also got a decent sidearm to deal with infantry and after the sidearm pass their all quite powerful especially the ion pistols/ smg's and bolt pistol's. just because 2 people are dealing with vehicles dosnt mean your team has lost 2 infantry. their fitted for a different role and are more susceptible to opposing infantry but still pose a threat.
as for the tank. lets say this one is a cheap crappy milita tank with no sp/isk invested. this should be looked as a literaly no threat and can be cake walked by mlt or std av. ADV av would decamatie it. proto would over kill it.
now lets make it a 500k isk fully skilled/ proto turret/complex mod fitted tank., this is what your team should fear and run away from. not simply ignore it and mill it for points. when a tank costing this much is deployed it should A: assist the team in away that the blue berrys want to keep it alive and maintain vehicle/firepower superiorty.
and B:should be the primary goal of removal for the opposing team in order to keep the fight balanced and prevent the enemy from haveing an advantage.
conclusion: if the more isk you pay for a dropsuit means its more effecent/.effective then the same should apply to vehicles. how ever with the current implemntaion of AV and vehicles. the scales currently wieigh in towards AV favour. although tanks have had their prices reduced from what they were, they are still noit worth their isk. especially when you have coordinated squad's of proto stomping assholes that not only wipe out infantry upon spwan in. but any vehicle on an rdv being deployed.
back in chromosome when even millita tanks were costing around a good 200-600k isk they were capable of scareing/killing proto suits....why.......BECUSE THEY WERE FREAKING MORE EXPENSIVE and hence had more bang for their back. and even if destroyed were still a pain to replace and restock. now lets not get started on chromosome STD fitted tanks being between 400k-1mill and the fearsome marduer tanks and their costs of anywhere bettwen 1.3 - 2.6mill isk prices.
so again: more isk/sp investment should mean what ever you use or your team uses should be harder to remove and is more efficient at its task.
Elite Gallenten Soldier
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3592
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 11:30:00 -
[197] - Quote
I'm obviously a little late to the party here so forgive me, if younhave heard all this before.
1) A single AVer should absolutely be capable of destroying your Incubus/Python much like the HAV an ADS is a vehicles mainly for solo pilots. This maintains the one to one ratio.
Your ADS specalises in clearing rooftops and hunting HAVs which is where the vehicle becomes worth it's weight in gold.
2) The whole problem stems from 2 main factors, vehicles do not have designated roles on the battlefield, a vehicle user can still have their infantry suit available aftee death.
If we had more defined roles for vehicles we could more accurately determine their force strength and buff/nerf them appropriately (this would be easiest by creating a full vehicle roster)
Because vehicle Pilots can still have their regular suit in addition to the vehicle, they effectively have 2 suits that they can change between at a moments notice, imagine having a scout suit that could transform into a heavy suit by pressing the circle button, that's effectively what a vehicle does.
3) Everyone, Pilots, AVers and most infantry (excluding those who don't want vehicles at all) are happy to give pilots so much more variation, the only stipulation most of us have is that pilot suits are also implememted.
4) Finally in relation to your 2mill SP for an AV fit statememt, this assumes you do not account for any of the transferrable or passive skills in the infantry, which would mean you only account for the large turret and the hull type you use.
In addition, while it the entire swarm launcher tree costs less than 10mill and the Commando tree also, slapping a PRO Launcher on a PRO Minmando will just get you killed a lot.
Your average AV suit (including your perphierals such as, sidearm, ehp mods, biotic mods, damage mods, electronic and engineeeing passive bonuses, weapon handling) comes to about 34million SP the last time I totted it up (memory serving) and approximately 500-750k ISK
While Your average Vehicle came to approximately 32.6million SP and about 1.3million ISK, though with the price reductions most of my ADS fits come in at around 450k ISK.
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
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
3592
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 11:41:00 -
[198] - Quote
Sorex Yel wrote:
Nailed it. In EVE it's common for massive numbers of smaller ships to engage a larger ship or a small group of larger ships. In a 16v16 game, this asymmetrical balance methodology does not work. Either vehicles need to require multiple people to use (equivalent to their power), or they need to be equal in power to infantry. If vehicle users cannot except either of those options, vehicles should honestly just be removed. Because a 16v16 game cannot be balanced if one player is able to be as powerful as two or three other players combined.
I may not like your attitude towards other people as a CPM, but for once with that statement you are preaching to the choir.
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
|
Ld Collins
Titans of Phoenix
VP Gaming Alliance
185
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 13:57:00 -
[199] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:The distinguishing difference in your rather extreme examples is the 60/1 infantry is an extreme rarity.
My two absolute best matches were 53/2 and 43/13. That's twice in two years. No other match comes remotely close.
The tank drivers at one point were running 20-25/0 for match after match after match until they bumped into someone like me and exploded. Then they came on the forums to scream that AV needed to be nerfed because :reasons:
Most of the infantry hate comes from the latter portion where a tank driver wpuld explode in a marauder once every 4-8 matches and absolutely sh*t themselves.
That offensive ember has never died in the minds of AV players.
Now. On the other side of the coin, the elite infantry slayers were whiny little brats who openly stated that they should not have to change their fits to tackle and win against a tank.
They also cried hardest when I shot them with a forge gun.
The blame lies equally both ways, but whenever pilots start raging that their precious toys need to be able to be immune to dying to infantry AV it usually inspires AV hate and you see a sharp uptick of players who will run AV just to kill vehicles.
When the mad happens because of these forum rants infantry stop caring about winning and focus on annihilating your walkets one HAV at a time to punish your audacity.
You want balance and parity? You want to stop being the battlefield victims?
Stop making entitled and poorly considered rants like this.
Tanks aren't going 60-0 50 40 30 20 or even 10 solo period point blank tanks barely manage 10 kills without being blown up. People are clinging to the past regurgitation the same cries about tanks every time an AV verses infantry thread comes up. They dont want things to change im sorry that you cannot see this happening. The only viable vehicles are gunnlogis pythons and the incubus im seriously disturbed by the people on this forum. Do you all even play this game?
Also what a waste of time this thread is not a single blue tag. Please continue rambling on aimlessly on this forum for likes.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6370
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 14:30:00 -
[200] - Quote
Because what I describe is what you seem to be demanding.
And when one of the HAV crowd has the audacity to say without irony that a solo AV gunner should be unable to take an HAV one on one, then in the same post claim someone losing 5-6 dropsuits tackling a vehicle is "doing it wrong" I tend to utterly lose respect for the argument.
Nothing the HAV community has presented here could be considered useful or balanced, entirely based on "I want infantry AV ineffective" and as childish as the early complaining that you couldn't slaughter an HAV with a rifle.
This thread exemplifies the tgreadcrapping of the past, hence the examples from as far back as chromosome beta are valid.
Because you are using cookie cutter whining that is identical to every whine thread I have encountered since January of 2013 when I entered the closed beta.
Two years hasn't been enough to foster maturity and an understanding that there is no immunity, no guarantee and no niche protection for anyone in DUST.
You are as bad as the AV crowd you claim wants to ruin your playstyle.
You are no better than Soraya's trolling because the core of your message to the majority of the playerbase is that "you should not matter."
This is a selfish, pathetic sentiment, and one commonly ascribed to sociopathic individuals and politicians.
Grow up.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
|
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
2735
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 18:22:00 -
[201] - Quote
Monkey MAC wrote:slobbering
Go ruin a different game.
I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1957
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 18:26:00 -
[202] - Quote
Breakin Stuff I k noticed erlyer when you were detailing the changes to the forge gun you missed one thing that I myself think should be returned . When I used to forge gun in chrome when you lined a tanks sweet spot up at the back you got 204% efficiency again shields and 214% efficiency against armour and that has been several decreased to 104% and 114% I think I'm not in game to check at the moment but that old 204% used to serve my breech forge guns well and I do think it should be returned both as a tanker and a forge gunner.
Proud Caldari purist . Rank 10 colonel omiwarrior.
I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
|
Toobar Zoobar
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
101
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:10:00 -
[203] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:Toobar Zoobar wrote:Soraya Xel wrote:Cost is irrelevant to balance, Vodar.
Game is 16v16. That means the game is balanced if 16 people equal 16 people.
Why do you think you're worth more than the AV player? (Hint: You're not, and you're wrong.) Cost. Is. Revelevent. Size. Is Relevant. Indeed what is the point in a currency if cost is irrelevant? Have a go at thinking about that for a second will you. And balance my friend is what makes games boring. Should I expect to be able to kill a titan in a frigate in EVE? No. No matter how much I shoot at it. I wouldn't even take on a battleship. The titan not only costs a few million times what a frigate costs, but is also several million times the mass. If someone who thinks a top end HAV shouldn't be able to tank a militia swarm launcher, started playing EVE, they would probably start whining that they can't kill all the battleships in their rookie ship. That's the analogy here. i.e. you Is EVE 16v16? Nailed it. In EVE it's common for massive numbers of smaller ships to engage a larger ship or a small group of larger ships. In a 16v16 game, this asymmetrical balance methodology does not work. Either vehicles need to require multiple people to use (equivalent to their power), or they need to be equal in power to infantry. If vehicle users cannot except either of those options, vehicles should honestly just be removed. Because a 16v16 game cannot be balanced if one player is able to be as powerful as two or three other players combined.
There are some major factors that you are overlooking when you saying that it should only ever take one player to counter one player. And I mean MASSIVE!
Think about this will you. Which has the advantage in confined close quarter spaces, assuming both are isolated from their teams, a sentinel with a hmg or two logis with ARs? Obviously the sentinel. Indeed you could argue that in close quarters a sentinel is worth more in terms of worth to the team than most other roles/suits. It will take several players to take down a sential, certainly a proto. In a way the player using the sentinel is worth several assault classes (players) when defending a point/objective. The sentinel has its weaknesses of course. It's slower thus easier targeted by snipers and is not as suitable for skirmish maps where there are several objectives set far apart from each other. But ultimately there are certain classes that are better suited to different roles. There could be a team of proto stompers against a team of blueberries. Still 16 v 16 but massivly unfair and unbalanced. The factors are how much the suit costs, how good your skills are and what your opponent's skills are that determine how much you are worth to the team. ( I would say an mk.0 assault is worth about 5 blueberries )
And so the HAV and the ADS. How many players are they worth now and how many players were they worth in the past?
( much of this would depend on how good the pilot is and what amount of isk was spent on the tank. In the hands of a blueberry a soma isn't worth 1 good player using a suit of equal isk cost on the opponent's side). Again it all depends on the environment in question. What use am I to my team using a blaster tank in a multi storey complex where most of the enemy team is far behind cover. Answer is I'm not worth much and I really shouldn't be in there in the first place as it is very easy to ambush me with PLCs and REs ( you know the AV that is actually balanced ). It should be easy for 1 player to counter me in this situation. But it is only these urban environments where it should be easy for one infantry to effectively counter me. I'm in a tank with a very fat ass I can't duck behind cover. Same with the ADS it takes only one militia swarm launcher to force me into a wall and possibly kill me.
Out in the open however, this is where vehicles should be necessary and where they should be boss. The only 1 man counter to a HAV out here should be another HAV or perhaps an ADS. Just like in close quarters if there is an adv heavy logi duo walking around stomping my team the best counter for that is another heavy logi duo and this time maybe it's worth risking a couple of proto suits.
This is what dust is about. It's not an even playing field all the time. Sometimes more isk will be risked for greater reward. Whether it be in the form of more expensive gear or indeed a vehicle. Taking that depth away is only dumbing the game down.
Specialization: Making typo's.
|
Bone Doc
Commando Perkone
Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:17:00 -
[204] - Quote
This sound like another thread I was in another part of the forum so I'm just going to repost...
Bone Doc wrote:The only vehicles that dont have a role are tanks while LAV and dropships are pure transportation with minor firepower, the only time I'v ever seen a good role for tanks was back in closed beta when the massive installations had to be destroyed or captured in order for the game to proceed to the next phase,everything that's changed since then has only boxed them into the role of death machines with no role outside of that.
Maybe the game modes need to change in order to give the vehicles more purpose instead of changing the vehicle themselfs,idk just thinking to myself. |
Toobar Zoobar
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
101
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:20:00 -
[205] - Quote
Bone Doc wrote:This sound like another thread I was in another part of the forum so I'm just going to repost... Bone Doc wrote:The only vehicles that dont have a role are tanks while LAV and dropships are pure transportation with minor firepower, the only time I'v ever seen a good role for tanks was back in closed beta when the massive installations had to be destroyed or captured in order for the game to proceed to the next phase,everything that's changed since then has only boxed them into the role of death machines with no role outside of that.
Maybe the game modes need to change in order to give the vehicles more purpose instead of changing the vehicle themselfs,idk just thinking to myself.
They need only bring back skirmish 1.0 for that.
Specialization: Making typo's.
|
Toobar Zoobar
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
101
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:21:00 -
[206] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:Breakin Stuff I k noticed erlyer when you were detailing the changes to the forge gun you missed one thing that I myself think should be returned . When I used to forge gun in chrome when you lined a tanks sweet spot up at the back you got 204% efficiency again shields and 214% efficiency against armour and that has been several decreased to 104% and 114% I think I'm not in game to check at the moment but that old 204% used to serve my breech forge guns well and I do think it should be returned both as a tanker and a forge gunner.
...ahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh!!!! NO.
Specialization: Making typo's.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6390
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:26:00 -
[207] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:Breakin Stuff I k noticed erlyer when you were detailing the changes to the forge gun you missed one thing that I myself think should be returned . When I used to forge gun in chrome when you lined a tanks sweet spot up at the back you got 204% efficiency again shields and 214% efficiency against armour and that has been several decreased to 104% and 114% I think I'm not in game to check at the moment but that old 204% used to serve my breech forge guns well and I do think it should be returned both as a tanker and a forge gunner.
weakspots were never removed ANY weapon that hits a tank in the aft quarter just so will annihilate it by the numbers.
Now just imagine. For a year in chrome I successfully hunted marauders ignorant of the existence of the weakspot.
Sheet's updated with proposed numbers for the scrambler lance and heavy autocannon that Rattati was thinking about at one point.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6390
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:27:00 -
[208] - Quote
Toobar Zoobar wrote:pegasis prime wrote:Breakin Stuff I k noticed erlyer when you were detailing the changes to the forge gun you missed one thing that I myself think should be returned . When I used to forge gun in chrome when you lined a tanks sweet spot up at the back you got 204% efficiency again shields and 214% efficiency against armour and that has been several decreased to 104% and 114% I think I'm not in game to check at the moment but that old 204% used to serve my breech forge guns well and I do think it should be returned both as a tanker and a forge gunner. ...ahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh!!!! NO.
weakspots still exist.
current values for the weakspot don't need a buff.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1957
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:37:00 -
[209] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Toobar Zoobar wrote:pegasis prime wrote:Breakin Stuff I k noticed erlyer when you were detailing the changes to the forge gun you missed one thing that I myself think should be returned . When I used to forge gun in chrome when you lined a tanks sweet spot up at the back you got 204% efficiency again shields and 214% efficiency against armour and that has been several decreased to 104% and 114% I think I'm not in game to check at the moment but that old 204% used to serve my breech forge guns well and I do think it should be returned both as a tanker and a forge gunner. ...ahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh!!!! NO. weakspots still exist. current values for the weakspot don't need a buff.
Never said they were removed but severely nerfed as forges gave 204% and 214% as i stated but have little over 100% now that a big nerf . It's a dynamic I do believe need to be fixed as when im rolling my Gunnlogi (which is about 80% of the time these days) I am very aware of forge gunners getting shots on my weak spot this is a habit I form tanking in chrome now it dosent really do that muchbmore dammage whrn hit in the soft spot . If a forge gunner was abke to get to a good position behind ta tank they deserve the dammage bonus . Also inthought you might want to consifer this when tour giving input into the hav thread in the ideas forum.
Proud Caldari purist . Rank 10 colonel omiwarrior.
I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
16551
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:48:00 -
[210] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Toobar Zoobar wrote:pegasis prime wrote:Breakin Stuff I k noticed erlyer when you were detailing the changes to the forge gun you missed one thing that I myself think should be returned . When I used to forge gun in chrome when you lined a tanks sweet spot up at the back you got 204% efficiency again shields and 214% efficiency against armour and that has been several decreased to 104% and 114% I think I'm not in game to check at the moment but that old 204% used to serve my breech forge guns well and I do think it should be returned both as a tanker and a forge gunner. ...ahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh!!!! NO. weakspots still exist. current values for the weakspot don't need a buff. Never said they were removed but severely nerfed as forges gave 204% and 214% as i stated but have little over 100% now that a big nerf . It's a dynamic I do believe need to be fixed as when im rolling my Gunnlogi (which is about 80% of the time these days) I am very aware of forge gunners getting shots on my weak spot this is a habit I form tanking in chrome now it dosent really do that muchbmore dammage whrn hit in the soft spot . If a forge gunner was abke to get to a good position behind ta tank they deserve the dammage bonus . Also inthought you might want to consifer this when tour giving input into the hav thread in the ideas forum.
It's certainly something worth consideration. On one hand it does in some way encourage AVers to attack the weaker rear armour on the other 204 and 214% respectively are very high bonuses for a game like Dust.
I can certainly handle 1-2 hit kills but I doubt the rest of the community can.
*"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |