DUST Search - Are Vehicles OP?

All Channels

General Discussions

Are Vehicles OP?

» 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)
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15605	Posted - 2015.01.21 17:00:00 - [1] - Quote Yes or No, and why My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Fizzer XCIV Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 2349	Posted - 2015.01.21 17:12:00 - [2] - Quote No. They are imbalanced with each other, though. Shield HAVs>>>>Armor HAVs for example. AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, and others... not so great (by that I mean terrible). But overall, AV/V is balanced, but not with themselves. Home at Last <3
Sir Snugglz Red Star. 1140	Posted - 2015.01.21 17:15:00 - [3] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Yes or No, and why Vehicles in general? No. The lav (like none ADS derpships) have no role aside for one way suicide trips. Aside from the fatty proto rail gun fit, lav's have no clear role aside transportation. Have no anti infantry/ anti vehicle capabilities. Cant even be used for supression nor defense. That's what I call major underpowered. Even running people over got nerfed (i do agree that was op) but no buff to compensate in other area. If lav was meant for only transportation, then we should remove the turret for another seat. I have never heard any PC team request an lav driver for their match... That says a lot. Same thing applies to general derpships. lav's/derpships have no bonuses whatsoever. initial transportation is only real purpose, aside from suicide runs to a point. Again, I've never seen a PC team ask for a general purpose derpship pilot, (only ADS). ADS main role now is to clear roof uplinks. It's slaying capabilities were taken away. If you see the ADS as an uplink cleaner then its fine. If you think it shouldn't just be an uplink cleaner, then its under powered. I was only a tanker in chromosome (not many people knew that). I cannot state how tanks are. But LAV and general purpose derpships are definitely underpowered. LAV's especially. -Pro AFKing LVL 5 -Luck is just one of my skills -Just because I make flying look easy doesn't mean it is
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 15162	Posted - 2015.01.21 17:18:00 - [4] - Quote No, as AV Weapons have a reasonable difficulty with destroying competent Pilots. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 644	Posted - 2015.01.21 18:56:00 - [5] - Quote No: Turrets are not well balanced... Large turrets still too good at farming infantry - Missiles can spray a whole area, clearing out areas of infantry, as well as popping a few individual missiles for single targets. - Rails can snipe like a boss still. - Blasters are about where they should be. No balance between turret types Large Turrets: - Rails charge too fast for something with that much range. - Missiles can spray enough to down most vehicles in 1 go, leading to boring fights. - Tanks turn speed makes the fastest turning turrets pointless, blasters main advantage for close range is the turrets turn speed, which means nothing when the other tank can just pirouette on the spot with a stronger turret! I suggest... We need to reduce the amount of missiles per reload. increase charge time on rails and make large turrets unable to turn while the tank is turning/moving. Small Turrets; - Small turrets are too forgiving when wasting shots. - Missiles can miss a target 7 times and still get the kill on the 8th, it makes killing infantry too easy. - Blasters have such little heat buildup and so much ammo, that you can spray down several infantry without having to stop, even if you miss half your shots. - Missiles have such a long reload time that vehicle reps make them somewhat useless against anything that repairs fast. - Rails could use a little more damage to break through reps, maybe less range because it's way too safe sniping from a distant LAV. I suggest... We half the number of missiles per reload and reload time. Give more heat buildup on blasters. Wait before changing rails again to see how they fair with other turret changes. Hulls are not well balanced. Gunni has much better turn speed - Ability to maneuver makes it the 'go to' tank, even before considering the favorable damage profile of shields. I suggest... Allowing both hulls to turn at a similar rate, have the changes to straight line speed/acceleration only. Though I would make the changes to turrets turning, before bothering with this, as it may become unnecessary. Maddi drops instantly to missiles - Gunni has a fair chance vs all weapons, while Maddi drops instantly to Missiles. I suggest... Either giving the Maddi a much higher potential hp, or evening out the damage profiles a bit. People can jump in/out of vehicles. - Jumping out and instantly firing av weapons makes vehicle fights boring. - It allows someone to escape death at the last second. - It makes multi-turret vehicles less useful, if you can avoid fitting and jump out with a HMG instead. I suggest... Adding a delay to getting out would screw up transport dropships badly! So instead I think a 3 or 4 second delay to movement input after exiting/entering would be more viable. Deciding where to drop passengers would require a little more thought. No more dumping into a hot zone and having them shoot some poor bugger in the back. Turrets can be used to cover the transported infantry after they exit. Tankers really shouldn't be getting out all that often, especially in the open. Makes multi-manned vehicles better than solo vehicles.
P14GU3 Savage Bullet 1146	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:09:00 - [6] - Quote Pretty much what derp said. From an AV perspective, maddys are WAY too easy to kill, with swarms or forge guns. Dropships get wrecked by swarms but are hard to down with a forge. I would say they are about where they should be. Gunnlogis are near unbeatable with AV if its a good pilot. The only way to take a good gunny down is with 2 or 3 coordinated AV at the moment. I think better shield AV would solve this (amarr lance plz.) LAVs are fine. My biggest issue with vehicles, and always has been, lack of enter/exit animation. The instant teleport in and out is broken on so many levels. 'Sault AK.0 - Logi AK.0 - Logi GK.0 - Scout GK.0 - 'Mando MK.0 - Masshole in every sense of the word.
Hector Carson G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 153	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:09:00 - [7] - Quote Add new type of LAV, troop transport able to seat 6 + driver, sorry since I saw we were on the topic of vehicles I just thought I throw this idea out there Assault c.k0 Proto Tankers
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 320	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:13:00 - [8] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Yes or No, and why Yes. Sort of. 1. Against AV, Vehicle players get to decide the terms of every engagement unless they are hit by so much AV that they are instantly or almost instantly killed, this means that the opposing AV has a massive disadvantage at all times which is magnified by the disparity in TTK (even a large blaster turret with the lowest anti-infantry TTK will be able to kill even the most tanked suit in the game before the tank is killed, this is even more pronounced when you get into railgun vs. forge or swarm where the railgun can sit at max range and just peck at the AV player until they manage to land a hit, AV player doesnt get that luxury and CANNOT kill a properly driven rail tank at long ranges) 2. Inter-vehicle balance is **. The Gunloggi HAV is stupendously overpowered compared to any other kind of tank, including the madruger. Any rail tank is just absurdly dangerous to any dropship in the field. Shield dropships take stupid amounts of damage from bumping into anything. LAVs and Dropships take massive falling damage or impact damage from anything whereas a tank is almost invincible to it (they can fall from insane heights and not die, run into just about anything and take only a little damage, yadda yadda). Small turrets have issues that make them nearly unusable in some situations, small rails have bad hit detection, small blasters are just , and missile turrets have some kind of weird thing where they take inertia from the parent vehicle and fly off in some random direction instead of where you are aiming. And last but not least, tank power to kill other tanks is so far above AV that it makes a militia sica with all militia mods a better AV choice to a non vehicle spec player than actual proto AV is. 3. While as mentioned in 1. AV is ** at killing vehicles, they are also good enough against vehicles to force vehicles into incredibly cautious play because vehicles are tremendously expensive and nobody wants to lose them. This results in boring play for both AV and vehicle players as they are in a kind of stalemate. AV ends up dodging infantry all game and doing nothing but having no fun, and vehicles end up sniping from safe spots (be it redline or near handy cover) at enemy redberries, having no fun as well, and not really doing much either. So no, vehicles are OP, but at the same time they are sort of stupidly implemented so its not like the vehicle player is having any fun with it most of the time.
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 1870	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:14:00 - [9] - Quote Atiim wrote: No, as AV Weapons have a reasonable difficulty with destroying competent Pilots. that bait
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2851	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:16:00 - [10] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: No. They are imbalanced with each other, though. Shield HAVs>>>>Armor HAVs for example. AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, and others... not so great (by that I mean terrible). But overall, AV/V is balanced, but not with themselves. Shield tanks are only slightly better compaired to armor because they're more versatile (especially fitting small turrets) and maneuverable. Shields suck defensively compaired to armor. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~

shaman oga Dead Man's Game 3740	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:21:00 - [11] - Quote Only in chromo, mostly because the lack of serious AV. Situational awareness also known as passive scan. Minmatar omni-merc
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 583	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:25:00 - [12] - Quote 1. No 2. LAV/DS/HAV have no role 3. Turrets are either anti vehicle or nothing at all due to infantry ability to whine about getting killed by turrets so they get nerfed 4. No module variety and what modules we have get nerfed because again infantry whine for it 5. Lack of skills and decent skill bonuses so even less to skill into and the gap between a 30mil vehicle SP player and a 0SP player is literally nothing 6. Anything a vehicle can do infantry can do it better for cheaper in SP and ISK 7. Armor vehicles melt to current AV weapons so shield is more powerful as a result 8. SL is the most broken and skillless weapon in any game i have come across - Crash Bandicoots Wumpa launcher requires more aiming and timing that this POS 9. No hull variety 10. MCRU is useless and not upgradeable 11. Prob a few more i forgot to add
Big Burns Dem Durrty Boyz General Tso's Alliance 332	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:32:00 - [13] - Quote No vehicles are not OP. If you give Kalante Schiffer a Militia Assault Rifle, does that make the Militia Assault Rifle OP? I'm a try-hard, because half my team sits in the MCC.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16724	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:54:00 - [14] - Quote Meh doesn't matter. They are just really boring. *"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 16724	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:56:00 - [15] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: No. They are imbalanced with each other, though. Shield HAVs>>>>Armor HAVs for example. AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, and others... not so great (by that I mean terrible). But overall, AV/V is balanced, but not with themselves. Shield tanks are only slightly better compaired to armor because they're more versatile (especially fitting small turrets) and maneuverable. Shields suck defensively compaired to armor. Indeed...... that 15% better hardener really makes them bad in a defensive sense....not to mention on tanks a passice 168 passive regeneration per second without requiring a module to be fit. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2855	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:04:00 - [16] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: No. They are imbalanced with each other, though. Shield HAVs>>>>Armor HAVs for example. AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, and others... not so great (by that I mean terrible). But overall, AV/V is balanced, but not with themselves. Shield tanks are only slightly better compaired to armor because they're more versatile (especially fitting small turrets) and maneuverable. Shields suck defensively compaired to armor. Indeed...... that 15% better hardener really makes them bad in a defensive sense....not to mention on tanks a passice 168 passive regeneration per second without requiring a module to be fit. Hardeners come down eventually, sure they can burst tank but after that they're tissuepaper. Edit: also you need to use on everytime you're attacked because your defenses depend on them, meaning even a single swarmer can cause you to use up your hardener(s) in some cases. Not to mention you're toast if youre caught with them down, even if you keep some shields you've lost most of it. Shield reps only work after a battle where as armor is constant, not to mention higher (typically 200-250). Sure it takes mods but you also require 3x defensive mods for max efficiency, plus using your lows for fitting mods where as armor gets at least one utility high (typically an overdrive which can help outrun/strafe missiles). Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16724	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:27:00 - [17] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: True Adamance wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: No. They are imbalanced with each other, though. Shield HAVs>>>>Armor HAVs for example. AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, and others... not so great (by that I mean terrible). But overall, AV/V is balanced, but not with themselves. Shield tanks are only slightly better compaired to armor because they're more versatile (especially fitting small turrets) and maneuverable. Shields suck defensively compaired to armor. Indeed...... that 15% better hardener really makes them bad in a defensive sense....not to mention on tanks a passice 168 passive regeneration per second without requiring a module to be fit. Hardeners come down eventually, sure they can burst tank but after that they're tissuepaper. Edit: also you need to use on everytime you're attacked because your defenses depend on them, meaning even a single swarmer can cause you to use up your hardener(s) in some cases. Not to mention you're toast if youre caught with them down, even if you keep some shields you've lost most of it. Shield reps only work after a battle where as armor is constant, not to mention higher (typically 200-250). Sure it takes mods but you also require 3x defensive mods for max efficiency, plus using your lows for fitting mods where as armor gets at least one utility high (typically an overdrive which can help outrun/strafe missiles). On a Shield Tank (since I always think in terms of tanks) you rarely ever have to come down from the active module high. 2x Hardeners create a 60 second resistance period with 30 seconds down time with an incredibly manageable 4 second regen delay for 168 per second (and effective 235.2 while module remains active). Ideally I'm never on field for longer than I can manage my active modules and always in a place to exploit some form of cover. The issue I find is that for the most part I can ignore swarm launcher users unless they appear in force unlike Forgegunners and Plasma Cannoniers as as such can ignore the most common AV form that I'm likely to encounter. I mean from a defensive stand point.....I get everything and more on the Shield HAV than I do on the Armour HAV. 15% better hardeners, effectively a free repairer, natural resistance to most forms of AV and comprable if not better eHP values due to my fitting capacities. I can't speak for Dropshippers.....never been able to fly. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2804	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:49:00 - [18] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Shields suck defensively compaired to armor. Shield defense is superior due to two AV weapons and two vehicle turrets getting a bonus against armor. The only thing armor has is its repair, so it's able to stay out of the redline, albeit in cover, to recover its HP and move out again. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2804	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:51:00 - [19] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, Wow, I'm surprised you actually admitted that. The first step towards rectifying a problem is admitting you have one. But overall, AV/V is balanced, No it's not. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Fizzer XCIV Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 2351	Posted - 2015.01.21 21:09:00 - [20] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, Wow, I'm surprised you actually admitted that. The first step towards rectifying a problem is admitting you have one. But overall, AV/V is balanced, No it's not. Why do you think I'm a Swarm user? I use Plasma Cannons. I just think swarms being fairly OP isn't a problem so long as they are the only viable Light AV. Right now, they are the best Light AV option for both Armor and Shield vehicles, despite their shield penalty. When/if Plasma Cannons become good AV options for fighting shield vehicles, I'll probably lobby for toning swarms down. Until then, they should remain OP. They act as an equalizer right now. Home at Last <3

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16726	Posted - 2015.01.21 21:23:00 - [21] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, Wow, I'm surprised you actually admitted that. The first step towards rectifying a problem is admitting you have one. But overall, AV/V is balanced, No it's not. Why do you think I'm a Swarm user? I use Plasma Cannons. I just think swarms being fairly OP isn't a problem so long as they are the only viable Light AV. Right now, they are the best Light AV option for both Armor and Shield vehicles, despite their shield penalty. When/if Plasma Cannons become good AV options for fighting shield vehicles, I'll probably lobby for toning swarms down. Until then, they should remain OP. They act as an equalizer right now. Go talk to Ceej and Kubo. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Echo 1991 Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 698	Posted - 2015.01.21 21:31:00 - [22] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, Wow, I'm surprised you actually admitted that. The first step towards rectifying a problem is admitting you have one. But overall, AV/V is balanced, No it's not. Why do you think I'm a Swarm user? I use Plasma Cannons. I just think swarms being fairly OP isn't a problem so long as they are the only viable Light AV. Right now, they are the best Light AV option for both Armor and Shield vehicles, despite their shield penalty. When/if Plasma Cannons become good AV options for fighting shield vehicles, I'll probably lobby for toning swarms down. Until then, they should remain OP. They act as an equalizer right now. They aren't OP. Against a shield tank, it will take about 6 swarms to get down to armour if they fit it like that. Armour vehicles have it bad cos 2/3 of all weapons that are used to kill vehicles have an efficiency bonus to armour. Armour vehicles need a buff, leave swarms alone until after vehicle rebalance and see how it plays out.
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2940	Posted - 2015.01.21 22:06:00 - [23] - Quote No. Because.
Beld Errmon Nyain San 1818	Posted - 2015.01.21 22:19:00 - [24] - Quote Atiim wrote: No, as AV Weapons have a reasonable difficulty with destroying competent Pilots. Scrubs with easy mode weapons can destroy exceptional pilots with "reasonable" difficulty, you must be pretty smug with the outcome of your one sided BS crusade, glad I didn't play long enough to see the day when a scrublord like you is actually happy with the "balance" between vehicles and AV. Retired bittervet.
Riptalis Horizons' Edge 166	Posted - 2015.01.21 22:21:00 - [25] - Quote Vehicles are not op, but they are imbalanced. Until more standard, ADV, and proto vehicles are released vehicles will always be underpowered to AV currently and still be imbalanced. Python pilot Logistics mk.0 Assault mk.0
LUGMOS Quafe Premium 1624	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:49:00 - [26] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Go talk to Ceej and Kubo. Or me... One thing I don't get is why exactly people think that AV should solo a vehicle with... Wait for it... Only a Swarm Launched, PLC, or Forge. Its like nobody knows that AV or Flux nades, REs, or lolProxies can be fit on one suit. I will laugh the day that the PLC gets buffed to the point that I can just rip someone's shields off and pop some AV nades, killing them in a second. Sure, the Swarm is sort of AV made unfriendly, but that's what the PLC is for. I want to see the PLC being the goto AV for close range, and the forge being better than the Swarm in long range. I think swarm launchers should have a clip of one, but double the damage per salvo. Keep range and everything else the same. Official QuafeGäó Advocate Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
LUGMOS Quafe Premium 1624	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:50:00 - [27] - Quote Beld Errmon wrote: Atiim wrote: No, as AV Weapons have a reasonable difficulty with destroying competent Pilots. Scrubs with easy mode weapons can destroy exceptional pilots with "reasonable" difficulty, you must be pretty smug with the outcome of your one sided BS crusade, glad I didn't play long enough to see the day when a scrublord like you is actually happy with the "balance" between vehicles and AV. Bait taken... Y u do dis??? Official QuafeGäó Advocate Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 648	Posted - 2015.01.23 13:20:00 - [28] - Quote P14GU3 wrote: Gunnlogis are near unbeatable with AV if its a good pilot. The only way to take a good gunny down is with 2 or 3 coordinated AV at the moment. I think better shield AV would solve this (amarr lance plz.) LAVs are fine. Plasma cannon could use a buff, or maybe a breach variant that travels faster but has no splash damage. Currently as the only AV shield weapon (not grenade) it's laughable. At a distance you can see it fired, watch the trail and have time to move slowly out the way. At close range the first shot may hit, but they have to reload instantly giving you time to make the distance to long range. As for downing Gunni at the moment, 1 aver can do it with a forge gun. Don't even need the fluxes. Just make sure your first hit is on the weak spot, if they don't die of shock seeing their hp halved, then they will die from the next few shots even if they pop a hardener. Infact if you use hardeners on your tank, you sacrifice shields, meaning that first shot deals a heck of a lot of damage. If you position well enough, then a flux before the first charge will almost mean certain death for the tank. I think forge gun is balanced well as av, good position + thinking ahead usually = a kill... While swarms just = kill if you're close enough... & Plasma cannon = kill, if you're extremely lucky and the vehicle is stuck somewhere, lol.
Echo 1991 Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 699	Posted - 2015.01.23 17:06:00 - [29] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: P14GU3 wrote: Gunnlogis are near unbeatable with AV if its a good pilot. The only way to take a good gunny down is with 2 or 3 coordinated AV at the moment. I think better shield AV would solve this (amarr lance plz.) LAVs are fine. Plasma cannon could use a buff, or maybe a breach variant that travels faster but has no splash damage. Currently as the only AV shield weapon (not grenade) it's laughable. At a distance you can see it fired, watch the trail and have time to move slowly out the way. At close range the first shot may hit, but they have to reload instantly giving you time to make the distance to long range. As for downing Gunni at the moment, 1 aver can do it with a forge gun. Don't even need the fluxes. Just make sure your first hit is on the weak spot, if they don't die of shock seeing their hp halved, then they will die from the next few shots even if they pop a hardener. Infact if you use hardeners on your tank, you sacrifice shields, meaning that first shot deals a heck of a lot of damage. If you position well enough, then a flux before the first charge will almost mean certain death for the tank. I think forge gun is balanced well as av, good position + thinking ahead usually = a kill... While swarms just = kill if you're close enough... & Plasma cannon = kill, if you're extremely lucky and the vehicle is stuck somewhere, lol. PLC doesn't need a damage buff. Maybe reduce reload speed a tad but we'll see. It does work well as an AV weapon if you get close enough, doing 2000+ alpha against shields is ridiculous, however it struggles against armour.
We are 138 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 655	Posted - 2015.01.23 17:41:00 - [30] - Quote Good players are op. I have seen drop ship pilots terrorize entire matches, and I've seen solo av savants wreck tanks. So many factors. I have been in matches where the vehicle presence is overwhelming (frekin duna) and as a part time CRUtanker/drop ship some matches I've seen the bolas get shot down by a hail of swarms and forge gun fire. Over all I blame the small player base and the juicy points that come from vehicle destuction. For instance if I blow up a LAV near a blue objective I get 75 75 40 plus the bonus. Oh and also there is much vehicle hate from when tanks and murdertaxis ran amok killing every thing match after match, that **** left scars man and made people skill into AV and have a fit ready to counter vehicles. Just the nature of the beast at this point we need an Influx of fresh blood to keep it mixed up, close quarters breeds contempt after all.... Hello? any one there?

Jack Galen Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 11	Posted - 2015.01.23 18:42:00 - [31] - Quote I think it is fairly okay. I can only speak for dropships though, as I only fly. That also comes from an experienced pilot. All I'd ask for is maybe an extra 75 PG/CPU for a tad more fitting freedom, and something useful to be done with the small rail reticule (1st person vertical aim pls?) What isn't okay is the aerial vehicle learning curve; dropships are hard enough to get used to anyway - I found them...interesting...and that is with RL experience in helicopters. While I can now cope with a match where every merc and their dogs are running SL fits (#shieldhardner2k15 #knowyourlimits), newbs can't at all, so they give up. I also find the witchhunt mechanic occurs now, where as soon as I am spotted, everyone on the map goes for me and my tasty damage points, which I find hilarious. However, as far as vehicles are OP posts go, I have to disagree. It is the pilot that makes the vehicle, not the other way around anymore, which is nice to see. In fact, I haven't had this much fun flying in DUST for a long time :D
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 328	Posted - 2015.01.23 18:53:00 - [32] - Quote These claims that damage profiles of AV is making Gunnlogi overpowered is rediculous. You dont see people complaining about how they cant kill shield tanked dropsuits with a rail rifle or combat rifle, you dont see people bitching about how its impossible to kill a heavy with a scrambler rifle or plasma rifle, it should be a little more difficult to kill someone with a weapon that isnt focused on whatever kind of tank they are using, but not impossible like against the gunnlogis. The reality of the situation is that all vehicles are a huge pain in the ass to kill with AV, to the point of it being completely impossible to kill unless the vehicle player is an idiot or they are dramatically outnumbered. This is magnified by the current Gunnlogi because it is just straight up significantly better than the Madruger in every way aside from straight travel speed and in fight regen.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution 9306	Posted - 2015.01.23 19:48:00 - [33] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: No. They are imbalanced with each other, though. Shield HAVs>>>>Armor HAVs for example. AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, and others... not so great (by that I mean terrible). But overall, AV/V is balanced, but not with themselves. Shield tanks are only slightly better compaired to armor because they're more versatile (especially fitting small turrets) and maneuverable. Shields suck defensively compaired to armor. lol what the hell are you talking about? Shield vehicles namely the tanks do so well because it takes less work to stack armor than it is to get shield defense. Another huge imbalance is that all of the AV in this game save for just 1 is anti-armor and then then only one anti-shield turret and it sucks for AV when compared to your other options. Anti Armor: Swarms, Forgeguns, AV grenades, Remote Explosives, Small Missiles, Large Missiles, Small Rails, Large Rails and even HMGs against anything other than a tank. Anti Shield: Plasma Cannon, Flux Grenade, Large Blaster. Plasma cannon which is used for more anti infantry because the risk reward still isn't where it should be for tanks when compared to easy mode fire and forget spam swarm launchers. Flux Grenades are about the only competent shield weapon that I do not have a problem with. Large Blasters are pathetic when it comes to HAV warfare when you have the Large Rails and Missiles to choose from. And for a side note blasters can't even damage infantry or lightly armored vehicles besides the Caldari Dropships for some reason. Reaching AV balance will be damn near impossible when they heavily favor one damage type over the other. I can't even think of a proper simile for this situation besides itself because that's how absurd the notion of trying to balance something when you don't have your own damn ducks in a row. *Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente HAV name!* *~Democracy will win!*
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2812	Posted - 2015.01.23 21:44:00 - [34] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, Wow, I'm surprised you actually admitted that. The first step towards rectifying a problem is admitting you have one. But overall, AV/V is balanced, No it's not. Why do you think I'm a Swarm user? I use Plasma Cannons. I just think swarms being fairly OP isn't a problem so long as they are the only viable Light AV. Right now, they are the best Light AV option for both Armor and Shield vehicles, despite their shield penalty. When/if Plasma Cannons become good AV options for fighting shield vehicles, I'll probably lobby for toning swarms down. Until then, they should remain OP. They act as an equalizer right now. So something that locks on through cover and terrain, goes around 3 corners, has a flight speed faster than the ADS, and has a max range of 400m isn't OP? Then I want my 600m range railgun back, as well as the blaster unnerfed, and the 6ft long missiles to have a splash radius of 5m and 500 damage. And before you complain about that, the core locus is 7m splash and 600 damage. I know because I have them. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Indy Strizer Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 303	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:20:00 - [35] - Quote I wouldn't say they're overpowered... but, I wouldn't exactly say their situation in regards to balance isn't exactly ideal either. Please ignore the text above, I half-heartedly wrote it to curb my boredom.
Vicious Minotaur 1865	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:24:00 - [36] - Quote Yes. Vehicles are indeed overly poopy. 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
LUGMOS Quafe Premium 1660	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:29:00 - [37] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: These claims that damage profiles of AV is making Gunnlogi overpowered is rediculous. You dont see people complaining about how they cant kill shield tanked dropsuits with a rail rifle or combat rifle, you dont see people bitching about how its impossible to kill a heavy with a scrambler rifle or plasma rifle, it should be a little more difficult to kill someone with a weapon that isnt focused on whatever kind of tank they are using, but not impossible like against the gunnlogis. The reality of the situation is that all vehicles are a huge pain in the ass to kill with AV, to the point of it being completely impossible to kill unless the vehicle player is an idiot or they are dramatically outnumbered. This is magnified by the current Gunnlogi because it is just straight up significantly better than the Madruger in every way aside from straight travel speed and in fight regen. Its not the damage profile alone, per se, but paired with 15% more effective hardeners and built in repairers, and still being able to fit good tank, it is unbalanced. Official QuafeGäó Advocate Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
taxi bastard Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 341	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:55:00 - [38] - Quote NO too many maps just make life too easy for tankers, or LAV's. DOM maps are are the worst offenders so many of them create such little risk for tankers or even LAV's. Bare in mind that a gunlogi with the harder up can simply ignore most AV for a reasonably long period before the need to retreat and thats the problem. 1 well fit tank is pretty much untouchable 1v1 in doms 2v1 its window of opportunity is decreased but its not exactly a huge risk with all the stuff to hide between or corners to move to safety. 3v1 .....well how often do you see 3 AV for 1 tank and when you do it puts that team at a huge disadvantage for trying to contain it as in a dom its contain not kill providing the driver is not a fool. proxies......might get you an occasional LAV kill - they need the damage increased by 500 per and bandwidth reduced to almost nothing. sheild AV .... too little all but PC armor based, most vehicle users use shield based vehicles surprise surprise. AV mostly balanced with armor - unbalanced against sheilds on most maps. LAV's IMO too much EHP tanks too fast and can go over too much terrain.
Echo 1991 Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 701	Posted - 2015.01.24 00:29:00 - [39] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: AV is also imbalanced in this same way, with some AV being great (probably too great) like swarms, Wow, I'm surprised you actually admitted that. The first step towards rectifying a problem is admitting you have one. But overall, AV/V is balanced, No it's not. Why do you think I'm a Swarm user? I use Plasma Cannons. I just think swarms being fairly OP isn't a problem so long as they are the only viable Light AV. Right now, they are the best Light AV option for both Armor and Shield vehicles, despite their shield penalty. When/if Plasma Cannons become good AV options for fighting shield vehicles, I'll probably lobby for toning swarms down. Until then, they should remain OP. They act as an equalizer right now. So something that locks on through cover and terrain, goes around 3 corners, has a flight speed faster than the ADS, and has a max range of 400m isn't OP? Then I want my 600m range railgun back, as well as the blaster unnerfed, and the 6ft long missiles to have a splash radius of 5m and 500 damage. And before you complain about that, the core locus is 7m splash and 600 damage. I know because I have them. Mate, stop blowing this out of proportion. Swarms arent that bad, they don't lock through all terrain and cover, they can through some and I'll admit that. Swarms Max range only applies if there is a clear path and you can get a lock. If they are so OP go blow up a ton of tanks with a militia swarm launcher.
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 7384	Posted - 2015.01.24 00:38:00 - [40] - Quote I think it depends on the vehicle. LAVs are too fast and too easy without any need for skilling into them or adding modules at the moment. While ADS were indeed in need of a nerf, afterwards I could take one down with my pro swarms easier than I could take out the flipping LAV with a fatty in it. Considering a cheap LAV is less a tenth of the cost of an ADS that is just insane. Some of the tanks were next to impossible, while I hear that others are easy targets. I don't think you can group vehicles together right now and say that as a whole they are OP or UP as I think there is room for improvement in both aspects. Thunderbolt. verb and noun. "James thunderbolted in his pants." "I lit a bag of thunderbolt on fire on CCP's doorway"



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.

Official QuafeGäó Advocate

Official QuafeGäó Advocate

I am a minotaur.

Official QuafeGäó Advocate