DUST Search - One AV User should NOT equal one MAV user.

All Channels

General Discussions

One AV User should NOT equal one MAV user.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Foxhound Elite Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 708	Posted - 2015.02.09 14:41:00 - [1] - Quote It's simply ridiculous that one AV user with a forge gun or a swarm launcher can single handedly force (or even destroy) a MAV out of action. The dropship is a vehicle for troop transport and close-aerial support, yet one commando with a swarm as a back-up weapon can fire one volley and do a staggering amount of damage, enough to force the pilot to run. AV should be a co-ordinated effort, taking maybe 2-3 forge gunners or 3-4 swarm launchers to effectively take down a dropship. There are a number of key issues that make the need for an urgent change in the Vehicle v Anti-Vehicle game, such as; 1. The visual impairment of a pilot vs smaller targets that sometimes do not render on the ground. It's difficult to see your enemy when they are unmarked, while a dropship is a pretty bigger target, that of course can be locked on to. 2. Rendering issues. A pilot can be flying his/her ship, completely unaware that dead ahead is a volley of swarms incoming, moments away from slamming into the craft. Why is the pilot unaware? There are no warning systems, no alarm, no heads-up red text, and most of all, a lot of the time the missiles simply do not render. They're completely invisible. So, how are we meant to kill the attacker before he kills our ship when we cannot even see the his ship-seeking-swarm from hell? The forge gun rounds are visible, but the HUD still doesn't give you a direction from where the blast game from if it slams you from an unseen angle. 3. Speed difference. Swarm missiles, forge gun rounds, large rail rounds and missiles travel faster than the max speed of all dropships, even with an afterburner equipped. Is this an issue in itself? No, it's absolutely fine. However, the speed advantage of these anti-vehicle weapons combined with their high damage output, makes a single AV user in close proximity of the craft highly-capable of single handedly destroying a ship on their own, especially combined with the two other points above. This should not be the case. 4. SP and ISK difference is huge. It doesn't take all that much SP to skill into swarm launchers, let alone proto-level, ... the same goes for forge guns. A dedicated pilot will roughly spend 20 million in total for a maxed-out, effective Assault-variant, as well as an expensively fitted standard dropship. The price tags for vehicles are quite fair, because the fact that they are vehicles. Not items. Of course they'll be more expensive. But right now, the risk vs. reward is way out of balance. The answer? I don't know, my best idea I can come up with is allow a PG/ CPU Increase on all MAV's (Dropships) to allow for larger defensive modules to cope in the unbalanced envionment, or maybe a simple base HP increase. A well-fit Python will have a total HP of around 3600 HP. That, in my opinion, to counter the issues above / high-damage levels, should be doubled. It would give the pilot time to decided "should I run away before this gets worse, or can I take on those two swarm launchers?" Instead of getting hit by one volley , frantically turning on all modules and going "**,** NONONO" and flying as far away as possible. TL:DR Small HP increase for dropships desperatley needed for bugged AV. As always, thanks for reading and hope you see my points. Python pilot, troop-transport specialist and an all-round ballbag.
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 15525	Posted - 2015.02.09 14:44:00 - [2] - Quote Reserved. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
TheSneakyDolphin DROPSHIP ONE OPERATIONS 6	Posted - 2015.02.09 15:08:00 - [3] - Quote Oh please! Stop the anti-AV posts. One guy running swarms can't take down a Dropship if you fly away scared after getting hit and know how to fly. I run proto swarms and w/ 3 damage mods and most Dropships get away. You are probably getting hit by more than one person or an installation without knowing it. Most of all, don't call in a vehicle if you don't want it destroyed. SQUEAK! SQUEAK!
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1865	Posted - 2015.02.09 15:20:00 - [4] - Quote The age old question. Probably have been arguing this since Chromosome. Yeah, just buff the defense for support dropships. They DO have to get into the conflict sometimes to drop off mercenaries. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." http://royventus.tumblr.com
Alaika Arbosa Minmatar Republic 2477	Posted - 2015.02.09 15:24:00 - [5] - Quote Dropship roughly equals a helicopter right? Just be glad you can't be brought down with small arms fire (which AFAIK, real helicopters can be). Another thing to be glad about? You can actually flee after getting hit with a single Swarm volley, I don't think many real helicopters would survive 2 missiles let alone 6. We the pc players make up a huge majority of active players. --Roman837 ^^ROFLMAO OMG I need to catch my breath now..
Lorhak Gannarsein nos nothi 4258	Posted - 2015.02.09 15:25:00 - [6] - Quote so... how many AV = HAV, then? Or, more pertinently, 'MAV' = HAV? Also, I want to point out that DSes are a pain in the arse to kill, probably harder than tanks, to be honest - the difference between dropships and tanks, though, is that everyone tries to kill a dropship. I've soloed a few tanks today, not managed to solo a single dropship. But I was involved in killing every single one I saw. Well, here goes nothing!!!
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2954	Posted - 2015.02.09 15:35:00 - [7] - Quote Only changes I want to see to AV: 1) Remove swarm bonus to Minmando. 2) Reduce AV effectiveness against STD LAVs (note: not BPOs; increased lock time for swarms and/or decreased damage from forges and swarms, AV nades the same though). 3) Smaller swarm lock box, decrease lock-break time once out of the box. (Just enough time to angle shots) Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7030	Posted - 2015.02.09 15:50:00 - [8] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Only changes I want to see to AV: 1) Remove swarm bonus to Minmando. 2) Reduce AV effectiveness against STD LAVs (note: not BPOs; increased lock time for swarms and/or decreased damage from forges and swarms, AV nades the same though). 3) Smaller swarm lock box, decrease lock-break time once out of the box. (Just enough time to angle shots) 1. It's not a swarm bonus, explosive applies to the mass driver. plus the Minmando TTK is the same as a galassault with three damage mods unless reloads come into play. learn math. the difference between a max-modded minmando and a max-modded galassault is less than 5% DPS. Math is awesome. I've tested TTK to death, and minmandos don't have the advantage you claim they do. 2: Get out. No. 3. eh. I don't use swarms unless I'm trolling so I can't comment here. AV
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 18652	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:16:00 - [9] - Quote My main belief of the most major portion of the problem is The time it takes to kill a vehicle verses the time its available to be shot at is highly disportionate. Solutions may include -Redesigning maps is the most expensive option and wrong as it takes away the idea of gameplay stories. -Increasing the alpha of AV weaponry; which is wrong as it would frustrate the hell out of AVers inability to react to what is going on in any meaningful manner. -Significantly slowing down vehicles in question of the imbalance. This option is most favorable because it allows for an HAV to actually require not only multiple people to kill in a reasonable manner BUT it still lets a single person able to kill the same vehicle if given the persistence and inefficiency. This of course means increasing the HP of the vehicle and encourage the use of modules. while biting into its abilty to kill infantry with large guns and have it rely on smaller guns to kill small targets. CPM 1 Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior \\= Prototype Forge Gun=// Unlocked
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2135	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:17:00 - [10] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Dropship roughly equals a helicopter right? Just be glad you can't be brought down with small arms fire (which AFAIK, real helicopters can be). Another thing to be glad about? You can actually flee after getting hit with a single Swarm volley, I don't think many real helicopters would survive 2 missiles let alone 6. Many infantry in real life cannot survive getting shot with bullets several hundred / several thousand times in the periods of fifteen minutes, but hey as long as it take all ten of your clones HP, you're fine. You're fine even if someone has a needle. Real life helicopters are not part of a science fiction setting, nor are they provided with 'shields'. Using 'real life' is poor argumentation. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.

Sinboto Simmons Dead Man's Game RUST415 7676	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:19:00 - [11] - Quote 1: That's a price you pay as a tanker yes, biggest thing in the battle, of course your target seems smaller. 2:Personally never have this problem, but that's a game flaw not a balance problem. 3: As a tank, where's your infantry? As a dropship, why are you so close? And two of the weapons you mentioned are railguns, they are quite slow all things considerd. And I'd not say missile from tank or infantry are over fast either. And the only way to be killed by a single AV guy is to remain in one area for two full clips. 4: I agree, needs to be more expensive to AV isk wise. No, dropships do not need more HP. Also a dropship, as a medium aerial vehicle, should in fact be swatted by heavy AV but be resistant to small. (Plasma and swarms) Sinboto - The True Blood Minja Forum Warrior level 5 Prof 2 Born of the Brutor tribe
Alaika Arbosa Minmatar Republic 2479	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:21:00 - [12] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Dropship roughly equals a helicopter right? Just be glad you can't be brought down with small arms fire (which AFAIK, real helicopters can be). Another thing to be glad about? You can actually flee after getting hit with a single Swarm volley, I don't think many real helicopters would survive 2 missiles let alone 6. Many infantry in real life cannot survive getting shot with bullets several hundred / several thousand times in the periods of fifteen minutes, but hey as long as it take all ten of your clones HP, you're fine. You're fine even if someone has a needle. Real life helicopters are not part of a science fiction setting, nor are they provided with 'shields'. Using 'real life' is poor argumentation. Yeah, well, OP asking to be an Aerial HAV is just as bad form. I was simply attempting to illustrate that it could be much, much worse. We the pc players make up a huge majority of active players. --Roman837 ^^ROFLMAO OMG I need to catch my breath now..
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency 7415	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:27:00 - [13] - Quote Nope, things aren't fine but they are the best since Chromosome. Put your flags up in the sky. And wave them side to side. Show the world where you're from. Show the world we are one.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7033	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:32:00 - [14] - Quote Foxhound I pretty much disagree with you on every point except the rendering issues and the fact that the hit indicator is trash. When they "improved" it in chrome it seems to randomly decide where the shot actually came from by which way is purple or something. But bluntly HAVs, ADS, DS and LAVs should absolutely be vulnerable to AV fire. Your "Less skillpoint investment argument is bullsh*t, because the whole dropsuit matters, with fittings. If you're going to go that route it's unfair that you can casually kill my dropsuit when it takes far less Sp to skill into the turret you're using than it does to skill into my proto AV fit. the hollow and anecdotal argument thing is getting old. You want to win, we get it. But you don't always get to win. AV
Cody Sietz Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 4383	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:33:00 - [15] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Only changes I want to see to AV: 1) Remove swarm bonus to Minmando. 2) Reduce AV effectiveness against STD LAVs (note: not BPOs; increased lock time for swarms and/or decreased damage from forges and swarms, AV nades the same though). 3) Smaller swarm lock box, decrease lock-break time once out of the box. (Just enough time to angle shots) Yeah, AV nades are already messed up vs LAVs. The 2nd will not do Dmg to a Armour LAV. People running around in armour LAVs with particle accelerators are impossible to take down with AV because they out run your swarms/PLC round every damn time. "I do agree with you there though. shudders" -Arkena Wyrnspire
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2954	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:38:00 - [16] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Only changes I want to see to AV: 1) Remove swarm bonus to Minmando. 2) Reduce AV effectiveness against STD LAVs (note: not BPOs; increased lock time for swarms and/or decreased damage from forges and swarms, AV nades the same though). 3) Smaller swarm lock box, decrease lock-break time once out of the box. (Just enough time to angle shots) 1. It's not a swarm bonus, explosive applies to the mass driver. plus the Minmando TTK is the same as a galassault with three damage mods unless reloads come into play. learn math. the difference between a max-modded minmando and a max-modded galassault is less than 5% DPS. Math is awesome. I've tested TTK to death, and minmandos don't have the advantage you claim they do. 2: Get out. No. 3. eh. I don't use swarms unless I'm trolling so I can't comment here. 1) First off, it doesn't make sense lore-wise. Cal should get it, if anyone, and even Amarr have almost as many missile ships in Eve. Gal assault need to be proto to match Minmando, where a Minmando can be maxed at ADV. Minmando also gets a bonus and shares the damage mod application with the CR, making it much more viable against infantry (at least moreso than an assault w/ swarms). I just think it's too good at too many things at the same time. 2) All AV does tank level damage, and unless you're in a Saga II, you're going to get wrecked. The only things affected will be swarms and forges; AV nades and proxies will still be more than viable. Also BPOs will be mainly for transport and won't be affected, I even want their highs and lows removed. 3) the goal here is to try and make swarms a little more "avoidable," if that makes sense. Kind of like flying over a forger in a ADS. It shouldn't affect tank engagements, but targeting a strafing LAV or ADS up close should require a bit more skill, imo. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15669	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:40:00 - [17] - Quote Just give us ADV and PRO hulls My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7034	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:45:00 - [18] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: 1) First off, it doesn't make sense lore-wise. Cal should get it, if anyone, and even Amarr have almost as many missile ships in Eve. Gal assault need to be proto to match Minmando, where a Minmando can be maxed at ADV. Minmando also gets a bonus and shares the damage mod application with the CR, making it much more viable against infantry (at least moreso than an assault w/ swarms). I just think it's too good at too many things at the same time. 2) All AV does tank level damage, and unless you're in a Saga II, you're going to get wrecked. The only things affected will be swarms and forges; AV nades and proxies will still be more than viable. Also BPOs will be mainly for transport and won't be affected, I even want their highs and lows removed. 3) the goal here is to try and make swarms a little more "avoidable," if that makes sense. Kind of like flying over a forger in a ADS. It shouldn't affect tank engagements, but targeting a strafing LAV or ADS up close should require a bit more skill, imo. 1. it's not a "missile bonus." If it were I'd agree with you 100% and bluntly the minmando is the only real viable commando suit PERIOD. Nerfing it pretty much puts the nail on the coffin of the class because compared to any other suit they all suck. further even with an assault with only two damage mods, the damage difference is still less than 10%. Still not enough to change the TTK because you're STILL firing the same number of shots from first launch to kill. The only thing that speeds this up is the reload bonus all of them share. 2. And a light vehicle should be vulnerable to weapons that are meant to kill things much larger and more heavily armored. The LAV design we have that withstands anti tank guns and keeps on trucking is ridiculous in it's entirety. If you don't fit it properly it shouldn't be survivable, and at no point should it be as survivable as a tank that costs 3-5 times as much. LLAVs did what you're talking about and those things were an abomination. You couldn't kill them with anything. 3. swarms need a mechanical overhaul, period. they're either utter trash or they're too effective, there's no middle ground cushion. It's like the HMG, there is only the razor's edge for balance, and we haven't found it. AV
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 501	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:45:00 - [19] - Quote The main term in Assault Dropship is Dropship not gunship The State will always survive.
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2954	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:58:00 - [20] - Quote Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: The main term in Assault Dropship is Dropship not gunship You seem to be missing the whole, "Assault" adjective. It's meant to support ground forces, in transport and firepower. Sadly, no one uses them for transport much, but that's not the pilot's fault (at least not mine). Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~

7th Son 7 BLITZKRIEG7 490	Posted - 2015.02.09 17:09:00 - [21] - Quote It would be nice to have an alternate way besides a dropship to transport the same amount of people. Let's be honest, a team that has a plan is already waiting with forge guns and swarms aimed at that clear blue sky, where there's nowhere to hide. I think a ground transport vehicle would mix it up more. Always mystify, mislead and surprise the enemy if possible........--- Stonewall Jackson
Bahirae Serugiusu Vendetta Reactionary Force 501	Posted - 2015.02.09 17:17:00 - [22] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Bahirae Serugiusu wrote: The main term in Assault Dropship is Dropship not gunship You seem to be missing the whole, "Assault" adjective. It's meant to support ground forces, in transport and firepower. Sadly, no one uses them for transport much, but that's not the pilot's fault (at least not mine). SUPPORT=/=One man army The State will always survive.
Joel II X Bacon with a bottle of Quafe 6096	Posted - 2015.02.09 17:26:00 - [23] - Quote It shouldn't take one player to control an MAV, either.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7039	Posted - 2015.02.09 17:29:00 - [24] - Quote Wouldn't it be nice if MAVs actually existed in the game? AV
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 737	Posted - 2015.02.09 18:33:00 - [25] - Quote I'd like to see swarms lose their lock if terrain comes between them and the vehicle. The only downside to aiming swarms is that you can lose the lock, without that you can't miss (unless firing it at the terrain.) If I drive or fly behind a lamppost (very dangerous, can explode ds & LAV, tank will usually catch on it and flail about like a fish out of water) but the swarmer can just hold the lock as they move the sight past it. The lock will hold for a few seconds behind a tower or a building, which without being able to tell where the swarms are coming from causes the pilot/driver hassle, while the swarmer can just wait for it to pop back into sight without issue. With the low buildings on most maps, there's really nothing much stopping a swarmer from holding the lock from any position within range. If the lock dropped when direct sight is lost swarms would at least require decent positioning, could maybe even give them a longer lock range because of it. Might cause issues with trying to fire around objects, but that's fixed by adding a delay between each missile, giving a chance to spin the view after letting go of the fire button, requiring mildly more skill to use.
Riptalis Horizons' Edge 217	Posted - 2015.02.09 19:24:00 - [26] - Quote Soz but the whole AV v Vehicle discussion will never be completely balanced until Dust is brought to current gen, CCP introduces ADV & proto vehicles, and/or all the bugs and glitches are fully fixed and polished. Sadly this is the current state: AV > Vehicles Python pilot Logistics mk.0 Assault mk.0
Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 434	Posted - 2015.02.09 19:35:00 - [27] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Dropship roughly equals a helicopter right? Just be glad you can't be brought down with small arms fire (which AFAIK, real helicopters can be). Another thing to be glad about? You can actually flee after getting hit with a single Swarm volley, I don't think many real helicopters would survive 2 missiles let alone 6. This just in: An infantryman can not survive multiple shots from an assault rifle or 50 cal machine gun. Nor can they jump ten feet in the air let alone shoot while hopping left and right and back and forth. Also, uplinks do not exist. Complete denial of a playstyle or use of an in game element is not acceptable no matter how much you want to get your kills or hate on vehicles. Death is a serious business. So is running a shoddy, half-baked game company.
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 401	Posted - 2015.02.09 19:53:00 - [28] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: 2) All AV does tank level damage, and unless you're in a Saga II, you're going to get wrecked. The only things affected will be swarms and forges; AV nades and proxies will still be more than viable. Also BPOs will be mainly for transport and won't be affected, I even want their highs and lows removed. You clearly have no idea how much damage tanks can output if you think this. Even without vehicle damage mods you can fire forge gun strength rail turret shots at around twice the speed. Im not sure how anyone arguing to buff dropships is seriously talking about nerfing AV while still ignoring how insanely effective large rail turrets (and large missile turrets at closer ranges) are at absolutely wrecking dropships in almost no time at all. While Im not sure if you are advocating for an AV nerf/dropship buff here overall (because Im too lazy to read the rest of the thread closely), I have noticed this pattern being very persistant among vehicle drivers and it shows how disingenuous they are when they argue for AV nerfs/"changes".
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17038	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:10:00 - [29] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Dropship roughly equals a helicopter right? Just be glad you can't be brought down with small arms fire (which AFAIK, real helicopters can be). Another thing to be glad about? You can actually flee after getting hit with a single Swarm volley, I don't think many real helicopters would survive 2 missiles let alone 6. However they are six with comparatively small payloads. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
Alaika Arbosa Minmatar Republic 2480	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:14:00 - [30] - Quote Operative 1174 Uuali wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Dropship roughly equals a helicopter right? Just be glad you can't be brought down with small arms fire (which AFAIK, real helicopters can be). Another thing to be glad about? You can actually flee after getting hit with a single Swarm volley, I don't think many real helicopters would survive 2 missiles let alone 6. This just in: An infantryman can not survive multiple shots from an assault rifle or 50 cal machine gun. Nor can they jump ten feet in the air let alone shoot while hopping left and right and back and forth. Also, uplinks do not exist. Complete denial of a playstyle or use of an in game element is not acceptable no matter how much you want to get your kills or hate on vehicles. lol srsbznss Oh, yeah, Aerial HAVs don't exist either. I love how you people fixate on what I typed completely overlooking the ridiculousness that is a Dropship needing 2-3 coordinated forgers or 3-4 coordinated swarmers (for clarification thats 18-24 missiles) to take it from the sky which is exactly what the OP said it should be to take one down. Foxhound Elite wrote: It's simply ridiculous that one AV user with a forge gun or a swarm launcher can single handedly force (or even destroy) an MAV out of action. The dropship is a vehicle for troop transport and close-aerial support, yet one commando with a swarm as a back-up weapon can fire one volley and do a staggering amount of damage, enough to force the pilot to run. AV should be a co-ordinated effort, taking maybe 2-3 forge gunners or 3-4 swarm launchers to effectively take down a dropship. There are a number of key issues that make the need for an urgent change in the Vehicle v Anti-Vehicle game, such as; 1. The visual impairment of a pilot vs smaller targets that sometimes do not render on the ground. It's difficult to see your enemy when they are unmarked, while a dropship is a pretty bigger target, that of course can be locked on to. 2. Rendering issues. A pilot can be flying his/her ship, completely unaware that dead ahead is a volley of swarms incoming, moments away from slamming into the craft. Why is the pilot unaware? There are no warning systems, no alarm, no heads-up red text, and most of all, a lot of the time the missiles simply do not render. They're completely invisible. So, how are we meant to kill the attacker before he kills our ship when we cannot even see the his ship-seeking-swarm from hell? The forge gun rounds are visible, but the HUD still doesn't give you a direction from where the blast came from if it slams you from an unseen angle. 3. Speed difference. Swarm missiles, forge gun rounds, large rail rounds and missiles travel faster than the max speed of all dropships, even with an afterburner equipped. Is this an issue in itself? No, it's absolutely fine. However, the speed advantage of these anti-vehicle weapons combined with their high damage output, makes a single AV user in close proximity of the craft highly-capable of single handedly destroying a ship on their own, especially combined with the two other points above. This should not be the case. 4. SP and ISK difference is huge. It doesn't take all that much SP to skill into swarm launchers, let alone proto-level, ... the same goes for forge guns. A dedicated pilot will roughly spend 20 million in total for a maxed-out, effective Assault-variant, as well as an expensively fitted standard dropship. The price tags for vehicles are quite fair, because the fact that they are vehicles. Not items. Of course they'll be more expensive. But right now, the risk vs. reward is way out of balance. The answer? I don't know, my best idea I can come up with is allow a PG/ CPU Increase on all MAV's (Dropships) to allow for larger defensive modules to cope in the unbalanced envionment, or maybe a simple base HP increase. A well-fit Python will have a total HP of around 3600 HP. That, in my opinion, to counter the issues above / high-damage levels, should be doubled. It would give the pilot time to decided "should I run away before this gets worse, or can I take on those two swarm launchers?" Instead of getting hit by one volley , frantically turning on all modules and going "**,** NONONO" and flying as far away as possible. TL:DR Small HP increase for dropships desperatley needed for bugged AV. As always, thanks for reading and hope you see my points. highlighted to ease your observation. white knighting ridiculousness like that is just unconscionable and should instantly bar you from any balance discussion. It has nothing to do with "hate on vehicles" or attempting to "deny an entire playstyle" and everything to do with sensible balance considerations. We the pc players make up a huge majority of active players. --Roman837 ^^ROFLMAO OMG I need to catch my breath now..

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17038	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:27:00 - [31] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: It has nothing to do with "hate on vehicles" or attempting to "deny an entire playstyle" and everything to do with sensible balance considerations. Gotta admit that for the most part it really shouldn't required a huge number of players to deal with vehicles...... however there are certain considerations AVers need to take into account. Vehicles still lack clearly defined roles. Vehicles do not have realistic weapons systems. Skill Tree is not great. Where are the counter measures? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
Michael Epic Bragian Order Amarr Empire 449	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:32:00 - [32] - Quote I'm going to tell you the truth in the nicest, most polite way I possibly can. Dust 514 is an infantry assault game...the meat of this game is close quarter combat one on one. Its hacking, running and defending that goes down. Dropships are ridiculous because they sit on the objectives (in domination) and just rain down kills. There is no risk involved in that UNLESS someone pulls out a proto swarm launcher loaded down with damage mods which is rare that they can or will pull one out without being nova knifed, shotgunned or AR'd in the nuts! The same with tanks...you all park your tanks in red lines and shoot. You snipe people. You take no risk at all. You just sit back, kick back and shoot your cannon off. So me? I run both Gal Logi gk.0 and Min Assault mk.0 fittings to vehicle hunt! I see you in the redline? I'll sneak up on you with remote explosives. I wait for a second to get the timing you are shooting your cannon off....you shoot, I drop RE...a lot of times, I can drop them on you and you have no idea due to the sound of you shooting your tank's weapon....I get at least 4 on you, but I try for 6 or all 10 just in case you're beefy....but then I hit you with the AV grenade and as soon as it goes off, you takers FREAK THE EFF OUT!!I But as soon as you start to move I'll trigger the 4 re's (boundless) first and then hope they annihilate you but if not I'll try to switch as fast as I can to F/45's or plain 'ol RE's and try to get you. KABOOM! You're dead. I get you more than you get me....period. But if I can't get you...because sometimes you get me or sometimes you're just too slick for my tricks to work...I'll hit you with the swarm launcher and try to finish you off before you kill me! I'm a tank hunter..tell your friends. But back to the topic at hand...you vehicle guys whine and moan and b!tch and p!ss and cry and boo hoo and the whambulance's sirens are blazing like we're all at the discotech because you HIDE behind your tanks and dropships. You don't transport troops, you rain down artillery on folks noggins and then think you're a beast at 66/0 at the end of the match because you blew up all the CRU's, flux'd anywhere you saw uplinks and camped the only spawn point left. So yeah...increase AV! You should have the same danger from us with you driving your vehicles as we have from you because you're driving your vehicles! I want to sneeze on your tanky whip and it blow up son!
Grimmiers 788	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:44:00 - [33] - Quote Which is why repair rates and av damage should be normalized. If a vehicle has to retreat It would be out of commission for a long period of time unless it has a logi, logistic vehicle repairing it. Supply depots should not repair vehicles after vehicle repair logistics gets redone. So even if a av player dies to a vehicle his damage should stick around much longer.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17043	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:58:00 - [34] - Quote Michael Epic wrote: you rain down artillery on folks noggins and then think you're a beast at 66/0 at the end of the match because you blew up all the CRU's, flux'd anywhere you saw uplinks and camped the only spawn point left. That's kind of the point. Tanks fire large shells. Those shells explode. Those shells travel great distances. Tanks have lots of guns all over them. Why they don't in Dust is a ******* mystery to me. As for on field assets why not destroy them. Infantry never protect them or use them worth a damn. See a Rail Turret? "Oh by maybe I should hack that....but I won't protect that asset..... oh a Supply Depot good thing I'm just going to run off an abandon that..." There is a reason I used to destroy such installations. They threaten my capacity to function effectively on field and help you guys not get overrun by enemy tanks. You don't want those turrets or Depot's going up in smoke then protect them. Don't let the other team take them. As for camping? Bro I'm done with that bullshit. Call it camping and scrubby if you will I'll call it taking the intelligent and profitable approach to denying the enemy a spawn point. Why give them the chance to redeploy and come at you from another angle with clones we could have destroyed? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1521	Posted - 2015.02.09 22:24:00 - [35] - Quote When I fly dropships it is always rails, not swarms, that bring me down. I wouldn't mind seeing a liitle more HP for standard dropships. Most pilot complaints though come from their expectation that they should not be the equivalent of any other single player though. They believe they should be worth 2 or 3. Because, that's why.
Alaika Arbosa Minmatar Republic 2480	Posted - 2015.02.09 23:33:00 - [36] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: It has nothing to do with "hate on vehicles" or attempting to "deny an entire playstyle" and everything to do with sensible balance considerations. Gotta admit that for the most part it really shouldn't required a huge number of players to deal with vehicles...... however there are certain considerations AVers need to take into account. Vehicles still lack clearly defined roles. Vehicles do not have realistic weapons systems. Skill Tree is not great. Where are the counter measures? True, when have you and I ever disagreed on any of these points? We haven't, I agree with all four of your points. However, I still cannot believe that there are people who just want to act like everything is perfectly fine with such a ridiculous assertion as the one found in the OP. It gets totally overlooked and anyone who tries to put it into perspective gets demonized. It is the main reason that vehicles are ****. True Adamance wrote:** As for camping? Bro I'm done with that bullshit. Call it camping and scrubby if you will I'll call it taking the intelligent and profitable approach to denying the enemy a spawn point. Why give them the chance to redeploy and come at you from another angle with clones we could have destroyed? +1 We the pc players make up a huge majority of active players. --Roman837 ^^ROFLMAO OMG I need to catch my breath now..
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17056	Posted - 2015.02.09 23:40:00 - [37] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: However, I still cannot believe that there are people who just want to act like everything is perfectly fine with such a ridiculous assertion as the one found in the OP. It gets totally overlooked and anyone who tries to put it into perspective gets demonized. +1[/quote] It's true.... and kind of tricky. One of the possible issue with swarm launcher is multi round magazines...... usually in other games lock on rockets fire once then are reloaded rather than several times quickly. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 833	Posted - 2015.02.09 23:45:00 - [38] - Quote Atiim wrote: AV rig costs also costs ~20mil SP Minmatar logi (among many infantry roles) and vehcle operator. I assuure you it does not take 20mil SP to get a adv min commando proto swarms, level 3 proficiency as well as a caldari heavy with level 4 forge gun and lai dai grenades. I got 43 mil SP, I've got min logi 5, and all equipment 5, gal logi 3, amaar logi 3, caldari logi 3, cal heavy 3, amar heavy 3 minmatar heavy 3, amarr comando 3 minmatar commando 3 amarr assault 3, minmatar assault 3, gall assault 3, caldari assault 3, minmatar scout 3, gallente scout 3, incubus level 3, python level 1, vehicle hp modules and reps proto, pg and CPU proto, all large turret level 3, all light weapons proto except the rail rifle 3, PLC, and lazer rifle, prof 4 combat rifles, prof 3 HMG , prof 2 AR, prof 3 scramblers, all side arms to level three except the bolt pistol, proto nades and explosives level 3 All my cores are at either level 4 or proto. According to your estimates, just under half of this SP is required for an AV suit. This i find very difficult to believe. Dont worry the door swings both ways, when people give astronmical SP figures for vehicles i doubt them too. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Foxhound Elite Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 710	Posted - 2015.02.10 14:41:00 - [39] - Quote I still am amazed about how blinded most of you are... wow. I mean, am I the only one playing this game as a pilot? Can anyone else not see how easy it is to shoot down a dropship? Why do swarms do so much damage versus shields anyway? I've read all your posts and I know my original post may seem a bit extreme in places, but as one user said, please give us ADV and PRO hulls so there would be a HP/ CPU / PG increase all across the board. This would give us more survivability, because as it stands, whoever doubts that dropships are 'fine' and have enough HP, is clearly delusional and perfectly happy with their swarms = free WP. They need to stop posting. Increasing dropship HP would be the easiest tweak CCP could do to balance things, at least double the HP which would allow for no more instances of one swarmer soloi'ng a ship. I've got probably the most experience in this game flying, since closed beta, i've been through it all. I know how to shoot infantry. I've lost more ships however, trying to 1v1 a swarmer than successful kills. Bottom line is, that should not be the case. Teamwork, people. Kill me with your squad, fair enough. I kill your ground troops to support my squad. My squad kills your AV guys to support me. Python pilot, troop-transport specialist and an all-round ballbag.
Jason Pearson Legio DXIV 4379	Posted - 2015.02.10 14:47:00 - [40] - Quote Deal with it baddie.

Foxhound Elite Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 710	Posted - 2015.02.10 14:49:00 - [41] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: Deal with it baddie. get off my post you welsh **** Python pilot, troop-transport specialist and an all-round ballbag.
Izlare Lenix Pub Stars 1246	Posted - 2015.02.10 14:55:00 - [42] - Quote In most games and in real life there are plenty of ways a single player can kill a vehicle. (In the real world simply disabling a vehicle is often good enough. An immobile vehicle is not much good and damaging an aircraft can often cause it to crash or flee the combat zone for repairs.) But it is very hard for a single person with swarms to kill a high sp vehicle solo. Either the vehicle pilot sucks ass or more than one AVer is shooting at it. The only real truth in history is that it was bloody.
Jason Pearson Legio DXIV 4379	Posted - 2015.02.10 14:58:00 - [43] - Quote Foxhound Elite wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: Deal with it baddie. get off my post you welsh **** Getting the Irish mad: Step 1 Be me. /end Nah but for real, you should stop flying, I'm still better than you and I've only just bothered playing again after like six months. just give me your isk and uninstall, I'll show you how to smash AV bads :)
Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 943	Posted - 2015.02.10 15:05:00 - [44] - Quote Having been on boths ideas of the equation I sympathise with the rendering issues - I've seen you fly and my flying skills are terrible compared to you since I haven't done it in a long while.... but the age-old fallacies that were trumpeted back in 1.7 in the eternal Vehicles vs AV debate shouldn't really make a comeback. As has been said before, ISK cost vs power is never really a good equaliser, and at this moment, while we are on limited 16 vs 16 engagements, as soon as you start saying 1 vehicle should equal 2 or more AV users, this becomes a force multiplier, and thus, automatically gives a numerical advantage to the side fielding the force multiplier - think back to the 1.7 tankbushes and tank spam... it was really game destroying. This being said, I don't have the solution either. I feel the solution will be a combination of improved rendering and larger team sizes and of course, different maps, but on different hardware, probably in a different game altogether. :)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7080	Posted - 2015.02.10 15:06:00 - [45] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: Atiim wrote: AV rig costs also costs ~20mil SP Minmatar logi (among many infantry roles) and vehcle operator. I assuure you it does not take 20mil SP to get a adv min commando proto swarms, level 3 proficiency as well as a caldari heavy with level 4 forge gun and lai dai grenades. I got 43 mil SP, I've got min logi 5, and all equipment 5, gal logi 3, amaar logi 3, caldari logi 3, cal heavy 3, amar heavy 3 minmatar heavy 3, amarr comando 3 minmatar commando 3 amarr assault 3, minmatar assault 3, gall assault 3, caldari assault 3, minmatar scout 3, gallente scout 3, incubus level 3, python level 1, vehicle hp modules and reps proto, pg and CPU proto, all large turret level 3, all light weapons proto except the rail rifle 3, PLC, and lazer rifle, prof 4 combat rifles, prof 3 HMG , prof 2 AR, prof 3 scramblers, all side arms to level three except the bolt pistol, proto nades and explosives level 3 All my cores are at either level 4 or proto. According to your estimates, just under half of this SP is required for an AV suit. This i find very difficult to believe. Dont worry the door swings both ways, when people give astronmical SP figures for vehicles i doubt them too. My 25 million + SP in sentinel suits, forge gun and core/armor/shield skills says you're full of it. Over 30 million if you account for the fact I can use all for racial fatties at max level. My 25 million + SP investment is just as valid as yours. 1 player = 1 player. We won't bother discussing the many flavors of commando. I love how everyone trots out the minmando like it's the be all end all of AV. it isn't, bluntly its only decent at everything it does. I don't use swarms so don't bother trotting that tired little argument with me. I'll use them when their mechanics stop irritating me intensely. AV
Lorhak Gannarsein Nos Nothi 4265	Posted - 2015.02.10 15:28:00 - [46] - Quote What is with this garbage people keep spouting about PRO vehicles somehow making things better? So. My HAV has 11500 EHP while hardened (Gunnlogi, Cx Heavy Extender, Cx Hardener). It is a Standard HAV. A Standard Forge Gun deals 1200 damage. A Prototype Forge Gun (Kaalakiota) deals 1440 damage. This is a 20% increase. My PRO HAV now gets just under 14k EHP. Over three thousand EHP. Sounds balanced, right? So we now have a HAV (hahaha) that is practically invulnerable to infantry AV; it'll take two forges to even put a dent in this monstrosity, three or four to guarantee killing it. Now FGs are rebalanced, so that PRO can kill PRO. That PRO FG's damage has now effectively decreased from 12.5% of EHP to 10%. Doesn't sound like a lot, but it's two full shots. So it gets rebalanced back up. It now deals 1750 damage. It now strikes for 15% of that STD Gunnlogi's EHP. Which has 5000 HP unhardened. Three shots. The person who you screw when you add PRO vehicles isn't the veteran, for whom the balance won't change at all, it's the newbie, who can't access or afford the top-tier vehicles - or AV. Gods, can you imagine if we scaled them like dropsuits? Can you say 200% EHP buff? N.B. I'm reasonably confident of my numbers, but it is 2:30am, so cut me some slack. The thrust should still be clear. Well, here goes nothing!!!
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7080	Posted - 2015.02.10 15:32:00 - [47] - Quote Nah. I'm recommending rattati not touch the AV alpha on any weapon to compensate for proto tanks. Rate of fire, however will allow AV to be lethal without worrying about dropships instapopping. And from what I'm seeing in the numbers, unless the SDE is COMPLETELY WRONG swarms shouldn't be touched until they can be overhauled. AV
Jack Galen Knights Of Ender RISE of LEGION 13	Posted - 2015.02.10 15:51:00 - [48] - Quote Only thing I'd ask for is for a tiny bit more fitting room for ADS (+50 to both PG and CPU), and a considerable buff to standard DS. I'd like to see STD dropships get some reasonable use aside from high-place-reachers, and I believe that it would be encouraged by increasing their EHP by means of a small passive resist; this means that they could survive flying around, but still suffer their mobility issues so cannot camp with a gunner and get shot at (they flip) - all without too much effort on the dev's part. Also, I fully agree with the statement that dropships get primaried instantly. This is why there is so much dropship QQ, as they can't be used without infantry seeing a large pile of potential WP flying around...a nice, squishy pile... And that should not change. On a side note, I find it irritating when I see the tankers who, when I fly towards them on the enemy redline in my AV incubus, he reverses at full speed when he sees me into safety. Those guys need to grow a pair.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2892	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:07:00 - [49] - Quote Atiim wrote: Making vehicles > AV makes Anti-Vehicle weapons useless in a competitive match, as nobody will field the 8-10 players it would require under your model to deal with them as opposed to a vehicle. We're getting tank destroyers. /end your complaints Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2892	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:11:00 - [50] - Quote TheSneakyDolphin wrote: Most of all, don't call in a vehicle if you don't want it destroyed. So then we shouldn't use vehicles at all? Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff

Jason Pearson Legio DXIV 4380	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:13:00 - [51] - Quote Vehicles should be situational, as with every role within the game, pretty simple. AV is the hard counter, deal with it.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7081	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:16:00 - [52] - Quote Jack Galen wrote: Only thing I'd ask for is for a tiny bit more fitting room for ADS (+50 to both PG and CPU), and a considerable buff to standard DS. I'd like to see STD dropships get some reasonable use aside from high-place-reachers, and I believe that it would be encouraged by increasing their EHP by means of a small passive resist; this means that they could survive flying around, but still suffer their mobility issues so cannot camp with a gunner and get shot at (they flip) - all without too much effort on the dev's part. Also, I fully agree with the statement that dropships get primaried instantly. This is why there is so much dropship QQ, as they can't be used without infantry seeing a large pile of potential WP flying around...a nice, squishy pile... And that should not change. On a side note, I find it irritating when I see the tankers who, when I fly towards them on the enemy redline in my AV incubus, he reverses at full speed when he sees me into safety. Those guys need to grow a pair. Standard dropships can eat four maxed forge shots before falling out of the sky. They need no buff AV
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2892	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:17:00 - [53] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: so... how many AV = HAV, then? Or, more pertinently, 'MAV' = HAV? Also, I want to point out that DSes are a pain in the arse to kill, probably harder than tanks, to be honest - the difference between dropships and tanks, though, is that everyone tries to kill a dropship. I've soloed a few tanks today, not managed to solo a single dropship. But I was involved in killing every single one I saw. Double complex damage mod tank with a particle cannon = dead ship. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Jason Pearson Legio DXIV 4380	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:18:00 - [54] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Jack Galen wrote: Only thing I'd ask for is for a tiny bit more fitting room for ADS (+50 to both PG and CPU), and a considerable buff to standard DS. I'd like to see STD dropships get some reasonable use aside from high-place-reachers, and I believe that it would be encouraged by increasing their EHP by means of a small passive resist; this means that they could survive flying around, but still suffer their mobility issues so cannot camp with a gunner and get shot at (they flip) - all without too much effort on the dev's part. Also, I fully agree with the statement that dropships get primaried instantly. This is why there is so much dropship QQ, as they can't be used without infantry seeing a large pile of potential WP flying around...a nice, squishy pile... And that should not change. On a side note, I find it irritating when I see the tankers who, when I fly towards them on the enemy redline in my AV incubus, he reverses at full speed when he sees me into safety. Those guys need to grow a pair. Standard dropships can eat four maxed forge shots before falling out of the sky. They need no buff Hm, Armor ships tend to stay up, I got dropped after 3 shots in a Python though.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7082	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:24:00 - [55] - Quote Pythons are ADS. Rattati made standards more durable and slow. ADS are more fragile killers. AV
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2892	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:24:00 - [56] - Quote Sinboto Simmons wrote: 3: As a tank, where's your infantry? We more faster, we don't always like small turrets, and we move faster. As a dropship, why are you so close? What are we supposed to do, stay at the flight cap the whole game? 4: I agree, needs to be more expensive to AV isk wise. IAFG used to cost 117k ISK. Now it's a drop in the bucket. No, dropships do not need more HP. Logi ships will. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2892	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:25:00 - [57] - Quote DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Nope, things aren't fine but they are the best since Chromosome. You don't use vehicles, so how can you say that? Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2892	Posted - 2015.02.10 16:26:00 - [58] - Quote Cody Sietz wrote: People running around in armour LAVs with particle accelerators are impossible to take down with AV because they out run your swarms/PLC round every damn time. Intelligence is OP. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2892	Posted - 2015.02.10 17:01:00 - [59] - Quote Joel II X wrote: It shouldn't take one player to control an MAV, either. Then logis should have to take out each others' equipment. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Sinboto Simmons Dead Man's Game RUST415 7688	Posted - 2015.02.10 17:40:00 - [60] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Sinboto Simmons wrote: 3: As a tank, where's your infantry? We more faster, we don't always like small turrets, and we move faster. As a dropship, why are you so close? What are we supposed to do, stay at the flight cap the whole game? 4: I agree, needs to be more expensive to AV isk wise. IAFG used to cost 117k ISK. Now it's a drop in the bucket. No, dropships do not need more HP. Logi ships will. You move faster, that's the excuse you're going with, right then. I asked why he was so close that he had no evasion chance against even AV grenades. Logi, yes, ADS/DS: no. Sinboto - The True Blood Minja Forum Warrior level 5 Prof 2 Born of the Brutor tribe

Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2894	Posted - 2015.02.10 18:45:00 - [61] - Quote Sinboto Simmons wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Sinboto Simmons wrote: 3: As a tank, where's your infantry? We more faster, we don't always like small turrets, and we move faster. As a dropship, why are you so close? What are we supposed to do, stay at the flight cap the whole game? 4: I agree, needs to be more expensive to AV isk wise. IAFG used to cost 117k ISK. Now it's a drop in the bucket. No, dropships do not need more HP. Logi ships will. You move faster, that's the excuse you're going with, right then. I asked why he was so close that he had no evasion chance against even AV grenades. Logi, yes, ADS/DS: no. Pilot's fault for getting that close. Small missile doesn't have 250m range. We need to get close to ensure hits. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Alaika Arbosa Minmatar Republic 2488	Posted - 2015.02.10 19:39:00 - [62] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Joel II X wrote: It shouldn't take one player to control an MAV, either. Then logis should have to take out each others' equipment. See, I actually have equipment slots on my dropsuit that allow me to use the equipment I fit all by myself; I don't need an RDV to deliver my nanohives or my reps leash to me. Where do you fit your vehicle to your dropsuit that allows you to use it all by your lonesome? We the pc players make up a huge majority of active players. --Roman837 ^^ROFLMAO OMG I need to catch my breath now..
Jammeh McJam T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 195	Posted - 2015.02.10 20:06:00 - [63] - Quote Atiim wrote: Making vehicles > AV makes Anti-Vehicle weapons useless in a competitive match, as nobody will field the 8-10 players it would require under your model to deal with them as opposed to a vehicle. While I'm 99% sure this is your intention, it is not CCP's and as such won't happen. The Dropship being designed for troop transport and close aerial support doesn't change the fact that the Anti-Vehicle weapons are designed for the sole purpose of Destroying vehicles and given said design should and will destroy you if you refuse to (or cannot) take evasive action. While rendering is certainly an issue, stealth is not. AVer's engagements are limited to wherever the Pilot flies/drives, which allows them to always dictate the scenario in which a fight happens. Given this advantage, I believe that not being able to see where an AVer is before they fire is fair. Though while antedotal, I will note that I have yet (since 1.10) to expireence a Swarm that was both invisible and inaudible and rarely one of the formers. Being disadvantaged when fighting an AVer in CQC is fair, as at Long Range the AVer can either not attack you (PLC and SL) or their shots will be easy to avoid (FG and SL). I have a test to take in a few minutes so I won't go in-depth until later but an AV rig costs also costs ~20mil SP. When it comes to ISK the investment is similar due to the fact that while the AVer's base price is low, they're far more likely to die than the PIlot. In a competitive match ppl will go back to using rail incubi to take out pythons and rail tanks to take out tanks (with the occasional forge gunner as a more point defense/av support thing) The fact that a single AV user can put several vehicle users out of action is just ridiculous "We may be small and disorganized, but we're still gonna kill you" - Intergalactic Super Friends MAG ~ Raven vet
Jammeh McJam T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 195	Posted - 2015.02.10 20:10:00 - [64] - Quote Justicar Karnellia wrote: Having been on boths ideas of the equation I sympathise with the rendering issues - I've seen you fly and my flying skills are terrible compared to you since I haven't done it in a long while.... but the age-old fallacies that were trumpeted back in 1.7 in the eternal Vehicles vs AV debate shouldn't really make a comeback. As has been said before, ISK cost vs power is never really a good equaliser, and at this moment, while we are on limited 16 vs 16 engagements, as soon as you start saying 1 vehicle should equal 2 or more AV users, this becomes a force multiplier, and thus, automatically gives a numerical advantage to the side fielding the force multiplier - think back to the 1.7 tankbushes and tank spam... it was really game destroying. This being said, I don't have the solution either. I feel the solution will be a combination of improved rendering and larger team sizes and of course, different maps, but on different hardware, probably in a different game altogether. :) Whats wrong with vehicles being a force multiplier? Isn't that their intention? besides it's not like your team is unable to use vehicles too... "We may be small and disorganized, but we're still gonna kill you" - Intergalactic Super Friends MAG ~ Raven vet
Cody Sietz Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 4384	Posted - 2015.02.10 20:12:00 - [65] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Cody Sietz wrote: People running around in armour LAVs with particle accelerators are impossible to take down with AV because they out run your swarms/PLC round every damn time. Intelligence is OP. Sooooo, your saying this doesn't happen? Ok then. "I do agree with you there though. shudders" -Arkena Wyrnspire
Jammeh McJam T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 195	Posted - 2015.02.10 20:16:00 - [66] - Quote Michael Epic wrote: I'm going to tell you the truth in the nicest, most polite way I possibly can. Dust 514 is an infantry assault game...the meat of this game is close quarter combat one on one. Its hacking, running and defending that goes down. Dropships are ridiculous because they sit on the objectives (in domination) and just rain down kills. There is no risk involved in that UNLESS someone pulls out a proto swarm launcher loaded down with damage mods which is rare that they can or will pull one out without being nova knifed, shotgunned or AR'd in the nuts! The same with tanks...you all park your tanks in red lines and shoot. You snipe people. You take no risk at all. You just sit back, kick back and shoot your cannon off. So me? I run both Gal Logi gk.0 and Min Assault mk.0 fittings to vehicle hunt! I see you in the redline? I'll sneak up on you with remote explosives. I wait for a second to get the timing you are shooting your cannon off....you shoot, I drop RE...a lot of times, I can drop them on you and you have no idea due to the sound of you shooting your tank's weapon....I get at least 4 on you, but I try for 6 or all 10 just in case you're beefy....but then I hit you with the AV grenade and as soon as it goes off, you takers FREAK THE EFF OUT!!I But as soon as you start to move I'll trigger the 4 re's (boundless) first and then hope they annihilate you but if not I'll try to switch as fast as I can to F/45's or plain 'ol RE's and try to get you. KABOOM! You're dead. I get you more than you get me....period. But if I can't get you...because sometimes you get me or sometimes you're just too slick for my tricks to work...I'll hit you with the swarm launcher and try to finish you off before you kill me! I'm a tank hunter..tell your friends. But back to the topic at hand...you vehicle guys whine and moan and b!tch and p!ss and cry and boo hoo and the whambulance's sirens are blazing like we're all at the discotech because you HIDE behind your tanks and dropships. You don't transport troops, you rain down artillery on folks noggins and then think you're a beast at 66/0 at the end of the match because you blew up all the CRU's, flux'd anywhere you saw uplinks and camped the only spawn point left. So yeah...increase AV! You should have the same danger from us with you driving your vehicles as we have from you because you're driving your vehicles! I want to sneeze on your tanky whip and it blow up son! I hate it when people start saying that dust is an infantry based game, because it's not. It's a war game with a space age theme, Battlefield has a massive majority of infantry players compared to vehicle users, that doesn't mean it's a game FOR infantry. I hate to burst your bubble but vehicles are a part of this game just like infantry, so you're gonna have to deal with them in a fairer way, and not just an excuse for easy wp "We may be small and disorganized, but we're still gonna kill you" - Intergalactic Super Friends MAG ~ Raven vet
ROMULUS H3X research lab 312	Posted - 2015.02.10 20:57:00 - [67] - Quote Are you assuming that ALL Anti-Vehicle users are equally matched in skill? Are you assuming that ALL Vehicle Pilots are equally matched in skill? You must be, it is the only reason I can see you posting that wall of garbage. FORGE/FLAYLOCK/FISTS PLASMA/PISTOL/PUNCH ALL OF YOU PUNKS GET HUMILIATED AFTER LUNCH!
CLONE117 True Pros Forever 882	Posted - 2015.02.10 21:12:00 - [68] - Quote i think ill just speak up here. havent touched this game a who knows? yet still keep getting on these forums. regardless of all that. when i see a tank. i want to here people scream out oh **** a tank!!!. happens alot in gta5 when i cruise around in mine. instead of, oh look! free WP YAY!. as for dropships including the other variants. and vehicles in general. they should be more durable. and they need to be made to where they are of a better use to the team as a whole. i dont know how to make that happen or even the slightest idea. but the nerf buff thing thats been getting this game nowhere for years now needs to stop. id imagine. if all the time that was wasted on doing this crap was put into better stuff. wed have already had pve right now. if only we could pilot the mcc. id end the matches real quick.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7094	Posted - 2015.02.11 04:12:00 - [69] - Quote Jammeh McJam wrote: The fact that a single AV user can put several vehicle users out of action is just ridiculous It's called skill. Get some. AV


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.