|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Balistyc Farshot
The Exemplars
RISE of LEGION
62
   |
Posted - 2015.02.20 16:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
I have been holding in four replies:
First - Anti Tank specific AV could be really easy, just make the planted REs more plentiful (we are making mine fields) and make them super effective against tanks specifically. Then things like PLC and SWARMs don't need a super buff. The forge gun needs a buff period, sorry but that was a bad couple of nerfs it got. Focus on AV to counter tanks in particualr, perhaps add a second super weak spot on the under side. Then increase ammo count on Vehicle REs, make it so tankers don't get a warning when close to REs, and remove the bandwidth on them.
AV can deny tanks areas by planting mine fields, but infantry can scan for them and blow them up for the tanks while making themselves vulnerable. It forces teamwork and both sides are happy. Don't buff dmg because LAVs already get blown to pieces by vehicle REs and we don't want them getting the infantry with the vehicles.
Second - Does CCP foresee tanks being able to aim their turrets upward more? If so, then ADS will be swatted out of the air with the new faster tank builds and weapon buffs. If not, could we get one of the small turrets to be capable of aiming upwards. Force a trade off for arming this turret, but I hate when swarmers are too high for me to shoot at and I have to step out of my tank to fire on them because there isn't an incline for me to aim up. Same for ADS fighting tanks, upward incline needs supports red line rail sniping.
Third - I don't agree with the blaster buff. That seems a little overkill to make it the anti infantry and anti vehicle weapon of choice. I know missiles really are the king of tank weaponry but blasters should be forced to be either anti infantry or anti vehicle. I hate seeing a neutron blaster take down a rail tank even if the pilot is more skilled. One tank is focused on not killing infantry and he still loses because the blaster is able to fight other tanks. You talk about trade offs, if you buff the blaster it will be the only weapon on tanks going forward IMO. Could we get some numbers on deaths caused by different tank main guns?
Four - Installations need to be buffed so that tanks fear them. Sorry tankers, but the installations can't move, are usually poorly placed and can't be replaced by calling in a new one. These installations need to be useful again if you are buffing tanks like this it will be a race to blow these up for the free WP. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a tanker rage at blue berries hacked turrets. I will leave that one for another thread, but something to consider with new tank hulls.
Otherwise these sound awesome for making some tanks nothing but damage sponges and some lighting assault tanks!
Heavy with a massive bullet hose called Lola (Burst HMG).
|
Balistyc Farshot
The Exemplars
RISE of LEGION
62
|
Posted - 2015.02.20 17:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
duster 35000 wrote:
Using a rail, if you are good enough a blaster won't be able to get near you, nitro helps.
Thanks for the advice, but then I become the redline rail sniper (I have done that before like everyone else). I don't want to be that guy. Railguns are only effective against heavies, snipers, installations, and vehicles (Correct me if I am wrong, I am not a master tanker.). If they make blasters effective against tanks, infantry, installations, and everything else, then why wouldn't everyone use them? Missiles still will do more dmg currently and have smaller clips, but I foresee a HMG similar nerf going to blasters where they will increase reload times and reduce range to balance the use.
Everyone what do you think? That way tank weapons reflect their preferred range and adversary. Also this could add a racial slant.
Blasters for infantry and shield tanks, (HMG equivalent)
Railguns for tank to vehicle and armor, (Forge Gun equivalent)
missiles for mid range and hybrid dmg. (AR equivalent)
Heavy with a massive bullet hose called Lola (Burst HMG).
|
Balistyc Farshot
The Exemplars
RISE of LEGION
62
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 18:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
I think the new hulls look good.
The modules could stand to be expanded to cover more diverse styles (Add some base speed enhancers or fuel injector enhancers like kin cats), but this was about hulls.
Is there a plan to change the handling (Turn speed of the tanks) or is that going to be the same for all tanks?
Same question for turrets? I didn't see any changes to those stats and wanted to confirm that.
Thanks!
Heavy with a massive bullet hose called Lola (Burst HMG).
|
Balistyc Farshot
The Exemplars
RISE of LEGION
65
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 14:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Tebu Gan wrote:duster 35000 wrote:
A gunlogi with nitro is worse than a maddy with nitro.
REALLY! That's a new one. Guess that speed is too much to handle for most tankers. Must be a top tier tanker thing. THE ARROGANCE IS OVER 9000!
Great quote! +1 for that. 
BTW - Like I posted earlier, I would like to see ways to build the solo tanks to be either slow ponderous bricks that can't be blown up but are basically stationary (Resolves our dropping in turrets issue!) or little and lighting fast, like an encased LAV with a Particle Cannon Railgun.
See where I am going with this?
Then the number of fittings is infinite and tank tactics change a lot. You think your gunlogi is the shizznit, well I go get my zippy railtank, run circles around you hitting your sweet spot till boom. Then I get 2 swarms and I am toast (And I don't complain about AV while being toasted).
It could make tanks like the fittings, scout, logi, heavy. Assault/Commando, lets not go there yet.
The main concern would be too many tanks on the battlefield.
Heavy with a massive bullet hose called Lola (Burst HMG).
|
|
|
| |
|