|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5276
   |
Posted - 2015.03.09 19:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
I pretty much see the LAV Echo change as a quick fix to make fitting more important to the survivability of the LAV. However, like the HAV rebalance, it needs to regain some slots to make it properly work. I think Rattati just wanted to fart out some sort of change for Echo, even if it needs further work in the future.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5277
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 00:36:00 -
[2] - Quote
Sgt Kirk wrote:Nocturnal Soul wrote:Bright Cloud wrote:The "new" LAV's are just going to be rolling coffins. Even if you fit them properly they will just die way too easy. A increase in module slots is required. Cause according to rattati only the "unfitted disposable LAV's" are too hard to kill. If thats the case then we surely wouldnt have a issue to give the methana 3 lows and 1 high and the Saga 3 high and 1 low slot. That way we actually could make use of the PG+CPU buff and the vehicles wouldnt be unfitted. I want the 3/2 and vice versa slots back That's what I was talking about. I should have specified better. 3-2 for Caldari 2-3 for Gallente Although if they give tanks placeholder hulls for Amarr and minmatar why not do the same for other vehicles. Gallente would still be 2-3 Caldari would change to 4-1 Amarr would be 1-4 Minmatar would be 3-2
I have the same slot layout for what I'm currently working on, so +1 from me.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5278
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 01:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
Just threw together some preliminary numbers.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jofxFZiz1wV9ju1qvXiPWrcoXDsrzejKjUDzYRPdEb4/edit?usp=sharing
Have not really done much in terms of balancing against current AV (which is likely changing anyways) but I included some reference values of current light modules if you want to do some mental math. Again just threw some stuff together so don't freak out if something weird pops up.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5279
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 01:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nocturnal Soul wrote:Native reps needs to die.... I really hate the idea of it
Not a huge fan either but Rattati seems married to the idea so I'm just going with the flow.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5284
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 05:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vulpes Dolosus wrote:The new LAVs are going to be more like unbonused, slow Scout LAVs of oldGǪ with lower health. I really can't fathom how some people see these changes as "good" or even "acceptable." Even the best fitted, all 5's fits barely make it back to even the base stats of current LAVs, and that's without a proto turret and in the Methana's case forgoing a module. Don't believe me? Try and come up with better fits: Saga (EHP: 1607/450) Methana (EHP: 325/2240) And while we're on the subjectGǪ who the heck has been complaining about LAVs? I mean seriously, I can't think of one QQ thread in the last three months outside of complaint about heavies driving around. Heck, even THAT isn't a huge problem. Yet now somehow LAVs need more attention than logi rebalance and other ACTUAL ISSUES that plague this game. Shall I count the ways LAVs can be countered? Gëñ3 swarms, Gëñ2 forge shots, Gëñ2 large rail shots, ADSs, proxy mines, snipers (when shooting), literally any tank, another LAV with rail and gunner. It's not hard if you actually try guys. Oh, and until there is a safe, accessible supply depot in every redline, I support giving vehicle small native repairs.
I don't have a problem with LAVs. I have an issue with unfit LAVs being as tanky as they are. When properly fit, LAVs should kick ass, but an unfit LAV should pop as easily as an unfit dropsuit in comparison.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5286
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Vulpes Dolosus wrote:
I really don't think the problem is with "unfitted LAVs" but more with the BPO LAVs. I do think BPO LAVs should be fragile and, imo, unfit-able throwaway transport. But STD LAVs (and beyond hopefully) should be considered a different class and far more defensive.
BPO LAVs are Standard LAVs
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5286
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 06:51:00 -
[7] - Quote
Vulpes Dolosus wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Vulpes Dolosus wrote:
I really don't think the problem is with "unfitted LAVs" but more with the BPO LAVs. I do think BPO LAVs should be fragile and, imo, unfit-able throwaway transport. But STD LAVs (and beyond hopefully) should be considered a different class and far more defensive.
BPO LAVs are Standard LAVs Which is why I'd like to change that: BPO LAV: Free, throwaway transport; fragile. STD LAV: Costs ISK but is more tanky/ customizable.
Except I purchased my BPO LAV because it was standard. Can I expect a cash refund of the pack that included the LAV in it since I purchased it directly with cash and not with AUR?
I mean the same thing can be said for dropsuits. Should all BPO dropsuits be downgraded to below Standard?
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
| |
|