DUST Search - Tanks are better than AV for a good reason.

All Channels

General Discussions

Tanks are better than AV for a good reason.

» 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)
emm kay Direct Action Resources 287	Posted - 2015.03.21 17:41:00 - [1] - Quote basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k I suspect some to say 'well cost has nothing to do with this, dumbass'. the thing is; cost has EVERYTHING to do with this. If tanks were 2,000,000 ISK a fit, I think we would se a ton more complaints saying 'buff tanks' than if tanks were 80k a fit. There is a reason you never see me in battle. it's because I see you first.
Fizzer XCIV Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 2781	Posted - 2015.03.21 17:48:00 - [2] - Quote ISK isn't to balance efficacy, only to disincentivize spamming... Home at Last <3
tal mrak-thanl Aethan Dor 274	Posted - 2015.03.21 17:49:00 - [3] - Quote Large rail turret installation: priceless
Ghosts Chance Intara Direct Action Caldari State 3032	Posted - 2015.03.21 17:50:00 - [4] - Quote basic tank fit 245k not 600k Minmatar is Winmatar Creed of the Minja - "I'm a leaf on the wind" I am Chances Ghost
Templar XIII 102	Posted - 2015.03.21 20:02:00 - [5] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: ISK isn't to balance efficacy, only to disincentivize spamming... This is indeed a very good point, but I do think you are both right to a certain point. Take both your statements, weigh them to one another, and I think we get to something more plausible and less simple-worldview-postulate-like. Thanks for providing this other vital part of the equation. Keeps this thread from being too polarizing. If I knew how to like in this forum, I would, both of you.
LOOKMOM NOHANDS Warpoint Sharx 315	Posted - 2015.03.21 20:28:00 - [6] - Quote emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k I suspect some to say 'well cost has nothing to do with this, dumbass'. the thing is; cost has EVERYTHING to do with this. If tanks were 2,000,000 ISK a fit, I think we would se a ton more complaints saying 'buff tanks' than if tanks were 80k a fit. Basic tank fit killed by basic 20k scout fit: NEVER Proto AV fit killed by basic 20k scout fit: Under a second
Jack McReady Dust University Ivy League 2065	Posted - 2015.03.21 20:35:00 - [7] - Quote emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k what is this shitfit of "proto AV" for only 80k and basic tank fit costs half of that. also tanks are better because a militia fit does not kill it under 2 seconds.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5955	Posted - 2015.03.21 20:49:00 - [8] - Quote No. Don't make threads this dumb, please. You cannot balance a game on ISK. Pay to be a broken class is not okay. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
emm kay Direct Action Resources 287	Posted - 2015.03.21 21:01:00 - [9] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: No. Don't make threads this dumb, please. You cannot balance a game on ISK. Pay to be a broken class is not okay. this irks me. A CPM member telling us that in game currency is not something that a game should considering when balancing certain aspects. Jack McReady wrote: emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k what is this shitfit of "proto AV" for only 80k and basic tank fit costs half of that. also tanks are better because a militia fit does not kill it under 2 seconds. minmatrud assault M1 high:mlt myo high: mlt myo high: mtt myo Main: federation allotek Plc side: empty grenade: Wyurkomi A/V grenades. low: enhanced kincat or CPU upgrade depending on skills. takes out tanks with ease. There is a reason you never see me in battle. it's because I see you first.
STYLIE77 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 484	Posted - 2015.03.21 21:04:00 - [10] - Quote emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k I suspect some to say 'well cost has nothing to do with this, dumbass'. the thing is; cost has EVERYTHING to do with this. If tanks were 2,000,000 ISK a fit, I think we would se a ton more complaints saying 'buff tanks' than if tanks were 80k a fit. Looks like I am going to be playing Ambush for the near future, the armor hardener is stupid OP... Once again we have vehicle guys playing all damned day and never dying... bullshit is what it is. http://caughtyouflinching.ytmnd.com/

emm kay Direct Action Resources 287	Posted - 2015.03.21 21:09:00 - [11] - Quote ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). There is a reason you never see me in battle. it's because I see you first.
Gelan Corbaine Gladiators Vanguard 487	Posted - 2015.03.21 21:28:00 - [12] - Quote emm kay wrote: minmatrud assault M1 high:mlt myo high: mlt myo high: mtt myo Main: federation allotek Plc side: empty grenade: Wyurkomi A/V grenades. low: enhanced kincat or CPU upgrade depending on skills. takes out tanks with ease. That's not an AV trooper ........that is a stupid gimmick. No job is worth doing if you don't get paid in the end .
Outlaw OneZero Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1607	Posted - 2015.03.21 21:42:00 - [13] - Quote emm kay wrote: ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). That's bullshit, tank elimination is a solo effort. Tank survival and support should be a team effort. AV is easily killed by regular infantry, tankers should have to cooperate with their infantry to survive. Hello, is this thing on?
emm kay Direct Action Resources 288	Posted - 2015.03.22 02:55:00 - [14] - Quote Outlaw OneZero wrote: emm kay wrote: ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). That's bullshit, tank elimination is a solo effort. Tank survival and support should be a team effort. AV is easily killed by regular infantry, tankers should have to cooperate with their infantry to survive. read the parentheses. Nobody's going to be like "yeh, let's support this tank guys, It will win us the game" tanks should be an auxillary tool, specifficaly for three things: 1) eliminating infantry 2) killing other tanks, installations, etc. 3) Acting as a mobile spawn point. they Should NOT be the main priority of a team to keep it alive. not in skirm, dom, or even ambush There is a reason you never see me in battle. it's because I see you first.
Alena Ventrallis Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 2770	Posted - 2015.03.22 03:21:00 - [15] - Quote emm kay wrote: Outlaw OneZero wrote: emm kay wrote: ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). That's bullshit, tank elimination is a solo effort. Tank survival and support should be a team effort. AV is easily killed by regular infantry, tankers should have to cooperate with their infantry to survive. read the parentheses. Nobody's going to be like "yeh, let's support this tank guys, It will win us the game" tanks should be an auxillary tool, specifficaly for three things: 1) eliminating infantry 2) killing other tanks, installations, etc. 3) Acting as a mobile spawn point. they Should NOT be the main priority of a team to keep it alive. not in skirm, dom, or even ambush The Germans would like to speak with you. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 533	Posted - 2015.03.22 03:25:00 - [16] - Quote STYLIE77 wrote: emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k I suspect some to say 'well cost has nothing to do with this, dumbass'. the thing is; cost has EVERYTHING to do with this. If tanks were 2,000,000 ISK a fit, I think we would se a ton more complaints saying 'buff tanks' than if tanks were 80k a fit. Looks like I am going to be playing Ambush for the near future, the armor hardener is stupid OP... Once again we have vehicle guys playing all damned day and never dying... bullshit is what it is. As a shield missile tanker I concur. Nerf armor tanksGÇª and buff missiles. Death is a serious businessGÇª So is running a shoddy, half-baked game company.
Thumb Green The Valyrian Mercenary Army 2183	Posted - 2015.03.22 04:21:00 - [17] - Quote emm kay wrote: ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). According to who? **** tankers that don't like the fact that one person can take down one person; because CCP has never stated that their intent was for one person in a tank to require multiple people to destroy. Being in a tank doesn't affect jack ** about how many people are needed to take you down. Tanks have always been extremely vulnerable to AV infantry, another person brought up the Germans whom invented the Panzerfaust and since then a single infantryman has had the power to take out tanks all by his lonesome. Sure, tank defense progresses to where what once worked won't but sooner or later something comes along that will work; a Panzerfaust certainly won't take out an M1 Abrams but an RPG can, though that can't take out an M1A2 Abrams. However an RPG-30 probably could. As well as the Javelin which despite the fact that it's usually has two people attached to it, it's completely possible for a single person to use it. The 2nd guy is just there to carry ammo and keep an eye out for threats and targets. You sir are the very definition of a pansy in a panzer. Take your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty hipster! Rated [TV-MA]
P14GU3 UNIVERSAL C.A.R.N.A.G.E 1373	Posted - 2015.03.22 04:36:00 - [18] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: emm kay wrote: ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). According to who? **** tankers that don't like the fact that one person can take down one person; because CCP has never stated that their intent was for one person in a tank to require multiple people to destroy. Being in a tank doesn't affect jack ** about how many people are needed to take you down. Tanks have always been extremely vulnerable to AV infantry, another person brought up the Germans whom invented the Panzerfaust and since then a single infantryman has had the power to take out tanks all by his lonesome. Sure, tank defense progresses to where what once worked won't but sooner or later something comes along that will work; a Panzerfaust certainly won't take out an M1 Abrams but an RPG can, though that can't take out an M1A2 Abrams. However an RPG-30 probably could. As well as the Javelin which despite the fact that it's usually has two people attached to it, it's completely possible for a single person to use it. The 2nd guy is just there to carry ammo and keep an eye out for threats and targets. You sir are the very definition of a pansy in a panzer. http://listverse.com/2013/10/18/10-world-war-ii-soldiers-who-pulled-off-amazing-feats/ Im not a fan of making real life comparisons as real life does not equal video games, but I'll just leave this here... 'Sault AK.0 - Logi AK.0 - Logi GK.0 - Scout GK.0 - 'Mando MK.0 - Masshole in every sense of the word.
Thumb Green The Valyrian Mercenary Army 2187	Posted - 2015.03.22 15:02:00 - [19] - Quote P14GU3 wrote: http://listverse.com/2013/10/18/10-world-war-ii-soldiers-who-pulled-off-amazing-feats/ Im not a fan of making real life comparisons as real life does not equal video games, but I'll just leave this here... And that is a very true point, however it wasn't meant to be a comparison. It was meant to make a point about the fact that a tank doesn't require multiple people or even another tank to take it down and that sooner or later the offense always beats the defense. Though it was a bit ranty but that's cause I'm sick of these snowflakes thinking they shouldn't die as easily as the rest of us just because they're in a tank. Sure non-AV being ineffective against them is a given but this asinine "logic" that AV should be ineffective against them just drives me up the wall. Hell, they're lucky it takes more than a clip of AV to do the job; unless it's hitting the weak point then you might get them in a clip if they can't activate a hardener. Take your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty hipster! Rated [TV-MA]
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 8194	Posted - 2015.03.22 15:57:00 - [20] - Quote Posts like this are usually a good indication that AV is once again UP. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley

Outlaw OneZero Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1607	Posted - 2015.03.22 17:32:00 - [21] - Quote emm kay wrote: Outlaw OneZero wrote: emm kay wrote: ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). That's bullshit, tank elimination is a solo effort. Tank survival and support should be a team effort. AV is easily killed by regular infantry, tankers should have to cooperate with their infantry to survive. read the parentheses. Nobody's going to be like "yeh, let's support this tank guys, It will win us the game" tanks should be an auxillary tool, specifficaly for three things: 1) eliminating infantry 2) killing other tanks, installations, etc. 3) Acting as a mobile spawn point. they Should NOT be the main priority of a team to keep it alive. not in skirm, dom, or even ambush Never said the survival of tanks should be the main priority of a team, just that coordination with infantry should be required for tanks to stay alive. If a team can't dedicate 1 or 2 guys to eliminating AV, then they shouldn't be surprised when their vehicles explode. For the edification of the general masses, here's the concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_arms Hello, is this thing on?
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1591	Posted - 2015.03.22 23:02:00 - [22] - Quote emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k I suspect some to say 'well cost has nothing to do with this, dumbass'. the thing is; cost has EVERYTHING to do with this. If tanks were 2,000,000 ISK a fit, I think we would se a ton more complaints saying 'buff tanks' than if tanks were 80k a fit. The arguments about balancing around ISK have been had many times. Higher ISK costs should gain you some advantage, a proto weapon costs 40Xthe ISK of a standard weapon and provides a 10% increase in damage. A 4-5X ISK expenditure in tanks increases your HP 200-300%, damage 200-300%, Speed 200% while allowing you to run a proto dropsuit under it as well. Tankers clearly expect a double standard in this. I would like to see vehicle costs drop though, just so the whiny tankers will have one less bad argument to justify their whininess. Because, that's why.
Mejt0 Dead Man's Game RUST415 1134	Posted - 2015.03.23 00:57:00 - [23] - Quote Madrugar can't be soled by AV guy. You need atleast two of them to do something. That's good enough. Caldari Hero Loyal To The State Mejt0 Sale List
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17798	Posted - 2015.03.23 01:12:00 - [24] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: emm kay wrote: ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). According to who? **** tankers that don't like the fact that one person can take down one person; because CCP has never stated that their intent was for one person in a tank to require multiple people to destroy. Being in a tank doesn't affect jack ** about how many people are needed to take you down. Tanks have always been extremely vulnerable to AV infantry, another person brought up the Germans whom invented the Panzerfaust and since then a single infantryman has had the power to take out tanks all by his lonesome. Sure, tank defense progresses to where what once worked won't but sooner or later something comes along that will work; a Panzerfaust certainly won't take out an M1 Abrams but an RPG can, though that can't take out an M1A2 Abrams. However an RPG-30 probably could. As well as the Javelin which despite the fact that it's usually has two people attached to it, it's completely possible for a single person to use it. The 2nd guy is just there to carry ammo and keep an eye out for threats and targets. You sir are the very definition of a pansy in a panzer. That is dependent on a number of factors. More modern RPG's will be able to penetrate modern tank armour with great efficiency but that is dependent to angle of hit, warhead type, range, angle of armour, thickness of armour, etc. The reason a lot of guided missile systems are so devastating to tanks is because they strike/detonate from above rather than against the thicker side and forward armour. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
emm kay Direct Action Resources 288	Posted - 2015.03.23 01:57:00 - [25] - Quote Thumb Green wrote: emm kay wrote: ^ I know the feels, fellow solo-er. But tank elimination is a group effort ( atleast, supposed to be, that's still broken). According to who? **** tankers that don't like the fact that one person can take down one person; because CCP has never stated that their intent was for one person in a tank to require multiple people to destroy. Being in a tank doesn't affect jack ** about how many people are needed to take you down. Tanks have always been extremely vulnerable to AV infantry, another person brought up the Germans whom invented the Panzerfaust and since then a single infantryman has had the power to take out tanks all by his lonesome. Sure, tank defense progresses to where what once worked won't but sooner or later something comes along that will work; a Panzerfaust certainly won't take out an M1 Abrams but an RPG can, though that can't take out an M1A2 Abrams. However an RPG-30 probably could. As well as the Javelin which despite the fact that it's usually has two people attached to it, it's completely possible for a single person to use it. The 2nd guy is just there to carry ammo and keep an eye out for threats and targets. You sir are the very definition of a pansy in a panzer. thing is my currend HAV operation level is 0 across the board on all accounts; I'm AV. There is a reason you never see me in battle. it's because I see you first.
Racro 01 Arifistan Simple Minded People Pty. Ltd. 521	Posted - 2015.03.23 02:10:00 - [26] - Quote emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k . my complete std maddy fit only costs me a good 156k isk. that's my std tank. my proto PLC av fit costs me exatctly 200k isk. I actually get better av efficiency out of my PLC fit. sort of. depends ont nhe target. thankfully I also have swarms. that fit is only 28k isk less. due to the swarm launcher being cheaper than PLC. see a shield tank bring the PLC/. see armour tank bring swarmys. OR I could do it the real easy less isk investive way and just use my own HAV's......but where the fun in stomping over cherry tanks with a 1.2mill isk tank fitting......am I right? *Elite Gallenten Soldier*
Archduke Ferd1nand Nos Nothi 273	Posted - 2015.03.23 03:56:00 - [27] - Quote emm kay wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: No. Don't make threads this dumb, please. You cannot balance a game on ISK. Pay to be a broken class is not okay. this irks me. A CPM member telling us that in game currency is not something that a game should considering when balancing certain aspects. Jack McReady wrote: emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k what is this shitfit of "proto AV" for only 80k and basic tank fit costs half of that. also tanks are better because a militia fit does not kill it under 2 seconds. minmatrud assault M1 high:mlt myo high: mlt myo high: mtt myo Main: federation allotek Plc side: empty grenade: Wyurkomi A/V grenades. low: enhanced kincat or CPU upgrade depending on skills. takes out tanks with ease. LOLOL I too enjoy being 2 shotted by a militia scrambler rifle. BRB, looking for socks Asslut Rifles OP, anal now I shit shotgun shells and piss Remote Explosives
DUST Fiend 16163	Posted - 2015.03.23 04:26:00 - [28] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: ISK isn't to balance efficacy, only to disincentivize spamming... This logic basically says we're going to keep you from being exactly as effective as you are now, by making you pay WAY more for it. Contests, Sales, Writing etc Fly Safe
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 535	Posted - 2015.03.23 05:44:00 - [29] - Quote emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k I suspect some to say 'well cost has nothing to do with this, dumbass'. the thing is; cost has EVERYTHING to do with this. If tanks were 2,000,000 ISK a fit, I think we would se a ton more complaints saying 'buff tanks' than if tanks were 80k a fit. So if you get to be invincible with 6x the investment (by the way AV fits cost more than 80k, but whatever), why do 10k militia dropsuits still get to kill proto suits that cost over 10x more? What Im saying here is: you're pretty stupid and you put zero thought into your brilliant theory of why tanks are overpowered before you posted it. Congrats!
Mejt0 Dead Man's Game RUST415 1137	Posted - 2015.03.23 06:36:00 - [30] - Quote Racro 01 Arifistan wrote: emm kay wrote: basic Tank fit: 600k proto AV fit: 80k . my complete std maddy fit only costs me a good 156k isk. that's my std tank. my proto PLC av fit costs me exatctly 200k isk. I actually get better av efficiency out of my PLC fit. sort of. depends ont nhe target. thankfully I also have swarms. that fit is only 28k isk less. due to the swarm launcher being cheaper than PLC. see a shield tank bring the PLC/. see armour tank bring swarmys. OR I could do it the real easy less isk investive way and just use my own HAV's......but where the fun in stomping over cherry tanks with a 1.2mill isk tank fitting......am I right? No. When you do, you should call somebody for help. As i said, even minmando lv5 with maxed swarms will do jack ** to madrugar. Caldari Hero Loyal To The State** Mejt0 Sale List

Lahut K'mar Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire 60	Posted - 2015.03.23 09:18:00 - [31] - Quote Yeah, most of the whiners equip AV as an afterthought and don't use proper tactics. A skilled tankbuster team should be able to defeat a skilled tank, but a lone redberry with a swarm launcher shouldn't be anything more than a deterrent. Read some IRL tank fighting techniques, people! Just because you can't take out visuals doesn't mean they don't apply to Dust. Soraya Xel wrote: No. Don't make threads this dumb, please. You cannot balance a game on ISK. Pay to be a broken class is not okay. You. Shush. Nothing is broken. Horrifying? That's a strange way to spell "romantic". FIX THE WHEEL, CCP!
Outlaw OneZero molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 1609	Posted - 2015.03.23 14:25:00 - [32] - Quote Lahut K'mar wrote: Yeah, most of the whiners equip AV as an afterthought and don't use proper tactics. A skilled tankbuster team should be able to defeat a skilled tank, but a lone redberry with a swarm launcher shouldn't be anything more than a deterrent. Read some IRL tank fighting techniques, people! Why would you bring real life into this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tank_warfare#Infantry_close_assault Of course the current US method is acquire lock on, fire Javelin missile watch tank go boom from up to 2500m away. What drives me crazy is when you suggest that we reduce SP and ISK investment to bring better parity between AV and HAV, the tankers all whine that they don't want that, they want to invest heavily in order to be superior to infantry, including AV. Dropships on the other hand, you guys got screwed. Hello, is this thing on?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17804	Posted - 2015.03.23 19:47:00 - [33] - Quote Outlaw OneZero wrote: Lahut K'mar wrote: Yeah, most of the whiners equip AV as an afterthought and don't use proper tactics. A skilled tankbuster team should be able to defeat a skilled tank, but a lone redberry with a swarm launcher shouldn't be anything more than a deterrent. Read some IRL tank fighting techniques, people! Why would you bring real life into this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tank_warfare#Infantry_close_assault Of course the current US method is acquire lock on, fire Javelin missile watch tank go boom from up to 2500m away. What drives me crazy is when you suggest that we reduce SP and ISK investment to bring better parity between AV and HAV, the tankers all whine that they don't want that, they want to invest heavily in order to be superior to infantry, including AV. Dropships on the other hand, you guys got screwed. You forget too that tanks can engage targets up to 4000m with more standard rounds and 8700m with LAHAT rounds. More to the point the standard tank round has a muzzle velocity of 1500m/s+ where as a Javelin is significantly less and takes longer to reach its target. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch


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.