DUST Search - Rattati, are you aware that...

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Rattati, are you aware that...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1987	Posted - 2015.04.08 15:13:00 - [1] - Quote Gunnlogis and getting absolutely destroyed by armor tanks in pretty much every situation. It doesn't matter if you flank an Armor tank with Proto XT-201 Missiles and et half a clip into him, as soon as he hits hardeners everything is in his favor. Blasters wreck hardened 6000 shields with boosters in under 10 seconds while I might be sitting there all day trying to kill an armor tank with missiles. Rail Gunnlogi < Rail Madrugar Balster Gunnlogi < Blaster Madrugar Missile Gunnlogi < Missile Madrugar Armor hardeners need a reduction to 35-30% Also= when armor hardeners are active, repair rates need to go down by the same amount that the hardener resists. Literally, forget gunnlogis, I can be shooting an armor tank with my proto Min Commando with Wiki swarms with 2-3 clips and the armor tank will be at full armor due to the fact that, long lasting high resistance hardeners+high base eHP+Passive Armor reps= indestructable. Armor hardener> shield hardener 1.) Armor Hardener lasts much longer. 6 whole seconds longer without skills (gap increases with skill) 2.) The fitting: The PG of Shield hardener and CPU of Armor hardener is proportionate. BUT... Complex Shield Hardener CPU cost vs Armor Hardener PG cost. The CPU cost of a Complex Shield extender is 341 which is 1/4 or 26.6% of my CPU on a Gunnlogi The PG cost of a Complex Armor hardener is 400 PG which is like is approx 13% of the Madrugars PG Gåæ That does not seem fair at all. Why does it take twice the fitting space to fit a shield hardener on a shield tank than a Armor Hardener on a Armor tank? Fitting a Complex shield extender on Gunnlogi takes up 26.6% of CPU and 9% of the PG ON the other hand, a Armor Hardener on a Madrugar takes up 13% CPU and 13% PG. So why is it so uneven for the Gunnlogi/why is it so advantageous to use Armor Hardener on Armor tank than a Shield Hardener on Shield tank? "Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.
JUPA SACH Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 458	Posted - 2015.04.08 15:23:00 - [2] - Quote Are you aware that all you do is complain about everything? Karma
Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1987	Posted - 2015.04.08 15:47:00 - [3] - Quote JUPA SACH wrote: Are you aware that all you do is complain about everything? Are you aware that this game is unbalanced? "Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3160	Posted - 2015.04.08 16:01:00 - [4] - Quote How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1987	Posted - 2015.04.08 16:25:00 - [5] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. I don't care what you have to say because no way in hell should armor tanks be invincible to AV. Shield tanks and AV are balanced in my opinion. Armor tanks are definitely not balanced. How is it fair that an armor tank can take 2-3 clips (Clips not swarms) from my Proto Min Commando with proficiency level 4 in swarms and still have full armor? "Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 589	Posted - 2015.04.08 17:01:00 - [6] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. I don't care what you have to say because no way in hell should armor tanks be invincible to AV. Shield tanks and AV are balanced in my opinion. Armor tanks are definitely not balanced. How is it fair that an armor tank can take 2-3 clips (Clips not swarms) from my Proto Min Commando with proficiency level 4 in swarms and still have full armor? Its not just 2-3 clips, you need to phrase this correctly. You can literally fire swarms at a double hardened madruger at full intensity and his armor hp will be capped at full until his hardeners run out, it doesn't matter how many clips you fire at him. One swarm launcher cannot do enough dps regardless of fitting to even scratch the repair of a hardened madruger.
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 589	Posted - 2015.04.08 17:03:00 - [7] - Quote JUPA SACH wrote: Are you aware that all you do is complain about everything? You're just complaining that he's complaining, but everyone knows hes right. Gunnlogis are complete crap compared to madrugers right now, not because the gunnlogis are bad, its because the madrugers have such high reps with hardeners up that they cannot be killed by people running prototype weaponry unless there are 3 or more attacking.
Alena Ventrallis Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 2974	Posted - 2015.04.08 17:13:00 - [8] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. I don't care what you have to say because no way in hell should armor tanks be invincible to AV. Shield tanks and AV are balanced in my opinion. Armor tanks are definitely not balanced. How is it fair that an armor tank can take 2-3 clips (Clips not swarms) from my Proto Min Commando with proficiency level 4 in swarms and still have full armor? Its not just 2-3 clips, you need to phrase this correctly. You can literally fire swarms at a double hardened madruger at full intensity and his armor hp will be capped at full until his hardeners run out, it doesn't matter how many clips you fire at him. One swarm launcher cannot do enough dps regardless of fitting to even scratch the repair of a hardened madruger. And that is exactly what should happen. If a single swarmed can still kill a double hardened tank, hardeners have absolutely no point in existing. It should take multiple people to kill a hardened tank. The problem is how quickly they can escape once it wears off. Tone down tank speed and greatly tone down tank acceleration, and we will finally have tanks in a close to balanced place. Whirly gun make much thunder! - Victor
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 589	Posted - 2015.04.08 19:55:00 - [9] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vesta Opalus wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. I don't care what you have to say because no way in hell should armor tanks be invincible to AV. Shield tanks and AV are balanced in my opinion. Armor tanks are definitely not balanced. How is it fair that an armor tank can take 2-3 clips (Clips not swarms) from my Proto Min Commando with proficiency level 4 in swarms and still have full armor? Its not just 2-3 clips, you need to phrase this correctly. You can literally fire swarms at a double hardened madruger at full intensity and his armor hp will be capped at full until his hardeners run out, it doesn't matter how many clips you fire at him. One swarm launcher cannot do enough dps regardless of fitting to even scratch the repair of a hardened madruger. And that is exactly what should happen. If a single swarmed can still kill a double hardened tank, hardeners have absolutely no point in existing. It should take multiple people to kill a hardened tank. The problem is how quickly they can escape once it wears off. Tone down tank speed and greatly tone down tank acceleration, and we will finally have tanks in a close to balanced place. Why should it take multiple people to kill a double hardened tank? It was already hard before, unless the tanker was certifiably ********, but the way hardeners combine with reps and armor hp makes it literally impossible now to kill a madruger until their hardeners go down. Why is that ok? Maybe if infantry had modules that boosted their damage so they could overcome the hardeners, it would be fine, but they dont. There is no AV/V balance when you can simply choose to negate AV completely when you fit your tank. Its not even a matter of tactics or ambush, its just straight up impossible for a single person to kill a tank fitted with 2 repairs and 2 hardeners unless the tanker just does not react. Could you imagine how absurd it would be if infantry had fits like that? Heavies walking around, literally invincible to every weapon on the field, unkillable until their hardeners went down, is that something you are ok with? If not, then why is it ok for tanks?
Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1988	Posted - 2015.04.08 20:03:00 - [10] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vesta Opalus wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. I don't care what you have to say because no way in hell should armor tanks be invincible to AV. Shield tanks and AV are balanced in my opinion. Armor tanks are definitely not balanced. How is it fair that an armor tank can take 2-3 clips (Clips not swarms) from my Proto Min Commando with proficiency level 4 in swarms and still have full armor? Its not just 2-3 clips, you need to phrase this correctly. You can literally fire swarms at a double hardened madruger at full intensity and his armor hp will be capped at full until his hardeners run out, it doesn't matter how many clips you fire at him. One swarm launcher cannot do enough dps regardless of fitting to even scratch the repair of a hardened madruger. And that is exactly what should happen. If a single swarmed can still kill a double hardened tank, hardeners have absolutely no point in existing. It should take multiple people to kill a hardened tank. The problem is how quickly they can escape once it wears off. Tone down tank speed and greatly tone down tank acceleration, and we will finally have tanks in a close to balanced place. Why should it take multiple people to kill a double hardened tank? It was already hard before, unless the tanker was certifiably ********, but the way hardeners combine with reps and armor hp makes it literally impossible now to kill a madruger until their hardeners go down. Why is that ok? Maybe if infantry had modules that boosted their damage so they could overcome the hardeners, it would be fine, but they dont. There is no AV/V balance when you can simply choose to negate AV completely when you fit your tank. Its not even a matter of tactics or ambush, its just straight up impossible for a single person to kill a tank fitted with 2 repairs and 2 hardeners unless the tanker just does not react. Could you imagine how absurd it would be if infantry had fits like that? Heavies walking around, literally invincible to every weapon on the field, unkillable until their hardeners went down, is that something you are ok with? If not, then why is it ok for tanks? truth be told, even multiple swarmers cannot harm them. "Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5731	Posted - 2015.04.08 20:43:00 - [11] - Quote Shield Boosters should be easier to fit and have a slightly higher HP/minute than an armor repairer. If you allow heavy boosters to trigger every 20 seconds (15 with skills) you achieve this fairly closely. It would allow shield HAVs to have access to a lot of repping power on demand and fairly frequently. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 18062	Posted - 2015.04.08 20:54:00 - [12] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Gunnlogis and getting absolutely destroyed by armor tanks in pretty much every situation. It doesn't matter if you flank an Armor tank with Proto XT-201 Missiles and et half a clip into him, as soon as he hits hardeners everything is in his favor. Blasters wreck hardened 6000 shields with boosters in under 10 seconds while I might be sitting there all day trying to kill an armor tank with missiles. Rail Gunnlogi < Rail Madrugar Balster Gunnlogi < Blaster Madrugar Missile Gunnlogi < Missile Madrugar Armor hardeners need a reduction to 35-30% Also= when armor hardeners are active, repair rates need to go down by the same amount that the hardener resists. Literally, forget gunnlogis, I can be shooting an armor tank with my proto Min Commando with Wiki swarms with 2-3 clips and the armor tank will be at full armor due to the fact that, long lasting high resistance hardeners+high base eHP+Passive Armor reps= indestructable. Armor hardener> shield hardener 1.) Armor Hardener lasts much longer. 6 whole seconds longer without skills (gap increases with skill) 2.) The fitting: The PG of Shield hardener and CPU of Armor hardener is proportionate. BUT... Complex Shield Hardener CPU cost vs Armor Hardener PG cost. The CPU cost of a Complex Shield extender is 341 which is 1/4 or 26.6% of my CPU on a Gunnlogi The PG cost of a Complex Armor hardener is 400 PG which is like is approx 13% of the Madrugars PG Gåæ That does not seem fair at all. Why does it take twice the fitting space to fit a shield hardener on a shield tank than a Armor Hardener on a Armor tank? Fitting a Complex shield extender on Gunnlogi takes up 26.6% of CPU and 9% of the PG ON the other hand, a Armor Hardener on a Madrugar takes up 13% CPU and 13% PG. So why is it so uneven for the Gunnlogi/why is it so advantageous to use Armor Hardener on Armor tank than a Shield Hardener on Shield tank? Also- armor hardeners are super easy to double stack. And two of them are super OP. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNLT2Qk2KxM Firstly I don't think anyone will deny that Shield HAV are lacking at the moment for a number of reasons though I don't believe they are necessarily what you believe them to be nor are you being particularly unbiased in this case. I'm still convinced that the primary reason the Madrugar is more powerful than it's shield counterpart is due to its repairs being both prolific and uninterruptedly passive as a result when coupled with our competitive hardeners they produce incredibly powerful effective repair values that the Gunnlogi simply cannot match. Beyond that if Shield Boosters could be more reliable and offer players the opportunity to completely regenerate the value stated on the module then I simply do not believe there will be such a gap between the HAV. GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥ -The Nameless City
Boot Booter Titans of Phoenix RUST415 1265	Posted - 2015.04.08 22:02:00 - [13] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vesta Opalus wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. I don't care what you have to say because no way in hell should armor tanks be invincible to AV. Shield tanks and AV are balanced in my opinion. Armor tanks are definitely not balanced. How is it fair that an armor tank can take 2-3 clips (Clips not swarms) from my Proto Min Commando with proficiency level 4 in swarms and still have full armor? Its not just 2-3 clips, you need to phrase this correctly. You can literally fire swarms at a double hardened madruger at full intensity and his armor hp will be capped at full until his hardeners run out, it doesn't matter how many clips you fire at him. One swarm launcher cannot do enough dps regardless of fitting to even scratch the repair of a hardened madruger. And that is exactly what should happen. If a single swarmed can still kill a double hardened tank, hardeners have absolutely no point in existing. It should take multiple people to kill a hardened tank. The problem is how quickly they can escape once it wears off. Tone down tank speed and greatly tone down tank acceleration, and we will finally have tanks in a close to balanced place. Why should it take multiple people to kill a double hardened tank? It was already hard before, unless the tanker was certifiably ********, but the way hardeners combine with reps and armor hp makes it literally impossible now to kill a madruger until their hardeners go down. Why is that ok? Maybe if infantry had modules that boosted their damage so they could overcome the hardeners, it would be fine, but they dont. There is no AV/V balance when you can simply choose to negate AV completely when you fit your tank. Its not even a matter of tactics or ambush, its just straight up impossible for a single person to kill a tank fitted with 2 repairs and 2 hardeners unless the tanker just does not react. Could you imagine how absurd it would be if infantry had fits like that? Heavies walking around, literally invincible to every weapon on the field, unkillable until their hardeners went down, is that something you are ok with? If not, then why is it ok for tanks? No you're missing the point. Yes it's near impossible to kill a tank with its hardener on but without its rather easy. The issue is tanks are way too fast so than can easily fly away from danger when their hardener drops. Slow tanks down and you force tankers to constantly be thinking about their slow escape to safety. This is how you balance them. No tanker wants to be insta popped by AV and no AVer wants a tank to escape their clutches easily. It would force tankers to play their position and hardeners in a smart fashion and force AV to use ambush tactics.
Alena Ventrallis Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 2976	Posted - 2015.04.08 22:23:00 - [14] - Quote Vesta Opalus wrote: Why should it take multiple people to kill a double hardened tank? It was already hard before, unless the tanker was certifiably ******, but the way hardeners combine with reps and armor hp makes it literally impossible now to kill a madruger until their hardeners go down.** Why is that ok? Maybe if infantry had modules that boosted their damage so they could overcome the hardeners, it would be fine, but they dont. There is no AV/V balance when you can simply choose to negate AV completely when you fit your tank. Its not even a matter of tactics or ambush, its just straight up impossible for a single person to kill a tank fitted with 2 repairs and 2 hardeners unless the tanker just does not react. Could you imagine how absurd it would be if infantry had fits like that? Heavies walking around, literally invincible to every weapon on the field, unkillable until their hardeners went down, is that something you are ok with? If not, then why is it ok for tanks? I highlightd the relevant portion of your reply. Tanks are supposed to be about stand-and-deliver gameplay. They are supposed to be hard to kill when hardeners are up. The entire point of hardeners is to make them take multiple people to kill so they don't have to run away as soon as someone switches to an AV fit. If one person can kill a tank, even if it is hardened, then hardeners have no purpose in existing. Imagine if armor plates only gave 8/12/15 armor hp. What would be the point of running them? They would technically increase your health, but not by near enough to be worth it. The problem is, tanks have too much speed, meaning once those hardeners go down, they quickly zip off to safety to come back and do it again. By slowing them down, we make them rely on infantry to provide support in the form of mobility. Ideally, a tank with hardeners would take 3-4 people running AV to kill, but the tank would have to have gunners, either to hop out and flank the AV or use their small guns to engage and kill them before hardeners come down. As it is now, I can easily zip off when I have about 5 seconds left on my hardeners and be perfectly fine. That shouldn't be the case. I want my tank to be a citadel when my hardeners are up. We have that now. But I don't want my tank to be able to zip away at LAV speeds when things go south. Whirly gun make much thunder! - Victor
sir RAVEN WING Corrosive Synergy Rise Of Legion. 3322	Posted - 2015.04.08 22:28:00 - [15] - Quote It was the Caldari's only good thing, why are you surprised? *"Vengeance. Vengeance is the name of the monster that consumed me so long ago." - Sir Raven Wing*
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 519	Posted - 2015.04.08 22:28:00 - [16] - Quote Most people agree it's shields that need work, but a commando is a poor choice against an armour tank as it lacks the alpha damage, try a suit with nades ADS Ramming Revenge! Plasma Cannon Rampage
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 18067	Posted - 2015.04.08 22:48:00 - [17] - Quote sir RAVEN WING wrote: It was the Caldari's only good thing, why are you surprised? Because Three of Five primary AV weapons aren't Caldari and aren't effective, because the ARR and RR weren't the go to weapons of top tier corporations for a good few months, because the previous Gunnlogi was not to the Madrugar what the Madrugar is to it now, and because you don't continually have the most content available to your race..... Seriously harden up........ ........................... PUNS! GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥ -The Nameless City
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Onikanabo Brigade Caldari State 1932	Posted - 2015.04.08 22:56:00 - [18] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Shield Boosters should be easier to fit and have a slightly higher HP/minute than an armor repairer. If you allow heavy boosters to trigger every 20 seconds (15 with skills) you achieve this fairly closely. It would allow shield HAVs to have access to a lot of repping power on demand and fairly frequently. It could work , I use the complex light shield booster just for that purpose . What are your thoughts about the shield regulators ? I use boosters because their just better to me then the regulators . I would say that they should just tweak the CPU / PG requirements first of shield mods and see how that plays out and change the mechanics like the OP spoke of . I would want a nerf for either but just bring them more inline with what already exist . Doubts are like flies and should be treated as such and crushed . #PubsShouldBeRandomPlayers
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Onikanabo Brigade Caldari State 1932	Posted - 2015.04.08 22:59:00 - [19] - Quote Juno Tristan wrote: Most people agree it's shields that need work, but a commando is a poor choice against an armour tank as it lacks the alpha damage, try a suit with nades I don't know about that . If you get a Min commando with a PLC and swarms it works out nicely . I use to do that with positive results . That was my AV fit . Doubts are like flies and should be treated as such and crushed . #PubsShouldBeRandomPlayers
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Onikanabo Brigade Caldari State 1932	Posted - 2015.04.08 23:08:00 - [20] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: The problem is, tanks have too much speed, meaning once those hardeners go down, they quickly zip off to safety to come back and do it again. By slowing them down, we make them rely on infantry to provide support in the form of mobility. I don't know about that , ground vehicles already have the most to fear as far as AV goes and to slow them down would make it too easy for AV players such as myself so I just don't think that's the problem . That's how DHAV's should be , slow with massive HP's and power to destroy ... not weak HP's and massive power . DHAV's should be the slowest but with the most power , like heavies of vehicles . I think the speed is just fine and warranted when you think of all that ground vehicles have to deal with and how most AV is anti-armor and they can't escape or maneuver like air vehicles can , couple that with terrain issues and multiple ground forces that can arrive at any moment and HAV's need the speed that they have at the present moment . Doubts are like flies and should be treated as such and crushed . #PubsShouldBeRandomPlayers

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5733	Posted - 2015.04.08 23:22:00 - [21] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Shield Boosters should be easier to fit and have a slightly higher HP/minute than an armor repairer. If you allow heavy boosters to trigger every 20 seconds (15 with skills) you achieve this fairly closely. It would allow shield HAVs to have access to a lot of repping power on demand and fairly frequently. It could work , I use the complex light shield booster just for that purpose . What are your thoughts about the shield regulators ? I use boosters because their just better to me then the regulators . I would say that they should just tweak the CPU / PG requirements first of shield mods and see how that plays out and change the mechanics like the OP spoke of . I would want a nerf for either but just bring them more inline with what already exist . Well shield regs are in the wrong slot and cost a lot to fit. That's problematic.' If Boosters had more HP/minute than repairers, shield HAVs would be less dependent on passive regen as their primary means of HP recovery and would put an end to the "but but but but recharge delay!" argument. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 263	Posted - 2015.04.08 23:27:00 - [22] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Shield Boosters should be easier to fit and have a slightly higher HP/minute than an armor repairer. If you allow heavy boosters to trigger every 20 seconds (15 with skills) you achieve this fairly closely. It would allow shield HAVs to have access to a lot of repping power on demand and fairly frequently. It could work , I use the complex light shield booster just for that purpose . What are your thoughts about the shield regulators ? I use boosters because their just better to me then the regulators . I would say that they should just tweak the CPU / PG requirements first of shield mods and see how that plays out and change the mechanics like the OP spoke of . I would want a nerf for either but just bring them more inline with what already exist . Well shield regs are in the wrong slot and cost a lot to fit. That's problematic.' If Boosters had more HP/minute than repairers, shield HAVs would be less dependent on passive regen as their primary means of HP recovery and would put an end to the "but but but but recharge delay!" argument. It wouldn't put an end to it... but it would make the mechanical arguments against it irrelevant the consistency within the setting argument could then be made...but never really need to be implemented besides making people (such as myself) who like the way Eve's shield regen work happy...but I imagine we're a small portion of the community, and CCP doesn't need to pander to us as long as they balance things in the system they have Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1993	Posted - 2015.04.08 23:34:00 - [23] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vesta Opalus wrote: Why should it take multiple people to kill a double hardened tank? It was already hard before, unless the tanker was certifiably ******, but the way hardeners combine with reps and armor hp makes it literally impossible now to kill a madruger until their hardeners go down.** Why is that ok? Maybe if infantry had modules that boosted their damage so they could overcome the hardeners, it would be fine, but they dont. There is no AV/V balance when you can simply choose to negate AV completely when you fit your tank. Its not even a matter of tactics or ambush, its just straight up impossible for a single person to kill a tank fitted with 2 repairs and 2 hardeners unless the tanker just does not react. Could you imagine how absurd it would be if infantry had fits like that? Heavies walking around, literally invincible to every weapon on the field, unkillable until their hardeners went down, is that something you are ok with? If not, then why is it ok for tanks? I highlightd the relevant portion of your reply. Tanks are supposed to be about stand-and-deliver gameplay. They are supposed to be hard to kill when hardeners are up. The entire point of hardeners is to make them take multiple people to kill so they don't have to run away as soon as someone switches to an AV fit. If one person can kill a tank, even if it is hardened, then hardeners have no purpose in existing. Imagine if armor plates only gave 8/12/15 armor hp. What would be the point of running them? They would technically increase your health, but not by near enough to be worth it. The problem is, tanks have too much speed, meaning once those hardeners go down, they quickly zip off to safety to come back and do it again. By slowing them down, we make them rely on infantry to provide support in the form of mobility. Ideally, a tank with hardeners would take 3-4 people running AV to kill, but the tank would have to have gunners, either to hop out and flank the AV or use their small guns to engage and kill them before hardeners come down. As it is now, I can easily zip off when I have about 5 seconds left on my hardeners and be perfectly fine. That shouldn't be the case. I want my tank to be a citadel when my hardeners are up. We have that now. But I don't want my tank to be able to zip away at LAV speeds when things go south. Listen, where do all tanks go when hardeners are down? How long does it take them to go there? Here are the answers. 1. Redline 2. maybe 20 seconds. "Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 18069	Posted - 2015.04.08 23:44:00 - [24] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Listen, where do all tanks go when hardeners are down? How long does it take them to go there? Here are the answers. 1. Redline 2. maybe 20 seconds. That's very debatable. Some pilots do chose to return to the redline as their fits are completely based around hardeners and have low eHP without them active other's don't have to and are more durable but I think the universal choice is to seek cover which is the correct course of action. Pretending like you can sit out in the open without your hardeners and have a good time is going to lose you that HAV. GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥ -The Nameless City
Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1993	Posted - 2015.04.08 23:46:00 - [25] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Listen, where do all tanks go when hardeners are down? How long does it take them to go there? Here are the answers. 1. Redline 2. maybe 20 seconds. That's very debatable. Some pilots do chose to return to the redline as their fits are completely based around hardeners and have low eHP without them active other's don't have to and are more durable but I think the universal choice is to seek cover which is the correct course of action. Pretending like you can sit out in the open without your hardeners and have a good time is going to lose you that HAV. Tell you the truth, I don't always go to redline when I'm dominating the match but I do when I know there is AV and there is possibility of other tanks. "Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 18069	Posted - 2015.04.08 23:52:00 - [26] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Listen, where do all tanks go when hardeners are down? How long does it take them to go there? Here are the answers. 1. Redline 2. maybe 20 seconds. That's very debatable. Some pilots do chose to return to the redline as their fits are completely based around hardeners and have low eHP without them active other's don't have to and are more durable but I think the universal choice is to seek cover which is the correct course of action. Pretending like you can sit out in the open without your hardeners and have a good time is going to lose you that HAV. Tell you the truth, I don't always go to redline when I'm dominating the match but I do when I know there is AV and there is possibility of other tanks. There are times when you simply have knocked out all resistance against you and therefore don't need to pull back. However most of the time I would suggest this is common sense, sticking around a single area with your hardeners on will draw pissed of AV to you, if you stay longer than your should you lose a big chunk of ISK simple as that. GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥ -The Nameless City
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood Rise Of Legion. 287	Posted - 2015.04.09 02:25:00 - [27] - Quote JUPA SACH wrote: Are you aware that all you do is complain about everything? It may be a complaint but... Armor hardeners need a chill pill... Whenever i engage a tank (ADS) i go for the gunny first because I know no matter how hard it can get, as long as I keep breaking recharge, i have a chance. But maddies? They just "OH! DAMAGE? HARDEN HA HA HA. " and know I'm waiting 30-45 seconds until i can engage. That and twin hardeners at max up/down time is near perma harden... It's simply too effective... It's 1.7 hardeners again. 40% and all the plus. Put shield hardeners back to 1.7 levels and watch the outcry. The ADS tourney! Join today!
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5736	Posted - 2015.04.09 03:41:00 - [28] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: It wouldn't put an end to it... but it would make the mechanical arguments against it irrelevant the consistency within the setting argument could then be made...but never really need to be implemented besides making people (such as myself) who like the way Eve's shield regen work happy...but I imagine we're a small portion of the community, and CCP doesn't need to pander to us as long as they balance things in the system they have Well I've said this before but here is what I envision with Armor Repairers becoming active modules and shield boosters having a slightly higher HP/minute. Natural Armor Rep (~30 HP/s) (Constant, very slow, Supplementary HP regeneration) Natural Shield Recharge (~120 HP/s) (Delayed, slow, Supplementary HP regeneration) Active Armor Repairer (Moderate Duration, Moderate Rate, Primary HP regeneration) Active Shield Booster (Short Duration, High Rate, Primary HP regeneration) The recharge delay is of course a factor, but is the tradeoff for a much higher natural rate. Even so in both cases that is simply supplementary regen. Currently Shield Boosters are so terribad that shield pretty much has to rely on natural recharge....which I think will remain nearly impossible properly balance against armor repairers, ESPECIALLY Heavy Passive ones. Most of this ** started when CCP Blam moved us to the "Passive Regeneration is Primary Regeneration" model and it has been a mess ever since. Passive regeneration is fine if it is limited to supplementary regen, but the primary regen moves back to the Active model. NOTE: I think that currently, the issue with armor repairers lies in the HEAVY ones. I don't think the Light ones are problematic so those can probably be left as is, as not to totally mess up Dropships and LAVs for the sake of HAV balance. As for balancing within the system we already have....I think Rattati is willing to be aggressive in change if it is absolutely necessary. However if he can reach a balanced state by making few changes, he's going to be more likely to go that direction with it. Manpower is very limited on the Dust Dev side so he has to make very tough choices on how things are done, and if he can get the desired result (of balance) with less work, he's going to take that direction with it. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 18087	Posted - 2015.04.09 09:00:00 - [29] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: It wouldn't put an end to it... but it would make the mechanical arguments against it irrelevant the consistency within the setting argument could then be made...but never really need to be implemented besides making people (such as myself) who like the way Eve's shield regen work happy...but I imagine we're a small portion of the community, and CCP doesn't need to pander to us as long as they balance things in the system they have Well I've said this before but here is what I envision with Armor Repairers becoming active modules and shield boosters having a slightly higher HP/minute. Natural Armor Rep (~30 HP/s) (Constant, very slow, Supplementary HP regeneration) Natural Shield Recharge (~120 HP/s) (Delayed, slow, Supplementary HP regeneration) Active Armor Repairer (Moderate Duration, Moderate Rate, Primary HP regeneration) Active Shield Booster (Short Duration, High Rate, Primary HP regeneration) The recharge delay is of course a factor, but is the tradeoff for a much higher natural rate. Even so in both cases that is simply supplementary regen. Currently Shield Boosters are so terribad that shield pretty much has to rely on natural recharge....which I think will remain nearly impossible properly balance against armor repairers, ESPECIALLY Heavy Passive ones. Most of this **** started when CCP Blam moved us to the "Passive Regeneration is Primary Regeneration" model and it has been a mess ever since. Passive regeneration is fine if it is limited to supplementary regen, but the primary regen moves back to the Active model. NOTE: I think that currently, the issue with armor repairers lies in the HEAVY ones. I don't think the Light ones are problematic so those can probably be left as is, as not to totally mess up Dropships and LAVs for the sake of HAV balance. As for balancing within the system we already have....I think Rattati is willing to be aggressive in change if it is absolutely necessary. However if he can reach a balanced state by making few changes, he's going to be more likely to go that direction with it. Manpower is very limited on the Dust Dev side so he has to make very tough choices on how things are done, and if he can get the desired result (of balance) with less work, he's going to take that direction with it. And as I have mentioned before in keeping with the above ideals since I too feel the same way. I think the current repair rates for the armour modules are fine, sans the passive repair rate. From previous builds the highest possible tier repairer was the old Efficient Heavy Armour Repairer which repaired a total of 414 armour every three seconds. On a per second basis this amounts to 138 repairs per second which I feel is fine and keeps the vehicle competitive and durable. However as it is not constant and gives time between pulses I feel like it would be distinctly more balanced while keeping the modules functionality relatively fair and balanced. Considering we have a skill for the betterment of repair values I think if you set the Repair Rate on the Prototype Module to 330 armour repaired per pulse unmodified (every 3 seconds for a fifteen second duration) you would woukd amount to the current Prototype module we have now. With skills that is 412.5 repairs every 3 seconds for the exactly 137.5 we have now just active and over a maximum time of between 15 and 18.75 seconds (which means Level V in core skills only adds one additional pulse meaning that under this model the total armour repaired changes from 2062.5 every 15 seconds to to 2475 over 18 seconds). Those values I think are fair but not overly powerful. An indvidual repairer under this model functions with the exact same efficiency however its window of operation is now much lower. Couple that with an appropriate cool down time that allows shield to regenerate their HP at a faster rate per minute and I think you will see some changes to the vehicles themselves. GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥ -The Nameless City
E-Rock Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 78	Posted - 2015.04.09 10:40:00 - [30] - Quote #specintomadrugers #tanksarelame #getajobscrub Japanese players call "hate mail", "fan mail".pÇÇµùÑµ£¼F¬PsñºS+êsñ½ -Founder of CKC and UCKC -Ahrendee Inc. #bringbackthewarbarge



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.

"Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.

"Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.

"Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.

"Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.

"Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.

"Skill for thee but no skill for me" so is the saying of the swarm infantry.