| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18192
   |
Posted - 2015.04.12 23:05:00 -
[91] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:True Adamance wrote:One Eyed King wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Instapop, no, but I think combined with how accurate some of the large turrets are regarding AI, its an OP double whammy. The "waves of opportunity" are too long, and the vulnerability too narrow. I think we should at least be able to do enough damage to require some maneuverability skill, hiding behind cover, escaping etc. As it is, they can just sit there and take as many shots as they please with no fear of being damaged, while still being fast enough to chase anyone trying to hide. A single Tanker shouldn't take 4 or 5 dedicated AV out of the game just in order to be chased off. Particularly when AV itself makes one vulnerable to infantry. Except when I am good enough at my role I can manage to survive against 5 AVers but using speed, terrain, modules, and firepower. Some players in Dust can go out of their way and manage to kill insane numbers of players, more so than I've seen any tank recently able to achieve, and still score good KDR's and all players do it salute them on "mad playz". It is wrong that I am better/ more able to deal with a forger with his proto Ishukone Assault Forge and Packed Lai Dai's and the hopping dicklord PLC scout he's running with? If it were a matter of skill, I would be fine with it. I do not believe that is the case however. If it was skill, it wouldn't just be any tanker doing it, but even mediocre tankers have no problem taking down AV. We shouldn't get to a point where the only solution to a tank is another tank, or 1/4 of the other team, just for one player. I don't even care if they have to decrease the costs of tanks to bring them more in line if need be, I just don't think they are balanced right now.
It's never been hard to drop AV though. They stand out in the open like it a god given right to be there and not die.
Just watch those AV sentinels walk out onto flat ground and try to forge, getting cut down as instead of running I rush them and drop them at close range, or as scouts attempt to play eHP peekabo and I pre-fire the corners they are popping around.
Reactive players who are smart enough to use positioning and their tools to not necessarily destroy that tank, though that happens, but blue balls it are the ones who are doing the job right. That leads to tankers becoming unfocused and therefore susceptible to smart players.
However I'd agree with you Tanks are unbalanced right now for what I see as two core reasons. One is that they have modules (armour repairers) that are passive yet have the prolific per second rep rate of Active Modules. And hardeners being stackable and static at 40%. I don't think dual hardeners are an issue but when you are hitting 60% resistance AND have something like 300 repairs per second something is wrong.
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3164
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 01:46:00 -
[92] - 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.
Oh no, can't solo a tank, the horror!
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3164
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 01:47:00 -
[93] - 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?
Of course you don't care what I have to say.
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?
No surprise there.
"I can't solo a tank, that's not fair."
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
JARREL THOMAS
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
574
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 02:04:00 -
[94] - Quote
Spkr4theDead 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? Of course you don't care what I have to say. 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?No surprise there. "I can't solo a tank, that's not fair."
No, go away.
But really, why don't you guys just wait for the hardeners to go down? I mean it's simple enough were not doing damage why continue shooting at it?
Caldari Loyalist. ( -í° -£-û -í°) They see me rollin they Hating (..) ( l: ) ( .-. ) ( :l ) (..)
|
Alena Ventrallis
Ahrendee Inc.
Negative-Feedback
3000
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 02:05:00 -
[95] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:
I don't think dual hardeners are an issue but when you are hitting 60% resistance AND have something like 300 repairs per second something is wrong.
See, that isn't even the problem. The problem is how fast you can react to threats. Slow tanks down, and now one caught in the open has a much harder time getting away.
Whirly gun make much thunder! - Victor
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3166
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 02:07:00 -
[96] - Quote
JARREL THOMAS wrote:
No, go away.
I've already been threatened because I call people out for their lack of experience, along with not compromising on my position. Why should I compromise when things were taken away from the deployment of Uprising through 1.8?
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18200
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 02:37:00 -
[97] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:JARREL THOMAS wrote:
No, go away.
I've already been threatened because I call people out for their lack of experience, along with not compromising on my position. Why should I compromise when things were taken away from the deployment of Uprising through 1.8?
You mean 1.7?
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3166
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 03:26:00 -
[98] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:JARREL THOMAS wrote:
No, go away.
I've already been threatened because I call people out for their lack of experience, along with not compromising on my position. Why should I compromise when things were taken away from the deployment of Uprising through 1.8? You mean 1.7?
What about 1.7? Do you have any experience with it?
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
Rise Of Legion.
311
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 03:36:00 -
[99] - Quote
JARREL THOMAS wrote:
But really, why don't you guys just wait for the hardeners to go down? I mean it's simple enough were not doing damage why continue shooting at it?
True; but, 45 seconds is a likkle too long to wait...
The ADS tourney! Join today!
|
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
1456
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 03:41:00 -
[100] - Quote
JARREL THOMAS wrote:But really, why don't you guys just wait for the hardeners to go down? I mean it's simple enough were not doing damage why continue shooting at it?
Two issues:
1) Vehicles are fast, meaning they can engage/disengage quickly, making their window of vulnerability difficult to judge at times as well as follow up on
2) For aHardeners particularly, they have a 37.5s cooldown (PRO, max skills) which is pretty damn short for a 45 second period of near invincibility.
One of the big issues, and I agree with Alena, is that HAVs are incredibly fast - probably the biggest factor being acceleration. HAVs can go from zero to top speed in about a second, almost instantly with a fuel injector. Make HAVs somewhat slower to accelerate and you'd see them being a lot more cautious and potentially vulnerable.
Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
|
|
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
Rise Of Legion.
312
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 03:43:00 -
[101] - Quote
501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07
Alright quick rephrase:
"it's fine that aHardeners are back to 1.7 levels? Yes or no."
"if you are fine with aHardeners going to 1.7, then campaign for sHardeners to go back to 1.7"
But isn't that essentially undoing 1.8 with a twist on tanks eHP?
"huh @.@"
*rephrasing the accusations against armor vehicles, not your post itself*
The ADS tourney! Join today!
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3167
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 04:39:00 -
[102] - Quote
Kallas Hallytyr wrote:
2) For aHardeners particularly, they have a 37.5s cooldown (PRO, max skills) which is pretty damn short for a 45 second period of near invincibility.
What is this invincibility you speak of?
Make HAVs somewhat slower to accelerate and you'd see them being a lot more cautious and potentially vulnerable.
Tanks during Chrome accelerated slowly, but back then a tank was a tank. But that was too OP, and they were subsequently nerfed.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3167
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 04:41:00 -
[103] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Alright quick rephrase: "it's fine that aHardeners are back to 1.7 levels? Yes or no." "if you are fine with aHardeners going to 1.7, then campaign for sHardeners to go back to 1.7" But isn't that essentially undoing 1.8 with a twist on tanks eHP? "huh @.@" *rephrasing the accusations against armor vehicles, not your post itself*
Undoing 1.8? No, it's doing everything vehicle-oriented in Echo. You nerf hardeners, you bring tanks back to where they were in 1.8. Nerfing hardeners is bringing back 1.8.
I don't think I can it say it any more ways than that.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
Rise Of Legion.
312
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 10:29:00 -
[104] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Alright quick rephrase: "it's fine that aHardeners are back to 1.7 levels? Yes or no." "if you are fine with aHardeners going to 1.7, then campaign for sHardeners to go back to 1.7" But isn't that essentially undoing 1.8 with a twist on tanks eHP? "huh @.@" *rephrasing the accusations against armor vehicles, not your post itself* Undoing 1.8? No, it's doing everything vehicle-oriented in Echo. You nerf hardeners, you bring tanks back to where they were in 1.8. Nerfing hardeners is bringing back 1.8. I don't think I can it say it any more ways than that.
So, are you okay w/ aHardeners being better than sHardeners? Echo sHardeners vs 1.7 aHardeners.
Now you see why we are complaining?
I say go back to 35/40 or 30/40 if 35 is too much. Better than 25% and not a complete "nerf" to vehicles... Its just balancing the hardeners.
Yes 1.8 aHardeners was ugh. But 1.7 aHardeners is "lolololol" for 36-45 seconds
Now that we found 2 absolutes, lets just go 50/50 (i know it contradicts what I just said)
40-25 = 15
15/2 = 7.5
25+7.5 = new aHardener. If its too little, and 1 or 2% too much take away 1 or 2%
The ADS tourney! Join today!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
935
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 10:41:00 -
[105] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Alright quick rephrase: "it's fine that aHardeners are back to 1.7 levels? Yes or no." "if you are fine with aHardeners going to 1.7, then campaign for sHardeners to go back to 1.7" But isn't that essentially undoing 1.8 with a twist on tanks eHP? "huh @.@" *rephrasing the accusations against armor vehicles, not your post itself*
Hardeners should not go back to 1.7 levels, however I missed the first month of 1.7 due to internet issues. All I'm saying is the hardeners should be strong enough to be a primary defense vs AV in a proto tank. Isk assets should be worth their investment. So either slightly nerf armor hardeners, and then give DHAVS a bonus to them (True Stand and Deliver Tanks), or buff the shield hardeners to 35%. I don't have the numbers to accurately say. I agree, tanking should require "skill" as the people call it these days, but also keep in mind that a tank is a force multiplier. It is SUPPOSE to require multiple people to take down, thus allowing ground infantry to more easily deal with hostiles who aren't AV. I have no qualms with current tanks, as I prefer the fun of getting a squad of friends and just hunting them down with Lavs all day lol. I hate free give-mes, so sure, make the tanks tough.
07
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
*The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven *
SWBF Trailer April
|
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
1456
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 13:25:00 -
[106] - Quote
501st Headstrong wrote:Hardeners should not go back to 1.7 levels, however I missed the first month of 1.7 due to internet issues. All I'm saying is the hardeners should be strong enough to be a primary defense vs AV in a proto tank. Isk assets should be worth their investment. So either slightly nerf armor hardeners,
That's the thing, aHardeners are back to 1.7: 1.7 aHardeners were 40% with sHardeners beings 60%, with the same uptime/cooldown as we currently have.
What we currently have is 1.7 aHardeners and nerfed sHardeners, making Armour HAVs vastly superior, in no small part due to having way long uptime/shorter cooldown.
This is why I have suggested previously that aHardeners need to have either their uptime reduced (or the sHardener uptime increased) or their cooldown increased (or the sHardener reduced.) Essentially, aHardeners have their fingers in every single pie: they have equal resistance (and coupled with the passive reps, that's incredibly powerful), a far longer active duration and a substantially lower cooldown - sHardeners need some kind of advantage, especially since Shields have lower HP levels and can have their regeneration stopped.
Spkr4theDead wrote:Kallas Hallytyr wrote:
2) For aHardeners particularly, they have a 37.5s cooldown (PRO, max skills) which is pretty damn short for a 45 second period of near invincibility.
What is this invincibility you speak of?
Well, for one I said near invincibility, because the double rep/double hardened Madrugars are tearing things up right now. If you either: a, dont think this is a problem or; b, haven't encountered/experienced it, then you dont really have anything to add to the discussion, especially given your ridiculous hard line position of "Tanks must be nigh unkillable!"
Armour HAVs currently are insanely resilient and even three or more AV working together struggle to even threaten a half awake pilot. Now, when Hardeners are down, they are made of paper...if you have high alpha weaponry like a railgun, but against applied DPS they are still very tough - and that's not using two of their modules!
Ostensibly, Shields are in a reasonably fair place - they can resist AV fire for a good amount of time and can recover their HO rapidly when needed, but even for that they can be focused down by enough firepower, or by one smart player doing the right things (like proxy traps.) Armour HAVs need overwhelming and entirely unreasonable amounts of force applied: even from other HAVs - even other Armour HAVs, where it's like watching Superman vs Superman.
Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
|
Doc DDD
TeamPlayers
Negative-Feedback
430
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 13:48:00 -
[107] - Quote
One of the reasons the double hardener double rep Maddies are so prevalent is the fact large rails have been nerfed at least 5 times in a row instead of fixing core issues.
Damage Nerf
Range Nerf
Heat Build up Nerf
Giving 90% more resist to armor hardener Nerf
Basic and Advanced damage mod Nerf
On top of these nerfs, shield tanks have also been nerfed ( because sitting in the redline hiding is supposed to be a 'pkaystyle' according to armor users). These nerfs include:
Hardener Nerf
Shield fitting Nerf
Shield staking penalty Nerf
Breaking Shield Booster Nerf
Shield regen rate Nerf
Shield starting armor value Nerf
Missile splash damage nerf
Missile clip size nerf
Missile reload time nerf
Fix Shields
Fix Rails
Fix Missiles
Fix the core problems
or do as per usual and pander to the masses that QQ on the forums for nerfs, as it is easier to cry on the forums than realize what the actual problem is in-game.
|
DeathwindRising
ROGUE RELICS
991
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 13:59:00 -
[108] - 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?
they forgot that armor reps were changed in 1.7 or whatever. armor reps needs to be changed from hp/s to hp/ 3 or 5 s
which would make them more vulnerable to burst damage |
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
1457
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 14:18:00 -
[109] - Quote
DeathwindRising wrote:they forgot that armor reps were changed in 1.7 or whatever. armor reps needs to be changed from hp/s to hp/ 3 or 5 s
which would make them more vulnerable to burst damage
This would be one of the better change to make to passive armour reps. Better yet, make it like this and make it active again!
Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
Rise Of Legion.
314
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 14:40:00 -
[110] - Quote
501st Headstrong wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Alright quick rephrase: "it's fine that aHardeners are back to 1.7 levels? Yes or no." "if you are fine with aHardeners going to 1.7, then campaign for sHardeners to go back to 1.7" But isn't that essentially undoing 1.8 with a twist on tanks eHP? "huh @.@" *rephrasing the accusations against armor vehicles, not your post itself* Hardeners should not go back to 1.7 levels, however I missed the first month of 1.7 due to internet issues. All I'm saying is the hardeners should be strong enough to be a primary defense vs AV in a proto tank. Isk assets should be worth their investment. So either slightly nerf armor hardeners, and then give DHAVS a bonus to them (True Stand and Deliver Tanks), or buff the shield hardeners to 35%. I don't have the numbers to accurately say. I agree, tanking should require "skill" as the people call it these days, but also keep in mind that a tank is a force multiplier. It is SUPPOSE to require multiple people to take down, thus allowing ground infantry to more easily deal with hostiles who aren't AV. I have no qualms with current tanks, as I prefer the fun of getting a squad of friends and just hunting them down with Lavs all day lol. I hate free give-mes, so sure, make the tanks tough. 07
Shield hardeners are at 40%, 35% would be a nerf.
501, you say they (aHardeners) shouldnt be at 1.7, but thats EXACTLY what you are defending... Not being rude, just pointing that out.
I think DHAVs should just have crazy eHP capability.
But before that, PILOT SUITS AND LINK MODULES. it could do so much...
The ADS tourney! Join today!
|
|
|
Echo 1991
Titans of Phoenix
RUST415
783
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 14:48:00 -
[111] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Alright quick rephrase: "it's fine that aHardeners are back to 1.7 levels? Yes or no." "if you are fine with aHardeners going to 1.7, then campaign for sHardeners to go back to 1.7" But isn't that essentially undoing 1.8 with a twist on tanks eHP? "huh @.@" *rephrasing the accusations against armor vehicles, not your post itself* Hardeners should not go back to 1.7 levels, however I missed the first month of 1.7 due to internet issues. All I'm saying is the hardeners should be strong enough to be a primary defense vs AV in a proto tank. Isk assets should be worth their investment. So either slightly nerf armor hardeners, and then give DHAVS a bonus to them (True Stand and Deliver Tanks), or buff the shield hardeners to 35%. I don't have the numbers to accurately say. I agree, tanking should require "skill" as the people call it these days, but also keep in mind that a tank is a force multiplier. It is SUPPOSE to require multiple people to take down, thus allowing ground infantry to more easily deal with hostiles who aren't AV. I have no qualms with current tanks, as I prefer the fun of getting a squad of friends and just hunting them down with Lavs all day lol. I hate free give-mes, so sure, make the tanks tough. 07 Shield hardeners are at 40%, 35% would be a nerf. 501, you say they (aHardeners) shouldnt be at 1.7, but thats EXACTLY what you are defending... Not being rude, just pointing that out. I think DHAVs should just have crazy eHP capability. But before that, PILOT SUITS AND LINK MODULES. it could do so much...
If by Dhav you mean destroyer HAVs they should not have crazy EHP capabilities, they would be the tanks that find other tanks and murder them. Marauder HAVs would be the high EHP lower damage variety. |
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
Rise Of Legion.
315
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 14:56:00 -
[112] - Quote
Echo 1991 wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Alright quick rephrase: "it's fine that aHardeners are back to 1.7 levels? Yes or no." "if you are fine with aHardeners going to 1.7, then campaign for sHardeners to go back to 1.7" But isn't that essentially undoing 1.8 with a twist on tanks eHP? "huh @.@" *rephrasing the accusations against armor vehicles, not your post itself* Hardeners should not go back to 1.7 levels, however I missed the first month of 1.7 due to internet issues. All I'm saying is the hardeners should be strong enough to be a primary defense vs AV in a proto tank. Isk assets should be worth their investment. So either slightly nerf armor hardeners, and then give DHAVS a bonus to them (True Stand and Deliver Tanks), or buff the shield hardeners to 35%. I don't have the numbers to accurately say. I agree, tanking should require "skill" as the people call it these days, but also keep in mind that a tank is a force multiplier. It is SUPPOSE to require multiple people to take down, thus allowing ground infantry to more easily deal with hostiles who aren't AV. I have no qualms with current tanks, as I prefer the fun of getting a squad of friends and just hunting them down with Lavs all day lol. I hate free give-mes, so sure, make the tanks tough. 07 Shield hardeners are at 40%, 35% would be a nerf. 501, you say they (aHardeners) shouldnt be at 1.7, but thats EXACTLY what you are defending... Not being rude, just pointing that out. I think DHAVs should just have crazy eHP capability. But before that, PILOT SUITS AND LINK MODULES. it could do so much... If by Dhav you mean destroyer HAVs they should not have crazy EHP capabilities, they would be the tanks that find other tanks and murder them. Marauder HAVs would be the high EHP lower damage variety.
Thanks for the correction!
The ADS tourney! Join today!
|
Echo 1991
Titans of Phoenix
RUST415
784
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 14:59:00 -
[113] - Quote
No problem.  |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |