P.S : @Breakin Stuff : yes, tankers are mostly cowards, which is sadly the case for 90% of the community. This is the main problem of this game as the guys wishing to fight are hardly penalized by that. Personally it's the worst community I've ever seen because of that.

Thx for the feedback, I don't agree with every points of course but it's still interesting.

About the blaster range, my point wasn't about blaster installation being OP because I gunned down a bunch of scrubs, I just don't find legit to be able to kill infantry in less than 1 second with a large blaster while being at over 120m. Theoretically the blaster was supposed to be short range and it is not.

About the tank role, I think there should be one build good against infantry at short range but bad against vehicles (large blaster, but right now it's destroying vehicles easily and can shoot very far). Have the rail cannons gods against vehicles and crap against infantry (roughly the case) and missiles ok at both but beaten by the specialized version at both.

Buffing hardeners is really what I want to avoid, tanks are too good with them and too fragile without them. Tanks should be naturally tougher while being less in god mode with hardeners. That would be fairer while increasing the variety of builds.

And finally about the AV vs vehicles communities people really need to play on both sides, which I do. Vehicles users have to understand that being invincible against 1 AV guy is extremely frustrating for the other side as the AV can't do anything else and don't get any kind of reward. On the other hand AVers are asking way too much for automatic success when hunting vehicles.

P.S : @Breakin Stuff : yes, tankers are mostly cowards, which is sadly the case for 90% of the community. This is the main problem of this game as the guys wishing to fight are hardly penalized by that. Personally it's the worst community I've ever seen because of that.

Half tankers are redline/hills campers, in the other half you have most blaster tanks. Sure some of them are there to get into the thick of it, but a part of them are just there to get easy kills and flee in front of any kind of engagement that has more than 5% chance to be fatal.
That's where you see the difference between the scrubs and the true good tankers who will try to destroy the threat until it's clear they're gonna lose and so retreat smartly to come back a bit later to get ridd of the opposition once more.

So yeah, 50%+a part of 50% = majority of cowards, and sadly those guys are pretty noisy and have too much impact on tanks evolution (as the whiney AVers). So you alternate between tanks=easy mode and too powerful AV

risk aversion is pretty much the definition of everything wrong with any given player in this game.

And you deal with the worst by ignoring them, or point out every logical insanity they throw at you.

Whatever is more fun for you.

And while I personally do hate Tankers who sit in the redline and nothing I cannot find fault with a player who has gone into cool down pulling back from combat. No different from how the good tankers play Battlefield, Planetside, etc.

However I must point out how boring I find the current Armour HAV meta since two Armour HAV on field pretty much invalidates most attempts to tankers to deal with them due to the length of engagements, can almost never be dealt with AV unless you catch one in cool down, and ADS don't even have a say any more.

I don't really think the repair values on HAV need to change only how they function. Transition them from Passives to Actives and a fair amount of time players will be engaging armour HAV which are hardeners but can only infrequently activate their reppers.

@ Breaking stuff regarding armor LAVs

You may survive the first hit but you wont survive the second one.

Assuming you fit a PG upgrade, which is necessary.

- Armor plate? No Reps, second hit kills.

- Rep tanK? First hit kills.

- Hardner? You are running on base eHP and no rreps second hit kills.

To use it soley as means of tranport from A to B is fine, as long as you own a BPO. Otherwise, LAV's with any sort decent turret on them is just a waste of time. The changes have made them from interesting if fit correctly to snot wrapped tissue paper no matter what you put on them. which is sad, i liked my quafe LAV. I bought it to use it, use it often, and effectivley as well.

But people bitched about wheelchair heavies, gunners using smail rail turrets, and LAV's being 'too hard to kill ( in a build where tanks were UP vs AV, people argued LAVs were OP?)' and here we are.

@Breakin
Agreed that tanks should have a role outside that of killing infantry. But I've yet to see a Dev response that that is even possible(and I and others have said this any times if tank are to kill other tanks, there must be reason). At this point, I just assume that it isn't exactly possible, or quite a ways down the road.

I imagine it would require quite a revamp to many things to become possible.

So thus we are stuck with making it so that tanks either are designed around killing other tanks (becoming useless in the process) or killing infantry, giving a reason to call tanks.

And honestly, right now I can't exactly say that tanks are insanely OP as AV make them out to be. It generally boils down to ONE singular fit that causes the problem for infantry AV, the infamous double rep - double hardened.

A double hardened - plate - rep fit, while strong, doesn't compare to the former as it is not possible to take sustained damage with hardeners up. As AV attack it, it slowly wears down, eventually getting to a critical point that takes a bit of time to recover from (say like 10 to 15 seconds or more).

So, imho, this should be the main focus of the balancing act, double rep - double hardened fits first and foremost. And I don't think that hardeners themselves are the biggest problem, but the nature of the passive reps. A return to active I think would have a very large impact.

And please be reasonable and respectful if you choose to reply. I've done nor said anything to elicit such negative and nasty comments that you generally leave for me. If you disagree, cool, but I don't need you bashing my intelligence because you find you are somehow more right.

If it doesn't destroy it then it's not the counter.

I like that one av load out is no longer the counter for every vehicle.


The counter to double rep double hardened maddy is high alpha, which used to come from damage modded rails. Now that you need a Gunlogi, with a heat sink, and a damage mod, and another damage mod, and another damage mod, and a shield extender, to hidein the redline and hopen this one build of tank comes within 300m and sits there for 5 straight shots is just bad game design.

The only thing you can really do is roll up with a missile madrugar with 2 hardeners and a damage mod and land every volley.

Shield tanks need to be fixed
Rails need decreased heat build up and more range
Missiles need that weird delay at end of clip reduced

If rails gets a heat and range buff, that damage needs to get nerfed.

Why?

They would be used primarily for anti vehicle, infantry should be happy

As is, missiles fire 50m shorter and have much higher alpha with the same number of damage mods. The state shields are in actually have madrugar missile tanks having more advantages over caldari missile tanks, this is sad. Unless it's a 4 damage mod shield missile tank hiding in the redline (paper thin to AV).

The only people that should be scared of rails that can take 3 shots without over heating and hitting targets 450m away are double repped, double hardened madrugars.

No, I do not accept any premise that says any unit should be immune to destruction by it's counter under any circumstance.

If that's what you have an inherent problem, instead of trying to argue with me, walk away, because that is the one point I will give no ground on. Counters in DUST should be lethal.

You want me to be nice? Be honest with your intent and don't try to hide it from the word go, and quit dismissing the opinions of dissent, because bluntly your opinions on balance are no more valid than mine than mine are to yours. they're opinions.