DUST Search - Requesting a clarification on vehicles

The Attorney General wrote:

Breakin Stuff wrote:

The Attorney General wrote:

Breakin Stuff wrote:

True Adamance wrote:

I think it should be a legitimate role. So many people who have supported this game for so long have committed themselves to making vehicles their specialty in the same way others have infantry roles, you yourself Breaking are a recognized Forge Gun Sentinel.

That being said I don't believe that making them a legitimate role means shoe horning them into a 'disposal' asset. All I really want to see for say....HAV is them in a place where they functionally make sense. If the concept is that HAV should be less durable again AV then by all means give HAV and Vehicles the fire power they logically deserve.

Oh I'm in favor of the heavy turrets having fangs, make no mistake. Very much in favor of upping the lethality if the defenses get shifted downward.

Why would defenses need to be shifted down? It is already easy enough for a single suit to nuke a tank, and all adding gunners does is add wp when you get killed.

Not being able to solo tanks with your forge from a rooftop unless they Muppet is a good thing for balance.

Since you don't know me, don't know how I play, I invite you to merrily screw off.

I cant rooftop snipe for longer than about four minutes because I literally fall asleep from boredom

So then how are tanks too strong?

3 av nades and a forge shot will do it, just don't miss.

You need it to be easier?


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
DUST Fiend 17	Posted - 2015.06.28 02:14:00 - [1] - Quote I still say if you want 1v1 then how can you possibly balance that? How can your suit which is automatically deployed and swappable at a supply depot be balanced against something that takes forever to be deployed, can be destroyed during said deployment, and can only be switched by waiting (while vulnerable) and calling in another (while vulnerable) This will never = 1v1, so how can you want a 1v1 equation for AV/V? Also keep in mind that there is a vehicle cap, so if it's 1v1 then AV will ALWAYS be superior to vehicles in the end. And vehicles can't cap points
DUST Fiend 17	Posted - 2015.06.28 02:36:00 - [2] - Quote The Attorney General wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: The Attorney General wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: I think it should be a legitimate role. So many people who have supported this game for so long have committed themselves to making vehicles their specialty in the same way others have infantry roles, you yourself Breaking are a recognized Forge Gun Sentinel. That being said I don't believe that making them a legitimate role means shoe horning them into a 'disposal' asset. All I really want to see for say....HAV is them in a place where they functionally make sense. If the concept is that HAV should be less durable again AV then by all means give HAV and Vehicles the fire power they logically deserve. Oh I'm in favor of the heavy turrets having fangs, make no mistake. Very much in favor of upping the lethality if the defenses get shifted downward. Why would defenses need to be shifted down? It is already easy enough for a single suit to nuke a tank, and all adding gunners does is add wp when you get killed. Not being able to solo tanks with your forge from a rooftop unless they Muppet is a good thing for balance. Since you don't know me, don't know how I play, I invite you to merrily screw off. I cant rooftop snipe for longer than about four minutes because I literally fall asleep from boredom So then how are tanks too strong? 3 av nades and a forge shot will do it, just don't miss. You need it to be easier? Honestly if we had webifier mines none of this would matter
DUST Fiend 17	Posted - 2015.06.28 02:46:00 - [3] - Quote The Attorney General wrote: Why though? Between proxy traps, RE's and hiding on a nanohive chucking nuclear baseballs there are already more then enough options for area denial. I am amazed by the lack of imagination of av'ers, especially since all tankers need to grow a second set of eyes and always be moving to survive. I am an awful tanker apparently haha, I die constantly on the few occasions I play. I usually just punch my hardeners when I want to run past AV nests and then I stick to the outskirts hunting vehicles since if I time the hardener wrong I tend to explode @_@ And I always bump into **** or stop at the wrong time and not have enough acceleration to turn the right way while still shooting that idiot who keeps shooting me. It's such a shame that this game is on permanent hold for real development. A higher player count in match would really change the dynamic a lot. I don't play enough now to say what is and isn't balanced, I can just say that losing 1.2 - 8 million ISK in a given play session is not entirely uncommon for me I R bad, and stubborn
DUST Fiend 17	Posted - 2015.06.28 03:08:00 - [4] - Quote The best tanker I ever played with personally was MUDFLAPS back when I was in OSG He was obnoxiously good and the only reason I ever bothered looking at tanks as anything other than WP. He always said something along the lines of the biggest sin a tanker can commit, is to stop. Never ever ever stop moving. He had some crazy setup that helped him maintain momentum on turns, it was really something else. He was also the first one I saw / to show me how drive the tank backwards while looking back with your gun to give you a stronger defense during a retreat. Pretty much common knowledge but it was really cool to see back then
DUST Fiend 17	Posted - 2015.06.28 03:29:00 - [5] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: This isn't a balance thread. If you wanna complain about balancing... Go make another thread. You want them to be 1v1'd or to have no skill line..... I think that indicates a need for balancing.....