DUST Search - Nerf impenetrable Madrugars already

All Channels

General Discussions

Nerf impenetrable Madrugars already

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 346	Posted - 2015.07.15 09:15:00 - [1] - Quote Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . Get some life in your hands.
maybe deadcatz the nomercs 343	Posted - 2015.07.15 09:30:00 - [2] - Quote hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies scanner? whats that? you can see enemies on the radar? just use your eyes and save a equipment slot for something useful
Daddrobit You Can Call Me Daddy 1	Posted - 2015.07.15 10:13:00 - [3] - Quote maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies ISK should never buy invulnerability. O.G. Pink Fluffy Bunny
nicholas73 Glitched Connection 465	Posted - 2015.07.15 10:19:00 - [4] - Quote Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. "Some walks you got to take alone" - Oregairu
Ghosts Chance Intara Direct Action Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.15 10:27:00 - [5] - Quote how to kill "invincable" maddies super sica 4x complex railgun damage mods 1x pg unit 1x plate 3-4 shot them and BOOM, just dont fire untill you are going to have aprox 2.5 seconds of LOS and DONT MISS Minmatar is Winmatar Creed of the Minja - "I'm a leaf on the wind" I am Chances Ghost
Varoth Drac Dead Man's Game 1	Posted - 2015.07.15 11:21:00 - [6] - Quote Madrugars don't need nerfing (except for large blaster dispersion). Instead buff Gunlogis and maybe missile turrets.
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 349	Posted - 2015.07.15 11:46:00 - [7] - Quote maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies I know I've got a 20 mil sp vehicle account. Get some life in your hands.
Mina Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 3	Posted - 2015.07.15 11:47:00 - [8] - Quote Varoth Drac wrote: Madrugars don't need nerfing (except for large blaster dispersion). Instead buff Gunlogis and maybe missile turrets. They do need some adjusting. Without their hardeners they're far too weak. With them they're practically invincible (-60.86% incoming damage) They go from ~5k ehp & ~150ish reps to ~11.5k ehp (presuming the plate, dual hardener & single rep) with roughly ~400 effective reps once both hardeners get activated. Their reps outpace incoming DPS unless you can find some massive burst or have way, way too many people shooting at target. Their effective reps get even wilder if they drop the plate for a second rep. Or something like that, I'm tired and not mathing well. The problem is largely that this is all done in effective hitpoints, which means that the damage reduction is insane. If tanks were to have higher raw hitpoints, and lower hardened values alongside lower proportional reps... people wouldn't be as upset, as tanks would take damage that actually sticks for a bit. The large other portion of the problem is that vehicles have isk costs that treat them like they're temporary powerups (and yes, isk IS used as a balancing feature in this game, like it or not) so when someone calls out a 1m isk tank they feel like it should 'buy' them a lot of power, because risk vs reward. Another issue is that vehicles take up an absolutely massive amount of SP to be any real good which really messes with their design, as it treats them more as a role than a temporary powerup anyone could purchase... so there's a second hurdle there. Thirdly vehicles lack a very well defined role other than 'roam around and kill whatever you encounter' which further adds to frustrations - If they had a clearly defined role, people would be less likely to pull them out in situations where they're not needed. If isk costs remain so absurdly high, SP costs should go down, and survivability should probably be retained. If sp costs remain so absurdly high, isk costs should go down and survivability should be lowered (no one likes dying, but I care less about dying in something that costs 20k than something that costs 2mil). Vehicles need clear and frequently useful roles, without people getting upset when they perform well in the roles they have (currently people get really upset that some tanks are good at slaying... because well, that's the only identifiable role they have, and then vehicles get nerfed into uselessness... which causes a set of buffs later down the line that breaks everything because they still don't have a role). Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 11:49:00 - [9] - Quote I'm no expert, but I'm of the opinion that Hardeners are more to blame than the HAVs themselves. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 349	Posted - 2015.07.15 11:51:00 - [10] - Quote nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. Not all 3. That the type of logic is what destroyed assault dropships. I still remember Rattati nerfing hit and runs by nerfing the AB, made the rof skill almost nonexistent, then to put salt in the wound buffed swarms all in the same update. Awful, awful update for dropships. I haven gone on my maxed out ads account since . Get some life in your hands.

A1ZEN AKUMA 7	Posted - 2015.07.15 11:53:00 - [11] - Quote hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . are you crazy. its pretty hard to tank already. my suggestion for you get in a tank and see how much fun you have before a militia bpo armour av decides to bombard you with swarms because that's what they always do other than snipe. then when people who are actually skilled into av have a go at you have to retreat for fear of losing 1.3+ isk. i dunno when ccp lost the plot tanks are suppose to be a dominating force that would require a squad or maybe a team effort to take out not just one merc. my suggestions nerf swarm launchers they are crazy and lai dais
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 349	Posted - 2015.07.15 11:59:00 - [12] - Quote A1ZEN AKUMA wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . are you crazy. its pretty hard to tank already. my suggestion for you get in a tank and see how much fun you have before a militia bpo armour av decides to bombard you with swarms because that's what they always do other than snipe. then when people who are actually skilled into av have a go at you have to retreat for fear of losing 1.3+ isk. i dunno when ccp lost the plot tanks are suppose to be a dominating force that would require a squad or maybe a team effort to take out not just one merc. my suggestions nerf swarm launchers they are crazy and lai dais Its really not hard at all. Just tank in pairs that way you don't get crowded on by Av. Anyways with 2 hardeners and maxed skills you can always stay hardened. Get some life in your hands.
Lone Wolf 777 Caldari Immortals 7	Posted - 2015.07.15 12:07:00 - [13] - Quote To be fair, tanks are easy to kill if you make a plan to kill it. Yeah, they can take alot of punishment but lets try to think for a second....hmm....its a damn tank, get used to 1 person with AV getting swatted to the side like a bug. It should take teamwork to kill a tank. Not a few Lai Dais at a un-hardened tank to kill it, which by the way is absolutely ridiculous. You want to know what I do to deal with a tank if it becomes a problem with me or my blues, i bring out a tank. So stop whining, either use teamwork or spend lots of SP & ISK into vehicles. And if that tank kills yours, dont go crying saying, "It was lag!", "He/she is cheating" or one of my favorite, "Tanks are OP!"....lol. Just remember, your infantry....a tank is "anti-infantry". Who do you expect to win lol.
Aidualc LATINOS KILLERS CORP RUST415 441	Posted - 2015.07.15 12:12:00 - [14] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: I'm no expert, but I'm of the opinion that Hardeners are more to blame than the HAVs themselves. Why not limit Hardeners to one per loadout, like the cloak? Yeap, limit the dual hardeners is a solution, dual rep is not efective vs 2 swarms or dai lai spawn. But dual hardener now is op. Yeap many players don't wanna loose a 1M isk so easy, but in a PC battle. A tank can slay at last 15 - 20 proto dropsuis... That is the risk. -- Ecce Initio -- Tomate Pote -- *Respectu, Honorem, Value, Unionem*******
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 10	Posted - 2015.07.15 12:17:00 - [15] - Quote maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies SP does not equal invulnerability. there are AV players who invest just as much SP if not more into perfecting their AV fits. Your argument is irrelevant. WoW has taught me that Purple means Legendary. This means Quafe suits are the optimal loadout for killing all of you.
Lone Wolf 777 Caldari Immortals 7	Posted - 2015.07.15 12:28:00 - [16] - Quote Limiting to 1 hardener would turn tanks into swiss cheese 2 seconds flat. Why not make a middle ground, by limiting to 1 hardener a tank becomes squishy, so why not nerf AV & remove 1 hardener & makes tank slightly more customized to deal with certain situations & not an every situation type of tank. For instance, increase pg & cpu slightly, choose what small turret can go where, if any and or make it to where pg upgrades go into high slot & cpu upgrades go into low slots, just like dropsuits. So there, both sides can be happy. More customize-ability for tankers & a little more damage from AV.
DDx77 Random Gunz Rise Of Legion. 325	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:37:00 - [17] - Quote It's definetly the hardeners that make them the most "invincible"
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:38:00 - [18] - Quote Lone Wolf 777 wrote: To be fair, tanks are easy to kill if you make a plan to kill it. BS. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 2	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:41:00 - [19] - Quote I agree. Incubus' are silly strong too. It's a gallente vehicle thing Official CPM Platform
A1ZEN AKUMA 10	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:43:00 - [20] - Quote stop complaining get in a tank and have an amazing dog fight, pick up a maddie with a rail and blow some sh*t up. stop trying to Nerf something which isn't OP. if you want to nerf something look at the weapons on your AV fit and try to tell me they are not overpowered ive taken out plenty of pro maddies with a militia rail gun turret using a soma

General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:43:00 - [21] - Quote hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . Nope. IF, and I strongly stress IF, you hit a dual rep maddy with 3 lai dais and a set of swarms, it goes down. Unless you take your sweet ass time doing it, in which case it is on you for being slow. The fact that you need TWO sets of homing weapons to hit a tank suggests that your skills are not so advanced as to actually aim. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:44:00 - [22] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: ISK should never buy invulnerability. And for tanks, it doesn't. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:47:00 - [23] - Quote A1ZEN AKUMA wrote: stop complaining get in a tank and have an amazing dog fight, pick up a maddie with a rail and blow some sht up. stop trying to Nerf something which isn't OP. if you want to nerf something look at the weapons on your AV fit and try to tell me they are not overpowered There's no AV fit in the game which is overpowered against perma-hardened Madrugars. The "if you don't like it, get one yourself"* argument is and always has been an indicator of imbalance. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:49:00 - [24] - Quote hails8n wrote: Its really not hard at all. Just tank in pairs that way you don't get crowded on by Av. Anyways with 2 hardeners and maxed skills you can always stay hardened. Yes, and a single hardened tank explodes under the barrage you described in the OP. Either that or he engages his second hardener and gives you a window where he will be without any hardeners and be an easy kill. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:54:00 - [25] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: A1ZEN AKUMA wrote: stop complaining get in a tank and have an amazing dog fight, pick up a maddie with a rail and blow some sht up. stop trying to Nerf something which isn't OP. if you want to nerf something look at the weapons on your AV fit and try to tell me they are not overpowered There's no AV fit in the game which is overpowered against perma-hardened Madrugars. The "if you don't like it, get one yourself"* argument is and always has been an indicator of imbalance. A permahardened Maddy takes much less punishment, and reps less than a dual hardened. Dual rep fits can be alpha'd through with either breach forges, rails, or proxies, or a triple Lai dai smack followed up with any STD AV weapon. Dual hardener/plate/single rep fits can be worn down before their hardeners finish cycling by all sorts of dog pile AV. The permahardened maddy is very difficult to take out for one person only if that one person refuses to use their mobility and all the tools at their disposal. AV who stays static can easily deny a tank access to a certain point, but the tank will have the option to disengage. AV who want to kill tanks has to actively ensure it happens. There is a lot of depth in the AV/Tank relationship, and ground troops have plenty of option, and more often than not use none of them. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:55:00 - [26] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: hails8n wrote: Its really not hard at all. Just tank in pairs that way you don't get crowded on by Av. Anyways with 2 hardeners and maxed skills you can always stay hardened. Yes, and a single hardened tank explodes under the barrage you described in the OP. Either that or he engages his second hardener and gives you a window where he will be without any hardeners and be an easy kill. A small window of vulnerability. Is that "waves of opportunity" working as intended? I've always thought it was intended to mean a short span of high resistance followed by a long span of vulnerability (as opposed to the inverse). Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:56:00 - [27] - Quote Aidualc wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: I'm no expert, but I'm of the opinion that Hardeners are more to blame than the HAVs themselves. Why not limit Hardeners to one per loadout, like the cloak? Yeap, limit the dual hardeners is a solution, dual rep is not efective vs 2 swarms or dai lai spawn. But dual hardener now is op. Yeap many players don't wanna loose a 1M isk so easy, but in a PC battle. A tank can slay at last 15 - 20 proto dropsuis... That is the risk. If a tank is slaying 20 suits in your PC, your AV players shouldn't be in that PC, and your tankers should all quit. AKA, get good. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:57:00 - [28] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: AKA get good. Pilots telling AV Infantry to "get gud". Another indicator of imbalance. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
zDemoncake Horizons' Edge No Context 918	Posted - 2015.07.15 13:59:00 - [29] - Quote I'll penetrate them for you CEO of Horizons' Edge's mercenary division *My soul, your beats!* Enemy to many; equal to none.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:02:00 - [30] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: SP does not equal invulnerability. there are AV players who invest just as much SP if not more into perfecting their AV fits. Your argument is irrelevant. In no way is a AV trooper spending more SP than a tanker. Tankers are not invulnerable. You know the last time I saw you, you were riding in a butter soft LAV in a match with 4 tankers on the board, and railguns on the killfeed. Did you drive carefully, using cover and geography to get to your destination? No, you drove across an open field like an idiot, and your lav got one shot by me. Even if I hadn't killed you, you were still barreling around a corner into 3 tanks and a red turret. You may have perfected your fits, but you aren't smart enough to use them. Mouthbreathers shouldn't be influential to balance calls. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.

Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:04:00 - [31] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Mouthbreathers shouldn't be influential to balance calls. "Mouthbreathing AVers are doing it wrong." Yet another indicator of a balance problem. This thread reminds me of 1.7. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:05:00 - [32] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: AKA get good. Pilots telling AV Infantry to "get gud". Another indicator of imbalance. Would you let a tank squat for 20 kills in a PC? NF, OH, etc would NEVER let that happen. First, their rail tankers are of enough quality to make sure that doesn't happen. Second, their battleplans do not allow a tank unfettered access to areas where grabbing twenty kills is even possible. Third, if a tank was being that much of a nuisance, they would change tactics to drop it, and limit its effectiveness. In a team mode, if you let one player dominate you, that is because you are a horrible team, not because tanks are OP. I'm not telling his AV to get good, I'm saying his team was a bunch of pubstars who have no concept of teamwork or strategy, and that is why they lost. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:06:00 - [33] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Mouthbreathers shouldn't be influential to balance calls. "Mouthbreathing AVers are doing it wrong." Yet another indicator of a balance problem. This thread reminds me of 1.7. Yes, because the guy who drives an untanked LAV into a swarm of infantry, tanks and turrets should be listened to when they complain tanks are OP. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Ghost Kaisar Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:07:00 - [34] - Quote Mina Longstrike wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: Madrugars don't need nerfing (except for large blaster dispersion). Instead buff Gunlogis and maybe missile turrets. They do need some adjusting. Without their hardeners they're far too weak. With them they're practically invincible (-60.86% incoming damage) They go from ~5k ehp & ~150ish reps to ~11.5k ehp (presuming the plate, dual hardener & single rep) with roughly ~400 effective reps once both hardeners get activated. Their reps outpace incoming DPS unless you can find some massive burst or have way, way too many people shooting at target. Their effective reps get even wilder if they drop the plate for a second rep. Or something like that, I'm tired and not mathing well. The problem is largely that this is all done in effective hitpoints, which means that the damage reduction is insane. If tanks were to have higher raw hitpoints, and lower hardened values alongside lower proportional reps... people wouldn't be as upset, as tanks would take damage that actually sticks for a bit. The large other portion of the problem is that vehicles have isk costs that treat them like they're temporary powerups (and yes, isk IS used as a balancing feature in this game, like it or not) so when someone calls out a 1m isk tank they feel like it should 'buy' them a lot of power, because risk vs reward. Another issue is that vehicles take up an absolutely massive amount of SP to be any real good which really messes with their design, as it treats them more as a role than a temporary powerup anyone could purchase... so there's a second hurdle there. Thirdly vehicles lack a very well defined role other than 'roam around and kill whatever you encounter' which further adds to frustrations - If they had a clearly defined role, people would be less likely to pull them out in situations where they're not needed. If isk costs remain so absurdly high, SP costs should go down, and survivability should probably be retained. If sp costs remain so absurdly high, isk costs should go down and survivability should be lowered (no one likes dying, but I care less about dying in something that costs 20k than something that costs 2mil). Vehicles need clear and frequently useful roles, without people getting upset when they perform well in the roles they have (currently people get really upset that some tanks are good at slaying... because well, that's the only identifiable role they have, and then vehicles get nerfed into uselessness... which causes a set of buffs later down the line that breaks everything because they still don't have a role). CCP has been trying to balance tanks for awhile. They pretty much flip between "Expensive Butterflies" and "Invincible Death Machines" My problem is that Tanks fill a very odd role in Combined arms. To Infantry, Tanks are SUPPOSED to be OP as F*CK. They are immune to small arms fire, have insanely more range, and far more firepower. In exchange, they need to be weak to something. I've always been of the opinion that AV is supposed to be DETERRENT in the hands of Infantry. More of a "Engage and you might die", not "CHASE AND KILL THE TANK". Tanks need to be on equal ground with other tanks in terms of fighting. Then what are tanks weak against? Tanks need to be weak to AIR. Dropships need heavier ordnance specifically for taking down tanks. Personally, I think that the main guns on ADS's need to be redone. Make an actual "Missile Launcher" for the ADS, just like the main turret on tank. Would be used for anti-tank/anti-infantry. Blaster would be akin to a mounted Plasma cannon with a larger clip for popping tanks. Rail would be where its at now, with a damage boost. With all this anti-tank abilities, dropships would still need to be weak to Infantry AV, with their fire and forget AA weapons, they will be able to terrorize dropships and keep them away from their armor. Now the Weapons Triangle is complete. Tanks > Infantry > Dropships > Tanks. Combined arms then boils down to this: Tanks protect the infantry, and the infantry protect the Dropships. Dropships then work as both infantry and vehicular support, much like the standard attack helicopter of today. Since Infantry still hard counter dropships, you can't stick a dropship into enemy territory, as swarms will quickly kill or dissuade attack. They also dissuade Armor from engaging due to damage. With enough AV, infantry can buy enough time to deploy their own ground or air power. Combined arms is always the way to go, and engagments are won from the Air down. Air Superiority is king. Just my thoughts on how Vehicles should work in Dust. I'm fully aware that this probably won't happen. Currently listening to: Tsukihime OST Un-Retired PC Scout. I miss the old days ;_;
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:08:00 - [35] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: I'm saying his team was a bunch of pubstars who have no concept of teamwork or strategy, and that is why they lost. So, since these pubstars aren't NF, FA, or OH your tank get to trump their focused fire. And rightfully so? How 'bout a compromise? If HAVs need be largely impervious to Infantry to thrive, give Infantry the same consideration. Retool Large Blasters as AV; set their AI capabilities equal to that of AV ... that is, lots and lots of warning shots followed by a brief window of "maybe". Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:13:00 - [36] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: A small window of vulnerability. Is that "waves of opportunity" working as intended? I've always thought it was intended to mean a short span of high resistance followed by a long span of vulnerability (as opposed to the inverse). If you can't kill an unhardened maddy in the thirty seconds that his hardeners are offline, then you shouldn't be playing competitive games. Considering that the time for a scout suit to deliver 3 lai dais and a PLC shot is less than 5 seconds, there is plenty of time to get your kill on. Of course if you were smart, when the tank showed up, you would just go and put proxies down on his retreat route, and let him have nothing to shoot at. But if you were smart we wouldn't be having this conversation. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 87	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:18:00 - [37] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: So, since these pubstars aren't NF, FA, or OH your tank get to trump their focused fire. And rightfully so. Because balance. How 'bout a compromise? If HAVs need be largely impervious to Infantry to thrive, give Infantry the same consideration. Retool Large Blasters as AV; set their AI capabilities equal to that of Infantry AV ... that is, lots and lots of warning shots followed by a brief window of "maybe", provided more than Large Blaster is simultaneously firing at the same Infantry unit. They didn't focus fire on anything. No debate about that. Any time 3 AV focus their fire on a tank, it dies. That is not up for debate, and people who say otherwise have never tanked in a PC. Most of the time 2 will do, but 3 will always do it. That isn't some long drawn out fight either, its 9 Lai dais and good night. Done in literally less than 3 seconds, no amount of hardeners will stop it. Every large socket has more than a half dozen spots where infantry can huck grenades from cover. Combined with places tanks MUST travel through to impact the battle in the large sockets, and tank control is trivial for a team in PC. You don't know anything about PC tanking. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:29:00 - [38] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: So, since these pubstars aren't NF, FA, or OH your tank get to trump their focused fire. And rightfully so. Because balance. How 'bout a compromise? If HAVs need be largely impervious to Infantry to thrive, give Infantry the same consideration. Retool Large Blasters as AV; set their AI capabilities equal to that of Infantry AV ... that is, lots and lots of warning shots followed by a brief window of "maybe", provided more than Large Blaster is simultaneously firing at the same Infantry unit. They didn't focus fire on anything. No debate about that. Any time 3 AV focus their fire on a tank, it dies. That is not up for debate, and people who say otherwise have never tanked in a PC. Most of the time 2 will do, but 3 will always do it. That isn't some long drawn out fight either, its 9 Lai dais and good night. Done in literally less than 3 seconds, no amount of hardeners will stop it. Every large socket has more than a half dozen spots where infantry can huck grenades from cover. Combined with places tanks MUST travel through to impact the battle in the large sockets, and tank control is trivial for a team in PC. You don't know anything about PC tanking. In your scenario, 3 units manage to sneak into grenade range, and then manage to keep your HAV in grenade range while tossing one grenade after another after another. That's not an impossible scenario, but it certainly isn't a probable one. Don't tanks move around sometimes, especially when taking damage? The scenario you've provided demonstrates plainly that you have it too easy. What's more concerning is that you seem to think it's OK. Focused Fire from 2 sources should be enough to make you sweat. Requiring focused fire from three is imbalanced. And AV shouldn't have to be prototype to threaten you. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:32:00 - [39] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: A small window of vulnerability. Is that "waves of opportunity" working as intended? I've always thought it was intended to mean a short span of high resistance followed by a long span of vulnerability (as opposed to the inverse). If you can't kill an unhardened maddy in the thirty seconds that his hardeners are offline, then you shouldn't be playing competitive games. Considering that the time for a scout suit to deliver 3 lai dais and a PLC shot is less than 5 seconds, there is plenty of time to get your kill on. Of course if you were smart, when the tank showed up, you would just go and put proxies down on his retreat route, and let him have nothing to shoot at. But if you were smart we wouldn't be having this conversation. So now I'm dumb? Please do keep telling us that we're doing it wrong. Meanwhile, this issue -- like all balance issues -- will come down to Kill/Spawn Efficiency. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Bradric Banewolf D3ATH CARD RUST415 982	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:32:00 - [40] - Quote nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. Respeccing out of tanks the minute they do "Anybody order chaos?"

deezy dabest Evil Syndicate Alliance. 2	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:40:00 - [41] - Quote maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies Did someone beat you down with a stupid stick? Are you seriously saying that one person should be able to force an entire squad to drop everything and coordinate to fight a tank with one guy in it? Two words...... FORCE MULTIPLIER Sorry to disappoint you by not saying GOD MODE. Remove NPC orbitals from FW. -- Fix orbital timers for Eve players assisting in Planetary Conquest.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 89	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:41:00 - [42] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: In your scenario, 3 units manage to sneak into grenade range, and then manage to keep your HAV in grenade range while tossing one grenade after another after another. That's not an impossible scenario, but it certainly isn't a probable one. Don't tanks move around sometimes, especially when taking damage? The scenario you've provided demonstrates plainly that you have it too easy. What's more concerning is that you seem to think it's OK. Focused Fire from 2 sources should be enough to make you sweat. Requiring focused fire from three is imbalanced. And the AV shouldn't have to be prototype to threaten you. What sneak into grenade range? All the Large sockets in PC have cover near and between every flag. Every flag has a location either withing a 30m approach or on the flag itself from which infantry can spawn and throw nades. A tank, in order to defend or attack a hack in the large sockets will ALWAYS have to put itself in nade range to do it. In order to get to that flag(assuming thats even possible) the tank MUST drive through a choke point, normally more than one. He also MUST retreat out of a choke point. You make it sound like tanks have all the advantages in the large sockets(where matches are won or lost more often than not) when the exact opposite is true. Focused fire from two sources means flee or die within 10 seconds. Focused fire from 3 is certain death, within 5and you aren't getting away. That is with two hardeners active. And tanks are OP? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Bradric Banewolf D3ATH CARD RUST415 982	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:42:00 - [43] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: A small window of vulnerability. Is that "waves of opportunity" working as intended? I've always thought it was intended to mean a short span of high resistance followed by a long span of vulnerability (as opposed to the inverse). If you can't kill an unhardened maddy in the thirty seconds that his hardeners are offline, then you shouldn't be playing competitive games. Considering that the time for a scout suit to deliver 3 lai dais and a PLC shot is less than 5 seconds, there is plenty of time to get your kill on. Of course if you were smart, when the tank showed up, you would just go and put proxies down on his retreat route, and let him have nothing to shoot at. But if you were smart we wouldn't be having this conversation. So now I'm dumb? Please do keep telling us that we're doing it wrong. Meanwhile, this issue -- like all balance issues -- will come down to Kill/Spawn Efficiency. Not dumb, but severely mis-informed?! That Maddy you guys described can be downed relatively quickly. The AV guys you're going to bat foe always fail to be truthful about the ingagement. A tanker can feel the difference between pro and cbr7?! Minmandos have 3 high slots, and are still complaining about tanks? I honestly feel sorry for dropship pilots smh?! The OP described a Maddy gv.0, and a smart operator! He also described either some advanced AV, or some very.... challenged proto AVers?! There is no way a Maddy is surviving 3 pro AVers toting Lai Dai grenades! That, if done right, is a 3-5 second engagement. "Anybody order chaos?"
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:47:00 - [44] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: And tanks are OP? That comes down to kill/spawn data; I suspect the affirmative is likely, but I can only speculate. If I were an HAV pilot, I'd be thinking in terms of contingencies just in case. Clutching that crutch and calling AVers "dumb" won't get you far if/when Rattati comes knocking. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Bradric Banewolf D3ATH CARD RUST415 983	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:50:00 - [45] - Quote Don't let lazy AV lie to you! I don't expect to whip out my 'quafe' plc, and kill multiple tanks?! It's a deterrent, nothing more. This games TTK is far too fast anyway. Why does everyone want insta-gank on everything? "Anybody order chaos?"
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:51:00 - [46] - Quote Bradric Banewolf wrote: The AV guys you're going to bat foe always fail to be truthful about the ingagement. A tanker can feel the difference between pro and cbr7?! Minmandos have 3 high slots, and are still complaining about tanks? I honestly feel sorry for dropship pilots smh?! I too feel bad for Dropships and even Gunnlogis, but Dropships and Gunnlogis are not Madrugars. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Lone Wolf 777 Caldari Immortals 7	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:51:00 - [47] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Lone Wolf 777 wrote: To be fair, tanks are easy to kill if you make a plan to kill it. BS. If Pilots can consistently ignore/escape focused fire, then Pilots have it too easy. I believe that this is the case at present. Edit: Not opposed to reducing the cost of HAVs. Nope, not BS. Just make a plan & a tank, simple really. Seems like a certain somebody has been killed by tanks 1 too many times XD haha
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:54:00 - [48] - Quote Bradric Banewolf wrote: Don't let lazy AV lie to you! I don't expect to whip out my 'quafe' plc, and kill multiple tanks?! It's a deterrent, nothing more. This games TTK is far too fast anyway. Why does everyone want insta-gank on everything? Does your Large Blaster Turret not insta-gank infantry? Do you think most pilots would prefer that be nerfed first, or do you think they'd prefer Hardeners or Reps? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Larkson Crazy Eye WarRavens D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 72	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:59:00 - [49] - Quote It's funny how many people think AV is OP despite the fact 3-4 guys can be trying to kill a tank and just die in droves. It's no joke that most proto tanks can kill 30+ people and never die, even withstand a major laser strike. The biggest joke is swarms for all that people seem to think their still OP after the latest nerf in their lock on range I have to wonder do these people ever try the other side of the coin? They keep say jump in a tank and see how bad it is, but when was the last time they chased down a tank that can cut you down in half a second with AV weapons that require you to hit it 3-5 times minimum? Even a militia tank with full proto swarms, proficiency 5 and at least 4% dmg on the war barge takes 3 missiles most of the time. A hardened shield variant is even worse due to the dmg penalty vs explosives. You won't even see their shield bar move when you hit them. Keep in mind with swarms it has zero use against any infantry running around with a huge visual effect every time you fire that screams "Kill me". Over all I don't mind tanks being hard to kill, forcing half the team to chase them down is a valid role in wasting the enemies time. I do think however tanks anti infantry capability should be toned down drastically. Imo the large turret should be nearly useless against infantry while the small turrets should be extremely effective within 100-150min range max. That not only solves the problem of being to easy to kill and a waste of ISK but their ability to be one man killing machines. I can accept a tank slaughtering it's way threw the map if 3 players are required to operate it. But 1 man tanks going 40-0 is insane. As it is now not only can tanks work fine without gunners, it's usually a waste of time to have them. The small turrets are largely ineffective and having 3 players ride in one tank is a large waste of man power on a 16 man team. But one major thing to consider when you think about vehicles... if they get nerfed to bad no one will ever get the vehicle kill assist mission done ever again ;)
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 89	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:00:00 - [50] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: And tanks are OP? That comes down to kill/spawn data; I suspect the affirmative is likely, but I can only speculate. If I were an HAV pilot, I'd be thinking in terms of contingencies just in case. Clutching that crutch and calling AVers "dumb" won't get you far if/when Rattati comes knocking. I have tanked since Open Beta, through good times and bad. Right now, they are as balanced as they can get. One ground suit is more than capable of killing any tank, provided that infantry is a better player than the tanker. They have numerous options with which to work, all of which are effective in different situations to varying degrees. Swarms are weak, and should stay that way. You need homing weapons, you should have to get in close and put yourself at risk too. Besides, minmandos with good skills in swarms are strong enough to force even dual hardened Maddys to check themselves. You can always tell when those guys are about, and they are extremely effective at area denial. One suit, no vehicles within 175m. Draw a 350m diameter circle on most maps, and that is enough area to hold three flags and win the match. I'll agree that the recent strafe changes have hurt scouts ability to completely dodge blaster fire, but that was ridiculous, and the scout suit is still the best AV suit anyway. The third equipment slot is really a more important swing for balance while it lasts. Heck, the increase in slots made for all sorts of cheap, AV fits that people could use. None of this applies to shield tanks of course, because they are crap. I call dumb AVers dumb, and if their friends did as well, they would get better instead of crying about it. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.

Lone Wolf 777 Caldari Immortals 7	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:02:00 - [51] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Aidualc wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: I'm no expert, but I'm of the opinion that Hardeners are more to blame than the HAVs themselves. Why not limit Hardeners to one per loadout, like the cloak? Yeap, limit the dual hardeners is a solution, dual rep is not efective vs 2 swarms or dai lai spawn. But dual hardener now is op. Yeap many players don't wanna loose a 1M isk so easy, but in a PC battle. A tank can slay at last 15 - 20 proto dropsuis... That is the risk. If a tank is slaying 20 suits in your PC, your AV players shouldn't be in that PC, and your tankers should all quit. AKA, get good. Lol couldnt say it better myself. Im not even a tanker & i dont complain about them. Its sad that these "nerf warriors" are whats ruining the game. The only thing i want nerfed is the obvious....ScRs. Give a scrub a ScR & very little practice & he becomes a slayer. Damn thing does more dps by 5 over an HMG! #FOTM Back to tanks XD
Lone Wolf 777 Caldari Immortals 9	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:10:00 - [52] - Quote Larkson Crazy Eye wrote: It's funny how many people think AV is OP despite the fact 3-4 guys can be trying to kill a tank and just die in droves. It's no joke that most proto tanks can kill 30+ people and never die, even withstand a major laser strike. The biggest joke is swarms for all that people seem to think their still OP after the latest nerf in their lock on range I have to wonder do these people ever try the other side of the coin? They keep say jump in a tank and see how bad it is, but when was the last time they chased down a tank that can cut you down in half a second with AV weapons that require you to hit it 3-5 times minimum? Even a militia tank with full proto swarms, proficiency 5 and at least 4% dmg on the war barge takes 3 missiles most of the time. A hardened shield variant is even worse due to the dmg penalty vs explosives. You won't even see their shield bar move when you hit them. Keep in mind with swarms it has zero use against any infantry running around with a huge visual effect every time you fire that screams "Kill me". Over all I don't mind tanks being hard to kill, forcing half the team to chase them down is a valid role in wasting the enemies time. I do think however tanks anti infantry capability should be toned down drastically. Imo the large turret should be nearly useless against infantry while the small turrets should be extremely effective within 100-150min range max. That not only solves the problem of being to easy to kill and a waste of ISK but their ability to be one man killing machines. I can accept a tank slaughtering it's way threw the map if 3 players are required to operate it. But 1 man tanks going 40-0 is insane. As it is now not only can tanks work fine without gunners, it's usually a waste of time to have them. The small turrets are largely ineffective and having 3 players ride in one tank is a large waste of man power on a 16 man team. But one major thing to consider when you think about vehicles... if they get nerfed to bad no one will ever get the vehicle kill assist mission done ever again ;) "Tanks anti infantry capability should toned down drastically"....Just lol. What would the point of a tank be then? To sit there and look pretty? & if a tank goes 40 - 0, then apparently your not doing a good job or literally charging at a tank head on
Bradric Banewolf D3ATH CARD RUST415 983	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:11:00 - [53] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Bradric Banewolf wrote: Don't let lazy AV lie to you! I don't expect to whip out my 'quafe' plc, and kill multiple tanks?! It's a deterrent, nothing more. This games TTK is far too fast anyway. Why does everyone want insta-gank on everything? Does your Large Blaster Turret not insta-gank infantry? Would you prefer that be nerfed first, or would you prefer Hardeners or Reps? Well mine doesn't lol! I'm not that good, but if I had a choice I'd choose survivability over dmg output all day! So nerf the turret if a nerf must come. I'm just saying most AV has never tried to be that force multiplier before. I always say, "to understand an adversary you must become him". I know what kills tanks because I tank! So on my pro login (a support role) are alloteks or Lai dais, always! Fools who want easy kills carry cores to PC as a logi?! No tanker expects to role up on a heavy/logi combo, and the logi drops him?! However, several tankers can testify that I have done just that! I've respecced more times than I care to admit, and in all those I ran everything! So I know better how to kill everything! Not saying I'm a slayer by any means , but I'm a mean strategist and can build a ferocious setup! Alot of AVers are singular in purpose, and if squaded with them, you will find they are hard pressed to slow down once they smell blood. It gets them killed often, and when the tank could've been killed instantly, you get to watch it escape 10 times because there was no coordination?! Sometimes they don't even announce it's presence, because like rep tool logis, they are point wh*res?! They focus on the vehicle destruction, more than the vehicle being deterred. Often letting the assaults protecting them die right next to them without disengaging the tank to help his buddy. That's what I mean. Those AVers in this story can kill that tank if they were on the same page. Really only takes two. That logi trying to milk guardian points should've been hucking lai dai! "Anybody order chaos?"
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 90	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:16:00 - [54] - Quote Larkson Crazy Eye wrote: It's funny how many people think AV is OP despite the fact 3-4 guys can be trying to kill a tank and just die in droves. It's no joke that most proto tanks can kill 30+ people and never die, even withstand a major laser strike. 3-4 guys putting AV on a tank kill it everytime. 4 guys with swarms, no av nades, no proxies, nothing else but ammo, will pop a Gv.0 before his hardners are even done the cycle. If 3-4 guys are trying to kill a tank, they have no excuse not to. There is no fitting for a Madrugar that allows you to sustain 4 AVers shooting at you, hardeners or no. Even a theoretical triple hardened and plated Maddy would melt under quad swarms, let alone the good AV options. Any dual rep maddy fit pops to 4 lai dais, which coming from your hypothetical AV squad only means they each need to hit one. That leaves 8 more nades for the next tanks, and surely one of you has a hive. Between 4 people in that hypothetical squad you could layout at least 48 proximity mines. That is 8 kill packs that you can set up to close down travel routes. Three guys hoping out of a tanked LAV with Lai dais will turn ANY tank, regardless of fitting into scrap. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Balistyc Farshot MONSTER SYNERGY 297	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:24:00 - [55] - Quote Bradric Banewolf wrote: nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. Respeccing out of tanks the minute they do I think everyone knows dual hardners is too easy to achieve. What they should do is either give it a stacking penalty or make the PG/CPU much larger so that there is sacrifice for the dual hardners. The issue is that as a Maddie, you can't fight another Maddie unless you have the dual hardner layout. That defines imbalanced. To balance this, I personally like where stacking them has way less benefit. Then you aren't seeing tanks focused on a single hardened time frame or perma hardened. I also miss Logi LAVs but that is a different problem. "Dying with your rep tool out - the logi-flasher!" Who hasn't been caught by a cute little female scout doing this?
Bradric Banewolf D3ATH CARD RUST415 985	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:42:00 - [56] - Quote Balistyc Farshot wrote: Bradric Banewolf wrote: nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. Respeccing out of tanks the minute they do I think everyone knows dual hardners is too easy to achieve. What they should do is either give it a stacking penalty or make the PG/CPU much larger so that there is sacrifice for the dual hardners. The issue is that as a Maddie, you can't fight another Maddie unless you have the dual hardner layout. That defines imbalanced. To balance this, I personally like where stacking them has way less benefit. Then you aren't seeing tanks focused on a single hardened time frame or perma hardened. I also miss Logi LAVs but that is a different problem. You guys must see the entire picture. 1. Dual hardeners are already a pain to fit, and automatically require dual reps 2. The Gallente are CQC brawlers in every aspect of fighting. Their vehicles are as armor durable as their dropsuits. In order to fight in close range amongst Lai Dai nades, swarms, forges, PLC's, etc., and be effective, you must be tough. 3. Shield tanks, like shield dropsuits, have long range weaponry (rail and missile turrets). They can fight from range. 4. The field cognicence of individual players is always a factor no one seems to account for. Tanks were balanced when they made the armor tank better than shield tanks in CQC. Now any shield tanks caught in CQC usually gets banged. Are they underpowered? No! I know several tankers that can wreck Maddies with gunlogis. They're just not king of the field from everywhere anymore. You guys have to understand that armor tanks are slow to turn, almost all AV is armor based, and the timing of the operator makes the tank hard to kill. The combination of hardener/rep is also the strategy afforded to the tanker. Just like the option for insane dmg output is afforded to the shield tanker. This player base is just too used to C.O.D., and wants insta-gank in everything. Hence modded controllers?! "Anybody order chaos?"
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 91	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:44:00 - [57] - Quote Balistyc Farshot wrote: The issue is that as a Maddie, you can't fight another Maddie unless you have the dual hardner layout. The limitation on tank fits isn't because of tanks themselves, but because all tanks must fight off, or at least temporarily weather an AV storm to accomplish an objective. A theoretical dual damage mod complex heat sink maddy sounds fantastic until you remember that AV nades and swarms exist. Its part why the Gunnloggi is a myth in PC, because it can't drive up to a flag, drop off two dudes and escape without exploding. The maddy can do it, as long as at most two people are using swarms, and they don't want to get into nade range on its way out. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 91	Posted - 2015.07.15 15:51:00 - [58] - Quote Bradric Banewolf wrote: 1. Dual hardeners are already a pain to fit, and automatically require dual reps No, I can fit a plate, two hardners and a rep without a problem with perfect fitting skills. Bradric Banewolf wrote: 3. Shield tanks, like shield dropsuits, have long range weaponry (rail and missile turrets). They can fight from range. Shield tanks are overall just crap. Insufficient HP, poor module distribution, expensive fitting for shield mods. Lower top speed, no gun depression just make it so that a shield tank that wants to hang back at range can be rendered ineffective with terrain. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 16:23:00 - [59] - Quote Assuming Armor HAV efficiency rates are above acceptable bounds and Shield HAVs are below: * Limit all vehicle fittings to 1 hardener * Decrease chassis and turret costs by 25% (all vehicles, all turrets) * Decrease speed and acceleration of Armor HAVs * Increase speed and acceleration of Shield HAVs * Increase Large Missile Turret Reload Speed * Increase Packed RE blast radius and damage If afterwards, HAV efficiency rates remain out of balance: * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Accuracy * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Range Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 10	Posted - 2015.07.15 16:34:00 - [60] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Mouthbreathers shouldn't be influential to balance calls. Right, exclude Tankers who claim that tanks are fine from balance decisions. Gotcha. WoW has taught me that Purple means Legendary. This means Quafe suits are the optimal loadout for killing all of you.

Larkson Crazy Eye WarRavens D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 74	Posted - 2015.07.15 16:45:00 - [61] - Quote I've always felt the tanks real job should be something that the LAV was supposed to do. Armored troop transport, getting a couple guys to the point under fire and back out again. The weapons on a HAV should be for clearing a path to the objective and general suppressive fire, not a one man army. People claim if a couple guys all run full proto AV tanks are nothing. Yet those proto AV suits cost how much, and what exactly is their life expectancy on the battle field lol? I think if they buffed LAV's to at least be able to take a few hits and not be complete death traps that would free up tanks a little more. Perhaps slow them down, decrease their accuracy. Let a tank be a tank, a brick to soak up dmg and provide cover for advancing infantry. However that same brick should not be able to fly across the map and kill any one it see's. In fact pretty much the best most determined AV in the world won't kill a tank if it doesn't bother to stay still too long. Which kind of makes HAV"s as they are more like mechanized scouts than heavies. Again doing more what the LAV in my mind should be doing than being a true brick like a heavy.
Doc DDD Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 506	Posted - 2015.07.15 16:45:00 - [62] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: SP does not equal invulnerability. there are AV players who invest just as much SP if not more into perfecting their AV fits. Your argument is irrelevant. In no way is a AV trooper spending more SP than a tanker. Tankers are not invulnerable. You know the last time I saw you, you were riding in a butter soft LAV in a match with 4 tankers on the board, and railguns on the killfeed. Did you drive carefully, using cover and geography to get to your destination? No, you drove across an open field like an idiot, and your lav got one shot by me. Even if I hadn't killed you, you were still barreling around a corner into 3 tanks and a red turret. You may have perfected your fits, but you aren't smart enough to use them. Mouthbreathers shouldn't be influential to balance calls. /sprays coffee out nose
Balistyc Farshot MONSTER SYNERGY 298	Posted - 2015.07.15 17:59:00 - [63] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Assuming Armor HAV efficiency rates are above acceptable bounds and Shield HAVs are below: * Limit all vehicle fittings to 1 hardener * Decrease chassis and turret costs by 25% (all vehicles, all turrets) * Decrease speed and acceleration of Armor HAVs * Increase speed and acceleration of Shield HAVs * Increase Large Missile Turret Reload Speed * Increase Packed RE blast radius and damage If afterwards, HAV efficiency rates remain out of balance: * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Accuracy * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Range BTW - Just throwing out an idea and seeing if it gets traction. Who else feels we should buff small turrets? I think we could see more gunner filled tanks if the small turrets packed a wallup. I mean big time buff the turrets. Make the small blaster hose down infantry. Make the small rail gun actually hurt tanks, DS, and LAV. If a light hand weapon can outdo the small turrets, people will never use them. Then we can nerf the hardners and make tanks what I want them to be. They should roll in and layout dmg as well as sop it up. "Dying with your rep tool out - the logi-flasher!" Who hasn't been caught by a cute little female scout doing this?
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 94	Posted - 2015.07.15 18:07:00 - [64] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Right, exclude Tankers who claim that tanks are fine from balance decisions. Gotcha. One dropsuit can tank out a tank. They can use any combo of proxies, AV nades, PLC, Swarms. They can kill it through its hardeners. If they are smart, they can be effectively immune to the tank responding other than running away at top speed taking blaster pot shots as they gtfo. If they are really smart, the tank doesn't even know exactly they just evaporated, but they think they must have run into mulitple AV. So where is balanced to you? If one suit can eliminate any tank, how is that unfair? Just because you can't kill tanks because you lack the capacity doesn't mean it isn't done regularly by people who are capable of tying their own shoes instead of having mommy velcro you up and cinching down your chin strap before you walk to the bus stop. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Sergeant Sazu Mantodea MC 663	Posted - 2015.07.15 18:14:00 - [65] - Quote As long as there is a redline, and as long as tanks move as fast as they do, the "waves of opportunity" thing is invalid. I mean, why leave the redline if you're not at your best? This is the hidden problem with the curret system. It's the same reason people want the ScR nerfed. It deals high DPS in short bursts. So when a ScR user can dictate the engagement and only be exposed to fire when he/she's cooled down and ready to spam, he/she is performing better than other rifle users. [64.9m SP] Sazu's Trading
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:01:00 - [66] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Right, exclude Tankers who claim that tanks are fine from balance decisions. Gotcha. One dropsuit can tank out a tank. They can use any combo of proxies, AV nades, PLC, Swarms. They can kill it through its hardeners. If they are smart, they can be effectively immune to the tank responding other than running away at top speed taking blaster pot shots as they gtfo. If they are really smart, the tank doesn't even know exactly they just evaporated, but they think they must have run into mulitple AV. So where is balanced to you? If one suit can eliminate any tank, how is that unfair? Just because you can't kill tanks because you lack the capacity doesn't mean it isn't done regularly by people who are capable of tying their own shoes instead of having mommy velcro you up and cinching down your chin strap before you walk to the bus stop. One moment, 3 infantry running proto AV are needed to pop a tank. Because balance. The next moment, infantry can solo any tank. Happens all the time. For real. Because balance. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
saxonmish T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 1	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:11:00 - [67] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies ISK should never buy invulnerability. Not invulnerable if the guy driving the tank is a dumbass, this being said thats almost every tanker SAXON ON A MISH - My Youtube Channel :)
Stormblade Green KnightKiller's inc. 110	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:16:00 - [68] - Quote hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . Solution. Get a squad mate to run either an Assualt FG, or minmitar commando with swarms. You fill in the other slot. Or just pull at your own tank. One might say... I'm very skilled... yet I'm his apprentice... So what does that say about my mentor?
Larkson Crazy Eye WarRavens D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 76	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:22:00 - [69] - Quote As it stands now a good proto tank and driver is pretty close to instant win in any match. Not that they can't be killed but the effort required to do so is so high that in a 16 on 16 game you end up losing the objectives in the process. If you ignore the tank it racks up kills and pushes people to use cheaper fits. Unless the driver is a complete moron a proto tank usually makes things insanely difficult for the enemy team depending on the map and how close they can get to the objectives. Never mind what happens when a couple proto tanks actually use team tactics and defend each other. But I guess most pro tankers think a mil or two isk should ensure their team wins by default. Not sure why no one things a proto drop suit should get that same consideration, even if it's officer weapons and suit....
Stupid Blueberry Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 1	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:23:00 - [70] - Quote x4 damage modded Alldin's to the sweet spot usually does the trick. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Haajakin Kalen. Blueberry smokin' that crack y'all

Bright Cloud Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:25:00 - [71] - Quote We wouldnt have this issue if we could fire our weapons from the passanger seat in a dropship. Ya know like you can do in battlefield. If you can keep chasing tanks until they are dead that would be a plus. Rudimentary Mercs of scrubs and incompetence. You touch my mind, fumbling in Ignorance, incapable of understanding.
Larkson Crazy Eye WarRavens D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 76	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:27:00 - [72] - Quote Stupid Blueberry wrote: x4 damage modded Alldin's to the sweet spot usually does the trick. I would say forge guns seem to be the best AV weapon out there. Their accurate, no travel time on the projectile with good range. No real tell tale effect pointing on the location the shot came from. Plus unlike swarm launchers, Av grenades etc it has some ability to kill infantry. Only down side is they take quite a bit of skill into both heavy suits heavy weapons to use effectively, though apex helps a bit there. Of course you are a heavy and after you take out the vehicles on the map it's a long walk back to a supply depot to switch out unless you risk your own vehicle to get there lol.
Stormblade Green KnightKiller's inc. 111	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:30:00 - [73] - Quote Larkson Crazy Eye wrote: Stupid Blueberry wrote: x4 damage modded Alldin's to the sweet spot usually does the trick. I would say forge guns seem to be the best AV weapon out there. Their accurate, no travel time on the projectile with good range. No real tell tale effect pointing on the location the shot came from. Plus unlike swarm launchers, Av grenades etc it has some ability to kill infantry. Only down side is they take quite a bit of skill into both heavy suits heavy weapons to use effectively, though apex helps a bit there. Of course you are a heavy and after you take out the vehicles on the map it's a long walk back to a supply depot to switch out unless you risk your own vehicle to get there lol. Forge sniping...... learn to frontline with a fg and the long way back is no issue. One might say... I'm very skilled... yet I'm his apprentice... So what does that say about my mentor?
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 95	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:41:00 - [74] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: One moment, 3 infantry running proto AV are needed to pop a tank. Because balance. The next moment, infantry can solo any tank. Happens all the time. For real. Because balance. I said three AV will devastate a tank, right through its hardeners. If a tank gets within 10 metres of two people with Lai dais it explodes. If it says within shooting line of 2 FGs for more than 8 seconds it explodes. If it comes within 150 metres of two swarmers and does not retreat it dies in around 15 seconds at the outside. One infantry can destroy a tank. Pick the right spot, have the right tools, the tanker won't even see you. 6 f/49(45?) proxy mines will detonate Gv.0 Maddy with a plate from full shield, with a hardener running. Can be carried and laid down by scouts. A single logi suit can lay six of those traps, each one capable of completely destroying a tank. While still carrying ammo and lai dais along with a main AV weapon. Scouts can carry spares in case their first one gets wasted on a LAV, and still have a hive to reload from. You have many options as an AV player with which to either destroy or nullify tanks, and yet you cry as if you are helpless. So what about tanks makes them so "impossible" for you to kill? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Darken-Sol Intruder Excluder 2	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:43:00 - [75] - Quote nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. You have no clue. Why even speak? Crush them
Larkson Crazy Eye WarRavens D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 78	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:45:00 - [76] - Quote Stormblade Green wrote: Larkson Crazy Eye wrote: Stupid Blueberry wrote: x4 damage modded Alldin's to the sweet spot usually does the trick. I would say forge guns seem to be the best AV weapon out there. Their accurate, no travel time on the projectile with good range. No real tell tale effect pointing on the location the shot came from. Plus unlike swarm launchers, Av grenades etc it has some ability to kill infantry. Only down side is they take quite a bit of skill into both heavy suits heavy weapons to use effectively, though apex helps a bit there. Of course you are a heavy and after you take out the vehicles on the map it's a long walk back to a supply depot to switch out unless you risk your own vehicle to get there lol. Forge sniping...... learn to frontline with a fg and the long way back is no issue. Never really had anything more than the militia FG. It used to be great fun to go close quarters with the FG and blow people up at point blank. But with all the speed and jumps people have now.. the FG isn't what it used to be against infantry. It is one of the best Anti sniper weapons out there though. Most heavy's can take a Thale to the head and survive while the range and accuracy of the FG let you one shot the snipers, even those stacked assault snipers who sacrifice dmg mods for more shields that normally take several shots to kill if you try to counter snipe.
SgtNONECK WASSSUP 0uter.Heaven 272	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:48:00 - [77] - Quote nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. Active repairers should be active. 1 hardner per tank is idiotic do this tanks are useless there is no argument. Tanks should be hard to kill if u have 25mill sp into them simple truth 1 forge or swarm should not shutdown all vehicles.
Larkson Crazy Eye WarRavens D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 78	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:55:00 - [78] - Quote SgtNONECK WASSSUP wrote: nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. Active repairers should be active. 1 hardner per tank is idiotic do this tanks are useless there is no argument. Tanks should be hard to kill if u have 25mill sp into them simple truth 1 forge or swarm should not shutdown all vehicles. Armor reppers used to be active btw back in the old days. It rather sucked for armor tanks to be honest. Not that they were not hard to kill, but it gave them far to many modules to have to constantly keep active to stay alive. Making driving and shooting hard to do since I believe in those days the armor reps only lasted like 15 seconds. Back in those days shield tanks were king because of the fact shields were always regenerating on their own and I don't believe many of the current AV weapons really existed yet if my memory serves me. Not to mention armor tanks were super slow back then and all the PG mods had to be put on low slots, the same ones the armor related stuff went on.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:04:00 - [79] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: You have many options as an AV player with which to either destroy or nullify tanks, and yet you cry as if you are helpless. So what about tanks makes them so "impossible" for you to kill? Back when Scouts were demonstrably and irrefutably overpowered, people killed them all the time. Same with HMG Heavies and the MN Assaults that followed. People pop HAVs all the time, but that doesn't make them balanced. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 95	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:09:00 - [80] - Quote Larkson Crazy Eye wrote: Armor reppers used to be active btw back in the old days. It rather sucked for armor tanks to be honest. Not that they were not hard to kill, but it gave them far to many modules to have to constantly keep active to stay alive. Making driving and shooting hard to do since I believe in those days the armor reps only lasted like 15 seconds. Back in those days shield tanks were king because of the fact shields were always regenerating on their own and I don't believe many of the current AV weapons really existed yet if my memory serves me. Not to mention armor tanks were super slow back then and all the PG mods had to be put on low slots, the same ones the armor related stuff went on. Active rep armor tanks were awesome. Much better and more fun than today. The only thing better than the old tanks is the reduced rail range making hill sniping non viable on most maps if you want to win. PG mods are still low slot mods btw. And armor tanks have had higher top speed since Uprising 1.0. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.

General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 97	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:16:00 - [81] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: You have many options as an AV player with which to either destroy or nullify tanks, and yet you cry as if you are helpless. So what about tanks makes them so "impossible" for you to kill? Back when Scouts were demonstrably and irrefutably overpowered, people killed them all the time. Same with HMG Heavies and the MN Assaults that followed. People pop HAVs all the time, but that doesn't make them balanced. So then, oh wise master of balance, how fast should one dropsuit kill a tank? They can do it in 6 seconds now, so where is the balance point? 5? 3? 1? Or would you just prefer that the nasty tanks that you can't kill not be in the game? Stick to ambush if you are afraid and unwilling to do what is necessary to win. But at least tell me why you think tanks are so hard to kill, especially since you have all the tools necessary to do the job. Please tell me why you can't kill a little old tanker with three lai dais and a PLC shot. What is so special with you, that you can't even do that? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Skotty Hellm Valor Company Freedom Fighters 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:25:00 - [82] - Quote Amazing. It is not simply the Tank, it is the Tanker you must be aware of. We All have access to the Same Skill Tree. You went Av They went Tank. An earlier post was correct, in that, 'A tank is anti-infantry etc... I hope you wouldn't expect the same result in RL. --Going 1 on 1, Standing Still, Bunching Up, Engaging with weak Vehicles, Forgetting that Tanks are valid AV Threats in their own right, (This one's my Favorite) Allowing a Tank to Sneak Up on You... A Tank, with the Second most annoying & Loud Droning Sound in the Game.. ETC. Your fault, not the Tankers. It should take a decent amount of attention to destroy any vehicle, yet not all are Fitted the same. As alluded to earlier, individuals Skill into different specialties, and benefit from the bonus their choices have provided. Maybe the choices you made are not reflective of the game, but more appropriately your tactics: or lack there of. Find what you do best, Practice and Master it. If and Item, Vehicle, Player, Prevents you from Achieving. Find the Best Solution to Counter it/Them. It exists, otherwise all Tankers would have a perfect KDR overall. The Solution should NOT be to call for the Silver Nerf Hammer, rallying fellow frenzied Maxwell's. Rather learn from your Failures, repeat your Successes, Pay attention to what's working for others, Attack the Enemy with the same fervor in which you want 'Balancing.' Funny. Balancing now means, What is somebody using Successfully to embarrass Me now... OH It's Invincible and OP!!!! Call CCP to Nerfidy Nerf it For MEEE!!! You are a Mercenary. Time To Start Acting Like It...... Embrace the Pain.....
Poison Diego Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 608	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:33:00 - [83] - Quote This is bullshit. Maddys do not NEEED a nerf, not even necessarily a tweak. AVers have for ages had uber advantage over tank pilots and now flip when the 500 tonne chunk of metal has the abilty and brains to kill them. Maddys are not invulnerable... The proto ones are difficult to take out yes, but not only because they are proto. They are expensive enough so that those good enough and confident enough should be the only ones driving them, and yes that is why you don't always beat them 1v1.. These post are just not right. They are not even that difficult to take out. Its only the very cautious(good) ones that survive full 13 minute matches. I am both part time tanker and religious AVer and the tanks are right where they should be I say. Nýja Eden er bara byrjunin.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:36:00 - [84] - Quote The very best HAV Pilot is no more skilled than the best infantry operator. HAV kill/spawn efficiency should proximate that of infantry. If affordability is at issue, then affordability should be addressed as its own separate issue. Price tag is not relevant, and it does not excuse imbalance. HAVs should be good at resisting damage from infantry or dealing damage to infantry. Not both simultaneously, which is exactly what we have at the moment with permahardened blaster Madrugars. If Blaster Maddies are to be the "anti-infantry tank", then they should be made more vulnerable to AV counter attack, and they should be nigh helpless against Missile and Rail Gunnlogis. This could be accomplished by reducing large blaster accuracy and range, reducing armor HAV mobility, and reducing resistance afforded by cycling hardeners by limited hardeners to 1 per loadout. If introducing all at once would be too much, then pick one to start with and iterate. I'd suggest starting with the restriction of 1 hardener per loadout. If "hardeners aren't the problem", then why do you need more than one? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 10	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:44:00 - [85] - Quote This is not an argument worth having adipem. Same tankers, same tactic. Someone suggests a nerf, drown the thread in sh*tposts till everyone gives up. It's how they tried to derail rattatis rebalance thread for 2 weeks and 50 pages. This is the song that never ends. WoW has taught me that Purple means Legendary. This means Quafe suits are the optimal loadout for killing all of you.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 100	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:44:00 - [86] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: The very best HAV Pilot is no more skilled than the best infantry operator. HAV kill/spawn efficiency should proximate that of infantry. If affordability is at issue, then affordability should be addressed as its own separate issue. Price tag is not relevant, and it does not excuse imbalance. HAVs should be good at resisting damage from infantry or dealing damage to infantry. Not both simultaneously, which is exactly what we have at the moment with permahardened blaster Madrugars. If Blaster Maddies are to be the "anti-infantry tank", then they should be made more vulnerable to AV counter attack, and they should be nigh helpless against Missile and Rail Gunnlogis. This could be accomplished by reducing large blaster accuracy and range, reducing armor HAV mobility, and reducing resistance afforded by cycling hardeners by limited hardeners to 1 per loadout. If introducing all at once would be too much, then pick one to start with and iterate. I'd suggest starting with the restriction of 1 hardener per loadout. You are appealing to a stat that can not be established, and is of dubious worth on its own. You want tanks to be more vulnerable than 3 lai dais and a PLC shot? So you think that any tank should just be one suits worth of grenades, no AV weapons or reloads needed? That is balance to you? A blaster maddy is helpless to a missile or rail tank, assuming both tankers are equally skilled, and not too far apart on SP. Yeah, you want paper tanks, which means no tanks in PC, so no endgame for the SP. I'm fine with tanks costing an arm and a leg, and being able to be killed by a single dropsuit, which is how it is now. You want an SP sink that wouldn't even be worth calling out, and turning the game into infantry only. If having vehicles in the game is so oppressive for you, there are plenty of FPS' on offer without them, go play that ****. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 100	Posted - 2015.07.15 20:46:00 - [87] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: This is not an argument worth having adipem. Same tankers, same tactic. Someone suggests a nerf, drown the thread in sh*tposts till everyone gives up. It's how they tried to derail rattatis rebalance thread for 2 weeks and 50 pages. This is the song that never ends. Simple question, can 3 lai dais and a PLC shot take out a dual rep dual hardener madrugar with its hardeners up? Yes or no? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Skihids Random Gunz Rise Of Legion. 3	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:03:00 - [88] - Quote I'm not surprised this argument is still running more than a year after I left. Tanks are impossible to balance as long as they have the exact same mission as a dropsuit and can be effectively piloted by one player. They are effectively a "Super Mega Dropsuit" or as someone put it, a "Power Up". With the low player count in a match that extra power is a huge advantage. CCP tried balancing on ISK which just exacerbated the problem. Drivers demanded invulnerability in return for insane costs. Once you price an asset so it has to last three matches to beak even you pretty much make it invulnerable to most attacks. They put tank skills behind a huge SP barrier, but that just meant it was harder to get into while the top drivers continued to wreak havoc. They then slapped limits on vehicle deployments which left some pilots standing around twiddling their thumbs. They finally stuffed a bunch of objectives inside buildings and banned vehicles from ambush. The last thing they tried "Waves of Opportunity" which would exchange the extra power for extra vulnerability part of the time. That doesn't seem to have worked out either. Drop ships go from vulnerable to fragile while tanks get to remain powered up indefinitely. The problem with waves is that insertion and extraction times have to be included with the station time which for ground vehicles is substantial. With short match times that means few waves. The solution? 1) Give tanks something to do other than kill infantry. Make them inefficient against infantry and great at breaching fortifications and killing other vehicles. And/or 2) Make tanks multi-crew. They are more powerful because you stack 2-3 players together rather than creating more power out of nothing so balance is maintained. You have a driver, a main gunner, and an anti-infantry gunner sharing the fun, responsibility, and cost. Make each position require SP skills to operate so nobody gets to play for free and nobody fees cheated when calling one in. The first requires game changes that might not be possible on the PS3. The second should be doable, but would be opposed by most tankers.
CHET CHEWS 129	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:06:00 - [89] - Quote What are you talking bout, ive killed proto tanks with 2 hardners with 3 adv res, 3 av nades and a hive. All it takes is just having patience. http://chetchews.imgur.com/all/ I was close sax >.<
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:11:00 - [90] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: This is not an argument worth having adipem. Same tankers, same tactic. Someone suggests a nerf, drown the thread in sh*tposts till everyone gives up. It's how they tried to derail rattatis rebalance thread for 2 weeks and 50 pages. This is the song that never ends. Simple question, can 3 lai dais and a PLC shot take out a dual rep dual hardener madrugar with its hardeners up? Yes or no? Assume each engagement begins with best AV odds possible; the grenadier is in range behind an immobile HAV; the HAV has no infantry support, and its pilot is entirely unaware of the grenadier's presence. After 1000 engagements, your best estimates ... In what percentage will we find the grenadier victorious? In what percentage will we find the grenadier dead? In what percentage will the HAV simply roll forward out-of-harm's way? How many other balanced settings are there in Dust where your Counter sneaks up behind you and has you dead to rights, and yet you maintain high odds of emerging victorious? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)

KILLER 20965 Negative-Feedback. 37	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:17:00 - [91] - Quote A1ZEN AKUMA wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . are you crazy. its pretty hard to tank already. my suggestion for you get in a tank and see how much fun you have before a militia bpo armour av decides to bombard you with swarms because that's what they always do other than snipe. then when people who are actually skilled into av have a go at you have to retreat for fear of losing 1.3+ isk. i dunno when ccp lost the plot tanks are suppose to be a dominating force that would require a squad or maybe a team effort to take out not just one merc. my suggestions nerf swarm launchers they are crazy and lai dais I ******* AGREE I once personally owned a district. Yes I run logi, got a problem? I want an officer armour tank.
Krixus Flux Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 880	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:20:00 - [92] - Quote I don't know. Tanks are pretty expensive to run and under attack by organized efforts can be headache inducing. You just see the part where he kills you. Maddies are not as scary as the time old. Saying what's on people's minds
KILLER 20965 Negative-Feedback. 37	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:21:00 - [93] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Daddrobit wrote: ISK should never buy invulnerability. And for tanks, it doesn't. I ******* hate you Fatal absolution fags, but you have a damn good point. I once personally owned a district. Yes I run logi, got a problem? I want an officer armour tank.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:27:00 - [94] - Quote nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. Don't need to limit to 1 per tank as a hard limit. Fitting requirement increases to allow double hardeners fits at the cost of those modules might work better in favour both Tankers and AV alike. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 105	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:29:00 - [95] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: TAG wrote: Simple question, can 3 lai dais and a PLC shot take out a dual rep dual hardener madrugar with its hardeners up? Yes or no? Assume each engagement begins with best AV odds possible; the grenadier is in range behind an immobile HAV; the HAV has no infantry support, and its pilot is entirely unaware of the grenadier's presence. After 1000 engagements, your best estimates ... In what percentage will we find the grenadier victorious? In what percentage will we find the grenadier dead? In what percentage will the HAV simply roll forward out-of-harm's way? How many other balanced settings are there in Dust where your Counter sneaks up behind you and has you dead to rights, and yet you maintain high odds of emerging victorious? What part of simple question eluded you? You are appealing to data that neither us, and I doubt even CCP could create. The situation you described is nothing close to the best AV odds possible, as a tank at rest can hear you pull the pin on your grenade. But I digress. Either the grenades and a plc shot can or cannot kill the tank described. From there we can further the discussion, but not until you start to acknowledge some facts. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
KILLER 20965 Negative-Feedback. 37	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:35:00 - [96] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: And tanks are OP? That comes down to kill/spawn data; I suspect the affirmative is likely, but I can only speculate. If I were an HAV pilot, I'd be thinking in terms of contingencies just in case. Clutching that crutch and calling AVers "dumb" won't get you far if/when Rattati comes knocking. This is one of the retrds running for cpm? welp, we are all ****** if he wins. I once personally owned a district. Yes I run logi, got a problem? I want an officer armour tank.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:37:00 - [97] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Either the grenades and a plc shot can or cannot kill the tank described. From there we can further the discussion, but not until you start to acknowledge some facts. The fact is that an HAV need only roll away when hit by the 1st grenade to be out-of-range for the 2nd or 3rd. If you're suggesting in a 'round about way that AV Grenade toss range and homing capabilities should be buffed, then just come out and say it. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
KILLER 20965 Negative-Feedback. 37	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:42:00 - [98] - Quote This post has autism............... I once personally owned a district. Yes I run logi, got a problem? I want an officer armour tank.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 105	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:45:00 - [99] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Either the grenades and a plc shot can or cannot kill the tank described. From there we can further the discussion, but not until you start to acknowledge some facts. The fact is that an HAV need only roll away when hit by the 1st grenade to be out-of-range for the 2nd or 3rd. If you're suggesting in a 'round about way that AV Grenade toss range and homing capabilities should be buffed, then just come out and say it. Stop avoiding the question. That you refuse to answer a simple question belies your intent. Are you really trying to become a CPM and you can't even handle a simple question without resorting hypotheticals? Do three lai dais and a PLC round destroy an dual rep Madrugar with its hardeners up? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 105	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:47:00 - [100] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: I'm not sure that it'd make for productive design decisions or discourse, but if it pleases you, sure. Let's discuss balancing AV against parked and empty HAVs. So you edited the post, said you would be willing to discuss it, but still didn't answer the question. Interesting. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.

Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:47:00 - [101] - Quote Lone Wolf 777 wrote: To be fair, tanks are easy to kill if you make a plan to kill it. Yeah, they can take alot of punishment but lets try to think for a second....hmm....its a damn tank, get used to 1 person with AV getting swatted to the side like a bug. It should take teamwork to kill a tank. Not a few Lai Dais at a un-hardened tank to kill it, which by the way is absolutely ridiculous. You want to know what I do to deal with a tank if it becomes a problem with me or my blues, i bring out a tank. So stop whining, either use teamwork or spend lots of SP & ISK into vehicles. And if that tank kills yours, dont go crying saying, "It was lag!", "He/she is cheating" or one of my favorite, "Tanks are OP!"....lol. Just remember, your infantry....a tank is "anti-infantry". Who do you expect to win when your not using advantages and or teamwork. No, killing a hardened Madrugar is never easy and the "It is a tank" line of logic fails because that tank is just one player, one player should never be able to replace 2 or 3 players merely by virtue of their fit. Tanks are anti-infantry and infantry AV is anti-tank, it makes no sense that tanks should be able to kill infantry but not the other way around. It is obvious that Madrugars are a little OP right now and that almost all other vehicles are too weak. LAV's go boom far too easy now, DS go down too easy, shield tanks die and the Madrugar reigns supreme, this is not balance in any sense. Because, that's why.
Larkson Crazy Eye WarRavens D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 81	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:48:00 - [102] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Either the grenades and a plc shot can or cannot kill the tank described. From there we can further the discussion, but not until you start to acknowledge some facts. The fact is that an HAV need only roll away when hit by the 1st grenade to be out-of-range for the 2nd or 3rd. If you're suggesting in a 'round about way that AV Grenade toss range and homing capabilities should be buffed, then just come out and say it. Stop avoiding the question. That you refuse to answer a simple question belies your intent. Are you really trying to become a CPM and you can't even handle a simple question without resorting hypotheticals? Do three lai dais and a PLC round destroy an dual rep Madrugar with its hardeners up? I think the better question is can you throw three grenades and fire a plasma cannon shot without the tank or any one else killing you first. AV at best is a glass cannon, a cannon that is only effective on one or two types of targets. Even amongst AV you got ones better at tanks, LAV's and Drop ships while weak or ineffective against the other types.
Satori Particle Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 66	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:49:00 - [103] - Quote If using more than one hardener there should be a cooldown time / active duration stacking penalty.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:50:00 - [104] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: one player should never be able to replace 2 or 3 players merely by virtue of their fit. By virtue of skill though any vehicle pilot should be able to match a slayer type player who can themselves by virtue of their own skill replace 2-3 players. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Larkson Crazy Eye WarRavens D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 81	Posted - 2015.07.15 21:53:00 - [105] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: [ No, killing a hardened Madrugar is never easy and the "It is a tank" line of logic fails because that tank is just one player, one player should never be able to replace 2 or 3 players merely by virtue of their fit. Tanks are anti-infantry and infantry AV is anti-tank, it makes no sense that tanks should be able to kill infantry but not the other way around. Which is why I always felt they should nerf Large turrets vs infantry, lower the range, accuracy, RoF what ever it takes to make their ability to kill infantry worse. Hurt, yes they should make infantry dive for cover and if your dumb enough to stand around long enough they could kill you. But a turret shouldn't be able to clear a field of all infantry in single clip. To compensate for this small turret's effectiveness should go up. Force tanks to have a crew. Then and only then would it be fair to force 3-4 people to go AV to kill a tank. After all 3 people are manning the tank, 3 people to kill it would be fair.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.15 22:04:00 - [106] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Either the grenades and a plc shot can or cannot kill the tank described. From there we can further the discussion, but not until you start to acknowledge some facts. The fact is that an HAV need only roll away when hit by the 1st grenade to be out-of-range for the 2nd or 3rd. If you're suggesting in a 'round about way that AV Grenade toss range and homing capabilities should be buffed, then just come out and say it. Stop avoiding the question. That you refuse to answer a simple question belies your intent. Are you really trying to become a CPM and you can't even handle a simple question without resorting hypotheticals? Do three lai dais and a PLC round destroy an dual rep Madrugar with its hardeners up? Since when am I running for CPM? Thought I answered your question. A number of infantry loadouts -- including PLC + Lai Dais -- can likely solo a parked and empty HAV. Unfortunately for this balance discussion, most HAVs aren't parked and empty in practice. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Balistyc Farshot MONSTER SYNERGY 299	Posted - 2015.07.15 22:21:00 - [107] - Quote SgtNONECK WASSSUP wrote: nicholas73 wrote: Options: 1. Make repairers active with a cool down time 2. Limit armour hardeners to 1 per tank. 3. Reduce hardener efficiency to 25% again Also, I think armour hardener needs to have a higher CPU/PG cost, they're awfully low for the benefit they provide and differ hugely from their shield counterparts. Active repairers should be active. 1 hardner per tank is idiotic do this tanks are useless there is no argument. Tanks should be hard to kill if u have 25mill sp into them simple truth 1 forge or swarm should not shutdown all vehicles. Hey. First thing tankers on this thread - You're doing it wrong! Just eat the fact that you still don't know what you are doing because you talk about tank spam or one man army which is stupid! You need to load a tank with 2 effective partners, one with AV to help when another vehicle challenges and one with AI for pesky AV. There is a guaranteed win, I do it with friends as an AHMG front gunner. Second, AV - I use forge guns regularly, they need a buff for all they sacrifice - give them back splash damage is my request, but otherwise AV is fine. Stop complaining please. If just the maddies double hardened are causing issues, then don't call for them to be nerfed, call for a way around the issue. CCP does not nerf well and we don't need that here. Swarms being barely useful on tanks is ok. Just stay away from tanks, there are so few points that can be directly fired on without jamming a tank into a hard to maneuver location. Use your swarms for smaller vehicles or get some real AV with a PLC, AV Nades, or other weapons that still work well without relegating yourself to strictly AV as a role. I don't like double hardners, I want that to be a more risk fit, making fits that focus say on damage mods, speed, or repping mods, but that is just me enforcing my opnion which is bias to my play style. "Dying with your rep tool out - the logi-flasher!" Who hasn't been caught by a cute little female scout doing this?
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 360	Posted - 2015.07.16 05:02:00 - [108] - Quote Bump Get some life in your hands.
Baltazar Pontain Blauhelme E.B.O.L.A. 184	Posted - 2015.07.16 07:01:00 - [109] - Quote hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . Sorry mate but I have to disagree. I run proto tank, have all skills and I can guarantee you that tanks dominate only as long as the enemy team is not annoyed and switch to AV. As soon as you have proto AV on the field you have to be careful. Most of the time you have to be very mobile and never be to confident about your fit or you will be toast. And on the other side it is very easy for me to destroy a tank in my AV fit.
Cesar Geronimo DUST University Ivy League 7	Posted - 2015.07.16 07:56:00 - [110] - Quote Ghost Kaisar wrote: Mina Longstrike wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: Madrugars don't need nerfing (except for large blaster dispersion). Instead buff Gunlogis and maybe missile turrets. They do need some adjusting. Without their hardeners they're far too weak. With them they're practically invincible (-60.86% incoming damage) They go from ~5k ehp & ~150ish reps to ~11.5k ehp (presuming the plate, dual hardener & single rep) with roughly ~400 effective reps once both hardeners get activated. Their reps outpace incoming DPS unless you can find some massive burst or have way, way too many people shooting at target. Their effective reps get even wilder if they drop the plate for a second rep. Or something like that, I'm tired and not mathing well. The problem is largely that this is all done in effective hitpoints, which means that the damage reduction is insane. If tanks were to have higher raw hitpoints, and lower hardened values alongside lower proportional reps... people wouldn't be as upset, as tanks would take damage that actually sticks for a bit. The large other portion of the problem is that vehicles have isk costs that treat them like they're temporary powerups (and yes, isk IS used as a balancing feature in this game, like it or not) so when someone calls out a 1m isk tank they feel like it should 'buy' them a lot of power, because risk vs reward. Another issue is that vehicles take up an absolutely massive amount of SP to be any real good which really messes with their design, as it treats them more as a role than a temporary powerup anyone could purchase... so there's a second hurdle there. Thirdly vehicles lack a very well defined role other than 'roam around and kill whatever you encounter' which further adds to frustrations - If they had a clearly defined role, people would be less likely to pull them out in situations where they're not needed. If isk costs remain so absurdly high, SP costs should go down, and survivability should probably be retained. If sp costs remain so absurdly high, isk costs should go down and survivability should be lowered (no one likes dying, but I care less about dying in something that costs 20k than something that costs 2mil). Vehicles need clear and frequently useful roles, without people getting upset when they perform well in the roles they have (currently people get really upset that some tanks are good at slaying... because well, that's the only identifiable role they have, and then vehicles get nerfed into uselessness... which causes a set of buffs later down the line that breaks everything because they still don't have a role). CCP has been trying to balance tanks for awhile. They pretty much flip between "Expensive Butterflies" and "Invincible Death Machines" My problem is that Tanks fill a very odd role in Combined arms. To Infantry, Tanks are SUPPOSED to be OP as F*CK. They are immune to small arms fire, have insanely more range, and far more firepower. In exchange, they need to be weak to something. I've always been of the opinion that AV is supposed to be DETERRENT in the hands of Infantry. More of a "Engage and you might die", not "CHASE AND KILL THE TANK". Tanks need to be on equal ground with other tanks in terms of fighting. Then what are tanks weak against? Tanks need to be weak to AIR. Dropships need heavier ordnance specifically for taking down tanks. Personally, I think that the main guns on ADS's need to be redone. Make an actual "Missile Launcher" for the ADS, just like the main turret on tank. Would be used for anti-tank/anti-infantry. Blaster would be akin to a mounted Plasma cannon with a larger clip for popping tanks. Rail would be where its at now, with a damage boost. With all this anti-tank abilities, dropships would still need to be weak to Infantry AV, with their fire and forget AA weapons, they will be able to terrorize dropships and keep them away from their armor. Now the Weapons Triangle is complete. Tanks > Infantry > Dropships > Tanks. Combined arms then boils down to this: Tanks protect the infantry, and the infantry protect the Dropships. Dropships then work as both infantry and vehicular support, much like the standard attack helicopter of today. Since Infantry still hard counter dropships, you can't stick a dropship into enemy territory, as swarms will quickly kill or dissuade attack. They also dissuade Armor from engaging due to damage. With enough AV, infantry can buy enough time to deploy their own ground or air power. Combined arms is always the way to go, and engagments are won from the Air down. Air Superiority is king. Just my thoughts on how Vehicles should work in Dust. I'm fully aware that this probably won't happen. ^^^^^^^^ This guy gets it...

General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 108	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:17:00 - [111] - Quote Larkson Crazy Eye wrote: I think the better question is can you throw three grenades and fire a plasma cannon shot without the tank or any one else killing you first. AV at best is a glass cannon, a cannon that is only effective on one or two types of targets. Even amongst AV you got ones better at tanks, LAV's and Drop ships while weak or ineffective against the other types. If the tanker kills you, you lost the duel. If infantry killed you, teamwork is OP, get more friends. If a gunner killed you, same as above. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 108	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:18:00 - [112] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Either the grenades and a plc shot can or cannot kill the tank described. From there we can further the discussion, but not until you start to acknowledge some facts. The fact is that an HAV need only roll away when hit by the 1st grenade to be out-of-range for the 2nd or 3rd. If you're suggesting in a 'round about way that AV Grenade toss range and homing capabilities should be buffed, then just come out and say it. Stop avoiding the question. That you refuse to answer a simple question belies your intent. Are you really trying to become a CPM and you can't even handle a simple question without resorting hypotheticals? Do three lai dais and a PLC round destroy an dual rep Madrugar with its hardeners up? Thought I answered your question. A number of infantry loadouts -- including PLC + Lai Dais -- can solo a parked and empty HAV. That was not my question. Try again. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 114	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:20:00 - [113] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: No, killing a hardened Madrugar is never easy and the "It is a tank" line of logic fails because that tank is just one player, one player should never be able to replace 2 or 3 players merely by virtue of their fit. Tanks are anti-infantry and infantry AV is anti-tank, it makes no sense that tanks should be able to kill infantry but not the other way around. A tank can be killed by a single dropsuit. The rest of your argument is invalid. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 1	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:30:00 - [114] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: So, since these pubstars aren't NF, FA, or OH your tank get to trump their focused fire. And rightfully so. Because balance. How 'bout a compromise? If HAVs need be largely impervious to Infantry to thrive, give Infantry the same consideration. Retool Large Blasters as AV; set their AI capabilities equal to that of Infantry AV ... that is, lots and lots of warning shots followed by a brief window of "maybe", provided more than Large Blaster is simultaneously firing at the same Infantry unit. They didn't focus fire on anything. No debate about that. Any time 3 AV focus their fire on a tank, it dies. That is not up for debate, and people who say otherwise have never tanked in a PC. Most of the time 2 will do, but 3 will always do it. That isn't some long drawn out fight either, its 9 Lai dais and good night. Done in literally less than 3 seconds, no amount of hardeners will stop it. Every large socket has more than a half dozen spots where infantry can huck grenades from cover. Combined with places tanks MUST travel through to impact the battle in the large sockets, and tank control is trivial for a team in PC. You don't know anything about PC tanking. In your scenario, 3 units manage to sneak into grenade range, and then manage to keep your HAV in grenade range while tossing one grenade after another after another. That's not an impossible scenario, but it certainly isn't a probable one. Don't tanks move around sometimes, especially when taking damage? The scenario you've provided demonstrates plainly that you have it too easy. What's more concerning is that you seem to think it's OK. Focused Fire from 2 sources should be enough to make you sweat. Requiring focused fire from three or more is imbalanced. And AV shouldn't have to be prototype to threaten you. I'm still reading the thread but on page 2 I got to this post and I just had to say something....Did you literally just claim that you don't need Proto AV to threaten a 1.3 million Isk tank?..... Wow... Goes back to thread PS. Kaiser your idea is on point and I love it and you need to be CPM next year... "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner *The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven * Internet down atm :(
Balistyc Farshot MONSTER SYNERGY 299	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:30:00 - [115] - Quote Cesar Geronimo wrote: Ghost Kaisar wrote: Mina Longstrike wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: Madrugars don't need nerfing (except for large blaster dispersion). Instead buff Gunlogis and maybe missile turrets. They do need some adjusting. Without their hardeners they're far too weak. With them they're practically invincible (-60.86% incoming damage) They go from ~5k ehp & ~150ish reps to ~11.5k ehp (presuming the plate, dual hardener & single rep) with roughly ~400 effective reps once both hardeners get activated. Their reps outpace incoming DPS unless you can find some massive burst or have way, way too many people shooting at target. Their effective reps get even wilder if they drop the plate for a second rep. Or something like that, I'm tired and not mathing well. The problem is largely that this is all done in effective hitpoints, which means that the damage reduction is insane. If tanks were to have higher raw hitpoints, and lower hardened values alongside lower proportional reps... people wouldn't be as upset, as tanks would take damage that actually sticks for a bit. The large other portion of the problem is that vehicles have isk costs that treat them like they're temporary powerups (and yes, isk IS used as a balancing feature in this game, like it or not) so when someone calls out a 1m isk tank they feel like it should 'buy' them a lot of power, because risk vs reward. Another issue is that vehicles take up an absolutely massive amount of SP to be any real good which really messes with their design, as it treats them more as a role than a temporary powerup anyone could purchase... so there's a second hurdle there. Thirdly vehicles lack a very well defined role other than 'roam around and kill whatever you encounter' which further adds to frustrations - If they had a clearly defined role, people would be less likely to pull them out in situations where they're not needed. If isk costs remain so absurdly high, SP costs should go down, and survivability should probably be retained. If sp costs remain so absurdly high, isk costs should go down and survivability should be lowered (no one likes dying, but I care less about dying in something that costs 20k than something that costs 2mil). Vehicles need clear and frequently useful roles, without people getting upset when they perform well in the roles they have (currently people get really upset that some tanks are good at slaying... because well, that's the only identifiable role they have, and then vehicles get nerfed into uselessness... which causes a set of buffs later down the line that breaks everything because they still don't have a role). CCP has been trying to balance tanks for awhile. They pretty much flip between "Expensive Butterflies" and "Invincible Death Machines" My problem is that Tanks fill a very odd role in Combined arms. To Infantry, Tanks are SUPPOSED to be OP as F*CK. They are immune to small arms fire, have insanely more range, and far more firepower. In exchange, they need to be weak to something. I've always been of the opinion that AV is supposed to be DETERRENT in the hands of Infantry. More of a "Engage and you might die", not "CHASE AND KILL THE TANK". Tanks need to be on equal ground with other tanks in terms of fighting. Then what are tanks weak against? Tanks need to be weak to AIR. Dropships need heavier ordnance specifically for taking down tanks. Personally, I think that the main guns on ADS's need to be redone. Make an actual "Missile Launcher" for the ADS, just like the main turret on tank. Would be used for anti-tank/anti-infantry. Blaster would be akin to a mounted Plasma cannon with a larger clip for popping tanks. Rail would be where its at now, with a damage boost. With all this anti-tank abilities, dropships would still need to be weak to Infantry AV, with their fire and forget AA weapons, they will be able to terrorize dropships and keep them away from their armor. Now the Weapons Triangle is complete. Tanks > Infantry > Dropships > Tanks. Combined arms then boils down to this: Tanks protect the infantry, and the infantry protect the Dropships. Dropships then work as both infantry and vehicular support, much like the standard attack helicopter of today. Since Infantry still hard counter dropships, you can't stick a dropship into enemy territory, as swarms will quickly kill or dissuade attack. They also dissuade Armor from engaging due to damage. With enough AV, infantry can buy enough time to deploy their own ground or air power. Combined arms is always the way to go, and engagments are won from the Air down. Air Superiority is king. Just my thoughts on how Vehicles should work in Dust. I'm fully aware that this probably won't happen. ^^^^^^^^ This guy gets it... I agree with most of the proposal above. I made a similiar proposal but it involved giving the DS lock on anti-tank missiles and maintaining their current guns to keep them from being gunships. Having a tank style missile launcher would decimate infantry. The other piece I threw in as well is that the LAV should be anti DS, but I like your simple layout better. Vehicle Version: Tanks > Infantry > Dropships > Tanks Infantry Version: Heavies > Assaults > Scouts > Heavies CCP needs to understand that formula and build around it. They just are so scared of archetypes. "Dying with your rep tool out - the logi-flasher!" Who hasn't been caught by a cute little female scout doing this?
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:32:00 - [116] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: A tank can be killed by a single dropsuit. The rest of your argument is invalid. Balance Talk with Tankers - Part III Tanks were balanced following Uprising 1.7. If an AVer did it right, he could solo a tank. That's why tanks were balanced then. They were balanced. Then they got nerfed. That makes tanks underpowered right now. Not representative of all tankers; some are in fact reasonable. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 1	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:39:00 - [117] - Quote Lone Wolf 777 wrote: Larkson Crazy Eye wrote: It's funny how many people think AV is OP despite the fact 3-4 guys can be trying to kill a tank and just die in droves. It's no joke that most proto tanks can kill 30+ people and never die, even withstand a major laser strike. The biggest joke is swarms for all that people seem to think their still OP after the latest nerf in their lock on range I have to wonder do these people ever try the other side of the coin? They keep say jump in a tank and see how bad it is, but when was the last time they chased down a tank that can cut you down in half a second with AV weapons that require you to hit it 3-5 times minimum? Even a militia tank with full proto swarms, proficiency 5 and at least 4% dmg on the war barge takes 3 missiles most of the time. A hardened shield variant is even worse due to the dmg penalty vs explosives. You won't even see their shield bar move when you hit them. Keep in mind with swarms it has zero use against any infantry running around with a huge visual effect every time you fire that screams "Kill me". Over all I don't mind tanks being hard to kill, forcing half the team to chase them down is a valid role in wasting the enemies time. I do think however tanks anti infantry capability should be toned down drastically. Imo the large turret should be nearly useless against infantry while the small turrets should be extremely effective within 100-150min range max. That not only solves the problem of being to easy to kill and a waste of ISK but their ability to be one man killing machines. I can accept a tank slaughtering it's way threw the map if 3 players are required to operate it. But 1 man tanks going 40-0 is insane. As it is now not only can tanks work fine without gunners, it's usually a waste of time to have them. The small turrets are largely ineffective and having 3 players ride in one tank is a large waste of man power on a 16 man team. But one major thing to consider when you think about vehicles... if they get nerfed to bad no one will ever get the vehicle kill assist mission done ever again ;) "Tanks anti infantry capability should toned down drastically"....Just lol. What would the point of a tank be then? To sit there and look pretty? & if a tank goes 40 - 0, then apparently your not doing a good job or literally charging at a tank head on This lol. Get on some high ground AV. Besides I fail to see why a tank shouldn't be willing to have a squad chase him, when if you kill them, they have to play six matches at 200k isk without dying to make up just dying once to your tank... SMH back to the thread "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner *The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven * Internet down atm :(
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:40:00 - [118] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: So, since these pubstars aren't NF, FA, or OH your tank get to trump their focused fire. And rightfully so. Because balance. How 'bout a compromise? If HAVs need be largely impervious to Infantry to thrive, give Infantry the same consideration. Retool Large Blasters as AV; set their AI capabilities equal to that of Infantry AV ... that is, lots and lots of warning shots followed by a brief window of "maybe", provided more than Large Blaster is simultaneously firing at the same Infantry unit. They didn't focus fire on anything. No debate about that. Any time 3 AV focus their fire on a tank, it dies. That is not up for debate, and people who say otherwise have never tanked in a PC. Most of the time 2 will do, but 3 will always do it. That isn't some long drawn out fight either, its 9 Lai dais and good night. Done in literally less than 3 seconds, no amount of hardeners will stop it. Every large socket has more than a half dozen spots where infantry can huck grenades from cover. Combined with places tanks MUST travel through to impact the battle in the large sockets, and tank control is trivial for a team in PC. You don't know anything about PC tanking. In your scenario, 3 units manage to sneak into grenade range, and then manage to keep your HAV in grenade range while tossing one grenade after another after another. That's not an impossible scenario, but it certainly isn't a probable one. Don't tanks move around sometimes, especially when taking damage? The scenario you've provided demonstrates plainly that you have it too easy. What's more concerning is that you seem to think it's OK. Focused Fire from 2 sources should be enough to make you sweat. Requiring focused fire from three or more is imbalanced. And AV shouldn't have to be prototype to threaten you. I'm still reading the thread but on page 2 I got to this post and I just had to say something....Did you literally just claim that you don't need Proto AV to threaten a 1.3 million Isk tank?..... Wow... Goes back to thread PS. Kaiser your idea is on point and I love it and you need to be CPM next year... The back-and-forth above with Mosquito is responsive to his claims that "everything is fine because ...". My only claim above is that most HAVs don't sit still long enough to take 3 AV grenades from one merc. It is my opinion that 2 or more mercs volleying AV at tank (prototype or otherwise) should be sufficient to threaten the tank. This often isn't the case with hardened maddies, hence my opinion that hardeners should be restricted to one per loadout. I suspect that eliminating perma-hardening and double-hardening would likely bring V/AV into better balance. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Sergeant Sazu Mantodea MC 681	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:46:00 - [119] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: A tank can be killed by a single dropsuit. The rest of your argument is invalid. Balance Talk with Tankers - Part III Tanks were balanced following Uprising 1.7. If an AVer did it right, he could solo a tank. That's why tanks were balanced then. Tanks were balanced. Then they got nerfed. That makes tanks underpowered right now. Not representative of all tankers; some are in fact reasonable. I think he has the views that he does because he plays PC, where everyone is overly prepared to gank a tank with Lai Dais and rooftop AV. In any other game mode, a Madrugar has clear superiority over unorganized teams through sheer mobility, firepower, and ridiculous durability. [64.9m SP] Sazu's Trading
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 2	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:51:00 - [120] - Quote hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . I'm sure the said tanker would say two of you just Lai Dai'ing at the same time would be hell as well. Yes, the best tanks while in their prime are impregnable solo. Did you notice the underlinings above? KERO-TRADER is my official Eve character for Dust trading.

KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 2	Posted - 2015.07.16 14:58:00 - [121] - Quote maybe deadcatz wrote: You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies A terrible argument. Just having spent SP and/or isk should not guarantee domination over others. KERO-TRADER is my official Eve character for Dust trading.
Darken-Sol Intruder Excluder 2	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:00:00 - [122] - Quote Sergeant Sazu wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: A tank can be killed by a single dropsuit. The rest of your argument is invalid. Balance Talk with Tankers - Part III Tanks were balanced following Uprising 1.7. If an AVer did it right, he could solo a tank. That's why tanks were balanced then. Tanks were balanced. Then they got nerfed. That makes tanks underpowered right now. Not representative of all tankers; some are in fact reasonable. I think he has the views that he does because he plays PC, where everyone is overly prepared to gank a tank with Lai Dais and rooftop AV. In any other game mode, a Madrugar has clear superiority over unorganized teams through sheer mobility, firepower, and ridiculous durability. Wanna know a secret? Its that feeling of invulnerability that you prey on. Two forgers can destroy a tank before his hardeners activate. Find a safe place and look at your map. A little prep goes a long way with AV Crush them
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 1	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:03:00 - [123] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: [quote=Lone Wolf 777]To be fair, tanks are easy to kill if you make a plan to kill it. Yeah, they can take alot of punishment but lets try to think for a second....hmm....its a damn tank, get used to 1 person with AV getting swatted to the side like a bug. It should take teamwork to kill a tank. Not a few Lai Dais at a un-hardened tank to kill it, which by the way is absolutely ridiculous. You want to know what I do to deal with a tank if it becomes a problem with me or my blues, i bring out a tank. So stop whining, either use teamwork or spend lots of SP & ISK into vehicles. And if that tank kills yours, dont go crying saying, "It was lag!", "He/she is cheating" or one of my favorite, "Tanks are OP!"....lol. Just remember, your infantry....a tank is "anti-infantry". Who do you expect to win when your not using advantages and or teamwork. No, killing a hardened Madrugar is never easy and the "It is a tank" line of logic fails because that tank is just one player, one player should never be able to replace 2 or 3 players merely by virtue of their fit. Tanks are anti-infantry and infantry AV is anti-tank, it makes no sense that tanks should be able to kill infantry but not the other way around. It is obvious that Madrugars are a little OP right now and that almost all other vehicles are too weak. LAV's go boom far too easy now, DS go down too easy, shield tanks die and the Madrugar reigns supreme, this is not balance in any sense. [/quote Then buff them all, not nerf the Madrugar so they are all bad. It's a mechanized vehicle... Almost done with reading thread "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner *The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven * Internet down atm :(
Sergeant Sazu Mantodea MC 681	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:04:00 - [124] - Quote Darken-Sol wrote: Wanna know a secret? Its that feeling of invulnerability that you prey on. Two forgers can destroy a tank before his hardeners activate. Find a safe place and look at your map. A little prep goes a long way with AV That's no secret. It's called outnumbering, and also applying alpha. Neither of those two should be required to take down a single player. That's unbalanced. [64.9m SP] Sazu's Trading
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 1	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:21:00 - [125] - Quote Ok full thread read. Now I cant say how easy it is to kill a tank now because I haven't played But I find it hard to believe that with all this "proto stomping complaining"going on these players sre unorganized and can't use AV. You are right Adipem, two AV should Threaten a tank, but I also want to point out that the game is centered around paying more Isk and having more Sp to become more deadly. A militia suit can kill a proto, but let us not pretend that it is in anyway on par with the amount of survivability. A player with all Core Upgrades has 25% more Armor and Shields than a player without. A 200k dropsuit vs a 1.3 million isk tank. I have no qualms with 3-4 needing to kill it because you can die 6 times them die once. You can tell your squad to cover you while you are AV. You can get up on roofs, inside buildings while a tank is outside Tanks are big, loud, SP intensive, and have to know that at anytime a competent squad will whip out AV. If a tanker is killing droves, that team needs to hunt him down. Just make sure your squad also is fighting for the point. Apologies if you have to deal with Proto tanks and proto suits, but neutering a tank is not the way to achieve balance Make other vehicles that onlu one user needs to operate capable of killing a Maddy. Buff all vehicles so people are more likely to use em and you can farm Wp and kills off of. Overall, Maddys are 0P because the other vehicles are UP. Buffing swarms and AV is a bad idea because you harm all other vehicles inadvertently. 07 "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner *The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven * Internet down atm :(
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 362	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:32:00 - [126] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Assuming Armor HAV efficiency rates are above acceptable bounds and Shield HAVs are below: * Limit all vehicle fittings to 1 hardener * Decrease chassis and turret costs by 25% (all vehicles, all turrets) * Decrease speed and acceleration of Armor HAVs * Increase speed and acceleration of Shield HAVs * Increase Large Missile Turret Reload Speed * Increase Packed RE blast radius and damage If afterwards, HAV efficiency rates remain out of balance: * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Accuracy * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Range I can't even read the rest. You can get bent dooder. Idk who beat you over the head with a stupid stick, but I'm here to put you out of your misery. The simple fact that you are trying to kill Maddie's with anything but a forge/missile boat shows your ignorance. Now your cries for nerf have awakened the beast. I can survive your onslaught in my std gunnlogi, quafe even. Your ignorant suggestions for vehicle rework tells me you have never once grown a pair and called your own tank. So many ways to kill a tanker, but you do not deserve this knowledge. Even if you had it you would fail. Your T count is too low to come at me bro. GOML Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:38:00 - [127] - Quote Devadander wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Assuming Armor HAV efficiency rates are above acceptable bounds and Shield HAVs are below: * Limit all vehicle fittings to 1 hardener * Decrease chassis and turret costs by 25% (all vehicles, all turrets) * Decrease speed and acceleration of Armor HAVs * Increase speed and acceleration of Shield HAVs * Increase Large Missile Turret Reload Speed * Increase Packed RE blast radius and damage If afterwards, HAV efficiency rates remain out of balance: * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Accuracy * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Range I can't even read the rest. You can get bent dooder. Idk who beat you over the head with a stupid stick, but I'm here to put you out of your misery. The simple fact that you are trying to kill Maddie's with anything but a forge/missile boat shows your ignorance. Now your cries for nerf have awakened the beast. I can survive your onslaught in my std gunnlogi, quafe even. Your ignorant suggestions for vehicle rework tells me you have never once grown a pair and called your own tank. So many ways to kill a tanker, but you do not deserve this knowledge. Even if you had it you would fail. Your T count is too low to come at me bro. GOML Absolutely correct. The only tanks I've ever driven were the ones I hacked and parked in the redline. Unqualified and non-expert suggestions (like mine) are precisely what you get when a class can't own and address its own imbalance. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 1	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:39:00 - [128] - Quote Devadander wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Assuming Armor HAV efficiency rates are above acceptable bounds and Shield HAVs are below: * Limit all vehicle fittings to 1 hardener * Decrease chassis and turret costs by 25% (all vehicles, all turrets) * Decrease speed and acceleration of Armor HAVs * Increase speed and acceleration of Shield HAVs * Increase Large Missile Turret Reload Speed * Increase Packed RE blast radius and damage If afterwards, HAV efficiency rates remain out of balance: * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Accuracy * Decrease Large Blaster Turret Range I can't even read the rest. You can get bent dooder. Idk who beat you over the head with a stupid stick, but I'm here to put you out of your misery. The simple fact that you are trying to kill Maddie's with anything but a forge/missile boat shows your ignorance. Now your cries for nerf have awakened the beast. I can survive your onslaught in my std gunnlogi, quafe even. Your ignorant suggestions for vehicle rework tells me you have never once grown a pair and called your own tank. So many ways to kill a tanker, but you do not deserve this knowledge. Even if you had it you would fail. Your T count is too low to come at me bro. GOML Attacking him solves nothing but show your lack of regard for xonversation. Debate with him "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner *The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven * Internet down atm :(
Kierkegaard Soren Eridani Light Horse Battalion 855	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:40:00 - [129] - Quote Tanks need a definitive role, but when you think about it, how much of the battlefield can be interacted with once you take "killing infantry" out of the equation? The game is very static once you account for hacking and murdering, and since tanks can't hack then murdering is all that is left for them. We can't give them another defined role when the path to victory in any given game is so small and narrow in scope. For example, if null cannons were made to be susceptible to heavy weapons fire and could be damaged to the point of being made inoperable (but not destroyed) then we could open up this whole new dynamic whereby teams that up against opposition that is really dug in around the objective could pull out tanks to seige the null, which in turn would require the defenders to switch to AV to protect the point. That's just one example of course, but you get my point; until we give vehicle players more to aim for they'll always be fitted to act like super slayers. Dedicated Commando. "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing."
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 1	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:42:00 - [130] - Quote Agreed Soren. "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner *The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven * Internet down atm :(

Darken-Sol Intruder Excluder 2	Posted - 2015.07.16 15:43:00 - [131] - Quote Sergeant Sazu wrote: Darken-Sol wrote: Wanna know a secret? Its that feeling of invulnerability that you prey on. Two forgers can destroy a tank before his hardeners activate. Find a safe place and look at your map. A little prep goes a long way with AV That's no secret. It's called outnumbering, and also applying alpha. Neither of those two should be required to take down a single player. That's unbalanced. Well i got three in my maddy so bring at least that or youre gonna be back here crying. Crush them
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 120	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:08:00 - [132] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: The back-and-forth above with Mosquito is responsive to his claims that "everything is fine because ...". My only claim above is that most HAVs don't sit still long enough to take 3 AV grenades from one merc. So wait, because the tank is moving it suddenly becomes impossible to hit three grenades? Tanks are not dropsuits, they cannot sidestep a clutch of grenades, especially since the things home in for you. Getting the three AV nades on target is the basic part, because it doesn't require anything other than putting yourself ahead of the tank. Why do you think that you shouldn't have to think about what the tanker is trying to do, or where they will go next? Adipem Nothi wrote: It is my opinion that 2 or more mercs volleying AV at tank (prototype or otherwise) should be sufficient to threaten the tank. This often isn't the case with hardened maddies, This is where you are 100% wrong. 2 mercs who want to kill a tank will, hardeners don't even matter. The tank runs or it dies. Proto tank, complex plate, dual hardeners, complex rep. The most sturdy of maddy builds. Versus 2 players with proto AV. 6 lai dais = Overkill, tank dead in 4.5 seconds. 12 proxies = Overkill, tank pops. 1 FG, 1 Swarms, tank dies on third set of swarms, after second FG hit. Might live 12 seconds. 1 FG, 1 Swarms, plus thrown AV nades, 1 volley each, one nade each, tank dead in under 5 seconds. 1 FG, 1 PLC, no nades, should be the second FG shot that pops it, if not the second PLC will. 1 FG, 1 PLC, with nades, one volley each, one nade. Now, if one of those people is a logi, not only do you have Lai dais, ammo and proxies, you have the bandwidth to actually lay multiple traps. The swarmer in the examples above isn't even a minmando. A tank that stays in range and sight of 2 equal tier AV is a tank that doesn't finish its hardener cycle. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 120	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:11:00 - [133] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: A 200k dropsuit vs a 1.3 million isk tank. I have no qualms with 3-4 needing to kill it because you can die 6 times them die once. No, the 1 to 1 is fine. Once you actually need multiple people to take out tanks in a small number game they become oppressive. Thankfully, one suit can take out a tank. And it needs to stay that way. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 120	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:13:00 - [134] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Absolutely correct. The only tanks I've ever driven were the ones I hacked and parked in the redline. Unqualified and non-expert suggestions (like mine) are precisely what you get when a class either cannot or refuses to address its own imbalance. I'd like to see you tank. Would make me laugh my ass off as you get evaporated. I'll give you the finest fit tanks, but since they are so strong, you break 'em you bought em. I'd put good money on you going negative and losing 5 million ISK a game. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 10	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:17:00 - [135] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: The back-and-forth above with Mosquito is responsive to his claims that "everything is fine because ...". My only claim above is that most HAVs don't sit still long enough to take 3 AV grenades from one merc. So wait, because the tank is moving it suddenly becomes impossible to hit three grenades? Tanks are not dropsuits, they cannot sidestep a clutch of grenades, especially since the things home in for you. Getting the three AV nades on target is the basic part, because it doesn't require anything other than putting yourself ahead of the tank. Why do you think that you shouldn't have to think about what the tanker is trying to do, or where they will go next? Adipem Nothi wrote: It is my opinion that 2 or more mercs volleying AV at tank (prototype or otherwise) should be sufficient to threaten the tank. This often isn't the case with hardened maddies, This is where you are 100% wrong. 2 mercs who want to kill a tank will, hardeners don't even matter. The tank runs or it dies. Proto tank, complex plate, dual hardeners, complex rep. The most sturdy of maddy builds. Versus 2 players with proto AV. 6 lai dais = Overkill, tank dead in 4.5 seconds. 12 proxies = Overkill, tank pops. 1 FG, 1 Swarms, tank dies on third set of swarms, after second FG hit. Might live 12 seconds. 1 FG, 1 Swarms, plus thrown AV nades, 1 volley each, one nade each, tank dead in under 5 seconds. 1 FG, 1 PLC, no nades, should be the second FG shot that pops it, if not the second PLC will. 1 FG, 1 PLC, with nades, one volley each, one nade. Now, if one of those people is a logi, not only do you have Lai dais, ammo and proxies, you have the bandwidth to actually lay multiple traps. The swarmer in the examples above isn't even a minmando. A tank that stays in range and sight of 2 equal tier AV is a tank that doesn't finish its hardener cycle. None of your examples cited here have proof. Further since your jab about the CPM was directed at me and not adipem... I don't need or care about your vote. I'm aiming for the votes of everyone you're sitting and treating like sh*t in this thread. I don't answer to people who've only proven they can browbeat after bringing NOTHING BUT ANECDOTE AND BALD FACED LIES as their evidence. Finally you're claiming balanced based on a single edge case while ignoring the fact that none of the other cases are relevant. HAVs will get toned down, it's inevitable with or without my input. But since HAV drivers insist on screaming that all is well rather than entering serious discussions on how to reconcile the problems, you will inevitably have no say and no appeal when the hammer drops. Judge Rhadamanthus used the exact same tactics you are in this thread while staging situations on video with his buddies to prove his points. And oh look. He rage quit the game after going thermal and having himself more or less disinvited from the CPM. Guess what my assessment of the usefulness is your arguments is. WoW has taught me that Purple means Legendary. This means Quafe suits are the optimal loadout for killing all of you.
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:24:00 - [136] - Quote Min scout Plasma cannon Lai Dais Kincats Tanks tend to die a lot with that. A point that needs to be made. Hardeners are performing EXACTLY AS INTENDED. The entire point of them is to let them stay even under attack by AV. If you can kill a tank with its hardener up, there is no point to having one fitted. That is exactly why Rattati buffed them in the first place; no one was using them because you still died to AV. Instead, we need to look at other options (limit one hardener per vehicle, make armor reps active, etc.) to fix the tank issue. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:31:00 - [137] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: we need to look at other options (limit one hardener per vehicle, make armor reps active, etc.) to fix the tank issue. Agreed. If deemed warranted, TA recommends increasing fitting costs for hardeners rather than introducing a hard cap. Thoughts? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 120	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:32:00 - [138] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: None of your examples cited here have proof. You and nothi can get together and I will sacrifice tanks to prove it. I will hand you proto tanks and watch you whelp them into AV until you see what it is actually like. You say none of these things have proof, which is absurd. 6 lai dais destroying any tank is simple math. Same with the proxies. As for the FG/Swarm/PLC combos, its just more math. Tank HP, resists, and reps can all be calculated. As can the damage of the weapons and their firing time. Spend some time, and show me a proto maddy fit that can survive two proto av shooting at it through its hardeners. I assure you there is no such fit, and ANY fit you can construct will be dead before its hardeners finish their cycle. I find your screaming about bold faced lies to be interesting, care to expound on that? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Sergeant Sazu Mantodea MC 683	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:38:00 - [139] - Quote -Call in blaster Madrugar -Kill 5-10 people -5 people pull out AV -Kill 2 or 3 of the AVers -Hide in the redline until hardeners recharge -Repeat This is the usual process that I see. I've been on both sides of the scenario, and it's not fun for anyone IMO. [64.9m SP] Sazu's Trading
Sergeant Sazu Mantodea MC 683	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:41:00 - [140] - Quote Darken-Sol wrote: Sergeant Sazu wrote: Darken-Sol wrote: Wanna know a secret? Its that feeling of invulnerability that you prey on. Two forgers can destroy a tank before his hardeners activate. Find a safe place and look at your map. A little prep goes a long way with AV That's no secret. It's called outnumbering, and also applying alpha. Neither of those two should be required to take down a single player. That's unbalanced. Well i got three in my maddy so bring at least that or youre gonna be back here crying. There's the underlying problem: Numbers-wise, your durability is exactly the same no matter how many players are in your tank. That's where the "1 player = 1 player" concept is getting messed up. Tankers ask that they take 3 people to take down since they have 3 seats. Then they turn around and slap on a large blaster + 2 hardeners and be a one-man army, throwing the match out of balance. If that was your agenda, you got it. Congrats. [64.9m SP] Sazu's Trading

General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 120	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:46:00 - [141] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Finally you're claiming balanced based on a single edge case while ignoring the fact that none of the other cases are relevant. There is essentially no edge case. Even though I was responding to a specific argument made by Adipem, so it was kind of required. There are two basic forms of tank right now, dual rep, and dual hardener maddies. Anything else gets looked at wrong and it explodes. Either AV can tackle these mythical beasts or they cannot. I contend that they can. Hell a single minmando creates a tank free bubble, where even though he may not kill them, they cannot approach while he lives. All with almost no risk from the tank, as baring a lucky rail or missile hit he won't be touched, and a blaster can't reach back that far. Oh, and he can also swat dropships while he is chilling. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 362	Posted - 2015.07.16 16:59:00 - [142] - Quote I still post great scores in my gunnlogi. My madrugar has been popped more than once. Petition for cheaper tanks, maybe I'll be OK with them being crap when they're not a mil plus for a good one. And my forge is all V from knowing it's the true AV. I have zero problems driving havs, and popping them on foot. And there's many more just like me. You ask me to be constructive with a guy who wants to increase missile reload times... At V reload its still a bad joke. It's jokers like this that killed the module and turret variety because they don't want tanks in their gun game. Want to OHK a vehicle? I suggest CoD... Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Darken-Sol Intruder Excluder 2	Posted - 2015.07.16 17:06:00 - [143] - Quote Sergeant Sazu wrote: Darken-Sol wrote: Sergeant Sazu wrote: Darken-Sol wrote: Wanna know a secret? Its that feeling of invulnerability that you prey on. Two forgers can destroy a tank before his hardeners activate. Find a safe place and look at your map. A little prep goes a long way with AV That's no secret. It's called outnumbering, and also applying alpha. Neither of those two should be required to take down a single player. That's unbalanced. Well i got three in my maddy so bring at least that or youre gonna be back here crying. There's the underlying problem: Numbers-wise, your durability is exactly the same no matter how many players are in your tank. That's where the "1 player = 1 player" concept is getting messed up. Tankers ask that they take 3 people to take down since they have 3 seats. Then they turn around and slap on a large blaster + 2 hardeners and be a one-man army, throwing the match out of balance. If that was your agenda, you got it. Congrats. I didnt ask anything. Durability and survivability are not the same. Fitting only really matters when you are up against a decent tanker or Good AV. My agenda. Lol. My agenda involves educating and training anyone that wants to learn something. I tank and AV. I know the weaknesses and strrengths of both. You can congratulate me when it dawns on you that you might not have all the facts. Crush them
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.16 17:29:00 - [144] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Absolutely correct. The only tanks I've ever driven were the ones I hacked and parked in the redline. Unqualified and non-expert suggestions (like mine) are precisely what you get when a class either cannot or refuses to address its own imbalance. I'd like to see you tank. Would make me laugh my ass off as you get evaporated. I'll give you the finest fit tanks, but since they are so strong, you break 'em you bought em. I'd put good money on you going negative and losing 5 million ISK a game. Had several million SP to spend a couple months back; thought about skilling into a Missile Gunnlogi. Something handy to thin the numbers of those oh-so-common blaster tanks, especially when the other side is running 2-3 at a time. Was advised by a buddy tanker that it'd be an unwise investment, with Blaster Madrugars being what they are. Found it peculiar that the most durable HAV on the field also happens to be the very best AI option and is all the while sufficiently competent in its presumed AV role to hold its own against a Missile Gunnlogi. No wonder it's so common. TL;DR: Will get around to skilling into HAVs, but not until they're better balanced. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Sergeant Sazu Mantodea MC 683	Posted - 2015.07.16 17:44:00 - [145] - Quote Darken-Sol wrote: I didnt ask anything. Durability and survivability are not the same. Fitting only really matters when you are up against a decent tanker or Good AV. My agenda. Lol. My agenda involves educating and training anyone that wants to learn something. I tank and AV. I know the weaknesses and strrengths of both. You can congratulate me when it dawns on you that you might not have all the facts. Having gunners improves survivability. Never denied that. Not my point. My point had to do with vehicles being overly effective without gunners. And I again made the mistake of lumping tankers together and thinking they all have an "agenda". So my bad, I didn't mean to make it personal. We should both drop the condescending attitude. No arrogance intended, please enlighten me as to what I'm missing. [64.9m SP] Sazu's Trading
Ghost Steps G0DS AM0NG MEN New Eden's Heros 27	Posted - 2015.07.16 17:50:00 - [146] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies ISK should never buy invulnerability. Agreed, nor SP. Caldari Scouts should be Ninjas.
Heimdallr69 Negative-Feedback. 6	Posted - 2015.07.16 17:54:00 - [147] - Quote I kill plenty with my sica rail..you are a dumb av player..don't attack when his Hardner is on wait for the right moment and use the element of surprise..you really think a fit that takes maybe 5-6m and costs 200k ISK should insta gank a tank that takes 40-60m sp and costs 1.2-2m ISK? Smart players surprise the tank, most just use tactics to suppress tanks then QQ about not being able to kill one. Removed inappropriate content - CCP Logibro püépü¬püƒpü»tºüpü«pâèpââpâêpéÆsÉ+püäpü+püÖ
Darken-Sol Intruder Excluder 2	Posted - 2015.07.16 18:03:00 - [148] - Quote Sergeant Sazu wrote: Darken-Sol wrote: I didnt ask anything. Durability and survivability are not the same. Fitting only really matters when you are up against a decent tanker or Good AV. My agenda. Lol. My agenda involves educating and training anyone that wants to learn something. I tank and AV. I know the weaknesses and strrengths of both. You can congratulate me when it dawns on you that you might not have all the facts. Having gunners improves survivability. Never denied that. Not my point. My point had to do with vehicles being overly effective without gunners. And I again made the mistake of lumping tankers together and thinking they all have an "agenda". So my bad, I didn't mean to make it personal. We should both drop the condescending attitude. No arrogance intended, please enlighten me as to what I'm missing. Most AV is swarms. Easy to skill easy to learn. Easy to outsmart. They need line of sight. When im rolling around in a tank it is to draw these half assers of the points. It works they get wp i get kills points get hacked. All the while they are chasing me right where i am leading them, usually near a group of blue infantry. I play hurt alot. Take swarms or fg to make people rush. When they in the open i kill them. If everyone just stayed at the points id get no kills. But they are easy to fool. Crush them
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.16 18:10:00 - [149] - Quote Heimdallr69 wrote: I kill plenty with my sica rail..you are a dumb av player..don't attack when his Hardner is on wait for the right moment and use the element of surprise..you really think a fit that takes maybe 5-6m and costs 200k ISK should insta gank a tank that takes 40-60m sp and costs 1.2-2m ISK? Smart players surprise the tank, most just use tactics to suppress tanks then QQ about not being able to kill one. Heim! Just so happens that I snuck up behind your tank not so long ago. It was an Acq or Dom. I arrived late in the match to find that we were more-or-less redlined. Spawned at the CRU in our ground spawn and was promptly gunned down by your Blaster HAV. Typically, I'd leave battle at this point, but you didn't have any infantry support nearby, so I thought I'd try to get you back first. Spawned elsewhere. GalScout, Lai Dais + PLC. Ran around the map and found my way back to you (you hadn't moved much at all; still camping that CRU). There I waited, cloaked, literally right next to you. Waiting waiting waiting. Your hardeners were up for what seemed like forever. I knew better than to open up while you were hardened. Finally! Hardeners drop. I decloak and rush in, tossing my first grenade and immediately following up with a second. The first grenade detonated and you were on the move, rolling backwards as my second hit. I'm racing toward you with 3rd in hand, trying to get back into range ... And then you activate your other hardener before promptly wiping me out with 2 blasts. Of course you were running multiple hardeners. Why wouldn't you? What was I thinking? Lol. Balance. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Heimdallr69 Negative-Feedback. 6	Posted - 2015.07.16 18:51:00 - [150] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Heimdallr69 wrote: I kill plenty with my sica rail..you are a dumb av player..don't attack when his Hardner is on wait for the right moment and use the element of surprise..you really think a fit that takes maybe 5-6m and costs 200k ISK should insta gank a tank that takes 40-60m sp and costs 1.2-2m ISK? Smart players surprise the tank, most just use tactics to suppress tanks then QQ about not being able to kill one. Heim! Just so happens that I snuck up behind your tank not so long ago. With PLC and Lai Dais, no less! It was an Acq or Dom. Train Map. I arrived late in the match to find that we were more-or-less redlined. Spawned at the CRU in our ground spawn and was promptly gunned down by your Blaster HAV. Checked the roster; obvious stomp is obvious. Typically, I'd leave battle at this point, but you didn't have any infantry support nearby, so I thought I'd try to get you back first. Spawned elsewhere. Scout gk.0 + Lai Dais + PLC. Ran around the map and found my way back to you. It took awhile, but you hadn't moved much as you were still camping that CRU for easy kills. So I crept up behind and there I waited, cloaked, literally right next to you. Waiting waiting waiting. Your hardeners were up for what seemed like forever. I knew better than to open up on a hardened tank, much less one piloted by a competent player. Almost out of cloak reserves ... and then your Hardeners dropped. Finally! I decloak, rush in and caught you wholly off-guard. Tossed my first Lai Dai and immediately followed up with a second. The first grenade detonated and you were on the move, rolling backwards as my second hit. You're hurting. I'm racing toward you with 3rd in hand ... have to get you back into grenade range before you mow me down ... And just then, you slow down and activate your other hardener. Of course you do. Of course you were running multiple hardeners. Why wouldn't you be? What was I thinking? Lol. Balance. In hindsight, my odds were near zero, and I shouldn't have even tried. If V/AV were better balanced, my odds would've been closer to 50/50. Instead, you got outplayed and still maintained near 100% odds of success. With room for error. Even if I had hit you with the 3rd Lai Dai and a followup PLC blast, I still wouldn't have put out enough damage to overcome your second hardener. I run a mlt sica rail, 2 hardners and a rep for those that do get into my armor..I tend to be lazy when in tank =ƒÿü 3 av nades will blow up my tank, it happens a lot Removed inappropriate content - CCP Logibro püépü¬püƒpü»tºüpü«pâèpââpâêpéÆsÉ+püäpü+püÖ

Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.16 18:53:00 - [151] - Quote Heimdallr69 wrote: I run a mlt sica rail, 2 hardners and a rep for those that do get into my armor..I tend to be lazy when in tank =ƒÿü 3 av nades will blow up my tank, it happens a lot The guy who got me was running a double hardened maddie with a prototype blaster. This happened ~2 months back. Thought for sure it was you. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Heimdallr69 Negative-Feedback. 6	Posted - 2015.07.16 19:25:00 - [152] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Heimdallr69 wrote: I run a mlt sica rail, 2 hardners and a rep for those that do get into my armor..I tend to be lazy when in tank =ƒÿü 3 av nades will blow up my tank, it happens a lot The guy who got me was running a double hardened maddie with what I recall being a prototype blaster. This happened ~2 months back. Thought for sure it was you. Edit: I stand corrected. This did happen two months ago, but the pilot was Clon Toxin. Not Heim. My mistake. Yeah when we got a respec like almost 1-2 years ago I left tanks for good..kept getting nerfed and was a complete waste of sp and ISK Removed inappropriate content - CCP Logibro püépü¬püƒpü»tºüpü«pâèpââpâêpéÆsÉ+püäpü+püÖ
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 362	Posted - 2015.07.16 19:57:00 - [153] - Quote PLC is shield AV at best.... Even in my gunni, only a kubo makes me care a little. Edit: std gunni at that. You are, in fact, doing it wrong. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Shadow Player Shadow Hitmen 115	Posted - 2015.07.16 20:14:00 - [154] - Quote Madrugar is hell on wheels without nerf. If you have 4x armor hardeners you are unstopable If you want to be a TRUE HITMAN, join Shadow Hitmen!!!
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.16 20:22:00 - [155] - Quote Devadander wrote: You are, in fact, doing it wrong. Obviously. But had that tank been limited to one hardener, which would be better for balance, things might have gone differently. Right? Right. I've since found Forge Guns to be far more effective than Pro5 Proto Swarms, Pro5 Plasma Cannon, Lai Dais, or any combination thereof. Like I said before, I kill tanks often. But doesn't mean that madrugars are balanced. Fairly confident that they aren't, and it won't come as a surprise if/when they get nerfed. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 362	Posted - 2015.07.16 20:34:00 - [156] - Quote I'll step OOC here and actually be helpful. As a tanker, my fears, from not scary to pure terror incarnate, are as follows: Nova knives - PLC - dropships - nades - remotes - other tanks - swarms - proxies - forge - unmanned rail installations True tankers see that last one and be like /nod. Proxies are only so high because of rarity, these days. Swarms are high because three guys with std swarms can put down a gv0. If I want to pop a tank, a good one, I bring a forge. If you are dedicated AV, you have more than adv and a few reload levels. Nobody is complaining about MLT here. We're talking about PRO hav. MLT AV can down my STD gunni if I make one tiny mistake. It's all perspective, a mk0 ass with a gk0 scout buddy go 44/4 against people with lower skills; working as intended. Vehicle drivers want epic vehicle battles, and just get waves of unprepared infantry; its game breaking... Bring an alldins for krins sake! Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 10	Posted - 2015.07.16 20:47:00 - [157] - Quote Devadander wrote: . Bring an alldins for krins sake! as you wish. WoW has taught me that Purple means Legendary. This means Quafe suits are the optimal loadout for killing all of you.
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 363	Posted - 2015.07.17 02:21:00 - [158] - Quote Bump Get some life in your hands.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 121	Posted - 2015.07.17 03:06:00 - [159] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Had several million SP to spend a couple months back; thought about skilling into a Missile Gunnlogi. Something handy to thin the numbers of those oh-so-common blaster tanks; a go-to response for when the other side is running 2-3 tanks at a time. Was advised by a buddy tanker that it'd be an unwise investment, with Blaster Madrugars being what they are. Found it peculiar that the most durable HAV on the field also happens to be the very best AI option and is all the while sufficiently competent in its presumed AV role to hold its own against even a Missile Gunnlogi. No wonder it's so common. TL;DR: Will get around to skilling into HAVs, but not until they're better balanced. Of course you would ignore the offer to prove yourself right. I guess me laughing at you while you die to a single AV guy would be too much for your pride. Missile Gunnloggis shred Madrugars well enough, but they have critical weaknesses, and as such will always remain less used unless they are given much stronger buffs than any infantry player would want. Sure you can build a gank Gunnloggi that will hurt a Madrugar, but double hardened you will still have to reload, and that means surviving the return damage, which they cannot do, or attack from further range, which they cannot do. Add in that because of the turret depression problem, you cannot defend yourself when someone gets within 5 metres. Oh, and an enemy tank that gets below you will require you to completely expose your tank to get shots on it. Tanks will never be balanced between themselves, because the shield tank hull is crap, and even though you can buff around some of its problems, it biggest alleged role is nullified by the fact that it can't depress the gun, and so can't properly fight from high ground, and with a slower top speed and slower practical acceleration it can't actually fight from range either. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 121	Posted - 2015.07.17 03:09:00 - [160] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Found it peculiar that the most durable HAV on the field also happens to be the very best AI option and is all the while sufficiently competent in its presumed AV role to hold its own against even a Missile Gunnlogi. TL;DR: Will get around to skilling into HAVs, but not until they're better balanced. Its not the most durable, its the only durable HAV. There is a difference, and you would be wise to consider that. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.

General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 121	Posted - 2015.07.17 03:14:00 - [161] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Obviously. But had that tank been limited to one hardener, which would be better for balance, things might have gone differently. Right? Right. I've since found Forge Guns to be far more effective than Pro5 Proto Swarms, Pro5 Plasma Cannon, Lai Dais, or any combination thereof. Like I said before, I kill tanks often. But doesn't mean that madrugars are balanced. Fairly confident that they aren't, and it won't come as a surprise if/when they get nerfed. FG most effective AV? I smell a roof topper. Is that what this is really about, CCP not letting you kill vehicles from rooftops with no risk to yourself? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Squagga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 935	Posted - 2015.07.17 03:33:00 - [162] - Quote First of all. Tankers are bitches. Second of all it's really not impossible to take down tanks. It's just expensive, and as usual, annoying to get shot in the back. You just gotta be smarter than the tanker Shields, the silent killer.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.17 04:08:00 - [163] - Quote Squagga wrote: First of all. Tankers are bitches. Second of all it's really not impossible to take down tanks. It's just expensive, and as usual, annoying to get shot in the back. You just gotta be smarter than the tanker Only met one of you who can throw a good roundhouse worth a damn and he was a bloody halfbreed. Learn to brawl. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 363	Posted - 2015.07.17 07:35:00 - [164] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Obviously. But had that tank been limited to one hardener, which would be better for balance, things might have gone differently. Right? Right. I've since found Forge Guns to be far more effective than Pro5 Proto Swarms, Pro5 Plasma Cannon, Lai Dais, or any combination thereof. Like I said before, I kill tanks often. But doesn't mean that madrugars are balanced. Fairly confident that they aren't, and it won't come as a surprise if/when they get nerfed. FG most effective AV? I smell a roof topper. Is that what this is really about, CCP not letting you kill vehicles from rooftops with no risk to yourself? Forges were good to me up until the Bandwith idea. How the hell am I supposed to supply myself with ammo if im not chilling by a supply depot? All I need is maybe 8-12 BW to drop a couple nanohives. Get some life in your hands.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.17 10:53:00 - [165] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Tanks will never be balanced between themselves, because the shield tank hull is crap, and even though you can buff around some of its problems, it biggest alleged role is nullified by the fact that it can't depress the gun, and so can't properly fight from high ground, and with a slower top speed and slower practical acceleration it can't actually fight from range either. Balancing tanks is no different than balancing anything else. If Armor-based Hulls are substantially better than Shield-based Hulls, then buff one or nerf the other. If the latter is favored over the former, and armor hardeners are for some reason sacrosanct, then knock armor HAVs down a notch by nerfing speed/acceleration and regen. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.17 11:32:00 - [166] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Obviously. But had that tank been limited to one hardener, which would be better for balance, things might have gone differently. Right? Right. I've since found Forge Guns to be far more effective than Pro5 Proto Swarms, Pro5 Plasma Cannon, Lai Dais, or any combination thereof. Like I said before, I kill tanks often. But doesn't mean that madrugars are balanced. Fairly confident that they aren't, and it won't come as a surprise if/when they get nerfed. FG most effective AV? I smell a roof topper. Is that what this is really about, CCP not letting you kill vehicles from rooftops with no risk to yourself? Unless a tank is inside a socket, Forge Guns are the only form of infantry AV which work reliably. So, yeah, sometime back I got tired of throwing 100k suits at blaster tanks. I'd always get my licks in, but unless the pilot was especially stupid (not uncommon) or inattentive, he'd more often than not kill me before I could deal sufficient damage to pose any real threat, even when I sync'd strikes with allied AV. In the vast majority of cases, running up on an HAV with Nades and/or REs is suicide. PLC and Swarms are little more than an eventual deterrent. Every tanker in this thread who isn't actively licking a window knows that this is true. For awhile, I'd just ignore HAVs, which (sadly) is what I think most tankers expect of infantry: "Let me farm you and leave me alone. My stuff's more expensive than yours, so I'm supposed to go 30/0. If you shoot back at me, you're an idiot and you deserve to die. I'm in a tank." :: eats chips :: Recently, I got aggravated with multiple HAV spam. Thought about skilling into Missile Gunnlogi. Changed my mind because Blaster Maddies are OP. Ended up skilling into a CalSent and maxed out the Forge Gun tree. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 10	Posted - 2015.07.17 11:45:00 - [167] - Quote Forge gun is only the most effective if you rooftop camp IMHO. This isn't something I particularly like. The breach is worthless if you don't roof camp and the STD is spotty in utility unless sniping, which annoys me. I actually submitted a idea to restore the old charge meter and use the overheat meter on the bottom right corner to indicate a "safety" that disengages the charge harmlessly after 5 seconds to lower the charge-holding sniper cannon. Dunno if that'll be a thing, but the rooftop thing actually irritates me intensely. It's not something I find fun. I'd rather lose six proto fits fighting vehicles on the ground than go 7/0 rooftop forging. Risk aversion is a foul concept to me. I'd rather get blapped by a rail while trying to approach. WoW has taught me that Purple means Legendary. This means Quafe suits are the optimal loadout for killing all of you.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 122	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:00:00 - [168] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Unless a tank is inside a socket, Forge Guns are the only form of infantry AV which work reliably. Well, they further away you stay, the better off the tank is, so you are doing all tankers a service by hanging in the back, so thanks I guess. Adipem Nothi wrote: In the vast majority of cases (unless inside), running up on a blaster HAV with Nades and/or REs is suicide. PLC and Swarms are little more than an eventual deterrent. Every tanker in this thread who isn't actively licking a window knows that this is true. Oh man, I laughed so hard at this. Adipem Nothi wrote: For awhile, I'd just ignore HAVs, which (sadly) is what I think most tankers expect of infantry: "Let me farm you and leave me alone. My stuff's more expensive than yours, so I'm supposed to go 30/0. If you shoot back at me, you're an idiot and you deserve to die. I'm in a tank." :: eats chips :: Wow, I know some people hate tankers, but you seem to have a pathological hatred of vehicle users. No wonder you can only scream nerf and will never admit that a single dropsuit can kill a tank. Adipem Nothi wrote: Recently got aggravated with multiple HAV spam. Thought about skilling into Missile Gunnlogi; changed my mind b/c Blaster Maddies are OP. Ended up skilling into CalSent and maxed out the Forge Gun tree. Missile Maddy beats blaster maddy, tell CCP to buff shield tanks if you want to see them on the field. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Mobius Wyvern Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 6	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:04:00 - [169] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies ISK should never buy invulnerability. <--- Made numerous threads about separate driver and gunner seats, and vehicle capacitors for modules that can be drained by infantry-carried grenades. Was shouted down every time for "forcing teamplay". Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:05:00 - [170] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Missile Maddy beats blaster maddy, tell CCP to buff shield tanks if you want to see them on the field. Buff them. I'm a patient guy. If in one build, both flavors of tank are made as OP as perma-hardened Maddies, then in the next build there will be twice the number of good reasons to balance tanks. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)

General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 122	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:07:00 - [171] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Missile Maddy beats blaster maddy, tell CCP to buff shield tanks if you want to see them on the field. Buff them. I'm a patient guy. If in one build, both flavors of tank are made as OP as maddies, then in the next there will be twice the number of good reasons to balance tanks. Buff shield tanks wouldn't make them OP because maddies are not OP. Try and keep up. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:11:00 - [172] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Missile Maddy beats blaster maddy, tell CCP to buff shield tanks if you want to see them on the field. Buff them. I'm a patient guy. If in one build, both flavors of tank are made as OP as maddies, then in the next there will be twice the number of good reasons to balance tanks. Buff shield tanks wouldn't make them OP because maddies are not OP. Try and keep up. Already two steps ahead of you, buddy. Do you think that your ill-formed arguments and/or browbeating demeanor are helping your side of this debate? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:13:00 - [173] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Daddrobit wrote: maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies ISK should never buy invulnerability. <--- Made numerous threads about separate driver and gunner seats, and vehicle capacitors for modules that can be drained by infantry-carried grenades. Was shouted down every time for "forcing teamplay". Again we've had this discussion and the issue is not about 'forcing team play' as you put it but instead taking a role that can be accessible to an individual player and telling them they are not allowed to play that role unless they can guarantee themselves something they know is online or someone they can trust to achieve the role well. Otherwise you consign them to blue berry gunners and you know as well as anyone how awful that it. More to the point it seems an unnecessary step when other games that arguably portray tanks better than Dust can achieve a state in which tanks can be operated by solo players in an accessible manner, with a fair degree of potency, and can be supplemented by an additional anti infantry gunner as opposed forced to divide the enjoyable roles of being a tanker between two individuals. HAV can achieve a level of team play without having to divide the driver and main gunner roles however for a long time they have been treated by players, led on by CCP, to believe that tanks are primarily anti-infantry assault assets when they should not be. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 122	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:30:00 - [174] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Already two steps ahead of you, buddy. Do you really think that your ill-formed arguments and/or browbeating demeanor are helping your side of this debate? I'm just toying with you at this point. If you wanted to debate, we could, but you refuse to admit basic truths, and as such are not interested in debate. I have been forward and direct in questions, you have deliberately not answered and struck off on tangents. Since I am more than willing to stand up and defend my viewpoint, while you refuse to make any arguments at all beyond nerf all the things, the debate is long over, and you lost. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:32:00 - [175] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Already two steps ahead of you, buddy. Do you really think that your ill-formed arguments and/or browbeating demeanor are helping your side of this debate? I'm just toying with you at this point. Please, keep doing what you're doing. Quote: Kill/Spawn Efficiency is what it is, and if hardened maddies are OP they're OP. Colorful excuses and name calling won't affect efficiency data, though both do make the process of problem solving much more entertaining. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Mobius Wyvern Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 6	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:35:00 - [176] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Daddrobit wrote: maybe deadcatz wrote: hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You ever think of the price and sp you have to invest to get a tank like that? A SH!T TON. Just get 3 dudes with swarms and a PLC or two and tanker dies ISK should never buy invulnerability. <--- Made numerous threads about separate driver and gunner seats, and vehicle capacitors for modules that can be drained by infantry-carried grenades. Was shouted down every time for "forcing teamplay". Again we've had this discussion and the issue is not about 'forcing team play' as you put it but instead taking a role that can be accessible to an individual player and telling them they are not allowed to play that role unless they can guarantee themselves something they know is online or someone they can trust to achieve the role well. Otherwise you consign them to blue berry gunners and you know as well as anyone how awful that it. More to the point it seems an unnecessary step when other games that arguably portray tanks better than Dust can achieve a state in which tanks can be operated by solo players in an accessible manner, with a fair degree of potency, and can be supplemented by an additional anti infantry gunner as opposed forced to divide the enjoyable roles of being a tanker between two individuals. HAV can achieve a level of team play without having to divide the driver and main gunner roles however for a long time they have been treated by players, led on by CCP, to believe that tanks are primarily anti-infantry assault assets when they should not be. The point was more that we're still in the box we are because any and all alternate suggestions are shouted down by a vocal minority that want their Skillpoint investment to give them invulnerability. My opposition to single-player tanks more comes from that being a tired old mechanic from virtually every combined-arms shooter, and I'd rather see a single-person heavy vehicle presented in a more unique and fun manner, like a Walker of some kind. In any case, I still believe capacitors would be both a boon for vehicle users, and an important balance factor for infantry. That would mean that you would have to manage your modules continuously to avoid running out of energy, and infantry can neutralize that energy to make you vulnerable until you can recharge enough to put your modules back on. I believe that fits quite well within the "waves of vulnerability" concept, as the only way to let your capacitor recharge would be to withdraw from the fight, thereby giving the infantry some breathing room. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.17 13:41:00 - [177] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: ... the debate is long over, and you lost. Right. Good job. When Rattati comes knocking, you should do exactly what you've done here. Parry his data with your excuses. Wow him with your intellect. Beat him with your brows. You should make a video of PLC + Lai Dais vs parked and empty Madrugar. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 364	Posted - 2015.07.17 14:11:00 - [178] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: ... the debate is long over, and you lost. Right. Good job. When Rattati comes knocking, you should do exactly what you've done here. Parry his data with your excuses. Wow him with your intellect. Beat him with those brows. You should probably make a video of PLC + Lai Dais vs a parked and empty Madrugar. For fullest effect, get a buddy with a British accent to narrate the play-by-play: "See how easy it is to solo a HAV? This is why we need double-hardened and perma-hardened Madrugars." You have made zero actual contribution. So yeah. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 364	Posted - 2015.07.17 14:42:00 - [179] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Forge gun is only the most effective if you rooftop camp IMHO. This isn't something I particularly like. The breach is worthless if you don't roof camp and the STD is spotty in utility unless sniping, which annoys me. I actually submitted a idea to restore the old charge meter and use the overheat meter on the bottom right corner to indicate a "safety" that disengages the charge harmlessly after 5 seconds to lower the charge-holding sniper cannon. Dunno if that'll be a thing, but the rooftop thing actually irritates me intensely. It's not something I find fun. I'd rather lose six proto fits fighting vehicles on the ground than go 7/0 rooftop forging. Risk aversion is a foul concept to me. I'd rather get blapped by a rail while trying to approach. Never been much for heights. I stay low for HAV LAV, maybe one story up for a DS. Something about the angle when forging up high I don't like. On the ground I just look at where I would bail to and lead em a hair. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.17 14:49:00 - [180] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Simple question, can 3 lai dais and a PLC shot take out a dual rep dual hardener madrugar with its hardeners up? Yes or no? Simple answer: no, the tank will survive. Long answer: Lai Dai Packed does 1563 damage * 0.6 first hardener * 0.656 second hardener * 1.2 explosive profile = 738 damage * 3 = 2214 damage over about a second and a half. Allotek PLC does 1690 damage * 1.1 blaster profile * 1.15 prof five = 2138 - 1200 Maddy shields = 938 / 1.1 to revert blaster profile then * .9 for profile vs armour * 0.6 * 0.656 = 302 damage to armour. 2214 + 302 = 2516 damage to armour, aka not enough to destroy the Madrugar's armour. Plus, the amount of time to throw three AV grenades is roughly 1.5-2 seconds, meaning the Madrugar will repair 275-550 armour in that time frame. So basically, no. Is it close? Sort of. As has been touched upon, the Maddy simply needs to move a small amount to throw off a single grenade and it has no chance of death. I definitely think M+¦bius is on the right track. When the discussion before was centre around sHAVs, I thought the crew style HAV might become a thing. Basically, have the Marduk/Gladius sort of as-is, but have the Madrugar/Gunnlogi as a driver/gunner split. You could then actually justify having amazing resilience because you could require multiple operators for full effect. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.

Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.17 14:51:00 - [181] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: we need to look at other options (limit one hardener per vehicle, make armor reps active, etc.) to fix the tank issue. Agreed. If deemed warranted, TA recommends increasing fitting costs for hardeners rather than introducing a hard cap. Thoughts? I disagree, because then it becomes difficult to fit anything else. Hardeners again become useless, since they aren't worth the cost. I see them used like siege modules from Eve of a sorts: and with one per vehicle, it becomes easy to balance them since you don't have to worry about people stacking them. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Alcina Nektaria KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 32	Posted - 2015.07.17 15:04:00 - [182] - Quote The vehicle system in this game really needs some work. If it takes half the team to take out one vehicle that is a serious problem, especially with the genius way matchmaking has been constructed (insert extreme sarcasm here) There are always those assholes that run the stupid tank fits that are extremely OP. If tanks get to be so indestructible, why can't dropships be so too? I understand the isk cost, but it's just like running a proto or officer suit. Expensive but your choice to use it or not. If you are going to bring an expensive vehicle out, you are willing to risk losing that money on it. Regardless, if you have a team of 14 vs a team of 8 for example; the larger team is more likely to have people spamming vehicles, say 3 or 4 tanks. It would take the entire team of 8 to take them out which is extremely pointless because then they can't focus on the objective (worse in a domination than a skirmish) so either tanks need to be nerfed, av needs a buff, or the number of vehicles allowed in each match should be severely reduced. *KEQ Diplomat* Gallente Loyalist ... Come at me bro.
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 367	Posted - 2015.07.17 21:46:00 - [183] - Quote Bump Get some life in your hands.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.17 21:50:00 - [184] - Quote Alcina Nektaria wrote: ... so either tanks need to be nerfed, av needs a buff, or the number of vehicles allowed in each match should be severely reduced. AV-wise, would have to be very careful about what to buff and how to buff it, as increasing pressure on Dropships would be ill-advised. Further, such changes would do nothing to address the fact that Madrugars > All Else. Personally prefer the most obvious and direct approach, which the title above sums up succinctly: Nerf impenetrable Madrugars already. So far, 'limit hardeners per loadout to 1' seems the most promising option. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Petra 222 SoM Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 106	Posted - 2015.07.17 21:57:00 - [185] - Quote People are really defending the current Madrugers? Can't say I am surprised but...Ring...Ring..."Reality Check calling"..."You're going to be nerfed".Click.
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 364	Posted - 2015.07.17 22:47:00 - [186] - Quote In the spirit of being constructive. Last night I thought I would put this all to the test. Ran 10 rounds strictly AV, 10 strictly HAV. The results were interesting. About half the AV rounds were me blapping installations as nobody called any vehicles. 3 rounds MLT-ADV HAV were dropped, then promptly popped by the AFG. (no officer used) One round involved me getting 1-2 good hits on a known gv0 only to have her rush me, and her HMG gunner jumps out to mow me down. (I do run black eagle AR for my forge sidearm lol) This happened pretty much all round ending with 0 kills and yet like 2800wp from drugar damage. Lowl. Total lost about 2.5m. 7 HAV 4 LAV 2 DS The surprising part. First two rounds I ran gunni missile and was uncontested. Some MLT swarm wanted it but couldn't get it. Nothing impressive, 4/0 6/0 And then 6 rounds of fml... Scotty decided to drop me into started matches. Rings map decided to grab my front corner from 5 meters away and Austin Powers my gunni in a city gate. Popped. New gunni, by then half the team is AV, popped with both hardeners up. Gv0 with minute or two left, chased away by three tanks and more SL than sound chip could render... Late deploy, gv0, pop an LAV omw out and three rail tanks show up behind me. Popped. Gunni dual reg with rail, turned into a full match shoot out that got us nowhere. Late deploy, rdv slams into the ground nose first, half dead gv0 slides into redline upside down... Popped. Cv0, get to topside alpha on boulder rim, MLT DS slams into me and two scouts pop out and rain lai dai before hardeners kick on. Popped. C-l, afterburn my way around map, pop one LAV and dodge a roof forge for rest of match. Late deploy, cv0, chased around by an angry python with rail all match. 0/0 and 0sp... Late deploy on winning side of a 3vs13, c-1, nothing to do but pop installations. Late deploy on losing side of same setup, cv0 dual reg with turbo. Hounded from redline exit to my hasty retreat, three times. Jihad at redline depot. Angry at this point, gv0 4500 on line harvest. 4 MLT scrubHAV meet me at Delta. I pass out my business card. Two of the tankers ADV up and round two. I hand them a flyer just in time to get popped by unmanned rail... Cv0 rail for rest of match as we slowly advance to redline. Meh kills but 5100wp. Last round of the night, rdv yoyos my HAV for three or four minutes. Rail HAV out of nowhere... Popped before it can drop. Tries to pop me, run to depot and swap to alldins, dispatched rail. Run to other side of ground, check map, call gv0, as I fasten my seat belt... Rail impact. Barely escape, but now stuck in redline as I'm blaster fit vs g-1 rail. Match ends. (If I had my two gunners this would have been a different post, but this was for the one man theory..) Total lost 9.1m. 7 HAV 1 LAV 0 DS So for AV guys I suggest maxing out that forge, make friends with a tanker, and hunt in packs. Tankers should always have gunners, or make some tanker friends, and drive with lai dai's. TL;DR If you can't solo a tank, maybe not keep trying solo. And if you keep dying as a solo tanker, maybe make a 3 man tank and get some friends. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.17 23:30:00 - [187] - Quote Devadander wrote: In the spirit of being constructive. TL;DR If you can't solo a tank, maybe not keep trying solo. And if you keep dying as a solo tanker, maybe make a 3 man tank and get some friends. Most of those are about the Gunnlogi, which is pretty spoton for balance: it can be killed with reasonable effort, but can also be a terror when operated well. The Madrugar, however, is the issue. From your own anecdotes your Madrugars were either not threatened or completely dominated by massive AV Swamping (3-4+; and still not dying) or rails. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 124	Posted - 2015.07.17 23:53:00 - [188] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: ... the debate is long over, and you lost. Right. Good job. When Rattati comes knocking, you should do exactly what you've done here. Parry his data with excuses. Where is the data you presented? Where in this entire thread have you made a single reference that could be measured? How many times will you ignore pointed direct questions and keep pretending as if you bring anything to this discussion other than "nurf tankz!"? I say three lai dais and a PLC round will destroy a dual rep Maddy, and simple math says it is correct. You said that two people should be a sufficient threat to a tank, I gave you a list of methods that would cut through a double hardened and plated maddy with its hardeners up. You can do the math and see that those examples hold up to scrutiny. Not once have you, or breakin provided any sort of data, nor do either of you attempt to refute any of my statement with some basic math to show why they are wrong. You won't even answer a simple question like how many seconds should it take a single infantry suit to destroy a hardened tank. Why not? Do you not want people to see how ridiculous your demands are for what you consider balanced? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 364	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:01:00 - [189] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Devadander wrote: In the spirit of being constructive. TL;DR If you can't solo a tank, maybe not keep trying solo. And if you keep dying as a solo tanker, maybe make a 3 man tank and get some friends. Most of those are about the Gunnlogi, which is pretty spoton for balance: it can be killed with reasonable effort, but can also be a terror when operated well. The Madrugar, however, is the issue. From your own anecdotes your Madrugars were either not threatened or completely dominated by massive AV Swamping (3-4+; and still not dying) or rails. Without gunners or a support squad madrugar is almost useless. Gunni, completely. Kinda what I took away from the experience. Teamwork being confirmed as OP, I know with my gunners we would dominate in either hull. One AV one AI truly helps seal the god deal. So if the tanker has a squad, you need a squad to counter. What am I missing? Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:05:00 - [190] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Where is the data you presented? Balance boils down to Kill / Spawn Efficiency. I've assumed (and I've said as much) that Madrugar Kill / Spawn Efficiency is disproportionately high. If the data isn't on my side, then my balance complaints are baseless and I'll stand corrected. If the data is on my side, however, then your excuses and what ifs -- while colorful and entertaining -- will fall on deaf ears while Rattati swings that hammer. I think it more probable than not kill/spawn efficiency data is on my side. I imagine you do as well. If you didn't, why would you be so frothy? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:09:00 - [191] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Where is the data you presented? Balance boils down to Kill / Spawn Efficiency. I've assumed (and I've said as much) that Madrugar Kill / Spawn Efficiency is disproportionately high. If the data isn't on my side, then my balance complaints are baseless and I'll stand corrected. If the data is on my side, then your excuses and "what ifs" -- while colorful and entertaining -- will fall on deaf ears while Rattati swings that hammer. I think it more probable than not kill/spawn efficiency data is on my side. I imagine you do as well. If you didn't, you wouldn't be so frothy. Can you guys quit this bickering. Adipem you are preaching to the choir. We already know how unbalanced Madrugar's are but fixing them is not about nerfing what we currently have it is fundamentally altering the design of HAV. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 364	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:10:00 - [192] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Where is the data you presented? Balance boils down to Kill / Spawn Efficiency. I've assumed (and I've said as much) that Madrugar Kill / Spawn Efficiency is disproportionately high. If the data isn't on my side, then my balance complaints are baseless and I'll stand corrected. If the data is on my side, then your excuses and "what ifs" -- while colorful and entertaining -- will fall on deaf ears while Rattati swings that hammer. I think it more probable than not kill/spawn efficiency data is on my side. I imagine you do as well. If you didn't, you wouldn't be so frothy. I killed more vehicles and infantry as AV than I did during my tank rounds... Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:11:00 - [193] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Where is the data you presented? Balance boils down to Kill / Spawn Efficiency. I've assumed (and I've said as much) that Madrugar Kill / Spawn Efficiency is disproportionately high. If the data isn't on my side, then my balance complaints are baseless and I'll stand corrected. If the data is on my side, however, then your excuses and what ifs -- while colorful and entertaining -- will fall on deaf ears while Rattati swings that hammer. I think it more probable than not kill/spawn efficiency data is on my side. I imagine you do as well. If you didn't, why would you be so frothy? I think Kill / Spawn Efficiency doesn't tell the whole story though. Match Making has been a royal pain, we all know this, so I'm curious as to how much factors and variables like that - not necessarily exclusively that - tie into the whole data read out. If a veteran with a prototype amarr assault ran with a scrambler rifle against a bunch of academy bros, obviously his kill/spawn is going to skew results. I think there's a lot more that colors a situation than simply how many times someone makes a kill compared to how many times they die. This isn't to say I'm disagreeing with the data so much as saying that I think there needs to be some serious consideration before we start swinging the nerf hammer around. I've always preferred the scalpel. EDIT: To better reflect my thinking here: Is it truly that Madrugars are over-powered or is that Gunnlogis are under-powered? Is it that players often refuse to run AV because it is a very risky platform? Is it that many times HAVs with hardeners were literally designed to be forced to disengage as opposed to always be killed? Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:14:00 - [194] - Quote Devadander wrote: What am I missing? Period: Uprising 1.0 - 1.5 Hypothesis: Cal/Gal Slayer Logis + AR are super duper OP. Test Method: Run MN Logi + MD over a dozen pub matches. Conclusion: ? Period: Uprising 1.8 - HF Alpha Hypothesis: Uparmored GalScouts + SG are super duper OP. Test Method: Run MN Scout + NK over a dozen matches. Conclusion: ? Period: Warlords 1.1 - 1.2 Hypothesis: MN Assaults + CR are super duper OP. Test Method: Run GA Assault + AR over a dozen matches. Conclusion: ? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Sergeant Sazu Mantodea MC 693	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:16:00 - [195] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Where is the data you presented? Balance boils down to Kill / Spawn Efficiency. I've assumed (and I've said as much) that Madrugar Kill / Spawn Efficiency is disproportionately high. If the data isn't on my side, then my balance complaints are baseless and I'll stand corrected. If the data is on my side, then your excuses and "what ifs" -- while colorful and entertaining -- will fall on deaf ears while Rattati swings that hammer. I think it more probable than not kill/spawn efficiency data is on my side. I imagine you do as well. If you didn't, you wouldn't be so frothy. To be honest, I rarely see Madrugars break 10 kills nowadays. (Though their death count is always low.) I don't think the data would prove much. My issue is how much effort it takes to deal with one, and how many players they take away from a team for several minutes. This is something that can't be put on a spreadsheet or a line graph. So we have to go on what seems right based on reasoning. And we all know how well that goes. [65.1m SP] Sazu's Trading
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 124	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:18:00 - [196] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Where is the data you presented? Balance boils down to Kill / Spawn Efficiency. I've assumed (and I've said as much) that Madrugar Kill / Spawn Efficiency is disproportionately high. If the data isn't on my side, then my balance complaints are baseless and I'll stand corrected. If the data is on my side, however, then your excuses and what ifs -- while colorful and entertaining -- will fall on deaf ears while Rattati swings that hammer. I think it more probable than not kill/spawn efficiency data is on my side. I imagine you do as well. If you didn't, why would you be so frothy? You can't call your assumptions data. So I ask again, where is your data? Can you construct a gv.0 fit that can survive two proto AV for 36 seconds? WIll you tell the audience how long you think it should take for an AV troop to kill a tank with its hardeners up? You will do neither of those things, instead you will appeal to "data" that you don't have, and can at best make a half assed guess at, and given how biased you are against vehicles(as you clearly stated), you can't be called a trusted source can you? Love the appeal to authority in there as well, you are just a fallacious machine. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 364	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:19:00 - [197] - Quote The point of my long post was that solo HAV are so far from OP its stupid... "...got away alive" For 1.3 mil a pop I would hope so. But barely in some cases. SOLO HAV OF ANY KIND IS NOT OP. Having one squad member on foot multiplies my force. One in my tank more so. So on. When infantry and vehicles work together it's devastating. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:21:00 - [198] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: If a veteran with a prototype amarr assault ran with a scrambler rifle against a bunch of academy bros, obviously his kill/spawn is going to skew results. The larger the dataset, the less anomalies like this will have the potential to "skew" it. Madrugars have been OP for a long time now, and there certainly are no shortage of them in game. I imagine Rattati has quite the robust sample to evaluate. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:22:00 - [199] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: I say three lai dais and a PLC round will destroy a dual rep Maddy, and simple math says it is correct. You said that two people should be a sufficient threat to a tank, I gave you a list of methods that would cut through a double hardened and plated maddy with its hardeners up. You can do the math and see that those examples hold up to scrutiny. Not once have you, or breakin provided any sort of data, nor do either of you attempt to refute any of my statement with some basic math to show why they are wrong. You won't even answer a simple question like how many seconds should it take a single infantry suit to destroy a hardened tank. Why not? Do you not want people to see how ridiculous your demands are for what you consider balanced? Please reference this post for maths disagreeing with your PLC+Lai Dai statement. As an additional point, assuming that the Maddy has no shields: APLC: 1690 * 0.9 (profile vs armour) * 0.6 * 0.656 = 599 Nade: 1563 * 1.2 (profile) * 0.6 * 0.656 = 739 * 3 = 2217 2217 + 599 = 2816 Assuming this takes you 0.5 seconds to accomplish (and will, in reality, take 1-2), the Madrugar (assuming 2x PRO Heavy Reps) will repair 137.5. Subtracting that from the damage we arrive at 2817-137.5=2679.5 damage taken: aka, the Madrugar survives. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:25:00 - [200] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: General Mosquito wrote: Where is the data you presented? Balance boils down to Kill / Spawn Efficiency. I've assumed (and I've said as much) that Madrugar Kill / Spawn Efficiency is disproportionately high. If the data isn't on my side, then my balance complaints are baseless and I'll stand corrected. If the data is on my side, however, then your excuses and what ifs -- while colorful and entertaining -- will fall on deaf ears while Rattati swings that hammer. I think it more probable than not kill/spawn efficiency data is on my side. I imagine you do as well. If you didn't, why would you be so frothy? You can't call your assumptions data. So I ask again, where is your data? Can you construct a gv.0 fit that can survive two proto AV for 36 seconds? WIll you tell the audience how long you think it should take for an AV troop to kill a tank with its hardeners up? You will do neither of those things, instead you will appeal to "data" that you don't have, and can at best make a half assed guess at, and given how biased you are against vehicles(as you clearly stated), you can't be called a trusted source can you? Love the appeal to authority in there as well, you are just a fallacious machine. I don't get to play with data. What I get is what I observe in game. When my observations resonate with Forum complaints, I gain confidence in my position. When my observations form a distinctive pattern over time, I gain confidence in my position. And when I'm told[i] And when I'm told "everything is fine" by a room full of tankers, well, I gain mucho confidence in my position. by a room full of tankers, well, I gain mucho confidence in my position. The data is what it is. All we can do is observe and hypothesize. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)

Devadander Woodgrain Atari 365	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:26:00 - [201] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: General Mosquito wrote: I say three lai dais and a PLC round will destroy a dual rep Maddy, and simple math says it is correct. You said that two people should be a sufficient threat to a tank, I gave you a list of methods that would cut through a double hardened and plated maddy with its hardeners up. You can do the math and see that those examples hold up to scrutiny. Not once have you, or breakin provided any sort of data, nor do either of you attempt to refute any of my statement with some basic math to show why they are wrong. You won't even answer a simple question like how many seconds should it take a single infantry suit to destroy a hardened tank. Why not? Do you not want people to see how ridiculous your demands are for what you consider balanced? Please reference this post for maths disagreeing with your PLC+Lai Dai statement. As an additional point, assuming that the Maddy has no shields: APLC: 1690 * 0.9 (profile vs armour) * 0.6 * 0.656 = 599 Nade: 1563 * 1.2 (profile) * 0.6 * 0.656 = 739 * 3 = 2217 2217 + 599 = 2816 Assuming this takes you 0.5 seconds to accomplish (and will, in reality, take 1-2), the Madrugar (assuming 2x PRO Heavy Reps) will repair 137.5. Subtracting that from the damage we arrive at 2817-137.5=2679.5 damage taken: aka, the Madrugar survives. I already pointed out that the PLC is a crap weapon vs any HAV. Idc about the math, I know firsthand. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:28:00 - [202] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: And when I'm told "everything is fine" by a room full of tankers, well, I gain mucho confidence in my position. I think that most tankers are pretty much of the opinion the current status quo is beyond broken and not a particularly good system. Can you two just quit bickering on a subject neither of you are able to or willing to change your own or your opponents opinions. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 365	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:31:00 - [203] - Quote I miss my chainlogi with 3 rof mods and a cooler. It would eat these gv0 alive. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:33:00 - [204] - Quote Devadander wrote: I already pointed out that the PLC is a crap weapon vs any HAV. Idc about the math, I know firsthand. I...don't care. This was in no way a response to your posts and is, in fact, a response to General Mosquito's specific question for Adipem Nothi, asking him if one APLC and 3x Lai Dai Packed AV Grenades would kill a double Hardened/double Repped Madrugar. He was stating that the maths supports his claim that it does. I have provided maths that shows otherwise. That is all. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 126	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:42:00 - [205] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: General Mosquito wrote: I say three lai dais and a PLC round will destroy a dual rep Maddy, and simple math says it is correct. You said that two people should be a sufficient threat to a tank, I gave you a list of methods that would cut through a double hardened and plated maddy with its hardeners up. You can do the math and see that those examples hold up to scrutiny. Not once have you, or breakin provided any sort of data, nor do either of you attempt to refute any of my statement with some basic math to show why they are wrong. You won't even answer a simple question like how many seconds should it take a single infantry suit to destroy a hardened tank. Why not? Do you not want people to see how ridiculous your demands are for what you consider balanced? Please reference this post for maths disagreeing with your PLC+Lai Dai statement. As an additional point, assuming that the Maddy has no shields: APLC: 1690 * 0.9 (profile vs armour) * 0.6 * 0.656 = 599 Nade: 1563 * 1.2 (profile) * 0.6 * 0.656 = 739 * 3 = 2217 2217 + 599 = 2816 Assuming this takes you 0.5 seconds to accomplish (and will, in reality, take 1-2), the Madrugar (assuming 2x PRO Heavy Reps) will repair 137.5. Subtracting that from the damage we arrive at 2817-137.5=2679.5 damage taken: aka, the Madrugar survives. Sorry I missed your earlier post, but thank you for reposting it. Clearly, I was wrong about it being an absolute. Given the margin, prof wouldn't even push it over. Prof and a single damage mod would, although that would be too much leeway for my original point. Thank you for the correction. General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:45:00 - [206] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: If a veteran with a prototype amarr assault ran with a scrambler rifle against a bunch of academy bros, obviously his kill/spawn is going to skew results. The larger the dataset, the less anomalies like this will have the potential to "skew" it. Madrugars have been OP for a long time now, and there certainly are no shortage of them in game. I imagine Rattati has quite the robust sample to evaluate. Again, how can you 100% be certain that they are, without a shadow of a doubt, the problem here? Dust 514 players have a repitoire for not wanting to run AV, even when they're getting hammered by Tanks, because it is a very high-risky playstyle and there have -always- been faults in the AV vs Vehicle logic; that it should take a team of people [AV] to deal with one person [a tank]. But, if it was on a one-to-one basis, vehicle users would immediately say that HAVs are a coffin. If it were up to me I'd have the damn hardeners built into the HAVs, be stupid powerful, but paper-thin without the hardener on, forcing Tankers into attacks of opportunity (which was the original intent behind Hardeners if anyone remembers). Trouble is that you can force a tank to disengage when his hardeners turn off but the chances of you killing them are sometimes very low because HAVs are simply faster than infantry. So, the AV vs HAV situation aside, instead of looking at how we can nerf Madrugars what can we do to bring the Gunnlogi up? I think that is where we should start, and if Madrugars and Gunnlogis are on par with one another but excessively over-powering infantry than we can bring them BOTH back down a bit. Let's explore our options before we immediately jump to castrating Madrugars. Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 00:58:00 - [207] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: If a veteran with a prototype amarr assault ran with a scrambler rifle against a bunch of academy bros, obviously his kill/spawn is going to skew results. The larger the dataset, the less anomalies like this will have the potential to "skew" it. Madrugars have been OP for a long time now, and there certainly are no shortage of them in game. I imagine Rattati has quite the robust sample to evaluate. Again, how can you 100% be certain that they are, without a shadow of a doubt, the problem here? Dust 514 players have a repitoire for not wanting to run AV, even when they're getting hammered by Tanks, because it is a very high-risky playstyle and there have -always- been faults in the AV vs Vehicle logic; that it should take a team of people [AV] to deal with one person [a tank]. But, if it was on a one-to-one basis, vehicle users would immediately say that HAVs are a coffin. If it were up to me I'd have the damn hardeners built into the HAVs, be stupid powerful, but paper-thin without the hardener on, forcing Tankers into attacks of opportunity (which was the original intent behind Hardeners if anyone remembers). Trouble is that you can force a tank to disengage when his hardeners turn off but the chances of you killing them are sometimes very low because HAVs are simply faster than infantry. So, the AV vs HAV situation aside, instead of looking at how we can nerf Madrugars what can we do to bring the Gunnlogi up? I think that is where we should start, and if Madrugars and Gunnlogis are on par with one another but excessively over-powering infantry than we can bring them BOTH back down a bit. Let's explore our options before we immediately jump to castrating Madrugars. I'm not 100% certain that Madrugars are overpowered, but I do think it more probable than not. If performance data says they are in fact OP, then I say we do something about rather than make excuses for it. What's been proposed is that we limit hardeners to 1 per loadout. Is it your opinion that such a change would "castrate Madrugars"? If so, why? And what alternative adjustment would you propose? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:06:00 - [208] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: If a veteran with a prototype amarr assault ran with a scrambler rifle against a bunch of academy bros, obviously his kill/spawn is going to skew results. The larger the dataset, the less anomalies like this will have the potential to "skew" it. Madrugars have been OP for a long time now, and there certainly are no shortage of them in game. I imagine Rattati has quite the robust sample to evaluate. Again, how can you 100% be certain that they are, without a shadow of a doubt, the problem here? Dust 514 players have a repitoire for not wanting to run AV, even when they're getting hammered by Tanks, because it is a very high-risky playstyle and there have -always- been faults in the AV vs Vehicle logic; that it should take a team of people [AV] to deal with one person [a tank]. But, if it was on a one-to-one basis, vehicle users would immediately say that HAVs are a coffin. If it were up to me I'd have the damn hardeners built into the HAVs, be stupid powerful, but paper-thin without the hardener on, forcing Tankers into attacks of opportunity (which was the original intent behind Hardeners if anyone remembers). Trouble is that you can force a tank to disengage when his hardeners turn off but the chances of you killing them are sometimes very low because HAVs are simply faster than infantry. So, the AV vs HAV situation aside, instead of looking at how we can nerf Madrugars what can we do to bring the Gunnlogi up? I think that is where we should start, and if Madrugars and Gunnlogis are on par with one another but excessively over-powering infantry than we can bring them BOTH back down a bit. Let's explore our options before we immediately jump to castrating Madrugars. I'm not 100% certain that Madrugars are overpowered, but I do think it more probable than not. If performance data says they are in fact OP, then I say we do something about rather than make excuses for it. What's been proposed is that we limit hardeners to 1 per loadout. Is it your opinion that such a change would "castrate Madrugars"? If so, why? And what alternative adjustment would you propose? Armor Hardeners are, to my knowledge, more powerful innately than shield hardeners and shields are harmed by the inadequacies and technicalities of shield boosters being difficult and unreliable. If we limited hardeners to one per, would that really solve anything or would it just fundamentally nerf -both- HAVs while not addressing the core problem? Would it be limiting player choice to address a problem that could have been addressed differently from the start? I don't run vehicles. I don't know these issues first hand, but I know the complaints of HAV users rather intimately given that I run with them frequently in NF. Railguns ghost firing being the reason that Missiles are preferred (reliability), Shield Boosters being unreliable to begin with, railguns simply not having enough damage to punch through a hardener+repairer combo. If we looked at anything, I'd look at shields being addressed, starting with technical issues. Then look at bringing them up in their own unique way so that they're viable rather than homogenizing hardeners. If that doesn't work, instead of hitting the hardeners, make Armor Repairers active rather than passive as it offers nothing to the opportunistic playstyle and is just a bonus for fitting it. You should have to make the choice between using your repairers to last longer in a fight or using them to recover post-fight, IMO (a little like Boosters only without the crippling issue of the boosters not working under fire xD) Just my thoughts. Like I said, I don't run vehicles though, so take it as a grain of salt. Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 365	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:07:00 - [209] - Quote A one hardener limit would doom shield HAV. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:08:00 - [210] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Sorry I missed your earlier post, but thank you for reposting it. Clearly, I was wrong about it being an absolute. Given the margin, prof wouldn't even push it over. Prof and a single damage mod would, although that would be too much leeway for my original point. Thank you for the correction. Mathematically, maybe. At the same time this is assuming an absolutely perfect ambush for the AVer. Not only does throw range on the AV grenades matter immensely, but Packed AV grenades have a far smaller seek radius and what that means is that a Maddy moving even slowly will be able to accelerate/stop altogether to avoid one or more grenades. While mathematically the numbers might support the AVer (I doubt it, actually, but would need to run the numbers further) the typical battlefield situation supports the notion that the HAV will survive, due to the actual mobility of it. With two damage mods, vs shields, the AVer will still not kill the Madrugar. 16901.11.151.07(.07.86+1)1.05 (Warbarge) = 2547 - 1200 Shields = 1347/1.15/1.1*0.9= 378; this is 76 more damage, even including Level 5 Warbarge (not previously included.) 2516 (previous damage to armour) + 76 = 2592 damage to armour is still insufficient to kill the Madrugar. Applying the Warbarge bonus to the 'No Shields' situation I ran gives an armour damage total of 2930: sufficient to kill the Madrugar assuming a 0.5s of repair (137.5; 2792.5) but insufficient if the Madrugar has a full 1.0s of repair (275; 2655.) This is still assuming that the Madrugar is entirely immobile/the AVer is able to land all three grenades without the Madrugar moving enough (which is perfectly possible with a Fuel Injector.) Essentially, the math is extremely close to killing the Madrugar for a perfect ambush, but any kind of imperfection sees the Maddy survive. Similarly, however, if the Maddy hasn't activated its hardeners then it is definitely dead. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.

Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:13:00 - [211] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Devadander wrote: A one hardener limit would doom shield HAV. This is wholeheartedly agree with. With Shield regen able to be halted, Shield tanks need that extra resistance, especially considering that their hardeners are also both shorter lasting and longer cooling down. Thanks for confirming this. Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 367	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:17:00 - [212] - Quote So can we agree that madrugars maybe only seem OP because the other turrets have trouble dispatching current fit meta? Edit: and shields cannot combat armor ATM. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:20:00 - [213] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: So, the AV vs HAV situation aside, instead of looking at how we can nerf Madrugars what can we do to bring the Gunnlogi up? I think that is where we should start.. I don't think we should bring Shield HAV up to a competitive level alongside armor HAV while we have two modules breaking tanks on a fundamental level. These being Armour Repairers and Hardener Modules. With the modules so broken what value would there be in bringing Shield HAV up to match? Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:21:00 - [214] - Quote Which, come to think of what Kallas was saying, if Shield Hardeners are less powerful, have shorter durations, and longer cool-downs than it can be assumed that Shield Tanking is intended to work better with Boosters and regen as a whole, rather than resistance. Maybe we should take a good hard look at the Armor Repairer, rather than the Armor Hardener, and let the Armor Hardener be Armor Tanking's "thing"? Like I said earlier, if we made Armor Repairers active than we force Armor Tankers to make the choice of when to use it. We could go beyond that though and give them long cool-down times to focus on the aspects of armor tanking: Buffer and Resistance, and encourage them to use that. After all, they do have passive armor regeneration as it is, so it isn't like we're forcing them to fit armor repairers or be hamstrung. This way, the Madrugar retains it's power-house nature with Hardeners but is more likely to go down when their modules are turned off. They'd have to choose to use the repairer during the hardener duration, which makes them vulnerable when they all turn off, or to use the repairer to recover from the damage, which makes them less resistant to taking -more- damage. Thoughts, guys? Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:23:00 - [215] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: So, the AV vs HAV situation aside, instead of looking at how we can nerf Madrugars what can we do to bring the Gunnlogi up? I think that is where we should start.. I don't think we should bring Shield HAV up to a competitive level alongside armor HAV while we have two modules breaking tanks on a fundamental level. These being Armour Repairers and Hardener Modules. With the modules so broken what value would there be in bringing Shield HAV up to match? Right right, I cover that in my previous post. I'm starting to think that the problem isn't Hardeners so much as the Armor Repairers, honestly. But Shields -do- need to have their technical issues ironed out, don't you think? How is it fair that boosters are intended for a quick recovery but don't work while under fire whereas Armor Repairers work regardless? Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:25:00 - [216] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: So, the AV vs HAV situation aside, instead of looking at how we can nerf Madrugars what can we do to bring the Gunnlogi up? I think that is where we should start.. I don't think we should bring Shield HAV up to a competitive level alongside armor HAV while we have two modules breaking tanks on a fundamental level. These being Armour Repairers and Hardener Modules. With the modules so broken what value would there be in bringing Shield HAV up to match? Right right, I cover that in my previous post. I'm starting to think that the problem isn't Hardeners so much as the Armor Repairers, honestly. But Shields -do- need to have their technical issues ironed out, don't you think? How is it fair that boosters are intended for a quick recovery but don't work while under fire whereas Armor Repairers work regardless? Yes and its good that you are seeing this. They're the greatest part of the problem however it extends further than and into the Hardeners that as I see it. In this case I'd argue we need tanks less reliant on those modules as they are killing tank fit diversity by being too useful. Rather than have low raw HP and massive eHP I'd argue we'd need higher raw HP values with less prolific eHP buffers. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 368	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:26:00 - [217] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: So, the AV vs HAV situation aside, instead of looking at how we can nerf Madrugars what can we do to bring the Gunnlogi up? I think that is where we should start.. I don't think we should bring Shield HAV up to a competitive level alongside armor HAV while we have two modules breaking tanks on a fundamental level. These being Armour Repairers and Hardener Modules. With the modules so broken what value would there be in bringing Shield HAV up to match? Right right, I cover that in my previous post. I'm starting to think that the problem isn't Hardeners so much as the Armor Repairers, honestly. But Shields -do- need to have their technical issues ironed out, don't you think? How is it fair that boosters are intended for a quick recovery but don't work while under fire whereas Armor Repairers work regardless? A missile tank can shut down a gv0 if it could just stay alive a touch longer. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:28:00 - [218] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: So, the AV vs HAV situation aside, instead of looking at how we can nerf Madrugars what can we do to bring the Gunnlogi up? I think that is where we should start.. I don't think we should bring Shield HAV up to a competitive level alongside armor HAV while we have two modules breaking tanks on a fundamental level. These being Armour Repairers and Hardener Modules. With the modules so broken what value would there be in bringing Shield HAV up to match? Right right, I cover that in my previous post. I'm starting to think that the problem isn't Hardeners so much as the Armor Repairers, honestly. But Shields -do- need to have their technical issues ironed out, don't you think? How is it fair that boosters are intended for a quick recovery but don't work while under fire whereas Armor Repairers work regardless? Yes and its good that you are seeing this. They're the greatest part of the problem however it extends further than and into the Hardeners that as I see it. In this case I'd argue we need tanks less reliant on those modules as they are killing tank fit diversity by being too useful. Rather than have low raw HP and massive eHP I'd argue we'd need higher raw HP values with less prolific eHP buffers. I understand your concerns but I feel we need to take this slowly, as with all things, and figure out what needs to be hit first: Hardeners or Armor Repairers, rather than both. I don't like pendulum balancing (over-buffing, over-nerfing, until you finally land on something that works). So, given that in mind, would you like to discuss balancing Hardeners or Repairers? Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:29:00 - [219] - Quote Devadander wrote: A one hardener limit would doom shield HAV. Spitballing: What meta shift would you expect if Armor Hardeners only were limited to one / loadout? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 368	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:33:00 - [220] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Devadander wrote: A one hardener limit would doom shield HAV. Spitballing: What would happen if Armor Hardeners only were limited to one / loadout? I've been tanking since first build, after all I've lost already I hate the thought of more restrictions. I like the active rep module. We had it once and you really had to think as a tanker to make it out alive. But again, anything that makes tanks weaker should bring a cost reduction. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:39:00 - [221] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Devadander wrote: A one hardener limit would doom shield HAV. This is wholeheartedly agree with. With Shield regen able to be halted, Shield tanks need that extra resistance, especially considering that their hardeners are also both shorter lasting and longer cooling down. Thanks for confirming this. The biggest reason Madrugars are considered overpowered (by those that do feel that way) is now they are able to remain highly resistant for long periods of time without needing to retreat for longer periods. Simply put, they repair too quickly. I, personally, feel that they both move too quickly (able to retreat out of harm's way) and can take too much punishment without flinching. Basically, one repair under one hardener grants too much effective resilience. Look at the following example. A PRO Forge Gun (1400 damage per shot), Prof 5 (1656) and Profile (1822.) A Madrugar with one PRO Plate, one PRO Rep, two aHardeners: 1200 Shields/4585 Armour One PRO Rep repairs 137.5/sec with L5 Skill. This is roughly equivalent to 1/13th of each FG shot. Given a charge/fire rate of, let's give a rough time of five seconds per shot (charge time plus lining it up) that means that the FG is 'winning' by 8/13ths per shot. If you understand what I mean? Essentially it's out damaging the repairs by 8/13ths. Vs one Hardener each FG shot will deal 1822.6= 1094 Now, each second of repair is equivalent to 1/8th. Now the FG is 'winning' by only 3/8ths per shot. We also have to consider that the FG only gets four shots before it reloads (6 seconds with Max RR.) ((10944)-(137.515)= 2314. The Madrugar is roughly at half armour. Now the FG has to reload (6 seconds) which grants another 825 (2314-825= 1489) meaning that the FG damages the Madrugar at only 1489 damage to armour per clip: it will take four clips of that FG to kill this Madrugar. That's roughly 84+ seconds of continuous, accurate fire. Against a single Hardener and a single Rep (Well the Hardener only lasts for 48 seconds: which is where a second one comes in, I guess...) (15 is 15 seconds of repair, as the first shot will have done no repairable damage during the charge, unlike the follow up shots) If a second Hardener is added, that damage is now 1094*.656= 718 The repairs are now equivalent to 1/5th. Now the FG is actually neutral with the repair rate: no damage is actually 'sticking' to the Madrugar. Factoring reload time, the FG has no possibility of killing the Madrugar, even if it make no attempt to evade. Essentially, the high resistance granted by the armour hardeners combined with the incredible and unstoppable repair rate of heat armour repairers makes Madrugars essentially unkillable unless attacked by three or more players. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:46:00 - [222] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Devadander wrote: A one hardener limit would doom shield HAV. This is wholeheartedly agree with. With Shield regen able to be halted, Shield tanks need that extra resistance, especially considering that their hardeners are also both shorter lasting and longer cooling down. Thanks for confirming this. The biggest reason Madrugars are considered overpowered (by those that do feel that way) is now they are able to remain highly resistant for long periods of time without needing to retreat for longer periods. Simply put, they repair too quickly. I, personally, feel that they both move too quickly (able to retreat out of harm's way) and can take too much punishment without flinching. Basically, one repair under one hardener grants too much effective resilience. Look at the following example. A PRO Forge Gun (1400 damage per shot), Prof 5 (1656) and Profile (1822.) A Madrugar with one PRO Plate, one PRO Rep, two aHardeners: 1200 Shields/4585 Armour One PRO Rep repairs 137.5/sec with L5 Skill. This is roughly equivalent to 1/13th of each FG shot. Given a charge/fire rate of, let's give a rough time of five seconds per shot (charge time plus lining it up) that means that the FG is 'winning' by 8/13ths per shot. If you understand what I mean? Essentially it's out damaging the repairs by 8/13ths. Vs one Hardener each FG shot will deal 1822.6= 1094 Now, each second of repair is equivalent to 1/8th. Now the FG is 'winning' by only 3/8ths per shot. We also have to consider that the FG only gets four shots before it reloads (6 seconds with Max RR.) ((10944)-(137.515)= 2314. The Madrugar is roughly at half armour. Now the FG has to reload (6 seconds) which grants another 825 (2314-825= 1489) meaning that the FG damages the Madrugar at only 1489 damage to armour per clip: it will take four clips of that FG to kill this Madrugar. That's roughly 84+ seconds of continuous, accurate fire. Against a single Hardener and a single Rep (Well the Hardener only lasts for 48 seconds: which is where a second one comes in, I guess...) (15 is 15 seconds of repair, as the first shot will have done no repairable damage during the charge, unlike the follow up shots) If a second Hardener is added, that damage is now 1094*.656= 718 The repairs are now equivalent to 1/5th. Now the FG is actually neutral with the repair rate: no damage is actually 'sticking' to the Madrugar. Factoring reload time, the FG has no possibility of killing the Madrugar, even if it make no attempt to evade. Essentially, the high resistance granted by the armour hardeners combined with the incredible and unstoppable repair rate of heat armour repairers makes Madrugars essentially unkillable unless attacked by three or more players. Is my proposal on making Armor Repairers active again acceptable? Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
General Mosquito Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 127	Posted - 2015.07.18 01:52:00 - [223] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: While mathematically the numbers might support the AVer (I doubt it, actually, but would need to run the numbers further) the typical battlefield situation supports the notion that the HAV will survive, due to the actual mobility of it. OK, so swarms will be longer TTK, and with forges you have to contend with the high fatality chance of an attempt that can actually land three grenades and a FG shot, along with the charge time after the last nade. I would think that buffing AV nade damage would be the simplest solution if it was the intent of CCP to have one dropsuit cut through a hardened tank. Kallas Hallytyr wrote:* 2516 (previous damage to armour) + 76 = 2592 damage to armour is still insufficient to kill the Madrugar. Applying the Warbarge bonus to the 'No Shields' situation I ran gives an armour damage total of 2930: sufficient to kill the Madrugar assuming a 0.5s of repair (137.5; 2792.5) but insufficient if the Madrugar has a full 1.0s of repair (275; 2655.) This is still assuming that the Madrugar is entirely immobile/the AVer is able to land all three grenades without the Madrugar moving enough (which is perfectly possible with a Fuel Injector.) Essentially, the math is extremely close to killing the Madrugar for a perfect ambush, but any kind of imperfection sees the Maddy survive. Similarly, however, if the Maddy hasn't activated its hardeners then it is definitely dead. And all of this is for a tank with maximum resist profile. So a tank can only exist in dual hardened state for at most 36 seconds, during which it must complete its attack and get AV safe, and the sit out the cooldown. Any armor tank that doesn't double harden can be solod by an equal tier AV suit without issue, I think would be a safe statement to make at this juncture. Having to play here is the doctrine, drive it or die in a fire, also, when you see AV run far, run fast is not exactly entertaining gameplay is it? General Butt Naked - Biomassed The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned Only 9 more alts to go.
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:07:00 - [224] - Quote Devadander wrote: A one hardener limit would doom shield HAV. You assume we can't buss shield gardeners to account for a limit. 60% for instance. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Sergeant Sazu Mantodea MC 708	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:08:00 - [225] - Quote General Mosquito wrote: Having to play here is the doctrine, drive it or die in a fire, also, when you see AV run far, run fast is not exactly entertaining gameplay is it? Another problem I forgot to address: Madrugars die really, really fast without hardeners. Like, I give them almost zero chance of escape. Takes no more than 4 Minmando swarms. Things are a little too black and white, if you ask me. [65.1m SP] Sazu's Trading
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:08:00 - [226] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: [Is my proposal on making Armor Repairers active again acceptable? Sorry got a bit carried away Personally, yes. Though I also feel that they would need something a little bit more than 'just' only being active, something like the old system of one pulse every 3 seconds (or 5 seconds, or whatever, with the corresponding buff to HP/cycle it needs) - making it possible to deal spike/alpha/whatever-kind damage between Rep cycles. Also up/downtimes are important. Too long up and they're basically just as is. Too long down and they're... Well not too bad anyway. If I were to spitball some numbers: PRO Active Armour Repaired: One cycle every five seconds; 600 Armour HP every cycle (750 w/ L5 Skill) Duration: 18 seconds (4500 per module, per recharge) Cooldown: 60 seconds (45 seconds) Short duration but with high yield (higher than passive) so it can rep up rapidly; but long cooldown prohibits prolonged exposure to sustained enemy fire uness multiple modified added fitted and managed effectively. That's hardly a definitive suggestion and just one I dropped off the top of my head. But it would make armour HAVs very tough when used by a good operator, yet fragile when caught off guard and also require a substantial time out of the fight. General Mosquito wrote: Having to play here is the doctrine, drive it or die in a fire, also, when you see AV run far, run fast is not exactly entertaining gameplay is it? As an ADS pilot, Madrugars have it so easy! Thing is, Madrugars can quite happily stay mobile: dodging one FG round buys them not just 250-300/sec repairs, it also negates the damage, requires a further charge time and then they need to hit. Fuel Injectors are not required to force misses, but they do massively increase the likelihood of one. PLCs have it similarly: each miss (very likely against an aware HAV operator) requires a 4s reload and 0.6 charge (both reduced by skills, of course, but that's still at least a 2.5s turnaround time, even on a Commando) Swarms have travel time to consider, and they seem to home in on HAVs far less effectively than any DS. As for AV grenades, Packed especially, they are very short range. Madrugars can move very rapidly - their acceleration is still barely noticeable and only corners in tight areas present any kind of difficulties. Essentially, a Maddy in the middle of a city socket has at least even odds of escaping an AVer that ambushed them: when all of the factors are stacked against the Maddy they're still very likely to escape, which seems wrong to me, unless the person is carrying a full compliment of Lai Dai Packed grenades, at which point it's probably a 50/50. In an open field, the Maddy will escape a 1v1 with soul destroying reliability. Honestly, I don't see how anyone can defend the current state of Madrugars. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:14:00 - [227] - Quote Cool cool. I'm not really interested in discussed hardcore numbers - that part CCP and the community at large can handle when it comes to it, but having a core concept down is a good start: - Active Armor Repairers that have a sane active duration (maybe something that coincides with hardeners) and cooldown (nothing too crazy for obvious reasons). - Shield Boosters need to be made viable and work -THROUGH- incoming damage to hallmark on their ability to recover quickly but be vulnerable when the booster(s) and regen are not working. I think that is a great start :D Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:19:00 - [228] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Devadander wrote: A one hardener limit would doom shield HAV. You assume we can't buss shield gardeners to account for a limit. 60% for instance. No thanks. I remember 1.7. I am a Python pilot and I am strongly against 60% resistance sHardeners. Wiyrkomis: 312/missile 312.8 profile .4 one sHardener .465 two sHardeners 1.1 MinCom 1.07(.07.86+1)(.07.56+1) three damage mods 1.05 Warbarge = 64 damage per missile *4 = 256 per volley. Kaalakiota FG: 1440 = 285 per shot Allotek PLC: 1690 = 521 per shot(!) If anything should be done for shield vehicles it's reducing the efficacy of the Large Blaster vs vehicles. It is simply too effective vs both infantry and vehicles and that unnecessarily hurts Shield HAVs greatly. Vs AV Gunnlogis are quite balanced. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
XxWarlordxX97 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N 4	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:24:00 - [229] - Quote hails8n wrote: Theres nothing like having a Madrigar survive your 3 boundless packed res, then your 3 Lai Dai packed nades, then your wyrikomi swarms consecutively and still have 75% armor, then 100% a second later. A pack of them together is HELL . You don't understand AV or tanks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs3nH8bE1AE
maybe deadcatz the nomercs 354	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:29:00 - [230] - Quote What if we make armour hardeners resist 70 to 100%(balance that plz) percent of damage but disable the reps on the tank so as soon as you hit hardener your reps stop but you can take a few swarms and get away from fight? Hardener limit one but almost complete resistance (ALMOST,and it wont be op because they cant rep through through Hardener active times) Plus sheild havs need to have 2700sheild to 1000 amour. Why does ccp hate teh sheilds so much?... Bring down the pg and cpu costs for the sheild stuff. Love how such low powered suits amd vehicles have such high power consuming weaponry and modules. I see a sheild based suit and i almost feel sorry for killing him,because he was trying to LIVE with his own style and not just do armour like everyone else. scanner? whats that? you can see enemies on the radar? just use your eyes and save a equipment slot for something useful

Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:15:00 - [231] - Quote Hmmm. ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:26:00 - [232] - Quote Tryin' to get tanks nerfed again eh? lol Nothing new. I'll admit, Maddys are pretty tough now. But I feel that is the way it should be for them. Dual hardened maddys can be destroyed with just a few coordinated attacks taking only a few seconds. Without those hardeners, They are paper-thin. In PC, I've had enemies chuck lai dais and burn into my armor and finish me off before I could even defend/move/react in any way. Taking a Proto tank down should always be a group effort and the AVers I see killing them are working together with their squadmates, Not running about solo. Now if we could just get the Shield Vehicles on that level :) ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:36:00 - [233] - Quote On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. They've tried making them AV and we still don't use em' to that full extent. CCP ain't never gonna make an IFV for this game, So why not make the blaster what we tankers always used it for - Killing infantry. Besides, When CCP turned the Blaster into a more Compressed AV version, It chews through shields like nothing. Even double hardened shields. Its all swiss cheese to an Ion Cannon. Again, I say one of the main problems here is lack of turret availability for variants and race. Also I don't think the XT-201s needed to be messed with. ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:41:00 - [234] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. Those are the turrets you camp CRUs with for free kills, right? Aren't they already pretty good at mopping up infantry (and everything else) as is? If Large Blasters are officially rebranded as "AI", then I'm thinking they should be reduced to crap when used in any AV capacity. Thinking the guy who whips out an anti-infantry blaster tank should lose pretty much every time when up against a proper AV missile or rail tank. You know, for balance for stuff. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:42:00 - [235] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. They've tried making them AV and we still don't use em' to that full extent. CCP ain't never gonna make an IFV for this game, So why not make the blaster what we tankers always used it for - Killing infantry. Besides, When CCP turned the Blaster into a more Compressed AV version, It chews through shields like nothing. Even double hardened shields. Its all swiss cheese to an Ion Cannon. Again, I say one of the main problems here is lack of turret availability for variants and race. Also I don't think the XT-201s needed to be messed with. The problem is CCP wants them to do both, while missiles/rails are only supposed to do AV. I would rather have blasters become pure AV, maybe turn it into a burst-fire plasma cannon of sorts. But they should pick one or the other. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:42:00 - [236] - Quote And most of you AVers don't know the half of being seriously OP. Most of you don't even know what the Sagaris or Surya was. They were super OP at the time. Mainly because AV amongst the general population of players was almost absent. But, They were total nightmares for infantry for the most part. If my Sagaris is never coming back, I at least want it's paint. Damn did it look so good on that Caldari hull. ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:45:00 - [237] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. Those are the turrets you camp CRUs with for free kills, right? Aren't they already pretty good at mopping up infantry (and everything else) as is? Actually no. Most blaster tankers I see nowadays that get kills have been tanking forever and know how to fire them. Do you know what a compressed blaster is? Do you know how it fires and how it works with the new dispersion? You just got to learn it. Camping CRUs? I wish I had the time but mainly these days in pubs I roll in my Sica and give the AVers a good tussle. ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:49:00 - [238] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: Do you know what a compressed blaster is? I don't play many single player games these days. Is that the best gun to use against the bosses? Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:51:00 - [239] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. Those are the turrets you camp CRUs with for free kills, right? Aren't they already pretty good at mopping up infantry (and everything else) as is? If Large Blasters are officially rebranded as "AI", then I'm thinking they should be reduced to crap when used in any AV capacity. Thinking the guy who whips out an anti-infantry blaster tank should lose pretty much every time when up against a proper AV missile or rail tank. You know, for balance for stuff. Also do you even read what people say completely or try to pick out small things and attack them? The reason CCP might as well make the Blaster AI is because we tankers will always combat infantry with the blaster. There is no IFV. The blaster is the next best thing. ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:51:00 - [240] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: Do you know what a compressed blaster is? I don't play many single player games these days. Is that the best gun to use against the bosses? Nope but CCP chose it because it kills infantry better than any other Blaster variant. :D ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team

Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:52:00 - [241] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: Do you know what a compressed blaster is? I don't play many single player games these days. Is that the best gun to use against the bosses? Nope but CCP chose it because it kills infantry better than any other Blaster variant. :D ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
Quasar Storm 0uter.Heaven 580	Posted - 2015.07.18 03:56:00 - [242] - Quote Anyways, Tell musturd I <3 him! Goodnight guys! ADS & Tank pilot. Drifting on *Stormy* Seas. The "Eh" Team
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.18 04:03:00 - [243] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: Do you know what a compressed blaster is? I don't play many single player games these days. Is that the best gun to use against the bosses? Nope but CCP chose it because it kills infantry better than any other Blaster variant. :D I miss the Compressed Blaster and its animations. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Darken-Sol Intruder Excluder 2	Posted - 2015.07.18 04:05:00 - [244] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. They've tried making them AV and we still don't use em' to that full extent. CCP ain't never gonna make an IFV for this game, So why not make the blaster what we tankers always used it for - Killing infantry. Besides, When CCP turned the Blaster into a more Compressed AV version, It chews through shields like nothing. Even double hardened shields. Its all swiss cheese to an Ion Cannon. Again, I say one of the main problems here is lack of turret availability for variants and race. Also I don't think the XT-201s needed to be messed with. Blasters=best av Crush them
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.18 04:14:00 - [245] - Quote Darken-Sol wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. They've tried making them AV and we still don't use em' to that full extent. CCP ain't never gonna make an IFV for this game, So why not make the blaster what we tankers always used it for - Killing infantry. Besides, When CCP turned the Blaster into a more Compressed AV version, It chews through shields like nothing. Even double hardened shields. Its all swiss cheese to an Ion Cannon. Again, I say one of the main problems here is lack of turret availability for variants and race. Also I don't think the XT-201s needed to be messed with. Blasters=best av Blasters in the form they are now shouldn't exist as HAV turrets end of story. They are not appropriate for the vehicles at all. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Darken-Sol Intruder Excluder 2	Posted - 2015.07.18 04:16:00 - [246] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Darken-Sol wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. They've tried making them AV and we still don't use em' to that full extent. CCP ain't never gonna make an IFV for this game, So why not make the blaster what we tankers always used it for - Killing infantry. Besides, When CCP turned the Blaster into a more Compressed AV version, It chews through shields like nothing. Even double hardened shields. Its all swiss cheese to an Ion Cannon. Again, I say one of the main problems here is lack of turret availability for variants and race. Also I don't think the XT-201s needed to be messed with. Blasters=best av Blasters in the form they are now shouldn't exist as HAV turrets end of story. They are not appropriate for the vehicles at all. You wish it to fire larger balls of plasma slower? What ever. Its the pilot that makes the tank. Crush them
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 04:26:00 - [247] - Quote Quasar Storm wrote: And most of you AVers don't know the half of being seriously OP. Most of you don't even know what the Sagaris or Surya was. They were super OP at the time. Mainly because AV amongst the general population of players was almost absent. But, They were total nightmares for infantry for the most part. If my Sagaris is never coming back, I at least want it's paint. Damn did it look so good on that Caldari hull. Went 72/1 with a Railgun Surya back in closed beta. You know, when tanks were impossible to kill but the RDVs went down with one shot? Hahaha, man, those were the days. Volunteer For The PSD! Design A SKIN 2
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.18 04:52:00 - [248] - Quote Darken-Sol wrote: You wish ... we had ... larger balls ? If more tankers did, I suspect conversations like this one would play out with far less fanfare and far more efficiency. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.18 05:04:00 - [249] - Quote Darken-Sol wrote: True Adamance wrote: Darken-Sol wrote: Quasar Storm wrote: On the blaster note, I think CCP should just make them AI. They've tried making them AV and we still don't use em' to that full extent. CCP ain't never gonna make an IFV for this game, So why not make the blaster what we tankers always used it for - Killing infantry. Besides, When CCP turned the Blaster into a more Compressed AV version, It chews through shields like nothing. Even double hardened shields. Its all swiss cheese to an Ion Cannon. Again, I say one of the main problems here is lack of turret availability for variants and race. Also I don't think the XT-201s needed to be messed with. Blasters=best av Blasters in the form they are now shouldn't exist as HAV turrets end of story. They are not appropriate for the vehicles at all. You wish it to fire larger balls of plasma slower? What ever. Its the pilot that makes the tank. Indeed but its not a tank unless it adheres to specific design tenets. Nor is it balanced if its capabilities overrule the efforts of others. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 369	Posted - 2015.07.18 05:09:00 - [250] - Quote I have to file this threadnaught under T. For Troll.. And just wash my damn hands of it. Gêå You want a toe? I can get you a toe dude. Gêå Joined - 06-28-12 ~Deal with it~

hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 369	Posted - 2015.07.18 15:36:00 - [251] - Quote Bump Get some life in your hands.
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 369	Posted - 2015.07.19 19:50:00 - [252] - Quote Bump Get some life in your hands.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1	Posted - 2015.07.21 22:18:00 - [253] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: one player should never be able to replace 2 or 3 players merely by virtue of their fit. By virtue of skill though any vehicle pilot should be able to match a slayer type player who can themselves by virtue of their own skill replace 2-3 players. I don't disagree, vehicles should be viable but the ability to just sit there and absorb damage is not skill. Duna still does pretty good, so do other tankers. Because, that's why.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 20	Posted - 2015.07.21 22:58:00 - [254] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: True Adamance wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: one player should never be able to replace 2 or 3 players merely by virtue of their fit. By virtue of skill though any vehicle pilot should be able to match a slayer type player who can themselves by virtue of their own skill replace 2-3 players. I don't disagree, vehicles should be viable but the ability to just sit there and absorb damage is not skill. Duna still does pretty good, so do other tankers. Depends really..... I mean managing incoming damage is a skill in its own right. Using hull down positions to your advantage to avoid swarm and forge gun damage entirely, hull orientating so as not to present rear armour, judging incoming damage against your module durations, against your repair values, against your ability to kill your target, etc. Having played more intensive MMO as a damage mitigation Tank type character I can tell you that absorbing damage IS a skill. Though in order to make that a real skill in Dust these functions of tanking need to be relatively low value active armour cool downs not passives and supplement high raw HP values not account for massive effective values. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 373	Posted - 2015.07.24 22:10:00 - [255] - Quote Bump Get some life in your hands.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [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.

Gallente Loyalist ... Come at me bro.