|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
   |
Posted - 2015.11.14 14:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Text Grant wrote:I run proto AV every match. I can't kill well built somas, much less gunnies, or maddies. Until 1 AV'er can kill 1 tanker, so long dust. It's been a crappy 4 years, and I'd like a refund for my aurum CCP.
. I think you are not aiming for a realistic balanced situation, at all. The underlined part sounds an awful lot like: Quote:Until any AV'er can kill 1 tanker Even if you mean maximized proto AV vs maximized proto tank and not lesser AV variations, that is not good gameplay balance. The reason why that is broken balance is that if in all theoretical 1v1 scenarios (impossible btw) both tank and infantryman are "on balance", the tank gets absolutely wrecked, instagibbed and all totaled if two infantrymen casually open fire together. Let's face it: infantry, dropships, tanks (and even scouts and sentinels) play differently.
I understand your point, but at the same time this point can be boiled down 'Tanks shouldn't be able to be killed 1v1 because then when they get into a 2v1 situation they are f*cked'. Which is the same scenario for every other non-vehicle player on the field. 2v1 with equivalent gear and the 1 is in trouble. It's not an even analogy because of the differences between infantry and vehicle combat, but the fact is that you can currently have people soloing in a fitting that cannot be killed by another player soloing in a fitting meant to counter the first. And with hardeners in their current state a solo Av player is better off trying to avoid a hardner stacked tank because they will accomplish nothing more than drawing it's attention to them. At best, scaring it away for a few seconds. The meta is broken and needs fixing. I'm not advocating any particular action, but in the end vehicles need to be able to be killed in a 1v1 fight.
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.16 07:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Richard Gamerich-R wrote:Don't forget, proto tank cost 1 200 000 ISK, your suit max 130 000.
Balance tank/AV is good, if you play in coordinate squad, no vehicle can run as they want.
So you're saying that a solo player in a tank is counterable by an entire squad. Yep, sounds totally balanced to me. 
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 08:11:00 -
[3] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Baal Omniscient wrote:Richard Gamerich-R wrote:Don't forget, proto tank cost 1 200 000 ISK, your suit max 130 000.
Balance tank/AV is good, if you play in coordinate squad, no vehicle can run as they want. So you're saying that a solo player in a tank is counterable by an entire squad. Yep, sounds totally balanced to me. It's not but he does have a point. A major aspect of HAV and vehicular game play is their disproportionally high upkeeps over time. If an HAV designed to be quickly destroyed by individual AVers they should see the costs of their modules and hulls reduced. At present they are difficult to kill and thus the costs to outfit one is very high. That all being said HAV have not been representative of tanks in DUST 514 at any point in their history due to a combination of woefully inappropriate turret options, poor design changes for armour modules, and a lack of emphasis on vehicle positioning.
The point that cost per death isn't equal is a given, I've never argued that point. I would honestly rather tanks be completely free and be uber killing machines that die in 2 shots at this point though. People playing the cost per death card like it means that makes it balanced and that gets under my skin. Regardless of ISK price, 1 ISK or 1,000,000 ISK, if one player running gear specifically made to shut down what you are running can't kill you without a squad of coordinated teammates who aren't busy dodging bullets from other sources, then there's a gameplay imbalance.
I agree with every point you make on tanks True, you're in fact the only tanker on these forums that I can easily agree with on a regular basis and you have been so for years. I just get frustrated with the rest of them who keep repeating the same tired old talking points rather than putting effort into trying to get a proper balance going. I don't want tanks to be useless but I want a fair fight between them and AV. Maybe some day....
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
THEAMAZING POTHEAD wrote:Commandos means theres always 3-7 swarms near every red berry furball.
Until theres not an average 4 av'ers every game that can insta pop everything that comes near them, you cant talk about 1v1 balance. In chrome a proto aver could solo maxed out tanks but it wasnt a huge problem because there was only 1 or 2 proto avers ever in a game, and redline rail gunnys kept other tanks, in redlines anyways.
I'd have no problem with proto av 1v1 killing tanks if tere weren't 4 on average each game.
And who did you get that info from? Any time I play I do so with my girlfriend and we're the only 2 AV players in the entire match 9 times out of ten because most people these days would rather avoid the triple hardened fortresses trying to camp them rather than attempt to fight them alone. But just like your little tale, mine is purely annecdotal as well and has no bearing on the average match.
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:42:00 -
[5] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Baal Omniscient wrote:True Adamance wrote:Baal Omniscient wrote:Richard Gamerich-R wrote:Don't forget, proto tank cost 1 200 000 ISK, your suit max 130 000.
Balance tank/AV is good, if you play in coordinate squad, no vehicle can run as they want. So you're saying that a solo player in a tank is counterable by an entire squad. Yep, sounds totally balanced to me. It's not but he does have a point. A major aspect of HAV and vehicular game play is their disproportionally high upkeeps over time. If an HAV designed to be quickly destroyed by individual AVers they should see the costs of their modules and hulls reduced. At present they are difficult to kill and thus the costs to outfit one is very high. That all being said HAV have not been representative of tanks in DUST 514 at any point in their history due to a combination of woefully inappropriate turret options, poor design changes for armour modules, and a lack of emphasis on vehicle positioning. The point that cost per death isn't equal is a given, I've never argued that point. I would honestly rather tanks be completely free and be uber killing machines that die in 2 shots at this point though. People playing the cost per death card like it means that makes it balanced and that gets under my skin. Regardless of ISK price, 1 ISK or 1,000,000 ISK, if one player running gear specifically made to shut down what you are running can't kill you without a squad of coordinated teammates who aren't busy dodging bullets from other sources, then there's a gameplay imbalance. I agree with every point you make on tanks True, you're in fact the only tanker on these forums that I can easily agree with on a regular basis and you have been so for years. I just get frustrated with the rest of them who keep repeating the same tired old talking points rather than putting effort into trying to get a proper balance going. I don't want tanks to be useless but I want a fair fight between them and AV. Maybe some day.... To be honest I wouldn't mind HAV being more susceptible to AV fire if there were various additional modules including active counter measures, target jamming arrays, scan suppressing armour coatings, and various other odds and ends most prominent amongst them would be a powerful main gun with AoE explosive power and the ability to either switch (like a side arm) to a Co-axial Small Turret or Cuppola Mounted Small Turret.
I wouldn't either, but the chances of that any time soon is about as likely as Jesus appearing on TV's worldwide and announcing he's gay. Given our current structure and what we are able to work with, the only path I can see as making them properly balanced is to give them a massive (and I mean massive) price reduction, crank back the clocks on their turrets so they are uber killing machines again, cut their speed, increase their base eHp by a bit, find a fix for hardner stacking (I personally like the idea of Flux grenades resetting all active modules or locking them for x# of seconds since that cuts out the commando suit soloer and makes other suits give up their AV grenades, but haven't thought it through enough to tell if that would be over the top) and move on from there. However that's almost just as likely as your proposition, for the same reasons that we'll likely never be rid of the stupid jumpy assholes: the tears of the addicts. The ones who refuse to give a little of their power up for the betterment of the game... But we'll see. I'd be thrilled to have deeper V v AV combat, but I'm not too hopeful.
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 07:26:00 -
[6] - Quote
THEAMAZING POTHEAD wrote:Baal Omniscient wrote:THEAMAZING POTHEAD wrote:Commandos means theres always 3-7 swarms near every red berry furball.
Until theres not an average 4 av'ers every game that can insta pop everything that comes near them, you cant talk about 1v1 balance. In chrome a proto aver could solo maxed out tanks but it wasnt a huge problem because there was only 1 or 2 proto avers ever in a game, and redline rail gunnys kept other tanks, in redlines anyways.
I'd have no problem with proto av 1v1 killing tanks if tere weren't 4 on average each game. And who did you get that info from? Any time I play I do so with my girlfriend and we're the only 2 AV players in the entire match 9 times out of ten because most people these days would rather avoid the triple hardened fortresses trying to camp them rather than attempt to fight them alone. But just like your little tale, mine is purely annecdotal as well and has no bearing on the average match. Instead of using av and following a tank after its running away, then saying you dont see any av- pull out a tank, see how long you last, and see if you can get over 5 kills with it.
When a tank does run it's often only gone for about 20 seconds tops, even with proto AV denying an area to a tank that's ADV or above and stacking hardeners with one or two AV players is virtually impossible unless the pilot is completely inept. When there's 1 person who's counterable by a squad, what happens when there's 4 tanks? That means one squad of proto tanks working together are counterable by.... the entire enemy team? Where's the balance there? I don't have a solution to the issues facing AV and tanks, but I'm also not going to sit quietly and let people completely misrepresent the situation without a proper counter argument. So far I've yet to see a good reason for why tanks should not be able to be killed 1v1, the only thing offered is price points and I've already covered that in my responses to True.
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 07:29:00 -
[7] - Quote
maybe deadcatz wrote:do you really think that a 1.2 million isk tank with several million sp invested in the skills to even make it work should be able to be killed by one focking scrub with a swarm launcher in a suit that costs maybe 1/5th at most?
Yes. For the same reason I think a 0 SP starter fit should be able to nade spam and kill a fully kitted officer suit. Balance. This is about gameplay, not price points.
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 22:24:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ice Royal Glantix wrote:For all of you defending the tank side of the argument, I remind you that ISK cost should never be considered when balancing an item, simply due to the extreme wealth of many players.
However, for those of you who think that a single AVer should be able to destroy a tank, you're just a little stupid.
The point of a tank is battlefield presence over killing ability. By running a tank, compared to an assault/scout/sentinel, a player understands he is sacrificing kills. A tank simply cannot kill as much as a properly run slayer suit.
If one person could easily destroy a tank, it totally ruins the idea of creating a large presence that must be dealt with.
If a tank is causing you trouble, you can always just hide from it. If a tank is causing your team trouble, your team can deal with it. If you could destroy a tank with just one person, then the tanker would be better off in an assault or other dropsuit.
If you want to 1 v 1 a tank, use a tank.
Sincerely,
Glantix / Ice
This is perhaps one of the more lucid responses I've heard to the issue, despite it still being wrong. +1 for understanding price points aren't to be balanced around however, that's a rare trait at least among those who run tanks and post on the forums. Now I'm not going to just say your wrong and leave it there, that would appear derisive and that isn't my intent. I'll explain it as briefly as I can.
Even if I were to concede that tankers sacrifice kills (which is hard to do since I see proper tankers regularly getting in the top 3 with more kills than most of the rest of their team), logi suits sacrifice killing potential as well as survivability for the ability to simply have access to more gear all at once than other suits and have a minor bonus for their racial one. They are susceptible to every weapon in the game barring swarms while also being just much a priority target for infantry to remove as a tank if not moreso due to their ability to maintain a group of soldiers. And I won't even go into how hard ADS pilots have it.
In short, even if tanks were sacrificing kills to be a presence on the field, sacrificing kills is no reason for someone to not be soloable. It should not take 1/4th of a team to counter 1/16th of the other team, you cannot have balance by trying to support numbers like that.
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.23 04:30:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ice Royal Glantix wrote:
It takes a very skilled tanker to pull off 30+ kill games, something your average assault can do in any game. A tank can easily be hid from and out maneuvered, making it hard to chase down what would be easy kills for any infantry member.
Therefore, and I am repeating my main argument at this point, a tank really shines in terms of battlefield presence, not killing ability. It can keep accessible points on lockdown and prevent infantry from crossing open fields. These tasks are what a tank should strive to accomplish, and you know what? All it takes is a single person to stop a tank from doing this. Yes, a single AVer probably won't be able to destroy the tank, but he/she will be able to scare off the tank, thus removing its immense presence.
This is no different than pushing a sniper off of objective overwatch or forcing an Amarr Logi to retreat, preventing him/her from from dropping links where they are needed. Both of these people will still be able to get kills, but they won't be able to do the job they were designed to do.
That is all I have to ramble on about. My apologies if I was rude/offensive in this post; that was not the intention.
Sincerely,
Glantix / Ice
An average assault player working with a squad can and does frequently clear 20 kills, 30 perhaps as an average for some of the moderately better players, but a solo assault is not going to be averaging 30 kills in an normal game. It takes a very skilled assault to pull off 30+ kill games playing solo as well.
An average skill level solo assault is going to be bouncing widely between anywhere from 5-20 on average depending largely on who's on the other team, what gear the opposing team is running, gear the player is willing to risk running and the content of their own team (officer squads are a huge drain on kills for everyone else in the match, just as an example) which are numbers I also see average solo tankers frequently pulling.
I play either solo or as a duo with my girlfriend exclusively these days, I never run in a full squad. I've been playing Dust since Replication and she's been playing since open beta and we both run both assault classes and AV and have done so for years now. A good match for us is when we top 20 kills individually, but typically we end up only averaging between 10 and 20 kills per game with bad games dipping into the single digits and really good games veering near the 30 mark. It's completely subjective for a solo player, and unless a tanker is good at working as a proper support for a squad (extrordinarily rare to see) they are basically a solo player whether they are in a squad or not (this being the reason for the emphasis on the solo assault experience).
As for a solo AV player being able to scare off a tank - Yes, if they can get behind them and get enough alpha damage on them with AV grenades and whatever AV weapon they have on hand through their hardners (because a tank isn't going to sit there with it's hardners down). Then, if they can manage that while dodging enemy fire, that tank will rocket off into the distance nearly as fast as a top speed LAV only to return to the same spot 20 seconds later fully repped and aware that someone's pulled AV so they should probably farm kills in 3rd person for a while to keep an eye on their week spot.
There is a very big balancing issue right now with making fits that are viable for tanks that aren't just triple hardened fortresses, I understand the issues there and don't deny that there is a big issue with that, however that doesn't excuse the abusability of the triple hardened tank. At MLT and basic levels it's not so bad, but once someone has fully specced into vehicle skills it can take a squad fully focused on AV just to scare off certain proto triple hardened tanks who know good routes and how to properly use cover.
Now all of that said, a tanker working with a squad won't necessarily net more kills like an assault or heavy would in a squad. The tank has a very difficult obstical to overcome if it is ever to truly feel at home in Dust, and that is utility. It doesn't have enough seats to carry a squad, it's useless when stuck outside apart from parking on a hill and trying to fire into the doorways/windows, it requires modules to manage dispersion on it's main anti infantry turret, etc, etc, etc. The presence of a tank will keep people indoors, but forcing people into hiding in tight groups is counter productive as it forces your team to have to breach a room already fortified by a blob of enemies already forted up with hives and uplinks in most cases. This is not a role. The tank lacks a proper role. I personally preffered it much more back when I could 1v1 a tank and it was completely up in the air who would win because their rounds were deadly accurate and I had to duck in and out and between different available cover just to try and shoot at them. At least then they had a role, and that was being a deadly machine that could die relatively easily. People didn't all run indoors to avoid the tanks because they had faith that someone would be able to scare it away soon, whereas now no one expects anyone to do anything about them so they all GTFO of the way of the tank to try to save their own gear. Back then 4-6 shots and a tank would go down from my swarms, and 1-3 shots from their blaster and I was dead. Tanks weren't perfect, but they had options and they had an at least workable purpose.
Sorry if my response seems grouchy or rattled, unable to sleep and my brain is hating me for trying to post through the haze of exhaustion.
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.10 11:45:00 -
[10] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:kickin six wrote:I'm a FG'er and this is an age-old situation that CCP makes worse on every release. I don't want to be able to take a tank out without some hard ass work but to even things I think they should lose one of their advantages when 1/2 damaged; Speed, Repairing or Firing. Disable any one and that's closer to fairness. Or maybe if they are severely damaged then high-acceleration increases the damage. That would give FG one more chance from long-distance.
I still take out a lot of tanks but I also die more since their aim precision was improved. Just part of the game. Other than picking off someone running in the open from 150m, there's nothing funner than watching a tank try to get away and not make it. Cheers I'll accept this when I can shoot at infantry and disable them too. Also, unless they've actually changed something since the last time I checked (2 weeks ago), precision on not a single turret, or anything else has improved.
I'll accept disabling infantry when infantry get active hardeners. Your argument boils down to 'that functions different than mine, so no'. Well, closer to 'that makes mine function more different than yours'. You can go around and around all day arguing like that and get nowhere. I am not saying that his suggestion is a good one, but your response is not a counter point in the slightest.
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
|
|
Baal Omniscient
Qualified Scrub
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.10 12:00:00 -
[11] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Baal Omniscient wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Text Grant wrote:I run proto AV every match. I can't kill well built somas, much less gunnies, or maddies. Until 1 AV'er can kill 1 tanker, so long dust. It's been a crappy 4 years, and I'd like a refund for my aurum CCP.
. I think you are not aiming for a realistic balanced situation, at all. The underlined part sounds an awful lot like: Quote:Until any AV'er can kill 1 tanker Even if you mean maximized proto AV vs maximized proto tank and not lesser AV variations, that is not good gameplay balance. The reason why that is broken balance is that if in all theoretical 1v1 scenarios (impossible btw) both tank and infantryman are "on balance", the tank gets absolutely wrecked, instagibbed and all totaled if two infantrymen casually open fire together. Let's face it: infantry, dropships, tanks (and even scouts and sentinels) play differently. I understand your point, but at the same time this point can be boiled down 'Tanks shouldn't be able to be killed 1v1 because then when they get into a 2v1 situation they are f*cked'. Which is the same scenario for every other non-vehicle player on the field. 2v1 with equivalent gear and the 1 is in trouble. It's not an even analogy because of the differences between infantry and vehicle combat, but the fact is that you can currently have people soloing in a fitting that cannot be killed by another player soloing in a fitting meant to counter the first. And with hardeners in their current state a solo Av player is better off trying to avoid a hardner stacked tank because they will accomplish nothing more than drawing it's attention to them. At best, scaring it away for a few seconds. The meta is broken and needs fixing. I'm not advocating any particular action, but in the end vehicles need to be able to be killed in a 1v1 fight. But do infantry players have to wait to call in their dropsuits? Are their dropsuits vulnerable to destruction and theft while being called and recalled? Can vehicles cap points? Do infantry have a supply cap? As far as tanks go, are full proto fits equivilent to Infantry? Why should one player have to go through so many more hurdles, in and even before match, just to be easily wrecked by a single player? And, to add icing to that tasty cake, after you go up in flames to that one idiot and wait all that time to get another vehicle up and running, that numskull wanders over to a supply depot and goes back to being rambo before switching out again for more free points. I've personally always advocated for less infantry killing power and simply make vehicles the best counter to vehicles, that way AV is more of a support role if alone yet can still function as primary AV in small groups of 2-3
In a situation where vehicles and av were balanced I would not be opposed to coding a limit to the number of fits allowed who have an AV weapon. As for the differences between vehicles and infantry, those are not the fault of infantry. A balanced game requires a meta that is evenly matched between av and vehicles in a 1v1 situation. Whatever is required to make that happen I will support because I want a game that is properly balanced for everyone who plays. A solo av player ambushed by a proto tank while crossing a map shouldn't be completely helpless anymore than a solo tank ambushed by a proto AV player. That's balance
añ¼añ+añ¦-añ¬añ+añƒañ¦-añÿañ¿añ+añ+añ¦-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ
"Baal comes...and destruction follows him like a storm."
añ¿añ+añ¦añ¿aÑìaññañ¦añ+añ¿aÑìañºañòañ+añ¦añ+aññ-añªañ+añùañ¿aÑìaññ-añ¦añ¦añÖaÑìañù
|
|
|
| |
|