|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
PDIGGY22
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
189
   |
Posted - 2012.07.18 02:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
re's are fine, i rarely die from them, you need to pay attention to your surroundings.
the only nerf that i could see as acceptable it the amount you carry, but they need to do more damage to structures/vehicles |
PDIGGY22
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
189
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 04:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Frame wrote:In the upcoming build Remote Explosive is going to be changed.
Arming time: 5 seconds
Maximum ammo: 2
Lower throw distance
No icon displayed above until it is armed.
will they actually be useful for non infantry? if not, horrible nerf. |
PDIGGY22
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
189
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 04:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Lurchasaurus wrote:PDIGGY22 wrote:CCP Frame wrote:In the upcoming build Remote Explosive is going to be changed.
Arming time: 5 seconds
Maximum ammo: 2
Lower throw distance
No icon displayed above until it is armed. will they actually be useful for non infantry? if not, horrible nerf. you worry about AV effectiveness but you forget that we are only currently able to use the first tier of remote explosives and im sure there will be an AV version just like grenades.
i worry that they keep nerfing AV weapons while vehicles still stay ever so strong. |
PDIGGY22
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
189
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 04:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Lurchasaurus wrote:PDIGGY22 wrote:Lurchasaurus wrote:PDIGGY22 wrote:CCP Frame wrote:In the upcoming build Remote Explosive is going to be changed.
Arming time: 5 seconds
Maximum ammo: 2
Lower throw distance
No icon displayed above until it is armed. will they actually be useful for non infantry? if not, horrible nerf. you worry about AV effectiveness but you forget that we are only currently able to use the first tier of remote explosives and im sure there will be an AV version just like grenades. i worry that they keep nerfing AV weapons while vehicles still stay ever so strong. do you agree that while debating this **** is entertaining, its pretty much all meaningless until we see the new build next week? btw, its a legitimate worry, but i feel if AV RE's are implemented, they will be pretty formidable since infantry RE's already do a bunch of damage and its not like tanks are supposed to be silly vehicles that you can just ignore if you dont wanna fight it...its a tank...and as far as marauders, those are upgraded tanks....even more formidable. edit: also, you can just fit more than one thing of RE's....an infantry guy carrying an AR shouldnt have the same AV efficiency as a dedicated AV fit with a forge gun or swarm launcher, even with AV RE's. THAT'S op....
until they announce a "nerf" for vehicles, i'll stay skeptical of their design decisions.
you will be able to fit 4 total compared to 10 now, 5 second arm time means i have to throw it on the ground and hope some tanks user doesnt look down and blow it before he gets close enough for me to kill him with it.
|
PDIGGY22
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
189
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 05:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
Drake Lyons wrote:PDIGGY22 wrote:
until they announce a "nerf" for vehicles
Drake Lyons wrote:I think I've got this one figured out. Here's how to properly balance tanks so we don't have any more threads like this.
Top tier tank should have about 700-1000 base EHP and be able to fit either something like an Assault Rifle or an HMG in the main turret. No additional concurrently active turrets, just one that could be activated by switching weapons. Maybe limit that to less powerful weapons...a submachine gun or a pistol or something.
They shouldn't have any type of active boosters available, just passive extenders or rechargers. And the resistance modules should be severely reduced. Maybe just limit it to the DCU.
And to be honest, the base speed is far too fast. Maybe slow it down to about 7 or 8...with the option to add a burst of speed. But only for a short period, not an indefinite "high speed" setting.
The ability to run over players needs to be removed, but a close quarters option for killing does make sense. Maybe a knife of some kind. That would be good.
And having the vehicles brought in by RDVs can cause problems - sometimes they crush people who just spawned. So instead, I say spawn in the vehicle. And they are way too big, anyway. Make it about the size of a player and no more friendly crushing will have.
Except having a dropsuit inside a vehicle is really lame. First you have to kill the vehicle, then the dropsuit pops out. I mean, talk about overpowered. Let's just make it one thing - you spawn in a vehicle you can't leave and you die when it does.
--
So the solution: Make vehicles dropsuit sized, capable of only fitting dropsuit weapons with dropsuit modules and dropsuit tank. Give them dropsuit speed, and dropsuit mechanics. Vechicles officially fixed! TL;DR If it kills PDIGGY, it needs a nerf...
yup, has nothing to do with them being free, having unlimited ammo and movement speed, along with fitting you and your best buddies on the guns.
No FPS should ever be based around vehicles, sure it's cool to hop in a jet or tank every once in a while but it makes for boring game play more often then not, especially for those who want a massive gun on gun game.
Vehicles are crutches for people that cant compete, it's the same thing with sniping in a MMO, high powered weapons on large maps makes for a good crutch as well.
|
PDIGGY22
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
189
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 15:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
Varys Targaryen wrote:PDIGGY,
Maybe, just maybe, this won't be your ideal type of gameplay. There are plenty of other shooters that allow for vehicle free gun play. This isn't one of them. So either have an open mind and get ready to play a new game, or find another outlet to shoot someone in the face for one of your montage videos.
(I hope you stay, you're pretty good with the AR even though you are kind of annoying to listen to sometimes)
game is supposed to be massive, 13v13 isnt massive infact it's only the 3rd biggest shooter on ps3
no hardcore ps3 players want a game focused on soley vehicles, there will be no player base if vehicles arent changed, hell there are only a few hundred playing the beta now.
look at every ps3 exclusive, not 1 is based around vehicles. Maybe they should do a bit more research when marketing and targeting a demographic and they would see games like battlefield sell better on xbox.
if the vehicle quota stays the same, which it should and player count increase to 24v24 or 32v32 then there would be some balance to this game as far as infantry vs vehicles are concerned |
PDIGGY22
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
189
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:PDIGGY22 wrote:no hardcore ps3 players want a game focused on soley vehicles
look at every ps3 exclusive, not 1 is based around vehicles. Battle Tanks. Motorstorm. Twisted Metal. Wipeout. I'm pretty sure those games are based around vehicles. And while it's not an exclusive, Ace Combat: Assault Horizon sold MUCH better on PS3, and is also about vehicles.
you included games that are vehicle only with no option for infantry, wow your dumb.
and twisted metal failed hard, nice try. |
PDIGGY22
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
189
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 19:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
Lavender Fields wrote:PDIGGY22 wrote:Varys Targaryen wrote:PDIGGY,
Maybe, just maybe, this won't be your ideal type of gameplay. There are plenty of other shooters that allow for vehicle free gun play. This isn't one of them. So either have an open mind and get ready to play a new game, or find another outlet to shoot someone in the face for one of your montage videos.
(I hope you stay, you're pretty good with the AR even though you are kind of annoying to listen to sometimes) game is supposed to be massive, 13v13 isnt massive infact it's only the 3rd biggest shooter on ps3 no hardcore ps3 players want a game focused on soley vehicles, there will be no player base if vehicles arent changed, hell there are only a few hundred playing the beta now. look at every ps3 exclusive, not 1 is based around vehicles. Maybe they should do a bit more research when marketing and targeting a demographic and they would see games like battlefield sell better on xbox. if the vehicle quota stays the same, which it should and player count increase to 24v24 or 32v32 then there would be some balance to this game as far as infantry vs vehicles are concerned There will be balance as far as vehicles are concerned when the player market goes live and the game is integrated with EVE Online. Also, you are not the spokesperson of the "hardcore PS3 gaming community." Don't act like it.
and you are? |
|
|
| |
|