DUST Search - Make Your Voice Heard: Let CCP Know that the AV Nerf is BAD

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Make Your Voice Heard: Let CCP Know that the AV Nerf is BAD

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Leither Yiltron KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 417	Posted - 2012.09.01 03:22:00 - [1] - Quote CCP.nothin wrote: [22:37] <@[CCP]nothin> I urge you guys to post in the forums about it, since there are conflicting opinions within the team on the topic :) [22:37] <@[CCP]nothin> make your voice heard This problem isn't going to go away by just sitting on our hands ignoring it. There are a ton of reasons that the AV nerf today was totally unwarranted. Remarks on the lackluster AV measures in Dust have circulated on the forums for a long time. Many of us have sat by, wisely by my estimation, waiting to see how grouping would affect the dynamics of AV versus vehicles. The time for waiting has passed. Nerfs to the range of the Forge Gun have made it practically useless in its intended role. The FG's primary advantage over the Swarm Launcher is that it had a long range and doesn't require a lock on to hit. Without that range, there's practically no reason to waste a Heavy's weapon slot on it. Some people complained that Forge Guns were "sniping" infantry. I never experienced that, but if it was a problem why wasn't the Swarm Launcher fix applied? The Forge Gun is a desperately needed AV tool, but with the range nerf it has been forced into the role of some sort of exotic shotgun. Anyone who thought to switch to the Swarm Launcher after the Forge Gun lost its steam, keep dreaming. Today's nerf to the Swarm Launcher's lock on range was completely unnecessary. All the SL's missiles hardly ever a tank because of the terrible AI pathing, and the missiles are easy to dodge already. At least the damage was about in line with expectations... Until today, when infantry lost 25% of its damage potential to vehicles. Was this because vehicles were going down too much? No. Were tank drivers complaining about AV? No. Did anyone from the community think that AV was broken? No. Well then, CCP must have a good reason why they changed the AV damage, then. I'd like to know what that reason is, wouldn't you? Let's look at the announcement post. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=282524#post282524 This underscores a trend that we can't let develop, because there IS NO EXPLANATION for the nerf. Just unilateral changing of a game mechanic that wasn't even broken. And you know what they say- if it ain't broke, don't fix it. We're here to do just this as beta testers. CCP have tried a change, and it's bad. We know it's bad. And we have the opportunity to fix it, right here, right now. If anything, the corporation battles today have made this issue extremely obvious. You haven't really met despair in Dust until you have 16 guys trying to train down a single Sagaris, and you can't do it. Make that 8 HAV's, and I can tell you from experience earlier today- it's zero fun for anybody. Grouping won't ever resolve this issue. If 16 guys dedicated to nothing except killing a single tank can't do it, I don't care how coordinated you are. It's not going to happen. CCP knows from Eve experience that changing the game without asking the community is just silly, and [CCP]nothin asked us to make our voices heard on the issue. So be a proper beta tester, and do just that. Don't just upvote people's posts and hope it gets better. Here's our chance. Post here or post somewhere else, POST ANYWHERE FFS. Just post and let CCP know that this is not the way we want Dust to go. Unless you want to SpamTanks514.
Ignatius Crumwald Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 475	Posted - 2012.09.01 03:24:00 - [2] - Quote I was trying, I asked those who cared to forego their 1mil SP bonuses for their participation in the now failed corp battles to hammer the point home. My fellow mercs told me to adapt. They called me a whiner. They called me a scrub - ME, really? Me... The richest man in Dust... So I went to play something else. I adapted.
Sleepy Zan Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 2048	Posted - 2012.09.01 03:27:00 - [3] - Quote AV nerf is bad... mmmK But seriously please return the swarms back to normal asap, I can sort of understand the AV grenade nerf because of the one shotting LAV issue, but all LAVs have to do is think before they run head first into an infantry unit and they will be alot better off.
RolyatDerTeufel D3ath D3alers RISE of LEGION 1648	Posted - 2012.09.01 03:34:00 - [4] - Quote Leither, TL;DR :P but agreed, AV weapon nerf is not a good thing at all.
Aqil Aegivan The Southern Legion 50	Posted - 2012.09.01 04:09:00 - [5] - Quote My thoughts on the topic go something like this. Why do we have AV weapons and grenades at all? What defines weapons which are put in the AV category? Either these weapons can be used to kill vehicles or they can't. If they can't then don't we just have a bunch of guns called AV weapons. If they kill some but not others then we have two types of AV, "anti light armor" which describes all the AV guns we have now and "anti heavy armor", which don't exist. People have been saying that while HAVs roll over everything now, wait until we get dedicated AV players. There are several problems with this position; First, we now have people who through bloody minded persistence have skilled for AV. Does anyone see them making a dent in the tide of tank drivers? No? Me neither. Second, skilling for AV makes you able to do one thing: Kill (weak) Vehicles. Skilling for armor lets you kill; Scouts. Assaults. Heavies. Other vehicles. Installations. And anyone who doesn't skill for heavy armor (believe it or not some people want this to play like an FPS) has to consign themself to getting steamrolled every time the armor shows up. Even if the number of people opting to take the arduous path of skilling for AV increased they would still be drowned in the sea of people taking the one skill fits all HAV path. Presumably everyone remembers the basics of "perfect imbalance"? Well a system where one thing beats all is the opposite of such a system. BTW, such a system is doomed to failure as a game, so, at this point the dev team is split on whether or not DUST514 should fail. Not a heartening fact. As an exercise, imagine that the battle finder worked and that we could stipulate certain conditions for the matches we play in. Now imagine we can search for battles where the vehicle cap is zero, or only LAVs and dropships are allowed. Can anyone reading this possibly believe that the vast majority of players won't be in the no HAV battles? Can anyone claim that these battles will be un-fun? I agree that they would be more fun with the option of HAVs if the HAVs were balanced but at present that is not possible. The devs could make it possible. If we don't get a serious set of buffs to AV (remove current nerfs and re-instate long range forge gun at minimum). Then it is easy to see what we have: EVE. A game where you cruise around in a vehicle, killing other vehicles. don't get me wrong, I like EVE. The problem is I already play EVE. I didn't come here from EVE to play EVE and I doubt the guys who are here to play an FPS came here to play EVE. If you are here to play EVE there is this game, it's out of beta and everything, it's called "EVE online".
Hollow Ling Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 32	Posted - 2012.09.01 05:08:00 - [6] - Quote We needed AV weapons(Forge Gun, and Swarm Launcher mostly)to be buffed in general in this build(IMO)
David Race Bannon Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 4	Posted - 2012.09.01 05:18:00 - [7] - Quote Hollow Ling wrote: We needed AV weapons(Forge Gun, and Swarm Launcher mostly)to be buffed in general in this build(IMO) I wonder why we can't have weapon customization with AV rounds. Different kinds of rounds for different situations, like how Mass Effect does it. That would be cool. I don't think it should be weapon-dependent, though. That becomes a pain because the developers then have to spend the time developing newer and newer kinds of weapons, which ultimately takes up more time and money than just going with a decent set of weapons with a nice variety of customization options. FWIW I think that's why they nerfed the AV weapons. Methinks they may be planning to bring out bigger and badder AV weapons in addition to what we've already seen so they tried to make all the initial AV weapons less powerful to compensate. That seems to be the most logical train of thought as far as developers go, but IMHO that's dumb. I'd rather they'd have just stuck with what they had or ditch AV weapons entirely so they can focus on AV mods for existing weapons, as I wrote about above.
Hollow Ling Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 32	Posted - 2012.09.01 05:31:00 - [8] - Quote David Race Bannon wrote: Hollow Ling wrote: We needed AV weapons(Forge Gun, and Swarm Launcher mostly)to be buffed in general in this build(IMO) I wonder why we can't have weapon customization with AV rounds. Different kinds of rounds for different situations, like how Mass Effect does it. That would be cool. I don't think it should be weapon-dependent, though. That becomes a pain because the developers then have to spend the time developing newer and newer kinds of weapons, which ultimately takes up more time and money than just going with a decent set of weapons with a nice variety of customization options. FWIW I think that's why they nerfed the AV weapons. Methinks they may be planning to bring out bigger and badder AV weapons in addition to what we've already seen so they tried to make all the initial AV weapons less powerful to compensate. That seems to be the most logical train of thought as far as developers go, but IMHO that's dumb. I'd rather they'd have just stuck with what they had or ditch AV weapons entirely so they can focus on AV mods for existing weapons, as I wrote about above. Pretty sure with racial weapons that we could have different kinds of rounds for AV weapons. But I HIGHLY doubt they would put in entirely new AV weapons......at least not any time soon.
Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.01 06:33:00 - [9] - Quote Some inCCP can read the future, when they look at the past build apparently. Here Tanks were the king of the game for a fairly long time, and all AV and Infantry people we screaming their heads of about them being OP. And they were at the time. Then what happened? People started speccing into AV gear, beyond the initial Militia weapons, and tanks started dying in droves, because AV gear were too cheap, too easy to use (skill point wise) and too powerful. This time, they increased the cost, but they also added a homing device on the AV grenades, and apparently a proximity fuse as well, as I've been hearing about people just dropping them on the road when a vehicle come at them....handheld mine = new RE spam. To balance things before they get out of hand, an AV nerf were needed. We can argue if they did too much, then again, when a few Militia fit swarm launchers can kill Madrugars and Gunnologies with relative ease, something has to change.
Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.01 06:57:00 - [10] - Quote Hollow Ling wrote: Pretty sure with racial weapons that we could have different kinds of rounds for AV weapons. But I HIGHLY doubt they would put in entirely new AV weapons......at least not any time soon. I'm almost certain we will get different types of ammo eventually. I just doubt it'll be before the release. It'll add a lot of complexity to the balancing of the weapons themselves, and it is obvious that many DUST testers come from other FPS games, and are unfamiliar with most of the terminologies and mechanics adopted from EVE so far, adding 8 types of ammo, in standard, tech 2, faction and other variants, with different sizes for different weapons for each of those, would be almost too much to handle for most. Just for hybrid ammo (the ones I have the most experience with) you have: 8 types, with different stats, damage profiles and flight characteristics. 4 sizes of each 6 Factional variants, of each (Tech 2 is for railguns and advanced blasters, they have 2 types each) For a look at EVE ammo and weapons, these pages should give people an idea: EVELOPEDIA: Ammunition & Charges And the EVELOPEDIA: Weapons Guide Specifically: Frequency Crystals (for Lasers, Amarr prefer these) Hybrid Charges (For blasters, Gallente prefer blasters, where Caldari uses the longer range railguns) Projectile Ammo (A Minmatar preference) and Missiles (Caldari have a thing for rockets and missiles) All in all, you can see that adding all the ammo would complicate things immensely :)

Leither Yiltron KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 417	Posted - 2012.09.01 07:07:00 - [11] - Quote Tanks have never died in "droves" in Dust514.
Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.01 07:17:00 - [12] - Quote Leither Yiltron wrote: Tanks have never died in "droves" in Dust514. True, and then again, not. Tanks are hard to kill, and should be. But I saw battles where 3-4 tanks owned the field in the previous build, but I also saw battles where Suryas and Sagarises died, in droves. 3-5 of them in some battles. And not poorly fitted ones either, people just managed to organize themselves and counter them. Just s you see friends squad up for a tank, imagine 4 people working in a permanent squad as AV specialists. We didn't even have that before.
Ignatius Crumwald Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 475	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:20:00 - [13] - Quote Dewie Cheecham wrote: Leither Yiltron wrote: Tanks have never died in "droves" in Dust514. True, and then again, not. Tanks are hard to kill, and should be. But I saw battles where 3-4 tanks owned the field in the previous build, but I also saw battles where Suryas and Sagarises died, in droves. 3-5 of them in some battles. And not poorly fitted ones either, people just managed to organize themselves and counter them. Just s you see friends squad up for a tank, imagine 4 people working in a permanent squad as AV specialists. We didn't even have that before. Are you even playing the same game as the rest of us? You simply cannot kill a Sagaris in this build without another tank. All AV has been nerfed down by two tiers - proto av does the same damage as standard in the last build did. Tanks should be ashamed to take the field.
Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:25:00 - [14] - Quote Ignatius Crumwald wrote: Dewie Cheecham wrote: Leither Yiltron wrote: Tanks have never died in "droves" in Dust514. True, and then again, not. Tanks are hard to kill, and should be. But I saw battles where 3-4 tanks owned the field in the previous build, but I also saw battles where Suryas and Sagarises died, in droves. 3-5 of them in some battles. And not poorly fitted ones either, people just managed to organize themselves and counter them. Just s you see friends squad up for a tank, imagine 4 people working in a permanent squad as AV specialists. We didn't even have that before. Are you even playing the same game as the rest of us? You simply cannot kill a Sagaris in this build without another tank. All AV has been nerfed down by two tiers - proto av does the same damage as standard in the last build did. Tanks should be ashamed to take the field. That much? I knew they took off 100 HP per rocket in an SL, have they nerfed all other AV even more? Edit: Btw, I were referring to the previous build in my comment. Where tanks were OP in the beginning, then became UP when AV became (too) prevalent.
Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2012.09.01 08:37:00 - [15] - Quote He said last build, it's much harder now. Last build I took out a standard hav, a surya and a sagaris, then a sica. This was one spawn in a few minutes time. The marauders came at me at same time, but most have been bad fits and/or drivers. No way I should have solo both at once, swarm kept alternating what tank it locked on. This build a militia tank is a threat, last build I could take them down with proto-smg since they weren't worth using av fit on.
Tailss Prower Pro Hic Immortalis RISE of LEGION 26	Posted - 2012.09.01 11:15:00 - [16] - Quote I use a dropship and think they were not needed however I think it should stay for the main reason of the av Grenade having that homing system as it basicly has become a overpowered ***** rocket hell get rid of the grenade and make it into a ***** rocket as it ain't a grenade if it can lock on and hit you now add like a detection system so if it senses a tank or lav or even a dropship if it was tossed into the air by blowing up when it senses them then yeah that would be good however the nerf is needed until they do something but this is just what I think and the range nerf on the forge I don't know since I don't use them but from what I seen they can hit me just fine with them so I don't see why so many are complaining about that now the swarm nerf is kinda fair since as a dropship pilot there is no dodging unless you can do a fast dive and upward climb and make them hit the rocks or ground......well if your lucky so that helps dropships since they can't get away half the time and outrunning them is a joke for the fact they follow you so easy and long and well it's stupid and sad so I agree with some changes and don't care for the others but again just what I think
Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.01 11:23:00 - [17] - Quote Looking at it now. I'd say everything were just fine, and as people gain SP, things would have balanced out on their own. The only thing I would have changed were the AV grenades, especially the P2W variants. Loose the homing feature and narrow the proximity fuse on the AV grenades, and lower the DMG of the P2W models.
Sha Kharn Clone Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1087	Posted - 2012.09.01 11:52:00 - [18] - Quote Tanks are super OP and are very very cheep. AV nerf was a dumb ass idea and those ccp team members should go have a word with themselfs. Ow and I'm a tank driver btw and its no fun anymore. No risk just reward its getting to feel like a day job. If its like this at release then I will have no choice but to go the lol tank route like everyone else that wants to stay ahead and that sucks cos I like being infantry
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:33:00 - [19] - Quote Tanks need a nerf, they're pretty overpowered. LAV's need a buff, they're a terrible transportation option because they can be destroyed so easily (especially because of the homing AV grenades) BPO LAV's should stay, but should have no turrets. If BPO LAVs are removed, then militia LAVs need a serious price cut. There should be a very cheap (or BPO) dropship with no turrets for the purpose of squad transportation.
Sha Kharn Clone Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1087	Posted - 2012.09.01 13:39:00 - [20] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Tanks need a nerf, they're pretty overpowered. LAV's need a buff, they're a terrible transportation option because they can be destroyed so easily (especially because of the homing AV grenades) BPO LAV's should stay, but should have no turrets. If BPO LAVs are removed, then militia LAVs need a serious price cut. There should be a very cheap (or BPO) dropship with no turrets for the purpose of squad transportation. Yea I think I like all this.

Rusty Shallows Creative Killers 11	Posted - 2012.09.01 18:42:00 - [21] - Quote Leither Yiltron wrote: Today's nerf to the Swarm Launcher's lock on range was completely unnecessary. 400M is a reduction? To be honest I thought it was an increase to combat Dropships.
Shadows Maker Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 129	Posted - 2012.09.01 19:04:00 - [22] - Quote we fight here for AV class buff and HAV users fight in IRC for AV nerf so i have decided to wait and see who wins then specialized in that class, yup if you can't beat them join them! meanwhile i'll support the rightful team the AV class.
Goliath Raven Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 80	Posted - 2012.09.01 22:24:00 - [23] - Quote HAV/Dropship pilot here. I will say this, one squad of dedicated AV protos should be able to take on a sagaris and at least make it run like kittens. Personally I feel that as a tank pilot, my 2 mill isk tank should not be able to be taken down by 300k totoal isk worth of equipment easily. I do think though that AV characters should get a LOT more sp for damaging a tank. Also the damaging determination needs to be drastically adjusted for shield tanks. If you get a sagaris shields down past 75% you should be rewarded with 10wp. 50%, 25wp, 10% 50wp. Kill 100wp. And similar rewards for armor tanks. Tanks should always have the ability to run away. They are expensive and cornering one to kill it should require good teamwork or a dumb tank pilot, but they should be able to be forced into retreat without having to switch and entire side to AV, unless that AV is militia grade. My opinion.
Chao Wolf Imperfects Negative-Feedback 209	Posted - 2012.09.01 22:50:00 - [24] - Quote As a dedicated heavy who has primarily speced into forge guns I feel completely useless now. The forge barely scratches HAVs. The only way to even have a chance is to use breach forge guns and they are suppose to be extremely effective av. After all they immobilize you while charging.
Tony Calif Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 2002	Posted - 2012.09.01 23:10:00 - [25] - Quote The AV Nerf has gone hand in hand with a Nerf to all high quality drop suits. Seems like someone at CCP doesn't want infantry in their game with super human clones. Just tanks. I haven't checked the suit stats except for assault & militia heavy, but it doesn't matter the damage you do when your dead after 1 shot.
Sees-Too-Much 332	Posted - 2012.09.01 23:17:00 - [26] - Quote Okay, you guys know that today's AV nerf was a temporary change to encourage more HAV on HAV engagements, right? They're trying to test the balance on those. I mean, it says temporary in the post. In bold. The explanation came up on IRC. I'm not surprised they didn't tell us. If we knew why they did it it might skew the results of the testing.
Tony Calif Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 2002	Posted - 2012.09.01 23:30:00 - [27] - Quote Well I can drop militia tanks about and the Devs can watch them explode going up against everyone else's proper tanks. Yay. They need to test this? Psssshh
Chao Wolf Imperfects Negative-Feedback 209	Posted - 2012.09.02 00:22:00 - [28] - Quote Sees-Too-Much wrote: Okay, you guys know that today's AV nerf was a temporary change to encourage more HAV on HAV engagements, right? They're trying to test the balance on those. I mean, it says temporary in the post. In bold. The explanation came up on IRC. I'm not surprised they didn't tell us. If we knew why they did it it might skew the results of the testing. here is an idea if they want to test certain combat types why not make contracts telling us what they want. Then at least people would know what they are getting into... And DON'T make it right at the start of a major competition. Personally I'm not even going to bother trying now cause my character is build for everything they beat the kitten out of with the nerf hammer.
Vesta Ren ZionTCD Legacy Rising 33	Posted - 2012.09.02 00:38:00 - [29] - Quote If you think tanks are overpowered, take the time to spec into a HAV and see how long you last. The only thing that has a chance to survive on the battlefield is a T2 buffer tanked sagaris. Thats like only being able to survive if your wearing prototype gear and being instantly slaughtered if you are wearing normal or advanced. Before you go talking about how OP vehicles are give them a try and you'll see that your wrong.
Buzzwords Deadly Blue Dots RISE of LEGION 416	Posted - 2012.09.02 00:49:00 - [30] - Quote Vesta Ren wrote: If you think tanks are overpowered, take the time to spec into a HAV and see how long you last. The only thing that has a chance to survive on the battlefield is a T2 buffer tanked sagaris. Thats like only being able to survive if your wearing prototype gear and being instantly slaughtered if you are wearing normal or advanced. Before you go talking about how OP vehicles are give them a try and you'll see that your wrong. bullshit. absolutely bullshit. i've lost 2 tanks since this change. one, to another tank, the other, to a disconnect. infantry are laughable. earlier today i had a bunch of infantry wailing on me with swarms and av grenades. i started to run... then i realized i had only lost 2/5ths of my shields... and hadn't used my booster yet. i literally said out loud to my squad mates "wait... why am i running?" i stopped the tank, turned it around, activated the booster, and murdered all the av guys. in the end, i was 100 shields under CAPPED. it really is laughable. i mean it's awesome, i get to be ***** godzilla on tank treads, rampaging through tokyo. i'm enjoying it greatly. but from a BALANCE perspective, it is MASSIVELY ****. EDIT: oh, and for the record, i'm still in a gunlogi.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.