|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
General Rian
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
10
   |
Posted - 2012.09.11 18:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
Whispercrow wrote: Shield Resist Amps and the Damage Control should not add to each other. They should follow the rule of diminishing returns, exactly as they do in EVE.
I'm fine with a tank resisting 50% of all damage. Resisting 80%? That's just nuts.
Damage controls in Eve are not affected by armor/shield hardeners in Eve. They apply their full resistance boost, and hardeners apply their full boost (with stacking penalties for additional hardeners obviously)...
And even with the best Damage control and 3x 25% resistance mods on my HAVs... awell put together squad/group (3-4 players) can turn my HAV into Swiss cheese. All you people are doing is whining. And when HAVs get nerfed into the ground to the point of useless (like you people seem to want), people will just stop using them... and CCP will be forced to return them to what they were pre-nerf where they should have stayed.
|
General Rian
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 19:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Scholar Him wrote:Gooly wrote:I still think the solution is needing more than one player for a tank to work so they're not just giant win buttons and become more of a strategic deployment. Exactly. If it take 4 players to kill a tank, it should take 4 players to operate a tank. Fair should be fair, in a game at least.
That would only be fair if the tank and the AV suits were both free. There's plenty of balance currently.
3 people in a tank vs 4 people on the ground. It takes 1 more person to take out the tank because the tank is *usually* far more expensive than the 4 AV suits being used to take it out. I'm talking reasonably fit suits and a reasonably fit tank. Obviously going cheaper on either shoves the favor into the other side's favor. |
General Rian
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 23:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
Billi Gene wrote:/confused how many suicide gankers does it take to bring a mining barge down? cost =/= survivability <--strawman? 
The best you can do is bring up an aspect of Eve that CCP was readily willing to admit was flawed? You do know they patched/updated the mining barges for that very reason right? The core idea behind Eve is that increased cost brings increased reward, but also increases your risk... regardless of the occasional thing that goes against this, it still is what Eve is all about.
Dust is following a pattern of going right along that same patch. Increased cost for a vehicle should most certainly give the player benefits that someone unwilling to invest as much isk should not receive. A tank isn't cheap, so it should be tough and it should do substantially more damage than an infantry player should be able to do. This game isn't about fair... it's about winning. And in this game, the side willing to risk more isk *SHOULD* have an advantage over the enemy proportionate to how much more they risk.
But alas, all you guys are going to do is scream "nerf". And if you get what you want, HAVs will just be nerfed into the ground to the point of no one wanting to use them. Even more so when CCP introduces more weapons, airships geared directly for combat, etc etc. |
|
|
| |
|