DUST Search - Why does everyone forget there is a heavy handed nerf inbound?

STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote:

Drake Lyons wrote:

STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote:

Dewie I'm only responding to your number 10

Do you honestly believe that a good tank is worth the same as 26 good ARs? I'm not talking about who is using them or their effectiveness just their stand alone value. Currently the US pays about $673.10 for an M4 and about $8.5mil for an M1 Abrams.

M4 link

M1 Abrams link

To be fair, I really don't know what will happen once these items become a part of the EVE Universe. A decent Tier One frigate fitting - completely fitted - costs less than a good take hull now. I can't imagine spaceships will end up being less expensive than tanks.

Along the same lines, however, those frigates are a bit papery (~5K EHP vs. ~12-15K EHP) compared to tanks. So, either:
1) DUST weaponry is tremendously powerful, even compared to the weaponry in EVE. For example, a single piece of battleship class artillery firing a 1400mm shell will do approximately 400 damage with some skills and a couple buffs. And it will do that while consuming ammo and while firing - by default - roughly once every 40 seconds. Compare that to a swarm launcher or forge gun. If only I could mount those tiny little weapons on my frigates.

2) DUST will see an EHP and damage drop - across the board - to fit better with EVE.

Yeah major changes need to happen because most of the current pricing and weapon stats are a bit absurd when compared to EVE.

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2012.09.11 21:44:00 - [31] - Quote I just checked 2 pdu on sica, both gave 5% 2752 with 2 pdu, 2623 with 1 pdu, 2499 with no modules fit 2623/2499=1.04961984794 2752/2623=1.04918032787 Looks like it is 5% each, but stacking penalty is not applying(or it's much smaller then EvE's). Second module should be about 4.33% instead of 5%. When you removed skill bonus did you remove the skill bonus from increase from pdu? It adds to that too. All bonuses multiply, not add. AV nerf was temporary, looking forward to my swarms doing 350 damage instead of 250 again. Forge gun range is way to short, didn't devs say it was a glitch being fixed next build I can't remember. The forge should have range about like sniper rifle, just won't hit much at that range with the barrel shake and no scope. I think the plasma cannon will be the higher damage short range version, like sniper rifle(forge) to shotgun(plasma cannon) Vehicles take time to change speed now, they are increasing the time next build. I think lowering the max too. The marauder skill was spotted on eve market. This supports my theory prereq. was lowered for testing, instead of hav lv3 they will need lv5 to unlock marauder skill at train it to lv1 with x16 skill multiplier. So, about 6.145million to unlock sagaris, more needed to fit non-militia gear to it. 8 million more to get back damage bonus from last build with marauder skill lv 5.
Cerebral Wolf Jr Immobile Infantry 760	Posted - 2012.09.11 22:20:00 - [32] - Quote Dewie Cheecham wrote: In another thread (edit: about tanks) Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Why does everyone forget there is a heavy handed nerf inbound? One. what is there to forget, I have seen NO dev post on this. What is this about Why is it heavy handed And why don't we just nerf everything down to spears and swords while we are at it. At this rate a tank will cost as much as an EVE titan, have rice paper for armour and a kittening slingshot for main gun by the time we make the release. I see you're posting skills have not got any better, did you take my advice and invest some SP in your POASTING Skills?
xeto rak Epidemic. Space Immigration 23	Posted - 2012.09.11 22:30:00 - [33] - Quote This is bloody ridiculous... since CCP nerfed forge guns I have basically stopped playing... now more and more nerfing is on the way.... how about we just walk around smiling at each other, dancing and hugging because the poor babies are too afraid to get blown up? Just a simple message "**** to all nerf crying babies...". And for CCP, what are you smart people doing? creating a cool game or keeping up to never-ending requests for nerfing?
Sha Kharn Clone Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1087	Posted - 2012.09.11 22:35:00 - [34] - Quote Yep I'm hardly playing anymore and I'm a tank driver (this build only). Its a yawnfest in a tank atm
Shiro Mokuzan 220	Posted - 2012.09.11 22:37:00 - [35] - Quote Garl Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I smile EVERY time I see a tank driver get upset, about ANYTHING. As a tank driver, this makes me sad. I enjoy using tanks to help claim objectives. I use them as a barricade while my team hacks, and I've seen entire matches turn around because of good tank use. I feel this is the intended use of a tank, and I love it. Unfortunately, there are people who camp at the top of maps and do nothing but snipe, and this gives people a horrible impression of tanks. I see so much hate on these forums, and it's upsetting knowing that fulfilling a developer-granted role will earn me a negative stigma. Tanks are in this game for a reason. They're supposed to be used. But the second people see them they think you're just there for easy kills and trolling. I'm not saying we shouldn't be looking for ways to balance things out, but saying things like "I love to see them get upset!" is just trolling. tldr; You look ignorant when you troll. Same here. On the rare occasions I use tanks, I use them to support infantry in taking objectives and so on. The problem is most drivers just roam the map randomly looking for free kills. Tanks should excel at their role, but right now they excel at everything.
Cross Atu Conspiratus Immortalis 775	Posted - 2012.09.11 22:55:00 - [36] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: Tanks need narrower rolls, not less power/survivability in those roles. Truth (also note this is coming from a non-tank user and someone who doesn't have a consistent tank in squad). In point of fact I think the above is the needed address to many of the balance issue (and the majority of the nerf cries I've seen regardless of their direction). Having a gun, tank, class, skill, be tip top at something is good for game balance as long as that "something" is specialized not sweeping and general. Highly successful specilized roles leads to more fun, and for the record could included a highly successful "jack of all trades" (think a C+ to B- range of effect but across the boards ;) ). It's only broken when one thing is the best answer to many other things/in many situations. (i.e. when it harms game diversity and player options/choice)
Billi Gene Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 130	Posted - 2012.09.11 23:08:00 - [37] - Quote Shiro Mokuzan wrote: Garl Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I smile EVERY time I see a tank driver get upset, about ANYTHING. As a tank driver, this makes me sad. I enjoy using tanks to help claim objectives. I use them as a barricade while my team hacks, and I've seen entire matches turn around because of good tank use. I feel this is the intended use of a tank, and I love it. Unfortunately, there are people who camp at the top of maps and do nothing but snipe, and this gives people a horrible impression of tanks. I see so much hate on these forums, and it's upsetting knowing that fulfilling a developer-granted role will earn me a negative stigma. Tanks are in this game for a reason. They're supposed to be used. But the second people see them they think you're just there for easy kills and trolling. I'm not saying we shouldn't be looking for ways to balance things out, but saying things like "I love to see them get upset!" is just trolling. tldr; You look ignorant when you troll. Same here. On the rare occasions I use tanks, I use them to support infantry in taking objectives and so on. The problem is most drivers just roam the map randomly looking for free kills. Tanks should excel at their role, but right now they excel at everything. the reason people are getting angry at tank drivers, is because most tank drivers are griefing at this point. Tanks do not need infantry to take out AV, it still happens and infantry love killing poor helpless AV, but its not needed. In every ambush map for the past week, there has been at least one tank sitting mid map, denying free movement to infantry. You might say that the tank is doing its job, but i'd say its doing its job too easily. Perhaps after the AV nerfs are rolled back, and tank resistances are nerfed as needed, then tank fits will be less god like. Tanks should fear AV, and for good reason, AV are supposed to be the hard counter to tanks. The movement changes for tanks, are needed, they are currently the easiest vehicle to pilot, a role which should be reserved for the LAV. Dropships are no longer as common, now that it takes some degree of skill to keep one up under fire, and tanks should be the same. Not just any pleb should be jumping into a tank, it is a massive Ground vehicle, like a semi-tralier, and it should take skill to pilot and operate a tank in a battle situation. Yes tanks provide Area Denial, through blocking and thru damage. Changes to tanks should define these two paths separately, much like every other fittings choice in the game, it is a choice between EHP or damage/utility. Currently tanks can just stack EHP and damage is native to them. With changes to resist mods and perhaps native tank resists, tanks will have to stack harder then they do atm to achieve the same results.... and most likely will not be able to stack as high as they have been at the present. This will define a tank as anti-infantry or AV, and also define its counter measure as either other tanks or AV-infantry. Ewar and ECM/ECCM will bring more to the table, it will also make for harder fittings choices, especially until we get a feel for how these mods affect combat, and therefore which ecm/eccm are default fittings, but it won't just be happening to tanks alone. imho
Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.11 23:23:00 - [38] - Quote STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote: There are several reasons why HAVs are broken (random order) 1. Infinite ammo 2. 3 Gun Turrets 3. Driver can operate the main turret and drive (not sure if they can do both at the same time) 4. Railgun has far more range than Forge gun (7000m/s slug should have far more range) 5. Good shield tanks are virtually unaffected by AV nades 6. All AV is 25% weaker (genius idea) 7. No Skill requirements for being a tank gunner 8. Even at 12x its still to easy to skill into tanks (I believe its only level 3 for Sagris/Surya) 9. Tanks are far too rewarding for SP gains (assists for just being in the HAV and doing zero damage to target) 10. A good Sagris build is over 2mil and Duvolle AR is 77k (yeah the value 26 ARs is about the same as one tank) I could list more but... meh. Lol sorry ted and lurch. (I took the liberty to renumber the last few) 1. True. 2. Not so much. it is the RoF of the missiles that are the problem And their insane splash damage. 3. We can, but trust me, it is NOT easy. Oh, you can shoot easily enough, it is the hitting part that becomes an issue if you don't stand still... 4. I respectfully disagree. Though I've noticed one thing. The rail HAS been nerfed. Severely. Previously a rail gun blast was FAST. Meaning if you could see it, you could kill it. Now you actually see the slug, and it is not going on a straight line either, making hitting anything moving really hard. 5. There is something odd about shields. They have the same HP, but afar far higher resist than armour, making the Caldari tanks the only ones that I think may be a bit OP. 6. That one I kinda agree with, the AV nades got a homing feature instead. The only part of that nerf I outright disagree with is the limit of a 400m locking distance. We are back to the previous build, only now we can see what we can't shoot at. 7. Related to the vehicle stealing, I hope they fix it, as a gunner with no skills is useless. 8. Not too easy at all. A dedicated tank driver can run around for ages in militia gear only if he puts all his SP in tanks. It is not just the tank, but it has a lot of modules and weapons that are very expensive, both the skill books, and the SP. 9. Assists should probably be lowered for the pilot, and none for the gunners, only their own kills. Same with DS. Even people in the four corners of the DS deck get assists. No wonder they are almost always full. 10. Tanks are too expensive already. Yes, they pretty much own the battlefield, especially i the team have 3 or more, covering each other. Don't make them more expensive, but limit their number by map size.
STB-stlcarlos989 EV Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 936	Posted - 2012.09.11 23:38:00 - [39] - Quote Dewie I'm only responding to your number 10 Do you honestly believe that a good tank is worth the same as 26 good ARs? I'm not talking about who is using them or their effectiveness just their stand alone value. Currently the US pays about $673.10 for an M4 and about $8.5mil for an M1 Abrams. M4 link M1 Abrams link
Tbone322 D3ath D3alers RISE of LEGION 124	Posted - 2012.09.11 23:39:00 - [40] - Quote In my opinion buff the forge gun, but don't buff the swarms too much. If you buff the swarms too much they will make dropships completely unusable.

Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.12 00:05:00 - [41] - Quote STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote: Dewie I'm only responding to your number 10 Do you honestly believe that a good tank is worth the same as 26 good ARs? I'm not talking about who is using them or their effectiveness just their stand alone value. Currently the US pays about $673.10 for an M4 and about $8.5mil for an M1 Abrams. M4 link M1 Abrams link Lower the cost of the AR then. The tanks are already at or above the pain threshold for most.
Billi Gene Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 130	Posted - 2012.09.12 00:06:00 - [42] - Quote .... if cost = survivability there wouldn't be suicide ganking. strawman argument is strawman
Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.12 00:06:00 - [43] - Quote Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote: I see you're posting skills have not got any better, did you take my advice and invest some SP in your POASTING Skills? Apparently you didn't take your own advice. And you certainly lack people skills. And if I have a typo or two in a post, doesn't invalidate the rest.
Cerebral Wolf Jr Immobile Infantry 760	Posted - 2012.09.12 01:16:00 - [44] - Quote Dewie Cheecham wrote: Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote: I see you're posting skills have not got any better, did you take my advice and invest some SP in your POASTING Skills? Apparently you didn't take your own advice. And you certainly lack people skills. And if I have a typo or two in a post, doesn't invalidate the rest. I'm not talking about typos etc i'm talking about your posts being terrible full stop. I'm not here for people skills, i'm here to beta test and part of that beta testing is to pay attention to what CCP are doing with the game and to test it, that includes being aware of the incoming HAV nerfs, Why they are doing it, how they are doing it and how it stacks up to the rest of the game. All points you clearly seem to miss... First of all, anyone who's active in the community, posts on the forums and is generally doing their part of the beta testing knows that the HAV's are getting nerfed, or more specifically that their modules are getting a massive nerf while the hull's themselves are getting tweaked. They also know WHY they are getting nerfed, because they are practically impossible to kill with the current AV tweaks that are in effect. If you was active and had half a brain you'd also know that bitching about prices for AR's and the HAV's is a totally moot point because once the market goes live those prices will NOT stay as they are, they will go up or down depending on how much people value a particular item. or as it's typically known as... supply and demand. HAV's will go UP in price if they are over powered as everyone buys them or go DOWN and be worth peanuts if they get popped by a single grenade because nobody will be using them. The same will happen with Rifles, using the current build for an example, Burst AR's will be worth a LOT less than you're typical variant because they are useless and people avoid them like the plague, hence driving up the price of typical AR's while lowering the price of Burst variants. Any argument you make about price points is a waste of time because while it maybe an issue currently, it won't be an issue for long and the markets will manage themselves so it's impossible for you to use ISK in any type of balance comparison.
Drake Lyons Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 209	Posted - 2012.09.12 03:24:00 - [45] - Quote STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote: Dewie I'm only responding to your number 10 Do you honestly believe that a good tank is worth the same as 26 good ARs? I'm not talking about who is using them or their effectiveness just their stand alone value. Currently the US pays about $673.10 for an M4 and about $8.5mil for an M1 Abrams. M4 link M1 Abrams link To be fair, I really don't know what will happen once these items become a part of the EVE Universe. A decent Tier One frigate fitting - completely fitted - costs less than a good take hull now. I can't imagine spaceships will end up being less expensive than tanks. Along the same lines, however, those frigates are a bit papery (~5K EHP vs. ~12-15K EHP) compared to tanks. So, either: 1) DUST weaponry is tremendously powerful, even compared to the weaponry in EVE. For example, a single piece of battleship class artillery firing a 1400mm shell will do approximately 400 damage with some skills and a couple buffs. And it will do that while consuming ammo and while firing - by default - roughly once every 40 seconds. Compare that to a swarm launcher or forge gun. If only I could mount those tiny little weapons on my frigates. 2) DUST will see an EHP and damage drop - across the board - to fit better with EVE.
STB-stlcarlos989 EV Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 936	Posted - 2012.09.12 04:33:00 - [46] - Quote Drake Lyons wrote: STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote: Dewie I'm only responding to your number 10 Do you honestly believe that a good tank is worth the same as 26 good ARs? I'm not talking about who is using them or their effectiveness just their stand alone value. Currently the US pays about $673.10 for an M4 and about $8.5mil for an M1 Abrams. M4 link M1 Abrams link To be fair, I really don't know what will happen once these items become a part of the EVE Universe. A decent Tier One frigate fitting - completely fitted - costs less than a good take hull now. I can't imagine spaceships will end up being less expensive than tanks. Along the same lines, however, those frigates are a bit papery (~5K EHP vs. ~12-15K EHP) compared to tanks. So, either: 1) DUST weaponry is tremendously powerful, even compared to the weaponry in EVE. For example, a single piece of battleship class artillery firing a 1400mm shell will do approximately 400 damage with some skills and a couple buffs. And it will do that while consuming ammo and while firing - by default - roughly once every 40 seconds. Compare that to a swarm launcher or forge gun. If only I could mount those tiny little weapons on my frigates. 2) DUST will see an EHP and damage drop - across the board - to fit better with EVE. Yeah major changes need to happen because most of the current pricing and weapon stats are a bit absurd when compared to EVE.
STB Vermaak Doe 558	Posted - 2012.09.12 04:37:00 - [47] - Quote Drake Lyons wrote: STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote: Dewie I'm only responding to your number 10 Do you honestly believe that a good tank is worth the same as 26 good ARs? I'm not talking about who is using them or their effectiveness just their stand alone value. Currently the US pays about $673.10 for an M4 and about $8.5mil for an M1 Abrams. M4 link M1 Abrams link To be fair, I really don't know what will happen once these items become a part of the EVE Universe. A decent Tier One frigate fitting - completely fitted - costs less than a good take hull now. I can't imagine spaceships will end up being less expensive than tanks. Along the same lines, however, those frigates are a bit papery (~5K EHP vs. ~12-15K EHP) compared to tanks. So, either: 1) DUST weaponry is tremendously powerful, even compared to the weaponry in EVE. For example, a single piece of battleship class artillery firing a 1400mm shell will do approximately 400 damage with some skills and a couple buffs. And it will do that while consuming ammo and while firing - by default - roughly once every 40 seconds. Compare that to a swarm launcher or forge gun. If only I could mount those tiny little weapons on my frigates. 2) DUST will see an EHP and damage drop - across the board - to fit better with EVE. I read somewhere that dust armour compared to Eve armour is on a different scale, as in one point of eve armour equals hundreds of dust armou, and something similar for weapons
Celestial3 Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 11	Posted - 2012.09.12 04:41:00 - [48] - Quote It's funny to me to see how some people jump to the complete opposite end of the spectrum to validate their argument. "Well if you nerf this then they'll just nerf everything and the game will become a glorified pillow fight." The game has to be fun for everyone that plays or else this game won't last long period. And the answer shouldn't be tanks should be the killing machine they are because thats how they are in real life. AR bullets don't travel farther than HMG, it's a game and certain liberties should be made to make this game enjoyable for more people. In this current build it's not even fun to be on the winning side with five tanks, especially when it drives people to quit and you're just sitting there waiting for the match to be over. Changes are coming as they emplement more aspects to the game. Maybe it'll balance it out, maybe it won't but right now I think majority of players know something needs to be done.
Encharrion L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 104	Posted - 2012.09.12 07:37:00 - [49] - Quote STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote: Drake Lyons wrote: STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote: Dewie I'm only responding to your number 10 Do you honestly believe that a good tank is worth the same as 26 good ARs? I'm not talking about who is using them or their effectiveness just their stand alone value. Currently the US pays about $673.10 for an M4 and about $8.5mil for an M1 Abrams. M4 link M1 Abrams link To be fair, I really don't know what will happen once these items become a part of the EVE Universe. A decent Tier One frigate fitting - completely fitted - costs less than a good take hull now. I can't imagine spaceships will end up being less expensive than tanks. Along the same lines, however, those frigates are a bit papery (~5K EHP vs. ~12-15K EHP) compared to tanks. So, either: 1) DUST weaponry is tremendously powerful, even compared to the weaponry in EVE. For example, a single piece of battleship class artillery firing a 1400mm shell will do approximately 400 damage with some skills and a couple buffs. And it will do that while consuming ammo and while firing - by default - roughly once every 40 seconds. Compare that to a swarm launcher or forge gun. If only I could mount those tiny little weapons on my frigates. 2) DUST will see an EHP and damage drop - across the board - to fit better with EVE. Yeah major changes need to happen because most of the current pricing and weapon stats are a bit absurd when compared to EVE. It is irrelevant how Dust damage or ehp compares to EVE ships or weaponry, we aren't going to be shooting EVE ships with our assault rifles and forge guns are we? It's an arbitrary measurement, and the only time we need to worry about the relationship between Dust hp and EVE hp is with orbital bombardments, at which point I'm sure the damage from the ship's guns will be translated into an appropriate amount of damage in Dust.
Dewie Cheecham Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 677	Posted - 2012.09.12 08:14:00 - [50] - Quote Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote: Dewie Cheecham wrote: Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote: I see you're posting skills have not got any better, did you take my advice and invest some SP in your POASTING Skills? Apparently you didn't take your own advice. And you certainly lack people skills. And if I have a typo or two in a post, doesn't invalidate the rest. I'm not talking about typos etc i'm talking about your posts being terrible full stop. I'm not here for people skills, i'm here to beta test and part of that beta testing is to pay attention to what CCP are doing with the game and to test it, that includes being aware of the incoming HAV nerfs, Why they are doing it, how they are doing it and how it stacks up to the rest of the game. All points you clearly seem to miss... You disagreeing with me, does not automatically make you right. Stay on topic. The only thing I can take away from your post, is that your name is .. just wrong. Jr. Maybe, but cerebral? hardly. This IS a beta, true, and this beta used to find the balance of the game mechanics. I'm merely trying to protect the assets I prefer to use from being nerfed into oblivion by a large mob of nincompoops who just want to get their gun game on, making Dust another CoDfish.

Cerebral Wolf Jr Immobile Infantry 760	Posted - 2012.09.12 13:02:00 - [51] - Quote I see you only pay attention to the parts that you can have an argument against and totally ignore the points i made about you being a total idiot for comparing ISK values?... I see you must be american too to result to name calling and thinking that it's a valid argument for your points. Fact is, Tanks are OP and are getting nerfed, i promise you, CCP know's what they are doing and where they are going and tanks will not be paper thin when CCP is finished but they may require a bit of strategy and skill to play after the nerfs to make use of the modules correctly and when to use them.


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