Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Alldin Kan
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
169
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 18:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
Fix this:
Step 1: LAV goes near depot, hard to reach area or in plain view. Step 2: Squad leaders use defend order on LAV. Step 3: Give little to no use of the LAV. Step 4: Obtain massive points of Squad Commision by any means.
Effect: Gain quick orbital strikes, SP and WP. |
Mobius Kaethis
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
306
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 19:29:00 -
[2] - Quote
Alldin Kan wrote:Fix this:
Step 1: LAV goes near depot, hard to reach area or in plain view. Step 2: Squad leaders use defend order on LAV. Step 3: Give little to no use of the LAV. Step 4: Obtain massive points of Squad Commision by any means.
Effect: Gain quick orbital strikes, SP and WP.
This is not an exploit it is smart play. |
Paran Tadec
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
902
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 19:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
Alldin Kan wrote:Fix this:
Step 1: LAV goes near depot, hard to reach area or in plain view. Step 2: Squad leaders use defend order on LAV. Step 3: Give little to no use of the LAV. Step 4: Obtain massive points of Squad Commision by any means.
Effect: Gain quick orbital strikes, SP and WP.
Exploit are the guys who sit in the back of their base damaging and repairing a LAV. YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE. They got 4 precision strikes in 20 seconds, but still couldn't hit my tank. |
Alldin Kan
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
169
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 19:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mobius Kaethis wrote:Alldin Kan wrote:Fix this:
Step 1: LAV goes near depot, hard to reach area or in plain view. Step 2: Squad leaders use defend order on LAV. Step 3: Give little to no use of the LAV. Step 4: Obtain massive points of Squad Commision by any means.
Effect: Gain quick orbital strikes, SP and WP. This is not an exploit it is smart play.
>implying that defending a LAV with no driver makes sense in Dust |
Timothy Reaper
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
321
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 19:46:00 -
[5] - Quote
Why put an LAV near a supply depot when you can set the order on the supply depot itself? |
STB Vermaak Doe
558
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 20:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
Still not an exploit |
Jotun Hiem
24
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 20:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
Timothy Reaper wrote:Why put an LAV near a supply depot when you can set the order on the supply depot itself?
|
Paran Tadec
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
902
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 21:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
Timothy Reaper wrote:Why put an LAV near a supply depot when you can set the order on the supply depot itself?
You get more points. Even better with a tank. |
Nyefari
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 21:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
Paran Tadec wrote:Timothy Reaper wrote:Why put an LAV near a supply depot when you can set the order on the supply depot itself? You get more points. Even better with a tank.
Is it really? that is good to know indeed.
And I think the real "fix" for this would be to make the extra points for a defend order constant. |
J'Jor Da'Wg
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
648
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 22:32:00 -
[10] - Quote
Its not an exploit, any more than putting the frago on the supply depot and gettin points for that is. |
|
Mobius Wyvern
BetaMax.
1216
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 22:34:00 -
[11] - Quote
J'Jor Da'Wg wrote:Its not an exploit, any more than putting the frago on the supply depot and gettin points for that is. Damaging and repairing it with the Defend order on it is an exploit. Shooting people around it is not. |
Typo Name
78
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 00:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
or just defend the depot |
Stile451
Red Star.
76
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 02:54:00 -
[13] - Quote
We need to be able to set a defend order on vehicles but not necessarily unmanned vehicles. |
The dark cloud
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
1060
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 03:47:00 -
[14] - Quote
reason for this is that you get only 90 points for a kill while the frago is on the supply depot however you get 125 points for a kill when the defend frago is on a vehicle like an LAV. Thats the reason for it and if you dont like it that the LAV is sitting there call in your own militia LAV thats totally for free. |
Goric Rumis
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
80
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 21:45:00 -
[15] - Quote
It qualifies as an exploit from the perspective that you're using the LAV for a benefit for which it isn't intended, diverting players from more meaningful interaction. The bonus is meant to reward strategic play, not to reward people for dropping vehicles.
Bonus points for defending a vehicle shouldn't be any more than bonus points for defending any other strategic point, IMHO. That way people wouldn't be parking unnecessary vehicles near strategic structures, and instead would place the order on the structure itself. I wasn't aware vehicle defenses gave bigger bonuses than point defenses, and that doesn't seem right. Maybe even backwards.
If people are getting bonus points for parking a vehicle in the safe zone and then fighting anywhere on the map, that's clearly an exploit. (I'm not clear whether this is what's happening, I haven't tried parking and leaving a vehicle with a defend order on it.) If so, it could be fixed by either having to be within proximity of the vehicle, the enemy you kill being in proximity of the vehicle, or the enemy you kill attempting to attack the vehicle, in order to get the bonus.
Not that big a deal overall, though, as long as people are still playing and not sitting in the safe zone. This will probably become less popular anyway if they choose to get rid of free vehicles altogether, as I would expect for the final release. At present there's no risk to dropping a militia LAV. |
STB Vermaak Doe
558
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 21:48:00 -
[16] - Quote
Goric Rumis wrote:It qualifies as an exploit from the perspective that you're using the LAV for a benefit for which it isn't intended, diverting players from more meaningful interaction. The bonus is meant to reward strategic play, not to reward people for dropping vehicles.
Bonus points for defending a vehicle shouldn't be any more than bonus points for defending any other strategic point, IMHO. That way people wouldn't be parking unnecessary vehicles near strategic structures, and instead would place the order on the structure itself. I wasn't aware vehicle defenses gave bigger bonuses than point defenses, and that doesn't seem right. Maybe even backwards.
If people are getting bonus points for parking a vehicle in the safe zone and then fighting anywhere on the map, that's clearly an exploit. (I'm not clear whether this is what's happening, I haven't tried parking and leaving a vehicle with a defend order on it.) If so, it could be fixed by either having to be within proximity of the vehicle, the enemy you kill being in proximity of the vehicle, or the enemy you kill attempting to attack the vehicle, in order to get the bonus.
Not that big a deal overall, though, as long as people are still playing and not sitting in the safe zone. This will probably become less popular anyway if they choose to get rid of free vehicles altogether, as I would expect for the final release. At present there's no risk to dropping a militia LAV.
I find what you call an exploit an adaptation to get things done faster and more efficient |
Goric Rumis
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
80
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 22:22:00 -
[17] - Quote
STB Vermaak Doe wrote:I find what you call an exploit an adaptation to get things done faster and more efficient Please explain.
EDIT: I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just interested in knowing how you think this improves gameplay. Right now it only seems to me like it subverts it, but maybe I'm just not looking at it the right way. |
SYST3M 0V3RL0AD
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
209
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 22:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
I actually use this tactic every chance i get. I don't consider it an exploit. Here's some random thoughts on it:
-Marked structures should give the same amount of points as a marked vehicle if the vehicle is empty. If there is someone inside, then it receives an additional bonus. Vehicles are easy to blow up. More risk, more reward. -If a map does not have a markeable structure, the vehicle method is valid. Again, manned. -RDV's should not be able to place vehicles on buildings. LAVs and HAVs do not belong on the tops of buildings. Currently a vehicle on the roof will give points to troops on the ground even if that roof is 100 feet high. Not so fair considering it's difficult to blow up.
If i think of anything else i'll adjust this post. |
Goric Rumis
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
80
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 00:17:00 -
[19] - Quote
I could get behind those changes. However, I'd still question whether it serves the purpose of making orders if this means it's always a better idea to set a defend order on a vehicle rather than setting an objective to capture or destroy. These seem like more useful orders in the context of a battle, at least on a skirmish map.
What it comes down to is this: If your squad leader gives an order and you're supposed to get bonus points for following that order, then getting bonus points when you don't follow that order defeats the purpose. If that's what's happening here--i.e., people are dropping LAVs just to get bonus points for defending them, while actually leaving them undefended--then I think that's a problem. Not a game breaker, but a minor problem that should get fixed.
If, on the other hand, you're dropping a LAV in the middle of the battlefield to define a strategic point that isn't already marked by an installation, and your squad is getting bonus points for trying to hold that point, I would consider that a "workaround" and not an "exploit." Maybe in the future we can use some form of heavy deployable equipment to serve this purpose instead of dropping vehicles, but for now, this seems perfectly legitimate. |
SYST3M 0V3RL0AD
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
209
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 00:41:00 -
[20] - Quote
Goric Rumis wrote:I could get behind those changes. However, I'd still question whether it serves the purpose of making orders if this means it's always a better idea to set a defend order on a vehicle rather than setting an objective to capture or destroy. These seem like more useful orders in the context of a battle, at least on a skirmish map.
What it comes down to is this: If your squad leader gives an order and you're supposed to get bonus points for following that order, then getting bonus points when you don't follow that order defeats the purpose. If that's what's happening here--i.e., people are dropping LAVs just to get bonus points for defending them, while actually leaving them undefended--then I think that's a problem. Not a game breaker, but a minor problem that should get fixed.
If, on the other hand, you're dropping a LAV in the middle of the battlefield to define a strategic point that isn't already marked by an installation, and your squad is getting bonus points for trying to hold that point, I would consider that a "workaround" and not an "exploit." Maybe in the future we can use some form of heavy deployable equipment to serve this purpose instead of dropping vehicles, but for now, this seems perfectly legitimate.
Most people like myself use them if there is no supply or structure to to put an order on. Some people will drop an LAV right beside the supply or structure and put an order on it to get more points. Technically they are still defending the depot they are stationed at and by default also protecting the vehicle that is next to it. I don't have an issue with it. But the fixes i proposed above would be beneficial. |
|
Foldenfly
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
81
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 00:47:00 -
[21] - Quote
Goric Rumis wrote:I could get behind those changes. However, I'd still question whether it serves the purpose of making orders if this means it's always a better idea to set a defend order on a vehicle rather than setting an objective to capture or destroy. These seem like more useful orders in the context of a battle, at least on a skirmish map.
What it comes down to is this: If your squad leader gives an order and you're supposed to get bonus points for following that order, then getting bonus points when you don't follow that order defeats the purpose. If that's what's happening here--i.e., people are dropping LAVs just to get bonus points for defending them, while actually leaving them undefended--then I think that's a problem. Not a game breaker, but a minor problem that should get fixed.
If, on the other hand, you're dropping a LAV in the middle of the battlefield to define a strategic point that isn't already marked by an installation, and your squad is getting bonus points for trying to hold that point, I would consider that a "workaround" and not an "exploit." Maybe in the future we can use some form of heavy deployable equipment to serve this purpose instead of dropping vehicles, but for now, this seems perfectly legitimate.
It's my understanding, and from the looks of the market, that we are eventually going to be able to deploy installations like turrets and such. |
SYST3M 0V3RL0AD
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
209
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 00:56:00 -
[22] - Quote
Foldenfly wrote: It's my understanding, and from the looks of the market, that we are eventually going to be able to deploy installations like turrets and such.
Yea, Soon(tm). That (tm) is the problem. lol.
|
Mobius Kaethis
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
306
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 01:12:00 -
[23] - Quote
Yes, and once that happens people probsbly won't call LAV in just to set a defend point. Until then we are going to call the LAV so we can set useful FRAGO away from markable objectives.
A fix for this would be to make it so a squad leader can place a defend/attack order at any location on the map. This would enable strategic use of the squad order system to encourage team play through increased WP while diminishing the need to use an unmanned LAV. |
Longshot Ravenwood
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
680
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 02:34:00 -
[24] - Quote
Guess how quickly they'll lose their bonuses when you send a few av grenades, swarms, or forge rounds at it?
SoonGäó
I would like to see extra points for the opposing team when they break an order. Something specific to the person who accomplishes the task. If they're defending an objective, getting bonus points for hacking through it or blowing it up/killing it/etc... Maybe like a final bonus to add on when sp is being totaled at the end. Quick before then, no bonus. Etc... |
Volek Tahn
Greatness Achieved Through Training
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 02:39:00 -
[25] - Quote
I LOVE popping LAVs with my assault forge gun. Set all the defend orders you want. They won't be there for long if I've got a forge gun in my hands. Unless someone shoots me in the back with a shotgun or something :D |
Billi Gene
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
130
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 03:55:00 -
[26] - Quote
Volek Tahn wrote:I LOVE popping LAVs with my assault forge gun. Set all the defend orders you want. They won't be there for long if I've got a forge gun in my hands. Unless someone shoots me in the back with a shotgun or something :D
basically this.
an unmanned LAV is so obviously netting the team Defend Order bonuses, that its a must kill target.
|
Timothy Reaper
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
321
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 05:24:00 -
[27] - Quote
Goric Rumis wrote:STB Vermaak Doe wrote:I find what you call an exploit an adaptation to get things done faster and more efficient Please explain. EDIT: I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just interested in knowing how you think this improves gameplay. Right now it only seems to me like it subverts it, but maybe I'm just not looking at it the right way. One of the biggest complaints I read about the Ambush matches is the random spawns points. If you can set up a base camp with drop uplinks inside then this problem is solved. But you can't set a defend order on a drop uplink, and you don't get any points for orders set on people. So, if there are no 'defendable' structures, your best option (at the moment) is to call in a vehicle. For some reason the orders only take into account length and width, but not depth. If you're within X meters of the order on the overhead map you get points, even if you're hundreds of meters below the defend point. This should probably be fixed.
Longshot Ravenwood wrote:I would like to see extra points for the opposing team when they break an order. Something specific to the person who accomplishes the task. If they're defending an objective, getting bonus points for hacking through it or blowing it up/killing it/etc... That's what attack/capture orders are for. |
Ima Leet
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
321
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 13:48:00 -
[28] - Quote
lmao, little girls will cry about anything and everything wont they? |
RedBleach
50
|
Posted - 2012.10.01 03:15:00 -
[29] - Quote
[/quote]One of the biggest complaints I read about the Ambush matches is the random spawns points. If you can set up a base camp with drop uplinks inside then this problem is solved. But you can't set a defend order on a drop uplink, and you don't get any points for orders set on people. So, if there are no 'defendable' structures, your best option (at the moment) is to call in a vehicle. For some reason the orders only take into account length and width, but not depth. If you're within X meters of the order on the overhead map you get points, even if you're hundreds of meters below the defend point. This should probably be fixed.
Longshot Ravenwood wrote:I would like to see extra points for the opposing team when they break an order. Something specific to the person who accomplishes the task. If they're defending an objective, getting bonus points for hacking through it or blowing it up/killing it/etc... That's what attack/capture orders are for.[/quote]
Are you reccommending setting a depth limit? How far? What is the range? 50ft or 100ft? Problems arise when you are guarding a point in a structure. If the point is at the top and you are blocking the lowerlevel entrances and you are well away from the point to defend in 3d space one would complain that they were not receiving bonuses for that defense.
Also think of the map. How is one to set a point in 3d space with a 2d map? Set it from the ground in 1st person view i guess but will that cover your air support? or snipers? No. Width and length are sufficient.
True there are some problems... so adapt, exploit, and overcome. If there is a tank on a roof call in a dropship or have an AV Forger find high ground in order to hit it. This is not a dumbed down shooter. Use what is available for tactical superiority and send the defeated home to cry. (i'll admit i've cried sometimes) |
Necrodermis
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
460
|
Posted - 2012.10.01 03:23:00 -
[30] - Quote
Alldin Kan wrote:Fix this:
Step 1: LAV goes near depot, hard to reach area or in plain view. Step 2: Squad leaders use defend order on LAV. Step 3: Give little to no use of the LAV. Step 4: Obtain massive points of Squad Commision by any means.
Effect: Gain quick orbital strikes, SP and WP. isn't that what everyone does.
sniper teams would do this all the time call in a free LAV on top of the tower place defend order and get loads of bombardments as they snipe everyone |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |