| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
   |
Posted - 2012.12.15 17:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
Investment protection:
In my opinion the main crew of the dropship and lav (pilot/gunner, possibly the lav passenger) shouldn't be able to get shot out of the vehicles, the vehicles should have to be destroyed or they should have to jump out of it to be killed. I'm against this applying to the militia and starter because that would just cause more starter lav spam. It also shouldn't apply to the dropship passengers because they're already protected by the doors and it would give people more of a reason to stay in dropships all day. For the lav, I'm a bit indecisive on passenger protection.
Slight combat utility:
I think that drivers should get a bit of personal defense. As a module I think that mounted, driver controlled weapons that perform sub par to the light weapon they fill the role of for the same level (standard rocket pods weaker than swarm launchers but not by much). It would make drivers a bit more self reliant but not to the point where a gunner is an after thought. The only weapons I can think to model this off of are the swarm launcher, assault rifle, hmg, and laser rifle.
Logistic vehicle alteration:
The lav needs to receive a special reduction for the pg/cpu requirements of heavy repairers to the point where they take up the pg/cpu of the regular repairers, it's inexcusable for the logistics lavs not to be the most powerful repairer. The logistics dropshi needs a pg/cpu buff along with the removal of the built in mcru, non militia mcrus, another high slot added to both dropships and reduced mcru pg/cpu needs |
Jason Pearson
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
742
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 17:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
I disagree with both suggestions.
No need for protecting passengers, the ability to shoot them out is brilliant and shouldn't be removed.
No to giving drivers the ability to fire weapons themselves, it'll be bad, we both know that. |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 17:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
So basically you're saying everyone should be able to be shot out of there vehicles including people (including me) with million ISK tanks
Again, that's like saying tank drivers shouldn't be able to use there own guns |
Jason Pearson
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
742
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 17:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Vermaak Kuvakei wrote:So basically you're saying everyone should be able to be shot out of there vehicles including people (including me) with million ISK tanks Never said a Tank Driver should be shot out, I do believe Tank passengers should be able to be killed somehow.
Quote:
Again, that's like saying tank drivers shouldn't be able to use there own guns
That's exactly what I'm saying. I'm in the "Tanks should be 4 man vehicles with a separate driver and main gunner" Camp.
Oh and, yeah I pilot, I drive Tanks (Nearly got my Sagaris, focusing more on Assault now though) and I play as an assault troop. |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 17:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
You didn't say that but you implied it by saying lav drivers/ gunners for both should stay exposed. They should require actual Av to take down.
I could live without the gun but it's common sense that all pilots should have a form of self defense that for balance purposes is weaker than equal meta weapons as since they'll be the ones driving, they know exactly where to aim and where enemy fire is coming from
|
ugg reset
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
234
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 21:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
Some doors on the LAV would be nice. considering the size and location of the weak point on the LAVs armor i don't think it's to much to ask for. |
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
389
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 21:19:00 -
[7] - Quote
Finally someone sees the main point of this post, there aren't any good arguments against protection for drivers |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 02:32:00 -
[8] - Quote
I still don't see how either of the first two could be a bad thing |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 18:58:00 -
[9] - Quote
Lighting a Cyno... |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.18 13:21:00 -
[10] - Quote
So no one agrees that logis should have the strongest repair capabilities? |
|
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.12.18 13:56:00 -
[11] - Quote
Vermaak Kuvakei wrote:Investment protection:
In my opinion the main crew of the dropship and lav (pilot/gunner, possibly the lav passenger) shouldn't be able to get shot out of the vehicles, the vehicles should have to be destroyed or they should have to jump out of it to be killed. I'm against this applying to the militia and starter because that would just cause more starter lav spam. It also shouldn't apply to the dropship passengers because they're already protected by the doors and it would give people more of a reason to stay in dropships all day. For the lav, I'm a bit indecisive on passenger protection.
EITHER the passenger needs an option of shooting, OR they need protection. If the passenger doesn't have protection, it makes it harder to justify protecting the driver. Also, adding protection to either or both would require a redesign of the model - or maybe an alternate LAV type with an enclosed driver/passenger area?
Quote:Slight combat utility:
I think that drivers should get a bit of personal defense. As a module I think that mounted, driver controlled weapons that perform sub par to the light weapon they fill the role of for the same level (standard rocket pods weaker than swarm launchers but not by much). It would make drivers a bit more self reliant but not to the point where a gunner is an after thought. The only weapons I can think to model this off of are the swarm launcher, assault rifle, hmg, and laser rifle.
You already have a "slight combat utility" - LAV drivers are equipped with the ability to instant-kill an enemy in melee range. Obviously, the range restriction is harsh, but it's an extremely high-damage weapon, and unlike the closest infantry equivalent, it doesn't require SP investment to be viable, and doesn't have a charge time.
Quote:Logistic vehicle alteration:
The lav needs to receive a special reduction for the pg/cpu requirements of heavy repairers to the point where they take up the pg/cpu of the regular repairers, it's inexcusable for the logistics lavs not to be the most powerful repairer. The logistics dropshi needs a pg/cpu buff along with the removal of the built in mcru, non militia mcrus, another high slot added to both dropships and reduced mcru pg/cpu needs
And if this was a thread to itself, you'd have a +1 from me. Your later comment reminding people about it gets my +1 instead.
I honestly think that there should be more than just the Logi variant, and different variants should get fitting bonuses to different module types. |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.18 15:14:00 -
[12] - Quote
I'd perfer protection over shooting for the passenger but what do you think of a protected gunner?
This would most likely draw away from everyone using them as OHK batteries, given the safety of firing at a range than possibly running into an Av nade
At least someone can agree with me on that |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.12.18 15:18:00 -
[13] - Quote
I definitely don't agree with protecting gunners on LAVs any more than they already are protected.
You already have to headshot or flank if you want to deal any damage to the gunner. |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.18 20:42:00 -
[14] - Quote
I find that having to take out the vehicle to get the lav or dropship gunner(only for standard and up transport gunners) |
Vermaak Kuvakei
Doomheim
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.23 00:53:00 -
[15] - Quote
Bump |
ugg reset
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
234
|
Posted - 2012.12.24 17:54:00 -
[16] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:I definitely don't agree with protecting gunners on LAVs any more than they already are protected.
You already have to headshot or flank if you want to deal any damage to the gunner.
I'm going to go ahead and call BS. I've lost so many gunners in my LAV its not even funny. you get behind the gunner he is as good as gone. Sad when the only thing that can mount a turret and live is a heavy.
+1 to doors (Keep the head and top exposed; the real trick to killing drivers/passengers should be to get above the LAV and shoot down into the car.)
+1 Logi LAV heavy repair |
Ulysses Knapse
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
73
|
Posted - 2012.12.24 18:13:00 -
[17] - Quote
LAVs should be more agile and faster, but that's it.
You'd think in such an advanced universe they could make a jeep more agile than today. |
Mobius Kaethis
Planetary Response Organisation
Test Friends Please Ignore
306
|
Posted - 2012.12.24 18:27:00 -
[18] - Quote
Ulysses Knapse wrote:LAVs should be more agile and faster, but that's it.
You'd think in such an advanced universe they could make a jeep more agile than today.
I think this is the real solution the the LAV issue. The exposed drivers and passengers would be fine if the LAV had a higher speed. It is supposed to be a Light Attack Vehicle after all, more for scouting than combat, as it stands it can not truly carry out this role. Boost its speed keep everything else the same.
I think what a lot of you are calling for is more of an APC which is something that will be coming out in time. Note the medium ground vehicle on the icons help screen. I am pretty sure that a MAV will fill this APC roll allowing us to use the LAV as it was intended to be used for scouting and moving a partial squad quickly. Though I should note that having room for a full squad would really help this out too. Why only 3? Are squad sizes going to be enlarged to 6 allowing 1 squad to move in 2 LAV? |
ugg reset
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
234
|
Posted - 2012.12.24 18:43:00 -
[19] - Quote
Ulysses Knapse wrote:LAVs should be more agile and faster, but that's it.
You'd think in such an advanced universe they could make a jeep more agile than today.
With the right modules LAVs are untouchable by Light weapons. problem is, this comes at the cost of a low defense. no amount of speed will save you from a swarm launcher. right now your best bet is to equip enough HP to take one hit and hope your not around when the second shot is fired |
Ulysses Knapse
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
73
|
Posted - 2012.12.24 20:23:00 -
[20] - Quote
ugg reset wrote:Ulysses Knapse wrote:LAVs should be more agile and faster, but that's it.
You'd think in such an advanced universe they could make a jeep more agile than today. With the right modules LAVs are untouchable by Light weapons. problem is, this comes at the cost of a low defense. no amount of speed will save you from a swarm launcher. right now your best bet is to equip enough HP to take one hit and hope your not around when the second shot is fired
Doesn't matter. Vehicles are too slow in general. LAVs are supposed to be a fast strike vehicle, but they aren't fast enough to serve that purpose very well. LAVs are also supposed to be a patrol and scout vehicle, but they also aren't fast enough for that. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |