DUST Search - Tanks and how they should act more like tanks

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Tanks and how they should act more like tanks

» 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)
VicBoss Militaires-Sans-Frontieres 135	Posted - 2012.12.29 01:01:00 - [1] - Quote Right now tanks are hyper powerhouses with not that much armor in comparison. Tanks however should carry more hp and less firepower so tanks battles are not over in seconds. This will also allow tanks to be in hotspots for over 3 seconds where infantry will not destroy them in seconds. This allows tanks to keep a presence and be supported by and support infantry. However their firepower should be reduced at that point so they cannot mow down everything in sight. tanks should be more like their old name, armor, than super strong firebower mobile instillations.
Vyzion Eyri The Southern Legion 155	Posted - 2012.12.29 01:35:00 - [2] - Quote The ability for vehicles to hold infantry basically turns it into, as some put it, a timeout taxi. Unless you're uncanny with sniping accuracy, you'll be firing at the vehicle and if its an HAV, you may as well spit peas at a brick wall for all the damage you're going to do. The increased firepower, however, is almost as much a dilemma for the team with these death on wheels machines as it is for the opposition. The costs of running one, taking into account also the risk, is high. If you want a tank fitted properly, it's going to cost you. Lets say you didn't fit it out properly. Before you know it, militia swarms will be decimating your armour and shields. And if you do fit it properly? Suddenly your team sees a battle ready HAV with the power to get them free kills. They just need to get into one of the turrets. Suddenly, 3 or 4 teammates are distracted by this HAV and spend their time around it, keeping it alive, than assisting others on the ground. An HAVs speed and cumbersome size means it presents a giant target for forge guns, swarms, av grenades, proximity explosives, etc. One merc, properly outfitted for av, can easily take it down, and if teammates are tripping over each other to get in the vehicle in the assumption it'll be a killing fest, they get caught in the boom.
Psychotic Shooter Opus Arcana Orion Empire 23	Posted - 2012.12.29 01:57:00 - [3] - Quote Tanks can be tough i have been in a tank on tank battle for about 3 min considering battles only last 15 min at max 3 min is a long time if you want a tougher tank put extra armor and shields on it
Beld Errmon Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 479	Posted - 2012.12.29 02:19:00 - [4] - Quote Most tank battles I am in last less then the time it takes to overheat a blaster (with a heatsink of course) My shield tank feels more like an infantry fighting vehicle than a tank, can glide around the battlefield killing inf by glancing in their direction, but if an armor tank comes along all bets are off gunnlogi is gunna go down. My armor tank on the other hand while just as accurate with the blaster and hitting harder feels a lot more like a tank, its slow and cumbersome great in a tank v tank battle, but gets ripped up by AV troops with swarms.
Kaathe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 41	Posted - 2012.12.29 06:21:00 - [5] - Quote Fit your vehicles (and dropsuits) properly and you have an amazing set up. No need to ask CCP for buffing tanks, you can already buff it! You're probably using a militia tank, which explains the quick death sentence. Even a militia tank with the proper modules can last a long time on the battlefield. Need more time playing... No, do not buff tanks, there is no need to to improve something that requires simple logic.
Ulysses Knapse Nuevo Atlas Corporation 73	Posted - 2012.12.29 06:43:00 - [6] - Quote You want HAVs to act more like real-life tanks? If you wanted that, you would give them more firepower, more speed, and less armor. Take, for example, the Main Battle Tanks today. The M1 Abrams can easily cruise at 60 kilometers per hour, and their guns could take out another Abrams in about two hits. The same could be said about the Leopard 2.
Go Away Putz Doomheim 11	Posted - 2012.12.29 11:11:00 - [7] - Quote Ulysses Knapse wrote: You want HAVs to act more like real-life tanks? If you wanted that, you would give them more firepower, more speed, and less armor. Take, for example, the Main Battle Tanks today. The M1 Abrams can easily cruise at 60 kilometers per hour, and their guns could take out another Abrams in about two hits. The same could be said about the Leopard 2. It is worth noting they have target lock, IR, Electronic counter measures, the barrels ride steady regardless of what the terrain is doing under the tank and they have three to five person crews depending on country of origin. And as @Ulysses Knapse pointed out two hits will take out a similar tank. What he didn't mention is one hit will take out any other tank that is a less than the M1 or the Leopard. So, anything that they hit is dead in one or two shots. Average tank battle will be over in 12 seconds, long enough to get out two shots.
VicBoss Militaires-Sans-Frontieres 135	Posted - 2012.12.29 15:43:00 - [8] - Quote Kaathe wrote: Fit your vehicles (and dropsuits) properly and you have an amazing set up. No need to ask CCP for buffing tanks, you can already buff it! You're probably using a militia tank, which explains the quick death sentence. Even a militia tank with the proper modules can last a long time on the battlefield. Need more time playing... No, do not buff tanks, there is no need to to improve something that requires simple logic. 1 yes i due sometimes throw in a derp HAV tank for kicks but i am not reffering to myself but my corpies tanks, which are pretty well fitted. 2 it would not be a straight up buff of make their armor unstoppable. 3 at least an option of exchanging large amounts of firepower for more armor/shielding would be great. That might be an option of different racial vehicles also i guess.
Jak Teston Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 99	Posted - 2012.12.29 19:55:00 - [9] - Quote Currently the only interactions between tanks and infantry are (beware, slight simplification ahead!): 1 ) Friendly infantry tries to get into any tank that's not militia. 2) Hostile infantry dies I'm pretty sure that's not what the design document says about HAVs, so I'm looking forward to how CCP is going to improve this. I'd personally like to see tanks become much slower. Even if that is unrealistic, it'll make maneuvering more important and cause HAVs to stay near friendly infantry. I generally support all measures that improve ground possession.
Ulysses Knapse Nuevo Atlas Corporation 73	Posted - 2012.12.29 22:02:00 - [10] - Quote Jak Teston wrote: Currently the only interactions between tanks and infantry are (beware, slight simplification ahead!): 1 ) Friendly infantry tries to get into any tank that's not militia. 2) Hostile infantry dies I'm pretty sure that's not what the design document says about HAVs, so I'm looking forward to how CCP is going to improve this. I'd personally like to see tanks become much slower. Even if that is unrealistic, it'll make maneuvering more important and cause HAVs to stay near friendly infantry. I generally support all measures that improve ground possession. Tanks don't need to be slower. In tight spaces, they are already slower than infantry. Sure, they might be faster on open ground, but that's what vehicles are for. Also, if you hide in cover and lob some AV grenades with your buddies, the HAV will fall, and it will fall hard.

Jax Thrife L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 1	Posted - 2013.01.01 15:10:00 - [11] - Quote I can agree with the less power and more armor because honestly since people can easily buy militia forge guns and swarm launchers it is ridiculous how fast a shield tank drops like it was a militia. There is another solution which would be to lower power but up the pg and cpu on tanks and maybe and extra slot on the opposite side (For example, surya would have 4 high powered slot instead of 3) that way people can mix and match modules until they feel like their tank doesnt feel like paper rolling around in the battlefield. The only reason why i agree that tanks can be way overpowered is because I was able to take out a sagaris easily with a Standard Scattered Blaster no heat sink on a Gunlogi. The battle lasted about 2-3 min. and honestly he barely dropped my shields and that makes absolutely no sense to me. And if thats not bad I have seen a teammate take out a sagaris with a MILITIA tank and all I have to say is how and why?
NovaShadowStorm The Southern Legion 63	Posted - 2013.01.01 15:20:00 - [12] - Quote Jax Thrife wrote: I can agree with the less power and more armor because honestly since people can easily buy militia forge guns and swarm launchers it is ridiculous how fast a shield tank drops like it was a militia. There is another solution which would be to lower power but up the pg and cpu on tanks and maybe and extra slot on the opposite side (For example, surya would have 4 high powered slot instead of 3) that way people can mix and match modules until they feel like their tank doesnt feel like paper rolling around in the battlefield. The only reason why i agree that tanks can be way overpowered is because I was able to take out a sagaris easily with a Standard Scattered Blaster no heat sink on a Gunlogi. The battle lasted about 2-3 min. and honestly he barely dropped my shields and that makes absolutely no sense to me. And if thats not bad I have seen a teammate take out a sagaris with a MILITIA tank and all I have to say is how and why? Most likely reason is they sank all their SP into the HAV skill just to get into the thing but didn't put any points into the shield side so the moment they got it trained they hopped in thinking they'd be awesome but then realised they actually need to fit it properly if they want it to actually survive.
Skihids Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 970	Posted - 2013.01.01 15:37:00 - [13] - Quote NovaShadowStorm wrote: Jax Thrife wrote: I can agree with the less power and more armor because honestly since people can easily buy militia forge guns and swarm launchers it is ridiculous how fast a shield tank drops like it was a militia. There is another solution which would be to lower power but up the pg and cpu on tanks and maybe and extra slot on the opposite side (For example, surya would have 4 high powered slot instead of 3) that way people can mix and match modules until they feel like their tank doesnt feel like paper rolling around in the battlefield. The only reason why i agree that tanks can be way overpowered is because I was able to take out a sagaris easily with a Standard Scattered Blaster no heat sink on a Gunlogi. The battle lasted about 2-3 min. and honestly he barely dropped my shields and that makes absolutely no sense to me. And if thats not bad I have seen a teammate take out a sagaris with a MILITIA tank and all I have to say is how and why? Most likely reason is they sank all their SP into the HAV skill just to get into the thing but didn't put any points into the shield side so the moment they got it trained they hopped in thinking they'd be awesome but then realised they actually need to fit it properly if they want it to actually survive. This is quite true. Fitting a vehicle requires a huge investment in engineering and defensive skills. The hull and weapons are but a fraction of the real cost. First you need to skill up CPU and PG generation so you can power your vehicle, then you need to level at least three shield or armor skills to get access to the best modules for your type. You will probably also need the best PG grid module which means leveling PG Upgrade to level 4. All that requires millions of SP. Good vehicles are huge SP sinks.
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1012	Posted - 2013.01.01 15:51:00 - [14] - Quote Skihids wrote: NovaShadowStorm wrote: Jax Thrife wrote: I can agree with the less power and more armor because honestly since people can easily buy militia forge guns and swarm launchers it is ridiculous how fast a shield tank drops like it was a militia. There is another solution which would be to lower power but up the pg and cpu on tanks and maybe and extra slot on the opposite side (For example, surya would have 4 high powered slot instead of 3) that way people can mix and match modules until they feel like their tank doesnt feel like paper rolling around in the battlefield. The only reason why i agree that tanks can be way overpowered is because I was able to take out a sagaris easily with a Standard Scattered Blaster no heat sink on a Gunlogi. The battle lasted about 2-3 min. and honestly he barely dropped my shields and that makes absolutely no sense to me. And if thats not bad I have seen a teammate take out a sagaris with a MILITIA tank and all I have to say is how and why? Most likely reason is they sank all their SP into the HAV skill just to get into the thing but didn't put any points into the shield side so the moment they got it trained they hopped in thinking they'd be awesome but then realised they actually need to fit it properly if they want it to actually survive. This is quite true. Fitting a vehicle requires a huge investment in engineering and defensive skills. The hull and weapons are but a fraction of the real cost. First you need to skill up CPU and PG generation so you can power your vehicle, then you need to level at least three shield or armor skills to get access to the best modules for your type. You will probably also need the best PG grid module which means leveling PG Upgrade to level 4. All that requires millions of SP. Good vehicles are huge SP sinks. Have perfect skills for shield tanks and armor yet it still doesnt feel like a tank, just an extra large dropsuit Tanks are far from being tanks, at one point they were feared whenever a tank was dropped now its laughter and free points for everyone Doesnt help that AV is broke and HAVs got another round of nerfs in the latest patch while AV got another powerful basically 'free' weapon
Skihids Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 970	Posted - 2013.01.01 16:42:00 - [15] - Quote EnglishSnake wrote: Skihids wrote: NovaShadowStorm wrote: Jax Thrife wrote: I can agree with the less power and more armor because honestly since people can easily buy militia forge guns and swarm launchers it is ridiculous how fast a shield tank drops like it was a militia. There is another solution which would be to lower power but up the pg and cpu on tanks and maybe and extra slot on the opposite side (For example, surya would have 4 high powered slot instead of 3) that way people can mix and match modules until they feel like their tank doesnt feel like paper rolling around in the battlefield. The only reason why i agree that tanks can be way overpowered is because I was able to take out a sagaris easily with a Standard Scattered Blaster no heat sink on a Gunlogi. The battle lasted about 2-3 min. and honestly he barely dropped my shields and that makes absolutely no sense to me. And if thats not bad I have seen a teammate take out a sagaris with a MILITIA tank and all I have to say is how and why? Most likely reason is they sank all their SP into the HAV skill just to get into the thing but didn't put any points into the shield side so the moment they got it trained they hopped in thinking they'd be awesome but then realised they actually need to fit it properly if they want it to actually survive. This is quite true. Fitting a vehicle requires a huge investment in engineering and defensive skills. The hull and weapons are but a fraction of the real cost. First you need to skill up CPU and PG generation so you can power your vehicle, then you need to level at least three shield or armor skills to get access to the best modules for your type. You will probably also need the best PG grid module which means leveling PG Upgrade to level 4. All that requires millions of SP. Good vehicles are huge SP sinks. Have perfect skills for shield tanks and armor yet it still doesnt feel like a tank, just an extra large dropsuit Tanks are far from being tanks, at one point they were feared whenever a tank was dropped now its laughter and free points for everyone Doesnt help that AV is broke and HAVs got another round of nerfs in the latest patch while AV got another powerful basically 'free' weapon I fit a Sagaris with an eHP* of 10,105 shield with an additional 2,082 eHP from a Clarity Ward Shield Booster. Add 1,249 Armor HP and that totals 13,436 eHP. I could increase that by an additional 396 eHP by skilling two more levels of Shield Control. That doesn't reduce my offense by much as I can run two 20GJ Scattered Ion Cannon small blaster turrets and an 80GJ Scattered Neutron Blaster main turret. I don't have any slots left for turret or propulsion mods, but I consider it a pretty tanky tank. How much eHP would you consider to be "tanky"? * Assuming that stacking two 15% Ward Shield Amplifiers yields 27% efficiency
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1012	Posted - 2013.01.01 17:07:00 - [16] - Quote Skihids wrote: EnglishSnake wrote: Skihids wrote: NovaShadowStorm wrote: Jax Thrife wrote: I can agree with the less power and more armor because honestly since people can easily buy militia forge guns and swarm launchers it is ridiculous how fast a shield tank drops like it was a militia. There is another solution which would be to lower power but up the pg and cpu on tanks and maybe and extra slot on the opposite side (For example, surya would have 4 high powered slot instead of 3) that way people can mix and match modules until they feel like their tank doesnt feel like paper rolling around in the battlefield. The only reason why i agree that tanks can be way overpowered is because I was able to take out a sagaris easily with a Standard Scattered Blaster no heat sink on a Gunlogi. The battle lasted about 2-3 min. and honestly he barely dropped my shields and that makes absolutely no sense to me. And if thats not bad I have seen a teammate take out a sagaris with a MILITIA tank and all I have to say is how and why? Most likely reason is they sank all their SP into the HAV skill just to get into the thing but didn't put any points into the shield side so the moment they got it trained they hopped in thinking they'd be awesome but then realised they actually need to fit it properly if they want it to actually survive. This is quite true. Fitting a vehicle requires a huge investment in engineering and defensive skills. The hull and weapons are but a fraction of the real cost. First you need to skill up CPU and PG generation so you can power your vehicle, then you need to level at least three shield or armor skills to get access to the best modules for your type. You will probably also need the best PG grid module which means leveling PG Upgrade to level 4. All that requires millions of SP. Good vehicles are huge SP sinks. Have perfect skills for shield tanks and armor yet it still doesnt feel like a tank, just an extra large dropsuit Tanks are far from being tanks, at one point they were feared whenever a tank was dropped now its laughter and free points for everyone Doesnt help that AV is broke and HAVs got another round of nerfs in the latest patch while AV got another powerful basically 'free' weapon I fit a Sagaris with an eHP* of 10,105 shield with an additional 2,082 eHP from a Clarity Ward Shield Booster. Add 1,249 Armor HP and that totals 13,436 eHP. I could increase that by an additional 396 eHP by skilling two more levels of Shield Control. That doesn't reduce my offense by much as I can run two 20GJ Scattered Ion Cannon small blaster turrets and an 80GJ Scattered Neutron Blaster main turret. I don't have any slots left for turret or propulsion mods, but I consider it a pretty tanky tank. How much eHP would you consider to be "tanky"? * Assuming that stacking two 15% Ward Shield Amplifiers yields 27% efficiency I can do the same 10k shields Prob is cant have a repper and still cant really hang around for too long either in general because FG take massive chunks off you and the same with SL You spend more time recharging shields Also passives mods suck tbh, i use active because by then im running What i mean by tanky is that not every tom ** and harry can instanly cause damage with next to no ISK/SP invested against a tank which requires 5mil in SP alone and 2.3mil to fit proper Basic and milita AV is that good you dont have to skill out of it if you dont want, just have a BPO suit ready milita fit and away you go in a cheap LAV Its way too easy to damage a tank let alone kill it and you can solo force back a tank on your own easily enough with milita, milita should be barebones ** AV choice and tbh even basic should be fairly crap, if you want to do real damage to a top teir tank you should have to work for it and skill up to a decent lvl and put some SP/ISK into it Its like throwing a stone at the HAV which happens to cause 1.2k of damage when really it should be able to shrug it off and tank it for a while without even having to touch any reppers or mods
Skihids Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 970	Posted - 2013.01.01 19:23:00 - [17] - Quote I suppose some of this comes down to play style. I came late into tanking after losing my dropship pilot career in the great missile nerf and needing to find another job to pay the bills. Since I was already heavily skilled into vehicles I allowed my corpmate Exmaple to encourage me to skill into tanks to assist Tritan Industries in corp battles. As such I'm a reluctant tank driver who would just as soon blow one up as drive it, and I'm conflicted about their strengths and weaknesses. How much eHP you require depends upon how aggressive a driver you are. If you always keep moving and never wade too deep into CQC you won't need nearly as much as if you like to wade into CQC without any infantry support. I myself am entirely to aggressive for my own good and I don't keep a sufficient situational awareness. Exmaple is attempting to instill me with a more conservative driving style, and I'm currently running weak BPO Sica fits to encourage that. As an AV user I've killed a few poorly fit tanks, but mostly I've only managed to force them to retreat if I'm soloing it. If the driver is aggressive enough to park close I can strip most of his shields with three flux grenades if I'm in my logi suit, but then I generally get killed trying to MD him the rest of the way. In my SL AV fit I can get off 2-3 sets of missiles off before I'm killed by his blaster or one of his infantry teammates, and that's not enough to kill even a moderately fit tank. I just started playing with the militia forge gun and it's even slower to fire than the SL. Last night I spent most of a match trying to solo a dropship with an advanced SL and he managed to tank 2-3 sets before his gunners took me out with small blasters. A dropship has less tank than an HAV but it seems that was enough for him. An HAV can shrug off one militia grade attacker, but a driver shouldn't sit there and absorb two or three attackers without killing them. You should be able to be more aggressive if you equip decent small turrets and carry good gunners, and even more if you have infantry support. Perhaps you should describe a scenario you think a tank should be able to survive that it can't today. How many enemy red dots how close to you and what sort of support you have in and outside your tank. Something like: Attacking Objective "A" on Manus Peak 3 infantry on the objective with AV or Flux grenades within throwing distance 2 Militia SL's hiding nearby 1 Militia FG on the objective 2 turret gunners using proto blasters No other infantry support
Ulysses Knapse Nuevo Atlas Corporation 73	Posted - 2013.01.01 19:30:00 - [18] - Quote VicBoss wrote: Right now tanks are hyper powerhouses with not that much armor in comparison. Tanks however should carry more hp and less firepower so tanks battles are not over in seconds. This will also allow tanks to be in hotspots for over 3 seconds where infantry will not destroy them in seconds. This allows tanks to keep a presence and be supported by and support infantry. However their firepower should be reduced at that point so they cannot mow down everything in sight. tanks should be more like their old name, armor, than super strong firebower mobile instillations. I call bullshit. Giving them twice as much armor and half as much damage wouldn't help, it would just make them half as useful and last somewhat longer. By that I mean, when your opponents rally, you can fight off half as many at once, and they will have twice as long to prepare. Even having double armor doesn't make up for half the firepower. HAVs have plenty of armor. Even my poor fit has plenty of armor. Of course (maybe), I still come out on top (sometimes) because I have experience (better than none) with the things (not quite identical to HAVs) that transcends Dust. I can hold off waves of fatboys with mostly no trouble. What really bothers me are the swarm launchers. They are far too effective for a long-range homing weapon that can be used by any dropsuit. Even then, I can survive some of that. I can personally vouch that tanks don't need more armor, and they don't need more firepower. Jak Teston wrote: I'd personally like to see tanks become much slower. Even if that is unrealistic, it'll make maneuvering more important and cause HAVs to stay near friendly infantry. I generally support all measures that improve ground possession. I am a HAV driver and I can say that maneuvering is already very important when driving a HAV. That's one of my main reasons I stay out of heavy infrastructure. Too much cover for infantry, not enough space to move. I only go through that **** when there is friendly infantry there, because I need their support just as much as they need mine. When facing a heavy force, even on open ground, I still opt to stay near Infantry. Fatboys with Forge Guns keep wanting to stand next to my HAV, and I'm not agile enough to get away in tight places.
Deveshi WarRavens 144	Posted - 2013.01.01 19:48:00 - [19] - Quote No tank needs to be buffed with armour or shield as this can all be done through skills. Any more and they would be ********. I am also a HAV driver and I think they are perfect the way they are (except splash missile damage grrr!). The important thing to remember is that a HAV does not make you Rambo. You still need a good team to support you as fatboys with FGs and grunts with swarm launchers are squishy to assault rifles. Ulysses said the rest perfectly.
Deveshi WarRavens 144	Posted - 2013.01.01 19:51:00 - [20] - Quote and by the way, @ Ulysses Knapse This explains your position of my swarm launcher suggestion here. Biased much?

Skihids Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 970	Posted - 2013.01.01 20:53:00 - [21] - Quote Coming from a dropship background I find maneuverability to be the biggest weakness of an HAV. It takes a full 10.8 seconds to pivot a tank through 360 degrees (and prop mods don't help). That's 5.4 seconds to reverse direction and 2.7 seconds for a right angle turn. A blaster tank can spin its turret and back up for a quick exit, but the rail tank is not so fortunate. Tanks slow to a crawl when turning and even shield tanks are slow to accelerate. Their wide bodies get hung up on all manner of obstacles. Third person view helps, but it has its own issues. When approaching obstacles and at odd times on hilly terrain the view suddenly climbs right up to the main turret, obscuring 80% of your view. One way to make a tank feel less like a bulky dropsuit is to separate driving from main gun. Again, coming from a dropship background I'm not wedded to firing the big gun from the pilot's seat. It would make driving far less distracting and allow the main gun to be much more effective as it wouldn't have to be pointing in the direction of travel. Imagine being able to circle an objective at speed while your main gunner was able to concentrate accurate fire. You could achieve very powerful drive by shootings with two or more gunners. You could give the front gun to the driver, but you could also use both sticks for steering which would make it much more tank like. Use R1 or R3 for backup camera activation. You could give the driver all the defensive module activations and let the main gunner activate any turret modules. MTACs would replace the HAV in the role of "super heavy dropsuit" where the operator is also the main gunner.
Ulysses Knapse Nuevo Atlas Corporation 73	Posted - 2013.01.01 21:06:00 - [22] - Quote Deveshi wrote: and by the way, @ Ulysses Knapse This explains your position of my swarm launcher suggestion here. Biased much? Your ad hominem means nothing to me. Swarm Launchers are plain better than Forge Guns. It's not biased, it's just an observation, one I have made many times.
Deveshi WarRavens 144	Posted - 2013.01.01 21:30:00 - [23] - Quote Ulysses Knapse wrote: Deveshi wrote: and by the way, @ Ulysses Knapse This explains your position of my swarm launcher suggestion here. Biased much? Your ad hominem means nothing to me. Swarm Launchers are plain better than Forge Guns. It's not biased, it's just an observation, one I have made many times. Apologies, but even with your refreshing vocabulary (big smiles) this is not an attack against you, it is an attack against your argument. I have simply identified that you are bias on the swarm launcher argument as you are on the receiving end!
Breakin Stuff Immobile Infantry 680	Posted - 2013.01.01 23:21:00 - [24] - Quote Militia tanks were built by the lowest bidder. they pop like zits. I love it when people field 'em. Now start using things like a soma.... I WILL KILL ONE OF YOU BASTARDS SOONER OR LATER!!!!!
Skihids Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 970	Posted - 2013.01.01 23:31:00 - [25] - Quote Militia tanks aren't serious tanks, but they do serve to train drivers to play very conservatively and be fully aware of their surroundings. They can be fielded once per match without losing ISK and once you can keep one alive for half a match you are probably ready to move up. I view it as driving around a balsa wood model of a tank.
Jax Thrife L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 1	Posted - 2013.01.01 23:42:00 - [26] - Quote I dont know I have seen people use militia tanks and change the battlefield BUT it all depends on who is behind the wheel
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2283	Posted - 2013.01.02 00:14:00 - [27] - Quote problem with tanks atm is that AV is too strong and there are alot of AV options + more on the way yet tanks got their cpu and pg values readjusted again. Low lvl AV especially seems too strong imo Militia FG/Swarms doin 1200 dmg with bonus dmg to shields or armor? srs ccp? my militia FG fit costs me about 4K and does 1320 dmg with a dmg mod marauder class tanks need to be able to take more of a beating tbh dropships as well both those class of vehicles dont last long in a hotzone
Breakin Stuff Immobile Infantry 680	Posted - 2013.01.02 00:23:00 - [28] - Quote Mavado V Noriega wrote: problem with tanks atm is that AV is too strong and there are alot of AV options + more on the way yet tanks got their cpu and pg values readjusted again. Low lvl AV especially seems too strong imo Militia FG/Swarms doin 1200 dmg with bonus dmg to shields or armor? srs ccp? my militia FG fit costs me about 4K and does 1320 dmg with a dmg mod marauder class tanks need to be able to take more of a beating tbh dropships as well both those class of vehicles dont last long in a hotzone It's not bonus damage, it's lower resistance. Shields have no inherent resistance to lasers, armor has no inherent resistence to autocannons. Armor base resistance versus lasers is high, against explosions is low. It forces people to think and adjust tactics rather than mindlessly use one tactic to death forever and expect it to win every time.
Ulysses Knapse Nuevo Atlas Corporation 73	Posted - 2013.01.02 11:19:00 - [29] - Quote Deveshi wrote: Ulysses Knapse wrote: Deveshi wrote: and by the way, @ Ulysses Knapse This explains your position of my swarm launcher suggestion here. Biased much? Your ad hominem means nothing to me. Swarm Launchers are plain better than Forge Guns. It's not biased, it's just an observation, one I have made many times. Apologies, but even with your refreshing vocabulary (big smiles) this is not an attack against you, it is an attack against your argument. I have simply identified that you are bias on the swarm launcher argument as you are on the receiving end! I am on the receiving end of a swarm launcher. I'm also on the receiving end of a forge gun. That doesn't make me biased against one of them, it just makes me more experienced with the repercussions of both, and I can tell you that forge guns are certainly not one of my bigger concerns as a HAV driver. Sometimes I get stuck temporarily and see a marvelously slow fatboy come up to me with a forge gun. In that situation, it scares me. In most situations, I brush it off and just move away from the fatboy, then shoot him. Swarm launchers are different. The minute I see or hear a swarm launcher, I'm instantly put on high alert, and I immediately try to find who is firing it. Forge guns scare me at close range. Swarm launchers scare the living **** out of me at all ranges. I am not biased against one AV weapon because I drive a HAV. In fact, until I actually started driving a HAV, I thought the forge gun was better. Now, I know better. If anything, my occupation reduces any of my biases against weapons used against me. So yes, it is ad hominem. You are saying that my argument is biased because of what I do. In other cases, that would make sense. For example, a LAV driver is more likely to say that swarm launchers are more overpowered than forge guns because swarm launchers are made to be better than forge guns at hitting fast targets. I, however, am not a LAV driver, I am a HAV driver, and forge guns don't have too much difficulty hitting me at their intended range, so long as they aim decently.
Go Away Putz Doomheim 11	Posted - 2013.01.02 11:36:00 - [30] - Quote Skihids wrote: Militia tanks aren't serious tanks, but they do serve to train drivers to play very conservatively and be fully aware of their surroundings. They can be fielded once per match without losing ISK and once you can keep one alive for half a match you are probably ready to move up. I view it as driving around a balsa wood model of a tank. Well, my first two or three lasted as long as a balsa wood tank would have. I did get a militia HAV to last a match but building SP for my two week old character is slow going. HAVs need a lot of SP to get to activated. One has to kitten a lot of SP down the drain of LAV land to get to HAVs. Not including the effort through both sets of small turrets to put the large turret you actually want on your HAV. Off topic: Skihids, have you posted a HAV driver's manual as well? Your DS version got me flying my DS, versus only crashing it.



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.