| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Deluxe Edition
Like a Boss.
56
   |
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:36:00 -
[1] - Quote
Currently in order to go AV you have to forfeit your ability to defend yourself against infantry, this makes it impossible to kill high skilled tanks who squad with good infantry. This is especcially concerning because it usually takes 2-3 people working AV in order to take down a good tanker with the only realistic counter to tanks being bring out your own. This is especially highlighted in 8v8 corp matches.
I'll use my corp as an example (we currently have no tankers). Even though we have enough people to currently to participate in corp matches we have largely had to abandon them because every opponent we face pulls out proto tanks no matter the size of the contract. This puts us n a position to where we have to sacrifice 2 shooters to be on tank detail. This means the other team has 7 people capable of killing infantry and one death machine that destroys all infantry in its sight whereas our team now only has 6 shooters and 2 people desperatly trying to get in a position to have enough of a shot on the tank to kill it while avoiding enemy infantry.
With the way the tanks are set up now they have become where dominance is 90% skill points and 10% skill in avoiding av. Furthermore tank vs tank fights are now 99% skill points and 1% ability. In my type-II assault with a exile I have been able to kill severy highly skilled proto suit players however when it comes to tanks my gunloggi has not chance of killing a proto tank because the damage difference between guns is astronomical and Surya's can cycle their repairers and hardners to a point where my damage isn't enough to kill them if they just sat their and let me shoot at them forever. This means in order to compete in CB's you must have a member with proto tanks.
Furthermore all that will change by making swarm launchers sidearms is that now i am able to carry my AR or a shotgun to defend myself from infantry, however i still have to choose between buffing my infantry killing abilities (Light dmg mods / Shield extenders) or buffing my AV (Sidearm Dmg Mods). |
Tex Mex Aztec
Deadly Blue Dots
RISE of LEGION
8
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
I don't agree. We had an awesome dropship pilot who would outrun swarms (prepatch) and annoy everyone. His purpose was to make the enemy waste their time trying to shoot him down, making them defenseless against us. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
303
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:06:00 -
[3] - Quote
At first I thought this must be a troll post but reading the whole thing you seem deadly serious, so I'll address this as such.
I run dedicated AV with swarms, though I'm only currently up to lvl 3. You have to spec up in sidearms too, then you can still be effective at anti-infantry. I can't count the number of times someone has obviously seen me swarming on my own from a remote area and thought I was an easy target, so tried to sneak up on me for the derp kill. Only for me to turn around and scrambler pistol them into the ground with a few quick trigger presses.
In fact I got so good at sidearms through this practice that when I'm not needed for AV I run pistol with SMG and am pretty darn deadly.
Unfortunately, you're still going to have problems in a 8 vs 8 corp battle if the enemy brings out a Surya or Sagaris because you'll need 3 or 4 skilled (both ability and SP) AV players to take one down unless you've got a decent tank supporting them and that's half your team already on the fringes of the battle. |
Pombe Geek
Red Star.
50
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
I agree - equip an SMG or pistol and you should be fine. One point of calling in a tank is to specifically do what you are saying, force the other team to pick and concentrate on 1 target (be it infantry or the tank). I'd suggest trying to recruit an experienced tanker or having someone in your corp focus on skilling tanks (reward them by funding their vehicle purchases from your corp wallet). |
Negris Albedo
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
3
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
I disagree, Tank Battles are very much based on actual ability. I've learned that the hard way. |
Deluxe Edition
Like a Boss.
56
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
On another note if they just bring back dummy firing on swarm launchers it would fixe the problem. My main issue as it currently stands corps without a proto tank are basically SOL in CB's. Tanks dominate the field far to easily without another comparable tank on the field.
Also for those people who run dedicated AV i have a quesiton... what kind of isk reward do you get for Running AV? If you kill the tank most of the isk goes to the guy at the top of the leaderboard whereas the person who spent the game avoiding red dots and trying to get a half decent shot on the tank go 1-4 with 200 WP's and 100k isk for your effors which isn't enough to even pay for the AV suites. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
305
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
I generally hit top 3 - 5 on the scoreboard because I'll often get a tonne of LAVs and maybe a dropship too, adding up to easily 10+ kills and then anyone I manage to pistol in the face too. If I get a tank, or two, or three (got 4 in 1 game the other day pretty much solo) I get lots of isk - I'm pretty sure isk is awarded mostly according to the value of the gear you've destroyed. Some matches I've gotten close to 400K isk. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
3193
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:36:00 -
[8] - Quote
So tanks and infantry are using teamwork? Use your own teamwork to counter; have some other players take out the infantry while you take out the tank.
To be able to destroy an expensive tank is not a power that should come without a great scarifice, it is a good thing that you can't both handle tanks and infantry, or else it would be imbalanced in favor of AV.
You should know there will be big changed to fanction warfare (currently "corp battles"), there will be 32 player planetary conquest battles for corps. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=63760
Always use SMG as sidearm. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
305
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:So tanks and infantry are using teamwork? Use your own teamwork to counter; have some other players take out the infantry while you take out the tank. To be able to destroy an expensive tank is not a power that should come without a great scarifice, it is a good thing that you can't both handle tanks and infantry, or else it would be imbalanced in favor of AV. You should know there will be big changed to fanction warfare (currently "corp battles"), there will be 32 player planetary conquest battles for corps. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=63760
Planetary Conquest isn't replacing FW; they will coexist. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
3193
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:44:00 -
[10] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:So tanks and infantry are using teamwork? Use your own teamwork to counter; have some other players take out the infantry while you take out the tank. To be able to destroy an expensive tank is not a power that should come without a great scarifice, it is a good thing that you can't both handle tanks and infantry, or else it would be imbalanced in favor of AV. You should know there will be big changed to fanction warfare (currently "corp battles"), there will be 32 player planetary conquest battles for corps. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=63760 Planetary Conquest isn't replacing FW; they will coexist.
Yes, but they will be more open to everbody, and not just cops, labeling them as corp battles won't be very appropriate IMO. |
|
|
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
525
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 19:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
When you think about it wouldn't an Ar being secondary make more since it's more compact, (apparently) lighter, and without a particular niche? |
Booby Tuesdays
THE DOLLARS
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 19:52:00 -
[12] - Quote
Aren't sidearms supposed to be small and carried on your "side"? If a Swarm Launcher is a sidearm, then what would your primary be, a NULL Canon? 
What is the problem with finding the nearest supply depot and swapping from an infantry fit to an anti-vehicle fit? |
Rusty Shallows
Creative Killers
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 19:59:00 -
[13] - Quote
Have to give Delux Edition credit for out-side-the-box thinking. It's refreshing.
My concern would be the potential for the Assault/AR/Swarm fit as a standard and the Vehicle Apocalypse happening. |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1037
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 20:00:00 -
[14] - Quote
Ok, let's just let SL's lock onto infantry and your infantry problem goes away... |
Charlotte O'Dell
Planetary Response Organisation
Test Friends Please Ignore
53
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 20:07:00 -
[15] - Quote
Then pay a good tanker to help you in corp battles. If you can come up with 2.5 million, I'll help you out.
I've got a Sagaris. Base cost is 2,000,000. Time is 500,000 but is negotiatable
|
Rusty Shallows
Creative Killers
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 20:13:00 -
[16] - Quote
Deluxe Edition wrote:Also for those people who run dedicated AV i have a quesiton... what kind of isk reward do you get for Running AV? If you kill the tank most of the isk goes to the guy at the top of the leaderboard whereas the person who spent the game avoiding red dots and trying to get a half decent shot on the tank go 1-4 with 200 WP's and 100k isk for your effors which isn't enough to even pay for the AV suites.
More or less correct.
I often run an Assault Forge for the LOLs. That and killing turrets. I hate them. It's not a form of bigotry because all turrets are Satan's spawn and deserve to die.
Without AV-Gs/Flux support I can only chase a decent tank pilot away.
So in short. If for operational victory it can work out with varying results. If for personal gain ISK/WP definitely not since my AF/Toxin combo is not nearly so KDR friendly as the HMG/Toxin. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
311
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:29:00 -
[17] - Quote
Skihids wrote:Ok, let's just let SL's lock onto infantry and your infantry problem goes away...
A long time ago you could dumbfire SLs but it just made it a ridiculously OP anti-infantry weapon. If you could lock onto infantry, it would be even more ridiculous.
Rusty Shallows wrote:My concern would be the potential for the Assault/AR/Swarm fit as a standard and the Vehicle Apocalypse happening.
Truest thing said in this thread. Absolutely everyone would rock a SL sidearm and this would make everyone an AV player, allowing no vehicle a chance on the battlefield but also removing AV as a niche. |
Thranx1231
CowTek
95
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:00:00 -
[18] - Quote
Forget all that Swarmer Love. Firing tiny little missiles.
Make my Assault Forge Gun a Side Arm. Now you're talking serious Side Arms.
Carry in my Assault setups with a proper AR and my extra special Side Arm in case your Drop Ship or their Tank shows up. Plus, I can carry a Hive. Life would be great. OP for certain, but great. |
pegasis prime
The Shadow Cavalry Mercenaries
97
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:02:00 -
[19] - Quote
I run both vehicles and heavy av (forge gun) and thus thread is well daft and insulting hell if the swarm was a side arm I wnt to be able to carry my forge and hmg but thats never going to happen just like your swarn sidearm idea. |
Toxxikcity
Planetary Response Organisation
Test Friends Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:24:00 -
[20] - Quote
in staying on the subject of tanks, i feel ccp needs to beef up the orbital strikes, to the extent of no matter the strength of the tanks, an orbital should obliterate it, after all it's not as if we carry o/s in our back pockets, we have to work for it and it's a strike from a galactic cruiser or main battleship |
|
|
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service
RISE of LEGION
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:30:00 -
[21] - Quote
A swarm as a sidearm makes indeed no sense. But I like the concept of a compact assault rifle as a sidearm. Compared to the original it should have less range, slightly less damage and more recoil due to the shorter barrel. That way it could fit in the niche between a smg and the standard assault rifle. |
Snagman 313
Carbon 7
41
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:53:00 -
[22] - Quote
I can see where the OP is coming from but I disagree with the thought of having SL as sidearms as there is already enough people calling for a AV nerf. It takes very little time to switch out to a AV loadout really, I have thrown myself infront of a tank before just so I could spawn in quickly with my FG. You also have AV nades to use as well which are very effective on a mobile suit.
It is difficult to take down HAVs supported by troops but it's not impossible (you should see some of the hate mail I get) and with the issue of Proto HAVs.... It's a freakin tank lads and the highest level to boot. This is why you find dedicated AV players just for such situations, we don't always manage to kill those high end HAV's but we'll damn sure give them a bloody nose and with your own infantry support the HAV's can be on the back foot more often than not.
To have the SL as a sidearm is having your cake and eating the whole damn thing and that's not how it works. My advice is get a few dedicated AV guys in your corp and have them ready to take squad lead when you come up against a high end HAV as they will know what to do and how best to deal with the different versions.
Every tankers worst nightmare is Snagman!!! |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1042
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 12:51:00 -
[23] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote:Ok, let's just let SL's lock onto infantry and your infantry problem goes away... A long time ago you could dumbfire SLs but it just made it a ridiculously OP anti-infantry weapon. If you could lock onto infantry, it would be even more ridiculous. Rusty Shallows wrote:My concern would be the potential for the Assault/AR/Swarm fit as a standard and the Vehicle Apocalypse happening. Truest thing said in this thread. Absolutely everyone would rock a SL sidearm and this would make everyone an AV player, allowing no vehicle a chance on the battlefield but also removing AV as a niche.
That was sarcasm to point out that the OP was asking for something absurd.
Giving every assult player AV on top of their AR would negate the role of dedicated AV, but that's the mentality of so many folks coming from other FPS's. Other games have only one role with slight modifications, not the Rock/Paper/Scissors of DUST.
We've seen this type of request before and we will see it many more times. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
314
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 13:01:00 -
[24] - Quote
Skihids wrote:Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote:Ok, let's just let SL's lock onto infantry and your infantry problem goes away... A long time ago you could dumbfire SLs but it just made it a ridiculously OP anti-infantry weapon. If you could lock onto infantry, it would be even more ridiculous. Rusty Shallows wrote:My concern would be the potential for the Assault/AR/Swarm fit as a standard and the Vehicle Apocalypse happening. Truest thing said in this thread. Absolutely everyone would rock a SL sidearm and this would make everyone an AV player, allowing no vehicle a chance on the battlefield but also removing AV as a niche. That was sarcasm to point out that the OP was asking for something absurd. Giving every assult player AV on top of their AR would negate the role of dedicated AV, but that's the mentality of so many folks coming from other FPS's. Other games have only one role with slight modifications, not the Rock/Paper/Scissors of DUST. We've seen this type of request before and we will see it many more times.
Lol yup okay, gotcha (damn [/sarcasm] tab didn't show ;p). But there was someone else earlier actually suggesting dumbfire SLs, so the point still needed to be made.
FYI I do believe the plasma launcher is set to be a dumbfire AV weapon but I don't think it's going to be anything like what a dumbfire swarm was like. |
Iron Wolf Saber
BetaMax.
CRONOS.
3151
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 13:03:00 -
[25] - Quote
Me Goes swarm and scrambler pistol.
Made team top score several times....
I don't see the need for the reassignment of the light av weapon to side arm. What I would rather see is upgrading a suit slot to turn the side arm into a light arms at the cost of your grenades and equipment. :D |
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action
Caldari State
146
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 13:25:00 -
[26] - Quote
Toxxikcity wrote:in staying on the subject of tanks, i feel ccp needs to beef up the orbital strikes, to the extent of no matter the strength of the tanks, an orbital should obliterate it, after all it's not as if we carry o/s in our back pockets, we have to work for it and it's a strike from a galactic cruiser or main battleship
Bad player is bad and wants an i win strike to get rid of that pesky HAV driver who knows what hes doing because he doesnt know how to use AV |
Dao Ferret
BetaMax.
CRONOS.
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:15:00 -
[27] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Toxxikcity wrote:in staying on the subject of tanks, i feel ccp needs to beef up the orbital strikes, to the extent of no matter the strength of the tanks, an orbital should obliterate it, after all it's not as if we carry o/s in our back pockets, we have to work for it and it's a strike from a galactic cruiser or main battleship Bad player is bad and wants an i win strike to get rid of that pesky HAV driver who knows what hes doing because he doesnt know how to use AV
Not to feed a troll, and not saying I disagree, but if the "bad player was so bad" how did they manage to accumulate the WP for an OB?
This is New Eden, life isn't always "easy", "balanced" or "fair". |
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action
Caldari State
149
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:23:00 -
[28] - Quote
Dao Ferret wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Toxxikcity wrote:in staying on the subject of tanks, i feel ccp needs to beef up the orbital strikes, to the extent of no matter the strength of the tanks, an orbital should obliterate it, after all it's not as if we carry o/s in our back pockets, we have to work for it and it's a strike from a galactic cruiser or main battleship Bad player is bad and wants an i win strike to get rid of that pesky HAV driver who knows what hes doing because he doesnt know how to use AV Not to feed a troll, and not saying I disagree, but if the "bad player was so bad" how did they manage to accumulate the WP for an OB? This is New Eden, life isn't always "easy", "balanced", "fair" or "safe".
2500wp is easy to obtain
Even with a tank on the field, standard AV is enough to keep that tank moving so the squad can contine on WP
Only in corp matches may it become a problem
But OB are fine as they are, if they become any stronger then we wont need EVE pilots in orbit |
Meeko Fent
Kinsho Swords
Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:28:00 -
[29] - Quote
The reason AV is primary weapons, not Side arms is this.
Can you put your Rocket Launcher in a Holster? No.
Can you Put a Pistol in a Holster? Yes.
If you made AV weapons Sidearms, where did the Need to balence your AV and your AI skills go?
If you can catch a foe when he may be focused on something else, like your AV buddy, you can kill him EASY.
I beleive that there should be a CQB beefy sidearm (Minmatar Hand Shot anyone?) But AV is fine where it is. If you get killed by Infantry frequently with good stuff in a match where you should be bringing your best stuff, its on you. Not CCP for making you unable to kill a Proto easily with standard |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2067
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:34:00 -
[30] - Quote
Swarm Launcher as a Sidearm? No, because a Swarm Launcher is a PRIMARY anti-tank weapon.
An anti-tank Sidearm? Yes, please.
Single-shot plasma burst pistol with REALLY fast damage falloff, or a short-range mini-launcher that works like a single-missile version of the SL, or a high powered short range cutting laser...
But something in the way of sidearms that actually fits as an anti-vehicle weapon would be pretty cool. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |