I guess you never have, it was funner when food was added to it

You mean AV people who know what they're doing? You're just proving my point that tanks only do well because they always go up against noobs, but guess what? All those people who switched over to AV are now easy to pick off with infantry, that was what you said right? Paper, scissors, rock.

I never have what? I had food fights, they usually didn't end well for me.

The only way noobs become AV people who know what they're doing is by going up against tanks, willingly or not.

Had a paper ball fight, which is just a catalyst for a food fight to escalate

I never learned how to sow, you going to force me to learn how to sow?

Well when you have to choose between sowing and repeating your last year of high school which do you choose?

Well when you have to choose between sowing and repeating your last year of high school which do you choose?

he wants to dropout then but still get the degree

Sowing, but not everyone wants to graduate to the big leagues. So if a guy wants to stay in IO for his whole life then let him, he's choosing to miss out on the fun.

Anyone who wanted to use guns would be using guns in IO
Anyone who wanted to blow up tanks with gear that cost 1000x less than the tanks would join the other ambush.
Anyone who wanted to lose their tank with no feasible chance of financial compensation or victory after calling it in would que non IO


And no other vehicle ever would be used anywhere after.

how is it that we have to keep explaining this?

So segregating graduates and drop outs is the only way for things go to work when there are wayys around it already?

This thread is actually making my brain bleed. What makes you think that giving people the chance to not fight vehicles somehow means that everyone who plays normal game types become super AV monsters? You do realize that people specing AV are specing AV regardless of game type, right? You do realize that these players will be in those games no matter what, right?

You do realize that all this does is give people a chance to fight without having to waddle around in AV all match, without hurting vehicle people because ::gasp:: their game types will be the same as always?

And as always, Sov. That's the playground, anything goes there. These are GAME TYPES, things you CHOOSE to play. NOTHING is forced on you....how is it that we have to keep explaining this?

That's just what this games needs. A game with specialization and variety of skills to be broken apart into subsets.

Now I have never driven a tank and never want to. However look at this from my perspective as a DS pilot.
If I want to use my dropship I'd have to queue against an entire team that's either using tanks
(which instantly kill me)
Or against AV
(which is balanced against tanks, and also instantly kill me)

So um.... Yeah. Essentially this would ruin the game for me or anyone who enjoys having diversity in their matches. Where each game is different, team is different and you don't know what to expect.

Now we know why this idea came about. It's because presently tanks own everyone. If there was more content in the game this wouldn't be a problem. If there were fighters and gunships that killed tanks, properly balanced AV and less free/militia gear ruining the cost-risk-balance then Infantry only Ambush would not have been considered.

So how about instead of ruining the game early be segregating AV vs Tanks and Guns vs Guns to their own games maybe just wait for new content. You could lobby for it, but it won't speed CCP up. Or you could lobby a quick and short sighted band-aid that would be easy to implement but completely devastating to the entire point of this game.

Nobody who plays this game really want it to try to be a COD clone. CoD is boring as balls and CCP would fail in that market.
It's supposed to be some kind of MMO FPS but like eve. Imagine someone in eve suggesting a frigates only sector of the universe...

You need 8 guys for a corp battle, there's 2 guys equally good at infantry, but only 1 who skilled into AV and there's only 1 spot left, who do you put on the team? Segregation based on skill happens in the real world too you know, we don't let people without educations, and it has to be a special education not GED, work at NASA, well, maybe as janitors, idk.

Skirmish will still be there for the tankers and DS pilots, in fact that is really where they belong and where they have true purpose.

People generally play ambush to fight against infantry, not tanks or anything else (with possibly the exception of LAV's, which can be handled with AV nades but not completely make the player defenseless to infantry like a AV fit against a tank would).

The thing with ambush is that there is no supply depots (well there is on one or two of the maps, but they come up very rarely). Which means unless somebody wants to suicide to pick a AV fit to deal with the tank, players have to wait until they die to switch (that is if they have an AV fit at all). Then sometimes when we do switch, somebody else gets the tanker while we are spawning or shortly thereafter, and we are left with a AV fit which is nearly 100% defenseless against other infantry players.

Non-supply depot ambush should not be a mode which harbors tanks and other vehicles that need dedicated AV to take out. it is wrong is so many ways, and that is the key to this whole subject. A tankers risk in ambush is significantly reduced than if they were playing OMS or skirmish.

False. Somebody might skill for One, the other, both, or neither. depending on how much SP they have and how they wish to use it.

That's called a tactical mistake, when you know you're more than likely facing vehicles

A lot of people are getting the impression that Ambush will be turned into an infantry-only mode.

NOT that we'll get a new mode with no vehicles, but that Ambush will no longer exist in its current form, and will be an infantry-only mode.

Ambush (with no vehicles)
Ambush OMS (as normal)
Skirmish (as normal)

That's what the thread CCP said they're "considering" was asking for.

I don't want that.

I'm not TOTALLY against the idea of an infantry based game mode. But I'm VERY strongly against the idea of replacing one of our existing modes with it.

And the player-base split is another reason against it.

"Dropships are OP, they're killing everyone and I can't take it down with free AV!" ~Said no one ever

Most dropships seem to ust outrun my swarm missiles, making them rather difficult to take down. I can normally get 1 shot in with swarm launcher then the ship just flys away staying just ahead of my missiles until they blow up in mid air. Is there something I don't know or is this a common occurance. Swarm missiles seem to be designed to take down arial vehicles yet they seem to be ultimately best against LAVs.

Also has anyone brought up a topic concerning making the swarm missiles more like EVE allowing for different damage type from missiles? Would make taking down shield based vehicles much more manageable with SL.

I hate to break it to you but

=D

You found someone pre AB nerf who didn't figure out how to spend 5k on a militia forge gun I guess.

Besides the obvious fact that that one noob with his single swarm admits to being able to stave off a DS from doing anything useful an entire match by firing off one shot. Imagine being able to do that with a tank.

Pull out one swarm and it hides behind a hill getting zero player kills for the rest of the match. That would point to AV being unbalanced in AV's favor I'd think right ?
:P

Again so you draw the exception at LAV's Because they're worthless. You COULD spend 500k on one but it would be taken out by free swarms instantly so nobody does.

Now if you'd just also admit that the same exception could be drawn for dropships because

"Dropships are OP, they're killing everyone and I can't take it down with free AV!" ~Said no one ever
then you'd be agreeing with me that this issue arose because of tanks and not vehicles in general.

IO lobby is a cry against the lack of content balancing tanks out, and not against LAV's. Not against DS and definitely not against LAVs.
Therefore since Vehicles = {lav, ds, hav}. And {LAV, DS} is a non issue then this is an issue about HAV.

Well I certainly am not going to say that dropships are some huge problem in ambush, they are pretty rare and it's not like it was in early Codex where they could own the battlefield single-handedly. But why would you even want to bring a DS into ambush? The maps are tiny, and it's not as if spawning and dropping from a DS in ambush would make any tactical sense (unless your a sniper and want to get up to an unreachable spot). Really the only thing a DS does in ambush is provide intel and maybe draw the attention of the enemy players a little bit.

However DS's do fall in the same category as tanks because players need a dedicated AV fit to take them out (even if it is BPO militia swarms, it's still dedicated to taking out AV and not infantry). LAV do not require dedicated AV, so players can still have a perfectly capable fit for dealing with infantry, but also at the same time keep the LAV's at bay.

Right, so you would choose the guy who's more versatile over the guy who isn't? I would.

nope this thread was started yesterday *sigh* some people just... ugh here's the link
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=65145&p=1

God it's like oozing troll and fail.

Ultimately it's CCP's choice. It's their game and people will play it or not. But if that's the sort of player they're trying to attract and retain then I'm not sure I'd stick around much.

So he was saying that on one of the few maps that has any cover, dropships sometimes run and hide from his free, zero SP weapon and are rendered useless and out of sight the rest of the game. But this upsets him because that weapon won't also instantly explode a million ISK 3 million SP vehicle that survived against all odds with the RDV deployment.

erm....

Have fun getting steamrolled by vehicles