Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
2622
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:06:00 -
[91] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Knight SoIaire wrote:Mavado V Noriega wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:AV nades - need the seeking feature removed from it, its a crutch
Swarms - should have to maintain lock on to hit target instead of fire and forget this guy gets it i dont mind the AV nade lock on that much BUT it needs tweakin cuz how fast u can spam it is ******** to avoid spam cooking it for 2secs should enable the homing function, quick toss no homing I like this idea. They could also make Homing variants that do less damage and have a slower throwing speed. If they're going to do that then they better place a reload speed after two explosives from the mass driver. Or, maybe they should slow the ROF of blasters and large railgun turrets. Or, maybe they should increase the pulse cooldown for hardeners to 1 minute and lower the pulse to a 5 sec duration. AV homing has been in the game for how long now? Homing is what makes the AV grenade....an AV grenade! Because locus and flux grenades all does damage to vehicles as well.
i love when ppl with 0 knowledge on vehicle vs vehicle/AV play talk like this.
1. takes 2 swarm volleys to down an armor tank without any hardeners active 2. rails overheat after 3 shots, the rof is 2.2 secs per shot about the same as a FG, lol @ blaster suggestion 3. MD is fine for the most part u rarely see them, why are u comparing MD to an AV nade in an AV vs Vehicle discussion? 4. AV homing is ez mode same as Swarms, if u think tankin is that easy then take it out for a spin get in some tank v tank fights
So as u can see dubbs ur suggestions are extremely terrible and its coming from an AR Assault bias pov and not from an overall game balance pov.
Swarms need to maintain a lock but naturally the speed of the rockets will be a bit faster and possibly a slight dmg increase to compensate. Check Noc's post on it.
Shield Hardeners are complete joke atm and need a buff Armor Hardeners are fine, slower tank that is meant more for defensive capabilities and ability to stay in a hotzone for a while
Even with hardeners on it doesnt give u much "tankin" ability as well. Maybe nubs should realise that the free/militia grade AV is garbage and stop using it?
Ppl complain and QQ about tanks sitting in the redzone yet u want to take away their defensive abilities more and wonder WHY alot of tankers sit in the gayest spots far away then QQ about it. When tanks were actually tanks and could take some hits u never had all this gay hill campin an **** u had ppl moving and supporting infantry but god forbid 1 guy cant solo a tank and cries about it enough to get it where we at today then they complain when they get sniped from the redline from a tank they now have no chance to reach so yea GG community. |
Philipp Achtel
Immobile Infantry
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:08:00 -
[92] - Quote
SoTa PoP wrote:I am not a tanker. I'm a Heavy. And AV nades carried by all members in a squad is indeed a replacement for main AV weapons.
I was using the hypothetical "you". I know you don't run tanks, but you're defending their terrible arguments, and I'm not quire sure why.
Anyway, I'm sure you're right. Now that AV grenades exist, I'm sure you've never brought out your forge gun to fire on any enemy vehicle from range. Why would you when you can just walk right up to a Sagaris and take it out with a few AV grenades risk free? |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
2622
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:10:00 -
[93] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Philipp Achtel wrote:SoTa PoP wrote:Let me translate then. AV nades are a secondary weapon that can be used as a main weapon against very large and expensive toys. This takes away from the necessity or even value of the Forge or Swarm. I.E. could just make it a must that all members need EX-08 AV nades in CB - effectively stopping any tank push with our strong gun game to support it. And it would cost our members next to nothing to set it up ISK and SP wise. That stuff about throwing is mostly untrue - but the homing - even reduced - has made sure my accuracy on throw is almost 100%. When games get larger with more people AV nades are going to show increase effectiveness as more people are able to throw in unison. The only balance to this so far is AV nades suck vs shield. And AV grenades are useless against anything but vehicles. And they take PG and CPU that could be used to fit better modules. And you have to be close enough to throw a grenade near the target. AV grenades are not a substitute for swarms or forge guns. They are a backup primarily useful against LAVs. If you get a squad who are all holding AV grenades within throwing range of a tank, and if that tank is unescorted by infantry, and if the tank has no line of retreat, then you will destroy the tank. This does happen, but eight times out of ten, it's because the tank driver put himself in a vulnerable position or the squad decided to suicide bum rush the tank and managed to get behind it without being noticed. This AV homing vs. not homing argument is a distraction. The tank drivers who want AV nerfed want to be able to waltz around the battlefield with no threats whatsoever because they've convinced themselves that their 2,000,000 ISK tank shouldn't be destroyed by anything other than another 2,000,000 ISK tank. That isn't the way things work in real life, and it's not the way things work here. If you can't deal with that, then the solution is to stop using tanks, not appeal for rule changes in your favor. "Now this guy gets it...." I'm reading people talking about players destroying $1M tanks with 24K sp into grenades. LOL, really? Grenadier skill is a 4x multiplier. It cost twice as much to get proto grenades as it does to get a proto forge gun or proto swarm launcher. If you got solo'ed by packed AV grenades with a souped tank, then you're a derp and you shouldn't blame the game mechanics for your bad tanking. Guys are talking about packed AV grenades destroying $2M tanks.....You know how many grenades it will take for a packed Lai Dai to destroy a sagaris or surya? A sagaris or surya will laugh at level 2 packed AV grenades.
u do know there is not much different between standard and marauder tanks right? also AV nades do more dmg to armor tanks so its actually very easy to take armor tanks down with some AV nade spam, shield tanks take less dmg to explosive dmg so common sense would tell ppl use flux and see how quick u can get some shields down but alas flux takes some skill to use since it doesnt auto lock on the vehicle so ppl dont use it as much as they should on shield tanks |
Philipp Achtel
Immobile Infantry
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:16:00 -
[94] - Quote
Mavado V Noriega wrote:Ppl complain and QQ about tanks sitting in the redzone yet u want to take away their defensive abilities more and wonder WHY alot of tankers sit in the gayest spots far away then QQ about it. When tanks were actually tanks and could take some hits u never had all this gay hill campin an **** u had ppl moving and supporting infantry but god forbid 1 guy cant solo a tank and cries about it enough to get it where we at today then they complain when they get sniped from the redline from a tank they now have no chance to reach so yea GG community.
The only one appealing for rules changes in this thread is you and your cohort. You're the one who wants to take away your adversary's abilities to keep you in check. And not just small damage value tweaks, you want to completely redesign the way two of the three primary anti-vehicle weapons work. |
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:27:00 -
[95] - Quote
Mavado V Noriega wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Knight SoIaire wrote:Mavado V Noriega wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:AV nades - need the seeking feature removed from it, its a crutch
Swarms - should have to maintain lock on to hit target instead of fire and forget this guy gets it i dont mind the AV nade lock on that much BUT it needs tweakin cuz how fast u can spam it is ******** to avoid spam cooking it for 2secs should enable the homing function, quick toss no homing I like this idea. They could also make Homing variants that do less damage and have a slower throwing speed. If they're going to do that then they better place a reload speed after two explosives from the mass driver. Or, maybe they should slow the ROF of blasters and large railgun turrets. Or, maybe they should increase the pulse cooldown for hardeners to 1 minute and lower the pulse to a 5 sec duration. AV homing has been in the game for how long now? Homing is what makes the AV grenade....an AV grenade! Because locus and flux grenades all does damage to vehicles as well. i love when ppl with 0 knowledge on vehicle vs vehicle/AV play talk like this. 1. takes 2 swarm volleys to down an armor tank without any hardeners active 2. rails overheat after 3 shots, the rof is 2.2 secs per shot about the same as a FG, lol @ blaster suggestion 3. MD is fine for the most part u rarely see them, why are u comparing MD to an AV nade in an AV vs Vehicle discussion? 4. AV homing is ez mode same as Swarms, if u think tankin is that easy then take it out for a spin get in some tank v tank fights So as u can see dubbs ur suggestions are extremely terrible and its coming from an AR Assault bias pov and not from an overall game balance pov. Swarms need to maintain a lock but naturally the speed of the rockets will be a bit faster and possibly a slight dmg increase to compensate. Check Noc's post on it. Shield Hardeners are complete joke atm and need a buff Armor Hardeners are fine, slower tank that is meant more for defensive capabilities and ability to stay in a hotzone for a while Even with hardeners on it doesnt give u much "tankin" ability as well. Maybe nubs should realise that the free/militia grade AV is garbage and stop using it? Ppl complain and QQ about tanks sitting in the redzone yet u want to take away their defensive abilities more and wonder WHY alot of tankers sit in the gayest spots far away then QQ about it. When tanks were actually tanks and could take some hits u never had all this gay hill campin an **** u had ppl moving and supporting infantry but god forbid 1 guy cant solo a tank and cries about it enough to get it where we at today then they complain when they get sniped from the redline from a tank they now have no chance to reach so yea GG community.
I guess I relied on common sense to realize when I use sarcasm but I continue to overestimate the bluedot..my mistake.
Those suggestions were just stabs because people are crying about nerfing AVs, so if people wanted to make ridiculous suggestions, then I'll do the same. |
BOZ MR
BurgezzE.T.F Orion Empire
45
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:34:00 -
[96] - Quote
Philipp Achtel wrote:Mavado V Noriega wrote:Ppl complain and QQ about tanks sitting in the redzone yet u want to take away their defensive abilities more and wonder WHY alot of tankers sit in the gayest spots far away then QQ about it. When tanks were actually tanks and could take some hits u never had all this gay hill campin an **** u had ppl moving and supporting infantry but god forbid 1 guy cant solo a tank and cries about it enough to get it where we at today then they complain when they get sniped from the redline from a tank they now have no chance to reach so yea GG community. The only one appealing for rules changes in this thread is you and your cohort. You're the one who wants to take away your adversary's abilities to keep you in check. And not just small damage value tweaks, you want to completely redesign the way two of the three primary anti-vehicle weapons work. Do you run tanks ? No. Than stop writing non-sense comments. I do run both tanks in my main and AV in my alt and with AV nades its pretty easy to spam and kill the tank since you dont need to aim, you just throw and it deals ridiculous damage. |
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:36:00 -
[97] - Quote
Mavado V Noriega wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Philipp Achtel wrote:SoTa PoP wrote:Let me translate then. AV nades are a secondary weapon that can be used as a main weapon against very large and expensive toys. This takes away from the necessity or even value of the Forge or Swarm. I.E. could just make it a must that all members need EX-08 AV nades in CB - effectively stopping any tank push with our strong gun game to support it. And it would cost our members next to nothing to set it up ISK and SP wise. That stuff about throwing is mostly untrue - but the homing - even reduced - has made sure my accuracy on throw is almost 100%. When games get larger with more people AV nades are going to show increase effectiveness as more people are able to throw in unison. The only balance to this so far is AV nades suck vs shield. And AV grenades are useless against anything but vehicles. And they take PG and CPU that could be used to fit better modules. And you have to be close enough to throw a grenade near the target. AV grenades are not a substitute for swarms or forge guns. They are a backup primarily useful against LAVs. If you get a squad who are all holding AV grenades within throwing range of a tank, and if that tank is unescorted by infantry, and if the tank has no line of retreat, then you will destroy the tank. This does happen, but eight times out of ten, it's because the tank driver put himself in a vulnerable position or the squad decided to suicide bum rush the tank and managed to get behind it without being noticed. This AV homing vs. not homing argument is a distraction. The tank drivers who want AV nerfed want to be able to waltz around the battlefield with no threats whatsoever because they've convinced themselves that their 2,000,000 ISK tank shouldn't be destroyed by anything other than another 2,000,000 ISK tank. That isn't the way things work in real life, and it's not the way things work here. If you can't deal with that, then the solution is to stop using tanks, not appeal for rule changes in your favor. "Now this guy gets it...." I'm reading people talking about players destroying $1M tanks with 24K sp into grenades. LOL, really? Grenadier skill is a 4x multiplier. It cost twice as much to get proto grenades as it does to get a proto forge gun or proto swarm launcher. If you got solo'ed by packed AV grenades with a souped tank, then you're a derp and you shouldn't blame the game mechanics for your bad tanking. Guys are talking about packed AV grenades destroying $2M tanks.....You know how many grenades it will take for a packed Lai Dai to destroy a sagaris or surya? A sagaris or surya will laugh at level 2 packed AV grenades. u do know there is not much different between standard and marauder tanks right? also AV nades do more dmg to armor tanks so its actually very easy to take armor tanks down with some AV nade spam, shield tanks take less dmg to explosive dmg so common sense would tell ppl use flux and see how quick u can get some shields down but alas flux takes some skill to use since it doesnt auto lock on the vehicle so ppl dont use it as much as they should on shield tanks
You make a suggestion to try tanking if one thinks that it is easy. But judging from your comments, you must have no idea what it takes to take out a tank by yourself with AV grenades.
"its actually very easy to take armor tanks down with some AV nade spam".....I would like for you to try fighting through infantry to get close enough to a tank and survive while throwing 6 or more grenades at it. You talk about flux grenades...but that implies that more than one person is attempting to destroy the tank. So, if a team is looking to do so....then how is destroying a tank, utilizing teamwork OP? You guys come across as if you want to survive the team and level the battlefield.
I am only talking about AV grenades when I say that it would be OP if you can easily solo a suped up tank, no matter the skill of the driver. But you can't do it so easily. And a matter of fact, you may be only able to do it if the tank is just sitting there waiting for you to blow him up. Coming from an assault guy with AV grenades.....I usually need help to destroy a tank and I'm no slouch at AV grenade game. |
Philipp Achtel
Immobile Infantry
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:37:00 -
[98] - Quote
BOZ MR wrote:Do you run tanks ? No. Than stop writing non-sense comments.
Yes, clearly only the tank runners are allowed to make nonsense comments in this thread.
I think that sums up this thread for me. I've made my points and we're just running in circles. |
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:39:00 -
[99] - Quote
BOZ MR wrote:Philipp Achtel wrote:Mavado V Noriega wrote:Ppl complain and QQ about tanks sitting in the redzone yet u want to take away their defensive abilities more and wonder WHY alot of tankers sit in the gayest spots far away then QQ about it. When tanks were actually tanks and could take some hits u never had all this gay hill campin an **** u had ppl moving and supporting infantry but god forbid 1 guy cant solo a tank and cries about it enough to get it where we at today then they complain when they get sniped from the redline from a tank they now have no chance to reach so yea GG community. The only one appealing for rules changes in this thread is you and your cohort. You're the one who wants to take away your adversary's abilities to keep you in check. And not just small damage value tweaks, you want to completely redesign the way two of the three primary anti-vehicle weapons work. Do you run tanks ? No. Than stop writing non-sense comments. I do run both tanks in my main and AV in my alt and with AV nades its pretty easy to spam and kill the tank since you dont need to aim, you just throw and it deals ridiculous damage.
What's ridiculous damage? I doubt that AV grenades does more than 1500hp in damage (there isn't a real stat...so I'm not sure. I'm just going off of what I see when I throw them). Opposed to the swarm launchers and forge guns that does more than that once you've put damage mods on them and skill points. |
BOZ MR
BurgezzE.T.F Orion Empire
45
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:55:00 -
[100] - Quote
Philipp Achtel wrote:Mavado V Noriega wrote:Ppl complain and QQ about tanks sitting in the redzone yet u want to take away their defensive abilities more and wonder WHY alot of tankers sit in the gayest spots far away then QQ about it. When tanks were actually tanks and could take some hits u never had all this gay hill campin an **** u had ppl moving and supporting infantry but god forbid 1 guy cant solo a tank and cries about it enough to get it where we at today then they complain when they get sniped from the redline from a tank they now have no chance to reach so yea GG community. The only one appealing for rules changes in this thread is you and your cohort. You're the one who wants to take away your adversary's abilities to keep you in check. And not just small damage value tweaks, you want to completely redesign the way two of the three primary anti-vehicle weapons work.
|
|
SoTa PoP
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1839
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 20:59:00 -
[101] - Quote
Philipp Achtel wrote:SoTa PoP wrote:I am not a tanker. I'm a Heavy. And AV nades carried by all members in a squad is indeed a replacement for main AV weapons. I was using the hypothetical "you". I know you don't run tanks, but you're defending their terrible arguments, and I'm not quire sure why. Anyway, I'm sure you're right. Now that AV grenades exist, I'm sure you've never brought out your forge gun to fire on any enemy vehicle from range. Why would you when you can just walk right up to a Sagaris and take it out with a few AV grenades risk free? Mmm, Maybe you're right. Pub games may of skewed my opinion of how effective AV nades are. |
Nemo Bluntz
Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation
41
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 22:04:00 -
[102] - Quote
Anyone who says tanks are OP has obviously never even attempted to drive one. |
Bones McGavins
Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 22:08:00 -
[103] - Quote
Tanks need their range reduced so they can't just act as invincible redline snipers. Also if folks are getting up to your tank to throw av nades maybe you need to work better with your squad to get infantry support to keep you safe?
Right now it's too easy for tanks to run at the slightest danger. I think reduced range and icresed signature profile so they show up on the radars limits always would make the game more balanced. As it is tankers can play super defensively and just never put themselves at risk and still get quite a lot of kills.
But part of this is due to how easy it is to snipe and how slow you have to be to fire av weapons abd how much attention those weapons draw. (Big flashes and trails) Tanks themselves might not be op but the current balance between all units means a tank playing "scared" is almost impossible t kill |
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 22:11:00 -
[104] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:It wasn't the tanks but the missiles that were OP and needed a nerf. Nerf happened...
What you see now are tankers complaining about AV equipment and infantry defending their AV counters.
|
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
328
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 00:16:00 -
[105] - Quote
MFW I realise that the tank I'm throwing my AV nades isn't a crappy militia tank, it's a Gunnlogi with a decent fit.
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
180
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 10:14:00 -
[106] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:AV nades - need the seeking feature removed from it, its a crutch
Swarms - should have to maintain lock on to hit target instead of fire and forget Tanks are a crutch.....since you want to go there. There isn't a feature in the game that someone wouldn't cry "crutch" about.
If you cannot hit a HAV which is a ******* massive target without needing help from a gimmick mechanic then go biomass yourself now |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
340
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 10:21:00 -
[107] - Quote
Hands up those who can remember the days when AV nades didn't have the homing feature?
Hands up those who thought it was awesome when CCP announced they'd put it in?
Hands up those who remember *why* CCP put it in in the first place?
Oh right. Not too many people. CCP put in the homing because people were running around with AV nades (me included) as a multi-purpose grenade. They did so much damage that the normal AP grenades were pretty much useless in comparison. They didn't only go off near a vehicle, they went off where you threw them, so people were using them as normal grenades aswell.
CCP's answer was to make them explode upon impact on vehicles. It didn't need a buff or a nerf to damage. It's fine in its current state. It also makes sense that an AV nade would be attracted to a vehicle, to cause maximum damage. |
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
180
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 10:47:00 -
[108] - Quote
Laheon wrote:Hands up those who can remember the days when AV nades didn't have the homing feature?
Hands up those who thought it was awesome when CCP announced they'd put it in?
Hands up those who remember *why* CCP put it in in the first place?
Oh right. Not too many people. CCP put in the homing because people were running around with AV nades (me included) as a multi-purpose grenade. They did so much damage that the normal AP grenades were pretty much useless in comparison. They didn't only go off near a vehicle, they went off where you threw them, so people were using them as normal grenades aswell.
CCP's answer was to make them explode upon impact on vehicles. It didn't need a buff or a nerf to damage. It's fine in its current state. It also makes sense that an AV nade would be attracted to a vehicle, to cause maximum damage.
They can still do that
All you have to do is hit the vehicle yourself with a nade and not have a mechanic do it for you |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2313
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 10:50:00 -
[109] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:If you cannot hit a HAV which is a ******* massive target without needing help from a gimmick mechanic then go biomass yourself now If you can consistently land a slow-moving projectile with a variable parabolic trajectory directly on a target moving more than double the speed of the best speed-tanked Prototype Scout, you have my permission to come here and try to biomass me. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
343
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 10:55:00 -
[110] - Quote
It's actually difficult to do that without the homing. "I threw a grenade and it landed about an inch away from the tank, but it didn't blow up. I couldn't get closer because if I popped out of cover too long, I would have died." That's a scenario I face quite often. The cover part, not the grenade not exploding.
The lore is that the AV grenade arms itself when it comes close to a vehicle, and then homes in on it. It works fine at the moment. |
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
180
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 11:01:00 -
[111] - Quote
Laheon wrote:It's actually difficult to do that without the homing. "I threw a grenade and it landed about an inch away from the tank, but it didn't blow up. I couldn't get closer because if I popped out of cover too long, I would have died." That's a scenario I face quite often. The cover part, not the grenade not exploding.
The lore is that the AV grenade arms itself when it comes close to a vehicle, and then homes in on it. It works fine at the moment.
So basically what you are saying is this
'i want to be able to endlessly spam nades from behind cover with as little risk as possible to myself' |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
344
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 11:08:00 -
[112] - Quote
No, what I'm saying is that I want to be able to SURVIVE trying to blow up a militia tank, instead of having to run within 5m of the hull, throw a single nade off then get blown to smithereens by the 80GJ blaster.
Even now, half the time I still die because I run out of cover and I die screaming my head off.
I don't particularly care if I die or not, I do things with very little thought of safety (in-game at least), so if I *have* to get close to blow up a tank, I will. Hell, when I see LAVs running round the map, I shoot at them to try to get their attention. If they come straight at me, I throw an AV nade and blow it up when it's close enough. Normally "close enough" is when it's about to run me over. But asking for the mechanic that allows me to use all three of my grenades instead of just barely getting one off (IF i take him by surprise) is ridiculous. |
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
180
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 11:18:00 -
[113] - Quote
I will never agree with the mechanism
It makes it far too easy to cause damage to tanks with little risk
I have infantry hiding somewhere where i cannot hit in a million years and they just spam them from cover and it looks like the nades are nowhere near my tank then it seeks and hits me
The seeking distance is huge it seems |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
344
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 11:22:00 -
[114] - Quote
It's really not - only a couple of metres. And that's why you have infantry support. Tanks aren't meant to lone wolf it. Infantry supports the tanks, and tanks support the infantry. Your infantry should have run in and either flushed them out or taken them out. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2313
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 11:22:00 -
[115] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:I will never agree with the mechanism
It makes it far too easy to cause damage to tanks with little risk
I have infantry hiding somewhere where i cannot hit in a million years and they just spam them from cover and it looks like the nades are nowhere near my tank then it seeks and hits me
The seeking distance is huge it seems It doesn't feel NEARLY as huge from the perspective of the guy throwing it, although I actually agree that the activation range is wider than I think it should be.
But scaling the tracking down is a good idea, removing it completely is a terrible one. |
Bones McGavins
Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic
38
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 16:38:00 -
[116] - Quote
Laheon wrote:It's really not - only a couple of metres. And that's why you have infantry support. Tanks aren't meant to lone wolf it. Infantry supports the tanks, and tanks support the infantry. Your infantry should have run in and either flushed them out or taken them out.
Exactly. The irony of tank users is funny to me. They redirect any complaints about being OP by saying you need to work as a squad, but then they make all their complaints based on being a lone wolf tank.
A bad tank player may die one on one to a good AV unit, but only if they dont recognize the threat and get out of range. It is not easy to get within throwing range of a tank, with cover, without the tank noticing and running.
But a good AV unit can easily die to a bad tank player, because the kill time is so low.
Once you start factoring in squads, things get even worse. Yes, a good squad can dominate a lone wolf tank.
But a good squad against even a mediocre squad supporting a tank? The tank reduces the room you can fight in, because if you give it LOS, your dead. So you have to fight its supporting squad in a tiny little box while speced to fight tanks and not infantry. Yes, its doable, but every advantage goes to the tank squad.
Meanwhile, if the tank does lose its support, all it has to do is fall back...
Then you factor in random blues? Militia AV spam from a distance doesnt do much to damage the tank. But militia sniper fire on a guy hiding behind cover to avoid a tank? Yes, that one helps the tank.
The point is, Tanks never describe a fair fight when talking about balance. But at every level, the tank obviously has the advantage. Are they invincible? No. But you are paying a few million ISK for a big advantage that can easily turn the battle, not an auto win invincibility button.
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
180
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 16:59:00 -
[117] - Quote
Laheon wrote:It's really not - only a couple of metres. And that's why you have infantry support. Tanks aren't meant to lone wolf it. Infantry supports the tanks, and tanks support the infantry. Your infantry should have run in and either flushed them out or taken them out.
Couple of metres lolno
More like 10m
AV nades are so easy to use and quick aswell, infantry can be sent in but if that tank is ther just keep lobbing nades because it will die at the rate you can spam them |
Bones McGavins
Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic
38
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 17:02:00 -
[118] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Laheon wrote:It's really not - only a couple of metres. And that's why you have infantry support. Tanks aren't meant to lone wolf it. Infantry supports the tanks, and tanks support the infantry. Your infantry should have run in and either flushed them out or taken them out. Couple of metres lolno More like 10m AV nades are so easy to use and quick aswell, infantry can be sent in but if that tank is ther just keep lobbing nades because it will die at the rate you can spam them
The tank can just...back up a bit. Why is it still just sitting there after one nade throw? |
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
180
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 17:35:00 -
[119] - Quote
Bones McGavins wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Laheon wrote:It's really not - only a couple of metres. And that's why you have infantry support. Tanks aren't meant to lone wolf it. Infantry supports the tanks, and tanks support the infantry. Your infantry should have run in and either flushed them out or taken them out. Couple of metres lolno More like 10m AV nades are so easy to use and quick aswell, infantry can be sent in but if that tank is ther just keep lobbing nades because it will die at the rate you can spam them The tank can just...back up a bit. Why is it still just sitting there after one nade throw?
If its an armor tank it takes sometime to get moving
Plus your assuming that the nades are coming from the front, you dont know where they could be coming from half the time so pick a direction and move
Plus the seeking distance from AV nades is large as it is, sure you can move but they can still keep on throwing and because of the seeking ability the nade has it will still get attracted the HAV until its far enough away
Sometimes the nade is infact an infantry nade so no need to run
But throwing nades is pretty quick anyways so by time 1 has hit the 2nd is in the air and the 3rd is about to be launched |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2321
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 18:25:00 -
[120] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Laheon wrote:It's really not - only a couple of metres. And that's why you have infantry support. Tanks aren't meant to lone wolf it. Infantry supports the tanks, and tanks support the infantry. Your infantry should have run in and either flushed them out or taken them out. Couple of metres lolno More like 10m AV nades are so easy to use and quick aswell, infantry can be sent in but if that tank is ther just keep lobbing nades because it will die at the rate you can spam them Feels like 10m when you're in the tank.
Feels like 2m when you're on foot.
I'm pretty sure it's somewhere in between the two, but like I said, I agree the tracking radius is too large. It's a mecahnic that needs WORK, not total abandonment. If they adjust the tracking range, then it'll shift away from being a "fire and forget" weapon and closer to being skill-based.
But my earlier comment still stands in defense of having some measure of tracking. You're trying to land a small, relatively slow-moving projectile DIRECTLY onto a target that's moving at least twice the speed of the fastest possible speed-tanked Proto Scout. That's going to make AV Grenades unusable. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |