| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
0 Try Harder
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
Noir. Mercenary Group
219
   |
Posted - 2013.04.11 19:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Right now anyone can skill into grenades and get the highest DPS anti-vehicle and anti-infanty weapons in the game. I request that these grenades are split into separate categories.
> Explosive Grenades
> Anti-Infantry Flux Grenades
> Anti-Vehicle Explosive Grenades and Anti-Vehicle Flux Grenades
Armor tanks have a clear advantage when it comes to AV grenades. Players can simply run around with one of the best AI grenades and it is also extremely effective against vehicles.
I would like to see an AV version of flux grenades, and reduce the effectiveness of the normal flux grenades against vehicles. Reducing the effectiveness of AI flux grenades and making AV grenades hybrid is another potential option, but I figure letting people choose between them could be fun too. Adding a hybrid variant might also be fine too. |
charlesnette dalari
Creative Killers
176
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 19:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Considering you are a tank driver seems pretty obvious the reasoning behind your suggestions. These suggestions would only serve to make powerful tanks that much more powerful against infantry. NO thanks |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
650
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 19:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
I would have no issue with AP Flux Grenades being less effective against vehicles if they added a Flux AV grenade (Which I am pretty sure they are going to do anyways, I remember reading it somewhere)
I mean let's be honest here...yes Flux Grenades are very effective against shield tanks, but AV grenades are even more stupidly easy to use and demolish armor. So I would not say Armor tanks really have an advantage, even if you argue for the grenades...at the moment AV is completely stacked against armor, with all but one AV weapon being explosive, and that one being Kinetic which is almost as effective against armor as explosive. |
0 Try Harder
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
Noir. Mercenary Group
220
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 21:46:00 -
[4] - Quote
charlesnette dalari wrote:Considering you are a tank driver seems pretty obvious the reasoning behind your suggestions. These suggestions would only serve to make powerful tanks that much more powerful against infantry. NO thanks
I am a tank driver. I am also primarily a shield tank driver. I believe CCP is going to split up the grenades in the next build anyways. It just makes sense, and from the little information that I have heard, they are splitting all of the weapons into different categories.
So the goal of this suggestion is to close the gap between shield tanks and armor tanks. It should not change the overall effectiveness of AV infantry.
Pokey Dravon wrote:I would have no issue with AP Flux Grenades being less effective against vehicles if they added a Flux AV grenade (Which I am pretty sure they are going to do anyways, I remember reading it somewhere)
I mean let's be honest here...yes Flux Grenades are very effective against shield tanks, but AV grenades are even more stupidly easy to use and demolish armor.
Right. I thought about the differences between the current flux and the current AV grenade. I am taking this from more of a corp battle perspective. AV grenades are easier to use, but someone who is skilled at throwing grenades (they practice) can make flux grenades just as effective as the current AV grenades. Flux grenades explode two seconds after contact.
I have put a lot of thought into this. It does have the potential to nerf shield tanks in pub matches. I eventually asked myself a question: Do I care about how well my HAV does in pub matches? What does this change in corp battles?
I would love to have an OP pub-stomping tank, but I believe the game should be balanced around battles between one or more corporations.
So what does this change in corp battles?
I thought about all of the corp battles I have participated in. Hellstorm was the corp that gave me and my infantry the hardest time. They were able to deal with my Sagaris and our infantry at the same time for most of the match. What they did was make good use of high ground and flux grenades. Usually a HAV forces some of the enemy infantry to switch to an AV fit. When an enemy switches to an AV fit, he reduces his combat effectiveness in infantry vs infantry battles.
Hellstorm made good use of high ground, cover and a bridge. They were able to maintain almost 100% combat effectiveness against our infantry and my Sagaris due to their use of flux grenades. If I had been an armor tank, their flux grenades would have been next to useless. Hellstorm would need to bring out some form of AV, or simply ignore the HAV.
Allowing a full proto HAV to do whatever it wants is never a good idea. The HAV can use its power to slice through enemy infantry. So Hellstorm would have to switch fits from a full AP fit to AV. Even if Hellstorm brought only brought AV grenades to deal with the HAV, it takes up a grenade slot and leaves less fewer people with fewer grenades that work on our infantry.
If you're curious about what happened, it was a truly epic battle. Each side put up 50mil ISK, and over a month ago that was a LOT of cash. It started off with a dropship duel. After that, Hellstorm made an excellent and effective push against our positions. They were able to take multiple objectives, and at this point we realized that they might be able to red line us. Alternatives were thought up which differed from our current strategy in case Hellstorm was able to push us into the red line.
And they did. Since 50 million ISK was on the line, sacrificing a HAV worth over 2 million ISK was an affordable option. Our HAV was destroyed so that a different fit could be brought in. A HAV fit had already been prepared to defend objectives and provide support for infantry, and one of those fits was modified to create a HAV designed to penetrate enemy defenses and spearhead an infantry attack. The combined armor and infantry attack managed to penetrate enemy defenses, and insert troops behind enemy lines, while providing a buffer for infantry to take objectives and defensive positions.
Hellstorm made a valiant, but ultimately failed attack against our defensive positions. They tried a direct attack, and once that was repelled they decided to make a coordinated pincer attack to capture objectives. I have to give them props on trying a tactic that few generals have successfully managed to against superior or equal numbers of enemy forces, but Hellstorm was unable to take any objectives.
I have been curious about the pincer attack in this game, and I've been dying to try it or see it done. We were able to put the same numbers on both sides of our positions to match enemy forces. We took up strategically better positions, and Hellstorm was forced into attacking while at a disadvantage. At this point, the MCC health was too low for Hellstorm to mount a third attack.
In the end, PFBHz was able to take the 100 million ISK pot. (both sides put up 50m) |
0 Try Harder
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
Noir. Mercenary Group
220
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 21:46:00 -
[5] - Quote
Even after victory, one should always analyze the battle. After the HAV was able to penetrate enemy defenses, it spent the rest of the match doing small hit and run raider attacks against our enemy. It did slightly weaken the enemy attacks, but most importantly it forced them to use resources to deter the HAV from successfully killing their infantry.
I analyzed the type of tank and fits that were used, what worked and what did not. It was obvious that using an armor tank instead of a shield would not only been able to successfully insert infantry behind enemy lines and escape, but it would have been significantly more effective in providing support to our troops.
Shield hardeners are active for only ten seconds and have a thirty second cooldown. This forced the shield tank to make an attack and escape in only ten seconds. Armor hardeners are active for 60 seconds with a 15 second cooldown, and two can be activated at the same time and provide significantly more EHP for a longer period of time than shield hardeners can. (Yes, I know that shield hardeners are 30% and armor are 25%, but 30% for 10 seconds is significantly less EHP than 25% for 60 seconds.) It is possible that an armor tank could have stayed in combat for a longer period of time, or at least have a better chance at making an attack and escape because it just has more time to do it in.
A blaster fit appeared to be the best option for the map and where and how the targets were positioned, but the Sagaris's damage was too low to kill or distract enough of the enemy's troops within a small period of time. For the most part, I was able to keep the Sagaris out of range of enemy flux grenades, although one enemy did try an AV grenade at the end of the match. The AV grenades does have a longer range than the flux.
I tried positioning my Sagaris during a pub match just beyond the range of enemy AV grenades where I could get to cover and do a number of things, like avoid swarms, and I found that I was nearing the end of the optimal range of the turret I was using. Again, the Sagaris would have been better with a boost to its damage, but I would lose far too much tank to do it.
If you look at the Surya, it receives 4% extra damage per level of the Marauder skill. 20% extra damage would have been amazing at close range. If I am at the end of the optimal range and go slightly beyond it to avoid enemy AV, the 20% extra damage offsets the damage loss if I am a few meters beyond the optimal range of my turret. |
0 Try Harder
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
Noir. Mercenary Group
220
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 21:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
I made this suggestion because I have seen armor tankers QQ all over forums about how shield tanks have an advantage against armor in tank vs tank fights.
Armor has many advantages over shield when it comes to dealing with infantry. If CCP does in fact remove the one thing that shield tanks are better at than armor, many HAV operators will no longer operate shield HAVs. Beyond personal preference, there is no reason to drive shield tanks if they are equal to armor tanks in HAV vs HAV battles, but much worse than armor tanks in HAV vs Infantry battles.
If you are wondering why I gave away a lot of valuable information, it is because I am now getting a nice armor tank. My shield tank skills are just about done. With the refund I will look at the changes and plan how to allocate my SP. I made a plan and schedule as to how I am going to allocate over 8 million SP, and I have stuck to it.
I look forward to the new build, and I hope that shield tanks will still be good at something. I also hope that CCP gives us more epic battles with epic payouts to match the fight. |
Eris Ernaga
GamersForChrist
113
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 23:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
0 Try Harder wrote:Right now anyone can skill into grenades and get the highest DPS anti-vehicle and anti-infanty weapons in the game. I request that these grenades are split into separate categories.
> Explosive Grenades
> Anti-Infantry Flux Grenades
> Anti-Vehicle Explosive Grenades and Anti-Vehicle Flux Grenades
Armor tanks have a clear advantage when it comes to AV grenades. Players can simply run around with one of the best AI grenades and it is also extremely effective against vehicles.
I would like to see an AV version of flux grenades, and reduce the effectiveness of the normal flux grenades against vehicles. Reducing the effectiveness of AI flux grenades and making AV grenades hybrid is another potential option, but I figure letting people choose between them could be fun too. Adding a hybrid variant might also be fine too.
+1 most people disagree but grenades are not a primary and even more av weapons are coming to dust. Primarys like the forge gun, new plasma rifle (i think its called) and swarm launchers should hold much more damage then av grenades and flux grenades. But you see a lot of players simply equipping av grenades and being more useful then swarms especially since they can spam them at supply depos or with nanohives. Once again don't mind the negative comments I am a tank driver and can tell you these little pesky nades are a problem. |
Eris Ernaga
GamersForChrist
113
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 23:26:00 -
[8] - Quote
charlesnette dalari wrote:Considering you are a tank driver seems pretty obvious the reasoning behind your suggestions. These suggestions would only serve to make powerful tanks that much more powerful against infantry. NO thanks
They have new av weapons coming and you obviously don't understand his post besides to disagree with it. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |