Nova Knife
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
975
   |
Posted - 2013.05.21 04:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
If you have enough time to 'hack' a vehicle... You should be running in a fit that has remote explosives, and AV grenades.
Seriously. You have no idea the amount of pwn you can inflict on a vehicle with a cluster of remote explosives, following by some AV nade spam. (Or maybe you do?) Either way... I'm not sold on the idea of forcibily ejecting enemy players and the like.
UI disruption and mobility penalties for vehicles are forms of E-War that are worth exploring though, IMO. |
Nova Knife
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
1018
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 01:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
Ecshon Autorez wrote:Nova Knife wrote:Seriously. You have no idea the amount of pwn you can inflict on a vehicle with a cluster of remote explosives, following by some AV nade spam. (Or maybe you do?) In regards to the above: I just placed two REs directly beneath (as in it drove over them and then I detonated them) a Gunnlogi, didn't even take it down one quarter of its shields. BUT, while I was placing them (about 2ft away with the driver in a missle turret, failing to hit me) I feel I had enough time to hack the vehicle.
Yeah, two RE won't really do much.
Generally speaking, RE's are much better used as a manually triggered cluster of mines, than as a "run up and blow them up" kind of weapon. (They'd be much more viable at the latter if the third person camera on HAV didn't make them immune to this)
Five RE's in a cluster will seriously hurt any HAV enough that most can be finished with AV nades before they move out of range. (Good 'traps' are laid with some proxy explosives laid down shortly before or after the RE's. Don't mix them within each others' blast radius, it doesn't work)
I guess I'm not really sold on the "If you get close and can stay close for X seconds, you get Y" as being something that improves the gameplay at all. Maybe it's just the suggestions tied to it. Instant destruction without some sort of warning (I do note that you have the "being hacked" warning in there, but wouldn't someone just like... drive away, at that point?)
Messing with their controls seems messy and unfun.
You're proposing options where the infantry have a massively unfair advantage without proposing any proper counter for vehicle people, and that's where I really take issue. AV already have a massive advantage over vehicles as-is. The idea of stealing someone's tank somehow is awesome, but we really don't need 'easymode' AV mechanics right now.
We need actual balance between the vehicle and AV dynamic, and I honestly think that these suggestions -as proposed- would make things worse. That's not to say the idea of "Get close for X and get Y" is a bad idea in itself, but you really need to work on your 'Why we need Y" in the first place. |