DUST Search - Logi and Scout LAVs

Hunter Fencen wrote:

Silas Swakhammer wrote:

Hunter Fencen wrote:

Esper Shadows wrote:

Obodiah Garro wrote:

I don't mind the HP LLAVs have, they need to be tanked in order to fulfil their battlefield role, however there are ways to prevent them being murder taxis/batmobiles.

My suggestion is simple. At 0ms they have 100% current resists. The faster they go the less resists they have to 100% dmg penalty against all weapons.

This gives them the kinda insane tank they have atm when doing the job they should be doing, but when they are racing around running people over they are very vurnable, especially to AV fire.

'Cept there ain't no warpoints to be had when "doing the stuff that I should be doing". That's the real problem. You people need to think the metagame through. Instead of burying a playstyle you don't like with a CCP mega-nerf you should be looking for ways to encourage behavior that the playerbase wants.

If CCP keeps nerfing everything its just going to drive people to quit and/or demand a respec so they can max out the next "OP" weapon or vehicle. Then the whole cycle begins anew. Forum QQ'ers cry for a nerf and on it goes.

If you read the original post we aren't looking for a nerf. We want to encourage the correct playstyles with these vehicles. Please read the whole post before commenting in the future.

The majority of this thread is calling for nerfs nerfs nerfs.

The correct playstyles for these vehicles have no incentive.

Where?

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Esper Shadows Savage Arms INC 25	Posted - 2013.06.11 08:09:00 - [31] - Quote Hunter Fencen wrote: Silas Swakhammer wrote: Hunter Fencen wrote: Esper Shadows wrote: Obodiah Garro wrote: I don't mind the HP LLAVs have, they need to be tanked in order to fulfil their battlefield role, however there are ways to prevent them being murder taxis/batmobiles. My suggestion is simple. At 0ms they have 100% current resists. The faster they go the less resists they have to 100% dmg penalty against all weapons. This gives them the kinda insane tank they have atm when doing the job they should be doing, but when they are racing around running people over they are very vurnable, especially to AV fire. 'Cept there ain't no warpoints to be had when "doing the stuff that I should be doing". That's the real problem. You people need to think the metagame through. Instead of burying a playstyle you don't like with a CCP mega-nerf you should be looking for ways to encourage behavior that the playerbase wants. If CCP keeps nerfing everything its just going to drive people to quit and/or demand a respec so they can max out the next "OP" weapon or vehicle. Then the whole cycle begins anew. Forum QQ'ers cry for a nerf and on it goes. If you read the original post we aren't looking for a nerf. We want to encourage the correct playstyles with these vehicles. Please read the whole post before commenting in the future. The majority of this thread is calling for nerfs nerfs nerfs. The correct playstyles for these vehicles have no incentive. Where? Read the thread again. Or learn some reading comprehension. Or learn to read. Not sure which.
Esper Shadows Savage Arms INC 25	Posted - 2013.06.11 08:24:00 - [32] - Quote Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: Hunter Fencen wrote: Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: I don't mind a tough LLAV, but when they can take more punishment than a HAV, there's something wrong. Sir we aren't looking at LAV's stats in general here just Scout and LLAV roles and why they aren't being filled. Well the above makes it obvious. There's no reward for them doing what they're supposed to do and fitting them to fill those roles is apparently difficult. And if there were rewards and the fitting/use wasn't unnecessarily difficult, it still wouldn't change the fact that most players still wouldn't use the SLAV and would still continue to use the outrageously tough LLAV as a deathmobile. Many players still have the CoD like mentality that KDR is all important and will take whatever the easiest path is for them to pad that stat. Very few players actually play public matches to support their squad/team. There are a variety of ways to address death taxis. CCP can certainly bury this playstyle with a nerf if they wanted. They could make it such that impacts do no damage to enemy dropsuits at all. They could end the CoD mentality overnight. The problem is, a death taxi nerf in exchange for nothing would mean that people will just stop using LAVs period except for basic transport. That would degrade the gameplay and **** off LAV drivers. In exchange for a death taxi nerf, there needs to be an acceptable WP gain from using SLAVs and LLAVs for their intended purpose (scouting, or support). There needs to be an acceptable WP gain from using the LAV turret. That much is beyond dispute, imo. I'd like to see these incentives put in place in exchange for a death taxi nerf. If properly implemented, it would "fix" the abuse of death taxis without making LAVs useless.
Hunter Fencen ROGUE SPADES EoN. 3	Posted - 2013.06.11 10:07:00 - [33] - Quote Compiled list of ideas so far: LLAV's: 1.WP from using remote reppers on vehicles. An acceptable figure? 2. Increased driver protection 3. Slower speed and accelaration 4. "Bubble" auto-repper for dropsuits. What should it be limited to in terms of amount and how many people can use it at once? 5. Possible Ammo replenishments. (Module?) 6. Small health decrease 7. Increased PG/CPU output (helps with those modules as its a bit low atm for the kind it is) 8. Slower stopping speed 9. Bonuses to turret tracking and damage 10. Possible implimentation of an HMG style turret. 11. Increased damage resistance at low to no speed. SLAV's: 1. Higher top speed and accelaration. How much? 2. Free passive or active on-board scanner. Ranges? 3. Lower profile against scans 4. More controllable (dune buggy style suspension?) 5. Lose the turret (there's gotta be a compromise here they have to get something (4 seats?)) 6.More PG/CPU 7. Gain WP from drops near enemy instillations or null cannons. (10 WP for instillation 35 for null cannon. ONLY if they are secured by someone from in the LAV. 20 second timer to get out and start hacking for the WP)
Esper Shadows Savage Arms INC 27	Posted - 2013.06.11 10:37:00 - [34] - Quote Hunter Fencen wrote: Compiled list of ideas so far: LLAV's: 1.WP from using remote reppers on vehicles. An acceptable figure? 2. Increased driver protection 3. Slower speed and accelaration 4. "Bubble" auto-repper for dropsuits. What should it be limited to in terms of amount and how many people can use it at once? 5. Possible Ammo replenishments. (Module?) 6. Small health decrease 7. Increased PG/CPU output (helps with those modules as its a bit low atm for the kind it is) 8. Slower stopping speed 9. Bonuses to turret tracking and damage 10. Possible implimentation of an HMG style turret. 11. Increased damage resistance at low to no speed. SLAV's: 1. Higher top speed and accelaration. How much? 2. Free passive or active on-board scanner. Ranges? 3. Lower profile against scans 4. More controllable (dune buggy style suspension?) 5. Lose the turret (there's gotta be a compromise here they have to get something (4 seats?)) 6.More PG/CPU 7. Gain WP from drops near enemy instillations or null cannons. (10 WP for instillation 35 for null cannon. ONLY if they are secured by someone from in the LAV. 20 second timer to get out and start hacking for the WP) This, except for LLAVS: 2. Gunner, not driver protection. Drivers are reasonably protected already. Gunners are out in the open and get picked off easily. That's a big problem. I generally favor reducing the impact damage vs. speed curve for LAVs impacting dropsuits, so that scouts still die pretty easily, medium suits are likely to survive unless they're hit at close to top speed and heavies roughly lose 3/4 EHP if they're hit at top speed (less at lower speed). If the LAV lands or rolls on top of infantry from above some damage would be incurred in that case too, but not death. Maybe half a medium suit EHP. Maybe this kind of a death taxi nerf instead of nerfing the LAV (or LLAV) speed and/or handling. I'm pretty happy with the speed and handling atm. Death taxi damage could be tweaked vs. turret damage and scouting/support duties so that WP gain favors the latter two options generally. But I would still like to be able to run certain dropsuits over for WP if I can't find a gunner, or for strategic reasons. Just that the nerf would make it quite a bit harder to do and would make that tactic more strategic (could be combined with gunning down whoever survives impact, for example) rather than something you can just spam. Put in some or all of these improvements along with the death taxi nerf. Would make LAVs a lot more interesting to field.
Skihids The Tritan Industries RISE of LEGION 1580	Posted - 2013.06.11 20:42:00 - [35] - Quote Add WPs for using the vehicle scanner. I've got on on my LLAV now that I use to hunt red dots with and sometimes I even park and run it to alert blue dots to where the enemy is even if they are in places I can't drive.
Hunter Fencen ROGUE SPADES EoN. 3	Posted - 2013.06.12 15:32:00 - [36] - Quote Cheeky bump cause this has to be adressed
Rough Galaxy S.e.V.e.N. 6	Posted - 2013.06.12 17:01:00 - [37] - Quote Silas Swakhammer wrote: Scout LAVs - Decrease size slightly - Increase acceleration slightly - Increase agility slightly to moderately - Dampen profile greatly - Place an on-board scanner that pulses every 1 sec. for 5 sec., revealing all enemy units within range and keeping them revealed to friendly team for approx. 30s. Cooldown approx. 60s. Warpoints awarded for this activity. Logi LAVs - Decrease HP slightly - Decrease acceleration moderately - Shield driver from direct fire - Warpoints awarded for shield/armor rep - Easier targeting mechanic for shield/armor rep - Allow ammo resupply for nearby friendly infantry. Warpoints, maybe? Cause minor damage to LAVs when hitting enemy infantry. I agree with everything in this except the decrease in logi lav hp. I think it's fine as is, especially if they let us put on more utility modules like a vehicle based ammo nanohive. The LLAV's still need to be able to take a bit of a beating so they can take a few shots and still be able to bug out. I would like to see a re working of how the LAV's drive though. dedicated driving controls would be splendid. accelerate/brake/ebrake buttons would make them a lot more fun to drive.
Silas Swakhammer GamersForChrist Orion Empire 18	Posted - 2013.06.13 06:35:00 - [38] - Quote Rough Galaxy wrote: Silas Swakhammer wrote: Scout LAVs - Decrease size slightly - Increase acceleration slightly - Increase agility slightly to moderately - Dampen profile greatly - Place an on-board scanner that pulses every 1 sec. for 5 sec., revealing all enemy units within range and keeping them revealed to friendly team for approx. 30s. Cooldown approx. 60s. Warpoints awarded for this activity. Logi LAVs - Decrease HP slightly - Decrease acceleration moderately - Shield driver from direct fire - Warpoints awarded for shield/armor rep - Easier targeting mechanic for shield/armor rep - Allow ammo resupply for nearby friendly infantry. Warpoints, maybe? Cause minor damage to LAVs when hitting enemy infantry. I agree with everything in this except the decrease in logi lav hp. I think it's fine as is, especially if they let us put on more utility modules like a vehicle based ammo nanohive. The LLAV's still need to be able to take a bit of a beating so they can take a few shots and still be able to bug out. I would like to see a re working of how the LAV's drive though. dedicated driving controls would be splendid. accelerate/brake/ebrake buttons would make them a lot more fun to drive. As a LLAV driver my biggest fear is direct fire to my suit. I almost always have enough time to get away from AV stuff, and therefore never really worry about my tank. But if the devs make rep smoother and easier, and possibly even add ammo ressuply as has been rumored, a LLAV should be balanced out by taking away it's hefty tank. I doubt they'll ever shield the driver, but one can hope.


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page