|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aerion Spiritus
The Southern Legion
RISE of LEGION
27
   |
Posted - 2013.06.05 04:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
With the BF3 Jet style I say NOOO! Do not make it possible to jump out use some sort of AV than hop back in. I don't want to be chasing a guy whos also in a jet only for him to hop out and throw and av nade in my face..... |
Aerion Spiritus
The Southern Legion
RISE of LEGION
30
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 05:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:None of you are vehicle users. Vehicles are not something CCP does well. I'll put it this way: everything EXCEPT vehicles has adv, pro, and officer varients. If we dont have proto tanks by now, we will never be getting fighters.
I'm a vehicle user and vehicles were alright (changes were needed but not as drastic as current) before the change to vehicle engineering. THAT nearly paralyzed vehicles. Currently they are going around with casts on their arms and legs. Vehicles need the Vehicle Engineering back to 5% PG per level. I am an HAV and LAV user. I use caldari vehicles and EVERY one of my fits requires all the low power slots to have Powergrid Expansion units. So before they add more variants of vehicles (BRILLIANT IDEA) they need to fix the current vehicles or they will be working from a broken foundation. |
Aerion Spiritus
The Southern Legion
RISE of LEGION
30
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 10:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
tander09 wrote:CCP need to make sure we fight IN SPAICE with thees babies.
Basically controlling fighters that get deployed from Super carriers? |
Aerion Spiritus
The Southern Legion
RISE of LEGION
31
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 21:28:00 -
[4] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Charlotte O'Dell wrote:None of you are vehicle users. Vehicles are not something CCP does well. I'll put it this way: everything EXCEPT vehicles has adv, pro, and officer varients. If we dont have proto tanks by now, we will never be getting fighters. This is wrong.
Charlotte O'Dell. You should play EVE. The ships have Tech I which is considered the base. Than there are Tech II which are specialised for certain roles and use the same base as a Tech I ship. This is what CCP are doing with vehicles. |
Aerion Spiritus
Phaze O n e
35
|
Posted - 2013.06.09 23:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
medomai grey wrote:Charlotte O'Dell wrote:None of you are vehicle users. Vehicles are not something CCP does well. I'll put it this way: everything EXCEPT vehicles has adv, pro, and officer varients. If we dont have proto tanks by now, we will never be getting fighters. Godin Thekiller wrote:He's talking about the removed Marauder and BO HAV's. You must be new here. Welcome to New Eden. Peace, Godin  Marauder class and BPO HAVs where not once mentioned in Charlotte O'Dell's post.  You must be new to reading comprehension. Keep reading more material, you'll get better with it the more you read. Screw peace. Fictional war is more fun, Grey
I don't think he meant BPO HAVs. I think he meant Black OPs HAVs. As in cloaking fields (when they are implemented). |
Aerion Spiritus
Phaze O n e
35
|
Posted - 2013.06.09 23:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote:That said, CCP needs to consider a small redesign of the Gallente fighter. It's way too overcomplicated to be true Gallente tech. Our equipment is supposed to be smooth, and visually appealing, and use badass plasma.
The current model looks too much like a bug. They got the Gallente RDV and HAV perfect. Fighter should just be smoother, look like one flowing frame.
Current comparison between Caldari and Gallente fighters looks too much like "Modern Human design vs 'da Aliens design' "
Edit: I will be speccing into the Gallente fighter no matter what, however, because that's how I roll.
I will enjoy shooting you while you "try" to turn fast enough to get a bead on me :P |
Aerion Spiritus
Phaze O n e
39
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 00:29:00 -
[7] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:medomai grey wrote:Aerion Spiritus wrote:
I don't think he meant BPO HAVs. I think he meant Black OPs HAVs. As in cloaking fields (when they are implemented).
Thanks for the correction. I didn't know cloaked tanks where in development. When they de-cloak in front of infantry, it'll give a whole new meaning to soiling yourself. Black Ops HAVs will be extremely thin. At least when they were available, they had reduced slot layouts and also less HP iirc. Anyways, my Enforcer or Maurader will have its turret pointed at any Black Ops HAV that dares to decloak. What we need are proto HAVs in the true meaning of proto. Not weaker variants that CCP use as lame excuses for expanding upon HAVs.
I don't think we should get proto HAVs. I think we should simply get specializations. Otherwise the Gunnlogi as you know it becomes as bad if not worse than a Sica.
Mobius Wyvern wrote:
Honestly, I don't see the point of Black Ops HAVs, and I don't see any reason to bring them back.
What they should do is implement Black Ops MAVs, because with what they showed and talked about at FanFest, those are higher-capacity APC-type vehicles, so having them be a stealthy mobile spawn point makes far more sense than a tank with only 3 slots.
I agree with Black Ops MAVs over HAVs. Though I think the Black Ops HAVs will probably create a brand new style of tank gameplay. |
Aerion Spiritus
Phaze O n e
39
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 00:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Aerion Spiritus wrote:With the BF3 Jet style I say NOOO! Do not make it possible to jump out use some sort of AV than hop back in. I don't want to be chasing a guy whos also in a jet only for him to hop out and throw and av nade in my face..... Pilot suits. Only CCP knows specifics, as far as I can tell, but it seems like they're going to be terrible infantry (probably sidearm only), but pilots with this suit will be at a big advantage over say, a heavy pilot.
I can't wait for them. I will do anything to get out of Caldari Logi (yeah you heard me). and into a pilot suit. |
|
|
| |
|