DUST Search - Reserved

All Channels

General Discussions

Reserved

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 113	Posted - 2013.06.11 17:14:00 - [61] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Go back to Call of Duty if you want vehicles to be useless. I never played that game. I didn't ask for HAVs to become less useful.
Bones McGavins TacoCat Industries 292	Posted - 2013.06.11 17:24:00 - [62] - Quote Webifiers. The ability to tackle tanks is the first step to balance. Webifire missiles or forge varients that do little or no damage but stop the vehicle for 1-3 seconds, webifier nades which stop them for 5-10 seconds. Then you can have your HP buff/AV nerf.
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 182	Posted - 2013.06.11 17:36:00 - [63] - Quote Bones McGavins wrote: Webifiers. The ability to tackle tanks is the first step to balance. Webifire missiles or forge varients that do little or no damage but stop the vehicle for 1-3 seconds, webifier nades which stop them for 5-10 seconds. Then you can have your HP buff/AV nerf. Do you want melee to hurt tanks?
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 430	Posted - 2013.06.11 17:39:00 - [64] - Quote Bones McGavins wrote: Webifiers. The ability to tackle tanks is the first step to balance. Webifire missiles or forge varients that do little or no damage but stop the vehicle for 1-3 seconds, webifier nades which stop them for 5-10 seconds. Then you can have your HP buff/AV nerf. We can't be adding that until we have ADV and PRO tanks with 8k and 11k HP, respectively.
Obodiah Garro Tech Guard General Tso's Alliance 133	Posted - 2013.06.11 17:46:00 - [65] - Quote Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Bones McGavins wrote: Webifiers. The ability to tackle tanks is the first step to balance. Webifire missiles or forge varients that do little or no damage but stop the vehicle for 1-3 seconds, webifier nades which stop them for 5-10 seconds. Then you can have your HP buff/AV nerf. We can't be adding that until we have ADV and PRO tanks with 8k and 11k HP, respectively. 8k and 11k? LOL Seriously just no sir, ehp is fine, too fine in the case of LLAV, what you will get is some extra slots and cpu/pgrid.
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 183	Posted - 2013.06.11 17:55:00 - [66] - Quote Obodiah Garro wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Bones McGavins wrote: Webifiers. The ability to tackle tanks is the first step to balance. Webifire missiles or forge varients that do little or no damage but stop the vehicle for 1-3 seconds, webifier nades which stop them for 5-10 seconds. Then you can have your HP buff/AV nerf. We can't be adding that until we have ADV and PRO tanks with 8k and 11k HP, respectively. 8k and 11k? LOL Seriously just no sir, ehp is fine, too fine in the case of LLAV, what you will get is some extra slots and cpu/pgrid. Which means more shield/armor. Sorry you can't figure that out. But of course you don't want ADV and PRO tanks. Those would be too difficult to solo.
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1255	Posted - 2013.06.11 18:02:00 - [67] - Quote Obodiah Garro wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Bones McGavins wrote: Webifiers. The ability to tackle tanks is the first step to balance. Webifire missiles or forge varients that do little or no damage but stop the vehicle for 1-3 seconds, webifier nades which stop them for 5-10 seconds. Then you can have your HP buff/AV nerf. We can't be adding that until we have ADV and PRO tanks with 8k and 11k HP, respectively. 8k and 11k? LOL Seriously just no sir, ehp is fine, too fine in the case of LLAV, what you will get is some extra slots and cpu/pgrid. By my rough estimates that excatly around the figures i have for advanced/proto HAVs which are fitted Also we should have an increase in the BASE HP but we defo should get an increase in CPU/PG also because we would have more slots If basic HAVs do a 5/2 then advanced i would like to see go 6/3 and proto 7/4 slot wise - reverse it for armor It would be exactly like it is for dropsuits, more CPU/PG and slots with a slight buff to base hp
IM-JUST TO-FAT Blauhelme Orion Empire 0	Posted - 2013.06.11 19:20:00 - [68] - Quote thaks a lot for this awesome post man ! i absolutly agree !
R F Gyro Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 360	Posted - 2013.06.11 19:37:00 - [69] - Quote EnglishSnake wrote: The problem is with the idea that we have a driver, main gunner and 2 sub gunners if needed (optional gunners tbh not needed to run the tank in anyway) is that who skills up what? Does the driver still have to skill up everything? he needs the hull and the mods but frankly he doesnt need the guns so that would mean the gunner needs the turrets but if the driver doesnt have them then how can he put on the gun Frankly its far too much work to go down this road because of how complicated it would be, the driver still it would seem needs everything just to be able to fit it in the fitting screen because you cannot deploy anything in the field if you have something on it where the pre req have not been met The only simplistic way of doing this is by seperating the main gun from the driver but still having the driver needing the skills for everything just so he can fit it, so he can deploy it in the field and then whoever jumps into the main gun, problem is johnny randoms jumps in and i cant kick his ass out or lock the vehicle to begin with. Maybe as a secondary measure the guy who will be in controll of the main gun needs to have turret skills also and up to the turret that the driver has so if driver has proto turrets the gunner will need to be skilled into proto turrets. I would also ask for a buff to the 4man HAV if its going to take more ppl to control it or it could be made a seperate HAV to the ones we have, call it Heavy HAV with improved defences and the pilot can utilise his pilot suit with the vehicle to make it defensively/offensively better Yep, there aren't any easy solutions, but I still firmly believe that you need to balance around number of players first, and then ISK/SP second. The critical hard limit in Dust battles is number of players. If you allow one player in a HAV to be significantly more effective than one player in any other role then there is only one place things can end up: 16 HAVs per side (has anyone ever brought 16 HAVs to a fight before, btw?) Teams A and B are fighting, with 16 players each. Team A pulls out a HAV. To maintain parity, team B can switch one guy to a HAV, or switch three guys to AV. I don't think any of the "tank crew" objections you raise are blockers, by the way, and I'm happy to go into detail if asked.
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 184	Posted - 2013.06.11 23:03:00 - [70] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: EnglishSnake wrote: The problem is with the idea that we have a driver, main gunner and 2 sub gunners if needed (optional gunners tbh not needed to run the tank in anyway) is that who skills up what? Does the driver still have to skill up everything? he needs the hull and the mods but frankly he doesnt need the guns so that would mean the gunner needs the turrets but if the driver doesnt have them then how can he put on the gun Frankly its far too much work to go down this road because of how complicated it would be, the driver still it would seem needs everything just to be able to fit it in the fitting screen because you cannot deploy anything in the field if you have something on it where the pre req have not been met The only simplistic way of doing this is by seperating the main gun from the driver but still having the driver needing the skills for everything just so he can fit it, so he can deploy it in the field and then whoever jumps into the main gun, problem is johnny randoms jumps in and i cant kick his ass out or lock the vehicle to begin with. Maybe as a secondary measure the guy who will be in controll of the main gun needs to have turret skills also and up to the turret that the driver has so if driver has proto turrets the gunner will need to be skilled into proto turrets. I would also ask for a buff to the 4man HAV if its going to take more ppl to control it or it could be made a seperate HAV to the ones we have, call it Heavy HAV with improved defences and the pilot can utilise his pilot suit with the vehicle to make it defensively/offensively better Yep, there aren't any easy solutions, but I still firmly believe that you need to balance around number of players first, and then ISK/SP second. The critical hard limit in Dust battles is number of players. If you allow one player in a HAV to be significantly more effective than one player in any other role then there is only one place things can end up: 16 HAVs per side (has anyone ever brought 16 HAVs to a fight before, btw?) Teams A and B are fighting, with 16 players each. Team A pulls out a HAV. To maintain parity, team B can switch one guy to a HAV, or switch three guys to AV. I don't think any of the "tank crew" objections you raise are blockers, by the way, and I'm happy to go into detail if asked. Vehicles are limited to 7 per side right now. No, there can't be 16 v 16 tank battles, no matter how bad I'd like to see that myself. The other team should have to react to a tank being dropped. Some assault guy can't say "I got this," call in a Baloch/Onikuma, roll over to the tank, and spam AV grenades at it to blow it up. That's an absolutely terrible dynamic for vehicle/anti-vehicle warfare. Wiyrkomi swarms are absolutely devastating, per individual volley. More so against armor, as explosive weapons have a huge bonus against armor. I'm lucky to keep half my armor after getting hit by just one volley from one of those. I'd rather be attacked by a duo of Ishukone forge guns, because I at least know those guys know what they're doing, and don't have to rely on a fire-and-forget crutch to blow me up. One proto assault scrub should not be able to solo a tank, and those that say "I have xx amount of SP invested towards anti vehicle," odds are they're mentioning how much they have towards lolstomping noobs, plus the amount they put in to get the CBR7 or Wiyrkomi swarms. That's not dedicated AV, that's barely branching out. Dedicated AV is someone whose points are in heavy suits and forge guns. That I can respect. Everybody that's on here crying that 2 proto AV grenades should destroy any tank, I cannot respect.

Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 438	Posted - 2013.06.11 23:25:00 - [71] - Quote Okay, call me crazy here, but what if we buffed tanks AND made parts of the map where a tank could have 10,000 DPS and 50,000 HP, but it wouldnt matter because it couldnt access that part of the battlefield. (inside buildings, underground, skyscrapers, narrow city streets). Let's say there are 5 points on a map- 2 are underground in tight passages where infantry dominate, 2 are above ground on open plains where infantry have no cover, and 1 is somehwere in between. Perhaps in a city with wide roads and accessible buildings, alleyways, 2nd stories where if a tank spots a grunt on the round, the grunt and all 15 of his friends next to him WILL die...unless those 15 were smart and got on top of the tank because of the accessibility of alleyways, indoor areas, etc. So to take that 5th objective would take tanks to lock it down once captured and infantry to protect the tanks, and tanks to make sure infantry dont take back that 5th point. I watched this trailor and it made so much perfect sense. This way, infantry don't get slaughtered unless they go in tank land, tanks don't get soloed by infantry, and tanks can have fun killing eachother in 5km maps all day with 10,000 HP, 2000DPS, etc... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_LlH2c5dyA Maybe it's a far off dream because every map would become so 3-dimensional and it would take a complete rework, but i think everyone would be happy if no side had any advantage in all situations. I mean, I'm sure the infantry would love more CQC inside where there are no lavs or tanks, and tanks love big open manus-peak like maps where they get to be tanks. Just a thought. yes, it's a tank buff, but it's a buff that doesn't effect infantry because if you choose, you will never have to fight a tank- ever!
Shijima Kuraimaru WarRavens League of Infamy 216	Posted - 2013.06.12 01:22:00 - [72] - Quote Eurydice Itzhak wrote: Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: I think the FG has better damage than the rail turret for the simple reason that the FG is carried by a merc that will be OHK by any rail turret, while the tank/installation, will take, on the average, 3 hits to kill. Breach FG, with the longest charge time, also renders the wielder immobile while it's charging/charged making them an easy target. Reducing the FG damage by 50% will result in the FG getting few to no kills as by the time the FG wielder fires 4 shots and reloads, the tank is usually out of range for the 5th shot. BTW... FG range is 300. Disregarding militia vehicles, there is no AV weapon that can OHK a HAV except, maybe, an officer breach if there is one. However, a direct hit by a rail turret always results in a OHK against any infantry, even heavies. Base charge times for forge guns, between each shot, are... Assault: 2.5sec Standard: 3.5sec Breach: 6sec Large rail turret base times are... Regulated/Standard: .3sec charge with a 1sec fire interval. Regulated has better tracking. Compressed: .3sec charge with a 2.2sec fire interval. So let's compare how many shots the large rail turret fires based on optimal base charge and fire of one shot from a FG if the two pulled the trigger at the same time. Regulated/Standard Rail vs Assault FG: 3 shots. Regulated/Standard Rail vs Standard FG: 4 shots. Compressed Rail vs Breach FG: 3 shots. The dynamic changes a bit if you go with the average of 3 forge shots to kill an HAV. I'll try to take into account managing heat on the rail turret. Regulated/Standard Rail vs Assault FG: 6 shots. Regulated/Standard Rail vs Standard FG: 8 shots. Compressed Rail vs Breach FG: 8 shots. So, when it comes to damage output over time, large rail tanks are way above FG not to mention that large rail turrets have twice the range of a FG. Some misinformation sir. Railguns have a 1.8 second fire interval. So this makes the Time to Fire 2.1 seconds. to the Assault forges 2.5. Except the Assault does way more damage. And the firing time can be reduced with skills. I would think that the forge gun MIGHT lose after having to reload except railguns have to cool down. (and forge guns can reduce their reload time via skills) Well I did have to use the data available to me which would be the specs from the in game info screens themselves. Those show a .3 second charge to the first shot that the rail turret fires with a 1 second refire rate. That's base. Still, changing the refire to 1.8, the rail turret still out damages a comparable forge gun when you put it down to damage over time. And I remind you that a rail turret is more accurate than a FG and will OHK any infantry, including a heavy. I do know that the LG rail turret works the same as the rail installations and they do fire their first shot at the end of the initial charge cycle, the second shot is fired at the end of the refire timer.
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1265	Posted - 2013.06.12 11:48:00 - [73] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: EnglishSnake wrote: The problem is with the idea that we have a driver, main gunner and 2 sub gunners if needed (optional gunners tbh not needed to run the tank in anyway) is that who skills up what? Does the driver still have to skill up everything? he needs the hull and the mods but frankly he doesnt need the guns so that would mean the gunner needs the turrets but if the driver doesnt have them then how can he put on the gun Frankly its far too much work to go down this road because of how complicated it would be, the driver still it would seem needs everything just to be able to fit it in the fitting screen because you cannot deploy anything in the field if you have something on it where the pre req have not been met The only simplistic way of doing this is by seperating the main gun from the driver but still having the driver needing the skills for everything just so he can fit it, so he can deploy it in the field and then whoever jumps into the main gun, problem is johnny randoms jumps in and i cant kick his ass out or lock the vehicle to begin with. Maybe as a secondary measure the guy who will be in controll of the main gun needs to have turret skills also and up to the turret that the driver has so if driver has proto turrets the gunner will need to be skilled into proto turrets. I would also ask for a buff to the 4man HAV if its going to take more ppl to control it or it could be made a seperate HAV to the ones we have, call it Heavy HAV with improved defences and the pilot can utilise his pilot suit with the vehicle to make it defensively/offensively better Yep, there aren't any easy solutions, but I still firmly believe that you need to balance around number of players first, and then ISK/SP second. The critical hard limit in Dust battles is number of players. If you allow one player in a HAV to be significantly more effective than one player in any other role then there is only one place things can end up: 16 HAVs per side (has anyone ever brought 16 HAVs to a fight before, btw?) Teams A and B are fighting, with 16 players each. Team A pulls out a HAV. To maintain parity, team B can switch one guy to a HAV, or switch three guys to AV. I don't think any of the "tank crew" objections you raise are blockers, by the way, and I'm happy to go into detail if asked. Your comparing a 3man HAV to a 3man AV team Problem here is that 3man HAV team is generally snort range except the driver if hes got a railgun on the HAV, the 2 small turrets are effectively useless and unless they have sniper rifles they cant do long range, on the other hand the 3 AV guys can be all FG or SL and hit from distance where only the driver can shoot back, if the turret is blaster its just better to run away but even then aslong as they have a line of sight you will still get hit In PC battles right now no one runs in the HAV with the driver, when AV hits it from long range and is only short range if you get in the thick of it like inside a compound, FG/SL are used in places that the HAV wont be able to hit Its mostly why HAV drivers tend to argue about ISK and SP, because a 3 man HAV crew cannot hit the AV guys when they are generally out of reach Now if we could have small turrets which could hit long range then maybe we would fill our small turrets up a bit more because we as drivers wouldnt have to feel that we need to run railgun all the time incase long range AV comes into play, we could switch up our tactics a little bit
Eurydice Itzhak Militaires Sans Jeux 66	Posted - 2013.06.12 12:14:00 - [74] - Quote Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: Well I did have to use the data available to me which would be the specs from the in game info screens themselves. Those show a .3 second charge to the first shot that the rail turret fires with a 1 second refire rate. That's base. Still, changing the refire to 1.8, the rail turret still out damages a comparable forge gun when you put it down to damage over time. And I remind you that a rail turret is more accurate than a FG and will OHK any infantry, including a heavy. I do know that the LG rail turret works the same as the rail installations and they do fire their first shot at the end of the initial charge cycle, the second shot is fired at the end of the refire timer. No, the forge gun will out dmg the railgun every time. The forge has higher base damage, damage mods available, and basically the same TtF with the charge time skill and the reload skill. Ishokune Assault Forge > Particle Canon. All day.
Obodiah Garro Tech Guard General Tso's Alliance 138	Posted - 2013.06.12 12:30:00 - [75] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Which means more shield/armor. Sorry you can't figure that out. But of course you don't want ADV and PRO tanks. Those would be too difficult to solo. Am fine with pilots wanting to use cpu/pgrid for more ehp if they can fit the mods, not fine at all buffing ehp arbitrally. HAV is, lets face it, a crutch after all no point in throwing random boosts on them.
Eurydice Itzhak Militaires Sans Jeux 66	Posted - 2013.06.12 12:36:00 - [76] - Quote Obodiah Garro wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Which means more shield/armor. Sorry you can't figure that out. But of course you don't want ADV and PRO tanks. Those would be too difficult to solo. Am fine with pilots wanting to use cpu/pgrid for more ehp if they can fit the mods, not fine at all buffing ehp arbitrally. HAV is, lets face it, a crutch after all no point in throwing random boosts on them. HAVs a crutch. So gud. 100% OP. This is why you ALWAYS see the vehicle cap reached by HAVs in PC right? Entire corps are made or broken by their pilots. HAVs be up in planetary conquest just WRECKING scrubs. Oh wait....
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1267	Posted - 2013.06.12 13:44:00 - [77] - Quote Obodiah Garro wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Which means more shield/armor. Sorry you can't figure that out. But of course you don't want ADV and PRO tanks. Those would be too difficult to solo. Am fine with pilots wanting to use cpu/pgrid for more ehp if they can fit the mods, not fine at all buffing ehp arbitrally. HAV is, lets face it, a crutch after all no point in throwing random boosts on them. A crutch LOL ahahahahahaha Seriously why are you in this thread when you have no clue about vehicles and obv dont use them either
NAV HIV The Generals EoN. 228	Posted - 2013.06.12 13:49:00 - [78] - Quote English the post was insightful as usual. Lot of good points. I started tanking again. Well the speed for armor isn't so bad, the buff to HP isn't that bad. The old enemies still remain, 180 Swarms, invisible swarms, Handheld FG > Tank Mounted Rails. The problem is the CPU and PG tbh. The skill tree has a lot of areas that only allow us to get to the next level without any bonuses. They could use those slots to introduce slight (not a lot) increase to CPU/PG bonus. As you've mentioned, SOLO tanking and SOLO Av is not balancing. I see a lot of tankers crying, everyday all day. But i see some of them trying to kill infantry in front of a supply depot. Thats just stupid in my books. Don't see that many blaster tanks. Its almost close to none. All the tankers are on top of the hills with Railguns blowing up installations. What happened to the blaster on blaster tanking? Oh wait, can't see infantry properly, can't see swarms, getting shot by multiple wanna be railgun tankers. Note: Spkr you are not a tanker. so don't speak on the elders' circle
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1269	Posted - 2013.06.12 16:35:00 - [79] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: English the post was insightful as usual. Lot of good points. I started tanking again. Well the speed for armor isn't so bad, the buff to HP isn't that bad. The old enemies still remain, 180 Swarms, invisible swarms, Handheld FG > Tank Mounted Rails. The problem is the CPU and PG tbh. The skill tree has a lot of areas that only allow us to get to the next level without any bonuses. They could use those slots to introduce slight (not a lot) increase to CPU/PG bonus. As you've mentioned, SOLO tanking and SOLO Av is not balancing. I see a lot of tankers crying, everyday all day. But i see some of them trying to kill infantry in front of a supply depot. Thats just stupid in my books. Don't see that many blaster tanks. Its almost close to none. All the tankers are on top of the hills with Railguns blowing up installations. What happened to the blaster on blaster tanking? Oh wait, can't see infantry properly, can't see swarms, getting shot by multiple wanna be railgun tankers. Note: Spkr you are not a tanker. so don't speak on the elders' circle The tree in general has alot of skills which are used for unlocking things but offer nothing for the SP spent Take basic HAVs, the Gunlogi & Madrugar has nothing in bonuses, not even a racial bonus and same with all basic non specalist vehicles Blaster tanking is not obsolete yet, its just that in your basic vehicle you have to get close to infantry who happen to throw AV nades like an NFL quaterback and deal with long range AV such as SL/FG which you have no chance of hitting and if its proto your next to dead
R F Gyro Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 362	Posted - 2013.06.12 16:43:00 - [80] - Quote EnglishSnake wrote: Your comparing a 3man HAV to a 3man AV team Problem here is that 3man HAV team is generally short range except the driver if hes got a railgun on the HAV, the 2 small turrets are effectively useless and unless they have sniper rifles they cant do long range, on the other hand the 3 AV guys can be all FG or SL and hit from distance where only the driver can shoot back, if the turret is blaster its just better to run away but even then aslong as they have a line of sight you will still get hit In PC battles right now no one runs in the HAV with the driver, when AV hits it from long range and is only short range if you get in the thick of it like inside a compound, FG/SL are used in places that the HAV wont be able to hit Its mostly why HAV drivers tend to argue about ISK and SP, because a 3 man HAV crew cannot hit the AV guys when they are generally out of reach Now if we could have small turrets which could hit long range then maybe we would fill our small turrets up a bit more because we as drivers wouldnt have to feel that we need to run railgun all the time incase long range AV comes into play, we could switch up our tactics a little bit I'm not saying a 3 man HAV crew is balanced with a 3 man AV team right now. I'm saying that a 3 man HAV crew should be balanced with a 3 man AV team. I'll support any initiative that achieves that. Once operating a tank requires 3 players I'm all in favour of buffing them, or nerfing AV, or whatever combination makes sense.

R F Gyro Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 362	Posted - 2013.06.12 16:48:00 - [81] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: One proto assault scrub should not be able to solo a tank, Why not? Why should one player with one set of kit not be able to solo one player with a different set of kit? Don't come back with "its a tank" because that isn't a valid game-play argument. Also, don't say "because of ISK or SP", because I don't believe those are significant limiting factors for a large portion of the player base any more. Is there a valid argument gameplay argument for "if I spec into this I will be significantly better than if I spec into anything else"? Also, remember I'm not saying one infantry player should be able to solo a HAV whenever they want. I'm saying a 3 man AV team should be able to kill a 3 man tank crew 50% of the time.
NAV HIV The Generals EoN. 229	Posted - 2013.06.12 16:50:00 - [82] - Quote EnglishSnake wrote: NAV HIV wrote: English the post was insightful as usual. Lot of good points. I started tanking again. Well the speed for armor isn't so bad, the buff to HP isn't that bad. The old enemies still remain, 180 Swarms, invisible swarms, Handheld FG > Tank Mounted Rails. The problem is the CPU and PG tbh. The skill tree has a lot of areas that only allow us to get to the next level without any bonuses. They could use those slots to introduce slight (not a lot) increase to CPU/PG bonus. As you've mentioned, SOLO tanking and SOLO Av is not balancing. I see a lot of tankers crying, everyday all day. But i see some of them trying to kill infantry in front of a supply depot. Thats just stupid in my books. Don't see that many blaster tanks. Its almost close to none. All the tankers are on top of the hills with Railguns blowing up installations. What happened to the blaster on blaster tanking? Oh wait, can't see infantry properly, can't see swarms, getting shot by multiple wanna be railgun tankers. Note: Spkr you are not a tanker. so don't speak on the elders' circle The tree in general has alot of skills which are used for unlocking things but offer nothing for the SP spent Take basic HAVs, the Gunlogi & Madrugar has nothing in bonuses, not even a racial bonus and same with all basic non specalist vehicles Blaster tanking is not obsolete yet, its just that in your basic vehicle you have to get close to infantry who happen to throw AV nades like an NFL quaterback and deal with long range AV such as SL/FG which you have no chance of hitting and if its proto your next to dead Yup thats what i mentioned in Charlottes post too. We have quite a few skills without any bonuses to them at all. 1. Vehicle command : 1%CPU and 1%PG per level? 2. Race LAVS (Caldari/Gallente) 1% PG for Caldari, 1%CPU for Gallente or 2% Reduction on PG usage for Caldari/ 2% reduction in CPU usage for Gallente 3. HAV skill tree> 2% bonus to PG for Gallente... 2% Bonus to CPU for Caldari per level it wouldn't be too OP and there would be some middle ground to it. AV's are just a bit too much. I use them so i know how unfair it could be. Specially Swarms to Armor. Make it Proto AR suit with 2 Complex Damage mods + Swarms
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.06.12 16:56:00 - [83] - Quote Obodiah Garro wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Which means more shield/armor. Sorry you can't figure that out. But of course you don't want ADV and PRO tanks. Those would be too difficult to solo. Am fine with pilots wanting to use cpu/pgrid for more ehp if they can fit the mods, not fine at all buffing ehp arbitrally. HAV is, lets face it, a crutch after all no point in throwing random boosts on them. What the hell crutch are you talking about? Have you ever tried tanking? Do you not realize just how effective swarms and AV grenades are (explosives)? They're the most popular AV in the game right now, wanna know why? Because it doesn't require any intelligence to use them, and they're basically fire and forget. They're the stupid man's anti-vehicle weapons. That's the first reason they're so popular. Wanna know the second reason they're so popular? Because the Madrugar gives you the best all-around options for tanking. Know what the Madrugar is? It's an armor tank. We can sacrifice defenses to make a glass cannon fit, or sacrifice offense for more defensive capabilities. It's only reasonable and logical that ADV and PRO tanks have more HP than STD tanks. After all, that's how dropsuits work, is it not? How would you feel if all CCP did for dropsuits was keep them at basically the same level of health across STD, ADV and PRO levels, and told you that if you want more health, the only way you could get more is by modules?
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.06.12 16:57:00 - [84] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: English the post was insightful as usual. Lot of good points. I started tanking again. Well the speed for armor isn't so bad, the buff to HP isn't that bad. The old enemies still remain, 180 Swarms, invisible swarms, Handheld FG > Tank Mounted Rails. The problem is the CPU and PG tbh. The skill tree has a lot of areas that only allow us to get to the next level without any bonuses. They could use those slots to introduce slight (not a lot) increase to CPU/PG bonus. As you've mentioned, SOLO tanking and SOLO Av is not balancing. I see a lot of tankers crying, everyday all day. But i see some of them trying to kill infantry in front of a supply depot. Thats just stupid in my books. Don't see that many blaster tanks. Its almost close to none. All the tankers are on top of the hills with Railguns blowing up installations. What happened to the blaster on blaster tanking? Oh wait, can't see infantry properly, can't see swarms, getting shot by multiple wanna be railgun tankers. Note: Spkr you are not a tanker. so don't speak on the elders' circle The hell with the rules. **** you
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.06.12 17:01:00 - [85] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: One proto assault scrub should not be able to solo a tank, Why not? Why should one player with one set of kit not be able to solo one player with a different set of kit? Don't come back with "its a tank" because that isn't a valid game-play argument. Also, don't say "because of ISK or SP", because I don't believe those are significant limiting factors for a large portion of the player base any more. Is there a valid argument gameplay argument for "if I spec into this I will be significantly better than if I spec into anything else"? Also, remember I'm not saying one infantry player should be able to solo a HAV whenever they want. I'm saying a 3 man AV team should be able to kill a 3 man tank crew 50% of the time. You're a ****. Please, go back to Call of Duty. You don't understand the dynamics a tank brings to the field. [quote=R F Gyro]Also, remember I'm not saying one infantry player should be able to solo a HAV whenever they want.[/quote\] THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY!!!!!** How the hell could you not see that? It's basically the same argument as 3 in a tank vs 3 with AV. Why should one guy with AV grenades be able to solo a tank? Can you answer that with any intelligence at all?
NAV HIV The Generals EoN. 229	Posted - 2013.06.12 17:02:00 - [86] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Obodiah Garro wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Which means more shield/armor. Sorry you can't figure that out. But of course you don't want ADV and PRO tanks. Those would be too difficult to solo. Am fine with pilots wanting to use cpu/pgrid for more ehp if they can fit the mods, not fine at all buffing ehp arbitrally. HAV is, lets face it, a crutch after all no point in throwing random boosts on them. What the hell crutch are you talking about? Have you ever tried tanking? Do you not realize just how effective swarms and AV grenades are (explosives)? They're the most popular AV in the game right now, wanna know why? Because it doesn't require any intelligence to use them, and they're basically fire and forget. They're the stupid man's anti-vehicle weapons. That's the first reason they're so popular. Wanna know the second reason they're so popular? Because the Madrugar gives you the best all-around options for tanking. Know what the Madrugar is? It's an armor tank. We can sacrifice defenses to make a glass cannon fit, or sacrifice offense for more defensive capabilities. It's only reasonable and logical that ADV and PRO tanks have more HP than STD tanks. After all, that's how dropsuits work, is it not? How would you feel if all CCP did for dropsuits was keep them at basically the same level of health across STD, ADV and PRO levels, and told you that if you want more health, the only way you could get more is by modules? Oh scrubba dub , if i'm not mistaken most AR suits have the same base HP. The difference is in the number of slots and, CPU and PG
NAV HIV The Generals EoN. 229	Posted - 2013.06.12 17:04:00 - [87] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: NAV HIV wrote: English the post was insightful as usual. Lot of good points. I started tanking again. Well the speed for armor isn't so bad, the buff to HP isn't that bad. The old enemies still remain, 180 Swarms, invisible swarms, Handheld FG > Tank Mounted Rails. The problem is the CPU and PG tbh. The skill tree has a lot of areas that only allow us to get to the next level without any bonuses. They could use those slots to introduce slight (not a lot) increase to CPU/PG bonus. As you've mentioned, SOLO tanking and SOLO Av is not balancing. I see a lot of tankers crying, everyday all day. But i see some of them trying to kill infantry in front of a supply depot. Thats just stupid in my books. Don't see that many blaster tanks. Its almost close to none. All the tankers are on top of the hills with Railguns blowing up installations. What happened to the blaster on blaster tanking? Oh wait, can't see infantry properly, can't see swarms, getting shot by multiple wanna be railgun tankers. Note: Spkr you are not a tanker. so don't speak on the elders' circle The hell with the rules. **** you LOL if i'm not mistaken you are one of those LAV scrubs arent you
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.06.12 17:06:00 - [88] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: NAV HIV wrote: English the post was insightful as usual. Lot of good points. I started tanking again. Well the speed for armor isn't so bad, the buff to HP isn't that bad. The old enemies still remain, 180 Swarms, invisible swarms, Handheld FG > Tank Mounted Rails. The problem is the CPU and PG tbh. The skill tree has a lot of areas that only allow us to get to the next level without any bonuses. They could use those slots to introduce slight (not a lot) increase to CPU/PG bonus. As you've mentioned, SOLO tanking and SOLO Av is not balancing. I see a lot of tankers crying, everyday all day. But i see some of them trying to kill infantry in front of a supply depot. Thats just stupid in my books. Don't see that many blaster tanks. Its almost close to none. All the tankers are on top of the hills with Railguns blowing up installations. What happened to the blaster on blaster tanking? Oh wait, can't see infantry properly, can't see swarms, getting shot by multiple wanna be railgun tankers. Note: Spkr you are not a tanker. so don't speak on the elders' circle The hell with the rules. **** you LOL if i'm not mistaken you are one of those LAV scrubs arent you You mean to tell me you're not spec'd into the Limbus/Charybdis at all? No Saga or Methana?
Spkr4theDead Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 186	Posted - 2013.06.12 17:11:00 - [89] - Quote NAV HIV wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Obodiah Garro wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Which means more shield/armor. Sorry you can't figure that out. But of course you don't want ADV and PRO tanks. Those would be too difficult to solo. Am fine with pilots wanting to use cpu/pgrid for more ehp if they can fit the mods, not fine at all buffing ehp arbitrally. HAV is, lets face it, a crutch after all no point in throwing random boosts on them. What the hell crutch are you talking about? Have you ever tried tanking? Do you not realize just how effective swarms and AV grenades are (explosives)? They're the most popular AV in the game right now, wanna know why? Because it doesn't require any intelligence to use them, and they're basically fire and forget. They're the stupid man's anti-vehicle weapons. That's the first reason they're so popular. Wanna know the second reason they're so popular? Because the Madrugar gives you the best all-around options for tanking. Know what the Madrugar is? It's an armor tank. We can sacrifice defenses to make a glass cannon fit, or sacrifice offense for more defensive capabilities. It's only reasonable and logical that ADV and PRO tanks have more HP than STD tanks. After all, that's how dropsuits work, is it not? How would you feel if all CCP did for dropsuits was keep them at basically the same level of health across STD, ADV and PRO levels, and told you that if you want more health, the only way you could get more is by modules? Oh scrubba dub , if i'm not mistaken most AR suits have the same base HP. The difference is in the number of slots and, CPU and PG I don't run assault at all. The only numbers I want to be familiar with at all are the numbers for AV weapons. If you had a brain, maybe you'd realize that.
NAV HIV The Generals EoN. 229	Posted - 2013.06.12 17:12:00 - [90] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: NAV HIV wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: NAV HIV wrote: English the post was insightful as usual. Lot of good points. I started tanking again. Well the speed for armor isn't so bad, the buff to HP isn't that bad. The old enemies still remain, 180 Swarms, invisible swarms, Handheld FG > Tank Mounted Rails. The problem is the CPU and PG tbh. The skill tree has a lot of areas that only allow us to get to the next level without any bonuses. They could use those slots to introduce slight (not a lot) increase to CPU/PG bonus. As you've mentioned, SOLO tanking and SOLO Av is not balancing. I see a lot of tankers crying, everyday all day. But i see some of them trying to kill infantry in front of a supply depot. Thats just stupid in my books. Don't see that many blaster tanks. Its almost close to none. All the tankers are on top of the hills with Railguns blowing up installations. What happened to the blaster on blaster tanking? Oh wait, can't see infantry properly, can't see swarms, getting shot by multiple wanna be railgun tankers. Note: Spkr you are not a tanker. so don't speak on the elders' circle The hell with the rules. **** you LOL if i'm not mistaken you are one of those LAV scrubs arent you You mean to tell me you're not spec'd into the Limbus/Charybdis at all? No Saga or Methana? Nope not even one. Unless the Gallente LAV skill to level 3 counts as anything. Didn't buy any of those. Don't need a LAV to kill someone LOL But as i've mentioned before. You are polluting a wonderful thread. So try and learn something from English about tanking if you can. or else shut up and listen



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.