Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Charlotte O'Dell
Molon Labe. League of Infamy
428
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 07:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
Give us prototype vehicles and our 5%/lvl PG skill back. Everything will be solved.
Can I please get some input from the AV guys on this? Is there a reason we should have to use standard gear to defend against proto gear? |
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
301
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 08:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
Inb4 other vehicle drivers call for nerfs anyway, unless you absolutely suck as a driver its a pain in the ass to deal with vehicles |
Aythadis Smith
The Generals EoN.
19
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 08:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
With forge being such a game changer, honestly, I love disagreeing with Charlotte, I have to agree. Maybe give something back to assault players with an indoor map, inside a ship, something with out murder taxis.
Best bet is lower the forge out of a 2/3 shot weapon. See what we get once it is 4/5. Maybe resistance if a nerf is too much. |
Ignatius Crumwald
IMPSwarm Negative-Feedback
564
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 09:02:00 -
[4] - Quote
Aythadis Smith wrote:With forge being such a game changer, honestly, I love disagreeing with Charlotte, I have to agree. Maybe give something back to assault players with an indoor map, inside a ship, something with out murder taxis.
Best bet is lower the forge out of a 2/3 shot weapon. See what we get once it is 4/5. Maybe resistance if a nerf is too much.
Yes, nerfing the one and only player skill based AV weapon is clearly the best option... |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
659
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 09:12:00 -
[5] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:Give us prototype vehicles and our 5%/lvl PG skill back. Everything will be solved.
Can I please get some input from the AV guys on this? Is there a reason we should have to use standard gear to defend against proto gear?
This will not fix the imbalance, it is not just vehicles vs AV where the imbalance is it is also between the variations of vehicles aswell. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
565
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 09:19:00 -
[6] - Quote
Ok just correct me here... but the only proto vehicle you have right now is the logi LAV right?
My prototype FG can 2/3 shot a militia/poor standard tank sure... as i think it should. But trying to take out adv vehicles is difficult even with proto weapons. The Logi LAV can already take multiple FG shots, not taking into account theyre damn impossible to hit lol.
I think things arent perfect at the moment... dropships for one need a good going over, higher tiers need to be added and THEN we can properly look at the balancing. |
Aythadis Smith
The Generals EoN.
19
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 12:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ignatius Crumwald wrote:Aythadis Smith wrote:With forge being such a game changer, honestly, I love disagreeing with Charlotte, I have to agree. Maybe give something back to assault players with an indoor map, inside a ship, something with out murder taxis.
Best bet is lower the forge out of a 2/3 shot weapon. See what we get once it is 4/5. Maybe resistance if a nerf is too much. Yes, nerfing the one and only player skill based AV weapon is clearly the best option... I guess I might be a little butthurt that a forge does more damage then a large turret. Could resistances be a better option? I feel both sides of the field. Getting a 2/3 shot is amazing, but... Receiving it and no clue where or where to run is frightening. Even more when it is coming from redicilous heights. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
565
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 12:46:00 -
[8] - Quote
Aythadis Smith wrote:Ignatius Crumwald wrote:Aythadis Smith wrote:With forge being such a game changer, honestly, I love disagreeing with Charlotte, I have to agree. Maybe give something back to assault players with an indoor map, inside a ship, something with out murder taxis.
Best bet is lower the forge out of a 2/3 shot weapon. See what we get once it is 4/5. Maybe resistance if a nerf is too much. Yes, nerfing the one and only player skill based AV weapon is clearly the best option... I guess I might be a little butthurt that a forge does more damage then a large turret. Could resistances be a better option? I feel both sides of the field. Getting a 2/3 shot is amazing, but... Receiving it and no clue where or where to run is frightening. Even more when it is coming from redicilous heights.
Thats what makes it AV, if someones shooting proto at you you should be worried. In a high level tank it should at least make you retreat. If you get caught out of position or ambushed... then it should be even more deadly. |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
292
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 16:48:00 -
[9] - Quote
The way CCP has chosen to make Vehicles, AV, Infantry rock paper scissors makes it very difficult to balance properly. Right now its all or nothing. Vehicles can murder infantry without risk, but as soon as two (solid)+ AV units are on the field, working together, suddenly vehicles are in big trouble and have to resort to redline sniping or just die constantly (LLAV aside, since their speed makes dedicated AV rather useless against them unless they happen to come near the AV).
Meanwhile infantry who arent AV are just sitting ducks against vehicles unless some solid AV come out.
All or nothing. EIther vehicles are untouchable gods if the AV threshold is too low, or they are usless death traps once enough AV is out there. Im not sure how to balance it any better. Ive suggested lowering the damage of AV weapons and then increasing the damage of standard weapons against vehicles but I get shot down of "LOL NOW HE WANTS HIS TAR TO KILL TANKS!"
But the reality is, something needs to change to break the all or nothing balance of vehicle/AV.
If I am the only AV on the field, I am useless against anything but militia. But as soon as 1 or 2 other dudes join me, and we work together, we drop tanks in a matter of seconds.
But theres very little feeling of "combat". Its pretty much
1: tank shoots at people who cant fight back, and at LAVs/installaitons who cant fight back. 2: AV units come out and murder tanks, tanks cant do much but try to run from them. If theres enough DPS on the AV side, tank will die before it escapes, otherwise it escapes. AV wait for tank to come back and try again.
Perhaps lowering AV damage, but giving tools to help (like being able to tag the tank so its always on radar, being able to webifier it so it cant just run, being able to drop smoke so you can get into better positions) would make the actual combat more fun. Right now its a DPS battle of AV versus tank health and thats it. Hell its not even like theres a lot of player skill involved on the AV side. Some map knowledge and awareness to get good firing spots, but the weapons themselves? Not really.
Which is ALSO a problem, because its part of the reason theres not a lot of AV. It is boring. Its "i hope i can do enough damage to this big slow target before it gets over that hill."
A situation where we shoot a webifier rocket to "tackle" the tank, then throw smoke gernades on it to obsucre its vision and flank it so we can get in position to hit a weak spot on its back, or plant some charges on it, while it struggles to pick off the players doing so would be fun for AV. From the tank side, youd take more damage, but youd have to be careful to try and take out the "tackler" or get infantry support to do so. |
EnglishSnake
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
1253
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 16:51:00 -
[10] - Quote
We dont have proto vehicles at all
Logi DS/LAV maybe classed as advanced but the logi DS has terrible bonus and should have the same bonus as the logi LAV and also they generally are easy to swat out of the sky
Logi LAV is the only true advanced vehicle since i can see it actually take some damage and that is also due to its awesome role bonus |
|
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State
113
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:04:00 -
[11] - Quote
Bones McGavins wrote:All or nothing. Good analysis of the problem. Right now all parts of the rock-paper-scissors-game are unhappy because neither losing nor winning is fun. Either you are losing without defense or winning without effort.
One way to reduce this effect would be to implement more anti-vehicle/anti-infantry hybrid weapons I believe. The plasma cannon is a good, if ultimately useless, attempt at this. Improve the mass driver's anti-vehicle capability, let the forge trade some direct damage dps for lowered charge-time to hit infantry better and reintroduce a dumb-fire-mechanic on the swarm launcher that doesn't kill everything in turn for some lower damage output.
Suddenly you will see a lot more AV hybrids on the field and as such a much slower progression from "I'm an unstoppable for of nature"" to "I had no chance of defending myself!" and vice-versa for everyone involved. |
Spkr4theDead
Namtar Elite Gallente Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:06:00 -
[12] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:
Can I please get some input from the AV guys on this? Is there a reason we should have to use standard gear to defend against proto gear?
That's what the people on the ground consider balance.
|
Spkr4theDead
Namtar Elite Gallente Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:09:00 -
[13] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Inb4 other vehicle drivers call for nerfs anyway, unless you absolutely suck as a driver its a pain in the ass to deal with vehicles Why use such a crutch as a homing missile launcher? We don't have any turrets that are homing. I used forge guns last build because I refused to use something as easy as the swarm launcher. Wiyrkomi launchers can destroy a mediocre STD tank fit in a volley. Why do you want more? |
Spkr4theDead
Namtar Elite Gallente Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:10:00 -
[14] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Ok just correct me here... but the only proto vehicle you have right now is the logi LAV right?
My prototype FG can 2/3 shot a militia/poor standard tank sure... as i think it should. But trying to take out adv vehicles is difficult even with proto weapons. The Logi LAV can already take multiple FG shots, not taking into account theyre damn impossible to hit lol.
I think things arent perfect at the moment... dropships for one need a good going over, higher tiers need to be added and THEN we can properly look at the balancing. The Charybdis/Limbus are not PRO. |
Spkr4theDead
Namtar Elite Gallente Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:14:00 -
[15] - Quote
Bones McGavins wrote:The way CCP has chosen to make Vehicles, AV, Infantry rock paper scissors makes it very difficult to balance properly. Right now its all or nothing. Vehicles can murder infantry without risk, but as soon as two (solid)+ AV units are on the field, working together, That "solid AV" you're talking about is AV grenade spam. That's all it takes to put a good Madrugar at less than half armor. |
BobThe843CakeMan
BurgezzE.T.F
427
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:14:00 -
[16] - Quote
Battlefront 3 |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
292
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:15:00 -
[17] - Quote
Stefan Stahl wrote:Bones McGavins wrote:All or nothing. Good analysis of the problem. Right now all parts of the rock-paper-scissors-game are unhappy because neither losing nor winning is fun. Either you are losing without defense or winning without effort. One way to reduce this effect would be to implement more anti-vehicle/anti-infantry hybrid weapons I believe. The plasma cannon is a good, if ultimately useless, attempt at this. Improve the mass driver's anti-vehicle capability, let the forge trade some direct damage dps for lowered charge-time to hit infantry better and reintroduce a dumb-fire-mechanic on the swarm launcher that doesn't kill everything in turn for some lower damage output. Suddenly you will see a lot more AV hybrids on the field and as such a much slower progression from "I'm an unstoppable for of nature"" to "I had no chance of defending myself!" and vice-versa for everyone involved.
I felt this way a bit before, thast maybe "hyrbid" roles were more of a solution. Then I started using AV regardless of how vulnerable I felt to infantry. And let me say, my heavy with some kincat mods and a scrambler pistol does not lose too many fights. Every time I spawn my forge I usually only end up dying once I run out of pistol ammo and try to kill with the forge instead.
Me and my buddy run as two AV with pistols, and its honestly a slaughter when folks try to come at us. Yes, we will lose to a bunch of infantry, but usually tanks only have 1 or 2 players supporting them, who just get owned by focused pistol fire.
So im not so sure hybrid roles are needed. Maybe for Assault/Scouts but not the heavy. The heavy can tank enough damage to win most fights with his side arm (as long as they are in range). And if you give kincat (which you should for AV since you need to get in position) you can usually force the fight to be in your range. |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
292
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:20:00 -
[18] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Bones McGavins wrote:The way CCP has chosen to make Vehicles, AV, Infantry rock paper scissors makes it very difficult to balance properly. Right now its all or nothing. Vehicles can murder infantry without risk, but as soon as two (solid)+ AV units are on the field, working together, That "solid AV" you're talking about is AV grenade spam. That's all it takes to put a good Madrugar at less than half armor.
Ill agree to a lot of HAV complaints, but not with AV nade spam. AV nade spam works against overly aggressive or bad tankers (not the same thing). But tankers with ANY infantry support or good map awareness, its useless. Me and my buddy used to try and run our AV through nades and we would just spend all match chasing tanks and dying to snipers and other infantry (or tanks if they tracked us well).
Then we switched to a forge / swarm combo and we destroy tanks left and right.
AV nades work as a good supplement to regular AV, and maybe to help finish off tanks who have fled from other AV. But as a primary AV, nah, its bad against decent tankers.
|
Spkr4theDead
Namtar Elite Gallente Federation
182
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:24:00 -
[19] - Quote
Bones McGavins wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Bones McGavins wrote:The way CCP has chosen to make Vehicles, AV, Infantry rock paper scissors makes it very difficult to balance properly. Right now its all or nothing. Vehicles can murder infantry without risk, but as soon as two (solid)+ AV units are on the field, working together, That "solid AV" you're talking about is AV grenade spam. That's all it takes to put a good Madrugar at less than half armor. Ill agree to a lot of HAV complaints, but not with AV nade spam. AV nade spam works against overly aggressive or bad tankers (not the same thing). But tankers with ANY infantry support or good map awareness, its useless. Me and my buddy used to try and run our AV through nades and we would just spend all match chasing tanks and dying to snipers and other infantry (or tanks if they tracked us well). Then we switched to a forge / swarm combo and we destroy tanks left and right. AV nades work as a good supplement to regular AV, and maybe to help finish off tanks who have fled from other AV. But as a primary AV, nah, its bad against decent tankers. It's aggressive covering someone hacking a NULL cannon, got it.
AV grenades are a force unto themselves when a vehicle is close in. Have you been on the vehicle side of things? |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
293
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:30:00 -
[20] - Quote
A bit before the reset, but never dedicated. I am not very good at HAV since i didnt do it much so I dont know if my opinion matters much from that side. But the times I did use HAV I never got hit with nades.
But yeah I mean, if you get in close to structures and other infantry friendly, HAV risky environments, its going to be dangerous unless you have infantry support to keep them off you.
Most Null cannons have good line of sight to them from pretty far off, not sure why you'd have to be that close to properly cover them.
Im not against an AV nade nerf, tbh, because I find them useless in 90% of the AV situations im in. But I guess I could see how they simply act as a detterant for tanks to get into the action more. Maybe eliminate the packed variety, then lower the tracking and range of standard to packed, and sleek to standard. Should help reduce the situations in which AV nade spam is effective.
But i wouldnt want to do too much to reduce their effectiveness on stupid LAV frogger players, so a damage nerf would be a mistake. |
|
Charlotte O'Dell
Molon Labe. League of Infamy
432
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 17:38:00 -
[21] - Quote
Other tankers will hate me for this, but other than the fact that it's officer forge vs standard tank, i have no problem with forge guns. They require skill and do reasonable damage for their level. Let's assume we had ADV tanks with 8k HP and PRO with >10k HP. Suddenly, they don't seem so powerful.
I think mlt AV is too powerful for it's cost and it does its job too well for being militia.
My other issue with AV is the PRICE of AV nades. I, and most other tankers, have figured out that keeping 20m away from infantry will due away with the nade spam. If the cost of AV grenades were increased to 6k for basic, 10k for adv, and 20k for pro, it'd be better because it only takes 2k isk to kill a maddy, right now.
Plasma cannon is UP- mostly because of the unpredictable arc and velocity of the round.
Swarms are fine, except for that they're a no-skill weapon and should probably do far less damage than a forge based on that, alone. Perhaps if only ADV and PRO swarms could lock on...
Another thing to help with the LAV problem would be if we had a lock-on version of missile turrets. That's about 2020 Damage/volley. No lav can live through that, short of a charybdis. |
EnglishSnake
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
1255
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 18:17:00 -
[22] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:Other tankers will hate me for this, but other than the fact that it's officer forge vs standard tank, i have no problem with forge guns. They require skill and do reasonable damage for their level. Let's assume we had ADV tanks with 8k HP and PRO with >10k HP. Suddenly, they don't seem so powerful.
I think mlt AV is too powerful for it's cost and it does its job too well for being militia.
My other issue with AV is the PRICE of AV nades. I, and most other tankers, have figured out that keeping 20m away from infantry will due away with the nade spam. If the cost of AV grenades were increased to 6k for basic, 10k for adv, and 20k for pro, it'd be better because it only takes 2k isk to kill a maddy, right now.
Plasma cannon is UP- mostly because of the unpredictable arc and velocity of the round.
Swarms are fine, except for that they're a no-skill weapon and should probably do far less damage than a forge based on that, alone. Perhaps if only ADV and PRO swarms could lock on...
Another thing to help with the LAV problem would be if we had a lock-on version of missile turrets. That's about 2020 Damage/volley. No lav can live through that, short of a charybdis.
Im fine with the FG i mean it at least requires aiming, im more pissed that its my basic tank vs proto
Milita as i said too good for its cost, need a nerf 50%
AV nades and everyone can throw it like they are a NFL quaterback and dont worry if it falls short the seeking feature will make sure it gets the rest of the way while it rapes your armor and puts you uner half with 3 hits, then again could be proto but packed do like 1k+ and they are just above basic
PC lol its a fail weapon
Ive said that with swarms, excpect a no
LAV problem is milita LAV too good and spammable ie no ISK cost
Generally i would like proto/adv AV to be temp removed so it doesnt **** basic vehicles but im wishing here |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
293
|
Posted - 2013.06.11 18:50:00 -
[23] - Quote
Guys, you over-rate the jump from standard to adv or proto when it comes to weapons. Look, the damage isnt THAT much more. You get more of a boost from the skills than you do from the weapons themselves. It maybe cuts the shots to kill down by 1. Thats how it is for all weapons, AV shouldnt be any different. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |