DUST Search - Things I notice as a Tanker.

All Channels

General Discussions

Things I notice as a Tanker.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Xender17 Intrepidus XI Omega Commission 183	Posted - 2013.06.23 08:25:00 - [1] - Quote Ever sense uprising I have began to notice things that don't quite make sense with tanks. These thing I believe need to be fixed. Fittings: Currently there is only one skill that slightly affects PG. The rest of the skills with fitting(PG/CPU) bonuses are CPU. Something I feel is a fault in all vehicles is the that there are no equipment slots. Much of the current modules would make sense to be equipment instead. Such as active scanners, mobile cru, shield transferors, armor repairs, etc. Adding equipment slots would not at all make vehicles OP. There, already noticeable, lack of PG and CPU would force pilots,drivers to trade defense for offence or extra capabilities. HAV- Something disturbing, to me, is the price of enforcers regardless that their fittings are hardly present any advantages. 1 extra slot and slightly increased PG/CPU. They cost 5.5 times as much as standard tank is what makes this disturbing. Dropship- They slots seem ok, I don't specialize DS but they obviously have problems. They're pg/cpu create an inferiority to most AV. I would suggest that medium modules be added as its commonly believed that DS are Medium AirCraft.(MAC) LAV- Currently these present a problem. They have the ability to easily rack kills for free, yet provide easy WP for, less than half-heartedly, specialize(AV) roles. I feel that 1 slot should be removed from whichever slot type has the most. (High or Low) HP: Impact damage included. HAV- I don't notice too much of a problem hear. Other than maybe a needed buff to enforcers.(Or lower their cost) But currently, due to fitting problems, shield tanks are much less likely to survive a fight with a armored tank. Dropship- I feel there is a problem here most AV easily knock these out of sky in 2 shots. A 30-35%, at least, buff to it's HP would be fine. LAV- This is the biggest problem with them. They can so easily speed through situations untouched. 30-40% HP reduction would be perfect. However not to scout or logi LAV's.(see Mobility: LAV) Mobility: HAV- Not anything big with HAV's. Maybe reduce the amount of damage you take fro accidently knocking your turret into a wall and flipping over. (This has to do with their ability to move.>) Give tankers reverse view like LAV's. This is the saddest thing in the world when a railgun or missile launcher has to turn its head around so slowly to see where its going. Dropship- I think they're speed is fine... But make it so they don't at the slightest tap of a building. LAV- Currently every LAV dies at the by even tickling a HAV, reduce the damage taken fro impacting HAV's. For logi LAV's currently what makes them the best option is their HP bonus. However I see, just like the Devs probably did, how this is needed for a vehicle meant to support other vehicles. They become targets for healing and supporting. I think a 30-40% reduction to its max speed would be good. So that way they can't escape at the first sign of trouble. They have to rely on what ever they are supporting for it's own support. Turrents: HAV- Blaster: It seems it's meant to have more focus on anti-infantry. I think if it had an 25% reduction of damage to all vehicles it would help support Dusts idea of rock, paper, scissors.(keep the latter idea in mind for the next 2 suggestions) Railgun: Growing amount of players want this to have a damage drop off. However that would completely undermine it being a AV weapon that's (obviously) meant for long range. I think should be just the opposite, have it be forced to play long ranged. Just like the Laser Rifle. Have it have low damage on close proximity targets. This will over all benefit the balance between the 3 turret varieties. Missile: These things are just crap. They are also confusing. It seems that they are meant to be balanced(somehow) between CQC, AV, AI(anti-infantry), and mid-long range. However to make these things viable. I suggest they simply are given a 30% blast radius increase, and 10% splash damage increase. Dropships/LAV/HAV: Small Turrets But mostly Dropships needs help. Blaster: They seem pretty much fine... IDK what would need fixing for them. Railgun: Most useless peace of crap in the game. Their damage stats are godly for something so small but its impossible to hit anything it just becomes pointless. A drastic increase in accuracy/tracking would be good. Missile: On the ground they seem to work perfectly. In the air... I think a accuracy increase would be good.
Xender17 Intrepidus XI Omega Commission 183	Posted - 2013.06.23 08:26:00 - [2] - Quote Reward: HAV- The HAV seems fine for how it's reward for what it does. Dropship- I feel sorry for DS's. They barely get anything for so obviously do so much. Addition/changes to DS WP reward system: +25 for players spawning into DS. +40 for, DS only, vehicle kill assists. And +5 WP for each clone that is in the DS, minus turret operators, every minute. LAV- Reduce WP gain for impact kills to 25. Drivers get WP from players that hack an objective, in a 30 sec window, after those players exit. +40 for objectives, +30 for all other hacks. Scout LAV gets 10% bonus of WP gained from the hacks. Logi LAV wp reward. +35 for guardian, +25 for repair. 10% bonus to each. AV: Grenades: Flux/AV grenades. Something I notice is that flux grenades do a LOT to shield tank and nothing to armor tanks. AV grenades do most of their damage to armor but still does a lot to shield tanks. Reduce damage of AV grenades on shields by 25%. Increase damage of flux grenades, on shields by 15%. Plasma Cannon: Its should do 5-10% more damage to shields. Swarms Launcher: They seem fine to me. They require the player to step out of hiding for a sec or two but get rewarded by lock-on. Forge Gun: The fact that this thing can only be used by a heavy makes sense. But it needs to require squad support... It can do more damage railrun, which is powered by an entire tank... I feel its max ammo should be reduced and have require more from nanohives. They put the power of a tank in a mans arms... it should require support.
Xender17 Intrepidus XI Omega Commission 183	Posted - 2013.06.23 08:32:00 - [3] - Quote I ask that you make sensible reply's to this thread. Please only argue about AV vs Vehicles if you have level 3 in a vehicle command skill (preferably not LAV's) and level 3 in Forge Guns, Swarm Launchers, Plasma cannons. Please only argue about AV grenades if you have the above qualifications.
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon DARKSTAR ARMY 196	Posted - 2013.06.23 08:42:00 - [4] - Quote Enforcers should cost a lot less, they are STD tanks, STD version of the specialistic dropsuits (assault and logi) cost less than their non specialistic counterpart, they took away marauders and they have substituted them with enforcers, but marauders were ADV, enforcers are STD.
Xender17 Intrepidus XI Omega Commission 183	Posted - 2013.06.23 08:48:00 - [5] - Quote I would also like to point out that I was ADV in swarms/forge and AV nades.
Judge Rhadamanthus Kapow Heavy Industries 166	Posted - 2013.06.23 09:01:00 - [6] - Quote Xender17 wrote: Turrents: This spelling error fills me with hatred for you.
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 588	Posted - 2013.06.23 09:34:00 - [7] - Quote gimme proto tanks
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 3240	Posted - 2013.06.23 10:03:00 - [8] - Quote This thread's first 3 posts quite definitively need an editor. Both spelling and grammar make me desperately hope that English isn't this poster's first language. In spite of that, the points made are excellent and well-explained, and it deserves a bump even as I'm using that bump to complain like the grammar kitten I am.
Xender17 Intrepidus XI Omega Commission 184	Posted - 2013.06.23 15:53:00 - [9] - Quote Garrett Blacknova wrote: This thread's first 3 posts quite definitively need an editor. Both spelling and grammar make me desperately hope that English isn't this poster's first language. In spite of that, the points made are excellent and well-explained, and it deserves a bump even as I'm using that bump to complain like the grammar kitten I am. I'm dyslexic. (Sorry -_-) Anyways I fixed all the grammar errors, or most I think. Thank you for your appreciation of my post.
TheAmazing FlyingPig Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 1156	Posted - 2013.06.23 16:53:00 - [10] - Quote Tanks and dropships are fine in their current state. Here's a thread I made earlier with reasons why. This is also coming from a Gunnlogi pilot heavily invested into vehicles.

Telleth DUST University Ivy League 60	Posted - 2013.06.23 17:18:00 - [11] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Enforcers should cost a lot less, they are STD tanks, STD version of the specialistic dropsuits (assault and logi) cost less than their non specialistic counterpart, they took away marauders and they have substituted them with enforcers, but marauders were ADV, enforcers are STD. I was just made aware of the fact that the specialized version (logi, scout) cost less than the basic. This bugs me quite a lot that a role specific dropsuit costs less than basic, but for Vehicles it is opposite, almost prohibitively more expensive. As far as the OP is concerned, a lot of good issues brought up, I think the bigger problem is trying to get CCP to move vehicles up on the priority list
Xender17 Intrepidus XI Omega Commission 186	Posted - 2013.06.23 19:51:00 - [12] - Quote Costs: Vehicles HAV- Standard HAV costs are fine. But like I said in the above points, enforcers need a isk price drop. Make it 400,000. They're bonuses are hardly noticeable. Turrets= Proto turrets cost 900,000. They are near impossible to fit unless you sacrifice survivability.(PG/CPU requirements) Some sort of ISK decrease is needed. Dropship- Unless the buffs I suggest are done there is no reason for dropships to even cost more than LAVs. LAV- Seems fine. Modules: From my point of view they seem fine for costs. However I believe medium modules should be created for dropships. Turrets: Reduce small railgun costs. Costs: AV Grenades- AV G's: They give a player the damage of a swarm launcher in their hand. I suggest a major price increase. Flux Grenades: They do a LOT to shields however require skill to use so I see no reason for a price increase. Plasma Cannon: I think the PC needs a decrease in cost for how little it does. (Other) Something I want to clear up on for AV grenades and Flux grenades is not that either's damage should be nerfed, but instead that they have major decreased damage to shield/armor. Flux grenades should be AV shield grenades. AV-G should be AV armor grenades.


Pages: 1 :: [one 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.