|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Scheneighnay McBob
Blueberry Gunners
1943
   |
Posted - 2013.07.07 18:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
All of your threads say that it should take multiple AVers to down an HAV, while a single AVer should just be a deterrent.
News flash:
AVers don't get WP for being scary, and using tons of teamwork just for everyone but one person to get an assist doesn't help us either.
It currently takes a lone AVer to turn a profit- if there are more than 2, nobody is getting enough WP, and everyone is losing money.
That is all. |
Scheneighnay McBob
Blueberry Gunners
1943
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 19:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
oso tiburon wrote:and no one man should not be able to bring down an hav ... here grab an at4 go run solo after a t74 mbt and let me know how that works out for ya
Guess what, this is a game, therefor there's no such thing as the current race between weapons and armoring/ountermeasures
Needing a team to down an HAV doesn't work because we won't get jack **** for WP when that happens. Especially since the driver usually just bails anyway and takes away even more WP. |
Scheneighnay McBob
Blueberry Gunners
1943
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 19:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote:Noo its not fair for one person to be able to solo a tank, not at all. it is not worth it to spend 2.5 mill on a tank and a single person blows you up. Does that sound appealing to any of the proto AV here? would you like to be on the reciving end? try see how long it takes you to quit dust like all the other tankers
I fly an assault dropship. HAVs are at least guaranteed some WP. I only get WP if the enemy AV is terrible/nonexistent. Otherwise, I'm looping around the map with afterburners on hoping nobody hits me. |
Scheneighnay McBob
Blueberry Gunners
1944
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 21:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:news flash to AV and assaulters, its a 50 ton machine that can driver around the battle field, of course it should take a minimum of 2 AV players to take down a tank of the same tier. as you av continue to skill up you have the overall advantage since we don't have advanced or prototype tanks.
Have you seen the physics on them? No way a 50 ton machine goes into the air that easily.
And the point isn't for it to be realistic- the point is that AVers don't get **** for spending half the battle trying to blow up an HAV |
Scheneighnay McBob
Blueberry Gunners
1945
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 21:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Void Echo wrote:news flash to AV and assaulters, its a 50 ton machine that can driver around the battle field, of course it should take a minimum of 2 AV players to take down a tank of the same tier. as you av continue to skill up you have the overall advantage since we don't have advanced or prototype tanks. Have you seen the physics on them? No way a 50 ton machine goes into the air that easily. And the point isn't for it to be realistic- the point is that AVers don't get **** for spending half the battle trying to blow up an HAV Yeah, bad AVers don't make money, neither do bad vehicle players, and bad vehicle players lose a lot more than bad AVers.
You're missing my point
destroying an HAV (you hardly see more than 1 per battle after you bring AV out)- 150 points. Not counting the kill, because all but the worst drivers will bail. Assist for destroying an HAV- 75 points. AVers don't destroy many LAVs either, believe it or not.
Usually, AVers resort to destroying installations for WP.
But, if there's a group of AVers like you want, WP will be even worse. More AVers means more competition for the already limited amount of targets. We barely scratch by for money going solo- with competition, we die just as much, but get half the points.
The problem isn't AV being too strong. It's vehicles being too expensive. If vehicles were cheaper, AV would actually be a steady source of WP because there would be more HAVs |
Scheneighnay McBob
Blueberry Gunners
1945
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 21:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:it costs us 10x more isk to bring our stuff into battle than it does for you, are you saying that its fair for us to risk losing 10 matches of profit in one game while you risk losing maybe 100k isk of profit a game? no its not fair, nothing you guys want is fair to us and were fighting back with everything we have to keep you from nerfing us to total uselessness which is almost there
Your version of "fighting back" is ignoring the real problem and instead asking for HAVs to be god-mode again. Seems like tankers never recovered from losing the massive buff they got in replication. |
Scheneighnay McBob
Blueberry Gunners
1945
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:11:00 -
[7] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Void Echo wrote:it costs us 10x more isk to bring our stuff into battle than it does for you, are you saying that its fair for us to risk losing 10 matches of profit in one game while you risk losing maybe 100k isk of profit a game? no its not fair, nothing you guys want is fair to us and were fighting back with everything we have to keep you from nerfing us to total uselessness which is almost there Your version of "fighting back" is ignoring the real problem and instead asking for HAVs to be god-mode again. Seems like tankers never recovered from losing the massive buff they got in replication. we haven't even recovered from the nerf known as enforcer tanks
If you haven't noticed, the tech 2 HAV changes every few builds. First we had Black Ops, which were replaced by Marauder, and now Enforcer. Up next is Destroyer, which has improved tracking, as it's meant for AA. |
|
|
| |
|