|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
102
   |
Posted - 2013.07.15 15:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
Me and my brother ran LAV "as intended" the other day in a Domination and it was crazy fun.
We drove up to an area, hopped out, attempted to hack whatever was there. And if we were getting overrun we'd fall back to the LAV and drive away. It was closer to the "hit and run" that I'm sure CCP means. |
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
102
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 15:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
Skyhound Solbrave wrote:If you remove LLAVs and buff the scout ones somehow, I would say yes. Some people may just want to be the best driver in new esen, drifting over the bodies of their enemies.
I never understood why logi vehicles were so hard to kill, but the infantry can be killed like wet paper. LLAVs need to be less difficult to kill. It should take only one, MAYBE 2 AV grenades of equivalent meta level to pop an LLAV. It would force real drivers to think about their maneuvers instead of just bull rushing a fire fight.
I love the idea of a Logi LAV having a ton of health and being there to recharge the armor and shields of infantry and give some fire support from the turret.
If they removed the impact damage, you might even see them being used that way. But you probably never will "because they're cars and cars can ram people."  |
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
109
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 21:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
Soldiersaint wrote:[quote=Scheneighnay McBob]IT SAYS ANTI INFANTRY ON IT...ARE YOU PEOPLE FREAKING BLIND? RUNNING PEOPLE OVER IS PART OF ANTI INFANTRY.......you people are amazing you know that? why is it that stupid assault rifle can destroy but nothing else can?....leave the lav the way it is.....so people can keep smashing those stupid infantry only assault rifle punks.....
And the gun on top is just there as an ornate piece of abstract art.
CCP was totally thinking "you know what? The gun is there, but let's have the front bumper be literally 10,000 times more effective."
|
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
109
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 21:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Nemo Bluntz wrote:Soldiersaint wrote:[quote=Scheneighnay McBob]IT SAYS ANTI INFANTRY ON IT...ARE YOU PEOPLE FREAKING BLIND? RUNNING PEOPLE OVER IS PART OF ANTI INFANTRY.......you people are amazing you know that? why is it that stupid assault rifle can destroy but nothing else can?....leave the lav the way it is.....so people can keep smashing those stupid infantry only assault rifle punks..... And the gun on top is just there as an ornate piece of abstract art. CCP was totally thinking "you know what? The gun is there, but let's have the front bumper be literally 10,000 times more effective." its just common sense ofc a moving VEHICLE can do you harm DUHH and killing someone with LAV turret is a pain in the ass
Then wouldn't the fix be "buff the turret, take away impact damage?" Even make it harder to hit the guy on the turret too?
I feel like a lot of you are trying to "make sense" of a video game about multiple races of immortal clones fighting across the galaxy. It's a video game. None of anything going on in it makes a whole lot of sense "realistically". But for some reason, you guys are drawing the line here.
Imagine how bad ass it would be to have the Logi LAV working as intended (giving health support to infantry and tanks). It makes sense for it to have that much health so it can be in the fight without worrying about being immediately blown up. Instead, since you can use it as a super fast, high health battering ram, of course people go that route. It's crazy lame. |
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
113
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 21:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:yeah lets just ignore everything by using the clones excuse
I'm using the video game excuse.
Street Fighter isn't a fighting sim, its a game, they make concessions to realism so it's balanced.
Battlefield isn't a war simulator, they make concessions so it's balanced.
Company of Heroes isn't a tactics sim, they made concessions so it's balanced.
Shall I go on?
It's a game. Games are supposed to be fun. Fun comes, in large part, from balance. One hit kill drive bys courtesy of a, near invincible to all infantry, speeding brick is not balanced and its not fun.
|
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
115
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 21:49:00 -
[6] - Quote
THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Nemo Bluntz wrote:THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:yeah lets just ignore everything by using the clones excuse
I'm using the video game excuse. Street Fighter isn't a fighting sim, its a game, they make concessions to realism so it's balanced. Battlefield isn't a war simulator, they make concessions so it's balanced. Company of Heroes isn't a tactics sim, they made concessions so it's balanced. Shall I go on? It's a game. Games are supposed to be fun. Fun comes, in large part, from balance. One hit kill drive bys courtesy of a, near invincible to all infantry, speeding brick is not balanced and its not fun. i dont like tank either , lets do something about them too , its a video game afterall and we do wear full high-tec body armor afterall
That's a different discussion, start a new topic. Headline it with something like "I'm a cry baby who can't hold a conversation and wants to change the subject" or something then list any reasons you can come up with in there that you have against the tank.
The LAV situation, on the other hand, is a real problem and is breaking the game away from some of the really cool mechanics it could have. If you could take a step back away from "what makes sense in a video game" and talk more about "what makes a game fun" you might see the topic with clearer eyes. |
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
115
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 21:52:00 -
[7] - Quote
THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:Nemo Bluntz wrote:That's a different discussion, start a new topic. Headline it with something like "I'm a cry baby who can't hold a conversation and wants to change the subject" or something then list any reasons you can come up with in there that you have against the tank.
The LAV situation, on the other hand, is a real problem and is breaking the game away from some of the really cool mechanics it could have. If you could take a step back away from "what makes sense in a video game" and talk more about "what makes a game fun" you might see the topic with clearer eyes. ur last defense is trolling? how sad
No. That's not a 'defense' and its certainly not trolling.
My current response to your nonsense is condescension. |
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
126
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 02:25:00 -
[8] - Quote
Soldiersaint wrote:Nemo Bluntz wrote:Soldiersaint wrote:[quote=Scheneighnay McBob]IT SAYS ANTI INFANTRY ON IT...ARE YOU PEOPLE FREAKING BLIND? RUNNING PEOPLE OVER IS PART OF ANTI INFANTRY.......you people are amazing you know that? why is it that stupid assault rifle can destroy but nothing else can?....leave the lav the way it is.....so people can keep smashing those stupid infantry only assault rifle punks..... And the gun on top is just there as an ornate piece of abstract art. CCP was totally thinking "you know what? The gun is there, but let's have the front bumper be literally 10,000 times more effective." the turret is worthless. thats why everyone just goes for road kills.
Even if the turret worked (which it really should), there is no incentive to use it. The instant kill is always going to beat out the point/shoot/hit a ton kill. That's why the road kill bull-**** needs to go. |
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
132
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 15:02:00 -
[9] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:We need to be able to run people over so the driver gets decent WP.
Haha, and there is no possible way to remedy that. 
|
Nemo Bluntz
TeamPlayers
EoN.
157
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 00:17:00 -
[10] - Quote
Poplo Furuya wrote:Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Currently, all the forum threads are heavily biased in favor of infantry, while the drivers in those threads don't make the right points. Gods, yes. I try to argue in favour of vehicles but vehicle users don't make it clucking easy.
+1
I really want the LAVs to work right in the game. Using them as one sided bumper cars is not the answer.
If the turret was way buffed (and the guy in the turret wasn't such a helpless target), and the LLAVs were used as support, they'd have an amazing place on the battlefield. You could argue the OP or UP of any of those things. But its clear that the car's front bumper isn't the answer, no matter how much those who love their crutch defend it. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|