All I got out of this is you're going to nerf vehicles some more by introducing more restrictions to how they work. Also the ammunition idea is terrible, to be perfectly blunt. They already overheat, they don't need another restriction.

The philosophy for how modules are working is basically how they work already. And what we've learned is that it's a pretty terrible philosophy for the investment unless you plan to make all vehicles absolutely dirt cheap.


Why don't you just copy the EVE capacitor and resistance scheme over to Dust instead of continually dumbing it down? You're underestimating the intelligence of the playerbase.

Maybe see the actual implementation instead of criticizing the design philosophy behind it before you get a chance to see what the implementation will be?

Dunno, just seems short-sighted to complain now. Feedback = good, whinage = bad.

I hate to be a pessimist but all I read was "we have no idea how to fix vehicles so we are trying a bunch of stupid ****" it's going to be a long time before vehicles are fun to drive, boys and girls.

As a tanker, what are your thoughts on how they should be replenished while IN battle? Other than supply depots of course.

They could temporarily add ADV/PRO versions of Vehicles I guess.

Boosting Swarms to high levels temporarily might make sense in context of having possibly super tanks around just to see how hard they are to take down (how many players, swarms, etc.) and check the dynamics of vehicle combat tank-on-tank and the like.

There aren't many other practical AV options, and so it's swarms for starters. They said they'd be balancing AV and vehicles at the same time, so Forges, Grenades, and Swarms will be looked at during this time I imagine. Plasma Cannons will continue to suck.

These look like great changes, the two I like are the fact that turrets have ammo, and that supply depots will now help vehicles, so we shouldn't see indiscriminate destruction of installations/turrets/CRU's because ammo will be more of a finite resource.

2. Shield recharge delay -- there should be a minimum damage threshold for this, otherwise infantry can just ping it with assault rifles to prevent the tank from restarting its shield recharge. That could prove irritating.

No, but now it seems like a good idea to get that SP back. Especially that stupidly expensive enforcer skill.

MAVs? Please say MAVs.

Or maybe deployable supply depots. Either way.

Ultimately, it appears CCP gave up on capacitor. Not necessarily the end of the world but their solution is oversized infantry mechanics with heavy reliance on burst powers. They are making vehicles super glass cannons. With all these active modules, I officially ask that we get a split between driver/gunner and vehicle locking tools. I don't see it being workable any other way unless you overhaul the controls as well for one button activation of modules.

So, is the issue of Gallente (Armor) Tanks being inherently faster than Caldari (Shield) Tanks being fixed or is there a moot point to shields being "hit and run"?

For that matter, will Caldari have better acceleration to effectively hit-and-run or just hit and pray to god they can achieve top speed fast enough without turning?

This is so silly.

Why did they run into such issues with capacitor, anyway? It works just fine in EVE. These are New Eden vehicles and they should behave like New Eden vehicles. A heavy investment in a tank with a working capacitor and strategic resistance allocation makes sense.

For ten second hulk-mode, it doesn't.

I understand Wolfman is trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator with this vehicle philosophy, but seriously it's not worth it. Just use EVE mechanics here. They are cool.

Stupid people are always going to die-and-cry, there is no need to appeal to them whatsoever.

Can we have a transport focussed Dropship that doesn't have both turret mounts. Maybe just one nose mounted gun that can be controlled by a passenger or put on sentry-mode. The loss of the main turrets will be replace with better survivability/speed/ manoeuvrability.

Also, when are we getting jetbikes?

For ammo to work, recalling a tank must store its current HP, cooldowns and ammo supply, so when you call it back in, it will have the same values (at least until the end of the match)

Resupplying ammo should be done by LOGISTICS!!!! Simple! Enables teamworking better on the battlefield also... and would work in a similar way to Eve with regards to reps etc.

With regards to cap... i can see the arguement, however i don't see why a projectile turret would need cap? Hence why the 'ammo' issue is a good idea IMHO. Cap usage should depend on the turret type.

They need to do something about those damned murder taxi's anyway... at least give reduced damage for jumping out the way.

What was wrong with the black ops tanks, I don't remember ever seeing one on the battlefield.

From the OP:
Armor has no native regen.

Buried in replies!

Thanks for the comments guys. Remnant and I are reading and itGÇÖs given us things stuff to think about. I donGÇÖt have time to respond to everything right now but IGÇÖll quickly throw a few more details out there.

*When we say weGÇÖre establishing a foundation with the most necessary archetypes that doesnGÇÖt mean youGÇÖre only getting basic and standard. You will have access to proto modules.

*We will be going over AV damage values along with these changes.

*Dropships will be scoring transport based WP rewards (and yes they have more HP).

balance HAV is easy, make the driver and gunner seperate operators then you can buff the standard hull hp in line with what it would take for 2 standard AV weilding infrantry to destroy it.

HAV being a 1 man army is the biggest problem, finite ammo is irrelevant as no doubt well organised people will use whatever resupply options are made available to full effect anyway.