|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
493
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
FINALLY NO MORE IDIOTS IN MY TANK GETTING ME FOUND OUT. WORKS JUST AS WELL AS A LOCK! THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO US ON THAT!
Now, for these hardeners. I'm gonna go with it, and ask, are they going to be 50% reduction since you say they're going to provide a massive boost to defenses?
How about slot count?
And for ammo. I hope it's not some ridiculously low count, like 10 for a rail and 150 for a blaster. Those rounds are relatively small. If anything, missile should have the lowest ammo count, because those rounds are fairly large. Will the small turrets have an ammo count? Will they have their own ammo, or will they *puke* pull off from the main ammo count? |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
493
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 17:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Lurchasaurus wrote: Do you intend to temporarily remove/replace current proto AV during this period? Removing all PRO AV would be a godsend. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
493
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 17:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
Lurchasaurus wrote:Zeylon Rho wrote:Lurchasaurus wrote:CCP, how do you intend to work with the entire vehicle rework while maintaining proto AV weapons? Are we to expect worthwhile tanks while we have a base amount of modules and hulls to choose from? Do we just accept that we do not have proto stuff until you bring it in? Do you intend to temporarily remove/replace current proto AV during this period? 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. they already said they will begin with a minimal amount of modules and hulls, so we are basically only allowed to use militia/standard stuff. For obvious reasons, continuing to keep proto AV is a stupid idea, esp with the 1.4 swarm buff. the only reason this would not be the case is if we have a one size fits all tank. this would also **** many people off because we like our sagarises and suryas. not to mention the failures that were black ops tanks and the enforcers What was wrong with the black ops tanks, I don't remember ever seeing one on the battlefield. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
493
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 17:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Justicar Karnellia wrote: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.
You already don't get how we do things.
We destroy turrets as a matter of standard operating procedure, because it's smart to destroy things that are a danger to our tank.
We'll destroy a CRU if we have to, such as if our blues are struggling to hold an objective with a red CRU right next to it.
We destroy enemy depots to deny them the ability to switch suits on the fly, so that they have to die to take out their swarm or forge gun. Plus it denies them infinite ammo when firing right next to it. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
494
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 18:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:
Ie. active hardeners drop movement by 80% whenever they are active but allow them to work indefinitely.
LOL You obviously don't drive anything.
Mobility is half the battle. The other half is being able to rep back the damage you take fast enough so you don't die. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
495
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:45:00 -
[6] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:So if an idiot starts shooting my Gunnlogi with an AR, my recharge will stop, WTF?
I think that there should be NO recharge delay for vehicle shields. They should make it so that small arms do absolutely zero damage to tanks. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
503
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 04:57:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Wolfman wrote: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).
The obvious questions.
PRO shield extenders/boosters, and PRO armor plates/reppers? I'd love a 250mm plate that has 3800 armor but would obviously take a ton of CPU and PG.
With hardeners... to me, it sounds we might we 50% or greater that may last for a minute, with an expected longer cooldown.
Can you guys please try to keep us updated with this stuff, and maybe set a dedicated feedback thread, paying particular attention to us vehicle operators? This is a complete rework of two opposing professions, not a tweak here and a half a percent adjustment there. For many, including me, 1.5 is make or break as a vehicle operator.
Will that "repair module bug" be "fixed?" It's literally the only thing that prevents armor tanks from being blown up as they're running from an alpha's worth of damage from PRO AV. It's no fun if someone says they need help somewhere, and two of the enemy just so happen to have Lai Dai AV grenades. That's ~12,000 damage that cannot be recovered from, if those two each have 3 grenades. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
503
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 04:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
crazy space 1 wrote:THE TRAINSPOTTER wrote:ammo depletion makes perfect sense
i agree with it It also allowed for laser based weapons in the future to use NO AMMO, since that is the advantage they hold. Right now it's like every weapon is an energy battery based weapon it makes no sense That would likely be its own capacitor. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
692
|
Posted - 2013.09.14 07:30:00 -
[9] - Quote
Temba Fusrodah wrote:ABadMutha13 wrote:Here is my deal and I want to just make sure I put it out here, even if it is a repeat.
ONLY AV Weapons doing damage to tanks. If you have to allow infantry weapons to damage tanks, my suggestion would be creating an infantry v infantry / infantry v armor / armor v armor damage system. Using these tables you could create and balance quickly and effectively. But seeing a laser rifle cut a shield tank down or a noob tube (aka Mass Driver) take out an armor tank is ridiculous.
I am even ok with your current crap level hit detection for our main turrets.
Ammo I think is going to make the job a little more complicated, but I am always up for a challenge.
In the end I will say that tanking requires capitol and money. ItGÇÖs like making really expensive awesome toys that only a few people can afford, but it turns out its nothing special. When I get into a tank I should feel that my millions of ISK and SP makes me a force on the battlefield. It should take the same amount of commitment to kill a tank, but right now it just takes a little SP and even less money. My turret cost 500k-1 Million and cost 1 Million SP to level into (THAT IS JUST MY MAIN TURRET!), and for infantry just 150,000 ISK and about 1 Million SP you have yourself something that can totally decimate it.
As the system currently stands, there is no endgame. This is what kills games, and if you want reference look at most every MMO/RPG that fails. ItGÇÖs due to lack of content for higher levels and poor game mechanics frustrating players. The endgame for tanks is nothing special EXCEPT how much you spend to be a tanker.
I am pissed because I care but you serious need to evaluate the role of tanks.
PS this same logic can be applied to my brothers in the air DS Pilots. So everybody wants invulnerability from the little armored soldiers running around, lol, get a clue! You are all taking parts of the game you like and saying " make me special because I spent isk to get this" lol, this game comes from CCP. In Eve players blow up trillions of isk worth of ships and stations and stuff daily. Even the biggest ship worth trillions of isk can be captured by a warp bubble from a ship a fraction of the cost. Stop whining and man up! Your HAV and your dropship are not going to ever be invulnerable, this is a kill and be killed game that is part of the kill and be killed sandbox created by CCP. Do not deploy any vehicle you don't want to see blown up, keep it shiny, nice, and safe in your assets and bring stuff to the battlefield you can afford to lose. Why should your AR or shotgun be a legitimate AV weapon? |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
692
|
Posted - 2013.09.14 07:31:00 -
[10] - Quote
Silas Swakhammer wrote:Has there been any word on vehicle locks? This too |
|
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
695
|
Posted - 2013.09.14 17:57:00 -
[11] - Quote
Temba Fusrodah wrote: I do not know of any tank that would be impervious to a sustained barrage of .50 caliber armor piercing rounds fired into it, or an even lower tech level barrage of Molotov Cocktails tossed against it.
Show me video of tanks being destroyed by the M2 and Molotov cocktails. Then I could consider your reply a serious one.
Yes, I was being entirely serious. I remember destroying a LAV with a shotgun a long time ago. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
695
|
Posted - 2013.09.14 19:51:00 -
[12] - Quote
Temba Fusrodah wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Temba Fusrodah wrote: I do not know of any tank that would be impervious to a sustained barrage of .50 caliber armor piercing rounds fired into it, or an even lower tech level barrage of Molotov Cocktails tossed against it.
Show me video of tanks being destroyed by the M2 and Molotov cocktails. Then I could consider your reply a serious one. Yes, I was being entirely serious. I remember destroying a LAV with a shotgun a long time ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igHX3JOGwJ8the relevant footage and commentary in regard to molotov cocktail attack is around 05:30 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M57-gg_J1Jwthe relevant footage and commentary in regard to molotov cocktail attack is around 06:45 A wise man reflects on history as lessons already learned. World War II =/= 20,000 - 50,000 years into the future. Better comparison would be today's tanks.
Try again |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
695
|
Posted - 2013.09.15 00:44:00 -
[13] - Quote
Temba Fusrodah wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Temba Fusrodah wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Temba Fusrodah wrote: I do not know of any tank that would be impervious to a sustained barrage of .50 caliber armor piercing rounds fired into it, or an even lower tech level barrage of Molotov Cocktails tossed against it.
Show me video of tanks being destroyed by the M2 and Molotov cocktails. Then I could consider your reply a serious one. Yes, I was being entirely serious. I remember destroying a LAV with a shotgun a long time ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igHX3JOGwJ8the relevant footage and commentary in regard to molotov cocktail attack is around 05:30 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M57-gg_J1Jwthe relevant footage and commentary in regard to molotov cocktail attack is around 06:45 A wise man reflects on history as lessons already learned. World War II =/= 20,000 - 50,000 years into the future. Better comparison would be today's tanks. Try again Ummm You asked for video proof, when it is shown, you then claim it's 20 to 50 thousand years out of date? However a mere 75 more years of Earthly vehicle development would be better. Okay, your logic is nonexistent but I'll indulge you. The guy in the baseball cap is going to destroy a tank in Syria by tossing a grenade down it's barrel. Is Syria current enough for you? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AevLyTR6lM You still think comparing WWII videos to the science in the EVE/Dust universe is valid?
There aren't any hatches to throw a Molotov in on the tanks in Dust. There are however, hatches on today's tanks because, well, we're human and don't have teleportation yet.
So no, a hypothetical Molotov can't destroy a Dust tank. Nor should an AR do anything at all to a Dust tank.
Was that tank American, or was it some rusted 50 year old POS?
Also, can't throw grenades down the barrel of Dust tanks.
Why are you still trying? |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
716
|
Posted - 2013.09.15 17:51:00 -
[14] - Quote
Temba Fusrodah wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:You still think comparing WWII videos to the science in the EVE/Dust universe is valid?
There aren't any hatches to throw a Molotov in on the tanks in Dust. There are however, hatches on today's tanks because, well, we're human and don't have teleportation yet.
So no, a hypothetical Molotov can't destroy a Dust tank. Nor should an AR do anything at all to a Dust tank.
Was that tank American, or was it some rusted 50 year old POS?
Also, can't throw grenades down the barrel of Dust tanks.
Why are you still trying? Goodness I guess there must be something wrong with my computer, I don't see the DEV banner on your character, not even the CCP part of your name. You are part of the design team right? If not everything you just typed was complete horse pucky! So let me borrow your tin foil DEV hat and inform you that Dust 514 "Molotov" cocktails are plasma and antimatter separately isolated until their containment vessel is shattered, that when mixed together create a fire of about 5778 kelvin, like the surface of the sun. Is that futuristic enough for you sir? What part of anything I said was wrong? |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
738
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 11:10:00 -
[15] - Quote
Bachini thegreat wrote:maybe increase the speed of the gunloggi and decrease the speed of madrugar Why nerf armor tanks?
Why does everybody include a nerf to armor tanks in their balancing pass? Everything for shield tanks should be brought up to an equivalent level so its on par with armor tanks.
I mean c'mon, Caldari suits have better shield recharge than their vehicles. There's something wrong with that. I put one of those free enhanced shield energizers on a basic suit, and the recharge went from 25 per second 36 per second! A tank has vastly superior resources to draw on. Why should a dropsuit have outright better shield recharge? It's not even comparatively better, it's outright better. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
738
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 11:11:00 -
[16] - Quote
Temba Fusrodah wrote:By the way, cool name, the book was good.
It's gonna be good |
|
|
|