DUST Search - Vehicles in 1.5 and beyond!

Gabriella Grey wrote:

Skihids wrote:

Gabriella Grey wrote:

I like the Idea stated above about releasing the other vehicle race variants, but the Eve capacitors only work for the ship itself mostly. You can run out of rockets, and other ammunition, with the exception of Amarr, if CCP has plans of coming out with Amarr turrets in the future. I think having a capacitor on the ground would make vehicle use much more difficult for new players, unless they make them really not a big deal, and have them in the game just for the sake of having them.

The current cool-down system is far more clunky and confusing than a capacitor based system.

Let's reverse things for a moment and give infantry movement a cool-down mechanism for comparison.

When you want to run you activate your sprint module, then deactivate it and wait for the cool-down before you can sprint again. How in the world is that easier to use or understand than stamina which is just another word for "body capacitor"?

The modules already work in a way like a capacitor, and doesn't need to be changed. Eve has it where modules have this similar cool down effect, and having a re-scripting of code for a specific button to be assigned this in the relation to a sprint button, would limit what you could really use in module slots, unless they come out with remapping and spend more time working on trying to follow other types of games. I think CCP has something very unique going on here, and should not change certain things in relations of the controls to work similar to other games, example, call of duty etc. Though I am not saying your suggestion is a bad, one and respect it, I just don't think its something needed to make a serious impact and simplicity that they are trying to accomplish across all vehicles. Big smile

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 1137	Posted - 2013.08.29 16:56:00 - [391] - Quote Vin Vicious wrote: 20 pages of whining Does any one have skill points in BlackOps HAV or Marauder HAV? No? that answers half the tears. SP refund confirmed We dont have BO HAVs or marauders dumbass
Void Echo Echo Galactic Industries 1125	Posted - 2013.08.29 19:10:00 - [392] - Quote Vin Vicious wrote: 20 pages of whining Does any one have skill points in BlackOps HAV or Marauder HAV? No? that answers half the tears. SP refund confirmed do you see anything available to skill into or buy on the market? no you don't.
Meeko Fent Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 729	Posted - 2013.08.29 22:55:00 - [393] - Quote I see this making vehicles fun CCP, but how about profitable? Are we going to see a Price cut on them ore a HP/Resist Buff, or even a AV nerf?
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 3373	Posted - 2013.08.29 23:06:00 - [394] - Quote CCP Wolfman wrote: 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 already have Proto turrets that cost too much PG and CPU to fit on the current NOT-PROTO tanks. How is it going to help to add more Proto modules we can't fit because we don't have Proto tanks to fit them on? Proto AV gets proto weapons, modules AND SUITS, and tanks get Proto weapons but then we can't fit anything else because we run out of PG if we try. We'll now get to choose between Proto modules or Proto weapons, and have nothing even remotely competent on our NOT EVEN ADVANCED tanks because we don't get the fitting capacity for them. Quote:* 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). There are several problems with AV vs. vehicles. None of those problems are related to the damage dealt by primary AV weapons. Lets look at the problems: 1. AV Grenades: I specified "primary AV weapons" for a reason. Locus Grenades aren't seen as a primary combat tool. They're a useful situational weapon, NOT a main method of attack that's relied on to the exclusion of all else. AV weapons should be a support weapon or a fallback weapon, and should NOT be considered a primary weapon for an AV fitting. At the moment, their damage is not only way too high, but there's an extreme lack of transparency regarding the damage values. Players need to actually know how much damage AV Grenades are dealing, and whatever the amount, it needs to be nerfed REALLY, REALLY, REALLY HARD. 2. LAVs, but particularly LLAVs: LAVs got a massive HP buff for no reason. The "problem" with LAV health was that they died too easily to AV grenades, and there was literally nothing else wrong with them. LLAVs have, as a result of this "fix" of a massive buff to their HP, become more difficult to kill than tanks. This isn't an exaggeration. There might be a small imbalance between raw HP and EHP values in favour of HAVs, but that "advantage" is more than negated by the mobility of LAVs. Nerfing LAV mobility would be a stupid idea, so the logical option is to - no, not buff AV which is already balanced against anything but LAVs - nerf LAV HP back to something that vaguely resembles a sensible level. No LAV, including LLAVs, should be able to tank more than 3 AV Grenades. No LAV, including LLAVs, should be able to tank more than 2 full volleys of Proto swarms where every missile hits. 3. Dropships: It's been obvious for quite some time that Dropships are under-rewarded. The addition of rewards is a great plan, and needs to be done. Preferably before release. OH WAIT LOL 5/14 RELEASE. Yeah, before deciding to start advertising the game, make sure Dropships are actually working at least vaguely similarly to how they're intended to be working. And here's a pro-tip: When even most AV guys are saying "Dropships are underpowered, they could use a buff", FURTHER REDUCING THEIR HP IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF A GOOD IDEA. And how did it not get fixed yet? Seriously, HOW IS THAT ACTUALLY STILL A PROBLEM AND ONLY NOW BEING ADDRESSED? All vehicles lost a skill that gave, at most, 25% extra HP, and had it replaced with a skill that potentially gives 11% extra HP. Other vehicle types got a 25% HP buff (LAVs got stupidly more for no logical reason, and Enforcers desperately needed more and got less than LAVs but still enough), and Dropships didn't, meaning that every other vehicle got a net buff while Dropships took a solid nerf after already being the black sheep of the vehicle family. 4. HAVs stop at Standard:* I know I covered this earlier, but it really is a core problem with the AV/vehicle comparison, and deserves a further emphasis. AV gets literally two whole tiers of extra fitting capacity (not counting the advantage in fitting skills that actually allow competent fitting within each tier) above the best HAVs around. We get Militia, or Standard HAVs, with up to Proto weapons. Yes, we'll be able to get Proto modules soon, but that doesn't negate the fact that we can only fit things onto a Standard HAV. There is no Advanced, let alone Prototype HAV. They don't exist, and there's no good reason why not when every other role, INCLUDING OTHER VEHICLES, has them. The primary hunters of tanks - AV players - can bring fully-fitted Prototype AV fittings. Their Dropsuit has the fitting capacity to handle a full complement of Prototype equipment, including an AV weapon, a backup anti-infantry weapon, deployables, AV Grenades (effectively a second primary AV weapon if point #1 isn't addressed), and passive modules that make them tougher to kill. A really, REALLY careful HAV builder can maybe cram 2 Proto weapons onto their HAV, if they're willing to compromise on almost every other aspect of their machine to do it. Add modules and all you've done is given us a choice about what to sacrifice. We're still giving up a huge amount in order to fit a couple of Prototype items into a Standard hull, when we SHOULD have the option of skilling into something that can actually handle Prototype equipment because it's a Protoype HAV that has Prototype fitting capacity. Fix all those problems, and you're back on track for fun vehicles. Basically scrapping and rebuilding the entire system is more work for what sounds like much worse results. *Sorry, no. You AREN'T in a release-ready state. Give up the pretense. Admit we're still WAY in beta, bordering on alpha in some aspects of the game. Wait until the game is ACTUALLY finished, then ACTUALLY release it. And while you're at it, ACTUALLY honour the agreement made with early Merc Pack purchasers and give them the full credit of their Pack's contents as you advertised, instead of saying "nope, we changed the deal now" without any real grounds to do so.
katel watcher Eyniletti Rangers Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2013.08.29 23:35:00 - [395] - Quote so are the minimatar and amarr getting their own vehicles now
Blaze Ashra Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 12	Posted - 2013.08.30 00:21:00 - [396] - Quote katel watcher wrote: so are the minimatar and amarr getting their own vehicles now I'm hoping they will be in 1.6 or 1.7.
Nguruthos IX Vagina Bombers 1212	Posted - 2013.08.30 01:34:00 - [397] - Quote Blaze Ashra wrote: katel watcher wrote: so are the minimatar and amarr getting their own vehicles now I'm hoping they will be in 1.6 or 1.7. If not theyre just making Dust a perpetual nightmare to balance forever. Or every patch will come with iterations of nerf this buff that till the whole picture finallly arrives
Shadow of War88 0uter.Heaven 55	Posted - 2013.08.30 05:38:00 - [398] - Quote armor tanks > shield tanks in every way atm.
ABadMutha13 Nihil-Obstat Mercs General Tso's Alliance 3	Posted - 2013.08.30 18:42:00 - [399] - Quote I think I have come to grips with the problems. Dust Players get nothing special, small ecosystem with a few highly contested planets. (Patched Later) Do we have connected Market with Eve? No (Patched Later) Do we have issues where a suit that a person paid ISK/Aurum for dies because of poor game mechanics? Yes (Patch Later) Do you think this game will get better? Yes (Patched Later) Will we have cool new vehicles? Yes (Patched Later) Will you fix the fact that tanks that cost millions of ISK and SP to get into are taking down with relative ease? Yes (Patched Later) Will you lock vehicles so that only owners can use them? Maybe (Patched Later) I am seeing a trend with promises and no delivery. I am also seeing a trend that we are given the short end of the stick under the guise that everything will be cool. Stop selling dreams CCP and lets start seeing some forward progress.
Doshneil Antaro Dem Durrty Boyz Public Disorder. 117	Posted - 2013.08.30 19:37:00 - [400] - Quote What makes me worry for this game the most is that their fixes usually envolves reworking something from the ground up. This could be a route to go at times, but usually the most broken or unbalanced things are rarely fixed in the process. I hardly play my main logi anymore don't to these types of fixed issues, and am enjoying my tank although more. With these up coming changes to vehicles, I will probably go Idol until decent community input is put out and points to some real feal of balance. CCP never even tried smaller changes to vehicles to address, instead just rewrites how they work yet again. This game has great potential, but its biggest downfall is ccp's lack of logic in how they approach balance issues. CCP alone, is killing this game.

Void Echo Echo Galactic Industries 1146	Posted - 2013.08.30 21:14:00 - [401] - Quote Doshneil Antaro wrote: What makes me worry for this game the most is that their fixes usually envolves reworking something from the ground up. This could be a route to go at times, but usually the most broken or unbalanced things are rarely fixed in the process. I hardly play my main logi anymore don't to these types of fixed issues, and am enjoying my tank although more. With these up coming changes to vehicles, I will probably go Idol until decent community input is put out and points to some real feal of balance. CCP never even tried smaller changes to vehicles to address, instead just rewrites how they work yet again. This game has great potential, but its biggest downfall is ccp's lack of logic in how they approach balance issues. CCP alone, is killing this game. il give you a message when the COD fanbois are gone. then we can get down to real balance.
ladwar Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 1378	Posted - 2013.08.31 05:46:00 - [402] - Quote i just had a moment where i went i wonder... is the limited ammo only effecting vehicles or are turret installation getting the same limited ammo?
Gloomy Cobra Hostile Acquisition Inc The Superpowers 41	Posted - 2013.08.31 06:04:00 - [403] - Quote ^^^^^This I hope they do cuz its not cool to have a redline turret that you cant destroy, atleast make it soo that when a person is using it the ammo start running out.
Vell0cet Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire 71	Posted - 2013.08.31 10:07:00 - [404] - Quote Didn't read the full thread. First, let me say that I'm happy CCP has posted this information early to get feedback. Increased transparency will only help DUST be balanced better and more efficiently. This is a big step in the right direction! Next, I echo the sentiment that adding a capacitor would have been a much better approach than long cool downs. It would have a similar effect on gameplay in the sense that boosting would be spaced out, but in a more EVE-like way and allow a bit more flexibility to the pilots. It also opens up the door to cap-warfare eventually which adds more depth and interest to combat. For example, I can picture a LLAV with a neut turret coordinating it's attack with AV infantry to take down a tank while trying to dodge fire itself--which sounds like deep, compelling, team-based gameplay that doesn't really exist anywhere else in the FPS market. I like the ammo changes, and think vehicle ammo-resupply roles could become an interesting dynamic, requiring teamwork and coordination which is fun and interesting. I also think turrets should be buffed (especially small turrets). I see tanks as VERY EXPENSIVE toys that can exert a lot of power on the battlefield, but are costly to loose. I don't have a problem with vehicle specialists funding their "habit" by playing matches as infantry. Many people in EVE have to fund their love of expensive PvP toys by mining or other activities that are less fun, I don't see why DUST vehicle drivers should be an exception (I also think proto suits need a huge increase to their prices--this should help reduce the threat of proto AV but also negate the argument that vehicles are vulnerable to proto AV). I don't think vehicles should be invulnerable though. They should be devastating with good team support and logistics, but vulnerable when going it on their own. I also like the idea of giving vehicles small repair turrets with plenty of range to be effective. I think we're overdue for Amarr and Minmatar vehicles. Adding these would have probably softened the blow of some these changes. This is especially true because of the back-to-basics nature of these changes. Adding basic Amarr and Minmatar vehicles would allow CCP to expand vehicles symmetrically going forward, giving players the opportunity to start skilling into them sooner-than-later. Overall I like the direction, but think CCP could be doing a lot more. I especially think not adding capacitors in 1.5 is a huge mistake.
Gabriella Grey 0uter.Heaven 22	Posted - 2013.08.31 13:13:00 - [405] - Quote I like the Idea stated above about releasing the other vehicle race variants, but the Eve capacitors only work for the ship itself mostly. You can run out of rockets, and other ammunition, with the exception of Amarr, if CCP has plans of coming out with Amarr turrets in the future. I think having a capacitor on the ground would make vehicle use much more difficult for new players, unless they make them really not a big deal, and have them in the game just for the sake of having them.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 1994	Posted - 2013.08.31 14:40:00 - [406] - Quote This rework would be a great opportunity to move to a cap system. I'll argue here that it's not even a new concept for players. Stamina anyone? Yes, that's right, infantry already has a "body capacitor". Running and jumping drain it at different rates, various skills and modules affect it in various ways. The vehicle cap could simply replace the infantry stamina bar just as the vehicle shield/armor bars replace the suit's bars. That would make it both more flexible AND more understandable than the cool-down system. Even beginner players instinctively understand the cap system when you use familiar words like "stamina". They are quite used to managing their body capacitor, and that would carry over to vehicles as well. Players are not stupid. CCP please don't miss this opportunity!
Skihids Bullet Cluster 1994	Posted - 2013.08.31 14:58:00 - [407] - Quote Gabriella Grey wrote: I like the Idea stated above about releasing the other vehicle race variants, but the Eve capacitors only work for the ship itself mostly. You can run out of rockets, and other ammunition, with the exception of Amarr, if CCP has plans of coming out with Amarr turrets in the future. I think having a capacitor on the ground would make vehicle use much more difficult for new players, unless they make them really not a big deal, and have them in the game just for the sake of having them. The current cool-down system is far more clunky and confusing than a capacitor based system. Let's reverse things for a moment and give infantry movement a cool-down mechanism for comparison. When you want to run you activate your sprint module, then deactivate it and wait for the cool-down before you can sprint again. How in the world is that easier to use or understand than stamina which is just another word for "body capacitor"?
Nguruthos IX Vagina Bombers 1255	Posted - 2013.08.31 15:32:00 - [408] - Quote Skihids wrote: Gabriella Grey wrote: I like the Idea stated above about releasing the other vehicle race variants, but the Eve capacitors only work for the ship itself mostly. You can run out of rockets, and other ammunition, with the exception of Amarr, if CCP has plans of coming out with Amarr turrets in the future. I think having a capacitor on the ground would make vehicle use much more difficult for new players, unless they make them really not a big deal, and have them in the game just for the sake of having them. The current cool-down system is far more clunky and confusing than a capacitor based system. Let's reverse things for a moment and give infantry movement a cool-down mechanism for comparison. When you want to run you activate your sprint module, then deactivate it and wait for the cool-down before you can sprint again. How in the world is that easier to use or understand than stamina which is just another word for "body capacitor"? Yes, I fear now may be the only real time to move to Cap. If not, it would take another re-working and lots of lost effort in the direction of whatever the heck they're doing now. Cap is objectively better for everything even if it is a little harder to setup. I would rather they rush cap, and then iterate on it with successive builds than have to scrap everything AGAIN and take a whole 2 months to do it once they conclude cap is the only way to go...
Skihids Bullet Cluster 1995	Posted - 2013.08.31 16:18:00 - [409] - Quote Nguruthos IX wrote: Skihids wrote: Gabriella Grey wrote: I like the Idea stated above about releasing the other vehicle race variants, but the Eve capacitors only work for the ship itself mostly. You can run out of rockets, and other ammunition, with the exception of Amarr, if CCP has plans of coming out with Amarr turrets in the future. I think having a capacitor on the ground would make vehicle use much more difficult for new players, unless they make them really not a big deal, and have them in the game just for the sake of having them. The current cool-down system is far more clunky and confusing than a capacitor based system. Let's reverse things for a moment and give infantry movement a cool-down mechanism for comparison. When you want to run you activate your sprint module, then deactivate it and wait for the cool-down before you can sprint again. How in the world is that easier to use or understand than stamina which is just another word for "body capacitor"? Yes, I fear now may be the only real time to move to Cap. If not, it would take another re-working and lots of lost effort in the direction of whatever the heck they're doing now. Cap is objectively better for everything even if it is a little harder to setup. I would rather they rush cap, and then iterate on it with successive builds than have to scrap everything AGAIN and take a whole 2 months to do it once they conclude cap is the only way to go... But in what way would cap be harder to set up? It's just vehicle stamina and all the code is in place to support that. The stamina display bar is already in the game. All the code to use and restore stamina are in the game. All the code for modules and skills that affect stamina are already in the game. If anything having half a dozen activation and cool-down timers is more complex.
Gabriella Grey 0uter.Heaven 22	Posted - 2013.08.31 16:55:00 - [410] - Quote Skihids wrote: Gabriella Grey wrote: I like the Idea stated above about releasing the other vehicle race variants, but the Eve capacitors only work for the ship itself mostly. You can run out of rockets, and other ammunition, with the exception of Amarr, if CCP has plans of coming out with Amarr turrets in the future. I think having a capacitor on the ground would make vehicle use much more difficult for new players, unless they make them really not a big deal, and have them in the game just for the sake of having them. The current cool-down system is far more clunky and confusing than a capacitor based system. Let's reverse things for a moment and give infantry movement a cool-down mechanism for comparison. When you want to run you activate your sprint module, then deactivate it and wait for the cool-down before you can sprint again. How in the world is that easier to use or understand than stamina which is just another word for "body capacitor"? The modules already work in a way like a capacitor, and doesn't need to be changed. Eve has it where modules have this similar cool down effect, and having a re-scripting of code for a specific button to be assigned this in the relation to a sprint button, would limit what you could really use in module slots, unless they come out with remapping and spend more time working on trying to follow other types of games. I think CCP has something very unique going on here, and should not change certain things in relations of the controls to work similar to other games, example, call of duty etc. Though I am not saying your suggestion is a bad, one and respect it, I just don't think its something needed to make a serious impact and simplicity that they are trying to accomplish across all vehicles.

Doshneil Antaro Dem Durrty Boyz Public Disorder. 117	Posted - 2013.08.31 17:46:00 - [411] - Quote Maybe I missed it in this thread, but what about rendering? This has to be the #1 killer for tanks. Also, tanks are expensive pieces of equipment, that should have sophisticated computers to help it survive. They should scan 360 degrees, and should have bigger scan radius than infantry. All but a scout, or player using dampener should be detected even from behind. As is, I can run my logi (no dampeners) straight at the sides of a tank, set up a nanohive right next to him and spam avs. I also want to talk more about ammo regeneration. It will take months for ccp to code and release a module for this. In the mean time, they should just patch ammo regeneration in. 30 seconds of nonfiring until it kicks in, and half ammo replenished in 1 min. This would prevent tanks from sustained combat, but also gives them a viable way to rearm. This would just a temporary but needed fix until ccp could code a real fix. If these items alone are addressed, tanks will still be usable, as well as fun. If they are not fixed, the will continue to be painful to use, and we will see the further decline as players quit playing, or respec out of them.
Doshneil Antaro Dem Durrty Boyz Public Disorder. 117	Posted - 2013.08.31 17:54:00 - [412] - Quote Doshneil Antaro wrote: Maybe I missed it in this thread, but what about rendering? This has to be the #1 killer for tanks. Also, tanks are expensive pieces of equipment, that should have sophisticated computers to help it survive. They should scan 360 degrees, and should have bigger scan radius than infantry. All but a scout, or player using dampener should be detected even from behind. As is, I can run my logi (no dampeners) straight at the sides of a tank, set up a nanohive right next to him and spam avs. I also want to talk more about ammo regeneration. It will take months for ccp to code and release a module for this. In the mean time, they should just patch ammo regeneration in. 30 seconds of nonfiring until it kicks in, and half ammo replenished in 1 min. This would prevent tanks from sustained combat, but also gives them a viable way to rearm. This would just a temporary but needed fix until ccp could code a real fix. If these items alone are addressed, tanks will still be usable, as well as fun. If they are not fixed, the will continue to be painful to use, and we will see the further decline as players quit playing, or respec out of them. I forget to touch on rendering. All rendering needs to be fixed. Infantry rendering needs to all be equal. The only time it's should be different is with scoped weapons while down the sites. Tank rendering should easily be greater than I infantry, but only slightly. To much would be op, but All av users should render, and we should never have invisible swarms/forge/turrets. This would be because of once again, the Super computers that would be in these expensive vehicles. These changes would actually justify the expense cost of tanks.
Needless Sacermendor Red Fox Brigade 384	Posted - 2013.08.31 18:43:00 - [413] - Quote Thought this might be an interesting read, from way back in November 2011 ... I wasn't wrong ! http://dust514.com/news/blog/2011/11/vehicular-dynamics-and-mayhem-1-1/ Lots of mention of vehicles being support oriented and symbiotic relationship with infantry and "heavily armoured units using long range, heavy, concussive attacks while lighter units utilize their speed and flexibility" Also "players may choose to swap out their main turret mount for a large bank of guided heavy missiles to pluck their enemyGÇÖs dropships from the sky" ... alongside other Ewar and 'guided' missiles ! Edit : I know things have evolved since then, but it's interesting to read back how the initial concept was proposed.
Stupid Blueberry Nova Corps Marines Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 55	Posted - 2013.08.31 21:39:00 - [414] - Quote And all around New Eden, the forge gunners grinned in glee, as they sat above the depots, and camped them happily
Skihids Bullet Cluster 1996	Posted - 2013.08.31 23:40:00 - [415] - Quote Gabriella Grey wrote: Skihids wrote: Gabriella Grey wrote: I like the Idea stated above about releasing the other vehicle race variants, but the Eve capacitors only work for the ship itself mostly. You can run out of rockets, and other ammunition, with the exception of Amarr, if CCP has plans of coming out with Amarr turrets in the future. I think having a capacitor on the ground would make vehicle use much more difficult for new players, unless they make them really not a big deal, and have them in the game just for the sake of having them. The current cool-down system is far more clunky and confusing than a capacitor based system. Let's reverse things for a moment and give infantry movement a cool-down mechanism for comparison. When you want to run you activate your sprint module, then deactivate it and wait for the cool-down before you can sprint again. How in the world is that easier to use or understand than stamina which is just another word for "body capacitor"? The modules already work in a way like a capacitor, and doesn't need to be changed. Eve has it where modules have this similar cool down effect, and having a re-scripting of code for a specific button to be assigned this in the relation to a sprint button, would limit what you could really use in module slots, unless they come out with remapping and spend more time working on trying to follow other types of games. I think CCP has something very unique going on here, and should not change certain things in relations of the controls to work similar to other games, example, call of duty etc. Though I am not saying your suggestion is a bad, one and respect it, I just don't think its something needed to make a serious impact and simplicity that they are trying to accomplish across all vehicles. Actually no, they don't act like capacitors. They act like sparklers. You light the up and they run until they burn out. Then you wait for them to cool down before you can light the next one up. You misunderstand me if you think I'm advocating activating all modules via L3. That's great for the AB, but the rest can be turned on and off via the current wheel mechanism. This doesn't have to alter the physical controls in any way.
Needless Sacermendor Red Fox Brigade 385	Posted - 2013.08.31 23:52:00 - [416] - Quote Skihids wrote: The current cool-down system is far more clunky and confusing than a capacitor based system. Let's reverse things for a moment and give infantry movement a cool-down mechanism for comparison. When you want to run you activate your sprint module, then deactivate it and wait for the cool-down before you can sprint again. How in the world is that easier to use or understand than stamina which is just another word for "dropsuit capacitor"? Fixed that for you.
Blaze Ashra Ametat Security Amarr Empire 4	Posted - 2013.09.01 01:52:00 - [417] - Quote CCP Wolfman, I was wondering if the vehicle engineering skill will be changed to give 5% PG per level? Was going ot pay tribute but the images didn't go through
Skihids Bullet Cluster 1996	Posted - 2013.09.01 04:14:00 - [418] - Quote Needless Sacermendor wrote: Skihids wrote: The current cool-down system is far more clunky and confusing than a capacitor based system. Let's reverse things for a moment and give infantry movement a cool-down mechanism for comparison. When you want to run you activate your sprint module, then deactivate it and wait for the cool-down before you can sprint again. How in the world is that easier to use or understand than stamina which is just another word for "dropsuit capacitor"? Fixed that for you. Thanks
Evolution-7 the unholy legion of darkstar DARKSTAR ARMY 51	Posted - 2013.09.01 13:39:00 - [419] - Quote ladwar wrote: i just had a moment where i went i wonder... is the limited ammo only effecting vehicles or are turret installation getting the same limited ammo? Smart idea.
Pilot Sparky TransLegio 2	Posted - 2013.09.01 17:35:00 - [420] - Quote I really like the idea of finite turret ammo and re-stocking at a supply depot. Now just make my fully loaded with standard modules of shield hardeners and boosters with a standard dropship actually useable ! I ALWAYS get exploded by the first five to eight minutes before blown up by a installation, forge gun or even mass driver, gosh dang it !



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page