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)

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.

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.

i just jizzed my pants

FINALLY I CAN HAVE

no small turrets
unstupid shield regen
ammo in turrets (meaningful engagements)
balanced modules between shields/armor

Turrets having ammo is a wonderful thing as it prevents senseless spamming and makes accuracy more important. Awesome change here guys! I think there to be a way for ships to 'restock' their ammo without having to recall it and call another of the same vehicle. Maybe a built-in nanohive that is very slow, and disables turrets while refilling them, or something? I'm not sold on a "Bigger ammo bay module" or needing to hang out at a supply depot (Especially with dropships)

One of the reasons vehicles are not 'fun' is because unlike a dropsuit... You can't really die in them without it being a huge deal and taking up several matches of earnings to even pay for it. In a game where the whole point is basically chaos and lots of things dying, saying "No, you can't die if you want to use this effectively" seems a bit dumb. I think that all vehicles should be relatively cheap and disposable, so that dying in them is no bigger deal than dying in a dropsuit.

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.

These changed sound good on paper but what's the purpose of this changes if anyone can "steal" your vehicle. That's the reason I don't like using vehicles!

CCP Rejavik
CCP Shanghia

Same company different studios, one has near perfected the player feedback process, the other is still rolling on the floor after it fell over its first baby step.

Seriously, all of the really stupid CoD players stick to militia-grade crap anyway. Anyone venturing seriously into the wonderful world of vehicles knows that they are taking incredible risks when doing so and are usually prepared to apply the use of their intelligence to keep themselves alive.

Most also like customizing stuff and nerding out over fits.

Why insult tankers by basically dumbing down the mods and the mechanics?

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.

On the topic of roles and such, We've bugged Wolfman about this to no end, but I'll throw it here anyways : Logistics modules simply need to be turrets, instead of pilot controlled modules. The use of these modules currently ranges from simply impractical to use, to downright impossible to use, as you look at them on each vehicle. The only vehicle that can even use them with good practicality is an HAV, because they are the only vehicle where the aiming/LOS is not dictated by movement controls. You could spend weeks/months reworking these module systems and making their aiming & locking functionality much more practical, or you could transfer this function to a series of turrets, and eliminate all of the 'ease of use' concerns pretty much by the sheer viture of how turrets work compared to vehicle controls. The only concern not addressed here is the seriously lacking range of these modules, which could honestly use a pretty big buff.

Now... Art becomes a concern. It is my honest belief that you guys could just rotate the 'turret' part of a blaster turret 90 degrees in each direction and then just slap two of them together side-by-side. You guys have done stuff like that before (*wink* MCC turrets *wink*) and I think this would look cool enough to pass until a real art asset could be drawn up. This only becomes a problem with the 'large' variants of remote-assist modules, because there's really no way I can think of to combine existing turrets to make them look different/cool enough to pass. I don't think this is an issue, if the current logistics vehicles were given proper bonuses (Oh god, PLEASE give them a range bonus)

it is bad game mechanics to have to go through a radial menu to select active modules in the middle of a fight. i have always had a problem with this. Either controls need to be more streamlined, not necessarily a one button thing, but def streamlined, or active modules need to be accessed in a different manner.

It is stupidly easy to select the wrong module on the radial menu as well, as the icons are small and close together. I have lost many a tank to this, compounded with the terrible mouse radial menu bug.

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)