| 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) |
Pseudogenesis
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
82
   |
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:15:00 -
[121] - Quote
This is great, but could we have some numbers? Unless none of the concrete details are ironed out yet, I'd love it if the resident number crunchers on the forums were able to do their thing. |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers
EoN.
1859
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:16:00 -
[122] - Quote
I don't know a whole lot about vehicles (just my limited experience with MLT tanks and about 500k SP in modules) so I wont comment on the changes to much.
But if anything, I just like the fact that you are posting before content lock.
Much respect Wolfman.
Another +1 (of many) to you sir. |
WUT ANG
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
26
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:19:00 -
[123] - Quote
So vehicle sp refund please. No small turrets means 620000+ wasted sp right. |
Beld Errmon
Paladin Survey Force
Amarr Empire
816
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:23:00 -
[124] - Quote
passive modules becoming weaker, ammo, active modules with long cool downs... ugh this could be so very very bad, hopefully they have module activation roulette fixed soon, a small part of me is hoping this will work out alright but most of me thinks this is probably the last nail in the tankers coffin. |
Beren Hurin
The Vanguardians
1250
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:30:00 -
[125] - Quote
Beld Errmon wrote:passive modules becoming weaker, ammo, active modules with long cool downs... ugh this could be so very very bad, hopefully they have module activation roulette fixed soon, a small part of me is hoping this will work out alright but most of me thinks this is probably the last nail in the tankers coffin.
I missed something...where did it say they get weaker? Its just logical that they wouldn't be stronger than active modules... Isn't it? Otherwise, why would you even equip active modules if you had to have a cooldown for something that was weaker than the passive variant? And why would you think its possible to have a module with a cooldown that was negligable, and basically gave it a passive bonus for 90% of the time?
You should just rename modules "tactical" and "persistent" or something. People like the above don't seem to understand the fundamentals of balance and trade-offs... |
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
1000
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:50:00 -
[126] - Quote
I think ammo should regenerate. Similar to a nanohive. I don't think they should be able to run out of ammo altogether. But I think there should be a time based generation of ammo.
Perhaps make a skill that improves the speed/capacity of this action. |
Madagascan Eagle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:51:00 -
[127] - Quote
Supply Depots will need much more HP. Maybe increase the amount of depots also.
Good work guys. My sleeping tank Alt will get to spend his points after all. The beast will be awoken! |
Nguruthos IX
Red and Silver Hand
Amarr Empire
1158
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:52:00 -
[128] - Quote
Im only afraid this means well never get the eve-like capacitor system for vehicles. If this is 1.5 and its the main structural rework of vehicles that likely spells a permanent design.
And boy did I have my heart set on flying a mini version of an eve ship. |
General Erick
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
62
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:52:00 -
[129] - Quote
CCP Wolfman wrote:
Turrets will now have finite ammunition. Vehicle vs. vehicle combat generally boils down to two vehicles parked opposite one another firing until someone pops. This is not fun. Finite ammunition allows us to make turrets more powerful while preventing them from being a constant threat; spam a target and eventually you will run out of ammo.
Once weGÇÖre confident weGÇÖve gotten the base balance right weGÇÖll start to add back in things weGÇÖve removed as well as introduce new elements to the mix. Pilot dropsuits, improved roles, increased infantry and vehicle interplay, and new turret types for a start.
1. How will ammo be replenished?
2. You mean we will finally get artillery turrets? |
TITANIC Xangore
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
279
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:52:00 -
[130] - Quote
Vrain Matari2)If CCP sticks with the tank roles model Wolfman is proposing, everything come down to the timing of the active modules. E.g., for a shield tank rolling in to an objective to support an infantry push the staggered activation of the active hardner followed by the shield booster has to last long enough for a successful engagement. How long is that? Two minutes at a minimum and prolly more is needed to be useful [i wrote:and survive[/i] long enough to retreat and recover. This is an area where skills should make a difference - in duration of active effects.
2 minutes at most for a battle? Sure, but with a 30 second active module that means we are only relevant for 1/4 that engagement. In addition to this, commando suits fit with advanced or proto swarms means that for that 30 seconds your not relevant. Your fodder for wp. |
|
|
TITANIC Xangore
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
279
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:53:00 -
[131] - Quote
Madagascan Eagle wrote:Supply Depots will need much more HP. Maybe increase the amount of depots also.
Good work guys. My sleeping tank Alt will get to spend his points after all. The beast will be awoken!
Good luck with that. He will be broke after the first couple days. |
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
772
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:56:00 -
[132] - Quote
No small turrets? That gets a +10 from me. No more useless blues giving away my position, no more wasting PG on turrets for my personal taxis, and even extra tank on my ADS.
Finite ammo? Sweet, no more redliners who spam rounds all day. Better add more supply depots to the maps though, because they will get blown up by infantry once they figure out that tanks need them too.
The rest is really worrying, but since it looks like I will be getting refunded a few million SP when you take out the enforcers, at least I can get a proto suit for ground work while you guys figure out the situation. Streamlining vehicles and only having basic modules means that unless you dramatically tone down AV, tanks are still going to be going pop way too easily.
I suspect that burst tanking will still be the only way to survive, but you will just shorten the burst, and lengthen the cooldown. Doing so will not make driving vehicles any more fun than they are now, which would be a serious bummer.
I hope Wolfman can take the lead from Exmaple and get some specific vehicle threads going on each type in the feedback forums. |
Canari Elphus
Pro Hic Immortalis
374
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:57:00 -
[133] - Quote
I like the idea but I think that they should buff/expand the modules for LLAVs and LDSs as someone mentioned before.
They should mimic the Logi/Heavy combo for infantry.
Logi Vehicles should have bonuses to help cooldown rates or speed up regen rates
They should have a hive module (with cooldown) for ammo replenish
They should have a shield bubble module to protect a tank when its healing/restocking (to avoid possible exploit, the tank will not be able to fire out of the bubble)
I like that there is not finite ammo for vehicles but they should be buffed heavily for survivability because of that. The ammo limit makes them what many wanted them to be, situational where they cant just spam an area with fire but I see no reason now why they cant have large amounts of EHP so that it becomes more of a tank v tank battle where infantry AV is more of a support rather than being able to solo tanks. |
Madagascan Eagle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 14:57:00 -
[134] - Quote
Oh and please look at putting the tank accelerator on the trigger buttons like you did with the LAVs.
thanks. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries
EoN.
610
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 15:01:00 -
[135] - Quote
Finite ammo is great...but how will you deal with the fact that people can simply call in new vehicles safely from their camping spot once they've run out of ammo? |
TITANIC Xangore
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
279
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 15:02:00 -
[136] - Quote
dustwaffle wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote: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.
You've already said you don't drive tanks, and are considering specing into them. Let me tell you, froma current tank driver. Don't. It's not worth it anymore. Av changes mean that with swarms you can launch 3-4 volleys before the first hits. They do more damage now (proto already would hit for 3500+ damage on a 6-8000 HP tank) and now they are giving you limited ammo and looooong recharge on modules. this means that you go into cooldown in a fight, they enemy launches let's say 3 swarms, your 2m isk tank goes pop, you now have a week before you are profitable again to buy another tank, that then goes pop again in 30 seconds. Guaranteed, the only ones that won't lose tanks are the redline railgun snipers. Anyone bringing one onto the battlefield is going to lose it. |
Lillica Deathdealer
Mango and Friends
253
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 15:13:00 -
[137] - Quote
Wolfman... I love you.... You removed requirement of small turrets! Yay! You clearly defined what you want! Yay! You decided to introduce more turrets later! Yay!
Now please, tell me that I will get any skills that I spent in vehicles refunded. If my enforcer tank lvl3 just disappears without refund I swear I might break something. |
DUST Fiend
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5927
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 15:32:00 -
[138] - Quote
Not having to fit turrets is a MASSIVE dropship buff that should have been in since closed beta.
Also, turret ammo is another thing that should have been in since beta, so those two changes alone have highly piqued my interest |
Nguruthos IX
Red and Silver Hand
Amarr Empire
1160
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 15:36:00 -
[139] - Quote
Lillica Deathdealer wrote:Wolfman... I love you.... You removed requirement of small turrets! Yay! You clearly defined what you want! Yay! You decided to introduce more turrets later! Yay!
Now please, tell me that I will get any skills that I spent in vehicles refunded. If my enforcer tank lvl3 just disappears without refund I swear I might break something.
Hed break your heart |
major faux-pas
Valor Coalition
RISE of LEGION
58
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 15:45:00 -
[140] - Quote
 Great
Also
Can I please be able to strip out the default turret in my 'dren-type' LAV 
No, I don't want a gun.
it gobbles PG/CPU, and more importantly I'd prefer not to have some dumb blue dot giving away my position by shooting off at birds.. |
|
|
ADAM-OF-EVE
Svartur Bjorn
230
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 15:56:00 -
[141] - Quote
please tell me you have done something about recalling damaged vehicles and now those without ammo too |
Nguruthos IX
Red and Silver Hand
Amarr Empire
1162
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:04:00 -
[142] - Quote
I hope im not spending half of the match running away because module cooldowns are up.
Half the match leaving mid fight to restock ammo because assault dropship aiming is crqp
And the third half running away because one assault forge gun started firing at me.
Then getting an rdv spawned into me when I have a single minute to come back to it all
|
Caeli SineDeo
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
676
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:13:00 -
[143] - Quote
Also forgot something. Is there going to be a source of ammo for vehicles besides supply depos
I have a feeling this could be very bad for tankers when infantry gets the good idea of destroying all depos on the map leaving vehicles ammo less for the rest of the game. This would break game play for vehicles also. |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
228
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:16:00 -
[144] - Quote
CCP Wolfman wrote:Hi guys, As promised the other day here is an overview of me being awesome.[snip] I think that's enough for now! We're looking forward to hearing what you think  CCP Wolfman Sorry for the spam, but you need a medal. |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers
EoN.
1861
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:17:00 -
[145] - Quote
Wolfman..
Curious... what happens when the 1-2 supply depots on a map are destroyed? Tanks are just SoL?
I have to agree, finite ammo on tanks sounds like a good idea, but supply depots are so few and far between atm. We have no way of calling in additional SDs and they cannot be repaired once destroyed.
Please keep this in mind. |
Skihids
Bullet Cluster
1954
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:21:00 -
[146] - Quote
Others have done a good job commenting on the details, but I'd like to take a look at the overall philosophy of vehicles that this patch reveals.
Vehicles:
1) Won't get unique roles and will continue to compete directly with infantry for the mission of slaying infantry.
2) Will continue to be solo player focused, even more so with the removal of small turrets.
3) Will be the equivalent of "Burst mode" dropsuits where one player briefly becomes super strong, but then has to run away and hide for an extended period of time.
I suppose it's a consequence of not having any game mode more complex than TDM, but the lack of roles that only vehicles can fill makes them a mere accessory. They become a more expensive and riskier version of a dropsuit and are totally optional. I think this is one of the biggest missed opportunities to add complexity and depth to the game. As long as the only reason to drop a vehicle rather than run in a suit is "because I want to", they will be balanced strength and capability wise against a single infantry unit, and that is simply too limiting.
These changes make piloting much more complex while placing the entire burden on the lone pilot. Task overload is pretty sure to follow, especially with the clumsy activation mechanism. I'm a private pilot with an instrument rating and I know quite a bit about workload management. There's a reason commercial flights require a co-pilot, and there's a reason real tanks have multiple crew members. There is frequently too much for one person to do right when the crap hits the fan.
It feels like CCP is throwing away a great chance to differentiate DUST from other shooters in the way it handles vehicles. If they are going to be balanced in capability with a single dropsuit fitting, then they will have to priced accordingly. That basically makes them another sidegrade of dropsuit rather than a unique role. |
Beren Hurin
The Vanguardians
1251
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:22:00 -
[147] - Quote
What if you could only deploy certain vehicles from supply depots? They have that deployment option that nobody ever uses...? |
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
3156
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:26:00 -
[148] - Quote
I love you.
I also really like the active vs passive thing.
Currently, actives is better in every practical way, including fitting cost. |
SteelDark Knight
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
101
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:28:00 -
[149] - Quote
CCP Wolfman wrote:
Turrets will now have finite ammunition. Vehicle vs. vehicle combat generally boils down to two vehicles parked opposite one another firing until someone pops. This is not fun. Finite ammunition allows us to make turrets more powerful while preventing them from being a constant threat; spam a target and eventually you will run out of ammo.
Perhaps the best way to handle this is to allow all Turrets to have a passive regeneration for ammunition. Additional items such as modules, Supply Depots, nanohives, etc. can instantly refill or increase that regeneration but by having a passive regeneration on all turrets it will mean that vehicles will not be in a position were they can no longer be of use within a match which I think is the greatest fear being expressed. |
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
3157
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 16:30:00 -
[150] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:What if you could only deploy certain vehicles from supply depots? They have that deployment option that nobody ever uses...?
I remember in codex that was the worst possible option: the deployment system was weird, so the RDV would put the vehicle directly on top of the supply depot.
I personally think that the non-depot deployment should be slow again, while deploying from a supply depot is nearly instant. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |