DUST Search - Vehicles in 1.5 and beyond!

Aero Yassavi wrote:

This communication is amazing. Telling us stuff early (like details on Uprising 1.5 when Uprising 1.4 hasn't even released). Very happy to see CCP is finally giving in to discussion with us!

As for the actual details of the post, everything sounded good but here are a few points that sort of drew a red flag for me,

Finite ammo. That sounds great, but what about the sniper tanks who sit back in the redzone. They are either really close to a redzone supply depot or can easily recall their HAV and then request it again for full ammo (yes infantry can do this too at supply depots but they need a supply depot, vehicles can get a fresh vehicle at any time). I suggest 1) remove redline supply depots and 2) track ammo remaining when a vehicle is recalled and keep it at the same level if called back in within a certain time frame.
Active Module vs Passive Module PG values. If active modules are high reward for a short period of time followed by a long delay and passive modules are low reward that is persistent, then is that not balance enough? What is the reasoning behind making active modules harder to fit, especially when these sound like the main modules that are going to make the vehicle gameplay fun and dynamic?
Shield recharge penalty for shield extenders. Not really a complaint since you did answer that they would be getting a substantial increase to shield recharge rates, but just a bit of emphasis that vehicles shield recharge rate needs to be much higher than dropsuit shield recharge rates.

Aside from that, here's a few things that I am a curious on that were not brought up,

Making LAVs main threat be the turret, not road kill. Anything being done to improve the "feel" of small turrets as well as protecting the open gunners?
Dropship purpose. Anything being done to give dropships a meaningful role in our current battleground?
ISK, ISK, ISK

Great job and keep up the good work!

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)
Bojo The Mighty Zanzibar Concept 1587	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:38:00 - [211] - Quote Our Deepest Regret wrote: Vespasian Andendare wrote: Our Deepest Regret wrote: I am skilled deeply into small turrets. If small turrets will no longer needed in order to fit a tank, I don't want them anymore. Can I have an SP refund? Why did you skill deeply into small turrets if you only wanted them "in order to fit a tank"? I figured if I was going to be forced into having passengers on my ride, they should at least have decent weapons. The damage bonus was also nice for when I'm in another tanker's ride. Well, now that we don't have to fit small turrets, no one will ever use them (myself included) making it the definitive example of a worthless talent. Just because you don't want them doesn't mean that you can't use them Surely you can use your SP in small turrets to spice up your fittings, to create more team oriented tanks, nes pas?
Our Deepest Regret Algintal Core Gallente Federation 70	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:41:00 - [212] - Quote Bojo The Mighty wrote: Just because you don't want them doesn't mean that you can't use them Surely you can use your SP in small turrets to spice up your fittings, to create more team oriented tanks, nes pas? It sounds nice, but the extra PG you'd save from not using them could go towards upping survivability. I'd really have to see what proto vehicles were like before I'd consider making my HAV a team boat.
major faux-pas Valor Coalition RISE of LEGION 60	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:41:00 - [213] - Quote Are lavs finally to be taking the same damage they deal when they hit us? That should deal with the silly anti-infantry role?
Mary Sedillo Pure Innocence. EoN. 274	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:45:00 - [214] - Quote Ammunition? REALLY? You state things that are already done currently with vehicle operations, with the base hull being useless without modules. Your statement on active v. passive IS ALREADY IN PLAY!!! Do you even TOUCH vehicles? Talk with veteran operators? This ammunition thing is a horrid idea which will hurt us MORE! My god, this game is ******.
Martin0 Brancaleone Maphia Clan Corporation CRONOS. 438	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:45:00 - [215] - Quote Nice. But Will Dropships actually get WP for their job? Like, for respawns and moving people around, for doing THEIR JOB
ladwar Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 1294	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:45:00 - [216] - Quote so just from reading the only thing i hear is we are buffing armor and nerfing shields. can't wait to actually see the numbers but till then it looks like caldari are going to stay 2nd rate tanks that no one should use.
Kage Roth Wolf-Monkey Bastards 40	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:46:00 - [217] - Quote I still want a stasis webifier deployable to equip to infantry. Say it would slow vehicles down 60% for 60 seconds in an 8 meter radius when activated. Long enough to counter active mods. It would take luck to get the vehicle on top of it and coordination to let a squad take advantage of it, but that would finally put a stop to those HAVs that just run when they take any damage and then are back in two minutes.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 1959	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:51:00 - [218] - Quote Kage Roth wrote: I still want a stasis webifier deployable to equip to infantry. Say it would slow vehicles down 60% for 60 seconds in an 8 meter radius when activated. Long enough to counter active mods. It would take luck to get the vehicle on top of it and coordination to let a squad take advantage of it, but that would finally put a stop to those HAVs that just run when they take any damage and then are back in two minutes. Or encourage them to have teammates nearby who can jump out and kill you while you are holding your webifier.
Our Deepest Regret Algintal Core Gallente Federation 70	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:55:00 - [219] - Quote Skihids wrote: Kage Roth wrote: I still want a stasis webifier deployable to equip to infantry. Say it would slow vehicles down 60% for 60 seconds in an 8 meter radius when activated. Long enough to counter active mods. It would take luck to get the vehicle on top of it and coordination to let a squad take advantage of it, but that would finally put a stop to those HAVs that just run when they take any damage and then are back in two minutes. Or encourage them to have teammates nearby who can jump out and kill you while you are holding your webifier. No passengers without small turrets! Tanks are going full lone wolf now.
THE TRAINSPOTTER ROMANIA Renegades C0VEN 241	Posted - 2013.08.27 18:59:00 - [220] - Quote ammo depletion makes perfect sense i agree with it

Needless Sacermendor Red Fox Brigade 365	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:00:00 - [221] - Quote ladwar wrote: so just from reading the only thing i hear is we are buffing armor and nerfing shields. can't wait to actually see the numbers but till then it looks like caldari are going to stay 2nd rate tanks that no one should use. and AV is not going to be touch so we will be just even rich WP targets then before. Why do they need to touch AV ... the point of 1.5 is to rebalance vehicles ... or do you think they'll just rebalance them where they are and not in balance with AV ? ... Sounds like good logic you've got there !
Aero Yassavi PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 1334	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:00:00 - [222] - Quote This communication is amazing. Telling us stuff early (like details on Uprising 1.5 when Uprising 1.4 hasn't even released). Very happy to see CCP is finally giving in to discussion with us! As for the actual details of the post, everything sounded good but here are a few points that sort of drew a red flag for me, Finite ammo. That sounds great, but what about the sniper tanks who sit back in the redzone. They are either really close to a redzone supply depot or can easily recall their HAV and then request it again for full ammo (yes infantry can do this too at supply depots but they need a supply depot, vehicles can get a fresh vehicle at any time). I suggest 1) remove redline supply depots and 2) track ammo remaining when a vehicle is recalled and keep it at the same level if called back in within a certain time frame. Active Module vs Passive Module PG values. If active modules are high reward for a short period of time followed by a long delay and passive modules are low reward that is persistent, then is that not balance enough? What is the reasoning behind making active modules harder to fit, especially when these sound like the main modules that are going to make the vehicle gameplay fun and dynamic? Shield recharge penalty for shield extenders. Not really a complaint since you did answer that they would be getting a substantial increase to shield recharge rates, but just a bit of emphasis that vehicles shield recharge rate needs to be much higher than dropsuit shield recharge rates. Aside from that, here's a few things that I am a curious on that were not brought up, Making LAVs main threat be the turret, not road kill. Anything being done to improve the "feel" of small turrets as well as protecting the open gunners? Dropship purpose. Anything being done to give dropships a meaningful role in our current battleground? ISK, ISK, ISK Great job and keep up the good work!
Needless Sacermendor Red Fox Brigade 365	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:01:00 - [223] - Quote Our Deepest Regret wrote: Skihids wrote: Kage Roth wrote: I still want a stasis webifier deployable to equip to infantry. Say it would slow vehicles down 60% for 60 seconds in an 8 meter radius when activated. Long enough to counter active mods. It would take luck to get the vehicle on top of it and coordination to let a squad take advantage of it, but that would finally put a stop to those HAVs that just run when they take any damage and then are back in two minutes. Or encourage them to have teammates nearby who can jump out and kill you while you are holding your webifier. No passengers without small turrets! Tanks are going full lone wolf now. Can I still get kill assists for jumping in your empty seats ... sounds like a great way to AFK farm :-/ Edit ... it's a good point though, would not fitting a turret remove the seat ... or could it still be used as transport ?
THE TRAINSPOTTER ROMANIA Renegades C0VEN 241	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:03:00 - [224] - Quote Aero Yassavi wrote: This communication is amazing. Telling us stuff early (like details on Uprising 1.5 when Uprising 1.4 hasn't even released). Very happy to see CCP is finally giving in to discussion with us! As for the actual details of the post, everything sounded good but here are a few points that sort of drew a red flag for me, Finite ammo. That sounds great, but what about the sniper tanks who sit back in the redzone. They are either really close to a redzone supply depot or can easily recall their HAV and then request it again for full ammo (yes infantry can do this too at supply depots but they need a supply depot, vehicles can get a fresh vehicle at any time). I suggest 1) remove redline supply depots and 2) track ammo remaining when a vehicle is recalled and keep it at the same level if called back in within a certain time frame. Active Module vs Passive Module PG values. If active modules are high reward for a short period of time followed by a long delay and passive modules are low reward that is persistent, then is that not balance enough? What is the reasoning behind making active modules harder to fit, especially when these sound like the main modules that are going to make the vehicle gameplay fun and dynamic? Shield recharge penalty for shield extenders. Not really a complaint since you did answer that they would be getting a substantial increase to shield recharge rates, but just a bit of emphasis that vehicles shield recharge rate needs to be much higher than dropsuit shield recharge rates. Aside from that, here's a few things that I am a curious on that were not brought up, Making LAVs main threat be the turret, not road kill. Anything being done to improve the "feel" of small turrets as well as protecting the open gunners? Dropship purpose. Anything being done to give dropships a meaningful role in our current battleground? ISK, ISK, ISK Great job and keep up the good work! that needs to be fixed , its a broken gameplay mechanic that gets abused into oblivion to get easy and cheap kills
Skihids Bullet Cluster 1959	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:03:00 - [225] - Quote Our Deepest Regret wrote: Skihids wrote: Kage Roth wrote: I still want a stasis webifier deployable to equip to infantry. Say it would slow vehicles down 60% for 60 seconds in an 8 meter radius when activated. Long enough to counter active mods. It would take luck to get the vehicle on top of it and coordination to let a squad take advantage of it, but that would finally put a stop to those HAVs that just run when they take any damage and then are back in two minutes. Or encourage them to have teammates nearby who can jump out and kill you while you are holding your webifier. No passengers without small turrets! Tanks are going full lone wolf now. The thing is tanks will have to coordinate with infantry now in order to do anything useful and get out again. They won't be able to do much on their own as the enemy can just hunker down and avoid the tank for the relatively short period of time they are "active", then come out and lob AV as it runs away. Friendly infantry will multiply the effect as it is in "active" mode and help cover its retreat. I see a tank used primarily as a breakthrough tool where it leads the charge to an objective, pounds the enemy and distracts them from killing the blues who overwhelm them. If successful the tank can regen in place, or if not it runs away under cover of the blues. If everything fails it gets blown up.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 1959	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:08:00 - [226] - Quote Concurrent with making vehicles mainly "breakthrough" assets is the an actual incentive to assault heavily defended objectives. Outside PC there really isn't any incentive. Yes, the current event attempts to make it worthwhile to put extra effort into winning, but what about when that's over? Why would any one throw themselves into a meat grinder when it's ISK stupid to do so? Why would blue dots be ecstatic to get tank support or a dropship ride to the objective when they can just sit back and snipe or pick off reds on the edges? We need a reason to win.
Bojo The Mighty Zanzibar Concept 1588	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:09:00 - [227] - Quote Mary Sedillo wrote: Ammunition? REALLY? You state things that are already done currently with vehicle operations, with the base hull being useless without modules. Your statement on active v. passive IS ALREADY IN PLAY!!! Do you even TOUCH vehicles? Talk with veteran operators? This ammunition thing is a horrid idea which will hurt us MORE! My god, this game is ******. So you ignore that: Turrets: getting buff with the finite ammo Small turrets are no longer required passive armor repair And these aren't patchnotes either, there is nothing terminal here.
Needless Sacermendor Red Fox Brigade 365	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:11:00 - [228] - Quote Aero Yassavi wrote: (yes infantry can do this too at supply depots but they need a supply depot, vehicles can get a fresh vehicle at any time). I suggest 1) remove redline supply depots and 2) track ammo remaining when a vehicle is recalled and keep it at the same level if called back in within a certain time frame. The system already tracks damage to dropsuits ... if you change at a supply depot to the same dropsuit type with a different fitting your shield and armor damage are retained with the new fitting. I agree it would be too easy to railsnipe and recall for ammo resupply ... it should be considered unintended behaviour and fixed before it's broken. I'm not keen on removing redline supply depots as they are useful for infantry and will be for vehicles at times when there's no other options. Hopefully just making vehicles more fun will reduce the desire to railsnipe.
ABadMutha13 Nihil-Obstat Mercs General Tso's Alliance 2	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:13:00 - [229] - Quote Ok here we go.... Definition: Strengths: Long range, heavy armor, and devastating attacks. Team unit. Weakness: Infantry at Close quarters (Think C4 charges low throw distance high damage triggered effect), mines, high value target, high powered unguided rockets, lower powered targeted rockets. Grenades doing little to no damage. CCP Definition: Finite ammo, "lift your skirt and run away after 15 seconds", pull up to supply depot / Shell Gas Station to refill every 3 minutes. Weakness: Forge Guns, lasers, harsh language, sharp sticks, bumps in the terran inflicting 1000's of damage, infantry hand held grenades that match damage of 20 ton barrel mounted on 50 tons of metal. I think what kills me is the grenades in this game doing insane damage, who thought that one up? I am sure someone noted that sometimes your Active Boosters DO NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY! So thanks for adding more emphasis on a broken link in programming. In closing get your sheet together.
Needless Sacermendor Red Fox Brigade 365	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:18:00 - [230] - Quote Needless Sacermendor wrote: Our Deepest Regret wrote: Skihids wrote: Kage Roth wrote: I still want a stasis webifier deployable to equip to infantry. Say it would slow vehicles down 60% for 60 seconds in an 8 meter radius when activated. Long enough to counter active mods. It would take luck to get the vehicle on top of it and coordination to let a squad take advantage of it, but that would finally put a stop to those HAVs that just run when they take any damage and then are back in two minutes. Or encourage them to have teammates nearby who can jump out and kill you while you are holding your webifier. No passengers without small turrets! Tanks are going full lone wolf now. Can I still get kill assists for jumping in your empty seats ... sounds like a great way to AFK farm :-/ Edit ... it's a good point though, would not fitting a turret remove the seat ... or could it still be used as transport ? And that brings to mind another important point ... PLEASE REMOVE WP FOR ASSITS IN VEHICLES ! I'm sure vehicles drivers would generally agree ... There's no reason to give assists to people in passenger seats unless they damaged the target ... The owner fine ... maybe even if he's not in the vehicle ie. call in 2 vehicles and get assists off both ... but not for passengers who just jumped in and get points for someone elses kills !

LCB Holdings Expert Intervention Caldari State 13	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:19:00 - [231] - Quote Since ammo will be finite. After blowing all the supply depots in the battlefield, I can already see tanks staying behind the red line with rail guns near the last supply depot ( You wouldn't want to get your 1.6 million ISK death machine popped just because you ran out of ammo) or recalling their tanks each time they ran out of ammo.
blue skink Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 20	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:24:00 - [232] - Quote Thank God another Nerf. Maybe I will stop this game now.
Reimus Klinsman Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 349	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:29:00 - [233] - Quote milo cordelli wrote: Reimus Klinsman wrote: CCP, please consider adding emphasis on HP Buffer over HP regen/recharge... This would allow damage that AV does to be far more persistent. Currently, if you inflict damage on a vehicle it will be able to recharge almost all the HP before you can get another shot off.. Or if it can't, it just runs to the other side of the map which it will have all its HP and its cooldown completed. Its not suppose to be easy to kill a tank it should tank three to four people to do so working in concert considering the cost of a tank vs cost of a drop suit. As it stands one person can easily kill most tanks. Using terrian and buffs is called good tankng and the only way a tank has survivability right now take that away and everyone will be running logi jeeps What I am suggesting actually increases strategy required for Tanks as well as AV. Currently when a tank begins taking damage, it has slow low HP that it usually needs to flee. It gains HP so quickly that it can get back into the fight with full HP. That means that the AV infantry had no lasting effect. Now lets say we boost HP by 4x and reduce all forms of HP regen by half. This would effectively mean that it will take 8 times as long to recharge from any damage given. Tanks become far more resilient and the damage AV inflicts will have more of a lasting effect. This is a simple win/win improvement. Tanks become more useful, and AV has more of a lasting effect. Tanks can't be solo'd by infantry (easily) and should infantry force a tank to flee, that tank will need to spend a lot more time away from the battle in order to recharge its HP.
ladwar Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 1295	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:38:00 - [234] - Quote Needless Sacermendor wrote: ladwar wrote: so just from reading the only thing i hear is we are buffing armor and nerfing shields. can't wait to actually see the numbers but till then it looks like caldari are going to stay 2nd rate tanks that no one should use. and AV is not going to be touch so we will be just even rich WP targets then before. Why do they need to touch AV ... the point of 1.5 is to rebalance vehicles ... or do you think they'll just rebalance them where they are and not in balance with AV ? ... Sounds like good logic you've got there ! yea current AV is balanced when they have Marauders and they actually had speed to get away from AV and tank some of it. now they are buffing the hell out of the SL so yea they need to balance AV to the current vehicles we now that can't do either because i bet they are not balancing vehicles up to their worth(up to AV) but down to shields currently then nerfing shields while keeping the high cost making vehicles free wp to anyone with an SL.
drake sadani Tacti-corp 69	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:44:00 - [235] - Quote this is the last thing i am going to say on this they are either going to screw up finite ammo . or make it sensible so it's either going to be awesome or it's going to be dumb, lets hope CCP has a backup version ready before they do this
Spkr4theDead International-Fleet 495	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:45:00 - [236] - 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.
Lurchasaurus SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 1080	Posted - 2013.08.27 19:51:00 - [237] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: 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. exactly
fussy Wolf Black Phoenix Mercenaries 2	Posted - 2013.08.27 20:04:00 - [238] - Quote This Patch is sexah :O and we know it XD
TITANIC Xangore Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 286	Posted - 2013.08.27 20:13:00 - [239] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: ammo will be dropped in by dropships You mean the non existant dropships cause they are being blown out of the air by the OP swarms now?
Soldner VonKuechle SAM-MIK 98	Posted - 2013.08.27 20:14:00 - [240] - Quote Why are we all spasming about finite ammo and redline sniping when the tacnet change will knock out a huge portion of redliningvia no sshared team or squad LOS. Any tank or sniper that wants to red line now will have to squad up with someone running/spamming an active scanner. The days of red lining are coming to a close, like it or not. Finite ammo in engagements also makes tank driving more tactical through the trade off mentality, Do you blow your load sploding neutral guns or do you tank/infantry hunt? The resupply aspect was hardly even mentioned; speculation as to how it'll all work is great, but to clamor and berate each other cause you don't like the change makes me think Cmndr Wang was on to something with his with holding of info. Discussion is good, itching because the tactical dynamic of ammo supply doesn't appeal to you is American politics level immature. I do hold concern on the active vs passive re-work, but with out true numbers, I can't really form an opinion. An answer for as to why thecapacitor system is being abandoned would be nice, because as himkor kimtoro from synergy (Will edit for spelling, om phone atm) said: we're not near as dumb as we appear. The av proto vs standard vehicles does need to be addressed fully, simply removing infantry av proto nor adding proto tanks will resolve the issue. Attributes need to be tweaked, and after the live testing 1.4 provides letshope the metrics show CCP what needs to be done. The lowering of vehicle costs and/or the isk kick-back for destroying vehicles in vehicles are prolly the two most agreed upon and liked ideas in this thread, can we have some blue post about how likely this is to happen? And yes bro, I do even tank.



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