Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Exmaple Core
Ancient Exiles
995
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 18:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:
Funny because you guys haven't come up with anything concrete as to why its a good idea. There isn't too much tangibility in pro prototype argument outside of making an extraordinary broken tank.
Design me an Prototype HAV on the current environment, prove people wrong.
I DARE YOU.
Firstly, lets all be on the same page with the deffinition of proto: the highest level of gear openly avaliable to the player; gear earned reaching max level skills; the highest tier items avaliable on the market; end game status
Additionally, we have to use "the current environment" to prove people wrong. So, it is apparent in this current environment that vehicals and dropsuits alike receive more slots and fitting when they advance through the tiers. So, it would be logical to give an adv caldari tank 6 highs and 3 lows because the standard caldari tank has 5 highs and 2 lows. Mirrior the same advancements for the armor tanks and give both more fitting and bam! Thats an advanced tank. From there, follow the same procedure for the proto tank, escalating their builds to be a true proto tank.
In this envirnment of progression, skills often give additional benifits in additon to unlocking gear, like mass driver operation unlocks more massdriver variants and gives a 5% increase to explosion radius per level. So, the skill that unlocks the tiers of tanks could give a +5 to 10% shield/armor tottal HP per level, respectfully. Or +5 to 10% PG/cpu bonus, or speed, or additional resist, what have you, or any combination of these bonuses like the current enforcers have.
This way, tanks become much, much more powerful throughout the tiers so they can compete with proto AV. Giving proto tanks 7/5 respectfully would be okay because infantry will still be able to handle them, many AV specialist have proficientcy 5, double/triple damage modded proto AV, the maximum amount of punishment possible in dust and they travel together in squads. They can handle a tank no problem and by the time we actually do get our proto tanks, many dozens of hundreds more players will be doing the absolute maximum amount of damage possible in dust |
Charlotte O'Dell
0uter.Heaven
1192
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 18:43:00 -
[2] - Quote
I'd say change module slots
Std 2/5 Adv 3/6 Pro 4/7
Then boost PG and CPU 20%/tier
Also increase speed 5%/tier
Then double cost per tier
Happiness clacheived.
Tanks need to be designed with the fact that everyone in a battle will have proto AV. |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
1865
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 18:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote:Firstly, lets all be on the same page with the deffinition of proto: the highest level of gear openly avaliable to the player; gear earned reaching max level skills; the highest tier items avaliable on the market; end game status
Additionally, we have to use "the current environment" to prove people wrong. So, it is apparent in this current environment that vehicals and dropsuits alike receive more slots and fitting when they advance through the tiers. So, it would be logical to give an adv caldari tank 6 highs and 3 lows because the standard caldari tank has 5 highs and 2 lows. Mirrior the same advancements for the armor tanks and give both more fitting and bam! Thats an advanced tank. From there, follow the same procedure for the proto tank, escalating their builds to be a true proto tank.
In this envirnment of progression, skills often give additional benifits in additon to unlocking gear, like mass driver operation unlocks more massdriver variants and gives a 5% increase to explosion radius per level. So, the skill that unlocks the tiers of tanks could give a +5 to 10% shield/armor tottal HP per level, respectfully. Or +5 to 10% PG/cpu bonus, or speed, or additional resist, what have you.
This way, tanks become much, much more powerful throughout the tiers so they can compete with proto AV. Giving proto tanks 7/5 respectfully would be okay because infantry will still be able to handle them, many AV specialist have proficientcy 5, double/triple damage modded proto AV, the maximum amount of punishment possible in dust and they travel together in squads. They can handle a tank no problem and by the time we actually do get our proto tanks, many dozens of hundreds more players will be doing the absolute maximum amount of damage possible in dust
Why not make it so that HAV Operation gives HP + CPU/PG?
Seriously, all you're asking is for Wolfman to take his current idea of a balanced HAV and then nerf it twice and call it STD/ADV.
Its not the right way to go. It would be better to balance AV than to add tiers to vehicle frames.
Same thing with dropsuits, we need to remove the tiers.. Why?
because proto dropsuits are literally pay to win. You pay more isk for more power, no drawbacks. Having proto vehicles does the same thing, more isk for more power, no drawbacks. Its the wrong way to go and its why new players hate this game so much.
Weaponry tiers and turret tiers are okay to have in game as long as running higher tiers of weaponry comes at the cost of HP and modules in general.
Also... damage mods... they are probably ruining the game and any sort of V vs AV balance more than anything. |
Rogatien Merc
Red Star. EoN.
823
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 18:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:
Funny because you guys haven't come up with anything concrete as to why its a good idea. There isn't too much tangibility in pro prototype argument outside of making an extraordinary broken tank.
Design me an Prototype HAV on the current environment, prove people wrong.
I DARE YOU.
Firstly, lets all be on the same page with the deffinition of proto: the highest level of gear openly avaliable to the player; gear earned reaching max level skills; the highest tier items avaliable on the market; end game status Additionally, we have to use "the current environment" to prove people wrong. So, it is apparent in this current environment that vehicals and dropsuits alike receive more slots and fitting when they advance through the tiers. So, it would be logical to give an adv caldari tank 6 highs and 3 lows because the standard caldari tank has 5 highs and 2 lows. Mirrior the same advancements for the armor tanks and give both more fitting and bam! Thats an advanced tank. From there, follow the same procedure for the proto tank, escalating their builds to be a true proto tank. In this envirnment of progression, skills often give additional benifits in additon to unlocking gear, like mass driver operation unlocks more massdriver variants and gives a 5% increase to explosion radius per level. So, the skill that unlocks the tiers of tanks could give a +5 to 10% shield/armor tottal HP per level, respectfully. Or +5 to 10% PG/cpu bonus, or speed, or additional resist, what have you. This way, tanks become much, much more powerful throughout the tiers so they can compete with proto AV. Giving proto tanks 7/5 respectfully would be okay because infantry will still be able to handle them, many AV specialist have proficientcy 5, double/triple damage modded proto AV, the maximum amount of punishment possible in dust and they travel together in squads. They can handle a tank no problem and by the time we actually do get our proto tanks, many dozens of hundreds more players will be doing the absolute maximum amount of damage possible in dust WoT is THAT way ---------> |
Halador Osiris
Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn
615
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 18:50:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rather than seeing proto tanks, I'd like to see tech 3 tanks. Tech 3 tanks have roughly 15% less base health than standard tanks, but they gain a subsystem slot. The subsystem slot determines the skill bonus the tank provides, ex. 5% bonus to shield module efficacy per level, 3% bonus to turret damage per level, etc. This makes proto tanks far more malleable than standard tanks, although they will be slightly less useful in general areas when compared to a standard tank. |
Shadow of War88
0uter.Heaven
44
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 18:53:00 -
[6] - Quote
uhm can we keep it simple and just get the sagaris back?
TECH tanks wud b a nightmare to balance
Plus sagaris has already been tested, used, and balanced properly.
BRING IT BACK!
5 high, 3 low, no speed penalty, 300 more raw HP in shield, 30 more cpu, Rep rate of 31hp/sec with full maxed skill, plus 3% dmg to missiles per level.
|
Our Deepest Regret
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
70
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
Shadow of War88 wrote:uhm can we keep it simple and just get the sagaris back?
TECH tanks wud b a nightmare to balance
Plus sagaris has already been tested, used, and balanced properly.
BRING IT BACK!
5 high, 3 low, no speed penalty, 300 more raw HP in shield, 30 more cpu, Rep rate of 31hp/sec with full maxed skill, plus 3% dmg to missiles per level.
I've seen those CPOpyrex videos. Sargaris tanks were murder wagons that could only be countered by another Sargaris.
I'm not saying this a bad thing, because lol, screw infantry. But I understand the issues that the devs had with leaving them in the game. |
Shadow of War88
0uter.Heaven
45
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:04:00 -
[8] - Quote
Our Deepest Regret wrote:Shadow of War88 wrote:uhm can we keep it simple and just get the sagaris back?
TECH tanks wud b a nightmare to balance
Plus sagaris has already been tested, used, and balanced properly.
BRING IT BACK!
5 high, 3 low, no speed penalty, 300 more raw HP in shield, 30 more cpu, Rep rate of 31hp/sec with full maxed skill, plus 3% dmg to missiles per level.
I've seen those CPOpyrex videos. Sargaris tanks were murder wagons that could only be countered by another Sargaris. I'm not saying this a bad thing, because lol, screw infantry. But I understand the issues that the devs had with leaving them in the game.
YOU sir have never drove a tank in PC. IN A COMPETITIVE SETTING WE NEED PROTO TANKS when hammered by proto forges with x2 dmg mods and proficiency 5.
|
Exmaple Core
Ancient Exiles
995
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:05:00 -
[9] - Quote
Our Deepest Regret wrote:Shadow of War88 wrote:uhm can we keep it simple and just get the sagaris back?
TECH tanks wud b a nightmare to balance
Plus sagaris has already been tested, used, and balanced properly.
BRING IT BACK!
5 high, 3 low, no speed penalty, 300 more raw HP in shield, 30 more cpu, Rep rate of 31hp/sec with full maxed skill, plus 3% dmg to missiles per level.
I've seen those CPOpyrex videos. Sargaris tanks were murder wagons that could only be countered by another Sargaris. I'm not saying this a bad thing, because lol, screw infantry. But I understand the issues that the devs had with leaving them in the game. They were easily countered by 2 proto forge gunners, js. No one decided tobdo that for some reason cuz they certainly do now but they were beatable with teamwork, like tanks over standard level should be |
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES Eternal Syndicate
706
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:07:00 -
[10] - Quote
Our Deepest Regret wrote:Shadow of War88 wrote:uhm can we keep it simple and just get the sagaris back?
TECH tanks wud b a nightmare to balance
Plus sagaris has already been tested, used, and balanced properly.
BRING IT BACK!
5 high, 3 low, no speed penalty, 300 more raw HP in shield, 30 more cpu, Rep rate of 31hp/sec with full maxed skill, plus 3% dmg to missiles per level.
I've seen those CPOpyrex videos. Sargaris tanks were murder wagons that could only be countered by another Sargaris. I'm not saying this a bad thing, because lol, screw infantry. But I understand the issues that the devs had with leaving them in the game.
Wrong I used to solo sagis with mu ishicone assault forge all the time. Its just not many mercs had proto av back then and thusly the illusion that the mauraders were invinsible was created . They still buckled to proto av but not as esilly as std havs . |
|
Our Deepest Regret
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
70
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:07:00 -
[11] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote: They were easily countered by 2 proto forge gunners, js. No one decided tobdo that for some reason cuz they certainly do now but they were beatable with teamwork, like tanks over standard level should be
Ah, gotcha.
|
Exmaple Core
Ancient Exiles
995
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:15:00 -
[12] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:Our Deepest Regret wrote:Shadow of War88 wrote:uhm can we keep it simple and just get the sagaris back?
TECH tanks wud b a nightmare to balance
Plus sagaris has already been tested, used, and balanced properly.
BRING IT BACK!
5 high, 3 low, no speed penalty, 300 more raw HP in shield, 30 more cpu, Rep rate of 31hp/sec with full maxed skill, plus 3% dmg to missiles per level.
I've seen those CPOpyrex videos. Sargaris tanks were murder wagons that could only be countered by another Sargaris. I'm not saying this a bad thing, because lol, screw infantry. But I understand the issues that the devs had with leaving them in the game. Wrong I used to solo sagis with mu ishicone assault forge all the time. Its just not many mercs had proto av back then and thusly the illusion that the mauraders were invinsible was created . They still buckled to proto av but not as esilly as std havs . Tbh its true, a single grimlock forge gunner brought me down to armor in a clip. The sagaris wasent that good, completly honest but it was so much better thwn standard tanks you needed it |
ladwar
Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn
1295
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:26:00 -
[13] - Quote
the max is 5 on either side for high/low slots. |
Buddha Brown
Factory Fresh
351
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:41:00 -
[14] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Tanks need to be designed with the fact that everyone in a battle will have proto AV.
More poison for the masses I see, better just give everyone badass everything cause it's a fact it's all proto |
Needless Sacermendor
Red Fox Brigade
365
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 19:50:00 -
[15] - Quote
You didn't read his post did you ...
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Max Rack Size in Dust is 5 and you're giving advanced 6 and proto 7 ! |
Exmaple Core
Ancient Exiles
999
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:05:00 -
[16] - Quote
Needless Sacermendor wrote:You didn't read his post did you ... Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Max Rack Size in Dust is 5 and you're giving advanced 6 and proto 7 ! If thats so then np, just give the proto tanks better stats and some built in perks |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
1874
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:11:00 -
[17] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote:Needless Sacermendor wrote:You didn't read his post did you ... Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Max Rack Size in Dust is 5 and you're giving advanced 6 and proto 7 ! If thats so then np, just give the proto tanks better stats and some built in perks
Nah I agree with IWS on this one.
Proto tanks, like proto dropsuits, are the fundemental definition of pay to win. I hadn't thought about it before but its very true.
The only way to balance tiers is by isk cost, and if you are balancing against isk you are doing nothing be creating a pay to win scenario. More power for more isk, thats all proto tanks will be, and it will be textbook pay to win, pay more isk for more power. This game has terrible new player retention because of this pay to win scheme they have inadvertently created.
Proto tanks is counter productive, instead we should be working on removing std/adv dropsuits and balancing std vs proto AV.
I think this is the mentality that Shanghai is starting to take and I wholeheartedly agree with them now. Just had to think about it some. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
3313
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:17:00 -
[18] - Quote
The very idea of a traditional proto vehicle revolts me, it would be so unbalanced and would lead to rudiculous levels of qq on the forums, not to mention that it would just turn vehicles into an even more expensive version of that crap called infantry balance. I'd rather see something like halidor proposed, where we get speciluased variants that suffer in other regards, while we get mire generalised variants as the base tanks.
And before that moron takarisho (something like that) blunders in here I would see proto av removed as well (along with everything else proto) and what's left be balanced against the new vehicles. |
Anmol Singh
the unholy legion of darkstar DARKSTAR ARMY
300
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:22:00 -
[19] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:I'd say change module slots
Std 2/5 Adv 3/6 Pro 4/7
Then boost PG and CPU 20%/tier
Also increase speed 5%/tier
Then double cost per tier
Happiness clacheived.
Tanks need to be designed with the fact that everyone in a battle will have proto AV.
yess!!! |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
1874
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:26:00 -
[20] - Quote
gbghg wrote:The very idea of a traditional proto vehicle revolts me, it would be so unbalanced and would lead to rudiculous levels of qq on the forums, not to mention that it would just turn vehicles into an even more expensive version of that crap called infantry balance. I'd rather see something like halidor proposed, where we get speciluased variants that suffer in other regards, while we get mire generalised variants as the base tanks.
And before that moron takarisho (something like that) blunders in here I would see proto av removed as well (along with everything else proto) and what's left be balanced against the new vehicles.
Not necessarily, removing all proto of everything would also go in the wrong direction. Prototype modules and weaponry have their place, its just that inflated dropsuit power combined with prototype weapons and modules has created a power imbalance.
Prototype modules and weapons should exist as a means to create 'slot efficiency' at the cost of relatively high CPU/PG (vs. their lower tier counterparts). With specialized variants of different suit and vehicle frames offering a reduction in this penalty to create a bias towards certain modules as part of each frame's playstyle.
Prototype items (that are non suit/vehicle) are balanced by their CPU/PG costs, and they are an integral part of the EVE based fitting system. Prototype suits and frames, however, are not balanced by anything but cost. Which is why they need to go.
Tiericide only needs to apply to items that are balanced purely by isk cost. Everything else can be balanced separate from cost and will not result in P2W imbalances. |
|
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
1875
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:31:00 -
[21] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:I'd say change module slots
Std 2/5 Adv 3/6 Pro 4/7
Then boost PG and CPU 20%/tier
Also increase speed 5%/tier
Then double cost per tier
Happiness clacheived.
Tanks need to be designed with the fact that everyone in a battle will have proto AV.
While this sounds fun an interesting, this is a clear definition of pay to win. The original intent of the developers was to create a risk vs reward scenario to balance the tiered dropsuits and vehicle frames, its clear however that this does not work. These changes cannot happen, or the game will just end up in a worse position than it is now.
However, creating new variants down the road. Like a behemoth class tank with 4/7 module slots, but requires 2-3 people to operate it can be an interesting addition to the field. They can be the titans of Dust and require the coordination of multiple vehicle drivers, yet be a completely terrifying presence on the battlefield as a result. |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
759
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:40:00 -
[22] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:Charlotte O'Dell wrote:I'd say change module slots
Std 2/5 Adv 3/6 Pro 4/7
Then boost PG and CPU 20%/tier
Also increase speed 5%/tier
Then double cost per tier
Happiness clacheived.
Tanks need to be designed with the fact that everyone in a battle will have proto AV. While this sounds fun an interesting, this is a clear definition of pay to win. The original intent of the developers was to create a risk vs reward scenario to balance the tiered dropsuits and vehicle frames, its clear however that this does not work. These changes cannot happen, or the game will just end up in a worse position than it is now. However, creating new variants down the road. Like a behemoth class tank with 4/7 module slots, but requires 2-3 people to operate it can be an interesting addition to the field. They can be the titans of Dust and require the coordination of multiple vehicle drivers, yet be a completely terrifying presence on the battlefield as a result. You're using "pay to win" in a sloppy sense. Why? State your agenda.
I think when you say "pay to win" you mean tiericide. And also alignment of DUST with more conventional FPS titles. |
Void Echo
Echo Galactic Industries
1081
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:41:00 -
[23] - Quote
Rogatien Merc wrote:Exmaple Core wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:
Funny because you guys haven't come up with anything concrete as to why its a good idea. There isn't too much tangibility in pro prototype argument outside of making an extraordinary broken tank.
Design me an Prototype HAV on the current environment, prove people wrong.
I DARE YOU.
Firstly, lets all be on the same page with the deffinition of proto: the highest level of gear openly avaliable to the player; gear earned reaching max level skills; the highest tier items avaliable on the market; end game status Additionally, we have to use "the current environment" to prove people wrong. So, it is apparent in this current environment that vehicals and dropsuits alike receive more slots and fitting when they advance through the tiers. So, it would be logical to give an adv caldari tank 6 highs and 3 lows because the standard caldari tank has 5 highs and 2 lows. Mirrior the same advancements for the armor tanks and give both more fitting and bam! Thats an advanced tank. From there, follow the same procedure for the proto tank, escalating their builds to be a true proto tank. In this envirnment of progression, skills often give additional benifits in additon to unlocking gear, like mass driver operation unlocks more massdriver variants and gives a 5% increase to explosion radius per level. So, the skill that unlocks the tiers of tanks could give a +5 to 10% shield/armor tottal HP per level, respectfully. Or +5 to 10% PG/cpu bonus, or speed, or additional resist, what have you. This way, tanks become much, much more powerful throughout the tiers so they can compete with proto AV. Giving proto tanks 7/5 respectfully would be okay because infantry will still be able to handle them, many AV specialist have proficientcy 5, double/triple damage modded proto AV, the maximum amount of punishment possible in dust and they travel together in squads. They can handle a tank no problem and by the time we actually do get our proto tanks, many dozens of hundreds more players will be doing the absolute maximum amount of damage possible in dust WoT is THAT way --------->
COD is THAT way <------------------------------------------- |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
503
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:45:00 -
[24] - Quote
Rogatien Merc wrote:Exmaple Core wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:
Funny because you guys haven't come up with anything concrete as to why its a good idea. There isn't too much tangibility in pro prototype argument outside of making an extraordinary broken tank.
Design me an Prototype HAV on the current environment, prove people wrong.
I DARE YOU.
Firstly, lets all be on the same page with the deffinition of proto: the highest level of gear openly avaliable to the player; gear earned reaching max level skills; the highest tier items avaliable on the market; end game status Additionally, we have to use "the current environment" to prove people wrong. So, it is apparent in this current environment that vehicals and dropsuits alike receive more slots and fitting when they advance through the tiers. So, it would be logical to give an adv caldari tank 6 highs and 3 lows because the standard caldari tank has 5 highs and 2 lows. Mirrior the same advancements for the armor tanks and give both more fitting and bam! Thats an advanced tank. From there, follow the same procedure for the proto tank, escalating their builds to be a true proto tank. In this envirnment of progression, skills often give additional benifits in additon to unlocking gear, like mass driver operation unlocks more massdriver variants and gives a 5% increase to explosion radius per level. So, the skill that unlocks the tiers of tanks could give a +5 to 10% shield/armor tottal HP per level, respectfully. Or +5 to 10% PG/cpu bonus, or speed, or additional resist, what have you. This way, tanks become much, much more powerful throughout the tiers so they can compete with proto AV. Giving proto tanks 7/5 respectfully would be okay because infantry will still be able to handle them, many AV specialist have proficientcy 5, double/triple damage modded proto AV, the maximum amount of punishment possible in dust and they travel together in squads. They can handle a tank no problem and by the time we actually do get our proto tanks, many dozens of hundreds more players will be doing the absolute maximum amount of damage possible in dust WoT is THAT way ---------> Call of Duty is this way <-------- |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
503
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:46:00 -
[25] - Quote
Halador Osiris wrote:Rather than seeing proto tanks, I'd like to see tech 3 tanks. Tech 3 tanks have roughly 15% less base health than standard tanks, but they gain a subsystem slot. The subsystem slot determines the skill bonus the tank provides, ex. 5% bonus to shield module efficacy per level, 3% bonus to turret damage per level, etc. This makes proto tanks far more malleable than standard tanks, although they will be slightly less useful in general areas when compared to a standard tank. We already have Enforcers, and I laugh every time I see one on the field. |
Daalzebul Del'Armgo
D3LTA FORC3 Inver Brass
78
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:46:00 -
[26] - Quote
Exmaple Core wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:
Funny because you guys haven't come up with anything concrete as to why its a good idea. There isn't too much tangibility in pro prototype argument outside of making an extraordinary broken tank.
Design me an Prototype HAV on the current environment, prove people wrong.
I DARE YOU.
Firstly, lets all be on the same page with the deffinition of proto: the highest level of gear openly avaliable to the player; gear earned reaching max level skills; the highest tier items avaliable on the market; end game status Additionally, we have to use "the current environment" to prove people wrong. So, it is apparent in this current environment that vehicals and dropsuits alike receive more slots and fitting when they advance through the tiers. So, it would be logical to give an adv caldari tank 6 highs and 3 lows because the standard caldari tank has 5 highs and 2 lows. Mirrior the same advancements for the armor tanks and give both more fitting and bam! Thats an advanced tank. From there, follow the same procedure for the proto tank, escalating their builds to be a true proto tank. In this envirnment of progression, skills often give additional benifits in additon to unlocking gear, like mass driver operation unlocks more massdriver variants and gives a 5% increase to explosion radius per level. So, the skill that unlocks the tiers of tanks could give a +5 to 10% shield/armor tottal HP per level, respectfully. Or +5 to 10% PG/cpu bonus, or speed, or additional resist, what have you, or any combination of these bonuses like the current enforcers have. This way, tanks become much, much more powerful throughout the tiers so they can compete with proto AV. Giving proto tanks 7/5 respectfully would be okay because infantry will still be able to handle them, many AV specialist have proficientcy 5, double/triple damage modded proto AV, the maximum amount of punishment possible in dust and they travel Yooo together in squads. They can handle a tank no problem and by the time we actually do get our proto tanks, many dozens of hundreds more players will be doing the absolute maximum amount of damage possible in dust However, this is only staying in the "current envirnment" and advancing through the tiers using the fitting methid, increasing slots and fitting stats. But! There is another equally effective way withiut using too many slots. Instead, you can model proto tanks the same way the adv tanks were in chrome, improving base stats over the under tier. for Exmaple the sagaris. It had more speed, fitting, shields, sheild regen and was faster than the gunlogi, its stats were significantly brighter than the gunlogi and was significantly more effective dispite only having the advantage of one additional low slot over the gunlogi. So, you could bump the base stats significantly to make a prot tank, give the skills like x per level, have an additional 3 or 4k shields, built in resist, a built in heavy rep or active residt that you can use in addition to how you fit your slots, ect
Currently the way tank modules activate and have there own cool down timers means that giving higher end tanks more slots just makes the matter worse. so the "current environment" is the problem. Raising the base stats seems to be a problem as well. to fix this All modules and turrets would have to pull off a Capacitor. If you do not know how to manage the Cap then you are dead no matter what av is on the field.
For balancing all you would have to change is Cap recharge rates and how much cap a module or turret uses per second during use.(this is key!!)
once that balance is achieved then your higher end tank's would just end up with More total cap to stay in the battle longer while lower level tanks have less total cap so they can do the same thing just for less time. then you can add more slots to the higher level tanks so they can eat through there cap faster thus shorting there time as a force multiplier before having to retreat.
Once that is achieved you can add more depth to the game by adding in E-war that gives a method to drain cap and the the hard counter of energy transfers.
the current path vehicles are taking is just sad and taking out depth.
|
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
503
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:49:00 -
[27] - Quote
Buddha Brown wrote:Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Tanks need to be designed with the fact that everyone in a battle will have proto AV.
More poison for the masses I see, better just give everyone badass everything cause it's a fact it's all proto What, don't wanna use teamwork to take down a STD tank? Your own fault. Not our fault we're more intelligent than you are. |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
503
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:51:00 -
[28] - Quote
gbghg wrote:The very idea of a traditional proto vehicle revolts me, it would be so unbalanced and would lead to rudiculous levels of qq on the forums, not to mention that it would just turn vehicles into an even more expensive version of that crap called infantry balance. I'd rather see something like halidor proposed, where we get speciluased variants that suffer in other regards, while we get mire generalised variants as the base tanks.
And before that moron takarisho (something like that) blunders in here I would see proto av removed as well (along with everything else proto) and what's left be balanced against the new vehicles. ................. you don't want to use teamwork to take out our tanks? |
Bojo The Mighty
Zanzibar Concept
1591
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:52:00 -
[29] - Quote
You can not have a proto tank without proto other vehicles
........
so you would never have a proto tank because a proto dropship would be HAHAHA |
Spkr4theDead
International-Fleet
503
|
Posted - 2013.08.27 23:53:00 -
[30] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote: The original intent of the developers was to create a risk vs reward scenario to balance the tiered dropsuits and vehicle frames, its clear however that this does not work. Of course it won't work, because people want to solo vehicles instead of using teamwork to bring them down. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |