|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
170
   |
Posted - 2013.09.10 00:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
With the back-to-the basics approach to the upcoming 1.5 vehicle rebalance, there will never be a better opportunity for CCP to implement a capacitor system for vehicles. As more vehicle content gets added it will only get harder to add these later, requiring another major vehicle rework and balancing effort when they add them later. It may become so cumbersome later on that CCP gives up on the concept entirely.
Capacitors could be implemented using the existing stamina system and expanded/improved as needed over time. Capacitors are fully compatible with CCP's stated goals/vision for vehicles in DUST (the ability to tank bursts of damage for limited time, but being vulnerable to attack when their cap is dry). Capacitors open up the opportunity for cap warfare down the road which would give DUST a gameplay element that doesn't exist in any other competing FPS title out there. Capacitors give vehicle users more flexibility and control in their module activation choices. They are an easy concept to grasp, and appeal to EVE players who may decide to play as vehicle specialists due to a similarity of mechanics.
Please post if you think adding vehicle capacitors is a good idea for 1.5. Or if you disagree, please share your reasons why you don't want them. |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
171
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 01:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
KalOfTheRathi wrote:Nah. Capacitors are an EVE thing. Let them stay there.
Adding them to DUST is potentially a ton (tonne) of work. The weapons systems work a particular way and there is lots of code that makes assumptions based on the current implementation. Maybe they are planned. Either way, a lot of work.
Weapons could be capless in 1.5 and into the foreseeable future. The ideal time to balance vehicle weapons and cap would be when they implement the full spectrum of turrets later on. As stated above, the existing stamina system (and code) could be used for capacitors in theory, so it shouldn't be nearly as difficult as designing a system from scratch.
If it wasn't a huge effort on CCP's part, would you still be opposed to the idea? If so, why? |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
175
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 10:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
Skihids wrote:CCP doesn't have to coddle us. They don't have to try to make things baby simple.
If anything the clunky cool-down system is more complex to deal with than stamina.
Yes let's just call it what it is, vehicle stamina. Infantry stamina is terribly simple. You use it up at various rates as you run and jump, and it "recharges" over time and is affected by modules and skills.
That's too complicated you say? People won't know how to deal with it? Ok, let's change that.
Let's give infantry a movement module. When a merc wants to run he activates his boost module and he can run until it runs out or he shuts it off. Then he watts for it to cool down before he can run again.
So simple isn't it?
Excellent argument. |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
186
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 23:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:I don't play EVE, but the capacitor idea sounds great.
Imagine the rage and cries for nerf threads that will be created when we figure out the perfect balance between cap and rep.
Obviously there will be tradeoffs, just like in EVE. For example, it's possible to have a perma-rep fit on some ships, but they will typically have much lower resistences, so they mitigate much less incoming damage. There are passive shield tank fits that passively shield rep a modest amount continuously, but will go down quickly with lots of alpha fire. There are brick-tank fits that are designed around logistics repping them, and speed tank fits that focus on mitigation and avoidance of damage via speed. In theory, some or all of these options will be available in DUST at some point. Also in EVE, there is the notion of gank vs. tank and finding the proper balance of boosting your dps output (or other role's effectiveness) vs. your survivability. It's having to make choices and tradeoffs that make the system so compelling. |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
196
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 23:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
Anyone else have an opinion? |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
231
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 00:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote: What, you gonna make me have to worry about ammo, overheating, and cap?
Infantry have to manage ammo, overheat and stamina, is it all that different? |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
231
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 17:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
Bump. |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
308
|
Posted - 2013.09.23 16:23:00 -
[8] - Quote
Back to the top. Share your thoughts. |
|
|
| |
|