|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1887
   |
Posted - 2013.10.01 18:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
If dust ia intended to be a long term game like eve this would avoid thr inevitable whole restructuring of vehicles again at a later date.
Perhaps best to get the system in place now to be iterated on as needed. To be honest cooldowns are clunky and awkward.
If vehicle work ia being pushed back to 1.7 I think most people just want it done right and well. Sod the time line its already been too long with broken vehicles to matter |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1888
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 18:45:00 -
[2] - Quote
Rogatien Merc wrote:This is the kind of feature creep that gets it pushed back to 1.9 ... ... But I like it!  Have always thought cap warfare on the ground would be interesting. Honestly lends itself more to larger-scale battles where players can play more specialized roles (run cap drain equipment or whatever), so not sure if it'll be seen on the PS3.
Thats what im saying. Back then if anyone knew itd take several or more months wed all have said screw it then take 6 months and adds caps.
Same thing applies again now. We know its going to take several or more months. So just go all out and bring caps to Dust. Its thr best solution, the most interesting game play and dust will be fr ever lacking in its absence |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1888
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 18:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:The vehicle rebalance would be the best time to implement it, yes.
But it's not going to happen. I pretty much guarantee it. Also, it'll probably get pushed back again.
Why wont it happen?
Why shouldn't it? |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1888
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 19:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
M McManus wrote:This is incredibly cute...
Oh? Do tell. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1888
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 20:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:The vehicle rebalance would be the best time to implement it, yes.
But it's not going to happen. I pretty much guarantee it. Also, it'll probably get pushed back again. Why wont it happen? Why shouldn't it? Because if CCP struggle to code much less important things, they're hardly going to manage to do this in such a comparatively short time. Of course it SHOULD happen, but it won't.
Hence saying screw timelines. Just get it done.
Figure by then either game will be awesome and vehicles fun or it will have failed anywyas and no worries about waiting. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1888
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 20:07:00 -
[6] - Quote
Oops. I meant to say 1.7 or later.
This isnt a "Get it done now, programmer slaves!".
This is a "take your time and do it right, if we are to be taking time here." Get thr design right on paper and then pluck away at it for however long.
Should end up being a net gain In time especially compared to when not having caps fails and they need to rework all vehicles again from the bottom up. This is to avoid repeating work or wasting time on what everyone knows will be an inferior, short sighted and eventually destructive solution to a larger problem then vehicles being underpowered. They need to be exciting and intricate. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1888
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 20:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
This is going to be a tremendously wasted opportunity if they don't take this time and focus on vehicles to add a capacitor function mimicking Eve.
But I correct myself.
I have trouble calling this an "opportunity".
You would not say, in software design, that you have an "opportunity" at the beginning to requirements and specifications correct.
You would say that you have an obligation to.
|
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1889
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 20:23:00 -
[8] - Quote
J'Jor Da'Wg wrote:
edit: okay, so my links don't work for some reason... wierd.
Most of those stem, I believe, from the failure of being able to use their engine and lost time between there.
We're still suffering through that loss, but that does not change the fact that right now is the best and perhaps the only time to get vehicles done Right.
and right does not mean adjusting EHP, cooldowns and passive module values.
Right means doing what will make Dust shine for years to come. Something unique and complicated.
Using strict passive + active (cooldown) modules is the easy way out. It makes balancing easier, perhaps less variables. But simplifying things does not a good game make. That's why dust has fittings where most games have 'roles' prefabricated. This gives players choice, freedom, increases re-playability, adds depth, meta, generates conversations, and generates a near infinite number of player created roles rather than a stock few.
The same could be said of vehicles. If we had capacitors it increases our module choices, and most importantly playstyles. Each game would be much more involved then "Flip defense on, Flip defense off".
We'd have to gauge various levels of threats, strengths, how to drive out vehicle to the edge of it's capabilities without exceeding them. We need these nobs, not a switch.
Having a fitting option makes infantry infinity more complicated to balance than stock fits. But they have to deal with it because that's Eve and that's the selling point.
Well having caps would create more options and make balance a greater challenge. But we should deal with it because that's Eve and that's the entire selling point.
We also have to accept that not everything can always be perfectly balanced, there is no such thing. When we accept that we can go on to make bold decisions like adding Caps. CCP needs to be ambitious with Dust, Dust will not stand on it's own as a lobby first person shooter on old hardware against ever growing competition.
|
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1889
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 21:02:00 -
[9] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:I think the cooldown mechanic will be here for a long time, possibly even after capacitors (if ever) are introduced. It will have to be treated like stamina for vehicles though
Isn't that more or less what the point of a capacitor is..? |
|
|
| |
|