DUST Search - since 1.6 will not have vehicle updates, can 1.7 bring capacitors

All Channels

General Discussions

since 1.6 will not have vehicle updates, can 1.7 bring capacitors

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

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
Rogatien Merc Red Star. EoN. 1305	Posted - 2013.10.01 18:42:00 - [2] - Quote 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.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 3619	Posted - 2013.10.01 18:44:00 - [3] - Quote 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.
Nguruthos IX PEN 15 CLUB 1888	Posted - 2013.10.01 18:45:00 - [4] - 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 - [5] - 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?
M McManus Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 113	Posted - 2013.10.01 19:05:00 - [6] - Quote This is incredibly cute...
Nguruthos IX PEN 15 CLUB 1888	Posted - 2013.10.01 19:11:00 - [7] - Quote M McManus wrote: This is incredibly cute... Oh? Do tell.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 3620	Posted - 2013.10.01 19:14:00 - [8] - Quote 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.
Nguruthos IX PEN 15 CLUB 1888	Posted - 2013.10.01 20:03:00 - [9] - 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.
J'Jor Da'Wg KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 940	Posted - 2013.10.01 20:04:00 - [10] - 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. Let's take a look at what was promised in 2011 but we still haven'[t heard about... [url]http://dust514.com/news/blog/2011/11/the-future-of-war-dust-514s-mobile-command-center-mcc/[/url] "Commander abilities..." "Dependence on fuel" So... MCC was revealed as a game feature over two years ago with the basic gameplay mapped out... and we still haven't heard even the breath of a rumor about anything to do with ever making the MCC's more in-depth... You know what that means? There are no plans. MCC's are vaporware, a left over art asset that has become an archaic dinosaur of game design but has been too deeply integrated into DUST to remove. Commander mode is only a dream far off in the future because quite simply no one at CCP has even touched it outside of the art department. [url]http://dust514.com/news/blog/2011/11/vehicular-dynamics-and-mayhem-1-1/[/url] Again, written two years ago. "Electronic warfare class modules enable players to immobilize unsuspecting targets with stasis webifiers, cripple enemy turrets with tracking disruptors, or enhance guided missile lethality on target-painted hostiles." EWAR? What EWAR? Even though its an essential part of the EVE experience lets just convieniently forget about everything that was said years ago and was obviously thought out enough to post online. OH HEY LOOK AT THIS [url]http://www.dust514.com/news/blog/2012/03/vehicle-dev-b/[/url] Looks like in March of 2012 they had already thought about the capacitor. Implementation, though. Nahh. Too hard. The blog talks about EWAR in dropships, capacitor drainers, cloaking, spotting, ECM, etc. I like this quote. "...and like EVE Online, the maxim: GÇ£no cap equals deathGÇ¥ is just as true in DUST 514. " OH WAIT. HAHAHAHAHAHA Its interesting to me how they promised all this stuff, talked about it, and gave scenarios for how it plays out in game BEFORE THEY EVEN ADDED IT IN. It can't be that hard to really get these game systems working. I could probably think up and balance the entire game myself if given 100% free reign and a few days. The amount of content promised compared to the amount we have in game is laughable. What has CCP spent all their time doing? Where are these great gameplay systems they promised? The DUST we have now is literally so far from the vision that when I go back to the original dev posts its like reading dev blogs for an entirely different game. The lesson to be learned here? Absence of evidence apparently now is evidence of absence. If you cannot see, feel, or touch a component of CCP's game that is promised then for all intents and purposes it does not exist in any way shape or form. edit: okay, so my links don't work for some reason... wierd.

Nguruthos IX PEN 15 CLUB 1888	Posted - 2013.10.01 20:07:00 - [11] - 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 - [12] - 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 - [13] - 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.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 9156	Posted - 2013.10.01 20:42:00 - [14] - Quote 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
Nguruthos IX PEN 15 CLUB 1889	Posted - 2013.10.01 21:02:00 - [15] - 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..?
Blaze Ashra Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 9	Posted - 2013.10.02 00:14:00 - [16] - Quote Here's a poll to see what/if changes vehicle users would be happy to deal with while we are waiting for the rebalancing to go through.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.