Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
BobThe 844-1 CakeMan
Murder Cakes Of Doom
414
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 22:51:00 -
[31] - Quote
Quote:It's probably a typo, we might still have burst function but in that case clip size needs to be much higher (20 or 24; 5-6 bursts to start). probably but knowing CCP u never know. although i do think this is what should happen. |
GVGMODE
WorstPlayersEver
65
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 23:08:00 -
[32] - Quote
CCP likes trolling vehicle player but that atrocity they call "vehicle balancing" it is more like a major nerf, I have already stated my views on the matter in such topic and I am stuck with ~19m SP of virtual metal junk.
I won't be bothered with such developer, whereas different games are already waiting for me at the exit door and I won't grind 15+ million SP to be a competitive infantry player in this game. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
3597
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 00:08:00 -
[33] - Quote
god you should have seen all the bloody knee jerk reactions in condor squad, the blindness to evrything except the ADS being removed and the instant "wolfman sucks" wolfman is gay" comments was atrocious, i got into a shouting match with mossiela delt, caps were involved. oh and noc, here's an interesting thing logibro said
wrote: When taking fire shields will not regenerate (not until the second wave of module types is introduced, at any rate) plenty of room for speculation there |
Exmaple Core
Ancient Exiles
1459
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 00:23:00 -
[34] - Quote
The legend345 wrote:No sorry but i dont plan on sticking around trying to balance another puzzle. Everyone had what was needed very clear. Shoutout to maple, i think he had it all down perfect. This is BS ccp has simply created another problem. I have been waiting for this much to long. They dont deserve any more of my support. This was a last chance for many people. Im not going to stick around and talk about changes. Ive been doing that since uprising. Forget it good luck balancing 1.7 i dont plan on holding ccps hand through commonsense. Thanks bro, ive been trying my hardest to get CCP to put their tracks on course but they ignored me. They ignored all of us Im going to make a couple new posts and im done. As soon as i get my hands on the PS4 im burning my ps3 and dust. I do not want this taint in my house |
Exmaple Core
Ancient Exiles
1459
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 00:24:00 -
[35] - Quote
gbghg wrote:god you should have seen all the bloody knee jerk reactions in condor squad, the blindness to evrything except the ADS being removed and the instant "wolfman sucks" wolfman is gay" comments was atrocious, i got into a shouting match with mossiela delt, caps were involved. oh and noc, here's an interesting thing logibro said wrote: When taking fire shields will not regenerate (not until the second wave of module types is introduced, at any rate) plenty of room for speculation there im not sacrificing one of my 3 high slots to get my natural regen working for 20 seconds |
Blaze Ashra
Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire
20
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 01:35:00 -
[36] - Quote
ghjl ghjkl wrote:I have a future vehicleer alt. I'm sadly sitting on alot of sp until I can choose the racial variant of my choice, and build on my specialties accordingly.
That's actually one of the better changes. Now you'll be specializing into all racial vehicles instead of one race at a time. |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire
394
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:20:00 -
[37] - Quote
I'm still really disappointed at the lack of vehicle capacitors. If there ever were a time to add them, this would be it. Instead we have to manage multiple long cooldown timers instead of a single, intuitive resource. Removing so many slots from vehicles also concerns me because it will destroy diverse fits, which is the most interesting thing DUST has going for it at the moment. Finally, removing the racial vehicle specialization skills seems like a big step backwards, discouraging variety and specialization. If they keep it this way when we have the full racial vehicle lineup, players will simply gravitate to the FotM vehicles and we will see much less diversity on the battlefield.
I've tried hard to keep the faith, but these changes make me think the emperor has no clothes. I was very optimistic about DUST's future after the major issues were hot fixed with 1.4. The game felt like it was on the right path and just needed time to iterate. Now I'm worried about CCP's vision for DUST for the first time. I'm going to stick it out, but I hope to hell they listen to their customers. |
True Adamance
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
2546
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:22:00 -
[38] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:With this post informing us of some major changes to come in the future with vehicles, understandably some of you are concerned about the future and how it will affect you and your enjoyment of the game. We must keep an open mind when it comes to the re-balance, whilst the chances of CCP failing very hard is likely, there is still a chance they might be successful in their endeavors and the only way they're going to be able to do this is with both the Vehicle and AV groups engaging in positive debate about various subjects. Now, we know some of the numbers seem off, as some people have mentioned with turrets and certain modules, and it's quite possible that these numbers are placeholders until they've worked it out, not only this but none of these numbers are yet set in stone I believe so we do have an opportunity to post feedback as to why certain numbers must be adjusted. What I need you all to do is clear your mind of any current stats and how AV v Vehicles currently is, that's what this is about, Vehicle v AV is broken and nothing can save it in its current form, it's like building a house on sand, it will never be secure unless you tear it down and build it on rock. CCP, your actions will decide whether many of us stay or go, you cannot deny that there are many games out there that can and will hold our attention a lot more than DUST can, particularly for those that enjoy vehicle combat. If you want your community to stick around you need to give them reason, when you do eventually roll this overhaul out please consider refunding all SP in the vehicle, anti vehicle and turret categories, I know a few players who will likely leave when you release this but by refunding their SP they might not be gone forever. By allowing this to happen, you'll be allowing players to enjoy the game in other areas rather than an area they now dislike due to changes you have forced upon them, I believe that this is only fair. Now that's said, I also believe that if you want us to give you proper feedback, we need to be fully informed and to this we're going to require more information, already players are worried that their Vehicles will not be able to stand up to AV come release, as we do not have any AV numbers which is something both the Vehicle and Anti-Vehicle group will need to see. Give us the knowledge and we'll work together to make a better Vehicle/AV experience on the battlefield. I also propose the term Vehicleers for all vehicle players, kthx.
King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here!Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here! I initially over reacted but I see potential for this system of vehicles and modules. I am looking forwards to the rebalance..... but isn't this two or more months away? |
KING CHECKMATE
TEAM SATISFACTION
1521
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:26:00 -
[39] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote: Here's a thought experiment. New madruger with two of those fancy 60% resists and the 150 hp/s from the heavy rep, even under fire. And the madruger has a damage mod. Hell I think a shield booster would actually be pretty pro in that final high slot. So the gunnlogi just looks like a toy in comparison. Of course both likely will explode if an infantry looks at them, but at least versus each other there is a clearly superior choice.
I understand what you are saying. The Maddy is stronger solo. But IMO , 2 shield Gunnos with Missiles will be able to drop to maddies, if they take the oportunity while the active dam mods are down Its just me,we'll have to wait see what happens.
(yeahyeah, im a shield tank Fanboi , so what...) |
grunt party
Carbon 7 CRONOS.
65
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:46:00 -
[40] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:it's like building a house on sand, it will never be secure unless you tear it down and build it on rock.
i know this quote isn't exact my father built a castle on a swamp that one sank so he built another that also sank so he built another.. that sank but the 4th one he built didn't sink |
|
True Adamance
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
2546
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:49:00 -
[41] - Quote
KING CHECKMATE wrote:Noc Tempre wrote: Here's a thought experiment. New madruger with two of those fancy 60% resists and the 150 hp/s from the heavy rep, even under fire. And the madruger has a damage mod. Hell I think a shield booster would actually be pretty pro in that final high slot. So the gunnlogi just looks like a toy in comparison. Of course both likely will explode if an infantry looks at them, but at least versus each other there is a clearly superior choice.
I understand what you are saying. The Maddy is stronger solo. But IMO , 2 shield Gunnos with Missiles will be able to drop to maddies, if they take the oportunity while the active dam mods are down Its just me,we'll have to wait see what happens. (yeahyeah, im a shield tank Fanboi , so what...) Evil Missile tanks always seem to gun me down if im not careful, the occasional Gunlogi will tear me apart if im not prepared for him. |
Beld Errmon
Evocatius
943
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 03:00:00 -
[42] - Quote
Bite down and think of england, this might sting a little.
Advice for tankers and dropship pilots. |
Jason Pearson
Animus Securities
3020
|
Posted - 2013.10.04 01:58:00 -
[43] - Quote
So erm, are we all agreeing to the term "Vehicleers?" because I like it, a word for those that are true vehicle players than cannot survive outside their vehicle shell.
King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here! Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here! |
Noragee Silverfire
HavoK Core RISE of LEGION
27
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 23:27:00 -
[44] - Quote
You have to take in excess of 103 (if I remember the number right, but it is over 100) damage per projectile (not tick!) for it to stop the shield regen, meaning anything that is not AV will not be able to prevent shield regen due to most INF weapons doing less than 50% against vehicles to start with. |
Hunter Junko
Zanzibar Concept
181
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 23:40:00 -
[45] - Quote
gbghg wrote:god you should have seen all the bloody knee jerk reactions in condor squad, the blindness to evrything except the ADS being removed and the instant "wolfman sucks" wolfman is gay" comments was atrocious, i got into a shouting match with mossiela delt, caps were involved. is it really that bad? i havent been on for a while and i was thinking of playing a few games right now |
Godin Thekiller
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
1079
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 23:41:00 -
[46] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:So erm, are we all agreeing to the term "Vehicleers?" because I like it, a word for those that are true vehicle players than cannot survive outside their vehicle shell.
King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here!Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
No. pilots is still better and will always be better. |
Godin Thekiller
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
1079
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 23:43:00 -
[47] - Quote
Alldin Kan wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:Here's a thought experiment. New madruger with two of those fancy 60% resists and the 150 hp/s from the heavy rep, even under fire. And the madruger has a damage mod. Hell I think a shield booster would actually be pretty pro in that final high slot. So the gunnlogi just looks like a toy in comparison. Of course both likely will explode if an infantry looks at them, but at least versus each other there is a clearly superior choice. I "may" have to disagree with this value: Looking at the Complex Ammo expansion, I see a value of 1.6 (as in 60%). Meanwhile, the 0.6 for resist (which is more of a reduction, not bonus) means that of the 100% damage taken (or 1.0) from 1500, I would actually receive 900 damage (0.6 being a 40% damage resist). Am I wrong? Correct me if that's the case :P
No, it's a 60% damage reduction, so 600 damage, depending on what it hits, 450 (shields) or 750 (armor). |
Godin Thekiller
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
1079
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 23:59:00 -
[48] - Quote
gbghg wrote:god you should have seen all the bloody knee jerk reactions in condor squad, the blindness to evrything except the ADS being removed and the instant "wolfman sucks" wolfman is gay" comments was atrocious, i got into a shouting match with mossiela delt, caps were involved. oh and noc, here's an interesting thing logibro said wrote: When taking fire shields will not regenerate (not until the second wave of module types is introduced, at any rate) plenty of room for speculation there
Also, regular infantry fire won't affect vehicle shields regen. |
Iron Wolf Saber
Den of Swords
9221
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 00:02:00 -
[49] - Quote
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqHgiF-KXQZXdFZ2ZzEyNW1neVdqYUF4bXU5NUdUOXc&usp=drive_web#gid=0
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113459
Panic is not a good word to use, however things do need to be feedback upon and reasonably presented why they're wrong instead of approaching from a whiner's rost. |
Monkey MAC
killer taxi company General Tso's Alliance
809
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 00:02:00 -
[50] - Quote
Don't forget this is only stage 1 of many in the vehicle rework, for now remove proto av, and deploy changes for field testing. Give feedback proceed to stage 2. |
|
Godin Thekiller
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
1079
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 00:20:00 -
[51] - Quote
I think that the speeds are just a placeholder, because all vehicles are like that. That doesn't make any sense.... |
Ld Collins
The Phalanx Inc
63
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 00:28:00 -
[52] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:So erm, are we all agreeing to the term "Vehicleers?" because I like it, a word for those that are true vehicle players than cannot survive outside their vehicle shell.
King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire Comment and like this thread about PvE, Here!Also, check out the Indirect Fire ability, Here!
I would like to use the term Operative since we are employed. We operate vehicles we don't drive tanks or lavs we dont fly dropships we use them as tools to perform functions on the battlefield and compensated based on how we perform. |
Hunter Junko
Zanzibar Concept
181
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 00:28:00 -
[53] - Quote
i'll try to contribute as i can |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |