Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1963
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts? |
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2033
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1965
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think
har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically.
the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles.
vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis.
This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto |
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2034
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically. the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles. vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis. This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto
Yes balance is important but so far CCP hasnt really shown they can balance the tiers between similar play styles let alone two that play completely different from each other so if Im going to support removing tiers Im not going to say lets just remove the AV tiers so the tankers stop crying but lets gut the entire system and start from scratch with just one tier
Just that alone would drastically simplify balancing the system IMO |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1965
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
Delta 749 wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically. the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles. vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis. This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto Yes balance is important but so far CCP hasnt really shown they can balance the tiers between similar play styles let alone two that play completely different from each other so if Im going to support removing tiers Im not going to say lets just remove the AV tiers so the tankers stop crying but lets gut the entire system and start from scratch with just one tier Just that alone would drastically simplify balancing the system IMO
I wasn't aware ground balance was that off. But if consensus points that it is, that'd be fine too. |
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
607
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:45:00 -
[6] - Quote
you can remove them if I get a respec |
Delta 749
Kestrel Reconnaissance
2035
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Delta 749 wrote:So you want to remove the advanced but leave our proto stuff alone huh I like the way you think har har. Implied removal of anything advance or better, to match vehicles so this can actually be accessed tier by tier symmetrically. the goal: balance AV+vehicles, vehicles vs vehicles. vehicle vs vehicle is starting out with just standards and (should include all races). You'd think to do av vs vehicles would require standards for any proper analysis. This helps ensure neither vehicles nor AV end up OP at any point between standard to proto Yes balance is important but so far CCP hasnt really shown they can balance the tiers between similar play styles let alone two that play completely different from each other so if Im going to support removing tiers Im not going to say lets just remove the AV tiers so the tankers stop crying but lets gut the entire system and start from scratch with just one tier Just that alone would drastically simplify balancing the system IMO I wasn't aware ground balance was that off. But if consensus points that it is, that'd be fine too.
Well there will always be some who say its fine but if you take two people, one in a standard fit another in a proto fit, even the standard getting the drop on the proto does not necessarily mean a kill simply due to stats Imagine going against a tank with twice as much health as your own that does more damage on top of that, not unbeatable but the stats give enough of a cushion that even if the opponent isnt as good as you they might come out on top |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1965
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:you can remove them if I get a respec
It's obvious that anyone thing being changed as drastically as vehicles were, or having tiers removed temporarily will be getting a respec.
They'll prob do a full respec to keep things simple.
Also the AV-vehicle and vehicle-vehicle balance somewhat lies independent of ground-ground.
As there's not really a whole lot of consideration on light weapons vs vehicles.
So these systems Could be tested independently if needed, ie: vehicles and av stripped to standard this time. ground all stripped to standard later.
And with the ground-ground would balance AV weapon efficiencies vs ground units like forge or plasma cannon. |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine
1379
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1965
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 10:53:00 -
[10] - Quote
Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. do explain the term tiericide |
|
Jack McReady
DUST University Ivy League
607
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:05:00 -
[11] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:Jack McReady wrote:you can remove them if I get a respec It's obvious that anyone thing being changed as drastically as vehicles were, or having tiers removed temporarily will be getting a respec. They'll prob do a full respec to keep things simple. Also the AV-vehicle and vehicle-vehicle balance somewhat lies independent of ground-ground. As there's not really a whole lot of consideration on light weapons vs vehicles. So these systems Could be tested independently if needed, ie: vehicles and av stripped to standard this time. ground all stripped to standard later. And with the ground-ground would balance AV weapon efficiencies vs ground units like forge or plasma cannon. well I seriously hope there will be a respec, everyone would benefit from it.
Nguruthos IX wrote:Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. do explain the term tiericide tiercide means that all suits are about equal, they only differ in specialization. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1966
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:Jack McReady wrote:you can remove them if I get a respec It's obvious that anyone thing being changed as drastically as vehicles were, or having tiers removed temporarily will be getting a respec. They'll prob do a full respec to keep things simple. Also the AV-vehicle and vehicle-vehicle balance somewhat lies independent of ground-ground. As there's not really a whole lot of consideration on light weapons vs vehicles. So these systems Could be tested independently if needed, ie: vehicles and av stripped to standard this time. ground all stripped to standard later. And with the ground-ground would balance AV weapon efficiencies vs ground units like forge or plasma cannon. I really hope there will be a respec, everyone would benefit from it. fresh air for everyone, testing and feedback can be speed up and new players can correct mistakes... Nguruthos IX wrote:Vyzion Eyri wrote:I'm hoping (and by the looks of it my hopes are pretty well founded) that they're going to test out a tiercided model for vehicles. I mean, even the WIP stats on these vehicles are pretty damn high, coupled with optional turrets, makes the potential for VERY tough vehicles, even against prototype AV. So if I'm not mistaken this is going to be a very interesting few months. do explain the term tiericide tiercide means that all suits are about equal, they only differ in specialization.
Does that reflect Eve as of now?
|
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1108
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:15:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jack McReady wrote:you can remove them if I get a respec
Well they are removing our logi lavs and logi/assault dropships and sagaII and enforcers so what makes you think your av is safe?
If CCP is trying to create balance by nerfing the total hp of all vehicles and their loadouts right down to the std bone you would think they will be doing the same for av. If not then it really wont crwate balance only a greater rift. |
Toby Flenderson
research lab The Superpowers
66
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:18:00 -
[14] - Quote
Nguruthos IX wrote:I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts?
I think you have a good point and I would be willing to do this myself. The only problem is I'm sure it won't be a popular choice so my willingness to comply would be useless. Another thing to consider would be when the new dropsuits come out (whenever that may be); do we ask people to go back to using standard dropsuits? Or is the addition of dropsuits too subtle compared to reworking vehicles and do not require the same measures to be taken? |
Mortedeamor
Internal Rebellion
335
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:21:00 -
[15] - Quote
not in the least i would not mind in the least the removal of all av other than standard lets go fun fun time |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
2530
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
Definitely agree with the importance of adding Amarr and Minmatar vehicles early. How can you really balance out vehicles and get good data when half the vehicles are missing? |
Mortedeamor
Internal Rebellion
335
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:22:00 -
[17] - Quote
assuming proto and adv turrets were also removed of course...tanks currently deal proto dmg they just dont take it. |
pegasis prime
BIG BAD W0LVES
1108
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
Mortedeamor wrote:assuming proto and adv turrets were also removed of course...tanks currently deal proto dmg they just dont take it.
Yes we do proto dammage well sort of but after the removal of turret proficiency we had our dammage nerfed when av got to keep proficiency dammage. |
Vin Mora
Sanguis Defense Syndicate
163
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
Why are people forgetting that they are releasing vehicle and weapon rebalances at the same time? So AV will be rebalanced with the new vehicles. |
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1563
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:53:00 -
[20] - Quote
Only if you accept a temporary removal of you turrets. |
|
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:53:00 -
[21] - Quote
Toby Flenderson wrote:Nguruthos IX wrote:I know it would suck, and I sure wouldn't want to do it. But lets be honest here, this is nothing to do with nerfing AV or making the game suck for AV players while re-building vehicles.
I just honestly wonder how CCP intends to balance vehicles VS av if they are starting with standard vehicles and working their way up from there (slowly). play-testing that will yield some data that's pretty difficult to shift though and interpret unless everything was standard vs standard.
And on another point I think it would be prudent before 1.7(vehicles?) to add the amarr and min standard vehicle variants. What good is 'balancing' the bottom up of only two races and then pluggin in the last 2 randomly?
Thoughts? I think you have a good point and I would be willing to do this myself. The only problem is I'm sure it won't be a popular choice so my willingness to comply would be useless. Another thing to consider would be when the new dropsuits come out (whenever that may be); do we ask people to go back to using standard dropsuits? Or is the addition of dropsuits too subtle compared to reworking vehicles and do not require the same measures to be taken?
Suppose that is yet to be seen |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:56:00 -
[22] - Quote
Mortedeamor wrote:assuming proto and adv turrets were also removed of course...tanks currently deal proto dmg they just dont take it.
Well a small vehicle turret should be equal to or greater than any small arms fire.
And so moving from STD to proto wouldn't change much vs infantry but it does have MASSIVE implications for vehicle vs vehicle balance. I don't see how they could balance vehicles without considering proto turrets modules in a standard vehicle vs another vehicle |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:56:00 -
[23] - Quote
Vin Mora wrote:Why are people forgetting that they are releasing vehicle and weapon rebalances at the same time? So AV will be rebalanced with the new vehicles.
But how? Unless they start at the same rate and work up from there?
|
The Attorney General
ZionTCD
1174
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 11:57:00 -
[24] - Quote
pegasis prime wrote:Mortedeamor wrote:assuming proto and adv turrets were also removed of course...tanks currently deal proto dmg they just dont take it. Yes we do proto dammage well sort of but after the removal of turret proficiency we had our dammage nerfed when av got to keep proficiency dammage.
Not to mention all infantry based weapons got that 10% buff at the start of Uprising. Tanks did not. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:00:00 -
[25] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:Only if you accept a temporary removal of you turrets.
I mean if that's what's best.
I'm not sure if it factors out the same way because if anything vehicle turrets would be balanced against infantry Suits.
So...see where this is going? We also going to strip out all suits to standard and work up from there?
If not the best dividing line is as I stated above. STD-AV dmg vs STD-vehicle HP. STD-vehicle(all modules) vs STD-vehicle(all moduels).
|
J Falcs
Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION
125
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:02:00 -
[26] - Quote
I am all for tiericide. Fantastic move on the EVE side. I was very very surprised when they kept the tiers in Dust 514 Uprising. It seemed archaic compared to the EVE model of all ships have a place/specialty.
I would like to see more suits with differing bonuses that encourages specialization. Based on layout and bonuses, suits can be more general, filling two roles in one, and on the other hand a suit that fills one role very well.
I would say same goes for vehicles, although I think vehicles lend themselves very well to the T3 model of eve ships. Base hulls but certain "parts" can turn the ship from assault to transport or to logistic (dropship example). |
Banning Hammer
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
1563
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:03:00 -
[27] - Quote
This community is getting stupider by the hour....
I see tanks going 30-0 / 40-0 in regular basics, most AV weapons are useless against them... and you want to temporally remove the only weapons that can make them run for cover now and again ?
I have a better idea; Just remove Dropsuits altogether, and lets make Dust 514 a Vehicles only game.
|
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:03:00 -
[28] - Quote
J Falcs wrote:I am all for tiericide. Fantastic move on the EVE side. I was very very surprised when they kept the tiers in Dust 514 Uprising. It seemed archaic compared to the EVE model of all ships have a place/specialty.
I would like to see more suits with differing bonuses that encourages specialization. Based on layout and bonuses, suits can be more general, filling two roles in one, and on the other hand a suit that fills one role very well.
I would say same goes for vehicles, although I think vehicles lend themselves very well to the T3 model of eve ships. Base hulls but certain "parts" can turn the ship from assault to transport or to logistic (dropship example).
T3 seems to be what they're going for with vehicles |
Sgt Buttscratch
SLAPHAPPY BANDITS
872
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:09:00 -
[29] - Quote
I dont think they'd need to removed adv weapons, If the removed Proto and Officer AV it would be good, ADV is actually very well balanced versus tanks, if you stick around too long your going down, but its survivable. |
Nguruthos IX
PEN 15 CLUB
1967
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 12:11:00 -
[30] - Quote
Banning Hammer wrote:This community is getting stupider by the hour....
I see tanks going 30-0 / 40-0 in regular basics, most AV weapons are useless against them... and you want to temporally remove the only weapons that can make them run for cover now and again ?
I have a better idea; Just remove Dropsuits altogether, and lets make Dust 514 a Vehicles only game.
QQ much?
any tank going 30 and 0 is when nobody goes AV because they're lazy and want easy infantry assist kills or they are terrible.
Av is cheap, costs little SP and I've never met a tank I couldn't put the finishing blow on with a militia forge and some AV nades.
A. "remove the only weapon". Are are impling you think the only weapon capable of killing a vehicle is (proto) forge? lawl? B. remove dropsuits. Ok QQ Queen. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |