DUST Search - Vehicles: Don't be fooled by IWS Multiplier stuff

All Channels

General Discussions

Vehicles: Don't be fooled by IWS Multiplier stuff

» 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)
daishi mk03 Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 254	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:02:00 - [1] - Quote IWS is saying the new SP multipliers are cut down by 32, which is totally wrong on so many levels. Old: Several Vehicle Command Skills (which brought no benefit and you would only skill what you want) Small amount of turret skills (which you all need to max) New: Less Vehicle Command Skills (I don't care) BIG amount of turret skills (WHICH YOU ALL FKING NEED) -> Tanking will be way more expensive SP wise with the upcoming patch.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 9465	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:20:00 - [2] - Quote https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqHgiF-KXQZXdFZ2ZzEyNW1neVdqYUF4bXU5NUdUOXc&usp=docslist_api#gid=2 My Evidence Lets pick Oh say HAV New HAV operation requires lvl 5 Vehicle command and HAV 1 Tally = 310,920 + 24,880 Total = 335,800 to sit in both Sica or Soma Old Vehicle command 1 Gallente or Caldari LAV 3 Gallente or Caldari HAV 1 Tally = 6,200 + 174,120 + 49,760 Subtotal = 230,080 sp for either sica or soma x2 for both to Unlock Total = 453960 for both sica and soma
Bendtner92 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1151	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:24:00 - [3] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqHgiF-KXQZXdFZ2ZzEyNW1neVdqYUF4bXU5NUdUOXc&usp=docslist_api#gid=2 My Evidence Lets pick Oh say HAV New HAV operation requires lvl 5 Vehicle command and HAV 1 Tally = 310,920 + 24,880 Total = 335,800 to sit in both Sica or Soma Old Vehicle command 1 Gallente or Caldari LAV 3 Gallente or Caldari HAV 1 Tally = 6,200 + 174,120 + 49,760 Subtotal = 230,080 sp for either sica or soma x2 for both to Unlock Total = 453960 for both sica and soma Eh you don't need any skills to use the Sica or Soma.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 1044	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:24:00 - [4] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqHgiF-KXQZXdFZ2ZzEyNW1neVdqYUF4bXU5NUdUOXc&usp=docslist_api#gid=2 My Evidence Lets pick Oh say HAV New HAV operation requires lvl 5 Vehicle command and HAV 1 Tally = 310,920 + 24,880 Total = 335,800 to sit in both Sica or Soma Old Vehicle command 1 Gallente or Caldari LAV 3 Gallente or Caldari HAV 1 Tally = 6,200 + 174,120 + 49,760 Subtotal = 230,080 sp for either sica or soma x2 for both to Unlock Total = 453960 for both sica and soma Are you really saying it requires SP to unlock MLT tanks?
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 9465	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:27:00 - [5] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqHgiF-KXQZXdFZ2ZzEyNW1neVdqYUF4bXU5NUdUOXc&usp=docslist_api#gid=2 My Evidence Lets pick Oh say HAV New HAV operation requires lvl 5 Vehicle command and HAV 1 Tally = 310,920 + 24,880 Total = 335,800 to sit in both Sica or Soma Old Vehicle command 1 Gallente or Caldari LAV 3 Gallente or Caldari HAV 1 Tally = 6,200 + 174,120 + 49,760 Subtotal = 230,080 sp for either sica or soma x2 for both to Unlock Total = 453960 for both sica and soma Are you really saying it requires SP to unlock MLT tanks? My bad the madruger and Gunnlogi
Beld Errmon Evocatius 1014	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:31:00 - [6] - Quote Considering Iron wolf saber is the only active CSM member left ppl should give him a break, when was the last time you even saw another CSM member say anything or even in game? thats all i've got to say couldn't careless about the subject anymore, i'll adapt or quit like all the CSM members it seems.
Bendtner92 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1151	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:40:00 - [7] - Quote Counting all vehicle skills, be it LAV, HAV or Dropships skills we currently have skills worth a 189 multiplier, or in other words it takes 189 * 310920 = 58763880 SP to max out your vehicle skills completely. In 1.7 we'll have skills worth a 179 multiplier, or in other words it takes 179 * 310920 = 55654680 SP to max out your vehicle skills. So IWS is right in saying that the 1.7 vehicle tree will have a less total multiplier, however he forgets that a lot of vehicles are being removed, so when these are reintroduced with their skills as well the vehicle tree will have a much higher total multiplier than the current one. So in essence it WILL take more SP in the 1.7 vehicle skill tree.
Mortedeamor Internal Rebellion 466	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:48:00 - [8] - Quote well obviously the overall goal is to make it take longer for people to specc up vehicles and realize that they are still ****
Lance 2ballzStrong SyNergy Gaming EoN. 4073	Posted - 2013.10.16 09:52:00 - [9] - Quote Bendtner92 wrote: Counting all vehicle skills, be it LAV, HAV or Dropships skills we currently have skills worth a 189 multiplier, or in other words it takes 189 * 310920 = 58763880 SP to max out your vehicle skills completely. In 1.7 we'll have skills worth a 179 multiplier, or in other words it takes 179 * 310920 = 55654680 SP to max out your vehicle skills. So IWS is right in saying that the 1.7 vehicle tree will have a less total multiplier, however he forgets that a lot of vehicles are being removed, so when these are reintroduced with their skills as well the vehicle tree will have a much higher total multiplier than the current one. So in essence it WILL take more SP in the 1.7 vehicle skill tree. lol... more grinding in DUST?!!! Never saw this coming!
Bendtner92 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1152	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:08:00 - [10] - Quote Just to add to my earlier post then The two Enforcer HAV skills are each x12, so x24 total. The two Assault Dropship skills are each x10, so x20 total. The two Logistics Dropship skills are each x10, so x20 total. The two Logistics LAV skills are each x6, so x12 total. The two Scout LAV skills are each x6, so x12 total. All of these skills with a total multiplier of 88 will be removed in the 1.7 vehicle skill tree, which means if you compare the two skill trees ignoring the above skills, then the current vehicle skill tree have a 101 total multiplier while the 1.7 vehicle skill tree will have a 179 total multiplier. This means that it will take around 24 million more SP to max out the 1.7 vehicle skill tree than the current one. Did anyone say SP sinks?

daishi mk03 Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 254	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:10:00 - [11] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: cool sheet and arguments NO. Consider a real Scenario: Madrugar + All Turrets / All Upgrades (my situation right now) and compare them. Sure, someone who wants to have everthing (DS, Tanks, LAVs) will have it easier BUT in a real scenario One kind of vehicle + all relevant upgrades + all turrets one is fked then. Edit: Oh, and yeah, Bendtner is so fking right!
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 236	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:14:00 - [12] - Quote Beld Errmon wrote: Considering Iron wolf saber is the only active CSM member left ppl should give him a break, when was the last time you even saw another CSM member say anything or even in game? thats all i've got to say couldn't careless about the subject anymore, i'll adapt or quit like all the CSM members it seems. Uh... last time?... four days ago? https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1388983#post1388983
daishi mk03 Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 254	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:17:00 - [13] - Quote IWS, this is no personal attack against you or your person. Keep up the good work. But it is simply not true, that tankers will need less SP in the upcoming vehicle change patch. I won't skill DS or LAVs, so i just suffer from the big turret tree.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 9468	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:18:00 - [14] - Quote You don't have to train these skills to lvl 5. You could also just bank your SP and let it sit there You could also spend it elsewhere. We also have no idea what the new Role skills would look like or their own multipliers when they do start moseying their way back in. We also have no idea outside of the ADS and Logi of which roles are if ever coming back . Also by your argument Amarr Light Amarr Scout Amarr Pilot Amarr Sniper Weapon Amarr Heavy Anti vehicle weapon Amarr SMG Amarr Speeder Amarr Gunship Amarr Fighter Amarr Shotgun Amarr Heavy Anti Infantry Amarr Launcher Amarr MAV Amarr Medium Turret Amarr Small Turret Amarr Large Turret Amarr Dropship Amarr LAV Amarr HAV Amarr MCC Amarr Grenade Caldari Scout Caldari Light Caldari Pilot Caldari Heavy Caldari Sentinel Caldari Commando Caldari MAV Caldari Speeder Caldari FIghter Caldari Gunship Caldari Pistol Caldari Shotgun Caldari Anti infantry Heavy weapon Caldari SMG Caldari MCC Caldari Rifle Gallente Heavy Gallente Sentinel Gallente Commando Gallente Pilot Gallente MAV Gallente Sniper Gallente SMG Gallente Heavy Anti Infantry Gallente Heavy Anti Vehicle Gallente MCC Minmatar Shotgun Minmatar Antivehciel Heavy weapon Minmatar Sniper Minmatar Pilot Minmatar Heavy Minmatar Sentinel Minmatar Commando Minmatar Rifle Minmatar Speeder Minamtar MAV Minamtar Small turret Minmatar Medium Turret Minmatar Large turret Minmatar HAV Minmatar LAV Minmatar Dropship Minmatar Fighter Minmatar Gunship Minmatar MCC Grind 514!
Lance 2ballzStrong SyNergy Gaming EoN. 4073	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:26:00 - [15] - Quote lol... by the year 2015 we might see half of these things... if we're lucky
daishi mk03 Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 254	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:27:00 - [16] - Quote Wat?
Bendtner92 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1152	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:28:00 - [17] - Quote I have no idea what your point is IWS. I'm simply comparing the two vehicle skill trees, the current one versus the 1.7 one. Fact is that the 1.7 one is far more SP intensive.
Nova Knife Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 1966	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:29:00 - [18] - Quote Beld Errmon wrote: Considering Iron wolf saber is the only active CSM member left ppl should give him a break, when was the last time you even saw another CSM member say anything or even in game? thats all i've got to say couldn't careless about the subject anymore, i'll adapt or quit like all the CSM members it seems. He's not the only one active :( You just don't see the rest of us saying stuff on the forums as much anymore, because like most civilized people, we were taught that if we don't have anything nice to ay.... saying nothing is the better option :P That's not to say that we aren't keeping up to speed with the daily forum blarg, or talking in irc or via skype with the people who take the effort to get in touch with us. Also, in IWS' defense. Anyone and everyone should know that they can pretty much ignore anything IWS says when he's trying to justify something. He tries to hard to make people happy and usually ends up saying the wrong stuff :P Give him points for trying and move on. As for the people 'calliing him out', see above. You don't get points for it anymore, because it's just the way of things.
daishi mk03 Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 254	Posted - 2013.10.16 10:32:00 - [19] - Quote We don't want to call him out ... it just feel like being slapped in your face, if someone says "everything will be better" and it WILL NOT BE BETTER. Anyway, I move on. Have a nice day IWS and Mocca Knive.
KalOfTheRathi Nec Tributis 825	Posted - 2013.10.16 11:41:00 - [20] - Quote Brief summary: IWS says X. Others say X+Y. CCP has yet to actually commit to the real values behind X or Y or Z, which they have yet to let anyone know about. The Vehicles will be better is you believe that only X is required. The Vehicles are a horror show waiting to happen and destroy the game if Y is believed. The Vehicles will be limited to the few roles that CCP/Shanghai believe that they should be used for. And! We should get excited because all these wonderful things will happen some ... undefined time unit variable. Although we will never get our SP back, not even to move from Amarr Heavy to Minmatar Heavy. Vehicle respec. Well, that is on the table. Probably the table down in the morgue, but it is a table. And they will not tell us until after they release the Great Vehicle Balancing Act of 2013 ... or 2014. Whatever. Cause HTFU people, CCP does not care. Decisions have consequences. Their decisions, our consequences.

Mobius Wyvern Guardian Solutions DARKSTAR ARMY 3715	Posted - 2013.10.16 11:51:00 - [21] - Quote KalOfTheRathi wrote: Brief summary: IWS says X. Others say X+Y. CCP has yet to actually commit to the real values behind X or Y or Z, which they have yet to let anyone know about. The Vehicles will be better is you believe that only X is required. The Vehicles are a horror show waiting to happen and destroy the game if Y is believed. The Vehicles will be limited to the few roles that CCP/Shanghai believe that they should be used for. And! We should get excited because all these wonderful things will happen some ... undefined time unit variable. Although we will never get our SP back, not even to move from Amarr Heavy to Minmatar Heavy. Vehicle respec. Well, that is on the table. Probably the table down in the morgue, but it is a table. And they will not tell us until after they release the Great Vehicle Balancing Act of 2013 ... or 2014. Whatever. Cause HTFU people, CCP does not care. Decisions have consequences. Their decisions, our consequences. Because it's so much easier to just yell "CCP DOESN'T CARE ABOUT US" and sob on the forums about it than it is to consider the fact that we're talking about a group of people not that different from us who apparently got in over their heads and are obviously working pretty hard to straighten things out. Everyone also needs to keep in mind that whatever is offered by this community is suggestions, not "the way things should be done". Your perceptions of how other games perfected such-and-such system are coming from the consumer end of the line, not from the far more complicated processes that run underneath to achieve what those other developers achieved. If game design were easy, you wouldn't get payed very much to do it, and Epic Games wouldn't be making billions off of licensing the Unreal Engine. The had eyes bigger than their stomachs, they spent some time on the wrong track, but now they're trying to get back in gear and fix the game. Let's at least take a look at the FINAL and NON-WORK IN PROGRESS values for 1.7 before we flip out. I'm willing to bet that everything that has been said so far about the changes is being taken into account, and that the values of changed a bit since they were posted here.
Bendtner92 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1152	Posted - 2013.10.16 12:06:00 - [22] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Let's at least take a look at the FINAL and NON-WORK IN PROGRESS values for 1.7 before we flip out. I'm willing to bet that everything that has been said so far about the changes is being taken into account, and that the values of changed a bit since they were posted here. Yeah let's do that because the ferroscale and reactive plates numbers weren't final either when we saw them in a video a while before they were introduced... Oh wait, they were final even though CCP said they weren't. Yes, I know we got all the vehicle numbers now so that CCP can change them before 1.7, but I HIGHLY doubt they'll make any changes to the multipliers of the skills. I also don't know what kind of changes they can even make based on the feedback given because we can't give proper feedback without knowing the state of AV in 1.7. I also don't flip out at all. To be honest I couldn't care less, but don't come here and say we shouldn't even tell CCP what we think of the numbers. If we don't tell them anything they can't change anything.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 1374	Posted - 2013.10.16 12:18:00 - [23] - Quote 1. Anyone who uses vehicles at all in this game already knows that IWS is generally 99% wrong about anything vehicle related, prime example is when he made a thread and asked the vehicle pilots to make a proto tank, a few were made but he nitpicked and changed the goalposts everytime to suit his own argument and is generally bias against vehicles - His opinion on anything vehicle releated should be automatically dismissed as gibberish and wrong 2. 1.7 is more SP intensive for all vehicles, we even have 20skills out of 52 which add nothing at all except unlocking mods 3. 10 vehicles have been removed, 12 if you include the Sagaris/Surya, and generally they each have at least 1 skill per vehicle with a high muliplier 4. Pilot suits if they ever turn up, 1 for each race, possibly a x8 multiplier and 2.5mil approx for each suit and possible a new set of mods for that suit 5. Mods removed, mods come with at least a skill each and also we do have proto mods now so that will be level 5 6. Turret skills, we have more of them instead of just the 2 for small and large turrets
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 9645	Posted - 2013.10.24 10:31:00 - [24] - Quote No promises but poking some folks for an update, should be out in time to still react and feedback to it. Because of the nature of it, I can't give a day or even if the event would occur. I will say this though, what we have on the front page is all WIP.
daishi mk03 Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 257	Posted - 2013.10.24 10:35:00 - [25] - Quote Thanks a lot, IWS!


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.