DUST Search - [Feedback] Vehicles & Modules of 1.7

Vitsuna Lancaster wrote:

HAV's are great now. I just think that swarms need some more distance back. The damage for AV is perfect. Maybe there is a little too much in the number of tanks on field. But only way I can see them changing that is to make a limit on each Vehicle type.
Ex. 4 Dropships, 8 LAV's, 4 HAV's.
Or something like that. Swarms do a bit less damage but still effective on most of everything. Just skill into swarms, most don't and ***** they can't kill HAV's/Dropships. Because they lac the skills to solo a HAV isn't the HAV's fault but the lack of skill by the player.

Tanks finally have a point on being on the field. Last update, they had no rhyme or reason when any AV could take them out in 2 hits.

Also stop bitching about the LAV's being used as ticking bombs. So what you can strap on explosives on an LAV and murder a speed HAV with it. It's a great element to the game. Makes it feel more real, you never know what will come after you so just be ready.

Great job CCP on fixing vehicles. Haven't used too many LAV's since the update, so I can't comment on how effective they are.
What ever you do CCP don't nurf Vehicles or AV any more! Let the community adjust and adapt to the new DUST514.

1+ to CCP

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
GVGMODE 87	Posted - 2013.12.15 19:04:00 - [1] - Quote The problem arises in public matches where players that havenGÇÖt spent a single skill point into the vehicle tree are spamming vehicles continuously and endlessly, such spam is because of two breaking points that affect the propensity a player has towards calling another tank fitting after being destroyed. Effectiveness of Modules The effectiveness of a militia module to a prototype module is almost the same, while CCP might argue that the difference that exists between each type and level of module is good and sufficient. It is hideous to expect balance when you have every module doing the same, therefore I must pledge for CCP to look into this matter and decrease the effectiveness of a module by reasonable percentage. A personal estimate would be to decrease the effectiveness of a module using the prototype module as a base. The advanced module could be 25% less effective that the prototype, while the basic module could be 50% less effective than the prototype module and the militia module could be 75% less effective in comparison with a prototype module. Pricing of Modules and Vehicles If CCP attempted to fix the pricing of every module it would take them a long time to find the equilibrium without the proper information regarding the elasticity a player has towards buying a module or not. It is necessary to not only change the pricing of modules but to also change the GÇ£rawGÇ¥ price of an unequipped vehicle, so that with a possible increase in the prices we would see a change in the propensity a player has towards using a vehicle. As of current build I am able to make a fully militia vehicle at a cost of 77 k per vehicle that in conjunction with the current effectiveness of modules can be as strong as a prototype level vehicle for a given period of time. Destruction of Vehicles The vehicles as of 1.7 are very powerful for a few seconds and then weak for a long period in which they have to take cover just like any other infantry player waiting for you to heal completely after being badly injured or die to almost anything. I should not be able to drive my militia LAV with a hardener (21,990 ISK) with my full BPO dropsuit, GÇ£stickGÇ¥ remote explosives (1,500 ISK) and drive against a vehicle that is worth around ~20 times more. In fact I love the developer that thought GÇ£stickyGÇ¥ remotes would be a good idea when their cost is almost none if compared to the rate we earn ISK in this game.
Shijima Kuraimaru warravens League of Infamy 436	Posted - 2013.12.15 22:08:00 - [2] - Quote GVGMODE wrote: The vehicles as of 1.7 are very powerful for a few seconds and then weak for a long period So here you're saying that the thirty second active hardener time is a few seconds while the forty second cool down time is a long period. If ten seconds makes that much difference to you, I'd hate to see you have to wait two minutes for something. I still can't find tanks on the market. All I see are those HAVs.
Alena Ventrallis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 300	Posted - 2013.12.15 22:36:00 - [3] - Quote Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: GVGMODE wrote: The vehicles as of 1.7 are very powerful for a few seconds and then weak for a long period So here you're saying that the thirty second active hardener time is a few seconds while the forty second cool down time is a long period. If ten seconds makes that much difference to you, I'd hate to see you have to wait two minutes for something. thats with level 5 everything. someone who has invested that much sp isn't an infantry whose running mlt tanks as FOTM. Its a dedicated vehicle pilot. I still see limiting the amount of HAVs on the field as a good solution. The issue at hand is AV doesn't have a chance to get a tank because there are 5-6 of them at once. Make the amount 1-2 and AV has the ability to get a tank isolated. Remember, nerfing modules to get at HAVs nerfs dropships and LAVs too. We need to hit HAVs without messing with the others as collateral damage.
Heavy Smurf Resheph Interstellar Strategy Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2013.12.16 00:10:00 - [4] - Quote limiting the amounts of HAVs on the field does seem like a more viable solution. They are after all tanks and should be strong however it is getting to be ridiculous. I had a match today where the other teams tanks were trying to ram past each other just to get at targets. I managed to kill one, hooorrrraaahhhh, must have been a noob
Shijima Kuraimaru warravens League of Infamy 437	Posted - 2013.12.16 10:05:00 - [5] - Quote There is already a limit to the maximum number of vehicles allowed on the field per team. The number of HAVs on the field isn't the problem. It's that AV has been made, for the most part, ineffective as of 1.7. Experienced HAV pilots that knew how to fit their HAVs, pre 1.7, still managed to drive away when my Ishukone Assault Forge could slap them seven times, all clean hits, before they drove out of range. No. They have their easy mode and they're going to milk it for as long as they can. When the pendulum swings back closer to reasonable game balance, they'll be complaining about infantry AV being OP again because, someone who gave up effectiveness against infantry can 1v1 them, if the Infantry AV can rely on playing smart instead of getting lucky. I still can't find tanks on the market. All I see are those HAVs.
daishi mk03 BLACK-GUARD Die Fremdenlegion 513	Posted - 2013.12.16 11:47:00 - [6] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: thats with level 5 everything. someone who has invested that much sp isn't an infantry whose running mlt tanks as FOTM. Its a dedicated vehicle pilot. > my sides To know the true path, but yet, to never follow it. That is possibly the gravest sin. The Scriptures,Book of Missions
CELESTA AUNGM Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 68	Posted - 2013.12.16 18:28:00 - [7] - Quote I've not argued or opposed much of anything CCP has done with this game (GREAT game, pushing the envelope of my previous FPS attitudes at nearly every turn I make). But I had the feeling when I read CCP's stated approach to "modules", and how they were going to make that the new core of patch 1.7, that I would be (tactically) opposing them in the game. I think this is especially true of a disadvantaged vehicle, that as you get "smarter" in the game, you will seek to use the available "modules" (with some bonuses from the SKILL tree) to scheme up a protection fit that helps you when you're IN a fight. I specifically schemed towards fit-outs that let me "activate this module going into the fight", and "start that module to STICK around LONGER under fire", and use my navigation and the map to get me OUT,... not modules. CCP's intent (1.7 is just the foundation of what they want) is COUNTER to mine. They expressed a wish to see drivers "activate this module COMING OUT of the fight". They're setting up (this is just the start) modules to be thrown on by the driver who is nearing dangerous damage, as an emergency parachute protection to allow him to successfully escape. The "scheming" and the "tactical opposition" terms I used above mean that I should be ALLOWED to find new or non-CCP scripted ways to protect myself---just like the LAV driver strapping remote mines on his nose to "lethalize" (what a kooky word!) himself. I hope CCP doesn't mind, and just hope the new module arrangements/limits aren't meant to try to prevent me from using the gear the way I think is best for me. Irrespective of the way HAV are (temporarily) enjoying an LSD error in their speed allowance, if we have any deisres to get around and overcome the new world of modules (I certainly do), lets try to do it by making strong suggestions for their UPCOMING modules moving forward,... not changes/buffs/nerfs of these current modules they've just introduced. I'd hate to get stuck in "changing the stuff we have" again for the next 7 months.
Vitsuna Lancaster Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 1	Posted - 2013.12.16 22:00:00 - [8] - Quote HAV's are great now. I just think that swarms need some more distance back. The damage for AV is perfect. Maybe there is a little too much in the number of tanks on field. But only way I can see them changing that is to make a limit on each Vehicle type. Ex. 4 Dropships, 8 LAV's, 4 HAV's. Or something like that. Swarms do a bit less damage but still effective on most of everything. Just skill into swarms, most don't and *** they can't kill HAV's/Dropships. Because they lac the skills to solo a HAV isn't the HAV's fault but the lack of skill by the player. Tanks finally have a point on being on the field. Last update, they had no rhyme or reason when any AV could take them out in 2 hits. Also stop bitching about the LAV's being used as ticking bombs. So what you can strap on explosives on an LAV and murder a speed HAV with it. It's a great element to the game. Makes it feel more real, you never know what will come after you so just be ready. Great job CCP on fixing vehicles. Haven't used too many LAV's since the update, so I can't comment on how effective they are. What ever you do CCP don't nurf Vehicles or AV any more!** Let the community adjust and adapt to the new DUST514. 1+ to CCP
Shijima Kuraimaru WarRavens League of Infamy 438	Posted - 2013.12.17 22:56:00 - [9] - Quote Vitsuna Lancaster wrote: HAV's are great now. I just think that swarms need some more distance back. The damage for AV is perfect. Maybe there is a little too much in the number of tanks on field. But only way I can see them changing that is to make a limit on each Vehicle type. Ex. 4 Dropships, 8 LAV's, 4 HAV's. Or something like that. Swarms do a bit less damage but still effective on most of everything. Just skill into swarms, most don't and *** they can't kill HAV's/Dropships. Because they lac the skills to solo a HAV isn't the HAV's fault but the lack of skill by the player. Tanks finally have a point on being on the field. Last update, they had no rhyme or reason when any AV could take them out in 2 hits. Also stop bitching about the LAV's being used as ticking bombs. So what you can strap on explosives on an LAV and murder a speed HAV with it. It's a great element to the game. Makes it feel more real, you never know what will come after you so just be ready. Great job CCP on fixing vehicles. Haven't used too many LAV's since the update, so I can't comment on how effective they are. What ever you do CCP don't nurf Vehicles or AV any more!** Let the community adjust and adapt to the new DUST514. 1+ to CCP Only unmodified militia HAVs could be two shotted. before 1.7. Anyone with a fair amount of knowledge and some SP investment could fit a HAV to survive four or more shots from the best forge guns. While I agree that Jihad jeeps are a viable element, they shouldn't be the only effective element that doesn't rely on luck, or a the target being a no SP pilot in a militia HAV. I still can't find tanks on the market. All I see are those HAVs.
Harpyja DUST University Ivy League 922	Posted - 2013.12.17 23:41:00 - [10] - Quote Yes, modules need to increase in effectiveness as they increase in tier, but what you are proposing is too steep. Also, we need skills to apply to attributes as well. I say nerf every module and vehicle attribute to some degree, then have the related skill (those that only unlock new modules) bring that attribute back up to current levels. For example, decrease shield and armor values for vehicles, but have it so that level 5 in shield/armor upgrades brings those values to what they are currently. "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32

Vitsuna Lancaster Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 1	Posted - 2013.12.23 22:38:00 - [11] - Quote Maybe. that would be close to what is was before the update. Also anyone else notice the milita speed boost mod, does like 100% increase to speed?? Someone made a boo boo in ccp when they added 1 too many zeros in that stat. Sure if will be fixed soon. Till then tanks will fly. lol. Never realized it till I saw on the forums, never used much in a way of milita mods on my HAVs.
GVGMODE 94	Posted - 2014.01.04 18:10:00 - [12] - Quote CCP Logibro wrote: Tanks still feel too strong in 1.7 and AV is not strong enough to stop them WeGÇÖll need to do something about MLT tanks. We will see to rebalance some PG/CPU for equipment and more. More details will come in a dev blog/forum post. Sometimes I just wonder about you CCP. 1. Nerf the MLT, STD and ADV modules: You cannot have a MLT module doing e same thing a PROTOTYPE module can do and thinking its balanced just because they have longer cool-down... OMG what were they thinking? 2. It should take more ISK to make a decent tank fitting than making a dropsuit, the pricing is a problem but unless CCP want to end up making 3 million tanks than can be solo'd by a couple of cents, oh wait that's where they heading because a remote explosive jihad LAV costs 24,000 ISK.
Michael Epic The Neutral Zone 184	Posted - 2014.01.04 18:23:00 - [13] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Shijima Kuraimaru wrote: GVGMODE wrote: The vehicles as of 1.7 are very powerful for a few seconds and then weak for a long period So here you're saying that the thirty second active hardener time is a few seconds while the forty second cool down time is a long period. If ten seconds makes that much difference to you, I'd hate to see you have to wait two minutes for something. thats with level 5 everything. someone who has invested that much sp isn't an infantry whose running mlt tanks as FOTM. Its a dedicated vehicle pilot. I still see limiting the amount of HAVs on the field as a good solution. The issue at hand is AV doesn't have a chance to get a tank because there are 5-6 of them at once. Make the amount 1-2 and AV has the ability to get a tank isolated. Remember, nerfing modules to get at HAVs nerfs dropships and LAVs too. We need to hit HAVs without messing with the others as collateral damage. Hey...Alena Ventrallis.....I don't recognize your name but you're TNZ like me. Are you an alt?
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 953	Posted - 2014.01.04 21:21:00 - [14] - Quote GVGMODE wrote: . . OP POST . . Unfortunately, I have to disagree on all your points: Effectiveness of Modules Having strongly by-effect tiered modules is the old system. It had fundamental problems, only the Maxxxximumm TanKING was viable. The new philosophy with effect being same but different cooldown is GREAT. Only the cooldowns are too short. See thread Pricing of Modules and Vehicles Pricing is the last thing to balance by hand. Isk balancing is the wrong way. Future player market will take care. Destruction of Vehicles The mechanic you describe is right. You are describing so called Jihad Jeeps which are fine, they have right to exist and are a great addition to game. Again, don't think isk-wise. Using Jihad Jeep takes time, the need of proper safe area to setup, intel to approach red tank from suitable angle, a little skill and LUCK not to get blown up even by small arms. Tank spam getting onto your nerves? An improvement:
Scheneighnay McBob Bojo's School of the Trades 3393	Posted - 2014.01.05 00:12:00 - [15] - Quote You've got the wrong idea with cost-to-effectiveness. Vehicles should be easy to replace but easy to destroy. High prices break the game. We used to have a time machine
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Intara Direct Action Caldari State 289	Posted - 2014.01.05 00:18:00 - [16] - Quote CELESTA AUNGM wrote: CCP's intent (1.7 is just the foundation of what they want) is COUNTER to mine. They expressed a wish to see drivers "activate this module COMING OUT of the fight". They're setting up (this is just the start) modules to be thrown on by the driver who is nearing dangerous damage, as an emergency parachute protection to allow him to successfully escape. I can agree with most of what you have written but I have taken out this excerpt because that seems like what there intentions are . They need to reinstall the previous mods and their particular characteristics . They were great and if you take on extensive damage only to activate a hardener ( shield or armor ) you will loose unless you are at least level 4 in the characteristics that apply in the vehicle skill tree . It's just NO time in taking damage and waiting for the mod to jump start and kick in again , unless you are level 4 in the armor repairer and shield recharge rate . That is done on purpose to MAKE one max out their vehicle skill tree because that's the only way to get the " true " standard and even more the maximum effect of the mods in the vehicles . This was done so the users can NEVER call the vehicle portion of the skill tree a " skill point sink " like some have done in the past . Now it's mandatory if you would like to be anywhere near as effective . The talk about militia v.s. Standard is baseless because anyone with any mental functionality knows that those who have skill points invested have a FAR greater advantage than those who don't . Gunnlogi's and Madrugars even handle better than a Sica and Soma now the computer and programming needs to be much greater for the standard ( that doesn't mean a nerf for the militia ) because the distance isn't even great enough to actually justify the skill points needed to invest to acquire those vehicles . They need to reinstall the former mods , they brought customization and variety to the vehicles and also their functionality is greatly missed and was an important part of many even specking into vehicles because they gave the vehicles flavor and strength . The previous system 1.6 was fine . All that was needed was some damage resistance to the vehicles and that was it .They might have even been able to get away with the previous AV if the damage resistance was done properly because of the slots and the enhancements of the variety of mods that WERE given . But in their disconnect which is clearly seen and noted they completely tore down to rebuild and this building process will take much longer than the community is expecting . " BANE " of ALL vehicle users , Crush , Kill and Destroy ALL vehicles !!!!!
GVGMODE Ancient Exiles. 97	Posted - 2014.01.05 00:34:00 - [17] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: You've got the wrong idea with cost-to-effectiveness. Vehicles should be easy to replace but easy to destroy. High prices break the game. So long the prices and the effectiveness of the modules remains fixated at the current state, we will continue to have a continuous spam of 4+ tanks running at the same time on just one team. If you want to discourage an unmeasured use of a certain good you have to affect the propensity that people have to acquire it, you must affect the price of it. If we allowed the prices in the market to float we will have the prices of tanks and modules going up do its high demand. As of right now some players have a demand for MLT tanks and low tier modules that it's not highly elastic, because they are cheap, they do same as prototype modules with lower duration but it doesn't matters when you can kill anything on less than 10 seconds. KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Effectiveness of Modules Having strongly by-effect tiered modules is the old system. It had fundamental problems, only the Maxxxximumm TanKING was viable. The new philosophy with effect being same but different cooldown is GREAT. Only the cooldowns are too short. See thread Look where such new philosophy has taken usGÇª A place where a MLT tank with MLT modules can kill in less than 8 seconds any standard tank that has prototype active modules on and in less than 2 seconds any tank that has no active modules on, which let me add that running Sicas is so profitable. It is not because the cool down is long or duration, in fact you could care less about it when you have every single player that has not invested any Skill Points into a specific skill tree can be able to do the same as somebody who has spent millions of Skill Points into that tree. Quote: AVG Joe: My tank has MLT modules and I havenGÇÖt invested anything aside from the initial payment of around 60,000 ISK Billy: I have invested so much time to gather experience to use the best modules and made the most of my fit that it costs me around 500,000 ISK each. Jason: My LAV costs 21,990 ISK and I just came out from the academy :D AVG Joe: >_< Billy: >_< Jason: ^_^ KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Pricing of Modules and Vehicles Pricing is the last thing to balance by hand. Isk balancing is the wrong way. Future player market will take care. The player market is not going happen anytime soon in an array of 1.5+ years, assuming Dust will survive with a consistent population. CCP should not rely on the probability of creating a successful player market when it cannot even balance weapons, classes, ranges and what not. KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Destruction of Vehicles You are describing so called Jihad Jeeps which are fine, they have right to exist and are a great addition to game. Again, don't think isk-wise. Using Jihad Jeep takes time, the need of proper safe area to setup, intel to approach red tank from suitable angle, a little skill and LUCK not to get blown up even by small arms. Maybe I am missing something but let me get this straight calling an MLT Shield LAV with MLIT nitro module on the redline near the resupply, spamming remote explosives and stomping it into the tank requires skill? I just successfully created a jihad LAV ALT with a fresh character from the academy and spammed 10+ jihad LAVs and still made a profit. As for intel it was not necessary the map pretty much tells you everything you need to know.


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