I always assumed the reason there was no capacitor mechanic in DUST was because there was already a limiting factor built into vehicles. Modules have a recharge time, guns overheat. In EVE, everything can perma-run if you've fit your ship to do so. it's a balancing act of mechanics. In this much faster-paced game, with a much more limited control scheme, cooldowns and overheating might be the best option, IMHO.

I thought tanks ran on tears...

Capacitor management as a function of game play could be a really interesting way to balance vehicles. I"m not sure if players would find it tedious or not, but if 'charging the capacitor' of vehicles required the kind of nuance and differences that rifles on dropsuits do.


Example.

Nuclear Reactors vs. Graviton Reactors

Drawbacks:

Nuclear reactors: Overheat causes a long period of armor damage over time.
Graviton reactors: Overheat causes significant agility loss of vehicle.

Management mechanics:

Rather than just passively recharge capacitors would have to be manually managed to maintain their maximum recharge rate. If unmanaged the recharge rate drops to 25% of maximum. So players would swap between a 'capacitor priming UI' mode, kind of like switching to equipment/sidearm on a dropsuit, and back to their turret. Perhaps secondary turret gunners could also man capacitors UIs.

Nuclear reactors (UI ideas):

Nuclear reactors would be based on getting the reactor core in an ideal heat zone to maintain energy stability. Therefore using R1 and 'square' to 'prime' and 'cool' the core to the right temperature will increase the stability of the core. Capacitor amount and core stability are directly related. Overuse of the capacitor would lead to quick cooling which would quickly reduce it's energy output. Accidentally over-priming the capacitor would overheat causing long term radioactive damage to the vehicle and user. Emergency cooling would take-over cutting core temperature (and energy production) down to minimal levels.

Damage modules are the most efficient users of nuclear reactor energy and hybrid weapons and laser weapons are the least.

Graviton reactors (UI ideas):

Graviton reactors are about space/mass distortion. Graviton cores are more stable and naturally balanced. Graviton cores can be 'primed' by rapidly pushing R1 in order to increase core stability. The higher the current stability, the faster you must press R1 to further increase stability. It's easy to maintain long-term decent power generation, but difficult to maintain the maximum. Overpriming/overheating causes spatial distortions that drastically affect the agility of the vehicle, while a cool core will take a significant amount of time to recharge from nothing.

Hybrid weapons and shield modules are the most efficient users of graviton reactors while armor modules are the least.

and here I thought you couldn't make the idea of capacitors any worse an idea. well I'm flabbergasted so good job I guess.



there is why caps don't work, yes it's and Xpost from feedback/requests but I like it and don't have much to add to it.(also I was right he wasn't the last)

now to "rechargeing" the capacitor... why? WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? no. NO. NO.

quick time events are bad mkay? in all forms. manual cap recharge is literally the least fun thing I can think of at the moment.

I agree that the selection wheel is a rather poor interface sometimes. It is always irritating when I go to activate both of my hardeners but instead just turn off the one I just turned on.
However giving free reign of mapping out controls could lead to an imbalance that favors KBM, you simply have more buttons that are easily accessible.
Total number of buttons on a DS3: 14
Total number of buttons within easy reach of a 4 finger placement: 20-27 + 2 on the mouse

On the matter of Capacitors:
I think they just would make ground combat unnecessarily complicated. It would draw too much of a single players attention away from what they are doing to simply managing their vehicle. Having to micro manage how much you are shooting, how much cap draw your defenses are taking, aiming, maneuvering, maintaining situational awareness, watching ammo count, judging how quickly your opponent is losing eHP vs your eHP, and communicating with allies is too much for a single person to handle. You would end up with very boring tank battles: Upon seeing each other they would stop their tanks and it would become a battle of capacitor micromanagement and build setup, which is EVE not Dust.

If you are truly displeased with the current mechanics then I see two possible alternatives:
1) Vehicle "crews". By allows several people control of a tank you reduce the overwhelming amount of micromanaging needed. The driver could manage defensive modules and steer while the gunner manages offensive modules/turrets and keeps situational awareness. Tank matches would be won by teamwork of the crew, capacitor micromanagement, and the build of the vehicle.
This option would also reduce tank spam as it would take at least 2 people to operate a tank and a poor crew that lacks communication would pale compared to an organized one, thus MLT tanks would fall out of favor. Redline rail tanks might still be a problem though, as sitting in the redline and striking at long range allows them to not deal with defenses or mobility.
2) Vehicle modules operate more like stamina than the hard cool down system we have currently. By not using up the full duration of the module then it recovers more quickly. The reduces the amount of micromanagement needed but increases the amount of detailed control the operator has (which is what I assume you capacitor people want).