DUST Search - Vehicles - Looking to the future

All Channels

General Discussions

Vehicles - Looking to the future

» 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)
Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz Dirt Nap Squad. 736	Posted - 2014.04.01 13:05:00 - [1] - Quote Thanks for the feedback on my other posting if you posted. You got the gears a turning, and helped me realize what it is that really upsets me. While I still don't agree with the changes, as I felt other area's needed to be addressed, there's still hope on the other side. The hope, vehicles are still not finished. A lot of people (myself included) get very caught up with the current state of things that we tend to forget what is really missing. A finished product. The changes to hardeners and rails, while helpful for AV, don't address the lack of variety in fits. Or the imbalances between 0 SP and 20 mil SP. T vs T (Tank vs Tank) I saw someone mention tanks TTK is fine, as it should be on par with infantry TTK. I could agree, but why would I want my battles to be so easy and boring? Infantry battles are not the same as tank battles. Infantry skirmishes are quick, and often times CHEAP. I have no qualms whatsoever dying in a STD or ADV suit. In fact, it's expected! But when it comes to tanks, the tank alone cost 100k, plus the high cost of a turret. Running ADV will cost at least 200k to 250k. So no, I don't expect quick, cheap battles like I would with infantry. I do expect a longer TTK than we currently have, as it's often not possible to run a profit losing what should be a better tank to sica's in 3 shots. MLT Variants There should be more noticable difference between the tank types. With SP, I may be able to fit complex stuff, have faster reload, longer durations and CD, most battles never last long enough to utilize any of this. It's all about who gets that first shot (more with shield than ever before). I ask for scaling of mods, to better reflect the differences between a MLT tank and a PRO tank. Cooldown times are NOT the way to go about it in my opinion. Even then, the differences don't have to be huge, but they need to be there. Using current numbers as an example. Shield hardener Pro - 40% Adv - 30% Std - 25% At the same time, move the cooldown numbers more inline with one another. Pro - 60 seconds Adv - 80 seconds Std - 90 seconds In this way, it creates a desire to actually invest points into tanking. As each level adds something more desirable, more resistance. Cooldown times be damned! Variants Now, on to the meat of my posting! The reason I was so butthurt over the resistance change stemmed from the fact that I felt 60% was an ok number. What wasn't ok was the duration and CD times, and the fact that you can stack, cycling to increase active time while reducing downtime. Or activating both to become invincible for what seemed an awfully long time. These new numbers got me thinking about variants and balance. In all honesty, the nerf makes far more sense than I thought it would. At max skills, 40% for 30 seconds actually makes sense and seems balanced. My idea of balance, to gain you must lose, to lose you must gain. Hardeners 60% at 30 seconds was FAR too much. But using the new numbers as a base, I give you these variations of the shield hardener. Shield hardener (Heavy resistance) Pro - 60% Adv - 50% 12 second duration. 15 seconds with skills Std - 40% Shield hardener (Light resistance) Pro - 40% Adv - 30% 24 second duration. 30 seconds with skills Std - 25% Couple this with stacking penalties on hardeners, IE more cooldown for multiple mods, and I think we get something more balanced. While you can run the heavy resistances, they don't last long, meaning your impact on the field is limited. Where on the other hand, you can run them for longer durations, but receive far less overall resistances. Extenders I've noticed more than a few people comment on extenders, saying they are more viable because of the nerf. Don't agree at all. For the amount of PG/CPU they eat up, they don't even add enough to stop a MLT rail shot. Used in tangent with a hardener, they do provide a noticeable improvement to eHP, as long as the hardener is active. But I want passive resists to come back, and I think adding them to extenders will make them very appealing to run for a change. Now I don't have the numbers for extenders on hand atm, so I'm going to make stuff up just to provide an example of what I mean. Extender (Heavy resistance) Pro - 700 HP / 15% resist Adv - 600 HP / 12% resist Std - 500 HP / 10 % resist Extender (Light resistance) Pro - 1200 HP / 10% resist Adv - 1000 HP / 8% resist Std - 800 HP / 6% resists For a shield tank, I think passive resists are very important. Unlike maddies, they don't get a buffer to damage, nor do they have a constant rep. The maddie's plates would be more HP focused, to reflect the reps better with very low resistances. Other topics to cover (running out of time here) Boosters Damage mods Armor reps Armor plates Armor hardener Railgun damage Turret variety [*] Overall tank TTK and it's role on the battlefield Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz Dirt Nap Squad. 736	Posted - 2014.04.01 13:05:00 - [2] - Quote Reserved Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz Dirt Nap Squad. 736	Posted - 2014.04.01 13:06:00 - [3] - Quote reserved Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 481	Posted - 2014.04.01 13:29:00 - [4] - Quote That passive resistance to shield extenders was a brilliant idea . You are right about them as well because they only work in tangent with a shield hardener . The PG / CPU would have more merit if the extenders has passive resistance and with the hardener change would actually help . The shield boosters need to go back to the functionality of 1.6 as well . I know some like the one pulse but in tandem with a shield hardener , the 1.6 shield booster actually served a purpose and held the shields in place while taking damage . Now you wouldn't think of using them in tandem also , if the hardener is used ... they are good for the immediate boost but to say it plainly , shields on vehicles are not in a good place . With the recharge rate skill it helps but the strength of the shields are not in a good place . Immediately falling when impacted with damage and a little passive resistance would help . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1713	Posted - 2014.04.01 13:31:00 - [5] - Quote Yep. I'd like to see Cal tank go back to passive resists and extenders. This would work esp well with all four racial tanks available. Minmatar could be the active shield hardener tank. Gal the repper tank and Amarr the active armor hardener tank. Capacitor would be nice, but without it bring back constant shield recharge. Then it would be a matter of balancing shield recharge to the amount of damage that could be resisted. Passive resists aren't as good as hardeners so the Cal tank would still be a hit and run but would have a better gauge as to whether to stay in an engagement or not. Things were better with Cal tanks before but shields needed better natural resistance to shield oriented weapons. Brick tanking a scout suit since April 2013!
Harpyja Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 1448	Posted - 2014.04.01 13:40:00 - [6] - Quote I like the idea of giving passive resistances to extenders. It'll be more similar to EVE where astacking shield extenders increases your tank through shield recharge rate. I think giving the railgun some proper nerfs as well as fixing its damage profile (if it hasn't been done so) will improve tank vs tank combat. I also like Shinobi's signature Can't wait to see the rest of your post "By His light, and His will" - The Scriptures, Gheinok the First, 12:32
Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz Dirt Nap Squad. 741	Posted - 2014.04.01 22:20:00 - [7] - Quote Harpyja wrote: I like the idea of giving passive resistances to extenders. It'll be more similar to EVE where astacking shield extenders increases your tank through shield recharge rate. I think giving the railgun some proper nerfs as well as fixing its damage profile (if it hasn't been done so) will improve tank vs tank combat. I also like Shinobi's signature Can't wait to see the rest of your post Updated it a bit, still some more to touch on to bring it all together. Basically though, I want variety brought back to tanks. As in variety in fits. To do this, new racial vehicles, with increased slot counts. Some of the things I'm suggesting help make a bigger slot count, therefore more PG/CPU available, possible. Or so I think. And a hint on my turret idea. I'm talking about bring blasters damage down. Down to where a Pro does current STD damage. And adjusting missiles and rails proportionately (Tad more on the rails and missiles). Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Tebu Gan Dem Durrty Boyz Dirt Nap Squad. 743	Posted - 2014.04.02 12:42:00 - [8] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: That passive resistance to shield extenders was a brilliant idea . You are right about them as well because they only work in tangent with a shield hardener . The PG / CPU would have more merit if the extenders has passive resistance and with the hardener change would actually help . The shield boosters need to go back to the functionality of 1.6 as well . I know some like the one pulse but in tandem with a shield hardener , the 1.6 shield booster actually served a purpose and held the shields in place while taking damage . Now you wouldn't think of using them in tandem also , if the hardener is used ... they are good for the immediate boost but to say it plainly , shields on vehicles are not in a good place . With the recharge rate skill it helps but the strength of the shields are not in a good place . Immediately falling when impacted with damage and a little passive resistance would help . Agreed on the shield booster. In it's current form it can be handy (if it works). But it really plays to ultra quick battles, where more of that shields over times plays to extended engagements. Rails really make the problem worse, with such high alpha, and low shielding, shield tanks crumble in just a few shots. I've actually taken to using 3 shield hardeners, which actually provides a noticeable difference against rail guns (where 2 does not). Maybe it's OP, but I'm so sick of getting 4 shot through hardeners. That's 4 seconds and yr dead. I'm sure my clones are enjoying the quick deaths. Tanks - Balancing Turrets
Kn1qht INTERDIMENSIONAL SPACE KAT FEDERATION 31	Posted - 2014.04.02 13:02:00 - [9] - Quote I think all vehicle's in there own way need to be improved ALOT , honestly . THIRD EYE \| O.E.G\| WIN AUR !


Pages: 1 :: [one 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.