DUST Search - To CCP Rouge (An Open Letter)

knight of 6 wrote:

CCP hire this man! everything but his opinion of capacitors is spot on.

Knight's genaric rant about capacitors wrote:

no.

vehicle combat is too fast for a capacitor to be a viable balancing tool, cool thingy/what have you. honestly I question how much time everyone who suggests this has spent in a vehicle(you aren't the first and undoubtedly wont be the last).

being completely honest the module wheel is a sub optimal solution to having a larger number of mods than buttons. anyone who has spent any time in a vehicle has turned off mods accidentally or selected the wrong mod and this typically results in death or best case a severe disadvantage. it also obstructs the screen and inhibits combat.

pulsing a rep is a common practice with a capacitor, for those unaware repairs/shield boosters take up a massive amount of cap per cycle so capsuleers switch them on and off regularly depending on how the fight is going and what other modules need to be on. can you imagine trying to pulse a rep while flying a dropship? or while in the middle of a tank battle? cap management in combat would be a nightmare.

in eve with a couple of mouse clicks you lock onto and fire on a ship automatically you don't need to aim or fire and there is no cover. flying is largely taken out of the pilots hands as well, this frees up time and concentration to focus on cap management. not to mention the TTK in eve is very long so if you make a mistake it's not the end of the world. the module activation system is very simple and fast to use unlike dust's and doesn't interrupt damage output or flight.

TL;DR no.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 405	Posted - 2014.05.06 14:22:00 - [1] - Quote knight of 6 wrote: CCP hire this man! everything but his opinion of capacitors is spot on. Knight's genaric rant about capacitors wrote: no. vehicle combat is too fast for a capacitor to be a viable balancing tool, cool thingy/what have you. honestly I question how much time everyone who suggests this has spent in a vehicle(you aren't the first and undoubtedly wont be the last). being completely honest the module wheel is a sub optimal solution to having a larger number of mods than buttons. anyone who has spent any time in a vehicle has turned off mods accidentally or selected the wrong mod and this typically results in death or best case a severe disadvantage. it also obstructs the screen and inhibits combat. pulsing a rep is a common practice with a capacitor, for those unaware repairs/shield boosters take up a massive amount of cap per cycle so capsuleers switch them on and off regularly depending on how the fight is going and what other modules need to be on. can you imagine trying to pulse a rep while flying a dropship? or while in the middle of a tank battle? cap management in combat would be a nightmare. in eve with a couple of mouse clicks you lock onto and fire on a ship automatically you don't need to aim or fire and there is no cover. flying is largely taken out of the pilots hands as well, this frees up time and concentration to focus on cap management. not to mention the TTK in eve is very long so if you make a mistake it's not the end of the world. the module activation system is very simple and fast to use unlike dust's and doesn't interrupt damage output or flight. TL;DR no. I would add that the same thing goes for damage profiles. An encounter lasts maybe five seconds in Dust/Legion. Damage profiles for infantry are extremely silly. They make sense on vehicles, though, where TTK is far longer and active modules mean that escape is a viable tactic for when you have the wrong damage modifier. P.S. I actually don't see the BPO suits negatively. That is because you still have equipment to burn. It's not like the risk/reward system is removed. It's just changed in a way that allows you to permanently have the same look even if your money runs out. It's a status symbol that indirectly shows your SP in the new system. However, I do want modules and the like to modify a person's look even more, to signify the ISK investment in the same vein as SP investment is signified by suits in the new system.
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 407	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:34:00 - [2] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: Sirpidey Adtur wrote: Also, I'm worried about CCP Z's flagrant disregard for the creation and destruction cycle of New Eden. It should be a legitimate gameplay worry for "Well, we could throw more money at this fight and maybe win it, but will it be worth the cost?" I am beginning to wonder if you people watched the same presentation I did... Same here. I've been answering basic questions that have been answered on these forums and on the stream multiple times already. I'm starting to feel like CCP needs to pay me for running their damage control, with the laughable measure of making the information that they gave us more accessible.
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 417	Posted - 2014.05.07 10:29:00 - [3] - Quote ...What if they removed skill tree bonuses? Then BPOs would make sense. They'd be your permanent bonuses, in contrast to Dust's model where your bonuses come from the skill tree. Functionally, it's almost identical, except that each suit would be a different set of bonuses. Which would level the playing field. Not sure how I feel about that, but it makes sense.
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 417	Posted - 2014.05.07 13:49:00 - [4] - Quote Django Quik wrote: The issue with suits being BPOs is that they cost nothing - the bonuses and skills are irrelevant to that. Are we still talking about arbitrary numbers in a fictional universe that is being simulated on a computer network? Or did you suddenly decide that ISK is somehow a real currency? It doesn't matter if the suits cost something or if they don't. If you run out of money, you still won't be able to equip them fully. Cheap fits will still be infinitely inferior to a fully outfitted suit. I would be surprised if we didn't also get a higher number of item slots for exactly this reason, to weaken the relative inherent strength of suits.
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 424	Posted - 2014.05.08 11:08:00 - [5] - Quote Django Quik wrote: Sole Fenychs wrote: Seriously, BPOs are no different from skill bonuses. Are you crying about skill bonuses? How are BPOs that are phyiscal (if virtual) items the same as skills that are intangible (if virtual) abilities. Would you be saying the same thing if they make all vehicles BPOs too? BPOs aren't physical. They are visual. You can see the BPOs. But there is no difference between "you permanently gain 200 armor and 500 shield, as well as three high and one low slot when you run Caldari Assault" vs "your shield is permanently raised by 25% and all modules you ever equip take up 25% less CPU/PG no matter what you do", except that the former is bound to BPOs which you can actually exchange, while the latter is a bonus that never goes away. You can actually see which BPO an enemy has and which bonuses apply to them, which is superior to the pure skill tree bonuses. It simply merges the current visual information (race and size) with the skill tree and also adds a component of carefully adjusting your loadout due to none of your bonuses being global. See it as all global bonuses turning into class bonuses. I see no issue with vehicle BPOs. That would imo be perfect for bikes. For all other vehicles, though, I would prefer the "be a mechanic" approach where each vehicle is expensive and carefully tuned. In a perfect world, each vehicle would be slightly different, causing you to bond emotionally to that one Gunnlogi that has the best stats for your equipment selection and going on a shooting spree if someone shoots it down. Imagine a tank driver who's so enraged about losing his baby that he sets out a bounty on your head. However, that doesn't work on infantry. Infantry is simply too short-lived for that kind of experience. It's feasible to never lose a tank throughout multiple matches by carefully using active modules. But good luck surviving even one match without deaths as infantry. That's also why I dislike damage profiles for infantry, while I like them for vehicles - They add tactics to vehicles, because a tank that is caught in a bad matchup will be able to engage overdrive. Meanwhile, as infantry, you are forced to engage anyway in most situations because sprint is laughable, numbers of infantry players are far higher, you are extremely squishy and there are no active modules to save you, aside from the really crappy cloak. Also, pilot suits would be BPOs. And I'd expect them to function as granting bonuses to vehicle operation.
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 425	Posted - 2014.05.08 14:58:00 - [6] - Quote Django Quik wrote: Sole Fenychs wrote: I see no issue with vehicle BPOs This line here invalidates anything else you have said on the subhject of BPOs. gg You seem to be under the assumption that turrets and hardeners come free with a BPO vehicle.