|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sylwester Dziewiecki
Interregnum.
332
   |
Posted - 2014.07.22 22:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Thoughts suggestions ideas expansions and addiums?
Yea, it would be cool if people could put giant potato in to LAV exhaust pipe which could trigger some chain reaction and big explosion ...
Gallente Speed Scout.
EVE side of me: Nosum Hseebnrido
|
Sylwester Dziewiecki
Interregnum.
333
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 15:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Roger Cordill wrote:Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Thoughts suggestions ideas expansions and addiums? Yea, it would be cool if people could put giant potato in to LAV exhaust pipe which could trigger some chain reaction and big explosion ... But seriously, I wouldn't mind if infantry(without AV) could somehow temporary disrupt how vehicles work. Killing or harming pilot that is inside is slightly to much, same as destroying whole vehicle. Maybe some sniper rifles could be able to penetrate DS cockpit, but that's it - HAV pilots should be safe from that. OK, so I see it as Outpost services mechanic in eve. Every module that is fitted to vehicle have it's outside representation placed on vehicle hull. Outpost services can be attacked and disabled independently of the outpost itself. They are always vulnerable, and sovereignty has no effect. Services appear in space at the same location as the Outpost itself, and can be targetted and shot at as usual. When they reach structure damage, they are disabled and will not function until repaired by remote structure/armor repairers and shield boosters in the normal way. When they reach 50% shield, they become active again. The different services have different numbers of hitpoints, and services cannot be completely destroyed.With exception that modules will not function properly until X amount of time or someone with Repair Tool or Vehicle Repair Module will fix them for pilot. And that they have only structure points, no shield or armor(so individuals pilots skills do not matter). Would you like it if say infantry could get shot at say in the say chest and the armor plates gets weakened, and or gets shot in the backpack or head and their scanners gets weakened, and the only way to wait for X amount of time, or getting reps from a logi? It's quite the same thing. The answer for me is no to both. It's a silly notion for a engineer to put critical parts like that out in the open. And it would just hurt balance for vehicles even more. Balance is there and it always be there. You do realize that all modern vehicles have they weak spots, right? Everything has weak spots..
7 shoots from paintball and he is blind
And yes to realistic example that you presented , I would like to if my shots were actually doing some meaning damage to target rather then seeing clowns running around with 1 Armor Points left like 'nothing happen', and jumping, sprinting, aiming and doing all stuff that infantry with full health and no damage can do.
You disregard the fact we have this mechanic today but on very small scale - if you head-shoot someone he die faster - why do you not question this, that several hundreds in future engineers did not grow up to put more armor on dropsuit head  ? Why - because it is obvious that everything around have it's advantages and disadvantages. Extending this concept would just make things more fun, and more realistic with is important for FPS game.
Example from the WW2:
Soldiers were rather wounding enemy soldier then kill them, because dead soldier does not require medical care of doctor, specialist, two nurses, or hospital bed. Dead soldier do not need to be evacuated from the battlefield, no one has to risk their life's to save them. Wounding enemy soldiers were caused much more damage than killing them. Everyone that worked in medical support couldn't work in military production sector. And when wounded person were send back to home he cause PR damage in civilians(potential future soldiers).
Some points of this^ can be similar to tanks.
In DUST we do not have a lot stuff that we should, like mud, muddy sand, driving on the hardened ground does not really matter, there is no icing, or dark smoke that can have impact on you awareness..
Gallente Speed Scout.
EVE side of me: Nosum Hseebnrido
|
Sylwester Dziewiecki
Interregnum.
334
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 21:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
Roger Cordill wrote:Syeven Reed wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Ideas and thoughts This is a good concept, although I could see it being to hard to manage. I'd imagine something like this would be balanced with giving the vehicle a counter such as an 'escape'. But as we know in Dust(beta) having vehicles with an easy escape only makes things more hit and run with my over-the-top killing machine. It made things hard to counter. However I like the idea that someone posted in response to your OP: for the ability to kill the driver and take the vehicle for your own (more loot!  ). While this would have to be very hard to do so, a small opening for a grenade in the top (think halo 1) or the ability to shoot a flap of metal off, reviling a squishy driver to shoot at, I think this would be a good mechanic. That's even a worse idea. It's as bad as being one shotted by any weapon in the game whilst being a heavy.
Yea, imagine that someone instead of throwing grenade into the hole just put his hand inside the hull, grabs pilot neck and starts to choke him to death
Gallente Speed Scout.
EVE side of me: Nosum Hseebnrido
|
Sylwester Dziewiecki
Interregnum.
334
|
Posted - 2014.07.24 21:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:I wouldn't mind having differing armour values depending on where I am hit.
E,g-
Frontal Armour- 10% Damage Resistance
Side Armour- 0% modifications to -10% Damage Resistance
Rear Armour- On top of the vulnerable spot a standard -25 Damage Resistance
Treads and Hull- -25% Damage Resistance
So hunting tanks requires AV to think on their toes and focus on HAV weak spots for critical damage, while HAV have to conside how the enter and exit and engagement and can tactically use their frontal armour as a shield of sorts.
It would be cool if AV attacks were living marks on vehicles hull - if HAV would survive encounter of cures he would regenerate his shield, armor to 100% but if someone would approached HAV close enough to use his non-AV weapon as leverage to pull out previously damaged part by AV attack. It could reveal the new HAV weak spot thereby reducing the resistance of the place by some -% number.
Gallente Speed Scout.
EVE side of me: Nosum Hseebnrido
|
Sylwester Dziewiecki
Interregnum.
334
|
Posted - 2014.07.25 21:46:00 -
[5] - Quote
Roger, you are amazing. You did not came with single idea in this topic, and all you do is keep criticize other's, like this is a hard part.
Gallente Speed Scout.
EVE side of me: Nosum Hseebnrido
|
|
|
| |
|