DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] EWAR Ideas

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] EWAR Ideas

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 13 post(s)
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 147	Posted - 2014.11.06 20:41:00 - [1] - Quote Rattati, I am generally in favor of all you have proposed except the following: Quote: Remove all directional information about the enemy - Enemies can be pure circles without the arrow Please consider not doing this one. In an FPS we can't "peek" around cover, there is no way to know without taking a step out from behind cover whether my target is facing away from me or not. This is purely from the pov of a minmatar scout using Nova Knives. If I could peek out behind cover to actually look at my target I wouldn't need directionals on tacnet, but this is just about impossible. Other suggestion: I absolutely love the idea of plates and shields adding to signature, this works for shield extenders in Eve (but not armor). It could work for both in Dust given it often has little quirky differences.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 149	Posted - 2014.11.06 22:31:00 - [2] - Quote The less attractive you make e-war to scouts, the more scouts are going to brick tank. The less attractive you make brick tanking to scouts, the more scouts are going to fit e-war. It has to remain attractive for a scout to field his/her suit with ewar, and remain paper thin. The opposite should be the rarity for players who just want to go against the grain. I think it would be best if medium and heavy frames had a chance to scan scouts. IDEA You created a secondary scanning system for vehicles, why not create more of them to reflect different radius of scanning power? first ring: 5m 120% scanning precision second ring:10m 100% scanning precision third ring: 20m 80% scanning precision I also want to repeat that I am against removing the directional indicator on the red dots on tacnet. The type of scout we want to have in the game (intel, stealth, low combat abilities, low tank) needs to know when to run from cover to cover. If peeking was possible, this would not be an issue. When he or she is running around with 250 EHP it isn't possible to survive even 1 person noticing him/her moving around.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 151	Posted - 2014.11.07 17:38:00 - [3] - Quote Xatha De'Agelle wrote: [...] If a catwalk is to the scouts east and someone is looking west, the scout knows that they may be able to see them there if they look down. This is a big deal because if a scout is cloaked, biding their time to move, it is imperative they do so while informed. They need to understand when their enemy looks a different direction so as to time movement out of danger, through danger, or into danger. [...] this +1 A min scout wired for scouting has a mere 200~250 effective HP (shield+armor). This play style cares significantly more about the directional arrow than the 700 HP brick tanked shotgun scout.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 151	Posted - 2014.11.07 17:40:00 - [4] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Kaeru Nayiri wrote: IDEA You created a secondary 60m scanning ring for vehicles, why not create more of them to reflect different radius of scanning power? first ring: 5m 120% scanning precision second ring:10m 100% scanning precision third ring: 20m 80% scanning precision This is actually an incredibly neat idea. Give each suit 5-6 rings so that you could fine tune precision at different ranges. I suggested only 3 so as to limit how much of the system resources the tacnet would take. Assuming it's as resource hungry as I imagine it is, having 3 for infantry+1 for vehicles would already be quite intense, but who knows?
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 152	Posted - 2014.11.08 23:02:00 - [5] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: IDEA [...] You created a secondary 60m scanning ring for vehicles, why not create more of them to reflect different radius of scanning power? first ring: 5m 120% scanning precision second ring:10m 100% scanning precision third ring: 20m 80% scanning precision I also want to repeat that I am against removing the directional indicator on the red dots on tacnet. The type of scout we want to have in the game (intel, stealth, low combat abilities, low tank) needs to know when to run from cover to cover. If peeking was possible, this would not be an issue. When he or she is running around with 250 EHP it isn't possible to survive even 1 person noticing him/her moving around. Any thoughts on this compromise to scanning falloff, Rattati?
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 152	Posted - 2014.11.09 17:54:00 - [6] - Quote Kensai Dragon wrote: Regarding scan falloff... Do you realize that my suggestion is a compromise that creates a "fake" scan falloff system using the current mechanics?

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.