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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 13 post(s)
Varoth Drac Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 317	Posted - 2014.11.07 20:00:00 - [121] - Quote I really think the Gal logi bonus should be changed so it doesn't benefit precision. It's just too hard for mediums to avoid. You should distinguish active scans as long range, forward facing, low precision scans. It should be viable for mediums to avoid. Mediums who tend to fight head on at range. Passive scans on scouts and logis should be how you scan scouts. 360 degrees, short range to combat scouts who specialise in CQC. Scouts should still be able to avoid passives with moderate dampening.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1271	Posted - 2014.11.07 20:01:00 - [122] - Quote Vitantur Nothus wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: I would reverse the abilities of suits regarding precision and dampening. Heavies would have the best precision but have high profile, scouts would remain best at dampening and have lowest profile. A heavy can see but will be seen, a scout can hide but will be blind, mediums can do either/or but neither as well. This would make Ewar accessible and valuable to all, not just scouts. Because the data is wrong. HMG Heavies are not yet EZ enough. They need the best HP, the best DPS, and the best native precision (so nothing can sneak up on them). Also, nerf REs. Then heavies will finally be "balanced" by GD standards. Yes, HMG's require a nerf as does the cloak, but it is a separate but related issue. Because, that's why.
Cody Sietz Evzones Public.Disorder. 4105	Posted - 2014.11.08 01:11:00 - [123] - Quote I think it needs a lot of attention simply because it feels like it was put on the back burner then kind of just forgotten. Also, each race should get a kind of bonus to one eWar skill vs the others. You can decide which should get which, but I suggest that that the Amarr and Minmatar but get bonus to a few stats. Minmatar would have all 3 stats get a slight bonus and Amarr would get 2 weak stat bonuses and 1 strong bonus. "I do agree with you there though. shudders" -Arkena Wyrnspire
Xatha De'Agelle Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 8	Posted - 2014.11.08 04:43:00 - [124] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: 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. Especially a minmitar scout going nova knives.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 10800	Posted - 2014.11.08 05:15:00 - [125] - Quote Mark Crusader wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Could do Plot twist: Extenders and Plates add signature profile I've thought of a similar idea before, with a slightly different approach. Shield Extenders increase signature profile Armor Plates increase scan precision (nerf) The reasoning is that the counter modules for each of these penalties go in the opposite slots. After the change, shield and armor tanking will be no worse off than the other if people want to sacrifice slots to balance their fit. It also complements common play-styles. Heavily armor tanked fits are ready to stand their ground when the enemy comes up on them, and more mobile shield tanked fits already have a means to evade enemies pursuing them. Additionally, this makes the fitting meta equally more interesting for both shield and armor. Players who don't want to be impacted by the penalties can choose to fit Shield Rechargers instead or complement with Dampeners when tanking shields, or fit Armor Reps instead or complement with Precision Enhancers when tanking armor. Lore wise, thick armor plating interferes with signal detection, while additional shields create extra EM noise that can be more easily detected. Excellent point, and much better. The penalty wouldn't be high and might even replace the current penalties. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Blueprint For Murder Immortal Guides 220	Posted - 2014.11.08 05:24:00 - [126] - Quote OOO no more speed penalties 8*D don't play with my emotions Rattatati that would probably do wonders to bring assaults back into the mix. If you did it would there be a speed increase for ak. suits? Check out the film Flame and Citron it is amazing! Wizard Talk
The Master Race Immortal Guides 226	Posted - 2014.11.08 05:24:00 - [127] - Quote OOO no more speed penalties 8*D don't play with my emotions Rattatati that would probably do wonders to bring assaults back into the mix. If you did it would there be a speed increase for ak. suits? Check out the film Flame and Citron it is amazing! Wizard Talk

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 10804	Posted - 2014.11.08 05:30:00 - [128] - Quote I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 10804	Posted - 2014.11.08 05:34:00 - [129] - Quote Also, I am all for wider scan angles, I think there needs to be rhyme and reason how they work, imagine a triangle with the precision, scan angle and range, as points, duration is a factor of precision, you always sacrifice one for the other two or have mediocre skills in the middle. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

voidfaction Nos Nothi 636	Posted - 2014.11.08 05:39:00 - [130] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. DO IT. In the Barbershop we have been asking for this.

Blueprint For Murder Immortal Guides 221	Posted - 2014.11.08 05:41:00 - [131] - Quote The way players use speed tanked scouts is kincats + plates with shotty so they can sprint at above normal speed including the penalty and one/2shot the target. So I am not sure how effective the speed penalty is/would be. And strife scouts are shield tankers. Check out the film Flame and Citron it is amazing! Wizard Talk
The Master Race Immortal Guides 226	Posted - 2014.11.08 05:41:00 - [132] - Quote The way players use speed tanked scouts is kincats + plates with shotty so they can sprint at above normal speed including the penalty and one/2shot the target. So I am not sure how effective the speed penalty is/would be. And strife scouts are shield tankers. Check out the film Flame and Citron it is amazing! Wizard Talk
Vell0cet Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 2478	Posted - 2014.11.08 06:25:00 - [133] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. Make a new stat on all suits called mass. Speed/agility would be derived from mass. Light suits have low mass, heavies high mass. Plates would add a fixed amount of mass to the suits (except feroscale). This would heavily penalize the movement of low mass suits and less so on heavy frames (as a relative percent change). Likewise shield extenders would increase signature profile. Add a feroscale analogue for shield extenders without the penalty. This would more closely follow EVE. Best PvE idea ever!

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 10818	Posted - 2014.11.08 07:40:00 - [134] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. Make a new stat on all suits called mass. Speed/agility would be derived from mass. Light suits have low mass, heavies high mass. Plates would add a fixed amount of mass to the suits (except feroscale). This would heavily penalize the movement of low mass suits and less so on heavy frames (as a relative percent change). Likewise shield extenders would increase signature profile. Add a feroscale analogue for shield extenders without the penalty. This would more closely follow EVE. Even if not directly added to the stats, that's exactly how I intend to design the penalties, and share the calculations. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

BL4CKST4R La Muerte Eterna Dark Taboo 3321	Posted - 2014.11.08 07:42:00 - [135] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Also, I am all for wider scan angles, I think there needs to be rhyme and reason how they work, imagine a triangle with the precision, scan angle and range, as points, duration is a factor of precision, you always sacrifice one for the other two or have mediocre skills in the middle. >Focused scanners favor precision and range over duration and angle. Major drawback, short duration requires constant use, the low angle forces the user to require multiple scans to get accurate and complete data. Team share scanner, no directional arrow, short duration short cool down 1:2 ratio Flux scanners favor range and angle over precision and duration. Flux scanners can do wide sweeps of an are but due to their low precision and duration they are only used for pre-breach situations. Team share scanner, directional arrow short duration (slightly longer than focused) high cool down 1:5 ratio Proximity scanners favor duration and angle over precision and range. Perform wide sweeps of large areas (wider than flux) but due to their short range information is limited. Squad share scanner, no directional arrow, long duration medium long cool down 1:2.0 ratio Quantum scanners favor range and duration over precision and angle. These scanners can perform long lasting sweeps at long ranges but suffer from bad precision and low angles. Team share scanner, no directional arrow short cool down and duration 1:1.7 ratio. Duration and cool down should be directly proportional. Ratio means every second of direction will cool down by this many seconds. supercalifragilisticexpialidocious
Vell0cet Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 2478	Posted - 2014.11.08 08:10:00 - [136] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Vell0cet wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. Make a new stat on all suits called mass. Speed/agility would be derived from mass. Light suits have low mass, heavies high mass. Plates would add a fixed amount of mass to the suits (except feroscale). This would heavily penalize the movement of low mass suits and less so on heavy frames (as a relative percent change). Likewise shield extenders would increase signature profile. Add a feroscale analogue for shield extenders without the penalty. This would more closely follow EVE. Even if not directly added to the stats, that's exactly how I intend to design the penalties, and share the calculations. Yeah, the outcome would be the same. With the mass stat, everything would be consistent though instead of having different rules applying to different frame sizes, which is "un-EVEesque." The mass stat would be more elegant, if a bit more work to add. It may not be hotfixable though. Best PvE idea ever!
nicholas73 Glitched Connection 271	Posted - 2014.11.08 11:06:00 - [137] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Mark Crusader wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Could do Plot twist: Extenders and Plates add signature profile I've thought of a similar idea before, with a slightly different approach. Shield Extenders increase signature profile Armor Plates increase scan precision (nerf) The reasoning is that the counter modules for each of these penalties go in the opposite slots. After the change, shield and armor tanking will be no worse off than the other if people want to sacrifice slots to balance their fit. It also complements common play-styles. Heavily armor tanked fits are ready to stand their ground when the enemy comes up on them, and more mobile shield tanked fits already have a means to evade enemies pursuing them. Additionally, this makes the fitting meta equally more interesting for both shield and armor. Players who don't want to be impacted by the penalties can choose to fit Shield Rechargers instead or complement with Dampeners when tanking shields, or fit Armor Reps instead or complement with Precision Enhancers when tanking armor. Lore wise, thick armor plating interferes with signal detection, while additional shields create extra EM noise that can be more easily detected. Excellent point, and much better. The penalty wouldn't be high and might even replace the current penalties. I actually want them to be reversed actually, armour plates increase signature profile and shield exteneders increase scan presicion. The reason being, if we go with the theory above, I can put on armour plates and then negate the scan precision penalty by stacking precision modules on the high slots. Take a gallante scout for example, I can have 600+ armour with decent reps and by putting 2 scan precision enhancers, I can totally negate the penalty of the armour plates; and thus we're back to square one. Wasn't this the problem with CA scouts before it was nerfs, it could stack precision enhancers and range amplifiers, and their bonuses provided just that as well. Proud member of Glitched Connection "Only idiots start a fight they can't win" - Sora (No Game No Life)
Sylwester Dziewiecki Interregnum. 417	Posted - 2014.11.08 11:54:00 - [138] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Bug report ID: 165755 This Active Scanner exploit is waiting 7 weeks to be filtered. Do it already please. Gallente Speed Scout. EVE side of me: Nosum Hseebnrido
Cavani1EE7 Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 437	Posted - 2014.11.08 13:25:00 - [139] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. Keep taking gun game out of this game. GG. I'm sure skilled players will all appreciate this. FFS. Take a bow
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 97	Posted - 2014.11.08 13:56:00 - [140] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. 1. In my best estimation, strafe acceleration has much more to do with the wiggle-wiggle meta than strafe speed. Reducing speed might help, but adding inertia would likely solve the problem. It should be noted that Assault users with decent strafe skills can wiggle-wiggle-weave through bullets nearly as readily as a Scout (strafe acceleration > strafe speed). 2. A "draconian :-)" plate penalty to scout movement would go a long way toward reducing AM/GA Assault Lite usage. I'm in favor. I also agree that lighter armors (ferro/reactive) should not be affected. With this change, I'd anticipate a shift in scout PC meta from GA to CA, but would offer that this would be an improvement. A GA Scout can simultaneously dampen below 18dB (or stack kin cats) while dual tanking well beyond the shotgun's OHK threshold; the CA Scout cannot. 3. While penalizing shield extenders (i.e. increasing signature) may prove an appropriate and necessary response to a rise in CalScouts, I'd advise doing so with caution on account of the non-problematic MinScout. He is heavily reliant upon both damps and shields; such a nerf will impact him by greater degree than it'd impact the target CalScout.

Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 833	Posted - 2014.11.08 14:20:00 - [141] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Vell0cet wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. Make a new stat on all suits called mass. Speed/agility would be derived from mass. Light suits have low mass, heavies high mass. Plates would add a fixed amount of mass to the suits (except feroscale). This would heavily penalize the movement of low mass suits and less so on heavy frames (as a relative percent change). Likewise shield extenders would increase signature profile. Add a feroscale analogue for shield extenders without the penalty. This would more closely follow EVE. Even if not directly added to the stats, that's exactly how I intend to design the penalties, and share the calculations. Different perspective on this: How would a person that didn't read the hotfix discussion pages come to understand this concept? Especially considering that this isn't how it used to work. I guess the person who designed the ewar system was originally thinking of a target audience that doesn't read the eve-wiki on every item they plan on fitting, that's my theory how we got the "if precision < signature and range < maximum range then scan"-design. While this has it's drawbacks I think the intention is worth keeping in mind. Can we maybe get a new mission statement for the discussion? So far we've mostly been brainstorming on stuff that may be fun, awesome or easy to implement, without directing it at a specific problem. While we're in the brainstorming mood: If you deconstructed a scout, assault and sentinel suit into a basic medium frame that has as many modules fit to it as necessary to achieve the base stats of a racial scout, assault and sentinel including lvl 5 operation, I believe you will arrive at a clear advantage for scouts in both the amounts of slots fitted and CPU/PG consumed. This I speculate is the main reason why we're unhappy with scouts and that then is why we're discussing ewar. So maybe we're unintentionally having an strawman-discussion.
Avallo Kantor SHAKING BABIES FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE 422	Posted - 2014.11.08 15:03:00 - [142] - Quote Speaking of the Ewar discussion, I have two questions based on the "can't do" column: 1) ls it possible to "blind" somebody, so that they can't see -any- scan results on their minimap, basically showing a blank slate. 2) Is it possible for a piece of equipment to create "ghosts" that only an enemy can scan and "see". For example, a piece of active equipment that causes enemy players scanners to pick up tons of fake suits. I feel that infantry should have equipment options that can cause defensive e-war that can fit and be active. Right now too much defensive e-war is passive only, and teams have little chance to defend against strong offensive e-war more dynamically. Ideally there should be equipment that can be carried (probably by logis / scouts) that can deny a teams offensive ewar for a short period, allowing for holes to be punched in their defense to attack from.
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 75	Posted - 2014.11.08 15:24:00 - [143] - Quote I know I might get some flak for this, but any chance of just making vehicles always visible (since fall-off can't be done, and no word on the psuedo fall-off as suggested earlier in this thread) and then adding a module that made them only appear when within scan range (stealth system...either active or passive, I'm not picky on this one)? (I'm not saying this should be a blanket apply for all vehicles...but I shouldn't be sneaking up on infantry in a tank for crying out loud). Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 99	Posted - 2014.11.08 15:36:00 - [144] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: I know I might get some flak for this, but any chance of just making vehicles always visible (since fall-off can't be done, and no word on the psuedo fall-off as suggested earlier in this thread) and then adding a module that made them only appear when within scan range (stealth system...either active or passive, I'm not picky on this one)? (I'm not saying this should be a blanket apply for all vehicles...but I shouldn't be sneaking up on infantry in a tank for crying out loud). Wasn't this already fixed with 1.9?
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 75	Posted - 2014.11.08 15:38:00 - [145] - Quote Vitantur Nothus wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: I know I might get some flak for this, but any chance of just making vehicles always visible (since fall-off can't be done, and no word on the psuedo fall-off as suggested earlier in this thread) and then adding a module that made them only appear when within scan range (stealth system...either active or passive, I'm not picky on this one)? (I'm not saying this should be a blanket apply for all vehicles...but I shouldn't be sneaking up on infantry in a tank for crying out loud). Wasn't this already fixed with 1.9? If it was I haven't noticed it when going on the ground...and the guys I killed yesterday with the 80GJ railgun...after sitting there for a minute certainly didn't (No they where not snipers) Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 2301	Posted - 2014.11.08 15:47:00 - [146] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Vell0cet wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. Make a new stat on all suits called mass. Speed/agility would be derived from mass. Light suits have low mass, heavies high mass. Plates would add a fixed amount of mass to the suits (except feroscale). This would heavily penalize the movement of low mass suits and less so on heavy frames (as a relative percent change). Likewise shield extenders would increase signature profile. Add a feroscale analogue for shield extenders without the penalty. This would more closely follow EVE. Even if not directly added to the stats, that's exactly how I intend to design the penalties, and share the calculations. Yeah, the outcome would be the same. With the mass stat, everything would be consistent though instead of having different rules applying to different frame sizes, which is "un-EVEesque." The mass stat would be more elegant, if a bit more work to add. It may not be hotfixable though. It honestly boggles the mind that things were not set up this way from the start. Suit drive systems produce force/torque, suits have mass/rotational inertia. So many benefits come from setting this up properly at the beginning that anything else honestly invites misery for devs engaged in future development. I hope were not making the same mistake in Legion. PSN: RationalSpark
Beren Hurin Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 2457	Posted - 2014.11.08 18:14:00 - [147] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm going to throw one final design that I have had evaluated. It is possible to penalize one class over the other. So we can do if scout then worse plate penalty for example. Another thing is that we are able to focus the penalty on strafing specifically. So the idea would be to penalize forward movement less on "normal plates", but severely decrease strafe speed, and more on the scout than other classes. Reactives and ferros would not incur these hard penalties. This would mean Amarr Sentinels become very unwieldy, bastions like they were supposed to be, but weak to being headshotted at range, and brick tanked scouts will always have speed less than equal ehp assaults. Let the fireworks begin. I laid this out in a long post months ago but it got little response. I'll hunt for it.
Blueprint For Murder Immortal Guides 227	Posted - 2014.11.08 18:23:00 - [148] - Quote It seems overly complicated and restrictive. Check out the film Flame and Citron it is amazing! Wizard Talk
Kensai Dragon DUST University Ivy League 53	Posted - 2014.11.08 18:56:00 - [149] - Quote Blueprint For Murder wrote: It seems overly complicated and restrictive. Some quick numbers I'm just throwing out for examples: Light = 100 kg Medium = 200 kg Heavy = 300 kg Basic Plate = 50 kg Enhanced Plate = 65 kg Complex Plate = 80 kg Assuming all suits have the same Power Grid giving them the initial Force, Light with (1x) Basic = 50% increase in mass, 33% reduction in acceleration Heavy with (1x) Basic = 17% increase in mass, 14.5% reduction in acceleration Light with (1x) Complex = 80% increase in mass, 45% reduction in acceleration Heavy with (1x) Complex = 27% increase in mass, 21% reduction in acceleration Amarr Ak.0 Sentinel with (4x) Complex = 207% increase in mass, 52% reduction in acceleration The light suits can still put on armor with a small penalty and remain fast. Heavy can carry more and not notice as much, but they're also already slower to begin with.
Spectral Clone Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 3071	Posted - 2014.11.08 19:05:00 - [150] - Quote Indy Strizer wrote: I feel that the logi should have better signature profile and the assault should have better precision. The logi should focus on survivability a bit more than the assault focuses on offense. That's just me though and my opinion on this is not very thought out. I agree with this. Scan precision is for hunters. Scan profile for prey. EVE: Legion, also known as: Schroedinger's Game, EVE: Limbo, or just "Not-a-game-yet".



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.