wait is the vehicle stuff you are writing going to be shared or the cpm assignement you got?

vehicle stuff I am writing as that seems to have much less of a time critical window (its number 2 after the cpm nda stuff though atm which may not get shared until its more ready) those in the community being poked are done so in the highest confidence and expertise over the subject though but even they are not privy to the entire thing being cooked up.

Either way my eyes are wanting to fall out; going to do something and get back into good mental shape; so bleh. Keep the feedback coming; CPM Cross Atu is also working on vehicles as well I highly recommend poking him as well as I typically have a semi skewed means of communicating which isn't fair to the more frustrated player base.

Anyways I'll post another update once I get done with this next draft and meeting request.

I would say in terms of documentation I have to draft up for cpm 1 its nearly doubled over cpm 0 currently and if you guys think I am only a prolific poster you haven't' seen anything.

After vehicles are out of the way maybe just maybe i can get back to my personal project or take a whack at the other new topics that are teasing me. (3 ring scans and the whole bandwidth thing)

1. Vehicle Command Tree Structure
1a. It should mimic infantry tree, that would also mean specalized vehicles like infantry with sentinal and commando for example and also adv/proto vehicles like infantry have, if not then we should take away adv/proto for infantry

2. Vehicle Upgrades Tree Structure
2a. It should be as it was in chrome, in fact all skills should always come with a skill bonus and if infantry have a skill such as 5% per level for CPU then vehicles should also have the same skill. Fair is Fair

3. Should there be reskinned place holders for FW vehicles (IE Golden Madrugers w/ amarr logo and Rusted Gunlogis /w repub logo) Even if this means that there is a very low chance of having unique models in the foreseeable future or unique stats even?
3a. Its lazy at its worst but frankly racial vehicles and turrets are the highest priority, a reskinned gunlogi would still be a gunlogi

4. Should Militia Vehicles and Military Grade Vehicles feature similar slot layouts (as to not eat up slot real-estate) akin to standard dropsuit relationship with militia dropsuits?
4a. Milita dropsuits generally have 1 less slot than the std counterpart, same for vehicles i would be fine with

5. Scout LAV's Role(s) should be?
5a. Fast stealth low EHP vehicle

6. Logistics LAV's where the start of the killer bee revolution, What tamer Role(s) should it have if brought back?
6a. Infantry Support, Vehicle Support, Vehicle Repairs, Infantry Repairs, average speed

7. Enforcer HAVs previously did not have a strong role, What roles should it have?
8. Murader HAVs previously had a god like role, What roles should it retain if ever brought back in?
7/8a. Both should be heavy battle tanks with high base hp, enforcer have better resistances making it point defence and slower, marauder faster for a roaming battle tank with high damage output with maybe reduced range so it has to brawl, in chrome marauders were fine, the enforcers as a glass cannon did not work espc with the state of AV and even so my madrugar could wipe out a vayu

9. Logistics DS underperformed massively last time, what roles should it have to make it useful?
9a.Infantry Support, Vehicle Support, Vehicle Repairs, Infantry Repairs, A 'Mobile' Supply Depot, A Mobile CRU, Tanky,

10. Assault Dropships are a subject of much Hyperbole, What attribute is the ADS hurting in the most right now?
10a. Its not supposed to transport anything, its supposed to assault things and lack of countermeasures and lock on warning systems hurts it more than anything, the way to survive is run and frankly it cant fit that much on it, best making it into a fighter

11. There is thought about bringing turret variants back BUT so many of the old variants were 'useless' in the light of another so in what way or roles would you give these returning turrets to avoid similar fates.
11a. Look at EVE variations of turrets and pick a few from the list
Anti-Infantry? Anti-Equipment? Anti-Vehicle? Burst? Long Range? Supression? Breach Firing? Bigger Splash? Higher ROF for lower Damage? Larger Magazines? Faster Reloads? More Backup Ammo? Come up with a goal theme for various prefix names.

12. Currently we have a selection of active and passive modules. Would you like to see an introduction of Modules that were off behavior of current as additional Options. An example would be an active armor repair that outperforms the passives?
12a. I want to see capacitors will all modules thrown back in and balanced with cap, if i can perma run a resistance mod let me, EVE has already answered this, copy and paste

13. There are currently no known technical evaluation on the possibility of more support like game play such as Deploying Equipment (ie Proximity Explosive or Nanohive), Siege Modes (your vehicle sacrifices a large amount of one stat to gain a great strength in another; Like 0 mobility for heavy tank and offensive ability) or even a repair turret or Mobile Supply Depot. Despite this are you very interested in seeing these mechanics brought into playing field to be hotfixed around and design something with? Which ones? Any new ideas of your own you think that could be done?
13a. Focus on the things which are needed now, there is more than enough to keep CCP busy, this game could be dead by next year

14. Dropship Immortality was pretty serious issue because of the lack of counters mostly. Would the community support an AA turret variant that cannot lower its turret base underneath a certain point making it difficult to deal with other threats if the Dropships where returned to similar power before 1.8D?
14a. DS immortality is a fallacy, its because we hit the AB because be have no other way of avoiding AV espc if its swarms, judge got rails distance nerfed by 50% which does AA quite well

15. Several Quality of Life Features do not have any technical evaluations yet, are you willing to support such features such as: Dropship Drop Camera for passengers, Fixing the Small Turret Facing Bug, Allowing LAV passengers to shoot their weapons, Lock On Warning, Entry and Delay of Exit of a vehicle up to 3 seconds.
15a. The above is fine execpt i can get out of my car faster than 3seconds and my large blaster has the accuracy of a blind dog so if i could kill infantry with it i wouldnt have to jump out

16. What kind of new modules are you willing to see?
16a. Anything useful

17. Should our Vehicle play model focus on slower cycles (High HP; Low Speed; Low Repairability)
or
Remain as is? (TTK similar to that of infantry; Low HP; Higher Speeds, Higher Recovery)
17a. If any AV jumps in now its extreme low TTK, take it back to chrome where i could battle 2 tanks with AV hitting me, im in a tank not a glass bottle

.

I don't believe Rat is capable of doing anything but making the vehicle experience worse for pilots.

If he proves me wrong, so be it, but hope is a fools errand when it comes to vehicles.

Well at least he can try. I don't think he has seriously tried yet.

I jus want anti shield AV so we can highlight how weak vehicles are against AV. Right now most pilots run shields because it actually gives you a tiny bit of breathing room. Nevermind the complete lack of fit diversity. I just don't have any hope that CCP can find balance between vehicles and AV. Good on you for compiling feedback at least

Id like weaker individual modules, but more slots and capacity for fitting things. Though, we'd probably need some new modules to help create diversity, so that probably won't happen. Making armor reps passive was dumb. Keep the passive modules, nerf the amount they heal, and put active ones back in (assuming my above suggestion was used)

Regardless, active reps are way more fun and rewarding. Though they still have to fix the bug, at least on shield boosters, that keeps the booster from working if taking damage.

Oh, and its only been almost 2 years now, but how about fixing side turrets on dropships? Looking towards the front of the ship STILL resets the turrets position, and missiles can STILL kill their gunner. This is nothing short of laziness on CCPs part atthis point

I would like to see active modules make a return and concurrent with passive ones.

Certainly....but why would anyone choose slow passive reps over crisis managing active repairs?

Passive armour reps have never been good unless abused by 3x stacking and have never made sense in game.

I was thinking quite the opposite, modules determining the power of your fitting like the once did.


180mm Polycrystalline Armour plating +2750 Armour
Heavy Efficient Armour Repairer 414 armour per pulse, 5 pulses over 15 seconds
C-Type Armour Hardener 25-30% armour resistances

Riding in a tank with something like this would actually make armour HAV work viable while really retaining the idea of "windows of opportunity"

For the love of amarr please stop distracting me everything else

Soon as I am getting one thing out of the way get hit up for stuff involving suit colors ><

http://i.imgur.com/vHzbNgf.jpg

Then Thanksgiving (happy holidays everyone)

Then Bamms tin foilery causing more questions than answers which is the exact opposite of what facts to but very much what speculation causes.

Anyways I haven't forgotten still gathering notes and what not just need to get stuff

More good stuff is on the way for you from other sources though just not specifically for vehicle pilots yet.

As always CPM Cross Atu is also working on specific vehicle feedback as well on his own project hit him up as well with your ideas and the sorts.

1. What you just said was Chrome, it did have windows of opportunity and pilots had options and variety to boot

2. Now we have windows of opportunity which feel like they last a week and that is it, no variety, no improvements, nothing for pilots except nerfs and removal of modules, turrets, hulls, skills and skill bonuses

3. CCP has gone backwards

Well, I may be in the minority of this thought, but I always thought that the pythons CPU and PG system needed to be tweaked. As it is currently, we have to shove a complex PG upgrade to fit any decent fit, but we don't need to heavily invest in shield fitting optimization. There's only one competitive fit that requires fitting OP to go level 3.

My proposition, reduce CPU by 8-10%, while buffing PG by 34-59.

WARNING: do not buff the PG beyond 59, I've done the math on this. And I can safely assure you the most OP fit will be reachable with a PG buff of this magnitude.

Fit is as follows:

1 complex afterburner
1 complex heavy extender
1 complex light shield booster
1 complex PG upgrade
1 xt missile

That's just my two cents, hope it helps!

And as far as the new mods go, for active reps, make it like the NOS meaning you can only fit one on a tank. Could do with the passive as well, because we'd otherwise achieve a full rep tank, with no damage attenuation. You all complained about not being able to solo a tank with Darkside swarms that had 3 reps on it. One active and one passive rep wouldn't be able to do that. Add a hardener and plate and a tank is back being good to go.

May also want to test making the damage mod the same way (could do that for infantry too ), so tankers have time to react instead of getting melted in 2 shots.

Shield should always be passive as per EVE lore, but I've never played EVE so I'm going off what other people tell me. Booster could remain as-is, one pulse adding a large amount of shield and kick starting the regen, but the regen shouldn't be interrupted by taking little damage. It's a forced boost, shunting power into the booster, so there shouldn't be any way a little damage should stop it. I'll even take a 3 second minor slowdown to give it more of a good feel to it.

For Marauders and Enforcers, require level 3 in HAV operation to unlock those. They could both get a speed penalty per level for activating their respective mods, but no more than 10% per level.

The roles should be switched: Marauder gets bonus to damage, Enforcer gets a bonus to defense. 2% or 3% bonus to damage per level for the Marauder, same for the Enforcer with defense. Both could have the siege module already fit, that won't subtract from the hull's CPU and PG. Those would probably be 10x or 12x skills. Infantry would probably want them to be 12x skills. The Marauder should get a flat bonus to turrets, since Caldari has 2 and Gallente only has 1. Could give the Gallente a bigger damage bonus to make up for it however.

Bringing the tanks back in line to what they used to be, would make experience matter a lot more again. If no AV was present, used to be able to battle 2 or 3 tanks and win due to superior driving and aiming. Now, like I've said, any random can hop into a Sica, and my rail will glitch, rendering me without any offense, and dying quickly.

To bring the age-old argument back, I don't see what would be wrong with a tank being its own best counter. As far as pubs go, it's the luck of the draw. The game shouldn't be balanced around ambush, which is what a lot of people seem to want. It should be balanced around FW and PC, to encourage a lot more people to get into those modes. Infantry could always squad with a dedicated tanker in a pub, in case there's a dedicated tanker on the other team.

Pilot suits could be introduced too. No slot layout or different colors and suits to buy from level 1 to 5, just passive bonuses. Gallente could be something like increased acceleration and a reduction to armor plate weight penalty per level. Caldari could be increased passive shield regen and base armor per level. Infantry now has 2 passive skills, no reason the pilot suit shouldn't. Take note that I didn't suggest damage bonuses to either suit. Gunnlogi could do with more armor so that people could stop dual tanking it. Could also introduce vehicle shield regulators to make the Gunnlogi a real shield tank; have around 2000 armor, ammo extension and a regulator.