DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Equipment Bandwidth

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] Equipment Bandwidth

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 11606	Posted - 2014.11.18 12:48:00 - [1] - Quote Dear Players Based on a lot of feedback, both from CPM, Community and previous CCP designs, one of the things we are able to conjure up is the much wanted Equipment Bandwidth feature. * We want to fix Equipment spam to increase framerate * We want Quality over Quantity Equipment gameplay * We want a solid Logistics progression at using Equipment * We want Logistics to excel at using Equipment, and other roles less so * We want Equipment diversity Now, we want to get your feedback as early as possible, so chime in. But here are some clarifications of intent. Equipment Limit The main design is primarily based off of Drones in EVE. Every dropsuit has a built-in Equipment Controller, which has a certain Bandwidth Capacity (in MHz). That Controller Bandwidth is used to manage deployed Equipment through constant signaling. Each piece of deployed Equipment has a different Bandwidth Cost (or Usage). Note that all Equipment still has the same current limitations of GÇPdeployed per typeGÇ£. Obviously Logistics are made for this purpose, and some Logistics more than others. In the case of deployed Equipment Bandwidth exceeding the Players current Bandwidth, deployed Equipment self-destructs instantly, in the sequence it was deployed. In the attached spreadsheet, we show an example of such a scenario. This feature will allow proper Logistics to excel at their deployment role, while keeping Assaults & Commandos relatively useful and Scouts will be diminished in capability as they were never meant to be a king of deployables, the additional slot was added for the Cloak Field. Quality over Quantity We want players to use the best Equipment they have at their disposal. ThatGÇÖs why Bandwidth will not increase with item tiers. We also have the capability and intent to reduce Scan Profile with tiers, so Advanced and Complex gear is not as easy to scan. However, this also allows us to increase the carried amount, for rapid redeployment. Spawn first Nanohive and Drop Uplink at point A, redeploy to Objective B, spawn second Nanohive and Drop Uplink, and so on. Stay out of trouble and you wonGÇÖt need to switch or restock for quite some time. Progression Logistics will have the, by far, the highest Bandwidth, with Caldari and Amarr the highest. We may need to reword or change some of their role bonuses. Bandwith progression will follow the Equipment slot progression so a Logistics player can almost always use their full allotment of deployable Equipment. Logistics vs other Dropsuits One of the key aspects of this proposal is that all Equipment is tied to the active Dropsuit of the Player. Switch from a suit with a high Bandwidth to another suit with lower Bandwidth, and the signal is lost. This means that starting as a Logistics dropsuit, throw down as much cheap Equipment as possible, then switch into another Logistics dropsuit at a Supply Depot, repeat and then finally switch into another role, Sentinel, Scout, Assault or Commando, will not be possible anymore. Diversity We can now influence players to use more Proximity Mines for example, as Scan Profile will allow them to be hidden from low Precision Vehicle Players, as well as having a lower Bandwidth Cost, allowing more at the same time, without allowing more Uplinks and Nanohives. Extra damage wouldnGÇÖt hurt either. Now, to the numbers found in this spreadsheet. Please remember that these numbers are placeholders, and are definitely up for debate so form your arguments for changes into clear and concise statements. Please read the Example as well, it should explain the whole design clearly. Again, your feedback and input is appreciated. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 11621	Posted - 2014.11.18 15:01:00 - [2] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: Only problem I have is the scout restrictions. Generally spawn in an advanced scout with cloak and drop 2 flux uplinks. Then on next spawn I spawn with an adv scout with remotes and cloak. Now, I am ok with a nerf where I can't run around covering loads of objectives with remotes with my uplinks still up. But I think it is too much of a nerf not being able to use remotes at all with a couple of uplinks running. Give scouts the same bandwidth as assaults and there will be no problems as far I'm concerned. Scouts shouldn't be the kings of deployables, I agree, but they are a central part of our battlefield role. 2 uplinks and a remote isn't spam or game breaking in my opinion. Meh, I personally disagree. I could understand having two low profile uplinks deployed behind enemy lines to give your team an advantage but having the ability to remote an objective (or god forbid start blowing up entire squads) on top of that, as well as all the inherent bonuses that a Scout gets to general combat as it is... Doesn't seem very fair. Personally, I think Scouts need to have more of a hard-chosen fitting scheme where they have to consider their options -before- spawning and I think having reduced equipment slots would be a good way of doing that. I advocated, back in 1.8, that Scouts have two equipment just to try it out. I even said, "They've been under powered for so long, let them be OP for a month". It's been over a year now, so I think it's time we try looking at other avenues to bring them back down in balance. I tend to agree, Scouts have been doing everything well for some time now. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 11621	Posted - 2014.11.18 15:02:00 - [3] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: John Psi wrote: It's very simple - the equipment running from any suit should not live longer this suit. Suit die or refitted - equipment DOWN. So the roll of a Logi should be to cower in a corner once all their equipment is deployed? Nono, as long as you respawn in a Logi again, they stay up. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 11630	Posted - 2014.11.18 15:51:00 - [4] - Quote Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: John Psi wrote: It's very simple - the equipment running from any suit should not live longer this suit. Suit die or refitted - equipment DOWN. So the roll of a Logi should be to cower in a corner once all their equipment is deployed? Nono, as long as you respawn in a Logi again, they stay up. Rattati...quick point on this. It does limit the tactical flexibility players have when they get painted into a corner (i.e. perhaps too steep a cost for switching roles in the match). The ability to adapt mid-game between suits / fits ect is at least for me a major positive of the game and this may induce too steep a penalty. Consider this...quite a few dedicated Logi players also play Sentinel as well. Imagine dropping a couple uplinks and seeding your nanohives and if it looks like the enemy push is gaining momentum you switch to your heavy hmg and poof...the hardpoint you had set up to support your team is gone. Yes, you made a decision to sacrifice one advantage for another, or you can choose to not do that. That's kind of the point. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 12494	Posted - 2014.12.01 09:20:00 - [5] - Quote Dear community We have painstakingly gone through the 25 pages, collected feedback and adjusted the proposal, Cross and the rest of the CPM have also reviewed and given their feedback. Please find the updated numbers here and note that almost every unique comment is addressed on the right hand side: Final Proposal Please give your feedback, clear and concise. Thanks! "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 12512	Posted - 2014.12.01 14:10:00 - [6] - Quote Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Mad Syringe wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Dear community We have painstakingly gone through the 25 pages, collected feedback and adjusted the proposal, Cross and the rest of the CPM have also reviewed and given their feedback. Please find the updated numbers here and note that almost every unique comment is addressed on the right hand side: Final Proposal Please give your feedback, clear and concise. Thanks! Dear Rattati, as a long time Logi player (not so much since survivability is down the drain), I do not approve these changes. 1. You make it much harder to be effective as a logi without running proto. 2. You make it impossible for a logi to adapt to the situation by changing Roles, this is a major nerf to game fun for strategic gameplay. (Not all logis prefer to run leashing a heavy) 3. You still leave the possibility to spam equipment for the rest of the roles. 4. You do not adress more important stuff like the possibility to drop EQ around supply depots, which shouldn't be possible in the first place. 5. You do not adress the isk cost of Equipment, meaning why can anybody resupply EQ at a supply depot without ISK cost? Charging ISK for EQ/Suit change at Depot would solve more problems than this mediocre change to EQ... I will play logi even less, since it would just be a waste of game time and a liability to the team. Commandos and Assaults will do the logying from now! If you introduce this crap without any buff to the survivability to the logi, it won't be worth to run the class anymore. Cheers And yet there are threads dedicated to addressing the logistics survivability issues in a clear and constructive manner with proposals in play. You really think cross would have bothered wasting the effort if Rattati had said "LOLno logis are fine?" Breakin, Cross and IWS both confirmed that this change was likely to go in without any further upgrades or reworks to the logi suits for a while. They did say the logi update was definetly still on the radar though which is good but very concerning. BLUF: I do not feel that this change is on solid foundation without updates to the class most effected by it. You'll also notice in the spread sheet the number of "yes, later" answers on some of the communities concerns...this feels like how CCP used to do things with the "lets get it out there and see what happens" mentality. When this comes out it needs to be close to spot on...it's too big a potential negative shift if it's not. So if I hadn't gone through 25 pages, picked every noticeable morsel of feedback, considered and commented specially on each one, then that would have been better? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 12515	Posted - 2014.12.01 15:42:00 - [7] - Quote Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Mad Syringe wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Dear community We have painstakingly gone through the 25 pages, collected feedback and adjusted the proposal, Cross and the rest of the CPM have also reviewed and given their feedback. Please find the updated numbers here and note that almost every unique comment is addressed on the right hand side: Final Proposal Please give your feedback, clear and concise. Thanks! Dear Rattati, as a long time Logi player (not so much since survivability is down the drain), I do not approve these changes. 1. You make it much harder to be effective as a logi without running proto. 2. You make it impossible for a logi to adapt to the situation by changing Roles, this is a major nerf to game fun for strategic gameplay. (Not all logis prefer to run leashing a heavy) 3. You still leave the possibility to spam equipment for the rest of the roles. 4. You do not adress more important stuff like the possibility to drop EQ around supply depots, which shouldn't be possible in the first place. 5. You do not adress the isk cost of Equipment, meaning why can anybody resupply EQ at a supply depot without ISK cost? Charging ISK for EQ/Suit change at Depot would solve more problems than this mediocre change to EQ... I will play logi even less, since it would just be a waste of game time and a liability to the team. Commandos and Assaults will do the logying from now! If you introduce this crap without any buff to the survivability to the logi, it won't be worth to run the class anymore. Cheers And yet there are threads dedicated to addressing the logistics survivability issues in a clear and constructive manner with proposals in play. You really think cross would have bothered wasting the effort if Rattati had said "LOLno logis are fine?" Breakin, Cross and IWS both confirmed that this change was likely to go in without any further upgrades or reworks to the logi suits for a while. They did say the logi update was definetly still on the radar though which is good but very concerning. BLUF: I do not feel that this change is on solid foundation without updates to the class most effected by it. You'll also notice in the spread sheet the number of "yes, later" answers on some of the communities concerns...this feels like how CCP used to do things with the "lets get it out there and see what happens" mentality. When this comes out it needs to be close to spot on...it's too big a potential negative shift if it's not. So if I hadn't gone through 25 pages, picked every noticeable morsel of feedback, considered and commented specially on each one, then that would have been better? Not sure where you are coming from on this. My point is that I think you've done an outstanding job of cataloging many of the player concerns and there seems to be some areas that could continue to be matured a little longer. I never indicated that it wasn't a good thing the way you captured and adjusted your BW concept based on some players feedback. It definitetly better than the original. Still not a fan of it per se but that ship has sailed and I want to focus on making it as good of a mechanic as possible. My bigger concern are the BW changes being done in isolation from adjustments to the Logisitcs class that seriously needs a refresh. Would you be willing to implement the logi refresh in conjunction with implementing the BW mechanic? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 12519	Posted - 2014.12.01 16:20:00 - [8] - Quote Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: You'll also notice in the spread sheet the number of "yes, later" answers on some of the communities concerns...this feels like how CCP used to do things with the "lets get it out there and see what happens" mentality. So if I hadn't gone through 25 pages, picked every noticeable morsel of feedback, considered and commented specially on each one, then that would have been better? Not sure where you are coming from on this. I'll admit it, I felt this was unfair criticism, the "Yes, later" referred to mostly tangential extra designs, but anyway. Cross, our resident CPM Logi was more than happy to play the wait and see card, especially since Logis may have a new role with EWAR changes. I also believe that everyone got a fair chance and this proposal has overwhelming support, from what we can see. Apologies if I wasn't clear with the "yes, later" post. I know that you are looking for additional feedback to the spreadsheet and as noted elsewhere I appreciate the chance to provide feedback. Reference Cross advocating to hold off on updating support roles....he is a friend and i often run with him, however, he is not nearly the total of the logi community. I susepct if you asked the logi community would they rather have their suit updated now and incremented on later or wait for down the road changes after two potentially huge shifts (BW & EWAR) go into place I think they would like refreshed suits / roles with tweaks based on BW & EWAR. My frustration is that there is no path or objective we see you driving at with roles/classes/ect. I suspect you have that pathway and probably have shared it with some of the CPM. The rest of the player community can only react to individual pieces in isolation and speculate at best on the synchronicity or connectivity to both announced much less unknown goals. That's it, this is not a logi balance pass, it's an equipment pass and one of the benefits is to strengthen the logi and make it more unique, not an afterthought you shed after 1 minute of spamming. Equipment Bandwidth is for the good of the game, and for Logis, in that order. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 12547	Posted - 2014.12.02 05:41:00 - [9] - Quote Thanks everyone, this was quite a ride. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"