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)
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 499	Posted - 2014.11.19 20:37:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. -1 I, as an open-beta logistics vet, am completely and totally opposed to this idea. This is a real bad idea which doesn't do enough to limit equipment use by other frames outside of logistics while simultaneously re-invents slayerlogis. There are many other, simpler ways to address the game issues that this idea is aimed at, most of which will significantly lower learning curves, allow for more tactical battlefields and do not limit player creativity as much. This idea I have trouble imagining as being born by the dev who's given the game much of it's needed recent balance and can only imagine it was designed by from the perspective of a players scorn versus from a players interest in balance. Rattati, that this idea has progressed this far leads me to conclude your effectiveness has begun to wane overall and perhaps a return to your cubicle in the pre-FanFest 2014 marketing department is in order. Sorry, bro. Thank You for you Hard Work, I do truly appreciate the effort. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 21:05:00 - [2] - Quote Vrain Matari wrote: If we keep theorycrafting based on mushy, half finished systems we might as well start philosophizing on religion or economics. ^ THIS Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 21:06:00 - [3] - Quote S-PANZA wrote: Solution to BW restrictions: - Run speed scout and drop some drop uplinks + RE's. - Switch to either logi slayer, logi AV, logi logi or logi sniper. - Shelf all other suits until next tree shake-up. ^ THIS EDIT: not edited, changes redacted. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 21:54:00 - [4] - Quote Meee One wrote: Rattati i hope you are paying attention to the underlying reason(s) players are against this. Players are willing to lose 7 uplinks to run 1 with a sent. Players want BW reduced on REs and proxies for scouts. Can you guess why players are so willing to run less equipment? Survival. Read through several posts and multiple imply being 'trapped' in a logistics suit AKA a death trap. If logistics had some advantage in terms of survival (like speed) then fewer players would be against this. They even say 'switch to support other suits'. Consider that for a second,switching from the master support suit (logistics) because it can't support as well as another can. There are many underlying problems with the suit itself. #1 being survivability Btw,240 eHP and slower than an assault with 400eHP base is stupidly broken.(for example) Or 240 eHP on a medium frame. (example #2) Players can see logistics is a walking coffin,gimped beyond belief 'because it has to be'. Imagine if scouts were slowed to sent speed,this is how logistics appears to anyone with a brain. That is why players don't like the BW idea,and will (attempt to) fight it tooth and nail. And TBH i don't blame them. ^THIS Excellent way of putting this, Meeee. I often don't agree with you, not even about this BW topic (!) but the point you're making here really hits it out of the park. There is other work to be done which should be PRIORITIZED FOR COMPLETION BEFORE completely rewriting the mechanics behind equipment. ESPECIALLY since other options would glean better results at addressing spam without introducing multiple new opportunities for imbalances and exploits. BALANCE WHAT WE HAVE. THEN ADD. "Problems never solved, just rearranged" Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 21:54:00 - [5] - Quote S-PANZA wrote: S-PANZA wrote: Solution to BW restrictions: - Run speed scout and drop some drop uplinks + RE's. - Switch to either logi slayer, logi AV, logi logi or logi sniper. - Shelf all other suits until next tree shake-up. Another option is to substitute the first step (speed scout making drops) to logi spamming equipment....then switching to slayer logi suits. FTFY Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 22:52:00 - [6] - Quote Mad Syringe wrote: This game is about adjustment to the battlefield, making logis not able to adapt is a bad move, because all other roles can switch without consequences. ^THIS And I've read the responses to this sentiment and want to emphasize something so the non-logis recognize it: The work of Logistics is exactly that, Logistics. "Support" is only a part of it. Sometimes, yeah, its following around a heavy or five and keeping them repped and resupplied. Others its moving (or trying to) with Assaults or scouts running scans. Sometimes tho, it is reinforcing areas as fallbacks OR creating advanced fortifications for striking groups to deploy from. At any point in any of this the occasion will often arise where the best thing for the group is for the Logi to flip frames into something actually combat-appropriate (since Logis now and by all available proposals are absolutely not and won't be) to address an issue or 16. These changes, as proposed will render the work the Logi has done up to that point largely null and void. The responses so far have centered on the idea that, 'Well if I go from HMG to guard a corridor to scout to run invisi-shotgun I don't get to keep my Heavy HP' etc. Which on the surface is true but really isn't applicable as an arguement because when you used that HMG in the corridor you defended that corridor ie. used the tools to do the work and afterwards benefitted from the results, a clear corridor freeing you to then go scoutie shotgun, kills made in your pocket and corridor defense complete. YOU GET TO KEEP WHAT YOU MADE. Logis will be denied this, this tactical flexibility which makes our battlefields as engaging as they are, as well as limiting FC ability to predictively and preemptively create staging area to fall to or from! The effect, while worst to Logis, ripples through all tactical predictively reasoned equipment use from ANY frame. Whats the point in a scout, any scout, placing a link somewhere to be used as needed if it'll pop the first time he's forced into pull a different fit to address an issue? Or an Assault? I, as much as anyone, despise equipment spamming and see scout frames as imbalanced versus the rest of the field. But changing DUST from Chess into Checkers is NOT the solution ! If anything, this idea dumbs down the tactical side of the gameplay, taking much of the overall field strategy elements ala Command and Conquer out in favor of the remaining low-denominator squad interplay ala SOCOM campaign mission aspects. The game becomes very 2D like this, and fundamentally less engaging, appealing or interesting. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 22:56:00 - [7] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: S-PANZA wrote: S-PANZA wrote: Solution to BW restrictions: - Run speed scout and drop some drop uplinks + RE's. - Switch to either logi slayer, logi AV, logi logi or logi sniper. - Shelf all other suits until next tree shake-up. Another option is to substitute the first step (speed scout making drops) to logi spamming equipment....then switching to slayer logi suits. FTFY Uhh... are you guys on crack? Have fun running a good old fashioned "slayer logi" with the current state of logi suits compared to the rest. No, I'm not on crack. I am High On Frustration with this proposal however, and if my lack of running full proto in pubs OR running slayerlogi TGS builds has taught me anything in the last 2 years its that IF I do, I can be reeeaal good at it. This **** nerfs us even more dude. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:00:00 - [8] - Quote There are other, better, solutions for the problems this is meant to address. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:17:00 - [9] - Quote Jadd Hatchen wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: 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. First good on you guys for finally coming up with a solution that actually fixes a problem correctly!!! Yay! But my main point is: Ok so you finally admit it! You f'ed up when you left scouts OP with the currently layout!!!! Honesltly scouts are able to do TOO MUCH. I can understand versatility, but the more versatility should come at a COST! As they are now, a scout can fit to be a decent logi, a decent assault, a more than decent scout, etc. They have too many role-specific slots!!! Hell you removed the sidearm from some logi's to represent the COST of being a logi! But for scouts you ADDED a slot instead? How dumb is that? So the point I'm making is that Scouts should either have one less equipment slot or have no sidearm slot.. You can still fit a sidearm in a light weapon slot, but now you only get one weapon instead of two. Or better yet! Let the players decide which they prefer! On two of the races, (let's say Minmatar and Caldari) you get to have two equipment slots and no sidearm slot. But on the other two races (Amarr and Galente) you get to have the sidearm slot as well as the light weapon slot, but only one equipment slot. The specific races don't matter, but the point is that there is one too many slots on the scout suits as they are now. Please fix it! ^THIS 100k times over! First things first! Fix the broken, then balance the fixed, then add in the new. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:22:00 - [10] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Uhh... are you guys on crack? Have fun running a good old fashioned "slayer logi" with the current state of logi suits compared to the rest. No, I'm not on crack. I am High On Frustration with this proposal however, and if my lack of running full proto in pubs OR running slayerlogi TGS builds has taught me anything in the last 2 years its that IF I do, I can be reeeaal good at it. This **** nerfs us even more dude. But you just said.... [quote=el OPERATOR]the best thing for the group is for the Logi to flip frames into something actually combat-appropriate (since Logis now and by all available proposals are absolutely not and won't be) ??? Ahh, but that flip isn't into a slayerlogi, its into another combat frame. What will happen tho will be that the flip IS into a slayerlogi. Which is NOT how I prefer to spend my time. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.

el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:27:00 - [11] - Quote Jadd Hatchen wrote: RedPencil wrote: Jadd Hatchen wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: 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. First good on you guys for finally coming up with a solution that actually fixes a problem correctly!!! Yay! But my main point is: Ok so you finally admit it! You f'ed up when you left scouts OP with the currently layout!!!! Honesltly scouts are able to do TOO MUCH. I can understand versatility, but the more versatility should come at a COST! As they are now, a scout can fit to be a decent logi, a decent assault, a more than decent scout, etc. They have too many role-specific slots!!! Hell you removed the sidearm from some logi's to represent the COST of being a logi! But for scouts you ADDED a slot instead? How dumb is that? So the point I'm making is that Scouts should either have one less equipment slot or have no sidearm slot.. You can still fit a sidearm in a light weapon slot, but now you only get one weapon instead of two. Or better yet! Let the players decide which they prefer! On two of the races, (let's say Minmatar and Caldari) you get to have two equipment slots and no sidearm slot. But on the other two races (Amarr and Galente) you get to have the sidearm slot as well as the light weapon slot, but only one equipment slot. The specific races don't matter, but the point is that there is one too many slots on the scout suits as they are now. Please fix it! Once upon a time, I told CCP Rattati to remove scout's sidearm slot. He reply me with only one word " NO ". Well CCP Rattati I'm calling you out!!! Please explain yourself! Why is it fair for a logistics dropsuit to have no sidearm slot and it's somehow fair for a scout to have the second most equipment slots AND still have the sidearm slot?!? How is this fair by any stretch of game theory and mechanics? I demand you explain you and your teams' logic on this one or forever be shamed and owe me a drink at next year's EVE Vegas event. 8) It isn't fair. But BFD about fair or not fair, IMHO. It isn't balanced. And THAT is a major issue. Unfortunately, its an issue that instead of having just been addressed from the outset instead has been essentially ignored but for the slightest sort of peripheral adjustments at the expense of the greater game and its gameplay as a whole. Which is where the start and stop of my problem with it is. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 504	Posted - 2014.11.20 00:32:00 - [12] - Quote S-PANZA wrote: Scouts having a second EQ slot isnt creating equipment spam. Logi suits fitted for the purpose of spamming equipment are the main source of the spam. No, a playerbase hell-bent on exploiting any possible angle of advantage under the umbrella excuse of "Well, this works so it must be intended so it must be working as intended" is the source of the spam. -Limits could be placed on logi suit entry, THAT would limit spam without turning DUSTs logistical side into PaperBoy514. -Access denial for equipment deployment in certain areas, like say surrounding supply depots, THAT would limit spam without turning DUSTs flexible side into a no returns/refunds/exchanges or warranties scenario. -Equipment deployment caps based on quantities deployed could be used that wouldn't turn DUSTs tactical reinforcement side into a constant shell-game of Robbing Peter to Pay Paul. -Equipment usage timers could be enacted so if those links/hives that got placed out aren't used within an acceptable time-period their internal battery expires and they "pop", neccessitating resupply or placement without penalizing forward-thinking field strategy or current condition flexibility Players are always looking to exploit and take advantage. THAT'S why it should be Mission#1 to ensure existing game elements are balanced in and of themselves BEFORE looking to rewrite fundamentals hoping to achieve balance afterwards. To not just adds opportunity for more imbalance, worse overall gameplay and compounds the difficulty in trying to fix the elements which were flawed in the first place. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 506	Posted - 2014.11.20 00:40:00 - [13] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Any why does the equipment pop if the scout has to switch fits, unless its to a sentinel? Or anyone else to switch fits for that matter? Everyone else can have some equipment out. It's not like the uplink pops every time you switch suits no matter what, or even when you switch to a suit that doesn't have it equipped. It only pops if you run out of BW. Scout drops uplink.... uh oh, I need to use a commando for AV or something... the uplink stays exactly where it is. Unless you want to drop a bunch of triage hives to stand on, in which case you have to think about if you really need all of them at once. Logi drops all 8 pieces of EQ. Switches to different logi suit with scanner/rep tool/needle. EQ stays right where it is. I don't see where the "zero" flexibility comes from. If you pull have to pull a frame whose equipment you're going to use will exceed your BW you'll have wasted your time doing whatever you were doing with the first one. I understand, people have been and are starting to play from the I see you there and raise you here method, I'm talking about playing from the I see you there and raise you not just here to address you there but here and here and here because if you're there then you can't be here or here or here. Good chess is 7 moves ahead, for every piece. Not one move ahead for the last piece that just moved. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 506	Posted - 2014.11.20 00:42:00 - [14] - Quote RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: Jadd Hatchen wrote: So the whole thing in this thread about people swapping roles after deploying equipment got me to thinking... If they make it so that the bandwidth of the currently equipped dropsuit is used for the max deployables possible, how will they actually get that code to work? I mean currently they can't even get the Amarr Logistics Dropsuit bonus to work right so how is CCP gonna get this change to even reliably work?!?!?!?!?! What am I talking about? Right now an Amarr Logi suit is supposed to decrease deployment time on uplinks that they deploy. However if they swap suits, then that bonus goes away. Ok that part works well and good... But if you die and come back in the same suit, your bonuses are STILL GONE!!!!! So what do I foresee happening? I foresee a world with deployable bandwidth where a logi suit deploys its maximum bandwidth of equipment, dies and then comes back into game with the same suit and all of its extra bandwidth of previously deployed goodies ALL GONE!!! Because before CCP can even do anything like this they need to fix the code that is already broken for this aspect of play!!!!! It comes back once you are back on the field, but unfortunately, yes, it's usually not possible for you to take advantage of your own bonus when respawning. No question that's lame, but allegedly a lot of that code got fixed with 1.9 (believe it when we see it, I know).\ The mechanic should be that the bonus disappears (or BW changes) only when you spawn in a new suit, not on death. The assumption, again, for what it's worth, is that this will be the case. Otherwise, yes, chaos and ragequtting will be the order of the day. I agree. And as of two days ago when I last played my Holy Amarr Templar Logi the bonus did not work when I was waiting in the heavens to spawn anew. So, It still looks broke to me. Absolutely it is still broken. Like many things also broken or still long imbalanced. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 506	Posted - 2014.11.20 00:51:00 - [15] - Quote Henchmen21 wrote: So any chances of Logis not dieing when sneezed at if we are to be forced to stay in the expensive suits? Nope, and current stat tweak projections actually have us being even easier to kill. smh Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 506	Posted - 2014.11.20 00:54:00 - [16] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: So I read through the thread and looked at the spreadsheet, and I don't know if I fully understand how this works. REs are set at 4, with a standard scout at 4. If I lay out one RE, does that equal 4 and laying out another would negate the first? Or, because they are both the same piece of EQ, would I be able to lay out the rest? I am fine for not letting scouts infringe on Logi territory, but if I can't lay out 3 std REs on a Std or Adv scout, that is going to be a problem. So go tell the Barbershop to accept a ***** nerf, an actual *** nerf, OR to quit fighting other frames getting actual ***** buffs so we can get some damm balance already AND then see wtf is up. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 506	Posted - 2014.11.20 01:02:00 - [17] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: deezy dabest wrote: We do not have enough people per match to start locking people into set roles. only 16 players means you need to be able to switch to the role that is needed. The only reason I support this is because it somewhat nerfs scout logis but it does not address the issue of scout medics who are keeping everyone alive as well as lighting up the entire enemy team. TL;DR The real issue is at best partially getting fixed so I am done even trying to give input that will never be seen. Fix scout logis before you try to nerf already ** logi suits. @CCP STOP LISTENING TO THE DAMN FORUMS. You can join any channel and there will be plenty of players there to give you issues and ideas. This would go much further as half the forum trolls dont play more than one match a week anyway. How much AUR does a dev token cost? I would be glad to pay for his 2 hours of time to sit in one of our channels with a few selected players to give an informed opinion of ** in this game. lol, asking to buy a Dev so you can pump him full of trash and a biased POV This has already happened, and the proof is in the rampant imbalances allowed to persist continually with little to no improvement that doesn't simultaneously degrade other game elements. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 506	Posted - 2014.11.20 01:07:00 - [18] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: One Eyed King wrote: So I read through the thread and looked at the spreadsheet, and I don't know if I fully understand how this works. REs are set at 4, with a standard scout at 4. If I lay out one RE, does that equal 4 and laying out another would negate the first? Or, because they are both the same piece of EQ, would I be able to lay out the rest? I am fine for not letting scouts infringe on Logi territory, but if I can't lay out 3 std REs on a Std or Adv scout, that is going to be a problem. So go tell the Barbershop to accept a ***** nerf, an actual *** nerf, OR to quit fighting other frames getting actual ***** buffs so we can get some damm balance already AND then see wtf is up. We have suggested MANY nerfs. With particular regard to EQ, I have suggested reducing all carried inventory by 1 and giving Logis the bonus of carrying one more. We have for a very long time advocated for a shift of dampening and other bonuses towards and increased speed penalties for just scouts on armor plates. That cloak range nerf (that I have loathed since it was brought up), was from the Barbershop. I suggest getting your facts straight before making claiming that the Barbershop doesn't ask for balance. In order to get balance, you have to identify the problem and directly fix the problem, not work your way around it while fixing nothing and reducing the viability of scouts roles that are not overperforming. Funny, since all I've seen in any other thread on the topic are your reps claiming any infringement into ewar as rendering scouts "useless", red-herring evidence arguements, and protracted claims to entitlement of elements you were endowed with in 1.8 but never entitled to. EDIT: keep your " roles" but recognize your base stats AS the problem and accept direct fixes there so all this "work around while fixing nothing business" can be done. At least until the next garbo idea gets patched in. But at least infantry can be balanced in the meantime. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 506	Posted - 2014.11.20 01:14:00 - [19] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: One Eyed King wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: One Eyed King wrote: So I read through the thread and looked at the spreadsheet, and I don't know if I fully understand how this works. REs are set at 4, with a standard scout at 4. If I lay out one RE, does that equal 4 and laying out another would negate the first? Or, because they are both the same piece of EQ, would I be able to lay out the rest? I am fine for not letting scouts infringe on Logi territory, but if I can't lay out 3 std REs on a Std or Adv scout, that is going to be a problem. So go tell the Barbershop to accept a ***** nerf, an actual *** nerf, OR to quit fighting other frames getting actual *** buffs so we can get some damm balance already AND then see wtf is up. We have suggested MANY nerfs. With particular regard to EQ, I have suggested reducing all carried inventory by 1 and giving Logis the bonus of carrying one more. We have for a very long time advocated for a shift of dampening and other bonuses towards and increased speed penalties for just scouts on armor plates. That cloak range nerf (that I have loathed since it was brought up), was from the Barbershop. I suggest getting your facts straight before making claiming that the Barbershop doesn't ask for balance. In order to get balance, you have to identify the problem and directly fix the problem, not work your way around it while fixing nothing and reducing the viability of scouts roles that are not overperforming. Funny, since all I've seen in any other thread on the topic are your reps claiming any infringement into ewar as rendering scouts "useless", red-herring evidence arguements, and protracted claims to entitlement of elements you were endowed with in 1.8 but never entitled to. Could you take this to GD or War Room or something. Not really staying on topic here. Meh, it is related and is part of my feedback : FIX broken ** FIRST, then use a different idea for spam because BW as proposed will SUCK. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 515	Posted - 2014.11.20 17:36:00 - [20] - Quote Mister Goo wrote: Equipment spam is the problem that BW is supposed to fix. I think BW is NOT the answer, there are much better ways to do this and the ideas in Cross's Logistics thread are the most solid I have seen. I know that there are no comments by a dev there, but I also know that you have been reading it. OMG, YES! I totally forgot about Cross's equipment revamp yesterday! THAT idea works without unduly penalizing tactical play! wtf, Rat? Why the push for BW, but not even a COMMENT about the other? Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.

el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 515	Posted - 2014.11.20 17:38:00 - [21] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Mister Goo wrote: After reading this thread I have determined 2 things. 1. Scouts think they should have the capability to do everything with the same suit SOLO. They are not OP and should not be forced to change how they play, everybody else should have to. 2. The players who truly play a logi are going to suffer from this, because the tourists who insist on vomiting equipment just for WP. Equipment spam is the problem that BW is supposed to fix. I think BW is NOT the answer, there are much better ways to do this and the ideas in Cross's Logistics thread are the most solid I have seen. I know that there are no comments by a dev there, but I also know that you have been reading it. It is very seldom when running with a squad that I need more than what my suit can put out at one time. But a player should not be punished for using multiple suits to change with the situation. The problem is not that one player uses multiple types of equipment it is that currently they are allowed to put large amounts of the same type of equipment in one place, mostly around supply depots. The fix to this is to put a non deployable radius around equipment of the same types. Granted one problem is repair hives with nano hives needing to be close for repair and resupply not a bad thing. Uplinks are the exceptions if you want good fall back points you need to put out some well placed uplinks. Not 5 in a line out in the open on the way to the objectives. WP whores know what I am talking about. There should not be any need to put hives anywhere near a supply depot. For that matter no equipment should be allowed within a determined radius of said depot. Drop links included, your better off putting them in a better location so your team can spawn in and retake the depot. . The "inactive radius" thing has already been suggested (by me at least 15 times, by others at least as many). Per Rattati it is not something they can do with the game's code. Great idea, but not technically feasible, unfortunately. BS. If they can code in the inability to deploy a vehicle into an open area of a city socket, they can code in the inability to deploy equipment around a supply depot. Period. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 515	Posted - 2014.11.20 18:00:00 - [22] - Quote dreth longbow wrote: Dubya Guy wrote: dreth longbow wrote: I did not read all the responses, so forgive me if this was talked about. This may be and issue, but not as much as other stuff that should be fixed first. The list is to long for this area but you know what I mean. OP why wast time and resources on this? It is not that big of a problem, it has its up and downs and yes the more noobs that come in cause the issues, but as past history has shown it resolves itself. Remember this went away and has just now come back as an irritant. The proposal is flawed. Basically the op wants to punish those who use links/nano especially if the switch suits, but does not do the same for all other classes. Keeping the theme lets prevent those start with proto and then when the team is losing want to switch to basic from doing that or in other words prevent other classes from switching up or down in suits or even between clases like scout then logi then assualt. No one wants that, but some want to limit what equipment I can run or how much I can drop? What about how many times I can call in a lav or tank? Instead of the op's proposal their should be a more elegant solution or one that is not as restrictive. 1) teak software and pay more for band width and problem goes away (this has been discussed in great detail in the past and has the community support by CCP does not want to spend money on buying band width) 2) allow equipment to stay even when switch to other suit and allow oh say (3 eqpmnt slots x2 units each x2 different logi suits =) 12 combo's of links/nanos to be deployed and stay in game through switching suits. 3) do not allow drops to be put within x meters of another drop (average room size/4) 4) nano's should be 1/4 distance because fighters need to resupply Just some thoughts I like most of your thoughts, particularly #3. Unfortunately, John Demonsbane says that the Devs told him that it was not easy to do. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2438711#post2438711 I know, it seems like it could be combined with code from flux grenades, but... Anyway this thread is not about alternatives to Equipment Bandwidth as a means to solve problems. It is about the specifics of Equipment Bandwidth. Equipment Bandwidth is going to happen. It has been determined to be an ingenious idea. We should stay on task and only talk about how much bandwidth different suits will get. I did not know that bandwidth was guaranteed to happen since I rarely look here, I just saw a post about it and was interested in what it was. Just for the record bandwidth as explained in OP seems like a bad and ineloquent "fix" for a small problem when their are so many other issues that would make the game so much better. CCP should prioritize issues based on severity not whims and OP should play more to be able to rate them better! I do not know why this has gotten traction but think about all the other things that ccp should be fixing instead that are easy. The idea has traction because noone except the WP whores and intentional lag inducers like spam AND because the impact of this on Logistics overall is being ignored in favor of input from minority Logis and NON-Logis. There are MANY other options to mitigate or solve the issue and MANY far greater issues needing attention priority but those are being rescheduled to ram this one through instead. Just read the commentary from the scout community (the brokenest suit in the game for what? 10 months running now?) worried about not being able to RE solo tanks and adamantly tweaking the numbers to keep that ability. What part of Recon/Speed Hacks/Assassination= Solo Tank Artist? But they're A-OK with this otherwise because it nerfs everyone else and afterwards keeps them in place, broken and OP. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 515	Posted - 2014.11.20 18:13:00 - [23] - Quote dreth longbow wrote: The time it takes to implement the current solution is more time than it would take to implement a simpler more reasonable solution not fix. 90% of my issue with this. I PC'd last night (Rings, 3 in 2 out) and we had a scout dash in on us at the southern terminal in the city (below the rings themselves) and drop an OB in the street from just behind the null cannon. I know he was there because I could SEE him. The OB wiped me (thats fine, I was in the street) wiped my heavy (he was in cover behind a southmost wall) but the scout did the OB strafe-dance, STRAFED THROUGH THE OB AND LIVED. And then speed-hacked the point. This has been like this for MONTHS, first time I saw it done was easily 6 months ago, in PC, when my group dropped an OB atop a sandcrawler structure and I watched a scout do the OB dance on my passives (I was under the crawler) and LIVE. For MONTHS this has been like this. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 515	Posted - 2014.11.20 18:14:00 - [24] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Mister Goo wrote: Equipment spam is the problem that BW is supposed to fix. I think BW is NOT the answer, there are much better ways to do this and the ideas in Cross's Logistics thread are the most solid I have seen. I know that there are no comments by a dev there, but I also know that you have been reading it. OMG, YES! I totally forgot about Cross's equipment revamp yesterday! THAT idea works without unduly penalizing tactical play! wtf, Rat? Why the push for BW, but not even a COMMENT about the other? Because Cross' logi revamps are compatible with BW changes and BW can be adjusted up or down to allow logis greater play and flexibility without indirectly buffing other suits since BW is a suit-specific stat. With appropriate dialing of the numbers in Cross' idea, BW and its inherent limitations to gameplay outside of equipment are not neccessary. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 515	Posted - 2014.11.20 18:30:00 - [25] - Quote Syeven Reed wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Mister Goo wrote: Equipment spam is the problem that BW is supposed to fix. I think BW is NOT the answer, there are much better ways to do this and the ideas in Cross's Logistics thread are the most solid I have seen. I know that there are no comments by a dev there, but I also know that you have been reading it. OMG, YES! I totally forgot about Cross's equipment revamp yesterday! THAT idea works without unduly penalizing tactical play! wtf, Rat? Why the push for BW, but not even a COMMENT about the other? Because Cross' logi revamps are compatible with BW changes and BW can be adjusted up or down to allow logis greater play and flexibility without indirectly buffing other suits since BW is a suit-specific stat. Exactly, BW is less binary than "let's stop stuff being placed here". wtf does " binary" have to do with it? Except that BW WON'T stop or limit bitches from dropping equipment all over supply depots to initiate lag? Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 519	Posted - 2014.11.20 23:56:00 - [26] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Mister Goo wrote: Equipment spam is the problem that BW is supposed to fix. I think BW is NOT the answer, there are much better ways to do this and the ideas in Cross's Logistics thread are the most solid I have seen. I know that there are no comments by a dev there, but I also know that you have been reading it. OMG, YES! I totally forgot about Cross's equipment revamp yesterday! THAT idea works without unduly penalizing tactical play! wtf, Rat? Why the push for BW, but not even a COMMENT about the other? Because Cross' logi revamps are compatible with BW changes and BW can be adjusted up or down to allow logis greater play and flexibility without indirectly buffing other suits since BW is a suit-specific stat. With appropriate dialing of the numbers in Cross' idea, BW and its inherent limitations to gameplay outside of equipment are not neccessary. That is an odd statement considering Cross is in favor of BW... Having both would be an odd scenario, and having both imposed would be hyper-redundant. Either one seems to fit his idea of an addressing of spam, but that doesn't mean one isn't better than the other when negative side-effects get weighed in. Good to know you're Cross' voice-piece now, he's been having trouble speaking for himself. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 524	Posted - 2014.11.21 00:42:00 - [27] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: With appropriate dialing of the numbers in Cross' idea, BW and its inherent limitations to gameplay outside of equipment are not neccessary. That is an odd statement considering Cross is in favor of BW... Having both would be an odd scenario, and having both imposed would be hyper-redundant. Either one seems to fit his idea of an addressing of spam, but that doesn't mean one isn't better than the other when negative side-effects get weighed in. Good to know you're Cross' voice-piece now, he's been having trouble speaking for himself. shrugs Just a statement of fact. It can be reasonably inferred from his reposting of my explanation of BW that our opinions are similar. However, I am in no way a spokesman for Cross. It's becoming readily apparent that engaging you in any sort of discussion is not worth the effort.... If all you're into is trying to snipe at my comments or opinions then, yeah, don't bother and save yourself getting LOGIc-bombed. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 529	Posted - 2014.11.21 16:07:00 - [28] - Quote Syeven Reed wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Syeven Reed wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Because Cross' logi revamps are compatible with BW changes and BW can be adjusted up or down to allow logis greater play and flexibility without indirectly buffing other suits since BW is a suit-specific stat. Exactly, BW is less binary than "let's stop stuff being placed here". wtf does " binary" have to do with it? Except that BW WON'T stop or limit bitches from dropping equipment all over supply depots to initiate lag? Binary - Yes or No, 1 or 0, True or False. Your right it won't stop them, thats the point. However when they move to a different suit the equipment is going to go poof. THANK YOU, that is my point. That and that for a completely convoluted "solution", which adds multiple layers of complexity botu for balancing and gameplay AND essentially negates productive Logistical gameplay we DON'T solve the problem, completely or absolutely when it could and should be . As well as adding those balance complexity layers ATOP already persistently imbalanced gameplay/game functionality. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 529	Posted - 2014.11.21 18:18:00 - [29] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: lee corwood wrote: ONLY if that different suit has lower BW than the previous, at which point it would 'poof' the EQ that is OVER the new suits BW in the queue order it was laid. There is nothing to stop multiple players from coming together and laying down 1-2 nanohives each to try and initiate this, but that sounds like a lot of effort. Almost no one who drops hives around depots plays dedicated logi. That's a lazy tourist thing that bandwidth is intended to fix. There is nothing broken about forcing people to be smarter about the position and timing of deployables. The fact that you can currently drop eight hives/uplinks in a cluster then swap to an HMG fatty is pretty stupid. If you want to swap to AV and keep equipment? Last I checked, PLC/swarms fit on a logistics suit. Coincidence? I think not. However, building a minefield thats actually going to be worthwhile AND being able to use support deployables with the squad you're with? That'll be gone. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 529	Posted - 2014.11.21 18:19:00 - [30] - Quote lee corwood wrote: Happy Violentime wrote: So I guess once the gal logis have dropped their deployables they'll be swapping out for their quad scanner suit? scanner plus injector and rep tool with a back up nanohive in a pinch, but likely hoarding and never using. EDIT: regardless of race, I don't see the rep tool being given up by any logi, unless they aren't actually a logi Combat Logistics is NOT always centered on the leash. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.

el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 529	Posted - 2014.11.21 18:21:00 - [31] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: 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. That said, I do generally like the idea of bandwidth and the thought process of deriving it from EVE. I think it's also key to remember that in EVE you don't die (i.e. lose ships) nearly on the same scale as Dust. Also, when you die in EVE the drones still stay in space and don't die with you. I think with perhaps some tweaks this system could work in Dust but I'm not sure quite how to implement it at the moment. Why not allow dropsuits to overload their bandwidth at the expense of their Shields? Still can't carry more equipment, but you could field more equipment by diverting power from your shields to the transmitter that keeps the equipment "alive" Maybe every BW point overloaded costs you 10 shield HP, 5 regen/sec and adds 1 sec to your delays? Maybe for the frames that have combat efficient base stats to start with, but for the Logistics class, who don't, that won't help enough. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 529	Posted - 2014.11.21 18:25:00 - [32] - Quote Nirwanda Vaughns wrote: with the changes, seeing as the amount of prox mines dropped is limited could we perhaps have them magnetized in teh same way as AV nades with say a 5 or 10m seek range? it'd make them so much more usefull and mixed with the lower sig radius of a proto one then at least passive scans wont just light them up all time because as it is prox mines are pointless. every tank ont he map can see em from a mile off PEs as a group are LONG overdue for a rewrite, even if it's just a name change from Proximity Explosive to AV Contact Explosive since that's what they actually are, AV explosives that vehicles need to touch to detonate, not be in proximity of. Changing the name to Don't Forget to Pad With REs would be acceptable IMO also. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 532	Posted - 2014.11.21 20:45:00 - [33] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Bluntly this needs to happen. Equipment substitutions and lemming rushes via uplink replace real tactics and a need for thought in DUST. People claim tthat this limits tactical options but the current meta is you spam or you lose. There is no tactical flexibility. There is room for only one tactic. For every advantage on the field you must make a sacrifice. The current equipment rules require players to sacrifice nothing. Bandwidth will force a meta change. In my opinion that alone is more than compensation for every drawback. Well, yeah, but thats largely because you in your regularly stated gameplay style (Heavy, some scout, some AV, maybe a tank iirc) don't actually perform much of an aspect in the role aside from benefitting from the support you receive. For us over here who do the regular daily work of Logistics (and hate the frikin spamming whores as much as anyone else) and do see the downsides to this understand the gameplay it will create. Blobbing. Lots of it. Then, more QQing about Heavy/Logi blobbing. Then followthrough nerfs on Logis, Heavies, blobbing and blobbing gameplay. While scouts run off into the night imbalanced as ever. Blobbing has a place in gameplay here. But it shouldn't be the veritable only option of gameplay for the gimpiest class with the highest amount of investment both in SP and ISK. And it really shouldn't be the predominant gameplay no matter how cursory a nod it is to TEAMWORK. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 532	Posted - 2014.11.21 20:53:00 - [34] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: Jadd Hatchen wrote: Stop this... Stop saying that scouts main role in life is to be anti-vehicle... it takes taht role away from the heavies and the assaults and the logis who are supposed to be doing this stuff. Second no tank should be a solo-able thing!!! Why do you all insist that the lightest dropsuit class in the game should be able to destroy the most heavy vehicle inthe game, BY ITSELF? This makes no logical sense whatsoever. That's like trying to claim that a frigate should have enough guns and firepower to solo kill a dreadnaught in EVE... It's not gonna happen. Third, you don't just have freaking REs as a scout!!! If you truly wanna go tank hunting in a scout, then ONE RE + proto-AV nades + skilled up PLASMA CANNON or SWARM LAUNCHER still gets you a very decen chance to kill a tank!!! Whining about the RE thing is just plain dumb as you have so many other tools to use in the toolbox!!!! First: Scouts are for CQC AV. Assault/Commando only get close enough to toss an AV grenade. Logi don't usually put RE on thanks. They do AV with Proxies & Remote traps on the road. Sentinels are for long range AV. Second: In WWII many people soloed Tanks. They would dig a shallow trench narrower than the tank tread and lay in it holding a magnetic tank mine on their chest. When the tank rolled over them they would reach up and place the mine on the belly of the tank. Then the guy would have to prey the tank kept going as you don't want to be under a tank mine when it blows up. Third: It is not so much that no tank should be solo-able, as no tank should be solo-able with only one weapon. To solo a Tank a Scout has to use Remote Explosives, AV Grenades, and a Swarm Launcher or Plasma Cannon. Without the Remote Explosives there chances of getting a kill without help are very low. Keep in mind that to use Remote Explosives a Scout has to get close enough to the Tank to risk getting run over, or squished against a wall. Sorry Fox, and I hate to disagree with you on fundamentals since I recognize you as representing one of DUSTs few actual educational institutions but scouts are not "for" CQC AV. They are "for" Recon, Advance Insertion and Flanking manuevers. Scouts, by the grace of the lopsided portfolio of base stats they were granted in 1.8 just happen to be currently the best out of the box base equipped suit to do CQC AV by RE. The imbalance in that is verifiable by their ability to do both CQC AV by RE AND CQC AV by swarm or PLC and AV nade WITH THE SAME SUIT FITTING. Simultaneous. Yes, I can AV from my Logi with a swarm/plc and nade or PE's OR I can speed+damp tank and run in REs. But its TWO seperate suits, two different fits. Because Logi base stats suck, and scout base stats are imbalanced. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 532	Posted - 2014.11.21 21:20:00 - [35] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: No dude. Heavies will eat a nerf before they touch logis after this. I think that's the misunderstanding. You can't touch logis much anymore given their fragility and weakness in combat. If anything bandwidth allows CCP wiggle room to boost a lot of logi aspects and it might come to pass that logis join commando suits as the kings of regen if that change happens. There's a lot of assumption going on here. Finally my gameplay doesn't involve SOME AV. I spend more time running AV than anything else. Everything else is a sideline. lol, I know you've been in our "buffing" thread and there ain't nuthin' in there, proposed or accepted, that's going to take the venom out of what BW is going to do us. We should have worthwhile regen abilities already (not this 3 hp bs) and don't. And by all projections won't. All other projected or accepted stats are the same, terribly gimped, right down the list- profile, precision, speed, HP, weapons- all of it. Thats not an assumption, thats whats on the table. I understand we can only theorize which cards are left in the deck, but based whats out already we know which ones aren't. And of what could be left, BW limits kills what the class could do. Kill SPAM. Kill it dead, to borrow a phrase, by fire. But don't kill DUSTs Tactical Logistics side with it! There are other ways. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 532	Posted - 2014.11.21 21:21:00 - [36] - Quote And AV as a primary forte is an admirable, noble and worthwhile cause, but recognize its a narrow discipline. Combat Logistics has way more moving parts. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 536	Posted - 2014.11.21 23:12:00 - [37] - Quote Yonkou Ifrit wrote: Maybe is time to leave the game, with this changes play this game is like kill myself, CCP you going to loose a lot of people with this changes. Maaan, I am NOT ready to go that far. YET. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 543	Posted - 2014.11.22 21:01:00 - [38] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Why not allow dropsuits to overload their bandwidth at the expense of their Shields? Still can't carry more equipment, but you could field more equipment by diverting power from your shields to the transmitter that keeps the equipment "alive" Maybe every BW point overloaded costs you 10 shield HP, 5 regen/sec and adds 1 sec to your delays? Maybe for the frames that have combat efficient base stats to start with, but for the Logistics class, who don't, that won't help enough. IDK how I missed this. What won't this help and why isn't it enough for logi? Logi don't have the combat stats to do the trade off, though they shouldn't need to do the trade off. If people start running in coordinated squads (which is really what should be encouraged), the logi won't need to support more BW than he can carry. I don't really understand your problem with the idea. The idea (yours) as proposed saps HP from suits already gimped HP side, with no equitable buffs to ewar, movement or weapons use. TLDR: We're already sitting ducks largely, with little to no offensive or defensive capabilities and to equip BW mods will inhibit our ability to make our already meager for expected conditions base stats better even more limited. BW will be of critical concern especially for Logis since ALL of our gameactions within our "maximized" discipline (support) will be constantly under the throttling of BW limits, as the BW idea as proposed stands. Except the ones who live inside the rears of heavies. Those guys dgaf. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 543	Posted - 2014.11.22 21:38:00 - [39] - Quote SO, new idea. I am already a declared fan of Cross' proposed equipment revamp, the one Shayz is talking about, I see it reinforcing Logistics (rightfully) as THE equipment use role and while it will have some adverse effects on certain playstyles it doesn't outright nullify others the way BW does. I am against BW in its entirety, because at it's core it address SPAM (very worthwhile endeavour) but as a collateral cost it also completely eliminates certain Combat Logistics gameplay (which I oppose). SO, since SPAM is the problem AND evidently switching usage of a Logi suit is the method, why not institute some code that tracks the SPAMming actions themselves and once the algorithm recognizes the spammer it a) kicks their ass out of the match completely b) insta-pops ALL equipment they've deployed c) deducts fully from their wallet all associated suit and fitting costs including the frame they were attampting to switch into and d) ALSO calculates up to that point in the match how many SP they would have received and deducts it from their current available SP pool! If their current available is 0 or less than what they would have gotten then they go negative until they generate proper WP to balance the deficit. SO, we already know CCP is more than capable to track player action vs. game result (FW friendlyfire negative points, vehicle driving and acceleration cues moving vehicles around etc.) and script appropriate reponses for the cues. Script a piece of code that when it sees [drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-SWITCH OR SUICIDE-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-SWITCH] all in one particular area it frikin' kicks that ass to the curb and leaves a nice fat CCP bootprint on it. CCP Glinda, now that she's no longer in denial about equipment spamming and the inherent lag it produces, can track and calculate roughly how much equipment it takes, set a worthwhile time limit to the "drop drop drop" element and quantify the algorithm/coding so it can't be broken by [drop-drop-drop-drop-(x action, say squatting down or firing a weapon)-SWITCH-drop-drop...] but still allows for active LOGISTICS which can be very much drop-drop-drop sometimes. Playtesting would be required. Analytics on existing and predicted Logistics use play metrics would be required. Coding would be required. BUT, this is the **** being done anyway to institute BW already and if composed correctly PENALIZES SPAMMERS without victimizing gameplayers. I'm all for growth, balancing and improvement and neccessary changes, especially those that cut down or eliminate exploitation. I'm not for the monthly Calvin and Hobbes comicstrip "New Rule!" method of addressing issues. btw, I am at work again (if I'm going to spend time doing game design, I'm getting paid dude) so if it takes me a bit to respond to responses that's what's up. douses self in gasoline Flame On! Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 543	Posted - 2014.11.22 22:22:00 - [40] - Quote How much trial and error is involved in ANY aspect of game design? That it's needed (though worthwhile metrics analytics reduces it significantly) isn't justification for immediate proposal dismissal. And, done properly which is completely within CCP devteam/codeing capability, what other issues does it create? And for whom, exactly? Logis? We're already getting the screwjob-hammer under BW as it is. I for one will be way more tolerant of a reasonable time period of "working out the kinks" on something like this since once those kinks are gone, the SPAM problem is handled AND legit gameplay overall isn't affected. Unlike BW, which will require the same trial-and-error-kink-fixing and once it's done, completely negates certain worthwhile gameplay. EDIT: LOL, Hell, under BW EVERYBODY is getting the screwjob-hammer. All fits, all frames, all styles. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.

el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 543	Posted - 2014.11.22 22:29:00 - [41] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: How much trial and error is involved in ANY aspect of game design? That it's needed (though worthwhile metrics analytics reduces it significantly) isn't justification for immediate proposal dismissal. And, done properly which is completely within CCP devteam/codeing capability, what other issues does it create? And for whom, exactly? Logis? We're already getting the screwjob-hammer under BW as it is. I for one will be way more tolerant of a reasonable time period of "working out the kinks" on something like this since once those kinks are gone, the SPAM problem is handled AND legit gameplay overall isn't affected. Unlike BW, which will require the same trial-and-error-kink-fixing and once it's done, completely negates certain worthwhile gameplay. Which worthwhile gameplay, specifically, are you speaking of? Position creation and reinforcement concurrent with active squad supply and replenishment, both for Anti-Infantry and Anti-Vehicle contexts. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 543	Posted - 2014.11.22 22:48:00 - [42] - Quote Okay, this is part of a reponse to more or less the same question I answered last night. Like I said before, I'm at work so cant compose a whole new explanation but this will help. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=181517&find=unread Don't judge, it's not my thread and I entered to respond to some responses in it and a convo grew from there. el OPERATOR wrote: I will add a 4th too, about Logistics play. There is a rampant school of thought that Logis belong anchored to heavies keeping beams on them, feeding them ammo and when they die, if they ask, reviving them. I do not attend this school. I am very effective at its techniques, top-caliber PC proven against PC teams NO ONE wanted to challenge, but do not come from that school. I am an understudy of Sun Tzu's School of Upholstery. Specifically a student and practitioner of "Holding Down the Pillow". Here, in DUST, that means that while yes, I am absolutley committed to supporting my corpmate fatties and everyone else in my squad and team, I also am constantly engaged in Logistically ensuring that squad and team can keep control of the areas we want. Sometimes that does mean leaving my heavies with some hives to keep them warm, and trotting off to plant a minefield so tanks don't just barrell right in on us or another squad, setting a link/hive set for another group to spawn etc. This sort of thing is Team Support facilitated by Map Control through Tactical Combat Logistics work . It isn't easy, or a huge WP farm which is why not too many people do it. And the particulars of it change every match, depending on what sorts of opposition we face. And as the enemies adapt to overcome, I adapt to overcome. This methodology is why I am one of the few people rarely trapped behind a redline, and when the random skirm I'm in has my blueberries trapped I can get them out (sometimes. It is warfare after all, and there's little accounting for classic lack of wherewithal, mine or the blues) This methodology, while as adaptable as I am and am willing to be, will be seriously negatively impacted by BW limitations. That seriously negatively impacts what drew me HARD to this game in the first place, the Field Strategy aspect and the available tools to execute. I'm all for limiting SPAM, I hate to limit playstyle too, yes, admittedly, especially, part of mine . EDITS complete Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 543	Posted - 2014.11.22 23:25:00 - [43] - Quote There's no place like Logic , John, so yeah, CCP Glinda's going on tour. And to paraphrase someone, somewhere, just dismissing an idea outright without saying why or showing how it's otherwise unreasonable or unworkable really just makes the dissmisser appear....dumb or something.... Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 543	Posted - 2014.11.23 00:15:00 - [44] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Why not allow dropsuits to overload their bandwidth at the expense of their Shields? Still can't carry more equipment, but you could field more equipment by diverting power from your shields to the transmitter that keeps the equipment "alive" Maybe every BW point overloaded costs you 10 shield HP, 5 regen/sec and adds 1 sec to your delays? Maybe for the frames that have combat efficient base stats to start with, but for the Logistics class, who don't, that won't help enough. IDK how I missed this. What won't this help and why isn't it enough for logi? Logi don't have the combat stats to do the trade off, though they shouldn't need to do the trade off. If people start running in coordinated squads (which is really what should be encouraged), the logi won't need to support more BW than he can carry. I don't really understand your problem with the idea. The idea (yours) as proposed saps HP from suits already gimped HP side, with no equitable buffs to ewar, movement or weapons use. TLDR: We're already sitting ducks largely, with little to no offensive or defensive capabilities and to equip BW mods will inhibit our ability to make our already meager for expected conditions base stats better even more limited. BW will be of critical concern especially for Logis since ALL of our gameactions within our "maximized" discipline (support) will be constantly under the throttling of BW limits, as the BW idea as proposed stands. Except the ones who live inside the rears of heavies. Those guys dgaf. So even though I specifically state that "Logis shouldn't need to do the trade off" you're still saying that they should? I mean, really? Your opposition to this makes me think that you're an equipment spammer yourself. The idea I proposed is a workaround for non-Logis to have the option to field more equipment at the expense of tank, it isn't intended to be something to allow Logis to uberspam equipment. Those that do choose to make that decision, well, they can suffer with the abysmal tank then. I'm saying that to facilitate actual Combat Logistics we will. And no, I'm not a spammer. I'm a fully invested, 100% DS Upgrades fully protoed in 3 of the 4 Logistics suits, with my 4th not far off, PC vetted, open-beta vet LOGI. A Logi who understands Strategically what it takes to take, hold and reinforce the MAP, not just feed ammo and lash on a heavy. My tank is abysmal (like most Logis) already especially my fits for PC (usually in the 4-500 total hp range. Which is where BW extension as a module doesn't sit well with me. You know who would like that? The spammer looking to spam, switch, and never switch back. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 543	Posted - 2014.11.23 02:16:00 - [45] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: I'm saying that to facilitate actual Combat Logistics we will. And no, I'm not a spammer. I'm a fully invested, 100% DS Upgrades fully protoed in 3 of the 4 Logistics suits, with my 4th not far off, PC vetted, open-beta vet LOGI. A Logi who understands Strategically what it takes to take, hold and reinforce the MAP, not just feed ammo and lash on a heavy. My tank is abysmal (like most Logis) already especially my fits for PC (usually in the 4-500 total hp range. Which is where BW extension as a module doesn't sit well with me. You know who would like that? The spammer looking to spam, switch, and never switch back. Alright so you're superlogi? Is that what you're saying? You want the ability to OMA all of your teams logi abilities? I've been a logi since my day one (Mordus), I know what it takes to support my squad and what you're describing is not that. You're describing someone who wants to be superlogi, responsible for all of the equipment for your entire team. Where did I say it would be a module? I never said that, I was proposing that it be possible to trade tank for added bandwidth. The idea as proposed would allow for someone to swap for a spawn to another dropsuit while allowing their equipment to remain (so it didn't hobble their team). Also, I'm curious, did you really take Dropsuit Upgrades to 5? What you described was a module, one for the other. I guess it could be an always on passive thing but with the lowering of HP I don't think I was unreasonable in concluding you were proposing a module. Its not about superlogi, its about specific suit bonuses being tied to specific equipment types so to get full usage of all available tools as conditions dictate. I use all the items across all the fits but in those times and places where the best possible is really what's needed I actually have those to draw from as well. Yes, Dropsuit Upgrades skilltree 100%. I don't alt, or use a training character. Not for forums either. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 562	Posted - 2014.11.26 23:32:00 - [46] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: NextDark Knight wrote: I just think this entire idea takes away freedom for a player so it can nicely fit into some predefined idea that some one else ahs on how the battles should unfold. Unfortunately easily exploitive behavior eradication and overall game balance needs to take precedence. On the less objective note, I think the whole "Drop equipment and swap suits" Bypasses one of the wewaknesses of a non-logi suit and diminishes the value of said logistics in the field. I firmly believe that that kind of play hurts the dedicated logistics role more than it helps. No one is arguing against exploitative behavior eradication. Your logic on swapping suits to bypass weaknesses tho is applicable to all suit swaps and many in-game actions such as Heavies using LAVs to bypass their mobility weaknesses. Snipers being at long ranges to bypass their short range weaknesses. Scouts being in close ranges to bypass their long range weaknesses etc. Do those player actions also diminish their relative field values? If no OR if yes then why are those acceptable but on the part of logis its a major issue requiring massive dev and coder rewriting of underlying gameplay fundamentals? Especially in light of the fact that the rewriting is intended to stop spammers and the logi switch limitations are a collateral effect? Especially since other methods could be applied that would have the desired effect of limiting the spam without gimping the gameplay? Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.

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.