DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] HP Modules and Strafe Speed

Vrain Matari wrote:

This discussion is honestly reminding me of the multi-thread multi-page battles we had back in the Mordu's forums.

I think one of the punchlines from those bone-crushing forum battles was realistic physics is nice but it messes with what many peeps expect from an FPS. Personally i love torque and rotational inertia, but that kind of realism sucks for kb/m players. It's not a matter of right or wrong it's a question of what do we want the game to be?

Right at the core of that question lies strafing/bunnyhopping and gungame. Some need it to make the game have any meaning at all as a competitive shooter, some despise it as unrealistic and ridiculous. It's a fundamental culture clash that can't be resolved to everyones' satisfaction.

But strafing/gungame does require genuine player skill. Anybody who can't admit this is in deep denial. DUST, because it is designed as an asymmetric shooter with passive skills and tiered gear, only serves to further exacerbate the culture clash between these groups.

Forget the lore and rationalizations. Rattai is proposing a tradeoff: more ehp means less strafe, end of story.

Is this acceptable?

For me the answer is yes, so long as the effect isn't too big.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 646	Posted - 2014.11.19 16:58:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: P.S. Medium speeds may get shaken up in light of the Assault HP boost , Logistics may get a speed boost, Commandos as well, Assault speed reduction, all very small. Okay first you state the issue and then you come up with a good plan to fix the issue and they you CREATE A LOOPHOLE THAT NULLIFIES YOUR FIX?????!!!! Seriously if you apply it to only heavies and all mediums except for logistics dropsuits, then guess what players will do? Oh they will return to the days of the logi-slayers! Of course! If you make this change,then make it apply game-wide to all suits. Making exceptions is what breaks the game balance. If it is mass based as you say, then that implies it should be a defining part of the physics in your game and thus Scotty would shame you for trying to break those laws! Shame on you CCP!!!
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 646	Posted - 2014.11.19 22:46:00 - [2] - Quote Piercing Serenity wrote: I am always surprised when I read post like this - one that reflects so little reading comprehension that I am truly baffled. Here is the current EHP layout by class, the combination of armor and shield strength, from greatest to least: Sentinel Commando Assault Logistics Scout Here is the actual speed layout by class, from greatest to least: Scout Assault Logistics Commando Sentinel As you can see, the position of the logistics class doesn't make sense. It has less EHP than an assault, yet it is slower than the assault. If a mass based system were to be implemented, it would require that logistics become faster than they currently are, and that assaults become slower than they currently. This would yield the following ranking of speed <--> EHP, where 1 is high speed and 5 is high EHP Scout Logistics Assault Commando Sentinel TL:DR - Speed changes would be required for the mass based system to make sense with the current EHP values of the suits as they are. We won't be returning to Slayer logis if they get a little faster. What it will likely mean is that logis will be able to rep more classes than just a heavy because they can keep up. While you lay our your case very plainly, you have also plainly missed your target... I agree that the speed vs tank position of the logi and assault are somewhat screwy. However the fix for that should NOT be due to an exception to physics in the game mechanics but instead by tweaking the base speed of the Logistics suit or the the assault suit. Duh!
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 646	Posted - 2014.11.19 23:00:00 - [3] - Quote Ok, so I've been reading through all the arguments for this thread and I've come to the conclusion that CCP's original idea for fixing strafing will not work unless something is also done about shield penalties... Meaning the following: !) For BOTH armor plates and shields extenders, they should be changed to a percentage system so that they become more tailored to the dropsuit they are being fitted on. This way "brick tanking" things that should be releatively lower EHP will not happen. 2) Imposing a movement penalty (ie. speed/strafe/mass) is good for armor plates and makes sense, however it does NOT make sense for shields. 3) For shield extenders, there should be one or possibly two drawbacks (and NOT have the recharge delay as one of them)... First they should affect the signature of the dropsuit so that they are almost one class size larger for detection purposes (light goes to medium, medium to heavy, heavy to LAV, LAV to HAV, HAV... welll no one hides those). Second it should increase the HITBOX of the dropsuit such that they are easier to HIT by players. These two changes would effectively mimic the drawback of shield extenders in EVE for spaceships. In EVE, adding armor plates adds mass, greater mass reduces top speed, acceration, and agility (turning/alignment time). In EVE, adding shield extenders makes the ship's signature radius bloom to a larger size and thus guns that would normally not be able to track and hit the smaller ships are subsequently able to do so. This sort of change would be a BETTER and more comprehensive FIX for the situation that has caused this line of discussion.
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 658	Posted - 2014.11.20 16:00:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: In DUST, not EVE, why would shield power generators not have weight/mass, even though the shield, being energy, would be weightless? The idea would be to normalize the strafe penalty on HP added. Why would that be unfair? With Extenders granting lower HP than Plates, obviously we would be talking about way lower penalties. Dual brick tanking should, however, be extremely slowing. Someone said, just make them all strafe slower, but that "is" punishing everyone for the sins of the few. I don't think you are getting it Rattati... The real issue is that small fast scouts are brick tanking... But that wouldn't be an issue if you could hit the freakishly fast buggers at close ranges, but you cant for two reasons... 1 - the mechanical interface of the game (the PS3 controller) is not designed to whip around in an instant like a person could in real life and still maintain fine aiming control in the process. This is something completely outside of your control so you cannot do much about it... 2 - the HITBOX of scouts is too freaking small!!!! That's ok if they have equivalently smaller HP totals, but when someone brick tanks that same freakishly fast and now freakishly small target's hitbox, then the combination of the three things together compounds the errors to create a broken situation. As with everything, difficult errors come not from one source but multiple sources that combine in one instance to cause the issue. So realizing that the issue you are trying to fix here is really only centered around a FEW being bad (you said so above), then stop trying to create a mechanic that covers all and instead address the issue with the FEW. In this case the easiest fix is to fix the HITBOX of the scouts. The next easiest fix is to nerf the speed of the scouts... not a fan of this one as scouts are meant to be fast. Another possible fix is to make tanking mods based on a percentage of the dropsuit they are fitted to... Thus stacking extenders on a scout has diminishing returns, but doing so on a heavy has greater effects as it should. Another possible fix is to make armor plates cost agility/speed/strafe speed and shield extenders cause the HITBOX to increase, but this may be difficult to code variable hitbox sizes. Another very heavy-handed method would be to just put a limit to tanking mods on specific dropsuits. People won't like this and it's counter to the emergent gameplay aspect of the game. And yes you could make both armor and shield tanking cause a speed penalty, however that is counter to currently understood mechanics of how the various factions develop their equipment as well as a serious change to the META of the gameplay.
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 660	Posted - 2014.11.20 16:11:00 - [5] - Quote Kensai Dragon wrote: Shields should carry some kind of balancing penalty, not sure it should be speed though. The increased sig radius in eve, is that the equivalent to hit box or profile in Dust? It's more equivalent to hitbox because sig affects both the ability to track and hit a target as well and increasing the amount of effective damage that target takes when it does get hit.
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 660	Posted - 2014.11.20 16:15:00 - [6] - Quote Meeko Fent wrote: Can we stop applying EVELogic to DUST? Please? I'm sure the Army's strategy and gear it uses is different in use and philosophy then The navy. Infantry troops and tanks=/= Battleships. It's not an army versus navy thing (and besides which for budget reasons they are all "combined arms" anyways now so they utilize the same resources in many cases). It's about staying with the lore of the game so that players will know that when they choose to be an Amarr toon, then they know that they will be using lasers and armor as opposed to using random things that have no immediate sense to them.
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 660	Posted - 2014.11.20 16:47:00 - [7] - Quote Vrain Matari wrote: This discussion is honestly reminding me of the multi-thread multi-page battles we had back in the Mordu's forums. I think one of the punchlines from those bone-crushing forum battles was realistic physics is nice but it messes with what many peeps expect from an FPS. Personally i love torque and rotational inertia, but that kind of realism sucks for kb/m players. It's not a matter of right or wrong it's a question of what do we want the game to be? Right at the core of that question lies strafing/bunnyhopping and gungame. Some need it to make the game have any meaning at all as a competitive shooter, some despise it as unrealistic and ridiculous. It's a fundamental culture clash that can't be resolved to everyones' satisfaction. But strafing/gungame does require genuine player skill. Anybody who can't admit this is in deep denial. DUST, because it is designed as an asymmetric shooter with passive skills and tiered gear, only serves to further exacerbate the culture clash between these groups. Forget the lore and rationalizations. Rattai is proposing a tradeoff: more ehp means less strafe, end of story. Is this acceptable? For me the answer is yes, so long as the effect isn't too big. And for me the answer is only a partial yes and only if the other half is implemented too... That being that armor has the nerf to strafe effect as proposed, but shields should instead increase ewar sig or increases hitbox size or both. Why? Why have any difference between shields and armor at all? Why not just remove shields altogether and just tell everyone that if you want more HP you use armor only? Because there is supposed to be a difference in style is why!!! This is not BF3 or CoD etc. This is DUST514 where you give different tools to the players that have different effects and let the players decide how they wish to use them. If you make both shields and armor the same penalties then what's the point? No real choice anymore. So you make armor give the speed/strafe penalties and make shields have some OTHER DIFFERENT penalty and this gives the player a choice in which way they want to used it. The secondary effect is that if there are DIFFERENT penalties for doing shield and armor tanking, then it gets rid of the DUAL TANK PHILOSOPHY that DUST514 somehow has... Because if armor reduces speed/strafe and shields makes your sig bloom, then you realize that doing both only incurs both drawbacks and is inefficient! Oh look, we kill two birds with one stone! We remove brick tanking AND make it less likely to dual tank in one fix!!!! Seriously, the reason we keep quoting EVE solutions for similar problems in this game is because EVE has 10+ years of developmental experience over what DUST 514 has. EVE has already figured out a lot of the game science behind the why's and wherefore's of this stuff. So why reinvent the wheel? Are you reading this CCP RATTATAI? I hope you are, because THIS^^^^^ is the reason why applying the same drawback to two different systems is BAD for this game.
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 661	Posted - 2014.11.20 17:22:00 - [8] - Quote So just to sum up the reasons why doing this change to BOTH armor and shields is bad... 1 - If you give both armor and shields the same penalty, you take choices and options for emergent gamplay away from the players. 2 - If you give both armor and shields the same penalty, then you make dual tanking more viable as an option. 3 - Why have a difference between shields and armor to begin with? Why not combine them and make them the same then? 4 - Making them the same takes away some of the "flavor" or differences in the different factions... again, why have different factions if they are the same? 5 - It doesn't address the real problem which is that scouts have a combination of small hitbox with faster speeds and can still HP tank on top of that. Combine that with the failures in lag/latency/hit-detection in this game as well as the limitations of a PS3 controller and you created the "perfect storm" of OP'ness that has created this issue. Fix ideas: 1 - Change the hitbox on scouts. 2 - Implement speed/strafe penaltyfor armor tank mods, but at the same time implement EWAR/hitbox penalty for shield tank mods. 3 - Reduce racial base speeds for suits to effectively nerf this issue... again until the next time it creeps back into the game. 4 - Add in a new mechanic where damage done is reduced the faster you are moving... As in if you stand still and hit your target then you get maximum damage potential, but if you are moving/strafing at high speeds, then your damage gets reduced by up to 50% max when you do score a hit. 5 - Right now people are favoring the EWAR only penalty for shields, but I doubt that alone will fix the issue completely as they will still be able to move super fast in close ranges and dance dance their way to shotgunning heaven. There's probably more, but this is a better start at the issue rather than what you guys are already implementing because I know that at the point you've started these discussions here on the forums, you've already gone through multiple meetings etc back at the offices in Shanghai and have already decided that this is the path you are going to use anyways unless a HGUE issue is found. Well CCP Rattati, this is us the playerbase telling you that there IS a HUGE issue with applying the SAME PENALTY to both armor tanking AND shield tanking.
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 676	Posted - 2014.11.21 16:01:00 - [9] - Quote Jebus McKing wrote: Signature penalty for shield extenders: Noone except scouts would even care because noone but scouts care for EWAR apparently. And this would hit the min scout even harder than the cal scout. Bad proposal. Hitbox size increase penalty for shield extenders: This would either be hardly noticeable or cause massive problems like getting hit even while behind cover etc. Bad proposal. Strafe speed penalty: Poor attempt at ending scout and heavy dominance. More mobility penalties make the game increasingly annoying to play. Have the potential to kill scout class while at the same time having no effect on heavies. Problem with hitting scouts is a hit detection problem, not a strafe speed problem. Bad proposal. What could be done instead: - Finally make scout bonus affect module efficacy instead of base stats. Tanked scouts will have awful EWAR abilities, easy to detect, bad scans. - Buff assaults profile by 5db to give them the chance to hide from scouts with poor EWAR. - Heavy dominance could be reduced by changing other parameters like base HP, HMG DPS, HMG range, rep-tool rep rate, etc. - HP module stacking could be solved by making other modules more effective and actually worth the risk. Your proposed solutions still don't address the ridicules strafing/dancing the revolution fandango style of play that scouts have now. They would still choose to do it and just be crappier at their role of scouting of the rest of the team and thus make them even less of a team player and more of a d-bag player.
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 683	Posted - 2014.11.24 20:14:00 - [10] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: Ripley Riley wrote: HP modules, as in, shield extenders and armor plating? im assuming only for armor plates, as extenders dont have movement penalties extender stacking is also under the scope Can the drawback for Extenders be a larger hit box for shields? Movement penalties don't make sense for Shield Extenders, and the big problem with Caldari Scouts is how small their hit box is, so how about when you extend your shields, it makes them bigger, as in easier to hit? No. The drawback cannot be a bigger hitbox I see your link sir and counter with another: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2473207#post2473207

Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 693	Posted - 2014.12.02 20:49:00 - [11] - Quote Ok, I just realized one more thing that makes this whole speed nerf to hp amount a bad idea... If you have a higher level in Dropsuit Armor Plating Skill, then you get more "efficacy" out of it... Meaning you get more hitpoints out of it. But if you make the speed nerf based on number of hit points, then you are penalizing people for having level 2 or 4 skills versus having level 1, 3, or 5. The higher your skill the slower you move? How does that make sense? Hell in EVE the higher your skill the more the penalty is reduced... Maybe add a skill to reduce Armor penalties and and another skill to reduce shield penalties. Instead just do something more simple like a suit based reduction in speed for the armor... something like BASIC PLATES ADVANCED PLATES COMPLEX PLATES -1% speed -2% speed -3% speed on Heavy Dropsuits -2% speed -4% speed -6% speed on Medium Dropsuits -3% speed -6% speed -9% speed on Light Dropsuits And I say again that the nerf for shield extenders should be an EWAR penalty.
Jadd Hatchen KILL-EM-QUICK 694	Posted - 2014.12.03 18:49:00 - [12] - Quote Talon Paetznick II wrote: they arent dodging bullets they are simply exceeding the other players ability so track them maybe buff turn speed and you will see a more noticable difference (not for heavys though they have to have at least one achilles heel) No actually you can have someone fire a steady stream of bullets from a assault combat rifle and still have a scout run right through it without getting hit at all if they are fast enough.