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

Cass Caul wrote:

CCP Rattati wrote:

Dear Players,

We are going to add separate strafe penalties to HP modules. We will not be reducing normal speed, nor running speed, only left-right speed, making the "dodging" of bullets more difficult, and Sentinels lack of mobility to become a real vulnerability when stacking eHP.

The calculations will theoretically be based off of relative mass (Scouts) and total mass (Sentinels). Medium Frames will not be affected as much as these two. Basic Frames may end up not having any penalties at all.

This is quite blunt, but it's been a long time coming.

Extenders and Armor Plates are obviously the focus here, and Reactives and Ferroscales may be omitted in the first pass.

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.

The title say ffedback, how is this a discussion at all?

think, as long as aim adhesion on rifles is as strong as it is that this is just a terrible idea.
Increase strafe penalties will really only further to decrease the level of skill in this game.

It's already laughable how easy it is to run around in a C-I Assault, with no modules outside a STD nanohive and kill players in ADV and PRO with my SMG

You might as well just put "stun on hit" and go back to 1.6's Aim Assist because it's effectiveness is the same thing: Aiming is a skill, inhibiting the ability to break out of aim-assisst should only further drop the level of enjoyment from vets as the game moves back to "I saw you first, I win."


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 152	Posted - 2014.11.19 19:08:00 - [1] - Quote Hum... Yeah I think it's a good idea, but I can't understand several things... 1) Ok, I agree with the logi (and commando but that's not the problem) I can understand logi "must be as fast as the assaults" But why nerf the assault's speed ? Do you thing they are OP ? Usually, you only nerf things when they are OP, so are assaults OP ? I think they aren't. So I don't understand the assault speed nerf (even if it's just "a bit") Give to the logi the same speed as the assaults (7.00 for Gal and Cal for example) 2) Straff penality for shield extender What would become the advantage to be a shield tanker compared to be an armor tanker if they have both a straff penality ? Is the objective not to fit any HP mod anymore ? 3) Why shouldn't have the ferro plates a straff speed penality too ? ferro are plates, so it's ON the dropsuit, normaly it would have a straff penality Complex shield extender >< complex ferro plate 66HP >< 75HP 54CPU >< 23 CPU 11PG >< 8PG 7% shield regu penality >< any penality And you're adding x% straff speed penality >< 0 Don't you see a problem ? It would become more easy to tank armor with ferro plates (AND YOU WANNA ADD ARMOR RESISTANCE MODS) than be a shield tanker Because Shield tankers are made to be good straffers if they don't put plate mods I'm gonna take the most normal example : Assaults - nerf the speed - add straff speed penality ====> BIG assault nerf (I think, I always play with the assault's speed, but if you nerf it, assault would be nerfed a lot (my opinion)). Assaults are slayers, slayers like them must have a great speed and straff speed. Think what you wanna think. That's what I think. Welcome to CAMPER 514 The game where you never touch the ground.
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 153	Posted - 2014.11.19 20:11:00 - [2] - Quote Cass Caul wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Dear Players, We are going to add separate strafe penalties to HP modules. We will not be reducing normal speed, nor running speed, only left-right speed, making the "dodging" of bullets more difficult, and Sentinels lack of mobility to become a real vulnerability when stacking eHP. The calculations will theoretically be based off of relative mass (Scouts) and total mass (Sentinels). Medium Frames will not be affected as much as these two. Basic Frames may end up not having any penalties at all. This is quite blunt, but it's been a long time coming. Extenders and Armor Plates are obviously the focus here, and Reactives and Ferroscales may be omitted in the first pass. 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. The title say ffedback, how is this a discussion at all? think, as long as aim adhesion on rifles is as strong as it is that this is just a terrible idea. Increase strafe penalties will really only further to decrease the level of skill in this game. It's already laughable how easy it is to run around in a C-I Assault, with no modules outside a STD nanohive and kill players in ADV and PRO with my SMG You might as well just put "stun on hit" and go back to 1.6's Aim Assist because it's effectiveness is the same thing: Aiming is a skill, inhibiting the ability to break out of aim-assisst should only further drop the level of enjoyment from vets as the game moves back to "I saw you first, I win." +1 Straff is the only chance to win a battle (when the ennemy begins to shoot on you) Decrease it, and lol this game would come back to 1.6 hahaha worst idea ever And so no difference between shield tankers and armor tankers (who use normal armor plate (lol a basic armor plate would become beter than a complex shield extender haha)) What I see ? 1) come back to 1.8 2) It'll be impossible to fight against a heavy with a medium suit. Why ? Become without straff, the OP HMG destroy you in less than 1 sec. CCP logical 3) armor tankers >>>>>>>>>> shield tanks. And, woaw ! Rattati is a gallente. WAIT & SEE Wait & see. Be sad about CCP choices. Or leave this game and be happy !
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 153	Posted - 2014.11.19 20:34:00 - [3] - Quote hfderrtgvcd wrote: This is a bad idea. The only reason shield tanking is viable is because they have higher strafe speeds than armor tanked suits. Armor plates already have a more than sufficient strafe penalty. I'd recommend just reducing heavies and scouts base strafe speeds and not touching any other stats. I'm not the only one, thank you bro CCP logical is very strange... Wait & see.
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 153	Posted - 2014.11.19 20:46:00 - [4] - Quote I just can't stand this choice CCP made the Calscout OP And now CCP wanna nerf all the shield tankers Isn't it just more simple and more logical to nerf the Calscout directly ???????? CCP logical is very strange... Wait & see.
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 156	Posted - 2014.11.19 21:04:00 - [5] - Quote Cavani1EE7 wrote: My fellow Caldari Assaults, Scouts and Sentinels, get your respec ready. I think CCP doesn't like shield tankers. They are good at the moment. So (CCP logical =) NERF IT PLEEEEAAAAAAAAAAASEEEEEE CCP One of the only good point of the shield extender is that it doesn't give any speed penality, and give some would nerf a lot shield extenders... CCP logical is very strange... Wait & see.
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 157	Posted - 2014.11.19 21:10:00 - [6] - Quote Whisperen Sub wrote: TTK is already way to low in a game with auto aim , wall hacks ,bullet magnetism and stupid draw distances and you want to make it worse? Good thing i got a bpo suit when it was cheap. You want to fix the scouts? Do it the same way you fixed the logis remove the light weapon slot and give them two sidearm slots. You want to fix shields? Double shield extender HP bonus and make them increase a suits sig radius or hitbox size. Agreed. But thay aren't any reason to nerf shield extenders... shield extender vs traditionnal armor plate shield has 2x less HP shield extender vs ferro plate shield has less HP shield cost more PG/CPU shield has a shield regen penality Ne need to nerf them CCP logical is very strange... Wait & see.
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 171	Posted - 2014.11.23 20:14:00 - [7] - Quote I've thought about this. My idea : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZwFLbTInQat2sN2RsaMUudAPeLmfNuutgIUkBC800xc/edit#gid=0 Please read it before looking at the sheet 1) I don't speak English very well 2) The numbers are just an idea 3) That's my first google sheet 4) I take the Caldari example because that's the only one I can use haha 5) Tell me what's wrong Thoughts ? :) CCP logical is very strange... Wait & see.