DUST Search - [REQUEST] Balance Design Questions about Vehicles

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[REQUEST] Balance Design Questions about Vehicles

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 734	Posted - 2014.11.27 05:46:00 - [1] - Quote Hey CCP Rattati, First, thanks again for the hard work. It is obviously well appreciated, regardless of how the community takes the changes that are being made. Second, I understand that we are currently in an "Dropsuit Rebuilding" period as evidenced by the volume of dropsuit-centric tweaks planned for the near and not-so-near future. However, while I truly appreciate these changes and look forward to seeing them in game, I think that vehicles have been largely excluded from the same level of balancing effort for quite some time. I firmly believe that vehicles should be the next set of assets to improve on. To this end, I have a few questions about your vision on the roles that vehicles should play on the battlefield. Furthermore, I'd love to hear any ideas you have on how to make vehicle combat more engaging in the future. My questions are the following: What should the main objectives of a LAV/Tank/Dropship/ADS be? Currently, the roles of vehicles heavily overlap with the roles of infantry. Besides for taking objectives, vehicles can do most things that infantry can do with increased efficiency. Although recent changes to the dispersion mechanics of the large blaster turret has assuaged that problem slightly, it seems to be more of a "band-aid" fix to the larger problem - vehicles do not have their own objectives. When I say objectives, I mean some type of battle-critical role that are best done with vehicles. One suggestion that I have - a sentiment that seems to be shared with some others - is to turn tanks into heavy ordinance machines with high damage, low RoF rounds. Personally, I believe that HAVs should have their large turret and hulls heavily balanced around killing other vehicles - so much so in the former that they could not be used effectively to fight infantry. In exchange, small turrets should be heavily balanced around killing infantry - so much so that they are almost non-effective against other large vehicles. In this way I think that vehicles would be have their own objective that could not be done without them (take out enemy vehicles), but could be fitted to help out infantry in their primary goal. This would mirror the roles of infantry itself - primarily used to capture points, but able to be fitted to aid in the destruction of vehicles. What are your thoughts on the matter? What are some of your objectives for improving vehicle combat, in order of importance? It was very helpful when you listed the things that the community could and could not expect from changes to the EWAR system, and allowed us to give better feedback. More importantly, it allowed us to manage expectations. I think that something similar for vehicles would be much appreciated. I have seen your posts on including a lock-on warning for dropships - a change that I predict to be much appreciated - but I would like to know if you have any other thoughts on how to improve the experience. In addition, I would like to know what rank they have on the "Things to do" list for vehicles. Some common suggestions are an improvement to the small turret interface, particularly for dropships and LAVs, as well as some counter-measures or some form of AV deterrence. To the best of your knowledge, will vehicles be balanced around the tools we have or with placeholders for racial parity? I understand that this is a tough question that many would try to hold you to, so you can answer this at your discretion. I would just like to know if changes will be for how vehicles react to current forms of AV, if we should expect to see some return of the old vehicle modules and tanks, or if we can hope for some placeholders for racial parity As always, your response is appreciated. Thanks in advance, and I hope to hear from you soon. Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 735	Posted - 2014.11.27 06:54:00 - [2] - Quote We're thinking alike Rattati... Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 738	Posted - 2014.11.27 16:32:00 - [3] - Quote bump Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1024	Posted - 2014.11.27 16:47:00 - [4] - Quote I too would be interested in the answers to these questions. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 745	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:07:00 - [5] - Quote bumping Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15151	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:24:00 - [6] - Quote Indeed especially regarding the rebalancing of Large Turrets and the propositions to covert them into actually Heavy Variations of existing AV options. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5464	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:51:00 - [7] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Indeed especially regarding the rebalancing of Large Turrets and the propositions to covert them into actually Heavy Variations of existing AV options. IMHO heavy turrets should be more cannon, less big autogun. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15153	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:55:00 - [8] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: Indeed especially regarding the rebalancing of Large Turrets and the propositions to covert them into actually Heavy Variations of existing AV options. IMHO heavy turrets should be more cannon, less big autogun. Certainly more like the Railgun or the 88mm Panzer VI H1 Tiger I always mention but in order to do that infantry would have to accept the potential of >5m Blast Radi on single shot high alpha canon powerful enough to drop smaller vehicles in 1-2 shots. I've even suggested a rebalance from Large Blasters that make them more like Automatic Plasma Cannon....but that's probably what you are referencing....regardless I believe that it is better than .50 Cal Blasters we have now. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Meeko Fent Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 2153	Posted - 2014.11.28 03:02:00 - [9] - Quote I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful. Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc. Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea. Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. I Live for Tears
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15153	Posted - 2014.11.28 03:16:00 - [10] - Quote Meeko Fent wrote: I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful. Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc. Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea. Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...

Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 745	Posted - 2014.11.28 06:25:00 - [11] - Quote Bumping for Dev feedback Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 747	Posted - 2014.11.28 07:01:00 - [12] - Quote Bumping for Dev feedback Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1166	Posted - 2014.11.28 12:07:00 - [13] - Quote Piercing Serenity wrote: Hey CCP Rattati, First, thanks again for the hard work. It is obviously well appreciated, regardless of how the community takes the changes that are being made. Second, I understand that we are currently in an "Dropsuit Rebuilding" period as evidenced by the volume of dropsuit-centric tweaks planned for the near and not-so-near future. However, while I truly appreciate these changes and look forward to seeing them in game, I think that vehicles have been largely excluded from the same level of balancing effort for quite some time. I firmly believe that vehicles should be the next set of assets to improve on. To this end, I have a few questions about your vision on the roles that vehicles should play on the battlefield. Furthermore, I'd love to hear any ideas you have on how to make vehicle combat more engaging in the future. My questions are the following: What should the main objectives of a LAV/Tank/Dropship/ADS be? Currently, the roles of vehicles heavily overlap with the roles of infantry. Besides for taking objectives, vehicles can do most things that infantry can do with increased efficiency. Although recent changes to the dispersion mechanics of the large blaster turret has assuaged that problem slightly, it seems to be more of a "band-aid" fix to the larger problem - vehicles do not have their own objectives. When I say objectives, I mean some type of battle-critical role that are best done with vehicles. One suggestion that I have - a sentiment that seems to be shared with some others - is to turn tanks into heavy ordinance machines with high damage, low RoF rounds. Personally, I believe that HAVs should have their large turret and hulls heavily balanced around killing other vehicles - so much so in the former that they could not be used effectively to fight infantry. In exchange, small turrets should be heavily balanced around killing infantry - so much so that they are almost non-effective against other large vehicles. In this way I think that vehicles would be have their own objective that could not be done without them (take out enemy vehicles), but could be fitted to help out infantry in their primary goal. This would mirror the roles of infantry itself - primarily used to capture points, but able to be fitted to aid in the destruction of vehicles. What are your thoughts on the matter? What are some of your objectives for improving vehicle combat, in order of importance? It was very helpful when you listed the things that the community could and could not expect from changes to the EWAR system, and allowed us to give better feedback. More importantly, it allowed us to manage expectations. I think that something similar for vehicles would be much appreciated. I have seen your posts on including a lock-on warning for dropships - a change that I predict to be much appreciated - but I would like to know if you have any other thoughts on how to improve the experience. In addition, I would like to know what rank they have on the "Things to do" list for vehicles. Some common suggestions are an improvement to the small turret interface, particularly for dropships and LAVs, as well as some counter-measures or some form of AV deterrence. To the best of your knowledge, will vehicles be balanced around the tools we have or with placeholders for racial parity? I understand that this is a tough question that many would try to hold you to, so you can answer this at your discretion. I would just like to know if changes will be for how vehicles react to current forms of AV, if we should expect to see some return of the old vehicle modules and tanks, or if we can hope for some placeholders for racial parity As always, your response is appreciated. Thanks in advance, and I hope to hear from you soon. Well, you got your first wish... Large Turrets are almost useless in killing vehicles. You also got your second wish... small turrets are almost useless in killing HAV's. Chocolate Juice
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1166	Posted - 2014.11.28 12:08:00 - [14] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful. Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc. Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea. Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? Redline railgun Turrets destroying ADS. Chocolate Juice
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15167	Posted - 2014.11.28 12:51:00 - [15] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful. Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc. Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea. Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? Redline railgun Turrets destroying ADS. Indeed. Trouble is ADS cannot destroy them and tanks take too long to do so leaving you with AV units doing that job as the turrets wont target them back. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 753	Posted - 2014.11.28 16:54:00 - [16] - Quote Looking for a response from Rattati or CPM Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1029	Posted - 2014.11.28 21:25:00 - [17] - Quote Would still like to hear from Rattati/Devs about the roles of vehicles too. (I'll help you bump, buddy!) Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 754	Posted - 2014.11.29 01:36:00 - [18] - Quote Still hoping for some feedback. Bump Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 755	Posted - 2014.11.29 17:38:00 - [19] - Quote Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 756	Posted - 2014.11.29 22:19:00 - [20] - Quote Piercing Serenity wrote: Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm

Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1193	Posted - 2014.11.29 22:34:00 - [21] - Quote Piercing Serenity wrote: Piercing Serenity wrote: Chocolate Juice
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1193	Posted - 2014.11.29 22:36:00 - [22] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful. Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc. Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea. Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? Redline railgun Turrets destroying ADS. Indeed. Trouble is ADS cannot destroy them and tanks take too long to do so leaving you with AV units doing that job as the turrets wont target them back. It takes 3 clips from an ADS with XT-1 to destroy a railgun installation. I don't know if CCP know this but it takes a long long long time to shoot off 3 clips (24 rounds) even with python 5. Also, factor this in with how everybody and their mother has proto AV, you have a higher chance of dying before killing this 1 out of the many redline turrets. Chocolate Juice
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 757	Posted - 2014.11.30 04:28:00 - [23] - Quote bump for luck Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 12437	Posted - 2014.11.30 15:16:00 - [24] - Quote Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Kain Spero Goonfeet 3874	Posted - 2014.11.30 15:25:00 - [25] - Quote Any possibility that quick exiting and then reentry will be addressed? Even if slower the LLAV could make certain aspects of current gameplay even worse. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Sylwester Dziewiecki Interregnum. 447	Posted - 2014.11.30 15:34:00 - [26] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) It would be easier to shot them down if they would have independent rotation mechanic for front turret(that is capable to make 360 degree), but you thinking about something that make 30-60 degree, right? CCP Rattati wrote: Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Do we have hull for that or it gone be improvised one? Gallente Speed Scout. EVE side of me: Nosum Hseebnrido

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 12441	Posted - 2014.11.30 15:43:00 - [27] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Any possibility that quick exiting and then reentry will be addressed? Even if slower the LLAV could make certain aspects of current gameplay even worse. Any hope that the repair tools for vehicles could be moved to a turret? The repair functions and the ability to lock on were downright annoying to work with and solo spider tanking really doesn't need to be a thing again. Would love to see a tank that has no large turret but instead 6 seats. I have asked the team to see if we can add a "hold to exit", much like a hacking bar. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Kain Spero Goonfeet 3876	Posted - 2014.11.30 15:59:00 - [28] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Any possibility that quick exiting and then reentry will be addressed? Even if slower the LLAV could make certain aspects of current gameplay even worse. Any hope that the repair tools for vehicles could be moved to a turret? The repair functions and the ability to lock on were downright annoying to work with and solo spider tanking really doesn't need to be a thing again. Would love to see a tank that has no large turret but instead 6 seats. I have asked the team to see if we can add a "hold to exit", much like a hacking bar. If this could be made to vary depending on the vehicle it would be amazing. I think things like dropship passengers hot dropping should still be a thing. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Vyuru Algintal Core Gallente Federation 63	Posted - 2014.11.30 16:03:00 - [29] - Quote I just had a thought. You know how when you go up to a vehicle and enter it, you are automatically in the driver seat? And how you can bounce around between seats on the inside of the vehicle? What if we removed that? What if when you go up to the vehicle from the passenger side, you enter the passenger seat, for a LAV, when approaching the back, you enter the gunner's seat, etc. I'd think that'd really reduce the whole dropsuit hops out of the LAV/HAV, then back in on low health. The only negative aspect I can see to this is that the ADS might be messed up for dropping off uplinks in high narrow places. The pilot might not be able to reenter the pilot's seat of his ADS.
Kain Spero Goonfeet 3876	Posted - 2014.11.30 16:15:00 - [30] - Quote Vyuru, I think that would lead to more annoyance than anything. Like the current vehicle lock which was well intentioned but is actually one of the more frustrating mechanics when you are playing with people you know. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 15300	Posted - 2014.11.30 16:48:00 - [31] - Quote By independent turret rotation for ADS, do you mean we will be able to aim up and down while in first person? Flight Academy coming soon(tm) to my YouTube WoD 514
Joseph Ridgeson WarRavens Capital Punishment. 2815	Posted - 2014.11.30 16:53:00 - [32] - Quote How about a "GTFO!" button? Nothing is worse than when I am trying to fly my ADS and a Stayberry jumps in. If I decide that I want to return my ADS, well, I can't because Mr. Stayberry is still there. Even worse is if I jump out to recall he flies away with it. Maybe a button that gives the player a warning that they will be kicked in 5 seconds, requires the vehicle to not be moving, to be low to or on the ground, and not taking damage? Would make dropping people to their doom impossible but let us deal with Stayberries. "This is B.S! This is B.S! I paid money! Cash money, dollars money, cash money!"
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 758	Posted - 2014.11.30 17:19:00 - [33] - Quote Thank you very much for the reply Rattati Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
Ryme Intrinseca Dead Man's Game RUST415 2129	Posted - 2014.11.30 17:30:00 - [34] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) I don't think I ever heard anyone mention the speed as what made LLAVs OP. It was their indestructibility. With their resistances they could tank more damage than an actual tank could. A slow but tough LAV would be perfect for driveby heavies, one of the absolutely worst things about the game. Also, Marauders would be a bad idea. Don't you remember the beta tankstomp fest? Most of these ideas are not bad at all if done right but I'm worried that they're sandwiched between the ghosts of imbalance past...
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution 8649	Posted - 2014.11.30 17:45:00 - [35] - Quote There needs to be an active module that allows for vehicles to resupply infantry. The Armor/Shield Repair function of the LLAV needs to be redone as well. An Area of Effect would be much more prefered...for both ammo and hp. CCP holds the Caldari's hand so this doesn't happen again.
Lady MDK Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 193	Posted - 2014.11.30 17:53:00 - [36] - Quote Not really a balance question but : Quote: If its possible to create the remaining heavy weapons using existing assets as suggested in another thread with tweaked stats what the possibility of creating a rust red reskin of the caldari Lav, Hav and Dropship and having it under minmatar vehicles. Also a Gold reskin of the gallente vehicles but calling them Amarrian. You would have to insert the skill trees into the game for these races vehicles of course. They could have weapons that are tweaked to act like the respective races cannons too? A minmatar Dropship with HMG Turrets raining bullets over the battlefield. Afterthought: If this is possible why not do it for turret mounts as well? Sorry for semi-Hi-Jack Anyone getting annoyed by reading of the above post should consider the following. I don't care so neither should you :)
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 17890	Posted - 2014.11.30 18:42:00 - [37] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) I don't think I ever heard anyone mention the speed as what made LLAVs OP. It was their indestructibility. With their resistances they could tank more damage than an actual tank could. A slow but tough LAV would be perfect for driveby heavies, one of the absolutely worst things about the game. Also, Marauders would be a bad idea. Don't you remember the beta tankstomp fest? Most of these ideas are not bad at all if done right but I'm worried that they're sandwiched between the ghosts of imbalance past... Speed = Invincibility on the LLAVs in a similar manner to the ADS' speed. As for alot of things we can go many many many different ways. For example It was suggested to make our current tanks act more like MBTs (slower heavier higher hp) while making marauders more like Light Infantry tanks fast and not as hard hitting but clearly designed for taking out other tanks with that speed and hit and run capabilities. While the enforcer goes into the tank destroyer route. There are plenty of suggest so far that I am compiling together and collaborating with other CPM members on; you can join in on one of the conversations here https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2457386#post2457386. CPM 1 Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior \\= Prototype Forge Gun=// Unlocked
killian178 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 39	Posted - 2014.11.30 19:18:00 - [38] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) ALLLLLLLLL of this !!!!!!!!!!!!, and for the love of god, so much yes on the ramming damage, nothing and i mean NOTHING is more irritating than a mlt ship smashing my 3200+ shield tanked python out of the air. Great job on everything so far. Gal and amarr commando, every weapon at adv or above. Don't give a damn bout my kdr, I will kill you.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15222	Posted - 2014.11.30 19:50:00 - [39] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) Fantastic. Sounds wonderful and I hope to be positive to provide you with the best feed back and suggestions I can offer. Certainly now that you are looking at two kinds of Missile Launcher what are the chances of considering a rebalancing/redesign of the large blaster turret so it can compete more effectively on an Anti Tank/ Vehicle level, and dominate less so on an infantry level? I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Helghus Resther Heisen Republic 25	Posted - 2014.11.30 19:52:00 - [40] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) Does that also mean we'll get Minmatar & Amarr vehicles?

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15222	Posted - 2014.11.30 19:58:00 - [41] - Quote Helghus Resther wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) Does that also mean we'll get Minmatar & Amarr vehicles? Unlikely. But depending on Rattati's technical support place holders might not be off the table. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1207	Posted - 2014.11.30 20:05:00 - [42] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? Would have much rather they just remove turrets. They're just noob magnets. #BurnHuola
Powerh8er The Rainbow Effect 561	Posted - 2014.11.30 20:43:00 - [43] - Quote The tank role defeats its own purpose if its only effective against itself.
Lloyd Orfay Kinsho Swords Caldari State 241	Posted - 2014.11.30 21:27:00 - [44] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) I feel like it would be a good idea to gimp installation and vehicle turret's ability to look up, but give small turrets the ability to look almost completely upwards. That's so tanks and installations just don't easily blast dropships out of the sky like they normally do, but it will give tank drivers the ability to defend their self through more team/squad orientation. Bring in players in their tank to protect them from AV and dropships and all. My Isk payout gets lower and lower the more I play, even though I'm getting better. Smells like success.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15229	Posted - 2014.11.30 21:38:00 - [45] - Quote Powerh8er wrote: The tank role defeats its own purpose if its only effective against itself. Not wholly true. I mean one design flaw that has irked me is that of the Large Turret. Why install a weapon that is fundamentally inferior in terms of penetrative and destructive power than a hand held weapon on a mechanised frame? Answer you probably wouldn't as a main gun. The main cannon of a tank is designed to apply massive fire power at range against other armoured vehicles and entrenched positions it was not a weapon deployed against individual infantry men (hence why most tanks have forward and cuppola gunners). I wholeheartedly believe the role of an HAV should follow this archetype and not used as a tool for slaying infantry in droves unless anti infantry small turrets are specifically made use of. That however is not to say a main gun would not instantly kill infantry on a direct hit and cause AoE splash damage against entrenched positions....but the cost of that has to be long reloads and sustained DPS. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15229	Posted - 2014.11.30 21:41:00 - [46] - Quote Lloyd Orfay wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) I feel like it would be a good idea to gimp installation and vehicle turret's ability to look up, but give small turrets the ability to look almost completely upwards. That's so tanks and installations just don't easily blast dropships out of the sky like they normally do, but it will give tank drivers the ability to defend their self through more team/squad orientation. Bring in players in their tank to protect them from AV and dropships and all. Currently we don't though there are some instances I feel the barrel depression should be lessened (though a gunnlogi needs to be able to aim down) most DS kills I score are against low flying DP landing or strafing. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 95	Posted - 2014.12.01 00:26:00 - [47] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Marauders (Mammoth tanks) Did someone say Dual Large Guns on the same Turret? Please Tell me that is what you meant, sooo much want! Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
danthrax martin Immortal Guides Learning Alliance 239	Posted - 2014.12.01 01:01:00 - [48] - Quote Joseph Ridgeson wrote: How about a "GTFO!" button? Nothing is worse than when I am trying to fly my ADS and a Stayberry jumps in. If I decide that I want to return my ADS, well, I can't because Mr. Stayberry is still there. Even worse is if I jump out to recall he flies away with it. Maybe a button that gives the player a warning that they will be kicked in 5 seconds, requires the vehicle to not be moving, to be low to or on the ground, and not taking damage? Would make dropping people to their doom impossible but let us deal with Stayberries. The part I like would be ejecting shock troops when I know I have them in postition for proper deployment. Pro Gal 'mando, Assault, Scout Pro Sentinel ak.0 Suicidal A/V Moron
GENERAL FCF Sentinels of New Eden 50	Posted - 2014.12.01 02:42:00 - [49] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) please tell me you are going to make a hover tank?! This is supposed to be the future so why in space are we still using wheels when we have the ability to cloak and transfer our consciousness immediately at the moment of death? The future ratatti the future ;P
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15258	Posted - 2014.12.01 03:16:00 - [50] - Quote GENERAL FCF wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) please tell me you are going to make a hover tank?! This is supposed to be the future so why in space are we still using wheels when we have the ability to cloak and transfer our consciousness immediately at the moment of death? The future ratatti the future ;P Not as efficient as conventional tracked vehicles and cheaper as well. Armour repair systems could easily deal with something as in-complex, relatively speaking, as a normal drive system.....but if you get into anti gravity systems for 60+ tonne vehicles....... more power is going to be needed...... perhaps this kind of power cannot be generated for the main gun and the drive system at the same time. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...

Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1203	Posted - 2014.12.01 03:31:00 - [51] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) Can you please fix shield collision, the RDV dropping my ADS knocks off over half the shields alone. Chocolate Juice
Powerh8er The Rainbow Effect 561	Posted - 2014.12.01 07:50:00 - [52] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Powerh8er wrote: The tank role defeats its own purpose if its only effective against itself. Not wholly true. I mean one design flaw that has irked me is that of the Large Turret. Why install a weapon that is fundamentally inferior in terms of penetrative and destructive power than a hand held weapon on a mechanised frame? Answer you probably wouldn't as a main gun. The main cannon of a tank is designed to apply massive fire power at range against other armoured vehicles and entrenched positions it was not a weapon deployed against individual infantry men (hence why most tanks have forward and cuppola gunners). The modern main battle tanks cannon are against all ground targets using different types of ammo, infact since WW2 the tanks cannon have had anti infantry and AV ammo. What your describing are a tank killer and it got obsolete a long time ago, because of when no prey can be found the tank itself becomes victim of the infantry, which describes dust514s vehicle balance right now. But hey whatever, lets even add an hold circle to enter and exit vehicles as CCP ratface suggested to make an even more stale, stupid boring game.
Skybladev2 LUX AETERNA INT RUST415 134	Posted - 2014.12.01 10:52:00 - [53] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Re-review Dropships I suggest to start with this. Dropships almost always does not use their full potential of transporting people over the area. That's quite sad, but pilots fly alone even with squad and mCRU. Transport capability heavily depends on map (small maps literally make dropships useless for transport). Also, landing and taking off a dropship is much more time consuming (and dangerous) than pick up teammates with ground vehicles. But the biggest enemy for transport dropship is the drop uplink. It provides too convenient way for delivering troops to battlefield - very fast and very precise. So I would not cry if you completely remove dropships and replace it with light aerial units. They will be one-manned vehicles with single small turret. So they can perform the same task as ADS do and will not be just a waste of SP, ISK and cargo capacity. <[^_^]>
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 149	Posted - 2014.12.01 11:05:00 - [54] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) 1. LLAV - Fine 2. 2 types? Anymore details? 3. Logi DS seems fine, also should come with mCRU and mobile supply depot for troop transport and also a kick button for blueberrys who will not leave 4. Ramming - I hope this benefits shield DS since they can tap the ground and lose half shield 5. Modules - Frankly i would like a fair few modules back like Passive Resistance Plates, Power Diagnostic Units, Damage Control, Nanofibres etc, also can skill that just unlock modules also come with a useful skill bonus too? 6. Large blaster dispersion is too high - Used to be where i aim is where i shoot, now its where i aim doesnt matter because your 2/3/4th shot miss anyways, HMG is more accurate 7. DS - Again? I hope its a buff this time to the ADS which has mainly been killed off 8. Elevation - Up or down? I expect judge to complain that we cant look up to kill his hovering dropship just like he got the railgun 600m range cut in half, i expect a nerf 9. Placement - You mean they go where i put them? 10. Turning - Seems to be a terrible skill if thats as fast as we can turn it now 11. I fly one way and shoot the other way, gonna be hard to master 12. Turretless HAV ftw 12a. APC are a must in this game, i would like to have 1 small turret - Anti infantry turret because its an APC which is supposed to get infantry into infantry places so covering fire would be good unless you can shoot out the side of the APC, could be like a Logi DS with a mobile CRU and supply depot so you pick up and drop ppl off, also button to kick out blueberrys who wont get out, infact the turret makes them stay in it maybe best no turret but better defences 13. Mauraders (mammoth tanks) - Apart from it being covered in hair and has 2 long tusks for stabbing infantry with this could be the best part of the entire list - Finally something to skill into which could be better than what we have now, i do hope it has extra slots, pg,cpu, shield armor etc 14. Hold to get in - Why? Its bad enough that the hacking skill doesnt work with your vehicle, i mean who else knows your system better than you? recall takes forever and skills/modules do not make it work any quicker Extras 15. Locking - We need proper locking, why can a blueberry who has no skills in anything vehicle be able to jump into the drivers seat of my HAV or ADS or any vehicle for that matter, we need to follow EVE and if you cant use it you cant get in it or just give me a lock everyone out button which can also double up as a get out button if i have ppl in my vehicle who i want out 16. Skillbooks - If it unlocks stuff it really should have a skill bonus added for that modules it unlocks 17. Installations - There HP is too damn high and no one uses them or looks after them anyways, they are WP hack targets for infantry and nothing more, they are rarely used and for pilots they have to get rid of them 1st, if you make them low HP then at least they are out of the way 18. Location inaccessible - Im in the middle of an open area with nothing round for 500m in all directions, really? in some areas i can call them next to a building 50m high 19. Large railgun glitches - For 2 years its been broken, it will fire and cause no damage to the target then either completely lock up and cant be used until you hop out and back in your vehicle or will over heat and use your ammo up 20. Large Missile - Its not fully auto, semi auto at best
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5555	Posted - 2014.12.01 11:08:00 - [55] - Quote Skybladev2 wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Re-review Dropships I suggest to start with this. Dropships almost always does not use their full potential of transporting people over the area. That's quite sad, but pilots fly alone even with squad and mCRU. Transport capability heavily depends on map (small maps literally make dropships useless for transport). Also, landing and taking off a dropship is much more time consuming (and dangerous) than pick up teammates with ground vehicles. But the biggest enemy for transport dropship is the drop uplink. It provides too convenient way for delivering troops to battlefield - very fast and very precise. So I would not cry if you completely remove dropships and replace it with light aerial units. They will be one-manned vehicles with single small turret. So they can perform the same task as ADS do and will not be just a waste of SP, ISK and cargo capacity. The map sizes dont justify transport dropships. It's about as efficient to run on foot. The tanks need a hard look and the ADS needs a tweak. But transport ships are... I have a hard time envisioning them as more useful than an ADS which can transport as well. Drop uplinks are not the problem, map sizes are. Moving a squad from place to place it takes longer to get to them, land, pick them up and fly to next target than it takes to run or just drop two LAVs and go. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Greiv Rabbah 13Art of War13 20	Posted - 2014.12.01 11:18:00 - [56] - Quote Yes we need MinJeeps, also MTACs. we were told 2013, will 2015 be the year of the MTAC? Also scout vehicles coming back ever? And pilot class??? I think especially with assault drop ships or marauder tanks we shouldn't have the person jumping out the cockpit be a heavy that couldn't fit in the cockpit much less maneuver in his armor plates well enough to work the controls. Now, if I was stomping around in an MTAC and got a grip of REs stuck on me and had to jumpout in a light suit with a couple pistols to either defend my vehicle or bail out and get to safety, that would be more plausible, right?
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 5556	Posted - 2014.12.01 12:34:00 - [57] - Quote I wouldn't get too hopeful about MTACs unless you visually design, animate and submit them yourself so you can put something neat on your resume. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 15324	Posted - 2014.12.01 14:26:00 - [58] - Quote Bingo Untill CCP can give us the maps they long since promised, troop transport won't ever be much of a thing outside of the initial drop in any given match. Especially if transpo ships are made to be slow. Just grab an LAV, its cheaper, faster, safer, and generally stealthier. Flight Academy coming soon(tm) to my YouTube WoD 514
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX Titans of Phoenix 4	Posted - 2014.12.01 14:39:00 - [59] - Quote Can we vehicle specialists get passive armor reps like the dropsuits? im thinking something like 10 reps per second. also when will i get my amarr lazer tank? i want to be able to cut other tanks in half.
Tweaksz Algintal Core Gallente Federation 113	Posted - 2014.12.01 14:43:00 - [60] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. A few things from the top of my head, that I would like to take a look at: LLAV, but not OP fast version Two types of Missile Turrets Logistics Dropships, "no" weapons, remote rep, slow as HAV, ultra durable Ramming damage calculations Bring back a few Modules, preferably Active Small Blaster Dispersion is too high Re-review Dropships Turret elevation Small turrets in proper fitting placement Turret rotation speed and skill bug (not a bug really, it's just capped by the rotation max speed) Would like independent movement of ADS front turret (slight) Turret less HAV's, or MAV's, high speed high durability troop transport Marauders (Mammoth tanks) I know of a friend who would definitely return if marauders made a comeback. Pill Popping Madness!

Slave of MORTE Eyniletti Rangers Minmatar Republic 119	Posted - 2014.12.01 18:14:00 - [61] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Any possibility that quick exiting and then reentry will be addressed? Even if slower the LLAV could make certain aspects of current gameplay even worse. Any hope that the repair tools for vehicles could be moved to a turret? The repair functions and the ability to lock on were downright annoying to work with and solo spider tanking really doesn't need to be a thing again. Would love to see a tank that has no large turret but instead 6 seats. I have asked the team to see if we can add a "hold to exit", much like a hacking bar. What about the repair turrets logi functioning vehicles had terrible locking mechanisms..they were hardly use full ..i would love having logi vehicles back bit only if they made the reppers better ..easier to use Yet another slave of Mortedeamor
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 549	Posted - 2014.12.02 13:02:00 - [62] - Quote Can we get an LAV with four additional back seats instead of the pitiful turret? I want more people to headshot out of vehicles. It would also be hilarious to have an entire squad drive around in an LAV.
The-Errorist SVER True Blood 909	Posted - 2014.12.02 17:29:00 - [63] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks for the topic. We will indeed be taking a look at vehicles, and I agree it's their time now. Right now I am hoping to be able to do so in December, with a hotfix. I will certainly be asking the CPM and Community for all the feedback necessary. ... Does this mean you'll finally get to addressing this issue you said was "on the list" of things to do around 5 months ago? MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill. http://vimeo.com/93181621
Skybladev2 LUX AETERNA INT RUST415 135	Posted - 2014.12.03 09:30:00 - [64] - Quote Tweaksz wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Marauders (Mammoth tanks) I know of a friend who would definitely return if marauders made a comeback. I hope marauders will cost higher, than ADS? <[^_^]>
Lynn Beck Delta Vanguard 6 2312	Posted - 2014.12.03 10:00:00 - [65] - Quote what is with people thinking tanks need to be anti-tank? that's like saying "the only thing that should EVER kill a Logistics is a Logistics." Or Assault/Assault, or Commando/Commando. If tanks are only there to be anti-vehicle, then what purpose would the AV Lav have? What purpose would any tank have then? Not to mention that Tanks can't be Anti DS, DS pilots complain to high hell when you can shoot them. Maybe if we could have some elements of the map(barriers, those humongous trucks) be destructable/repairable, and then having Tanks balanced for taking those out, then we could say Tanks are the heavy ordnance. In the meantime, Tanks are your open ground slaughtering machines. Give them something else to do that isn't entirely dependent on someone else wanting to kill you with non-AV, and we'll have moar tanks to kill General John Ripper -BAM! I'm Emeril Lagasse. This message was approved by the 'Nobody Loved You' Foundation'
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 762	Posted - 2014.12.03 20:05:00 - [66] - Quote Lynn Beck wrote: what is with people thinking tanks need to be anti-tank? that's like saying "the only thing that should EVER kill a Logistics is a Logistics." Or Assault/Assault, or Commando/Commando. If tanks are only there to be anti-vehicle, then what purpose would the AV Lav have? What purpose would any tank have then? Not to mention that Tanks can't be Anti DS, DS pilots complain to high hell when you can shoot them. Maybe if we could have some elements of the map(barriers, those humongous trucks) be destructable/repairable, and then having Tanks balanced for taking those out, then we could say Tanks are the heavy ordnance. In the meantime, Tanks are your open ground slaughtering machines. Give them something else to do that isn't entirely dependent on someone else wanting to kill you with non-AV, and we'll have moar tanks to kill This (Bolded) was another kind of objective for tanks that I thought could bring about a good change for vehicles. I failed to add it to the OP Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15395	Posted - 2014.12.03 20:16:00 - [67] - Quote Lynn Beck wrote: what is with people thinking tanks need to be anti-tank? that's like saying "the only thing that should EVER kill a Logistics is a Logistics." Or Assault/Assault, or Commando/Commando. If tanks are only there to be anti-vehicle, then what purpose would the AV Lav have? What purpose would any tank have then? Not to mention that Tanks can't be Anti DS, DS pilots complain to high hell when you can shoot them. Maybe if we could have some elements of the map(barriers, those humongous trucks) be destructable/repairable, and then having Tanks balanced for taking those out, then we could say Tanks are the heavy ordnance. In the meantime, Tanks are your open ground slaughtering machines. Give them something else to do that isn't entirely dependent on someone else wanting to kill you with non-AV, and we'll have moar tanks to kill Because when you look at a tanks fundamental design, both IRL, and in almost all forms of sci fi media, video games, film, etc...... what do tanks fire? Heavy Cannon Shells. I'm not saying such as shell should not have AoE splash damage to allow a tank to bombard a static position but no HAV should have the equivalent of a .50 Cal Gun as its main cannon. Moreover this Blasters should not have the lowest DPS of all the current turrets in the game. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
Ace Boone Capital Acquisitions LLC 520	Posted - 2014.12.03 20:33:00 - [68] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful. Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc. Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea. Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? it was a dumb idea when the first guy suggested it and it's still dumb. They were free WP and good for the occasional kill. Now they're ridiculously tanked out useless installations that are still no more than good for the occasional kill. All they did was make it harder for ADS pilots. Only loyal to the republic.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15397	Posted - 2014.12.03 20:55:00 - [69] - Quote Ace Boone wrote: True Adamance wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: I feel, in the vein of vehicles needing special objectives, that perhaps there should be more installations that vehicles find useful. Things like Rep stations just for vehicles, w/ Supply depots being just for infantry resupply, or Shield Generators that are too hard for infantry to kill, but vehicles could handle, that block OBs from hitting. Etc, etc, etc. Currently vehicles are very much designed around infantry roles, which is kinda a broken idea. Sadly, vehicles are designed (or were) around the huge maps of old (IDK if there still there, but zoom all the way out on the map screen), where their their speed would be useful for getting to various obbys, and would be useful for engaging other vehicles at range. Currently one of the things gimping HAV (maybe other vehicles ) and the insanely high EHP turrets. Fighting one of those is like going up against an enemy tank....... what genius decided that effectually double the EHP of an installation that infantry don't even bother to defend was a good idea? it was a dumb idea when the first guy suggested it and it's still dumb. They were free WP and good for the occasional kill. Now they're ridiculously tanked out useless installations that are still no more than good for the occasional kill. All they did was make it harder for ADS pilots. The easy fix to that was buff EHP between 10-20% to allow turrets to fire of that extra shot or two and reduce the WP gains for destroyed turrets down to around 25-50WP. I said, "Empress, I do this, I thought that you knew this. Can't stand non-believers and honest, the truth is...
La Lore Sleipnier TraSTraS x DeTraS 232	Posted - 2014.12.04 02:48:00 - [70] - Quote Good news!! Thanks guys!! Thanks CCP! Well in my opinion afterburners (dropship and ground vehicules) should be removed, then the survive option will be in the pilot skill (vehicule pilot not only for dropships) not the afterburner boosting to escape. And maybe return the swarms old, more missile per shot and adjust the damage per missile. MAV to infantry transport is a good thing to people who don't know how to fly a dropship but need trasport their team. Soy una hoja al viento a merced de los elementos... https://dust514.com/recruit/MfQjol/

Astr0 Knot Algintal Core Gallente Federation 3	Posted - 2014.12.05 05:31:00 - [71] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: It takes 3 clips from an ADS with XT-1 to destroy a railgun installation. I don't know if CCP know this but it takes a long long long time to shoot off 3 clips (24 rounds) even with python 5. Also, factor this in with how everybody and their mother has proto AV, you have a higher chance of dying before killing this 1 out of the many redline turrets. Since it appears that real development is happening on Dust again, maybe it's time for a new "integration" mechanic. Maybe this would be a good place to implement "Medium" orbital bombardment mechanics. They are only able to target instillationsand maybe large slow vehicles? (Medium to long, non-reducible lock on time?) Then, they could create another condition, where you can drop "Large" orbital bombardments on an enemy MCC by some intricate mechanics to end a battle faster. Assuming the mechanic requires a heavy amount of map control and skill, it could be very infrequently available and extremely satisfying to see it go off. Especially if they make it flashy enough! Strategic strikes > random aoe This would also call for some economy integration too. I would suggest a plex, aurum or some other new monetary device that can be exchanged for plex/aurum to be contractible to Dust from EvE and visa versa. That way nobody breaks anyone's economy by dumping basically unlimited isk into something. CCP gets moneys, and potentially more dust players have access to monetized content. (depending on the price of course) CCP Rattati wrote: Turret elevation This! If you limit the downward pitch of HAV turrets, their effectiveness against infantry would be greatly reduced while also becoming much more susceptible to them. Easy fix, big payoff. You don't need to completely remove a tank's ability to kill infantry, just make it much hard and less likely. Maybe allow hacking to temporarily disable them completely or just one of their functions (mobility,offense,defense)?


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

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.

I Live for Tears

Chocolate Juice

Chocolate Juice

Chocolate Juice

Chocolate Juice

Chocolate Juice

-BAM! I'm Emeril Lagasse.