DUST Search - Buff Prox Explosives

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Buff Prox Explosives

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2288	Posted - 2014.12.04 22:57:00 - [1] - Quote With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
HUGGLE BEAR MAKIN' MO' MONEY WIT HUGGLES 20	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:03:00 - [2] - Quote If you buff PEs i wont be giving out as many RE HUGS
First Prophet Followers of The Prophet 2007	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:03:00 - [3] - Quote I support this. People find this this review helpful!
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 6353	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:05:00 - [4] - Quote I have a feeling once 1.10 drops, that they will start looking into these kind of things more. They probably want to get a baseline after it drops first though to see how everything, including PEs are being affected. Thunderbolt. verb and noun. "James thunderbolted in his pants." "I lit a bag of thunderbolt on fire on CCP's doorway"
Spademan Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4878	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:09:00 - [5] - Quote Oh please, I've never seen anyone other than me use them, and I haven't for months. I remember one time back in the logi Lav stupidity I laid down a crap load in a gate into the mushroom complex. Guy comes speeding through, Lav flips and gets stuck inbetween a buiding and a wall. The worst part? All that did was take down the shields, and it was an armour one Made it unusable though, which was nice I am part shovel, part man, full scout, and a little bit special. Official Time Lord of the Scout Community
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2288	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:14:00 - [6] - Quote @Spademan lol, sorry about the luck with that LLAV However, I use them whenever I notice reddots using LAVs (or HAVs but LAVs are the best targets). You'd be surprised how often I get kills with them. I love it, it is always nice when you're in the middle of a firefight and all of a sudden: Madrugar Damage +75 Madrugar Damage +75 Madrugar Destruction +150 Kill +50 Kill +50 Kill +50 Pops up on your screen, I imagine they're fairly pissed as well which makes it all the sweeter. Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
RedPencil Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 154	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:18:00 - [7] - Quote All trap equipments (RE and Prox) defiantly need to visit and address. Even the damage buff, 1.10 will kill all trap game anyway. Congratulation Thank to Rattati, he just made it worse. from 1.10 Patch notes: * All Equipment now has a tiered Scan Profile: STD/ADV/PRO = 55/45/35 dB Without active scan, EVERYONE CAN SEE PROX ON TACNET. Beware Paper cut M[;..;]M
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2288	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:20:00 - [8] - Quote RedPencil wrote: All trap equipments (RE and Prox) defiantly need to visit and address. Even the damage buff, 1.10 will kill all trap game anyway. Congratulation Thank to Rattati, he just made it worse. from 1.10 Patch notes: * All Equipment now has a tiered Scan Profile: STD/ADV/PRO = 55/45/35 dB Without active scan, EVERYONE CAN SEE PROX ON TACNET. I totally missed that Well, that sucks....... Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15469	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:22:00 - [9] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? Hmmm how many max deployable, splash radius, scan profiles, then I can work out the damage profiles for each tank type and then consider how I feel as a tanker about being killed by them. Do they have a deployment timer? Or are they deployed instantly, do they stick to surfaces, etc. RE are currently the other think I don't think is fair in AV vs Vehicle balance as no JLAV should be able to apply 10054 explosive damage vs a vehicle in the way JLAV's do. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 6354	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:28:00 - [10] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? Hmmm how many max deployable, splash radius, scan profiles, then I can work out the damage profiles for each tank type and then consider how I feel as a tanker about being killed by them. Do they have a deployment timer? Or are they deployed instantly, do they stick to surfaces, etc. RE are currently the other think I don't think is fair in AV vs Vehicle balance as no JLAV should be able to apply 10054 explosive damage vs a vehicle in the way JLAV's do. I am fine with nerfing JLAVs as long as we don't further nerf RE users too much outside of that. Ideally it would be something like giving REs a polarity so that they magnetically stick to red things (opposite polarity) but are repelled by friendly things (same polarity). Or anything that works similarly. Thunderbolt. verb and noun. "James thunderbolted in his pants." "I lit a bag of thunderbolt on fire on CCP's doorway"

Spademan Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4879	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:30:00 - [11] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? Hmmm how many max deployable, splash radius, scan profiles, then I can work out the damage profiles for each tank type and then consider how I feel as a tanker about being killed by them. Do they have a deployment timer? Or are they deployed instantly, do they stick to surfaces, etc. RE are currently the other think I don't think is fair in AV vs Vehicle balance as no JLAV should be able to apply 10054 explosive damage vs a vehicle in the way JLAV's do. If a RE sticks to it, a PE will. Deployable: 4 at Std, 5 at Adv and 6 at Pro. 5m blast, I don't know about current profile but that's changing along with the other equipment. I am part shovel, part man, full scout, and a little bit special. Official Time Lord of the Scout Community
Enji Elric Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 336	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:44:00 - [12] - Quote This is a good idea if your not going to allow as much EQ on the Field then that EQ should have a BUFF on other games GHOST RECON PHANTOMS HAWKEN Warframe STO Origin: enjamin86 <-- BF4 64v64 Steam: enjamin
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15469	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:49:00 - [13] - Quote Spademan wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? Hmmm how many max deployable, splash radius, scan profiles, then I can work out the damage profiles for each tank type and then consider how I feel as a tanker about being killed by them. Do they have a deployment timer? Or are they deployed instantly, do they stick to surfaces, etc. RE are currently the other think I don't think is fair in AV vs Vehicle balance as no JLAV should be able to apply 10054 explosive damage vs a vehicle in the way JLAV's do. If a RE sticks to it, a PE will. Deployable: 4 at Std, 5 at Adv and 6 at Pro. 5m blast, I don't know about current profile but that's changing along with the other equipment. (2625x1.2) x 6= 18900 damage. Answer is no. This is too much damage potential for what the actual equipment options themselves cost. 3150 explosive damage is by far in away too much. Even under a 4/2 2/4 Marauder model such and HAV could only theoretically amass maybe 11-12K EHP. 2150 Damage @ Proto x 5 deployable = 12900 which is much more reasonable. This considering that most other tanks beneath Marauder level will only have 9K EHP *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2288	Posted - 2014.12.04 23:57:00 - [14] - Quote Spademan wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? Hmmm how many max deployable, splash radius, scan profiles, then I can work out the damage profiles for each tank type and then consider how I feel as a tanker about being killed by them. Do they have a deployment timer? Or are they deployed instantly, do they stick to surfaces, etc. RE are currently the other think I don't think is fair in AV vs Vehicle balance as no JLAV should be able to apply 10054 explosive damage vs a vehicle in the way JLAV's do. If a RE sticks to it, a PE will. Deployable: 4 at Std, 5 at Adv and 6 at Pro. 5m blast, I don't know about current profile but that's changing along with the other equipment. Since we are tweaking damage values, why not also tweak the other values? I'd propose 2/3/3 deployed, 10m blast and remove the warning beep. Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15474	Posted - 2014.12.05 00:18:00 - [15] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Spademan wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? Hmmm how many max deployable, splash radius, scan profiles, then I can work out the damage profiles for each tank type and then consider how I feel as a tanker about being killed by them. Do they have a deployment timer? Or are they deployed instantly, do they stick to surfaces, etc. RE are currently the other think I don't think is fair in AV vs Vehicle balance as no JLAV should be able to apply 10054 explosive damage vs a vehicle in the way JLAV's do. If a RE sticks to it, a PE will. Deployable: 4 at Std, 5 at Adv and 6 at Pro. 5m blast, I don't know about current profile but that's changing along with the other equipment. Since we are tweaking damage values, why not also tweak the other values? I'd propose 2/3/3 deployed, 10m blast and remove the warning beep. So what do you suggest as a direct damage value under the 2/3/3 model without the sound prompts. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2288	Posted - 2014.12.05 00:27:00 - [16] - Quote True Adamance wrote: So what do you suggest as a direct damage value under the 2/3/3 model without the sound prompts. Well, I was thinking the same as the OP this would give totals of 3750/6750/7875 Which would mean that they'd be only truly effective against HAVs that were fleeing incoming damage or LAVs. Looking at it like that, I am inclined to say that PRO should be 4 rather than 3 or they should get damage buffed further to 200% of REs STD: 2500 ADV: 3000 PRO: 3500 Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15475	Posted - 2014.12.05 00:35:00 - [17] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: So what do you suggest as a direct damage value under the 2/3/3 model without the sound prompts. Well, I was thinking the same as the OP this would give totals of 3750/6750/7875 Which would mean that they'd be only truly effective against HAVs that were fleeing incoming damage or LAVs. Looking at it like that, I am inclined to say that PRO should be 4 rather than 3 or they should get damage buffed further to 200% of REs STD: 2500 ADV: 3000 PRO: 3500 Okay lets work out the maths for that. 35001.2 = 4200 Explosive Damage vs Armour Per Proxy 42004 = 16800 (you have almost 4800 damage overkill making that 3rd proxy pointless) vs armour vehicles 3500* 0.8 = 2800 Explosive Damage vs Shields Per Proxy 2800+4 = 11200 (much fairer value) However without the sound prompts I do not believe this is a fair damage model. With it. I could get behind it.....but its just another Anti Armour Av option in a sea of Anti Armour AV options...... and probably would cause me to campaign for JLAV removal from the game. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2288	Posted - 2014.12.05 00:49:00 - [18] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: So what do you suggest as a direct damage value under the 2/3/3 model without the sound prompts. Well, I was thinking the same as the OP this would give totals of 3750/6750/7875 Which would mean that they'd be only truly effective against HAVs that were fleeing incoming damage or LAVs. Looking at it like that, I am inclined to say that PRO should be 4 rather than 3 or they should get damage buffed further to 200% of REs STD: 2500 ADV: 3000 PRO: 3500 Okay lets work out the maths for that. 35001.2 = 4200 Explosive Damage vs Armour Per Proxy 42004 = 16800 (you have almost 4800 damage overkill making that 3rd proxy pointless) vs armour vehicles 3500* 0.8 = 2800 Explosive Damage vs Shields Per Proxy 2800+4 = 11200 (much fairer value) However without the sound prompts I do not believe this is a fair damage model. With it. I could get behind it.....but its just another Anti Armour Av option in a sea of Anti Armour AV options...... and probably would cause me to campaign for JLAV removal from the game. You bring up a good point. Why not solve that point by taking existing models and using them to add Flux variants of both PE and RE? Also, you only do the math for PRO PE, which isn't really the greatest comparison since I think we can all agree that PRO AV should lolwtfpwn STD V. Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15479	Posted - 2014.12.05 01:00:00 - [19] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: So what do you suggest as a direct damage value under the 2/3/3 model without the sound prompts. Well, I was thinking the same as the OP this would give totals of 3750/6750/7875 Which would mean that they'd be only truly effective against HAVs that were fleeing incoming damage or LAVs. Looking at it like that, I am inclined to say that PRO should be 4 rather than 3 or they should get damage buffed further to 200% of REs STD: 2500 ADV: 3000 PRO: 3500 Okay lets work out the maths for that. 35001.2 = 4200 Explosive Damage vs Armour Per Proxy 42004 = 16800 (you have almost 4800 damage overkill making that 3rd proxy pointless) vs armour vehicles 3500* 0.8 = 2800 Explosive Damage vs Shields Per Proxy 2800+4 = 11200 (much fairer value) However without the sound prompts I do not believe this is a fair damage model. With it. I could get behind it.....but its just another Anti Armour Av option in a sea of Anti Armour AV options...... and probably would cause me to campaign for JLAV removal from the game. You bring up a good point. Why not solve that point by taking existing models and using them to add Flux variants of both PE and RE? Also, you only do the math for PRO PE, which isn't really the greatest comparison since I think we can all agree that PRO AV should lolwtfpwn STD V. I'll always use the best variant of something in a series because its likely the most commonly used tool competitively vs something of equal tier. 3600 per remote @ ADV vs armour 14400 Explosive Damage all up vs armour (unfair value as even 2/4 Marauders cannot attain 14K EHP...) 2400 per remote @ ADV vs shields 9600 Explosive Damage all up vs shield (fair value) 3000 per @ STD vs armour 12000 Explosive all up 2000 per remote vs Shields 8000 Explosive Damage vs Shield Disparities are too great vs shield and armour and without sound based indicators they are there ....... another nail in the coffin. I am all for them doing sizeable damage to a vehicle like a tank but I do not believe there is cause to remove the sound based indicators or have yet another tool for AV that will instantly Alpha a tank of the field especially when new OB strikes are being designed expressly for this. I could certainly see something more akin to a damage cap (for all remotes hitting around 9-10K damage vs armour tanks and the Flux variations around similar values for shield HAV) moreover a Radius of 10m is huge........ I could suggest a 3/3/4 model with values ranging in between 2000 per explosive and 2300. With Flux and Anti Armour variations. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 195	Posted - 2014.12.05 01:01:00 - [20] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: [...]Also, you only do the math for PRO PE, which isn't really the greatest comparison since I think we can all agree that PRO AV should lolwtfpwn STD V. Just chiming in on this part, but I find this to be disingenuous. Vehicles do not seem to follow the STD/ADV/PRO paradigm, but rather follow a more Tech I/Tech II paradigm. By that I mean to say that vehicle tiering is based more on "what does this do better than the versatile, unspecialized version?" or "what does this do that the basic, unspecialized version can't?" rather than "this does the same thing but better". A good example would be dropships, and the previous Logi and current Assault variants. An ADS is capable of greater fire support thanks to the nose gun, and is even more capable of air superiority... though it still sucks at that anyways due to the fact that derpships handle like the equivalent of an egg-laying skywhale. The previous (and perhaps returning) Logi DS conducted a degree of remote repair function, and also had a built-in MCRU that used no PG/CPU, making it an excellent reinforcement platform. Another good example- though it's EVE side- is how the Tech I cruisers and Tech II cruisers interact. It's something that's fairly complex, but in a nutshell it consists of taking a moderately specialized hull and turning it into a highly specialized platform that is really only good at doing one particular thing. It becomes a very expensive, very "one-trick pony" ship... but bugger me if it doesn't do that one thing better than 99% of the competition, and easily holds it's own against the remaining 1%. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts

Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui VEHICLEBUSTERS Demolitions and Logistics Corp . 1491	Posted - 2014.12.05 01:11:00 - [21] - Quote I use proxies and get kills with them so your not the only one using them . I don't think that the buffs proposed are reasonable and I agree more with True on this one and removing the beeping mechanic is just a flat out no . That's just too much even with the up coming changes and not having a gage of what and how they will play on the battlefield because numbers just don't reflect real time situations and no one knows how any of this will play out . I like proxies at there current state and it causes for more players using them instead of just one person using pro and insta-ganking the whole field with massive amounts of damage administered and ground vehicles already have way more to face in the form of anti-vehicle then air vehicles as it is . Doubts are like flies and should be treated as such and crushed .
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2288	Posted - 2014.12.05 01:31:00 - [22] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I'll always use the best variant of something in a series because its likely the most commonly used tool competitively vs something of equal tier. 3600 per remote @ ADV vs armour 14400 Explosive Damage all up vs armour (unfair value as even 2/4 Marauders cannot attain 14K EHP...) 2400 per remote @ ADV vs shields 9600 Explosive Damage all up vs shield (fair value) 3000 per @ STD vs armour 12000 Explosive all up 2000 per remote vs Shields 8000 Explosive Damage vs Shield Disparities are too great vs shield and armour and without sound based indicators they are there ....... another nail in the coffin. I am all for them doing sizeable damage to a vehicle like a tank but I do not believe there is cause to remove the sound based indicators or have yet another tool for AV that will instantly Alpha a tank of the field especially when new OB strikes are being designed expressly for this. I could certainly see something more akin to a damage cap (for all remotes hitting around 9-10K damage vs armour tanks and the Flux variations around similar values for shield HAV) moreover a Radius of 10m is huge........ I could suggest a 3/3/4 model with values ranging in between 2000 per explosive and 2300. With Flux and Anti Armour variations. See, IDK, IMHO, a single PE should be all that it takes to put a LAV out of commission. I don't think that a single PE should decommission an HAV (at least until we can specify track damage as opposed to hull damage), it should take at least a full single tier load of PE to kill an HAV. If that HAV misses even one they should still be able to limp away. However, PE kills are usually from LAVs speeding along not paying attention or damaged HAVs fleeing their aggressors straight into the arms of death. My problem with the warning beep is that it reminds me of a game I used to play that had a detector for explosives though you had to actually choose to take it rather than getting it as a built in feature. It just strikes me as a crutch that should be a module you need to choose to fit to get that benefit. If it isn't a module, PE should be instagank, you heard the free beep, you chose to keep moving forward, you lost your HAV and went back to respawn, gimme your cookie. @Victor Moody Stahl I am aware of what a T1/T2 paradigm is, has that been confirmed for Dust though? I know it looks that way though I am just curious if we're going to end up getting STD/ADV/PRO ADS/DS/HAV/LLAVs/SLAVs once things are a little more hammered out balance-wise. @Shinobi TBH, this is all spitballing. Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15480	Posted - 2014.12.05 01:34:00 - [23] - Quote It's tough in this regard isn't it. Not as simple as static damage values since each tank type has modifiers which adjust the damage in significant ways. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Finn Colman Immortal Guides Learning Alliance 83	Posted - 2014.12.05 02:21:00 - [24] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: You bring up a good point. Why not solve that point by taking existing models and using them to add Flux variants of both PE and RE? Also, you only do the math for PRO PE, which isn't really the greatest comparison since I think we can all agree that PRO AV should lolwtfpwn STD V. I believe that there was at one point (and may still be) STD Flux PEs, though I don't think there have been Flux REs. A shadow clad in duct tape, waiting for the moment to strike. PSA: Tell players to terminate in order to access mCRUs.
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2289	Posted - 2014.12.05 13:06:00 - [25] - Quote Finn Colman wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: You bring up a good point. Why not solve that point by taking existing models and using them to add Flux variants of both PE and RE? Also, you only do the math for PRO PE, which isn't really the greatest comparison since I think we can all agree that PRO AV should lolwtfpwn STD V. I believe that there was at one point (and may still be) STD Flux PEs, though I don't think there have been Flux REs. If there are or were, I totally missed them and I've been a member of the Dust Miners Union since Chromosome. @True Yeah, I honestly think it'd be easier if they just gave us the Eve Damage Profiles instead of Armor/Shield. At least then we could vary the damage outputs/resists more which would make it easier to do balancing. Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
Twelve Guage Death Firm. 320	Posted - 2014.12.05 13:46:00 - [26] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? Add to this the removal of the sound they make if a tank get to close to them. Why do tanker get a heads up when i'm setting up a trap for them. This has to be the most ridiculous feature of the proximity mine. Scouts don't beep when carrying RE's and neither does an object so why do tankers get the early warning messages. Fix this nonsense. Death Firm's sandwich maker. You're been like by Twelve Gauge = her grabbing your @$$.
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 204	Posted - 2014.12.07 06:16:00 - [27] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: @Victor Moody Stahl I am aware of what a T1/T2 paradigm is, has that been confirmed for Dust though? I know it looks that way though I am just curious if we're going to end up getting STD/ADV/PRO ADS/DS/HAV/LLAVs/SLAVs once things are a little more hammered out balance-wise. There's nothing that's been actually out-and-out said about whether vehicles will follow the traditional EVE-esque T1/T2 paradigm, or if they will follow the new-fangled DUST-y STD/ADV/PRO model. However, given how dropships and LAVs were modeled prior to (most) of the variants of these vehicles being removed, I think it's more likely that we'd end up with a T1/T2 model rather than the STD/ADV/PRO one- Logi and Scout LAVs had (or were intended to have) definite drawbacks compared to the traditional LAV, while also having significant advantages in a particular task. So to were the dropships alike; a regular derpship would be capable of CAS and RR'ing duty, but an ADS excelled at the former while the Logi DS was superb at the latter; each variant was incredibly inferior at its unintended duty, but for the intended role it excelled in comparison to both the opposing variant and the basic variety. Buff Logis \| Nerf Scouts
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1219	Posted - 2014.12.07 08:01:00 - [28] - Quote You guys are trying to balance it around people only placing one tier of them, which no one ever will. Anyone who does proxy traps uses as many tiers as they can. More like Titans of Penis amirite? Come play a better game.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1219	Posted - 2014.12.07 08:10:00 - [29] - Quote Victor Moody Stahl wrote: -snip-. I never understood when people talked about how beneficial tiercide would be to DUST as a whole until I played EVE and saw how well it worked. I just have a ******* nerdgasim thinking about how much better of a game we would have if it was done right. More like Titans of Penis amirite? Come play a better game.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 171	Posted - 2014.12.07 14:28:00 - [30] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: With the incoming bandwidth changes there will be even less proximity mines on the field than there already are (I think I've seen two other people aside from myself get mine kills, in the entire time I've been playing). Vehicles already get an advance warning system for them and it is ridiculous that they do less damage than REs (have no fear, I am not proposing that silly swap damages). I think that they should be buffed to 150% of the damage output of a corresponding tier RE, so: STD: 1875 per mine ADV: 2250 per mine PRO: 2625 per mine Comments, Questions, Thoughts? 1. The 'Advanced warning system' as you put it is about maybe at maximum 5m which in game is very small and next to worthless while the beeping is also tied to the range so by the time you hear it you will most likely hit it 1a. The 'Advanced warning system' is useless overall 2. At maximum speed in a LAV you cannot break fast enough to avoid it 3. At maximum speed in a HAV you cannot break fast enough to avoid it 4. 2625 at PRO is over half of the Madrugars overall HP at base add in 20% more damage to armor due to explosive damage and its over 3k per mine 5. You have a PRO suit with PRO modules and PRO weapons and PRO equipment, pilots are stuck trying to fit PRO turrets and modules onto a BASIC vehicle hull with no specalized pilot suit which you want to blap with 9k of damage from 3mines, that completely alphas basically anything on the field and causes more damage than 3 BFG shots 6. MAG/BF/PS2 all have better 'advanced warning systems' - If i could have MAGs Explosive Detector as a module fitted onto my Pilot suit i would 7. Pilots only option is for a handheld scanner to pick them up or to fit on a scanner but with the changes it means i would need to use proto scanners on my vehicle or suit, problem is on a vehicle espc a madrugar it doesnt have enough CPU at all and with a Gunlogi im eating into my tank so its not worth it 8. The numbers are completely unreasonable

Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2302	Posted - 2014.12.07 16:39:00 - [31] - Quote @Victor Only time will tell. IDK which I am pulling for more though since STD/ADV/PRO would be consistent with what we already have in Dust but T1/T2 would be more consistent with Eve (which TBH is the base game and I've always wondered why they went with STD/ADV/PRO instead of T1/T2). @Thundergroove I too have had nerdgasms for the same reason. Also, Never not use all the tiers @Lazer Fo Cused 1. I have watched HAVs slow to a stop and reverse just at the edge of a minefield, I doubt the advanced warning system is as worthless as you'd have us believe. 2. LAVs are low-hanging fruit, minefields are an inherent risk associated with zipping around in one. 3. The only time I have seen HAVs travelling at max speed is when they were fleeing AV (in which case they're gonna die one way or the other). 4. The numbers are an idea, have numbers you think are more reasonable? Suggest them. 5. Don't ***** to me about the lack of ADV/PRO vehicles, I'm not a Dev. 6. You have a Pilot suit? Please tell me where I can get the skillbook, I am only a Pilot suit away from having full PRO Minmatar Dropsuits. Aside from that, I would love it if they added an Explosives Detector (maybe then we could get Anti-Infantry Prox Mines as well). 7. Stop worrying solely about running around in a solo pwnmobile and practice some teamwork and then that handheld scanner wouldn't be a problem. 8. See #4 above. Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2217	Posted - 2014.12.07 16:57:00 - [32] - Quote The problem with proxies is that not enough people use them tacticly. I've been killed plenty of times by proxies that were well placed and barely visible. I've been fairly lucky lots of times to accidentally stop right in front of them or to drive just around them on a major road of travel. Sorry but I lol'ed at the OP's comment on "advanced warning system" on vehicles. It's not like BF3 where they get highlighted for you at a fair distance. Well placed proxies are simply unavoidable because you're blowing up by the time you realize there were proxies. The only buff for proxies that's needed is a buff to player tactics (which doesn't come with code). You can't just place those black disks on bright desert sand and expect a vehicle kill. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
abdullah muzaffar G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 76	Posted - 2014.12.07 21:22:00 - [33] - Quote Only a tiny buff(maybe range too)... Proxies do not require much active participation, and thus have less risk
JUDASisMYhomeboy xCosmic Voidx Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 173	Posted - 2014.12.08 02:02:00 - [34] - Quote I use std proxies all of the time. They're fine. They are just "set it and forget it". How good should they be when they can do work while you're afk?
Racro 01 Arifistan 501st Knights of Leanbox 463	Posted - 2014.12.08 02:34:00 - [35] - Quote puts volume on t.v to 100. drives madruagr over proxys. blows up........'advanced warning system?......coulnt even hear the beeping of proxys over my engine noise.....back in chromosome these things were stronger and beeped louder. then they got nerfed in damage and distance warning. these thing sliterally tell you your near them AFTER you've run over them and blown up. unless you want to catapillar crawl a tank all the time. I say. yes buff proxy damage ONLY IF their bandwidth is high. (should be lower than normal RE's) AND make their beeping noise louder than your vehicle's engine. like a warning system should be. higher tiered proxys MUST have lower warning radius. std proxy re: waring radius of 30m. adv at 25m proto at 20m. Lavs wont have time to stop and still run over them. slight chance tanks might not run voer them as they take ages to slow to a stop., and . even with a surround sound headset. still a pain to hear proxys over both the tank/turret noise and the fckn squad member's talking. *Elite Gallenten Soldier*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15573	Posted - 2014.12.08 02:39:00 - [36] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: 7. Stop worrying solely about running around in a solo pwnmobile and practice some teamwork and then that handheld scanner wouldn't be a problem. Pilots have been asking for this for months, and every time a suggestion is made that fundamentally determines the role of a vehicle certain sections of the forums pounce on it and nothing every changes. Most pilots whose opinions are worth asking for aren't interested in massacring infantry and would rather be blapping turrets, tanks, entrenched positions, etc But killing infantry is all infantry have every let us do. However regarding the RE I suggested that values between 2050 and 2300 with 4 deployable at proto level would be acceptable. Proportionately less for each additionally Proxy able to be deployed. Either you want concentrated AP mines with high alpha, a compact blast radius, and high penetrative power...... or you want lots of Proxies, with larger blast radius, and significantly lesser penetrative power. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2304	Posted - 2014.12.08 04:18:00 - [37] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: 7. Stop worrying solely about running around in a solo pwnmobile and practice some teamwork and then that handheld scanner wouldn't be a problem. Pilots have been asking for this for months, and every time a suggestion is made that fundamentally determines the role of a vehicle certain sections of the forums pounce on it and nothing every changes. Most pilots whose opinions are worth asking for aren't interested in massacring infantry and would rather be blapping turrets, tanks, entrenched positions, etc But killing infantry is all infantry have every let us do. However regarding the RE I suggested that values between 2050 and 2300 with 4 deployable at proto level would be acceptable. Proportionately less for each additionally Proxy able to be deployed. Either you want concentrated AP mines with high alpha, a compact blast radius, and high penetrative power...... or you want lots of Proxies, with larger blast radius, and significantly lesser penetrative power. Yeah, I understand that not every pilot is wanting to run around doing nothing but murdering infantry by the vatload and I support your pursuit of other endeavors. I want you to have other things to do rather than killing infantry since that means that you'll likely be occupied when I start hammering you with AV (surprise!!). I think the numbers that you propose are fair however IMHO, if PRO gets 4 @2300, ADV should get 5@2175 and STD should get 6@2050 though to compensate, higher tiers should have less bandwidth cost. This would mean that you could concentrate larger numbers of the lower tier mines for higher damage potential in exchange for battlefield utility (since you're spending more bandwidth for them and you'll likely not be able to do much other than lay out the single tier field). As for your either or, what if I want both? Is that too much to ask? I like both ideas and I think that they would make for more diversity in minefields. Dust514/Legion should be a(n): [_] Arcade Lobby Shooter [X] Sci-fi Military Sim
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 171	Posted - 2014.12.08 10:51:00 - [38] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: @Lazer Fo Cused 1. I have watched HAVs slow to a stop and reverse just at the edge of a minefield, I doubt the advanced warning system is as worthless as you'd have us believe. 2. LAVs are low-hanging fruit, minefields are an inherent risk associated with zipping around in one. 3. The only time I have seen HAVs travelling at max speed is when they were fleeing AV (in which case they're gonna die one way or the other). 4. The numbers are an idea, have numbers you think are more reasonable? Suggest them. 5. Don't ***** to me about the lack of ADV/PRO vehicles, I'm not a Dev. 6. You have a Pilot suit? Please tell me where I can get the skillbook, I am only a Pilot suit away from having full PRO Minmatar Dropsuits. Aside from that, I would love it if they added an Explosives Detector (maybe then we could get Anti-Infantry Prox Mines as well). 7. Stop worrying solely about running around in a solo pwnmobile and practice some teamwork and then that handheld scanner wouldn't be a problem. 8. See #4 above. 1. I only slow if i see it scanned beforehand or if i manage to see them on the road 2. Still doesnt help the LAV that it cannot stop to avoid one unless they see it 3. They always travel at max speed because its as fast as it can generally go 4. No buff frankly with the current state of vehicles 5. No but yet you want to alpha the only BASIC UNSPECALIZED HAV with 3 mines, i supported buffing PE when we had HAVs at chrome level but now we have less of everything including HP/EHP/Slot layouts/Modules/Turrets/Skills/Skill bonuses and Specialized HAV - Its already easy to remove vehicles from battle 6. I wish, ED i would like, Claymores are the answer to those annoying frisbee RE 7. Solo pwnmobile no that is me using an LAV with RE strapped to it like a skillless monkey, or using a FG because 3 hits and its dead, also handheld scanner cannot be used inside a vehicle and i do use teamwork unlike when i use AV because its so easy to kill vehicles


Pages: 1 2 :: [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.