For the remotes (it was about time), can't you make them sticky like for AV grenades ? When you throw an AV, there is an area when it can still hit the tank. Apply the same thing. For the short time a remote is -½-áin the air-á-+, make it be attracted by a vehicle in a specified range. If the remote touch the ground, then it stays on the ground.
But of course delete the distance when you can throw equipment. When I want to put an uplink (or any equipment) on the ground, I don't really wan't to play freesbee with red guys in PC...

As for vehicles, well IGÇÖve been asking and posting for a so long time that I think my eyes are fooling me .

New Packed Remote Explosive
STD/ADV/PRO:
Current Damage: 1250/1500/1750
DMG +30%
Activation Time: 3/3/3
Radius 0.1
Same PG/CPU

Dunno what you mean by this.

Current Remote Explosives
STD/ADV/PRO:
Activation 5/5/5

See above

Armor Plates
STD/ADV/PRO from 85/110/135 to 60/80/100
Strafe speed penalty of regular plates doubled on scouts

Weren't armor plates buffed because armor tanking wasn't good enough?

Rifles

Assault Rifle
Clip to 70 from 60, same clip to ammo ratio

Is this going to affect the officer rifles?

Various
Increased Warbarge time to X from Y minutes for squadbuilding

Is this in pubs? We used to have 30 seconds or so, but then that got taken away in favor of immediate deployment.

Adding all racial frames and tiers to Loyalty Store

No offense, should've been done a while ago, man.

Vehicles
Reduced Small Blaster Dispersion
Transport WP for LAV's
Larger Supply Depot Radius
Vehicle plate speed penalty discrepancy

Vehicle plate speed penalty discrepancy? What?

Community proposed stats requested:
GA LLAV
CA LLAV
Anti Infantry Small Missiles
Anti Vehicle Small Missiles
Sagaris
Surya
Modules

Well, with all of this... This will likely take some time. Like with what IWS is working on, will all this in Echo be in conjunction with what he's working on? If so, that needs to be fully fleshed out before working on the rest of the stuff.

Since you didn't mention the Logi DS, I'm guessing it will come later on.

AI small missiles - decrease the damage 50% - 60%, increase the fire rate by 40% - 50%, increase the splash zone by .5 to 1 meter.

AV small missiles - we already have them. There's no change necessary. Sir Snugglz can already wreck any tank I bring out, because he gets directly over it and hammers away.

Sagaris/Surya - as I've said before, when I think of the word 'marauder', I think of pirates. Pirates didn't hold back and defend anything, they went out, took what they wanted, didn't care who they killed, then left for other treasures. The Marauders in here should be the offensive tanks, not the defensive ones.

I'm a proponent of increasing the slot layout of the STD tanks, and these would obviously have one more hi and lo slot than their STD counterparts for shield and armor. Gunnlogi/Madrugar should be 4/2 and 2/4, while the Marauders should be 5/3 and 3/5. Keeping with infantry, base HP will remain the same, whereas CPU and PG need to be increased quite a bit.

Siege modules should actively increase turret damage. This shouldn't be on top of the current active damage mods. In fact, if my proposed siege module should be used, the active damage mods shouldn't stack on top. That's absolutely insane damage to dish out from just one railgun shot. The siege module could be at least 3% per level, though since it's an ADV tank, the module should increase damage output by 5% per level. Obviously, racial Marauder Operation would go towards the siege module. Maybe increase rate of fire for the racial turrets? The blaster would need a not-so-small bonus to rate of fire to make up for it being close quarters, vs 250m for the large missile and 300m for the railgun. This SHOULD NOT increase heat buildup. If that were to happen, the module would be counterproductive, and nobody would actually use it. I'd only be able to fire one rail round before it would overheat, and that one rail round would make it overheat.

Armor needs some passive resistance, as literally the only AV weapon/turret geared towards shield is the plasma cannon. Or is it also blaster? I don't play EVE, so I'm not up and up on all of the lore. But still, there's the forge, swarm and AV grenade that get great bonus damage against armor, so I don't think 2% per level passive resistance is an unfair thing to ask for.

Sadly, a fire rate buff is needed to make the turrets viable again. Missile could use a nerf to base speed; attach one to a Sagaris and it'll be something to be feared.

Modules - we're missing so much that it's actually sad. Passive hardeners/shield resistance mods, damage control mods, torque mods, active coolant, passive coolant, passive damage mods, active reps , remote armor reps and shield boosters (will get to logi LAV next), carbon nanofiber chassis mods, and I'm sure I'm missing more.

The Logi LAV should armor rep and shield boost in a circular area of effect, rather than the next-to-impossible way it used to be done, of using the right analog stick, when the camera view defaulted to center. Passive skill could be to rep rate; it should be something good like 3% - 5% per level. The Logi DS, when they're introduced, should get the passive skill to range. Their area of effect should be a cone pointed towards the ground. Range should be at 5% per level. Its second passive could be something like 10% reduction in mCRU spawn time per level to make it worth a heavy investment in SP. It'll be great in PC. It'll make tanks quite a bit more important, to swat them out of the sky. Not sure what a second passive for the Logi LAV could be. The Logi LAVs need to be 2/3 and 3/2, with good fitting. They could come with the infantry passive mods built-in, with option for the vehicle reps. They'll need to have quite a lot of CPU and PG to fit the remote vehicle mods on. Or, could make the second passive skill 5% reduction in CPU/PG usage per level.

I said this in IWS' thread, and I'll say it again. If infantry didn't complain about everything related to vehicles, we wouldn't be in the position we are currently. Chrome was the ideal build - tanks wrecked each other, and at least 10mil ISK was lost combined from both sides.

I have no problem with a price increase if tanks are worth it.

Vehicles are balanced to work against proto AV.
They were also designed to have different roles, not a straight increase of power (tiercide).

This isn't a matter of STD vs PRO, it's a matter of no tiers vs PRO.

Glad to see LLAVs "hopefully" coming back.

Is there any plan for changing the function of remote repair/ shield booster mods? Are you open to suggestions?

What about the addition of new vehicle logistic mods?

Also, shamelessly promoting my vehicle equipment slot thread.

The usefulness of RE's against vehicles is strongly out weighed by the community's abuse of throwing them at infantry, grenade like. Could you adjust RE's and make them not able to be restocked through the use of nano hives. This would help tremendously with the RE spam that is happening.

As for Marauders (which I think those tanks were), they need to be focused on their respective weaponry (blasters for Gallente and Missiles for Caldari), but I think should be slightly weaker defensively than their STD counterparts (though the damage bonus should be enough to account for it).

Perhaps have slightly higher base hp stats, but lower slot count. Also a bit faster and more agile (or at least nerf the STD variants). Basically the ground version of an ADS.

If LLAVs are going to be slow,the vehicles shield must protect the driver and rep gunner.

can you please buff proximity explosives thanks..

Proto tanks?
Introduce proto ads

So, basically, you want your own little battle in DUST that doesn't affect anything?
Gotchya

@ CCP Rattati

Re: Your module and Marauder foot notes, which I am very interested in, what do you think would be realistically attainable amongst these suggestions as these will determine my suggested value for the Marauders.

- Active Armour Repairs
- 180mm Plates
- 2/4 (4/2) or 2/5 (5/2) Slot lay outs
- PG and CPU adjustments for all HAV
- Adjustment of Shield Passive Regeneration
- Damage Control and Heat Sink Modules

You don't seem to understand me.
I am all for vehicle weapons being primarily anti vehicle.

The problem is that he wants his own enclosed little box within DUST 514, vehicles will essentially fight their own battle without affecting anything else.
What's the point of that?

Problem is, that when there's only vehicles on one side, or the opposing vehicles refuse to fight after losing their initial tank or running back to recall, then they melt the infantry anyways.

And that is the nature of escalation.

One teams acts.

The Other reacts.

The conflict is resolved. The losing side must then either choose to react again or stand down.

If a team is unwilling to commit either AV units, Tanks, or even a freaking Jihad Jeep to the combat then they have no cause to complain.

Those old Tank fights looked tough as hell and I remember watching Beld in his Surya, I think it was, blapping bobthecakeman (forgot his name its been so long)and visa versa all the live long day @ 3 million a pop.

blah blah

Nyain San is still stomping Ambush all day every day, and they're quick to drop two HAVs when the map loads OMS.

An overwhelming majority of infantry doesn't stomp, they don't even have positive KDRs. Even on my most tanked suit, a GK0 assault with 857 hp and 50,000,000 SP boosting all aspects of infantry life, a militia assault rifle available for free to every Gallente toon, or 610 isk for everyone else, will take me down in less than two seconds if they can bead me. Faster if they aim for the head. Not to mention the plethora of one hit kill weapons.

Infantry is countered by literally everything bar AV nades, swarmers, and flux grenades.

It is a tiny fraction of percent the infantry community that is able to actually put up high kills and low to no deaths.

However there is the belief among a large portion of tanker community that demands, just by virtue of being in a tank and with no consideration to personal skill, that they deserve to be difficult to kill, often even by other tanks, while maintaining the ability to destroy infantry just by looking at them.

There is no balance to be had there.

Aye, I agree, if vehicles were specialized more for anti tank over infantry, then I don't think we'd be having this conversation. However that is not the case, tank shots are just as effective at taking out tanks as they are infantry, and that leaves infantry in a bad place getting one shotted by every rail, and blasters in 2-5.

And that's exactly the mentality I was talking about earlier.

"I deserve to kill everything with relative ease and be difficult to kill in return because..."

Tankers should have the ability to go 40-0 through individual player skill just like saxonamish or whatever other high tier player, absolutely. But for every one tanker that does, there should be 100s of others that fall to their own lack of abilities just like the rest of the playerbase.

Sitting in a tank should not innately make you a good player.

Yes, I would love it if CCP took away aim assist from the game. I trust my own abilities to aim, I did very well for myself in the past, the less crutches the game has the better.

But if you don't think sitting in a vehicle with 5000+ health and resistance to 95% of everything in the game with an instant kill weapon isn't relying on a crutch, then you're delusional.

If you don't like infantry, go play World of Tanks.

While I can accept that it's probably true we'd not be having this discussion..... ain't no reason in hell an infantry ever deserve to live through a direct hit from a tank shell. Small turrets in Dust may or may not be equivalent to small turrets in EVE..... if they are you don't survive something that knocks starships out of the skies.

message begins

I'm not saying they shouldn't, in fact i literally said it in what you quoted that they should be able to kill like the top percentile of infantry. What I'm on about is that even bad players are made at least decent just because they're in a tank.

I never once said that I feel ARs should do damage to tanks, I only stated that they don't. However for the sake of game balance, I do feel that infantry needs some recourse against untouchable instant death machines, especially with the possibility of real proto tanks making a comeback soon and our current AV only being balanced against basic. Not absolute resistance, but at least -something- to mitigate the damage.

If I had my way about it it certainly wouldn't.

To be fair to Dust 514 I think we as vehicle players in many respects have been coddled and times, then kicked in the teeth at times..... one of the main reasons I think the Shield HAV is OP is because you cannot 2-3 shot it..... I'm used to dying in a Tank in 1-2 two rounds tops from 500m away (War Thunder).....but I certainly can't tell infantry he guys check out this alpha and blast radius borne from a Tank Simulator as frankly they couldn't handle it.

Rattati before you go and buff the TAC so much, please watch this video of mine:

http://www.twitch.tv/funkmasterwhale/c/5584743

This is me using the ADV TAC for the first time after a viewer asked me to demonstrate it. I honestly think if you gave this gun a 30 round clip it'd be a little too much. It's honestly fine as it is.

Second, kills in PC means absolutely nothing. I don't even understand why this is a metric you go by. PC is completely and utterly different from a public match. PC is all about taking and camping objectives. People don't go around farming kills and warpoints in PC like they do in public matches. This is the reason you see Boundless HMG and Shotguns as the top killers because everything revolves around spamming an objective with as much EHP and high-alpha damage to keep it protected.

In a public contract, people just go around farming warpoints and mercilessly killing everything. The objectives are cool but winning doesn't give you anything, so the dynamic of the battle is entirely different. Please don't base your balancing off people who claim "it's not used in PC".

Watch my video. I went 39-1 using the advanced version.

Maybe the issue isn't the gun but your own inability. But hey, let's balance things around people who are terrible and do nothing but whine. That always works

Yes it is your fault. Is that really hard to grasp? Like seriously, how daft can you be dude?

Just because you suck doesn't mean the rest of us do. Your logic is "buff this weapon because I can't do well with it", when there's evidence sitting right in front of your face of someone doing well with it. I use the TAC AR all the time and I can easily get 20+ kills without dying. Stop sucking at the game and maybe the weapons will work for you.

Just stop talking dude.

I don't even know why I bother with you.

Currently, the rest of kills in PC are split fairly equally between the rest of all the rifles, which is a huge win for the balancing effort that's been going on since Hotfix Alpha.