DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Hotfix Echo

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] Hotfix Echo

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 12 post(s)
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15627	Posted - 2014.12.09 19:56:00 - [1] - Quote @ 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 *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15628	Posted - 2014.12.09 21:07:00 - [2] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: Seems to me like your problem is with amarr suits not gallente suits, yet your armor witch hunt would not only nerf them but also gallente suits which are between balanced and UP. Even then an Amarr Assault with the much touted 1200 EHP is just plain bad. You might as well use a Sentinel at that point since you lose all semblance of mobility and could have higher EHP values anyway. And as I have found more recently...... mobility, sprint speed, and the ability to vault over low rails if incredible. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15628	Posted - 2014.12.09 21:20:00 - [3] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Cat Merc wrote: Sinboto Simmons wrote: As much as many AV users will disagree (I believe) the return of the LLV and prototype HAV will go far in efforts to balance current AV vs vehicles of it's rank. As of now there's only standard and militia vehicles against all four tiers of AV. 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. AV was buffed to be an end-all solution against all vehicles. One set of Boundless proxies will take out any vehicle. Vehicles should be balanced to take out other vehicles. Let us whack the hell out of each other, and you go take an objective. Leave us alone, we'll leave you alone. It's when you try to take me out with AV that I put an HMG in your face. Just leave us alone. We don't tell you how to do your role, you shouldn't tell us how our role should work. So, basically, you want your own little battle in DUST that doesn't affect anything? Gotchya Cat he isn't wrong. The main gun of most modern battle tanks has been a large calibre cannon designed to apply the maximum amount of destructive force at a target or at an enemy vehicle. All HAV main guns should be designed first and foremost to take down another vehicle of similar or small size, with a focus on infantry second. However the value of such vehicles really should become apparent in the inter play between the two units. Tanks will require gunners to engage multiple smaller targets in cover....... kind of the reason tanks often have forward hull guns or machine guns on the cuppola, and in the escorting of friendly units across open ground.....as well as (what I perceive to be the most important part of my role) forcing the enemy to bring out anti vehicle fits for you infantry to **** up. Line battles for HAV should be entirely possible...... all of those scenes from Dust 514 trailers should be possible for vehicle users to attain. It's what we want....hell I don't know of another tanker who thinks of a successful battle in KDR..... we think in terms of potential ISK destroyed. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15630	Posted - 2014.12.09 22:39:00 - [4] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: 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? There's not point but I think as a pilot of one of the, arguably, most hated vehicles know to this game...... there has to be a point where I step back and say.... I'm not designed to do this.... The issue is that when tanks do help infantry, the other infantry whine that HAV are OP, and the friendlies whine that the HAV stole their kills..... When we want to drop other vehicles AV whine that their role is not THE most effective means of dealing with vehicles, and other vehicles complain that we ARE the best means of destroying other vehicles..... With a current mind set like this where else can we go but our own little line battles if infantry won't let us help them, and other vehicles won't let us destroy them? *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15643	Posted - 2014.12.10 02:03:00 - [5] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Cat Merc wrote: 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? I'll say it again. We can melt all infantry, or vehicles can beat the hell out of each other. Choose one. 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. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15650	Posted - 2014.12.10 02:49:00 - [6] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: True Adamance wrote: Daddrobit wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Cat Merc wrote: 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? I'll say it again. We can melt all infantry, or vehicles can beat the hell out of each other. Choose one. 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. I think they didn't like Chromosome tanks because they very easily beat the hell out of each other, leaving AV to just watch the carnage. I bet they thought "why should tanks do that to each other, we should do that to them instead," and that started the straight-down roller coaster of tank nerfs. 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. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15656	Posted - 2014.12.10 03:50:00 - [7] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Daddrobit wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Cat Merc wrote: 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? I'll say it again. We can melt all infantry, or vehicles can beat the hell out of each other. Choose one. 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. So it should be balanced on the off chance that nobody on one team has access to a good tank? That's a terrible way to balance vehicles. It's the luck of the draw. If someone starts to protect their redline from the big bad wolf after losing one tank, then they have no business being in a tank in the first place. You can't balance vehicles around that. You say it shouldn't be balanced around the chance that someone can't counter you, but then say it's the luck of the draw that lets you stomp the other team if there isn't an opposing tank and suddenly that's an ok way to balance? No. Speaking 100% on general game balance, in a scenario where two teams have equal numbers of potential actors able to attack one another, there should never be a situation where one actor has a powerful manner of play that is best countered by itself or otherwise requires the combined effort of more than one individual on the enemy team. That is not proper game balance. And this applies to all gameplay, be it tanks, cloaky scouts, or murder taxi heavies. The best counter to any power play can never be itself and be considered balance. I won't start to talk too much about other games.....but I'll cite a number of games which are universally received as well made and that have vehicles that are able to counter multiple players at a time. Battlefield 3-4 Starwars Battlefront 1-2 Planetside 2 At some point players have to realise that vehicle operators have to be give credit for what they do. For every infantry man players accept that can have 8/0, 16/0, 21/1, hell if you are Saxonmish upwards of 40/0 you have to accept vehicles pilots can do that as well. However unlike in those games I am investing my personal economic resources (in game ISK) into the operation of these things. The difference between Tanks and infantry is that..... Tanks will always be one of the best counters to tanks (doesn't matter if its the best of not) as modern tanks are designed to destroy...... other modern tanks. Every infantry mounted heavy weapon will be a smaller calibre version of armaments that can be fitted on a tank. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15658	Posted - 2014.12.10 04:02:00 - [8] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Daddrobit wrote: blah blah But it's okay when it's 98% infantry doing the stomping, right? 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. Comparitively a Sica fit with roughly less that 8 Million SP worth of investment can utterly annihilate a fully speced out Tanker, additionally I have probably Op 5 Swarm Launchers and I can utterly deny armour tanks a place on the map. I don't want HAV to over powered. There's no reward or value in driving an overpowered vehicle nor any semblance of fun. I just want HAV to have a place on the battlefield that is their own and that they can thrive in. Killing infantry is not that role. Killing other ground based vehicles and installations is IMO that role we should excel in, with at best a secondary or tertiary focus on being able to engage infantry. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15662	Posted - 2014.12.10 04:27:00 - [9] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: True Adamance wrote: Daddrobit wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Daddrobit wrote: blah blah But it's okay when it's 98% infantry doing the stomping, right? 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. Comparitively a Sica fit with roughly less that 8 Million SP worth of investment can utterly annihilate a fully speced out Tanker, additionally I have probably Op 5 Swarm Launchers and I can utterly deny armour tanks a place on the map. I don't want HAV to over powered. There's no reward or value in driving an overpowered vehicle nor any semblance of fun. I just want HAV to have a place on the battlefield that is their own and that they can thrive in. Killing infantry is not that role. Killing other ground based vehicles and installations is IMO that role we should excel in, with at best a secondary or tertiary focus on being able to engage infantry. 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. If I could, I'd put resistances on infantry suits based on frame sizes to help mitigate that effect. Something like %75 %50 %25 and help actually place tanks into anti tank as a primary role. But I can already see speakers text in my head now.... "That's stupid, I'm in a tank, I should tear apart infantry with my cannons..." 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. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15667	Posted - 2014.12.10 05:08:00 - [10] - Quote Daddrobit wrote: True Adamance wrote: 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. 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. 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. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15706	Posted - 2014.12.10 23:15:00 - [11] - Quote I'm honestly not sure the Surya or Sagaris can be reimplemented properly using the current modules and stats we have right now. Shield HAV would still have the 168 Passive rep/sec over armour HAV, would still likely have the 40% Shield Hardeners (15% more effective than the Armour Hardener), better mobility options and arguably able to have near 9-10K EHP AND damage modules and function in exactly the same way Gunnlogi currently do.......only better. -At the very least Shield HAV PG and CPU need to be adjusted to prevent Armour tanking and exploitation of Fitting Mods -Standardisation of Hardeners to 30% my own personal opinion -Adjust Passive Shield Regeneration on Shield Vehicles to older constant values and kill off Passive Armour Rep Modules. Could coincide with the return of Powergrid Diagnostic Units, Passive Ward Fields, and Shield Regenerators to boost their statistics for passive tanks. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15710	Posted - 2014.12.11 00:15:00 - [12] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kaze Eyrou wrote: Sinboto Simmons wrote: Valor Goat wrote: John Psi wrote: Rattati, i hope, "armor plate strafe penalty" should be understood as "any HP Module strafe penalty"? Otherwise, it is one-sided gall nerf. No, leave us shield tankers alone; we're already poor and wretched. Now, now, be diplomatic: you can have that if we get our lowslot damage mods.... Speaking of that... I wouldn't mind seeing a ROF Damage Mod for the lows. Works perfect with the EVE mindset too. High slot Damage mods straight increase the damage of the weapon. Low slot ROF mod would increase any weapon's DPS with the downside of chewing through more ammo. Shield tankers will have the ability of fitting shields with damage (or rather ROF) mods in lows, similar to how Gallente or Amarr can fit damage mods in highs and armor in lows. Glass cannon fits could be made. No tank with high damage, fast hitting weapons. Thoughts? Really cool By comparison propulsion modules are typically in the mid slots (equivalent of high slots) ..... hint hint.... Kin Cats are prop mods.... *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15718	Posted - 2014.12.11 03:45:00 - [13] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: I want Repair Small Turrets Holy crap Like Favorite Retweet Why fit them over lets say remote reps unless you are willing to commit say 3 people to logi (pilot X gunners)..... *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 15802	Posted - 2014.12.12 08:52:00 - [14] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: 30 hp regen after 4 secs..... adds a recharger or energizer now 45 or 50 after 4 secs. Puts hp on 5 sec.... puts reg on 3 sec. Goes to fight gal with brch ar at 60 m gets him down to half armor waits for shields pops out full armor repeat. Why cant i get his armor down. Sees its a logi with 4 rep hives cries on the inside Y'know Jaques oddly enough it is the exact reason you suggest above why Shield HAV are currently over powered.... very odd that its almost completely the opposite way around for infantry. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.

Copyright © 2013-2024, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,03s, ref 20241102/1429
EVE-Online™/DUST514™ and EVE/DUST514 imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

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.