DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] HAV Bring Back Initiative

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] HAV Bring Back Initiative

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16366	Posted - 2015.01.01 00:48:00 - [631] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: True Adamance wrote: Again want to point out if Rattati cares where he can take inspiration from in terms of tank design. The WW2 American Tank line up is brilliant. M4 Sherman Medium Tank (Standard Hull) is the perfect example of the Madrugar in many respects. It's got thick armour, a competitive main gun, and fair mobility capabilities in terms of weight to power ratios. The M41 Walker Bulldog (Enforcer) is a thinly armoured tank with a big gun that uses sabot ammunition. Was one of the fastest tanks the Americans developed during the time but only had a maximum armour thickness of something like 32mm at its strongest point. The M106 Heavy Tank (Marauder) was an armoured behemoth and carried on of the largest cannons of the era while having an effective armour thickness on its glacis plate of almost 300mm being impenetrable to most smaller calibre weapons at longer ranges. 1. WOT/WW2 does not work in DUST - These tanks were created this way because of the era at that time - Penetation values of the ammo for example to thicker armor on the front turret means that the tank was going to be used hull down and bounce rounds of it 2. DUST is shield and armor - But you cannot bounce rounds, you cannot angle your tank so your treads get hit but you take no damage, you cant go hull down and let the turret bounce a few - damage is damage in this game, what it does it what it delivers 3. Glass cannons - TD or light tanks, TD massive frontal armor sloped to bounce rounds, light tanks fast and hard to hit - DUST glass is glass, you cannot bounce rounds only absorb damage, less HP = dead 4. WOT to DUST - Only way is to use skills/skill bonuses - For the enforcer to be like the TD because its a tank it needs to have more damage for its main turret to act like a TD, maybe have longer range too, also for it to be like a TD the turret doesnt move or it does very slowly in comparision to a normal tank and that it has more resistance at the front, weaker at the sides and at the back weaker still but between the TD there are variations such as the Hellcat 60kph or the Jpanther with strong frontal armor sloped or the AT7 with 200mm frontal armor not sloped but thick enough to stop most things My only points of contention are numbers 1 and 3... 1. Why wouldn't WW2 examples work for the time/place of DUST 514 (at least as abstractions to give us a general idea of how the different HAV hulls should operate) 3. Why not give Enforcers massive resitances to the front? they can give a decreased resistance (or negative value) to a weak point on the back, why not strengthen the front? Personally I'm always of the opinion that tanks forward armour could benefit from some kind of resistance buff to encourage tanks to always be facing their targets and using cover to minimise angles of fire against them. It's interesting with Lazer....he's saying all of these things as if I have not covered them long before him in this thread...... *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2654	Posted - 2015.01.01 00:54:00 - [632] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Would bekinda neat if ccp coded impact angles for av and turrets. Like the shallower the strike angle the more damage lost. No, because video game. Just because you hate fun doesn't mean everyone else does. No, I hate how my preferred playstyle gets marginalized, and being treated like a second class citizen. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 6123	Posted - 2015.01.01 02:05:00 - [633] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Would bekinda neat if ccp coded impact angles for av and turrets. Like the shallower the strike angle the more damage lost. No, because video game. Just because you hate fun doesn't mean everyone else does. No, I hate how my preferred playstyle gets marginalized, and being treated like a second class citizen. Try not treating everyone else like they're made of pure sh*t and they'll stop treating you like a second class citizen. You know, courtesy if you want courtesy? It does work occasionally. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2654	Posted - 2015.01.01 04:11:00 - [634] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Would bekinda neat if ccp coded impact angles for av and turrets. Like the shallower the strike angle the more damage lost. No, because video game. Just because you hate fun doesn't mean everyone else does. No, I hate how my preferred playstyle gets marginalized, and being treated like a second class citizen. Try not treating everyone else like they're made of pure sh*t and they'll stop treating you like a second class citizen. You know, courtesy if you want courtesy? It does work occasionally. So that's what you call my unwavering support of my chosen playstyle? Real nice I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 137	Posted - 2015.01.01 04:48:00 - [635] - Quote Spker and Breakin can we stop with the argumentative tangents? Spker, AVers and line infantry have just as much right to comment on their feelings of vehicle balance as vehicle users have to comment on dropsuit balance. Breakin does have a vehicle pilot alt (a maddy pilot), and if anything has been calling for AV and the Gunnlogi to both be nerfed to bring the maddy up to snuff (or, depending on how you read his wording, the maddy to be buffed and gunnlogi slightly nerfed)...the important part being that there is a reasonable TTK for a Dedicated AVer (Note the dedicated, not a guy who just grabs the starter AV fit or MLT FG) to take out an HAV (regardless of type) when the active mods are on cooldown. I guess my point is Spkr, tone it down, and don't take everything the Breakin suggests as automatically bad for vehicles (as not everything he suggests is), just consider his ideas and try to explain why you do or don't agree with him (give him the benefit of the doubt) According to the OP, Marauders and Enforcers are going to be side-grades...accept that they're not going to be as relatively powerful as they used to be, instead let's focus on developing suggestions for how they can best fill the rolls as described in the OP (or any role you feel they should fill, provided it stays with the stipulation of a side-grade). Breakin, it has felt in the past that Vehicle Operator's concerns took second seat to the concerns of AVers, so I understand Spker's fervent defense of roll, and violent opposition to the ideas he sees as threatening it. I agree that he needs to bring it down a notch but I agree that not having impact angles is an acceptable abstraction for the sake of simplifying game mechanics (although, I agree it would be kinda neat, base values don't change, but provides either more or less damage resistance dependent on the angle). At least you both agree on vehicles being brought back to something more similar to the old values, and that the modules that you fit should modify tank performance more than the hull. So can we talk about new base values that would be good for the hulls and modules that would support this style of customization (preferably without calling anyone's ideas crap out of hand, at least not without a full explanation as to why)? Also, for reference as we work on our suggestions: what's a good TTK MBT vs MBT assuming identical, defensive, brick fits facing each-other head-on (spherical mercs in a vacuum), I'm in favor of a longer TTK myself. oh, and what about adding a co-axial small turret? Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1276	Posted - 2015.01.01 09:29:00 - [636] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: problem is whenever someone suggests making enforcers light HP, big gun, people start absolutely shtting kittens saying they'll be useless and wanting them to be able to take lots of hits. I don't think people are on the same sheet of music when you say "Glass cannon." But on the other hand, I don't forsee anyone making the easy to annihilate hulls cheap, which is the POINT of glas cannon stuff economically. Lots of cheap tanks with big guns usually trumps a few heavy tanks with good armor. I would want them to be glass cannons to other tanks, but just as "tanky" against AV. It'd be a complete upgrade, but we wouldn't be *** on by AV for using our SP and also not being in a Marauder. As it stands, having the SP and running a STD tank makes no sense real sense unless you have the cash to blow. You'll be almost entirely as effective in a militia tank. I don't want the same thing to happen to the other tank types and out basic variants. Dual tanking is for bad players. Come play a better game.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 6127	Posted - 2015.01.01 09:59:00 - [637] - Quote Honestly the only way to balance enforcers as cannon destructo balls with a weak tank would be to bring back splash values. You can't make it a glass cannon and tanky period. But you can make it punch hard in both weight classes or as you said, AV will trivialize it. But if it has the ability to blow the crap out of infantry while retaining vulnerability it can balance out. Regardless it needs to be cheaper than the others. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 337	Posted - 2015.01.01 15:11:00 - [638] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: True Adamance wrote: Again want to point out if Rattati cares where he can take inspiration from in terms of tank design. The WW2 American Tank line up is brilliant. M4 Sherman Medium Tank (Standard Hull) is the perfect example of the Madrugar in many respects. It's got thick armour, a competitive main gun, and fair mobility capabilities in terms of weight to power ratios. The M41 Walker Bulldog (Enforcer) is a thinly armoured tank with a big gun that uses sabot ammunition. Was one of the fastest tanks the Americans developed during the time but only had a maximum armour thickness of something like 32mm at its strongest point. The M106 Heavy Tank (Marauder) was an armoured behemoth and carried on of the largest cannons of the era while having an effective armour thickness on its glacis plate of almost 300mm being impenetrable to most smaller calibre weapons at longer ranges. 1. WOT/WW2 does not work in DUST - These tanks were created this way because of the era at that time - Penetation values of the ammo for example to thicker armor on the front turret means that the tank was going to be used hull down and bounce rounds of it 2. DUST is shield and armor - But you cannot bounce rounds, you cannot angle your tank so your treads get hit but you take no damage, you cant go hull down and let the turret bounce a few - damage is damage in this game, what it does it what it delivers 3. Glass cannons - TD or light tanks, TD massive frontal armor sloped to bounce rounds, light tanks fast and hard to hit - DUST glass is glass, you cannot bounce rounds only absorb damage, less HP = dead 4. WOT to DUST - Only way is to use skills/skill bonuses - For the enforcer to be like the TD because its a tank it needs to have more damage for its main turret to act like a TD, maybe have longer range too, also for it to be like a TD the turret doesnt move or it does very slowly in comparision to a normal tank and that it has more resistance at the front, weaker at the sides and at the back weaker still but between the TD there are variations such as the Hellcat 60kph or the Jpanther with strong frontal armor sloped or the AT7 with 200mm frontal armor not sloped but thick enough to stop most things My only points of contention are numbers 1 and 3... 1. Why wouldn't WW2 examples work for the time/place of DUST 514 (at least as abstractions to give us a general idea of how the different HAV hulls should operate) 3. Why not give Enforcers massive resitances to the front? they can give a decreased resistance (or negative value) to a weak point on the back, why not strengthen the front? 1. Armor needs thickness and angling while all ammo needs penetration values and how does that work with shields and EVE in general? 3. Its the only way to do it in new eden so flanking is required but the problem is that damage is still caused where as TD in WW2 were able to bounce shots for no damage
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 138	Posted - 2015.01.01 16:26:00 - [639] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: True Adamance wrote: Again want to point out if Rattati cares where he can take inspiration from in terms of tank design. The WW2 American Tank line up is brilliant. M4 Sherman Medium Tank (Standard Hull) is the perfect example of the Madrugar in many respects. It's got thick armour, a competitive main gun, and fair mobility capabilities in terms of weight to power ratios. The M41 Walker Bulldog (Enforcer) is a thinly armoured tank with a big gun that uses sabot ammunition. Was one of the fastest tanks the Americans developed during the time but only had a maximum armour thickness of something like 32mm at its strongest point. The M106 Heavy Tank (Marauder) was an armoured behemoth and carried on of the largest cannons of the era while having an effective armour thickness on its glacis plate of almost 300mm being impenetrable to most smaller calibre weapons at longer ranges. 1. WOT/WW2 does not work in DUST - These tanks were created this way because of the era at that time - Penetation values of the ammo for example to thicker armor on the front turret means that the tank was going to be used hull down and bounce rounds of it 2. DUST is shield and armor - But you cannot bounce rounds, you cannot angle your tank so your treads get hit but you take no damage, you cant go hull down and let the turret bounce a few - damage is damage in this game, what it does it what it delivers 3. Glass cannons - TD or light tanks, TD massive frontal armor sloped to bounce rounds, light tanks fast and hard to hit - DUST glass is glass, you cannot bounce rounds only absorb damage, less HP = dead 4. WOT to DUST - Only way is to use skills/skill bonuses - For the enforcer to be like the TD because its a tank it needs to have more damage for its main turret to act like a TD, maybe have longer range too, also for it to be like a TD the turret doesnt move or it does very slowly in comparision to a normal tank and that it has more resistance at the front, weaker at the sides and at the back weaker still but between the TD there are variations such as the Hellcat 60kph or the Jpanther with strong frontal armor sloped or the AT7 with 200mm frontal armor not sloped but thick enough to stop most things My only points of contention are numbers 1 and 3... 1. Why wouldn't WW2 examples work for the time/place of DUST 514 (at least as abstractions to give us a general idea of how the different HAV hulls should operate) 3. Why not give Enforcers massive resitances to the front? they can give a decreased resistance (or negative value) to a weak point on the back, why not strengthen the front? 1. Armor needs thickness and angling while all ammo needs penetration values and how does that work with shields and EVE in general? 3. Its the only way to do it in new eden so flanking is required but the problem is that damage is still caused where as TD in WW2 were able to bounce shots for no damage Gotcha Let's Abstract that and assume that the weapons in New Eden are always able to make some ammount of damage stick (through warping armor plates, or drawing energy from the shields)...and using the WW2 model, abstract a given tank's armor plating (or resistance to penetration) as a combination of HP and Resistances (or if shield recharge delay is kept...hoping not..a better recharge threshold)...work with the WW2 examples as a baseline, but then see how you would make the functional within the rules of the game. (Maybe add in armor angling to add/remove resistances or damage when firing at certain parts of a tank from certain angles). A Tiger in dust doesn't have to be immune from lighter weapons fire, just practically immune (My Mission running BS in eve isn't immune from fire from rat cruisers, but I sure as hell don't worry about them very much...unless there are a ton of them) Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16375	Posted - 2015.01.01 19:13:00 - [640] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: True Adamance wrote: Again want to point out if Rattati cares where he can take inspiration from in terms of tank design. The WW2 American Tank line up is brilliant. M4 Sherman Medium Tank (Standard Hull) is the perfect example of the Madrugar in many respects. It's got thick armour, a competitive main gun, and fair mobility capabilities in terms of weight to power ratios. The M41 Walker Bulldog (Enforcer) is a thinly armoured tank with a big gun that uses sabot ammunition. Was one of the fastest tanks the Americans developed during the time but only had a maximum armour thickness of something like 32mm at its strongest point. The M106 Heavy Tank (Marauder) was an armoured behemoth and carried on of the largest cannons of the era while having an effective armour thickness on its glacis plate of almost 300mm being impenetrable to most smaller calibre weapons at longer ranges. 1. WOT/WW2 does not work in DUST - These tanks were created this way because of the era at that time - Penetation values of the ammo for example to thicker armor on the front turret means that the tank was going to be used hull down and bounce rounds of it 2. DUST is shield and armor - But you cannot bounce rounds, you cannot angle your tank so your treads get hit but you take no damage, you cant go hull down and let the turret bounce a few - damage is damage in this game, what it does it what it delivers 3. Glass cannons - TD or light tanks, TD massive frontal armor sloped to bounce rounds, light tanks fast and hard to hit - DUST glass is glass, you cannot bounce rounds only absorb damage, less HP = dead 4. WOT to DUST - Only way is to use skills/skill bonuses - For the enforcer to be like the TD because its a tank it needs to have more damage for its main turret to act like a TD, maybe have longer range too, also for it to be like a TD the turret doesnt move or it does very slowly in comparision to a normal tank and that it has more resistance at the front, weaker at the sides and at the back weaker still but between the TD there are variations such as the Hellcat 60kph or the Jpanther with strong frontal armor sloped or the AT7 with 200mm frontal armor not sloped but thick enough to stop most things My only points of contention are numbers 1 and 3... 1. Why wouldn't WW2 examples work for the time/place of DUST 514 (at least as abstractions to give us a general idea of how the different HAV hulls should operate) 3. Why not give Enforcers massive resitances to the front? they can give a decreased resistance (or negative value) to a weak point on the back, why not strengthen the front? 1. Armor needs thickness and angling while all ammo needs penetration values and how does that work with shields and EVE in general? 3. Its the only way to do it in new eden so flanking is required but the problem is that damage is still caused where as TD in WW2 were able to bounce shots for no damage Gotcha Let's Abstract that and assume that the weapons in New Eden are always able to make some ammount of damage stick (through warping armor plates, or drawing energy from the shields)...and using the WW2 model, abstract a given tank's armor plating (or resistance to penetration) as a combination of HP and Resistances (or if shield recharge delay is kept...hoping not..a better recharge threshold)...work with the WW2 examples as a baseline, but then see how you would make the functional within the rules of the game. (Maybe add in armor angling to add/remove resistances or damage when firing at certain parts of a tank from certain angles). A Tiger in dust doesn't have to be immune from lighter weapons fire, just practically immune (My Mission running BS in eve isn't immune from fire from rat cruisers, but I sure as hell don't worry about them very much...unless there are a ton of them) But the Tiger was immune to small arms fire. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.

Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 140	Posted - 2015.01.01 19:30:00 - [641] - Quote And HAVS are currently practically immune from smll arms fire (concen trated fire will. still hurt it if the HAV has no armor reps....we've gotten 5 tank kills by finishing off the survivor of a slugging match with my squads rifles). Not saying we need that level of front facing resistance, but it illustrates the point (we don't need a full tank simulation, just a reasonable facsimile of one) Sorry for any mistakes, phone is freaking out Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2672	Posted - 2015.01.02 02:42:00 - [642] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Would bekinda neat if ccp coded impact angles for av and turrets. Like the shallower the strike angle the more damage lost. No, because video game. So the 1,000,000+ who likes it a lot on War Thunder doesn't like fun then? Silly pilots are still as silly as silly Avers I see. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2672	Posted - 2015.01.02 02:44:00 - [643] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: True Adamance wrote: Again want to point out if Rattati cares where he can take inspiration from in terms of tank design. The WW2 American Tank line up is brilliant. M4 Sherman Medium Tank (Standard Hull) is the perfect example of the Madrugar in many respects. It's got thick armour, a competitive main gun, and fair mobility capabilities in terms of weight to power ratios. The M41 Walker Bulldog (Enforcer) is a thinly armoured tank with a big gun that uses sabot ammunition. Was one of the fastest tanks the Americans developed during the time but only had a maximum armour thickness of something like 32mm at its strongest point. The M106 Heavy Tank (Marauder) was an armoured behemoth and carried on of the largest cannons of the era while having an effective armour thickness on its glacis plate of almost 300mm being impenetrable to most smaller calibre weapons at longer ranges. 1. WOT/WW2 does not work in DUST - These tanks were created this way because of the era at that time - Penetation values of the ammo for example to thicker armor on the front turret means that the tank was going to be used hull down and bounce rounds of it 2. DUST is shield and armor - But you cannot bounce rounds, you cannot angle your tank so your treads get hit but you take no damage, you cant go hull down and let the turret bounce a few - damage is damage in this game, what it does it what it delivers 3. Glass cannons - TD or light tanks, TD massive frontal armor sloped to bounce rounds, light tanks fast and hard to hit - DUST glass is glass, you cannot bounce rounds only absorb damage, less HP = dead 4. WOT to DUST - Only way is to use skills/skill bonuses - For the enforcer to be like the TD because its a tank it needs to have more damage for its main turret to act like a TD, maybe have longer range too, also for it to be like a TD the turret doesnt move or it does very slowly in comparision to a normal tank and that it has more resistance at the front, weaker at the sides and at the back weaker still but between the TD there are variations such as the Hellcat 60kph or the Jpanther with strong frontal armor sloped or the AT7 with 200mm frontal armor not sloped but thick enough to stop most things My only points of contention are numbers 1 and 3... 1. Why wouldn't WW2 examples work for the time/place of DUST 514 (at least as abstractions to give us a general idea of how the different HAV hulls should operate) 3. Why not give Enforcers massive resitances to the front? they can give a decreased resistance (or negative value) to a weak point on the back, why not strengthen the front? That would actually make sense, well unless the Enforcer is fast, and therefore might try and orbit something, in which it won't have its face pointing towards the other HAV, but rather its sides and even back. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16386	Posted - 2015.01.02 07:51:00 - [644] - Quote I've had another thought. Perhaps it's easier to balance tanks around this ideal Tanks have less generalised slots and more specialise slot lay outs. Large Turret Slots (Slow RoF high damage cannon) Secondary Small Turret Slots (High RoF Anti Infantry guns) Armour/Shielding Slot (Designed to accommodate the tier of armour from Light to Heavy determining the vehicle primary HP and and mobility attributes) Defensive Slot 1 (designed to accommodate defensive modules that affect Shields or armour functionality from passive resistance to regenerative functions) Utility Slot 1 (designed to accommodate one utility slot that affects generally speaking non combative attributes) Utility Slot 2 (designed to accommodate one utility slot that affects generally speaking non combative attributes) From here vehicles and the angles of armour they are engaged at have standard resistance values depending firstly of the logical location the armour/shields would be thickest and then by racial attributes perhaps. Frontal Armour - Basic 25% resistance to AV weapons followed by racial modifier Side Armour - Basic 10% resistance to AV weapons followed by racial modifier Rear Armour - 0% - "-"10% resistance to AV weapons followed by racial modifier (not rear armour also have the weak point on it so additional damage vs this face is likely) Turret - 0% Resistance to damage. A Tank theoretically could look like this. Large Turret Slot: 80GJ Charged Electron Cannon Small Turret Slot: 20GJ Compressed Light Railgun Armour Slot: 120mm Armour Plating Offensive Slot: Plasma Focusing Array (adjusts Turret functionality) Defensive Slot: Active Nanite Injection System (passive regenerative feature ...blegh) Utility Slot 1: Damage Control Unit Utility Slot 2: Nitrous Injector Frontal Armour Damage Profile: 65% Damage Side Armour Damage Profile: 85% Damage Rear Armour Damage Profile: 115% Damage Turret Armour Profile: 100% The Turret Slots determine what basic functionality you want your tank to have. DPS vs Alpha. Armour Slot Conveys in this case a fair static armour boost and moderate mobility penalties. Pilot wants this tank to move reasonable quickly. Defensive Slot: Pilot wants this tank to passively repair itself during combat or actively at a slower rate outside of combat. Utility Slot 1: Pilot wants to have small resistance boosts for short periods of time to manage damage taken vs regenerated. Utility Slot 2: Pilot wants this tank to be able to accelerate quickly for a short time at a moments notice. If this ever was considered then..... Rig Slots: An Additional Slot that general enhances or focuses on boosting one single small aspect of your hull while coming with a slight penalty as well. E.G- Nanite Repair Systems Overclocker - Boosts the % of armour repaired by the Active Nanite Injection System by 10% however increases the cool down time of the unit by 5% or increases the PG of the unit by 10% etc. Armour Damage Profiles = Gallente - The Gallente are specialists of the scoot and shoot style of armoured warfare. A Gallentean Vehicle will rapidly approach and enemy column presenting its thicker forward armour at an angle firing a volley before reloading on the move. Thus Gallentea vehicles can rapidly agress and de-agress enemies with ease. However Gallentean tanks are usually constructed with lighter alloys to preserve mobility and this have weakened internal structures on the turret and rear sections of the hull. +10% resistance to Forward Armour Damage Profile +5% resistance to Side Armour Damage Profile -15% resistance to Rear Armour Damage Profile +0% resistance to Turret Armour Damage Profile So ideally when a Gallentean Tanker is on the field they are trying to be mobile, preserve their ability to manoeuvre for aggressive and passive actions and close in on their targets for maximum DPS while presenting either their forward or side armours. Meh just an off the cuff idea I've been mulling over. I got bored really and thought of ways to adjust the dynamic of tanks. Specialisations could function like this Marauder - +1 Defensive Module Slot - 25% Mobility Values and -15% Cool down to Utility Modules Fitted Enforcer - +1 Offensive Systems Module Slot -15% Defensive Values - 20% Turret Tracking Speed Black Ops - +2 Utility Systems Module Slots -10% to Offensive Systems Slot cooldown -10% to Defensive Systems Slot Cooldown. Or some other ***. "He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 6128	Posted - 2015.01.02 09:07:00 - [645] - Quote Bluntly I think impact angles would help vehicles overall. Of course It would require another rebalance but eh. Just make the assumption that shields are there to provide additional deflection and follow the contours of the vehicle to match the armor. I.e. Caldari would have angled armor, gallente sloped armor. Give the sloped less resistance to direct fire penetration and more splash deflection and do the opposite with angled or whatever seems appropriate. Or use Kane's signature radius idea. It's not an obvious solution but it seems to have a bit of merit. That way rather than trying to balance the guns to each vehicle you can increase or decrease sig to lower damage to that vehicle. A forge shot that passes through the bay doors of a dropship aren't going to do as much damage to a dropship as it will to a square hit on an HAVs ass. The HAV has almost zero "deadspace" inside it's hull comparatively so it's sig radius would be bigger and take more damage from AV (not just handhelds, but turrets too) This would allow vehicles that are constantly getting slapped around to be adjusted on the fly by tweaking the sig. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 673	Posted - 2015.01.02 09:28:00 - [646] - Quote I dont understand the need to turn Dust Tanks into War Thunder Ground Forces. This is just as much unrelated to the OP as Tank Crews. Its still an FPS and not a tank simulator. We dont need to remodel tanks from the ground up, we just need the old tanks reintroduced with an aceeptable slot layout, pg and CPU. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 6128	Posted - 2015.01.02 10:45:00 - [647] - Quote My vote is rebuilding the chromebalance and tweaking. We have a lot of the baseline stats now and besides the fact that to match chrome tank speed would need to go down to match the old balance we could simply tweak dropships upward to acommodate the necessary reversions of some AV weapons with the PLC brought upward a bit. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 140	Posted - 2015.01.02 12:50:00 - [648] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: True Adamance wrote: Again want to point out if Rattati cares where he can take inspiration from in terms of tank design. The WW2 American Tank line up is brilliant. M4 Sherman Medium Tank (Standard Hull) is the perfect example of the Madrugar in many respects. It's got thick armour, a competitive main gun, and fair mobility capabilities in terms of weight to power ratios. The M41 Walker Bulldog (Enforcer) is a thinly armoured tank with a big gun that uses sabot ammunition. Was one of the fastest tanks the Americans developed during the time but only had a maximum armour thickness of something like 32mm at its strongest point. The M106 Heavy Tank (Marauder) was an armoured behemoth and carried on of the largest cannons of the era while having an effective armour thickness on its glacis plate of almost 300mm being impenetrable to most smaller calibre weapons at longer ranges. 1. WOT/WW2 does not work in DUST - These tanks were created this way because of the era at that time - Penetation values of the ammo for example to thicker armor on the front turret means that the tank was going to be used hull down and bounce rounds of it 2. DUST is shield and armor - But you cannot bounce rounds, you cannot angle your tank so your treads get hit but you take no damage, you cant go hull down and let the turret bounce a few - damage is damage in this game, what it does it what it delivers 3. Glass cannons - TD or light tanks, TD massive frontal armor sloped to bounce rounds, light tanks fast and hard to hit - DUST glass is glass, you cannot bounce rounds only absorb damage, less HP = dead 4. WOT to DUST - Only way is to use skills/skill bonuses - For the enforcer to be like the TD because its a tank it needs to have more damage for its main turret to act like a TD, maybe have longer range too, also for it to be like a TD the turret doesnt move or it does very slowly in comparision to a normal tank and that it has more resistance at the front, weaker at the sides and at the back weaker still but between the TD there are variations such as the Hellcat 60kph or the Jpanther with strong frontal armor sloped or the AT7 with 200mm frontal armor not sloped but thick enough to stop most things My only points of contention are numbers 1 and 3... 1. Why wouldn't WW2 examples work for the time/place of DUST 514 (at least as abstractions to give us a general idea of how the different HAV hulls should operate) 3. Why not give Enforcers massive resitances to the front? they can give a decreased resistance (or negative value) to a weak point on the back, why not strengthen the front? That would actually make sense, well unless the Enforcer is fast, and therefore might try and orbit something, in which it won't have its face pointing towards the other HAV, but rather its sides and even back. Well give the Caldari Enforcer the Hardened Front Facing Armor/Shield, and give the Gallente hardened Side armor? Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 6129	Posted - 2015.01.02 15:02:00 - [649] - Quote Enhanced resists on the glacis plate and would fit the tank destroyer motif. There's nothing saying that a "glass cannon" cannot have strong points the way regular HAVs have weak points. Forcing people to think before they engage is never bad design space. I still think enforcers should have a 25% size reduction to make them harder to hit. Perhaps having one secondary gunner at most. You can justify all sorts of dirty design tricks if the premise of the vehicle is high vulnerability to AV weaponry of all types in order to avoid getting hit in the first place. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 343	Posted - 2015.01.02 17:56:00 - [650] - Quote True Adamance wrote: . 1. Problem with all that is that its another overhaul for a new type of tank 2. The reduction of module slots and seperation into specific areas does limit what you fit on to it, possibly allow rigs as in EVE and maybe a unqiue module that cannot be taken off but also does not take up a module slot so that all the races can use them without half the races having to put it into a tank slot but comes with that specific vehicle - Im sure someone has said this before somehwere 3. For a 'TD' type of tank then would the turret come with it? ie a turret that you cannot buy on the market but cannot be removed from the tank either, so the turret is a specalized turret 4. The resistances could work possibly for shield, but for armor seems out of place, how would laser work? the armor reflects the laser beam onto a nearby enemy tank and causes damage or the laser goes straight through it - Cant really have sloped/angled armor with laser or even missiles

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 6130	Posted - 2015.01.02 18:06:00 - [651] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: True Adamance wrote: . 1. Problem with all that is that its another overhaul for a new type of tank 2. The reduction of module slots and seperation into specific areas does limit what you fit on to it, possibly allow rigs as in EVE and maybe a unqiue module that cannot be taken off but also does not take up a module slot so that all the races can use them without half the races having to put it into a tank slot but comes with that specific vehicle - Im sure someone has said this before somehwere 3. For a 'TD' type of tank then would the turret come with it? ie a turret that you cannot buy on the market but cannot be removed from the tank either, so the turret is a specalized turret 4. The resistances could work possibly for shield, but for armor seems out of place, how would laser work? the armor reflects the laser beam onto a nearby enemy tank and causes damage or the laser goes straight through it - Cant really have sloped/angled armor with laser or even missiles assume that the armor is ablative, reflective coating to deflect coherent light energy. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2672	Posted - 2015.01.02 19:03:00 - [652] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I've had another thought. Perhaps it's easier to balance tanks around this ideal Tanks have less generalised slots and more specialise slot lay outs. Large Turret Slots (Slow RoF high damage cannon) Secondary Small Turret Slots (High RoF Anti Infantry guns) Armour/Shielding Slot (Designed to accommodate the tier of armour from Light to Heavy determining the vehicle primary HP and and mobility attributes) Defensive Slot 1 (designed to accommodate defensive modules that affect Shields or armour functionality from passive resistance to regenerative functions) Utility Slot 1 (designed to accommodate one utility slot that affects generally speaking non combative attributes) Utility Slot 2 (designed to accommodate one utility slot that affects generally speaking non combative attributes) From here vehicles and the angles of armour they are engaged at have standard resistance values depending firstly of the logical location the armour/shields would be thickest and then by racial attributes perhaps. Frontal Armour - Basic 25% resistance to AV weapons followed by racial modifier Side Armour - Basic 10% resistance to AV weapons followed by racial modifier Rear Armour - 0% - "-"10% resistance to AV weapons followed by racial modifier (not rear armour also have the weak point on it so additional damage vs this face is likely) Turret - 0% Resistance to damage. A Tank theoretically could look like this. Large Turret Slot: 80GJ Charged Electron Cannon Small Turret Slot: 20GJ Compressed Light Railgun Armour Slot: 120mm Armour Plating Offensive Slot: Plasma Focusing Array (adjusts Turret functionality) Defensive Slot: Active Nanite Injection System (passive regenerative feature ...blegh) Utility Slot 1: Damage Control Unit Utility Slot 2: Nitrous Injector Frontal Armour Damage Profile: 65% Damage Side Armour Damage Profile: 85% Damage Rear Armour Damage Profile: 115% Damage Turret Armour Profile: 100% The Turret Slots determine what basic functionality you want your tank to have. DPS vs Alpha. Armour Slot Conveys in this case a fair static armour boost and moderate mobility penalties. Pilot wants this tank to move reasonable quickly. Defensive Slot: Pilot wants this tank to passively repair itself during combat or actively at a slower rate outside of combat. Utility Slot 1: Pilot wants to have small resistance boosts for short periods of time to manage damage taken vs regenerated. Utility Slot 2: Pilot wants this tank to be able to accelerate quickly for a short time at a moments notice. If this ever was considered then..... Rig Slots: An Additional Slot that general enhances or focuses on boosting one single small aspect of your hull while coming with a slight penalty as well. E.G- Nanite Repair Systems Overclocker - Boosts the % of armour repaired by the Active Nanite Injection System by 10% however increases the cool down time of the unit by 5% or increases the PG of the unit by 10% etc. Armour Damage Profiles = Gallente - The Gallente are specialists of the scoot and shoot style of armoured warfare. A Gallentean Vehicle will rapidly approach and enemy column presenting its thicker forward armour at an angle firing a volley before reloading on the move. Thus Gallentea vehicles can rapidly agress and de-agress enemies with ease. However Gallentean tanks are usually constructed with lighter alloys to preserve mobility and this have weakened internal structures on the turret and rear sections of the hull. +10% resistance to Forward Armour Damage Profile +5% resistance to Side Armour Damage Profile -15% resistance to Rear Armour Damage Profile +0% resistance to Turret Armour Damage Profile So ideally when a Gallentean Tanker is on the field they are trying to be mobile, preserve their ability to manoeuvre for aggressive and passive actions and close in on their targets for maximum DPS while presenting either their forward or side armours. Meh just an off the cuff idea I've been mulling over. I got bored really and thought of ways to adjust the dynamic of tanks. Specialisations could function like this Marauder - +1 Defensive Module Slot - 25% Mobility Values and -15% Cool down to Utility Modules Fitted Enforcer - +1 Offensive Systems Module Slot -15% Defensive Values - 20% Turret Tracking Speed Black Ops - +2 Utility Systems Module Slots -10% to Offensive Systems Slot cooldown -10% to Defensive Systems Slot Cooldown. Or some other **. The slot layout stuff, absolutely ***** no. That's a more extreme way of doing 1.7, limiting choice because balance. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2672	Posted - 2015.01.02 19:04:00 - [653] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: My vote is rebuilding the chromebalance and tweaking. We have a lot of the baseline stats now and besides the fact that to match chrome tank speed would need to go down to match the old balance we could simply tweak dropships upward to acommodate the necessary reversions of some AV weapons with the PLC brought upward a bit. As I told you, that should exclude turret damage values, as they were as broken as now. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders Top Men. 2672	Posted - 2015.01.02 19:05:00 - [654] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: True Adamance wrote: Again want to point out if Rattati cares where he can take inspiration from in terms of tank design. The WW2 American Tank line up is brilliant. M4 Sherman Medium Tank (Standard Hull) is the perfect example of the Madrugar in many respects. It's got thick armour, a competitive main gun, and fair mobility capabilities in terms of weight to power ratios. The M41 Walker Bulldog (Enforcer) is a thinly armoured tank with a big gun that uses sabot ammunition. Was one of the fastest tanks the Americans developed during the time but only had a maximum armour thickness of something like 32mm at its strongest point. The M106 Heavy Tank (Marauder) was an armoured behemoth and carried on of the largest cannons of the era while having an effective armour thickness on its glacis plate of almost 300mm being impenetrable to most smaller calibre weapons at longer ranges. 1. WOT/WW2 does not work in DUST - These tanks were created this way because of the era at that time - Penetation values of the ammo for example to thicker armor on the front turret means that the tank was going to be used hull down and bounce rounds of it 2. DUST is shield and armor - But you cannot bounce rounds, you cannot angle your tank so your treads get hit but you take no damage, you cant go hull down and let the turret bounce a few - damage is damage in this game, what it does it what it delivers 3. Glass cannons - TD or light tanks, TD massive frontal armor sloped to bounce rounds, light tanks fast and hard to hit - DUST glass is glass, you cannot bounce rounds only absorb damage, less HP = dead 4. WOT to DUST - Only way is to use skills/skill bonuses - For the enforcer to be like the TD because its a tank it needs to have more damage for its main turret to act like a TD, maybe have longer range too, also for it to be like a TD the turret doesnt move or it does very slowly in comparision to a normal tank and that it has more resistance at the front, weaker at the sides and at the back weaker still but between the TD there are variations such as the Hellcat 60kph or the Jpanther with strong frontal armor sloped or the AT7 with 200mm frontal armor not sloped but thick enough to stop most things My only points of contention are numbers 1 and 3... 1. Why wouldn't WW2 examples work for the time/place of DUST 514 (at least as abstractions to give us a general idea of how the different HAV hulls should operate) 3. Why not give Enforcers massive resitances to the front? they can give a decreased resistance (or negative value) to a weak point on the back, why not strengthen the front? That would actually make sense, well unless the Enforcer is fast, and therefore might try and orbit something, in which it won't have its face pointing towards the other HAV, but rather its sides and even back. Well give the Caldari Enforcer the Hardened Front Facing Armor/Shield, and give the Gallente hardened Side armor? That would make sense. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16392	Posted - 2015.01.02 21:39:00 - [655] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: I dont understand the need to turn Dust Tanks into War Thunder Ground Forces. This is just as much unrelated to the OP as Tank Crews. Its still an FPS and not a tank simulator. We dont need to remodel tanks from the ground up, we just need the old tanks reintroduced with an aceeptable slot layout, pg and CPU. Not necessarily Ground Forces but like almost every other successful game that came out in the last ten years. Very rarely in online play have tanks been balanced around the idea of rapid firing guns. AKA for the all the long standing dumbshits who are continuing to not use their brains...... TANKS DONT FIRE .50 Calibre guns as their primary turrets they have those 120mm Guns for a ******* reason. If you are driving a vehicle that does has such a calibre of gun you are not driving a tank. None of us every have. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2655	Posted - 2015.01.02 22:44:00 - [656] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: I dont understand the need to turn Dust Tanks into War Thunder Ground Forces. This is just as much unrelated to the OP as Tank Crews. Its still an FPS and not a tank simulator. We dont need to remodel tanks from the ground up, we just need the old tanks reintroduced with an aceeptable slot layout, pg and CPU. Yeah, because FPS means no vehicles allowed. Vehicles do need to be redone, skills need to have proper bonuses, they need good PG, CPU and HP values, and turrets need to be proper as well. "Acceptable slot layout" to infantry means 2/2 on all hulls. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 6134	Posted - 2015.01.02 22:57:00 - [657] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Yeah, because FPS means no vehicles allowed. Vehicles do need to be redone, skills need to have proper bonuses, they need good PG, CPU and HP values, and turrets need to be proper as well. "Acceptable slot layout" to infantry means 2/2 on all hulls. You just keep banging on that drum princess. You and Laser can start a HAV bitterness focus group. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2655	Posted - 2015.01.03 00:14:00 - [658] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Yeah, because FPS means no vehicles allowed. Vehicles do need to be redone, skills need to have proper bonuses, they need good PG, CPU and HP values, and turrets need to be proper as well. "Acceptable slot layout" to infantry means 2/2 on all hulls. You just keep banging on that drum princess. You and Laser can start a HAV bitterness focus group. Oh boy, more trolling. I'm crying tears. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
ADAM-OF-EVE Dead Man's Game RUST415 1856	Posted - 2015.01.03 02:47:00 - [659] - Quote i think we will always have issues with tanks until you let us defeat them in other ways than killing which currently is the only way to deal with them. what we need is more options like https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2527039#post2527039 which i have been suggesting for ages. this will allow us to temporarily restrict vehicle movements and provide a middle ground to the infantry/vehicle interaction which doesn't involve 1 killing the other on sight. when we get this proper balance can be introduced between the 2 sides as needing to kill the other side fast is not going to be as important as restricting movement or returning it All Hail Legion
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 6135	Posted - 2015.01.03 08:30:00 - [660] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: i think we will always have issues with tanks until you let us defeat them in other ways than killing which currently is the only way to deal with them. what we need is more options like https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2527039#post2527039 which i have been suggesting for ages. this will allow us to temporarily restrict vehicle movements and provide a middle ground to the infantry/vehicle interaction which doesn't involve 1 killing the other on sight. when we get this proper balance can be introduced between the 2 sides as needing to kill the other side fast is not going to be as important as restricting movement or returning it The purpose of disabling a tank is so you can kill it. There is no justification for the assertion that destroying a tank should not be the primary objective of engaging it. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.