so the numbers are assuming hardeners running, not the base passive tank? If so **** yeah. Having to pull a reload while the hardeners are up is hardly what I'd call unfair. HOWEVER. three minutes to regen shields is too much downtime. I don't think it should be twenty seconds (like now) but three minutes would be overkill.

and I'm iffy on 45 seconds active hardener, but what the hell? I'm not remembering how long the current ones last. I'd be willing to give some of this a shot just to see how well it worked.

They're assuming hardeners running

I'll re-tweak the numbers...the idea of the 180 second regen time to to encourage the use of boosters and rechargers (added rechargers in the modules page). The Hardener is 22.5 Seconds Active, then goes on cooldown for 45 seconds (Same cooldown, reduced active duration assuming level 5). If I try to redo the regen time, I'll have to redo the rechargers as well

remember rechargers stop if you shoot them currently. And passive shield tank should be viable if you can get away from incoming fire long enough for the shields to kick in the recharge.

To an extent. To be fair, most dropsuits cant fit Proto EVERYTHING. Typically the sidearm and/or grenades are of a lower tier. So Proto Modules and Large Turret? Totally. But proto smalls on top of that? I'd have to say they would be a notch or two lower

Keep the "sidegrade, not an upgrade" mentality when coming up with prices. No need to make them super overpriced.

Updated my numbers with what I think would be pretty good (drawing heavily from EVE and the Dropsuits)...I don't think these will require too much of an AV Re-balance (other than filling the missing AV Roles).

A couple questions on the numbers. This isnt meant to be offesnsive, but its sure isnt going to be nice.

1) Why would i run a tank with a negative 25% damage bonus to a very expensive turret? Basically your Sagaris and Suraya are fat slow piniatas.

2) Why the STD tank redesign, and i do not have kind words for the stats on the maddy and gunlogi.

I would not like a 4-0 gunlogi with a passive shield regen of 18.1. My militia dropsuits rep shields faster than that. hell all of the shield regen numbers are bad, the infantry would riot if they had those numbers.

There is no use for a 3-3 madrugar, espeially with you slash proposed base hp stats from 5200 to 3400.


3) Caldari enforcer a 50% increase to range is in no way acceptable. 450 meters is from one red line to the other.

4)Amarr 15% natural armor resists, nope. Not with 4 low slots.

5) those turret stats, trying not to offend, but ........i dont know where to begin. if you want pro rail turrets to do 3242 damage per shot...sigh just tell me where did you get these numbers from?

some ideas are okay, but the majority, no. I think you are trying to take on too much at once, and those stats seem impossible to get rght without testing, and since nothing in vehicle related in dust is tested until after release, no i dont want to sit through months of these numbers at all. I think you shoud not tweak the base hulls that we already have and move the maruaders up and the enforces down the ladder respectively.

1. That propsal is depressing

2. Minmatar/Amarr vehicles do not exist and frankly we need to balance what we have now and not what will be introduced

3. Shield recharge on a shield vehicle is less than 20hp/s? Militia dropsuits have better - Its a vehicle with an engine and a shield generator and the old Surya had a better passive shield regen and thats an armor tank

4. Shield/Armor hardeners need to be the same %

5. Resistance numbers for front/side/back will need introducing
5a. I dont think i have a tank in WOT where the sides have better armor than the front, the front is always the strongest part of a tank and the -5/10% at the back isnt needed

6. Shield extenders in EVE always improve regen rate and also do not add to a deley in regen either, its adds to the sig profile
6a. Shield extenders look nerfed
6b. Armor plates are nerfed
6c. Ancillery - Would mean introduction of capacitors which i doubt
6d. Shield hardeners - 18seconds isnt long enough to do anything worthwhile and basic is same as complex should be tiered

7. Turrets - You just increased damage while nerfing the HP of the hulls/modules and activation times with resistance numbers on all sides of the vehicles so in the end add it together and we have TTK which is even quicker than compared to now - Why? You just have made all the work before it pointless since pilots do not want short timers and 3 shot each other

8. Bring back Chrome for AV vs vehicles and Uprising 1.0 for HAV vs HAV
6e. Armor hardeners - You just made them king again compared to shield and basic is same as complex should be tiered

Before you start yanking numbers from EVE:

EVE is not an FPS game. Your ability to aim in the game is calculated purely by server fiat. The firing mechanics in EVE are tethered to the fitting potential and hull speed and maneuverability.

In DUST it is player piloting agility and error vs. Enemy ability to consistently hit targets.

I agree with laser for once here. Because facing armor values aren't in the game we are unlikely to get it unless DUST becomes a cult hit and the cash overflow overruneth the cup, allowing CCP to do legion and a PS4 port.

Further armor on the glacis plate should be strongest as statistically the front of a tank is the most likely to be facing anti armor fire.

I like what you are trying to do, but we need to use existing mechanics. Troll back a few pages and look up the chrome V/AV spreadsheet someone linked to and poke at those numbers.

Ask the HAV pilots what the turrets were doing in 1.1 and take that into account. Once we have enough of that, if we can get enough people to sign off "this is what we want" we have something we can ask rattati for.

Trying to re-invent the wheel won't get us anywhere. The more we work within established mechanical boundaries the more likely we are to get what we want.

1) Really?

2) These Racial vehicle values are based on the relative values of the current dropsuits, and don't necessarily need to be fully introduced to achieve balance, but we do need more racial weapons (and damage types to achieve proper balance).

3) Shield regeneration based on a recharge time 3.5 times smaller than the frigates in eve, and every effort made to maintain the charge time when increasing buffer. In addition, rechargers under this proposal are very powerful, and consider fitting a booster every once in a while (It's designed to prevent shield tanks from being massively powerful compared to their armor counterparts).

4) They don't necessarily need to be, provided that shield Hardeners have a low enough active duration and long enough cooldown, but I agree it would be easier to balance if they where identical (feel free to try stuff out, using the armor hardener stats for it...shield's being pulse-like isn't something I'm attached to).

5) Page 3 of the proposal talks about resistance by facing, Are you agreeing with me that it should be introduced? (Hard to tell).
5a) Side Armor stronger on the Brawler Marauders could be changed, but it is to demonstrate their "Orbiting Style" of combat that Rattati suggested, what would good values be for this?
5a-b) Noted, but it isn't that big of a deal to remove them.

6) Yes, in eve shields increase signature radius not some DRD level, but Signature radius helps all weapons hit you better (not to mention decreases enemy lock-time) which is a hard feature to implement in DUST, so DRD helps with the damage application side of things.

6a-b) yes both are nerfed by approx 10% to account for the average resistance gained under the Base Resistance by fitting section, might not be entirely necessary, but I thought it was a good idea to account for gaining 10% more EHP base on the sides, and 20% more base on the front.

6c) No it wouldn't, these are just active armor repairers...(these assume we're keeping our current passive ones as well)

6d) I was keeping with the current feel of shields being pulse-like, and the difference in stats is in the Cooldown, can look at active duration if you'd like

6e) (I saw you down at the bottom) They have the same tiering as shield hardeners, reduced cooldown. This sticks with CCP's current design philosophy...but if you think they need changed, what are good values for them? (I'll plug them in and see how they change things)

7) Rail Turrets have the same DPS as before (Just fire slower), Blasters could be toned down, but all the other weapons are based on the relative DPS of infantry portable weapons (using the Railgun as the Rail Rifle). TTK with railgun might be modified very slightly

8) If CCP happens to have the exact numbers cached somewhere agreed, this is only in case they didn't save the old numbers (or if they felt that reverting to them would be too much of an overhaul) and to demonstrate where racial variants might be.

Thanks for the neatly ordered feadback Lazer

Lazer
I think you misunderstood what I was talking about in number 3 and 6...but that's a bit irrelevant to the discussion as a whole. You don't have to explain Eve's mechanics to me, I know them well. Anyway, so if vehicle v vehicle TTK is too low, why not try adjusting the turret DPS instead of increasing base hp too much (I'm adjusting my hp numbers back up and just going to make a note on the resistance page).

What do you think would be a good DPS for the Rail Turret? (If I change its DPS the other guns should update accordingly)

(Guns in my proposal as it is now can only theoretically OHKO a base hull with no HP Mods)

Weakspot changes that instantly.

A wiyrkomi breach forge can kill a maddy in one shot with three mods if the gunner is slick enough to get in aft.

Against shields in the weakspot my forge guns hit for 165% and about 245% to raw armor

My hud may or may not be inaccurate but the results speak for themselves.

You absolutely CAN oneshot an HAV by putting a round up the tailpipe.

So instead of increasing the base stats on the hulls, why not increase the HP given by armor plates themselves? (or re-examine the damage bonus from the tailpipe weakspot)

Nowadays I only need to know three things.

1: what your hull is

2: what your gun is.

3:whether you're an HMG sentinel poptart.

That's it.

That's not how it should be.

3. Chrome/Uprising you could tell from the stats of the HAV if they had skills or not and the skill tree alone gave a number of options into where to skill 1st while modules created a variety of fits - At 30mil SP you would not have level 5 everything for vehicles let alone have any SP into infantry things because there was always something else you wanted or needed to create that perfect fit or just to finish off a level - The difference in them days was huge, you either went full vehicles or not at all and it felt like a role, like something to get your teeth into - Yes it was hard for a new vehicle pilot due to no MM or decent academy system but you stick with it and learn and improve like any other role

So...we're in agreement that we need a less hull-centric model for vehicles, with more of a focus on what modules are fitted, and with skills effecting final stats?

Lazer
I think you misunderstood what I was talking about in number 3 and 6...but that's a bit irrelevant to the discussion as a whole. You don't have to explain Eve's mechanics to me, I know them well. Anyway, so if vehicle v vehicle TTK is too low, why not try adjusting the turret DPS instead of increasing base hp too much (I'm adjusting my hp numbers back up and just going to make a note on the resistance page).

What do you think would be a good DPS for the Rail Turret? (If I change its DPS the other guns should update accordingly)

(Guns in my proposal as it is now can only theoretically OHKO a base hull with no HP Mods)

1. New Eden - If its in EVE it should follow to DUST - Its the same universe

2. Chrome was the 2 shot era for vehicles - Uprising 1.0 stopped that with reduction in damage mods and turrets damage - Also more modules slots and variety of modules and turrets with useful skills and skillbooks altered TTK before anyone brought out a vehicle - Vehicles were more defensive in Uprising era because to me at least it did take longer to take down vehicles due to everything above

Updated my numbers with what I think would be pretty good (drawing heavily from EVE and the Dropsuits)...I don't think these will require too much of an AV Re-balance (other than filling the missing AV Roles).

Nerfing the Gunnlogi? Giving the Sagaris worse fitting than the Gunnlogi?

People like you get vehicles nerfed into worthlessness. Is there any specialized suit that has less PG and CPU than its basic counterpart?

1) Based on the descriptions that Rattati gave, I came up with the idea of making the Marauders Giant Battle-Buses. The Actual Size of the negative bonus is irrelevant (25% is a bit ridiculous) but it was to illustrate their roll as a large, frontline infantry killer.

I'm thinking the Madrugar and Gunnlogi will be the main battle tanks.

2) The Gunnlogi's Regen and Buffer currently are way too high relative to the Maddy, so I started by Slashing the regen down (and basing it off of a recharge time 3.5 time lower than the frigates) and making ever effort to ensure that adding buffer maintained the recharge. I then lowered the base fitting stats slightly (5%) to account for a 5% per level fitting skill being added in.

So instead of buffing the Madrugar to be on par with the Gunnlogi, you nerf the Gunnlogi to be on par with the Madrugar. Another bad idea.

a) The Maddy got a base armor nerf, but a fitting buff and on the modules page the introduction of the Large Plates should help significantly. As for the Specifics of slot layouts it's more to demonstrate that Gallente and Minmatar need to be mirroring eachother (Try it with the Maddy being a 2/4 instead)

My Madrugar already nearly gets destroyed by a single Minmando. It doesn't need any less HP.

c) The base HP numbers came from the cruisers in EVE, taking their shield and armor numbers and modifying them slightly to fit better into dust, (such as decreasing the shield levels slightly to account for the proposed base resistance by facing, increase the values of all the base HP and fitting mods that provide hp by 10% if you don't think the resistance by facing will be coming)

Might as well have pulled the numbers out of a hat.

d) Also, the shield regen numbers come back at a constant rate under this proposal, no shield recharge delay (Only Depleted Delay), so the hit isn't quite as bad as it seems. Additionaly, vehicle recharges are massively powerful under this proposal (if you look next to them you can see the power of only fitting one to a gunnlogi)

That's how it was in Chrome. I'm working on numbers with that in effect.

3) Again here, the actual size of the bonus doesn't really matter (as long as the devs know that a proposal like this will need to be hammered out) and could probably be brought down to a 25% total, but it is to illustrate the Caldari Philosophy of Range.

Yes it does, because a PRO breach forge hitting the 167% in the back has a real good chance of destroying a base HP tank in one shot. That's an insane bonus for a weapon that already does insane damage.

5) The turret stats for Rails Specifically came from reducing the refire rate to make them feel more like main cannone,

No, because it's the future.