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)
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1322	Posted - 2014.12.17 21:23:00 - [211] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Dear Players, We have wanted to bring back variety for the Vehicle Users of DUST 514 for some time now. I will be honest and admit that I thought it would be easier. After considerable groundwork, I see that there is no easy way to do this and we have to refactor the Enforcers and Marauders completely, with new skills and bonuses where I was hoping to quickly review the slots, eHP and fitting capacity and ship them. So kind of good news and bad news. All that said and done, I am sharing an incredibly preliminary spreadsheet on how I see this working. In short The Enforcers and Marauders are strictly side-grades and meant to create an interesting vehicle vs vehicle paper/rock/scissors gameplay. Tank Destroyers - Enforcers - DHAVs Falchion - slow to react, quick to aim, long range platforms with very low ehp - Main Counter to Marauder - insta pops Vayu Vayu - flanking brawlers that circle to avoid tracking while blasting - Main counter to Falchion, has a fighting chance against Marauder Ultra Heavy Tanks (Super) - Marauders - UHAVs Surya - Armor and rep, low mobility, good turret tracking, stand and deliver Sagaris - Shield and regen, ok mobility, bad turret tracking, aim through maneuvering and flanking Main Battle Tank - HAV Marauder - Same (with tweaks) Gunnlogi - Same (with tweaks) I am not a tanker, so will rely on the Vehicle Community to bring everything they have to the table. CPM is also crowdsourcing something so should get interesting. Here is the spreadsheet, you are seeing this early an unpolished, probably with some errors. CCP, can you make it so when we point to a Sagaris, it says PRO instead of UHAV or Sagaris. It was my dream since I started playing two years ago. My dream to drive a Beast mode Sgaris with 7000+ shields that could tank hits from 5 guys. You do remember though that that kind of Sagaris was PASSIVE Tanked and only had a rep rate of 50-60 Shields per second..... and maybe only 20-30% passive resistances. Yeah, but people had militia starter fits and I had a Scattered ION CANNON! Anyway, that is false, they had two hardeners active (mine did), it also had passive resistance from the fact that it was a Marauder and it had the best heavy shield repair possible. Well, actually, it had all the best shield modules possible. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4029	Posted - 2014.12.17 21:27:00 - [212] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Are we getting a repec? Please, it's only fair. When you introduced new suits in 1.8 you gave everyone a respec and since the whole system is being reworked I demand a FREE respec. Um....why? Any specialty HAVs would be built off of existing skills, meaning that if you wanted to spec into them, you would just level up skills that require the ones you already have trained as a prereq. I'm pretty sure if CCP added in another special medium frame, special light frame and a special heavy frame, people would scream respec. Especially discussing the fact that this "build on" is going to potentially cost millions and millions of sp. I understand if it was minor fixes tweaks ect, but come on, they are releasing new variants/ skill books. So you're saying we should get a respec with the release of every new suit, weapon, and vehicle? lol "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1322	Posted - 2014.12.17 22:14:00 - [213] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Are we getting a repec? Please, it's only fair. When you introduced new suits in 1.8 you gave everyone a respec and since the whole system is being reworked I demand a FREE respec. Um....why? Any specialty HAVs would be built off of existing skills, meaning that if you wanted to spec into them, you would just level up skills that require the ones you already have trained as a prereq. I'm pretty sure if CCP added in another special medium frame, special light frame and a special heavy frame, people would scream respec. Especially discussing the fact that this "build on" is going to potentially cost millions and millions of sp. I understand if it was minor fixes tweaks ect, but come on, they are releasing new variants/ skill books. So you're saying we should get a respec with the release of every new suit, weapon, and vehicle? lol Except this is not just one suit, this is a crap ton of fixes and variants like logi LAV's, Marauders, Logi Drop ships, Enforcers and with a bunch of changes. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4030	Posted - 2014.12.17 22:19:00 - [214] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Are we getting a repec? Please, it's only fair. When you introduced new suits in 1.8 you gave everyone a respec and since the whole system is being reworked I demand a FREE respec. Um....why? Any specialty HAVs would be built off of existing skills, meaning that if you wanted to spec into them, you would just level up skills that require the ones you already have trained as a prereq. I'm pretty sure if CCP added in another special medium frame, special light frame and a special heavy frame, people would scream respec. Especially discussing the fact that this "build on" is going to potentially cost millions and millions of sp. I understand if it was minor fixes tweaks ect, but come on, they are releasing new variants/ skill books. So you're saying we should get a respec with the release of every new suit, weapon, and vehicle? lol Except this is not just one suit, this is a crap ton of fixes and variants like logi LAV's, Marauders, Logi Drop ships, Enforcers and with a bunch of changes. Which would require you to have the skills trained you already have trained lol. Say they release Caldari Enforcers. It requires Caldari HAV 3. Why do I need a respec to get the SP I've already spent on Caldari HAV, just so I can re-spend it on Caldari HAV? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16052	Posted - 2014.12.17 22:23:00 - [215] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Dear Players, We have wanted to bring back variety for the Vehicle Users of DUST 514 for some time now. I will be honest and admit that I thought it would be easier. After considerable groundwork, I see that there is no easy way to do this and we have to refactor the Enforcers and Marauders completely, with new skills and bonuses where I was hoping to quickly review the slots, eHP and fitting capacity and ship them. So kind of good news and bad news. All that said and done, I am sharing an incredibly preliminary spreadsheet on how I see this working. In short The Enforcers and Marauders are strictly side-grades and meant to create an interesting vehicle vs vehicle paper/rock/scissors gameplay. Tank Destroyers - Enforcers - DHAVs Falchion - slow to react, quick to aim, long range platforms with very low ehp - Main Counter to Marauder - insta pops Vayu Vayu - flanking brawlers that circle to avoid tracking while blasting - Main counter to Falchion, has a fighting chance against Marauder Ultra Heavy Tanks (Super) - Marauders - UHAVs Surya - Armor and rep, low mobility, good turret tracking, stand and deliver Sagaris - Shield and regen, ok mobility, bad turret tracking, aim through maneuvering and flanking Main Battle Tank - HAV Marauder - Same (with tweaks) Gunnlogi - Same (with tweaks) I am not a tanker, so will rely on the Vehicle Community to bring everything they have to the table. CPM is also crowdsourcing something so should get interesting. Here is the spreadsheet, you are seeing this early an unpolished, probably with some errors. CCP, can you make it so when we point to a Sagaris, it says PRO instead of UHAV or Sagaris. It was my dream since I started playing two years ago. My dream to drive a Beast mode Sgaris with 7000+ shields that could tank hits from 5 guys. You do remember though that that kind of Sagaris was PASSIVE Tanked and only had a rep rate of 50-60 Shields per second..... and maybe only 20-30% passive resistances. Yeah, but people had militia starter fits and I had a Scattered ION CANNON! Anyway, that is false, they had two hardeners active (mine did), it also had passive resistance from the fact that it was a Marauder and it had the best heavy shield repair possible. Well, actually, it had all the best shield modules possible. We'll never get the old Sagaris back the way it was. I have had a look into the statistics of the thing and normally you'd not be able to fit a Scattered Ion Cannon and a Heavy Clarity Ward Shield Booster, plus two Surge Hardners, and two Extenders to reach that 7000 Cap...... WITHOUT Maximum Fitting Values, and Low Slot Power Diagnostics. Grid Extenders...... AND after all of that just your gun and hull was 1,750,000 ISK with another 350,000 worth of module ISK, and 100,000 ISK for your turrets. NOT including the SP it took into core skill to use efficiently the Racial Marauders skill being a x12 skill, Racial HAV an 8x Skill, and the increased number of useful core skills. If I am not mistaken and you were not able to fit low slot damage modules your blaster would have done 180.1 damage per shot and a total DPS of almost 1400. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
DarthJT5 12th Shadow Legion 152	Posted - 2014.12.17 22:27:00 - [216] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Which would require you to have the skills trained you already have trained lol. Say they release Caldari Enforcers. It requires Caldari HAV 3. Why do I need a respec to get the SP I've already spent on Caldari HAV, just so I can re-spend it on Caldari HAV? Well pokey, you are going off the assumption that they won't fundamentally change the vehicle skill tree, just add new skills. He has a point in that if they change what some of the vehicle skills do, a respec may be warranted. Especially since you can just buy them now. Although, I find it unlikely that they will change the skills at all (even though I want them too) so a respec is probably not needed Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4031	Posted - 2014.12.17 22:29:00 - [217] - Quote DarthJT5 wrote: Well pokey, you are going off the assumption that they won't fundamentally change the vehicle skill tree, just add new skills. He has a point in that if they change what some of the vehicle skills do, a respec may be warranted. Especially since you can just buy them now. Although, I find it unlikely that they will change the skills at all (even though I want them too) so a respec is probably not needed Well obviously yes, if skills are removed that people have specced into, then they would obviously have to offer a respec, but that's entirely different from "They added new stuff I want so gimme SP back" "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1322	Posted - 2014.12.17 23:01:00 - [218] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: Well pokey, you are going off the assumption that they won't fundamentally change the vehicle skill tree, just add new skills. He has a point in that if they change what some of the vehicle skills do, a respec may be warranted. Especially since you can just buy them now. Although, I find it unlikely that they will change the skills at all (even though I want them too) so a respec is probably not needed Well obviously yes, if skills are removed that people have specced into, then they would obviously have to offer a respec, but that's entirely different from "They added new stuff I want so gimme SP back" It's more like, I skilled into pythons to 5 and incubus 5 and put a lot of SP in vehicle skills that I don't need however with new stuff coming out, I would like a respec so I can take the SP out of the stuff that is useless and put it in where it should have been if they didn't remove vehicles. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16053	Posted - 2014.12.17 23:12:00 - [219] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: Well pokey, you are going off the assumption that they won't fundamentally change the vehicle skill tree, just add new skills. He has a point in that if they change what some of the vehicle skills do, a respec may be warranted. Especially since you can just buy them now. Although, I find it unlikely that they will change the skills at all (even though I want them too) so a respec is probably not needed Well obviously yes, if skills are removed that people have specced into, then they would obviously have to offer a respec, but that's entirely different from "They added new stuff I want so gimme SP back" It's more like, I skilled into pythons to 5 and incubus 5 and put a lot of SP in vehicle skills that I don't need however with new stuff coming out, I would like a respec so I can take the SP out of the stuff that is useless and put it in where it should have been if they didn't remove vehicles. At this point that argument is rather..... moot. More importantly I'd like to hear what Rattati thinks of the current suggestions and if he has any of his own conclusions drawn from this thread. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
DarthJT5 12th Shadow Legion 152	Posted - 2014.12.17 23:24:00 - [220] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: Well pokey, you are going off the assumption that they won't fundamentally change the vehicle skill tree, just add new skills. He has a point in that if they change what some of the vehicle skills do, a respec may be warranted. Especially since you can just buy them now. Although, I find it unlikely that they will change the skills at all (even though I want them too) so a respec is probably not needed Well obviously yes, if skills are removed that people have specced into, then they would obviously have to offer a respec, but that's entirely different from "They added new stuff I want so gimme SP back" It's more like, I skilled into pythons to 5 and incubus 5 and put a lot of SP in vehicle skills that I don't need however with new stuff coming out, I would like a respec so I can take the SP out of the stuff that is useless and put it in where it should have been if they didn't remove vehicles. At this point that argument is rather..... moot. More importantly I'd like to hear what Rattati thinks of the current suggestions and if he has any of his own conclusions drawn from this thread. I think I'll make a thread that takes all of the best ideas of the thread and puts them together without having ten pages to go through. Lot easier to read. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16055	Posted - 2014.12.17 23:28:00 - [221] - Quote DarthJT5 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: Well pokey, you are going off the assumption that they won't fundamentally change the vehicle skill tree, just add new skills. He has a point in that if they change what some of the vehicle skills do, a respec may be warranted. Especially since you can just buy them now. Although, I find it unlikely that they will change the skills at all (even though I want them too) so a respec is probably not needed Well obviously yes, if skills are removed that people have specced into, then they would obviously have to offer a respec, but that's entirely different from "They added new stuff I want so gimme SP back" It's more like, I skilled into pythons to 5 and incubus 5 and put a lot of SP in vehicle skills that I don't need however with new stuff coming out, I would like a respec so I can take the SP out of the stuff that is useless and put it in where it should have been if they didn't remove vehicles. At this point that argument is rather..... moot. More importantly I'd like to hear what Rattati thinks of the current suggestions and if he has any of his own conclusions drawn from this thread. I think I'll make a thread that takes all of the best ideas of the thread and puts them together without having ten pages to go through. Lot easier to read. Leave that to Rattati. If he wants to clear this thread up then we should compile the best ideas and translate them. Let's not start making dozens of threads and dividing our suggestions. *"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 16055	Posted - 2014.12.17 23:38:00 - [222] - Quote I think the archetypes CCP Rattati has designed are fine in many respects. Some of his examples from EVE are a little iffy but get the point across, and while he kind of lacks the real world parallels to draw from it's very easy to provide examples. Tank Destroyers Russian ISU -122 German Jagdpather Heavy Infantry Tank German PzKpfw VI Ausf H American Sherman M4A2 Brittish Mk IV Churchill Russian Kv-85 Light Tanks and Cruiser Tanks (Generalist Hulls you might even say) Brittish Mk VIII Cromwell American M10 Wolverine German PzKpfw III Russian T-34 However I am concerned that in his proposal we risk needlessly creating great disparities between the Hull types where they are not necessarily needed, in terms of movement, and tracking, etc. I If I were to comment on the proposal I'd suggest basing the various version of concepts like the following (purely my opinion) Gunlogi Shield: 3000 Armour: 1200 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 (for now) Traits: Generalist's Hull Sagaris Shield: 3120 Armour: 1000 Slot Lay Out: 5/2 Traits: Slower Acceleration, Reduced Top Speed, Increased PG and CPU Allotment. Falchion Shield: 3200 Armour: 1125 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 Traits: More Powerful Main Gun, Slower Turret Tracking, Low PG and CPU allotment to discourage eHP tanking, Moderate Torque. Madrugar Shield: 1125 Armour: 3400 Slot Lay Out: 2/4 Traits: Generalist Hull Surya Shields: 1000 Armour: 3560 Slot Lay Out: 2/5 Traits: Slower Acceleration, Reduced Top Speed, Increased PG and CPU Allotment. Vayu Shield: 980 Armour: 3625 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 Traits: More Powerful Main Gun, Slower Turret Tracking, Low PG and CPU allotment to discourage eHP tanking, Moderate Torque. I have Pumped up my suggestions slot allocation by 1 on its Primary Racial Side at the moment but may reduce it later after eHP calculations are fully complete and consideration for reintroduction of other modules (the old ones). *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4032	Posted - 2014.12.17 23:48:00 - [223] - Quote True, I like the increase to slots but decrease to base HP. Puts more emphasis on WHAT You fit on your hull, not just what your base hull has naturally. It's a philosophy I want to apply to LAVs as well because 1. Their slot layouts are dismal, and 2. I'm tired of unfit LAVs being a pain in the ass to kill. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16057	Posted - 2014.12.18 00:01:00 - [224] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: True, I like the increase to slots but decrease to base HP. Puts more emphasis on WHAT You fit on your hull, not just what your base hull has naturally. It's a philosophy I want to apply to LAVs as well because 1. Their slot layouts are dismal, and 2. I'm tired of unfit LAVs being a pain in the ass to kill. Also you will probably note the counter intuitive base HP allocations for enforcers. As I mentioned before that's because I want to give them a fair fighting chance in combat with their limitied capability to fit plates, reppers, hardeners. Also updated the design philosophies which are a combination of how I feel they should be, what tanks were like when they had roles (before the concept of MBT), and dramatic flair. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
DarthJT5 12th Shadow Legion 153	Posted - 2014.12.18 00:04:00 - [225] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I think the archetypes CCP Rattati has designed are fine in many respects. Some of his examples from EVE are a little iffy but get the point across, and while he kind of lacks the real world parallels to draw from it's very easy to provide examples. Tank Destroyers Russian ISU -122 German Jagdpather Heavy Infantry Tank German PzKpfw VI Ausf H American Sherman M4A2 Brittish Mk IV Churchill Russian Kv-85 Light Tanks and Cruiser Tanks (Generalist Hulls you might even say) Brittish Mk VIII Cromwell American M10 Wolverine German PzKpfw III Russian T-34 However I am concerned that in his proposal we risk needlessly creating great disparities between the Hull types where they are not necessarily needed, in terms of movement, and tracking, etc. I If I were to comment on the proposal I'd suggest basing the various version of concepts like the following (purely my opinion) Gunlogi Shield: 3000 Armour: 1200 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 (for now) Traits: Generalist's Hull Sagaris Shield: 3120 Armour: 1000 Slot Lay Out: 5/2 Traits: Slower Acceleration, Reduced Top Speed, Increased PG and CPU Allotment. Falchion Shield: 3200 Armour: 1125 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 Traits: More Powerful Main Gun, Slower Turret Tracking, Low PG and CPU allotment to discourage eHP tanking, Moderate Torque. Madrugar Shield: 1125 Armour: 3400 Slot Lay Out: 2/4 Traits: Generalist Hull Surya Shields: 1000 Armour: 3560 Slot Lay Out: 2/5 Traits: Slower Acceleration, Reduced Top Speed, Increased PG and CPU Allotment. Vayu Shield: 980 Armour: 3625 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 Traits: More Powerful Main Gun, Slower Turret Tracking, Low PG and CPU allotment to discourage eHP tanking, Moderate Torque. I have Pumped up my suggestions slot allocation by 1 on its Primary Racial Side at the moment but may reduce it later after eHP calculations are fully complete and consideration for reintroduction of other modules (the old ones). What happened to the extra off rack mod for the enforcers? I rather liked that idea. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16059	Posted - 2014.12.18 00:16:00 - [226] - Quote DarthJT5 wrote: What happened to the extra off rack mod for the enforcers? I rather liked that idea. I personally don't (though I accept that you and Pokey Dravon do and noting that the above numbers are all just and opinion designed to be kicked around here). I see no value in it on a "protected gun system" which is arguably what a Tank Destroyer is in modern military terms (I guess). Design wise I am working off a more EVE like model of slot lay out and allocations...not to mention statistics in some places. One of those core ideals I am working under is that most modules that directly increase weapon damage or effectiveness are in the LOW SLOTS where they should always have been and at one time were. Under this ideal it makes more sense to have at least 4 on-rack (is that the correct term) modules which makes for better balance. Caldari in this case have access to High Slot Utility Modules necessary to function their vehicle's turret while not hugely compromising the little bit of racial tank they can and will need to fit while being able to fit damage modules in their low slots. Gallente gain the ability to stack damage affecting modules in their low slots but must not compromise the small racial tank the hull gets while being able to stack utility modules in their off rack slots. Ideally design wise each tank would have the capability to fit 2 or so slots for some eHP protection while the unfitted 2 highs and 2 lows not assigned to eHP can be filled with whatever weapons utility modules a player feels is most appropriate for their playstyle. In summary and after sooooooo much waffling on the idea behind the Enforcer is high damage out put and low tank. I feel this can be achieved in a very balanced manner. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4037	Posted - 2014.12.18 00:20:00 - [227] - Quote I guess my question is then...will people actually want to devote 2/3 of their slots to combat utility? EDIT: Again I apologize if I'm just not understanding, work + holidays = very fried brain. But to me the most intuitive setup is you devote all of your main-rack to defense, and then your off-rack to utility. Your proposal doesn't seem to follow that logic and I'm confused as to why. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1326	Posted - 2014.12.18 00:24:00 - [228] - Quote DarthJT5 wrote: True Adamance wrote: I think the archetypes CCP Rattati has designed are fine in many respects. Some of his examples from EVE are a little iffy but get the point across, and while he kind of lacks the real world parallels to draw from it's very easy to provide examples. Tank Destroyers Russian ISU -122 German Jagdpather Heavy Infantry Tank German PzKpfw VI Ausf H American Sherman M4A2 Brittish Mk IV Churchill Russian Kv-85 Light Tanks and Cruiser Tanks (Generalist Hulls you might even say) Brittish Mk VIII Cromwell American M10 Wolverine German PzKpfw III Russian T-34 However I am concerned that in his proposal we risk needlessly creating great disparities between the Hull types where they are not necessarily needed, in terms of movement, and tracking, etc. I If I were to comment on the proposal I'd suggest basing the various version of concepts like the following (purely my opinion) Gunlogi Shield: 3000 Armour: 1200 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 (for now) Traits: Generalist's Hull Sagaris Shield: 3120 Armour: 1000 Slot Lay Out: 5/2 Traits: Slower Acceleration, Reduced Top Speed, Increased PG and CPU Allotment. Falchion Shield: 3200 Armour: 1125 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 Traits: More Powerful Main Gun, Slower Turret Tracking, Low PG and CPU allotment to discourage eHP tanking, Moderate Torque. Madrugar Shield: 1125 Armour: 3400 Slot Lay Out: 2/4 Traits: Generalist Hull Surya Shields: 1000 Armour: 3560 Slot Lay Out: 2/5 Traits: Slower Acceleration, Reduced Top Speed, Increased PG and CPU Allotment. Vayu Shield: 980 Armour: 3625 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 Traits: More Powerful Main Gun, Slower Turret Tracking, Low PG and CPU allotment to discourage eHP tanking, Moderate Torque. I have Pumped up my suggestions slot allocation by 1 on its Primary Racial Side at the moment but may reduce it later after eHP calculations are fully complete and consideration for reintroduction of other modules (the old ones). What happened to the extra off rack mod for the enforcers? I rather liked that idea. Enforcer is suppose to be less tanked than the Standard Main Battle Tank but a lot more damage, Marauder is suppose to have a lot more tank ever the standard. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16063	Posted - 2014.12.18 00:45:00 - [229] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Enforcer is suppose to be less tanked than the Standard Main Battle Tank but a lot more damage, Marauder is suppose to have a lot more tank ever the standard. I believe we can achieve that. Following eHP values of Enforcer Tank < Cruiser Tank < Marauder Tank E.G -A Gunlogi will have 4/2 Slot Lay Out and 150/150 PG/CPU after turrets -A Sagaris will have 5/2 and 175/175 PG/CPU after turrets -A Falchion would have 4/2 and 100/100 PG?CPU after turrets Comparatively Shield Extenders, Shield Hardeners, and Shield Boosters are expensive module to fit. Costing anywhere between 35/35 and 50/50 (or some combination of values to fit). However Heat Sinks, Tracking Computers, Tracking Enhancers, Damage Modules, etc only cost between 1/1 and 10/10 (or some combination of these values). In comparison an Enforcer Tank has superior hull HP attributes, but less fitting capacity. If a Gunnlogi could fit 2 Heavy Extenders, a Hardener, and a Passive Recharger (for a passive tank) an Enforcer could only fit a hardener and maybe a Light Shield Extender/ or booster...... encouraging them to use the rest of their PG and CPU on Weapons Upgrades. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
The-Errorist 929	Posted - 2014.12.18 01:05:00 - [230] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: {Part 2/2} Add the [Black Ops] HAV as the support HAV. Short description: Heavily armored infantry, vehicle, and installation support platform. -25% turret damage (flat) -x% PG/CPU of fitting active scanners and vehicle remote repairers per level +1 built-in mCRU Less total PG/CPU compared to basic tanks Kubera (Gallente): x% bonus towards __ for remote vehicle armor repair modules per level. Changed base stats compared to basic: Scan profile: 35db to hide from STD scanners Base armor repair rate: -20% (20 hp/s) Base shield recharge rate: -20% (76.8 hp/s) Base price: 130,000 ISK Chakram (Caldari): x% bonus towards __ for remote vehicle shield repair modules per level. Changed base stats compared to basic: Scan profile: 35db to hide from STD scanners Base armor repair rate: -20% (12 hp/s) Base shield recharge rate: -20% (134.4 hp/s) Base price: 130,000 ISK [Marauder] HAVs: +2% to base shield and armor HP -x% penalty to turret rotation speed (flat) -x% penalty torque (flat) Surya (Gallente): 1% increase armor damage resistance and 2% increase in armor recharge rate per level Base armor repair rate: +20% (30 hp/s) Base price: 130,000 ISK Sagaris (Caldari): 1% increase in shield damage resistance and 2% increase in shield recharge rate per level Base price: 130,000 ISK [Enforcer] HAVs: +2% increased turret damage & +x% increase in turret rotation speed smaller -x% torque penalty torque than Marauders (flat) Faster forward speed and acceleration Less total PG/CPU compared to basic tanks Vayu (Gallente): Damage and fitting bonus to blasters and railguns Base armor repair rate: -20% (20 hp/s) Base shield recharge rate: -20% (76.8 hp/s) Base price: 130,000 ISK Falchion (Caldari): Damage and fitting bonus to missiles and railguns Base armor repair rate: -20% (12 hp/s) Base shield recharge rate: -20% (134.4 hp/s) Base price: 130,000 ISK [Other good ideas]: The Gallente tank has 76.9% of it's total HP as armor which is pretty good since Gallente is an armor tanking race, but If you look at the Gunnlogi, it has 63.9% of it's total HP as shields which is pretty ridiculous since Caldari vehicles should be almost exclusively shield tanking; making all Caldari vehicles have around 80% of their HP as shields would remedy this (3320 shields 830 armor). If racial placeholder vehicles get added later on, Minmatar vehicles should have around 50% of their HP as shields, and Amarr vehicles should have at least 80% of their HP as armor. Also to make Caldari tanks have a harder time at fitting armor modules and help Gallente tanks fit armor, all shield modules should cost 1 less PG and 4 to 5 more CPU, armor hardeners should cost around 30 less CPU and 7 more PG, and armor plates should cost around 20 less CPU and 5 more PG. Cat Merc wrote: I think the generalist tanks should have more slots, while the specialized tanks get fewer. ... I agree with that tanks don't have enough slots; basic tanks should have a 4/2 (Caldari) and 2/4 (Gallente) layout and I think it would be best to give specialized tanks less PG/CPU and a bonus to fitting stuff for their specialization instead of how an ADS has less slots than a basic DS. Also increasing the slot layout would mostly benefit Gallente tanks which are currently underpowered. Breakin Stuff wrote: ... You could allow HAVs to disable null cannons temporarily ... This would be cool and add to why would a team want a tank in the 1st place. If that can't be done, let turret installations able to damage MCC. MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).

The-Errorist 929	Posted - 2014.12.18 01:06:00 - [231] - Quote Can someone comment on what I wrote on post #196 & #197 Sir Dukey wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: ... CCP, can you make it so when we point to a Sagaris, it says PRO instead of UHAV or Sagaris. It was my dream since I started playing two years ago. My dream to drive a Beast mode Sgaris with 7000+ shields that could tank hits from 5 guys. It would say STD and not PRO since these specialized tanks would would be standard tanks. True Adamance wrote: Gunlogi Shield: 3000 Armour: 1200 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 (for now) .... Sagaris Shield: 3120 Armour: 1000 Slot Lay Out: 5/2 ... Falchion Shield: 3200 Armour: 1125 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 ... Madrugar Shield: 1125 Armour: 3400 Slot Lay Out: 2/4 ... Surya Shields: 1000 Armour: 3560 Slot Lay Out: 2/5 ... Vayu Shield: 980 Armour: 3625 Slot Lay Out: 4/2 ... I have Pumped up my suggestions slot allocation by 1 on its Primary Racial Side at the moment but may reduce it later after eHP calculations are fully complete and consideration for reintroduction of other modules (the old ones). While I support increasing the slot layout up 1 module, I don't support giving an extra module on top of that just for specializations. It's not much of a sidegrade even with the downsides you listed if it gets extra slots. Specializations shouldn't have part of their HP shifted from one side to another (changing the ratio of shields to armor) like how you have the Gunlogi compared to the Sagaris and Falchion, and the Falchion is supposed to the glass cannon, so it should not have more base eHP to start with compared to a generalist tank. Think of it this way: if a generalist tank doesn't stack HP mods and the glass cannon doesn't stack HP also, which should have the highest base HP? Also I want to say this again: Quote: The Gallente tank has 76.9% of it's total HP as armor which is pretty good since Gallente is an armor tanking race, but If you look at the Gunnlogi, it has 63.9% of it's total HP as shields which is pretty ridiculous since Caldari vehicles should be almost exclusively shield tanking; making all Caldari vehicles have around 80% of their HP as shields would remedy this (3320 shields 830 armor). If racial placeholder vehicles get added later on, Minmatar vehicles should have around 50% of their HP as shields, and Amarr vehicles should have at least 80% of their HP as armor. MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16072	Posted - 2014.12.18 01:33:00 - [232] - Quote Now on to your post. I like the concept of Black Ops and Logi Vehicles and I suppose at this stage we have to accept that if we want them they will have to be either in LAV or HAV form. Personally I'd love to see bother in the MAV as specialisations. Stats seem fine to be especially considering we could be using Medium Turrets rather than applying negative modifiers to existing assets....something I am simply not a fan off unless its tastefully done. ISK Prices are far too low for any specialist vehicle IMO. MLT HAV should cost 97,500, Standard Hulls 200,000, and Enforcer/Marauders at least 757,000. This to discourage spam and at least have us place some damn value on our tanks. RE: Your Marauder bonuses as I mentioned at the start of the post that is subject to change. Depending on eHP calculations for the Sagaris and bonuses for the hull it will change. RE: You Enforcer Changes. I wholly believe that Enforcer's turret tracking should go in the opposite direction. The Larger the cannon your have on a tank the slower it traverses, this is especially true for things in New Eden as we already have examples of more powerful turrets traversing more slowly. E.g- Dual Light Pulse Lasers traverse more quickly than Small Focused Pulse Lasers, which traverse faster than Dual Medium Pulse Lasers, whic Traverse Faster than Mega Pulse Lasers, etc.... ..... and I feel this would and should be negated if you chose to through the fitting of weapons upgrade modules which should be core to the design of Enforcers. Pokey has the base suggestions for the Amarr and Minmatar HAV in his post. 800 Shields 4000 Armour for the Amarr 2600 Shields 1500 Armour for the Minmatar The could be broken down as Disciple: 800/4000 (Cruiser) Malison: 580/4150 (Marauder) Bendiction: 690/ 4325 (Enforcer) or some such allocation. Remember again I am assuming this model under the old shield regen stats..... armour tanks will always essentially be tanking in their armour and shield HAV will either be passively regen tanking or actively booster tanking. Not this bullshit passive 168rep/sec we have now. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
The-Errorist 929	Posted - 2014.12.18 01:58:00 - [233] - Quote Going to edit shield recharge values on my post. MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16073	Posted - 2014.12.18 02:05:00 - [234] - Quote Let me give some more constructive feed back. Logisitics and Support Vehicles - I love the concept of this in every sense of the word, adding new layers of vehicle and infantry interplay would be lovely. Personally I see these roles as MAV roles but in their absence and accepting they may never eventuate these could be tastefully done on the HAV or LAV platform. -Your stats are fair I think, though I dislike the idea of reducing the effectiveness of existing assets over the introduction of mid tier assets....but again that's besides the point. - One thing we have to consider, and you may or may not know about it, is when you introduce/reintroduce remote reps you have to be very careful they aren't too powerful. In EVE most people consider logi the bane of fleet fighting because reps from an organised lgo chain are...... insanely good meaning if you call out that you are primary early you essentially cannot be killed as the enemy cannot break your logi. - Reintroduction of remote reps cannot be too powerful like they were at one point if I am not mistaken......and should not be too weak they have no effect in combat. Other than that I love it. Marauders Bonuses. Your suggestions are the kinds of bonuses I would drop that extra module slot for as passive shield resists with the additional slot would be OP. Enforcers. Fair and valid suggestions since the focus of the hull is its gun and I can see why you opted for faster tracking. I hope you can also see why I have suggested slower tracking. It's mainly because any tank that has a large turret tends to track slower due to the weight of the cannon. While in Dust we don't have such higher sizes of cannon I think it might do the Enforcer Class a world of good in terms of balancing to have a slower tracking speed in exchange for potentially much higher DPS and Alpha. I think the unanimous suggestions has been 10% at Racial Enforcer V. Plus damage modules, etc. You cannot really offer a much better vehicle as not only would you be more than powerful for your role in Vehicle vs Vehicle Combat but also have no reason to ever fit things like Tracking Computers and Enhancers/Metastasis Adjusters which are usually seen on kiting/sniping ships in EVE to enhancer tracking power. I hope this feed back is more constructive. Dat Subway was sooooooo good. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
DarthJT5 12th Shadow Legion 154	Posted - 2014.12.18 03:11:00 - [235] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Let me give some more constructive feed back. Logisitics and Support Vehicles - I love the concept of this in every sense of the word, adding new layers of vehicle and infantry interplay would be lovely. Personally I see these roles as MAV roles but in their absence and accepting they may never eventuate these could be tastefully done on the HAV or LAV platform. -Your stats are fair I think, though I dislike the idea of reducing the effectiveness of existing assets over the introduction of mid tier assets....but again that's besides the point. - One thing we have to consider, and you may or may not know about it, is when you introduce/reintroduce remote reps you have to be very careful they aren't too powerful. In EVE most people consider logi the bane of fleet fighting because reps from an organised lgo chain are...... insanely good meaning if you call out that you are primary early you essentially cannot be killed as the enemy cannot break your logi. - Reintroduction of remote reps cannot be too powerful like they were at one point if I am not mistaken......and should not be too weak they have no effect in combat. Other than that I love it. Marauders Bonuses. Your suggestions are the kinds of bonuses I would drop that extra module slot for as passive shield resists with the additional slot would be OP. Enforcers. Fair and valid suggestions since the focus of the hull is its gun and I can see why you opted for faster tracking. I hope you can also see why I have suggested slower tracking. It's mainly because any tank that has a large turret tends to track slower due to the weight of the cannon. While in Dust we don't have such higher sizes of cannon I think it might do the Enforcer Class a world of good in terms of balancing to have a slower tracking speed in exchange for potentially much higher DPS and Alpha. I think the unanimous suggestions has been 10% at Racial Enforcer V. Plus damage modules, etc. You cannot really offer a much better vehicle as not only would you be more than powerful for your role in Vehicle vs Vehicle Combat but also have no reason to ever fit things like Tracking Computers and Enhancers/Metastasis Adjusters which are usually seen on kiting/sniping ships in EVE to enhancer tracking power. I hope this feed back is more constructive. Dat Subway was sooooooo good. I would rather have the module slot. Make marauders get a small bonus to resistance to armour and shields per level, like 1-2%. Then the racial bonus could be small Hp and regen bonuses for their respective racial tank, plus the extra slot to make them the real tanky tanks. Customization and variety>>>>>>>> bonuses. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16081	Posted - 2014.12.18 03:14:00 - [236] - Quote DarthJT5 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Let me give some more constructive feed back. Logisitics and Support Vehicles - I love the concept of this in every sense of the word, adding new layers of vehicle and infantry interplay would be lovely. Personally I see these roles as MAV roles but in their absence and accepting they may never eventuate these could be tastefully done on the HAV or LAV platform. -Your stats are fair I think, though I dislike the idea of reducing the effectiveness of existing assets over the introduction of mid tier assets....but again that's besides the point. - One thing we have to consider, and you may or may not know about it, is when you introduce/reintroduce remote reps you have to be very careful they aren't too powerful. In EVE most people consider logi the bane of fleet fighting because reps from an organised lgo chain are...... insanely good meaning if you call out that you are primary early you essentially cannot be killed as the enemy cannot break your logi. - Reintroduction of remote reps cannot be too powerful like they were at one point if I am not mistaken......and should not be too weak they have no effect in combat. Other than that I love it. Marauders Bonuses. Your suggestions are the kinds of bonuses I would drop that extra module slot for as passive shield resists with the additional slot would be OP. Enforcers. Fair and valid suggestions since the focus of the hull is its gun and I can see why you opted for faster tracking. I hope you can also see why I have suggested slower tracking. It's mainly because any tank that has a large turret tends to track slower due to the weight of the cannon. While in Dust we don't have such higher sizes of cannon I think it might do the Enforcer Class a world of good in terms of balancing to have a slower tracking speed in exchange for potentially much higher DPS and Alpha. I think the unanimous suggestions has been 10% at Racial Enforcer V. Plus damage modules, etc. You cannot really offer a much better vehicle as not only would you be more than powerful for your role in Vehicle vs Vehicle Combat but also have no reason to ever fit things like Tracking Computers and Enhancers/Metastasis Adjusters which are usually seen on kiting/sniping ships in EVE to enhancer tracking power. I hope this feed back is more constructive. Dat Subway was sooooooo good. I would rather have the module slot. Make marauders get a small bonus to resistance to armour and shields per level, like 1-2%. Then the racial bonus could be small Hp and regen bonuses for their respective racial tank, plus the extra slot to make them the real tanky tanks. Customization and variety>>>>>>>> bonuses. That is certainly how I feel about the matter, however we have to consider with 5/2 and 2/5 lay outs the maximum eHP values of the Marauders especially with passive skill based bonuses like passive resists. It may be that we cannot have bother....but as you say that is in Rattati's hands. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
DarthJT5 12th Shadow Legion 154	Posted - 2014.12.18 03:29:00 - [237] - Quote True Adamance wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Let me give some more constructive feed back. Logisitics and Support Vehicles - I love the concept of this in every sense of the word, adding new layers of vehicle and infantry interplay would be lovely. Personally I see these roles as MAV roles but in their absence and accepting they may never eventuate these could be tastefully done on the HAV or LAV platform. -Your stats are fair I think, though I dislike the idea of reducing the effectiveness of existing assets over the introduction of mid tier assets....but again that's besides the point. - One thing we have to consider, and you may or may not know about it, is when you introduce/reintroduce remote reps you have to be very careful they aren't too powerful. In EVE most people consider logi the bane of fleet fighting because reps from an organised lgo chain are...... insanely good meaning if you call out that you are primary early you essentially cannot be killed as the enemy cannot break your logi. - Reintroduction of remote reps cannot be too powerful like they were at one point if I am not mistaken......and should not be too weak they have no effect in combat. Other than that I love it. Marauders Bonuses. Your suggestions are the kinds of bonuses I would drop that extra module slot for as passive shield resists with the additional slot would be OP. Enforcers. Fair and valid suggestions since the focus of the hull is its gun and I can see why you opted for faster tracking. I hope you can also see why I have suggested slower tracking. It's mainly because any tank that has a large turret tends to track slower due to the weight of the cannon. While in Dust we don't have such higher sizes of cannon I think it might do the Enforcer Class a world of good in terms of balancing to have a slower tracking speed in exchange for potentially much higher DPS and Alpha. I think the unanimous suggestions has been 10% at Racial Enforcer V. Plus damage modules, etc. You cannot really offer a much better vehicle as not only would you be more than powerful for your role in Vehicle vs Vehicle Combat but also have no reason to ever fit things like Tracking Computers and Enhancers/Metastasis Adjusters which are usually seen on kiting/sniping ships in EVE to enhancer tracking power. I hope this feed back is more constructive. Dat Subway was sooooooo good. I would rather have the module slot. Make marauders get a small bonus to resistance to armour and shields per level, like 1-2%. Then the racial bonus could be small Hp and regen bonuses for their respective racial tank, plus the extra slot to make them the real tanky tanks. Customization and variety>>>>>>>> bonuses. That is certainly how I feel about the matter, however we have to consider with 5/2 and 2/5 lay outs the maximum eHP values of the Marauders especially with passive skill based bonuses like passive resists. It may be that we cannot have both....but as you say that is in Rattati's hands. Some of the currently suggested ideas include. - Racial Benefits to their respective tanking modules Caldari - Shield resists Amarr- Armour resists Gallente - Armour repairs Minmatar- Shield boosters - Reduced cool downs on defensive modules - Increased duration on defensive modules - Passive Resistances - Static Base Shield or Armour increases Is it really in his hands? He's asked us on how to do it, so it's kinda in our hands. Also,new idea... What if marauders get fitting bonuses towards racial defensive mods, and either shield or armor regen on the racial skill books, then the marauder skill bonus could be defensive module duration and cool down. Thus, we can have the extra slot without giving bonuses that would be OP. Again, shield tanks would have to be looked at so they aren't too good but this doesn't seem like a bad idea too me. Btw, how was your sandwich? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
Buwaro Draemon WarRavens Capital Punishment. 476	Posted - 2014.12.18 03:33:00 - [238] - Quote Racro 01 Arifistan wrote: not sure if I like the idea of the falch insta poping the vayu/surya. please don't give any of the caldarian tank's a rail bonus. we don't need bonused double complex modded railguns. or at least keep railgun bonus to minimal ammounts missiles at least punish the user for missing their targets with slow reloads and having to line/track targets. blasters.................does anything else need to be said. while your doing tank changes. PLEASE REDUCE THE LARGE BLASTER DISPERION. AV on roof tops is ridiculos. at least railguns and missiles have a chance of kicking them off of a roof top. the blaster how ever is basically defencless and cant counter such a tatic. dont give the blaster pin point accuracy but at least give us less dispersion or the longer the blaster is fired the more that dispersion is appernet. and dispersion makes it a horrible pain to kill bunny hoping av users. takeing or sitting to long to kill a LONE av user until buddies come to help him is a death sentence. as it is right now blaster fitted tanks are just harmless beasts that cherrys feed off for points. at the very least give the gallente tanks some sort of bonus to reduce dispersion. The Falchion of before had the bonus for the Large Missile Turret and not the Rail Gun. Side effects of playing Dust: Emotional trauma, Anger Management issues, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and Depression
The-Errorist 929	Posted - 2014.12.18 03:38:00 - [239] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Let me give some more constructive feed back. Logisitics and Support Vehicles ... - One thing we have to consider, and you may or may not know about it, is when you introduce/reintroduce remote reps you have to be very careful they aren't too powerful. In EVE most people consider logi the bane of fleet fighting because reps from an organised lgo chain are...... insanely good meaning if you call out that you are primary early you essentially cannot be killed as the enemy cannot break your logi. - Reintroduction of remote reps cannot be too powerful like they were at one point if I am not mistaken......and should not be too weak they have no effect in combat. Other than that I love it. Also I rather have the reps be at first underpowered than increase it 'till it's balanced. How does these stats look? 7 cycles Armor: 370 hp/cycle Shield: 316 hp/cycle Cooldown for STD/ADV/PRO: 70/60/50 and it should work more like the cloakfield, so if you don't use all of the cycles, you won't experience the full cooldown time. True Adamance wrote: Marauders Bonuses. Your suggestions are the kinds of bonuses I would drop that extra module slot for as passive shield resists with the additional slot would be OP. In my post I said that specializations should have the same slot layout as basic tanks and have less PG/CPU compared to them. Also would you really think 5% resistance only to shields and 10% more HP is OP? I also removed the small other bonus I had towards repair rate. True Adamance wrote: Enforcers. Fair and valid suggestions since the focus of the hull is its gun and I can see why you opted for faster tracking. I hope you can also see why I have suggested slower tracking. It's mainly because any tank that has a large turret tends to track slower due to the weight of the cannon. While in Dust we don't have such higher sizes of cannon I think it might do the Enforcer Class a world of good in terms of balancing to have a slower tracking speed in exchange for potentially much higher DPS and Alpha. I think the unanimous suggestions has been 10% at Racial Enforcer V. Plus damage modules, etc. You cannot really offer a much better vehicle as not only would you be more than powerful for your role in Vehicle vs Vehicle Combat but also have no reason to ever fit things like Tracking Computers and Enhancers/Metastasis Adjusters which are usually seen on kiting/sniping ships in EVE to enhancer tracking power. I hope this feed back is more constructive. Dat Subway was sooooooo good. Yeah, I see your point, but I don't know if making turning speed slower to necessitate the existence/resurgence of tracking modules is good. Again I don't really feel strongly one way or another on that so I guess that would be ok. Also yes, that feedback was way more constructive and I edited my post to have less HP for Enforcers (forgot to add it) and I edited the segments about shield recharge: If the Gallente use 1/3 of their slots for armor repair, it should be better than Caldari's base repair like it is for dropsuits; Gunnlogi should have around 120 hp/s base repair. MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16083	Posted - 2014.12.18 03:43:00 - [240] - Quote DarthJT5 wrote: True Adamance wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Let me give some more constructive feed back. Logisitics and Support Vehicles - I love the concept of this in every sense of the word, adding new layers of vehicle and infantry interplay would be lovely. Personally I see these roles as MAV roles but in their absence and accepting they may never eventuate these could be tastefully done on the HAV or LAV platform. -Your stats are fair I think, though I dislike the idea of reducing the effectiveness of existing assets over the introduction of mid tier assets....but again that's besides the point. - One thing we have to consider, and you may or may not know about it, is when you introduce/reintroduce remote reps you have to be very careful they aren't too powerful. In EVE most people consider logi the bane of fleet fighting because reps from an organised lgo chain are...... insanely good meaning if you call out that you are primary early you essentially cannot be killed as the enemy cannot break your logi. - Reintroduction of remote reps cannot be too powerful like they were at one point if I am not mistaken......and should not be too weak they have no effect in combat. Other than that I love it. Marauders Bonuses. Your suggestions are the kinds of bonuses I would drop that extra module slot for as passive shield resists with the additional slot would be OP. Enforcers. Fair and valid suggestions since the focus of the hull is its gun and I can see why you opted for faster tracking. I hope you can also see why I have suggested slower tracking. It's mainly because any tank that has a large turret tends to track slower due to the weight of the cannon. While in Dust we don't have such higher sizes of cannon I think it might do the Enforcer Class a world of good in terms of balancing to have a slower tracking speed in exchange for potentially much higher DPS and Alpha. I think the unanimous suggestions has been 10% at Racial Enforcer V. Plus damage modules, etc. You cannot really offer a much better vehicle as not only would you be more than powerful for your role in Vehicle vs Vehicle Combat but also have no reason to ever fit things like Tracking Computers and Enhancers/Metastasis Adjusters which are usually seen on kiting/sniping ships in EVE to enhancer tracking power. I hope this feed back is more constructive. Dat Subway was sooooooo good. I would rather have the module slot. Make marauders get a small bonus to resistance to armour and shields per level, like 1-2%. Then the racial bonus could be small Hp and regen bonuses for their respective racial tank, plus the extra slot to make them the real tanky tanks. Customization and variety>>>>>>>> bonuses. That is certainly how I feel about the matter, however we have to consider with 5/2 and 2/5 lay outs the maximum eHP values of the Marauders especially with passive skill based bonuses like passive resists. It may be that we cannot have both....but as you say that is in Rattati's hands. Some of the currently suggested ideas include. - Racial Benefits to their respective tanking modules Caldari - Shield resists Amarr- Armour resists Gallente - Armour repairs Minmatar- Shield boosters - Reduced cool downs on defensive modules - Increased duration on defensive modules - Passive Resistances - Static Base Shield or Armour increases Is it really in his hands? He's asked us on how to do it, so it's kinda in our hands. Also,new idea... What if marauders get fitting bonuses towards racial defensive mods, and either shield or armor regen on the racial skill books, then the marauder skill bonus could be defensive module duration and cool down. Thus, we can have the extra slot without giving bonuses that would be OP. Again, shield tanks would have to be looked at so they aren't too good but this doesn't seem like a bad idea too me. Btw, how was your sandwich? It was a very good sandwich. In terms of fitting modules...... I don't know...... seems appropriate.....but underwhelming if you know what I mean....and regen wise? Regen is a sore spot for me right now. Just for my sake so I can understand what you want propose to me a ........ Role Bonus ( the bonus that either each Marauder has or the bonus that the Marauder's skill affects on the Sagaris vs Surya) and the Hull Bonus (The bonus unique to the hull perhaps affected by the Caldari/Gallente HAV skill) *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.



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.

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris