DUST Search - [Idea] New Installation That Spawns Vehicles

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Idea] New Installation That Spawns Vehicles

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 533	Posted - 2014.12.30 06:15:00 - [1] - Quote This new installation would make getting vehicles on the battlefield easier than before and avoids the frustrations caused by RDVs. Players can spawn in any vehicle they choose with this new asset and it can be hacked like any other installation. It will be a flat platform with a console on one side and can only spawn one vehicle at a time. If a vehicle is on the platform, the installation will not spawn another until the vehicle gets off. This installation can be used in a new game mode that is detailed in this thread. What do you guys think?
Ydubbs81 RND Ahrendee Mercenaries 3640	Posted - 2014.12.30 06:30:00 - [2] - Quote I like it at first glance....but what happens if the enemy has all of the installations hacked and your team is redlined? how will you call in vehicles? Shield tanking is hard mode /period. > Check RND out here
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 533	Posted - 2014.12.30 06:35:00 - [3] - Quote Good question, Ydubbs81. The vehicle installation will also be available in your redline.
Zepod Titans of Phoenix 50	Posted - 2014.12.30 07:39:00 - [4] - Quote I think we should simply improve the Bolas' AI. You may not like what I just said, but you know it's true...
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1655	Posted - 2014.12.30 14:25:00 - [5] - Quote Zepod wrote: I think we should simply improve the Bolas' AI. Bolases don't have to be perfect. Delivery failure every once and then suits the feeling of war. BUT AI improvements and environment collision have to be upgraded; there's no room for tank yo-yoing bolas pilots on the field. Pro-choice! For hazardous self-activated inertial dampeners! We want to live on the edge (((of MCC)))
Buwaro Draemon WarRavens Capital Punishment. 521	Posted - 2014.12.30 20:03:00 - [6] - Quote So instead of a CRU you want a VRU? Changes to Damage mods!
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2346	Posted - 2014.12.30 20:09:00 - [7] - Quote Buwaro Draemon wrote: So instead of a CRU you want a VRU? They're called Motor Pools.... TBH, this is something that I've been thinking about a bit today and I like the idea. Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 751	Posted - 2014.12.30 20:35:00 - [8] - Quote I had a similar idea back when RDV spam at the beginning of matches was causing problems. My idea was that calling in a vehicle anywhere on the map incurred an additional RDV fee. While calling a vehicle at a designated spawn pad would be free. Who cares what some sniper has to say
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 536	Posted - 2014.12.31 03:55:00 - [9] - Quote Buwaro Draemon wrote: So instead of a CRU you want a VRU? It's more like the supply depot.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 335	Posted - 2014.12.31 14:18:00 - [10] - Quote 1. PS2 has these, call in a vehicle it pops up with you in it, can only hack it if you own the compound or are a scout, if not can only be destroyed

Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2652	Posted - 2014.12.31 18:34:00 - [11] - Quote Terry Webber wrote: This new installation would make getting vehicles on the battlefield easier than before and avoids the frustrations caused by RDVs. Players can spawn in any vehicle they choose with this new asset and it can be hacked like any other installation. It will be a flat platform with a console on one side and can only spawn one vehicle at a time. If a vehicle is on the platform, the installation will not spawn another until the vehicle gets off. This installation can be used in a new game mode that is detailed in this thread. What do you guys think? No, it doesn't make it easier, it's a terrible idea. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2348	Posted - 2014.12.31 23:00:00 - [12] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Terry Webber wrote: This new installation would make getting vehicles on the battlefield easier than before and avoids the frustrations caused by RDVs. Players can spawn in any vehicle they choose with this new asset and it can be hacked like any other installation. It will be a flat platform with a console on one side and can only spawn one vehicle at a time. If a vehicle is on the platform, the installation will not spawn another until the vehicle gets off. This installation can be used in a new game mode that is detailed in this thread. What do you guys think? No, it doesn't make it easier, it's a terrible idea. Do you have something aside from your opinion to add to this or do you simply desire to deride this idea? Really, you should cite facts before declaring it to be a terrible idea. Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 536	Posted - 2015.01.02 22:35:00 - [13] - Quote Alaika is right, Spkr4theDead, a kneejerk reaction is not enough of an opinion about this topic. Please explain your disagreement further.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 539	Posted - 2015.01.06 06:53:00 - [14] - Quote This thread needs some feedback.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 546	Posted - 2015.01.13 01:45:00 - [15] - Quote Any thoughts at all about this subject?
Finn Colman Immortal Guides Learning Alliance 107	Posted - 2015.01.13 02:44:00 - [16] - Quote I feel that it works well as an alternate option rather than a replacement. PSA: Tell players to terminate in order to access mCRUs.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 551	Posted - 2015.01.14 23:42:00 - [17] - Quote Finn Colman wrote: I feel that it works well as an alternate option rather than a replacement. You may be right. The RDV may be useful for getting a vehicle on the battlefield when this installation is not nearby. I'll edit the OP to reflect this.
ADAM-OF-EVE Dead Man's Game RUST415 1902	Posted - 2015.01.15 01:05:00 - [18] - Quote step 1 place proximity mines at front of platform step 2 place removes at back of platform step 3 blow up any poor soul that spawn s on it repeat All Hail Legion
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 551	Posted - 2015.01.15 01:43:00 - [19] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: step 1 place proximity mines at front of platform step 2 place removes at back of platform step 3 blow up any poor soul that spawn s on it repeat Unless someone checks for an RE. What will you do then?
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 564	Posted - 2015.02.01 07:14:00 - [20] - Quote Any support for this?

TooMany Names AlreadyTaken Going for the gold 957	Posted - 2015.02.01 10:57:00 - [21] - Quote Wtf? Dude, I had a dream about such an Installation a few days ago, but it was like a garage of sort. You would access a console on the outside and after 5 seconds the doors would open and your vehicle would be pushed out on a pad on rails. Found my favorite DJ - ATB
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 599	Posted - 2015.03.13 21:06:00 - [22] - Quote That's pretty much what I had in mind, TooMany.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 641	Posted - 2015.04.08 21:50:00 - [23] - Quote This would be a very convenient alternative to the RDV.
Mister Goo Random Gunz 194	Posted - 2015.04.09 14:15:00 - [24] - Quote Terry Webber wrote: This new installation would make getting vehicles on the battlefield easier than before and provides an alternative to RDVs. Players can spawn in any vehicle they choose with this new asset and it can be hacked like any other installation. It will be a flat platform with a console on one side and can only spawn one vehicle at a time. If a vehicle is on the platform, the installation will not spawn another until the vehicle gets off. This installation can be used in a new game mode that is detailed in this thread. What do you guys think? sounds like planet side 2 on the PS4 Closed Beta Vet Minmatar Logistics I Repair, Revive, and Replenish. Leave the slaying for Assaults and Heavies.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 644	Posted - 2015.04.09 15:34:00 - [25] - Quote Mister Goo wrote: Terry Webber wrote: This new installation would make getting vehicles on the battlefield easier than before and provides an alternative to RDVs. Players can spawn in any vehicle they choose with this new asset and it can be hacked like any other installation. It will be a flat platform with a console on one side and can only spawn one vehicle at a time. If a vehicle is on the platform, the installation will not spawn another until the vehicle gets off. This installation can be used in a new game mode that is detailed in this thread. What do you guys think? sounds like planet side 2 on the PS4 Exactly.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 23130	Posted - 2015.04.09 15:38:00 - [26] - Quote RDVs have never worked well. Fixed spawn points should have always been the way to go. Gallente Guide one day i may leave the basement but that day is not today
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 3047	Posted - 2015.04.09 22:24:00 - [27] - Quote Depends on where they're positioned. None will be used in the map due to being a big ass target (unless that entire part of the map is locked down), and if there's only one in the base, calling in **** for multiple pilots per match would take forever, kinda like people having to wait for other people to be spawned in before they get spawned in. Also, if this is a replacement idea, then it presents the problem of there not being a effective way to send things away as you described it, unless it's a two way thing. If so, this could be even better, allowing for a quick way to get rid of fits, especially if near the base. Hell, even fit switching would be faster. Regardless, I think RDV's should stay in, especially if maps ever get larger (eventually Dust will move to a X86 platform...... at least I hope it does) click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 644	Posted - 2015.04.10 01:28:00 - [28] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Depends on where they're positioned. None will be used in the map due to being a big ass target (unless that entire part of the map is locked down), and if there's only one in the base, calling in **** for multiple pilots per match would take forever, kinda like people having to wait for other people to be spawned in before they get spawned in. Also, if this is a replacement idea, then it presents the problem of there not being a effective way to send things away as you described it, unless it's a two way thing. If so, this could be even better, allowing for a quick way to get rid of fits, especially if near the base. Hell, even fit switching would be faster. Regardless, I think RDV's should stay in, especially if maps ever get larger (eventually Dust will move to a X86 platform...... at least I hope it does) I'm not saying RDVs should be removed. The vehicle installation is just a different method of bringing in vehicles.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 669	Posted - 2015.04.21 22:37:00 - [29] - Quote I thought of making the installation being able to spawn four vehicles at a time instead of one. This might address the issue Godin brought up about long lines of players trying to get their vehicles. What do you guys think?
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 3119	Posted - 2015.04.22 02:35:00 - [30] - Quote Terry Webber wrote: I thought of making the installation being able to spawn four vehicles at a time instead of one. This might address the issue Godin brought up about long lines of players trying to get their vehicles. What do you guys think? It would probably have to be modeled to reflect this, and seeing how big vehicles are and might get in the future, would have to be quite big, and therefore deployment areas for maps that have them might have to grow, or simply not have them. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-

Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 671	Posted - 2015.04.22 12:41:00 - [31] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Terry Webber wrote: I thought of making the installation being able to spawn four vehicles at a time instead of one. This might address the issue Godin brought up about long lines of players trying to get their vehicles. What do you guys think? It would probably have to be modeled to reflect this, and seeing how big vehicles are and might get in the future, would have to be quite big, and therefore deployment areas for maps that have them might have to grow, or simply not have them. Then we can have multiple single spawn vehicle installations.
Lightning35 Delta514 48TH SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCE 286	Posted - 2015.04.22 15:23:00 - [32] - Quote I think it's is called a supply depot. 48th Special Operations Force. Twitter- @48SOF
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 671	Posted - 2015.04.22 17:22:00 - [33] - Quote Can you explain why a supply depot should spawn vehicles, Lightning?
Isa Lucifer Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 208	Posted - 2015.04.22 17:51:00 - [34] - Quote Terry Webber wrote: Can you explain why a supply depot should spawn vehicles, Lightning? Good reference on War of the Worlds. I like the idea. I think this would entail having more building on the map, making it bigger. Thus making the max amounts of players bigger... But back on the installation itself, Yes I like it. Maybe put it in a certain place where the RDV cannot come in because of so many building together (like in the city socket). Also might be too dangerous for the RDV. I think to make it enticing to use the facility, the RDV has to be a. be a killable target for a bigger amount of time b. have reduce HP. It makes more logic the RDV making the trip from the MCC to the drop off point instead of just appearing very near the point and then dissapearing Amarr Victor
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 3121	Posted - 2015.04.22 20:24:00 - [35] - Quote Terry Webber wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Terry Webber wrote: I thought of making the installation being able to spawn four vehicles at a time instead of one. This might address the issue Godin brought up about long lines of players trying to get their vehicles. What do you guys think? It would probably have to be modeled to reflect this, and seeing how big vehicles are and might get in the future, would have to be quite big, and therefore deployment areas for maps that have them might have to grow, or simply not have them. Then we can have multiple single spawn vehicle installations. The problem will still exist if they are separate or not (it might be even a slightly bigger issue with them separate). click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 3121	Posted - 2015.04.22 20:26:00 - [36] - Quote Lightning35 Delta514 wrote: I think it's is called a supply depot. There's lots of SD's that are simply not accessible by vehicles, and the ones that are is in the actual battlefield, meaning that calling in a vehicle would take more time than current for no reason, and would become a lot of the time much more dangerous. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 672	Posted - 2015.04.22 21:33:00 - [37] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Terry Webber wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Terry Webber wrote: I thought of making the installation being able to spawn four vehicles at a time instead of one. This might address the issue Godin brought up about long lines of players trying to get their vehicles. What do you guys think? It would probably have to be modeled to reflect this, and seeing how big vehicles are and might get in the future, would have to be quite big, and therefore deployment areas for maps that have them might have to grow, or simply not have them. Then we can have multiple single spawn vehicle installations. The problem will still exist if they are separate or not (it might be even a slightly bigger issue with them separate). Then only the consoles can be modeled. The platforms can be added later.
tritan abbattere DBAG CORE 62	Posted - 2015.04.23 01:07:00 - [38] - Quote I think this would be great to add but RDV should stay in the game. I am the all mighty Tritan. Fear me for I am a MassHole
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 672	Posted - 2015.04.23 12:38:00 - [39] - Quote tritan abbattere wrote: I think this would be great to add but RDV should stay in the game. As I have already said, I don't think the RDV should be removed. This installation is just another option for bringing in vehicles.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. RUST415 682	Posted - 2015.05.02 05:52:00 - [40] - Quote Any other thoughts about this? It could also be used in planetary raiding.

I-Shayz-I I----------I 5496	Posted - 2015.05.02 11:18:00 - [41] - Quote I'd call it a vehicle garage. Basically a supply depot and cry combined, but for vehicles. You would drive into it for repairs, resupplying, or swapping fits. Obviously any of these things would remove you from the battle for quite some time, and the vehicle swap might take as much time as recalling and calling in a new bolas. but yeah, this is the kind of installation I would want. 7162 wp with a Repair Tool!
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1017	Posted - 2015.05.02 11:35:00 - [42] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Terry Webber wrote: This new installation would make getting vehicles on the battlefield easier than before and avoids the frustrations caused by RDVs. Players can spawn in any vehicle they choose with this new asset and it can be hacked like any other installation. It will be a flat platform with a console on one side and can only spawn one vehicle at a time. If a vehicle is on the platform, the installation will not spawn another until the vehicle gets off. This installation can be used in a new game mode that is detailed in this thread. What do you guys think? No, it doesn't make it easier, it's a terrible idea. Do you have something aside from your opinion to add to this or do you simply desire to deride this idea? Really, you should cite facts before declaring it to be a terrible idea. dont worry about spkr. he likes to speak out of his ass and **** out his mouth
Terry Webber Molon Labe. RUST415 687	Posted - 2015.05.04 23:52:00 - [43] - Quote Any other thoughts on the subject?
Terry Webber Molon Labe. RUST415 690	Posted - 2015.05.20 00:58:00 - [44] - Quote Updated original post.
KalOfTheRathi Nec Tributis 1	Posted - 2015.05.20 01:19:00 - [45] - Quote Works great in MOG*. Note it does seriously limit where you can access a vehicle. Dropping on roof tops for instance. Also the Reds will be setting up mines, AV squads and PRO HAV will be waiting for suckers at the exit. So, it might not be that great in Dust. In MOG the maps are massive, tiny Dust514 maps mean there will be little option for escape. What would work nearly as well is allowing the driver/pilot to place a target on the ground and have the vehicle materialize (pointed in the proper direction!). It would eliminate the massive amount of work to plot navigation maps in UE3. And it would look cool, like Star Trek transporters. This would be the best of both worlds, getting rid of the drunken RDV pilots and simplifying the vehicle deployment mechanism. * I suspect that the entire hype train associated with the entry trailer is the entire reason for the RDV existence, much less their continued existence. Somebody higher up really, really liked them. So we are still stuck with their massive load on the system and their junk performance. * My Other Game. I post in the foot locker as mentioning it here is a banning offense, last I checked. My favorite tank is a Lightning. Just sayin.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. RUST415 711	Posted - 2015.05.30 03:39:00 - [46] - Quote KalOfTheRathi wrote: Works great in MOG*. Note it does seriously limit where you can access a vehicle. Dropping on roof tops for instance. Also the Reds will be setting up mines, AV squads and PRO HAV will be waiting for suckers at the exit. So, it might not be that great in Dust. In MOG the maps are massive, tiny Dust514 maps mean there will be little option for escape. What would work nearly as well is allowing the driver/pilot to place a target on the ground and have the vehicle materialize (pointed in the proper direction!). It would eliminate the massive amount of work to plot navigation maps in UE3. And it would look cool, like Star Trek transporters. This would be the best of both worlds, getting rid of the drunken RDV pilots and simplifying the vehicle deployment mechanism. * I suspect that the entire hype train associated with the entry trailer is the entire reason for the RDV existence, much less their continued existence. Somebody higher up really, really liked them. So we are still stuck with their massive load on the system and their junk performance. * My Other Game. I post in the foot locker as mentioning it here is a banning offense, last I checked. Most of the vehicle installation can be placed inside both opponents' redline and those that are in the middle of the map can scan for mines. As for campers, pilots will just have to wait for their team to clear them. I'm not too sure about teleporting vehicles. It might be a little too challenging for CCP to implement.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. RUST415 726	Posted - 2015.06.05 22:10:00 - [47] - Quote First post updated.
KalOfTheRathi Nec Tributis 1	Posted - 2015.06.05 22:32:00 - [48] - Quote Terry Webber wrote: What do you guys think? What I would prefer is for the deployment to be handled by the Mercenary. Select the vehicle to deploy and a target icon is shown on the ground in front of the Merc. If it is Red you cannot deploy here. Once green, you can deploy. Also it would allow for the vehicle to be aimed in the proper direction, as in facing the actual battle. Once the green icon is ready, put the crown thingie out and materialize the vehicle. Completely remove the RDV. This will remove the vast navigation pass they are having to do offline for RDV paths now. The reason many of the current locations "aren't acceptable for deployment" is the navigation map doesn't include them. Limiting them is fine, but the pathfinding is a huge time burner. And yes, this was proposed before. Maybe we can get some traction this time. One wonders about the entire RDV design. It smells of an early must have, really cool feature that was favored by some layer of management at CCP/Mothership. That it has turned into a massive resource hog, a constant source of frustration and player rage has yet to alter its position as a cornerstone of Dust. Time to kick it to the curb. My favorite tank is a Lightning. Just sayin.
KalOfTheRathi Nec Tributis 1	Posted - 2015.06.05 22:44:00 - [49] - Quote Second comment; this is regarding the locked thread concept of stealing gear. We cannot acquire all items from others. It is quite possibly impossible once you consider how the game is constructed. Many fittings are uniquely identified to a Merc. BPOs and reward items to name a few. Now we have skins as well, no doubt there will be more. This is one reason why CCP Rattati is adding items slowly to the 'give item' menu, the other being changes to the economy. Some you will never be able to acquire, no matter how buttons you mash on your controller. Salvage, as provided by CCP at end of match, is the answer. In PC battles it was originally stated that all lost equipment, modules, suits and weapons were placed into a pool. Some percentage of that inventory is then distributed to the players at the end of the match. As PC battles are not interesting to me (way too laggy) I have no idea if that is still true. It might be true for FW as well, another battle type I don't play. There are several checks that have to happen in relationship to inventory, it is best if they can be done by the server and not in real-time. We have significant network loading (as evidenced by the latency) and adding packets during battle isn't a great idea. I have no idea if there are sufficient server resources to solve it quickly there as well. My favorite tank is a Lightning. Just sayin.
Terry Webber Molon Labe. RUST415 740	Posted - 2015.06.11 06:30:00 - [50] - Quote You probably already know this, Kal, but CCP is trying to free up memory to add more stuff to the game. With some time, Kal, CCP can make the game mode possible. Inertial Booster Module Thread



Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.