They do not, at least not in the long run. Why? Because it would ultimately be an SP and ISK sink.

Vehicles would eventually be balanced around pilot suits. This would mean that pilot suits wouldn't be so much an enhancement, but a necessity for vehicle users. You wouldn't wear it to get an edge: you would wear it to just perform at the standard tier.

That's why vehicle users don't really want pilot suits. They will give them nothing.

P.S Because few people seem to have figured it out I shall explain the position of the title. To simplify my argument I chose an absolute position. When arguing it is necessary to use absolute positions as to save the use of words which would indicate mildness. I hope that everyone is able to comprehend that I'm not trying to dictate rather I am trying to inform those of what I forsee. Some have understood this: many have not.

Actually speaker, I think the whole community would rather you go to call of duty or need for speed ,whichever you prefer just leave.

Of course, because I won't play along to get along.

I never claimed superiority over anyone. Granted I lost my temper and insulted Spkr4theDead, though he did insult me first. I specifically said that I want conversation and have explicitly stated that no one person's view should be imposed rather we should talk about the issues of the game civilly and without passion. Passion clouds the logical mind because it makes us choose impulse and instinct over logic and reason.

Of course, because I won't play along to get along.

Do me a favor Spkr, google FPS. Actually, there. Where does it talk about Vehicles there? (Might be an idea to be thankful for their inclusion rather than view it as an entitlement)

Because "FPS" means "no vehicles allowed ever."

If you "don't want some idiot making you show up on the mini-map to get bombed" why push for removable turrets and not for Vehicle Locks (I know why, I was there in squad when you and English discussed it, do you remember that? I remember "no bluedots" being a secondary reasoning for the push)?

We asked for it numerous times for a long time, we didn't get locks. Your question is moot.

lol "death to all vehicles", really? You really need to get your facts straight before you go telling people incorrect things about me. I've never said "death to all vehicles" and saying that is how I feel is terribly wrong. I want for there to be a good and decent balance between vehicles and AV. I want us to get all of the vehicles we've been offered though not delivered.

Why do you even care about racial parity if you're not going to use them? I never cared about infantry parity because I had far more SP into vehicles than I did infantry. Now the reverse is true, where most of my SP is in infantry, at least 40mil, while vehicle SP is relegated into a "use it if I have to" role.

You only know my MAG experience with Vehicles and you don't care to inquire about or to try to understand my Dust experience with Vehicles seeking only to deride it since it isn't the same as what you've chosen to experience in Dust.

If you had any experience with vehicles in Dust, you wouldn't have an irrational fear and hatred of them.

BTW, I still do the things we used to do in MAG with an APC, only now I do it with an LAV. I still use vehicles to compliment my infantry pursuits rather than pursuing vehicles to the exclusion of all else.

I've never seen you in a vehicle as the driver or a passenger. I do however remember you complaining that none of us could hack fast. Why? Because I had far more SP into vehicles and didn't really care about infantry.

No, because you're a judgemental ******* who spouts off without knowing anything about people in question (aka 'you're not a tanker'... to people who either have vehicle alts, or to people who have 2/3rds of their sp into vehicles) and does everything they can to stifle positive discussion. If you stopped having such kneejerk responses and being so belligerent you might find it easier to discuss things with people.

lol "vehicle alts"

Those that have "vehicle alts" still spout out the nonsense about how easy it is to use a vehicle and how difficult they are to destroy. Their opinion is moot because of that, especially if "they have 2/3 of their SP into vehicles." That makes them a majority pilot, and if they still complain about how hard AV is to use and how difficult it is to destroy vehicles, they might as well cut off their feet if they don't like the way they look.

Positive discussion? There is no "positive discussion" when someone that's not a pilot speaks for all those that ARE pilots and says "pilots don't want the pilot suit." There cannot be any rational discussion with someone that insane. That's like Hannibal Lector saying he eats people because he's hungry.

There cannot be rational discussion with people like that.

Belligerent? Hostile? Difficult? What do you expect me to do when infantry dictates the direction of vehicles, be quiet and say "thank you sir may I have another?" I'm supposed to shut my mouth when these people tell me how I'm supposed to play my desired role?

Okay, you've got me really confused here.

Which side of this argument are you on? Are you just going after the OP for "infantry dictating vehicle design" or are you actually advocating pilot suits?

Okay, you've got me really confused here.

Which side of this argument are you on? Are you just going after the OP for "infantry dictating vehicle design" or are you actually advocating pilot suits?

Basically it boils down to SPKR feels that only he and the circle of people that he personally acknowledges should have any input as to what goes on with vehicles. Doesn't matter how much experience, knowledge or even SP you have into vehicles, unless he's accepted you you're 'not a tanker/pilot'. He's a walking 'no true scotsman fallacy'

"THEY'RE NOT VEHICLE USERS UNLESS I SAY THEY'RE VEHICLE USERS!".

He's not a pilot.

Are you an aspergers spectrum by chance spkr? because the stomping the feet, screaming, tantrums and stubbornness is the type of behaviour I'd expect from someone with that disorder.

That's just insulting. Childish tactics, insulting someone in that fashion.

I for one am a vehicle user that *doesn't* want pilot suits because I think they'll be an arbitrary SP sink. In conversations I've had with a CPM member or two (I'll try not to misrepresent the CPM member I talked to here and assert that this is what I as a person got from the conversation), we talked about vehicle sp vs infantry sp, and touched on pilot suits. To sum it up, my position was largely that every skillpoint spent on infantry skills is inherently more valuable than any skillpoint spent on vehicles as infantry sp carries over to more roles and is applicable more often and in more diverse ways than vehicle sp and that I dislike the large plateaus of skillpoints in vehicles and the feeling that vehicles are a skillpoint 'sink' - a 'supplementary' role rather than a 'primary' role. The response I got from the CPM member was that 'well, we still want any given vehicle role to take as many skillpoints as their 'comparative' infantry counterpart and in that regard vehicles end up being about 3-4m sp less expensive than infantry'.

So, since they'll SP sinks to you, that means the rest of us don't want them? That's nice.

From the brief conversation that we had, what I got was that pilot suits were basically there just to cost sp so as to make things 'evenly costed'.

See above

Now to address your comments of 'infantry shouldn't have a say', that is outright wrong. Infantry should have a say, otherwise vehicle 'balance' just becomes a joke - an echo room where people want more and better things. Non-pilots have concerns about how vehicles will affect their gameplay every bit as much as we have concerns about how they affect ours and their concerns do have merit. The only people I feel should be dismissed out of hand are people who cannot have a logical discussion based on facts and sound reasoning, not fallacies, ad hominem and appeals to emotion.

Infantry have had the only word on vehicles for 3 years. Vehicles have been consistently nerfed over that time, while AV has been consistently buffed. Ask anybody that's been here for that long. They'll tell you the same thing. I regularly play with someone that's been a pilot for far longer than I have. He knows what the deal is. AV = nuclear option/ vehicles = lolfest, unless you have significant time as a pilot.

And how infantry can work? Well.... I have probably over 40mil into infantry now, so yeah, I can comment on it. Not much into AV, because I prefer to use a tank. Why? Not because it's easy, but because it's hard.

I hate infantry dictating the direction vehicles go in, and yeah, I want the pilot suits because I'm a pilot.

So by your metric then, you're not even a tanker Spkr, you shouldn't have a say - go run around playing your ground game while the big boys talk, If you were a real pilot you'd have more sp in vehicles than in infantry.

Also, I loved the continued foot stamping, and handwaived denials of actual concerns, and assertions without any basis. You're still throwing a tantrum over balance changes that you perceive to have come from a mysterious antagonist you call 'av players'.

There's no point in even talking to you about this or well... anything really, there is no positive discussion to be had with you and your incredible bias and perceived slights. As you have said, why talk to someone who cannot be reasoned with.

YOU'RE the one acting like a child

Aah I missed this, spkr's incoherent whining about because nobody is him or his friend Taki they shouldn't get a say as to how vehicles work, yet they are allowed to say how Infantry works, loving that logic.

Now I'm not saying that Spkr is entirely wrong their are somethings, that he says here I agree with, even if he lacks the tact to put them across elegantly.

1) Pilot Suits giving penalties based on race.
Shouldn't happen, if I put a Rail Rifle on a Minmatar suit, do I recieve a physical penalty to my stats? No. Do Caldari weapons synergise with Minmatar well? No. The conflicting styles are enough off a penalty in themselves, this should be the same with vehicles.

2) Pilot Suits giving fittings bonuses/reductions based on race
Can't happen, unless the devs find a way of incorporating Pilot Suits directly into the vehicle fitting screen, you will never be able to call in your fits, because they will all be invalid where you have built them with your suit in mind. While this makes for the simplest bonus to pilot suits, it's also the hardest to implement.

Now I'm not going to bother going over the bad points that spkr has made, I've tried that too many times and to be honest I already have an exercise in futility at home.

However when it comes to pilot suits, their main job is not to give bonuses to the vehicle user (not saying I'm opposed to them doing so, it just isn't the primary use). Their priority job is to turn vehicles into a fully fledged role, that the player entirely commits themself to. To stop the current situation where a player can stroll round in a tank, take a few hits, get out amd continue to slay as infantry.

To stop pilots operating as their own ground support, to stop vehicles being a very expensive second suit for a player.
I don't think the vehicles in the current state of play are ready for pilot suits, but they need to be introduced before(or as) the vehicle roster is completed.

Just go away.