|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6194
   |
Posted - 2015.01.08 12:51:00 -
[1] - Quote
Thread is toast IMHO. It devolved quick starting with the jerk basically telling rattati that he's an idiot who has no business touching vehicles and aside from a few people trying to help, devolved from there.
If Rattati is particularly inclined to play nice after that I'll be shocked.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6200
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 15:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Then we need more people interested in bringing vehicles into a useful role rather than the battlefield win butan or eternal victim post constructively to drown out the idiocy.
The cure for an obnoxious and relentlessly vicious minority is to come together and drown their cries out.
This means both AVers who want vehicles to be easy victims and pilots who want nothing less than to be immune to infantry.
The unironic statement that only pilots have any right to comment on balance has been made. If we want a real change then we need to come to some agreement as a community.
Otherwise we'll be stuck with whatever we are simply handed. Regardless of whether good or bad.
Or worse, the devs decide that the work isn't worth the return.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6261
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 16:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
calm down laser, I should have a spreadsheet with proposed stats for people to look at and comment on based on the stats from chromosome in a couple days. This will include the vehicle skill trees, which I just located.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6261
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 16:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
Echo 1991 wrote:
PG and CPU yes, not armour and shields. You shouldn't have 5K armour just cos you skilled into something, 3% seems more reasonable. Also, I dont think a flaylock would do enough damage to stop the regen (I think it only has a 30-40% effeciacy against vehicles, but i maybe wrong).
flaylock is 50%, higher than the HMG.
However, I think you're off base with the assertion that vehicle pilots shouldn't benefit from their skills in similar fashion to dropsuits. They aren't scaled, or operated like dropsuits. 5k armor on an HAV does not mean the same thing that 5,000 armor on a dropsuit would.
It can be balanced, it just requires a few changes to the hulls. CCP had, at one point, an excellent balance between V/AV and with Rattati working on changing the focus of vehicle heavy turrets you don't have quite the same worry as you used to about vehicles ripball farming infantry casually.
I'm working on compiling the vehicle stats and AV stats I'd like to see in play, along with the vehicle skill tree. Vehicle skill trees with bonusing and less focus on the primary hulls and more focus on the fittings allowed Vehicles to be more diverse, dynamic and unpredictable. Part of the problem right now that most pilots have is there's very little variation possible. I have a problem with it too as an AV gunner because it's little more than a math equation in my head on what I need to do to kill an HAV.
I also have a theorycrafted AV weapon I might include for a look if the whole thing gels together based on Rattati's statement that he'd like to use current assets to fill out the heavy weapon parity.
But blanket statements about what is fair and unfair, on both sides, is what got us TO this mess. So screw it, I'll bust out the calculator and use the math.
if you're going to say that HAVs having 5k HP is unfair by all means please explain your reasoning, but don't expect it to be taken seriously if ALL you say is X is unfair because :reasons:.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6261
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 16:50:00 -
[5] - Quote
passive rep mods got nerfed. go ahead and triple rep a madrugar now. You'll get two-shotted by an IAFG. Potentially one-shotted by a wiyrkomi breach.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6261
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 17:33:00 -
[6] - Quote
LUGMOS wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:passive rep mods got nerfed. go ahead and triple rep a madrugar now. You'll get two-shotted by an IAFG. Potentially one-shotted by a wiyrkomi breach. I gues thats how its suppossed to be... Any rep tanked suit/vehicle is extremely prone to high alpha, but just not be one or two shotted by it... Thats just rediculous.
triple rep madrugar means all of the lows have rep mods, no plates. it's one of the very, very few times where damage mods on a forge gun would actually matter.
IAFG does a base 1500 damage every 2.25 seconds. After skills and depending on my mood I can spike the bugger to about 2100 every 2.25 seconds against armor. And the madrugar is an armor tank. this math does not support the triple repped maddy very well.
The triple rep maddy is a paper tiger that's only effective in hit 'n run against academy newbies.
It's an imaginary threat, like the chupacabra and slayer logi (the latter went extinct the build after the caldari logi was introduced)
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6261
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 17:56:00 -
[7] - Quote
Atiim wrote:LUGMOS wrote:
I gues thats how its suppossed to be... Any rep tanked suit/vehicle is extremely prone to high alpha, but just not be one or two shotted by it... Thats just rediculous.
I don't think it's ridiculous, as they're filling every slot with the same type of module. Personally I believe that you should be forced to fit your vehicle with more than just 1 type of module. In comparison to Dropsuits, put nothing but Repair Mods and watch as even a Starter Fits takes you down with ease.
Oddly enough it actually works for some playstyles. Rep mods are better when running AV in a gallente or amarr suit for fast recovery from AV engagements. You're dead anyway vs. infantry unless you're slick, so worrying about the lost HP is pointless.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6288
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 21:13:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alaika Arbosa wrote:@Spkr
Alena did answer your question, you chose to dismiss the answer.
I can't believe I'm doing this.
Alena answered but failed to give reasons beyond "I think it's unfair." Using an abstraction between the differences in HP between dropsuits and HAVs is irrelevant because they are scaled differently.
The weapons that can damage vehicles can one-shot a dropsuit, thus necessitating comparative bonus increases to the armor/shields of an HAV in order to survive the incoming fire.
Now that I have agreed with spkr, I must go cleanse myself.
With napalm and fire.
I will never feel clean again.
By the way, my spreadsheet for vehicles is up. I'll be adding the modules I just found that I couldn't earlier later tonight. It's on the last couple pages of the HAV debacle.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
|
|
| |
|