DUST Search - Vehicle reintroductions, is it dead?

All Channels

General Discussions

Vehicle reintroductions, is it dead?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 686	Posted - 2015.01.08 10:56:00 - [1] - Quote 4 weeks, 37 pages, and 738 posts of feedback so far. No commentary from the devs since post #17. Just asking, is it still on the table at all? This 1.2 Milliion sp i've saved up for tanks is really starting to burn a hole in my pocket. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
LudiKure ninda Dead Man's Game RUST415 186	Posted - 2015.01.08 11:13:00 - [2] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: 4 weeks, 37 pages, and 738 posts of feedback so far. No commentary from the devs since post #17. Just asking, is it still on the table at all? This 1.2 Milliion sp i've saved up for tanks is really starting to burn a hole in my pocket. Hah only 1.2? I had 17 in vehicles and I am so glad I did respec.. Now I hawe max core skills and 7 proto suits :) ( -í° -£-û -í°) `SCAN ATTEMPT PREVENTED`
H0riz0n Unlimit Dead Man's Game 309	Posted - 2015.01.08 12:18:00 - [3] - Quote It was a joke The KTM DuKe lives here, send a message after the "beep".One of the few vehiculist remained in dust 514
duster 35000 Algintal Core Gallente Federation 147	Posted - 2015.01.08 12:46:00 - [4] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: 4 weeks, 37 pages, and 738 posts of feedback so far. No commentary from the devs since post #17. Just asking, is it still on the table at all? This 1.2 Milliion sp i've saved up for tanks is really starting to burn a hole in my pocket. It's deader than hit....the romans. Choo Choo
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 2953	Posted - 2015.01.08 12:47:00 - [5] - Quote I sure hope its not dead, I think reintroducing some of those neat vehicles would reinvigorate me to play more. Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6194	Posted - 2015.01.08 12:51:00 - [6] - 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.
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2362	Posted - 2015.01.08 13:17:00 - [7] - Quote IMHO, we should really be pushing for full parity first anyway. After that start looking at releasing the old vehicle types for all four races. Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
duster 35000 Algintal Core Gallente Federation 147	Posted - 2015.01.08 13:25:00 - [8] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. I guess you can say, it would be shocking, if he did reply nicely... Choo Choo
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 14937	Posted - 2015.01.08 13:57:00 - [9] - Quote No, it's being saved for Hotfix Foxtrot. However I believe the DEVs are on vacation this time of year. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 14937	Posted - 2015.01.08 13:59:00 - [10] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. The quick solution would be to hide the posts of everyone in that thread that was not being constructive, than sift through feedback from there. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND

Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 686	Posted - 2015.01.08 14:42:00 - [11] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. I would be much more worried if the way dust is handled is reliant on the emotional state of the Devs. If it was dropped becuse people were mean on the internet.... Something tells me CCP are more professional than that. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5270	Posted - 2015.01.08 14:47:00 - [12] - Quote I'll ask where it's at. They're working on the next release, so the hotfix work kinda fits in where time's available. Tesfa Alem wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. I would be much more worried if the way dust is handled is reliant on the emotional state of the Devs. If it was dropped becuse people were mean on the internet.... Something tells me CCP are more professional than that. Well, something like that may not be based on his "emotional state", but if the devs get the idea that nothing they do with it is going to improve overall player happiness, then it's a waste of his time. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 2954	Posted - 2015.01.08 14:57:00 - [13] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: I'll ask where it's at. They're working on the next release, so the hotfix work kinda fits in where time's available. Tesfa Alem wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. I would be much more worried if the way dust is handled is reliant on the emotional state of the Devs. If it was dropped becuse people were mean on the internet.... Something tells me CCP are more professional than that. Well, something like that may not be based on his "emotional state", but if the devs get the idea that nothing they do with it is going to improve overall player happiness, then it's a waste of his time. Trust me when I say that the non-vocal majority would greatly value the return of things like the Logi LAV and older tank variants, at least that is the overwhelming feeling I get from people I talk to / see on the forums. Just because a few very 'vocal' people spout all sorts of rubbish in that thread, they do not represent us as a whole. Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 686	Posted - 2015.01.08 15:04:00 - [14] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: I'll ask where it's at. They're working on the next release, so the hotfix work kinda fits in where time's available. Tesfa Alem wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. I would be much more worried if the way dust is handled is reliant on the emotional state of the Devs. If it was dropped becuse people were mean on the internet.... Something tells me CCP are more professional than that. Well, something like that may not be based on his "emotional state", but if the devs get the idea that nothing they do with it is going to improve overall player happiness, then it's a waste of his time. Players were happy about the reintroduction of vehicles, there was a massive buzz around Dust. Majority of posts in the hotfix echo thread and the HAV thread are not from players who do'nt find it iteresting, and all want to give feedbck. Frankly its more than twice as popular than the Roadmap 2015 PC thread. 1 month of silence later, players have become disheartened from the lack of response by the devs. I understand its the holiday season, but really, does it deserve less attention than backpedalspeed? If its dead, declare it so. If its still kicking can we have an update please? Btw my 1.2 mil is to take HAV skill to level 5, i already roll maddys, gunlogis, and dropships with pro modules. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5271	Posted - 2015.01.08 15:06:00 - [15] - Quote As I said, I'll see where it's at. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Sir Dukey Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 1489	Posted - 2015.01.08 15:07:00 - [16] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: 4 weeks, 37 pages, and 738 posts of feedback so far. No commentary from the devs since post #17. Just asking, is it still on the table at all? This 1.2 Milliion sp i've saved up for tanks is really starting to burn a hole in my pocket. same bro Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6200	Posted - 2015.01.08 15:09:00 - [17] - 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.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 372	Posted - 2015.01.08 16:16:00 - [18] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: 4 weeks, 37 pages, and 738 posts of feedback so far. No commentary from the devs since post #17. Just asking, is it still on the table at all? This 1.2 Milliion sp i've saved up for tanks is really starting to burn a hole in my pocket. 1. At this point we need to hear from the devs and see an updated spreadsheet
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2697	Posted - 2015.01.08 17:52:00 - [19] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: 4 weeks, 37 pages, and 738 posts of feedback so far. No commentary from the devs since post #17. Just asking, is it still on the table at all? This 1.2 Milliion sp i've saved up for tanks is really starting to burn a hole in my pocket. Not dead I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2697	Posted - 2015.01.08 17:53:00 - [20] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: 4 weeks, 37 pages, and 738 posts of feedback so far. No commentary from the devs since post #17. Just asking, is it still on the table at all? This 1.2 Milliion sp i've saved up for tanks is really starting to burn a hole in my pocket. same bro Not dead I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim

TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 103	Posted - 2015.01.10 03:05:00 - [21] - Quote I'm so hoping more vehicles get rereleased.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2702	Posted - 2015.01.10 03:33:00 - [22] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: I'll ask where it's at. They're working on the next release, so the hotfix work kinda fits in where time's available. Tesfa Alem wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. I would be much more worried if the way dust is handled is reliant on the emotional state of the Devs. If it was dropped becuse people were mean on the internet.... Something tells me CCP are more professional than that. Well, something like that may not be based on his "emotional state", but if the devs get the idea that nothing they do with it is going to improve overall player happiness, then it's a waste of his time. Players were happy about the reintroduction of vehicles, there was a massive buzz around Dust. Majority of posts in the hotfix echo thread and the HAV thread are not from players who do'nt find it iteresting, and all want to give feedbck. Frankly its more than twice as popular than the Roadmap 2015 PC thread. 1 month of silence later, players have become disheartened from the lack of response by the devs. I understand its the holiday season, but really, does it deserve less attention than backpedalspeed? If its dead, declare it so. If its still kicking can we have an update please? Btw my 1.2 mil is to take HAV skill to level 5, i already roll maddys, gunlogis, and dropships with pro modules. Why are you saving 1.2mil to bring a skill you only need at level 1, up to level 5? The Marauders and Enforcers will likely only require level 3. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2702	Posted - 2015.01.10 03:33:00 - [23] - Quote TIGER SHARK1501 wrote: I'm so hoping more vehicles get rereleased. SoonTM I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 14376	Posted - 2015.01.10 04:07:00 - [24] - Quote Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2768	Posted - 2015.01.10 04:15:00 - [25] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. So no Dust update for the Proteus release? Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2702	Posted - 2015.01.10 04:18:00 - [26] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Well like I said a little while ago man, if you or anybody else is able to tell us some more specifics, like a concrete slot layout, then stuff will be easier to work with. And I would imagine we're all 100% in agreement that the PG, CPU, shield and armor skills need to be back to what they used to be, and that is 5% per level. It would make such a huge difference in fitting capability. The Madrugar needs to be brought up to the Gunnlogi's level, not the Gunnlogi nerfed to the Madrugar's level. Hell, I had a game a couple hours ago where some MLT red dot was firing his MLT flaylock at me when I was in a Maddy - it got me to 1020 shield, and stopped my regen. That just shouldn't happen. We got the ballpark, now we need a bit of the strategy. With that, we can all move forward at a little faster pace to getting vehicles back to where they should be. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2702	Posted - 2015.01.10 04:34:00 - [27] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. So no Dust update for the Proteus release? Proteus? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2769	Posted - 2015.01.10 04:37:00 - [28] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. So no Dust update for the Proteus release? Proteus? New Eve patch coming on Tuesday. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Miokai Zahou WarRavens Capital Punishment. 446	Posted - 2015.01.10 04:38:00 - [29] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. So no Dust update for the Proteus release? Proteus? It's the name of the next Eve Online expansion coming out on Tuesday so yeah. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2703	Posted - 2015.01.10 05:19:00 - [30] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. So no Dust update for the Proteus release? Proteus? New Eve patch coming on Tuesday. Ah I'm not an EVE pilot, so I wouldn't know. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1241	Posted - 2015.01.10 06:17:00 - [31] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Can you at least acknowledge that there's been some quality feedback that's not part of that train wreck of a thread? Some of us vehicle pilots have given some actual feedback outside of the BBHI thread...this is just, "vehicle users didn't contribute," all over again... Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Rowdy Railgunner Capital Acquisitions LLC Bad Intention 511	Posted - 2015.01.10 06:54:00 - [32] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Can you at least acknowledge that there's been some quality feedback that's not part of that train wreck of a thread? Some of us vehicle pilots have given some actual feedback outside of the BBHI thread...this is just, "vehicle users didn't contribute," all over again... And why should we contribute? Last time people contributed CCP did the exact opposite to what people wanted to happen. Then they lost 60% of their player base and even now they are still feeling the effects of that day. I know that my Colonel ass isn't putting any more money into this game. Neither are any of my Captain and Lieutenant alts.
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 10701	Posted - 2015.01.10 07:20:00 - [33] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. So no Dust update for the Proteus release? Proteus? New Eve patch coming on Tuesday. Ah I'm not an EVE pilot, so I wouldn't know. https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy If you ever decide to want to try out Eve Online, you can click on this link and accept my open invite. You'll get a 21-Day trial instead of the normal 14-Day trial. You'll find some Dust players in there as well especially if you join a Faction Warfare corp in Eve where you can provide Orbital Bombardments in FW and get LP for blapping mercs with a destroyer. If you ever need some resources to help you out... https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/rookie-resources/ On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1241	Posted - 2015.01.10 08:01:00 - [34] - Quote Rowdy Railgunner wrote: And why should we contribute? Last time people contributed CCP did the exact opposite to what people wanted to happen. Then they lost 60% of their player base and even now they are still feeling the effects of that day. I know that my Colonel ass isn't putting any more money into this game. Neither are any of my Captain and Lieutenant alts. Maybe you misunderstood my post: some vehicle pilots, myself included, have given the feedback that Rattati has asked for (in my case, I was looking at small missile variants) as well as others who have given more comprehensive feedback (Pokey Dravon, Tesfa and Vulpes come to mind) yet seem to get lumped in with the vocal minority of people spouting rubbish in the one thread. There are vehicle pilots giving good feedback, I just want those people to get recognition such that when Rattati eventually decided to just pull vehicles entirely he can't point fingers at pilots et al. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1864	Posted - 2015.01.10 08:52:00 - [35] - Quote For the most part, I like some of the stuff that pokey has been providing (I also like true's redesign of the blaster turret). If we got a bit more feedback from ccp in regards to things though we might be able to progress the discussion a bit more, as of right now it feels like we're just retreading a lot of the old arguments with all the vitriol that was the loyalty ranks titles. Mute the people who just want to argue, I want to see vehicles in a healthy place and a lot of the damage that happened in 1.7 fixed. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Atom Heart Mother Nazionali Senza Filtro 139	Posted - 2015.01.10 09:23:00 - [36] - Quote 1.2 million? you kidding right?, sorry to ruin your expectations man, if you really want to spec on vehicles you better start saving at least 25 million SP, and that wont be enough yet

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 14404	Posted - 2015.01.10 10:10:00 - [37] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Rowdy Railgunner wrote: And why should we contribute? Last time people contributed CCP did the exact opposite to what people wanted to happen. Then they lost 60% of their player base and even now they are still feeling the effects of that day. I know that my Colonel ass isn't putting any more money into this game. Neither are any of my Captain and Lieutenant alts. Maybe you misunderstood my post: some vehicle pilots, myself included, have given the feedback that Rattati has asked for (in my case, I was looking at small missile variants) as well as others who have given more comprehensive feedback (Pokey Dravon, Tesfa and Vulpes come to mind) yet seem to get lumped in with the vocal minority of people spouting rubbish in the one thread. There are vehicle pilots giving good feedback, I just want those people to get recognition such that when Rattati eventually decided to just pull vehicles entirely he can't point fingers at pilots et al. Absolutely, there is a learning period for us devs to figure out the the real contributors, and it's clear to me who they are. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Vitharr Foebane Terminal Courtesy Proficiency V. 2177	Posted - 2015.01.10 10:15:00 - [38] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Rowdy Railgunner wrote: And why should we contribute? Last time people contributed CCP did the exact opposite to what people wanted to happen. Then they lost 60% of their player base and even now they are still feeling the effects of that day. I know that my Colonel ass isn't putting any more money into this game. Neither are any of my Captain and Lieutenant alts. Maybe you misunderstood my post: some vehicle pilots, myself included, have given the feedback that Rattati has asked for (in my case, I was looking at small missile variants) as well as others who have given more comprehensive feedback (Pokey Dravon, Tesfa and Vulpes come to mind) yet seem to get lumped in with the vocal minority of people spouting rubbish in the one thread. There are vehicle pilots giving good feedback, I just want those people to get recognition such that when Rattati eventually decided to just pull vehicles entirely he can't point fingers at pilots et al. Absolutely, there is a learning period for us devs to figure out the the real contributors, and it's clear to me who they are. Sooo how bout dem Amarr vehicles? I'm running out of Amarr things to skill Amarr Omnisoldier: Assault, Commando, Logistics, Scout, Sentinel at V My faith is in my God, my Empress, and my Laz0r
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS VP Gaming Alliance 776	Posted - 2015.01.10 10:21:00 - [39] - Quote Atom Heart Mother wrote: 1.2 million? you kidding right?, sorry to ruin your expectations man, if you really want to spec on vehicles you better start saving at least 25 million SP, and that wont be enough yet yea man after i completed both the vehicle and turret skill trees, i had just enough SP left to proto one suit and weapon. vehicles take a crap ton of SP
Nirwanda Vaughns 1200	Posted - 2015.01.10 11:42:00 - [40] - Quote as long as when we have racial vehicles we have at least some form of a Gallente Plasma Forge gun. otherwise players will just stick to the shield tankers becuase of the lack of shield AV. my idea for the tank 'profiles' would be Amarr - High armour HP, very slow moving. good for prolonged bombardments of objectives but struggles to 'run away' from a fight. Caldari - High shield HP, long range/low damage, almost used as mobile Anti-Air Gallente - pretty much as it is but perhaps needs higher base HPs and to either lose a low or tweak PG/CPU to reduce amount of reppers. or change armour reppers back to active to cut back on 'invincible' rep maddies. Minmatar - probably how the ships operate in EVE, fast moving, great turn circles in order to literally run rings around an Amarr tank. nothing that'll last extended HAV vs HAV battles but if a couple gang up they can become pretty devastating Never argue with an idiot. they bring you down to their level and beat you through experience proud C-II bpo owner

Luther Mandrix WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL Top Men. 411	Posted - 2015.01.10 12:01:00 - [41] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Check trello out Vehicle Based Objectives ,Lets give Vehicles Gameplay Objectives also besides killing foot soldiers. https://trello.com/c/8HBjPXFW/382-vehicle-based-objectives
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 2973	Posted - 2015.01.10 12:05:00 - [42] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Rowdy Railgunner wrote: And why should we contribute? Last time people contributed CCP did the exact opposite to what people wanted to happen. Then they lost 60% of their player base and even now they are still feeling the effects of that day. I know that my Colonel ass isn't putting any more money into this game. Neither are any of my Captain and Lieutenant alts. Maybe you misunderstood my post: some vehicle pilots, myself included, have given the feedback that Rattati has asked for (in my case, I was looking at small missile variants) as well as others who have given more comprehensive feedback (Pokey Dravon, Tesfa and Vulpes come to mind) yet seem to get lumped in with the vocal minority of people spouting rubbish in the one thread. There are vehicle pilots giving good feedback, I just want those people to get recognition such that when Rattati eventually decided to just pull vehicles entirely he can't point fingers at pilots et al. Absolutely, there is a learning period for us devs to figure out the the real contributors, and it's clear to me who they are. I might give CCP a hard time sometimes but I have to be honest, I do not envy your position Rats. Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 690	Posted - 2015.01.10 12:08:00 - [43] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. It would be better if you did declare your intentions for Vehicles Reintroduction back on that thread. Some of the guys on there have spent a ton of of thier own freetime proposing things coming up with various ideas and fits, and you really ought to adress some of what they proposed. If you are not going to take their ideas let them know, and if your are postponing for a much longer period than you let on, then you can wrap up your internal balance as per usual. A dev presence in that conversation is whats needed now. Otherwise, these guys are wasting their time proposing things that may not even be looked at. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 400	Posted - 2015.01.10 12:56:00 - [44] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. 1. Both sides have been at it 2. I would rarther see what CCP comes up with 1st and then move on from there because right now the current spreadsheet is a bit meh without it being updated and giving a clear direction of where CCP wants to see vehicles go 3. Some ideas in the thread are just terrible and if its between working with bad ideas and have CCP doing it internally then either way i may never be happy anyways
Echo 1991 Titans of Phoenix 647	Posted - 2015.01.10 13:40:00 - [45] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Well like I said a little while ago man, if you or anybody else is able to tell us some more specifics, like a concrete slot layout, then stuff will be easier to work with. And I would imagine we're all 100% in agreement that the PG, CPU, shield and armor skills need to be back to what they used to be, and that is 5% per level. It would make such a huge difference in fitting capability. The Madrugar needs to be brought up to the Gunnlogi's level, not the Gunnlogi nerfed to the Madrugar's level. Hell, I had a game a couple hours ago where some MLT red dot was firing his MLT flaylock at me when I was in a Maddy - it got me to 1020 shield, and stopped my regen. That just shouldn't happen. We got the ballpark, now we need a bit of the strategy. With that, we can all move forward at a little faster pace to getting vehicles back to where they should be. 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). What i think needs to happen is the Maddy has to be given a fitting buff cos right now the gunnlogi is better in everyway, it also needs a turning speed increase cos right now it is too slow to turn. I also think that the Armour hardener needs to be giving 30% resist, and if the old passive resist mods come back, the adaptive plating should give around 16% base resist which could be improved with a skill at 5% per level so at level 5 it gives 20% (value could be lowered if it is too much for passive). and DCU (like this mod) could give around 10% resist to shield and about 12% for armour.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 403	Posted - 2015.01.10 15:07:00 - [46] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Well like I said a little while ago man, if you or anybody else is able to tell us some more specifics, like a concrete slot layout, then stuff will be easier to work with. And I would imagine we're all 100% in agreement that the PG, CPU, shield and armor skills need to be back to what they used to be, and that is 5% per level. It would make such a huge difference in fitting capability. The Madrugar needs to be brought up to the Gunnlogi's level, not the Gunnlogi nerfed to the Madrugar's level. Hell, I had a game a couple hours ago where some MLT red dot was firing his MLT flaylock at me when I was in a Maddy - it got me to 1020 shield, and stopped my regen. That just shouldn't happen. We got the ballpark, now we need a bit of the strategy. With that, we can all move forward at a little faster pace to getting vehicles back to where they should be. 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). What i think needs to happen is the Maddy has to be given a fitting buff cos right now the gunnlogi is better in everyway, it also needs a turning speed increase cos right now it is too slow to turn. I also think that the Armour hardener needs to be giving 30% resist, and if the old passive resist mods come back, the adaptive plating should give around 16% base resist which could be improved with a skill at 5% per level so at level 5 it gives 20% (value could be lowered if it is too much for passive). and DCU (like this mod) could give around 10% resist to shield and about 12% for armour. 1. Infantry says no armor and shields while they have 5% per level for armor and shields - Pilots had this skill before 1.7, they had these skills back in chrome and affect all vehicles not just HAVs but DS/ADS/LAV which are light on HP
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6261	Posted - 2015.01.10 16:15:00 - [47] - 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 - [48] - 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.
killian178 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 72	Posted - 2015.01.10 16:48:00 - [49] - Quote If all the old modules get brought back, well have much more V vs V fights again, as long as we can stay away from those pesky min mandos lol Every commando k.o, every weapon at adv or above. Don't give a damn bout my kdr, I will kill you.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6261	Posted - 2015.01.10 16:50:00 - [50] - 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.

LUGMOS Quafe Premium 1425	Posted - 2015.01.10 17:22:00 - [51] - Quote 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. Official QuafeGäó Advocate Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6261	Posted - 2015.01.10 17:33:00 - [52] - 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.
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 14977	Posted - 2015.01.10 17:50:00 - [53] - Quote 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. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6261	Posted - 2015.01.10 17:56:00 - [54] - 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.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2707	Posted - 2015.01.10 18:22:00 - [55] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: If you ever need some resources to help you out... https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/rookie-resources/ Thanks but no thanks, I already have enough games and none of them are subscription based. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2707	Posted - 2015.01.10 18:48:00 - [56] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Well like I said a little while ago man, if you or anybody else is able to tell us some more specifics, like a concrete slot layout, then stuff will be easier to work with. And I would imagine we're all 100% in agreement that the PG, CPU, shield and armor skills need to be back to what they used to be, and that is 5% per level. It would make such a huge difference in fitting capability. The Madrugar needs to be brought up to the Gunnlogi's level, not the Gunnlogi nerfed to the Madrugar's level. Hell, I had a game a couple hours ago where some MLT red dot was firing his MLT flaylock at me when I was in a Maddy - it got me to 1020 shield, and stopped my regen. That just shouldn't happen. We got the ballpark, now we need a bit of the strategy. With that, we can all move forward at a little faster pace to getting vehicles back to where they should be. 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). What i think needs to happen is the Maddy has to be given a fitting buff cos right now the gunnlogi is better in everyway, it also needs a turning speed increase cos right now it is too slow to turn. I also think that the Armour hardener needs to be giving 30% resist, and if the old passive resist mods come back, the adaptive plating should give around 16% base resist which could be improved with a skill at 5% per level so at level 5 it gives 20% (value could be lowered if it is too much for passive). and DCU (like this mod) could give around 10% resist to shield and about 12% for armour. Well then why does infantry get 5% for armor and shield? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Alena Ventrallis Intara Direct Action Caldari State 2477	Posted - 2015.01.10 18:49:00 - [57] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Well like I said a little while ago man, if you or anybody else is able to tell us some more specifics, like a concrete slot layout, then stuff will be easier to work with. And I would imagine we're all 100% in agreement that the PG, CPU, shield and armor skills need to be back to what they used to be, and that is 5% per level. It would make such a huge difference in fitting capability. The Madrugar needs to be brought up to the Gunnlogi's level, not the Gunnlogi nerfed to the Madrugar's level. Hell, I had a game a couple hours ago where some MLT red dot was firing his MLT flaylock at me when I was in a Maddy - it got me to 1020 shield, and stopped my regen. That just shouldn't happen. We got the ballpark, now we need a bit of the strategy. With that, we can all move forward at a little faster pace to getting vehicles back to where they should be. 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). What i think needs to happen is the Maddy has to be given a fitting buff cos right now the gunnlogi is better in everyway, it also needs a turning speed increase cos right now it is too slow to turn. I also think that the Armour hardener needs to be giving 30% resist, and if the old passive resist mods come back, the adaptive plating should give around 16% base resist which could be improved with a skill at 5% per level so at level 5 it gives 20% (value could be lowered if it is too much for passive). and DCU (like this mod) could give around 10% resist to shield and about 12% for armour. Well then why does infantry get 5% for armor and shield? Infantry are dealing with far lower numbers than wedo. 5% of 4000 is way more than 5% of 250. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2710	Posted - 2015.01.10 20:37:00 - [58] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Well like I said a little while ago man, if you or anybody else is able to tell us some more specifics, like a concrete slot layout, then stuff will be easier to work with. And I would imagine we're all 100% in agreement that the PG, CPU, shield and armor skills need to be back to what they used to be, and that is 5% per level. It would make such a huge difference in fitting capability. The Madrugar needs to be brought up to the Gunnlogi's level, not the Gunnlogi nerfed to the Madrugar's level. Hell, I had a game a couple hours ago where some MLT red dot was firing his MLT flaylock at me when I was in a Maddy - it got me to 1020 shield, and stopped my regen. That just shouldn't happen. We got the ballpark, now we need a bit of the strategy. With that, we can all move forward at a little faster pace to getting vehicles back to where they should be. 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). What i think needs to happen is the Maddy has to be given a fitting buff cos right now the gunnlogi is better in everyway, it also needs a turning speed increase cos right now it is too slow to turn. I also think that the Armour hardener needs to be giving 30% resist, and if the old passive resist mods come back, the adaptive plating should give around 16% base resist which could be improved with a skill at 5% per level so at level 5 it gives 20% (value could be lowered if it is too much for passive). and DCU (like this mod) could give around 10% resist to shield and about 12% for armour. Well then why does infantry get 5% for armor and shield? Infantry are dealing with far lower numbers than wedo. 5% of 4000 is way more than 5% of 250. Big deal, answer my question. Why does infantry get 5% per level, and we don't? 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. 2369	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:04:00 - [59] - Quote @Spkr Alena did answer your question, you chose to dismiss the answer. Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6288	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:13:00 - [60] - 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.

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4348	Posted - 2015.01.10 21:31:00 - [61] - Quote And yet another vehicle thread quickly turns to poop. Thanks for the response Rattati, good to see the vehicle conversation has not been lost despite the heavy focus on PC rework. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2370	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:10:00 - [62] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: And yet another vehicle thread quickly turns to poop. Thanks for the response Rattati, good to see the vehicle conversation has not been lost despite the heavy focus on PC rework. How do you figure? Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4348	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:13:00 - [63] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: And yet another vehicle thread quickly turns to poop. Thanks for the response Rattati, good to see the vehicle conversation has not been lost despite the heavy focus on PC rework. How do you figure? hm? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2370	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:16:00 - [64] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: And yet another vehicle thread quickly turns to poop. Thanks for the response Rattati, good to see the vehicle conversation has not been lost despite the heavy focus on PC rework. How do you figure? hm? How do you figure? This isn't nearly as bad as some of the threads. Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2710	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:21:00 - [65] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: @Spkr Alena did answer your question, you chose to dismiss the answer. Because it's a stupid answer. Why is it fair for infantry to get 5% per level for armor and shield, but not vehicles? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 3648	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:25:00 - [66] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Absolutely, there is a learning period for us devs to figure out the the real contributors, and it's clear to me who they are. I'm a nostalgic of the old vehicle situation, many other are for various reasons, personally i was enjoying pre 1.7 for diversity and previous skill tree for being very well designed and give real advantages (it was more like infatry skill tree). It was cool to spider tanking, it was cool to stack skill on little turrets, it was cool to be self sustaining with every turret, but most of all there was choice. Numbers are up to you, but please consider to the option to make a step back, just for the feelings, numbers may change, fun is not always related to them. Situational awareness also known as passive scan.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4349	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:28:00 - [67] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: And yet another vehicle thread quickly turns to poop. Thanks for the response Rattati, good to see the vehicle conversation has not been lost despite the heavy focus on PC rework. How do you figure? hm? How do you figure? This isn't nearly as bad as some of the threads. Oh just people bickering already, forgive me I'm a little tired of it, that's all. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 14989	Posted - 2015.01.10 23:11:00 - [68] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Oh just people bickering already, forgive me I'm a little tired of it, that's all. Than do yourself a favor. Click on [Non-Constructive Scrub]'s name and then hit the "HIde Posts" option. Now you'll be free to read any of the Vehicle Threads and you'll only see the posts worth reading. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 10704	Posted - 2015.01.10 23:33:00 - [69] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Maken Tosch wrote: If you ever need some resources to help you out... https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/rookie-resources/ Thanks but no thanks, I already have enough games and none of them are subscription based. There's actually a way to play Eve Online for free without having to continue to pay cash for it. PLEX can be purchased in Eve using in-game ISK and is then redeemed to add 30 days to your account. But you'll have to be able to gather enough ISK each month to get one from the secondary market. Right now, PLEX is going for about 814 Million ISK per unit in the market. Price will fluctuate although we expect PLEX prices to go down over the next 3-4 months now that ISBoxing has been officially banned by CCP in their Dev Blog recently. PLEX prices in Eve Online https://eve-central.com/home/quicklook.html?typeid=29668 On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
Echo 1991 Titans of Phoenix 647	Posted - 2015.01.11 15:16:00 - [70] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. If they are scaled differently, why would you give them the same bonus to HP per level? A tank shouldn't be given the same amount as a bonus as we are dealing with much larger numbers. Giving them a free basic heavy plate isnt balanced is it?

Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 144	Posted - 2015.01.11 15:38:00 - [71] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: 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. If they are scaled differently, why would you give them the same bonus to HP per level? A tank shouldn't be given the same amount as a bonus as we are dealing with much larger numbers. Giving them a free basic heavy plate isnt balanced is it? So let's say for the sake of argument that we're dealing in two different scales of HP totals that are connected (these are not anywhere dust values, just going to be used to demonstrate how scale matters). Infantry - 100 HP Vehicle - 2000 HP Infantry weapons doing 25 DPS Vehicle (and anti-vehicle) weapons doing 500 DPS a 25% bonus will give Infantry - 125 HP Vehicles - 2500 HP So assuming the weapons stay the same, both the infantry and the vehicle will have gained 1 second of time living since the weapons also operate on the same scale, the same percentage bonus gives you the same TTK. (It's the same reason why the 5% to HP buffers per level works well on everything from Frigates to Titans in EVE, they're going to be mostly fighting against things that do Damage scaled to hit against their HP) In essence, the same bonus to HP per level can work because not only are the HP values on different scales, but so are the weapons designed to kill them (in the past in DUST the dropsuit HP skills also effected vehicles in the same amounts) Also, Sentinel Dropsuits gain essentially a free enhanced plate (most more HP than that), yet it isn't exactly something that most people think about Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
Taskanoss Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 43	Posted - 2015.01.11 17:18:00 - [72] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Neither my mental state nor vacations are affecting this. After the first 20 pages were dragged down into the useless drivel I have come to expect between vehicle and infantry discussions, I decided to let it simmer and see if it would dig itself out of the hole. And it seems to be doing so, spreadsheets being worked on etc. This initiative is full on, but without quality feedback, we will just work on it internally. Sooooooooooo.....What you are saying is you need feedback, right? I got your back Bro Beans!
TIGER SHARK1501 Savage Bullet 110	Posted - 2015.01.11 22:20:00 - [73] - Quote Sadly I do not have a spreadsheet to show a projection for performance but ultimately I think vehicles should perform besides piloting ability better based on the amount of SP one specs into the role. Much like in pre 1.8 for example the enforcer tank would have increased range and damage based on the amount of SP that you allocate into the skill tree and the same worked for armor rep, plating, etc. I feel the ADS is on the right track as far as unlocking the turret of choice then putting SP into small turret damage followed by putting SP into the ADS of choice gaining a raised ROF and ammo capacity. Vehicles shouldn't be treated as disposable.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16497	Posted - 2015.01.11 22:37:00 - [74] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Oh just people bickering already, forgive me I'm a little tired of it, that's all. I would be too if I'd put the same time and effort into constructing a proposal of the quality you did. *"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 :: [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.

MY LIFE FOR AIUR!

MY LIFE FOR AIUR!

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

MY LIFE FOR AIUR!

Official QuafeGäó Advocate