DUST Search - HAV revamp proposal

All Channels

General Discussions

HAV revamp proposal

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6391	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:20:00 - [1] - Quote I am working on a proposal involving re-introduction of V/AV balance from chromosome and modify what has frequently been referred to as too short of a TTK in HAV vs. HAV engagements You can find the numbers here. Since I have asked for vehicle driver input repeatedly for advice on numbers so that HAV vs HAV engagements are not too short, and have gotten none.. And since no one has provided numbers and input pertaining to dropship balance... If no one steps up to help me run these numbers for flaws, and to insure that HAV vs. HAV engagements are fun and there are meaningful fights with HAVs and dropships on the field I am setting a deadline. If I have received no meaningful input by 9:00 AM Pacific standard time on thursday the 15th of January, I will take it as your (the vehicle community) blessing to adjust the numbers as I see fit. I need actual numbers and math, not vague suggestions like "it needs to work kinda like..." The HAV bring back initiative is something I want, and it's something that will benefit the game as a whole. But I want pilot input on how this proposal should go. Any suggestion that AV needs to be marginalized will be summarily dismissed, V/AV values are being set at the chromosome build level for the purposes of this propopsal. oh there's theoretical heavy weapon proposals for you sentinel parity spergs. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16553	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:38:00 - [2] - Quote Have you given consideration to increasing the Shield Passive Recharge Values from the old Uprising Chormosome stats alongside the Shield Boosters? Those were two reasons I remember that Shield Tanks of the past were inferior to Armour Tanks? *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 320	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:40:00 - [3] - Quote Math? You're already limiting yourself on input right there. Talk to the EVE forum peeps. They'll be more likely to be the math nerd types. http://vimeo.com/65921206 I'm better than laser focused; I'm hybrid focused.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6392	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:42:00 - [4] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Have you given consideration to increasing the Shield Passive Recharge Values from the old Uprising Chormosome stats alongside the Shield Boosters? Those were two reasons I remember that Shield Tanks of the past were inferior to Armour Tanks? If I do they won't be close to current values The 25 second recovery from near death is excessive without active reps EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16553	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:51:00 - [5] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: Have you given consideration to increasing the Shield Passive Recharge Values from the old Uprising Chormosome stats alongside the Shield Boosters? Those were two reasons I remember that Shield Tanks of the past were inferior to Armour Tanks? If I do they won't be close to current values The 25 second recovery from near death is excessive without active reps See above for the numbers on Thaddeus 90 Second Shield Regen model applied to the old Choromo Stats. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Joel II X Bacon with a bottle of Quafe 5473	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:54:00 - [6] - Quote Does that mean that you want modules to work like they did before, as well (i.e. active reps)?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16554	Posted - 2015.01.13 22:59:00 - [7] - Quote Joel II X wrote: Does that mean that you want modules to work like they did before, as well (i.e. active reps)? Yup that's the plan. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 3595	Posted - 2015.01.13 23:19:00 - [8] - Quote Isn't Chromosone considered the Dark Age? When tanks roamed the map near unkillable? If you want to balance vehicles you need to, 1) Designate an actual role to each vehicle 2) Increase player count so vehicles become useful I would prefer not to have to be in a vehicle to enjoy this game afterall their is a vehicle limit and I don't want to race to get mine in first lest I end up cannon fodder to 6 enemy madrugars. They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank! Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
xavier zor Rogue Instincts 401	Posted - 2015.01.14 00:27:00 - [9] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Isn't Chromosone considered the Dark Age? When tanks roamed the map near unkillable? If you want to balance vehicles you need to, 1) Designate an actual role to each vehicle 2) Increase player count so vehicles become useful I would prefer not to have to be in a vehicle to enjoy this game afterall their is a vehicle limit and I don't want to race to get mine in first lest I end up cannon fodder to 6 enemy madrugars. It was the 'fun' age....for tanks 5v5 tank battles, where they were trying to kill other tanks and infantry was a side-dish, with enemy tanks as the main well...i have nothing to say
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16560	Posted - 2015.01.14 00:32:00 - [10] - Quote xavier zor wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Isn't Chromosone considered the Dark Age? When tanks roamed the map near unkillable? If you want to balance vehicles you need to, 1) Designate an actual role to each vehicle 2) Increase player count so vehicles become useful I would prefer not to have to be in a vehicle to enjoy this game afterall their is a vehicle limit and I don't want to race to get mine in first lest I end up cannon fodder to 6 enemy madrugars. It was the 'fun' age....for tanks 5v5 tank battles, where they were trying to kill other tanks and infantry was a side-dish, with enemy tanks as the main I think arguably it also had fair balance for AV but as many players were new to the game and didn't understand the importance of AV it was left by the way side. *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.

Toobar Zoobar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 103	Posted - 2015.01.14 00:38:00 - [11] - Quote Not the 3 AV grenades. I can't accept that. They were OP before okay, they really really were. So much so that they gave me cancer. And what, you want the breach forge gun to 1 shot every ADS from the sky? Specialization: Making typo's.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16560	Posted - 2015.01.14 00:41:00 - [12] - Quote Toobar Zoobar wrote: Not the 3 AV grenades. I can't accept that. They were OP before okay, they really really were. So much so that they gave me cancer. And what, you want the breach forge gun to 1 shot every ADS from the sky? face palms...... Have you not seen his posts asking for AD pilot feedback? "He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Toobar Zoobar The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 104	Posted - 2015.01.14 00:44:00 - [13] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Toobar Zoobar wrote: Not the 3 AV grenades. I can't accept that. They were OP before okay, they really really were. So much so that they gave me cancer. And what, you want the breach forge gun to 1 shot every ADS from the sky? *face palms...... Have you not seen his posts asking for AD pilot feedback? yes yes but i'm far too tired atm Specialization: Making typo's.
Yokal Bob Murphys-Law General Tso's Alliance 630	Posted - 2015.01.14 00:45:00 - [14] - Quote math? doesnt exist here, just gimme a gun /{o.o}/ ---L Inflatable hammer strikes again
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Onikanabo Brigade Caldari State 1694	Posted - 2015.01.14 01:52:00 - [15] - Quote Operative 1174 Uuali wrote: Math? You're already limiting yourself on input right there. Talk to the EVE forum peeps. They'll be more likely to be the math nerd types. http://vimeo.com/65921206 I understand the premise but this is what's wrong with this game , the forum and the community as a whole ... THIS IS DUST and while yes it is in the EVE universe , some might look at this response as what's wrong with this game in the fact that the OP mentioned that he didn't get any feedback . Now some might not have known about it , no matter how long it's been up ... some might not have wanted to give any input because of fear of being insulted or feeling inferior like saying that you put this in the wrong forum . To me that's like saying that what you might have to say is just not important or if the problems of Dust get fixed , it will be from the EVE side not the Dust side . Now while I myself am not the sensitive and could give a frack less what someone else thinks , just that display alone can stifle any progress from people who 1 : have to deal with it more then an EVE player would if this is their only link to New Eden and 2 : already feel like their ideas and feedback are not important because they look and see who the DEV's or the CPM feel are important in their responses or the lack there of in the forums . Most of the dual ( EVE / DUST ) players get the attention deserved in their topics , hell they create troll post that get blue tagged . If your looking for feedback then you have to be wiling to wait for it , not too many will give you numbers and spreadsheets full of collected data because console players just play the game but that doesn't mean that they can't give you a comprehensive report or a discussion on and about what's wrong with a game and the fact that they just play , makes it easy for them to do that but they won't number crunch . You have to have a discussion where you actually listen and help them to understand that your trying to build something with then and not exclude them which happens so much in these forums . Like this post OP you have to help these people understand what your trying to do and include them but you have to allow them to do just that . Help them to help you to allow you to help them . Doubts are like flies and should be treated as such and crushed .
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2798	Posted - 2015.01.14 02:02:00 - [16] - Quote I started writing a post picking out everything that was wrong and I came to this conclusion: Pre-1.7 was bad and should stay dead. I say let's keep and improve on current numbers and stats and picki and choose add ons from pre-1.7. For example: Let's keep passive armor repairersGÇª BUT dramatically reduce their repair amount and add a new module that's essentially an active repairer. Armor Repairer: 45-50hp/s, passive, low fitting requirements (CPU mainly) Ancillary Armor Repairer: 375hp/pulse, 8 pulses (on per sec) (3,000 armor total), fitting comparable to a plate, 90s cooldown. (Numbers just for example) Current numbers aren't bad. Most of the solutions lie with value changes and/or the addition of new mods. Besides, it would probably be less labor intensive than trying to necromance 1.6. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6395	Posted - 2015.01.14 04:01:00 - [17] - Quote I do not share your opinion that pre 1.7 is bad. I will be altering passive mods to be viable but less efficient. 3 AV grenades stays. If I'm proposing chrome tanks you get to suffer chrome AV. 1.7 taught the playerbase the importance of AV weapons. I don't think hav dominance will have the same bite. I used to be able to solo chrome marauders. I can teach newbies to do the same. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 3531	Posted - 2015.01.14 04:54:00 - [18] - Quote I want AV to be super potent if tanks are going back to the god-mode days of chromosome. Seriously, there needs to be a reason for me to neuter my infantry slaying abilities in order to have a shot at killing someone who can also easily kill me with 1/10th the shots i need to kill them. Id like AV nades returned to their former usefulness so that we have an actual way to say "Stop sticking your blaster in here or you will die." in exchange for infantry slaying power. Current AV nades are lol. Swarms need more damage and range, forge guns i can't comment on as i don't use them, and dropships will need a survivability buff as well. "Minja" and "Masochist" are synonyms. FA's Shotgunning T-Dome Champ I piss Remote Explosives and shit Shotgun shells.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6395	Posted - 2015.01.14 05:47:00 - [19] - Quote Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote: I want AV to be super potent if tanks are going back to the god-mode days of chromosome. Seriously, there needs to be a reason for me to neuter my infantry slaying abilities in order to have a shot at killing someone who can also easily kill me with 1/10th the shots i need to kill them. Id like AV nades returned to their former usefulness so that we have an actual way to say "Stop sticking your blaster in here or you will die." in exchange for infantry slaying power. Current AV nades are lol. Swarms need more damage and range, forge guns i can't comment on as i don't use them, and dropships will need a survivability buff as well. Chrome vehicles means chrome AV across the board. which means that forges and av nades go back to beast mode, just like the sagaris and Surya are beast mode. I will not, howwever be advocating hives being able to generate av nades like they did in chrome EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Smoke Jaguar Elemental Superior Genetics 0	Posted - 2015.01.14 07:11:00 - [20] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Hilariously swarms actually have DPS I consider viable for hunting marauders in TODAY's build. If I am reading this correctly, do you mean that the Swarm Launchers of today can hunt the Marauders of old? Skills needed Electonics V - 25% more CPU (broken not applied) Engineering V - 25% more Powergrid (broken/not applied) Engineering Upgrdes V - 25% less CPU use per powergrid Module (broken?) Shield Adaption V - 15% less CPU use per Shield Amplifier Shield Managment V - 25% more shields Shield Operations V - 15% more shield recharge rates Shield Upgrades V - 15% less CPU use per shield module (broken?) Mechanics V - 25% more armor (currently bugged) Armor Upgrades -15% less PG per armor module.(broken?) Of course HAV III and the sorts but no bonuses from them. Sagaris w/ max support skills 3900 shields 5200 EHP shields when [1/(1-0.25{natural resists on hull}) * 3900{base shields w/o resistance}]) 1000/1250 (bugged) 27.6 shields a second (EHP repaired is 37.75 shields a second) 141.3 second shield recharge time or 188.4 EHP a second 437.5 CPU 2300 PG 5 highs 3 lows MAX Sagaris + DCU+ AMPx2 + LSEx2 + PDU x3(best stuff) 8972 Shields (Management 25% + 7% PDU x3 (shields hp is not penalized) +LSE x2) 25% Hull + 14% DCU +24% AMPx2(penalty is suggested to be bugged) =45% resists (which unfortunately are hidden stats) EHP 16,312 1000/1250 armor (bugged) 30 shields a second (EHP repaired is 55 shields a second) 220.5 second shield recharge time 177.4 CPU 1103 GRID PDU x3 7% Shield HP, PG, and Shield Gen DCU 14% resists F-S3 Shield Amp 23% resists x2 HAW ES +2185 shields x2 I would like to see some number crunching of prototype swarms, counting the reload times and damage malus against shields, against this Sagaris fit, and see how long it would take to kill it. The EHP of the Sagaris, and the constant shield regen even during damage, would nullify most AV attacks unless it were under sustained fire.

Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6398	Posted - 2015.01.14 07:15:00 - [21] - Quote before skills wiyrkomi swarm is 430 DPS if you include base reloads. Raw DPS is 891.4 this is before skills and damage mods. Ishukone assault forge damage before anything is 600 DPS by the chrome model, at 400 DPS with reloads accounted for. So yes, I consider swarms viable for marauder hunting. Further, the Surya was inordinately more bricky than the sagaris, thanks for providing me fitting numbers to look at. the skill tree I have for HAvs is in my spreadsheet. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
SoTa PoP Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 5644	Posted - 2015.01.14 07:18:00 - [22] - Quote What's with you being in IE? n+ÅS¦¦Gùò GÇ+GÇ+ GùòS¦¦n++ I watch anime for the plot
Smoke Jaguar Elemental Superior Genetics 0	Posted - 2015.01.14 07:20:00 - [23] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: before skills wiyrkomi swarm is 430 DPS if you include base reloads. Is this also counting the constant 55 EHP regen the Sagaris is accumulating every second of engagement which subracts your effective DPS? It stacks up disturbingly fast. I'm also assuming your numbers are also counting for shield malus penalties that swarms suffer. Granted, the Sagaris is substantially slower then the HAVs we have now, so it would be more committed to engagements.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6398	Posted - 2015.01.14 07:24:00 - [24] - Quote Smoke Jaguar Elemental wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: before skills wiyrkomi swarm is 430 DPS if you include base reloads. Is this also counting the constant 55 EHP regen the Sagaris is accumulating every second of engagement which subracts your effective DPS? It stacks up disturbingly fast. I'm also assuming your numbers are also counting for shield malus penalties that swarms suffer. Granted, the Sagaris is substantially slower then the HAVs we have now, so it would be more committed to engagements. swarms are better for hunting Surya, were it not for the fact that the Surya as written in chrome has far too much EHP compared to anything else besides and MCC. I intend to bring it closer to the sagaris. No, closer does not mean identical. Once I figure these out I intend to begin work integrating enforcers. working on re-introducing shield and armor remote reps as turrets 55 HP/sec reaps shockingly diminishing returns compared to triple damage mods, reload speed, etc. Slow shield regen is a nonfactor. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 3600	Posted - 2015.01.14 11:56:00 - [25] - Quote xavier zor wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Isn't Chromosone considered the Dark Age? When tanks roamed the map near unkillable? If you want to balance vehicles you need to, 1) Designate an actual role to each vehicle 2) Increase player count so vehicles become useful I would prefer not to have to be in a vehicle to enjoy this game afterall their is a vehicle limit and I don't want to race to get mine in first lest I end up cannon fodder to 6 enemy madrugars. It was the 'fun' age....for tanks 5v5 tank battles, where they were trying to kill other tanks and infantry was a side-dish, with enemy tanks as the main And Infantry still hated it, because you would get that 1 guy (Spkr, Taki) who decided that enemy tanks weren't enough, so they went round going 20+ every match because no-one could stop them. It'll end up like 1.6 again, if you don't have someone on your team who is a dedicated tanker EVERY Match, you loose. Don't get me wrong I'm all for a shake-up on vehicles, adding some variety back, both to variants, modules and layouts would be fantastic. I just don't agree with you basing your numbers off a time when vehicles were the highest tier of warfare. That's not how it should work. Unless CCP are prepared to start adding in more ways to move between sockets without being skewered by 5 Madrugars, the game just becomes stagnant for infantry. So long as there are large swathes of ground with no cover or hidey holes for infantry, making vehicles 'fun' like they were in chrome will only make it fun for tank drivers. They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank! Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6400	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:04:00 - [26] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Relevant things Maddies were dealable. Honesty the concern point I have is the Surya. Part of the problem in Chrome was there was a cultural inertia where everyone REFUSED to load swarms or forges. But all of the non-marauder HAVs were tacklable solo. The Sagaris if you were a dedicated murder maniac could also be soloed with timing and effort. I think only three or four people ever managed to drop a surya solo, myself among them. It's EHP was entirely too high. the most comparable vehicle we have now is the overtanked gunnlogi, which swallows eight to ten proto forge shots before exploding. I'm basing my numbers off chrome. I'm not following chrome in lockstep. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 1784	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:22:00 - [27] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Part of the problem in Chrome was there was a cultural inertia where everyone REFUSED to load swarms or forges. "refused" is the wrong word. I remember it like it was yesterday when I had my tripple damage modded proto swarm shooting 6 volleys at an armor tank which didnt really cared about me. then he drove off behind the hill before I could reload to kill him. I would have used my overpowered AV nades but this guy was clever enough not to get close, he didnt had to, his turrets were super effective and could wreck infantry at range. good old times, right?
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6402	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:25:00 - [28] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Part of the problem in Chrome was there was a cultural inertia where everyone REFUSED to load swarms or forges. "refused" is the wrong word. I remember it like it was yesterday when I had my tripple damage modded proto swarm shooting 6 volleys at an armor tank which didnt really cared about me. then he drove off behind the hill before I could reload to kill him. I would have used my overpowered AV nades but this guy was clever enough not to get close, he didnt had to, his turrets were super accurate and could wreck infantry at range. good old times, right? Surya. I'm well aware of how obnoxious the Surya was. Like I said, if I have my way that HAV's ability to soak fire is going to be dropped back near the sagaris into manageable. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 153	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:27:00 - [29] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Relevant things Maddies were dealable. Honesty the concern point I have is the Surya. Part of the problem in Chrome was there was a cultural inertia where everyone REFUSED to load swarms or forges. But all of the non-marauder HAVs were tacklable solo. The Sagaris if you were a dedicated murder maniac could also be soloed with timing and effort. I think only three or four people ever managed to drop a surya solo, myself among them. It's EHP was entirely too high. the most comparable vehicle we have now is the overtanked gunnlogi, which swallows eight to ten proto forge shots before exploding. I'm basing my numbers off chrome. I'm not following chrome in lockstep. There was also the problem where MLT and STD swarms where so much worse than their older brothers that even when people picked them up, it couldn't do anything even against unskilled failfits (That problem has largely been addressed). Anyway...for helping out the Derpships...expand their PG/CPU to be near HAV levels, this will allow them to fit heavy eHP mods no problem, and largely address their survivabiltiy problems (their slot layout should be fine) as is. (maybe too drastic of a change, but through their PG especially...should help) Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. I believe all these roles are support for front line soldiers.
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 1784	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:28:00 - [30] - Quote dont you think this effort is futile without racial parity in terms of AV options?



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.