DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] HAV Hull Progression

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] HAV Hull Progression

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 66 post(s)
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 194	Posted - 2015.01.22 14:53:00 - [1] - Quote Just one question. Will the UHAV have two variants as well? One with smalls and one without? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 194	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:32:00 - [2] - Quote My Only problem with this Ratt, is that your still going by a 3/2 or 2/3 system for slots. This is very, very bad. Reduce power of the mods, add more slots because we need variety. Gunnlogi should get 4 highs and 2 lows, opposite for Maddy. Minmatar should get a 3/3 layout, but I'm not sure about what to do with Amarr.... Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 194	Posted - 2015.01.24 05:53:00 - [3] - Quote Will two turret tanks still be an option? I have specific fits for a friend of mine that guns all the time, but I only use one small turret. Are we screwed? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 194	Posted - 2015.01.24 06:05:00 - [4] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: Will two turret tanks still be an option? I have specific fits for a friend of mine that guns all the time, but I only use one small turret. Are we screwed? I guess a 3rd variant with a single turret? And then a 4th variant with a single turret in the other slot? Or just add vehicle locks and everything will be fine with the normal 3 turret HAV. Very much this. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 198	Posted - 2015.01.26 23:35:00 - [5] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: There will be no DHAV rail fit, I will make it so, whether through fitting bonuses or something even heavier handed. A positive side to this is that we can properly define vehicle roles. Just to see how i interpret your tank vision. UHAVs: high ehp, slow speed, low manueverability, is vulnerable to other tanks but excells in anti infantry: (heavy) MBTs: medium eHP, medium speed- medium to long range , can run all purpose fittings, but is the best tank class to equip with rail turrets to escort UHAVs against DHAVs (assault) DHAV: low eHP, high speed, high damage, short range, best at ambushing the other tanks in short range quick battles, but if spotted first will have a rough time of it. (scout) People have been asking about vehicle roles, now we can tell them 3 A Tanker should want to have some back up before going anti infantry in a UHAV. Encourages Teamwork infantry demand of tankers to make the reddots life miserable. A Tanker can go for all purpose fits that are not quite as good as the specialized fits but don't need a lot of team work to do so. Not much beyond the current meta. Can hurt UHAVs and wreck DHAVs (if DHAV spotted first). A Tanker can choose for the high damage tank. Solo tankers can set up ambushes to catch enemy tanks unawares, and can chew UHAVs to peices, and stands a good chance of defeating a MBT if they have the element of surprise. More likely than not risks losing that tank trying to bring that power to bear on infantry. pretty good ;) I've got a question Ratt, will UHAV and DHAV have required smalls? Honestly I don't like the idea very much (it destroys people like me who just want 1 turret on my tank for the one gunner I have). Instead of having to variants of tanks, one with and one without, why not just add vehicle locks? Seems a lot simpler to me. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 200	Posted - 2015.01.28 15:36:00 - [6] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: so far we're looking at a 4/1 layout for caldari UHAVs and DHAVs Looks like the Main Battle Tanks are sitting at 5/2 so far. check it out. It's all in the spreadsheet Those who are interested can take a look at the WIP progress for capacity, for UHAVs, DHAVs and HAVs in the Final Proposal Caldari Hulls. It also has most of the skills/specializations/modules that are needed in phase 1. Duplicating this sheet for Gallente tomorrow. Looking really good Ratt, although the 1 low slot for Cal UHAV is kinda weird. Can't even fathom how awesome a Proto Marauder will be :). Will a proto UHAV or DHAV get more slots? Or is it 4/1 across all tiers? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 200	Posted - 2015.01.28 16:07:00 - [7] - Quote My thoughts on bonuses for the tanks released in phase 1 (Minmatar and Amarr vehicle bonuses can be dicussed later, when they are closer to being released) HAV operation 1 unlocks Caldari and Gallente HAV operation. 1% bonus to something per level so it's not useless past 1. Caldari HAV operation unlocks Std MBT at 1, ADV at 3, PRO at 5 (obvious) Not sure if DHAV and UHAV should be unlocked separately or at the same level. If same level, both are unlocked at 3. If different, DHAV is unlocked at 3, UHAV at 5. 2% bonus to shield recharge per level. Caldari UHAV operation unlocks STD Marauder at 1. 2% bonus to shield HP and resistance per level, plus Marader bonus of 5% to small turret fitting bonus and damage. Caldari DHAV operation unlocks STD Enforcer at 1. 5% bonus to Large Missile damage and reload per level, plus Enforcer bonus of 5% to Large Turret fitting reduction. Gallente HAV operation goes the same as Caldari, 2% bonus to armor repair per level. Gallente UHAV operation unlocks STD Marauder at 1. 2% bonus to armor HP and Resistance per level, plus Marader bonus to small turrets. Gallente DHAV operation unlocks STD enforcer at 1. 5% bonus to Large Blaster Damage and Dispersion(or Reload) per level, plus Enforcer bonus to Large Turrets. What do you guys think of those? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 202	Posted - 2015.01.28 19:02:00 - [8] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: My thoughts on bonuses for the tanks released in phase 1 (Minmatar and Amarr vehicle bonuses can be dicussed later, when they are closer to being released) HAV operation 1 unlocks Caldari and Gallente HAV operation. 1% bonus to something per level so it's not useless past 1. Caldari HAV operation unlocks Std MBT at 1, ADV at 3, PRO at 5 (obvious) Not sure if DHAV and UHAV should be unlocked separately or at the same level. If same level, both are unlocked at 3. If different, DHAV is unlocked at 3, UHAV at 5. 2% bonus to shield recharge per level. Caldari UHAV operation unlocks STD Marauder at 1. 2% bonus to shield HP and resistance per level, plus Marader bonus of 5% to small turret fitting bonus and damage. Caldari DHAV operation unlocks STD Enforcer at 1. 5% bonus to Large Missile damage and reload per level, plus Enforcer bonus of 5% to Large Turret fitting reduction. Gallente HAV operation goes the same as Caldari, 2% bonus to armor repair per level. Gallente UHAV operation unlocks STD Marauder at 1. 2% bonus to armor HP and Resistance per level, plus Marader bonus to small turrets. Gallente DHAV operation unlocks STD enforcer at 1. 5% bonus to Large Blaster Damage and Dispersion(or Reload) per level, plus Enforcer bonus to Large Turrets. What do you guys think of those? I think it is a very good idea to make the generic racial HAV skill give a bonus specifically to the tanking style of that race, and make that bonus apply to all HAVs of that race (Even the DHAVs and UHAVs) Amarr: +% Reduction to Speed Penalty from Armor Plates Caldari: +% Bonus to Shield Recharge Rate Gallente: +% Bonus to Armor Repair Rate Minmatar: +% Reduction to Shield Recharge Delay I seem to remember an exploit where HP Boosting skills actually allowed a driver to hop in and out of a vehicle to artificially regenerate HP. For example a +25% Bonus to shield HAV, when the drive got in the vehicle the base 4000 would increase to 5000. However if say he was reduced to 2500/5000 HP, he would hop out, the max HP would decrease to 4000 so the HAV would have 2500/4000, he would hop back in and it would increase the HP of the vehicle by 25%, pushing it to 3125/5000. This is why the +% HP skills were change to +% Damage Resistance back in the day. Now I don't know the status of this exploit, but it is something to keep in mind when adding any sort of +% HP skill bonuses, as you may want to consider damage resistance instead (which I find to be a better bonus than HP anyways due to its added effects on regeneration). Fitting reduction for small turrets is kind of pointless since the turrets are prefit and the resources scaled appropriately to accommodate them. Though I have to ask, if we're able to swap the turrets out, would players not be able to just swap to a lower tiered turret in order to free up resources to bolster defenses further? I guess in that regard you could give a flat Role Bonus of a significant drop in the cost of small turrets. This would mean that even downgrading them would free up minimal resources, thus lessening the effect. However I don't think that should be the scaling general role bonus for the UHAV but rather a flat bonus that doesn't increase per level, as it would be crucial in properly balancing PG/CPU in the design phase. UHAV Role Bonus: % Reduction to PG/CPU of Small Turrets (flat bonus) +% Bonus to Small Turret Damage Amarr: +% Reduction to Small Turret Heat Buildup +% Bonus to Armor Damage Resistance Caldari: +% Bonus to Small Turret Reload Speed (Or Missile Velocity) +% Bonus to Shield Damage Resistance Gallente: +% Reduction to Small Turret Dispersion +% Bonus to Armor Damage Resistance Minmatar: +% Bonus to Small Turret Splash Radius +% Bonus to Shield Damage Resistance DHAV Role Bonus: +% Bonus to Large Turret Damage Amarr: +% Reduction to Large Turret Heat Buildup +% Bonus Powertrain Enhancer (Active High, Increase Vehicle Turn Speed) Caldari: +% Bonus to Large Turret Reload Speed (Or Missile Velocity) +% Bonus to Nanofiber Modules (Passive Low, Increased Speed/Acceleration at cost of armor HP) Gallente: +% Reduction to Large Turret Dispersion +% Bonus to Fuel Injector Modules (Active High) Minmatar: +% Bonus to Large Turret Tracking Speed +% Bonus to Overdrive Modules (Passive Low, Increase Torque/Acceleration) Alright, so just change the HP Bonus to a resist Bonus? 4% would be good then. I'm trying to keep the DHAV Damage bonus higher than the UHAV defense bonus to keep the UHAV in check. What do you think about the DHAV getting a fitting bonus towards Large Turrets/damage mods for the role bonus, then bonuses to each races respective turret on their tanks? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 205	Posted - 2015.01.28 21:26:00 - [9] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: Alright, so just change the HP Bonus to a resist Bonus? 4% would be good then. I'm trying to keep the DHAV Damage bonus higher than the UHAV defense bonus to keep the UHAV in check. What do you think about the DHAV getting a fitting bonus towards Large Turrets/damage mods for the role bonus, then bonuses to each races respective turret on their tanks? 4-5% per level is pretty reasonable given their reduce slot count. It lets them decently tank even when the hardeners are on cooldown. As for the damage bonus you don't want to get too crazy with it and totally bone MBTs, but their additional slots will help a little to counteract that. I wont delve into numbers too much with that, as its highly dependent on where the eHP and turret values land. Again the Large Turret Fitting reduction....well kinda goes along with the bit I spoke about with the smalls. Since the vehicle comes pre-fit with a turret and the PG/CPU is already modified specifically to handle that turret, offering the fitting reduction as a bonus is kind of pointless since the hull is already tailored to fit the cost of the gun. A flat role bonus to reduction may help to negate the "downgrade" issue I mentioned with the smalls but that will probably be less of a problem with the DHAVs. As for Damage Mods that's kind of a tough one, as Armor Hulls would likely benefit from the bonus more than Shield since they don't have to sacrifice any main-rack slots to use them. Also I'm going under the assumption that we're not getting racial turrets anytime soon, so Im trying to keep bonuses very generic for the sake of Amarr and Minmatar which don't have proper racial turrets. The damage mod problem for shield tanks could be lessened with passive damage mods in the lows, with 5%/7%/10% for the progression. I was thinking that there should be passive utility mods in the lows, active in the highs like we had before. For example, passive and active damage mods, speed mods, heat sinks, scanning mods even. Would give shield tanks a lot more fitting options for their low slots, which helps Them not have to use armor stuff. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 206	Posted - 2015.01.28 21:50:00 - [10] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: The damage mod problem for shield tanks could be lessened with passive damage mods in the lows, with 5%/7%/10% for the progression. I was thinking that there should be passive utility mods in the lows, active in the highs like we had before. For example, passive and active damage mods, speed mods, heat sinks, scanning mods even. Would give shield tanks a lot more fitting options for their low slots, which helps Them not have to use armor stuff. Hmmm well that's sorta true, except the active damage mod would theoretically gain more of a benefit due to a larger base value. As for the Active/Passive High/Low duality, totally on board with that and it adds in some much needed options for low slots. I think we can also use PG limitations to really hinder shield vehicles from fitting plates. I actually would prefer having a smaller boost all the time. I don't like active reliant fits, which is why I REALLY want my passive shield resist mods to come back. Back then, I could slap on two supplemental amplifiers and get constant 30% damage reduction. Then I had 1 large extender and a booster, the only active mod on the fit. Had about 4500 shields, constant 30% damage reduction, and I could regen my shields if I needed to. Onto the second part, the PG would have to be extremely high for plates, otherwise the Proto Shield vehicles will still be able to use them, which we don't want. Same goes for CPU on shield mods, so armor can't use them effectively. I'm pretty sure that dual tanked Surya's were the most OP tanks we had, and we don't need that again. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....

DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 206	Posted - 2015.01.28 21:52:00 - [11] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: Perhaps instead have different Large Turrets have different weapon mod slots? For example: Rail should be a low slot (lore reason: Using more power, Game Reason: Paired with Shield Tanks) Blaster should be high Missile should be ... high / low? (Depending on Missile Type? AV vs AI) Another idea would be to have separate weapon mods for the small turrets, with these providing larger benefits per mod (Let's say... 2 x as effective?) This way tanks, especially UHAVs, have a way of increasing the AI capability. These mods for small turrets need not be straight damage, they could be heat, ammo, accuracy, etc Heavily disagree. Changes way to much. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 209	Posted - 2015.01.28 22:54:00 - [12] - Quote We're getting increased sots, as has been said Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 209	Posted - 2015.01.28 23:44:00 - [13] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I am not following the "damage mods" discussion, we already have damage amps in high, I am not changing any of that. But I do want them to be active. We use to have passive damage mods that went in the low slots, which would be great if they were added back in. These were passive, and had a smaller boost than the active ones. These would allow the Caldari DHAV to be able to have some extra damage without sacrificing to much compared to the Gallente that will be able to have both tank and damage mods without sacrifices Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 209	Posted - 2015.01.29 00:23:00 - [14] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Foundation Seldon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I am not following the "damage mods" discussion, we already have damage amps in high, I am not changing any of that. But I do want them to be active. The basic question is this, what is the incentive to fitting X new module over an additional damage mod or additional modules that increase my eHP? It's a question of whether or not the additional properties are going to be worth sacrificing those aspects for. You mentioned active dispersion decreasing modules in the other thread, which is something that I hadn't seen mentioned yet. This is great! This is the type of module that adds a very real and tangible benefit to Large Blaster tanks assuming it gave them limited infantry slaying ability during activation. Im only questioning the overall usefulness of the other proposed active modules. A lot of this is hinged on the insane fitting power of the Gunnlogi at the moment. The thing can fit everything without the need for any sort of PG or CPU upgrade. I would honestly support bringing it down to the level of the Maddy (basically bottlenecking its PG in the same way that the Maddy is CPU bottlenecked) so they could stop being omni-tanked monstrosities. The reason, I imagine, that their PG is as high as it is because of the high fitting cost of Heavy Shield Boosters. But given that Shield Boosters can be interrupted half way through the boosting process its much more reliable to stick a heavy plate/hardener in the lows instead. Secondary questions include, whats the proposed slot layout for these modules? At the moment there's a distinct lack of utility based low slot modules that allow a tank to be able to comfortably stack shields while gaining some secondary battlefield utility. My suggestion would be : Active Dispersion Module - High Slot, on the basis that Maddys are Gallente and Gallente are Blasters. You don't want people comfortably stacking damage mods and the infantry slaying dispersion module as well. Active Heat Sink - Low Slot, so the Gunnlogi can focus on its shields while gaining the benefit of better Rails. Yep, I have raised the low slot issue in this thread and unfair fitting between ca and ga, and both heat sinks and disp modules work for rails and missiles, blaster can use both. There was a whole page of pure dmg mods that i just didnt get I was suggesting that each active module get a passive variant. Active versions in high slots, passive in low slots. Every turret related module should do this, just like it did before. This way, Gal and Cal HAV's aren't imblalanced in terms of utility, as both have their own versions of the same module to use. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 209	Posted - 2015.01.29 00:24:00 - [15] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Yep, I have raised the low slot issue in this thread and unfair fitting between ca and ga, and both heat sinks and disp modules work for rails and missiles, blaster can use both. There was a whole page of pure dmg mods that i just didnt get Perhaps I'm confused, but currently missiles pretty much hit where you aim. Are you adding in missile dispersion so they can make use of the dispersion reduction modules? If you try to fire missiles full auto, they have dispersion. Hence why most missile tankers semi auto it. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 209	Posted - 2015.01.29 00:31:00 - [16] - Quote You know.... I don't think Rattati likes me.... :( Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 211	Posted - 2015.01.29 22:04:00 - [17] - Quote Yo Doc.... I would listen to Pokey if I were you. He's usually right and this is no exception. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 213	Posted - 2015.01.30 04:42:00 - [18] - Quote Harpyja wrote: While the topic of regen is still floating about, why don't we look to EVE for ideas to implement into Dust? Generalized summary on shields in EVE: -Always passively recharging, though at a variable rate which is at a max around 30% shields -Shield recharge per ship is around a base time to full recharge ---This means that adding extenders increases the hp/s ---Allows for passive fits that rely only on resists and recharge rates while maintaining a large shield buffer -Active shield tanking draws a higher capacitor usage as opposed to active armor tanking ---Shield boosters and active hardeners are harder to run for a longer period of time than their armor counterparts -Penalty on extenders is what would equate to an increased hitbox in Dust -Shield tanked ships generally have less utility (medium slots), but a better ability to fit fitting enhancements and turret upgrades (low slots) -Caldari ships are the slowest before plates are added to Amarr ships Armor: -Can only be repaired actively -Armor reps and active armor hardeners draw less capacitor than their shield counterparts, allowing them to be run for a much longer time or for an indefinite amount of time -Armor fits can get a higher armor buffer than comparable shield buffers ---Passive armor tanking uses hardeners and plates to maximize EHP (no reps) ---Theory is that you have more EHP than what you would be able to rep back in an engagement -Gallente focus more on armor rep, Amarr focuses more on bricking I'm wondering if it will be worth a try to implement some of these features into Dust. We could base shield recharge on a base time to full recharge (which of course means that extenders will increase the hp/s) and make it constant and uninterruptible. This could equate to somewhere between 30-40 base shield per second on an unfitted Gunnlogi. Considerably worse than what one active armor rep could achieve. For a passively tanked Gunnlogi, your base shield should be roughly doubled with two extenders, increasing your recharge to 60-80 shield/s, and with maybe two recharger modules you should be able to add around 50% more for a final recharge rate of 90-120 shield/s. You might notice that shield recharges provide a smaller boost, though they should be considerably easier to fit. This seems to address people's concerns that shield gets a natural regen that's simply too high for having to spend zero modules on. The fit I described seems appropriate for what I consider to be a competitive passive fit. Also, fitting your high slots with damage amps and/or other utility modules and armor tanking your Gunnlogi will no longer give you the benefits of a high shield recharge. Another parallel than can be drawn with EVE is to have armor reps have a longer active duration than shield boosters and to provide more HP at the end of their run. I forget how shield boosters and armor reps compared in terms of hp/s. Armor reps can also have a shorter cooldown to replicate capacitor recovery in EVE due to their smaller cap requirements. One last thing I'd like to add: new module inspiration from EVE. Capacitor batteries and capacitor recharge relays. In Dust, we can have a module that increases module active duration (larger cap pool) and a module that decreases cooldown time (faster cap recovery). (I know that this is generalized but for Dust it could work). The first is a high slot module and the second is a low slot module. Perfect for making armor reps last for a longer time and reducing the longer cooldown times of the shield booster. I really like your last idea. Modules that affect Cooldown and duration of modules would be great and add variety. +1 for that Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 213	Posted - 2015.01.30 22:52:00 - [19] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: Harpyja wrote: While the topic of regen is still floating about, why don't we look to EVE for ideas to implement into Dust? Generalized summary on shields in EVE: -Always passively recharging, though at a variable rate which is at a max around 30% shields -Shield recharge per ship is around a base time to full recharge ---This means that adding extenders increases the hp/s ---Allows for passive fits that rely only on resists and recharge rates while maintaining a large shield buffer -Active shield tanking draws a higher capacitor usage as opposed to active armor tanking ---Shield boosters and active hardeners are harder to run for a longer period of time than their armor counterparts -Penalty on extenders is what would equate to an increased hitbox in Dust -Shield tanked ships generally have less utility (medium slots), but a better ability to fit fitting enhancements and turret upgrades (low slots) -Caldari ships are the slowest before plates are added to Amarr ships Armor: -Can only be repaired actively -Armor reps and active armor hardeners draw less capacitor than their shield counterparts, allowing them to be run for a much longer time or for an indefinite amount of time -Armor fits can get a higher armor buffer than comparable shield buffers ---Passive armor tanking uses hardeners and plates to maximize EHP (no reps) ---Theory is that you have more EHP than what you would be able to rep back in an engagement -Gallente focus more on armor rep, Amarr focuses more on bricking I'm wondering if it will be worth a try to implement some of these features into Dust. We could base shield recharge on a base time to full recharge (which of course means that extenders will increase the hp/s) and make it constant and uninterruptible. This could equate to somewhere between 30-40 base shield per second on an unfitted Gunnlogi. Considerably worse than what one active armor rep could achieve. For a passively tanked Gunnlogi, your base shield should be roughly doubled with two extenders, increasing your recharge to 60-80 shield/s, and with maybe two recharger modules you should be able to add around 50% more for a final recharge rate of 90-120 shield/s. You might notice that shield recharges provide a smaller boost, though they should be considerably easier to fit. This seems to address people's concerns that shield gets a natural regen that's simply too high for having to spend zero modules on. The fit I described seems appropriate for what I consider to be a competitive passive fit. Also, fitting your high slots with damage amps and/or other utility modules and armor tanking your Gunnlogi will no longer give you the benefits of a high shield recharge. Another parallel than can be drawn with EVE is to have armor reps have a longer active duration than shield boosters and to provide more HP at the end of their run. I forget how shield boosters and armor reps compared in terms of hp/s. Armor reps can also have a shorter cooldown to replicate capacitor recovery in EVE due to their smaller cap requirements. One last thing I'd like to add: new module inspiration from EVE. Capacitor batteries and capacitor recharge relays. In Dust, we can have a module that increases module active duration (larger cap pool) and a module that decreases cooldown time (faster cap recovery). (I know that this is generalized but for Dust it could work). The first is a high slot module and the second is a low slot module. Perfect for making armor reps last for a longer time and reducing the longer cooldown times of the shield booster. I really like your last idea. Modules that affect Cooldown and duration of modules would be great and add variety. +1 for that We do have skills for that too. And we could use those skills to unlock the modules. Cooldown mods in the lows, duration mods in the highs.. What do you say? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 214	Posted - 2015.01.31 00:21:00 - [20] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: I have made a glorious spreadsheet of how I feel hull stats for the all the tanks of all races should be. I also have a different UHAV skill bonus. The UHAV would have no advantage over the MBT if your skills were implemented. +200 hp is nothing when the MBT gets extra slots Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....

DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 214	Posted - 2015.01.31 02:25:00 - [21] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: The-Errorist wrote: I have made a glorious spreadsheet of how I feel hull stats for the all the tanks of all races should be. I also have a different UHAV skill bonus. The UHAV would have no advantage over the MBT if your skills were implemented. +200 hp is nothing when the MBT gets extra slots duster 35000 wrote: The-Errorist wrote: I have made a glorious spreadsheet of how I feel hull stats for the all the tanks of all races should be. I also have a different UHAV skill bonus. With that, the UHAV would be so obsolete. You guys didn't scroll to the right to see what it would be like with max skills. I had split the 10% bonus into the skill and the hull. Anyway, I edited the spreadsheet to use the same UHAV skill from Rattati's spreadsheet and the 2.3k more HP, added shield recharge rates and a specific skill bonus Caldari UHAVs. The main point of the spreadsheet was to show how armor and shields should be split between the races. Edit: and more sensible shield recharge rates as well as a specific bonus for how much the shield recharge bonus for caldari should be. I was actually basing it off of the maxed numbers. Even with Max UHAV you would have gotten about +400 ehp, which is again, nothing. But, good update. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 214	Posted - 2015.01.31 02:35:00 - [22] - Quote I was talking about before he updated it dude. The 10% did nothing. What it is now is fine Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 214	Posted - 2015.01.31 02:37:00 - [23] - Quote On another note, I believe the HP bonus should actually be a resist bonus, as the UHAV already gets increased HP from being a UHAV. IMO, you should get a 2% bonus to the respective races preferred tank per level, with a 1/1 split for Min (maybe) Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 215	Posted - 2015.01.31 04:12:00 - [24] - Quote Is there an ETA on when phase 1 will drop? February? March? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 234	Posted - 2015.02.05 15:27:00 - [25] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Hey, still alive, i need ideas for good bonuses. dhavs general speed dmg mod duration faction ROF on missiles lower heat increase for blaster uhavs general passive resists more hp faction hardener and shield duration amor rep, shield regen any idea is a good idea (Copy and pasted from different part of the thread with some adjustments) My thoughts on bonuses for the tanks released in phase 1 (Minmatar and Amarr vehicle bonuses can be dicussed later, when they are closer to being released) HAV operation 1 unlocks Caldari and Gallente HAV operation. 1% bonus to something per level so it's not useless past 1. Caldari HAV operation unlocks Std MBT at 1, ADV at 3, PRO at 5 (obvious) Not sure if DHAV and UHAV should be unlocked separately or at the same level. If same level, both are unlocked at 3. If different, DHAV is unlocked at 3, UHAV at 5. 2% bonus to shield recharge per level. Caldari UHAV operation unlocks STD Marauder at 1. 2% bonus to shield recharge and resistance per level, plus Marader bonus of 5% to defensive module Duration and/or cooldown and Small turret damage Caldari DHAV operation unlocks STD Enforcer at 1. 5% bonus to Large Missile damage and reload per level, plus Enforcer bonus of 5% to Large Turret fitting reduction. Gallente HAV operation goes the same as Caldari, 2% bonus to armor repair per level. Gallente UHAV operation unlocks STD Marauder at 1. 2% bonus to armor repair and Resistance per level, plus Marader bonus to small turrets/ cooldown/duration Gallente DHAV operation unlocks STD enforcer at 1. 5% bonus to Large Blaster Damage and Dispersion(or Reload) per level, plus Enforcer bonus to Large Turrets. What do you think of those? Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 236	Posted - 2015.02.06 16:20:00 - [26] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: A large part of why the Sentinel Damage Resistance is limited to specific damage types is because a blanket damage resist is because resisting all types of weapons would make them too powerful in all situations. The idea was to create situations where a Sentinel would be resistant to specific types of weapons. The concept of AV Damage vs Turret Damage is not that different. You're creating a situation where the UHAV is exceptionally good at fighting one type of weapon, but not as good fighting another type. The issue I'm seeing is some people are envisioning it as such: UHAV is the Defender DHAV is the Attacker MBT is in Limbo This seems reasonable enough in a general sense, however we've already established that as things are currently listed, the UHAV will take about 60% longer to kill than the DHAV in direct combat. While the DHAV has advantages of speed and tracking rotation, a 60% difference is simply too large of a difference to overcome with secondary advantages. Additionally, this places the MBT in an awkward position. It would have the same TTK as the DHAV in a head on encounter, but likely falter due to lower speed...this much is ok. The issue then comes down to the UHAV in which the TTK would be about 60% longer, only to exchange marginally better speed and tracking, but to a lesser extent than the DHAV has. This clearly puts the MBT on the bottom rung, as the DHAV will struggle to kill the UHAV given its massive TTK differential (Even with taking secondary effects into account). Since the advantages the DHAV has over the UHAV (Speed, Damage, and Tracking) are actually weaker on the MBT (Its slower and does less damage than the DHAV, but has drastically inferior defenses to the UHAV) it will actually struggle even more to kill the UHAV. The issue is that the more extreme the DHAV and UHAV get, the more trivialized the MBT becomes. Additionally, as has been pointed out, you'll be running into situations where DHAVs are basically being 1 shotted by AV Infantry, 1 shotted by other DHAVs, and will have to struggle to kill UHAVs. The only think they'll be marginally good at is killing MBTs. UHAVs on the other hand will be able to tank infantry, tank DHAVs, and tank MBTs. You can argue "Well its only on paper!" but when the numbers imply such a massive difference in TTK, you're going to really struggle to try and balance that with secondary advantages (which indeed have to be field tested). For me, I'm starting to think of it like this: UHAV is extremely good at fighting infantry DHAV is extremely good at fighting vehicles MBT is decent at fighting both infantry and vehicles Its a departure from the "UHAV = Defense Tank" and more to a "UHAV = Anti Infantry Tank" but Im curious on why some are so against this concept and I'd like to hear why exactly. Making the UHAV EXTREMELY slow might help this problem. Say the MBT has 100% movement speed. UHAV has 50% movement speed, and the DHAV has 150% movement speed. Now the MBT can basically do what the DHAV does when fighting a UHAV, to a lesser extent. Another thing that might help is giving UHAV's a flat range reduction of 25% or so, so the MBT can engage it from a safe distance, although this probably shouldn't be done with my other idea because It would mean the UNAV would lose every single time. I'm trying to think of some ways to keep the UHAV as the defender tank, so I'll get back to you on that. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 236	Posted - 2015.02.06 17:26:00 - [27] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: Making the UHAV EXTREMELY slow might help this problem. Say the MBT has 100% movement speed. UHAV has 50% movement speed, and the DHAV has 150% movement speed. Now the MBT can basically do what the DHAV does when fighting a UHAV, to a lesser extent. Another thing that might help is giving UHAV's a flat range reduction of 25% or so, so the MBT can engage it from a safe distance, although this probably shouldn't be done with my other idea because It would mean the UNAV would lose every single time. I'm trying to think of some ways to keep the UHAV as the defender tank, so I'll get back to you on that. I mean sure there are extreme options like absurdly slow, or locking the large turret so it can't rotate independently from the frame...but that itself has issues. If you're fighting something and try to flee, in theory if it takes you twice as long to run, you have to tank twice as much damage....so where does that land you? Additionally you start to run into that 'fun' factor where secondary attributes are so restrictive that the gameplay itself doesn't feel enjoyable.' Also I'm not typically a fan of negative bonuses to damage or range, otherwise I'd just nerf UHAV large turret into the ground, but that will then negatively affect its AP capabilities which isn't the intention. I had an idea a while back that UHAV's take more damage to their critical points, to give MBT's an advantage against them and to give infantry AV a better chance if they're smart. Say 30% extra damage to the weak point. Inversely, the DHAV could have a stronger weak point so they don't get insta popped Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 246	Posted - 2015.02.08 01:57:00 - [28] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I would say that the average infantry that complains when vehicles don't kill them, but refuses to use AV or vehicles to counter or Pilots such as Sparky who refuse to take the opinions of others shouldn't even comment. I do read their comments, problem is, what they say just sounds dumb. Blaster easy to use? Not at all. Large missile good against infantry? Not when an explosive the size of a golf ball has a larger splash radius and more splash damage than a missile the size of a human. Lol, missiles are good against infantry if your accurate. If I actually went after infantry with my XT-201 every game, I would be getting 20+ kills a game. I like to focus on other things though, like tanks. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 249	Posted - 2015.02.09 03:56:00 - [29] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Don't worry too much about the skills, I was theorycrafting and making sure the formulas worked. I do still want it to be difficult, and more difficult than a single proto dropsuit, for sure. I only have 1 question about the skills. Are we going off the sa,e system we have right now where HAV operation unlocks both racial vehicles when you level it up, or the old system where you did HAV operation< Racial HAV operation< specialized racial HAV operatio. The old system was much better IMO. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 253	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:28:00 - [30] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: We just want the SP and ISK investment to be worth it. Our experience makes us hard to kill. There's a difference. I agree. I believe that SP dumped into a given fit should be as valuable as the same amount of SP dumped into any other fit. Just having a badass tank isn't enough. Most of the people I ripball through are just bads. But every so often you get that one guy who actually has half a brain and a clue and then it's fun attacking vehicles again. Means something when you dump a good driver's HAV, that kinda thing can completely alter the course of a battle. Just like having a good logi who isn't merely a WP farming dingbat can make the difference between a phenomenal squad and a dead squad. I hope to see you in battle some day Breakin. I've only faced 1 or 2 good AV'ers in pubs, and it gets old stomping all the bad ones. (Like the ones who just stand still while they're swarming. Makes them so easy to missile snipe.) Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....

DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 254	Posted - 2015.02.09 18:33:00 - [31] - Quote Galvatrona wrote: enough is enough, just put enforcer tanks back in and be done with it. Ummmm..... No. What Rattati has planned is much better. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 255	Posted - 2015.02.09 23:24:00 - [32] - Quote I think the idea floating around with a cloak-like soft Cooldown would be really nice. That's all I would change about active mods, besides bringing armor hardeners up to 35% Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 255	Posted - 2015.02.09 23:47:00 - [33] - Quote True Adamance wrote: DarthJT5 wrote: I think the idea floating around with a cloak-like soft Cooldown would be really nice. That's all I would change about active mods, besides bringing armor hardeners up to 35% Or both to a convergent 30%...... Eh, I'm not super convinced on what they should be. Whether it be convergent, or shield a little better than armor is indifferent to me. Armor needs to be buffed though. Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....

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.