I want that to change and here's what I'd like it to be (from my thread/spreadsheet):

(LAV and dropship stats in thread/spreadsheet)
[HAVs]:
Caldari: 110 HP/s
Minmatar: 88 HP/s
Amarr/Gallente: 66 HP/s

I also want vehicles to have natural passive reps:

[HAVs]
Gallente: 25 HP/s

Armarr & Minmatar: 22.5 HP/s

Caldari: HAV: 20 HP/s

If CCP does this, adds regulators, and rechargers, vehicle regen would be in a much more balanced state.

That's like saying shield recharge for Am/gal assaults should be around 10 HP/s (instead of 20 HP/s), 36% of Caldari's recharge rate, instead of the normal roughly 60%.

The current regen is way to high on Gunnlogis.

I don't know what your point is and what you mean by armor repping shields, so I'll try my best to reply to what you said.

Yes 110 HP/s shield recharge rate is like a complex heavy armor rep and 66 HP/s shield recharge rate is in-between an advanced and complex light rep. I also said I want vehicles to have base armor repair and with that, vehicles with an armor rep can rep faster than base shield recharge.


Right now, the faster you fire the large missile turret, the more dispersion it gains.

Besides the feedback I gave on armor repair and shield recharge rates, I have these:

It's not fair how Gallente tanks have more of their main tank to use than the Caldari, make it balanced like it is for Cal & Gal dropsuits.

Caldari tanks have 36% (1,500) of their total HP (4,150) as armor and only 64% (2,650) as shields; I would like it to be the reverse ratio compared to Gallente tanks: ~23% (958) armor and ~77% (3192) shields.

I still would like tanks to have 6 total slots instead of the current 5; 4/2 for Cal, 2/4 for Gal/AM, and 3/3 for Min.

Lastly, the total HP, speed, PG/CPU, and other hull stats look fine.


He meant shield recharge rates not the delay.

A spit-balled idea:

Is it possible to have some variant of UHAV that goes away with a "main turret" completely, and instead has the driver using 1 / 2 small turrets in lieu of it's main turret?

Basic Idea:
UHAV Variant: 2 small turrets (need gunners), and a top mounted 1/2-gun linked Small Turret

This way you could have a tank type that purely focuses on AI by giving up most if not all of it's AV capability. The smaller turrets having advantage of very quick tracking speed, and having the twin sponsors for a greater volume of fire. (trading quantity for quality to better handle infantry)

Think: Imperial Guard Leman Russ Annihilator (2x Lascannons mount)

a HAV fitted with a medium turret (turet with the capibilities between that of a small and large turret) would be really good. a faster, decently armored HAV that gives up a large turret to be able to fight infantry. This reminds me of something........

Oh yea, my BO HAV idea, maybe adjusted.

Anyone who actually believes DHAVs are going to rule the battlefield have been drinking too much jungle juice and smoking too much weed.

MBT HAVs are going to be kings in class overall.

DHAVs are one trick pony weapons. They do one thing. Period. But if you fart too hard in the driver's seat it's likely to damage the chassis. You don't field a DHAV because LOLWINMOBILE, you drop a DHAV for the express purpose if putting death rocks through the face of that HAV/UHAV who has been dominating the infantry.

UHAVS will be popular among the HAV MASTER RACE crowd and when the DHAVs and MBTs jump on them the crying will start.

I want them because I think it'll be a fun challenge. Just don't expect me to stick around to exchange quiche recipies with your Gunnlogi.

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.

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.

CCP, I want better bonuses for UHAV instead of fitting bonuses. Something to help them be really tanky. The fitting bonus for small turrets should be given to HAV's. The skill for UHAV should not only unlock UHAV but give some sort of bonus, maybe 2% resistance to armor and shield per level.

See updated on the fly document here: HAV Master Spreadsheet

That would insanely over powered.

Ok, Ratatti cleaned up the spreadsheet (Thank you!) so i think I'm reading it better...even so if I have it wrong, I apologize.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1A6p9jXdSNHTtmo_PtuQdgkntr-JpY-vo5cTAWjEijw8/edit?usp=sharing

the UHAV seems much more reasonable, good call on droping the base HP from x2 to x1.5. Also glad to see you spread out the HP drop on the DHAV over the armor and shields, those look a lot more reasonable now.

From my understanding, AV is being balanced around the new vehicles. Specifically to match equivalent tiers (STD AV vs STD Vehicle, ADV AV vs ADV Vehicle, ect.)

If there are two minmitar commandos on the other team, vehicles have little chance of making it out of the redline. Feel bad for tankers speccing into DHAV that will spend entire matches diving around corners trying to avoid swarms.

With warbarges eventually giving everyone 5% damage to thier light weapons, including swarms and plasma, reducing the HP of tanks doesn't seem like a great idea. Filling a slot with anything that doesn't stack ehp higher or help you get out of range is going to be a rough sell.

I like the proposed uhav hull resistances, shields - hybrid , armor - projectile.

technically, missiles even though they are more explosive than projectile.

Projectiles and laser AV don't exist yet.

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 and Damage Mod duration/cooldown

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/ Dmg mods

What do you think of those?

I understand your concerns. Ideally, the UHAV should be the choice for pilots that just want to kill infantry. Its bonuses should be geared towards killing infantry and that should make it a better choice over the MBT.

Lot of interesting conversation going around.

I like harpyj idea, as it was the very first thought that came to mind when I first read of the proposals. I am just a little confused on why some assume that it HAS to have higher defenses to deal with infantry.

There are instances now, where I have no gunners running with me where yes a high defense (which is offered by the gunnlogi) is essential in surviving infantry AV. But when I run a good set of gunners (which is the idea surrounding the UHAV), defenses are of lesser concern. AV can't do their work if they can't live long enough to see it through to the end.

This is how this plays out now, and I run a very tough tank WITH the gunners. I liken my current tank setup with gunners to the proposed UHAV. Ridiculously OP in the right hands against infantry. I honestly just don't see these proposed changes panning out how people expect. Back to tank spammin!

A tank built around the idea of slaughtering infantry honestly doesn't need defenses above and beyond what AV can handle. They don't NEED this to get the job done. It's over kill and puts infantry AV at a disadvantage that doesn't need to be there in the first place. I see us going back to the idea that the best way to deal with a tank is another tank, and I thought we were agreed that this isn't right.

---

I personally don't think that we need such separation between tanks. I do say that yes a tank not built for AI should have the best time against infantry AV while a tank built around AI should be more on par with the enemy infantry they are designed to fight, not above and beyond them.

But I also wonder why we need such a large separation between the two tank types to begin with. What happens when we

Make their base HP more or less equal, and emphasize the differences through role bonuses

Your UHAV is slower, but has bonuses to small turrets and makes better use of modules that help the large turret kill infantry. Base Hp could sit around 2500, still tough but not over the top.

On the other hand your DHAV is slightly faster, with bonuses to their large turrets, and unable to use small guns. Base HP sits around 3000, current proposed for the UHAV. They are slightly tougher than their counterpart, able to more easily survive AV they will struggle to kill.

---

In this way the 2 tank types will still be distinctively different but stat wise there won't be a huge outright difference. Differences come from skills ( as it should be ) and bonuses associated with those skills.

Imagine a UHAV versus a DHAV.

>The DHAV is faster, slightly more HP, and bonuses to their large main turret.
>The UHAV is slower, slightly less HP, and bonuses to their small turrets.

DHAV has an outright advantage over the UHAV when the main gun is considered, but small rails or missiles can play a HUGE part to keeping the UHAV on more even ground against the DHAV. Sure the DHAV seems to have an advantage, but I think it will more or less struggle against a UHAV running rails or missiles, not to mention if it runs anything other than a blaster for the main gun.

I think this is something else people don't seem to notice, what happens when you have a UHAV with double the base HP of the counterpart designed to kill it, with small guns that can effectively double DPS against them.

I wonder, why run a DHAV? UHAV would actually be a better tank killer if fit with all rails AND be extremely effective against infantry. Unless of course DHAV are one shot wonders (exaggerating here), but in that case it just wouldn't be fun.

Exactly what I'm thinking. If the update is released as it is currently, I'm just going with a Sagaris (Caldari UHAV), slap on two small railguns and a large missile launcher (if it is still effective and not nerfed into the ground), and watch the tears flow as my gunners kill infantry and I destroy most vehicles out there, even DHAVs.

Random thought

Destroyer HAV
Less Slots
Low Base HP
Fast Movement
Fast Large Turret Tracking
No Smalls
+% Resist to Turrets
+% Bonus to Large Turret

Ultra HAV
Less Slots
Low Base HP
Slower Movement
Fast Small Turret Tracking
Slow Large Turret Tracking
+% Resist to Infantry AV
+% Bonus to Small Turrets

Destroyer can easily resist the UHAV's turrets, but infantry AV ignores its resistance and kills its low base HP. Ultra can easily resist infantry AV, but DHAV's turrets ignore its resistance and kills its low base HP.

You misunderstand, the resistance bonus versus infantry AV would push its eHP (against infantry) well above the MBT, but its defense against enemy turrets would be lower than the MBT. Inversely, the DHAV's eHP against turrets would be higher than the MBT, but its defense against infantry AV would be lower than the MBT.

Also since AV is being changed to match these new vehicles, I don't consider "current tanks" even a factor, as their performance is irrelevant under the new design.

If its effective HP is higher, why does it matter? The idea is to make it stronger against infantry than the MBT, and weaker against Turrets than the MBT. Incidentally the Hull's base HP would likely be the same, but the reduced slots would yield a lower raw HP.



Indeed, I actually made a few suggestions for this a few pages back. Personally I'd like to see the basic skills for both dropsuits and vehicles, reflect a mix of the racial tanking style as well as frame size. What I came up with off the top of my head was

Amarr - Decreased Penalty from Armor Plates
Caldari - Increased Bonus from Shield Regulators
Gallente - Increased Rate from Armor Repairers
Minmatar - Increased Rate from Shield Rechargers/Boosters

Ok, so how much of a damage bonus should the DHAV have to overcome the defensive bonus of the UHAV? What is the proper ratio in your opinion?

So the DHAV will have say a 25% increase to DPS, and a 25% decrease in HP.

the UHAV will have roughly 50% more HP and normal DPS.

So lets use 1000 base HP and 100 DPS

DHAV would have
750 HP and 125DPS

UHAV would have
1500 HP and 100 DPS.

At 100 DPS, the UHAV will kill the DHAV in 7.5 seconds
At 125 DPS, the DHAVE will kill the UHAV in 12 seconds

So in a direct encounter, the DHAV will lose to the UHAV. That being the case, why would I want to use a DHAV when the UHAV is able to kill the DHAV faster?

So, if you want to "nearly offset each other" the DHAV would have to be able to kill the UHAV in 7.5 seconds or less.

In order to do that, it would need to do at a minimum 200DPS. That being said, are yous saying that the DHAV should get double damage bonus to its main turret?

So.....whats the point of the DHAV if it can't kill a UHAV?

So the DHAV will have say a 25% increase to DPS, and a 25% decrease in HP.

the UHAV will have roughly 50% more HP and normal DPS.

So lets use 1000 base HP and 100 DPS

DHAV would have
750 HP and 125DPS

UHAV would have
1500 HP and 100 DPS.

At 100 DPS, the UHAV will kill the DHAV in 7.5 seconds
At 125 DPS, the DHAVE will kill the UHAV in 12 seconds

So in a direct encounter, the DHAV will lose to the UHAV. That being the case, why would I want to use a DHAV when the UHAV is able to kill the DHAV faster?

So, if you want to "nearly offset each other" the DHAV would have to be able to kill the UHAV in 7.5 seconds or less.
--------------------------------------------------------------------'-'-''----------



I think you need to look at it more like scout suit with damage bonus vs 3 brick tanked logi suits that combine for 50% more ehp total than the scout and the logis are all tied together sharing the health pool.

It is more play style and strategy, that is the problem with spreadsheet wizards, great at making numbers balance on paper, bad at seeing the big picture. .. sometimes.

If DHAV win toe to toe vs UHAVS then there will just be 6 DHAVS zooming around shooting down red RDVs before they can drop anything in. Why have 6 infantry in 2 UHAVS when you can have 6 DHAV S for three times the firepower. This leads to forum tears and Rattati nerfing vehicles to 2 per map.

Try and imagine there are infantry trying to capture and hold an objective, and the tanks are there to help hold or push the point.

Uprising turret damage was in the right place. Rail spool up and refire was great, blasters were great. If we had all those variants and damage, and the current missiles we have now, along with hull strength, vehicles would have a very concrete place on the battlefield, rather than the WP pinatas they are now.

No, it wont, given the listed stats. Given what the sheet is currently showing, the UHAV will be better at AV. A damage mod will not turn 25% bonus into the needed 200% bonus.

Like really, what is the DHAV for if the UHAV can beat it, by a very large margin?

I was taken out by a Minmando in 5 volleys in a Madrugar. Infantry throwing out that much damage that fast (double swarm) is just insane.

No, I don't actually. I was pointing out how absurd it is.

Done being a douche?

As we have seen repeatedly with sentinels, even a 15% resist MATTERS.

I have to reccomend going against this route. UHAVs will take more the 4 million SP to max out, and players want a good reward for that kind of investment. Any bonus less than 5% per level would not be worth it. Like the uproar caused by the 3% per level ADS ROF bonus for 2.2million SP.

Yet, any resistances bonuses have to be very low, otherwise you risk returning the Logi LAV in tank form. Yes it was fast, but its near immortality came from is shield resistance + hardener.

The duration sounds better, as it can roll in, smash some troops, swich on the hardener and try o roll out before Infantry defensive fire becomes too over whelming. Its going to be slow but not that slow it cant turn a corner or two to break line of sight.

We have to keep in mind how few players really tank, and the reaction a lot of infantry who don't understand resists or following this on the forums.

The UHAV skill books has got to change in SP requirement.

To unlock the skill book for racial UHAVs you need to spec into Level 3 HAV operation, Level 3 UHAV, and then spec into UHAV

HAV x 2 skill
Level 1: 24,880
Level 2: 74,640
Level 3: 174,160


UHAV x 6
Level 1: 49,760
Level 2: 149,280
Level 3: 348,320

Racial UHAV x 12
Level 1: 74,640
Level 2: 223,920
Level 3: 522,480
Level 4: 1,044,960
Level 5: 1,866,000

Total required SP 4,553, 040. Minimum time to unlock (divide by cap = 750,000) 6 weeks.

Both the DHAV and the UHAV should be a 8x skill, not a 10x or a 12x skill.

There is also the possibility of reskinned amarr and minmatar versions, unless there is a respec planned for their release ( which i doubt) then i don't see the need to put an extraordinary SP investment burden on tankers. Most of whom will want to have different types available. Certainly the SHAV or MBT to PRO, at least one destroyer and one UHAV. Having the right tool for the right job is important. Thats should be more than enough of an SP sink for a while, rather than 12 x skills to inflate it.

words and more combatitiveness and arguing pointless arguing derailing random childish