Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 66 post(s) |
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2756
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 21:55:00 -
[691] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:The-Errorist wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:... From an EVE perspective, sure, but in Dust its the armor that reps constantly and the shields with a delay. I guess my point is that why do we need to make dropsuits and vehicles different? On a related note, Caldari and Gallente dropsuits in have the opposite % of armor as shields and for vehicles its not? The Madrugar has 23% of its total HP as shields and the rest of 77% as armor, but the Gunnlogi has 64% shields and 36% armor. It doesn't make sense why the madrugar has more of it's tank to use than the Caldari, especially since the Caldari's main focus is shields. The Cal tanks should have 23% armor and 77% shields, the reverse of what the Gallente has or this. If I had it my way, Caldari and Gallente vehicles would have inverted Shield/Armor from one another. The primary reason the Caldari have the lower shields now is because their hardeners are a hell of a lot better than armor, but as I've stated before Id prefer those % resists to be closer to one another. Namely shoot for the 30% range for both of them and bring the Caldari's base shields up to compensate for the loss of hardener strength.
Well, they don't, because Gallente focuses on active tanking more (rep with a little hardeners) as opposed to Cal passive tanking more, as far as I've seen anyways.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
MINA Longstrike
Kirjuun Heiian
2047
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 21:58:00 -
[692] - Quote
Avallo Kantor wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:I'm going to be VERY honest with you, that's going to be impossible to predict until we start shooting at each other. Fair enough, let me reword the question then: What, in your opinion, should that number be for engaging gameplay both for tankers and AV and infantry? Also, why do you feel that way? [Sorry, I hope I am not being too much of a nuisance with my attempts to join the conversation] As a vehicle user that number depends on a few things first is isk cost of vehicles. If I could run a vehicle for the same cost as a dropsuit I'd spend them like dropsuits. The second is feeling like i'm able to accomplish something with my vehicle, I remember calling in 3m isk tanks in 1.6 just to have an on dropped on the rdv - I was madder than you can believe about that (this was before I had taken my previous corps wallet when I divorced them). The third is proliferation of av and its power relative to various tiers of vehicle - currently everyone (or so it feels) not only has wiyrkomi swarms, but also has them on a double damage modded level 5 min commando and it makes it incredibly difficult to use anything less good than the 'best' fits. I was trying to run a dual rep soma for the suppressor mission on an alt with no sp in vehicles earlier and in tracking my deaths 8/10 times I was killed by wiyrkomi's from a minmando (doing ~2400 to armor a shot). I don't mind being shot at or dying, but when the response to any vehicle, less than two minutes in to a match is the highest tiers of av (pro swarms or pro rails) its horribly inequal engagements which kick off arms races.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2756
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 21:59:00 -
[693] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Tesfa Alem wrote:I am Looking forward for future DHAV tankers thinking its going to be them running the battlefield. 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. When have we ever said we want tanks to be invincible?
You haven't, but you've heavily implied that you want to be.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
duster 35000
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
159
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 22:00:00 -
[694] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Tesfa Alem wrote:I am Looking forward for future DHAV tankers thinking its going to be them running the battlefield. 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. You said pony
But yeah, HAV's will be used the most, can't wait til the skrubs cry about the DHAV being too weak.
Choo Choo
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
6874
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 22:03:00 -
[695] - Quote
duster 35000 wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Tesfa Alem wrote:I am Looking forward for future DHAV tankers thinking its going to be them running the battlefield. 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. You said pony But yeah, HAV's will be used the most, can't wait til the skrubs cry about the DHAV being too weak. Up until one of those "weak" hulls blows the crap out of their HAVs by being overgunned
AV
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2759
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 22:06:00 -
[696] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Avallo Kantor wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:I'm going to be VERY honest with you, that's going to be impossible to predict until we start shooting at each other. Fair enough, let me reword the question then: What, in your opinion, should that number be for engaging gameplay both for tankers and AV and infantry? Also, why do you feel that way? [Sorry, I hope I am not being too much of a nuisance with my attempts to join the conversation] I have no preference for how often tankers die. I'm good at ripping them up, that's good enough. But setting up an arbitrary "what's fair" number of losses isn't going to be a balance point. Hull costs are going to by necessity be revamped. Doesn't make a damn lick of sense for a STD HAV to cost 150k id the top tier is 200k
Arkena would tell you otherwise
But really, yes, seeing as hulls are being tiered,there really needs to be cheaper HAV's at the lower end. The reason why people usually runs high end HAV's since the beginning of time is because regardless you're going to not make even on the higher end if you died, so might as well use the best or 2 best fit you got.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
DarthJT5
Random Gunz RISE of LEGION
213
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 22:52:00 -
[697] - 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....
|
The-Errorist
984
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 23:46:00 -
[698] - Quote
I have made a glorious spreadsheet of how I feel hull stats for the all the tanks of all races should be.
MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).
|
DarthJT5
Random Gunz RISE of LEGION
214
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 00:21:00 -
[699] - 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....
|
duster 35000
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
159
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 00:25:00 -
[700] - 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. With that, the UHAV would be so obsolete.
Choo Choo
|
|
WeapondigitX V7
The Exemplars RISE of LEGION
201
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 00:30:00 -
[701] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Harpyja wrote: So essentially DHAVs are going to become the current missile HAVs, except that they will be able to insta-pop every HAV out there as opposed to just armor. Not from what I can tell on the spreadsheet as they will only get a max 10% damage bonus.
Except that 2 railgun shots and they're dead, or one full clip of swarms...
Isn't that the definition of a Glass Cannon? I guess my question to you then is, if DHAVs have the same defense as UHAVs, is there any point in running a SHAV at all?
from what ive read and can make sense of, SHAVs are supposed to be better at anti infantry compared to DHAVs (destroyers) and UHAVs would be better at anti infantry combat than SHAVs. The SHAVs would likely also have less "Damage Per Second" towards other DHAVs (despite there lower defense which probably ONLY means less total health points) and less DPS towards other UHAVs. The only advantage is that the SHAV is completely controlled by only 1 person. This would appeal to only those players that like to work on there own.
In PC this may mean that a if only 1 player can be spared for a tank role they will just use UHAVs but no one will pilot the small turrents until its convenient for the team (saves time having to recall a SHAV and call a UHAV in).
In uprising 1.10, HAVs without small turrents are usually worse at anti infantry combat compared to HAVs with 2 small blasters and 1 large blaster. This is just like a SHAV having less anti infantry DPS compared to UHAVs, and SHAVs having less DPS towards UHAVs. Looking at the above example, it may be as if smaller changes have occurred to tank gameplay than originally believed.
The only large difference might be that SHAVs may have the same PG and CPU potential as UHAVs (if you exclude the small turrent costs on UHAVs, assuming you used turrents of the correct tier and type that Rattati designed the tank for) We shall see eventually.
SHAVs in there final iteration may perhaps have more speed and acceleration compared to UHAVs but less than DHAVs. We don't know, it might be done so SHAVs have a few very small advantages compared to UHAVs and DHAVs. If you want something like that for SHAVs, you should let rattati know.
Perhaps you could suggest a 5% increase in armor regen rates for armor SHAVs and 5% increase in shield regen rates for shield SHAVs.
OR maybe SHAVs could have 40% larger vertical aiming movement range in degrees (able to aim much higher at dropships).
Any of these suggestions might be worth debating on with rattati.
|
WeapondigitX V7
The Exemplars RISE of LEGION
201
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 00:51:00 -
[702] - Quote
Is the MBT supposed to be a jack of all trades tank which has small turrents? |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4674
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 01:13:00 -
[703] - Quote
WeapondigitX V7 wrote:Is the MBT supposed to be a jack of all trades tank which has small turrents?
Master of None, yes.
The SHAV is superior to the DHAV when fighting infantry in that it has better defenses, but is slower and has less large turret damage so it is not as good as the DHAV when fighting large targets.
The MBT is superior to the UHAV when fighting vehicles, as it is faster and have better large turret tracking as well as more slots for weapon utility if it so chooses.
SHAV and MBT are identical aside from the existence (or lack of) small turrets. Really the only purpose the SHAV serves is for solo tankers that never want anyone else in their tank. Other than that, it doesn't have much of a purpose.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2760
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 01:49:00 -
[704] - Quote
No disrespect to Master Splinter, but your spreadsheets hurt my eyes. Can someone make a better looking one, with like the same stats?
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
The-Errorist
984
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 01:55:00 -
[705] - Quote
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 armor and shields should be split between the races.
MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2760
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 02:03:00 -
[706] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:WeapondigitX V7 wrote:Is the MBT supposed to be a jack of all trades tank which has small turrents? Master of None, yes. The SHAV is superior to the DHAV when fighting infantry in that it has better defenses, but is slower and has less large turret damage so it is not as good as the DHAV when fighting large targets. The MBT is superior to the UHAV when fighting vehicles, as it is faster and have better large turret tracking as well as more slots for weapon utility if it so chooses. SHAV and MBT are identical aside from the existence (or lack of) small turrets. Really the only purpose the SHAV serves is for solo tankers that never want anyone else in their tank. Other than that, it doesn't have much of a purpose.
He made a actual difference between the Solo HAV and the regular one now?
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
duster 35000
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
159
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 02:22:00 -
[707] - 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 didn't see that last time, looks good.
Choo Choo
|
DarthJT5
Random Gunz RISE of LEGION
214
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 02:25:00 -
[708] - 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....
|
duster 35000
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
159
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 02:31:00 -
[709] - Quote
DarthJT5 wrote:DarthJT5 wrote:The-Errorist wrote: 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. Nnnoooo? It goes up to around 4,800 hp base. 5.1k shields for caldari.
Choo Choo
|
DarthJT5
Random Gunz RISE of LEGION
214
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 02:35:00 -
[710] - 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 -
[711] - 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....
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4674
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 03:25:00 -
[712] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:WeapondigitX V7 wrote:Is the MBT supposed to be a jack of all trades tank which has small turrents? Master of None, yes. The SHAV is superior to the DHAV when fighting infantry in that it has better defenses, but is slower and has less large turret damage so it is not as good as the DHAV when fighting large targets. The MBT is superior to the UHAV when fighting vehicles, as it is faster and have better large turret tracking as well as more slots for weapon utility if it so chooses. SHAV and MBT are identical aside from the existence (or lack of) small turrets. Really the only purpose the SHAV serves is for solo tankers that never want anyone else in their tank. Other than that, it doesn't have much of a purpose. He made a actual difference between the Solo HAV and the regular one now?
No? I flat out said they're identical aside from the small turrets.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
The-Errorist
986
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 03:51:00 -
[713] - Quote
I added base armor reps and a new tab with an easy to read chart of base armor & shield reps/recharge, made DHAVs have 75% less HP like from Rattati's spreadsheet, and made MBTs have lower base reps cuz of they have 2 more slot capacity.
MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).
|
DarthJT5
Random Gunz RISE of LEGION
215
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 04:12:00 -
[714] - 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....
|
The-Errorist
986
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 04:17:00 -
[715] - Quote
DarthJT5 wrote:Is there an ETA on when phase 1 will drop? February? March? I'm guessing March because it's a lot of changes, were not not even close on finalizing numbers, and he and the rest of the dev team have to try those changes, and make sure all the numbers are what they should be.
On top of all that there's work they already have/working on for the next builds after 1.0. All of that sounds like a nightmare.
MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).
|
killian178
Random Gunz RISE of LEGION
101
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 04:35:00 -
[716] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Harpyja wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I don't see why people feel the need to depart from the existing shield/armor mechanics we have in Dust. They're so set on making shields recharge constantly, yet armor already works that way. If people want to run passive fits, why are they not just running armor? I see no reason why there shouldn't be viable active and passive fits, and any fits inbetween, for both shield and armor. Otherwise what's your opinion on what I had to say about passive shield recharge and making it low to start off with but can be increased through fitting shield modules (and thus only giving the advantage of a faster recharge to those who actually shield tank their vehicle). Harpyja making passive tanks is supposed to be doable with module investment, thats the point. He wants a passive fit that's always regenerating, like armor, but for shields. I guess my point is, if you do that, what's the difference between shields and armor anymore? Lots. Mod slots, base speed, resistances, handling etc.
Every commando k.o, every weapon at adv or above. Don't give a damn bout my kdr, I will kill you.
|
Sir Dukey
G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance
1628
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 04:39:00 -
[717] - Quote
There is nothing more I hate than not getting slots as I skill up. This is exactly the reason I use literally standard Commandos over my protos because I gain no benefit for the slot where I want it.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4674
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 04:46:00 -
[718] - Quote
killian178 wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Harpyja wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I don't see why people feel the need to depart from the existing shield/armor mechanics we have in Dust. They're so set on making shields recharge constantly, yet armor already works that way. If people want to run passive fits, why are they not just running armor? I see no reason why there shouldn't be viable active and passive fits, and any fits inbetween, for both shield and armor. Otherwise what's your opinion on what I had to say about passive shield recharge and making it low to start off with but can be increased through fitting shield modules (and thus only giving the advantage of a faster recharge to those who actually shield tank their vehicle). Harpyja making passive tanks is supposed to be doable with module investment, thats the point. He wants a passive fit that's always regenerating, like armor, but for shields. I guess my point is, if you do that, what's the difference between shields and armor anymore? Lots. Mod slots, base speed, resistances, handling etc.
I'm talking about secondary attributes. I'm talking about tanking style specifically.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
16306
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 08:15:00 -
[719] - 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. can you sig it, so I can find it easier, back at work?
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
173
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 08:41:00 -
[720] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:killian178 wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Harpyja wrote: I see no reason why there shouldn't be viable active and passive fits, and any fits inbetween, for both shield and armor.
Otherwise what's your opinion on what I had to say about passive shield recharge and making it low to start off with but can be increased through fitting shield modules (and thus only giving the advantage of a faster recharge to those who actually shield tank their vehicle).
Harpyja making passive tanks is supposed to be doable with module investment, thats the point. He wants a passive fit that's always regenerating, like armor, but for shields. I guess my point is, if you do that, what's the difference between shields and armor anymore? Lots. Mod slots, base speed, resistances, handling etc. I'm not talking about secondary attributes. I'm talking about tanking style specifically.
Relative effective total buffer amounts (since we're assuming that hardeners will be getting a balance pass, and will be approx equal in overall power). To draw on space-side mechanics (for sake of example) armor gives more buffer directly, while shields gives less buffer directly. However, what shields gain is additional buffer in longer battles, where their shields will be giving them back HP/s just for existing, which helps narrow the actual buffer gap between shields and armor. Now, this still means that shields are more vulnerable to alpha-strike capabilities (since they obviously don't have the same total of HP), but in any slugging match, the shield based ship will have an additional buffer provided by its regeneration, and be much closer to an armor ship in terms of eHP over the course of the engagement.
If the mechanics are kept the same in here in DUST, armor will have the higher buffer, and constant regen giving it effective bonus buffer (once again, on top of the superior base buffer, and once again assuming a hardener balance pass), making armor repairers far more valuable than any shield regeneration module (without a significant reducion to repair amount to armor modules, and in direct engagements that you would expect HAVs to be able to tackle). Now, shield regeneration is too high currently, but with a recharge delay, combined with not only a lower base buffer, but a lower effective buffer (read the assumptions about this initiative again)...shields will need to recharge extremely quickly out of combat (relative to armor repairers even) in order to make up for having 2 shortcomings in direct combat.
In general I agree that the scale should go:
Native Armor Regen < Native Shield Regen < Fit Armor Regen < Fitt Shield Regen < Fitted Armor Repair < Fit Shield Boosting (not necessarily in the same ratios)
However, that can only be effective where shields to not have an associated delay (particularly since it seemed to be the general consensus that we wanted a large TTK for HAVs in general). If the above scale would be better for balancing in all cases, then why wouldn't it work for Dropsuits as well? (and on the subject of maintaining consistency within dust, then why not have such a low shield regeneration time (High Regen Rate) to keep consistent with dropsuits? After all, your listed scale doesn't apply to dropsuit modules, and if dust is to be kept consistent it should be applicable).
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |