| 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) |
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6891
   |
Posted - 2015.01.31 10:47:00 -
[721] - Quote
CCP Rattati 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. can you sig it, so I can find it easier, back at work?
I'm going to be critical of the base hull EHP.
Putting that much EHP on the hull directly marginalizes the utility of modules. This is one of the current problems and leads directly to cookie cutter fits with little to no variation.
While your percentage breakdowns make sense, I'm going to suggest dropping the baseline hull HP some.
AV
|
Doc DDD
TeamPlayers
Negative-Feedback
296
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 16:05:00 -
[722] - Quote
I like the extra hp, having less slots gives you the opportunity to skip an extender or plate in your fit. With only 5 slots and low ehp you are more than likely going to stack as much hp as you can on a slow target. |
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2762
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 16:36:00 -
[723] - 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.
And that is why I'm still confused as to why it exists. If you can make the exact same fits with it minus small turrets, why does it exist again?
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4675
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 16:53:00 -
[724] - 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. And that is why I'm still confused as to why it exists. If you can make the exact same fits with it minus small turrets, why does it exist again?
For players that don't want to risk bluberries hopping in their tank and shooting small turrets to alert the enemy. We've been over this  .
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
176
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 17:26:00 -
[725] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote: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. And that is why I'm still confused as to why it exists. If you can make the exact same fits with it minus small turrets, why does it exist again? For players that don't want to risk bluberries hopping in their tank and shooting small turrets to alert the enemy. We've been over this .
well...for players who don't want to risk blueberries hopping in their tanks, and NOT shooting the small turrets...just sitting there, doing nothing, quite possibly AFK...
Would rather have a kick-blues from vehicle button (bind it to X or something)
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2762
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 18:09:00 -
[726] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote: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. And that is why I'm still confused as to why it exists. If you can make the exact same fits with it minus small turrets, why does it exist again? For players that don't want to risk bluberries hopping in their tank and shooting small turrets to alert the enemy. We've been over this .
No, I mean if smalls didn't effect the amount of fitting possibilities that a HAV could have (seeing as without them you can make the same fits), then why have a different hull just to do that? Seems like a utter waste of time.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
The-Errorist
988
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 19:13:00 -
[727] - Quote
CCP Rattati 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. can you sig it, so I can find it easier, back at work?
Sure and by sign you mean make it more very apparent that I designed that spreadsheet besides the title, I just did. I renamed a tap to have The-Errorist, added a cell my Alias in bold, and gave it a bright yellow background on both tabs.
MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill AKA Enkouyami (Main PSN).
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
177
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 19:45:00 -
[728] - Quote
The-Errorist wrote:CCP Rattati 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. can you sig it, so I can find it easier, back at work? Sure and by sign you mean make it more very apparent that I designed that spreadsheet besides the title, I just did. I renamed a tap to have The-Errorist, added a cell my Alias in bold, and gave it a bright yellow background on both tabs.
I think he meant to put it into your signature as well...maybe?
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
|
The-Errorist
988
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 19:58:00 -
[729] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:CCP Rattati 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. can you sig it, so I can find it easier, back at work? I'm going to be critical of the base hull EHP. Putting that much EHP on the hull directly marginalizes the utility of modules. This is one of the current problems and leads directly to cookie cutter fits with little to no variation. While your percentage breakdowns make sense, I'm going to suggest dropping the baseline hull HP some.
If you had read what I wrote on post #705, you would have known that the main point of the spreadsheet was to show how armor and shields should be split between the races, provide more sensible shield recharge rates, base armor reps, as well as a specific bonus for how much the shield recharge bonus for Caldari should be. Maybe I should also add that to spreadsheet.
Putting that much EHP directly into the hull and with the vague penalty to using HP mods to get higher than base HP, would discourage HP tanking, which opens the road for more mods combinations.
Also you can't make a direct correlation to our current problem when the situation is shifting to what I said above, more mods will be added, and the DHAV & UHAV tanks having slot layouts of 4/1 and 1/4 instead of 3/2 and 2/3.
Glorious spreadsheet of racial tank stats.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4677
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 21:13:00 -
[730] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:No, I mean if smalls didn't effect the amount of fitting possibilities that a HAV could have (seeing as without them you can make the same fits), then why have a different hull just to do that? Seems like a utter waste of time.
The idea was to prevent people from not fitting smalls just to free up additional resources.
The MBT forces you to fit them, to avoid this issue.
The SHAV doesn't have them at all with adjusted resources, for those who don't want smalls for whatever reasons, without giving them 'free' resources.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2762
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 23:14:00 -
[731] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:No, I mean if smalls didn't effect the amount of fitting possibilities that a HAV could have (seeing as without them you can make the same fits), then why have a different hull just to do that? Seems like a utter waste of time. The idea was to prevent people from not fitting smalls just to free up additional resources. The MBT forces you to fit them, to avoid this issue. The SHAV doesn't have them at all with adjusted resources, for those who don't want smalls for whatever reasons, without giving them 'free' resources.
If turrets didn't suck up so much resources like they used to, that would be a non issue.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4682
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 23:40:00 -
[732] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:No, I mean if smalls didn't effect the amount of fitting possibilities that a HAV could have (seeing as without them you can make the same fits), then why have a different hull just to do that? Seems like a utter waste of time. The idea was to prevent people from not fitting smalls just to free up additional resources. The MBT forces you to fit them, to avoid this issue. The SHAV doesn't have them at all with adjusted resources, for those who don't want smalls for whatever reasons, without giving them 'free' resources. If turrets didn't suck up so much resources like they used to, that would be a non issue.
Well ok but I don't see why you're so upset about it. Just don't use them if you don't like them. You've honestly spent more time complaining about it than it takes to code them into the system 
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
killian178
Random Gunz
RISE of LEGION
102
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 04:17:00 -
[733] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:CCP Rattati 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. can you sig it, so I can find it easier, back at work? I'm going to be critical of the base hull EHP. Putting that much EHP on the hull directly marginalizes the utility of modules. This is one of the current problems and leads directly to cookie cutter fits with little to no variation. While your percentage breakdowns make sense, I'm going to suggest dropping the baseline hull HP some.
I disagree
Every commando k.o, every weapon at adv or above. Don't give a damn bout my kdr, I will kill you.
|
duster 35000
Algintal Core
Gallente Federation
162
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 04:22:00 -
[734] - Quote
killian178 wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:CCP Rattati 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. can you sig it, so I can find it easier, back at work? I'm going to be critical of the base hull EHP. Putting that much EHP on the hull directly marginalizes the utility of modules. This is one of the current problems and leads directly to cookie cutter fits with little to no variation. While your percentage breakdowns make sense, I'm going to suggest dropping the baseline hull HP some. I disagree
No link is present.
Choo Choo
|
killian178
Random Gunz
RISE of LEGION
102
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 04:23:00 -
[735] - Quote
Try again
Every commando k.o, every weapon at adv or above. Don't give a damn bout my kdr, I will kill you.
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2763
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 14:41:00 -
[736] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:No, I mean if smalls didn't effect the amount of fitting possibilities that a HAV could have (seeing as without them you can make the same fits), then why have a different hull just to do that? Seems like a utter waste of time. The idea was to prevent people from not fitting smalls just to free up additional resources. The MBT forces you to fit them, to avoid this issue. The SHAV doesn't have them at all with adjusted resources, for those who don't want smalls for whatever reasons, without giving them 'free' resources. If turrets didn't suck up so much resources like they used to, that would be a non issue. Well ok but I don't see why you're so upset about it. Just don't use them if you don't like them. You've honestly spent more time complaining about it than it takes to code them into the system
I'm not upset, confused, yes. I just don't get why they are here.
Also, I used to run fits with one single top turret (because bottom turrets suck). That isn't possible anymore.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Harpyja
Legio DXIV
2302
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 15:30:00 -
[737] - Quote
Godin, the idea between having the SHAV and MBT is that they both can fit the exact same fits, except that the MBT has two small turrets as well.
The current design hurts those that want team play when fitting small turrets by reducing the fitting power available to them.
I don't know how else I could explain this to you if you're still not understanding.
"By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
|
Sir Dukey
G0DS AM0NG MEN
General Tso's Alliance
1633
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 15:47:00 -
[738] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Godin, the idea between having the SHAV and MBT is that they both can fit the exact same fits, except that the MBT has two small turrets as well.
The current design hurts those that want team play when fitting small turrets by reducing the fitting power available to them.
I don't know how else I could explain this to you if you're still not understanding.
Not to mention that you have to go into MBT to get UHAV and SHAV to get the DHAV.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2763
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 19:10:00 -
[739] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Godin, the idea between having the SHAV and MBT is that they both can fit the exact same fits, except that the MBT has two small turrets as well.
The current design hurts those that want team play when fitting small turrets by reducing the fitting power available to them.
I don't know how else I could explain this to you if you're still not understanding.
1: Why does small turrets cost so much to fit again?
2: What if I want to fit just one small?
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6925
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 05:28:00 -
[740] - Quote
Because it's the only way to ensure that solo HAV drivers aren't rendered instantly inferior by the standard HAV drivers dismounting the turrets to Instantly free up resources for a superior EHP value.
I have explained this before.
The difference between an advanced and proto hardener is much less than the difference between a standard small and no smalls.
AV
|
|
|
STYLIE77
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
421
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 11:37:00 -
[741] - Quote
CCP Rattati 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. can you sig it, so I can find it easier, back at work?
Click on dev posts and you will find it... 
http://caughtyouflinching.ytmnd.com/
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4697
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 15:36:00 -
[742] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Because it's the only way to ensure that solo HAV drivers aren't rendered instantly inferior by the standard HAV drivers dismounting the turrets to Instantly free up resources for a superior EHP value.
I have explained this before.
The difference between an advanced and proto hardener is much less than the difference between a standard small and no smalls.
I suppose the alternate method is to give all HAVs a significant %PG/CPU Reduction bonus (75-85%) for small turrets and scale the total PG/CPU capacity around that. So removing the smalls would free up very little resources since the smalls only consumed maybe 15-25% of their listed cost. It would offer a very minimal benefit to not fitting the smalls but less of a benefit from fitting and having them manned. This is largely how the Logistics equipment bonus is supposed to work. It's less heavy handed than the MBT/SHAV dynamic Ratatti has proposed, but also less absolute and does allow solo tankers to gain a slight advantage by not fitting smalls.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Xocoyol Zaraoul
Superior Genetics
3071
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 23:03:00 -
[743] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Also, I used to run fits with one single top turret (because bottom turrets suck). That isn't possible anymore.
I don't remember that ever being possible, every single iteration of turrets iirc has the current issue today, if you only fit one it automatically goes to the front slot.
"You see those red dots over there?
Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4703
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 23:51:00 -
[744] - Quote
Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:Also, I used to run fits with one single top turret (because bottom turrets suck). That isn't possible anymore. I don't remember that ever being possible, every single iteration of turrets iirc has the current issue today, if you only fit one it automatically goes to the front slot.
If memory serves, there was a time where you could specifically get it to fit to the top only, but that was quite a while ago.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2767
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 00:10:00 -
[745] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:Also, I used to run fits with one single top turret (because bottom turrets suck). That isn't possible anymore. I don't remember that ever being possible, every single iteration of turrets iirc has the current issue today, if you only fit one it automatically goes to the front slot. If memory serves, there was a time where you could specifically get it to fit to the top only, but that was quite a while ago.
It was. Stabilized blaster on top.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2767
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 00:14:00 -
[746] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Because it's the only way to ensure that solo HAV drivers aren't rendered instantly inferior by the standard HAV drivers dismounting the turrets to Instantly free up resources for a superior EHP value.
I have explained this before.
The difference between an advanced and proto hardener is much less than the difference between a standard small and no smalls.
I don't think you understand what I'm getting at here. I simply don't think the solo HAV should even exist. Seeing as you can make basically the exact same fits, why won't the turrets themselves take up very little fitting cost? Therefore, taking off turrets won't do anything, just gives you options.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
16931
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 00:41:00 -
[747] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Because it's the only way to ensure that solo HAV drivers aren't rendered instantly inferior by the standard HAV drivers dismounting the turrets to Instantly free up resources for a superior EHP value.
I have explained this before.
The difference between an advanced and proto hardener is much less than the difference between a standard small and no smalls. I don't think you understand what I'm getting at here. I simply don't think the solo HAV should even exist. Seeing as you can make basically the exact same fits, why won't the turrets themselves take up very little fitting cost? Therefore, taking off turrets won't do anything, just gives you options.
Pretty much the same on this one.
Pilots should be encouraged to use small turrets and our developers towards actual vehicle locks rather than a half measure.
"This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6939
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 06:07:00 -
[748] - Quote
Not locks. Eject button.
Believe it or not, stolen vehicles is intended to be a thing.
AV
|
Doc DDD
TeamPlayers
Negative-Feedback
303
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 21:30:00 -
[749] - Quote
Rattati:
We really need to consider the extra 5% damage every light weapon is going to be doing to vehicles with war barge bonuses.
It doesn't sound like much but the damage modded minmando goes from 5800 damage per clip to armor to 6100... in one clip.. and when plasma canons are doing 2000 damage per shot to shields already, the extra 100 will still make a big difference. |
Godin Thekiller
The Corporate Raiders
2769
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 22:01:00 -
[750] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Not locks. Eject button.
Believe it or not, stolen vehicles is intended to be a thing.
About that, if the person doesn't have the skills for said vehicle, I don't think they should be able to even steal it (maybe recall it, but seeing as they don't ahve the skills, it'd be only useful as trophies and extra ISK).
EDIT: I'd like eject buttons as well, for hot drops and such. Like people queue up for drops, and the pilot hits a button, launching everyone out of the passenger seats.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |