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 [?]

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)
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2887	Posted - 2015.02.08 01:03:00 - [931] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: Players being childish wrote: words and more combatitiveness and arguing pointless arguing derailing random childish You guys are derailing the thread again. UHAV and DHAV skill should be 8x or 10x as 12x 4.5m sp is too much. 8x 10x is too much. The suits aren't 10x, there's no reason specialized tanks should be 10x. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2887	Posted - 2015.02.08 01:05:00 - [932] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: wordswordswords and more combatitiveness and arguing Watching spkr try to interact with more reasonable vehicle users Fyi, repeatedly screaming that someone doesn't play this game isn't attacking their ideas, it's attacking them through their characteristics - You are going "They don't have enough EXPERIENCE to even be QUALIFIED to have an opinion on this" which is your standard modus operandi. According to you only you are qualified to have an opinion on vehicles or av. So who do you consider users on here? There's obviously Doc, Harp and Godin. Anybody else.... not so sure. And again............... I can't say the Cal scout is a great suit because I don't have it. All the same as people can't say tanks are easy to use if they don't use them. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2889	Posted - 2015.02.08 01:18:00 - [933] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Because you present and argue them poorly. Maybe I should've taken debate class in high school just to make you happy. Look at my above exchanges with breakin stuff, and my exchanges about av with pokey & breakin. I've pointed out errors in their thinking when I've found them, provided refutations and counterarguments and I've done that all civilly and without attacking them or their characteristics. I'm attacking their ideas, not them. I'm pointing out that they have no experience in a tank. That's not a personal attack, that's saying they have no experience with something. People are much more willing to listen to you and consider your position when you're acting in a reasonable, mature manner and not attacking them See above Look at that hierarchy of arguments in the link. Screaming "YOU'RE NOT A **ING TANKER" will never get you anywhere, try instead going "Well you would think this because [x], but when you have some experience it's actually [y]". That's exactly what I'm doing. They think being in a tank is hard because they don't do it. They think AV is hard because it can't destroy a tank in 2 seconds flat, minus the PRO breach, which few people use because it actually requires timing for the perfect shot. I have nearly two years' experience in a tank. When I joined Red Star, I did 5-10 PC battles for a month straight, and that doesn't include the re-ups.More like 20-25 or 30 a day. And in every single one of them, I was in a tank. That said, you really consider their opinion about tanks, which they have no experience in to be worth more than mine, when I actually have PC experience in tanks? Breaking is IIRC more than willing to admit he doesn't do much on the vehicle side, but he is more than willing to listen to explanations of why parts of his points are mistaken. He doesn't do anything on the vehicle side. He also argued vehemently that the UHAV shouldn't have a lot of HP, even though on Rattati's original thread, he hinted that it would take a laser strike to destroy one. That's not "listening to an explanation," that's covering his ears and yelling "I can't hear you." There cannot be a rational argument with someone like that, when it's right in the thread for the whole world to see. Ignoring does nothing to prove a point. He doesn't listen to anything I say, even though I've been in a tank for so long. He hasn't. 1: Pokey Pilots. He's not a very good DS pilot (), but he's a pretty decent HAV pilot. Breakin does too, although not nearly as much, however at least tries to listen to people. 2: links to what Breakin said, and I'm pretty sure you took that out of context. 3: Your argument is flawed, as it pretty much says that AV or infantry can't talk about balance of vehicles because they don't use them. You must not understand the fact that THEY STILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM.** Just Letting you know that. He has 17k all-time kills. I've checked. That tells me he barely plays the game. I've also never seen him at all. Never seen Breakin at all, either. Infantry can go bugger off, I'll take care of enemy tanks, instead of them launching asteroids at us. It was just fine during Chromosome, there was no need to reverse it. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2889	Posted - 2015.02.08 01:21:00 - [934] - Quote 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. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4821	Posted - 2015.02.08 01:47:00 - [935] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: He has 17k all-time kills. I've checked. That tells me he barely plays the game. I've also never seen him at all. Never seen Breakin at all, either. Nah just means I have a life and a job and other things that I do besides no-life on Dust. Also I've never seen you either, therefor you must not even exist. Spkrception! "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 246	Posted - 2015.02.08 01:57:00 - [936] - 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....
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 825	Posted - 2015.02.08 13:35:00 - [937] - Quote If the biweekly spkr vs the world derail has gotten out of our system I'd like to focus back on the skill tree and the spreadsheet @ Rattati I believe the general player consensus is that HAV skill point investment should reflect the infantry skill point investsment. 6x then 8x rather than 3x, 6x 10x 12x. The only difference in HAV and SHAV is prefit turrets. I can't see a reason not to combine both in a single skill tree, and have he two types in the market instead of a double SP sink for the same vehicle. From what i can tell there will be no unique bonus applied to either the HAV or SHAV to differentiate the two. The only bonus is not having griefers leap into your tank. It doesn't make much sense anymore to have two skill books for one hull. Its more akin to asking breaking suff to spec into proto caldari heavy twice to either use a forge gun, or use a forge gun and a side arm. You are alreadly removing turret fiting options for tanks, effectivley doubling the ISK sink for tankers. I will have to buy two unique gunlogis, one with turrets, one without. No need to have a massive SP sink as well. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7020	Posted - 2015.02.08 13:47:00 - [938] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: If the biweekly spkr vs the world derail has gotten out of our system I'd like to focus back on the skill tree and the spreadsheet @ Rattati I believe the general player consensus is that HAV skill point investment should reflect the infantry skill point investsment. 6x then 8x rather than 3x, 6x 10x 12x. The only difference in HAV and SHAV is prefit turrets. I can't see a reason not to combine both in a single skill tree, and have he two types in the market instead of a double SP sink for the same vehicle. From what i can tell there will be no unique bonus applied to either the HAV or SHAV to differentiate the two. The only bonus is not having griefers leap into your tank. It doesn't make much sense anymore to have two skill books for one hull. Its more akin to asking breaking suff to spec into proto caldari heavy twice to either use a forge gun, or use a forge gun and a side arm. You are alreadly removing turret fiting options for tanks, effectivley doubling the ISK sink for tankers. I will have to buy two unique gunlogis, one with turrets, one without. No need to have a massive SP sink as well. I tend to agree here. branching off the DHAV and UHAV from the HAV skill will be simpler, and less clunky. I don't think there needs to be two separate HAV skills, just prefitted turrets and no turrets on market. simplicity in a complex system helps keep the learning curve from going here. AV
Doc DDD TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 313	Posted - 2015.02.08 13:49:00 - [939] - Quote With the new skill cap I like the 12x, will keep the level 5 specialist tanks for the first couple months in the hhands of those really interested in investing the time ( which really isn't that long when you can get 1 mil sp a week if you cap + passive ) I am guessing electronics and engineering will also serve a purpose and need to be leveled. Seriously, even playing a couple games a day until this update comes out will probably bank you enough to level pretty high into everyrhing. Regular Havs will still have thier place with 7 slots. I am still hoping that instead of nerfing shields ( the only tank build that can survive 2 proto AV infantry for 10 seconds before death is eminent if the pilot doesn't find cover deep in the redline) that armor hardners have thier % reduction increased at the cost of duration so they have a fighting chance. Even if armor hardeners were at 30% damage reduction at current duration there would be more parity with the immediate armor reps. Right now armor hardners are not useful on tanks.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC Bad Intention 1262	Posted - 2015.02.08 14:13:00 - [940] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: wordswordswords and more combatitiveness and arguing Watching spkr try to interact with more reasonable vehicle users Fyi, repeatedly screaming that someone doesn't play this game isn't attacking their ideas, it's attacking them through their characteristics - You are going "They don't have enough EXPERIENCE to even be QUALIFIED to have an opinion on this" which is your standard modus operandi. According to you only you are qualified to have an opinion on vehicles or av. So who do you consider users on here? There's obviously Doc, Harp and Godin. Anybody else.... not so sure. And again............... I can't say the Cal scout is a great suit because I don't have it. All the same as people can't say tanks are easy to use if they don't use them. Umm, me. Probably the best of them all Tanks - Balancing Turrets

H0riz0n Unlimit Dead Man's Game 434	Posted - 2015.02.08 14:24:00 - [941] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: With the new skill cap I like the 12x, will keep the level 5 specialist tanks for the first couple months in the hhands of those really interested in investing the time ( which really isn't that long when you can get 1 mil sp a week if you cap + passive ) I am guessing electronics and engineering will also serve a purpose and need to be leveled. Seriously, even playing a couple games a day until this update comes out will probably bank you enough to level pretty high into everyrhing. Regular Havs will still have thier place with 7 slots. I am still hoping that instead of nerfing shields ( the only tank build that can survive 2 proto AV infantry for 10 seconds before death is eminent if the pilot doesn't find cover deep in the redline) that armor hardners have thier % reduction increased at the cost of duration so they have a fighting chance. Even if armor hardeners were at 30% damage reduction at current duration there would be more parity with the immediate armor reps. Right now armor hardners are not useful on tanks. Totally agree, if you want a good Hav spend Sp in it, after this it s obvious pretend a bit of immortality with that skill at level 5 Welcome to Aurlord 1.0. Building a vayu in my garage, waiting for aurlord 1.1 soon(tm)
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders 2847	Posted - 2015.02.08 16:48:00 - [942] - Quote H0riz0n Unlimit wrote: Doc DDD wrote: With the new skill cap I like the 12x, will keep the level 5 specialist tanks for the first couple months in the hhands of those really interested in investing the time ( which really isn't that long when you can get 1 mil sp a week if you cap + passive ) I am guessing electronics and engineering will also serve a purpose and need to be leveled. Seriously, even playing a couple games a day until this update comes out will probably bank you enough to level pretty high into everyrhing. Regular Havs will still have thier place with 7 slots. I am still hoping that instead of nerfing shields ( the only tank build that can survive 2 proto AV infantry for 10 seconds before death is eminent if the pilot doesn't find cover deep in the redline) that armor hardners have thier % reduction increased at the cost of duration so they have a fighting chance. Even if armor hardeners were at 30% damage reduction at current duration there would be more parity with the immediate armor reps. Right now armor hardners are not useful on tanks. Totally agree, if you want a good Hav spend Sp in it, after this it s obvious pretend a bit of immortality with that skill at level 5 Thing is I've already dumped a **** ton into HAV's, and to have to dump even more, and THIS much more is silly. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders 2847	Posted - 2015.02.08 16:59:00 - [943] - Quote As I woke up, a thought occurred into my mind: I'm not sure that the Enforcers and Marauders bonuses should be what they are, being focused only around AI or AV. My reasoning for this is because currently, HAV's don't have a role. From what I've gathered, the popular opinion is that HAV's should be based around killing big ** (so installations and **), while being good at AV. You could say that Enforcers still fits, as it's a although weak hull, still has a damage bonus, Marauders don't really fit under that (more so as a infantry support tool). Seeing as we don't have the big things to shoot at really (installation count is low, and infantry hacks them to quickly to really blow them up), I'd say that for the moment it's fine. But like the passenger suggestion, I believe that it should change to something else. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2125	Posted - 2015.02.08 17:55:00 - [944] - Quote H0riz0n Unlimit wrote: Doc DDD wrote: With the new skill cap I like the 12x, will keep the level 5 specialist tanks for the first couple months in the hhands of those really interested in investing the time ( which really isn't that long when you can get 1 mil sp a week if you cap + passive ) I am guessing electronics and engineering will also serve a purpose and need to be leveled. Seriously, even playing a couple games a day until this update comes out will probably bank you enough to level pretty high into everyrhing. Regular Havs will still have thier place with 7 slots. I am still hoping that instead of nerfing shields ( the only tank build that can survive 2 proto AV infantry for 10 seconds before death is eminent if the pilot doesn't find cover deep in the redline) that armor hardners have thier % reduction increased at the cost of duration so they have a fighting chance. Even if armor hardeners were at 30% damage reduction at current duration there would be more parity with the immediate armor reps. Right now armor hardners are not useful on tanks. Totally agree, if you want a good Hav spend Sp in it, after this it s obvious pretend a bit of immortality with that skill at level 5 No, a 12x skill is far too costly. That's 50% more than a max level dropsuit role. I do not feel that this is a position based in reason or sound logic especially with the false assertions of 'immortality' provided by vehicles. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4847	Posted - 2015.02.08 18:29:00 - [945] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: If the biweekly spkr vs the world derail has gotten out of our system I'd like to focus back on the skill tree and the spreadsheet @ Rattati I believe the general player consensus is that HAV skill point investment should reflect the infantry skill point investsment. 6x then 8x rather than 3x, 6x 10x 12x. The only difference in HAV and SHAV is prefit turrets. I can't see a reason not to combine both in a single skill tree, and have he two types in the market instead of a double SP sink for the same vehicle. From what i can tell there will be no unique bonus applied to either the HAV or SHAV to differentiate the two. The only bonus is not having griefers leap into your tank. It doesn't make much sense anymore to have two skill books for one hull. Its more akin to asking breaking suff to spec into proto caldari heavy twice to either use a forge gun, or use a forge gun and a side arm. You are alreadly removing turret fiting options for tanks, effectivley doubling the ISK sink for tankers. I will have to buy two unique gunlogis, one with turrets, one without. No need to have a massive SP sink as well. I tend to agree here. branching off the DHAV and UHAV from the HAV skill will be simpler, and less clunky. I don't think there needs to be two separate HAV skills, just prefitted turrets and no turrets on market. simplicity in a complex system helps keep the learning curve from going here. Yep I agree as well. Not only does it not make sense that Small Turrets vs No Small turrets on an HAV would dictate a different skill, but it's really an unnecessary SP sink. Simply have the 4 racial HAV Operation skills which each unlock their racial MBT and SHAV, and then the DHAV and UHAV skills branching off of that skill. It's clean and simple. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2125	Posted - 2015.02.08 19:49:00 - [946] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: If the biweekly spkr vs the world derail has gotten out of our system I'd like to focus back on the skill tree and the spreadsheet @ Rattati I believe the general player consensus is that HAV skill point investment should reflect the infantry skill point investsment. 6x then 8x rather than 3x, 6x 10x 12x. The only difference in HAV and SHAV is prefit turrets. I can't see a reason not to combine both in a single skill tree, and have he two types in the market instead of a double SP sink for the same vehicle. From what i can tell there will be no unique bonus applied to either the HAV or SHAV to differentiate the two. The only bonus is not having griefers leap into your tank. It doesn't make much sense anymore to have two skill books for one hull. Its more akin to asking breaking suff to spec into proto caldari heavy twice to either use a forge gun, or use a forge gun and a side arm. You are alreadly removing turret fiting options for tanks, effectivley doubling the ISK sink for tankers. I will have to buy two unique gunlogis, one with turrets, one without. No need to have a massive SP sink as well. I tend to agree here. branching off the DHAV and UHAV from the HAV skill will be simpler, and less clunky. I don't think there needs to be two separate HAV skills, just prefitted turrets and no turrets on market. simplicity in a complex system helps keep the learning curve from going here. Yep I agree as well. Not only does it not make sense that Small Turrets vs No Small turrets on an HAV would dictate a different skill, but it's really an unnecessary SP sink. Simply have the 4 racial HAV Operation skills which each unlock their racial MBT and SHAV, and then the DHAV and UHAV skills branching off of that skill. It's clean and simple. Maybe key the HAV operation skill to unlock std adv pro HAV's at level 1 2 3 and SHAV's at 3 4 5 Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Doc DDD TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 313	Posted - 2015.02.08 20:38:00 - [947] - Quote I like it the way it is, if it was up to me I would make it 20 times to keep the scrubs out.
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2316	Posted - 2015.02.08 20:53:00 - [948] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: I like it the way it is, if it was up to me I would make it 20 times to keep the scrubs out. And I'm glad that it isn't up to you because that's just a terrible idea. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4855	Posted - 2015.02.09 00:45:00 - [949] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Maybe key the HAV operation skill to unlock std adv pro HAV's at level 1 2 3 and SHAV's at 3 4 5 I don't really see the point, why would a player who chooses to play solo have to spend more SP to unlock which is basically the exact same time? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2126	Posted - 2015.02.09 01:21:00 - [950] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Maybe key the HAV operation skill to unlock std adv pro HAV's at level 1 2 3 and SHAV's at 3 4 5 I don't really see the point, why would a player who chooses to play solo have to spend more SP to unlock which is basically the exact same time? SHAVs were meant to be a bit harder to unlock so people had to have turrets. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4856	Posted - 2015.02.09 01:25:00 - [951] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Maybe key the HAV operation skill to unlock std adv pro HAV's at level 1 2 3 and SHAV's at 3 4 5 I don't really see the point, why would a player who chooses to play solo have to spend more SP to unlock which is basically the exact same time? SHAVs were meant to be a bit harder to unlock so people had to have turrets. .....I still don't see why. I have to train more skills....to not have turrets? It's basically a Gunnlogi Type-II, a variant, not an upgrade or anything. I see no valid reason to require either of them to have more or less of a skill investment than the other. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2126	Posted - 2015.02.09 02:15:00 - [952] - Quote I'm just going off of rattati's design intent. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2317	Posted - 2015.02.09 03:04:00 - [953] - Quote Just spitballing an idea here... If the SHAV is to be a variant of the HAV, without any upgrades or anything as Pokey has said, why not just have one operation skill for both of them? It would be similar to infantry weapons -> 1 operation skill, multiple variants. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1736	Posted - 2015.02.09 03:06:00 - [954] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Maybe key the HAV operation skill to unlock std adv pro HAV's at level 1 2 3 and SHAV's at 3 4 5 I don't really see the point, why would a player who chooses to play solo have to spend more SP to unlock which is basically the exact same time? I don't see the point in getting HAV level to 5 just to unlock proto HAV's and then having to level up UHAV skill to utilize the passive bonuses. I'm pretty sure people wold revolt if you have to get Assault Dropsuit skill to level 5 to unlock proto and then you have to get the racial to level 5 to get the passive assault bonuses. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4859	Posted - 2015.02.09 03:14:00 - [955] - Quote Sir Dukey wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Maybe key the HAV operation skill to unlock std adv pro HAV's at level 1 2 3 and SHAV's at 3 4 5 I don't really see the point, why would a player who chooses to play solo have to spend more SP to unlock which is basically the exact same time? I don't see the point in getting UHAV level to 5 just to unlock proto UHAV's and then having to level up UHAV skill to utilize the passive bonuses. I'm pretty sure people wold revolt if you have to get Assault Dropsuit skill to level 5 to unlock proto and then you have to get the racial to level 5 to get the passive assault bonuses. To be quite frank, I'd prefer an unlock system where STD, ADV, and PRO unlocked on ranks 1-3 and then 4 and 5 were there for additional bonus ranks. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 16934	Posted - 2015.02.09 03:48:00 - [956] - Quote 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. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 249	Posted - 2015.02.09 03:56:00 - [957] - 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....
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 829	Posted - 2015.02.09 04:36:00 - [958] - 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. 10x for the destroyers and UHAVs would really, really be strectching it but thats the upper limit. At 12 x I wouldn't know how to go about offering Infantry balance suggestions, having SP investment on par with the suits removes any excuses from vehicle users as to why they feel the right to go on a infantry farming spree. Anyways, its a bit early to go voer this topic, perhaps another feedback thread on the SP tree investment would be good, get everybodies eyes on it. As far as i can tell, in terms of your spreadsheet the only hot topics to crop up in my eyes are SP tree (as you said theory crafted for now nothing final) Changes to missiles (other thread) Changes to rails (other thread) small rail stats (other thread) But hey its been a long grindy week and weekend for you devs concerning warlords, so no pressure from my end. Pace on the pages is beginning to slack a bit, some of us has been posting about tanks almost daily since december. Pay no mind when the spkr, breaking, pokey etc flareups happen. Given the specific references to the master spreedsheet it seems everybody is still generally on board with the new suggestions. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4864	Posted - 2015.02.09 06:46:00 - [959] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: [Pace on the pages is beginning to slack a bit, some of us has been posting about tanks almost daily since december. Pay no mind when the spkr, breaking, pokey etc flareups happen. Given the specific references to the master spreedsheet it seems everybody is still generally on board with the new suggestions. Hey now, every once in a while I say something remotely useful! But yeah the skill tree Ratatti has is not exactly how I'd like to see it...I'll do a mockup tomorrow and get a link in. As for skill multipliers I'll let you kids fight over that, it's not really my cup of tea. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7023	Posted - 2015.02.09 09:10:00 - [960] - 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 am less concerned honestly with individual skill costs. I'm more on the "overall investment" If an HAV and sentinel benefit from the same number of skills with similar skill bonusing Then they should cost similar. If a HAV has less skills total then it should be more expensive per skill Then the sentinel. HOWEVER.. Unbonused skills should not cost the same amount as bonused skills IMHO. The value isn't there as much. It also means that you're getting less overall utility. So enough editorial from me. I want tanks so I can shoot at them and get a feel for the V/AV interaction. I have a pretty good idea based on the posted numbers how it'll play out, but I want to confirm. AV



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

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.

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris