DUST Search - AV feedback

Breakin Stuff wrote:

Nothing Certain wrote:

Although it is out of the scope of your post, HAV/AV "balance" can't be achieved without changing the expectations of vehicle users. If they pay 500K for a vehicle and can only make 150K a match they understandably think that they should rarely be killed. You can't balance around that, they must be OP to achieve that. The price of well fitted vehicles should drop drastically, and they should expect to be roughly equivalent to a proto dropsuit in survivability.

Second, the "swarm problem" is less a problem with swarms themselves and more a problem of how easy it is to fit a SL at a SD and then go back to whatever. Remove this ability and only let those in dedicated swarm fits have them and almost all the problems are solved. Increased turn radius for swarms against DS is in order. A small change in profile damage making them more effective against shields and less effective against armor seems like it would help the armor/shield imbalance. Forge guns remain Ok, but with the Gunnloggi being prominent struggles. I personally found that BW eliminated my ability to play forge. I do not camp with the blues, I would set up nests in unlikely spots to ambush vehicles. This is no longer possible. If I play forge I spend the whole match looking for a hive.

Small turrets need some love across the board. Large Missile turrets seem to need some toning down.

What is needed is some data to look at to see how things are actually performing. Tankers say blasters are useless against infantry now, as infantry it seems to me that they are still overperforming. Who is right? The data knows.

Without it we are all just throwing darts with our bias blinders on.

the BW change didn't affect my ability to assault vehicles even slightly. There's a knack to it, and playing it safe means less fun violence

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 61	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:05:00 - [61] - Quote I'm getting on dust now, if you guys would like to squad up/sync against each other for in game data? Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1999	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:06:00 - [62] - Quote I'm talking more about have them zoom by air targets and potentially waste fuel in turning around then coming back to target. there's no real easy guesswork for this though. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 194	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:16:00 - [63] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: I'm talking more about have them zoom by air targets and potentially waste fuel in turning around then coming back to target. there's no real easy guesswork for this though. Congrats on that 2000th like I just gave you :) Dedicated Shield Tanking vet since Open Beta. Up and coming Python pilot. The awnser is always XT missiles....
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1489	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:36:00 - [64] - Quote Although it is out of the scope of your post, HAV/AV "balance" can't be achieved without changing the expectations of vehicle users. If they pay 500K for a vehicle and can only make 150K a match they understandably think that they should rarely be killed. You can't balance around that, they must be OP to achieve that. The price of well fitted vehicles should drop drastically, and they should expect to be roughly equivalent to a proto dropsuit in survivability. Second, the "swarm problem" is less a problem with swarms themselves and more a problem of how easy it is to fit a SL at a SD and then go back to whatever. Remove this ability and only let those in dedicated swarm fits have them and almost all the problems are solved. Increased turn radius for swarms against DS is in order. A small change in profile damage making them more effective against shields and less effective against armor seems like it would help the armor/shield imbalance. Forge guns remain Ok, but with the Gunnloggi being prominent struggles. I personally found that BW eliminated my ability to play forge. I do not camp with the blues, I would set up nests in unlikely spots to ambush vehicles. This is no longer possible. If I play forge I spend the whole match looking for a hive. Small turrets need some love across the board. Large Missile turrets seem to need some toning down. What is needed is some data to look at to see how things are actually performing. Tankers say blasters are useless against infantry now, as infantry it seems to me that they are still overperforming. Who is right? The data knows. Without it we are all just throwing darts with our bias blinders on. Because, that's why.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6721	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:39:00 - [65] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Although it is out of the scope of your post, HAV/AV "balance" can't be achieved without changing the expectations of vehicle users. If they pay 500K for a vehicle and can only make 150K a match they understandably think that they should rarely be killed. You can't balance around that, they must be OP to achieve that. The price of well fitted vehicles should drop drastically, and they should expect to be roughly equivalent to a proto dropsuit in survivability. Second, the "swarm problem" is less a problem with swarms themselves and more a problem of how easy it is to fit a SL at a SD and then go back to whatever. Remove this ability and only let those in dedicated swarm fits have them and almost all the problems are solved. Increased turn radius for swarms against DS is in order. A small change in profile damage making them more effective against shields and less effective against armor seems like it would help the armor/shield imbalance. Forge guns remain Ok, but with the Gunnloggi being prominent struggles. I personally found that BW eliminated my ability to play forge. I do not camp with the blues, I would set up nests in unlikely spots to ambush vehicles. This is no longer possible. If I play forge I spend the whole match looking for a hive. Small turrets need some love across the board. Large Missile turrets seem to need some toning down. What is needed is some data to look at to see how things are actually performing. Tankers say blasters are useless against infantry now, as infantry it seems to me that they are still overperforming. Who is right? The data knows. Without it we are all just throwing darts with our bias blinders on. the BW change didn't affect my ability to assault vehicles even slightly. There's a knack to it, and playing it safe means less fun violence AV
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 813	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:44:00 - [66] - Quote As AV goes Assault Swarm Launcher (Longer Lock-on range, Shorter Lock-on Time, Far Less Damage) Swarm Launcher (75 Meter Lock On Range (Might aid in Rendering if they have to get closer), 3 second Lock On time, Slightly less damage. 1000 damage per volley means 3000 damage a Clip. Prof 5 takes this up to around 1200 damage a shot. Minmando gives around 1400 damage. Two Damage Mods at 10% bonus gives 1600 damage. 3 volleys on a fully maxed character Minmando Glass Cannon to kill Repping Ion Madrugars. ) Breach Forge Gun (Keep as current. It can OHK if it hits the vehicle right.) Assault Forge Gun (Keep as Current. Has close to 5000 DPS in the clip. ) Standard Forge Gun (Buff Damage Slightly. 5500 DPS in Clip needed to justify longer charge as well as holding the charge. Or return splash so it can be used vs infantry??) Breach Plasma Cannon Needs to be added Fires like an RPG. No Splash damage, Around 1500 Damage Vs Shields to hurt those Hardener Gunnlogis. Longer Charge Up Time. Plasma Cannon (Leave as is) Blasters need to either have dispersion lowered as a skill, or have a bonus tied to those UHAVs. That way you have a reason to bring one out aside from stronger HP. Rail Guns- Should be able to fire enough kill a tank if they stay at range, Blasters should destroy them up close. Increase Damage Percentage to Shields. Explain why 2 Damage Mods cannot be active on a Blaster, but 3 can be on a Gunnlogi. Missiles- Gankers. The Bane of Armor Tankers. Should have slightly less Range However The turrets really could be fixed if they had their old variants rereleased, and then fixed from there. "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD Moody come back SWBF3!!
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6721	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:46:00 - [67] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: I'm getting on dust now, if you guys would like to squad up/sync against each other for in game data? I'm on. go ahead and invite me AV
Kierkegaard Soren Eridani Light Horse Striker 657	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:47:00 - [68] - Quote Regarding swarms: Yes, too easy against dropships of all flavours, although I've seen exceptional pilots hug the ground to make lock ons and sustained barrages impossible, but the level of skill required to pull that off must be astronomical, so we really can't balance swarms around this. I consider the low HP of dropship hulls a part of this issue, but still. Very little skill is required. Very poor against shield tanks. Profficieny is part of the problem here: Swarms do massive bonus damage to armoir hulls, which is why they melt so fast. Against shield tanks you can unload two full clips and still not pick up e WP for damaging them sufficiently. Naturally, poorly fitted tanks will die but for the most part they pretty much shrug off swarms and carry on as normal. Conversely, armour tanks are paper tigers, which makes little sense when you consider that armour is designed to stand and deliver, not stand and fall over and burst into flames. Swarms need a damage profile change. I've argued for a while now that they need to be switched to hybrid-rail, so that the calmandos gets its AV option and, more importantly, so that the imbalance between damage dealt to the two defense types isn't so massively pronounced. Assault swarms should keep the current flight dynamics all swarms do currently, but deal 30% less damage, making them decent against LAVs and dropships but poor against heavier vehicles. Standard swarms should be much slower with a poor turning capability. Dedicated Commando. CEO of Eridani Light Horse Strikers. "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing."
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6721	Posted - 2015.01.24 20:51:00 - [69] - Quote assault swarms are functionally identical to standard. the only difference is the ability to lock two targets, which is functionally as useful as a football bat. AV spreadsheet has been updated, check the link in my sig, again as a reminder this spreadsheet only has CURRENT Av numbers. There is nothing theoretical in the sheet (yet) so this is all current hard data. AV
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6722	Posted - 2015.01.24 21:25:00 - [70] - Quote Given the numbers I have seen from the mass driver I'm expecting the actual AV numbers for NK and flaylocks to be hilariously bad AV

Kierkegaard Soren Eridani Light Horse Striker 658	Posted - 2015.01.24 21:55:00 - [71] - Quote Nova knives are only good for hurting the feelings of tanks. Dedicated Commando. CEO of Eridani Light Horse Strikers. "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing."
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1489	Posted - 2015.01.24 22:06:00 - [72] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Nothing Certain wrote: Although it is out of the scope of your post, HAV/AV "balance" can't be achieved without changing the expectations of vehicle users. If they pay 500K for a vehicle and can only make 150K a match they understandably think that they should rarely be killed. You can't balance around that, they must be OP to achieve that. The price of well fitted vehicles should drop drastically, and they should expect to be roughly equivalent to a proto dropsuit in survivability. Second, the "swarm problem" is less a problem with swarms themselves and more a problem of how easy it is to fit a SL at a SD and then go back to whatever. Remove this ability and only let those in dedicated swarm fits have them and almost all the problems are solved. Increased turn radius for swarms against DS is in order. A small change in profile damage making them more effective against shields and less effective against armor seems like it would help the armor/shield imbalance. Forge guns remain Ok, but with the Gunnloggi being prominent struggles. I personally found that BW eliminated my ability to play forge. I do not camp with the blues, I would set up nests in unlikely spots to ambush vehicles. This is no longer possible. If I play forge I spend the whole match looking for a hive. Small turrets need some love across the board. Large Missile turrets seem to need some toning down. What is needed is some data to look at to see how things are actually performing. Tankers say blasters are useless against infantry now, as infantry it seems to me that they are still overperforming. Who is right? The data knows. Without it we are all just throwing darts with our bias blinders on. the BW change didn't affect my ability to assault vehicles even slightly. There's a knack to it, and playing it safe means less fun violence I switched to swarms. Which seems to be the cause of many complaints. I don't mean me personally switching but so many doing it. Because, that's why.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6723	Posted - 2015.01.24 22:10:00 - [73] - Quote Meh. F&F is a righteous pain in the rear AV
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1330	Posted - 2015.01.25 01:04:00 - [74] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: stuff The thing is, despite any amount of theory crafting, no one has been able to predict how the gameplay has worked out in any major chance CCP has done. This is why baby steps is the best thing CCP can do when it comes to balancing at least for things that don't require skill tree changes. Dual tanking is for bad players. 21 day EVE trial.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1330	Posted - 2015.01.25 01:31:00 - [75] - Quote By the way Breakin'. If you're looking for any specific information/stats about swarms which isn't in game or in the SDE ask me. Some stuff that would be nice for mathing mLockOnAcquisitionInterruptionTime 0.3 mLockOnAcquisitionTime 1.4 mLockOnLosingAngle 90 mLockOnLosingTime 1 These stats are the same on all variants of swarms. Supa s33kr3t Dual tanking is for bad players. 21 day EVE trial.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6724	Posted - 2015.01.25 02:43:00 - [76] - Quote If you can find tge unlisted shot delay on the PLC I'd appreciate it. And please see if it's duplicated on any other weapon. AV
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1330	Posted - 2015.01.25 03:35:00 - [77] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: If you can find tge unlisted shot delay on the PLC I'd appreciate it. And please see if it's duplicated on any other weapon. So the PLC operation skill modifier modifies m_ChargeInfo.m_fChargeUpTime m_ChargeInfo.m_fChargeUpTime is 0.6 However there are a few other numbers under m_ChargeInfo Quote: "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeDamageMultiplierCurve.curveIndex": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeDamageMultiplierCurve.m_fMultiplier": 1 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeDamageMultiplierCurve.m_fOffset": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeDamageMultiplierCurve.maxInValue": 1 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeDownCurve.curveIndex": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeDownCurve.m_fMultiplier": 1 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeDownCurve.m_fOffset": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeDownCurve.maxInValue": 1 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeUpCurve.curveIndex": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeUpCurve.m_fMultiplier": 1 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeUpCurve.m_fOffset": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_ChargeUpCurve.maxInValue": 1 "m_ChargeInfo.m_bChargeOncePerTriggerPress": "False" "m_ChargeInfo.m_bFireOnMinCharge": "True" "m_ChargeInfo.m_eChargeStartType": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_fChargeDownTime": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_fChargeMoveSpeedMult": 0.7 "m_ChargeInfo.m_fChargeUpTime": 0.6 "m_ChargeInfo.m_fMaxChargeHeldTime": 0 "m_ChargeInfo.m_fMinChargeToFire": 1 If CCP doesn't want this posted just edit it out or whatever. e: I think you were talking about the delay between when the projectile fires after the charge up being full. I can't seem to find much other than what I listed. Dual tanking is for bad players. 21 day EVE trial.
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 345	Posted - 2015.01.25 03:41:00 - [78] - Quote AV is **** and doesnt work, and the AV v V balance makes playing in both roles unfun and boring. But since thats not very constructive Ill just say: Dropships are way too vulnerable to large railgun turrets. Swarm Launchers are not fun to use. Swarm Launchers are not fun to fight against. Plasma Cannon needs a major buff in anti vehicle damage to make it useful. Heavy Turrets (excluding possibly the blaster) do so much damage in such little time that it makes any vehicle v. vehicle engagement incredibly short (unless its all these dumb 8 billion ehp gunnlogi fit of the months everyone is using). The main problem with the breach forge gun is that it requires you to be still, this makes you an easy kill for the thing you are trying to kill, particularly large missile or large rail turrets. The large blaster turret needs the dispersion nerf to be at least partially rolled back. The damage profile debate on AV weapons vs. the overpowered gunnlogi is a red herring, the reality of the situation is the gunnlogi is just straight up way better than the madruger right now, and should be nerfed (10% less hardener effectiveness might be about right, but whatever works is fine by me). Small blaster turret is complete crap right now. Please fix/rework. Small railgun turret has something odd with where the projectile goes vs. where the dot is. Im not sure if it has dispersion or if its always 100% accurate, but even with a completely unmoving vehicle there are big problems with hitting people even when the dot is fully engulfed by the target and red. Hitting with this turret seems entirely random. This should be investigated and fixed. Small missile turrets need to be fixed to never, ever hit the dropship that fired them (Or is that intentional? Seems dumb). Buffing Nova Knife damage to vehicles would make them useful (50-100% more damage would not be out of the question). Since you have to break cover, run up to a vehicle, and slice it up to apply the damage, why isnt it doing more damage? A militia assault dropship would be welcome. Vehicle prices are too high for prototype stuff, this encourages conservative and unfun play. Thats it I guess, Im sure I have more in me but Im bored.
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K General Tso's Alliance 345	Posted - 2015.01.25 03:50:00 - [79] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Although it is out of the scope of your post, HAV/AV "balance" can't be achieved without changing the expectations of vehicle users. If they pay 500K for a vehicle and can only make 150K a match they understandably think that they should rarely be killed. You can't balance around that, they must be OP to achieve that. The price of well fitted vehicles should drop drastically, and they should expect to be roughly equivalent to a proto dropsuit in survivability. Second, the "swarm problem" is less a problem with swarms themselves and more a problem of how easy it is to fit a SL at a SD and then go back to whatever. Remove this ability and only let those in dedicated swarm fits have them and almost all the problems are solved. Increased turn radius for swarms against DS is in order. A small change in profile damage making them more effective against shields and less effective against armor seems like it would help the armor/shield imbalance. Forge guns remain Ok, but with the Gunnloggi being prominent struggles. I personally found that BW eliminated my ability to play forge. I do not camp with the blues, I would set up nests in unlikely spots to ambush vehicles. This is no longer possible. If I play forge I spend the whole match looking for a hive. Small turrets need some love across the board. Large Missile turrets seem to need some toning down. What is needed is some data to look at to see how things are actually performing. Tankers say blasters are useless against infantry now, as infantry it seems to me that they are still overperforming. Who is right? The data knows. Without it we are all just throwing darts with our bias blinders on. In my tank I generally find it much easier to kill reds with a railgun turret these days. This has risks (its much easier to surprise and kill me with another tank if Im sitting there halfway through a reload after having made a bunch of noise and not really paying enough attention to whatever Im not shooting, but its still much more effective than the new blaster. You can still feather the blaster trigger to avoid alot of the dispersion, but it is significantly harder to hit infantry with it now, and you have to attack them from much closer (leaving you more vunlerable to AV return fire). At the same time its about the worst AV gun there is, lacking in range, damage output, and sustained damage. This turret has no purpose right now, and should be fixed in some way.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 775	Posted - 2015.01.25 09:30:00 - [80] - Quote THUNDERGROOVE wrote: By the way Breakin'. If you're looking for any specific information/stats about swarms which isn't in game or in the SDE ask me. Some stuff that would be nice for mathing mLockOnAcquisitionInterruptionTime 0.3 mLockOnAcquisitionTime 1.4 mLockOnLosingAngle 90 mLockOnLosingTime 1 These stats are the same on all variants of swarms. Supa s33kr3t more please? Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.

Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6736	Posted - 2015.01.25 11:25:00 - [81] - Quote Thundergroove: The 0.5 second delay between shot fired and reload on the PLC. And if there is an iidentical trait on any other weapon. AV
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 923	Posted - 2015.01.25 15:00:00 - [82] - Quote THUNDERGROOVE wrote: mLockOnLosingAngle 90 mLockOnLosingTime 1 These stats are the same on all variants of swarms. Supa s33kr3t Thanks for digging this up. Does that mean there's currently a system implemented that could be used to dial back the "Lock an, turn around and shoot in the air"-behavior of Swarms? And it's been there all the time? And could be patched in a hotfix? I'd love to hear some experience from the devs what happens when you set mLockOnLosingAngle to 25-30. ... Some of these mechanics have a hugely detailed design to them. We already saw the in-depth mechanics related to dispersion on hit-scan weapons. I'm starting to think the person who did the design on the FPS mechanics actually knew what he was doing. Except there was no QA-team to dial in the right numbers and thus we have good mechanics with the wrong parameters.
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 62	Posted - 2015.01.25 18:34:00 - [83] - Quote Since you have access to some variables, do you also have access to some code also? I want to see if Breakin's homing theory is true. To be specific what I'm looking for is a thread that updates the location which sleeps every 'X' milliseconds. And if it is possible to increase the number of iterations the loop structure would go through. (UNSURE IF THIS IS HOW SWARMS WORK, DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT) If that can't be seen/can't be posted (unsure if there'll be any legal problems) I understand. ^ if it cannot be seen, is it okay to ask a dev specific questions relating to the code? sorry for the caps, phone is dying and well i'm typing in quick reply * Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1332	Posted - 2015.01.25 19:13:00 - [84] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Thundergroove: The 0.5 second delay between shot fired and reload on the PLC. And if there is an iidentical trait on any other weapon. I'll look again. Roughly 450 attributes and nothing that I found pertaining to that. Dual tanking is for bad players. 21 day EVE trial.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1333	Posted - 2015.01.25 19:24:00 - [85] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: Does that mean there's currently a system implemented that could be used to dial back the "Lock an, turn around and shoot in the air"-behavior of Swarms? And it's been there all the time? And could be patched in a hotfix? Yes. It's possibly for them to change any of these values at any time. That's what the synchronizations are. Shamarskii Simon wrote: Since you have access to some variables, do you also have access to some code also? I want to see if Breakin's homing theory is true. To be specific what I'm looking for is a thread that updates the location which sleeps every 'X' milliseconds. And if it is possible to increase the number of iterations the loop structure would go through. (UNSURE IF THIS IS HOW SWARMS WORK, DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT) If that can't be seen/can't be posted (unsure if there'll be any legal problems) I understand. ^ if it cannot be seen, is it okay to ask a dev specific questions relating to the code? sorry for the caps, phone is dying and well i'm typing in quick reply * I have a bit over 600,000 lines of code which includes some standard libraries. I had to decompile Python bytecode. I won't release anything but I can make sense of it for you if it's there. The thing is, most of the stuff that is in Python is stuff like UI, out of match networking, etc. It looks like all the firing stuff isn't there though, so it's probably implemented elsewhere. Dual tanking is for bad players. 21 day EVE trial.
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 62	Posted - 2015.01.25 19:56:00 - [86] - Quote THUNDERGROOVE wrote: Shamarskii Simon wrote: Since you have access to some variables, do you also have access to some code also? I want to see if Breakin's homing theory is true. To be specific what I'm looking for is a thread that updates the location which sleeps every 'X' milliseconds. And if it is possible to increase the number of iterations the loop structure would go through. (UNSURE IF THIS IS HOW SWARMS WORK, DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT) If that can't be seen/can't be posted (unsure if there'll be any legal problems) I understand. ^ if it cannot be seen, is it okay to ask a dev specific questions relating to the code? sorry for the caps, phone is dying and well i'm typing in quick reply * I have a bit over 600,000 lines of code which includes some standard libraries. I had to decompile Python bytecode. I won't release anything but I can make sense of it for you if it's there. The thing is, most of the stuff that is in Python is stuff like UI, out of match networking, etc. It looks like all the firing stuff isn't there though, so it's probably implemented elsewhere. Ah, it's in Python? Sadly I can't pinpoint what i'm looking for then (I've just started to learn Python so I can use Blender). How about some variables? Anything relating to vehicle speed/location? Or Swarm location? I think that's a good place to start. I expect some things to be serverside so I understand if it's an impossible find for some things i might ask for. First understanding the mechanics might be a good starting point, from there i think we as a community can rebuild swarms accordingly... -I know i'm asking for way too much with this one- is there anything like a JAVADOC there also? It could help us understand just what the variable is used for. P.S. i have a good feeling for this topic.. Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1333	Posted - 2015.01.25 20:12:00 - [87] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: Ah, it's in Python? Sadly I can't pinpoint what i'm looking for then (I've just started to learn Python so I can use Blender). How about some variables? Anything relating to vehicle speed/location? Or Swarm location? I think that's a good place to start. I expect some things to be serverside so I understand if it's an impossible find for some things i might ask for. First understanding the mechanics might be a good starting point, from there i think we as a community can rebuild swarms accordingly... -I know i'm asking for way too much with this one- is there anything like a JAVADOC there also? It could help us understand just what the variable is used for. P.S. i have a good feeling for this topic.. It's probably documented on their end, but it's decompiled bytecode so there's no comments. Dual tanking is for bad players. 21 day EVE trial.
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 62	Posted - 2015.01.25 20:29:00 - [88] - Quote Ah, thanks for the info. I'll consult you whenever i need a variable / line check. Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 64	Posted - 2015.01.26 02:22:00 - [89] - Quote A quick idea just came to mind. Why not give small blasters a 77/63 (the old rails' damage profile against vehicles) profile against vehicles. It's damage is already too low to break recharge but, it can give better combat support in the sense of AV. Rail = 90s/110a vehicle : 63s/77a infantry Missile = 79s/119a Blaster = 77s/63a vehicle : 110s/90a infantry This will cause: Rail - Superior AV capabilities, best at vehicle combat support. Some infantry support ability. Missile - the bridge between AV and AI, equally effective. Blaster - Superior AI capabilities, best at infantry combat support. Some vehicle support ability. Well, after hit detection on infantry is fixed. (Thunder that's your queue) I know hit detection is dealt with serverside but can you show some blaster variables that we can analyze? I Appreciate it!! Entering the void and becoming wind with my repbus.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1333	Posted - 2015.01.26 07:35:00 - [90] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: A quick idea just came to mind. Why not give small blasters a 77/63 (the old rails' damage profile against vehicles) profile against vehicles. It's damage is already too low to break recharge but, it can give better combat support in the sense of AV. Rail = 90s/110a vehicle : 63s/77a infantry Missile = 79s/119a Blaster = 77s/63a vehicle : 110s/90a infantry This will cause: Rail - Superior AV capabilities, best at vehicle combat support. Some infantry support ability. Missile - the bridge between AV and AI, equally effective. Blaster - Superior AI capabilities, best at infantry combat support. Some vehicle support ability. Well, after hit detection on infantry is fixed. (Thunder that's your queue) I know hit detection is dealt with serverside but can you show some blaster variables that we can analyze? I Appreciate it!! Welp 80GJ Ion Cannon wrote: "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fMaxOffsetAngle": 2, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fMaxShootAtTimeAccuracy": 1, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fMaxStationaryAccuracy": 2, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fMinOffsetAngle": 0.12, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fNewOffsetInterval": 2, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fNoiseConstant": 0.1, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fPitchOffsetScalar": 0.1, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fShotTimeTillAccurate": 8, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fStationaryDecay": 50, "m_AccuracyProperties.m_fStationaryTimeTillAccurate": 8, I did find some interesting things that look like they tweak turret AI, so it seams installations use the turrets types for stats. Nifty. Other stuff too like overlay colors/alpha/positions. Attack/Defend order score bonus radius. Draw distances, even WP rewards. Soo much stuff CCP can easily tweak. Dual tanking is for bad players. 21 day EVE trial.



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Moody come back