DUST Search - HAV bring back initiative

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

HAV bring back initiative

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mary Sedillo Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 373	Posted - 2015.02.12 19:59:00 - [31] - Quote But you did bro. You want faster firing speed, which is a DPS buff.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7146	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:03:00 - [32] - Quote Mary Sedillo wrote: But you did bro. You want faster firing speed, which is a DPS buff. damage. alpha. rate of fire is not the same and bluntly Im not worried about shooting dropships. HAVs hold a much higher priority. AV
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15729	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:05:00 - [33] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Mary Sedillo wrote: But you did bro. You want faster firing speed, which is a DPS buff. damage. alpha. rate of fire is not the same Not the same no, but it will most certainly effect dropships as well, giving skilled forge gunners an upper hand in what is typically a very balanced engagement. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7148	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:29:00 - [34] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Mary Sedillo wrote: But you did bro. You want faster firing speed, which is a DPS buff. damage. alpha. rate of fire is not the same Not the same no, but it will most certainly effect dropships as well, giving skilled forge gunners an upper hand in what is typically a very balanced engagement. in your opinion. AV
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders 2875	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:32:00 - [35] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I hear you loud and clear man, and I agree. Simply offering up a word of caution to keep my beloved babies from fading into obscurity. I always get a little spooked when a reasonable Dropship Pilot appears. It's like seeing Bigfoot or a Unicorn. Theres only like 10 of us who are actual, dedicated pilots haha. And for the record, im a unicorn with big feet. Petition for 'Fiend' Gallente Dropship. It's hot pink with a giant horn on the front that can be used to spear other dropships in midair. I want a Rainbow colored FRDS from this click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15732	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:33:00 - [36] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Mary Sedillo wrote: But you did bro. You want faster firing speed, which is a DPS buff. damage. alpha. rate of fire is not the same Not the same no, but it will most certainly effect dropships as well, giving skilled forge gunners an upper hand in what is typically a very balanced engagement. in your opinion. How would being able to land more shots before they can retreat from your range or find cover NOT lend an advantage to the forge gun? How is that in any way an opinion? O.o My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7156	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:37:00 - [37] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Mary Sedillo wrote: But you did bro. You want faster firing speed, which is a DPS buff. damage. alpha. rate of fire is not the same Not the same no, but it will most certainly effect dropships as well, giving skilled forge gunners an upper hand in what is typically a very balanced engagement. in your opinion. How would being able to land more shots before they can retreat from your range or find cover NOT lend an advantage to the forge gun? How is that in any way an opinion? O.o losing a short amount of time isn't going to render dropships unusable. Nevermind there are two variants of forge guns that are pretty much useless except against the clinically stupid. the breach only lands a second hit vs. an idiot, and the standard model forge has the worst Alpha and worst DPS. The PLC is in desperate need of an RoF buff. AV
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15732	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:44:00 - [38] - Quote I have never, and will never say that PLC doesnt need some more love, at least not till it receives it. Breach forge gun, ive always felt that was the team variant, as its borderline OP when paired with any other form of AV from basic on up. IAFG is beautifully balanced, period. Standard forge guns could maybe use a small RoF and or damage buff, but I mean, even if they got it, who would use it? Buff either too much and the IAFG loses its appeal, dont buff it enough and its a pointless buff. Im inclined to say Forge guns are the most balanced weapon in this game, and only "suffer" because theyre weak vs shield, and we have virtually no anti shield AV still. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7156	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:50:00 - [39] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I have never, and will never say that PLC doesnt need some more love, at least not till it receives it. Breach forge gun, ive always felt that was the team variant, as its borderline OP when paired with any other form of AV from basic on up. IAFG is beautifully balanced, period. Standard forge guns could maybe use a small RoF and or damage buff, but I mean, even if they got it, who would use it? Buff either too much and the IAFG loses its appeal, dont buff it enough and its a pointless buff. Im inclined to say Forge guns are the most balanced weapon in this game, and only "suffer" because theyre weak vs shield, and we have virtually no anti shield AV still. I'm recommending the alpha on the forge fill the gap between the assault and breach. I want to revert the RoF nerf, because with the EHP Rattati's giving HAVs it's going to need it. Me and pokey have already run EHP numbers on the various chassis. As it stands a maxed HAV (madrugar) versus a matched max HP assault forge will require a reload solo. I'm surprisingly comfortable with this. but the RoF will have to go up slightly. There's a lot going on with those hulls. I'm recommending that the PLC reload time drop sharply. charge time slightly. I know you don't like it, but rather than bitching about it, why aren't you looking at offering suggestions for doing the tier setup for the ADS and standard dropships? It's not like they've been thrown off the table. And honestly I don't think the ADS is quite at the agility range it needs to be, but I dunno how to buff that. but i've found that rattati is remarkably receptive to suggestions backed with numbers. I have found him remarkably unreceptive to people trying to tell him that tanks shouldn't be fixed, or that AV shouldn't be a credible threat. The HAv drivers absolutely insist it should take several infantry gunners to kill an HAV regardless of the fact that all of the proposed numbers are several HUNDRED DPS behind the proposed HAV RAILGUN which runs at a bit over 850 DPS. so most of the resistance is purely reactionary. You have a valid beef, because dropships are going to need something in response, but standing out going "no dude, you can't do that" isn't likely to get much traction. AV
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15732	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:55:00 - [40] - Quote I domt involve myself with numbers because thats not my strong point, and im not going to offer up discussion on that topic until its actually on the table, in front of me. Too many empty promises to put my faith there again. And im not "bitching", im simply concerned that AV will be buffed to handle new tanks, while every single other vehicle gets brutally raped into the ground until CCP gets around to giving them a similar overhaul. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7157	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:59:00 - [41] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I domt involve myself with numbers because thats not my strong point, and im not going to offer up discussion on that topic until its actually on the table, in front of me. Too many empty promises to put my faith there again. And im not "bitching", im simply concerned that AV will be buffed to handle new tanks, while every single other vehicle gets brutally raped into the ground until CCP gets around to giving them a similar overhaul. LAVs need a nerf so that you have to fit them to survive a damn forge strike. Dropships can be fixed by doing something about the swarm turn radii and speeding them up while slowing down the refire a bit. But that would require increasing the range. Increasing the overall agility of dropships (maybe making the controls a bit less clunky would help) would reduce the chance of catastrophic speedball forge shots. I'm not JUST working or brainstorming on the AV side here. There's a lot more I'm considering at all times when I'm making recommendations to rattati. AV
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4945	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:02:00 - [42] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I domt involve myself with numbers because thats not my strong point, and im not going to offer up discussion on that topic until its actually on the table, in front of me. Too many empty promises to put my faith there again. And im not "bitching", im simply concerned that AV will be buffed to handle new tanks, while every single other vehicle gets brutally raped into the ground until CCP gets around to giving them a similar overhaul. Hopefully Dropships will be next (LAvs after that, they're less critical) but your concerns are valid. Sadly I will not be able to do ** for dropships as I don't use them like...at all, so try to remain engaged in the conversation when it comes. You're probably one of the most knowledgeable dropship pilots I know, so please be involved so it gets done right. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7157	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:06:00 - [43] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I domt involve myself with numbers because thats not my strong point, and im not going to offer up discussion on that topic until its actually on the table, in front of me. Too many empty promises to put my faith there again. And im not "bitching", im simply concerned that AV will be buffed to handle new tanks, while every single other vehicle gets brutally raped into the ground until CCP gets around to giving them a similar overhaul. Hopefully Dropships will be next (LAvs after that, they're less critical) but your concerns are valid. Sadly I will not be able to do **** for dropships as I don't use them like...at all, so try to remain engaged in the conversation when it comes. You're probably one of the most knowledgeable dropship pilots I know, so please be involved so it gets done right. plus it goes like this Fiend, you have input, we are number nerds. Coincidence? Just don't lunatic out on us like spkr4thedead. AV
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15734	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:17:00 - [44] - Quote To be perfectly honest, im actually sort of against increasing dropship mobility, as ill probably never die to forge guns ever again haha. I would love to see 2% resitance to armor (incubus) and 2% resistance to shield (python) added per level to their respective skills, without applying stacking penalty. That change alone could go a long way towards keeping dropships balanced in the face of new AV. Im also STRONGLY in favor of weaker hulls with more fitting capacity for ALL vehicles, since vehicle fits are painfully boring right now. Ive gotten most of my knee jerk reactions out over the past few years, but I AM manic depressive bi polar so I am prone to lashing out emotionally before ive had time to properly test and consider things. Which is why im PUMPED to be able to record again soon, it really helps with analysis. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7157	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:20:00 - [45] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: To be perfectly honest, im actually sort of against increasing dropship mobility, as ill probably never die to forge guns ever again haha. I would love to see 2% resitance to armor (incubus) and 2% resistance to shield (python) added per level to their respective skills, without applying stacking penalty. That change alone could go a long way towards keeping dropships balanced in the face of new AV. Im also STRONGLY in favor of weaker hulls with more fitting capacity for ALL vehicles, since vehicle fits are painfully boring right now. Ive gotten most of my knee jerk reactions out over the past few years, but I AM manic depressive bi polar so I am prone to lashing out emotionally before ive had time to properly test and consider things. Which is why im PUMPED to be able to record again soon, it really helps with analysis. so whenever AV changes come down the pipe, you and I can go rounds to see just where the failure points are. It's what I did with a couple other people when I did my original ADS analysis. And when i did a few other things. Also if Rattati brings in more heavy weapons I want to trade out the splash resistance for racial weapon bonusing. AV
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4946	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:20:00 - [46] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: To be perfectly honest, im actually sort of against increasing dropship mobility, as ill probably never die to forge guns ever again haha. I would love to see 2% resitance to armor (incubus) and 2% resistance to shield (python) added per level to their respective skills, without applying stacking penalty. That change alone could go a long way towards keeping dropships balanced in the face of new AV. Im also STRONGLY in favor of weaker hulls with more fitting capacity for ALL vehicles, since vehicle fits are painfully boring right now. Ive gotten most of my knee jerk reactions out over the past few years, but I AM manic depressive bi polar so I am prone to lashing out emotionally before ive had time to properly test and consider things. Which is why im PUMPED to be able to record again soon, it really helps with analysis. Again I know very little about the operation of dropships, so I can only speak conceptually here. Do you feel the slot progression for Dropships and ADS is in a good place? It always looked right to me on paper, but do you feel it's fine from your personal experience? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15734	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:25:00 - [47] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: To be perfectly honest, im actually sort of against increasing dropship mobility, as ill probably never die to forge guns ever again haha. I would love to see 2% resitance to armor (incubus) and 2% resistance to shield (python) added per level to their respective skills, without applying stacking penalty. That change alone could go a long way towards keeping dropships balanced in the face of new AV. Im also STRONGLY in favor of weaker hulls with more fitting capacity for ALL vehicles, since vehicle fits are painfully boring right now. Ive gotten most of my knee jerk reactions out over the past few years, but I AM manic depressive bi polar so I am prone to lashing out emotionally before ive had time to properly test and consider things. Which is why im PUMPED to be able to record again soon, it really helps with analysis. Again I know very little about the operation of dropships, so I can only speak conceptually here. Do you feel the slot progression for Dropships and ADS is in a good place? It always looked right to me on paper, but do you feel it's fine from your personal experience? I just want a 2/3 - 3/2 layout with either a slight buff to hp, or my propsed native resists. That could open up so many fitting options for us. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7157	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:27:00 - [48] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: To be perfectly honest, im actually sort of against increasing dropship mobility, as ill probably never die to forge guns ever again haha. I would love to see 2% resitance to armor (incubus) and 2% resistance to shield (python) added per level to their respective skills, without applying stacking penalty. That change alone could go a long way towards keeping dropships balanced in the face of new AV. Im also STRONGLY in favor of weaker hulls with more fitting capacity for ALL vehicles, since vehicle fits are painfully boring right now. Ive gotten most of my knee jerk reactions out over the past few years, but I AM manic depressive bi polar so I am prone to lashing out emotionally before ive had time to properly test and consider things. Which is why im PUMPED to be able to record again soon, it really helps with analysis. Again I know very little about the operation of dropships, so I can only speak conceptually here. Do you feel the slot progression for Dropships and ADS is in a good place? It always looked right to me on paper, but do you feel it's fine from your personal experience? I just want a 2/3 - 3/2 layout with either a slight buff to hp, or my propsed native resists. That could open up so many fitting options for us. with the idea of not making ADS as bricky as HAVs, what kinds of fitting options could help? AV
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4947	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:29:00 - [49] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I just want a 2/3 - 3/2 layout with either a slight buff to hp, or my propsed native resists. That could open up so many fitting options for us. I assume you're speaking specifically about ADS in that case? Assault Dropship Amarr: 1/4 Caldari: 4/1 Minmatar: 3/2 Gallente: 2/3 I take it the extra off-rack slot is for utility? What about your thoughts on the normal dropship? Also I think if the ADS needs more eHP to deal with changes to AV that's fine, but I'd avoid attaching a damage resistance to the ADS...I think it gives the wrong idea about how it is supposed to perform. In the case of the ADS I'd rather tie it to the HP directly. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 266	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:33:00 - [50] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I just want a 2/3 - 3/2 layout with either a slight buff to hp, or my propsed native resists. That could open up so many fitting options for us. I assume you're speaking specifically about ADS in that case? Assault Dropship Amarr: 1/4 Caldari: 4/1 Minmatar: 3/2 Gallente: 2/3 I take it the extra off-rack slot is for utility? What about your thoughts on the normal dropship? Also I think if the ADS needs more eHP to deal with changes to AV that's fine, but I'd avoid attaching a damage resistance to the ADS...I think it gives the wrong idea about how it is supposed to perform. In the case of the ADS I'd rather tie it to the HP directly. That layout looks good to me. A lot better than what it is currently obviously. Somebody needs to start an ADS overhaul thread (I'm looking at you guys) 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 4947	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:35:00 - [51] - Quote Well don't look at me too much. I can speak on concepts and roles but when it comes to fitting/flying the damn things.... "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15734	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:35:00 - [52] - Quote The additional slot is mainly for utility in my mind. We could use some more v3hicle modules to spice thingd up, but im not sure what off the top of my head. ABs being mandatoryon armor ships is my main reason for wanting a second high slot. The second low slot on shield ships could yield much higher tank for shield ships, allowing them to forgo the AB if they choose to go that route. Standard ships I really dont care about. They should be throw away garbage only good as elevators, suicide bombs, and training tools. If any ship should stand and deliver and transport, its logistics ships. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders 2875	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:39:00 - [53] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I domt involve myself with numbers because thats not my strong point, and im not going to offer up discussion on that topic until its actually on the table, in front of me. Too many empty promises to put my faith there again. And im not "bitching", im simply concerned that AV will be buffed to handle new tanks, while every single other vehicle gets brutally raped into the ground until CCP gets around to giving them a similar overhaul. LAVs need a nerf so that you have to fit them to survive a damn forge strike. Dropships can be fixed by doing something about the swarm turn radii and speeding them up while slowing down the refire a bit. But that would require increasing the range. Increasing the overall agility of dropships (maybe making the controls a bit less clunky would help) would reduce the chance of catastrophic speedball forge shots. I'm not JUST working or brainstorming on the AV side here. There's a lot more I'm considering at all times when I'm making recommendations to rattati. Agreed I'd also suggest lowering their turning angles, and if they could not let them stop and turn anymore, so dodging could be a thing. It's really more of ingame movement than controls. And You've so far done well. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4949	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:41:00 - [54] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: The additional slot is mainly for utility in my mind. We could use some more v3hicle modules to spice thingd up, but im not sure what off the top of my head. ABs being mandatoryon armor ships is my main reason for wanting a second high slot. The second low slot on shield ships could yield much higher tank for shield ships, allowing them to forgo the AB if they choose to go that route. Standard ships I really dont care about. They should be throw away garbage only good as elevators, suicide bombs, and training tools. If any ship should stand and deliver and transport, its logistics ships. Well taking a page from what Ratatti came up with for HAVs I kinda see it as follows Standard Dropship Role: Tranport Ship Average Defenses Average Speed 1 Pilot 4 Passengers 2 Gunners Most Slots Generalist ship, mostly used to ferry people around/provide light fire support. Assault Dropship Role: Heavy Fire Support Below Average Defenses High Speed 1 Pilot 2 Passengers 2 Gunners 1 Pilot Turret Less Slots (Same as Logistics) Quick zippy ship, hard to catch, capable of good dps. Bonuses to small turrets. Logistics Dropship Role: Troop Deployment/Vehicle Support Above Average Defenses Low Speed 1 Pilot 4 Passengers 0 Gunners Less Slots (Same as Assault) Difficult to kill but lacks any offensive ability. Built in Mobile CRU. Bonuses for damage resistance. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15737	Posted - 2015.02.12 22:45:00 - [55] - Quote I feel like logistics ships should have the most fitting options, but only if logistics modules are added. Or, if you must have them have less fitting options, make it so they can ONLY fit infantry repair turrets, while giving the LDS a strong, medium range vehicle rep, and a high base tank, along with a built in MCRU that spawns faster as you level up the LDS skill My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
DarthJT5 Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 266	Posted - 2015.02.12 23:05:00 - [56] - Quote I've started a dedicated thread for it guys, if yall wanna start it there. 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 4951	Posted - 2015.02.12 23:07:00 - [57] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I feel like logistics ships should have the most fitting options, but only if logistics modules are added. Or, if you must have them have less fitting options, make it so they can ONLY fit infantry repair turrets, while giving the LDS a strong, medium range vehicle rep, and a high base tank, along with a built in MCRU that spawns faster as you level up the LDS skill Well for one I want to completely do away with the "Lock onto Infantry to Rep them" mechanic for vehicles, I feel its far too clunky. My plan was to propose an infantry rep module which acted like a repping nanohive, producing a bubble around the vehicle which repped any friendlies inside. Lock on repping modules would be reserved for repping vehicles. That being said, we need to decide where vehicle repair modules land. Ideally, I'd like to see Light vehicles focus on infantry, repping them, spawning them, ect. Whereas Medium vehicles would be focused on 'larger' functions, repping vehicles for example. Don't get me wrong, I dont have an issue with a LAV repping vehicles or an MAV repping infantry, but I think the specific bonuses should be unique to each vehicle 'frame' size. So should LAVs and Dropships be able to fit vehicle reppers? Totally. Should get get awesome bonuses specific to repping vehicles? Probably not. But thats just my personal view at the moment "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders 2875	Posted - 2015.02.12 23:29:00 - [58] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: The additional slot is mainly for utility in my mind. We could use some more vehicle modules to spice things up, but im not sure what off the top of my head. ABs being mandatory on armor ships is my main reason for wanting a second high slot. The second low slot on shield ships could yield much higher tank, allowing them to forgo the AB if they choose to go that route. Standard ships I really dont care about. They should be throw away garbage only good as elevators, suicide bombs, and training tools. If any ship should stand and deliver and transport, its logistics ships. That's unnecessary. Making it to where things aren't useful, and others simply overall better than others is broken. There simply would be no point in having those things, just like the T I Dropsuits, so they might as well not exist. Do I think that LDS's should be better at getting a lot of people on point? yes. Do I think that they should be simply better DS's than the STD DS? No. It shouldn't be able to attack as well as the regular one (a small turret nerf and being in general slower would help with that), and it won't be as fast to deploy, so it would be made more for getting there, and staying in the general area for a decent period of time. Same for ADS, but in the opposite direction. Should it be a better DS's? No. It wouldn't have the passenger count needed to do full squad drops, but be able to protect whatever they drop and any nearby people, or at least give them enough time to get into cover before having to fly off due to getting another pickup request, or getting shot at by AV or another vehicle, such as a HAV. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller The Corporate Raiders 2875	Posted - 2015.02.12 23:32:00 - [59] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I feel like logistics ships should have the most fitting options, but only if logistics modules are added. Or, if you must have them have less fitting options, make it so they can ONLY fit infantry repair turrets, while giving the LDS a strong, medium range vehicle rep, and a high base tank, along with a built in MCRU that spawns faster as you level up the LDS skill Well for one I want to completely do away with the "Lock onto Infantry to Rep them" mechanic for vehicles, I feel its far too clunky. My plan was to propose an infantry rep module which acted like a repping nanohive, producing a bubble around the vehicle which repped any friendlies inside. Lock on repping modules would be reserved for repping vehicles. That being said, we need to decide where vehicle repair modules land. Ideally, I'd like to see Light vehicles focus on infantry, repping them, spawning them, ect. Whereas Medium vehicles would be focused on 'larger' functions, repping vehicles for example. Don't get me wrong, I dont have an issue with a LAV repping vehicles or an MAV repping infantry, but I think the specific bonuses should be unique to each vehicle 'frame' size. So should LAVs and Dropships be able to fit vehicle reppers? Totally. Should get get awesome bonuses specific to repping vehicles? Probably not. But thats just my personal view at the moment Vehicles can't really follow infantry to infantry specific locations, so it'd only be useful in more open locations where the vehicle can move, in which would be kind pointless to have a single vehicle type do such a task, or at least too specific. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15740	Posted - 2015.02.13 03:43:00 - [60] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I feel like logistics ships should have the most fitting options, but only if logistics modules are added. Or, if you must have them have less fitting options, make it so they can ONLY fit infantry repair turrets, while giving the LDS a strong, medium range vehicle rep, and a high base tank, along with a built in MCRU that spawns faster as you level up the LDS skill Well for one I want to completely do away with the "Lock onto Infantry to Rep them" mechanic for vehicles, I feel its far too clunky. My plan was to propose an infantry rep module which acted like a repping nanohive, producing a bubble around the vehicle which repped any friendlies inside. Lock on repping modules would be reserved for repping vehicles. That being said, we need to decide where vehicle repair modules land. Ideally, I'd like to see Light vehicles focus on infantry, repping them, spawning them, ect. Whereas Medium vehicles would be focused on 'larger' functions, repping vehicles for example. Don't get me wrong, I dont have an issue with a LAV repping vehicles or an MAV repping infantry, but I think the specific bonuses should be unique to each vehicle 'frame' size. So should LAVs and Dropships be able to fit vehicle reppers? Totally. Should get get awesome bonuses specific to repping vehicles? Probably not. But thats just my personal view at the moment I think repairer turrets should be targetted, exactly like a remote repairer. Its a turret that can only be fit to logistics vehicles, and logistics vehicles cannot fit standard turrets. They have charge, which is basically ammo, so they require trips to the depot like everyone else LAVs could have a burst radius heal on a cooldown, while dropships would have a targetted remote vehicle rep. I see logistics ships as mobile staging platforms capable of bolstering their troops through powerful heals and mobile spawns. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.