DUST Search - CCP Rattati: A Plea For Caution

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

CCP Rattati: A Plea For Caution

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15727	Posted - 2015.02.12 18:55:00 - [1] - Quote I see you seem to be considering more AV buffs to help handle tanks, which is all well and good, but I just wanted to make this into its own thread to highlight one obvious thing, just in case: Dropships (and LAVs) are not tanks. Any buff to anything other than PLC at this point will force dropships into obscurity. Right now, you live or die most of the time by literally one to two seconds. If you take any longer than that to properly respond to any given threat, you die. And, while frustrating, thats mostly ok. Go buffing AV without adjusting our hp to compensate (or return native resists) and we will lose that one to two second window, and die horrible deaths with little to no ability to react and survive. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Mary Sedillo Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 370	Posted - 2015.02.12 19:45:00 - [2] - Quote Don't buff the AV. They are FINE as is. They require coordination and that is FINE. It should NOT go back to Lone Wolf, Low-SP, AV'rs able to hold off entire tank groups. I have to coordinate to engage and disengage to survive. The other side needs to do the same. They should NOT expect to kill me every engagement and if you do so balance it that way, you need to cut the price MORE for our vehicles.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7146	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:05:00 - [3] - Quote Mary Sedillo wrote: Don't buff the AV. They are FINE as is. They require coordination and that is FINE. It should NOT go back to Lone Wolf, Low-SP, AV'rs able to hold off entire tank groups. I have to coordinate to engage and disengage to survive. The other side needs to do the same. They should NOT expect to kill me every engagement and if you do so balance it that way, you need to cut the price MORE for our vehicles. no they are not fine. AV
Ku Shala UNITED MERCINARY AND PILOTS ALLIANCE 1253	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:06:00 - [4] - Quote you are forgetting the current tanks are milita/basic when proto tanks return do you want it to take a whole team to destroy one should work like basic av can destroy basic tank with some challenge advanced av destroy basic tank with some effort proto av destroy basic tank with ease basic av destroy advanced tank with difficulty advanced av destroy advanced tank with some challenge proto av destroys advanced tank with some effort basic av destroy proto tank very difficult advanced av destroy proto tank with with difficulty proto av destroy proto tank with some challenge similar theory for all vehicles it cant take 3-4 players off the map to kill 1 vehicle that is very unfair/unbalanced at least with a 16 vs 16 match. 100 vs 100 would be a different story. I understand risk vs reward and that tanks are expensive but if it takes 4 av users to destroy 1 basic shield tank what happens when proto tanks are reintroduced? 4 shield tanks = win? *-¦a+ó a+ú-Æa+äla+ä (CK-0 Specialist)* Caldari Loyalist Superior technology will privale.
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15729	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:13:00 - [5] - Quote Im only concerned with assets that actually exist right now, or in the near future. There is still no info on when or even if vehicles will get higher tier hulls, so we cant as non CCP / CPM account for those shadow factors. Also, speaking of things that dont exist, there is no anti shield av save PLC, flux grenades, and large blasters. If you would see AV buffed to handle tanks, without compensating dropships and LAVs in return, you will have everything in the game except shield HAVs woefully underpowered in all aspects Hence, the thread, cautioning CCP to tread lightly and slowly on this matter. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Ku Shala UNITED MERCINARY AND PILOTS ALLIANCE 1253	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:16:00 - [6] - Quote I agree with your concern but since the vehicles currently are basic should they not be balanced as basic, being weak to stronger av? *-¦a+ó a+ú-Æa+äla+ä (CK-0 Specialist)* Caldari Loyalist Superior technology will privale.
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15730	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:21:00 - [7] - Quote Ku Shala wrote: I agree with your concern but since the vehicles currently are basic should they not be balanced as basic, being weak to stronger av? Unfortunately no, they shouldnt, because that means that no matter how much Sp you pour into your role, you will ALWAYS be inferior and subject to losing massive amounts of ISK no matter how well you operate your vehicle. Basic vehicles can only be balanced as basic when all options exist, allowing for progression. Otherwise, you just doom pilots to a life of misery and rage. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Ku Shala UNITED MERCINARY AND PILOTS ALLIANCE 1253	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:25:00 - [8] - Quote and pilots dont have that effect on infantry now? *-¦a+ó a+ú-Æa+äla+ä (CK-0 Specialist)* Caldari Loyalist Superior technology will privale.
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15730	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:26:00 - [9] - Quote Ku Shala wrote: and pilots dont have that effect on infantry now? Only if that team spawns no AV in response. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7148	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:28:00 - [10] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Ku Shala wrote: and pilots dont have that effect on infantry now? Only if that team spawns no AV in response. more specifically if the team is unlucky enough to not have someone who runs dedicated AV AV

DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15730	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:30:00 - [11] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: Ku Shala wrote: and pilots dont have that effect on infantry now? Only if that team spawns no AV in response. more specifically if the team is unlucky enough to not have someone who runs dedicated AV More specifically still if that team is unlucky enough to not use installations or free damage stacked rail tanks. Should vehicles take 1000% damage from small arms fire to compensate for that teams lack of preparedness? How does the enmy not spawning AV factor into a V vs AV discussion? My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Mary Sedillo Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 387	Posted - 2015.02.12 20:43:00 - [12] - Quote Ku Shala wrote: you are forgetting the current tanks are milita/basic when proto tanks return do you want it to take a whole team to destroy one should work like basic av can destroy basic tank with some challenge advanced av destroy basic tank with some effort proto av destroy basic tank with ease basic av destroy advanced tank with difficulty advanced av destroy advanced tank with some challenge proto av destroys advanced tank with some effort basic av destroy proto tank very difficult advanced av destroy proto tank with with difficulty proto av destroy proto tank with some challenge similar theory for all vehicles it cant take 3-4 players off the map to kill 1 vehicle that is very unfair/unbalanced at least with a 16 vs 16 match. 100 vs 100 would be a different story. I understand risk vs reward and that tanks are expensive but if it takes 4 av users to destroy 1 basic shield tank what happens when proto tanks are reintroduced? 4 shield tanks = win? should a hav, lav or dropship be able to one shot infantry if infantry cant 1 shot the pilot? Until we get advance and proto tanks, this thinking is NOT fine.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1527	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:33:00 - [13] - Quote What buffs to AV have you heard about? I haven't heard of any nor do I think any ate needed. Because, that's why.
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15732	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:37:00 - [14] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: What buffs to AV have you heard about? I haven't heard of any nor do I think any ate needed. In Spkrs thread about continual shield regen or whatever, rattati breaks down his personal experience vs tanks and shows at least a slight interest in buffing AV. Also, the HAV initiative calls for higher tier hulls, yet no word on when other vehicles will recieve similar treatment. Im just afraid he will buff AV to handle new tanks without giving other vehicles the same treatment for months on end. Ive been here long enough to know how this goes haha, as have you if im not mistaken My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7156	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:42:00 - [15] - Quote Mary Sedillo wrote: Ku Shala wrote: you are forgetting the current tanks are milita/basic when proto tanks return do you want it to take a whole team to destroy one should work like basic av can destroy basic tank with some challenge advanced av destroy basic tank with some effort proto av destroy basic tank with ease basic av destroy advanced tank with difficulty advanced av destroy advanced tank with some challenge proto av destroys advanced tank with some effort basic av destroy proto tank very difficult advanced av destroy proto tank with with difficulty proto av destroy proto tank with some challenge similar theory for all vehicles it cant take 3-4 players off the map to kill 1 vehicle that is very unfair/unbalanced at least with a 16 vs 16 match. 100 vs 100 would be a different story. I understand risk vs reward and that tanks are expensive but if it takes 4 av users to destroy 1 basic shield tank what happens when proto tanks are reintroduced? 4 shield tanks = win? should a hav, lav or dropship be able to one shot infantry if infantry cant 1 shot the pilot? Until we get advance and proto tanks, this thinking is NOT fine. and until we get the advanced and proto tanks, odds are AV is going to be on the backburner according to rattati. I'm doing preliminary work and have been helping him with the numbers. I also submitted a proposal for buffing the crap out of vehicles in general, so assuming I'm in it to make vehicles EZ mode tells me that you're sipping spkr4thedead's kool-aid. Stop it. That stuff ain't safe. Edit: Just understand that Proto tanks will be balanced with proto AV, ADV with ADV and STD with STD. No more of this sicas tanking better than a maddy BS AV
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15732	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:47:00 - [16] - Quote And that would be a welcome change, so long as balancing happens all at once. We can't balance basic vehicles as trash vs proto AV till we have proto vehicles of all types actually in the game My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Ku Shala UNITED MERCINARY AND PILOTS ALLIANCE 1253	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:53:00 - [17] - Quote correct me if im wrong but the higher level vehicles were removed to make balancing av easier? so the vehicles we have now must be treated as basic because that is what they are. balance them so they act as proto and that will leave the scale off centre and we have the same problems we had before they were removed. Its an unfortunate step that pilots will pay the price for. vehicles are similar to dropsuits, fit a basic suit with proto modules and passive skills and you have a suit that is similar to a proto suit that is where vehicles are now *-¦a+ó a+ú-Æa+äla+ä (CK-0 Specialist)* Caldari Loyalist Superior technology will privale.
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15732	Posted - 2015.02.12 21:58:00 - [18] - Quote Ku Shala wrote: correct me if im wrong but the higher level vehicles were removed to make balancing av easier? so the vehicles we have now must be treated as basic because that is what they are. balance them so they act as proto and that will leave the scale off centre and we have the same problems we had before they were removed. Its an unfortunate step that pilots will pay the price for. vehicles are similar to dropsuits, fit a basic suit with proto modules and passive skills and you have a suit that is similar to a proto suit that is where vehicles are now Or Keep it as is, and only roll out the new balance changes when ALL vehicles can be addressed at once, instead of creating a horrible AV vs v imbalance for possibly months on end My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 8681	Posted - 2015.02.13 03:32:00 - [19] - Quote Read thread title. Read author's name. Instantly knew what this was going to be about. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
DRT 99 Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 95	Posted - 2015.02.13 03:43:00 - [20] - Quote Mary Sedillo wrote: Don't buff the AV. They are FINE as is. They require coordination and that is FINE. It should NOT go back to Lone Wolf, Low-SP, AV'rs able to hold off entire tank groups. I have to coordinate to engage and disengage to survive. The other side needs to do the same. They should NOT expect to kill me every engagement and if you do so balance it that way, you need to cut the price MORE for our vehicles. Well, in this case it would only be reasonable that it takes 2 people to operate a HAV. 2 people to drive them off, 2 people to use them. Seems balanced, no?

DRT 99 Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 96	Posted - 2015.02.13 03:54:00 - [21] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Should vehicles take 1000% damage from small arms fire to compensate for that teams lack of preparedness? How does the enmy not spawning AV factor into a V vs AV discussion? Vehicles are already immune to most weapons in the game, and youre saying "Its their fault that they died to a vehicle because they werent pidgeonholing themselves into AV"
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15742	Posted - 2015.02.13 04:06:00 - [22] - Quote DRT 99 wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: Should vehicles take 1000% damage from small arms fire to compensate for that teams lack of preparedness? How does the enmy not spawning AV factor into a V vs AV discussion? Vehicles are already immune to most weapons in the game, and youre saying "Its their fault that they died to a vehicle because they werent pidgeonholing themselves into AV" And im saying, what do you want? Infantry only game? Sorry, thats not what it is. Im saying AV is a thing, and you need to live with it, or adjust your approach in battle accordingly. If no one wants to call in a sica with a rail and damage mods that costs exactly 0 Sp to deploy, then thats on your team. I just dont get what is you want is all. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
tritan abbattere DBAG CORE 38	Posted - 2015.02.13 04:33:00 - [23] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I see you seem to be considering more AV buffs to help handle tanks, which is all well and good, but I just wanted to make this into its own thread to highlight one obvious thing, just in case: Dropships (and LAVs) are not tanks. Any buff to anything other than PLC at this point will force dropships into obscurity. Right now, you live or die most of the time by literally one to two seconds. If you take any longer than that to properly respond to any given threat, you die. And, while frustrating, thats mostly ok. Go buffing AV without adjusting our hp to compensate (or return native resists) and we will lose that one to two second window, and die horrible deaths with little to no ability to react and survive. Heres an idea so your not changing HP but not screwing with LAVs and Drop Ships to much. tritan abbattere wrote: I was thinking for swarms you have the lock on time change based on the vehicle in question.. Kinda like the lock on system in EVE. Your swarm launcher has a Sensor strength and your vehicle Signature size. Dropships and LAVs could have this lowered while tanks have same lock on time. This could be another balancing factor for AV. Could even add Passive and active ewar to tanks to complement this system. Link to my quote I am the all mighty Tritan. Fear me for I am a MassHole
Michael Epic Bragian Order Amarr Empire 480	Posted - 2015.02.13 15:26:00 - [24] - Quote Look man....I was in 3 matches last night where the raspberry team called in THREE assault dropships, totally proto everything and shield hardeners and all they did was circle around the domination objective dropping ordinance. There were 4 players with swarms and myself and another guy with forges and not one dropship was blown up...every time they'd get hit, they'd fly so far up and out of range and shield boost and then come back down while the other two swarmed around. 4 swarm launchers and 2 forge guns couldn't take out even ONE of them...and you're saying wah don't buff AV it'll hurt dropshipssssssssss Seems to me like Dropships need to be dealt with like tanks...the vehicles in this game are overpowered x10, they were GOOD in 1.6 and now in Warlords 1.0, they're not as bad as Uprising 1.7/1.8 but they're still bad.
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15753	Posted - 2015.02.13 15:33:00 - [25] - Quote I think anti ahield AV needs to be introduced, so yes, I do feel that buffing AV without compensating will be a problem. Most people struggle with shield vehicles, then call for AV buffs, not realizing how much damage they currently do to armor. You cant fix AV imbalance till an effective anti shield option becomes available, and that only Rattat can help you with. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
tritan abbattere DBAG CORE 41	Posted - 2015.02.13 16:40:00 - [26] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I think anti ahield AV needs to be introduced, so yes, I do feel that buffing AV without compensating will be a problem. Most people struggle with shield vehicles, then call for AV buffs, not realizing how much damage they currently do to armor. You cant fix AV imbalance till an effective anti shield option becomes available, and that only Rattat can help you with. tachyon cannon for heavy amarr AV? Giant Beam Laser that fires for 1/10 of a second :D I am the all mighty Tritan. Fear me for I am a MassHole
Vesta Opalus T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K RISE of LEGION 423	Posted - 2015.02.13 18:26:00 - [27] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I see you seem to be considering more AV buffs to help handle tanks, which is all well and good, but I just wanted to make this into its own thread to highlight one obvious thing, just in case: Dropships (and LAVs) are not tanks. Any buff to anything other than PLC at this point will force dropships into obscurity. Right now, you live or die most of the time by literally one to two seconds. If you take any longer than that to properly respond to any given threat, you die. And, while frustrating, thats mostly ok. Go buffing AV without adjusting our hp to compensate (or return native resists) and we will lose that one to two second window, and die horrible deaths with little to no ability to react and survive. Agree, the balance on dropships (outside of some very specific fits for the python) is much more finely tuned and could easily be upset to completely destroy non-transport use. The problem out there today is not that AV is underpowered, its that tanks are overpowered. Specifically the Gunnlogi, I think the madruger is in a better place, but honestly I cant even tell since the field is absolutely 100% dominated by these chodes in Gunnlogi EHP fits. Nerf Gunnlogis first, see where balance is afterwards, and go from there. (Vehicle release is probably coming out well before any rebalancing happens, so Im not even sure these discussions matter )
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 766	Posted - 2015.02.13 18:50:00 - [28] - Quote Ku Shala wrote: I agree with your concern but since the vehicles currently are basic should they not be balanced as basic, being weak to stronger av? They're basic fitted with complex modules, Which are required to not get torn apart by a starter fit swarm launcher. How about you fit a 'basic' ads with all 'basic' mods and tell me how long you live once out of the red zone. I fly a Incubus occasionally with an mCRU taking up a slot. It can be downed (and has been many times) when just flying near an adv swarmer, because unless I'm going full speed, or have some terrain big enough to block the lock, all 3 rounds will land and I will have 0 health. the starter fit swarms would down this fit in 4... Would be nice to be able to fly something other than the afterburner ads without being downed by someone you can't see, firing something you can't see, from somewhere you can't see. When are invisible swarms going to get sorted?
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2908	Posted - 2015.02.13 18:51:00 - [29] - Quote Mary Sedillo wrote: Don't buff the AV. They are FINE as is. They require coordination and that is FINE. It should NOT go back to Lone Wolf, Low-SP, AV'rs able to hold off entire tank groups. I have to coordinate to engage and disengage to survive. The other side needs to do the same. They should NOT expect to kill me every engagement and if you do so balance it that way, you need to cut the price MORE for our vehicles. It still is lone wolf. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 2908	Posted - 2015.02.13 18:58:00 - [30] - Quote Ku Shala wrote: and pilots dont have that effect on infantry now? So tanks should have absolutely no anti infantry role at all? Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff



Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.