DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] HAV and SHAV Progression

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] HAV and SHAV Progression

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4972	Posted - 2015.02.17 06:00:00 - [1] - Quote Uhg 1 hardener limitation....I hate heavy handed stuff like that....oh well, time to get to work and break things. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4972	Posted - 2015.02.17 07:49:00 - [2] - Quote Rattati just a fair warning on something with the MBTs. They will come fit with small turrets with the resources in place to run them, as not to give them and advantage or disadvantage over SHAVs. That's fine. I think it's also important to allow players to swap the turret types out or some other type if they so chose. This much is good. However, if a Prototype MBT is fit with prototype small turrets, I will totally swap those smalls for Standards, in order to squeeze more resources out by freeing up some of the resources the proto smalls were using by replacing them with standards (which subsequently use less resources). Prevent me from doing this. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4972	Posted - 2015.02.17 08:27:00 - [3] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Rattati just a fair warning on something with the MBTs. They will come fit with small turrets with the resources in place to run them, as not to give them and advantage or disadvantage over SHAVs. That's fine. I think it's also important to allow players to swap the turret types out or some other type if they so chose. This much is good. However, if a Prototype MBT is fit with prototype small turrets, I will totally swap those smalls for Standards, in order to squeeze more resources out by freeing up some of the resources the proto smalls were using by replacing them with standards (which subsequently use less resources). Prevent me from doing this. They will all come with std turrets, even prototype and only get a fitting "bonus" equivalent to those. Good point though, but I had already "seen that coming" Good to hear, just wanted to make sure it had been thought of. Also looking over some fits for the MBTs and SHAVs...have you decided on how to handle the UHAV's defensive bonus? The reason I ask is that if it ends up being a significant resistance bonus, you may run into some issues with the Passive Armor Repairers if they are left as is. The base 30HP/s + 137HP/s armor repairer puts the Madrugar at 167HP per second. Since Passive reps effectively negate portions of incoming DPS, putting a heavy resistance on top of that is going to push the effective regen rate....very high. I'm concerned that the UHAV bonus, + a hardener + heavy passive reps will lead to HAVs that can basically negate large portions of incoming DPS to a point where they're nearly unkillable in typical situations. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4972	Posted - 2015.02.17 08:58:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I will be happy to entertain such theorycrafting, just like now, but in the future, when we have balanced HAV's and are trying to add UHAV's, using ProtoFits. Well try not to take it as an attempt to derail the thread, the reason I bring it up is because if the solution ultimately ends in a fundamental change to Armor Repairers, that is critical in the proper balance of the MBTs and SHAVs. I would hate to get the MBT's balanced, only to have to come back and reevaluate them again due to a core change in module function. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4975	Posted - 2015.02.17 19:03:00 - [5] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: 126 hp/s regen vs 305 regen and 4.5k armor, regens when shot at. shields don't regen under fire and don't have NOS. Or 167 hp/s armor regen with 2 armor plates. maddy will always win a blaster fight. Your edit: I was commenting on HAV's in general, Well, it makes sense that the Gallente would be better at using their own weapons in the close quarters combat, and Caldari would falter using the enemy turret in a range Caldari are not designed for. Regardless, I have serious concerns with regen rates in general. I think keeping the status quo where passive regeneration being the primary means of tanking, is going to self destruct in terms of design. Tanks really should have more HP, less regen, and move a bit slower if unmodded. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4975	Posted - 2015.02.17 19:30:00 - [6] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: duster 35000 wrote: 126 hp/s regen vs 305 regen and 4.5k armor, regens when shot at. shields don't regen under fire and don't have NOS. Or 167 hp/s armor regen with 2 armor plates. maddy will always win a blaster fight. Your edit: I was commenting on HAV's in general, Well, it makes sense that the Gallente would be better at using their own weapons in the close quarters combat, and Caldari would falter using the enemy turret in a range Caldari are not designed for. Regardless, I have serious concerns with regen rates in general. I think keeping the status quo where passive regeneration being the primary means of tanking, is going to self destruct in terms of design. Tanks really should have more HP, less regen, and move a bit slower if unmodded. Caldari and amarr are the cqc ones, having the most hp... So by that logic Gallente and Minmatar should be long range. Lemme know how that works out with a Blaster. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4977	Posted - 2015.02.17 20:05:00 - [7] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: shield tanks aren't going to become less hard to kill from what I'm seeing here. Shield tanks will be 100% easier to kill. Shield reps nerfed Shield damage unable to be mitigated by alternating hardeners or activating more than one. Shield EHP nerfed per engagement. How have shields not been nerfed? Just did a mockup fit for a Proto Gunnlogi No fitting modules were used 6228 Shields +40% Hardener 8719 Shield eHP 900 Armor 9619 Total eHP 49 + 4 seconds to fully regain shield eHP 90 seconds to fully regain armor eHP Proto Railgun Low can be fit with Fitting Modules or Ammo Caches Dropping the tier of Railgun/playing with fitting mods allows for more raw shield HP. Similarly with Proto Madrugar 1200 Shields 6035 Armor +25% Hardner 7546 Armor eHP 8746 Total eHP Proto Blaster Highs can be fit with fuel injector, damage mod, & scanner. Dropping tier of Blaster or utility mods allows for more raw armor HP. (18 + 6) 24 seconds to fully recharge shield eHP (18 + 11) 29 seconds to fully recharge shield eHP (from depleted) 36 seconds to fully regain armor eHP "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4978	Posted - 2015.02.17 21:12:00 - [8] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: Pokey, I think I have a better Cv.0 fit, but it's using CPU and PG upgrades: For 964 less shield eHP, it gains 1950 HP every 40s which is really great if the shield booster would never fail. There are some variants yeah. I really wish they would put Rattati's Shield Regulators in there, because those are going to be key for the Caldari MBT. If they use the same values as dropsuit regs, the Caldari MBT will be looking at a 1.8 second recharge delay which will actually allow it to rep in between volley's of AV damage. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4979	Posted - 2015.02.17 21:57:00 - [9] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: 3x assorted repairers 2x assorted plates basic railgun assorted nitros etc in highs Doc DDD. So OP he can fit 5 modules into 4 slots! "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.17 22:29:00 - [10] - Quote DarthJT5 wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Doc DDD wrote: 3x assorted repairers 2x assorted plates basic railgun assorted nitros etc in highs Doc DDD. So OP he can fit 5 modules into 4 slots! So go 3 reps and 1 plate, same outcome, was under assumption Maddy was 2/5 Not reallyly the same outcome dude. Any kind of alpha will destroy that fit. Around the same armor as the current Maddy, less shield, with around 300 hp/s. Missiles in the weak spot bro. Really the only thing that fit is good against would be Swarms and Blasters. High alpha weapons like Forge Guns, Rails, and Missiles tears apart low HP, high regen fits. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.17 22:41:00 - [11] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon] DarthJT5 wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Doc DDD wrote: 3x assorted repairers 2x assorted plates basic railgun assorted nitros etc in highs Doc DDD. So OP he can fit 5 modules into 4 slots! So go 3 reps and 1 plate, same outcome, was under assumption Maddy was 2/5 Not reallyly the same outcome dude. Any kind of alpha will destroy that fit. Around the same armor as the current Maddy, less shield, with around 300 hp/s. Missiles in the weak spot bro. Really the only thing that fit is good against would be Swarms and Blasters. High alpha weapons like Forge Guns, Rails, and Missiles tears apart low HP, high regen fits. I don't think you are following the conversation. The build is vs an isukone assault forge gun that hides behind a hill while the tank has similar cover.[/quote] So you're upset about a vehicle using a fit and cover to be successful and keep itself alive? I have issues with high passive armor repairs in general, but the whole "OMG TRIPLE STACKED VEHICLES PILOTED BY SLAYER LOGIS SHOOTING LOCK ON CLOAKY SWARM SCOUTS WITH RABBID BUTTCRAB PLASMA FORGE CANNONS OHHHMMMYYYGGAAAWWWWWWDDDDDDDD" mentality is getting a little old. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.18 00:23:00 - [12] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: The current reason the gallente tanks are little used is due to poor cpu and next to useless hardeners. As per the request of the AV community, instead of increasing efficiency of using one hardner and dramatically increasing stacking penalties, ratatti has decided to double nerf shields to promote ehp stacking and ensure any 2 swarmers can keep all vehicles trapped in the back of thier redline. Actually most people asked for requiring the Gunnlogi to fit a module to get it regen as high as it was, since its natural regen would outclass even the best armor repairer. the added effect at the time was shield pilots would need to swap a hardener for a recharger if they wanted to enjoy regen around 200hp/s. Obviously things are a bit different given the fact that there are more slots. Now I know some others have asked for it, but I've always been against the 1 Hardener limit, and instead advocated for a more uniform resistance model (ie both armor and shields closer to the 30%-35% range with an increase to shield base HP to compensate for the loss in resistance % per hardener. so that stacking them causes a less extreme jump in eHP. Passive Regen still needs to die in a fire, it's too hard to balance. Passive Regen should be slow to take light damage, active regen to temporarily rep through incoming DPS. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.18 01:02:00 - [13] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Not most people, just 3 people that spend more time posting on the forums then calling in a tank in- game. With one hardener, for 24 seconds shield hardners need the old 60% reduction, and armor tankers need the old 35 second 40% reduction. Again, the 4 second shield delay, depleted shield delay, and damage threshold was the trade off for not needing a module to start shield reps. If there is a low slot module introduced that triples shield reps and reduces repair delay to near zero seconds then there would be some parity. As it is proposed a shield tank with blaster VS an armor tank with blaster of equal skill will have the shield tank lose badly every time. Armor will rep through damage. Well when "most people" spend most time complaining about how much they hate everything rather than offering tangible solutions, those producing actual feedback are taken the most seriously. Also I've said, many times, that hardeners in general need to be redone on both fronts. Also note that I never said shield vehicles should need a module to start shield reps. I have no issue with them repping naturally without any modules needed. What I did have an issue with is the natural shield recharge outclassing even the best armor repairer with zero module investment...again, it leads to balance issues. And no, throwing more CPU at the Madrugar would not change this fact. And you're right, a CALDARI vehicle using a GALLENTE turret against a tanking style SPECIFICALLY designed to counter low sustained damage in a range which is not supposed to be well suited for a shield tanking style...you're going to lose. Working as intended. If you want to be a close range blaster sustained brawler, use a Gallente HAV. If you want longer range burst damage, use a Caldari HAV. It's not complicated. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.18 01:19:00 - [14] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: How would you have range and be able to kill infantry? Against non noob infantry the rail won't do mich, missiles are lol. Well, small turrets should be tuned to deal with infantry, that's kinda what they're there for. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.18 03:06:00 - [15] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: I've offered a tangible solution regarding hardners and hull parity about 20 times. Well I wasn't talking about you but if the shoe fits, feel free to lace that *** up and wear it. Doc DDD wrote: shield hardeners- 24 sec 60% Armor hardeners -35 sec 40% Cpu/pg buff to gallente vehicles. Introduce low slot shield module to bring shield reps over 200 hps and reduce recharge delay to near zero. So you just want to buff both hardeners but maintain the fact that shield hardeners still have a massive difference in percentage, thus maintaining the issue we currently have? Also, why exactly do we have a huge difference between armor and shield hardeners? They're nearly identical in EVE for a reason. And yeah........no vehicle should be passively repping at 200 hp/s constantly, armor or shield, especially with resistances. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.18 03:24:00 - [16] - Quote Um no, I cite EVE because it works in EVE, and it's not working right in Dust. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.18 04:23:00 - [17] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Pokey: So when you are done advocating all the vehicles being nerfed to behave like those in EVE, will you move on to nerfing all the infantry to behave like the ships in eve? Get rid of passive infantry armor and shield reps because Eve? Rebalanced suits once again so Ehp of all the races suits are exactly the same because Eve? Make sure a shield modules are required to have reps anywhere near armor levels because Eve? I don't even play Eve yet I am fairly certain armor reps are lower than shield reps in Eve yet you never bring that point up. Shouldn't armor levels be much much higher and armor reps much much lower because Eve? Or is it that you prefer the high reps in this completely different game. This is not Eve and we need to work with what we have so that people actually want to play. Doc, I'm not saying make the modules behave exactly like EVE, because you're right, it's not the same game. However, there IS a reason why they behave similarly in EVE, because large differences cause balance issues. My point is simply that I think they need to be more similar, but not necessarily identical. Also, as for how armor and shields work in EVE I'll try to give you a really simply explanation as not to get into the nitty gritty of it all. Shields do indeed regen constantly in EVE, but very VERY slowly, We're talking unmodded it takes upwards of 15 minutes for passive regen to completely recharge your shields. Even if you speed that time up for the sake of gameplay pace difference between Dust and EVE...you're looking at very long regen times in Dust. That being said, passive regen is very rarely used as the primary means of HP regeneration. The few cases where you do use passive regeneration, are typically on ships which have bonuses to push resistances very high, so you can focus most of your slots and modules on buffing the natural recharge very high. The high regen + high resists allows a 'Passive Shield Tank'. The typical sort of fit you'll seen for both armor and shield are active fits, which use either armor repairers or shield boosters to repair/recharge armor/shield quickly. Active modules. You then have two setups, Cap Stable, and Non-Cap Stable. Cap stable basically means that it can run constantly, and Non-Cap Stable means you have to pulse your repper/booster to deal with damage but are then forced to let your capacitor recharge before you can keep doing it.... So for Dust Passive Regen would be Cap Stable, and Active Regen would be Non-Cap Stable (I'm simplifying this greatly but thats the general idea.) Passive Regen is always slower than Active regen, typically by a fairly large margin. Truth be told, you'll rarely see viable Cap Stable (Passive) PvP fits because when you need HP, you need it NOW, not spread out over large periods of time. However, in Dust we have PASSIVE reps which perform at rates more similar to how ACTIVE reps should be behaving, because they need to be able to actually tank incoming DPS. The issue however is that because it's still repping even after the engagement at the same rate, which leads to a very frustrating gameplay of "If he gets away, he's going to be at full health and back here in 30 seconds" which is an understandable frustration from the AV perspective. As for how the Reppers perform against one another.... Shield Boosters use cap faster but also have higher regen rates. So in Dust terms, short duration, high regen/cycle Armor Repairers use cap slower but have slower regen rates. So in Dust terms, long duration, lower regen/cycle That being said I agree that shield vehicles with active modules should rep faster than armor repairers, but also be more moment to moment with spikes of regeneration, rather than the slower sustained burn of armor repairers. It is important to note however that the sustained HP per minute between the two does not differ that much, it's just a matter if you want it all in big chunks (shields) or more spread out (armor) As for how hardeners work..... Nearly identical in every way. They both offer 30% resistance typically and have very similar capacitor usage, so in Dust terms the duration/cooldown would be nearly identical. The reason for this is that eHP differences are tied to the modules with their respective downsides, but because hardeners are percentage based instead of absolute value, things quickly get ugly if they start to differ too much, even with stacking penalties. You begin to run into situations where the burst tank of the higher resist becomes so great that sustained tank of the other quickly becomes meaningless. In which we arrive at the issue we have in Dust right now...since one can simply burst tank through just about anything and then zip off to the redline to wait for cooldowns. I think the dichotomy of shields being slightly higher resist with shorter duration and longer cooldowns and armor being lower resist, longer duration, and shorter (relative) cooldown is a find concept....if not taken too far. The differences between the two are too great, and should be pushed closer to one another. Putting armor resist at 30% and maybe easing up on the Shield Hardeners duration/cooldown a bit would a good start....but I think maintaining a 15-20% difference between the two is going in the wrong direction. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4981	Posted - 2015.02.18 06:11:00 - [18] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Thank you for the Eve lesson, but it really shows how different the games operate. Short of both games having 'shields and armor' we should really work on making what we have now fair on both sides. ie, armor always has the advantage of a shield buffer, if shields tanks get down to its armor buffer it's game over with these new numbers. Well let me lay out a general sense of what I would like to see overall given some of the design points Rattati has laid out Shields Recharge Slowly, but naturally with recharge delay Armor Recharge even slower (not a huge fan of this but Rattati seems set on on it) Shield Recharge on Armor HAVs should be equally as low as armor repair on Shield HAVs Shield Boosters Boost for 5 seconds, High HP/s (Primary means of HP regeneration for most fits) Armor Repairers Repair for 15 seconds, Moderate HP/s (Primary means of HP regeneration for most fits) Shield Hardeners 40%, slightly better duration/cooldown than current Armor Hardeners 30%, same duration/cooldown as current Shield Rechargers, increase Natural shield recharge (High Slot) Shield Regulators, decrease shield recharge delay (Low Slot) Stable Armor Repairer, Low armor HP/s, constant recharge "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4982	Posted - 2015.02.18 08:23:00 - [19] - Quote Well back on topic, my general feel on the Madrugar. i wont get into the nitty gritty with the numbers, as I've made it pretty clear my thoughts on regen, hardeners, and the sort...so I'll focus on general fitting concepts. I really like how this is shaping up. I can fit a full rack of the utility mods I'd want to have on a Madrugar (Damage Mod, Scanner, and Nitro) while maintaining a full lineup of defenses (typically Hardener and 2 Plate + Repper or 1 Plate + 2 reppers). It's not the tankiest thing in the world...the Amarrian HAV will trump it easily with another low, but for a UtiliTank, it's looking really good. At standard level I like that I can fit the above fit with all Standard modules. It's a very tight fit but it's doable. At proto, you can't fit full main-rack defenses (typically you have to drop the 2 plates from Proto to Advanced to get the PG to fit) if you want a proto turret. Dropping the turret down a notch frees up a good chuck of resources, but even if all the utility modules are fixed at Standard, you can't upgrade those plates to Complex without exceeding the PG limit, so you would really only downgrade the turret if you wanted a better Nitro (Downgrading the turret to upgrade the damage mod is a poor choice, as the damage difference between turrets is +10% but the higher tiered damage mod only nets +5% additional.) As for the numbers, I'll at least look at a comparison between the typical old Maddy (which was way underpowered). The New Maddy will: Be slightly slower due to a second plate, but offset by addition of Nitro module. Have slightly higher eHP if Enhanced or Complex turret is used. Basic turrets will allow for a little more HP. More DPS output overall due to better turrets and a damage mod. Have enough CPU to run a really nice scanner on many fits which will help a lot in spotting threats in close quarters. Rep faster with the 30HP/s base armor repair rate Regenerate shields ~30% slower Overall fitting the Madrugar feels more enjoyable and more like it should be. It's an armor tank with good potential for utility and will be a very flexible. Aside from some minor tweaks here and there, it's looking really good. Note that I still think Hardeners and regen modules need to be looked at though, but that's for another thread. Any chance we can get the Protofit Bros to put your Vehicle Shield Regulators in there? I feel like I cant properly review the Gunnlogi until I can see them in there. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4983	Posted - 2015.02.18 18:59:00 - [20] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: This is both directed towards rattati and Pokey, where do the Assault dropships fit into this? Are they going to have the same modifications as tanks, in regards to shield/armor reps? Could we see dropships being given the same treatment as tanks? the ADS is listed as advanced, perhaps we can have pro dropships as well with an slightly improved slot layout? Perhaps 5-1 version of the Python and a 2-3 version of the incubus 3-2 Minmatar and a 1-5 Amarr? Paint over the skins, use the tank fitting template downgraded for dropships? On shields: Pythons that don't use a shield booster rely on high regen to get them back into the action. Incubi could use high burst regen sure, yet after giving it some though i'm not sure that only a 5% increase to armor hardeners may be suffecient. Moslty because minandos have 10+ prof 5 15% damage bonus before damage mods, I have some doubts that a 5% damage resistance really going to be enough as a defensive measure. I know its not meant to completley nullify incoming damage, but since fitting a hardener means droping hp, its a question of can i tank shots better with a brick or better with a hardener? Can that 5% make hardners a better fitting option? Or will the 30% + Active high regen make incubus balanced? Well I wont pretend to know much about dropships, but what i will say is that even light vehicles need to have enough time to get their active defenses online before being blapped out of existence. That being said I think it still applies in that active modules allow a vehicle to remain in a high DPS hot-zone for a short period of time or quickly recover from surprise damage in case of emergencies. Passive regeneration serves as maintenance to recover small amounts of HP constantly, so you don't have to waste your booster/repairer to recover small amounts of damage. Note that passive shield should be a bit faster than armor, as to compensate for its lack of constant regen. Cyrus Grevare wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Any chance we can get the Protofit Bros to put your Vehicle Shield Regulators in there? I feel like I cant properly review the Gunnlogi until I can see them in there. Sure, I can add things if Rattati gives me some numbers o7 And speaking about numbers, the only stats updated apart from hull names is PG/CPU, slots, armor regen, shield regen and armor/shield values. Other stats like speed or profiles, even cost, remained the same as the old base hull. At this point I don't know if they're to remain the same or not. Thank you and keep up the good work. I can't tell you how much Protofits makes my life much much easier. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4986	Posted - 2015.02.18 23:49:00 - [21] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: Please do not buff AV until after the tanks are out. Madrugars.and Gunnlogis costing half a mil already get outclassed when up against two AV if they are any good and coordinated. A proto tank costing millions should be worth such an isk investment. Sorta. Some AV is overperforming, some AV is underperforming. Same goes for some vehicles performing better than others. We need to get Shield and Armor vehicles balanced against each other, then get AV balanced against each other. Once they're balanced amongst themselves in a vacuum, you can "slide the bar" for AV up or down to properly match the vehicles. The first two steps can more or less be done on paper, but the last step really requires field testing to see where things land. Chances are Vehicle/AV balance will be a bit mucked up for a bit at that state, but that's just how things go when you don't have a test server. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4986	Posted - 2015.02.19 03:20:00 - [22] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: After conversing with a few folks I think the 10% per level fitting for engineering and electronics on the upgrades is far too generous, 1% 1% doesn't really feel rewarding in terms of a skill, particularly when the Infantry version is so much larger. 2% at a minimum, 5% at a maximum. 10% per level is absurd. If you're concerned about resource creep, balance the final intended fits around max skills. Or are you talking about buffing the bonus the module provides? In that case I ask...why different from infantry? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4991	Posted - 2015.02.19 06:58:00 - [23] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: After conversing with a few folks I think the 10% per level fitting for engineering and electronics on the upgrades is far too generous, 1% Why do you think 1% is enough an 10% too much? Please show your work, very little has been accepted here without numbers to back up "feelings" Frankly, 1% bonus for anything is absurd. There is a 1% skill on the Dropuit core skills, and i had a hard time justifying taking that to level 3. Well at the very least the Dropsuit Core skill buffs multiple stats at once, so the 1% feels a little more worth it. I don't have an issue with lower gain skills, but for something as core as Engineering and Electronics should feel substantial. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4993	Posted - 2015.02.19 20:17:00 - [24] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Minmando with damage mods gives a 3.6% benefit to alpha over a triple mod assault. The benefit is purely ppsychological. Edit: misquote because phone. If the bonus 'doesn't do anything' why keep it? The suit is being used for some kind of reason. http://wiki.dust514.info/index.php?title=Stacking_Penalties Triple modded assault is 18.04% (7, 6.08, 3.99, these are multiplicative) Base wiyrkomi dmg is 312, after 3mod assault it's 368.27~ Commando has an un penalized 10%, which makes that first mod a 17.7% dmg and the second dmg mod is penalized to 6.08. Total damage bonus is ~1.2485... A lot higher than the 3% you claim. Base wiyrkomi is 312, 2x modded minmando is 389.55 dmg... Before proficiency or the swarm actually doing 1.3x vs armor instead of the 1.2 its supposed to. 24.85 - 18.04 = 6.81 almost a full 7%, close to double the 3.6 you're claiming. So if this bonus "doesn't do anything" why don't we remove it? If you're opposed to it the bonus must clearly do something To be fair, the Gallente Commando offers a massive bonus to DPS (though through the reload bonus mainly) for the Plasma Cannon. I guess for me I've always considered the Commando to be the Light AV specialist, and given the downsides thy suffer from in general, the 10% damage bonus is pretty reasonable. To me it sounds like there is more an issue with the swarms themselves than the Commando, which in all other situations performs reasonably (if not a little underpowered) However....should this discussion not be moved to a different thread entirely? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4993	Posted - 2015.02.19 20:27:00 - [25] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: While the bonus to the plasma cannon might be incredibly significant that weapon is difficult to use. Swarms certainly have problems but part of the issues is with a single suit that so long as a bonus can and will throw numbers out of whack. Well to me that says that the issue more lies in the Swarm being too easy to use then. Because you're right, the Plasma cannon is difficult and risky to use, but with the right setup really kicks ass. I think a similar line of thinking could be applied to the swarms. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4993	Posted - 2015.02.19 23:11:00 - [26] - Quote Lets move the Commando discussion elsewhere, https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2634177 "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5001	Posted - 2015.02.20 17:50:00 - [27] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: 5. Thanks for breaking quite a few vehicle fits but this is also another bad idea and i shall explain why. PG/CPU modules are there to add variety to fits or to squeeze a bit more juice out so you can add something else or upgrade to a higher tier module. The shield vehicles would always benefit more from this due to having nothing worthwhile for shields in the low slots since PDS, nanofibers, damage mods etc removed or moved to a different slot hence why a few made the Gunnlogi to dual tank so they whack on an armor plate in the lows where as armor would be sacrificing tank. The Python is a prime example, i need a complex PG expansion unit on every fit and you adding a 200CPU penalty to it means it breaks every fit i have and i need to reduce all the modules to a lower tier and thus makes the PG module useless and not worth it. I believe Rattati's intention is to buff the resources of hulls such as the Python so that either the use of the PG expander is non-problematic, or unnecessary. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5001	Posted - 2015.02.20 17:56:00 - [28] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: 5. Thanks for breaking quite a few vehicle fits but this is also another bad idea and i shall explain why. PG/CPU modules are there to add variety to fits or to squeeze a bit more juice out so you can add something else or upgrade to a higher tier module. The shield vehicles would always benefit more from this due to having nothing worthwhile for shields in the low slots since PDS, nanofibers, damage mods etc removed or moved to a different slot hence why a few made the Gunnlogi to dual tank so they whack on an armor plate in the lows where as armor would be sacrificing tank. The Python is a prime example, i need a complex PG expansion unit on every fit and you adding a 200CPU penalty to it means it breaks every fit i have and i need to reduce all the modules to a lower tier and thus makes the PG module useless and not worth it. I believe Rattati's intention is to buff the resources of hulls such as the Python so that either the use of the PG expander is non-problematic, or unnecessary. So it essentially stays the same. Why buff Python fitting if the PG mod will just use more CPU? I imagine he will either give the Python more PG so you don't need the extender, or more CPU so you can run the extender to get the extra PG. Keep in mind we'll likely see a pass on Dropships as well as LAVs following the HAV rework. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5001	Posted - 2015.02.20 18:13:00 - [29] - Quote Well Im not defending the choice, but I imagine his train of thought is he was trying to avoid shield vehicles from having too many resources by always using their lows for that purpose. If anything if he goes this route, we really need more low slot modules that a shield pilot would find useful (and not armor plates). "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5005	Posted - 2015.02.20 18:33:00 - [30] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Well Im not defending the choice, but I imagine his train of thought is he was trying to avoid shield vehicles from having too many resources by always using their lows for that purpose. If anything if he goes this route, we really need more low slot modules that a shield pilot would find useful (and not armor plates). But its an option i should be allowed to have Back in the day we had low slot modules, dmg mods, nanofibres, power diagnostic systems etc and overnight its gone I can do the same in a Caldari suit and put extra CPU in the lows and not get punished for it Yes i can also put regulators in aswell but i might not want to and that is my choice but it is no reason to jack up the fitting requirements by a factor of 10 If he does go this route I can see that these modules will die a death and not be used because i dont think any vehicle will generally have enough to fit them and if you do stick in an armor module because its cheaper to fit and then what happens? Dual tanking is promoted again on the shield vehicle which i think we are trying to avoid I think of anything it should be more of an evaluation of the tradeoff you would be making. Currently we pretty much have crap for low slots that a shield tanker would want to fit (aside from resource enhancers). I think what we really need is players to be asking "Well I can have more PG, but I need to give up X in order to do so" by consuming that low slot. So whatever low slot modules they add, then need to be useful enough that using a PG/CPU extender is not a no-brainer idea....get what Im saying? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5006	Posted - 2015.02.20 18:53:00 - [31] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: You want a PG module to give you x% more PG for a tradeoff of something like -% CPU? Well that is an option I suppose but that's not what I was saying. Like....just as an example, Rattati is adding in Shield Regulators for vehicles. For a MBT (again just as an example), if he uses Infantry reg values, 2 regulators on a Caldari MBT would drop its recharge delay to ~1.8s which is actually pretty good. So for a Caldari MBT user, having those regs in the lows is a valuable thing, OR they can choose go with the longer recharge delay (due to not using the regs) in order to get more CPU/PG by using the Enhancers. I guess my point is that personally I don't mind shield vehicles making us of resource modules, but I would like there to be an equally attractive alternative they could use instead of PG/CPU mods, so there is actually a sort of tradeoff. Because right now, there's really not much going on for shield vehicles in the lows, so resource mods are often the clear and obvious choice. But you are right in that any sort of 'cost' for fitting them, if Rattati goes that direction, it needs to be percentage based. You can get away with absolute values for things like Heavy vs Light HP modules, but for generic modules like resource extenders, it needs to scale to the vehicle, so % based is the way to go. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5006	Posted - 2015.02.20 19:07:00 - [32] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Well the option that is posted is the worst kind of option since a module like that does not exist and i hope it doesn't What you mean is basically 'more options for low slots' so you dont have to fill it with resource modules unless you want to Many moons ago we did have more modules for low slots and they got taken away, i wouldn't be suprised if they were buried in the code somewhere but until then if i can improve my tank by using resource modules then i will do it Resource modules have always given PG/CPU by %, frankly i do not want to see them changed Well last I checked, putting regulators in was on Rattati's plan, which is why I used it as an example. And yes i would like the return of many of those old low slot modules. I miss my Nano fit vehicles. But yes, I want valuable low slot modules so there are more options besides more resources. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5023	Posted - 2015.02.21 04:47:00 - [33] - Quote Im very confused on how the "HAV and SHAV Progression" thread turned into "Lets talk about installations!" Rattati is going to come back from vacation and be like "Guys..." "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5039	Posted - 2015.02.22 21:44:00 - [34] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Uhg 1 hardener limitation....I hate heavy handed stuff like that....oh well, time to get to work and break things. Well, we can also make them worse or harder to fit. I just want to see how people will fit them with that restriction in mind. How about good old reliable stacking penalties??? We've always had stacking penalties on hardeners. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5040	Posted - 2015.02.22 23:02:00 - [35] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Specific kinds of hardeners? Low all round resistance hardeners vs powerful damage type specific ones? For example players might choose to stack say 20% hardeners and one explosive damage resistance modules that provides 35% against explosive weapons? I forget, in EVE do damage specific hardeners stack separately from omni-damage hardeners? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5041	Posted - 2015.02.23 19:36:00 - [36] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Uhg 1 hardener limitation....I hate heavy handed stuff like that....oh well, time to get to work and break things. Well, we can also make them worse or harder to fit. I just want to see how people will fit them with that restriction in mind. How about good old reliable stacking penalties??? We've always had stacking penalties on hardeners. Hence why we do not need a hard cap on hardeners The primary issue when we had the 3 slot system was that the Gunnlogi didn't need any modules to have very good regen, so they could fill their 'regen slot' with the second hardener. Had they required a module to get really good regen, the stacking of hardeners would have been non-issue. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5041	Posted - 2015.02.23 20:17:00 - [37] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: True Adamance wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: The primary issue when we had the 3 slot system was that the Gunnlogi didn't need any modules to have very good regen, so they could fill their 'regen slot' with the second hardener. Had they required a module to get really good regen, the stacking of hardeners would have been non-issue. They took away the regen module with the 1.7 vehicle rebalance. Also they removed 2 slots so less variety and more focus on defence and trying to limit the damage, boosters are still bugged and unreliable so the choice is hardeners and something else. CCP actions caused these problems, they were not a problem before 1.7 and any problems that were around were due to swarms and that the Gunnlogi was 2nd best due to 10sec hardeners. His inference was that the Gunnlogi could effectively have a rep/sec rate of 168 (higher than a single complex [with skills V] armour repairer) without having to fit a module at all. That gave it a huge edge over the Madrugar counter part since you could couple that rep rate with higher module based and natural resistances and higher total eHP's. It only has a rep/sec rate of 168 IF you are not taking damage. You do not get that rep rate immediately, you have to wait and pray that nothing hits you so essentially it is not there. The complex armor repairer at the time was 150 a sec i think before it got nerfed hard and also it worked all the time. I think the Gunnlogi should have a better regen than an armor vehicle, that's the tradeoff for the shield delay. The issue was that they also didn't need to fit a module to do it. A shield vehicle using a regen module should easily outrep an armor repairer. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5041	Posted - 2015.02.23 23:33:00 - [38] - Quote Not to mention if Rattati goes ahead and adds Regulators, 2 complex regs will drop the recharge delay to 1.8 seconds.....faster than most infantry AV weapons can refire. It'll be awesome. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5044	Posted - 2015.02.24 01:40:00 - [39] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Well I would continue to propose until boosters are fixed, regulators/rechargers are released and armor repairers become active, that shield recharge stats/ hardener stacking remain where they are currently. Unnecessary to double nerf one class when it's remaining modules are broken/ non-existent. Armor tanks got thier fittings buffed, all they really needed was for the hardener to be slightly buffed. I agree that Shield Boosters need to work under fire. I'm not sure what voodoo needs to happen behind the scenes to make this work, but it is problematic. I also have no issue with passive armor repairers, I see them as 'cap stable' modules but as such need to be much much lower...like 30-50HP/s for heavy reps. Active armor reps should be very powerful however. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5044	Posted - 2015.02.24 02:11:00 - [40] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Well I would continue to propose until boosters are fixed, regulators/rechargers are released and armor repairers become active, that shield recharge stats/ hardener stacking remain where they are currently. Unnecessary to double nerf one class when it's remaining modules are broken/ non-existent. Armor tanks got thier fittings buffed, all they really needed was for the hardener to be slightly buffed. I agree that Shield Boosters need to work under fire. I'm not sure what voodoo needs to happen behind the scenes to make this work, but it is problematic. I also have no issue with passive armor repairers, I see them as 'cap stable' modules but as such need to be much much lower...like 30-50HP/s for heavy reps. Active armor reps should be very powerful however. If complex heavy shield boosters repped 250 every half second over 5 seconds then, 2500 total, then they would work properly and be worth fitting. It's the single boost that gets disrupted with damage. If one 250 hp boost gets interrupted then there is plenty to follow. I am guessing armor should rep lower rates over a longer period. Well I'm not entirely opposed to a singular pulse of shield HP, and then another type that reps in smaller, multiple bursts over a 5 second period. Even in EVE you have types of shield boosters that work both ways more or less, and they each have their purposes. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5044	Posted - 2015.02.24 02:42:00 - [41] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Except one is loaded with specific charges that are consumed when used and have insanely long cool downs. Well sure but the rough equivalent in Dust would be similar to the Boosters we currently have. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5056	Posted - 2015.02.25 20:56:00 - [42] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Regardless speed is not generally my thing and likely won't be something I worry about until I can get my hands on an Amarrian HAV because it is coming. I dunno man. Put a nitro on an Amarrian HAV and you might actually see what a flying brick looks like. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5067	Posted - 2015.02.27 20:11:00 - [43] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: You are correct, spreadsheets assume spherical mercs in a vacuum, and thus aren't going to ever be where final balance is struck. But they are a great starting point to hammer into a correct shape through testing...and we as the Vehicle Operator/AV community should be focusing on the new stats, and looking for any issues that will come up through the course of normal game-play. It's true that we cannot predict everything, but we can get a pretty good idea based on our past experiences. Perfect description! I've never believed that you can figure out the solution on paper, as things work differently in the field than they do on paper often. But all these things go hand in hand, paper creates the shape, experience and practice hammers out the edges. Can't have one without the other. Love it. Completely correct. You can't predict everything with the numbers, but you do need to make sure things within their own category work correctly numerically, and then adjust accordingly through field testing grumbles about lack of test server For example AV TTK values are currently a mess and all over the place. Breakin did quite a bit of work to reign in the values and try to normalize the TTK so that all AV weapons are about equally effective in a general sense. Those values are set around a 10 second TTK. Personally I think this is pretty short, but as I've stated to him "As long as they all have the same TTK more or less, we'll deploy them with the 10 seconds and if field testing proves this to be too long or too short, we can adjust all of the AV weapons together because they're already balanced against one another, rather than trying to balance them all individually through field testing." If the numerical values are totally messed up, the amount of needed field testing and adjustment will be so much that it'll take forever to get it right. That's why you have to look at the numbers first and get things close, and then actually test it in the field and adjust accordingly. Think of it like star gazing, you typically use a map and a low zoom lens to get close to where you want to look in the sky. This would be the "Numbers Balance" phase. Then you use the really high powered lens to fine tune and really lock onto what you're looking for. This would be the "Field Testing" phase. Spkr4theDead wrote: When have tanks ever been OP? I dunno if you were around during early closed beta, but HAVs were nearly unkillable if fit properly. Only time I ever lost one was against an ambush of 4-5 forge guns, otherwise you could rep through basically anything and do it frequently. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5067	Posted - 2015.02.27 20:17:00 - [44] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Correction pokey. 13-16 second MINIMUM TTK. I'm erring on the side of advantage to tank versus solo AV. Ah you must have updated it from last time I looked at it. I'm more comfortable with 13-16 seconds, but we'll have to see how it plays out in testing. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5070	Posted - 2015.02.28 02:13:00 - [45] - Quote Yeah I'm really really iffy about the changes. At the very least if he goes this route, it should be a % cost and not absolute...otherwise its going to be impossible to balance them properly on smaller vehicles. I think the "cost" of fitting them needs to be more on an opportunity cost, and not so much a direct cost. If low slot modules are introduced that are REALLY nice to have, such as regulators, then it would mean more to fit PG/CPU mods because you're giving up that potential regulator (just as an example). "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5078	Posted - 2015.02.28 09:04:00 - [46] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: How is the maddy going to require more than 1 forge clip? 4k armor, or 4.5k, is still the same. Im not sure what fit you're using for your Madrugar but its obviously a bit different from mine. Complex Armor Hardener Complex Armor Repairer Enhanced 120mm Armor Plate Enhanced 120mm Armor Plate Basic Fuel Injector Enhanced Damage Mod Complex Scanner Proto Large Blaster 1200 Shield HP 5600 Armor HP 7000 Armor eHP (Hardened) That's quite a bit more than 4k-4.5k armor, are you only using one plate? Looks like 1 Complex Plate pushes you around 4.5k armor or so. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5078	Posted - 2015.02.28 09:11:00 - [47] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Overall I think the PG/CPU mods should be much less fitting intensive. As it stands using the mods we have currently on rattati's hulls? Unless I'm missing something it won't allow more than the addition of a forge gun shot worth of TTK overall. If I'm wrong tell me. I'm not seeing the current mods breaking rattati's hulls. Seriously can anyone use the current fitting mods in protofits to spike an HAV above 8k raw HP (before hardeners/reps)? If so, how and by how much? Well if you're looking for a fit thats actually viable, at least for a Madrugar (ie including a heavy armor rep) you can get 8677 Raw HP 1 Enhanced Heavy Shield Extender --Empty-- --Empty-- Complex Armor Hardener Basic Heavy Armor Repairer Complex 120mm Armor Plate Complex 120mm Armor Plate Basic Large Railgun 2207 Shield HP 6470 Armor HP 8677 Total HP If you downgrade your armor rep to a light armor rep, or downgrade the hardener, you might be able to squeeze more out. EDIT: Ok, if you downgrade your Hardener to Basic and your Repairer to a Light Basic Armor repper, you can fit this Complex Heavy Shield Extender Complex Light Shield Extender --Empty-- Basic Shield Hardener Basic Light Armor Repairer Complex 120mm Armor Plate Complex 120mm Armor Plate Basic Large Railgun 3005 Shield HP 6470 Armor HP 9475 Total HP So I mean...yeah that's a lot of HP, but you're only repping at 61.25 HP/s, which is a 105s total repair time which is....pretty ugly. Shields also recharge at 66HP/s which is a 45 second recharge + 13seconds depletion delay for a total of 58 seconds. So I mean yeah if you want a metric fuckton of HP you could fit it like that, but I wouldn't want to run a tank like that, not with that regen rate. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5084	Posted - 2015.02.28 18:24:00 - [48] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: 14,000 eHP is not enough for an "ultra heavy tank." They should start at 14,000 eHP, and increase from there. Rattati hinted at needing a laser strike to take them out. So unkillable unless a squad of six is working together and gets basically 1 shot at dropping a Laser Strike per match. I know it's not quite the same in PC, but you do realize that you would almost never die in pubs right? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5084	Posted - 2015.02.28 19:03:00 - [49] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: 14,000 eHP is not enough for an "ultra heavy tank." They should start at 14,000 eHP, and increase from there. Rattati hinted at needing a laser strike to take them out. So unkillable unless a squad of six is working together and gets basically 1 shot at dropping a Laser Strike per match. I know it's not quite the same in PC, but you do realize that you would almost never die in pubs right? I would love to play in the same pubs as you Pokey, I have a fit near 10k ehp currently that often pops in 4 seconds fully hardened. So excited to dump another 10 million sp into vehicles so i can tank that extra forge blast before the militia swarms pop me. Lol @ 1 Hardener. Tanks without nitro will be terrible unless they have over 20k ehp. Otherwise I will need to find whatever server you are on that only has one red berry that ever uses AV. Balancing tanks around ONE AV player crippling a tank with ONE clip is rediculous. Well you're assuming AV is staying the same, which it is not, so.... And I don't think a single AV player should be able to cripple a tank with one magazine, that is ridiculous. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5089	Posted - 2015.02.28 21:36:00 - [50] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Yes that would be ideal, guess I was hoping this was what we were heading towards... instead of just making 'fast tanks with low ehp' and 'slow tanks with slightly more ehp than we have now' while nerfing defenses and regen. See? Even we can agree on some things "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5097	Posted - 2015.03.01 07:03:00 - [51] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: I thought you disagreed with that statement? Which part? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5119	Posted - 2015.03.02 20:09:00 - [52] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: And this is why we've lost so many pilots. Those that don't use vehicles having the sole say in the direction vehicles go in. Unfortunately, it likely won't end. As it is, pilots aren't being listened to now. We're losing base HP on both hulls. That constitutes a nerf to vehicles, no matter what you want to say. Well spkr, if we listened to YOU, tanks would be unstoppable God-Engines. Fortunately, very few people share your opinions. I've never said that. I have said that AV should be a deterrent. Deterrent =/= useless. Can you possibly explain why tanks can't beat on tanks, with AV providing supplementary damage, rather than relegating a friendly tank to a mere distraction? Because a weapon that is incapable of killing the intended target is a worthless waste of resources and SP. Pretty much. I mean with a similar logic one could say "Well infantry weapons should be the primary means of killing infantry, and Turrets damage should just be supplementary damage to infantry" It has to flow both ways, if you want vehicles to be lethal to infantry, then infantry need to be lethal to vehicles. Similarly if you want infantry to simply be supplementary damage to vehicles, then vehicles should be supplementary damage to infantry. I don't think anyone particularly wants the latter option. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5119	Posted - 2015.03.02 20:56:00 - [53] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: True Adamance wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: So you want AV to be the main counter to vehicles, rather than vehicles countering vehicles. Got it He didn't say that only that AV should be capable of killing HAV in a meaningful manner.... y'know ....having actually talked to Breaking on the odd occasion when he hasn't called me a "nerd" instead of spewing vitriol at him..... Our Cannon are bigger and better than existing AV forms and should act like it. None of this rapid firing bullshit. Better? Swarms and forge don't glitch. Swarms don't require aim. Infantry is a smaller target and can take cover much easier than a tank. Also, a suit with PRO AV (doesn't have to be a PRO suit) is cheaper than a PRO turret by itself. AV is better than a vehicle in more ways than one. Citing a glitch as a downside is not a valid argument. Obviously glitches happen in the turrets and should be fixed, but they shouldn't be considered a "downside" to an asset as they are to be fixed eventually. Additionally you're leaving out many of the advantages that turrets (and the vehicles they are attached to) have over infantry in an attempt to make it look more one sided than it really is. For example the TTK of an infantry with a large turret is far shorter than an AV weapon attacking a vehicle in a direct confrontation. The AV's ability to readily use elevation and cover is a means to offset this advantage. Additionally as you stated, vehicles are very large and easy to hit compared to an infantryman, this is why they are capable of much higher movement speeds to help offset their larger target. Even if the AV chases the enemy HAV down in an LAV, they're incapable of doing appreciable damage before the HAV is out of weapon range again. I'm not saying the balance is quite right, but you're really only presenting half of the argument. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5120	Posted - 2015.03.02 22:13:00 - [54] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Ofc all this AV discussion is irrelevant to the topic of the thread itself... The proposed HAVs are almost good...both need a resource buff, and we need some utility for the lows (That way you can actually have the intended opportunity cost of fitting mods)...no change to the resource cost is necessary once the slot becomes competitive (Things like Overdrives, Regulators...even passive damage amps and the like for things for the low slot) Can we all agree that Damage Modules/ Weapons Utility Modules really should be low slot passives anyway. Not high slot actives. Do you think having both types (assuming both types receive stacking penalties appropriately) would be problematic? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5122	Posted - 2015.03.02 22:59:00 - [55] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: True Adamance wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Ofc all this AV discussion is irrelevant to the topic of the thread itself... The proposed HAVs are almost good...both need a resource buff, and we need some utility for the lows (That way you can actually have the intended opportunity cost of fitting mods)...no change to the resource cost is necessary once the slot becomes competitive (Things like Overdrives, Regulators...even passive damage amps and the like for things for the low slot) Can we all agree that Damage Modules/ Weapons Utility Modules really should be low slot passives anyway. Not high slot actives. Do you think having both types (assuming both types receive stacking penalties appropriately) would be problematic? Yes and no. I just rather enjoy the dynamic of Active Highs vs Passive Lows, that's largely what we've had in the past and the move away from it left our low slots largely starved for things to put in them. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5123	Posted - 2015.03.02 23:59:00 - [56] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Even if he's presenting half the argument, it's the half that is problematic. The return of splash damage on large rails is a good start. Fragmented large missile turrets should follow. The large blaster dispersion module also sounds interesting if it works and doesn't have an epic downtime. As it is now, AV has more advantages. Fair point, but I suppose what I was getting at is that if Turrets are to be lethal the infantry, then AV should be more than "supplementary damage". Obviously there are a number of factors to consider aside from simply aside from damage and defense, which is why this is such a difficult problem. However these are topics best left for other threads, lest be continue to derail the kitten out of this one. I believe it safe to say that AV will be seeing a balance pass of some sort, so it's more or less pointless to argue values at this stage, at least in this thread. So lets try to get back to the topic at hand, which is address the fittings of the vehicle, and not so much how it stacks against current AV. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5126	Posted - 2015.03.03 00:53:00 - [57] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: For example, I am making some rediculous marduk fits with shield extenders and shield hardeners with a nitro, 2 complex light armor repairers and 2 basic plates... proto blaster with 2 small basic rails... What inventive shield fits are there going to be? Extender Extender Extender Extender Hardener ammo expansion plate Again I think this comes full circle to the fact that passive regeneration is really the only true means of regaining HP. I mean sure you have boosters but they're difficult to fit a lot of the time, and they're more of a means to trigger passive regeneration than they are actively regenerating HP. That being said if your entire means to regain HP is in passive regen, and you have no means to improve that regen (rechargers for example) there is little reason to NOT max out eHP. Pretty much all of my Gunnlogi fits are 4 extenders and a hardener too because I have very little reason NOT to do that. We got more slots, but without new modules and restricting to a single hardener instead of addressing the issues with hardeners directly....I feel like in terms of freedom of fitting its 2 steps forward and 2 steps back. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5128	Posted - 2015.03.03 01:10:00 - [58] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: I don't know if my proto fits is bugged but I can't even fit 4 complex extenders and a complex hardener on a Gladius with a blaster and basic rails... nothing in the low slots.. Boosters take more pg than extenders and defiantly wouldn't fit, even if they weren't broken... I seem to recall having to fit PG/CPU modules to get it all to fit....though I know I wasn't putting a Blaster on it so that might some of the issue? Are you short on PG, CPU, or both? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5128	Posted - 2015.03.03 01:27:00 - [59] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: I don't know if my proto fits is bugged but I can't even fit 4 complex extenders and a complex hardener on a Gladius with a blaster and basic rails... nothing in the low slots.. Boosters take more pg than extenders and defiantly wouldn't fit, even if they weren't broken... How are shield users supposed to fit anything in the low slots other than ammo? Ok I just did a full complex 4Extender 1 Hardener fit on a SHAV. Even without a turret, you're pretty much maxed on PG (2573/2610) and thats with nothing in the lows. Now...if a fit should be full proto or not is an entirely different argument so I won't comment on that at this time, but at the very least the fitting between the Madrugar and Gunnlogi needs to be fair. I'm not sure how much you've played around with Madrugar fits but I'll lay out what I've experienced so far. Note that I've just been playing with the SHAVs specifically, but it shouldn't really matter for a MBT since they have effectively the same resources to work with. It's very difficult to fit full proto low slots. Typically I ended up with Complex Hardener, Complex Repairer, and x2 Enhanced 120mm Plates I fit a Prototype Large Blaster I was unable to fit all of my high slots with utility modules. Complex Scanner, Enhanced Damage Modifier, Basic Injector So again I'm not stating an opinion weather a proto tank should be able fit full proto or not, I'm simply stating what needs to happen with the Gunnlogi fitting if it is to be fair with the Madrugar fitting About half of its highs should be proto About half of its highs should be enhanced It should be able to fit utility mods in the lows (Ammo Cache doesn't count) that have an average tier of Enhanced Now this is....impossible to do since we don't have any low utility modules that aren't ammo caches, but I think it would fair to call Regulators (which from my understanding are still in the plan) "utility" modules. So assuming the Madrugar is the baseline I imagine a Gunnlogi would look something like this Complex Shield Hardener Complex Shield Extender Complex/Enhanced Shield Extender Enhanced Shield Extender Enhanced Shield Extender Enhanced Shield Regulator Enhanced Shield Regulator Prototype Turret (I'd say make it difficult to fit a Proto Blaster on a Gunnlogi, same with making it difficult to fit Missiles on a Madrugar. I'd put Rails right in the middle) "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5129	Posted - 2015.03.03 01:53:00 - [60] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Yeah so the marduk fit I made had 2500 shields with a complex hardner bumping that up to around 3600. It also had 4700 armor with 210 immediate reps per second. There is no shield fit with enhanced extenders and one hardener that is going to do anything but shoot rails from the redline. Stack those damage mods. Again this comes back to the fundamental issue that passive regen is basically the only thing we get. It puts WAY too much emphasis on eHP which is going to make shield extenders feel like they're not worth it next to plates. I mean without getting into a shouting match, I could see a situation where the shield HAV is capable of fitting full proto highs if it dedicates its utility slots to PG/CPU enhancers. That being said, a half complex half enhanced Gunnlogi with utilitiy in its low, still needs to remain viable if that similar setup on the Madrugar is also viable. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5132	Posted - 2015.03.03 02:13:00 - [61] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Yeah I can fit the armor tank proto hardener proto plate proto reps proto reps nitro scanner the shield tank would only be able to fit all proto if the cpu/pg nerf is scrapped or better yet, cpu pg is buffed. are the proto tanks rail fitting proposed bonus applied in proto fits? Not that it would give you much.. should almost apply to all turrets. Well if you're leaving slots empty, sure that'll obviously free up resources. But it's very difficult to fit full proto defenses on an armor HAV and still fill all of its slots. If a shield tank wants to leave its lows empty to fit full proto, that seems reasonable as well. Honestly I've always seen the use of CPU/PG enhancers (at least on dropsuits) as a "wasted" fit and really only use them if I'm doing something very specific/weird with the fit. I think an asset should be able to be fit properly without PG/CPU extenders. Now regardless of what defines "proper fit" it needs to be fair for all vehicles within the class. So you're right, if the Madrugar can fit full proto by leaving some slots empty, it seems reasonable that the Gunnlogi should be able to do the same. One thing you do need to look out for is the fact that main defense modules will almost always cost a lot more than a utility module, so the tradeoff can't always been seen as entirely equivalent. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5135	Posted - 2015.03.03 03:55:00 - [62] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: I think that the 'fitting all proto' balance is one way to look at it, the more important point should be that the all proto armor fits are looking much more effective than the all proto shield fits. At this time. At the same time you also don't want the PG/CPU modules to feel completely pointless because the base fitting gives you everything you could ever want, you know? It's a weird balance. Heres just a random thought....what if the natural regen of the Gunnlogi was dropped down, the option to fit a recharger to boost the passive regen up was introduced, and shield boosters were a bit easier to fit but more importantly cooled down far more quickly so they could be activated on a more regular basis. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5135	Posted - 2015.03.03 04:05:00 - [63] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Blegh You didn't like what you said? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5138	Posted - 2015.03.03 05:22:00 - [64] - Quote I didn't think it was that bad but ok "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5152	Posted - 2015.03.03 17:38:00 - [65] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Cpu/pg fitting optimization shouldn't be pointless to skill into on turrets either.. they are very sp expensive for little return. The problem Rattati is having is trying to make a Militia tank with 2 chips balanced against a tank with 50 million sp invested, when you can get some pretty crazy fits on these militia tanks thanks to bad game design. It's why teiricide doesn't work when you have TWO CHIPS THAT BYPASS THE WHOLE POINTS OF TEIRICIDE. Especially on a vehicle that has 2 pointless low slots, that you either stick armor plates or mod chips in. Would make more sense to have PROTO hull cpu and pg levels significantly higher so you don't need a chip and can put a recharger in your low. As I've said before, reducing natural regen shouldn't happen until a recharger is introduced forthe low slots that is not cpu/pg hungry, and increases recharge rate significantly- ie over 200 hps - due to the delay penalty. Shield boosters would also have to be worth fitting - ie far less pg, larger boost over longer time (complex large 2500 shields over 5 seconds) then the cooldown can remain as long as it is.. right now its better just to fit an extender or light booster. Also hardeners should stack with appropriate penalties. Yeah the whole fitting optimization thing is nice and all but I think the original +5%PG/CPU skills felt more rewarding, you know? As for Militia HAVs, hopefully this reduction in base HP will help bring them into a more reasonable position by forcing them to use decent modules to accomplish anything against a proper HAV. As for regen, I dunno if you saw my other thread but assuming everything is kept as proposed but you reduce the Complex Heavy Shield Booster from 40 second cooldown to a 25 second cooldown, after skills it's a 18.75s cooldown. At 1950 HP that works out to about 104HP/s over that total cooldown (obviously it hits all at once opposed to constant regen) on top of your 126HP/s natural regen, you're looking at 230HP/s effective recharge. Pair that with a couple of Regulators and you're looking at a 1.8-2.0 second delay and the ability to regen nearly 2000HP every 19 seconds when you want to. So you end up with like ~35% more effective regen but its obviously a much more burst taking style instead of constant regen, but I think you could find some nice uses for it, and would perhaps break up the need for nothing but buffer. And yeah obviously Boosters would need to be fixed so they perform properly and are much easier to fit. Obviously I'd like a proper rework of the regen system in general but if only minor tweaks to existing modules are going to happen, I think decreasing that booster cooldown would go a long way to give shield HAVs a more active fitting option. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5155	Posted - 2015.03.03 21:21:00 - [66] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: LudiKure ninda wrote: Solution is simple,.. If you dont drive tanks or ADS you can fck off from this thread. Never gonna happen. Of course it won't happen, because despite you not using vehicles, you still believe with absolute conviction that you know what's best for vehicles, and not those that actually use them, and use them often. I've confirmed that Breakin has actually Piloted vehicles of all kinds (well, not sure about a ADS). Also, he is on the receiving end of a HAV a lot. AND He is saying that on a balanced field (ex. PROTO to PROTO), iirc will take at least iirc 13-16 seconds for the TTK for AV, which is ample time to escape, at least that's what he feels is balanced, in which I agree. You can stop berating his motives and his character, and instead focus on what he is saying. You are acting like racists act. Instead of judging people on what they do and say, you simply are quick to turn whatever they say down, simply because you believe them to be inferior to you. That is silly. Stop it. Also bear in mind that 13-16 seconds is under optimal conditions for the AV user, in practice it'll probably be a bit longer. I think its a good starting point, but obviously you really have to field test that ** to see if that time frame makes sense. Not everything can be decided on paper. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5157	Posted - 2015.03.03 23:53:00 - [67] - Quote True Adamance wrote: LudiKure ninda wrote: When you point turrent at someone it says what suit they have,..look at pyrex bottom screen and your see that all suits are MLT. And yeah I agree that 3 fully specced minmandos could take out MHAV Ah.... I didn't consider that. Thanks for reminding me of that little bit of info I can use in future. It actually highlights a fair point some tankers bring up that back when that was recorded [Chromosome I believe] most of the community didn't have the SP for proper AV and didn't appreciate its role. At time's I'm not even sure Marauders were or would be in this climate over powered.....especially considering how slow tanks used to be and how active pilots had to be in their operation. Pretty much. I miss the days where it took experience to properly maintain your modules and cycle them constantly. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5160	Posted - 2015.03.04 01:21:00 - [68] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: So do I. Sooner or later EVERYONE makes mistakes during a battle. I think back then Hardeners were all 25-30% but you almost always had 2-3 of them at a time. Sometimes you had to have multiples on at the same time to stay alive which then left you all that much more vulnerable later on. The gameplay felt so much more dynamic back then because not only did we have flexibility of fitting, but also flexibility of how each person played. I remember rolling up on guys that would pop all 3 hardeners at once and be basically impossible to damage for 20 seconds as I desperately tried to stay alive long enough for his hardeners to fail and I could wipe him out.....good times. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5161	Posted - 2015.03.04 02:52:00 - [69] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Well, it is. remember, phase 3 Phase 3? Actually Phase 2 https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2583382#post2583382 "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5163	Posted - 2015.03.04 03:19:00 - [70] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: True Adamance wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Well, it is. remember, phase 3 Phase 3? Actually Phase 2 https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2583382#post2583382 Not sure this placates me. shrugs In function at the least, but I know the roleplaying part is important to you. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5197	Posted - 2015.03.05 07:19:00 - [71] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: No single hardener rule No PG/CPU upgrade debuff (increased fitting costs as previously discussed) stay posted Good to hear. I think hardeners on both sides need to be tweaked a bit to get them working properly. Looking forward to your thoughts in general. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

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.