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)
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17169	Posted - 2015.02.17 08:56:00 - [1] - Quote Well just when I thought we'd avoid the native reps..... you just tossed them in there and buggered it all up. Honestly CCP Rattati in terms of vehicle I think if they want Armour Reps they should have to FIT armour reps. None of this passive bullcrap. If Armour vehicles want better than worthless (and I hope you drastically reduced the shield stats on armour vehicles) shield regen values we should have to FIT FOR THEM! "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17170	Posted - 2015.02.17 09:08:00 - [2] - Quote Also I don't know if I am doing this right but it seems like I can make an 8400 Shield Proto Tank before hardeners...... Comparatively when I tried the Min Max the "Marduk"..... I could manage a very modest raw HP value. Gotta admit though the Marduk is looking pretty decent with a 3 high slot set up. Can get my Damage Mods, Nitrous, and Scanners in there plus a decent armour tank. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17170	Posted - 2015.02.17 09:24:00 - [3] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: I'm really liking my Marduk but True is making me nervous about this god shield tank with 8000+ shields. My measly 2700 413 hp/s Marduk with 25% resistance probably couldn't survive that. I'm pretty sure I'm supposed to fit turrets. If that's the case then it would be 8400 shielding...... but still..... "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17170	Posted - 2015.02.17 09:42:00 - [4] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: I'm really liking my Marduk but True is making me nervous about this god shield tank with 8000+ shields. My measly 2700 413 hp/s Marduk with 25% resistance probably couldn't survive that. I'm pretty sure I'm supposed to fit turrets. If that's the case then it would be 8400 shielding...... but still..... I'm a little worried about the speed too. Are Caldari tanks still going to have faster acceleration over madrugars? I'm sure they aren't but if they do, the Gallente HAV having 3 more m/s over the Caldari isn't going to cut it. With my Gallente HAV fit speed and repair is key to it's success so if the Caldari still has its lightning fast acceleration and rail/missile turret turn speed that's a insta kill for this suit. Of course this is just keeping the Gallente mantra in mind with fittings. Okay going on record to say I read the Protofits statistics wrongly. The Shield value of my Proto HAV is 7500 and 900 Armour. This included 4x Heavy Complex Shield Extenders and 1x Complex Hardener, a PG upgrade, and a Railgun Ammunition Expansion Unit. 80Gj Particle Cannon, 2x 29Gj Railguns with those values I theoretically depending on what is done with the Shield Hardener could have somewhere between 9750 (assuming 30%) and 10500 Shield eHP. That's not over the top per se..... but it leaves a lot of be desired of the Gk.0 Marduk's from where I am sitting right now. Also I think I estimated a full passive regen of all eHP should take about 90 seconds now that the passive stuff is in place (I beg you please don't do this) with the armour in this fit taking 90 seconds to regenerate and the shields taking 60 seconds. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17170	Posted - 2015.02.17 09:44:00 - [5] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: great work. I like limiting active harderners A preliminary concern is that the CV.0 now has limited fitting options compared to the GV.0 . As in the frist few fits i've tried i always need a pg or cpu enhancer to get above three complex HP modules and a proto missile turret. The GV.0, can fit near everything complex with an ion turret. Would like to see other fits before i pass any real judgment, i'm not a PG/CPU numbers type of guy. I don't know about you but I'm able to fit a XT-201 and 4x Complex Extenders with an Advanced Hardener pretty easily. What is your fit? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17170	Posted - 2015.02.17 09:55:00 - [6] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: great work. I like limiting active harderners A preliminary concern is that the CV.0 now has limited fitting options compared to the GV.0 . As in the frist few fits i've tried i always need a pg or cpu enhancer to get above three complex HP modules and a proto missile turret. The GV.0, can fit near everything complex with an ion turret. Would like to see other fits before i pass any real judgment, i'm not a PG/CPU numbers type of guy. I don't know about you but I'm able to fit a XT-201 and 4x Complex Extenders with an Advanced Hardener pretty easily. What is your fit? 2 complex extenders Complex hardener Enh heavy Shield booster enh damage mod XTs complex PG upgrade and thats it. Protofits is buggin out for me, so if you can verify i'd be much obliged. I seem to be able to fit that quite comfortably. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17171	Posted - 2015.02.17 10:03:00 - [7] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tesfa Alem wrote: great work. I like limiting active harderners A preliminary concern is that the CV.0 now has limited fitting options compared to the GV.0 . As in the frist few fits i've tried i always need a pg or cpu enhancer to get above three complex HP modules and a proto missile turret. The GV.0, can fit near everything complex with an ion turret. Would like to see other fits before i pass any real judgment, i'm not a PG/CPU numbers type of guy. I don't know about you but I'm able to fit a XT-201 and 4x Complex Extenders with an Advanced Hardener pretty easily. What is your fit? 2 complex extenders Complex hardener Enh heavy Shield booster enh damage mod XTs complex PG upgrade and thats it. Protofits is buggin out for me, so if you can verify i'd be much obliged. I seem to be able to fit that quite comfortably. That looks like a pretty nice fit. I could probably tier up further. EDIT: Yes it seems currently on my Protofits that I can fit a Complex Shield Booster as well. Please take into account my comments of PG and CPU mods. They will cost heftily in the opposite direction. Apologies. Is it possible to add these into the Protofits library so we can play around with them? Right now it just makes it look like I can have all the fruit in the basket including that red apple for no cost. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17172	Posted - 2015.02.17 10:21:00 - [8] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: http://www.protofits.com/fittings/shared/136/11751 I don't like the trend this is going. Tanks seem to be trending toward repair fitting where they need to be buffer fit. When repair oriented, they take damage and come back moments later; even ignoring them for 5s and all you've done to them is repaired. Buffer fits force the pilot to choose between staying and finishing off threats (and having to take more time to repair) or to fall back and try something else. It also increases TTK for high alpha weapons, providing more interesting engagements. Not to mention that this severely favors armor fits over shield. I know they need a buff but let's strive for balance. I mean seriously that thing reps from zero in 15s... Also, I hope you introduce AV small missile turrets with this iteration as well as a buff to small rails, because, as you claim, if ADSs are supposed to be a counter to tanks, they'll need it. Not sure I'm convinced of that yet. Neither tank however interests me greatly though the Caldari HAV still seems to be my go to choice this build even though I despise shield tanking. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17176	Posted - 2015.02.18 06:29:00 - [9] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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 Honestly tanks in Dust should operate more like ships in EVE.... None of this arcade passive regeneration bullshit. None of these lame ass disparities between certain kinds of hardener, etc. I'm just horribly despondent that CCP Rattati is doing what he can without back up from his company. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17177	Posted - 2015.02.18 08:43:00 - [10] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. We won't know until we drive them. I can theory craft with the best..... but I wouldn't mind field testing. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17190	Posted - 2015.02.20 22:58:00 - [11] - Quote THUNDERGROOVE wrote: Balistyc Farshot wrote: Four - Installations need to be buffed so that tanks fear them. Sorry tankers, but the installations can't move, are usually poorly placed and can't be replaced by calling in a new one. These installations need to be useful again if you are buffing tanks like this it will be a race to blow these up for the free WP. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a tanker rage at blue berries hacked turrets. I will leave that one for another thread, but something to consider with new tank hulls. No. Never. Turrets need to just be removed, at least the ones in the redline. If WP are your concern just reduce the WP pay out for doing so that farming them is not worth the time or the risk. Or ask Rattati for a turret reinforcement timer model that means tanks can immobilise them but never destroy them. That way everyone gets more WP. Tanks for destroying and infantry for rehacking once they are reset to neutral ownership. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17199	Posted - 2015.02.22 22:10:00 - [12] - Quote 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. 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? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17199	Posted - 2015.02.22 23:16:00 - [13] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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 is something I'm not aware of. I know the passive players have issues with stacking.....but not active hardeners since I never use them. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17200	Posted - 2015.02.23 00:32:00 - [14] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: 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 is something I'm not aware of. I know the passive players have issues with stacking.....but not active hardeners since I never use them. Why don't you use active? Not possible to fit on my ships. I use either a speed tanked Slicer or smaller ships like the Tormentor/Coercer. (the former being passive tanked for a really nice allotment of eHP for Scrambrawling, the latter actually being Shield Tanked to allow for increased DPS and range in fleet ops). "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17201	Posted - 2015.02.23 01:11:00 - [15] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: If I played eve I would use caldari and a active hardener. Depending on your fit that would be a good idea. However we're getting off topic. So in this instance is it plausible to keep multiple hardeners in use without the heavy handed arbitrary limit and allow players to specifically stack resistance vs certain damage type or combine the aforementioned hardeners with Omni Hardeners for some middle ground. E.G- I am fitting a Gladius. Lets assume I have the following natural resistances. Expl- -20% Kinetic- -10% Heat- +10% EM- +20% I fit two Hardeners. 1x Omni-Damage Shield Hardener (-25% to all damage types) and 1x EM Ward Screen Shield Thingamywhassit (-40% damage to EM damage) this is because I know I am weakest against EM damage and am moderate against all other damage types. Now I do not have ridiculous damage resistance values against any one weapon BARRING the ones I've specifically invested ISK, SP, and Slot into fitting. When active my profile looks like Expl- -40% Kinetic- -30% Heat- -10% EM- -37.5% (-40% modified by stacking penalties) "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17212	Posted - 2015.02.23 08:55:00 - [16] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: THUNDERGROOVE wrote: I feel the better course of action is to remove damage profiles for vehicles entirely until we can get more variation in AV. Cough, Cough, add variation. Thermal Swarm Missiles (Hybrid Plasma damage profile) Laser "Forge" Gun (Laser damage profile) have it be a beam that you have to keep on to deal the full damage. It should still be charged shot. At least until we can get actual weapons in the game but with missiles there should be a damage profile for everyone really. Kinetic Swarm Missile Launcher which uses sheer kinetic force to deal damage. It would be the most accurate, longest range and fastest missile (Hybrid Rail Profile) Swarm Missile Launcher with Thermal Warhead (Hybrid Plasma Profile) Swarm Missiles with Explosive Warhead (Explosive Profile) Swarm Missiles with Electromagnetic warheads Eh..... really you'd put that kind of douchey ass anti everything power in the hands of a Caldari Kirk? What kind of Gallentean are you? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17216	Posted - 2015.02.23 19:52:00 - [17] - Quote 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. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17216	Posted - 2015.02.23 20:31:00 - [18] - 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. The 4 second delay was incredibly manageable. In many respects too easy to manage for the prolific nature of the reps that did not require a module. I've basically be using the two common Gunnlogi fits since their inception.....half the reason the 5300 one works as well as it does is that it has enough hardened and unhardened tank to survive until you could get your shield regen to kick in. It was basically a passive tank for all intents and purposes but with significantly higher rep values than it should have had. I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest that a passive shield rep rate take 90 seconds without imput from boosters. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17228	Posted - 2015.02.24 00:21:00 - [19] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: With boosters being broken for all intents and purposes, both in functionality and extreme cpu/pg costs, all the shield tank has is passive reps. With the hardener nerf and recharge rate nerf (double gunlogi nerf), if low slot shield rechargers/regulators are not released alongside a fix tto shield boosters, then armor repairers are going to have a huge advantage everywhere on the map. One armor repair module with bonuses will rep 500 damage before a shield starts repping at all, that's if the shields don't take any damage past their threshold, which they more than likely will with only one hardener. The armor tank reps damage while taking damage. All shield tanks have are one level of unalterable shield recharge. Those are now being nerfed by 20% while hardner stacking (which armor tanks don't do ) is also being nerfed. Seems a little too aggressive during these changes, would make more sense to try out the new fits with current recharge/hardener values in battle to see if there is need for improvement. Otherwise it's just going to be shield tanks in the redline while armor tanks nitro around repping instantaneously. But you are not considering that those reps were nothing to do with anything I fitted. So while an Armour tank might have been able to rep 500 armour between when its repair start and my regen start that Madrugar consumed PG and CPU to fit that as well as a low slot that could have been reserved for another module. So in terms of contemporary fittings where the Madrugar is forced to fit at least one repair module to keep it functional on the battlefield and Gunnlogi never did since it was always taken for granted that those shield values would passively repair after a set amount of time essentially cementing the value of a high eHP tank using hardeners and extenders in a situation it was undeserving of. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17228	Posted - 2015.02.24 00:53:00 - [20] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. If the regulators are also rechargers, otherwise the proposed rate will still underperform with one hardener limitation as the shield tank will need to find cover to start repping. If it needs cover then pilots will end up stacking armor plates to ensure they make it to cover in the first place. Basically shields will rep under 1000 hp between Missile volleys if they don't take any damage in between, and 120 damage between rail blasts if one shot misses. I'll take the armor plate thanks. You are not supposed to passively for any reason repair a significant amount of HP during Large Turret reloads. Prolific regeneration is the sole domain of active modules. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17228	Posted - 2015.02.24 01:11:00 - [21] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: True Adamance wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. If the regulators are also rechargers, otherwise the proposed rate will still underperform with one hardener limitation as the shield tank will need to find cover to start repping. If it needs cover then pilots will end up stacking armor plates to ensure they make it to cover in the first place. Basically shields will rep under 1000 hp between Missile volleys if they don't take any damage in between, and 120 damage between rail blasts if one shot misses. I'll take the armor plate thanks. You are not supposed to passively for any reason repair a significant amount of HP during Large Turret reloads. Prolific regeneration is the sole domain of active modules. That would mean armor repairers need a nerf to become active to follow suit. Boosters would need to be fixed to repair damage under fire and cost less cpu/pg. And instead of regulators on my shield tank it will still make more sense to fit a plate. Yup Passive Armour reps need to die in a fire. Ideally the conflict between shield and armour mods should be intense enough that fitting both is less valuable than fitting on single tank type. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17230	Posted - 2015.02.24 02:23:00 - [22] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. Except one is loaded with specific charges that are consumed when used and have insanely long cool downs. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17230	Posted - 2015.02.24 02:55:00 - [23] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. Y'know one day I dream of having to load tanks with Ancillary Charges, Ammunition, Flares or ECM Scripts, Cap Boosters..... etc So that tanks actually function like terrestrial EVE ship counterparts "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17248	Posted - 2015.02.25 00:53:00 - [24] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: duster 35000 wrote: A gunlogi with nitro is worse than a maddy with nitro. REALLY! That's a new one. Guess that speed is too much to handle for most tankers. Must be a top tier tanker thing. THE ARROGANCE IS OVER 9000! "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17277	Posted - 2015.02.25 19:52:00 - [25] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: duster 35000 wrote: A gunlogi with nitro is worse than a maddy with nitro. REALLY! That's a new one. Guess that speed is too much to handle for most tankers. Must be a top tier tanker thing. THE ARROGANCE IS OVER 9000! Naw, WAY higher than that! But anyways, you aren't "sacrificing" anything when you fit a nitro. Used properly, it works just like any other defensive module would work. Too many people get caught up in this idea that HP and Defense are the only way to go. Speed is key in engagements. It comes down to fitting either an extender, booster, or nitro. All viable options, with the latter booster and nitro being a bit stronger in my opinion for staying power. This is of course using double hardeners. That way you can stack some armor for a bit added D. Don't knock it til you try it. I've noticed a lot of PC players using it, in addition to the booster over a nitro. My high defense fits couldn't stack up which is why I was forced to adapt. Speed is key, can't kill it if you can't hit it. Don't get stuck in the box, step out every now and again. It's more or less how I imagine a Dhav would work. That..... response.....was actually in no way as antagonistic as I thought it would be. I have used it by I'm not a fan of light tanks or haven't been since Uprising 1.4. Apologies for the earlier comment. 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. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17281	Posted - 2015.02.25 21:28:00 - [26] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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's the plan if they ever get put in the game. Oh how I fantasise over that beautiful tank. - Rolled Homogeneous Tungsten Carbide Armour - 180mm Graphene Layered Armour Plates - Reduced Antimatter Reactor Systems - Modified Tesserect Capacitor Resevoirs - Dual Focused Pulse Lasers - LADAR ECM Modules ((According to CCP Falcon Amarr use this stuff on ships.... I'd assume they used similar tech on their ridiculously supped up vehicles) Dribbles a bit.... "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17288	Posted - 2015.02.26 00:52:00 - [27] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: 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's the plan if they ever get put in the game. Oh how I fantasise over that beautiful tank. - Rolled Homogeneous Tungsten Carbide Armour - 180mm Graphene Layered Armour Plates - Reduced Antimatter Reactor Systems - Modified Tesserect Capacitor Resevoirs - Dual Focused Pulse Lasers - LADAR ECM Modules ((According to CCP Falcon Amarr use this stuff on ships.... I'd assume they used similar tech on their ridiculously supped up vehicles) Dribbles a bit.... Carbide armor? This is apparently what the Amarr use. At the same time this is also what modern KE penetrator rounds are made/tipped with. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17311	Posted - 2015.02.26 21:06:00 - [28] - Quote In regards to the above post I noted you said something that is very insightful. Tebu Gan wrote: I basically took my current 3 slot layout on my high slot modules I use currently and built out from there. Keep in mind none of these use the new "HAV" tanks as these are not going to be used in the competitive PC environment that. In fact, something to note, gunners tanks (those using smalls) in any iteration will more than likely NEVER be used in PC. That's what I call a Pub Scrub tank:) This I feel is a fundamental design flaw that Rattati is pursuing in the SHAV. An HAV should NEVER be a tool that rewards the selfish solo player mind set. It should always require the fitting of small turrets. Rather than looking for a quick fix solution it would be better to pursue squad and pilot seat locks. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17318	Posted - 2015.02.26 22:10:00 - [29] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: True Adamance wrote: In regards to the above post I noted you said something that is very insightful. Tebu Gan wrote: I basically took my current 3 slot layout on my high slot modules I use currently and built out from there. Keep in mind none of these use the new "HAV" tanks as these are not going to be used in the competitive PC environment that. In fact, something to note, gunners tanks (those using smalls) in any iteration will more than likely NEVER be used in PC. That's what I call a Pub Scrub tank:) This I feel is a fundamental design flaw that Rattati is pursuing in the SHAV. An HAV should NEVER be a tool that rewards the selfish solo player mind set. It should always require the fitting of small turrets. Rather than looking for a quick fix solution it would be better to pursue squad and pilot seat locks. Nothing "selfish" about it. Fact of the matter is that a 3 seater tank will NEVER be a viable tank for PC. Those 3 people in a tank can generally slay just as well out of the tank as in it (if not better out of it). And in PC a tank is extremely limited when it comes to point control. Tanks general main role in PC is ADS control. With tank control following behind it as you can't blow up the ADS if you can't keep your tank out long enough to do so. Every now and again you get a point that can be held by a blaster, but it's not often and in my experience not nearly as effective as a man on foot. Sure, in a pub running a 3 seater tank is fun ( and something I do a LOT) and viable. But when it comes to PC, no good team is going to actually sacrifice people on the ground to get into a tank. Every one has a role, and teams aren't simply going to sacrifice 3 people to ONE tank. Maps just don't makes this viable in the least. I understand where you are coming from, and yeah sure it would make sense if we weren't limited by things like map design or the 16 man limit. But with things as they are, multi man tanks are novelties at best and have no place in the competitive PC environment. Still fine for a PUB match, but it must be kept in mind that this will be their ONLY place. Unless of course a UHAV can have a module that decreases dispersion on the large blaster but even still, you would still be running the thing solo in a PC. You would simply be forced to run guns on it, guns that would never get used outside of a PUB match. I'm not suggesting you have to mount people in the tank. but I am suggesting regardless of what you want you must fit at least the minimum number of guns. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17318	Posted - 2015.02.26 22:12:00 - [30] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: no passive resists unless by module. Ummm, duh? I'm sorry, when I say passive resists I mean like we had pre 1.6. Sorry I'm a long time tanker and forget to clarify, I simply assume everyone knows what I mean:) Of course by module. That's why I say you wouldn't need to run multiple hardeners with a small passive resist module. And you being an AV guy, saying AV needs no tweaking. OMG dude, the hell they won't. They won't be able to scratch most of these tanks fits. Maybe armor, but there really need to be some more shield based AV out there. Gunnlogi is OP with the current setup, still. I am well aware that AV will need tweaking. I've been keeping silent on the AV until the HAVs are finalized per my understanding of Rattati's priorities. Other people have said that AV will need to be toned down or not be touched. I'm fully aware of what AV will need to burn down the new HAVs. I'm keeping silent because I don't really feel like starting a screaming riot until everyone is done gloating about how AV will be useless tank side. I've already done the calculations for what it'll take for AV to stand a chance. Especially with AV-resistant UHAVs on the horizon. Before you ask, no, I don't think AV should be balanced to fight UHAVs solo. MBTs yes. UHAVs, no. Are UHAV getting defensive module bonuses or something else entirely? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17318	Posted - 2015.02.26 22:20:00 - [31] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: Are UHAV getting defensive module bonuses or something else entirely? If the winds are blowing the way the aught, they'll be getting a direct resistance to Infantry AV. Which will not apply to heavy turrets. that's really the only way for the DHAV to be a viable counter while still maintaining hardcore resistance to my particular brand of ******. Hmmmm okay that does sound odd. I was simply thinking things like cooldown and duration bonuses.....not actually making the hulls more resistant to damage. I'm assuming the hulls will have better based HP values anyway right? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17319	Posted - 2015.02.26 22:49:00 - [32] - Quote LudiKure ninda wrote: cal UHAV- 3 resistance to hybrid railgun and hybrid blaster damage per lvl Gal UHAV-3 resistance to projectile damage per lvl So much fail right here. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17319	Posted - 2015.02.26 22:59:00 - [33] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: LudiKure ninda wrote: cal UHAV- 3 resistance to hybrid railgun and hybrid blaster damage per lvl Gal UHAV-3 resistance to projectile damage per lvl So much fail right here. I believe the simplest thing would be to flag all infantry AV with some kind of tag and put a resistance bonus against that tag on the UHAVs. I tend to view Tank turrets as the EFFICIENT method of killing vehicles. I tend to view infantry AV as the sloppy, overkill, Do-this-because-it-might-work kind of thing. It's why I want HAVs to have the higher efficiency and lower TTK versus other HAVs overall. But basically I see infantry AV as a means of trying to brute force a solution, and because it's a brute-force thing it can be countered via different materiels and methods than you would use to deflect a rail cannon shot. I get ya. In my mind all I'm saying is that every capacity an infantry mounted AV weapon has a tank mounted one theoretically should have more of in spades. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17319	Posted - 2015.02.26 23:01:00 - [34] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: LudiKure ninda wrote: cal UHAV- 3 resistance to hybrid railgun and hybrid blaster damage per lvl Gal UHAV-3 resistance to projectile damage per lvl So much fail right here. I believe the simplest thing would be to flag all infantry AV with some kind of tag and put a resistance bonus against that tag on the UHAVs. I tend to view Tank turrets as the EFFICIENT method of killing vehicles. I tend to view infantry AV as the sloppy, overkill, Do-this-because-it-might-work kind of thing. It's why I want HAVs to have the higher efficiency and lower TTK versus other HAVs overall. But basically I see infantry AV as a means of trying to brute force a solution, and because it's a brute-force thing it can be countered via different materiels and methods than you would use to deflect a rail cannon shot. I get ya. In my mind all I'm saying is that every capacity an infantry mounted AV weapon has a tank mounted one theoretically should have more of in spades. honestly I'm of the opinion that small turrets and heavy weapons should have similar functionality. Interesting theory. Btw what is your scrambler lance like? I've been thinking of suggestions for the Large and Small Laser Turrets if they ever are to appear and how they might function. Normally I hate the idea of another hold trigger down laser but after I started thinking about one with twin barrels....... it started to fall into place. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17319	Posted - 2015.02.26 23:07:00 - [35] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: Interesting theory. Btw what is your scrambler lance like? I've been thinking of suggestions for the Large and Small Laser Turrets if they ever are to appear and how they might function. Normally I hate the idea of another hold trigger down laser but after I started thinking about one with twin barrels....... it started to fall into place. Scrambler lance is kinda like the laser rifle WITHOUT the overheat for more damage mechanic. There's no reality in which that won't be broken and in dire need of an instant nerf. When it overheats it doesn't seize, it just does 100-150 damage per second to the firer. the arc cannon is a charged weapon, you charge the laser and it erupts a 1-second beam of energy that you must hold on the target. when it ends it charges and releases again, and it doesn't overheat (a nod to the amarr commando, who needs something to not suck with). Interesting ideas. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17320	Posted - 2015.02.26 23:43:00 - [36] - Quote LudiKure ninda wrote: Ammar tank turrent https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RMZQnWJUSw I've suggested this before and while I like it I wonder about the practicality of the weapon itself. That for all intents and purposes is a Pulse Laser by the way. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17320	Posted - 2015.02.26 23:47:00 - [37] - Quote Tebu been using 3 man HAV's since the competitive days of FW where it was 16 corpmates vs the 8-10 guys PIE could field. It is inordinately successful with good co-ordination. I don't pretend to know about PC but with two good infantrymen we're more than enough to hold two separate external objectives on almost any map in the game. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17322	Posted - 2015.02.27 00:28:00 - [38] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: [quote=True Adamance] I mean I know FW can be competitive, but there is nothing like a 16 vs 16 fully prepped and ALWAYS proto team. It was like that at one point. But just like your PC crowd you kinda had to have been there and if you didn't bring your proto you'd get face rolled and fleet fights would happen in the air above out matches. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17364	Posted - 2015.02.28 20:36:00 - [39] - 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. Your tank or tanking skills must be gawdawfull if you die in 4 seconds..... "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17366	Posted - 2015.03.01 01:14:00 - [40] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: True Adamance wrote: 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. Your tank or tanking skills must be gawdawfull if you die in 4 seconds..... Yes i try and teleport away but can't remember the button. I was thinking more......drive away through a clear escape route you left yourself and was not too far from?...... I've been driving all morning and seen some really nasty AV combinations..... and just reversed away. That's not to hard is it? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17371	Posted - 2015.03.01 07:22:00 - [41] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: I was thinking more......drive away through a clear escape route you left yourself and was not too far from?...... I've been driving all morning and seen some really nasty AV combinations..... and just reversed away. That's not to hard is it?[/quote] Gee that sounds super complicated, tanks go backwards? On a serious note, AV infantry sometimes wait till you drive past them to step out of a building, sometimes there two behind you, sometimes they have friends up on towers.. try coming out of your redline now and then on north American servers.[/quote] That's the point. Why bother with complex manoeuvres that get you killed when simple ones keep you alive and killing. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17381	Posted - 2015.03.01 20:38:00 - [42] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Again, this is all fine and good if you are 2 seconds from cover in the redline, but bringing a blaster or missile tank to a city socket to help your team push a point opens up all sides of your tank to potential fire. By all means sit in the redline and snipe but I have more fun trying to push out and help the team. These proposed changes will be pushing us deeper into the redline unless nitro on a DHAV let's me outrun swarms. My question is why are you going into cities with a HAV...... Exactly. But more to the point you don't need the redline to find cover. Cover is everything around you from the side of a building to the slight incline of a hill that puts you below a Gunnlogi's barrel depression, a turret, anything that can screen or otherwise throw off enemy shots. If you are in a city socket then you personally need to account for it as you enter, find yourself a location that gives you room to manoeuvre or fire on your enemies, pre-plan an escape route, etc but most of all accept that urban warfare is not where tanks excel. I'm still struggling to understand where you drew the exaggerated 2 second TTK from especially on a tank....... either HTFU or try out a game like War Thunder which does tank simulation better and has varying TTK depending on where you place your shots, etc. Could be any thing from a OHKO to 1-2 mins or slugging it out. Edit- Also for a tanker I can accept my KDR is pretty bad for a tanker but I was an assault for a couple of months before I picked up tanking and a partial Commando during the abysmal 1.7 patch when we were so over powered it wasn't even funny. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17384	Posted - 2015.03.01 22:17:00 - [43] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: True Adamance wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Again, this is all fine and good if you are 2 seconds from cover in the redline, but bringing a blaster or missile tank to a city socket to help your team push a point opens up all sides of your tank to potential fire. By all means sit in the redline and snipe but I have more fun trying to push out and help the team. These proposed changes will be pushing us deeper into the redline unless nitro on a DHAV let's me outrun swarms. My question is why are you going into cities with a HAV...... Exactly. But more to the point you don't need the redline to find cover. Cover is everything around you from the side of a building to the slight incline of a hill that puts you below a Gunnlogi's barrel depression, a turret, anything that can screen or otherwise throw off enemy shots. If you are in a city socket then you personally need to account for it as you enter, find yourself a location that gives you room to manoeuvre or fire on your enemies, pre-plan an escape route, etc but most of all accept that urban warfare is not where tanks excel. I'm still struggling to understand where you drew the exaggerated 2 second TTK from especially on a tank....... either HTFU or try out a game like War Thunder which does tank simulation better and has varying TTK depending on where you place your shots, etc. Could be any thing from a OHKO to 1-2 mins or slugging it out. Edit- Also for a tanker I can accept my KDR is pretty bad for a tanker but I was an assault for a couple of months before I picked up tanking and a partial Commando during the abysmal 1.7 patch when we were so over powered it wasn't even funny. where did I say 2 second ttk? .. it's 4 seconds ttk . Pop hardeners, count to 4, tank explodes. If you are confused as to how any tank could be anywhere in the map where you are vulnerable for 4 seconds then I can't help you. Stick to the redline. The two seconds was how far from cover you can be, gives you just over a second to react and drive backwards. Even four seconds boggles the mind. That's a more than a total of 2230 DPS or 9000 damage in Alpha! Not many things can achieve this. I simply want to know how you suffered this kind of catastrophic damage within your established parameters (strikes me that JLAV are not likely used in PC). Also while the redline certainly is a useful tool as a safe zone for redeployment, resupply, and to gain a little bit of battlefield perspective I've long been wishing for a no fire zone in the redline. Deliberately hiding in there because you are unwilling to deploy to the battlefield is somewhat shameful....but I can't begrudge the people who do it...that's their prerogative but it marks the battlefield as MINE if they are unwilling to come down onto it. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17410	Posted - 2015.03.02 18:58:00 - [44] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Doc DDD wrote: If we are worried about balancing in ambush, just remove vehicles all together from oms. .. The only thing keeping tanks alive as long as they are now is the ability to stack hardeners, removing this ability, while nerfing shield regen and cpu/pg chips, nerfing base HP of hulls to force the 2 extra slots to be filled with isk costing hp modules, all add up to a vehicle nerf. Armor tanks seem to be in a better place though. Seems like this was more of an AV buff initiative then a ' let's make tanks useful and give them something to do' LOL ambush. there's a lot of whining about OMS and vehicles. It's pure magic. suck up the pain and spawn AV. And the gunnlogi is OP. Pure and simple. It's only effectively stopped by another gunnlogi, which has been the developer definition of OP> A thing that can only effectively be countered by itself. The gunlogi is no where near OP, and definitely not after all the proposed nerfs. The gunlogi is the only vehicle that can tank damage from mutiple sources ONLY while it's hardeners are activated, and even theniit's not for any longer than the time it takes a breach forge to fire 3 times. I have words for tank drivers who hang around long enough for breach forges to fire three times. they rhyme with Boron, crabgrass, cupid and shrub And bluntly, nothing should be balanced to survive 3 v 1. that's stupid as hell. Exactly. I get that you want to tank AV fire and you can...... but you shouldn't be sitting around waiting for it to hit you.... "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17410	Posted - 2015.03.02 18:59:00 - [45] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: I dunno, does the tank magically get more protection from having two blueberries in the dump seats? party tanks are a lot harder to kill than standard one-seaters. Not because the small turrets are amazing. But because one of the passengers jumps out and rips the AV gunner's head off casually. So I'd say it's a pretty damn viable protective measure. we will, of course laugh like madmen at the thought of a three man tank in PC. We all know no one EVER does that sht there. Sure why not, it is still a ratio of 1 AV to 3 pilots and 1:3 doesn't look fair to me but yet you will complain that it may take 3 AV to kill 1 HAV. Can't have it both ways. Small turrets suck, if the AV player is close enough to get there head ripped off that is the AV players fault but there are many areas of a map that the gunners cannot reach out of a tank or in the gun seat. It has been an option in PC, a rare one but if it is a ratio of 3 man HAV to 3 AV then maybe it may happen. having the extra seats bring something to the table defensively has never been an objection I have. Even if it's a built-in booster or mini-hardener that the second/third seat can trigger or something. If the defenses take three people to operate then yes, it should absolutely improve the survival of the HAV versus solo AV. 1 player = 1 player HAS to mean something. And no, it can't be a one-way street. However, the "jump out and shoot the AV" is stupid. it's just as cheesy as JLAVs, which I use whenever I have an HMG jump out to pop my AV fatsuit. If an HAV takes three people to operate at max capacity, then the three AV to kill ratio becomes reasonable. But as long as it only requires one player to run at max defensive capacity? Then no. it's still really one player versus one player. because the two smalls are rarely useful due to hit detection stupidity, and they'll just jump out and shoot the AV player with a rail rifle or whatever. The JLAV can cause over 10k of damage, the 'jump out and shoot someone' requires at least some aim so for me it is chalk and cheese because the JLAV is complete no skill and no risk being able to kill something that takes a lot of SP to skill into and alot of ISK to field but the 'jump out' can be killed or you kill the LAV and it is done with. There is 3people in a HAV so it should take 3 to kill it. The general argument is for AV is that it is only 1 person in a HAV and it is unfair and should only take 1 to kill it no matter the SP or ISK invested for the pilot so likewise 3 for 3 with no other additions in SP or ISK for the 2nd & 3rd gunners. If it is 1 AV to 3 man HAV then why run the 3man HAV? What advanatage does it carry? They cannot defend from AV because small turrets and jumping out offers nothing if AV is not in CQC/short run range? It is just more people in a HAV which gives more points to AV who can solo it. In fact im also finding it hard to justify the existance of a HAV with 3 gunners in it, like the DHAV it has massive shortcomings with next to no advantages. As much as i would like to run with 2 extra gunners the HAV overall gets no extra game changing benefits or even a stronger tank let alone the simple ability to defend itself from AV. Maybe if pilot suits could stack with each other and the vehicle then possibly it would be worth it but that is looking unlikely since infantry had a heart attack with pilot suits placeholders so i doubt they would even agree to something like this. Except an epic almost 1000 DPS increase depending on your turret and two pairs of eyes to communicate the locations of HAV, DS, LAV as you drive...... that's can and does make you much more powerful than you would normally be. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17412	Posted - 2015.03.02 20:39:00 - [46] - Quote 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. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17413	Posted - 2015.03.02 20:54:00 - [47] - 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. Well I meant ideally. I mean currently AV is arguably just better than tank turrets and significantly better in terms of representing high power ordinance. If we could just get rid of the Assault Turrets we have now a replace them with more conventional main battle cannon tanks would be a real threat on the field. I'm sure you know what I mean when I say the 120mm Smoothbore style guns from Battlefield are just plain superior to use as a tank driver. Range Power Explosive Charge Longer Reload Times Etc "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17416	Posted - 2015.03.02 21:59:00 - [48] - Quote 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. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17416	Posted - 2015.03.02 22:17:00 - [49] - Quote 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. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17425	Posted - 2015.03.03 03:55:00 - [50] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. 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. I don't know if I agree with that but hopefully we'll see on the shield better than armour fits...... "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17426	Posted - 2015.03.03 05:15:00 - [51] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: True Adamance wrote: Blegh You didn't like what you said? I didn't sounded stupid even for me so I hid the post behind Blegh. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17433	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:59:00 - [52] - Quote Please do remember that I am currently looking at a Surya fit right now with Shields: 2135 Armour: 8867 That's a 3/5 Tank as you all well know. Fit up very well, with 25% damage reducing hardeners that lasted over 30 seconds with a very short cool down, damage control unit, and a Heat Sink. That's also coupled with a pin point accurate blaster that deal 180.1 damage per round....... AV these days wouldn't have had a chance against that. We'd have everything we need, range, power, durability. One of the best aspects about the old style of Chromo/Uprising Tanking AV I think was that if AV could engage us, providing you guys had rendered we could also engage you back. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17433	Posted - 2015.03.03 20:29:00 - [53] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: True Adamance wrote: Please do remember that I am currently looking at a Surya fit right now with Shields: 2135 Armour: 8867 That's a 3/5 Tank as you all well know. Fit up very well, with 25% damage reducing hardeners that lasted over 30 seconds with a very short cool down, damage control unit, and a Heat Sink. That's also coupled with a pin point accurate blaster that deal 180.1 damage per round....... AV these days wouldn't have had a chance against that. We'd have everything we need, range, power, durability. One of the best aspects about the old style of Chromo/Uprising Tanking AV I think was that if AV could engage us, providing you guys had rendered we could also engage you back. No rep i take it? The rep could bail you out sometimes with that extra 5k+ when needed. I never used shields, nitro and heat sinks. AV render now mostly but the blaster is a game of luck, Uprising the blaster required aim and rewarded it but i do remember in PC the FG up top i could not shoot but i could still fight a tank while they were hitting me. Swarms on the otherhand out of reach, out of sight. No it apparently had reps. Actually is the one from the Pyrex Video from way back in the day not that he's the one piloting it. I can only speculate on the fit since the perspective was of the secondary gunner. Certainly has reps but I'd image two plates at the very least and one shield extender at the very least. Still with that damage it could pump out and 11,000 effective armour HP it was bloody hard for those guys to even hurt. I certainly know what you mean about the blaster. Yeah it was incredibly powerful....... being pin point accurate but that allowed the gun to have range. Picking off players at 200m was a matter of having solid aim AND them being morons, sad to see that go since Uprising tanks was to me was already pretty top tier and enjoyable. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17434	Posted - 2015.03.03 21:56:00 - [54] - Quote LudiKure ninda wrote: True Adamance wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: True Adamance wrote: Please do remember that I am currently looking at a Surya fit right now with Shields: 2135 Armour: 8867 That's a 3/5 Tank as you all well know. Fit up very well, with 25% damage reducing hardeners that lasted over 30 seconds with a very short cool down, damage control unit, and a Heat Sink. That's also coupled with a pin point accurate blaster that deal 180.1 damage per round....... AV these days wouldn't have had a chance against that. We'd have everything we need, range, power, durability. One of the best aspects about the old style of Chromo/Uprising Tanking AV I think was that if AV could engage us, providing you guys had rendered we could also engage you back. No rep i take it? The rep could bail you out sometimes with that extra 5k+ when needed. I never used shields, nitro and heat sinks. AV render now mostly but the blaster is a game of luck, Uprising the blaster required aim and rewarded it but i do remember in PC the FG up top i could not shoot but i could still fight a tank while they were hitting me. Swarms on the otherhand out of reach, out of sight. No it apparently had reps. Actually is the one from the Pyrex Video from way back in the day not that he's the one piloting it. I can only speculate on the fit since the perspective was of the secondary gunner. Certainly has reps but I'd image two plates at the very least and one shield extender at the very least. Still with that damage it could pump out and 11,000 effective armour HP it was bloody hard for those guys to even hurt. I certainly know what you mean about the blaster. Yeah it was incredibly powerful....... being pin point accurate but that allowed the gun to have range. Picking off players at 200m was a matter of having solid aim AND them being morons, sad to see that go since Uprising tanks was to me was already pretty top tier and enjoyable. The guys in that video(reds) had only militia AV, Imagine 3 people now with min comando with swarms and all that to 5..? I'm going out on a limb here and going to ask for sources and proof before you make that assumption, also going to remind you that the damage increase on the individual swarm launcher volleys on the Minmando are negligible and its the sustained DPS that makes Minmando what they are. 3 Fully specced AV players vs one fully specced Marauders tankers? Something has to take it down and honestly that seems fair to me.....certainly not like you should be sitting out in the middle of the map not using cover or range in this case to your advantage. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17435	Posted - 2015.03.03 22:37:00 - [55] - Quote 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. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17438	Posted - 2015.03.03 22:54:00 - [56] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: 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 severely. Except for swarms AV has eaten a ratehr sharp kick to the teeth. 20% rate of fire nerf for forge guns plus the addition of the hidden refire delay Conceded. All I want is my damn modules and a ******* acceptable range profile back. EDIT- breathes in slowly breathes out deeply But honestly it doesn't matter any more. I took the time yesterday evening to work through my growing irritation now that I have somewhat returned to Dust and accepted and let go of my extreme disappointment in the game. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17442	Posted - 2015.03.04 01:25:00 - [57] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. So do I. Sooner or later EVERYONE makes mistakes during a battle. I had to stop playing yesterday after dozens on consecutive mistakes sent me into a downward spiral into "not giving a ***" and "why am I doing this when I have Tale of Symphonia right there". But honestly I do miss having to be active in my management of module. I miss having power in my hands that was subject to a varied and in-depth skill tree. I miss having a Blaster Turret with range that was subject to my accuracy not luck. I miss AV meaning something to me and my tanks meaning something to me. I miss armour being viable. I miss being naive enough to think progress toward the Amarr HAV was on the horizon. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17445	Posted - 2015.03.04 02:47:00 - [58] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Well, it is. remember, phase 3 Phase 3? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17447	Posted - 2015.03.04 03:16:00 - [59] - Quote 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. "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17461	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:47:00 - [60] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Tanks were fine during Chrome. chrome got killed. Devs decided to say no. get over it. What about Uprising prior to 1.7? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."

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.