| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
RISE of LEGION
145
   |
Posted - 2015.02.27 12:43:00 -
[61] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:We should have vehicle modifiers in the slots.
Shield modifiers in the highs, armor modifiers in the lows.
Why else would anyone want to use higher than militia Yknow?
And! Damage Modifiers will have penalties relating to the slot (high or low / shield or armor).
Nothing big! Like maybe a complex damage control will be 7 to 10% reduction to damage received (slot based) at the cost of EHP or maneuverability etc. Damage (nothing over 5%, can only fit one), turret rotation, round velocity, torque, etc, regulators, etc. modifiers on a pilot suit only.
Fit suits accordingly annnd boom boom diverse vehicles No downside. There's no downside with regular infantry suits, why should their be a downside with a pilot suit? Plates: movement penalty Extends: recharge delay Energizers: max hp. Plus, it could make you think hard and well about What you fit. Or we'll just have damage control/modifiers stacked all over the place and it'll become bland :/ Imagine... 5 complex shield damage control (only 2 damage types in the sense of vehicles so... Might as well keep it shield and armor) then a hardener on top of that? Shield recharge isn't breaking at all any time soon. Well... If you want to be as basic as infantry suits? Or wouldn't you rather become a fitting master that manages to make the superior all round vehicle by balancing the pros and cons? No need for HUGE penalties, but tiny ones...let us all Vote on it later. Idea: pilot suit; 10% reduction to vehicle link module fitting per level. Then racial bonuses get looked at later. Bonuses Those are modules added.
Ah, well let's look at the types
Armor tank: Ama
Shield tank: Cal
Armor regen: Gal
Speed: Min
Now in the sense of vehicles what can we do? Keep it small.
Ama: 2% aHP per level
Cal: 2% sHP per level
Gal: 2% aHP/s per level
Min: 2% to speed/accel per level.
But making it a 8x skill will be crazy for 2%
But making it too strong will offset the pilot suit vs non pilot suit.
Entering the void and becoming wind.
Message for 1v1 air to air
|
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides
Learning Alliance
6008
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 12:51:00 -
[62] - Quote
Terry Webber wrote:Some have been suggesting that the pilot suit should have bonuses to vehicle mobility and tracking.
A speed bonus for Minmitar would make sense.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:04:00 -
[63] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:
Alright!
[reserved]
As promised, pulled some data on rigs and modules from EVE that have upsides and downsides that could be converted over to Dust terms. Really only for inspiration, but enough to help think of some ideas. If you're not familiar with how capacitor works in EVE, probably the rough translation into Dust terms would be: Cap Capacity = Active Module Duration Cap Recharge = Active Module Cooldown This is a GROSSLY simplified translation, but Dust in general is grossly simplified compared to EVE anyways. Also note that there are a few other Rigs/modules out there that don't really translate into Dust terms for vehicles (lock times, ECM, ect.) so I didn't include them. Rigs Armor Increased Resistance - Decreased Max Velocity Increased Armor Repair - Increase PG Cost Increased Armor HP - Decreased Max Velocity Shield Increased resistance - Increased Signature Decreased Cap Use - Increased Signature Increased Shield HP - Increased Signature Increased Shield Regen - Increased Signature Increased Shield Booster - Increased Signature Astronautics Increased Max Velocity - Decreased Armor HP Increased Cargo capacity - Decreased Armor HP Decreased Afterburner Cap Cost - Decreased Armor HP Increased Afterburner Duration - Decreased Armor HP Increased Ship Agility - Decreased Armor HP Increased Velocity and Agility - Decreased Armor HP Engineering Increased Powergrid - No Downside Decreased Powergrid Use - No Downside Increase Cap Recharge Rate - No Downside Increased CPU - No Downside Decreased CPU Usage - No Downside Increased Capacitor - No Downside Turrets Decrease CPU Cost - Increased PG Cost Increased Falloff Range - Increased PG Cost Increased Fire Rate - Increased PG Cost Increased Damage - Increased PG Cost Decreased Cap Usage - Increased PG Cost Increased Optimal Range - Increase PG Cost Increased Tracking Speed - Increased PG Cost Missiles Increased Fire Rate - Increased CPU Cost Increased Velocity - Increased CPU Cost Increased Flight Time - Increase CPU Cost Increased Damage - Increased CPU Cost Decreased Explosion Radius (This is actually a good thing in EVE ^_^) - Increased CPU cost Modules Increase Cap Recharge Rate - Increased Cap Capacity Increased Cap Recharge Rate- Increased Shield Boosting Increased Armor HP - Decreased Agility and Speed Increased Cargo capacity - Decreased Speed Increased Agility - Decreased Armor HP Increased Speed - Decreased Cargo Capacity Increased Shield Recharge - Decreased Shield HP Increased Shield HP - Increased Signature
Translating to dust will be hard..
All we got here is: sHP, sHP/s, sHP/s delay, aHP, aHP/s, turret rotation, turret reload, projectile speed, damage mods, damage control x2 (shield vs armor), torque, speed, module up time, module down time.
[I'll have some ideas by lunchtime today]
A vehicle cap would be great nevertheless.
Entering the void and becoming wind.
Message for 1v1 air to air
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
4012
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:16:00 -
[64] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:
Alright!
[reserved]
As promised, pulled some data on rigs and modules from EVE that have upsides and downsides that could be converted over to Dust terms. Really only for inspiration, but enough to help think of some ideas. If you're not familiar with how capacitor works in EVE, probably the rough translation into Dust terms would be: Cap Capacity = Active Module Duration Cap Recharge = Active Module Cooldown This is a GROSSLY simplified translation, but Dust in general is grossly simplified compared to EVE anyways. Also note that there are a few other Rigs/modules out there that don't really translate into Dust terms for vehicles (lock times, ECM, ect.) so I didn't include them. Rigs Armor Increased Resistance - Decreased Max Velocity Increased Armor Repair - Increase PG Cost Increased Armor HP - Decreased Max Velocity Shield Increased resistance - Increased Signature Decreased Cap Use - Increased Signature Increased Shield HP - Increased Signature Increased Shield Regen - Increased Signature Increased Shield Booster - Increased Signature Astronautics Increased Max Velocity - Decreased Armor HP Increased Cargo capacity - Decreased Armor HP Decreased Afterburner Cap Cost - Decreased Armor HP Increased Afterburner Duration - Decreased Armor HP Increased Ship Agility - Decreased Armor HP Increased Velocity and Agility - Decreased Armor HP Engineering Increased Powergrid - No Downside Decreased Powergrid Use - No Downside Increase Cap Recharge Rate - No Downside Increased CPU - No Downside Decreased CPU Usage - No Downside Increased Capacitor - No Downside Turrets Decrease CPU Cost - Increased PG Cost Increased Falloff Range - Increased PG Cost Increased Fire Rate - Increased PG Cost Increased Damage - Increased PG Cost Decreased Cap Usage - Increased PG Cost Increased Optimal Range - Increase PG Cost Increased Tracking Speed - Increased PG Cost Missiles Increased Fire Rate - Increased CPU Cost Increased Velocity - Increased CPU Cost Increased Flight Time - Increase CPU Cost Increased Damage - Increased CPU Cost Decreased Explosion Radius (This is actually a good thing in EVE ^_^) - Increased CPU cost Modules Increase Cap Recharge Rate - Increased Cap Capacity Increased Cap Recharge Rate- Increased Shield Boosting Increased Armor HP - Decreased Agility and Speed Increased Cargo capacity - Decreased Speed Increased Agility - Decreased Armor HP Increased Speed - Decreased Cargo Capacity Increased Shield Recharge - Decreased Shield HP Increased Shield HP - Increased Signature Translating to dust will be hard.. All we got here is: sHP, sHP/s, sHP/s delay, aHP, aHP/s, turret rotation, turret reload, projectile speed, damage mods, damage control x2 (shield vs armor), torque, speed, module up time, module down time. [I'll have some ideas by lunchtime today] A vehicle cap would be great nevertheless.
Translating to DUST is quite easy with rigs.
All you have to do for vehicles is add in rig slots, so 1 for a LAV, 2 for DS and 3 for a HAV.
The problem is capacitors and if they are not going to be added with the vehicle shake up then they will never be added for PS3 at least, maybe if Legion ever gets greenlit but even then that is a long shot. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3002
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:31:00 -
[65] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:buttvomit
Don't you goddamn dare treat me like a child.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:45:00 -
[66] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:
Alright!
[reserved]
As promised, pulled some data on rigs and modules from EVE that have upsides and downsides that could be converted over to Dust terms. Really only for inspiration, but enough to help think of some ideas. If you're not familiar with how capacitor works in EVE, probably the rough translation into Dust terms would be: Cap Capacity = Active Module Duration Cap Recharge = Active Module Cooldown This is a GROSSLY simplified translation, but Dust in general is grossly simplified compared to EVE anyways. Also note that there are a few other Rigs/modules out there that don't really translate into Dust terms for vehicles (lock times, ECM, ect.) so I didn't include them. Rigs Armor Increased Resistance - Decreased Max Velocity Increased Armor Repair - Increase PG Cost Increased Armor HP - Decreased Max Velocity Shield Increased resistance - Increased Signature Decreased Cap Use - Increased Signature Increased Shield HP - Increased Signature Increased Shield Regen - Increased Signature Increased Shield Booster - Increased Signature Astronautics Increased Max Velocity - Decreased Armor HP Increased Cargo capacity - Decreased Armor HP Decreased Afterburner Cap Cost - Decreased Armor HP Increased Afterburner Duration - Decreased Armor HP Increased Ship Agility - Decreased Armor HP Increased Velocity and Agility - Decreased Armor HP Engineering Increased Powergrid - No Downside Decreased Powergrid Use - No Downside Increase Cap Recharge Rate - No Downside Increased CPU - No Downside Decreased CPU Usage - No Downside Increased Capacitor - No Downside Turrets Decrease CPU Cost - Increased PG Cost Increased Falloff Range - Increased PG Cost Increased Fire Rate - Increased PG Cost Increased Damage - Increased PG Cost Decreased Cap Usage - Increased PG Cost Increased Optimal Range - Increase PG Cost Increased Tracking Speed - Increased PG Cost Missiles Increased Fire Rate - Increased CPU Cost Increased Velocity - Increased CPU Cost Increased Flight Time - Increase CPU Cost Increased Damage - Increased CPU Cost Decreased Explosion Radius (This is actually a good thing in EVE ^_^) - Increased CPU cost Modules Increase Cap Recharge Rate - Increased Cap Capacity Increased Cap Recharge Rate- Increased Shield Boosting Increased Armor HP - Decreased Agility and Speed Increased Cargo capacity - Decreased Speed Increased Agility - Decreased Armor HP Increased Speed - Decreased Cargo Capacity Increased Shield Recharge - Decreased Shield HP Increased Shield HP - Increased Signature Translating to dust will be hard.. All we got here is: sHP, sHP/s, sHP/s delay, aHP, aHP/s, turret rotation, turret reload, projectile speed, damage mods, damage control x2 (shield vs armor), torque, speed, module up time, module down time. [I'll have some ideas by lunchtime today] A vehicle cap would be great nevertheless. Translating to DUST is quite easy with rigs. All you have to do for vehicles is add in rig slots, so 1 for a LAV, 2 for DS and 3 for a HAV. The problem is capacitors and if they are not going to be added with the vehicle shake up then they will never be added for PS3 at least, maybe if Legion ever gets greenlit but even then that is a long shot.
That involves the vehicle itself, not the suit. What we were saying is the "rig" is suit based, suit fit, applied "actively" like skills.
Saying "rigs" are suit based but fit on vehicles defeats the purpose of the suit.
Signature, cap, pg/cpu fitting etc. will be hard/impossible to fit in dust with the suit + vehicle.
Other things will need work arounds, different pros/cons and more. That makes it difficult to translate into dust.
Entering the void and becoming wind.
Message for 1v1 air to air
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
4013
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:58:00 -
[67] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:
Translating to DUST is quite easy with rigs.
All you have to do for vehicles is add in rig slots, so 1 for a LAV, 2 for DS and 3 for a HAV.
The problem is capacitors and if they are not going to be added with the vehicle shake up then they will never be added for PS3 at least, maybe if Legion ever gets greenlit but even then that is a long shot.
That involves the vehicle itself, not the suit. What we were saying is the "rig" is suit based, suit fit, applied "actively" like skills. Saying "rigs" are suit based but fit on vehicles defeats the purpose of the suit. Signature, cap, pg/cpu fitting etc. will be hard/impossible to fit in dust with the suit + vehicle. Other things will need work arounds, different pros/cons and more. That makes it difficult to translate into dust.
Rigs are pure passive, so if its on the suit or the vehicle the stats applied are the same.
The one problem pilots have is that the suit can be fitted up and the vehicle can be fitted up but they will be fitted up seperately and because the pilot suit works in tandem with the vehicle then on a fitting screen we would need a way to apply the fitted pilot suit with the fitted vehicle to get a full overview of the stats.
A possible way is to split up rigs between the pilot suit and the vehicle, so the vehicle gets the HP mods and the suit has the EWAR mods for an example but still the problem is seeing the pilot suit and the vehicle stats together without the need for getting out the calculator. |
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 14:22:00 -
[68] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:
Translating to DUST is quite easy with rigs.
All you have to do for vehicles is add in rig slots, so 1 for a LAV, 2 for DS and 3 for a HAV.
The problem is capacitors and if they are not going to be added with the vehicle shake up then they will never be added for PS3 at least, maybe if Legion ever gets greenlit but even then that is a long shot.
That involves the vehicle itself, not the suit. What we were saying is the "rig" is suit based, suit fit, applied "actively" like skills. Saying "rigs" are suit based but fit on vehicles defeats the purpose of the suit. Signature, cap, pg/cpu fitting etc. will be hard/impossible to fit in dust with the suit + vehicle. Other things will need work arounds, different pros/cons and more. That makes it difficult to translate into dust. Rigs are pure passive, so if its on the suit or the vehicle the stats applied are the same. The one problem pilots have is that the suit can be fitted up and the vehicle can be fitted up but they will be fitted up seperately and because the pilot suit works in tandem with the vehicle then on a fitting screen we would need a way to apply the fitted pilot suit with the fitted vehicle to get a full overview of the stats. A possible way is to split up rigs between the pilot suit and the vehicle, so the vehicle gets the HP mods and the suit has the EWAR mods for an example but still the problem is seeing the pilot suit and the vehicle stats together without the need for getting out the calculator.
By "rig" I mean vehicle link modules (i think that should be the name) i'm saying "rig" to relate it to something familiar.
By "actively" applying think skills.
"passivily" applying think fitting.
Skills don't matter for the vehicle, you hop in and see the turret ammo go up according to your level. Make that "active" application.
Think like that but apply to all modules and whatnot
Entering the void and becoming wind.
Message for 1v1 air to air
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
4014
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 14:27:00 -
[69] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:
Translating to DUST is quite easy with rigs.
All you have to do for vehicles is add in rig slots, so 1 for a LAV, 2 for DS and 3 for a HAV.
The problem is capacitors and if they are not going to be added with the vehicle shake up then they will never be added for PS3 at least, maybe if Legion ever gets greenlit but even then that is a long shot.
That involves the vehicle itself, not the suit. What we were saying is the "rig" is suit based, suit fit, applied "actively" like skills. Saying "rigs" are suit based but fit on vehicles defeats the purpose of the suit. Signature, cap, pg/cpu fitting etc. will be hard/impossible to fit in dust with the suit + vehicle. Other things will need work arounds, different pros/cons and more. That makes it difficult to translate into dust. Rigs are pure passive, so if its on the suit or the vehicle the stats applied are the same. The one problem pilots have is that the suit can be fitted up and the vehicle can be fitted up but they will be fitted up seperately and because the pilot suit works in tandem with the vehicle then on a fitting screen we would need a way to apply the fitted pilot suit with the fitted vehicle to get a full overview of the stats. A possible way is to split up rigs between the pilot suit and the vehicle, so the vehicle gets the HP mods and the suit has the EWAR mods for an example but still the problem is seeing the pilot suit and the vehicle stats together without the need for getting out the calculator. By "rig" I mean vehicle link modules (i think that should be the name) i'm saying "rig" to relate it to something familiar. By "actively" applying think skills. "passivily" applying think fitting. Skills don't matter for the vehicle, you hop in and see the turret ammo go up according to your level. Make that "active" application. Think like that but apply to all modules and whatnot
'Rig' is already taken in EVE and it means a module that has to be fitted to the ship and can only be taken off by destroying it.
So vehicle link modules is not a rig.
No i need to see that stats or at least work it out, this whole watch your ammo goes up doesnt work because if i fit PG/CPU mods on i need to know how much i have to use, i cannot make a invalid fit and deploy it even if i know a pilot suit i made has enough CPU/PG mods on it to make it valid, it just doesnt work.
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 14:46:00 -
[70] - Quote
No no i know what rigs. That's why I used quotations around rig Lol sorry for the confusion.
They are fit suit side, applied vehicle side. PG/CPU is regulated suit side. It'll be invalid suit side, it cannot be deployed soo, it can't be applied vehicle side.
They are applied like how skills are applied, ammo is an example of skills being applied.
Entering the void and becoming wind.
Message for 1v1 air to air
|
|
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
4016
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 15:23:00 -
[71] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:No no i know what rigs are. That's why I used quotations around rig Lol sorry for the confusion.
They are fit suit side, applied vehicle side. PG/CPU is regulated suit side. It'll be invalid suit side, it cannot be deployed soo, it can't be applied vehicle side.
They are applied like how skills are applied, ammo is an example of skills being applied.
If i put PG/CPU mods on my pilot suit that is a valid fit i can deploy it but if it is for a vehicle which is invalid due to lack of CPU/PG then i cannot deploy it thus it is useless to me. |
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 15:40:00 -
[72] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:No no i know what rigs are. That's why I used quotations around rig Lol sorry for the confusion.
They are fit suit side, applied vehicle side. PG/CPU is regulated suit side. It'll be invalid suit side, it cannot be deployed soo, it can't be applied vehicle side.
They are applied like how skills are applied, ammo is an example of skills being applied. If i put PG/CPU mods on my pilot suit that is a valid fit i can deploy it but if it is for a vehicle which is invalid due to lack of CPU/PG then i cannot deploy it thus it is useless to me.
Those wouldnt exist for vehicles. You could fit suit pg/cpu on your suit, not vehicle CPU/PG.
Entering the void and becoming wind.
Message for 1v1 air to air
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3004
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 15:53:00 -
[73] - Quote
Pokey, it's a tank. I have no idea what you're trying to say. You're treating me like an invalid. Doc is exactly right when he calls you a spreadsheet warrior. You do all this talk here about numbers, but don't play the game.
It's a tank, of course it has a much higher rep rate. Also, I don't know who uses just one rep on a tank, unless they're going for max armor.
There's no reason to talk to me like I'm a piece of s*** of a person. Of course I'm angry at you, you don't listen to anything pilots say, preferring instead to point to your numbers without any play time. Numbers don't translate to gameplay.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
4026
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 16:07:00 -
[74] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:No no i know what rigs are. That's why I used quotations around rig Lol sorry for the confusion.
They are fit suit side, applied vehicle side. PG/CPU is regulated suit side. It'll be invalid suit side, it cannot be deployed soo, it can't be applied vehicle side.
They are applied like how skills are applied, ammo is an example of skills being applied. If i put PG/CPU mods on my pilot suit that is a valid fit i can deploy it but if it is for a vehicle which is invalid due to lack of CPU/PG then i cannot deploy it thus it is useless to me. Those wouldnt exist for vehicles. You could fit suit pg/cpu on your suit, not vehicle CPU/PG.
Then what is the point?
If a pilot suit is supposed to be intergrated into the vehicle then it should have the full array of modules open to it, if not then why have a pilot suit and also why is HP modules allowed but not CPU/PG?
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5066
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 18:04:00 -
[75] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Pokey, it's a tank. I have no idea what you're trying to say. You're treating me like an invalid. Doc is exactly right when he calls you a spreadsheet warrior. You do all this talk here about numbers, but don't play the game.
It's a tank, of course it has a much higher rep rate. Also, I don't know who uses just one rep on a tank, unless they're going for max armor.
There's no reason to talk to me like I'm a piece of s*** of a person. Of course I'm angry at you, you don't listen to anything pilots say, preferring instead to point to your numbers without any play time. Numbers don't translate to gameplay.
No, I just don't listen to *you* because you're a jerk.
I don't know what metric you're looking at that leads you to believe that I don't play the game, I was even logged in yesterday doing missions for warbarge components. You've never seen me in match? Well I've never seen you in match either, so by that logic you don't play either...but I know that's a silly way to think.
My frustration comes due to the fact that you act like the numerical data doesn't matter at all, in a game heavily depended on numerical data. I've never said that experience doesn't matter, and in fact I've cited in many cases "Well here's how the numbers work, but we wont be able to see for sure until it's field tested". You on the other hand will often say "I don't care if the numbers show massive imbalance, I have a personal experience where things worked out fine!" but the fact of the matter is that anecdotal evidence is not valid evidence, as it it represents only a small sample of the data.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal
Experience is important, but the experience of a single, or even a couple players in a limited sample size, is not grounds for making design choices. One must first look at the quantitative evidence, fix any discrepancies, and then put it through a qualitative test (aka, field testing) to see if everything lines up. CCP Pre-Rattati largely skipped the quantitative step, and only fixed things based off of qualitative review....and as such things got more and more messed up as time went on. You seem to subscribe to a similar philosophy, and I'm sorry but my experience over the past 2 years of playing this game, tells me that that is the wrong course of action.
Another point is that it's fine if you're not very good at math, lots of people struggle with the subject. But just because you don't understand what I'm talking about, doesn't mean that what I'm saying is incorrect. Both quantitative and qualitative evidence are important in the design process, yet you completely disregard one of them if it becomes too complicated for you to grasp. So in other words you're only interested in looking at half the picture, and do so in the most negative and abrasive way possible. That is why I don't listen to you.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5066
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 18:07:00 -
[76] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:No no i know what rigs are. That's why I used quotations around rig Lol sorry for the confusion.
They are fit suit side, applied vehicle side. PG/CPU is regulated suit side. It'll be invalid suit side, it cannot be deployed soo, it can't be applied vehicle side.
They are applied like how skills are applied, ammo is an example of skills being applied. If i put PG/CPU mods on my pilot suit that is a valid fit i can deploy it but if it is for a vehicle which is invalid due to lack of CPU/PG then i cannot deploy it thus it is useless to me. Those wouldnt exist for vehicles. You could fit suit pg/cpu on your suit, not vehicle CPU/PG. Then what is the point? If a pilot suit is supposed to be intergrated into the vehicle then it should have the full array of modules open to it, if not then why have a pilot suit and also why is HP modules allowed but not CPU/PG?
I think what Simon is getting at is that you could have rigs on the vehicle which affect performance at the cost/gain or PG or CPU.
Additionally pilot suits could be fit with link modules that also offer a large benefit with a small downside, but specifically avoiding PG/CPU changes as not to make vehicle fits invalid without the pilot suit.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
4034
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 18:24:00 -
[77] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:
I think what Simon is getting at is that you could have rigs on the vehicle which affect performance at the cost/gain or PG or CPU.
Additionally pilot suits could be fit with link modules that also offer a large benefit with a small downside, but specifically avoiding PG/CPU changes as not to make vehicle fits invalid without the pilot suit.
Rigs in EVE generally change the CPU/PG of turrets at least and maybe a couple of other things so on a vehicle it wouldn't change much just like a rig on a ship.
The pilot suit itself may have link modules but if it contained link modules that alter the amount of CPU/PG (CPU/PG extenders) on a vehicle and i wanted to use that extra PG/CPU on the vehicle (upgrade a module or add another modules) how can i effectively use it if the vehicle fit is invalid and cannot be called in?
The only answer i can think is that with the correct pilot suit on you can call in invalid fits because the game recognizes that you are wearing a pilot suit that will make the vehicle fit valid or you spawn in the vehicle with the pilot suit on. |
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3006
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 18:26:00 -
[78] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Pokey, it's a tank. I have no idea what you're trying to say. You're treating me like an invalid. Doc is exactly right when he calls you a spreadsheet warrior. You do all this talk here about numbers, but don't play the game.
It's a tank, of course it has a much higher rep rate. Also, I don't know who uses just one rep on a tank, unless they're going for max armor.
There's no reason to talk to me like I'm a piece of s*** of a person. Of course I'm angry at you, you don't listen to anything pilots say, preferring instead to point to your numbers without any play time. Numbers don't translate to gameplay. No, I just don't listen to *you* because you're a jerk. I don't know what metric you're looking at that leads you to believe that I don't play the game, I was even logged in yesterday doing missions for warbarge components. You've never seen me in match? Well I've never seen you in match either, so by that logic you don't play either...but I know that's a silly way to think. My frustration comes due to the fact that you act like the numerical data doesn't matter at all, in a game heavily depended on numerical data. I've never said that experience doesn't matter, and in fact I've cited in many cases "Well here's how the numbers work, but we wont be able to see for sure until it's field tested". You on the other hand will often say "I don't care if the numbers show massive imbalance, I have a personal experience where things worked out fine!" but the fact of the matter is that anecdotal evidence is not valid evidence, as it it represents only a small sample of the data. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotalExperience is important, but the experience of a single, or even a couple players in a limited sample size, is not grounds for making design choices. One must first look at the quantitative evidence, fix any discrepancies, and then put it through a qualitative test (aka, field testing) to see if everything lines up. CCP Pre-Rattati largely skipped the quantitative step, and only fixed things based off of qualitative review....and as such things got more and more messed up as time went on. You seem to subscribe to a similar philosophy, and I'm sorry but my experience over the past 2 years of playing this game, tells me that that is the wrong course of action. Another point is that it's fine if you're not very good at math, lots of people struggle with the subject. But just because you don't understand what I'm talking about, doesn't mean that what I'm saying is incorrect. Both quantitative and qualitative evidence are important in the design process, yet you completely disregard one of them if it becomes too complicated for you to grasp. So in other words you're only interested in looking at half the picture, and do so in the most negative and abrasive way possible. That is why I don't listen to you.
All it takes is adding someone to your friend's list, then looking at weekly and monthly kills. Last I checked, you had none for the month. It's easy to figure out, if you played the game.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Avallo Kantor
461
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 18:31:00 -
[79] - Quote
One idea I am interested in with Pilot suits is the idea of multiple pilot suits in a single vehicle.
Will it be possible to have pilot skills added to vehicles when a pilot suit sits in a valid gunner turret as well. If this was possible, it would certainly make multi-person tanks that much more of a serious threat on the battlefield, to represent the larger number of players going in to operating said vehicle.
There are two ways this could work:
1) Pilot Suits in a gunner seat provide all relevant bonuses to their vehicle.
+++ This would Make it easy for tanks to know the full benefit o any pilot suit joining a vehicle.
+++ Pilots would not need to worry if they are gunner or driver when spawning in.
+++ Tanks that take advantage of Gunners would become far more popular
--- Will cause balance concerns, such a change might require pilot suits to be neutered, and give barely any effect to make stacking less powerful
--- Could destroy the balance of UHAV vs DHAVs before it begins.
--- If we go with the Mod Stacking idea, it is possible for blue berries to enter that give negatives to areas you don't want.
2) Pilot Suits in a Gunner Seat only provide bonuses to that Gun, i.e being in a small blaster turret would only affect that turret.
+++ Allows players to directly bonus the weapon they are using
+++ Makes Turrets (in the hands of a skilled gunner pilot) very effective
+++ Allows dedicated Gunners a way to progress in DUST
--- Pilots would need separate fittings for being a gunner
--- Would need special mods that only target small turrets (and enough variety of them to make varied fittings)
--- Potentially would overtune Small Turret damage. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5067
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 19:46:00 -
[80] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:
All it takes is adding someone to your friend's list, then looking at weekly and monthly kills. Last I checked, you had none for the month. It's easy to figure out, if you played the game.
Here's a screenshot of my wallet transaction, I didn't have time to play yesterday because I was taking care of my sick brother, but you can see I was playing on the 25th. Now please get over yourself, because you clearly have no idea what the hell you're talking about.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v243/leowen/2015-02-27_12-33-00_119_zpszibqzzbn.jpg
EDIT: Just because I know you wont be satisfied with that much, here you go.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v243/leowen/2015-02-27_12-48-44_913_zpstredmviw.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v243/leowen/2015-02-27_12-49-01_85_zpsqrwkexcx.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v243/leowen/2015-02-27_12-49-18_203_zpstsn8hyh5.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v243/leowen/2015-02-27_12-49-29_218_zpsrpqzixdg.jpg
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7396
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 20:31:00 -
[81] - Quote
Spkr lies. He doesn't have Friends, much less a list of them. 
I think it hasn't occurred to him that we don't play in his primetime.
Time zones are hard, yo.
AV
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 22:34:00 -
[82] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:
I think what Simon is getting at is that you could have rigs on the vehicle which affect performance at the cost/gain or PG or CPU.
Additionally pilot suits could be fit with link modules that also offer a large benefit with a small downside, but specifically avoiding PG/CPU changes as not to make vehicle fits invalid without the pilot suit.
Rigs in EVE generally change the CPU/PG of turrets at least and maybe a couple of other things so on a vehicle it wouldn't change much just like a rig on a ship. The pilot suit itself may have link modules but if it contained link modules that alter the amount of CPU/PG (CPU/PG extenders) on a vehicle and i wanted to use that extra PG/CPU on the vehicle (upgrade a module or add another modules) how can i effectively use it if the vehicle fit is invalid and cannot be called in? The only answer i can think is that with the correct pilot suit on you can call in invalid fits because the game recognizes that you are wearing a pilot suit that will make the vehicle fit valid or you spawn in the vehicle with the pilot suit on.
Nothing alters vehicle CPU/PG. That makes it too complicated firstly (ensuring valid fits, balancing etc), secondly everyone will just PG/CPU there suits. Why should I fit a regulator when I can just CPU/PG my way to a comp heavy booster?
The idea I have is universal, doesn't modify vehicle fitting, doesn't offset pilot suit vs non pilot suit greatly, and can be balanced suit side
Entering the void and becoming wind.
Message for 1v1 air to air
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5069
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 22:51:00 -
[83] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:
I think what Simon is getting at is that you could have rigs on the vehicle which affect performance at the cost/gain or PG or CPU.
Additionally pilot suits could be fit with link modules that also offer a large benefit with a small downside, but specifically avoiding PG/CPU changes as not to make vehicle fits invalid without the pilot suit.
Rigs in EVE generally change the CPU/PG of turrets at least and maybe a couple of other things so on a vehicle it wouldn't change much just like a rig on a ship. The pilot suit itself may have link modules but if it contained link modules that alter the amount of CPU/PG (CPU/PG extenders) on a vehicle and i wanted to use that extra PG/CPU on the vehicle (upgrade a module or add another modules) how can i effectively use it if the vehicle fit is invalid and cannot be called in? The only answer i can think is that with the correct pilot suit on you can call in invalid fits because the game recognizes that you are wearing a pilot suit that will make the vehicle fit valid or you spawn in the vehicle with the pilot suit on. Nothing alters vehicle CPU/PG. That makes it too complicated firstly (ensuring valid fits, balancing etc), secondly everyone will just PG/CPU there suits. Why should I fit a regulator when I can just CPU/PG my way to a comp heavy booster? The idea I have is universal, doesn't modify vehicle fitting, doesn't offset pilot suit vs non pilot suit greatly, and can be balanced suit side
Like I said I would avoid having anything on the pilot suit that alters the PG/CPU cost/capacity of anything on the vehicle. If you want to have a rig on the vehicle itself which does that....sure, but the link modules would be something else entirely.
Bear in mind I just yanked rig bonuses from EVE for inspiration, obviously if you have link modules with upsides/downsides (much like Armor Plates, Shield Energizers, ect have) that went on the pilot suit but didn't affect the PG/CPU at all...I think that would work out nicely.
You could also have link modules that offer a lesser benefit with no downside. And example of this for normal modules would be Ferroscale Plates offering less HP than an armor plate, but without the speed penalty.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3008
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 23:03:00 -
[84] - Quote
As if I know your personal issues.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5069
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 23:08:00 -
[85] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:As if I know your personal issues.
Doesn't change the fact that I have been playing, quite frequently in fact. It may not be every day, and it may not be for long periods of time, but I have a life outside of the game I have to live as well. Regardless, I would appreciate it if you stopped pulling baseless accusations out of your ass and trying to use them to discredit me, when you yourself have no idea how much I play.
I've tried many times to have a constructive conversation with you, and I've always been met with nothing but negative abrasive comments from you, typically in you spewing about how I don't know what I'm talking about (which is clearly not true). So until you can pull the stick out of your ass and talk to me like a decent human being and actually contribute to the conversation with more than negative dribble, I will continue to ignore what you say. I tried to be patient, and I tried to work with you, but honestly I am out of fucks to give about you.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Spkr4theDead
Red Star.
3008
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 00:08:00 -
[86] - Quote
It comes down to
1. Bad idea
Rebuttal
2. Bad idea
Rebuttal
3. Bad idea
Rebuttal
That doesn't make me a bad person, it doesn't make me stupid, it doesn't make me evil, it doesn't make me bad at math. I have a boatload of experience to back up my claims. I've been in a tank for a year and a half. When I joined R*S, I had many hours of PC every single day for a month straight, every single one of those hours in a tank. I've made my own spreadsheets, which were half ignored. I make this thread, and it's poo-pooed on because I actually want to give the suits useful bonuses, rather that something worse than useless such as allowing a person to get into a vehicle. I can't think of a bonus more useless than that.
I've also seen another bonus such as adding CPU and PG, without the idea of a rig, with my own reply to myself being more neurons dying. How could a suit you deploy in possibly improve a hull's fitting capability like that? Also, why can't we have 5% to PG, CPU, armor and shield? Why must AV be so damn powerful that one unchecked infantryman with PRO AV can deny access to all vehicles in a 175m radius? Why can't tanks be their own best counter? When I say AV should be a deterrent, that does not mean or imply that I want it to be useless. It implies supplemental damage, not next to no damage.
Why does a metal slug traveling at hypersonic speed do less damage than a forge gun? A forge is modified mining equipment, a railgun has a range measured in miles.
Pilots point out bad ideas, and offer our own, yet we're the ones being unreasonable, when the bad ideas we counter are the unreasonable ones in the first place.
Like the spreadsheet about pilot suits you made a while ago. Direct disadvantages to the advantages you get with the suit? Every single one of them a bad idea. What disadvantages are there to the skills for infantry suits? If I get Amarr logi to 5, does that mean a Core Focused rep tool only reps 50 a second to infantry? No, it does its base rep rate. If I get Gallente assault to level 5, that doesn't mean an SMG does less damage, or have less ammo, or suffer longer reload time, or becomes less accurate. We already have shield recharge delay with the addition of extenders. Why should there be a longer delay with the addition of a pilot suit? It's supposed to make a vehicle better, not add more of a penalty to something.
You say you cannot have a rational argument with any of us, well, we cannot have a rational argument with you. When bad ideas are countered with experience and history, and you don't counter with anything logical, that's not a rational argument.
Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5070
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 00:56:00 -
[87] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:
That doesn't make me a bad person, it doesn't make me stupid, it doesn't make me evil, it doesn't make me bad at math. I have a boatload of experience to back up my claims. I've been in a tank for a year and a half. When I joined R*S, I had many hours of PC every single day for a month straight, every single one of those hours in a tank. I've made my own spreadsheets, which were half ignored. I make this thread, and it's poo-pooed on because I actually want to give the suits useful bonuses, rather that something worse than useless such as allowing a person to get into a vehicle. I can't think of a bonus more useless than that.
I've also seen another bonus such as adding CPU and PG, without the idea of a rig, with my own reply to myself being more neurons dying. How could a suit you deploy in possibly improve a hull's fitting capability like that? Also, why can't we have 5% to PG, CPU, armor and shield?
We actually agree on that. I think the whole "must be in a pilot suit to pilot" idea is stupid, maybe reduce the time to climb in and out of a vehicle....sure, but there needs to be more to it that that. So we agree on that.
I've also stated several times that I'm against any sort of pilot bonus or link module that modifies PG/CPU. We also agree on that.
I also don't have an issue with offering up a similar skill/bonus progression between Dropsuits and Vehicles. Again, we also agree on that.
Spkr4theDead wrote:Why must AV be so damn powerful that one unchecked infantryman with PRO AV can deny access to all vehicles in a 175m radius? Why can't tanks be their own best counter? When I say AV should be a deterrent, that does not mean or imply that I want it to be useless. It implies supplemental damage, not next to no damage.
Well you're obviously speaking out Swarms, which I think in general are too easy to use. I don't think I've ever heard you complain about Plasma Cannons right? I can only imagine the reason is because Plasma Cannons are pretty tough to use, so it has a clearer risk/reward ratio. Swarms are fairly risk free and *really* easy to use. I think in general swarms should be more about sustained DPS, and less about alpha-ing vehicles at medium range. I suppose the short version of that would be long range but less damage, more about doing doing light damage constantly within a large radius -- opposed to Plasma Cannon being really bursty damage in a small radius. But that's really an entirely different conversation.
As for the whole deterrent thing, I think that's just a fundamental difference in opinion. Looking at it from the perspective of a new player, it's difficult to encourage a player to actually run AV if you tell them "Well....its an anti-vehicle weapon but you have a very low chance of ever killing a vehicle with it." Commandos aside, why would anyone want to sacrifice their primary weapon to use an AV weapon which by your definition, isn't designed to actually kill vehicles?
Spkr4theDead wrote:
Pilots point out bad ideas, and offer our own, yet we're the ones being unreasonable, when the bad ideas we counter are the unreasonable ones in the first place.
Like the spreadsheet about pilot suits you made a while ago. Direct disadvantages to the advantages you get with the suit? Every single one of them a bad idea. What disadvantages are there to the skills for infantry suits? If I get Amarr logi to 5, does that mean a Core Focused rep tool only reps 50 a second to infantry? No, it does its base rep rate. If I get Gallente assault to level 5, that doesn't mean an SMG does less damage, or have less ammo, or suffer longer reload time, or becomes less accurate. We already have shield recharge delay with the addition of extenders. Why should there be a longer delay with the addition of a pilot suit? It's supposed to make a vehicle better, not add more of a penalty to something.
It would seem you completely misunderstood what I was getting at in that document. Never did I suggest that a skill bonus should come with an associated downside. Skills should always be 100% benefit with no downside associated with them. What I DID suggest, and have continued to suggest, are Link Modules which offer a sizable benefit to the vehicle you are piloting, with an associated downside.
We see this even in Dropsuit modules, with things like Armor Plates, Shield Extenders, and Shield Energizers. All of which offer a positive benefit in exchange for a negative downside. Link Modules would operate on a similar system. I even suggested variants of said link modules which would offer a smaller benefit with no downside (Ferroscale Plates and Shield Rechargers would be the Dropsuit example).
This is a prime example of why you're impossible to work with. I offer up an idea and you immediately respond with "Its a horrible idea" yet when you finally get around to explaining why you think its a horrible idea, it's clear that you didn't really understand what I was saying in the first place. What I suggested in that document was not anything foreign to the game, dropsuits that offer a positive bonus with no downside, and modules which offer a bonus with a small downside. These are existing concepts that I simply applied to the Pilot Suit idea, yet you dump on them like it's the worst idea ever.
Again, had you taken the time to properly listen and understand what I was saying, instead of immediately jumping into an angry rant, we could have probably had a meaningful discussion about it. But as usual you would rather be negative than actually have a friendly talk.
"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 00:57:00 -
[88] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:
You say you cannot have a rational argument with any of us, well, we cannot have a rational argument with you. When bad ideas are countered with experience and history, and you don't counter with anything logical, that's not a rational argument.
And I never said I couldn't have a rational argument with any of you. It's just you. I have very friendly, positive, and constructive discussions with many members of the community on many various topics. However when individuals such as yourself are only capable of responding with negativity without even completely comprehending what I'm talking about, it's difficult to respond with logic, because you still don't understand what I'm saying. The sad part is that in many cases, i'm actually agreeing with you, but you struggle so much to comprehend what I'm saying that you just assume I'm wrong and respond with more negativity.
I dunno, maybe I'm just really bad at explaining things, more maybe you're really bad at understanding what I'm talking about. But in general people don't have issues understanding what I'm getting at, even if they disagree, yet you seem to be in the small minority that always seems to struggle with it. So I tend to believe that it's the latter of the two.
And here's the thing, I have no issue if you disagree with me. In fact I enjoy when people disagree with me because then I can talk to them and come to a compromise between our ideals. However when you disagree (and hell even when you unwittingly agree) you have to be such an ass about it, that I really don't want to bother with you.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Shamarskii Simon
The Hundred Acre Hood
RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 02:39:00 -
[89] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:
I think what Simon is getting at is that you could have rigs on the vehicle which affect performance at the cost/gain or PG or CPU.
Additionally pilot suits could be fit with link modules that also offer a large benefit with a small downside, but specifically avoiding PG/CPU changes as not to make vehicle fits invalid without the pilot suit.
Rigs in EVE generally change the CPU/PG of turrets at least and maybe a couple of other things so on a vehicle it wouldn't change much just like a rig on a ship. The pilot suit itself may have link modules but if it contained link modules that alter the amount of CPU/PG (CPU/PG extenders) on a vehicle and i wanted to use that extra PG/CPU on the vehicle (upgrade a module or add another modules) how can i effectively use it if the vehicle fit is invalid and cannot be called in? The only answer i can think is that with the correct pilot suit on you can call in invalid fits because the game recognizes that you are wearing a pilot suit that will make the vehicle fit valid or you spawn in the vehicle with the pilot suit on. Nothing alters vehicle CPU/PG. That makes it too complicated firstly (ensuring valid fits, balancing etc), secondly everyone will just PG/CPU there suits. Why should I fit a regulator when I can just CPU/PG my way to a comp heavy booster? The idea I have is universal, doesn't modify vehicle fitting, doesn't offset pilot suit vs non pilot suit greatly, and can be balanced suit side Like I said I would avoid having anything on the pilot suit that alters the PG/CPU cost/capacity of anything on the vehicle. If you want to have a rig on the vehicle itself which does that....sure, but the link modules would be something else entirely. Bear in mind I just yanked rig bonuses from EVE for inspiration, obviously if you have link modules with upsides/downsides (much like Armor Plates, Shield Energizers, ect have) that went on the pilot suit but didn't affect the PG/CPU at all...I think that would work out nicely. You could also have link modules that offer a lesser benefit with no downside. And example of this for normal modules would be Ferroscale Plates offering less HP than an armor plate, but without the speed penalty.
Pokey we definitely are on the same page. Just saying.
Annnyways! Back on topic you guys... Let's try and work on our common goal hmm?
Spkr, pokey; what you think of the suit bonuses?
Also, turret stacking? That doesn't seem like such a bad idea... As long as the pros and cons stack. Helps out dedicated gunners.
But then there's a chance of stacking damage mods... (make 1 fitable only)
Entering the void and becoming wind.
Message for 1v1 air to air
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5075
|
Posted - 2015.02.28 05:12:00 -
[90] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:
Pokey we definitely are on the same page. Just saying.
Annnyways! Back on topic you guys... Let's try and work on our common goal hmm?
Spkr, pokey; what you think of the suit bonuses?
Also, turret stacking? That doesn't seem like such a bad idea... As long as the pros and cons stack. Helps out dedicated gunners.
But then there's a chance of stacking damage mods... (make 1 fitable only)
Turret stacking is tricky. You obviously want the turret to be useful with a single gunner, but not overpowered with 3. I mean if you ever experienced a triple stacked Assault dropship back when they had the 50% DPS bonus on missiles...you understand what overpowered looks like.
Maybe if there was a stacking penalty or something? I mean I'm all for encouraging people to have support gunners but you don't want to make solo vehicles nonviable, or make fully manned vehicles unkillable.
As for bonuses I have a document I wrote a while ago, it needs to be revised but you can see some of my general thoughts on page 8: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16DwpratAsrJ1zbxry8VFqoeAMdFGuc-IsHNSPULZK6M/edit?usp=sharing
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |