DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Hotfix Echo

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] Hotfix Echo - Narrative and Numbers

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 32 post(s)

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17894	Posted - 2015.03.05 06:04:00 - [1] - Quote Dear players, We have been working on Hotfix Echo, more silently than in the past. It is not to say that we donGÇÖt want your feedback, more that we already have it. Aside from the HAV progression thread, that all in all is probably over 100 pages, the rest of the changes have been discussed and vetted before. Some of them may have been less in the spotlight than others, but we believe these all reflect the will of the community and are for the greater good of the game. Many of these changes are supported by a multitude of spreadsheets made by many individual community contributors, such as; starter fittings, AV, HAV slot progression, turret statistiscs and so on. So let us proceed, and know that I am going to elaborate on a few topics, and end on the new vehicles, to make sure no one leaves early to yell angrily about stuff. Detailed numbers are of course in a spreadsheet, available here. Starter Loadouts As part of our never-ending quest to keep our new players happy and playing, we completely revamped the Starter Fits. They have all been given 3 slots, 2/1 or 1/2 arrangements, and faction themed modules and weapons. By playing regularly in the Academy, we have specifically noticed the alarming lack of uplinks, and have therefore added them to Frontline loadouts. We have also added a repair tool to the Medic loadout as the primary equipment. We also want new players to have counters to all threats, so have added the Shield AV fit with a plasma cannon (versus Armor AV using the swarm launcher), while both Anti-Vehicle starter fits have been given AV grenades, that by the way have been increased to 3 carried instead of 2, and nano-hives to replenish those weapons. Finally, in a sweeping change, we are removing the Sniper loadout, and replacing it with the Recon loadout. The Sniper has proven to be far too passive as a role for new players, and we want to encourage them to get into the thick of it. The Recon loadout is focused on getting quickly and silently into position, hacking and establishing a frontal base of operations. Movement We are going to reduce backpedal speed, to 85% of forward speed. There are three main reasons, 1) itGÇÖs silly to walk as fast backwards as forward, and not the case in common fpsGÇÖs, 2) itGÇÖs too easy to kite an opponent at range, f.ex. tilting the favor to range over dps on rifles, 3) melee attacks are difficult to master, especially if you canGÇÖt catch up after your first swing. Game Modes and Maps As has been reported, we are changing the Research Facility socket to the Communications Outpost, for the relevant Planetary Conquest District Battles. This is a part of our mission to locate, fix and iterate on known issues for performance. We are also removing, based on popular demand, consistency, and balance issues, all vehicles from Ambush OMS. Ambush will from now on be infantry only, a traditional Team Death Match mode. Handheld Weapons Heavy Machine Guns Always a touchy subject, but by deep diving we see that the normal HMG is completely prevalent in Planetary Conquest, has a K/S ratio above what it acceptable, and renders short range rifles such as the Gallente Assault Rifle moot, something needed to be done. So we are reducing range on the HMG and Burst while keeping the the Assault HMG the highest range. We will also be reducing the ROF and increasing the damage on the Assault HMG, to make it a sort of an auto-cannon (with 75% efficiency against vehicles), that is able to interrupt shield recharge on LAVs, which is in turn being reduced from 102 to 40. Assault Scrambler Rifles Increased damage quite massively, itGÇÖs simply a weapon that is not performing adequately, anywhere. The reasoning for GÇ£breakingGÇ¥ the range vs dps curve, is the heat factor, which is a downside shared with the scrambler rifle, and likewise, with a downside, we warrant the upside in damage. LetGÇÖs see how it performs now. Plasma Cannons These are, as demonstrated by the community, the worst AV weapon currently, and outclassed by the Swarm Launcher. Increasing reload speed, dps or flight speed, would make it too good against infantry, so we just went with a solid 13% increase in damage across all tiers. This will be good for those Anti-Shield Starter loadouts. Equipment Deployables Simple, we have increased the carried amount of all deployable equipment by 3, since bandwidth has reduced individual spam of equipment, allowing simpler redistribution, sort of a chain of uplinks or hives from the start of the battle. We have, however, also a need to reduce the efficiency of drop uplinks, and are reducing the spawns per uplink by 50%. We have also reduced bandwidth of Proximity Explosives from 2 to 1. Cloak Fields Community raised the issue of cloak fields being very hard to fit on standard and advanced dropsuits so we decreased fitting costs on the STD and ADV versions. Dropsuit Modules Myofibril Stimulants simply increase strength and thereby melee damage. All right, said the community, why wouldnGÇÖt it make your legs stronger as well? So we just added that functionality to them and now you can jump higher by adding them to your loadouts, opening up a whole new tactical gameplay plus allowing sentinels to jump a few of those hamster height curbs they canGÇÖt cross now. Turrets Small Turrets In our efforts to make the Small Blaster turret the Anti-Infantry turret it is supposed to be, we have reduced dispersion considerably, and used the same mechanic that HMG has, which is inverse dispersion, the weapon becomes more accurate over time. Utilizing some of the new Vehicle modules, our hope is that the Small Blaster becomes a real threat on the battlefield. Large Turrets We made tweaks to make the Missile launcher ROF a little less, and increased heat build-up on Railguns. We reduced ROF on Blaster Turrets, while keeping DPS the same by increasing damage per projectile. That also makes sure that multi-hardened shield vehicles can be engaged, especially if utilizing the two new vehicle modules. We spent quite some time with the community on discussing Turrets, and are striving for solid balance between the three. New Vehicle Modules We are adding the following modules to increase flavor of vehicle loadouts. They are specifically picked to support playstyles that are currently at a disadv... "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17905	Posted - 2015.03.05 06:36:00 - [2] - Quote Foundation Seldon wrote: Light Assault Vehicle Hmm ... hard to say anything without having solid numbers in front of me. Numbers are in the link "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17911	Posted - 2015.03.05 06:39:00 - [3] - Quote LOOKMOM NOHANDS wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Movement We are going to reduce backpedal speed, to 85% of forward speed. There are three main reasons, 1) itGÇÖs silly to walk as fast backwards as forward, and not the case in common fpsGÇÖs, 2) itGÇÖs too easy to kite an opponent at range, f.ex. tilting the favor to range over dps on rifles, 3) melee attacks are difficult to master, especially if you canGÇÖt catch up after your first swing. Will this affect backwards movement when jumping? Side note for something else in the hotfix. Would it be possible to increase the frequency of the maps that are just a large socket with very tight red lines? These are very fun and seem to run much better in terms of performance. Good idea "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17914	Posted - 2015.03.05 06:53:00 - [4] - Quote Y-BLOCK wrote: Assault scrambler numbers reversed?? Fixed thanks! "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17915	Posted - 2015.03.05 07:03:00 - [5] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: One concern with the ASCR, which I currently use. (Clearly making me an idiot since the weapon is apparently far crappier than I realized) With an Amarr Assault at level 5, this gun does not overheat. I can fire a full clip without overheat, not that I would want to as the accuracy becomes worse than shooting blind. With this large buff (which I am thankful for) I feel it might make the ASCR with an Amarr Assault too powerful. Basically it's drawback is moot, and you give it a free advantage at no downside. At 200 kills in PC, I am not to worried. Let's monitor PC kills data and see if it even shows up in a month. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17924	Posted - 2015.03.05 07:40:00 - [6] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: "HMG DPS: 38400" I notice native rep rates have appeared on tanks. Will they appear on LAVs? Small blasters also needed a slight range buff too... They have plenty of range, it's just ruined by dispersion, with inverse dispersion it should become more accurate over time and use that range. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17924	Posted - 2015.03.05 07:41:00 - [7] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: "HMG DPS: 38400" sounds of sobbing I believe you have an oddity in your spreadsheet. This column should be damage per minute, or it needs a /60 tacked on. ASCR changes are great. Equipment changes... tripling the amount you can carry? O_O Wow. So if I carry Ishukone Gauged Nanohives I can carry 12? What's with reducing the fitting requirements on the cloaks by <2% at proto? Is that going to make much difference? I am immensely pleased by the LAV HP nerfs. In an age of BPO LAVs we do not need LAVs with such absurdly high HP numbers. Hopefully the increased fitting space will be good for drivers who properly fit their LAVs, too. Blaster turrets... What are these changes intended to achieve? To make the blaster a more AV oriented turret? I'm not sure that works as for a 15% increase in DPS heat has increased by a third, and sustained DPS is important when trying to kill a tank with it. Speaking of blaster turrets, will dispersion be coming to the emplacements? I wonder how missiles will fare. I notice native rep rates have appeared on tanks. Will they appear on LAVs? Cloak fitting is meant to specifically address lower variants as STD and ADV scouts had a hard time fitting any cloaks. This is not meant for proto scouts/cloaks. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17934	Posted - 2015.03.05 09:21:00 - [8] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Two critiques: Assault HMG: let's just bite the bullet and make it 100% AV. take away the aim down sight and aim assist so it can be balanced to fight vehicles without becoming an infantry devouring god-monster. As I have said elsewhere I have a proposal for autocannon firing mechanics and stats if you are interested. Plasma cannon: there is no problem the PLC has that can't be fixed by sharply reducing the reload and charge speeds. That alone will cure most ills. Details in my sig. reload will affect infantry effectiveness where as more damage won't, as it already OHK almost everyone "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17934	Posted - 2015.03.05 09:24:00 - [9] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: The new starter loadouts sound really cool and interesting, showcasing some of Dusts unique weapons. I'd appreciate it you could release a spreadsheet of the planned fits for community critique. I'm glad the small blaster is getting looked at, I think this will really help it out. I am worried that the large blaster with decreased RoF, increased damage, and the dispersion mod will become more anti-infantry focused. Sniping one or two shots in bursts is already pretty effective against infantry. The Starter loadouts are all in the sheet . Large Rails kill more infantry than Large blasters right now , it's ok if they get slightly better. 3 AV grenades. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17937	Posted - 2015.03.05 09:35:00 - [10] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Simple Changes Backpedal speed only makes sense, people never moves quickly backwards as they do forwards. This will be a nice buff to Nova Knifers Jump Height increase seems fun, though I still think some base increase to jump height, even without a Mirofib, is much needed. A heavy shouldn't have to put on a module just to transverse basic terrain. Even a very small increase would help stop the Uplink Heavy Deathtraps we often see. 13% increase to Plasma Cannon alpha damage? WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW?! BWAHAHAHAHA HMG changes look....interesting. We'll see how it all plays out. Cloak changes seem totally reasonable. When the role bonus of the Scout is the cloak, but you can't even use it until level 3 or 4 while still maintaining a viable fit....that's a problem. Hopefully this will ease that restriction up a bit. LAVs This seems like a reasonable stopgap to cut down on the excessively tanky, unfit LAVs. I do however think we need to have a full LAV pass at a later date to truly address them. (I know you're thinking, "Oh god, I'm never doing a vehicle rebalance again!" but honestly I think you'll find the LAV crowd far less.....feisty than the HAV crowd. As for dropships well....hahahaha....good luck with that one. Turrets General buff to Blasters looks pretty decent, massive decrease in magazine size is interesting to say the least. I might have to put a few more points into that reload speed now. We'll see how that plays out. Large Rails....looks like more shots per magazine....meh fine, I dont think it was needed but I can't think of a valid downside. Increase to heat buildup though....will that reduce the number of shots before overheat from 4 to 3 without a heat sink now? Large Missiles....well then, I knew they needed to be toned down a bit but I think you might have gone too far with that reload. We'll see how much it affects their performance but I'd keep an eye on that one. Vehicle Modules So shield hardeners will be harder to fit and armor hardeners will resist the same amount of damage now. This will probably discourage excessive stacking of shield hardeners, though I have to ask....shield hardeners do have a much shorter duration and a longer cooldown than an armor hardener. Given that Armor Hardeners will resist the same amount now, will you be looking at modifying the duration/cooldown of shield hardeners to bring it closer to armor hardeners? Shield Regulators look awesome. 2 Complex Regulators will reduce a 4 second delay down to ~1.8s which will be beastly against infantry AV (recharge delay will be shorter than AV weapon refire rate) Active Heat Sinks are awesome, I've missed them so. Dispersion Reduction modules look nice too, will be nice to give them a try. HAVs I noticed you decreased the resources for both HAVs (at least at the Proto level I checked), what is your reasoning behind this? The increase to skill multiplier is interesting to say the least. Do you have plans to add a bonus/level to this skill in the future? Armor hardener needs to be viable, if you are hardening your shields, you still have them. That is not a luxury of armor hardeners. HAV resources were tuned down a bit to be future-proof for a PG/CPU boosting skills, also simply concerns for infantry balance. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"



CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17937	Posted - 2015.03.05 09:36:00 - [11] - Quote Sinboto Simmons wrote: Interesting idea to make the LAVs less protected, have you considered adding another slot as well? Or adding ADV/PRO LAVs? Currently the slots are 1/2 and 2/1 methana-saga respectively, with the decrease in health I'm concerned with the LAVs becoming nothing more than scanning platforms and not actual attack vehicles. Especially considering how little hp the modules actually give. Not to mention that it's very unlikely that a saga could be anywhere near as effective with one of two valuable slots taken by a scanner. Just my thought, but take a look if you may. That is easily the best way to buff LAV's, adding slots. Good point (for later) "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17938	Posted - 2015.03.05 09:43:00 - [12] - Quote Jebus McKing wrote: AScR buff is too much. It is not as bad of a weapon as people say it is. Sure, it has issues with armor tankers, naturally, but apart from that it is quite decent already. With this buff though it will have the highest DPS of all rifle assault variants AND the second highest range. Also, I found the heat built-up to not be a problem at all, not even if using a non-AM-Assault suit. AScR will be Bolt Pistol 2.0. But I trust in Rattati to hotfix the hotfix in a timely manner if my predictions become reality. Myofibs only giving 25% jump height at PRO? Hm, I expected more. What about also reducing the CPU requirements a bit? Currently it requires 51 CPU, which is a lot for a module with such limited usefulness. I will monitor the ASCR. The Myofibs need to be scaled at triple stacking. Otherwise we will be seeing players jumping "silly" and I don't want that, I want ninjas, not Hancock "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17943	Posted - 2015.03.05 09:57:00 - [13] - Quote Francois Sanchez wrote: I forgot to ask if the removal/reduction of the ridiculous scan range penalty of the cloak was still on the table? Scout bonus encourages you to fit a cloak while you're better when running around without it, there is something not right here. Ask any good scouts, they use it only to climb ladders and sometimes to cross wide open areas or to hack an installation (only if it's in the open, otherwise it's better to hack uncloaked). We do not want risk-free gameplay, neither picking your targets while invisible for a shot in the back, nor hacking with perfect awareness of your surroundings, while invisible. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18082	Posted - 2015.03.06 02:33:00 - [14] - Quote Doc DDD wrote: Mostly excited for the patch as it has potential.. Have same concerns as a few others. Scrambler buff... Ok so no one in thier right mind runs shield fits as Armor>Shields... so lets buff the anti shield gun that no one is using since no one runs shields... Instead of 3 people running shields on the server there will be around 1... the problem is using the scrambler sucks against armor and EVERYONE IS RUNNING ARMOR... balance shields first then look at the scrambler rifle. Yo Rattati armor hardeners needed some love but going from 50% worse than shield hardeners to 50% better is swaying the pendulum pretty far in the direction of armor tanks. Infantry is already dominated by armor.. we want tanks doing the same thing? That duration is going to make running Incubus and armor HAVS the only option... 30% makes far more sense given how long they last. Shield tanks have like 900 armor that spells death to any weapon while armor tanks have like 1200 shields that is used as a buffer... while the regulators are a good start, without shield boosters being viable there are going to be A LOT of armor tanks. Myofibrils + RE spam is going to get old fast Dropsuit Shield and Armor tanking are currently at pretty good parity. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18089	Posted - 2015.03.06 09:21:00 - [15] - Quote Update, and the spreadsheet is updated as well, and added to the OP. "After making the Starter loadouts much better, we ran into the issue of PG/CPU capacity. The situation was tricky because Militia and Standard Basic Frames were not in parity, and we wanted to simplify fitting so that all starter fits had the same PG/CPU capacity. However, we also had an old issue we could fix at the same time, Basic Medium Frames have been underpowered for a while and the solution was simple. Massively increase and equalize all Basic Medium Frame capacity, make them worth skilling up to Prototype, and give Militia Dropsuits a reduced, fixed % of Standard capacity. So thatGÇÖs what we did. Coupled with the fact that we reduced the ISK cost of Basic Dropsuits in a recent hotfix, will hopefully make them viable choices for battle. To fine-tune the Starter loadouts, and increase parity of militia choices, we also made tweaks to the PG/CPU requirements of a few militia items as well." "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18102	Posted - 2015.03.06 13:40:00 - [16] - Quote Cavani1EE7 wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Mostly excited for the patch as it has potential.. Have same concerns as a few others. Scrambler buff... Ok so no one in thier right mind runs shield fits as Armor>Shields... so lets buff the anti shield gun that no one is using since no one runs shields... Instead of 3 people running shields on the server there will be around 1... the problem is using the scrambler sucks against armor and EVERYONE IS RUNNING ARMOR... balance shields first then look at the scrambler rifle. Yo Rattati armor hardeners needed some love but going from 50% worse than shield hardeners to 50% better is swaying the pendulum pretty far in the direction of armor tanks. Infantry is already dominated by armor.. we want tanks doing the same thing? That duration is going to make running Incubus and armor HAVS the only option... 30% makes far more sense given how long they last. Shield tanks have like 900 armor that spells death to any weapon while armor tanks have like 1200 shields that is used as a buffer... while the regulators are a good start, without shield boosters being viable there are going to be A LOT of armor tanks. Myofibrils + RE spam is going to get old fast Dropsuit Shield and Armor tanking are currently at pretty good parity. Says the guy who bases everything off numbers while knowing nothing about his own game meta. yeah totally "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18149	Posted - 2015.03.07 02:14:00 - [17] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Most very good! But few are not: Removal of vehicles from ambush OMS: because lessens the option and variety. There was no problem about people not playing OMSs and leaving. Now it will be possible to play dust with zero intent on skilling up AV. I call this 'dumbening the game'. Not that vehicular slaughter did not exist, no. But it certainly was not prevalent. Increasing deployable equipment carried amount by THREE Oh no. That WILL increase nade spam. I promise, I will multiply my Core nade spam amount! That would require a nade nerf of sorts (nade resupply rate should be increased a lot) Small turrets I still guess the change won't be enough to make them usable. Sorry. At least no for ADS use (5x range for ADS blasters would do that) New vehicle modules: Unless the fitting costs are minimal, I suspect they will remain gimmicks. This has been true to several 'funny' Eve modules in the past, and especially true in case of Dust. It was never worth sacrificing much PG/CPU for turret rotation or cooldown bonus, let alone a module slot! But hey, as I said, most are good or even great! L MSL turrets really needed that nerf. Backpedaling has been also long awaited. I am even considering a squad free ambush mode. Grenades are not deployable equipment, this applies to nanohives, proximity explosives and drop uplinks. On the other topics, we will see. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18150	Posted - 2015.03.07 02:50:00 - [18] - Quote Raffael-Puma Austria wrote: Why assault hmg gets a 120 clip? It had to be 425! And range from normal hmg of 40,2 meters is to short, it has to be 60m! And the damage has to be by baundless 20.5!!!! Rattati you will lose very much players! I go to reallife, because only YOU destroy the game since Hotfix Alfa to much! All tank changes are also unnecessary! I can promise you we will monitor these numbers carefully, and I am pretty sure I haven't destroyed the game . "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18150	Posted - 2015.03.07 02:56:00 - [19] - Quote LOOKMOM NOHANDS wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Most very good! But few are not: Removal of vehicles from ambush OMS: because lessens the option and variety. There was no problem about people not playing OMSs and leaving. Now it will be possible to play dust with zero intent on skilling up AV. I call this 'dumbening the game'. Not that vehicular slaughter did not exist, no. But it certainly was not prevalent. Increasing deployable equipment carried amount by THREE Oh no. That WILL increase nade spam. I promise, I will multiply my Core nade spam amount! That would require a nade nerf of sorts (nade resupply rate should be increased a lot) Small turrets I still guess the change won't be enough to make them usable. Sorry. At least no for ADS use (5x range for ADS blasters would do that) New vehicle modules: Unless the fitting costs are minimal, I suspect they will remain gimmicks. This has been true to several 'funny' Eve modules in the past, and especially true in case of Dust. It was never worth sacrificing much PG/CPU for turret rotation or cooldown bonus, let alone a module slot! But hey, as I said, most are good or even great! L MSL turrets really needed that nerf. Backpedaling has been also long awaited. I am even considering a squad free ambush mode. Grenades are not deployable equipment, this applies to nanohives, proximity explosives and drop uplinks. On the other topics, we will see. I believe his point is that an assault suit will be able to fill itself up on grenades over and over again. Lets say an assault only resupplies two grenades before running off. The new increase gives 5 nanohives that can be deployed at various times. This means that with only a small pause and assault carrying a hive is now essentially carrying a total of 12 grenades. Just imagine a scout on high ground with 2 sets of nanohives. He now essentially has 22+ grenades to drop. The same principle applies to REs. I for one do not feel good about seeing all equipment go up by 3 because of this. I think the carried equipment count is just fine where it is. I think it's going to be great, you will be able to reposition rapidly. Grenade spam is a not a big issue in our game right now, and nanohives were not being used much except by dedicated logis. If scouts are going to use one slot to be able to throw a few grenades, then good for him. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18152	Posted - 2015.03.07 03:18:00 - [20] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Raffael-Puma Austria wrote: Why assault hmg gets a 120 clip? It had to be 425! And range from normal hmg of 40,2 meters is to short, it has to be 60m! And the damage has to be by baundless 20.5!!!! Rattati you will lose very much players! I go to reallife, because only YOU destroy the game since Hotfix Alfa to much! All tank changes are also unnecessary! You're going to be able to blow holes in vehicles. Honestly the old assault HMG did not work. So it's being changed. One of the reasons is we need a minmatar AV gun. TThe assault was a good weapon to test. It will do less DPS but it looks like an excellent weapon choice for the minsent or calsent. It will also chew infantry fairly well. So what I see looks very good. What we get needs to be tested thoroughly by shooting people. Very similar dps, a little lower than normal because it can harm vehicles whereas the other one can not. The clip is reduced to have similar damage per clip and ammo reserves. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"



CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18216	Posted - 2015.03.08 13:24:00 - [21] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: That's... a very high AV DPS on the AHMG. That's going to outDPS all other AV weapons, actually. Is that intentional? Of all the AV weapons, the AHMG is the one that can be best used against infantry in addition to its AV role. I don't think so, can you demonstrate with numbers please :) Galmando PLC with Echo buff Minmando Swarm Top AHMG sentinel all at max skills. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18217	Posted - 2015.03.08 14:36:00 - [22] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: That's... a very high AV DPS on the AHMG. That's going to outDPS all other AV weapons, actually. Is that intentional? Of all the AV weapons, the AHMG is the one that can be best used against infantry in addition to its AV role. I don't think so, can you demonstrate with numbers please :), to err is to be human so anything is possible. Galmando PLC with Echo buff Minmando Swarm Top AHMG sentinel all at max skills. Righto, I haven't actually run the numbers yet and that was off the top of my head, so let's go. Will disregard proficiency for all weapons because it only applies to certain damage types. Let's look at raw damage. Summary at the bottom. Galmando with Allotek does 1870 damage per shot (glorious). Reload time with Galmando is 3.5.75 = 2.25. Charge time with maxed skill is 0.45s. Therefore max fire rate without lag and with perfect timing is one shot per 2.7 seconds. 1870/2.7 = 692 DPS Minmando with Wiyrkomis does 1373 damage per volley. Lock on time is 1.05s with max skills. I'm not entirely sure how to calculate swarm DPS, honestly. I know there's a forced delay between lock ons and the SDE suggests that's 1 second, but I might be reading the wrong thing. Let's go with the 1 second number for now. 1373 damage per 2.05 seconds means 669 DPS. Top AHMG sentinel: The best case scenario for an AHMG is on the Galsent because it can fit 2x damage mods. 2x HDMs gives about a 9% damage increase. The proto AHMG does 616 DPS under the current proposal. 6161.09 = 671 DPS Let's add the forge gun to this list. Your normal proto forge gun hits for 1440 damage every 3 seconds. With the same circumstances as the AHMG, this leads to 523 DPS. An IAFG will do substantially more at 726 DPS. Summary: So under optimal circumstances: PLCs do 692 DPS. Swarms do 669 DPS (?) AHMGs do 671 DPS FGs do 523 DPS IAFGs do 726 DPS Hm. They're all very close, really. AHMG does very similar damage to swarms and marginally less than the Galmando PLC. Bearing in mind that the Galmando does wonderful, wonderful things to the placon I will point out that a double damage modded non-commando allotek placon without the bonus does 481 DPS. The placon is comparatively only viable on the Galmando, then. Anyhow, looks like I was wrong about it outDPSing -all- other AV weapons. However, it's very similar in terms of DPS to all the others! IAFGs are the only ones that noticeably outDPS it, at 50 DPS more, and that's a difference of less than 10%. My concern is that it can very viably compete with all other AV options on raw DPS (and indeed, if those other AV options aren't in optimal circumstances it will noticeably outDPS a good few of them) while being much easier to use than the other options and also being by far the most effective against infantry. No other AV weapon offers anywhere near as much anti-infantry capability as the AHMG, but the AHMG is right up there with the best of the AV options at the same time. It offers, quite literally, the best of both worlds. Good, thanks, I had done the same but the work was at the office. Now, only the swarm, the highest dps AV weapon, is the only weapon with no AI capability, as it should. The other ones do both have solid OHK AI capabilities, so the AHMG isn't alone there. However, it does have heat so should be balanced by that. Other than that, I am happy to welcome the Minmatar AV weapon to the game and now we are only missing a heavy laser of some sort. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18260	Posted - 2015.03.09 09:20:00 - [23] - Quote GLOBAL RAGE wrote: True Adamance wrote: Bright Cloud wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: Don't forget, swarms are also the most skillless weapon in the game. That's a very debatable point. It's not so much that the weapons as skill-less....that's a poor term indeed it is that the weapon is very hands off about the way it applies damage....though to some degree that is a very exploitable weakness of the weapon. It doesnt need a good player to just point the swarm launcher at the general direction of a vehicle, get a lock on and then fire the swarm volley. So yes it does not require skill cause once you done that the swarms will fly sright towards the targeted vehicle. What it does require arguably is a player able to be in the right position to compensate for the dumb AI that Swarms have. AKA being in a position where the HAV pilot cannot exploit cover. and then defend yourself with a sidearm. Exactly. Some pilots just keep hammering this topic in an effort to win some forum points. Nobody is listening to this particular rhetoric at CCP. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18268	Posted - 2015.03.09 13:36:00 - [24] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Exactly. Some pilots just keep hammering this topic in an effort to win some forum points. Nobody is listening to this particular rhetoric at CCP. It's not rhetoric if it's true Rattati, it's called arguing the point. Many of us find swarms so frustrating because they are mathematically guaranteed to hit. Its 'consistency' has often been a very frustrating point of balance, I remember 1.6 gameplay where I was shot down by swarm fire from the *other side of the map* by someone who went 'oh noes there's a dropship out time to grab a swarm and aggressively hold r1 at this thing that offends me while standing on a nanohive for forever!' The balance pendulum has swung many times on the swarm where it's gone from overpowered (pre 1.7) to useless (1.7 triple rep maddies) to powerful (hey it could kill tanks again!) to useless (dropships need only hit an afterburner to zoom away!) to powerful again (get too close to a swarm launcher and you are dead - user skill is irrelevant). Maybe it's time to re-think the weapon from the ground up as it's clear that its current form is fundamentally flawed from a balance standpoint. I'd love to see a swarm launcher that can be boiled down to a wordsoup of 'plasma cannon + av grenade lockon'. Who is more likely to die, the swarmer or the ADS? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18274	Posted - 2015.03.09 14:39:00 - [25] - Quote Balistyc Farshot wrote: This discussion as had on several posts. The spam doesn't belong here. Agreed, no more swarm ADS discussion in this thread. It will be deleted. Neither are a topic of Hotfix Echo. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18288	Posted - 2015.03.10 03:23:00 - [26] - Quote Haerr wrote: So about the HAV skill going from x4 to x8: If we have already specced it to 5 once the changes go live will SP be deducted from the unallocated pool? yes "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18288	Posted - 2015.03.10 03:26:00 - [27] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: That's... a very high AV DPS on the AHMG. That's going to outDPS all other AV weapons, actually. Is that intentional? Of all the AV weapons, the AHMG is the one that can be best used against infantry in addition to its AV role. I don't think so, can you demonstrate with numbers please :), to err is to be human so anything is possible. Galmando PLC with Echo buff Minmando Swarm Top AHMG sentinel all at max skills. Righto, I haven't actually run the numbers yet and that was off the top of my head, so let's go. Will disregard proficiency for all weapons because it only applies to certain damage types. Let's look at raw damage. Summary at the bottom. Galmando with Allotek does 1870 damage per shot (glorious). Reload time with Galmando is 3.5.75 = 2.25. Charge time with maxed skill is 0.45s. Therefore max fire rate without lag and with perfect timing is one shot per 2.7 seconds. 1870/2.7 = 692 DPS Minmando with Wiyrkomis does 1373 damage per volley. Lock on time is 1.05s with max skills. I'm not entirely sure how to calculate swarm DPS, honestly. I know there's a forced delay between lock ons and the SDE suggests that's 1 second, but I might be reading the wrong thing. Let's go with the 1 second number for now. 1373 damage per 2.05 seconds means 669 DPS. Top AHMG sentinel: The best case scenario for an AHMG is on the Galsent because it can fit 2x damage mods. 2x HDMs gives about a 9% damage increase. The proto AHMG does 616 DPS under the current proposal. 6161.09 = 671 DPS Let's add the forge gun to this list. Your normal proto forge gun hits for 1440 damage every 3 seconds. With the same circumstances as the AHMG, this leads to 523 DPS. An IAFG will do substantially more at 726 DPS. Summary: So under optimal circumstances: PLCs do 692 DPS. Swarms do 669 DPS (?) AHMGs do 671 DPS FGs do 523 DPS IAFGs do 726 DPS Hm. They're all very close, really. AHMG does very similar damage to swarms and marginally less than the Galmando PLC. Bearing in mind that the Galmando does wonderful, wonderful things to the placon I will point out that a double damage modded non-commando allotek placon without the bonus does 481 DPS. The placon is comparatively only viable on the Galmando, then. Anyhow, looks like I was wrong about it outDPSing -all- other AV weapons. However, it's very similar in terms of DPS to all the others! IAFGs are the only ones that noticeably outDPS it, at 50 DPS more, and that's a difference of less than 10%. My concern is that it can very viably compete with all other AV options on raw DPS (and indeed, if those other AV options aren't in optimal circumstances it will noticeably outDPS a good few of them) while being much easier to use than the other options and also being by far the most effective against infantry. No other AV weapon offers anywhere near as much anti-infantry capability as the AHMG, but the AHMG is right up there with the best of the AV options at the same time. It offers, quite literally, the best of both worlds. EDIT: I am also concerned that the Galmando is practically required to have viable placon DPS. I know the bonuses fit the commando type, but they just do so much good for the placon that you pretty much need to have them to use the placon viably. @Arkena, @Rattati Very important inevitable outcome here that I must point out, the Assault HMG must work uphill against the shield regen of vehicles that will NOT BE BROKEN by the minimum damage that it applies. You may think the DPS looks similar on paper until you realize all those weapons break the minimum shield regen damage requirement EXCEPT for the AHMG. Meaning it has anywhere between 120 to 200 HP/s taken off it's DPS numbers unless you are already into armor. exactly, someone needs to break shield recharge for them, or flux the vehicle. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18291	Posted - 2015.03.10 04:51:00 - [28] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: DRT 99 wrote: i dont think the AHMG not breaking shield regen is a big deal. Most heavies already carry fluxes, and av oriented AHMG heavies will carry the newly buffed AV grenades. we going to require swarms to use flux/AV nades to break regen too? this can't be a surprise? the AHM is doing 50 ish dmg, and the shield regen threshold is 102. Are you suggesting we bring it down to 50? Like the LAV threshold? Haven't fully thought that through, but maybe it's ok. The AMG has the highest AI capability, and therefore has the lowest AV capability. Maybe the ROF of the AHMG can be brought further down, increasing the hit damage. Let's see how this pans out. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18291	Posted - 2015.03.10 08:42:00 - [29] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: DRT 99 wrote: i dont think the AHMG not breaking shield regen is a big deal. Most heavies already carry fluxes, and av oriented AHMG heavies will carry the newly buffed AV grenades. we going to require swarms to use flux/AV nades to break regen too? this can't be a surprise? the AHM is doing 50 ish dmg, and the shield regen threshold is 102. Are you suggesting we bring it down to 50? Like the LAV threshold? Haven't fully thought that through, but maybe it's ok. The AMG has the highest AI capability, and therefore has the lowest AV capability. Maybe the ROF of the AHMG can be brought further down, increasing the hit damage. Let's see how this pans out. 50? Does that mean a tact ar could stop shield regen? That's a bit much Rifles have 1% efficiency against vehicles (or thereabouts) so can inflict no damage. AHMG has 100% in Hotfix Echo. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18316	Posted - 2015.03.11 02:07:00 - [30] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: I'm reading it as one big giant vehicle nerf frankly with more power to AV again. AHMG will be the only HMG to go for, the ability to kill infantry and vehicles at the same time and it will be easy for infantry. The last time vehicles had a turret which could do this it got nerfed and accuracy replaced with luck. The PLC, nice it got a buff but it will still perform the worst out of the AV weapons, even the new AHMG will do better while the SL is still king for the no skill players and it is still broken and needs to be removed and reworked or outright deleted. The small blaster turret gets a small buff but requires me to use a secondary person to kill infantry, will it take 2 AV to kill the vehicle overall? The large railgun, increase ammo and increase heat means i will still only be able to fire 4 shots and then overheat, so no change. The large missile, less ammo, lower ROF and longer reload time while it still has next to 0 splash damage for a 6ft missile in which it is outclassed by a grenade/flaylock/mass driver/PLC and anything else with splash. The large blaster, less ammo, smaller clip, lower ROF and more heat, nice nerfs Overall the turrets are mostly nerfed again. Shield regulators a new low slot module but if it is inferior to an armor module then armor is king, still no sign of nanofibres/torque modules/power diagnostic system modules or even the removal of active damage mods and back to the low slot passive versions which exist in EVE. Active heat sink, an actual old module i remember and used. Active dispersion module so that my blaster doesn't miss a LAV at 50m, still not a fan of the luck replaces accuracy gun model that we have. LAV - Big nerf so they are basically coffins on wheels, a Cal sentinal has more shield hp than a LAV and if this new LAV rolls over i can see it blowing up, will be used for getting to a point quickly but if you plan on fitting it up and using it then it wont work because it will still be very weak. HAV - Madrugar - 'We created one (the same) loadout of the new slot layout for each tier, using standard, advanced and prototype gear in each tier, all at max skills' - Cookie cutter fits, no variety in there at all, i'm hoping i have enough PG/CPU to mix it up but if not then everyone runs the same fit as they already do now. The only good thing is the improved armor hardener. HAV - 'Prototype' - No they are not, If you compare a Basic Gallente Medium Frame to a Prototype Gallente Medium Frame you can see the difference is in PG/CPU amounts and slot layout which is improved between each tier. With vehicles and the HAV this is not the case, the slot layout is the same across all tiers which does not increase variety, it just means that from basic to prototype the modules will go from basic to prototype. HAV - Training cost mulitplier x4 to x8 - What is the skill bonus? I do not want to skill 2.7mil for nothing like what happens in the majority of vehicle skills now. Disclaimer: The above post is respectful, contains no ranting, contains no personal attacks, contains no trolling, contains no racism, contains no discrimination, contains no profanity, contains no spamming. This post is an opinion and is related to DUST514 Can't really argue with you there. We've still not heard about the skill tree being fixed and actually worth the time of day. Nothing about Damage Control Modules and as you said Heat Sinks and Passive Damage Modules. Nor might I add a return to the Active Armour Repper [even going so far as to institute BLOODY Native armour reps that no vehicle pilot asked for]. Finally still no word on attempt to form racial vehicle parity..... What about the the 3 phases of bring back didn't you understand? We actually managed to add three modules, that were NOT a part of phase 1. To remind you. 1) Progression for HAVs and Balance tweaks 2) Additional Modules and Balance tweaks 3) Racial Hulls - this could not and can not happen until we know 1) and 2) have been successful. Very unhappy with the reaction to a lot of work on our and the community's behalf on vehicles. Coupled with the constant negativity, this is not an encouragement to keep working on 2) and 3), frankly. "One giant vehicle nerf with more power to AV", you have got to be kidding... "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"



CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18322	Posted - 2015.03.11 03:34:00 - [31] - Quote True Adamance wrote: True Adamance wrote: Firstly I apologise it was an unkind and poorly thought out knee jerk reaction born of a long practised negativity. I do genuinely appreciate what you and your guys are doing, especially tackling vehicles, and engaging us on the subject. And though I do appreciate it I do have a few concerns that I'll voice else where. The latter comment was as previously mentioned passion for a specific kind of gameplay masquerading as something it was not. I don't mean to sound ungrateful even though I suppose is very much so do.....not so easy to detach as I previously told myself it was and I certainly don't mean to be discouraging. The changes are a good start, I do hope you build on them and we can see some real change. Figured the post had already been seen after the edit. It's all good, it's just truly frustrating to me personally when pillars of the community take a ride on the hate-train when I have finally learned (somewhat) to live with the existence of said train. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18322	Posted - 2015.03.11 03:46:00 - [32] - Quote Never seen finer words to end a thread. We are closed and further feedback can be given after deployment. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

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.