CCP Rattati has so far ignored these issues that are relevant to Hotfix Echo:

• For the starter fits, seems kind of redundant to have 2 fits with uplinks. The recon should have uplinks while the frontline gets nanohives to replenish their ammo. Would also like to see starter fits with more interesting weapons, like the mass driver.


• Why not make basic medium frames have 2 equipment slots so they'll finally be the generalists that assaults and logistics branch out from?


• Since "Myofibril Stimulants simply increase strength", could we also have grenade throw speed/distance looked at? If the modules also increased the speed/distance which grenades are thrown, that might help clearing off rooftops/high areas.


• Fall damage.

Lying to people's faces when you said you were going to address the problem of speed penalties of 60mm plates being higher than 120mm plates.


• What is the point of increasing the LAV scan radius to 30m when their scan precision is 50 dB and when vehicle active scanner range is independent of base range?


• Will there ever be a reduction of the terrible vehicle hardener glow? That issue goes hand-in-hand with the success of the new gunner tanks


• Armor hardener vs shield hardener issues.


• Shield boosters being faulty. Change them to give same amount of HP, but have something like 5 pulses that are spaced 0.2 seconds apart.

[...]

Shield boosters being faulty. Change them to give same amount of HP, but have something like 5 pulses that are spaced 0.2 seconds apart.

why shouldnt it? I only leveled it to 5 for the extra cpu.
I think if they do change it they should lower the base cpu and raise the base Pg so it still comes to the same number. I already have 2 sidearms (bolt pistol, smg) that is std 15cpu 3 pg that has pg optimization. I do not need another one.
There is only 2 sidearms that has cpu reduction only 1 light weapon. I think more need cpu reduction than pg reduction.

What's with this hotfix echo talk? As far as I know, we're still on Warlords 1.0 with no hotfixes at all yet.

What's with this hotfix echo talk? As far as I know, we're still on Warlords 1.0 with no hotfixes at all yet.

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

Keep the AHMG damage as proposed, if you want to break the threshold on tanks/dropships use av grenades/flux to stop the recharge and then start shoting the AHMG. We dont want to make everything supereasy. And if you want to shot dropships down then use a sleek av grenade first. They can be thrown really far and have a large area where the homing feature gets triggered.

CCP is working on a hotfix to apply to this current build and they chose to continue letter based naming convention from past hotfixes.

Also Echo is what comes after Delta and there was never a hotfix named "Hotfix Echo" before, so it makes sense to call this one that.

Any chance you could change the Ion piston fitting optimisation skill Rattati? It really shouldnt reduce cpu.

why shouldnt it? I only leveled it to 5 for the extra cpu.
I think if they do change it they should lower the base cpu and raise the base Pg so it still comes to the same number. I already have 2 sidearms (bolt pistol, smg) that is std 15cpu 3 pg that has pg optimization. I do not need another one.
There is only 2 sidearms that has cpu reduction only 1 light weapon. I think more need cpu reduction than pg reduction.

Many shield vehicles would suffer at long range from Blaster installations if the shield threshold is brought down too low. If anything, up the damage of the AHMG would be my suggestion. OR accept that they must not be able to break the shield regen and use homing flux grenades. Both seem interesting.

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.....

"One giant vehicle nerf with more power to AV", you have got to be kidding...

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...

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...

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.

CCP will probably never fix them. I reported that problem on 2014.01.03 and CCP lied about going to fix it.