|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17548
   |
Posted - 2015.03.10 20:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:Stop exaggerating , current HAV's can nowhere near fit almost all PRO mods , even if you want to talk about Cal HAV's like most try to bash because their use to roaming around in their Gal HAV's and smashing like pre 1.7 .
#STOPTHECALHAVHATE
I think they should be a hefty price but so should the DS's and LAV's .
My Gunnlogi can.
"This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17566
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 01:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:LudiKure ninda wrote:A fully fited PRO tank should cost around 1 mill isk in my opinion,..and MLT should be at least 150k. Bear in mind that more modules will have to be fit, so even if the hulls remain the same for Pr oto, the cost will actually go up. I dont mind a slight price increase, but the point im trying to make is that Proto hulls should be of a similar price to existing hulls, since STD and ADV hulls will be more restrictive than existing hulls. Of course you don't mind a price increase, you don't use tanks. wow, did you even read what he said? jesus, and you wonder why tankers have a bad reputation.
Y'know awkwardly Spkr did admit a couple of weeks back that even he doesn't/didn't use tanks.....
"This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17566
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 01:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:LudiKure ninda wrote:A fully fited PRO tank should cost around 1 mill isk in my opinion,..and MLT should be at least 150k. Bear in mind that more modules will have to be fit, so even if the hulls remain the same for Pr oto, the cost will actually go up. I dont mind a slight price increase, but the point im trying to make is that Proto hulls should be of a similar price to existing hulls, since STD and ADV hulls will be more restrictive than existing hulls. Of course you don't mind a price increase, you don't use tanks. wow, did you even read what he said? jesus, and you wonder why tankers have a bad reputation. To make it worse he is probably the most extreme example of the biased tanker, and insists that basically anyone more moderate than him doesn't pilot tanks. It's pretty much his go to response to anything that he doesn't agree with. Hell he's even agreed with me in the past but insisted I'm still wrong. It's totes adorbs.
Read Sign NOW!
"Hell he's even agreed with me in the past but insisted I'm still wrong. It's totes adorbs." Pokey Dravon on Spkr4thDead
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17572
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 03:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Costings look good, I like the idea that my tanks might be worth a million ISK again forcing me to do better in matches to not run ISK negative.
Hopefully I get to see UHAV as well to compare roles and costings. I do some love my Heavy Tanks.
"Hell he's even agreed with me in the past but insisted I'm still wrong. It's totes adorbs." Pokey Dravon on Spkr4thDead
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17577
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 08:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
duster 35000 wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:duster 35000 wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Because I still worry about balance of the prototype HAVs, and want them to be consciously committed to battle, not thrown around like candy, we are pricing them at
STD/ADV/PRO @ 97,500/195,000/682,500 ISK for all HAV tiers
This is below what some tankers felt was right, and above what some tankers felt was right. The CPM was also consulted.
It is also a much lower increase per tier than f.ex. specialized dropsuits.
Really? 682k for a proto hull? Adv is the best hull, slightly less recources, much less price. That's the point really of the whole DUST 514 philosophy, proto is incrementally better, much more expensive But that's kind of too expensive. IMO, 350k or 400k would have been better. Eh, I'll still use it, but the price feels like 1.6 Uprising.
Better days mate, just remember the beauty of 1.6
"Hell he's even agreed with me in the past but insisted I'm still wrong. It's totes adorbs." Pokey Dravon on Spkr4thDead
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17585
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 20:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:duster 35000 wrote:
Armor hardeners were 25% reduction I believe, I used 2.
Shield hards had long cooldown, 10 sec duration, 30% DR, or 40%
Active Armor was 25%, Active Shield was 30% but the duration was so short you were typically better off running passives at 15% each.
I do really miss Passives, I felt they were a good option for players to have and also worth considering implementing to follow the same skill tree design as the EVE passive resistance modules [streamlined] into one skill. They're kind of key to my idealised Amarr HAV fitting.
E.g- Passive Armour Hardeners Operate on the basis of 16.25%, 17.5%, and 18.75% from Basic to Prototype and are modified in efficiency by the skill Armour Adaption [old skill but rather than hull bonuses it applied to resistance module bonuses] by 2% per level.
This means per tier descending from STD to PRO your resistance modules could look like
16.25 * 1.1 = 17.875
17.5 * 1.1 = 19.25
18.75 * 1.1 = 20.625
"Hell he's even agreed with me in the past but insisted I'm still wrong. It's totes adorbs." Pokey Dravon on Spkr4thDead
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17585
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 20:52:00 -
[7] - Quote
duster 35000 wrote:True Adamance wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:duster 35000 wrote:
Armor hardeners were 25% reduction I believe, I used 2.
Shield hards had long cooldown, 10 sec duration, 30% DR, or 40%
Active Armor was 25%, Active Shield was 30% but the duration was so short you were typically better off running passives at 15% each. I do really miss Passives, I felt they were a good option for players to have and also worth considering implementing to follow the same skill tree design as the EVE passive resistance modules [streamlined] into one skill. They're kind of key to my idealised Amarr HAV fitting. E.g- Passive Armour Hardeners Operate on the basis of 16.25%, 17.5%, and 18.75% from Basic to Prototype and are modified in efficiency by the skill Armour Adaption [old skill but rather than hull bonuses it applied to resistance module bonuses] by 2% per level. This means per tier descending from STD to PRO your resistance modules could look like 16.25 * 1.1 = 17.875 17.5 * 1.1 = 19.25 18.75 * 1.1 = 20.625 So, passive armor hardeners were better than shield ones? Of course.
No actually those were just the first workable ideas I could draw out of my head. I made a spread sheet a while back and the shield modules have slightly higher base stats and as such add up to slight greater passive resistances.
If I am not mistaken in thinking my armour passives, thinking more carefully on it now, Armour went 15,16.25,17.5 while shields followed the above values.
"Hell he's even agreed with me in the past but insisted I'm still wrong. It's totes adorbs." Pokey Dravon on Spkr4thDead
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17594
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 00:07:00 -
[8] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:duster 35000 wrote:So, passive armor hardeners were better than shield ones? Of course. I think he's using it as an example in comparison to the +60% actives we have now. I could be wrong but I seem to remember that passive shield hardeners were better than armor back in the day? They were, which is fine imo. Passives aren't good enough to be used on the speedy but weak Winmatar Hulls, but makes sense for the slower, bombardment type of style Squid HAV's are made for (and why it tickles me that people wish to use them up close and personal). Yeah I don't have an issue with Shield Hardeners/Resistance Amps being a bigger resist than Armor counterparts.
The only real reason I can justify that paradigm on passives is that shield will tend to have a lower total shield HP value than armour..... but in this climate not by much...as such the passives really can't have significant disparities between values.
Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you.
Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
17596
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 00:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:
Pretty much my reasoning as well.
Additionally when it comes to tiering and acceptable resistance values we cannot have a basic value of more the 20% resistance especially when vehicles are gaining more slots nor can you have significant tier disparities or risk a prototype is necessary mentality.
So I've been trying to keep values, especially those modified by skills, lower than 20% and within a 1.25% per tier difference. Especially with relation when comparing armour to shield.
I figure these are a good idea since we have arbitrarily limited active hardeners to 1 per fitting why not have significantly less effective passives we can still attempt to plug for resistance while active modules are offline without breaking vs AV.
Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you.
Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
|
|
|
| |
|