dual activation isew definitely possible with this model. I only gave an example. Don't be closed minded to the idea of DIFFERENT kinds of hardeners. No reason for basic, enhanced and prototype to use the same number of battery cells. Different hulls can also have MORE cells. There can and SHOULD be configurations that can dual harden. This is not about limiting the HAV fitting possibilties, it's adding depth to them.

Also, the question I asked in my previous post, do I extract my answer to it as "I'd rather have nothing akin to capacitor at all" ? If that's really the case, I am ready to give up on this idea.

Sorta off topic question for you, since you know dropships well. Would Dropships suffer if Light Armor Repairers moved back to an active style?

We need real "EVE-style" capacitors for vehicles and dropsuits (dropsuits would use this for active equipment). It's really not very complicated, and simpler than trying to manage multiple batteries. There is one pool that regenerates. All active mods use the pool. There are a few nuances in how it regenerates, but they aren't that critical to understand, just don't let it get too low and you're good. It's nearly identical to stamina and people seem to understand that just fine. With capacitors, neutralizers and webs we would finally be able to achieve vehicle balance. Vehicles would be durable, powerful and expensive, but always vulnerable to being "tackled." That's what's been missing from vehicle/anti-vehicle gameplay and it can't ever be balanced without it.

A lot of things in this game could easily be balanced by capacitors. We said this in the beginning but Blam thought we were too stupid to understand the concept of capacitors.

I'm not saying we should be obnoxious about it, but persistent and try to provide suggestions for how it could be done and make the case for why it's so crucial.

They have the resources to do warbarges, trading, matchmaking, etc. so there are guys who can dig into the code, get their hands dirty and make changes. I'm looking at DUST as a low-res beta for the x86 version. I think it's important to have as much stuff balanced and figured out in DUST so that the relaunch can have the best possible initial release to the public. The game will live or die by how those first few months go.

1. Vehicles can't ever be properly balanced without capacitors. They're either very weak and feel cheap and pathetic. or they're too strong and they ruin the experience for everyone. It's pretty impossible to get that right unless vehicles have to fear being tackled.

2. Having balanced vehicles is a critical component of a relaunch.

3. Therefore capacitors need to be a priority at some point this year.

It's easy to always pick the low hanging-fruit, but sometimes you need to roll up your sleeves and tackle the hard problems, like CCP Rattati is doing with PC right now.

I don't see how.

It's like looking at one combined module cool down. If its going down you might need to turn some modules off if you get to <25%. If it's going up you are in the clear and probably should turn some mods on.

Godin I may not be aiming in EVE but I am trying to process a lot more information when I fly an EVE ship than I drive a tank in Dust. Speed, Distance, Transversal (multiple ships) drones, targeting, orbits, d-scanner, fleet broad casts, DPS values, capacitor,etc.

Honestly if we were looking at on decreasing orange wheel/meter it would be easier to process cap consumption and hardener/module life than doing the same on half a dozen smaller such metres. But to each their own.

I've been working on a long post about this for a while now, but haven't gotten around to finishing it.

For one thing there is a fundamental difference between vehicle play and infantry play. A huge part of what makes infantry vs. infantry fun is the simple act of trying to hit a target thats actively evading your fire. Imagine how little fun would be had in an FPS with players the size of buildings. It would be a matter of who started shooting first. Vehicles are huge and rather simplistic. Capacitors help add a ton of depth to fittings and strategy, so vehicle play becomes as much about tactics and fits as it is about positioning. Fights can last much longer and be more interesting instead of quickly blaping each other off the field.

In most cases capacitors would actually free up a lot of the obnoxious module-management that the current system uses, since you could create cap-stable fits, if that's your preferred play style. You call in your vehicle, activate your stuff and then don't worry about cap for the rest of the battle (aside from perhaps pulsing some reps after a fight).

Another problem with the current system is that adding active modules actually INCREASES the size of your "virtual capacitor," since each one basically has it's own independent capacitor. This creates a lot of weird imbalances that a single shared capacitor would solve. In EVE if you fit all active mods, your cap would only last a few seconds, in DUST each one lasts as long as its active timer. You're essentially getting capacitor batteries, and rechargers for "free" since you don't need to sacrifice a slot or the PG/CPU to fit it.

As for things being balanced in the past, I respectfully disagree. There has always been QQ about vehicles vs. AV. It was better in 1.6 than after CCP Blam ruined things, but if you search back, you'll find a lot of rage back then too (it's what motivated the rebalance in the first place). It always comes down to the central question of can one AV take out one HAV. With capacitors, one player can always tackle an HAV, but they may need help to kill it. That's a reasonable balance. HAVs can ride around feeling like gods, but they will always have that tingle in their balls that someone's going to get tackle on them.

1. So what's your point, that you should run fits that require lots of micromanagement? I thought you said that would be difficult to use. How would using a difficult-to-use fit be more advantageous in a fight? Maybe you could eek out a bit higher EHP or DPS, but then if you're fumbling around with your module wheel and not DPSing then it's probably not going to be a good fit. The point is that cap stable fits would be an option for some, that would be easier than we have now, and people that want to try to micro manage stuff can give it a go, but it's probably not going to work well. People will find a balance that works well for their play style. Having that kind of fitting flexibility would make vehicles a lot more interesting than they are now with cookie-cutter builds.

The point is that you've been saying it would be impossible to manage all of the modules with a capacitor because it would make driving/flying/shooting too difficult. I'm saying, if that's the case then cap-stable fits would have the advantage since they can focus 100% on driving/flying/shooting. In all likelihood the best fits will probably have a small amount of management, but not so much that it's obnoxious (i.e. because if it's obnoxious than it's probably going to cause you to loose fights).

I have to admit currently tanks (Armour) need very little imput from their pilot to function properly. Activate everything and drive away 3-5 seconds before modules go on cool down.

The current system is hell, trying to manage 5 different modules with long cooldowns that won't auto-cycle. Vehicles that become nearly invincible and can absorb insane amounts of focused fire, retreat for a few seconds only to return and be at full strength again. Capacitors would solve all of those issues.

I agreed that armor tanks are currently very simple to use. The whole system is clunky and awkward. It would be much easier to say toggle on a couple active modules and have them auto-cycle as cap stable and manage a couple of others (maybe a prop mod or a rapper) during the fight as cap allows. That's more flexible, more interesting, more fun, and less management that what we currently have.

I gladly and humbly can accept this. Both Vellocet and yourself want the absolute best capacitor system we can get.

I still feel like I have to ask, though, if they don't want to give you Eve's cap system, would you be satisfied with nothing at all?

How can you possibly balance out this power curve with the existing broken system?

No I'm saying that EVE's system is balanced, and ours is broken, and the graphs show exactly why we can't have balance with our current system. When we get Amarr tanks, and you can run an even more beastly armor tank, it will further highlight the problem.

I can't remember a time when I would describe vehicles as being balanced. There have been times that were better than others, but there has always been issues, and now we have proto tanks, and will be getting Amarr tanks. The point stands, in EVE active modules are better than passives but come at the cost of your cap pool and the threat of cap warfare. In DUST there is no downside to fitting active mods. There is no counter-balance to the system. It's broken and will remain so.