|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
952
   |
Posted - 2015.04.16 18:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Posting this on behalf of someone, I also think it's a great idea and a potentially less difficult implementation compared to full blown EVE style vehicle capacitor.
CONTEXT:
For awhile now, many vehicle users have wanted to have a capacitor on vehicles to manage active modules and balance them a bit better. Balance itself could be made easier with capacitor as very strong active modules do not need be nerfed into the ground or limited in other ways that may render them un-fun to use. Capacitor is an arguably complex system that DOES NOT cater well to the average FPS player. It's something that is very important in Eve but potentially just an unnecessary level of complexity in Dust.
IDEA:
What we are proposing is a compromise. Something simple, effective and different that can achieve the desired goal. This idea requires no change in the functionality of current active_duration modules.
Every vehicle has a certain number of Battery Cells. This is a number based on the hull. Some vehicles can have less others can have more. Every active module "occupies" a certain number of battery cells when it is turned on. When the module's active duration has run out, or when the active module is manually turned off, those battery cells are liberated for use. This is akin to bandwidth for equipment or even RAM for computer applications. If there are not enough available battery cells to activate a given module, it cannot be turned on.
EXAMPLE:
Tank with 8 battery cells rolls out onto the field. It is equipped with:
Heat Sink (2 cells)
FuelInjector (3 cells)
Armor HardenerA (5 cells)
Armor HardenerB (5 cells)
Passive Armor Repair (null)
Tank activates Armor Hardener A and drops from 8 cells to 3.
Tank activates Heat Sink and drops from 3 to 1
Armor Hardener A active duration runs out, battery cells go from 1 up to 6
Tank activates Armor Hardener B, going from 6 back to 1
Tank manually de-activates Heat Sink after ending engagement with hostile armor, going from 1 to 3
Tank activates Fuel Injector to escape hostile AV with hardener B still on, going from 3 to 0 cells left available for other modules.
After escaping into redline and all active modules turn off, all 8 cells are available for use again.
The important thing here is that it does not change the active_time and cooldown_time of current modules, meaning less overhead.
______________________________________________________
In the future, I would like to see weapons that can disable X number of battery cells on vehicles, forcing their modules to deactivate if they cannot be sustained. I would also like to see more active modules, the likes of which we cannot implement right now because they would be OP. With this battery cell system, we could easily see the co-existence of active and passive armor repair, as well as shield boosting.
THANK YOU FOR READING
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
957
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 18:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
Terry Webber wrote:This sounds like a good balancing mechanic but I'll leave it up to the experts. By the way, how much more complex are EVE capacitor systems than what you are proposing?
Capacitor is a constantly regening pool from which active modules constantly drain power from. There are no cool downs for active modules, as long as you can supply them with power, they will keep running. This creates meta-terms like being "cap-stable" meaning your capacitor regen and depletion are equal, so you can run all your active modules forever (or until someone attacks your capacitor). Alternatively you can create "burst regen" fits that deplete your capacitor but can get you back up to full in moments. Then you'd have to wait a long time to be able to regen again, not because of module cooldown, but because your capacitor would take while to slowly climb back up. I also think capacitor regens at different speeds depending on what level it's at.
I think the first 20% is the worst, adding an extra level of sacrifice for depleting it that far. I don't want to misinform you though, I could be wrong and it's been a very long time since I played Eve.
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
959
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 20:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Interesting idea to say the least, like you said It's kind of like bandwidth.
However I don't think this is exactly a low-hanging fruit so to speak. I'd much rather get rid of these damn passive reps first, see where things go from there, and reevaluate if entirely new systems are needed.
Why not have both?
This is a means to address Rattati's multiple hardener issue.
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
964
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 20:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Calculating the number of cells in use mid combat is never going to be a popular method especially when cool downs or actual capacitor wheels might better and more clearly state your actual ability to use modules.
[...]
If there are between 5 to 10 cells for any given hull, it would be easy to know well in advance things like:
"I can't use both hardeners at the same time" or,
"If my hardener and active repair module are both online, I can't use my heatsink"
or simply
"I have only 2 active modules and I have enough cells for both so I don't need to think about it"
I am not meaning to suggest any form of large numbers of cells that would be difficult to handle. Does that make sense? Or am I misunderstanding your argument?
Also, Adamance, how do you feel about the current context that Capacitor is simply not for Dust ? Which seems to be the conclusion arrived at everytime we ask for capacitor? Wouldn't this be better than nothing at all?
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
966
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 22:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Lightning35 Delta514 wrote:This sounds good. It would definitely be helpful to "nerf" the madrugars. However not in a health manner. What is model basically suggests placing an additional limitation on HAV module use rather than providing a frame work on which competitive builds can be constructed. The example given basically institutes a model under which dual module activation is simply not possible.
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.
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
966
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 22:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Here is my point....we've had multiple hardeners for literally the entire existence of Dust. There has never been a limit, and it has never been a problem until recently. What changed? A move from Active Regen modules to Passive Regen modules. People seem so very set on killing hardeners and restricting them, yet they have never been an issue prior to the original vehicle mass-rework.
Much of which happened then was a mistake, and should be reversed. I think that's the key to making things right again, not trying to place arbitrary restrictions on hardeners which have never been an issue until they were paired with passive regen modules.
I don't want to see hardeners nerfed. I want to seem them buffed.
In my view there is an 80% resistance hardener at 8 cell use.
There are 10% passive hardeners
There are active and passive Armor repairers.
Try not to use my single example close your mind. Perhaps I shouldn't have given an example at all.
:(
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
966
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 23:18:00 -
[7] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:[...] I just think we should be revert back to an active system that we know worked in the past before we start exploring options to limit functionality of module use.
Agreed 100% !
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
968
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 23:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Kaeru Nayiri wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:[...] I just think we should be revert back to an active system that we know worked in the past before we start exploring options to limit functionality of module use. Agreed 100% ! Sorta off topic question for you, since you know dropships well. Would Dropships suffer if Light Armor Repairers moved back to an active style?
Not at all ! it would actually be great. Right noww shield dropships have more stayingpower than armor ones, which is backwards. With active armor repping, we could finally see that fixed. Turn on reps -> I am tanking this AV for 10 seconds, and not, i'm going to use my passive reps to barely escape.
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
968
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 03:22:00 -
[9] - Quote
I feel like the purpose behind this thread is being lost.
Vehicle users want capacitor for depth.
It's not "low hanging fruit".
It's complicated for the average dust player.
I propose more simple alternative that would functionally be similar, right down to having neuts in the distant future.
But we want real capacitors, except the're too complex.
Hence the compromise.
I don't want this idea to be implemented right away. I agree that many other things should come first. But changes happen WAAAY in advance, and once theyre in QA it's too late for any player input.
If and when we ever need a cap system, this idea will be here. Until then, it's fine if we focus on other things. try to understand this is a compromise, not an ideal.
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
968
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 05:12:00 -
[10] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:To qualify my earlier statement more given the example in the OP I just simply find it strange that the model would keep the same cool down timers, etc but only limit the effectiveness of those modules to the value of one primary tanking module and one utility module active at a time.
you're assuming my example is the only possibility with the proposition. I actually regret giving an example at all, now.
Have an 80% hardener that lasts 10 seconds and takes many cells.
Have passive resistance modules that require none.
Have multiple smaller cycle active armor reps.
etc..
Think BEYOND what we currently have. Compromise or true capacitor allows us to have better active modules because they can't be stacked ontop of one another for as many slots as the hull can allow. I'm fine with multiple hardeners being on at once in this model. The point is it would be deliberate and balanced instead of a by product.
Another example:
passive armor rep at 15 hp/s
active armor rep at 75 hp/s (3 cells)
armor hardener A (4 cells)
armor hardener B (4 cells)
again, 8 cells on the hull.
Know what cannot be known.
|
|
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
968
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 05:15:00 -
[11] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:I like your suggestion very much but honestly I would not want it on vehicles because I don't believe its a step forwards.
I gladly and humbly can accept this. Both Vellocet and yourself want the absolute best capacitor system we can get.
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
968
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 17:05:00 -
[12] - Quote
Kindly answer my final question.
Know what cannot be known.
|
|
|
| |
|