DUST Search - Vehicle Capacitor Compromise

Godin Thekiller wrote:

Vell0cet wrote:

Godin Thekiller wrote:

Vell0cet wrote:

Godin Thekiller wrote:

1: If cap stable fits are anything like they are in EVE, they won't be viable for actual combat, unless it's against a idiot, or it's mostly passive stuff.

2: lel. I said nothing about AV in that, I specifically pointed out that VEHICLES were mostly balanced against each other. Also, even if AV wasn't balanced, how in the **** does that reason "HERP DERP LET'S ADD UNNECESSARY ****!!!!!!"?

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.

Pure passive fits are always **** against their active counterpart for the most part. That is the norm in both EVE and Dust, for like ever. I don't get your point.

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 never said impossible, I said it will be hell. Two very different things.

My point is that it's unnecessary, and it's counter productive.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2953	Posted - 2015.04.16 23:39:00 - [1] - Quote We need real capacitors. Vehicles and dropsuits (dropouts 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." Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 00:07:00 - [2] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: 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. And sadly there just isn't the manpower to implement it now. Rattati has said himself that there are no current plans to implement capacitors. Well if we keep on him, maybe he can see that it's important and try to push it higher in the list of priorities. Perhaps when CCP AquarHEAD finishes up his work with the matchmaker and they get PC figured out. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 00:26:00 - [3] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: 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. And sadly there just isn't the manpower to implement it now. Rattati has said himself that there are no current plans to implement capacitors. Well if we keep on him, maybe he can see that it's important and try to push it higher in the list of priorities. Perhaps when CCP AquarHEAD finishes up his work with the matchmaker and they get PC figured out. Apparently CCP the current DUST team only has enough resources to tune things already in game. Pretty much all they can do is **** with colors and numbers. Pretty much. I mean small new features are not out of the question, but something like a Cap system is pretty 'deep-code' so to speak and would take a lot of effort and change to get working properly. I just don't think it's economical for them to dedicate so many resources to it at this time when there is a lot of other things that could be more readily changed. 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. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 01:13:00 - [4] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vell0cet wrote: 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. And for what reason do we "need" them? This has never been told to me. It seems utterly pointless to have them. 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. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 02:25:00 - [5] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Again I have to ask, why do you need capacitors to tackle vehicles? Can you not use Webifiers to slow vehicles and open up opportunities for AV to break through a vehicles tank before it escapes? It would be a start, but a vehicle could still activate it's prop mod if webbed and probably get away. With cap, and neuts, you could shut down the prop mod and kill their ability to run hardeners/reppers. The whole thing becomes a lot more deep and fun. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 02:30:00 - [6] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: 1: If cap stable fits are anything like they are in EVE, they won't be viable for actual combat, unless it's against a idiot, or it's mostly passive stuff. 2: lel. I said nothing about AV in that, I specifically pointed out that VEHICLES were mostly balanced against each other. Also, even if AV wasn't balanced, how in the ** does that reason "HERP DERP LET'S ADD UNNECESSARY **!!!!!!"? 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. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 02:37:00 - [7] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Tackling and Neuting are two different things. One slows the vehicle down the other reduced the capacitor of a vessel over time (even then Neuts and Nosferatu's do require their fair share of cap to activate and maintain so if they were hand held infantry tools they could not possibly be eternally active, nor would they instantly drain or prevent an HAV from simply driving off). That's true. I'm thinking we could have lots of options for both: We could have webbing grenades, mines, handheld active tools like a re-purposed reptool, and possibly ewar small turrets (could add a lot of value to LAVs). We could have equivalent stuff for neuts. So a scout could conceivably place down a neut mine, wait for the HAV to roll through and set it off, follow that up with a few neut grenades and then switch to his handheld webifier to lock it down for his squad. You could picture dozens of different scenarios that could play out in different ways. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 02:41:00 - [8] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: 1: If cap stable fits are anything like they are in EVE, they won't be viable for actual combat, unless it's against a idiot, or it's mostly passive stuff. 2: lel. I said nothing about AV in that, I specifically pointed out that VEHICLES were mostly balanced against each other. Also, even if AV wasn't balanced, how in the ** does that reason "HERP DERP LET'S ADD UNNECESSARY !!!!!!"? 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. Pure passive fits are always ** against their active counterpart for the most part. That is the norm in both EVE and Dust, for like ever. I don't get your point. 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). Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 02:56:00 - [9] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Vell0cet wrote: True Adamance wrote: Tackling and Neuting are two different things. One slows the vehicle down the other reduced the capacitor of a vessel over time (even then Neuts and Nosferatu's do require their fair share of cap to activate and maintain so if they were hand held infantry tools they could not possibly be eternally active, nor would they instantly drain or prevent an HAV from simply driving off). That's true. I'm thinking we could have lots of options for both: We could have webbing grenades, mines, handheld active tools like a re-purposed reptool, and possibly ewar small turrets (could add a lot of value to LAVs). We could have equivalent stuff for neuts. So a scout could conceivably place down a neut mine, wait for the HAV to roll through and set it off, follow that up with a few neut grenades and then switch to his handheld webifier to lock it down for his squad. You could picture dozens of different scenarios that could play out in different ways. I like some of those ideas and absolutely loath others. Grenades and Mines are a no go for me. Tools that can seen and identified by a pilot as a threat yet yield a more tactical application than "Spam Here X" certainly seem more fair. Well mines can be countered with scanners. You'd have to be aware/leery of possible ambush chokepoints. I think grenades would be fair as well. You can only carry a limited number. They could be balanced on how much cap they neut out. I think grenades would be particularly useful for knocking out the cap of logis running reptools on heavies before an assault on a fixed position. It creates new tactical opportunities and counter-tactical opportunities. That's what leads to fun, rich combat. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2015.04.17 02:57:00 - [10] - Quote True Adamance wrote: 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. ...And more than a few people are banging the drum to have them nerfed. Best PvE idea ever!

Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2956	Posted - 2015.04.17 03:20:00 - [11] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: 1: If cap stable fits are anything like they are in EVE, they won't be viable for actual combat, unless it's against a idiot, or it's mostly passive stuff. 2: lel. I said nothing about AV in that, I specifically pointed out that VEHICLES were mostly balanced against each other. Also, even if AV wasn't balanced, how in the ** does that reason "HERP DERP LET'S ADD UNNECESSARY !!!!!!"? 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. Pure passive fits are always ** against their active counterpart for the most part. That is the norm in both EVE and Dust, for like ever. I don't get your point. 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 never said impossible, I said it will be hell. Two very different things. My point is that it's unnecessary, and it's counter productive. 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. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2956	Posted - 2015.04.17 03:31:00 - [12] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: 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. I think it's an unnecessary compromise. I disagree that EVE-style capacitors are too hard for the average Merc to figure out. It's like a stamina bar that goes down when you sprint, jump or melee, or like a mana bar in other games. Hell I remember very old-school FPS games had flashlights with a battery that recharges, people seemed to understand that pretty quickly. Your solution doesn't address many of the reasons why a capacitor is a good thing (such as basically giving all active modules free batteries and rechargers) and doesn't diminish the hassles of trying to manage lots of independent cooldowns. And it adds the complexity of having a "bandwitdth" for active modules. I don't want to be disrespectful but it's much worse (and more complex) than just adding EVE capacitors. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2956	Posted - 2015.04.17 03:53:00 - [13] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vell0cet wrote: 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. Well, if it's simple to use, which you seem to agree with, I call bullshit. 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. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2956	Posted - 2015.04.17 04:07:00 - [14] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Vell0cet wrote: 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. Well, if it's simple to use, which you seem to agree with, I call bullshit. 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. Yet that exact same fit is would be stomped by a unstable fit, and said unstable fit (probably a fit made just like one we have now) would be hell to manage period. ALso, what makes you think it won't be any less clunky? Because modules would auto-cycle. If I'm only actively managing a couple of modules (e.g. prop mod and reps), and allowing my hardeners to auto-cycle while you're distracted trying to micro your hardeners and everything else there's a good chance I can out maneuver/gun you and take you out. That's the point. There will be a natural balance in how much mico managing modules gives you an advantage vs. distracts you from the fight. I suspect there will be an equilibrium with just a few modules being actively managed while the rest auto-cycle for most players. This would be a significant improvement over the current level of management with having to constantly toggle all modules. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2958	Posted - 2015.04.17 04:12:00 - [15] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Again I have to ask, why do you need capacitors to tackle vehicles? Can you not use Webifiers to slow vehicles and open up opportunities for AV to break through a vehicles tank before it escapes? It would be a start, but a vehicle could still activate it's prop mod if webbed and probably get away. With cap, and neuts, you could shut down the prop mod and kill their ability to run hardeners/reppers. The whole thing becomes a lot more deep and fun. True, but with the sake of manpower in mind, I think it may be better to go with a simply webifier before we go into something as intensive as a full cap system. I think that in of itself would be awesome. Remote Webifier Mines? Awww yeah. I agree that there are some more immediate pressing concerns (like trading, and PC, and webs) but I think trying to add capacitors and get them balanced before a relaunch is important (hopefully before December). DUST is the perfect "laboratory" to work this stuff out and get it all balanced. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2958	Posted - 2015.04.17 04:22:00 - [16] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Again I have to ask, why do you need capacitors to tackle vehicles? Can you not use Webifiers to slow vehicles and open up opportunities for AV to break through a vehicles tank before it escapes? It would be a start, but a vehicle could still activate it's prop mod if webbed and probably get away. With cap, and neuts, you could shut down the prop mod and kill their ability to run hardeners/reppers. The whole thing becomes a lot more deep and fun. True, but with the sake of manpower in mind, I think it may be better to go with a simply webifier before we go into something as intensive as a full cap system. I think that in of itself would be awesome. Remote Webifier Mines? Awww yeah. I agree that there are some more immediate pressing concerns (like trading, and PC, and webs) but I think trying to add capacitors and get them balanced before a relaunch is important (hopefully before December). DUST is the perfect "laboratory" to work this stuff out and get it all balanced. You speak as if a relaunch is a guaranteed thing right now. Was there something I missed on this topic? Well either we have one and we should get ready for it, or we don't, in which case none of this really matters much at all. Either way I'd like to give feedback under the assumption that the game will have a future. If it won't than nothing I write (or you or anyone else for that matter) really means anything. CCP Hilmar hinted that he's happy with the direction of the game, I have to think we're going to have some kind of future. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2960	Posted - 2015.04.17 05:32:00 - [17] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Kaeru Nayiri wrote: 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. Vell0cet wrote: I think it's an unnecessary compromise [...] 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? My question is why do we need one in the first place, when we can just as easily balance it out? How can you possibly balance out this power curve with the existing broken system? Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2960	Posted - 2015.04.17 05:47:00 - [18] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: That seriously doesn't mean **** when you realize that these two systems aren't in the same game. You are seriously saying since EVE does it, Dust should as well. 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. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2960	Posted - 2015.04.17 06:00:00 - [19] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Vell0cet wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: That seriously doesn't mean **** when you realize that these two systems aren't in the same game. You are seriously saying since EVE does it, Dust should as well. 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. Yet there's been several points in which it was balanced in Dust. I guess those weren't for some reason? 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. Best PvE idea ever!
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2960	Posted - 2015.04.17 07:14:00 - [20] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Let's see: Codex before the rail buff and after the missile nerf Chromosome after the rail nerf Pretty much all of Uprising, minus Squid HAV's being too weak Explain those time periods, Because I quite remember those periods of time being quite balanced. Also, there's always little balance issues in EVERY game. Does that validate restructuring an entire system for no reason? Nope. nada. Hell no. You've yet to say any other reason by the way. Maybe we're playing different games, because I recall years of vehicle fights being very short and dull, fits being cookie-cutter, an endless debate about vehicles vs. anti-vehicles. Redline Rail QQ. The rule for ambush being whoever can call in vehicles faster than the other team wins (ultimately resulting in them being removed from the mode entirely). Dropships being insanely OP, UP. Vehicles being too expensive, being much too cheap, and on and on. Now with pro tanks these problems are compounded, and with the intro of Amarr and Minmatar placeholders, the problems will likely get worse. If you think vehicles are great as they are, there's no convincing you of anything. I'm confident that EVEifying vehicles (modeling them after frigates) would allow for a wide range of fits, gameplay depth and tactics, fewer balancing issues (EVE has been balancing these for over a decade), while retaining the fast-paced feel of a frigate brawl. If we could bring that to DUST we would have the best vehicle experience of any multiplayer FPS. Incidentally when vehicles were much more EVE-like (pre 1.7) they were a lot more fun and interesting. I'm not saying we need an "orbit" button or crap like that, but brining in the diversity of modules, the ability to fit in many different ways for different play styles and tactics would be so much richer than what we have now. Best PvE idea ever!

Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2962	Posted - 2015.04.17 17:14:00 - [21] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: Kindly answer my final question. CCP are capable of implementing an EVE-style capacitor system. It's a matter of them choosing to make it a priority. I'd rather them stick with the existing sh*tty system than spend a lot of energy on a compromise solution. It would mean they can add capacitors that much faster when they do have the time. Best PvE idea ever!