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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

Kindly answer my final question.

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