DUST Search - Vehicle Balance Proposal or How To Never Be CPM

Zan Azikuchi wrote:

Void Echo wrote:

Mobius Wyvern wrote:

A friend of mine pointed out something I forgot to mention:

My concept assumes the existence of selective vehicle locking. That way you can ensure that your gunners are the people you want and no one else.

Void Echo wrote:

With that idea your sure to never get the CPM position, that idea will literally kill HAVs. 5 main problems come with that design.

Care to elaborate.

If you really need an explanation then ok.

1. Who skills into what? Who will put their SP into the HAV itself and who will go with the turret?

2. If the HAV dies then who takes a blow to their wallet, there's no way to determine because one person could spec into turrets 70% and the HAVS 60%.

3. This would be like making it where you need 2 others to pilot your suit aloen, one for movement, one for aiming and one for shooting.

4. Blue dots have an IQ of .5, there's no way you can justify forcing HAV pilots to trust a random person to not drive them into a suicide nor can you trust them to shoot at the right people.

5. Quite plainly nobody will spec into either one, the investment in something like this would make it absolutely worthless.

So what if we keep enforcer tanks as they are now, but make normal tank's use the OP? This way, we'll see who out performs who, the synergy tank? Or the solo tank, IT'S TIME FOR A DUST BATTLE~! (like a death battle, but in dust). Okay joke's aside, I really think this may be the way to go. Beside's it's not like EVERY vehicle would end up with this, only if it's super effective, gotta test it out first, y'know?


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.05 15:31:00 - [1] - Quote With that idea your sure to never get the CPM position, that idea will literally kill HAVs. 5 main problems come with that design. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.05 22:11:00 - [2] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: A friend of mine pointed out something I forgot to mention: My concept assumes the existence of selective vehicle locking. That way you can ensure that your gunners are the people you want and no one else. Void Echo wrote: With that idea your sure to never get the CPM position, that idea will literally kill HAVs. 5 main problems come with that design. Care to elaborate. If you really need an explanation then ok. 1. Who skills into what? Who will put their SP into the HAV itself and who will go with the turret? 2. If the HAV dies then who takes a blow to their wallet, there's no way to determine because one person could spec into turrets 70% and the HAVS 60%. 3. This would be like making it where you need 2 others to pilot your suit aloen, one for movement, one for aiming and one for shooting. 4. Blue dots have an IQ of .5, there's no way you can justify forcing HAV pilots to trust a random person to not drive them into a suicide nor can you trust them to shoot at the right people. 5. Quite plainly nobody will spec into either one, the investment in something like this would make it absolutely worthless. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.05 22:39:00 - [3] - Quote Zan Azikuchi wrote: Void Echo wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: A friend of mine pointed out something I forgot to mention: My concept assumes the existence of selective vehicle locking. That way you can ensure that your gunners are the people you want and no one else. Void Echo wrote: With that idea your sure to never get the CPM position, that idea will literally kill HAVs. 5 main problems come with that design. Care to elaborate. If you really need an explanation then ok. 1. Who skills into what? Who will put their SP into the HAV itself and who will go with the turret? 2. If the HAV dies then who takes a blow to their wallet, there's no way to determine because one person could spec into turrets 70% and the HAVS 60%. 3. This would be like making it where you need 2 others to pilot your suit aloen, one for movement, one for aiming and one for shooting. 4. Blue dots have an IQ of .5, there's no way you can justify forcing HAV pilots to trust a random person to not drive them into a suicide nor can you trust them to shoot at the right people. 5. Quite plainly nobody will spec into either one, the investment in something like this would make it absolutely worthless. So what if we keep enforcer tanks as they are now, but make normal tank's use the OP? This way, we'll see who out performs who, the synergy tank? Or the solo tank, IT'S TIME FOR A DUST BATTLE~! (like a death battle, but in dust). Okay joke's aside, I really think this may be the way to go. Beside's it's not like EVERY vehicle would end up with this, only if it's super effective, gotta test it out first, y'know? Testing out this game killing idea is fine, but never should it be actually implimented, there is literally no incentive to spec into their side if this is what will happen. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.05 22:41:00 - [4] - Quote This idea has been shot down by all pilots, HAV, drop ships and LAVs, not to mention some of the infantry community, lots of people know that this will without a doubt kill tanking immediately. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.05 22:48:00 - [5] - Quote I will never accept this concept, no pilot would (back in closed and open beta this was brought up countless times) Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.05 23:03:00 - [6] - Quote Something new is fine, but this suggestion isn't nor will it ever be an option. Your suggesting a mechanic that will literally eliminate the want or incentive to use HAVs, no game that has tanks is using this mechanic and for good reason, because they know that if they do it they might as well just remove tanks completely and make it like cod. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.05 23:35:00 - [7] - Quote And you think that forcing them to rely on someone else to drive or shoot their own HAV will give them incentives? Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.06 00:13:00 - [8] - Quote Then separate your dropsuits, one person to move your dropsuit, one to aim and the other to shoot your gun. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.06 02:17:00 - [9] - Quote Yeah, your wanting to turn this into cod 514, with your suggestion tanking would die. There is no reward for being forced to deal with randoms with your class. There is no logical reason for your idea, its an excuse for ccp to say "let's get rid of tanks" when they see that 0% of players spec into having someone drive them around or shoot our of their own tank. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.06 02:48:00 - [10] - Quote I really don't care about anyone else, staying up till 4 a.m with a knife under your bed at night waiting for your bastard father to try and do something eliminates feelings for anyone else. Can you not see that what your demanding is basically for HAVS to not be in the game anymore? Answer this, why would anyone skill into something that requires someone else for it to work resulting in a complete waste of your SP because you can call anytime in because your friends aren't online? That's a complete waste. Results of your idea being put into action: 1. HAV class completely dies because nobody specs into them, because nobody wants to depend on someone else completely just to run their desired class. 2. CCP removes HAVS from the game because nobody uses them. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.

Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.06 02:53:00 - [11] - Quote And to answer your question, investment is the answer. In dust 514, you literally have to invest everything into what you want, we call it SP. There is nothing like it in any other game. In battlefield there isn't a mechanic that you get skill points to drive or shoot out of a tank or gun, in cod there aren't even vehicles, no other game besides eve requires complete personal investment. Your saying that we should force pilots to invest their stuff so that a completely random person has full access to it. There is no possible outcome that is good from your suggestion. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.06 16:31:00 - [12] - Quote Couldv fooled me, this is a massive need to HAVs that's your suggesting, nobody wants to depend on someone else just so they can run their desired class. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.
Void Echo Helix Order 2	Posted - 2015.06.09 02:34:00 - [13] - Quote If anything it will be a lot more boring for HAV drivers. Closed Beta Vet. Founder of Helix Order. For the Federation, For Freedom, *Till all are Free*.