DUST Search - REQUEST: AV Acknowledgement

DeathwindRising wrote:

Breakin Stuff wrote:

True Adamance wrote:

Mina Longstrike wrote:

I believe the real issue is that vehicle raw HP is too low, hardeners harden for too much, and effective reps per second are way too high. Increase the raw hp (makes vehicles feel a bit more confident without modules up), lower the hardening values (2hardener 2 reps tank goes from ~4kehp to ~10k with modules active, and its reps go from ~200 to ~500) and lower the effective reps (this makes damage 'stick', so tanks are not fine 10-15 seconds after they leave an area).

Av is either immediately lethal, or almost infinitely endurable in the current model.

In some respects I agree with this in others not so much.

I do feel like raw hit point values are too low and that modules convey too much benefit to the point where they are the defining modules on the vehicle.

On the other hand I don't believe the repair values per second are too high at all. The only thing that prevents them from being balanced is that they are passive.

138 repairs per second from a Complex Heavy Armour Repairer is a fair value.

yes and no. Have i showed you my horrible AV/HAV proposal?

It addresses a lot of things.

The only thing I can't figure out how to word in it is adjusting tank prices downward without sounding more arrogant than I usually do, or some poncy douchewad who thinks he knows more than he does.

I'm of the opinion that HAV/LAVs/Dropships should be disposable assets, just like dropsuits (not as easy to kill, obviously or why bother?) and priced as such so the roles can be economically sustainable rather than "LOL you must win this many battles to drive this vehicle."

I'd like an opinion of someone who is NOT an infantry sperg, so Pokey won't be alone in his odd dissenting points.

if vehicles get the same powercore treatment as dropsuits, how would you view tanks then?

disposable assets? we went through that phase once before. Everyone stopped running tanks, despite their lower costs, because proto tanks died to milita tanks. Vet tankers wont drive tanks that dont convey the level of investment made in SP/player skill.

Pricing is one way to handle things because vet tankers will run noobs into the ground economically.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 293	Posted - 2015.06.17 21:57:00 - [1] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: Mina Longstrike wrote: I believe the real issue is that vehicle raw HP is too low, hardeners harden for too much, and effective reps per second are way too high. Increase the raw hp (makes vehicles feel a bit more confident without modules up), lower the hardening values (2hardener 2 reps tank goes from ~4kehp to ~10k with modules active, and its reps go from ~200 to ~500) and lower the effective reps (this makes damage 'stick', so tanks are not fine 10-15 seconds after they leave an area). Av is either immediately lethal, or almost infinitely endurable in the current model. In some respects I agree with this in others not so much. I do feel like raw hit point values are too low and that modules convey too much benefit to the point where they are the defining modules on the vehicle. On the other hand I don't believe the repair values per second are too high at all. The only thing that prevents them from being balanced is that they are passive. 138 repairs per second from a Complex Heavy Armour Repairer is a fair value. yes and no. Have i showed you my horrible AV/HAV proposal? It addresses a lot of things. The only thing I can't figure out how to word in it is adjusting tank prices downward without sounding more arrogant than I usually do, or some poncy douchewad who thinks he knows more than he does. I'm of the opinion that HAV/LAVs/Dropships should be disposable assets, just like dropsuits (not as easy to kill, obviously or why bother?) and priced as such so the roles can be economically sustainable rather than "LOL you must win this many battles to drive this vehicle." I'd like an opinion of someone who is NOT an infantry sperg, so Pokey won't be alone in his odd dissenting points. if vehicles get the same powercore treatment as dropsuits, how would you view tanks then? disposable assets? we went through that phase once before. Everyone stopped running tanks, despite their lower costs, because proto tanks died to milita tanks. Vet tankers wont drive tanks that dont convey the level of investment made in SP/player skill. Pricing is one way to handle things because vet tankers will run noobs into the ground economically. Well...HAVs already kinda have the Powercore Treatment that dropsuits might be getting... HAVs as-is are at a power level where they should be considered disposable assets, with one module set being a glaring exception (Looking at you Passive Armor Reps) in my opinion ofc...I think buffer on HAVs should go up, but regen should be going down and/or moved to actives...so that damage sticks around longer Price shouldn't be a balancing point precisely because it automatically puts the advantage into veteran player's hands, as they are the ones who know how to survive in their expensive assets the most, and have had the most time to amass assets to cover the losses sustained during normal operation. Something shouldn't be too strong because it's expensive, nor should something be expensive because it's too strong, both are indicative of a fundamental problem with the variables at play, with price being a limiter that's largely irrelevant to the tactical play. (It wouldn't matter how expensive you made an HAV, if it truly provided you with a massive, no-counter advantage, there'd still be no reason not to run it...See the early days of Titan class vessels in Eve) Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal