Bernie Sanders for president 2016

cut

The pilot wouldn't have the option of a highly tanked suit that they can jump out of the HAV wearing, prey and spray an HMG then insta jump back into the HAV. That's my MAJOR peeve with the current design.

I also wouldn't give the passengers the option to jump from a DS after the amour is gone and it's crashing. It would blow up and kill them immediately. They should be paying attention to the condition of the DS and make the choice to escape before it blows..

So no. What you should have wanted was to hold CCP to a higher standard.

Further proof that the CPM should never have existed in this game in the first place. If CCP can't make their own game by themselves then they don't need to drag in random opinions on top of it.

From what I can say here, PRE 1.7 seemed to be overall the best time for tanking since both AV and vehicles were on equal ground. AV requiring to work as a team to destroy a tank and a tank ravaging anyone foolish enough to run out in the open without a care.

I agree with you on the part of vehicle hopping, i have a vehicle alt and i use it only for vehicles, but don't go off topic even with good arguments.

I'm talking about actual gameplay and possibility, balance can be achieved with numbers, numbers can be balanced ot not, but current vehicle situation is tragic.

One vehicle rule, even if vehicle stats can be balanced, then a couple of fit would rule and again even if modules can be balanced, then it would be about who have better modules.

What i miss more about blam! model is pilot skill, leave marauders alone, they were designed to be OP (and almost nobody carried pro AV), but tank battles were made of skill, timing, good pilot ability to manouver.
Current design is: module active= tank invicible, module not active= tank dead.

My point is that i miss skilled vehicle battles, where one fit was better than another for a certain situation and the other fit was also viable for another situation.

Hopefully not.

Speaking for myself here but the Blam model for reasons too dull to go into again made balancing the vehicles v infantry v vehicles near impossible.

It's always my contention that the introduction and design philosophy of the vehicles in Dust 514 was faulty from day one. For instance HAV and DS frames should've been your suit. In the same way the Cylon Fighers in the Battlestar Galactica reboot, they'd have an organic brain into which the Mercs consciousness jumps.

The pilot wouldn't have the option of a highly tanked suit that they can jump out of the HAV wearing, prey and spray an HMG then insta jump back into the HAV. That's my MAJOR peeve with the current design.

I also wouldn't give the passengers the option to jump from a DS after the amour is gone and it's crashing. It would blow up and kill them immediately. They should be paying attention to the condition of the DS and make the choice to escape before it blows.

If the vehicle was your suit I'd be more supportive of the calls to increase the survivability of the HAV and DS in general. But while we have the insta jump in and out and the option to have a second suit as back up (another factor that Rattati has to factor in term of survivability in balance), I'm reluctant to do so so until fundamental issues with the vehicles are fixed.

I also wouldn't give the passengers the option to jump from a DS after the amour is gone and it's crashing. It would blow up and kill them immediately. They should be paying attention to the condition of the DS and make the choice to escape before it blows.

I highly disagree with this for three reasons.
1. That dropship blowing up just cost me more than any of my proto suits
2. 50-50 shot the dropship crushes me
3. Trying to fight my way out of enemy lines after crashing might be the most fun I can possibly have in dust

At the same time I have to ask. Why do Dropships Pilots get the opportunity to bail out of a doomed vehicle but HAV and LAV pilots do not?

This is stupid. You want to alter the entirety of the lore to make it so clones are basically physically merged with their vehicle, instead of admitting that if CCP had put forth the required effort and resources to develop the tech, they could have simply balanced this all with animations.

Because it was coded that way originally? I think the main issue is that AV users want the +50 kill, while some vehicle users REALLY do not want the death. However, in the case of a dropship bailout situation the pilot ends up dead (in my own experiences) ~80% of the time. Either through being crushed or immediately gunned down by angry reds. So now the AV user is upset for not getting the kill but the pilot is dead anyways. And in the 20% situation where the pilot survives, I reference point 3 I made earlier.

I think BLAM's model had a lot of very key flaws with vehicles and we've been suffering from it ever since. The phrase was "Waves of Opportunity" yet many of the changes did quite the opposite (ie passive armor repairs) and allows HAVs to have near constant high levels of tanking ability.

At the same time I have to ask. Why do Dropships Pilots get the opportunity to bail out of a doomed vehicle but HAV and LAV pilots do not?

Apples to Oranges.

Why do HAV and LAV drivers get to hop in and out of their vehicle at any random moment?

If a Dropship Pilot jumps out at a random moment me and my dropship fall to earth taking damage or blowing up. But a tank/jeep driver hops out at any moment and can jump right back into his tank with out it exploding.

Tanks and LAVs should come to a full stop (like dropship pilots have to land) before exiting and entering thier vehicles. Or they explode.

Blam was pre-"Waves of Opportunity". Basically everything before Uprising and the official release of the game was Blam. More diverse suite of modules, marauder tanks, tanks that stayed damaged for more than 10 seconds before their health regen'd (no passive regen for Armor and very little for shields). That was BLAM.

I don't really see why an ability to enter/exit because you're a ground vehicle has anything to do with a difference in destruction conditions. One has to do with a difference in that you're flying vs being on the ground, the other has to do with the fact that one vehicle doesn't blow up immediate once it runs out of HP.

How are those two things related? Or is the ground the only thing capable of actually blowing up vehicles which is why HAVs and LAVs do it instantly?