DUST Search - Can we revisit changing/removing warbarge weapon damage?

Regis Blackbird wrote:

Aeon Amadi wrote:

Jadek Menaheim wrote:

Aeon Amadi wrote:

Damage Bonus was initially supposed to be a choice thing. You either went with 5% extra HP or 5% damage but for whatever reason the HP thing just couldn't work. Rather than removing content, CCP opted to keep it and thusly it made it onto the Warbarge.

I'm trying to recall when that was discussed? What?

Had the warbarge subsystem design been intended to be a choose-which-systems-you-want-active design? i.e. warbarges having cpu and powergrid systems.

Rattati mentioned it at one point but I can't find the post.

Found one post, but I remember there are more (this was a hot topic at the time)
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2567688#post2567688
(Under Phase 1 - Merc Warbarge)

CCP Rattati wrote:

Augmented Ammunition Facility - Primary weapons damage boost (we wanted to start with armor rep or max armor, but it was difficult, eventually we want to have a choice here).

I also think that this was a big mistake, especially since makes the balancing so much harder.
My opinion (back then and now) is that the Warbarge should not grant any in-match bonuses...at all. Neither offensive or defensive.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jadek Menaheim Positive-Feedback. 7	Posted - 2015.09.25 22:22:00 - [1] - Quote With this undertaking to rework weapon damage profiles did the CPM discuss removing primary weapon damage bonuses from the warbarge? Future balance efforts really seem negatively impacted by a variable that is going to be different for everyone. Dust 514 Market Trello. The essential resource for trading in Dust.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 11	Posted - 2015.09.25 23:03:00 - [2] - Quote Jadek Menaheim wrote: With this undertaking to rework weapon damage profiles did the CPM discuss removing primary weapon damage bonuses from the warbarge? Future balance efforts really seem negatively impacted by a variable that is going to be different for everyone (and a variable most people seem to forget to reference). the only weapon profile rework that happened was to transfer a caldari weapon primary bonus to the correct commando. WoW has taught me that Purple means Legendary. This means Quafe suits are the optimal loadout for killing all of you.
Jadek Menaheim Algintal Core Gallente Federation 7	Posted - 2015.09.25 23:57:00 - [3] - Quote Thanks Breakin, however I highlighted the wrong term (damage profiles). I was also intending to convey weapon balancing as a whole (not just profiles). Dust 514 Market Trello. The essential resource for trading in Dust.
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 2	Posted - 2015.09.26 00:33:00 - [4] - Quote From the day 1, the warbarge blanket weapon damage bonus was a huge mistake. Sure, it generated revenue for CCP which is good, but the price was pretty high. When warbarge was introduced, the Time to Kill vs HP balance was finally tuned few months before, and announced it was in good place. This undermined those balance efforts from 1 to 6%. AV vs vehicles balance was affected, although maddies swallowed it pretty nicely. Just think about it. A fully passive blanket damage bonus. The 'weaponry' skill was removed some year before after being deemed intrusive. The is one termI use with extreme caution. It is "Pay to Win" or P2W. Considering warbarge, yes, we all know that all warbarge upgrades can be acquired thru waiting, and getting extra components from battles and free strongboxes. But the scale of higher levels is such extreme and the wait time is measured in months and even in years, so claiming that the given bonus can be gotten otherwise is just lying to oneself. This is the first time CCP has done a P2W design choice in Dust. All other cases so far have been invalid. Isk, SP, component bonus? No problem. None is that strong and has balancing mechanics of itself (isk is consumed, the more you have SP does not mean you get more powerful but flexible etc). But the damage bonus is straight up battlefield hard bonus giving edge to big spenders. That is an issue. It may not be the biggest issue in dust, but still a considerable one. PS: I do enjoy the benefits of the +7% warbarge damage bonus myself. So far I've made the decision not to use 200k AUR or something for next upgrade. KERO-TRADER is my official Eve character for Dust trading.
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 2	Posted - 2015.09.26 01:24:00 - [5] - Quote I'm also not a huge fan Real CPM Platform
Aeon Amadi 12	Posted - 2015.09.26 01:34:00 - [6] - Quote Damage Bonus was initially supposed to be a choice thing. You either went with 5% extra HP or 5% damage but for whatever reason the HP thing just couldn't work. Rather than removing content, CCP opted to keep it and thusly it made it onto the Warbarge. It is a blanket bonus that does affect TTK, absolutely, but I'm sort of banking that progressive shield changes bringing shield capability up to a comparable level as armor will bring us back to that butter-zone. It'll just take a while. Negative Introspection - Aeon's CPM Blog Skype: nomistrav
Jadek Menaheim 1nner.Heaven 7	Posted - 2015.09.26 02:22:00 - [7] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Damage Bonus was initially supposed to be a choice thing. You either went with 5% extra HP or 5% damage but for whatever reason the HP thing just couldn't work. Rather than removing content, CCP opted to keep it and thusly it made it onto the Warbarge. I'm trying to recall when that was discussed? Had the warbarge subsystem design been intended to be a choose-which-systems-you-want-active design? i.e. warbarges having cpu and powergrid systems. Dust 514 Market Trello. The essential resource for trading in Dust.
Mortedeamor The Black Masquerade 1	Posted - 2015.09.26 02:52:00 - [8] - Quote eyy i dont mind that its a complete p2w model ...ok i get it ccp u need money gotta buy ur beer right>? but kero is right it has ****** up ttk dramatically ,,i think if you wanna keep the wb bonus you should do a blanket dmg nerf again to adjust ttk back to where it was before the wb because in my opinion before the warbarge ttk was ina good place and yall were gunna get a pat on the back until u made the wb ...you know you want that pat on the back dust 514 ruined console gaming for me pc master race PORT IT CCP
Aeon Amadi 12	Posted - 2015.09.26 03:43:00 - [9] - Quote Jadek Menaheim wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Damage Bonus was initially supposed to be a choice thing. You either went with 5% extra HP or 5% damage but for whatever reason the HP thing just couldn't work. Rather than removing content, CCP opted to keep it and thusly it made it onto the Warbarge. I'm trying to recall when that was discussed? Had the warbarge subsystem design been intended to be a choose-which-systems-you-want-active design? i.e. warbarges having cpu and powergrid systems. Rattati mentioned it at one point but I can't find the post. Negative Introspection - Aeon's CPM Blog Skype: nomistrav
Loyal Glasses G.L.O.R.Y 100	Posted - 2015.09.26 04:00:00 - [10] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Jadek Menaheim wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Damage Bonus was initially supposed to be a choice thing. You either went with 5% extra HP or 5% damage but for whatever reason the HP thing just couldn't work. Rather than removing content, CCP opted to keep it and thusly it made it onto the Warbarge. I'm trying to recall when that was discussed? Had the warbarge subsystem design been intended to be a choose-which-systems-you-want-active design? i.e. warbarges having cpu and powergrid systems. Rattati mentioned it at one point but I can't find the post. Can you find out if it is possible to switch the warbarge damage dealing upgrade for a defensive damage decrease upgrade? Glasses of the Loyal Variety > "The dead are notoriously unproductive "

Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 1	Posted - 2015.09.26 06:38:00 - [11] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Jadek Menaheim wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Damage Bonus was initially supposed to be a choice thing. You either went with 5% extra HP or 5% damage but for whatever reason the HP thing just couldn't work. Rather than removing content, CCP opted to keep it and thusly it made it onto the Warbarge. I'm trying to recall when that was discussed? Had the warbarge subsystem design been intended to be a choose-which-systems-you-want-active design? i.e. warbarges having cpu and powergrid systems. Rattati mentioned it at one point but I can't find the post. Found one post, but I remember there are more (this was a hot topic at the time) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2567688#post2567688 (Under Phase 1 - Merc Warbarge) CCP Rattati wrote: Augmented Ammunition Facility - Primary weapons damage boost (we wanted to start with armor rep or max armor, but it was difficult, eventually we want to have a choice here). I also think that this was a big mistake, especially since makes the balancing so much harder. My opinion (back then and now) is that the Warbarge should not grant any in-match bonuses...at all. Neither offensive or defensive.
Loyal Glasses G.L.O.R.Y 100	Posted - 2015.09.26 14:38:00 - [12] - Quote Regis Blackbird wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Jadek Menaheim wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Damage Bonus was initially supposed to be a choice thing. You either went with 5% extra HP or 5% damage but for whatever reason the HP thing just couldn't work. Rather than removing content, CCP opted to keep it and thusly it made it onto the Warbarge. I'm trying to recall when that was discussed? Had the warbarge subsystem design been intended to be a choose-which-systems-you-want-active design? i.e. warbarges having cpu and powergrid systems. Rattati mentioned it at one point but I can't find the post. Found one post, but I remember there are more (this was a hot topic at the time) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2567688#post2567688 (Under Phase 1 - Merc Warbarge) CCP Rattati wrote: Augmented Ammunition Facility - Primary weapons damage boost (we wanted to start with armor rep or max armor, but it was difficult, eventually we want to have a choice here). I also think that this was a big mistake, especially since makes the balancing so much harder. My opinion (back then and now) is that the Warbarge should not grant any in-match bonuses...at all. Neither offensive or defensive. A defensive bounus will go a long way in lowering TTK. Glasses of the Loyal Variety > "The dead are notoriously unproductive "
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 1	Posted - 2015.09.26 15:41:00 - [13] - Quote Loyal Glasses wrote: A defensive bounus will go a long way in lowering TTK. True, but removing the damage bonus will do the same thing (albeit not as much). I actually think TTK is roughly right at the moment (can be reduced slightly), especially after the tiericide. Can't we replace the augmented weapon facility with?: District Tactical Command - bonus to CP in PC matches Faction HyperLink - bonus to LP generation for a faction of choice (30 day cool down to re-select faction) Encryption Facility - increases the chance of rare loot from strong boxes I can probably think up several more which would benefit the day to day operation but does not give a direct advantage in-match. Some of course will require extra dev time, but it will make all out life's easier... Trust me.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]