DUST Search - Vehicle Hardeners

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Vehicle Hardeners

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 1	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:01:00 - [1] - Quote It seems the era of hardener stacking is still upon us - rejoice... I think vehicles would be more interesting if hardeners had a decent downside. Disable reps/recharge while active... Possibly have shields begin to recharge as soon as hardener is disabled. People will no longer be able to just activate hardeners to feel safe for a period of time, you must think if you need to tank or need to rep. Stacking multiple hardeners will still be viable, but you will need to plan ahead to make sure you can get to a safe place to regen, instead of just sitting around soaking up damage until it runs out. Thoughts?
Mikel Arias Challengers 506 217	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:41:00 - [2] - Quote Well, its an idea, and one of the most crazy I have heard. I like it. However, I would rather that only one hardener could be fitted. Last match a p u s s y (sorry, Im not really the kind of guy to use that kind of lenguaje, but there is no other word for this guy) had like three hardeners, so his tanks could not be taken out by my friend and I with AV fittings that almost all the time get prototype HAVs destroyed (by surprise). This guy took damage and didnt even bother to move, he was just camping... and my team kept attacking with just guns...
Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 447	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:41:00 - [3] - Quote Recharge isn't strong enough to warrant that, and if armor reps were active again, hardeners would be a non issue, considering a pilot would have a set time frame to do pretty much anything.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Four Horseman Tactical Agency 2	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:07:00 - [4] - Quote You know that AV grenades and packed remotes have a lot of effects on vehicles , even when hardened given the right combinations of PLC's , swarms and forges .. also now with breach mass and flaylock's as well . It just seems like if you can't do well one on one then that sounds personal but ground vehicles already have many more things that make them fall back compared to the three the DS's have . I have a fit that solo's HAV's when the operator isn't aware or good and that's the way it should be , I shouldn't be able to beat a decent operator , neither should I expect to . I just believe that HAV's should be HAV's ( Tanks ) and anymore weaknesses and it really won't be fair to those who place SP's into that role or fair to the role it's self by it being so water downed . I hope that people will stop making threads about non issues and get on the issues that make this game stagnate , talking about myo's is mundane and so is talking about boosters ( it's been happening way before the event and happens a lot in FW matches ) , high uplinks ( that's why your in that squad that you people fight so hard for , to get in a DS and take them out but now they want to nerf their application ) or more " things that HAV's need to " balance " them ." , when their already fragile as it is and CCP is finally trying to bring out the rest of the racial HAV's on top of fixing the disparage between the gunnies and maddies . I just don't see HAV's as being too much of a problem unless your just lazy and don't want to switch roles to deal with the threat , not good enough to battle them or just flat out , do not like them and want the role killed ... to me their weak enough and they way people stress about squads , it just seems that players in squads do the most complaining while solo players just seek balance . There are just too many ways to deal with HAV's now , that it just doesn't make sense to " re-tweak " them , I mean ... their weak already if you know how to approach them and CCP just did major work on expanding their weak spots . Anything else done to them and it just wouldn't make sense to even have them in-game . I would rather wait until the next batch of vehicles drop before anything else is done , it just wouldn't make sense with that looming . I'm sure they don't need the extra work and if anything needs to be done , they could just do it in one swoop . Teamwork is really important - said the Tyrannosarus Rex from Kung Fury .
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui Four Horseman Tactical Agency 2	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:11:00 - [5] - Quote Mikel Arias wrote: Well, its an idea, and one of the most crazy I have heard. I like it. However, I would rather that only one hardener could be fitted. Last match a p u s s y (sorry, Im not really the kind of guy to use that kind of lenguaje, but there is no other word for this guy) had like three hardeners, so his tanks could not be taken out by my friend and I with AV fittings that almost all the time get prototype HAVs destroyed (by surprise). This guy took damage and didnt even bother to move, he was just camping... and my team kept attacking with just guns... That just sounds like the operator was smart , it's no different from infantry using two or three damage mods , armor reps , shield / armor plates or anything else that would give them a better advantage on the battlefield . Just don't think that's being a p u s s y more then being smart . You said it yourself that you get guys by surprise , it sounds like he wasn't surprised and was ready for anything , that takes smarts . Teamwork is really important - said the Tyrannosarus Rex from Kung Fury .
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 21	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:29:00 - [6] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: It seems the era of hardener stacking is still upon us - rejoice... I think vehicles would be more interesting if hardeners had a decent downside. Disable reps/recharge while active... Possibly have shields begin to recharge as soon as hardener is disabled. People will no longer be able to just activate hardeners to feel safe for a period of time, you must think if you need to tank or need to rep. Stacking multiple hardeners will still be viable, but you will need to plan ahead to make sure you can get to a safe place to regen, instead of just sitting around soaking up damage until it runs out. Thoughts? Yeah maybe if we had Bastion Modules but never on standard Hardeners. They just need lesser resistance increases so a focus can be of HAV raw HP with small total gains not effective HP due to huge resistance gains. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations 6	Posted - 2015.10.28 02:05:00 - [7] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Derpty Derp wrote: It seems the era of hardener stacking is still upon us - rejoice... I think vehicles would be more interesting if hardeners had a decent downside. Disable reps/recharge while active... Possibly have shields begin to recharge as soon as hardener is disabled. People will no longer be able to just activate hardeners to feel safe for a period of time, you must think if you need to tank or need to rep. Stacking multiple hardeners will still be viable, but you will need to plan ahead to make sure you can get to a safe place to regen, instead of just sitting around soaking up damage until it runs out. Thoughts? Yeah maybe if we had Bastion Modules but never on standard Hardeners. They just need lesser resistance increases so a focus can be of HAV raw HP with small total gains not effective HP due to huge resistance gains. This guy gets it. "That little sh*t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati
Mikel Arias Challengers 506 219	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:45:00 - [8] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Mikel Arias wrote: Well, its an idea, and one of the most crazy I have heard. I like it. However, I would rather that only one hardener could be fitted. Last match a p u s s y (sorry, Im not really the kind of guy to use that kind of lenguaje, but there is no other word for this guy) had like three hardeners, so his tanks could not be taken out by my friend and I with AV fittings that almost all the time get prototype HAVs destroyed (by surprise). This guy took damage and didnt even bother to move, he was just camping... and my team kept attacking with just guns... That just sounds like the operator was smart , it's no different from infantry using two or three damage mods , armor reps , shield / armor plates or anything else that would give them a better advantage on the battlefield . Just don't think that's being a p u s s y more then being smart . You said it yourself that you get guys by surprise , it sounds like he wasn't surprised and was ready for anything , that takes smarts . Alright, you have a point.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. 4	Posted - 2015.10.28 16:48:00 - [9] - Quote Vehicles have ** for HP, HP modules got nerfed, active reps removed or outright broken in the case of shield boosters and also nerfed the amount to regen, the vehicles themselves have been nerfed HP wise in some cases. Stacking multiple hardeners already comes with stacking penalties so you are adding another nerf onto an essential module because all other modules are generally useless hence why cookie cutter fits is all you see. We had more variety back in Chromosome once again because we had module variety. Add in that basically every weapon now does damage to a HAV including my butter knife it has never been easier to destroy a vehicle let alone a HAV which now has weakspots everywhere on the hull because little timmy complained that there HMG doesn't do damage. You are asking for just another nerf on top of the ** sandwich and asking vehicle pilots to yet again take another bite. CCP Rattati - "One giant vehicle nerf with more power to AV", you have got to be kidding...''
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 1	Posted - 2015.10.28 23:42:00 - [10] - Quote Just a little 'heads up' to the people jumping straight to "Tankers got it rough yo, get gud with your swarm and av nades bro." I am a tanker, the thing that annoys me is not tanks being unkillable, they aren't... They're just boring as ****. Something needs to change, because they're either kill everything or get insta-popped, there's no happy medium... I've pretty much given up on av vs vehicle, as it is inherently designed to be boring, but it would be nice if vehicle vs vehicle could be more interesting. Would honestly love it if we had to choose between outputting damage, tanking damage and repairing damage, though this would likely require a lot of work... It would add a lot of strategy to the (vehicle) game.

Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 455	Posted - 2015.10.29 00:33:00 - [11] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: Just a little 'heads up' to the people jumping straight to "Tankers got it rough yo, get gud with your swarm and av nades bro." I am a tanker, the thing that annoys me is not tanks being unkillable, they aren't... They're just boring as ****. Something needs to change, because they're either kill everything or get insta-popped, there's no happy medium... I've pretty much given up on av vs vehicle, as it is inherently designed to be boring, but it would be nice if vehicle vs vehicle could be more interesting. Would honestly love it if we had to choose between outputting damage, tanking damage and repairing damage, though this would likely require a lot of work... It would add a lot of strategy to the (vehicle) game. The issue people have is instead of using what we know worked, you want to try something completely new, which probably won't, just add to the list of things needed to be reverted.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.10.29 15:10:00 - [12] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: True Adamance wrote: Derpty Derp wrote: It seems the era of hardener stacking is still upon us - rejoice... I think vehicles would be more interesting if hardeners had a decent downside. Disable reps/recharge while active... Possibly have shields begin to recharge as soon as hardener is disabled. People will no longer be able to just activate hardeners to feel safe for a period of time, you must think if you need to tank or need to rep. Stacking multiple hardeners will still be viable, but you will need to plan ahead to make sure you can get to a safe place to regen, instead of just sitting around soaking up damage until it runs out. Thoughts? Yeah maybe if we had Bastion Modules but never on standard Hardeners. They just need lesser resistance increases so a focus can be of HAV raw HP with small total gains not effective HP due to huge resistance gains. This guy gets it. Hardeners are fine but the cooldown and uptimes need some serious tweaking. I've only said this like a million times. 45 seconds on an armor hardener? Really? Try 30 with max skills and see what happens.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 21	Posted - 2015.10.29 16:26:00 - [13] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: True Adamance wrote: Derpty Derp wrote: It seems the era of hardener stacking is still upon us - rejoice... I think vehicles would be more interesting if hardeners had a decent downside. Disable reps/recharge while active... Possibly have shields begin to recharge as soon as hardener is disabled. People will no longer be able to just activate hardeners to feel safe for a period of time, you must think if you need to tank or need to rep. Stacking multiple hardeners will still be viable, but you will need to plan ahead to make sure you can get to a safe place to regen, instead of just sitting around soaking up damage until it runs out. Thoughts? Yeah maybe if we had Bastion Modules but never on standard Hardeners. They just need lesser resistance increases so a focus can be of HAV raw HP with small total gains not effective HP due to huge resistance gains. This guy gets it. Hardeners are fine but the cooldown and uptimes need some serious tweaking. I've only said this like a million times. 45 seconds on an armor hardener? Really? Try 30 with max skills and see what happens. I'm not convince this meta of having 30% resistance hardeners make tanks either be useful or worthless is positive or particularly interesting tank gameplay. Concepts like defliade and enfilade should be encouraged and a tankers should feel like they can be useful at all time even if at some times their defenses are heightened. I got no respect for tanks in Dust 514. They're not particularly reflective of real tank combat nor do they require altogether that much effort to pilot these days. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Ardos 130297 Prima Gallicus 122	Posted - 2015.10.29 16:31:00 - [14] - Quote I think, one of the problem is : No hardener on your tank = useless Hardener on your tank = too powerfull So, conclusion, you've got only 1 meta for tank player and it's very boring... You do not win a war by making what is just... You win it by making what is necessary... Veteran Closed Beta
CLONE117 True Pros Forever 914	Posted - 2015.10.29 17:15:00 - [15] - Quote well im just going to miss the days of 500 hps reps on my 200 k maddy with std blaster again. and 4000 armor hp. it was hardener free... and great at dealing with hardener tanks... but asides from that all of those fits were invalid when i got on last night. only valid fit i had were a few gunlogis which now would be useless in any situation as i designed them during 1.7 as glass cannons. and my mlt soma.. with a mlt damage mod and fuel injector. the fact i cant even stack decent reps or 120 mm plates is ridiculous. and the turn speed is much slower than i remember its all slower than last i played. over all i was forced to play it safe during that domination near the end.. i got fed up with being incapable on the ground with all the scouts dancing in my crosshairs as my line of hmg bullets fail to hit the as they kill me with a combat rifle. this is low end gear im using against proto though. in fact the only reason i got a positive kd that match was because i spawned on an uplink that a bunch of people were camping and put and re on the ground and set it off right before i died. if only we could pilot the mcc. id end the matches real quick.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations 6	Posted - 2015.10.29 17:36:00 - [16] - Quote Tebu Gan wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: True Adamance wrote: Derpty Derp wrote: It seems the era of hardener stacking is still upon us - rejoice... I think vehicles would be more interesting if hardeners had a decent downside. Disable reps/recharge while active... Possibly have shields begin to recharge as soon as hardener is disabled. People will no longer be able to just activate hardeners to feel safe for a period of time, you must think if you need to tank or need to rep. Stacking multiple hardeners will still be viable, but you will need to plan ahead to make sure you can get to a safe place to regen, instead of just sitting around soaking up damage until it runs out. Thoughts? Yeah maybe if we had Bastion Modules but never on standard Hardeners. They just need lesser resistance increases so a focus can be of HAV raw HP with small total gains not effective HP due to huge resistance gains. This guy gets it. Hardeners are fine but the cooldown and uptimes need some serious tweaking. I've only said this like a million times. 45 seconds on an armor hardener? Really? Try 30 with max skills and see what happens. Not to mention hardeners increase effective rep rate while active. So you end up with vehicles that are often at 100% or dead. I mean you rarely see a tank that isn't at full hp if its not taking fire. Av players should be able to whittle down an havs hp over time but that's never going to happen if the HAV can regen to full hp in a matter of seconds all the time. Buff HP modules and nerf regen mods "That little sh*t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati
JudgeIsABadPilot Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 56	Posted - 2015.10.29 19:46:00 - [17] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: Just a little 'heads up' to the people jumping straight to "Tankers got it rough yo, get gud with your swarm and av nades bro." I am a tanker, the thing that annoys me is not tanks being unkillable, they aren't... They're just boring as ****. Something needs to change, because they're either kill everything or get insta-popped, there's no happy medium... I've pretty much given up on av vs vehicle, as it is inherently designed to be boring, but it would be nice if vehicle vs vehicle could be more interesting. Would honestly love it if we had to choose between outputting damage, tanking damage and repairing damage, though this would likely require a lot of work... It would add a lot of strategy to the (vehicle) game. That's what we had during Chromosome. But, as usual, the special snowflakes complained that it wasn't fair that pilots were braying the hell out of each other, and that they should be the sole effective means of destroying a tank. As such, that's why we're in this position of tanks being useless and infantry still complaining that their SMG can't destroy it.
Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 457	Posted - 2015.10.30 04:08:00 - [18] - Quote Ardos 130297 wrote: I think, one of the problem is : No hardener on your tank = useless Hardener on your tank = too powerfull So, conclusion, you've got only 1 meta for tank player and it's very boring... The thing is, it used to not be like that, when there was much more variation, and reps weren't such trash.
Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 457	Posted - 2015.10.30 04:12:00 - [19] - Quote JudgeIsABadPilot wrote: Derpty Derp wrote: Just a little 'heads up' to the people jumping straight to "Tankers got it rough yo, get gud with your swarm and av nades bro." I am a tanker, the thing that annoys me is not tanks being unkillable, they aren't... They're just boring as ****. Something needs to change, because they're either kill everything or get insta-popped, there's no happy medium... I've pretty much given up on av vs vehicle, as it is inherently designed to be boring, but it would be nice if vehicle vs vehicle could be more interesting. Would honestly love it if we had to choose between outputting damage, tanking damage and repairing damage, though this would likely require a lot of work... It would add a lot of strategy to the (vehicle) game. That's what we had during Chromosome. But, as usual, the special snowflakes complained that it wasn't fair that pilots were braying the hell out of each other, and that they should be the sole effective means of destroying a tank. As such, that's why we're in this position of tanks being useless and infantry still complaining that their SMG can't destroy it. Chromosome was extreme in that Rail Saggy's would pretty much own anything it shot at. After rails were adjusted to be a more lower damage, sustained weapon platform, it was far more balanced. If that change was done, Honestly Chromosome HAV's would be much more acceptable than current ones.
Mortedeamor The Black Masquerade 2	Posted - 2015.10.30 19:24:00 - [20] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: It seems the era of hardener stacking is still upon us - rejoice... I think vehicles would be more interesting if hardeners had a decent downside. Disable reps/recharge while active... Possibly have shields begin to recharge as soon as hardener is disabled. People will no longer be able to just activate hardeners to feel safe for a period of time, you must think if you need to tank or need to rep. Stacking multiple hardeners will still be viable, but you will need to plan ahead to make sure you can get to a safe place to regen, instead of just sitting around soaking up damage until it runs out. Thoughts? you know what would make vehicle vs av interesting if all av users got good and realized that their tears over their inadequacy have ruined vehicles vs av for years waaaa hardeners need nerfed waaaa people that know how to aim blasters get kills waaa rails can snipe waaa waa waaa waaa i wanna pop every vehicle on the map with my gun that requires 0 aiming because i need an ego boost due to have no real life accomplishments pc master race PORT IT CCP

Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 467	Posted - 2015.10.30 19:38:00 - [21] - Quote Mortedeamor wrote: Derpty Derp wrote: It seems the era of hardener stacking is still upon us - rejoice... I think vehicles would be more interesting if hardeners had a decent downside. Disable reps/recharge while active... Possibly have shields begin to recharge as soon as hardener is disabled. People will no longer be able to just activate hardeners to feel safe for a period of time, you must think if you need to tank or need to rep. Stacking multiple hardeners will still be viable, but you will need to plan ahead to make sure you can get to a safe place to regen, instead of just sitting around soaking up damage until it runs out. Thoughts? you know what would make vehicle vs av interesting if all av users got good and realized that their tears over their inadequacy have ruined vehicles vs av for years waaaa hardeners need nerfed waaaa people that know how to aim blasters get kills waaa rails can snipe waaa waa waaa waaa i wanna pop every vehicle on the map with my gun that requires 0 aiming because i need an ego boost due to have no real life accomplishments The only thing I would have to disagree on is blasters, but not for the reason of killing infantry with them. Honestly, the autocannon-like platform should have been sidelined for medium turrets, and a more hard hitting, more alpha based gun (such as, like I've said over and over, a shotgun based platform) should have took its place. The reason why I say this is because trying to balance them all has turned into a **** show to be frank. People constantly want its effectiveness towards large targets curbed but it become essentially a large rifle, which infantry loathe, and it gets reblanced to soothe their nerves. Additionally, the devs always initially push it to be a superior close range platform, which also makes it the highest DPS platform, and most feel this isn't fair, as it's the premier infantry farming tool at the same time as previously stated. Large turrets suffer a similar situation to HAV's in that they aren't clearly designed and given a role accordingly, and if that's not done, then good luck on actually balancing them. I'd like to see that discussion go though, myself removed, because I have actually tried having such conversation, and nobody has yet taken such advise, with any power anyways...
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood 469	Posted - 2015.10.31 10:11:00 - [22] - Quote Hmm.... Don't like it? I'll tell you what. Vehicles + cap. That's all we need. Nuff said. Forever ADS. Best role.
Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 471	Posted - 2015.11.01 03:51:00 - [23] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: Hmm.... Don't like it? I'll tell you what. Vehicles + cap. That's all we need. Nuff said. Edit: think about it? Everything is different after that. vehicle v vehicle might get more fun (except ads v ads... That's actually so fun and truly is the only balanced thing anyone can do in dust imo) Nobody can complain about things being so binary, also. AV can get a neut kinda thing... Vehicles can too, or a vamp.. A little more dynamics for us all :D Plus, i heard if you're running multiple hards your cap just falls apart... Build that cap stable fit boi Put Cap in, remove uptime/downtime, switch skill to max cap and module usage drain... ORRRR we have to skill each module after awhile... Idk... But i feel that cap is the cure to all vehicle problems. ..Heck, maybe shield boost might actually work for everyone... [edited because i realized nuff said, wasn't enough said] I still don't believe that Caps would be well placed in Dust due to the maintaining factor that it has. It would only benefit vehicles that doesn't move much, as moving is a much more involved in Dust than it is in EVE, and requires more attention. Hell, even shooting does as well. EVE is built around managing systems, so it works well there. I wouldn't be opposed to a cloak-like system for all active modules for people to better manage the modules, pulling out the most performance from their modules when they need it, instead of having no control over the timings, but a completely unified system I just don't see working well. It would be interesting to see it actually tested though. This is why I wish we had some form of test server...
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood 475	Posted - 2015.11.01 04:00:00 - [24] - Quote Roger Cordill wrote: Shamarskii Simon wrote: Hmm.... Don't like it? I'll tell you what. Vehicles + cap. That's all we need. Nuff said. Edit: think about it? Everything is different after that. vehicle v vehicle might get more fun (except ads v ads... That's actually so fun and truly is the only balanced thing anyone can do in dust imo) Nobody can complain about things being so binary, also. AV can get a neut kinda thing... Vehicles can too, or a vamp.. A little more dynamics for us all :D Plus, i heard if you're running multiple hards your cap just falls apart... Build that cap stable fit boi Put Cap in, remove uptime/downtime, switch skill to max cap and module usage drain... ORRRR we have to skill each module after awhile... Idk... But i feel that cap is the cure to all vehicle problems. ..Heck, maybe shield boost might actually work for everyone... [edited because i realized nuff said, wasn't enough said] I still don't believe that Caps would be well placed in Dust due to the maintaining factor that it has. It would only benefit vehicles that doesn't move much, as moving is a much more involved in Dust than it is in EVE, and requires more attention. Hell, even shooting does as well. EVE is built around managing systems, so it works well there. I wouldn't be opposed to a cloak-like system for all active modules for people to better manage the modules, pulling out the most performance from their modules when they need it, instead of having no control over the timings, but a completely unified system I just don't see working well. It would be interesting to see it actually tested though. This is why I wish we had some form of test server... I see what you mean. Other contracts +1? Worked with teleporting Forever ADS. Best role.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations 6	Posted - 2015.11.01 04:11:00 - [25] - Quote Roger Cordill wrote: Shamarskii Simon wrote: Hmm.... Don't like it? I'll tell you what. Vehicles + cap. That's all we need. Nuff said. Edit: think about it? Everything is different after that. vehicle v vehicle might get more fun (except ads v ads... That's actually so fun and truly is the only balanced thing anyone can do in dust imo) Nobody can complain about things being so binary, also. AV can get a neut kinda thing... Vehicles can too, or a vamp.. A little more dynamics for us all :D Plus, i heard if you're running multiple hards your cap just falls apart... Build that cap stable fit boi Put Cap in, remove uptime/downtime, switch skill to max cap and module usage drain... ORRRR we have to skill each module after awhile... Idk... But i feel that cap is the cure to all vehicle problems. ..Heck, maybe shield boost might actually work for everyone... [edited because i realized nuff said, wasn't enough said] I still don't believe that Caps would be well placed in Dust due to the maintaining factor that it has. It would only benefit vehicles that doesn't move much, as moving is a much more involved in Dust than it is in EVE, and requires more attention. Hell, even shooting does as well. EVE is built around managing systems, so it works well there. I wouldn't be opposed to a cloak-like system for all active modules for people to better manage the modules, pulling out the most performance from their modules when they need it, instead of having no control over the timings, but a completely unified system I just don't see working well. It would be interesting to see it actually tested though. This is why I wish we had some form of test server... To be honest the lack of micromanagement is what has caused tanking to take a downward spiral in both difficulty and fun. There is far less of a skill factor in piloting as there used to be and in my opinion, that is a huge negative. Back when tankers needed to cycle often 2-3 hardeners and 1-2 reppera constantly, plus other active modules like damage control units...tanking was an art form. Now you can pretty much derp you way to victory because of superior modules. "That little sh*t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati
Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 471	Posted - 2015.11.01 07:54:00 - [26] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Roger Cordill wrote: Shamarskii Simon wrote: Hmm.... Don't like it? I'll tell you what. Vehicles + cap. That's all we need. Nuff said. Edit: think about it? Everything is different after that. vehicle v vehicle might get more fun (except ads v ads... That's actually so fun and truly is the only balanced thing anyone can do in dust imo) Nobody can complain about things being so binary, also. AV can get a neut kinda thing... Vehicles can too, or a vamp.. A little more dynamics for us all :D Plus, i heard if you're running multiple hards your cap just falls apart... Build that cap stable fit boi Put Cap in, remove uptime/downtime, switch skill to max cap and module usage drain... ORRRR we have to skill each module after awhile... Idk... But i feel that cap is the cure to all vehicle problems. ..Heck, maybe shield boost might actually work for everyone... [edited because i realized nuff said, wasn't enough said] I still don't believe that Caps would be well placed in Dust due to the maintaining factor that it has. It would only benefit vehicles that doesn't move much, as moving is a much more involved in Dust than it is in EVE, and requires more attention. Hell, even shooting does as well. EVE is built around managing systems, so it works well there. I wouldn't be opposed to a cloak-like system for all active modules for people to better manage the modules, pulling out the most performance from their modules when they need it, instead of having no control over the timings, but a completely unified system I just don't see working well. It would be interesting to see it actually tested though. This is why I wish we had some form of test server... To be honest the lack of micromanagement is what has caused tanking to take a downward spiral in both difficulty and fun. There is far less of a skill factor in piloting as there used to be and in my opinion, that is a huge negative. Back when tankers needed to cycle often 2-3 hardeners and 1-2 reppera constantly, plus other active modules like damage control units...tanking was an art form. Now you can pretty much derp you way to victory because of superior modules. Although that is true, Adding caps means you would have to manage all of that together, constantly having to think about what modules you have on, what modules drain more than others, etc. It's taking it a step too far in my opinion. It would be nice to receive a variation of modules, and more of a emphasis on active modules for "active" gameplay again though. And as I said, I wouldn't be opposed to Having a cloak-like system put into active modules, seeing as it would be more of a optional sort of thing.
Roger Cordill The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 471	Posted - 2015.11.01 07:56:00 - [27] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: Roger Cordill wrote: Shamarskii Simon wrote: Hmm.... Don't like it? I'll tell you what. Vehicles + cap. That's all we need. Nuff said. Edit: think about it? Everything is different after that. vehicle v vehicle might get more fun (except ads v ads... That's actually so fun and truly is the only balanced thing anyone can do in dust imo) Nobody can complain about things being so binary, also. AV can get a neut kinda thing... Vehicles can too, or a vamp.. A little more dynamics for us all :D Plus, i heard if you're running multiple hards your cap just falls apart... Build that cap stable fit boi Put Cap in, remove uptime/downtime, switch skill to max cap and module usage drain... ORRRR we have to skill each module after awhile... Idk... But i feel that cap is the cure to all vehicle problems. ..Heck, maybe shield boost might actually work for everyone... [edited because i realized nuff said, wasn't enough said] I still don't believe that Caps would be well placed in Dust due to the maintaining factor that it has. It would only benefit vehicles that doesn't move much, as moving is a much more involved in Dust than it is in EVE, and requires more attention. Hell, even shooting does as well. EVE is built around managing systems, so it works well there. I wouldn't be opposed to a cloak-like system for all active modules for people to better manage the modules, pulling out the most performance from their modules when they need it, instead of having no control over the timings, but a completely unified system I just don't see working well. It would be interesting to see it actually tested though. This is why I wish we had some form of test server... I see what you mean. Other contracts +1? Worked with teleporting That is true. How would they implement it though? Make it to where Testing items are only allowed in there or something?
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood 476	Posted - 2015.11.01 11:02:00 - [28] - Quote Well you both have a point (pokey and Roger) See, micromanagement will separate the boys from the men. While you're going around... You have to think about your cap... How much do I have? Can i turn on a shield booster or armor repair if i need it? Will i use up my cap with my hybrid turret accidentally? What's the usage drain of the hardener looking like? This enemy tank has it's hardener on, but for how long? How much cap does the enemy have; how long will I wait? If i turn on all my modules can I quickly finish the fight or... Will I be completely exposed? A lot of questions come up... Good pilots will answer them correctly based on situation, bad pilots will not... Skill becomes so heavily involved now. But as Roger points out, a little too heavily involved for the type of system everyone is so used to. The good pilots will become the few, just like with ADS... Which I don't mind! But, it's the bad group that'll be up in arms on the forums... Tons will complain about the difficulty... Without a tutorial, many people won't even understand what cap is.... So why not change it to something we are all familiar with? Still... I prefer cap... Maybe i'd start writing down tank pilot names, too. if that happens. The way it would have to be implemented is like......... Any ordinary skirm, dom, etc... Just switch modules in that mode from typical on or off to use up, wait till full again. Forever ADS. Best role.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 21	Posted - 2015.11.01 16:04:00 - [29] - Quote Roger Cordill wrote: Although that is true, Adding caps means you would have to manage all of that together, constantly having to think about what modules you have on, what modules drain more than others, etc. It's taking it a step too far in my opinion. That's what I used to love about HAV gameplay back then. Guessing your opponents fits, memorizing how long their hardeners would operate for activating your modules at the exactly the right time. Micromanaging secondary defensive modules was an art form in its own way especially when you learned what you could survive when combining modules. Em shah tey et naGÇÖemsaer ek rahvi, amarr osedah gasi ubday pahk. Ekin tey vahka ijed div ema ziel. Et tey vamatal em.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations 6	Posted - 2015.11.01 23:43:00 - [30] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Roger Cordill wrote: Although that is true, Adding caps means you would have to manage all of that together, constantly having to think about what modules you have on, what modules drain more than others, etc. It's taking it a step too far in my opinion. That's what I used to love about HAV gameplay back then. Guessing your opponents fits, memorizing how long their hardeners would operate for activating your modules at the exactly the right time. Micromanaging secondary defensive modules was an art form in its own way especially when you learned what you could survive when combining modules. Pretty much. I got to a point where I didnt even really look at my icons because I was counting in my head the seconds I had left on my reps, hardeners, DCUs, ect. and plotting paths of escape knowing how long it would take to get there. It was challenging and it was fun. But now? Eh? Flip hardener on, when that one is up flip the other on. That's about all there is to it and a large reason why I really dislike piloting now. Do we need a full on cap system? Maybe not. But the current philosophy is so painful unimaginative and boring, that it's really not fun anymore and applying arbitrary debuffs when a hardener is active not going to fix that underlying issue. It'll still be boring, just less effective. "That little sh*t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.