DUST Search - What do we expect in DUST Legion?

All Channels

General Discussions

What do we expect in DUST Legion?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Operative 1174 Uuali True Companion Planetary Requisitions 1	Posted - 2016.02.06 23:57:00 - [121] - Quote Whatever it is, I want them to be able to continue to implement what they say they are going to implement and not keep announcing and showing trailers of what they dream of doing. I also want to see nothing less than an alpha demo at this year's Fanfest after they had two years since announcing this direction to produce at least that. No trailer; a working alpha demo. Nothing fancy, just show you actually have something for having cancelled DUST. CCP logic GÇô We fix what doesn't need breaking.
el OPERATOR Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2016.02.07 00:30:00 - [122] - Quote TP/OTS view. So I can see me doing the cool **** I'm doing. Open-Beta Vet. CAPCRO Nomad. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR
SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 877	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:26:00 - [123] - Quote Murder Medic wrote: SPECTATOR MODE HELP US MAKE MOVIES CCP This is an amazing idea. Anything to help with the creation of nice looking Youtube videos that would help us promote the game.
Soto Gallente 878	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:31:00 - [124] - Quote SILENTSAM 69 wrote: Murder Medic wrote: SPECTATOR MODE HELP US MAKE MOVIES CCP This is an amazing idea. Anything to help with the creation of nice looking Youtube videos that would help us promote the game. I would love to see some Dust 514 sfms, I bet they would make tf2 sfms look like kiddie shows. Ex-news reporter for The Scope
SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 878	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:35:00 - [125] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Movement and aiming are already in, 3-5 modules is already in, adding in a capacitor is just one more thing. Infantry has the basics already and a capacitor for suits would not fit well, vehicles are not 360noscoping machines thus quick gameplay is not always required. EVE can give you orbit but you need to know the range of your weapons, the weapons tracking speed with guns, missile speed, range, enemy ships speed, enemy orbit speed etc EVE is anything but simple and dust in comparision is very simple, even with adding everything i want to add it still will be simple for infantry but for vehicles will have more variety and be a tad harder. As someone who has played EVE for years, and been in null sec,and played DUST since the start, I can say they are different. EVE is more complex for the FC, but DUST is more complex for the average grunt. In EVE the FC has a vast amount of information to go through quickly to determine how to fight or flee in a given battle. The average pilot just follows FC order. I know that can be beyond many pilots, but I use to see 40 man fleets with 30 console playing noobs have no problem aligning and warping and applying dps where and when told. (How to Stay Aligned is playing in my head now...) In DUST I would say the leader have an easier time. Only giving direction where and when needed. That said a DUST ground leader doesn't get to see everyone they are giving orders too. Now the average grunt merc though has to take general orders given by someone who can not see where they are fighting, and know how to adjust those orders to fit the situation. While the average EVE pilot is setting orbit and shooting at what the FC says to shoot at in the Overview, the DUST pilot has to be very situationally aware. That right there is a complex thing to describe and requires a lot of learned skill. EVE is more complex in general to play, but combat is not easy to compare.
SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 878	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:37:00 - [126] - Quote Viktor Hadah Jr wrote: A well placed integration of dust progress moved over to new FPS. I'm not saying SP or ISK which i believe they should not even move a single point of over. But i'd be upset if they did something like. well we see you played dust before here is a AR BPO. I would like something along the lines of well you put in 1,000 hours of game play in here is a special vanity skin that no one else but this special group of people who put the time in can get. Along with other similar rewards. I myself mainly just hope they let us start accounts with our old player names if we use the same email or something. I would love to have my original character name and character creation date that predated the release of the new game.
Aikuchi Tomaru Subdreddit 2	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:39:00 - [127] - Quote I would be content with what they announced they wanted to add in Legion. Mainly PvE and the ability to steal **** from other players doing PvE. Sign up for Caldari FW and defeat the evil Gallente Overlords!
SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 881	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:43:00 - [128] - Quote Alena Asakura wrote: I love the idea of adding a capacitor for use with discharge of weapons, etc, similar to EvE ships, this makes a lot of sense to me. I agree that the level of detail would not be a hindrance for an FPS. While I do think that the general FPS player would find the EvE skilling system and level of skill detail somewhat daunting, I can't see how that necessarily translates into a slow game play. It's only how you come to the level of skills you have that's slow, not the skills themselves or their use. Yeah, I think it can be made to work with a fast paced FPS game. I could see it mainly coming into play with some energy weapons. Maybe having the Forge Gun and other energy weapons taking some energy from a capacitor so that you may have to stop after some sustained fire. It could give a new way to help to balance a weapon.
SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 882	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:49:00 - [129] - Quote Aikuchi Tomaru wrote: I would be content with what they announced they wanted to add in Legion. Mainly PvE and the ability to steal **** from other players doing PvE. PVE would be huge, I would love PVE so much. Especially squad based PVE.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 3	Posted - 2016.02.08 12:40:00 - [130] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Well I suddenly remember why I gave up talking to you. It's not a case of it being a "simpler" game. It's a case of it being a faster game. EvE takes care of navigation and aiming for you. Now granted the new game being on PC would be easier. But do you really want to be monitoring 10+ modules +Weapon Energy Levels +Movement +Aiming at the same time? I don't why I'm asking, I know what you'll say. I would say vehicles would benefit most from the fractured space way of dealing with things. You have your capacitor, using modules drains your energy level dependant on effect. Use too much and you can't activate new powers. But at the same time you don't need to sit there tweaking shield booster consumption by 5% to allow you to activate your hardener permanently. It's meant to be faster paced and the fidelity should reflect that, otherwise you might as well not actually participate in an FPS game. Movement and aiming are already in, 3-5 modules is already in, adding in a capacitor is just one more thing. Infantry has the basics already and a capacitor for suits would not fit well, vehicles are not 360noscoping machines thus quick gameplay is not always required. EVE can give you orbit but you need to know the range of your weapons, the weapons tracking speed with guns, missile speed, range, enemy ships speed, enemy orbit speed etc EVE is anything but simple and dust in comparision is very simple, even with adding everything i want to add it still will be simple for infantry but for vehicles will have more variety and be a tad harder. Who said EvE is easy? But once again EvE is not fast paced, so all those variables have time to be considered.That level of fidelity will be too high for fast paced combat. Especially if you consider LAV and fighters. It's also entirely incompatible for V/AV balance, since their will be effectively 2 levels of combat. 1 which can tweak power levels and energy consumption for better survivability against another which can only apply straight damage. At that point you might as well segregate the 2 theaters of war entirely. To which you eventually end up with lobby shooter V2 and EvE world of tanks. There needs to be a relative amount of parity in terms of fidelity. You effectively need to be able to just get in a tank and drive it, without having to assign power distribution first. Like I said perhaps some more arbitrary power system that limits the number of successive module activations in return for faster cooldown. At the end of the day it comes down to what you believe the tanks or most specifically the vehicles role in the game should be. My understanding of your view point is that there should be minimal actual interaction between vehicles and infantry. Meanwhile I am of the opinion that vehicle/infantry interaction should be specifically ingrained into the meta, specifically for larger matches. They call me the Monkey - I like to jump off sh** and piss RE's all over your tank! Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior Lvl 3

SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 883	Posted - 2016.02.08 23:58:00 - [131] - Quote What kind of ideas outside of combat mechanics do people have for the new PC version of DUST? I loved the idea of having some social spaces to meet up with people. Maybe somewhere to discuss battles, or decide what to do next. I know we have comms to chat with each other, but it would be nice to meet up and actually walk around the people you are talking to.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 21	Posted - 2016.02.09 00:12:00 - [132] - Quote A well written conclusion to the Dust 514 arc of New Eden Lore and a well rationalised continuation of the same thing in the new game with emphasis on operative freedom and links to PI/Orbital Infrastructure. "That means Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-bitch in space." - Unnamed Gunnery Chief, The Citadel
da GAND Seykal Expeditionary Group Minmatar Republic 1	Posted - 2016.02.09 00:27:00 - [133] - Quote I expect the game I was first expecting when I got into the beta, a New Eden FPS not like Dust514 which didn't feel like I was in New Eden at all. I also expect to not get stuck on stupid shite as much as I could in Dust514, weapons to have actual weight. And good maps, the maps in Dust514 just felt bad. Hopefully they got rid of whoever thought these maps were good ideas. Finally we're getting this shite off of the ps3
Draxus Prime Nos Nothi 4	Posted - 2016.02.09 00:30:00 - [134] - Quote putting the mmo in the mmofps. No lobby system or semi lobby system with openish world elements "Spilling floor cleaner only makes the floor cleaner." - Draxus Prime Closed Beta Vet Scout
SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 886	Posted - 2016.02.09 07:02:00 - [135] - Quote True Adamance wrote: A well written conclusion to the Dust 514 arc of New Eden Lore and a well rationalised continuation of the same thing in the new game with emphasis on operative freedom and links to PI/Orbital Infrastructure. Good point. This should be a significant step in the lore. Something that shows these mercs branching out fro a smaller limited role into something larger. There must become a point when the DUST merc stop being simply immortal soldiers, but demi gods just as the pilots of the ships among the stars.
SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 886	Posted - 2016.02.09 07:08:00 - [136] - Quote Actually, I would love to see the stories of the DUST community captured in that lore. We created our own political struggles that shaped our own portion of New Eden. There was connections to many EVE pilots, and we made our mark in history. I would like to see CCP write the lore of DUST 514 in a way that captures the story of the DUST mercs, and the first battles for control of Districts within Molden Heath. The EVE pilots have created their own lore and history in New Eden, and so have the DUST mercs. In some similar way that EVE players own politics has been included into the story of New Eden, the stories of the DUST mercs should be mentioned within the lore. They should be seen as part of the path to becoming the demi gods they become during the new game.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 21	Posted - 2016.02.09 09:53:00 - [137] - Quote SILENTSAM 69 wrote: True Adamance wrote: A well written conclusion to the Dust 514 arc of New Eden Lore and a well rationalised continuation of the same thing in the new game with emphasis on operative freedom and links to PI/Orbital Infrastructure. Good point. This should be a significant step in the lore. Something that shows these mercs branching out fro a smaller limited role into something larger. There must become a point when the DUST merc stop being simply immortal soldiers, but demi gods just as the pilots of the ships among the stars. I'm more inclined to say the opposite really. Something that takes us back from being demi gods and puts us into a believable, useful, and desirable role. We're super soldiers sure but that's face value. Who needs a goddamn super soldier when 1000 regular soldiers could do the same job for less. We're the guys you send in when things get so complicated it becomes to expensive to send in the regulars or the technology required to do something doesn't exist for mortals. Part Immortal, Part Warrior, Part Astronaut. People who can reliably operate Planetary Infrastructure and defend it if need be. People willing to make the one way trip into a ships corridors though the midship hull. Operators who can continue to salvage and fight even while being irradiated by reactors or suffering from lethal temperatures. Demi Gods are boring. Their contrived. They're what we were. That wasn't fun. We're supposed to be goddamn professionals, the best at what we do, and what we can't do in combat no one can. *Waves that dye the land gold. Blessed breath to nurture life in a land of wheat. The path the Sef descend drawn in ash.
Axel Giatsu The Naughty Ninjas The-Office 195	Posted - 2016.02.09 12:54:00 - [138] - Quote Being able to keep all of your skill points in Dust An anti blueberry system Being able to use same character in Dust and possibly same loadouts? Nerf Gallente Hp for all suits Nerf Experimental Better trading system Better PC system as well and lastly the most important thing GIVE ME ALL MY SKILL POINTS(unallocated and regular) also some bonus for sticking with Dust even through all the **** it's been through would be nice. (maybe an APEX or something thats exclusive for people that have played Dust and have at least 5 mil sp, hell i'd even take a skin.) Creator of the Slayer Scout and Slayer Assault Logi Now averaging 1k+ WP per match and 3k+ using Slayer Assault Logi ;)
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. 4	Posted - 2016.02.09 18:17:00 - [139] - Quote SILENTSAM 69 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Movement and aiming are already in, 3-5 modules is already in, adding in a capacitor is just one more thing. Infantry has the basics already and a capacitor for suits would not fit well, vehicles are not 360noscoping machines thus quick gameplay is not always required. EVE can give you orbit but you need to know the range of your weapons, the weapons tracking speed with guns, missile speed, range, enemy ships speed, enemy orbit speed etc EVE is anything but simple and dust in comparision is very simple, even with adding everything i want to add it still will be simple for infantry but for vehicles will have more variety and be a tad harder. As someone who has played EVE for years, and been in null sec,and played DUST since the start, I can say they are different. EVE is more complex for the FC, but DUST is more complex for the average grunt. In EVE the FC has a vast amount of information to go through quickly to determine how to fight or flee in a given battle. The average pilot just follows FC order. I know that can be beyond many pilots, but I use to see 40 man fleets with 30 console playing noobs have no problem aligning and warping and applying dps where and when told. (How to Stay Aligned is playing in my head now...) In DUST I would say the leader have an easier time. Only giving direction where and when needed. That said a DUST ground leader doesn't get to see everyone they are giving orders too. Now the average grunt merc though has to take general orders given by someone who can not see where they are fighting, and know how to adjust those orders to fit the situation. While the average EVE pilot is setting orbit and shooting at what the FC says to shoot at in the Overview, the DUST pilot has to be very situationally aware. That right there is a complex thing to describe and requires a lot of learned skill. EVE is more complex in general to play, but combat is not easy to compare. The main difference between the 2 is that the DUST merc is allowed to make choices on there own to a larger extent, in EVE you just cannot run off and try to flank from the otherside unless it is pre planned but even then that means the fleet has to be cut in 2 and warp from different areas but even then get scrammed and the tactic is scrubed but even that can fail from the start due to directional scanners and scouts. There is no cover in EVE, there is what is on your screen which is updated in real time, on DUST you can hide and effectively go dark to then attack or defend from a different area. Because of the differences a FC in DUST can choose to micromange everything or allow squads/soliders to make there own choices which can make things alot easier or harder but also does depend on other factors such as the overall gameplan/enemies/map etc. I would say EVE FC is harder in general because they have to do everything but also you need a line of capable FCs as backup for when the primary FC dies and gets podded and if the FC is well known to the enemy then sometimes that will happen alot because if you can cut the head of the snake then the fleet may fall but with DUST you respawn and more importantly got to look at the map as you did respawn and had a chance to see what was happening for a brief moment. None of this even looks at the enemy setup, if EVE it is not predetermined but generally the fleet will pick a setup such as a drake fleet for a example but if they die the respawn is very slow unless you have a clone very close to the battle area with a ship ready, in DUST you die and 10secs respawn back in and with the ability to bring out a completely different setup. Entire teams could swap from shield based dropsuits to armor and explosive weapons and then swap back again. Both games can be hard and easy at the same time but mainly it does depend on the player more so than the mechanics, it can be the side with the players which understand the mechanics better than the enemy which win the majority of the time. CCP Rattati - "One giant vehicle nerf with more power to AV", you have got to be kidding...''
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. 4	Posted - 2016.02.09 18:46:00 - [140] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Who said EvE is easy? But once again EvE is not fast paced, so all those variables have time to be considered.That level of fidelity will be too high for fast paced combat. Especially if you consider LAV and fighters. It's also entirely incompatible for V/AV balance, since their will be effectively 2 levels of combat. 1 which can tweak power levels and energy consumption for better survivability against another which can only apply straight damage. At that point you might as well segregate the 2 theaters of war entirely. To which you eventually end up with lobby shooter V2 and EvE world of tanks. There needs to be a relative amount of parity in terms of fidelity. You effectively need to be able to just get in a tank and drive it, without having to assign power distribution first. Like I said perhaps some more arbitrary power system that limits the number of successive module activations in return for faster cooldown. At the end of the day it comes down to what you believe the tanks or most specifically the vehicles role in the game should be. My understanding of your view point is that there should be minimal actual interaction between vehicles and infantry. Meanwhile I am of the opinion that vehicle/infantry interaction should be specifically ingrained into the meta, specifically for larger matches. Frigate fights are the fastest paced battles you will fight in EVE apart from gate/station camping fools who will alpha you in a second before your screen loads up and yet you do have time to activate modules and manouver about for a brief while before one of you die. Once you start climbing the ladder then the bigger ships even with more firepower but with better defences start to take time to melt unless you focus fire and have 10ships on it for example. There is no 2 levels, it is a choice, do you go cap stable or do you not go cap stable, the difference between the 2 is generally on for PVE and the other for PVP. Most of the time the cap stable fit will be more to running defensive modules non stop while the unstable fit will have modules which may increase defences for a shorter while but be stronger or active a module or 2 to hit harder or trap the enemy. It is all about what the pilot wants out of there vehicle, how they want to run it and fit it up. If you want to jump into a tank fine but dont expect to be able to ignore the game mechanics, you cannot ignore cap in EVE thus you have to learn about it and what it means for you and your ship and as you gain a greater understanding you begin to become better. Quote: Like I said perhaps some more arbitrary power system that limits the number of successive module activations in return for faster cooldown. Completely disagree, if i put all the lights on in my house it does not take them longer to come back on after i turn them off so why should that be applied to cap and vehicles? capacitors is just an energy meter of sorts, you activate 3 modules and it will take x amount of cap per cycle per module and if it is more than your cap recharge rate then you will slowly lose all your cap, but if you only activate 2 and it uses the same or less amount of cap compared to the cap recharge rate then you can perma run them. Capacitors are a completely balanced mechanism already, modules uses x amount and cap recharges at x amount and whatever is outcome is you get stable and unstable builds. This does not include the modules already which do have a cooldown timer in EVE, some you can turn on and off at will while others will need to finish the current cycle before they can be put on again. Quote: At the end of the day it comes down to what you believe the tanks or most specifically the vehicles role in the game should be. My understanding of your view point is that there should be minimal actual interaction between vehicles and infantry. Meanwhile I am of the opinion that vehicle/infantry interaction should be specifically ingrained into the meta, specifically for larger matches. Infantry - vehicles - AV - infantry - vehicles - AV - infantry - vehicles etc That is what it is supposed to be generally on a very basic level. Capacitors in any way shape of from from EVE do not effect that in the slightest. How would capacitors lead to minimal action with infantry? they do not, what does though is having vehicle weapons having a minimal effect against infantry while on the other foot having powerful AV being able to combat all vehicles. Capacitors lead to more weapons being able to be used, more modules to be made, more ways to counter x with y and being able to develop new tactics. Capacitors also lead to more vehicles being able to successfully combat other vehicles which then gives vehicles a larger role and not just the simple role of farming infantry but if no other enemy vehicles pose a threat or are even put onto the battlefield then farming infantry is what they will do unless the enemy put a stop to it. LAV, Logi LAV, APC, MAV, HAV, SHAV, Marauders, Logi DS, APCDS, Fighters, Bombers, Helis etc Vehicles can easily have enough roles with enough abilities/modules/skills/bonuses/hulls/turrets to do more than just interact with infantry. It starts with the capacitor. CCP Rattati - "One giant vehicle nerf with more power to AV", you have got to be kidding...''

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 21	Posted - 2016.02.09 19:42:00 - [141] - Quote I do feel like whatever new FPS CCP creates could benefit from vehicle capacitors. It's arguably the best way to allow vehicle users the flexibility to use their modules however they see fit while also forcing them to manage those modules or risk a complete shut down. Also for reference in EVE it sucks to be Energy Neuted..... not being able to fire or use even simple propulsion modules makes you a sitting duck for just about everyone. Waves that dye the land gold. Blessed breath to nurture life in a land of wheat. A path the Sef descend drawn in ash.
Living Rock 523 Intara Direct Action Caldari State 75	Posted - 2016.02.09 20:53:00 - [142] - Quote How would capacitors work with a passive module style of play? My favorite DS build was always armor stacked, no active modules (aside from 1 build that carried a scanner). Would a vehicle focused on passive mods have an advantage, maybe be considered OP? Or would it be underpowered, or simply not possible (if nearly all mods were active)? Obviously we don't know the answer, but what would be the ideal situation? I've been informed that active is the way to go currently in Dust, at least for dropships, but sometime around jan/feb of 2014 all passive mods on a dropship was very possible and very effective (affective? I always screw those up), and I still get much more enjoyment from flying a passive 4800-6k+ armor block than I ever did flying lighter craft and managing cooldowns. I've played a bit of EVE so I have somewhat of a grasp on capacitors, and I'm not against having to go all active for an aircraft in the next Dust. But I do enjoy the simple elegance (in any game) of relying on passive skills and a clear understanding of the role you are geared for, and I'd like to see that option available in the next Dust.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. 4	Posted - 2016.02.09 21:26:00 - [143] - Quote Living Rock 523 wrote: How would capacitors work with a passive module style of play? My favorite DS build was always armor stacked, no active modules (aside from 1 build that carried a scanner). Would a vehicle focused on passive mods have an advantage, maybe be considered OP? Or would it be underpowered, or simply not possible (if nearly all mods were active)? Obviously we don't know the answer, but what would be the ideal situation? I've been informed that active is the way to go currently in Dust, at least for dropships, but sometime around jan/feb of 2014 all passive mods on a dropship was very possible and very effective (affective? I always screw those up), and I still get much more enjoyment from flying a passive 4800-6k+ armor block than I ever did flying lighter craft and managing cooldowns. I've played a bit of EVE so I have somewhat of a grasp on capacitors, and I'm not against having to go all active for an aircraft in the next Dust. But I do enjoy the simple elegance (in any game) of relying on passive skills and a clear understanding of the role you are geared for, and I'd like to see that option available in the next Dust. Your passive armor DS was made possible due to CCP removing active armor repairers and replacing them with passive ones. I do not see why you could not have passive armor repairers but even so with the right fit and skills you could perma run an active repairer which would repair at a much better rate. Also module management on a KB would be far superior in general compared to the wheel. CCP Rattati - "One giant vehicle nerf with more power to AV", you have got to be kidding...''
SILENTSAM 69 KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 890	Posted - 2016.02.09 21:43:00 - [144] - Quote Some things can be considered passive if they just add armor. Some things can be considered passive if they do not take energy faster than your capacitor recharges. So Some people figure out what are called "Cap Stable" fits. Ones that can continue, just not as strong as fits that go hard until the capacitor runs out. That right there introduces whole new balances for items and vehicles, and I would say even mercs. It allows people to decide between a sustainable fit and a all out fit which burns out fast. Capacitors are an interesting idea in many ways. Even if instead of mercs having capacitors on their suits certain weapons themselves had capacitors.
1913 DfLo ScReWeD uP InC Devil's Descendants 1	Posted - 2016.02.09 21:57:00 - [145] - Quote Radiant Pancake3 wrote: Having sex with Jara, Duct tape vehicles to fuk the butterberries harder, even more racial parity, lags fixes, bug fixes, higher playerbase to fix MM, better graphics, new stuff, new maps, new everything, 60 FPS, More EvE and Dust connection, more impact on the Eve Universe, something something lorey type stuff, Merc quarters that are traverseable, being able to sit on the couch, being able to sleep on that concrete slab of a bed, OPEN MARKET TRADING! Did I miss anything? Mmmm Jara's Big Ass She better be back CCP *DIPLO* *SUinc Mission* *514 Surplus*
Living Rock 523 Intara Direct Action Caldari State 75	Posted - 2016.02.09 22:31:00 - [146] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Your passive armor DS was made possible due to CCP removing active armor repairers and replacing them with passive ones. I do not see why you could not have passive armor repairers but even so with the right fit and skills you could perma run an active repairer which would repair at a much better rate. Also module management on a KB would be far superior in general compared to the wheel. I was referencing straight armor plates, as opposed to reppers. I traded self repair ability for max HP, and used a trip to the depot as my cooldown. I've always gravitated towards passive abilities (Diablo 2 Barb is the best example I can give atm), but if I need to go active that's fine, as long as AV/Vehicle balance is realized, that's all that matters. And yea, outside of basic shooting and moving/flying I'd much rather have a KB lol so I'm looking forward to that
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 21	Posted - 2016.02.09 23:03:00 - [147] - Quote Living Rock 523 wrote: How would capacitors work with a passive module style of play? My favorite DS build was always armor stacked, no active modules (aside from 1 build that carried a scanner). Would a vehicle focused on passive mods have an advantage, maybe be considered OP? Or would it be underpowered, or simply not possible (if nearly all mods were active)? Obviously we don't know the answer, but what would be the ideal situation? I've been informed that active is the way to go currently in Dust, at least for dropships, but sometime around jan/feb of 2014 all passive mods on a dropship was very possible and very effective (affective? I always screw those up), and I still get much more enjoyment from flying a passive 4800-6k+ armor block than I ever did flying lighter craft and managing cooldowns. I've played a bit of EVE so I have somewhat of a grasp on capacitors, and I'm not against having to go all active for an aircraft in the next Dust. But I do enjoy the simple elegance (in any game) of relying on passive skills and a clear understanding of the role you are geared for, and I'd like to see that option available in the next Dust. The ideal away I imagine capacitors workings is almost exactly as they do in EVE. They are a pool of energy representing your capacitors output beyond what it required to operate the basic systems of the vehicle that regenerates on a second by second basis. E.G- Your vehicles Capacitor produced/stored 1000 MW of energy. You regenerate 10 MW a second. Your Capacitor Recharge time is 100 seconds. Passive Modules are modules are those modules that provide statistical increases without the player having to manage them. Their features are that their effects are constant, comparatively lesser that active modules, and do not or barely penalise your capacitors recharge values. Examples of Passive Modules include Standard 90mm,150mm, and 210mm Armour Plating, Shield Extenders, Resistance Armour Plating, Shield Ward Fields, Heat Sinks and Turret Modifications, CPU and PG Extenders, Capacitor Rechargers, Profile Dampening Armour Weaves. Active modules are those modules that players choose to activate in combat and must actively manage/monitor or risk consuming their capacitors. Their features are comparatively more powerful than passive modules, pulse based, and quite significantly tax your capacitor. Examples of Active Modules include Armour Repair Systems, Shield Boosters, Armour Hardeners, Shield Hardeners, Remote Armour Repair Systems, Remote Shield Boosters, Propulsion Modules, and Specialist Modules such as Bastion, Triage, or Cloaking Modules. The ideal system in my mind would be to allow passive fits to be combat viable yet not quite as powerful in terms of yield as active fits. It would also encourage and reward combinations of active and passive modules to create fittings that can sustain their capacitors either indefinitely or for longer durations of time. That said it's a bloody complicated system that I honestly have no idea how to implement. Waves that dye the land gold. Blessed breath to nurture life in a land of wheat. A path the Sef descend drawn in ash.
Living Rock 523 Intara Direct Action Caldari State 78	Posted - 2016.02.10 02:38:00 - [148] - Quote My biggest concern is simply how are they going to balance vehicles? I was around for some pretty heavy AV/Vehicle thread wars here, and both sides had some pretty valid points. How can it be acceptable that a single suit can near single handedly take on a vehicle, and on the flip side how can it be acceptable that a vehicle can just become a very large suit and demolish infantry unchecked? Overall I never really felt good with any of the builds I played, as they seemed to swing wildly between vehicles enjoying near dominance and infantry having near dominance. Add to that the proto factor, which (as has been previously feared) could create a "it's simply not feasible to run anything but proto" situation in the AV/V game. I personally think the ideal situation is maps that are sectioned in a way to cut down on forced infantry/vehicle interaction. My (super rough) example would be a map in which your team must cross a large swath of "no man's land", areas that are wide open and give vehicles the edge on maneuverability/line of sight, and thus an overall edge in general in said area. Once your force reached any fortifications/objectives/building clusters the edge would switch to infantry due to vehicles being ackward to maneuver in tight spaces and the amount of cover available to infantry. I know we don't like to drag rl into theoretical discussions on how game play mechanics should work, but obviously in rl mechanized forces fair much better in open spaces, though we have to go back to WW2 to get an honest assessment of proper armor tactics/infantry interaction (that's my opinion at least, hasn't been a fair/real clash of armor since WW2). To this day taking an Abrams into a city is a risky proposition simply because a tanks job is to kill tanks, and if your armor has pushed into a city more than likely it has already pushed through enemy armor, or enemy armor is non existant. Once in the city some of a tanks greatest attributes are completely nullified: firing on the move/long range. Targets switch from lumbering hunks of metal to single soldiers that disappear just as fast as they appear, yet pack almost as much firepower as a tank. In my mind (keeping the thought of an old thread involving Medium Attack Vehicles being armored troop transports in mind) the thing to do is have mechanics set where when you start a match, vehicles are called in, infantry is loaded up, and a single mechanized force advances to a point where the infantry can disembark their vehicle under cover fire from vehicles, and from there the vehicle/infantry fighting somewhat seperates, with vehicles duking it out in the open areas around a city/objective, and infantry doing the fighting and hacking inside the city/objective. A lone tank wandering into a city would be nearly a sitting duck, even with infantry support (column of tanks rolling through the middle of a city? Hit the first and last then rain the pain on the rest of the now trapped convoy), and a lone merc or 3 wandering into the open land outside a city/objective would be wiped out. Unfortunately there is still some heavy issues, because after everything I just said, what if the people of 1 team all pull out tanks? Or if they are loaded down with dropships and infantry? What if you have situations where one team consists of mainly lone wolf players? Do you limit vehicles? Force teamplay? I haven't even touched AV/V balance in all my babbling, how does that change the scheme of things? There are so many variables, so many people looking for that quirky little edge or trick that totally destroys balance. I do not envy CCP in regards to giving us what we want, but still balancing everything they give us. Another example I like to use is the supposed fighters. In 1 thread a while back, fears of fighters targeting infantry and questions of small arms effectiveness vs fighters came to light. This, to me was an immediate wrong step. It's not even fumbling right out of the gate, it's fumbling on the way to getting into the gate. Fighters should have no business targeting ground anything, and if the maps are big enough this could be counteracted simply by the speed of a fighter, it should go too fast to target ground. And if you do that, the fighters need a reason to exist, which would be bombers. My point is that so many things in Dust have been able to be geared towards fighting so many other things, it's made balance near impossible. I can almost guarantee with 100% certainty that had fighters been introduced to our Dust, dropship kills would not be the only victims of fighter attack. Pretty much anything other than tanks would have been fair game. So I guess the issue becomes do you force a general balance onto everything in game across all professions/allow for casual and or lone wolf as well as hardcore and teamplay, or do you force people to remain in a role/play tightly as a team? I'm personally down for hardcore team play, as well as imbalance when it makes sense (1 dude vs 1 tank on open ground/1 tank vs 1 dude in a tight city street). On top of all of that stuff, what's the general idea/vision of what CCP wants, overall and mechanics wise? And what kind of limitations do they have due to technology? I'm just rambling at this point (sorry, I've got 2 roommates trying to chat me up while I'm typing this, my brains locking up), so I'll just end this and say CCP has a hell of a job on their hands and I really hope they can pull it off because I am still fully hooked on their vision, and the idea of full blown virtual warfare is just.........AAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!! It would be awesome.
Lost Apollo Moose Knuckle Pros Devil's Descendants 318	Posted - 2016.02.10 08:01:00 - [149] - Quote Amalepsa Zarek wrote: I expect to keep: 1. Skill Points 2. ISK 3. Gear BPO/s This is already included in the EVE database and should there fore be easy to transfer. Any additional like: +aurum +loyalty rank +standings +boosters would of course be nice, but the top three are expected after the announcement at Fan Fest . Or there will be crying nerds. With tight wallets for the next run. Are you serious? A new game would quickly become unbalanced if bpo/SP/ISK were to be transferred. Nobody wants that. I undsrstand that people earned their SP and everything else. For the sake of balance, I hope they wipe our slates clean. Just more stomps. Also, let the damn myo-scrubs stay with Dust 514... My armor is weak, but my shields are relentless. State 'Rasetsu' Assault Born - April 1, 2013
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. 4	Posted - 2016.02.10 13:50:00 - [150] - Quote Living Rock 523 wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Your passive armor DS was made possible due to CCP removing active armor repairers and replacing them with passive ones. I do not see why you could not have passive armor repairers but even so with the right fit and skills you could perma run an active repairer which would repair at a much better rate. Also module management on a KB would be far superior in general compared to the wheel. I was referencing straight armor plates, as opposed to reppers. I traded self repair ability for max HP, and used a trip to the depot as my cooldown. I've always gravitated towards passive abilities (Diablo 2 Barb is the best example I can give atm), but if I need to go active that's fine, as long as AV/Vehicle balance is realized, that's all that matters. And yea, outside of basic shooting and moving/flying I'd much rather have a KB lol so I'm looking forward to that You should be able to do that no problem. If we get triage vehicles then fine, add in infantry repair kits and again fine. EVE overall has many of these problems solved for vehicles, all CCP need to do is also make infantry versions of some of these items. CCP Rattati - "One giant vehicle nerf with more power to AV", you have got to be kidding...''



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 :: 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.