DUST Search - Discussion - Should PG and CPU be combined into one?

All Channels

General Discussions

Discussion - Should PG and CPU be combined into one?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 1239	Posted - 2017.05.16 14:26:00 - [31] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: I do like the fact that we will have something resembling a capacitor (operating like a mana bar in a fantasy game, for those not familiar with the capacitor in EVE.) Maybe there will be a fitting trade off over the resources it requires to fit, versus how much capacitor it will use to activate? This is something we are heavily looking at, we have a few design pillars that we are working from and the top one of those is Balance through Quantity, Capacitor and Cooldowns Universal Equipment [vs Class-Only] Universal Slots [vs Offensive/Defensive, vs High/Low, vs Assault/Logistics, vs Active/Passive] At most one Resource, maybe zero Resource [vs PG/CPU] Earned Equipment [vs bought, vs looted] What this means is we can allow a lot of versatility, and balance through "availability". Power can be increased or decreased by the Cap cost/recharge rate instead of pre-battle configurations of PG/CPU. Can I "use" it vs can I "fit" it Can I ask why the departure from Dust's mechanics? I'm not saying they shouldn't evolve, but the existing fitting system was one of main strengths of Dust The Final PLC Kill Dust 514 - My Final Moments
byte modal 1303	Posted - 2017.05.16 14:26:00 - [32] - Quote Just to reiterate my earlier posts, and to simplify it so as not to get lost in the thread: 10 Complexity isn't bad. 20 Teach complexity, and users will follow (quality interface design and education beyond a low-res PDF are helpful). 30 Simplifying isn't bad either, if it adds quality to the overall product. 40 Don't replace complexity with simplicity unless it's the complexity that is the issue (and not poor education---see #2). 50 GOTO and PLAY 10 all that correlation and causation stuff. because, ...eyebrows. Alrighty. I've said my part and will try to shufnitthefrikerp and let the discussion evolve. Big hugs, all around. @CCP Rattati, thanks for the clarification and discussion points. <3 kitten bacon taco (nom)
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations 9261	Posted - 2017.05.16 14:27:00 - [33] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Rattati, Will passive modules such as Armor Repairers consume capacitor as they run? Or is capcitor reserved for more active effects such as equipment? (Ie Repair tools) One way to balance is to reduce Cap when you fit Passive Equipment, less to use in battle for your Actives Makes sense. How do you plan to limit player behavior such as dual tanking or running fits that would normally be restricted due to resource limitations? The dual cost system allowed developers to restrict certain modules from being used with each other due to high usage of one resource, but encouraged mixing certain modules together due to high usage of different resources. It seems like removing this duality would take away a lot of developer tools for balancing. How do you plan to compensate for this loss of control? EVE: Phoenix - 'Rise Again' Trailer
Echo 1991 WarRavens Imperium Eden 1344	Posted - 2017.05.16 14:40:00 - [34] - Quote Juno Tristan wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: I do like the fact that we will have something resembling a capacitor (operating like a mana bar in a fantasy game, for those not familiar with the capacitor in EVE.) Maybe there will be a fitting trade off over the resources it requires to fit, versus how much capacitor it will use to activate? This is something we are heavily looking at, we have a few design pillars that we are working from and the top one of those is Balance through Quantity, Capacitor and Cooldowns Universal Equipment [vs Class-Only] Universal Slots [vs Offensive/Defensive, vs High/Low, vs Assault/Logistics, vs Active/Passive] At most one Resource, maybe zero Resource [vs PG/CPU] Earned Equipment [vs bought, vs looted] What this means is we can allow a lot of versatility, and balance through "availability". Power can be increased or decreased by the Cap cost/recharge rate instead of pre-battle configurations of PG/CPU. Can I "use" it vs can I "fit" it Can I ask why the departure from Dust's mechanics? I'm not saying they shouldn't evolve, but the existing fitting system was one of main strengths of Dust I too was a big fan of the system. Going from the dual system to a singular one just seems odd and harder to balance. Change the Ion Pistol Fitting Skill Pls. #PortDust514 'Echo is a dirty hooker' - UnclS2
Jack Boost Zarena Family 1227	Posted - 2017.05.16 14:42:00 - [35] - Quote Few questions: - Is there place for turn off modules at battlefield? (more resources for another modules/less signature) - How items/modules quantity and quality influence signature factor? - Is there place for overcharging modules? (eg I turn off 2 modules on the fly and I get boost to another for 20-30%?) Not much time left...
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 17146	Posted - 2017.05.16 15:31:00 - [36] - Quote From reading through the thread, it seems to me that some people are equating complexity with depth. I don't think that is necessarily true. Some of the best games, video and otherwise are fairly simple, yet still have depth. My problem with complexity for complexity's sake is that the more moving parts there are, the more various interactions there are, the more room for glitches and potential abuses that can occur. If there is a legit reason for having more complex parts, and they substantially add to the depth, fun, and strategy for the game, I am all for it. But merely having complexity for its own sake is just asking to revisit the worst parts of Dust; the brokenness, glitchiness, and imbalance that ruined an otherwise amazing game. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations 9262	Posted - 2017.05.16 15:49:00 - [37] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: From reading through the thread, it seems to me that some people are equating complexity with depth. I don't think that is necessarily true. Some of the best games, video and otherwise are fairly simple, yet still have depth. My problem with complexity for complexity's sake is that the more moving parts there are, the more various interactions there are, the more room for glitches and potential abuses that can occur. If there is a legit reason for having more complex parts, and they substantially add to the depth, fun, and strategy for the game, I am all for it. But merely having complexity for its own sake is just asking to revisit the worst parts of Dust; the brokenness, glitchiness, and imbalance that ruined an otherwise amazing game. Except it's not complexity for the sake of complexity. Dual resources allow for a sort of game of finding ratios of the two for each module you use that give you the optimal use of each. Think of it like Tetris. A single resource is like filling up a space that is 1 block wide and all you have are line pieces. of various legnths. Simple right? All you have to do is drop them A dual resource resource system is like traditional tertris, where you have blocks of multiple dimensions that have to be fit together in an optimal configuration. More complicated, but which game is more fun? EVE: Phoenix - 'Rise Again' Trailer
DUST Fiend 19149	Posted - 2017.05.16 15:55:00 - [38] - Quote Sigh They're finally considering capacitors...and it's for dropsuits Wtf. Rage flavored bitter berry
Sylwester Dziewiecki Interregnum. 613	Posted - 2017.05.16 15:59:00 - [39] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: I do like the fact that we will have something resembling a capacitor (operating like a mana bar in a fantasy game, for those not familiar with the capacitor in EVE.) Maybe there will be a fitting trade off over the resources it requires to fit, versus how much capacitor it will use to activate? This is something we are heavily looking at, we have a few design pillars that we are working from and the top one of those is Balance through Quantity, Capacitor and Cooldowns Universal Equipment [vs Class-Only] Universal Slots [vs Offensive/Defensive, vs High/Low, vs Assault/Logistics, vs Active/Passive] At most one Resource, maybe zero Resource [vs PG/CPU] Earned Equipment [vs bought, vs looted] What this means is we can allow a lot of versatility, and balance through "availability". Power can be increased or decreased by the Cap cost/recharge rate instead of pre-battle configurations of PG/CPU. Can I "use" it vs can I "fit" it Combining PG/CPU into one 'thing' is good idea. As soon as I read this I found it a brilliant idea. Just do it. Players who think that this mechanics added some 'taste' to the game are partly right, it was interesting at the begining of the game career when you acctully had to choose equipment - but at the late game, when palayer could fit everything he wanted to dropsuit(dual-tank, eq, o-weapons and all top tiers) all charm was gone. I'm strong supporter on all ideas that show Nova as new product, that is much more improved, and new player friendly compare to old-buggy-unwanted-Dust. Beside combining PG/CPU, do even more and add stacking penalty to fitting requirements, so that fitting another 'tanking' module cost more than previous one, so that running around with all slots being: shield extensions or armor plates is imposible/or very resorce consuming. PS I <3 the "Earned Equipment" pillar idea; no matter how game progression will look like at the end of developing, can we have game a type that use this pillar and look like "PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds" gameplay, were players start without they equipment jumping from the plane, then collecting fitting by random salvage, and running to the center of the map to spectacularly kill each other? This is Skirmish v1.0. In my free time I like to spend time.
MarasdF Loron fatal absolution Bleeding Sun Conglomerate 1148	Posted - 2017.05.16 16:16:00 - [40] - Quote Joel II X wrote: It'll certainly hurt racial diversify, that's for sure. As a tradeoff, it'll be easier to balance between classes, maybe. Reason for this having all of one class have different slot layouts, but all the same Power Core (PC) meter. For argument's sake, let's compare Caldari and Gallente Assaults. Caldari favor shields, tanking, and ECM (jamming) for EWAR. The Gallente favor Repair, light armor tanking, and RSD (dampening-ish). Both very different, right? Now, let's give the Calass a 4/2 and Galass 2/4, but both have the same PC (for balancing). Because they have the same limitations, both should be able to do what the other one could. Dual tanking is one of these problems, but because they have different slots, the degrees at which one can do the other varies. If they keep the CPU/PG mechanic, you can encourage players to play to their race's strengths. Give Caldari a high CPU count and low-mid PG count, while the Gallente has mid on both. Give Shield Extenders a high CPU cost with low PG costs, and give Armor Repair low-mid costs on both CPU/PG, while giving Armor Plates low CPU, but high PG. To balance out the Matari/Amarr, just give the Minnies 3/3 with medium on both, and Amarr 1/5 with low CPU/high PG. this way the Matari can still dual tank as in eve, and the Amarr become the armor tankers like in Eve. Anywho, you get the point: it allows for a more strategic way of making builds around these limitations. Don't fix it if it ain't broken. Also, an idea I had some time ago was removing CPU/PG requirements from weapons to simplify the build making while lowering the amounts of CPU/PG of the suits to compensate, I'll leave that for another thread. This is pretty much how I feel, I think too many games are going for oversimplification these days, it really takes the fun out of the games when your choices get limited not necessarily for balance but for easier to understand mechanics. Pokey Dravon wrote: In regards to complexity... One resource pool is very common in games with any sort of loadout system so people will probably grasp that pretty easily. Two fitting resources is really not that much more complicated but it can be confusing if not explained properly, which is why people struggled with it in Dust. So my question is, was the system itself flawed? Or was the way it was taught to you flawed? I'm kinda feeling it was the second. So is it worth dropping a lot of fitting depth for the sake of a easier to digest NPE? I don't think so. I'd rather they keep the two resource system and just properly explain it this time. I started playing Dust in open beta and I hadn't played EVE before Dust and to me the NPE seemed perfectly fine at the time, it took me around 30 mins to get a basic grasp of how things work in Dust, I really though that the tutorial stuff that was in place at the time was informative enough to get you started on your journey of loss, success and most importantly self learning. After a week of playing I had learned most of the stuff in Dust and then through the years I kept on learning small bits and pieces from time to time and I really liked the fact that there was always something new to learn. To me it didn't seem like the NPE was flawed, it was the players that didn't bother listening to the tutorials or properly checking different things in the game. It was a problem of CoD generation of players that need their hand being held throughout the whole game, having a tooltip for every single thing in the game. It's fine if the game has a tootltip controls the first time you are playing the game but it goes way too far if you need the game to tell you that "Hey, did you know that loadouts are there so that you can build your own kind of suit and choose the kind of weapon that you want to use" or that "Skillpoints are there so that you can unlock new stuff with them" or "Money is there so that you can buy new stuff with it" or "Hey, did you know that those letters in the match represent objectives that you can capture" like how retarted are you if you need the game to tell you these things? Again what is fine is telling you where to access the market, your skilltree or your loadouts. But I guess this was kind of off topic, altough I think it really is important to take into consideration when thinking about simplification. If you make things complicated then retarted people won't understand how to play the game, but if you make the game too simple then normal people who want variety and complexity from a game will turn away from your game.

Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 1240	Posted - 2017.05.16 16:23:00 - [41] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Sigh They're finally considering capacitors...and it's for dropsuits Wtf. One Eyed King wrote: From reading through the thread, it seems to me that some people are equating complexity with depth. I don't think that is necessarily true. Some of the best games, video and otherwise are fairly simple, yet still have depth. My problem with complexity for complexity's sake is that the more moving parts there are, the more various interactions there are, the more room for glitches and potential abuses that can occur. If there is a legit reason for having more complex parts, and they substantially add to the depth, fun, and strategy for the game, I am all for it. But merely having complexity for its own sake is just asking to revisit the worst parts of Dust; the brokenness, glitchiness, and imbalance that ruined an otherwise amazing game. They want to add real time resource management to ground based run and gun gameplay, so this argument sort of falls flat on its face lol. It depends what kind of modules are available, if it's activate a shield hardener before storming the stronghold it would work well, but activate reps in the middle of a firefight could feel frustrating if the controls are not perfect The Final PLC Kill Dust 514 - My Final Moments
Varoth Drac Dead Man's Game Preatoriani 2398	Posted - 2017.05.16 16:23:00 - [42] - Quote I am in favour. Fitting depth can be achieved in more intuitive ways than using both CPU and PG. It's not necessary. Of course, the dual resource method could be made more intuitive, but if CCP are looking to streamline things, this is a good candidate. I was going to suggest, for example, that if shields and armour and speed (kincats) all shared the same slots, issues such as dual tanking and a lack of fitting variety and depth can be avoided without the need for pg/cpu. Looks like Rattati has beaten me to it with the shared module slot comment. I assume this means all modules will compete, instead of highs and lows. Nice. You can't dual tank if your shield take up armour slots. Also, I would argue that any buff such as speed, regen, dampening etc. should come at the cost of hp. I like to shared slot solution. In reality I don't think the pg/cpu resources added a great deal to Dust. I'm actually struggling to think of a good example of where it added to the game.
Clone D Solo Zen 2213	Posted - 2017.05.16 17:00:00 - [43] - Quote How about fitting by weight class? Every suit type has a sustainable weight limit before it begins incurring various penalties. Every piece of equipment, each weapon, and module has a weight. If you carry more of a burden than your suit is capable of handling, then it slows you down, makes aiming sluggish, etc.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 28011	Posted - 2017.05.16 17:05:00 - [44] - Quote Clone D wrote: How about fitting by weight class? Every suit type has a sustainable weight limit before it begins incurring various penalties. Every piece of equipment, each weapon, and module has a weight. If you carry more of a burden than your suit is capable of handling, then it slows you down, makes aiming sluggish, etc. with shared equipment, heavy's will simply become more powerful. There is no reason to build such inequality into the foundation "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Clone D Solo Zen 2214	Posted - 2017.05.16 18:08:00 - [45] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Clone D wrote: How about fitting by weight class? Every suit type has a sustainable weight limit before it begins incurring various penalties. Every piece of equipment, each weapon, and module has a weight. If you carry more of a burden than your suit is capable of handling, then it slows you down, makes aiming sluggish, etc. with shared equipment, heavy's will simply become more powerful. There is no reason to build such inequality into the foundation Is Nova being built from a perspective of gorilla warfare, or a more traditional style where both combatants stand still and shoot each other until one falls down? I view the performance advantage of being lightweight and maneuverable as a counter balance to heavy clunky suits. While maneuverability is quantifiable in terms of meters per second or rotations per second, skill and tactical thinking can compound the power of maneuverability as leverage to take down a slower opponent with more armor/shield HP. In terms of balance between classes (logi, heavy, scout), who is to say that in wartime, a heavy suit can't be used as a logi? I am inclined to think, let the player mount anything on a suit that he/she wants as long as it is within the physical constraints of what the suit can support. Maybe beginners will gravitate toward heavy suits, but trained and refined players will have the skill to survive in lighter classes and they will be rewarded with the advantage of maneuverability. Please keep dexterity in the equation, enough so that if leveraged properly that it can determine the outcome of a face off. To me, the skill required to play Dust 514 was the joy. Running, straifing and aiming simultaneously, while deciding on the most effective weapon to handle a situation was the juice. TLDR; please keep an element of juice for dynamic players who move and bound and soloists who like to take on entire squads with smarts alone.
Varoth Drac Dead Man's Game Preatoriani 2398	Posted - 2017.05.16 20:05:00 - [46] - Quote Clone D wrote: How about fitting by weight class? Every suit type has a sustainable weight limit before it begins incurring various penalties. Every piece of equipment, each weapon, and module has a weight. If you carry more of a burden than your suit is capable of handling, then it slows you down, makes aiming sluggish, etc. I feel weight is kind of redundant. Limited module slots is effectively the same thing and so I don't feel it would be necessary to include weight and incumbency. As for speed variations, if there are modules that increase your speed there's no need for things that decrease it, since that's the same as an absence of speed enhancements.
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1479	Posted - 2017.05.16 21:00:00 - [47] - Quote why not do both? CCP talked about consumables. Why not have cosumables that alter fitting? Allowing vets to tweak their fits, with the limitation of not being able to all the time. Eve Online has the mechanic in place already with drugs, and implants/rigs to lesser extent.
Moorian Flav 648	Posted - 2017.05.16 21:08:00 - [48] - Quote Varoth Drac wrote: As for speed variations, if there are modules that increase your speed there's no need for things that decrease it, since that's the same as an absence of speed enhancements. In EVE, there are active speed boost modules (afterburner and MWD). Therefore, it would be interesting if speed modules were thrown into the mix in Nova as it sounds there would be a capacitor to draw from. Of course, these speed modules in EVE react differently based off of the weight of the ship they are attached to as it does make sense. I think there would be the same kind of thing would be in Nova if there were indeed speed modules. Speaking of weight, I'd like to add a thought on Sentinels. For a long time in PC, Sentinels were used by the majority as they were hard to remove from points. As DUST advanced though and added cloaking, super jumping, and other stuff, Sentinels became less and less dominant. Near the end of my time with DUST, Assaults looked to me to be the majority used as they were so versatile. I just hope when it comes to class balancing, CCP will make each class have pros AND cons along with having their own battlefield niche to fill. Speaking of niches while also thinking of EVE, I hope there will be more gameplay options than there was in DUST such as an option to 1v1 Duel. With all that said, I hope we continue to hear from you, Rattati. I don't troll; I tell the truth. I'm also known as "The ANTI-Propaganda Machine".
Alena Asakura Rogue Clones Yulai Federation 1444	Posted - 2017.05.16 21:42:00 - [49] - Quote Quote: If you haven't read the article yet (http://biomassed.net/2017/05/12/project-nova-ongoing-updates/) one of the considerations of the design team for Nova is to possibly combine PG and CPU into a single fitting resource. So instead of balancing two pools that your modules and whatnot consume, it would just be a single pool that modules and weapons draw from. I feel this is actually a pretty important discussion to have and I think people should really be vocal about their feedback regarding this potential change. What do you think? Will combining these resources help to simplify things? Or will it take away a lot of the depth that Dust and EVEs systems offered? I'm fundamentally against anything that moves further away from EvE. The fact you're even considering something like this means Nova is moving generally away from EvE. Sorry, not interested.
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 17149	Posted - 2017.05.16 23:03:00 - [50] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: One Eyed King wrote: From reading through the thread, it seems to me that some people are equating complexity with depth. I don't think that is necessarily true. Some of the best games, video and otherwise are fairly simple, yet still have depth. My problem with complexity for complexity's sake is that the more moving parts there are, the more various interactions there are, the more room for glitches and potential abuses that can occur. If there is a legit reason for having more complex parts, and they substantially add to the depth, fun, and strategy for the game, I am all for it. But merely having complexity for its own sake is just asking to revisit the worst parts of Dust; the brokenness, glitchiness, and imbalance that ruined an otherwise amazing game. Except it's not complexity for the sake of complexity. Dual resources allow for a sort of game of finding ratios of the two for each module you use that give you the optimal use of each. Think of it like Tetris. A single resource is like filling up a space that is 1 block wide and all you have are line pieces. of various legnths. Simple right? All you have to do is drop them A dual resource resource system is like traditional tertris, where you have blocks of multiple dimensions that have to be fit together in an optimal configuration. More complicated, but which game is more fun? But that isn't how Dust actually worked... If you looked at the modules being used, and many of the guns being used, it was less about fitting, and more about what worked best. There was some fitting optimization, but little to none of it had to do with the PG/CPU dynamic, the caveat being that 90% of the time I used one type of suit, and considering it was a Scout M-1, I had a lot of optimizing to do. I am by no means suggesting that the game be simplified as in your simple Tetris analogy. I simply think that creating those two fitting resources instead of having one is at this point arbitrary. I am open to well thought out reasons why the two are more than arbitrary, and how they can be used to provide depth. It is just that given my experience with Dust, there seemed less rhyme and reason as to how much an item cost, and what I could and couldn't fit given those costs. Some items seemed cheap compared to their benefits, while others cost too many resources and provided too little in return. Maybe their was some logic to it I couldn't grasp, but that is how I perceived it. I agree with Varoth in that depth can be gained elsewhere. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.

One Eyed King Nos Nothi 17149	Posted - 2017.05.16 23:07:00 - [51] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Sigh They're finally considering capacitors...and it's for dropsuits Wtf. One Eyed King wrote: From reading through the thread, it seems to me that some people are equating complexity with depth. I don't think that is necessarily true. Some of the best games, video and otherwise are fairly simple, yet still have depth. My problem with complexity for complexity's sake is that the more moving parts there are, the more various interactions there are, the more room for glitches and potential abuses that can occur. If there is a legit reason for having more complex parts, and they substantially add to the depth, fun, and strategy for the game, I am all for it. But merely having complexity for its own sake is just asking to revisit the worst parts of Dust; the brokenness, glitchiness, and imbalance that ruined an otherwise amazing game. They want to add real time resource management to ground based run and gun gameplay, so this argument sort of falls flat on its face lol. PG/CPU was not a real time resource management portion of Dust... Fitting was not a real time strategy game... I was merely staying within the scope of discussion. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
DUST Fiend 19149	Posted - 2017.05.17 00:30:00 - [52] - Quote I was talking about Capacitor....aka, real time resource management.... Rage flavored bitter berry
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1479	Posted - 2017.05.17 00:33:00 - [53] - Quote I guess I need to know why we had fitting resources in the first place. Because Eve Online had them? How far can we break away from Eve Online before the game no longer feels like an Eve game? Do we trash fitting resources completely? What if we just did loadouts? Picking a class and suit would dictate what modules and weapons are available to for you to fit. You still can customize the suit, but only with whatever CCP says you can use for modules and weapons. No need to track fitting costs, because you can fit anything to the suit that CCP allows you to select. Some items may be locked to specific classes, and some may be used on all classes. Anything deemed too OP by CCP by simply be tuned by preventing certain combinations of modules weapons. and then we could get rid of pg/cpu completely.
Clone D Solo Zen 2215	Posted - 2017.05.17 00:41:00 - [54] - Quote Varoth Drac wrote: Clone D wrote: How about fitting by weight class? Every suit type has a sustainable weight limit before it begins incurring various penalties. Every piece of equipment, each weapon, and module has a weight. If you carry more of a burden than your suit is capable of handling, then it slows you down, makes aiming sluggish, etc. I feel weight is kind of redundant. Limited module slots is effectively the same thing and so I don't feel it would be necessary to include weight and incumbency. As for speed variations, if there are modules that increase your speed there's no need for things that decrease it, since that's the same as an absence of speed enhancements. I imagine carried weight as more of a fuzzy constraint. Extreme example: Can you carry that HMG with your lightweight suit? Yeah, but it wasn't designed to do so, therefore suffer a 85% speed, turn rate, aiming penalty like I can't lift my cross hairs above the waist line because my suit just can't hold the weight up. So, maybe I can slot a couple of speed modules to counter the effect a little bit, but those have a weight as well, so they contribute to my overall payload (carried weight). I'm sure that we could devise some kind of logarithmic formula that takes into account the weight capacity as the amount of weight that a suit is classed to handle, and the payload as the total weight of the equipment, weapons, modules (ammo?) being carried, to enforce a fuzzy boundary to the weight limit of the suit. It could form a shallow asymptote for T1 suits and a steep asymptote for T3 suits. Hypothetical example light suit (capacity 7.25 kg) sidearm 1 kg weapon 2.3 kg light armor 3.4 kg scanner 0.4 kg <<<<< If this is all I carry, than I am under the 7.25 kg capacity, so no penalties apply ... but then I really want to add that T3 dampener dampener 0.7 kg <<<<<< barely over the limit so apply our hypothetical formula yielding a speed/turn/aim penalty of 2.1%
Joel II X Bacon with a bottle of Quafe 10850	Posted - 2017.05.17 02:59:00 - [55] - Quote byte modal wrote: On my phone so will try to be quick. You bring up a great point: NPE. More specifically, the efficiency of educating new players---highlighting connections between this or that. I'd go a step farther to point out how awkward the graphic user interface was. Fonts were small. PG and CPU meters were unclear as to wtf they were and how they either affected loadouts or WERE AFFECTED BY loadouts and skill points. I think a combination of lack of education and generally poor interface design is where the weak link rests. Fix those two elements, and I wonder if the understanding of PG/CPU becomes easier... as would many things, I imagine. Is the idea of capacitor still floating around? Dust definitely had a lack of explanations for things, but I feel like the PC crowd is a bit more capable of grasping concepts than the console crowd in the F2P market and as a whole. You don't necessarily need a PvE example of how to fit a Dropsuit (how would that even work, anyways?) assuming we go back using our MQs, there should be an assistant hologram that can walk around the room and give the players a tour the first time they spawn in. Once they get to the fitting screen, just explain that the CPU and PG of a suit are the limiters of what you can fit. *Scouts United* Gk.0s & Quafes all day.
Clone D Solo Zen 2217	Posted - 2017.05.17 13:40:00 - [56] - Quote ROMULUS H3X wrote: Having them combined into one might allow for more possible loadouts. More is better, right! .......right? I concur. More variety is better. The player can then create a fitting that is more expressive of his/her play style.
Moorian Flav 650	Posted - 2017.05.17 14:13:00 - [57] - Quote This thread had turned a bit negative and even argumentative. Due to that, I'd like to point out a few things: Nova is not DUST. Even though all of us liked DUST, Nova is striving to be better than DUST was while also being more welcoming to new players outside of the DUST/EVE universe. To accomplish that, things have to change from what they were in DUST. Rather than simply say you don't like something or arguing against, try coming up with ways to improve what CCP is going with. As for me, earlier in the thread I suggested Civ and T1 suits uss power core system while T2 and T3 suits use CPU/PG. That system would accomplish both good NPE while also being true to EVE. Sticking to the point above, Nova should have a better NPE than DUST as DUST basically did not have one due to being stuck in a perpetual beta. Even on EVE side, CCP has improved NPE in recent years by expanding their tutorials and even adding voice so new players do not have to read through screen after screen. Due to that, I am guessing Nova will also have tutorials explaining mostly everything about Nova to new players. Therefore, I would not worry about NPE or players not knowing what is what. Lastly, try to stay on point. Even I had gotten off subject as am overjoyed to get responses from Rattati. In the end though, it's not really helpful as it makes it hard for anyone including CCP to take out anything beneficial from the discussion in the end. One fortunate thing of only the diehards remaining on the forum is this thread did not explode and go off into multiple tangents too much already. I am not meaning to preach here. I am just trying to move forward with this discussion. In all honesty, we have too few details on Nova to do anything more than provide our opinion and basic ideas around the question provided in the Subject. To provide anything more than that is wasted effort due to the little we actually know about Nova. I don't troll; I tell the truth. I'm also known as "The ANTI-Propaganda Machine".
LOL KILLZ LulKlz 1445	Posted - 2017.05.17 15:13:00 - [58] - Quote Rattati, one aspect of Eve that really surprised me and quite honestly impressed me was the salvage system. Could it be possible to incorporate a salvager module in Nova? It would tick me off in Dust when I would go try to revive a fallen comrade that pressed X only for that guy to respawn and leave me out in the open to possibly get shot or Die just to help him out. Maybe we can shoot the corpse with nanites and repurpose the suits A capacitor would be sweet to see in Nova. But would it do away with stamina? Because that was like the only selling point of the Amarr scout, you could run a long time. Your friendly Pub match logi
byte modal 1303	Posted - 2017.05.17 15:14:00 - [59] - Quote Alena Asakura wrote: Quote: If you haven't read the article yet (http://biomassed.net/2017/05/12/project-nova-ongoing-updates/) one of the considerations of the design team for Nova is to possibly combine PG and CPU into a single fitting resource. So instead of balancing two pools that your modules and whatnot consume, it would just be a single pool that modules and weapons draw from. I feel this is actually a pretty important discussion to have and I think people should really be vocal about their feedback regarding this potential change. What do you think? Will combining these resources help to simplify things? Or will it take away a lot of the depth that Dust and EVEs systems offered? I'm fundamentally against anything that moves further away from EvE. The fact you're even considering something like this means Nova is moving generally away from EvE. Sorry, not interested. Yeah, I had a near similar reaction at first but I posted my thoughts and waited for further replies. I thought the first page was good insight and broke a few of my assumptions. If you haven't already, please do read on a bit more. Also, I was wondering when you might pop in ;) <3 kitten bacon taco (nom)
byte modal 1303	Posted - 2017.05.17 15:17:00 - [60] - Quote LOL KILLZ wrote: Rattati, one aspect of Eve that really surprised me and quite honestly impressed me was the salvage system. Could it be possible to incorporate a salvager module in Nova? It would tick me off in Dust when I would go try to revive a fallen comrade that pressed X only for that guy to respawn and leave me out in the open to possibly get shot or Die just to help him out. Maybe we can shoot the corpse with nanites and repurpose the suits A capacitor would be sweet to see in Nova. But would it do away with stamina? Because that was like the only selling point of the Amarr scout, you could run a long time. Good point: Cap vs. Stamina. What's the difference? Mostly, I'm just fishing for more context in anything that I can get. cough inquiring minds cough kitten bacon taco (nom)



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