DUST Search - Balancing Vehicle Deployment.

Jason Pearson wrote:

Th3rdSun wrote:

So it seems that Dust isn't really going to be a game about balancing things out for the most part,but I think that it's a must for the sake of keeping the game fun,and not just making it seem like a second(or first for some people) job.

I would propose that one of the things that can be done to balance out vehicle usage is to make it where calling in vehicles has to be earned with warpoints.

So a match starts out and your first vehicle called in is for free,but you'd better be sure that it's a vehicle that's going to benefit the team immediately,because every vehicle called in after that would require earning warpoints for them to be called in.

Another interesting strategy about this is that now you'll have to manage whether to call in another tank,dropship,or LAV,or to use those warpoints for an orbital strike.Having a field general to give the squad leaders approval for said deployments would be part of this too.So if you wanted to call in a LAV,it has to go up the proper chain of command to approve the deployment of a vehicle.

Now this all sounds fine and dandy,but it would still require the proper implementation of a proper command structure.Hopefully,the commander roles would play a major role in making this happen too.Anyway you look at it,the way that vehicles are deployed is pretty nonsensical and I feel is pretty stupid,especially when you see two dropships and a tank on one team in ambush.

Sounds like a bad idea. Not only will I have to skill into Dropships to be a pilot, I'll have to skill into infantry skills to get the WP to get my vehicle after the first one dies? Oh and then I've got to find 300k-1Million ISK to actually pay for the damn thing.
Also, how is it pretty stupid when theres two dropships and a tank in a game? Wait, the enemy team doesn't have anyone that spec'd into a vehicle? What a damn shame.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Th3rdSun L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 323	Posted - 2012.10.28 23:06:00 - [1] - Quote So it seems that Dust isn't really going to be a game about balancing things out for the most part,but I think that it's a must for the sake of keeping the game fun,and not just making it seem like a second(or first for some people) job. I would propose that one of the things that can be done to balance out vehicle usage is to make it where calling in vehicles has to be earned with warpoints. So a match starts out and your first vehicle called in is for free,but you'd better be sure that it's a vehicle that's going to benefit the team immediately,because every vehicle called in after that would require earning warpoints for them to be called in. Another interesting strategy about this is that now you'll have to manage whether to call in another tank,dropship,or LAV,or to use those warpoints for an orbital strike.Having a field general to give the squad leaders approval for said deployments would be part of this too.So if you wanted to call in a LAV,it has to go up the proper chain of command to approve the deployment of a vehicle. Now this all sounds fine and dandy,but it would still require the proper implementation of a proper command structure.Hopefully,the commander roles would play a major role in making this happen too.Anyway you look at it,the way that vehicles are deployed is pretty nonsensical and I feel is pretty stupid,especially when you see two dropships and a tank on one team in ambush.
Jason Pearson Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 742	Posted - 2012.10.28 23:14:00 - [2] - Quote Th3rdSun wrote: So it seems that Dust isn't really going to be a game about balancing things out for the most part,but I think that it's a must for the sake of keeping the game fun,and not just making it seem like a second(or first for some people) job. I would propose that one of the things that can be done to balance out vehicle usage is to make it where calling in vehicles has to be earned with warpoints. So a match starts out and your first vehicle called in is for free,but you'd better be sure that it's a vehicle that's going to benefit the team immediately,because every vehicle called in after that would require earning warpoints for them to be called in. Another interesting strategy about this is that now you'll have to manage whether to call in another tank,dropship,or LAV,or to use those warpoints for an orbital strike.Having a field general to give the squad leaders approval for said deployments would be part of this too.So if you wanted to call in a LAV,it has to go up the proper chain of command to approve the deployment of a vehicle. Now this all sounds fine and dandy,but it would still require the proper implementation of a proper command structure.Hopefully,the commander roles would play a major role in making this happen too.Anyway you look at it,the way that vehicles are deployed is pretty nonsensical and I feel is pretty stupid,especially when you see two dropships and a tank on one team in ambush. Sounds like a bad idea. Not only will I have to skill into Dropships to be a pilot, I'll have to skill into infantry skills to get the WP to get my vehicle after the first one dies? Oh and then I've got to find 300k-1Million ISK to actually pay for the damn thing. Also, how is it pretty stupid when theres two dropships and a tank in a game? Wait, the enemy team doesn't have anyone that spec'd into a vehicle? What a damn shame.
Th3rdSun L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 323	Posted - 2012.10.28 23:22:00 - [3] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: Th3rdSun wrote: So it seems that Dust isn't really going to be a game about balancing things out for the most part,but I think that it's a must for the sake of keeping the game fun,and not just making it seem like a second(or first for some people) job. I would propose that one of the things that can be done to balance out vehicle usage is to make it where calling in vehicles has to be earned with warpoints. So a match starts out and your first vehicle called in is for free,but you'd better be sure that it's a vehicle that's going to benefit the team immediately,because every vehicle called in after that would require earning warpoints for them to be called in. Another interesting strategy about this is that now you'll have to manage whether to call in another tank,dropship,or LAV,or to use those warpoints for an orbital strike.Having a field general to give the squad leaders approval for said deployments would be part of this too.So if you wanted to call in a LAV,it has to go up the proper chain of command to approve the deployment of a vehicle. Now this all sounds fine and dandy,but it would still require the proper implementation of a proper command structure.Hopefully,the commander roles would play a major role in making this happen too.Anyway you look at it,the way that vehicles are deployed is pretty nonsensical and I feel is pretty stupid,especially when you see two dropships and a tank on one team in ambush. Sounds like a bad idea. Not only will I have to skill into Dropships to be a pilot, I'll have to skill into infantry skills to get the WP to get my vehicle after the first one dies? Oh and then I've got to find 300k-1Million ISK to actually pay for the damn thing. Also, how is it pretty stupid when theres two dropships and a tank in a game? Wait, the enemy team doesn't have anyone that spec'd into a vehicle? What a damn shame. And that's why I said that CCP isn't really interested in balancing the game out,if they were,this would be a viable option,imo. You don't have to spec into anything that you don't want to.That's part of making a team in your corp to complement each other,so that no one is a one man army.You still have militia gear,besides,you still have militia gear. What would happen is that on your team,you and whoever is the commander would talk about what you want to do an the start of the match,then you be the first one to deploy your vehicle.Simple as that.
Mavado V Noriega SyNergy Gaming 2283	Posted - 2012.10.29 00:18:00 - [4] - Quote more randoms need to invest into AV and stop spending SPs on dumb skills at the beginning tbqh
Scheneighnay McBob Bojo's School of the Trades 1058	Posted - 2012.10.29 02:02:00 - [5] - Quote I'm an LAV driver- and I love the idea! Not only does it make sense (why would anyone lend a ton of RDVs for noobs?), but it helps me get recognized as a driver. I put tons of time, ISK, and SP into getting the most out of my wide selection of LAV fittings, but right now, people can't find me (or people like myself) out of the packs of random blues using starter fit LAVs. Maybe after something like this, I can get a decent gunner.
Scheneighnay McBob Bojo's School of the Trades 1058	Posted - 2012.10.29 02:05:00 - [6] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: Sounds like a bad idea. Not only will I have to skill into Dropships to be a pilot, I'll have to skill into infantry skills to get the WP to get my vehicle after the first one dies? Oh and then I've got to find 300k-1Million ISK to actually pay for the damn thing. Also, how is it pretty stupid when theres two dropships and a tank in a game? Wait, the enemy team doesn't have anyone that spec'd into a vehicle? What a damn shame. He said your first vehicle will be free- that means if you prove to be a terrible pilot, you're out of luck; BUT, if you absolutely kick kitten before an army takes you down, you'll be happily given permission to use another dropship.
Th3rdSun L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 323	Posted - 2012.10.29 02:27:00 - [7] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: Jason Pearson wrote: Sounds like a bad idea. Not only will I have to skill into Dropships to be a pilot, I'll have to skill into infantry skills to get the WP to get my vehicle after the first one dies? Oh and then I've got to find 300k-1Million ISK to actually pay for the damn thing. Also, how is it pretty stupid when theres two dropships and a tank in a game? Wait, the enemy team doesn't have anyone that spec'd into a vehicle? What a damn shame. He said your first vehicle will be free- that means if you prove to be a terrible pilot, you're out of luck; BUT, if you absolutely kick kitten before an army takes you down, you'll be happily given permission to use another dropship. Exactly! Why should we give free reign to those that aren't good at what they do?I'm looking to promote the team aspect of what's hopefully to be.Also,this should definitely encourage the use of team chat too.I haven't heard anyone really using it since the corp battles in the last build. I would like to add in regards to what Jason said about getting warpoints.The warpoints earned would go into a collective team pot that the commander would have control of.You don't have to personally earn warpoints,the whole team has to earn them. Also,just because you have enough warpoints,that doesn't automatically mean that you are going to get what you want either.Like McBob said,if you suck at piloting and that reputation gets out,no one is going to give you permission to fly,unless you steal someone else's called in dropship. So what I hope with this proposal is to see more coordination and cooperation within a corp,and if randoms don't learn then they can keep playing without wasting and spamming vehicles.Those randoms that want to step up their game will learn to play with more coordination and be better players for it.
Hobos-N-Guns Soldiers Of One Network Orion Empire 44	Posted - 2012.10.29 02:53:00 - [8] - Quote Quote: Sounds like a bad idea. Not only will I have to skill into Dropships to be a pilot, I'll have to skill into infantry skills to get the WP to get my vehicle after the first one dies? Oh and then I've got to find 300k-1Million ISK to actually pay for the damn thing. Also, how is it pretty stupid when theres two dropships and a tank in a game? Wait, the enemy team doesn't have anyone that spec'd into a vehicle? What a damn shame. If you can buy it, you should be able to use it.... +1
Galthur CrimeWave Syndicate 22	Posted - 2012.10.29 02:59:00 - [9] - Quote I'm pretty sure in the full game eve players have to pay for the transport of vehicles into battle so....
mikegunnz Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 425	Posted - 2012.10.29 03:03:00 - [10] - Quote Not sure about how I feel about the WP idea. Others have mentioned limiting the number of vehicles on the map at any given time... IMO, this is probably the easiest solution. No more than one DS, one HAV, and two LAVs at any given time. (or some combo like that, whatever is deemed appropriate) Otherwise, there needs to be ANOTHER rebalancing of AV gear vs vehicles. I've always been a proponent of having vehicles in the game, but they should be support pieces... not game changers.

Th3rdSun L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 323	Posted - 2012.10.29 03:04:00 - [11] - Quote Hobos-N-Guns wrote: Quote: Sounds like a bad idea. Not only will I have to skill into Dropships to be a pilot, I'll have to skill into infantry skills to get the WP to get my vehicle after the first one dies? Oh and then I've got to find 300k-1Million ISK to actually pay for the damn thing. Also, how is it pretty stupid when theres two dropships and a tank in a game? Wait, the enemy team doesn't have anyone that spec'd into a vehicle? What a damn shame. If you can buy it, you should be able to use it.... +1 And you will be able to use it...if your team plays like a team and earns the WP to use it. Hell,you can buy prototype dropsuits and weapons,and any thing else without the skills to use to actually use them,so that argument doesn't really hold water.
Skihids Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 969	Posted - 2012.10.29 03:05:00 - [12] - Quote To cudgel the rotting equine corpse, we don't yet have all the game elements so a careful balancing is premature. CCP is working to keep the game playable as it builds the rest and gathers data. I'm as anxious as the next person to see progress, but I recognise it takes time. I didn't get any of the promised dropship changes this build and I'm hoping they show up in the next. I'd rather they get it right than rush it.
Th3rdSun L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 323	Posted - 2012.10.29 03:08:00 - [13] - Quote mikegunnz wrote: Not sure about how I feel about the WP idea. Others have mentioned limiting the number of vehicles on the map at any given time... IMO, this is probably the easiest solution. No more than one DS, one HAV, and two LAVs at any given time. (or some combo like that, whatever is deemed appropriate) Otherwise, there needs to be ANOTHER rebalancing of AV gear vs vehicles. I've always been a proponent of having vehicles in the game, but they should be support pieces... not game changers. I do agree with this,and at this juncture,they are total game changers. The thing is,if the vehicles and AV aren't balanced,within a year,there will be minimal infantry combat,which will just turn the game into a gigantic Twisted Metal.Sorry,but I'm just not down for that.I'm not saying that vehicles should be limited,just make them harder to deploy onto the battlefield.
Jonquill Caronite Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 115	Posted - 2012.10.29 03:26:00 - [14] - Quote Another way to solve this problem would be to make Bolas's cost the friendly team something, and make them limited and something that needs to be purchased and stocked with limited slots on board an MCC for a Bolas. Then the AT teams can focus fire on Bolas instead of on the ground vehicles, and THEN take out vehicles to prevent the continued spamming of enemy vehicles. Make a Bolas cost something stupid like 100 million, its a medium aircraft capable of entering and exiting orbit with cloaking tech good armor and a huge carrying capacity, it should cost 1/10th of a billion ISK. That will make even some of the most well funded EVE corporations hesitant about providing it, and will force Dust players who don't want to risk WAY more then any battles worth to deploy only at the beginning of the match unless they want to risk their teams VERY VERY expensive asset for a critical mid-mission deployment where the enemy might have eyes on. Further this would be the sort of thing that a commander would have to approve or could deny, such that vehicle pilots would have to rely on the command structure to receive vehicles after the first minute of the game, and if the commander didn't think it was worth the risk he could deny vehicle requests made later. Its all reasonable, solves a significant problem, makes more sense then the current system, falls within EVE's style of win it or lose it, and suck it up play-style, and overall aside from whining that some players may not get access to their vehicles later in the game because their team is unwilling to risk major assets for this sort of thing, it will improve most player experience overall. Really really sucks for people who spam militia LAV's though, and will draw complaints from players who can't keep their heavy assets alive because their rich and up until now could afford to be reckless.
angelarch Algintal Core Gallente Federation 93	Posted - 2012.10.29 07:50:00 - [15] - Quote i hate the idea of needing someone else to allow or dis-allow me from using MY OWN EQUIPMENT that i paid for. pls no. If you want to play in a very organized command structure, then that will come naturally when you are playing corp battles in null space AFAIK. EDIT: like a previous poster said, once everyone skills up AV skills, that will be the balance.
Riot Ruckus Doomheim 56	Posted - 2012.10.29 08:14:00 - [16] - Quote As a forge gunner, i have no problems with vehicles, the more the merrier.
The dark cloud Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1060	Posted - 2012.10.29 11:19:00 - [17] - Quote Wp to call in vehicles? Are you out of your mind? This would be extreme unbalanced cause teams who dominate will dominate even more giving weak teams even a worse time.
Reout Karaal Doomheim 85	Posted - 2012.10.29 11:35:00 - [18] - Quote Oh, I've got a better idea! Let's limit ammo and fuel for vehicles. Like DS should only have around 4 missiles total and fuel for 3 minutes of flight, then it should crash & burn. This would balance things out nicely. This kind of QQ is the worst thing in beta. If you suck at playing AV then maybe spec into vehicles? Or go play Singstar or something.
Laurent Cazaderon Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 1155	Posted - 2012.10.29 13:29:00 - [19] - Quote There's a lot of other things to do before considering WP limitations for vehicules. => Limiting the amount of ammo on vehicles and add items to replenish those. Like Vehicle Nanohives, or simply Supply depot. Would avoid perma-spam of vehicles on specific targets. Would also somehow "force" dropship to land a few times in a game and thus reinforcing its transport role. Also, it would push further cooperation between infantry and vehicles. Infantry could carry those Vehicle Nanohives. There's no reason an infantry guy has to make sure he has ways of getting some ammos and a vehicle hasnt. => Kill those freakin missile turret..... whether it is range, ROF, damage, they're an obvious OP Win Button. => Rethink some skills..... the damage bonus for turret as a passive skill.... really ? And finally, there's already a limit in the number of vehicle a map can sustain.
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1012	Posted - 2012.10.29 13:39:00 - [20] - Quote Th3rdSun wrote: So it seems that Dust isn't really going to be a game about balancing things out for the most part,but I think that it's a must for the sake of keeping the game fun,and not just making it seem like a second(or first for some people) job. I would propose that one of the things that can be done to balance out vehicle usage is to make it where calling in vehicles has to be earned with warpoints. So a match starts out and your first vehicle called in is for free,but you'd better be sure that it's a vehicle that's going to benefit the team immediately,because every vehicle called in after that would require earning warpoints for them to be called in. Another interesting strategy about this is that now you'll have to manage whether to call in another tank,dropship,or LAV,or to use those warpoints for an orbital strike.Having a field general to give the squad leaders approval for said deployments would be part of this too.So if you wanted to call in a LAV,it has to go up the proper chain of command to approve the deployment of a vehicle. Now this all sounds fine and dandy,but it would still require the proper implementation of a proper command structure.Hopefully,the commander roles would play a major role in making this happen too.Anyway you look at it,the way that vehicles are deployed is pretty nonsensical and I feel is pretty stupid,especially when you see two dropships and a tank on one team in ambush. Its a bad idea Why should i invest well over 3mil SP into tanks only to find out i maybe only be able to call one in after the MCC is halfway into armor and the match is nearly over?

Shiro Mokuzan GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 106	Posted - 2012.10.29 18:19:00 - [21] - Quote Terrible idea. Vehicles are an asset that you train for and pay for, not a bonus you might get to use.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2012.10.29 18:21:00 - [22] - Quote Shiro Mokuzan wrote: Terrible idea. Vehicles are an asset that you train for and pay for, not a bonus you might get to use. ^This.
Sentient Archon Red Star. 690	Posted - 2012.10.29 18:25:00 - [23] - Quote Mavado V Noriega wrote: more randoms need to invest into AV and stop spending SPs on dumb skills at the beginning tbqh I would hate to be that dripshit pilot or tank driver that has 8 or 16 sets of swarms on my tail! I dont care who you are 32 or 64 swarms on me is not my idea of fun! Its the main thing randoms should learn! Just my 0.02 ISK!
Jariel Manton SVER True Blood Unclaimed. 210	Posted - 2012.10.29 18:33:00 - [24] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: I'm an LAV driver- and I love the idea! Not only does it make sense (why would anyone lend a ton of RDVs for noobs?), but it helps me get recognized as a driver. I put tons of time, ISK, and SP into getting the most out of my wide selection of LAV fittings, but right now, people can't find me (or people like myself) out of the packs of random blues using starter fit LAVs. Maybe after something like this, I can get a decent gunner. I absolutely love pew pewing from the back of a good LAV driver. Come on over to STB and i'll let you drive me around allllll day long!
Th3rdSun L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 323	Posted - 2012.10.30 01:47:00 - [25] - Quote I understand the reservations,but it seems that the poo poo-ers are only thinking about themselves and not thinking of the bigger picture of the team aspect of the game. I must admit,I do like Laurent Cazaderon idea for resupplying ammo in vehicles though,and actually I must admit,is probably a better idea than mine.But of course,no one likes it when there easy mode is taken away,so.... PS,I will firmly stand behind my belief that this game in a year after release,if left unchecked with the ridiculous vehicle spam,will turn into Twisted Metal,where there are more vehicle on a map than actual soldiers on the ground.Check back in a year to see if I'm right or not.
ugg reset ZionTCD Legacy Rising 234	Posted - 2012.10.30 02:42:00 - [26] - Quote I'd like to see the free LAV disappear. they need to be cheap but just like the milita swam launcher it needs to have a price tag. Make people choose between calling in a bunch of cheep vehicles or saving up to stalk up on for the gear they have specced into. Heck, give new player 50 free one so they can get comfortable be hind the wheel. If they like them they will buy more!
ugg reset ZionTCD Legacy Rising 234	Posted - 2012.10.30 02:43:00 - [27] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Shiro Mokuzan wrote: Terrible idea. Vehicles are an asset that you train for and pay for, not a bonus you might get to use. ^This. ^^This
ugg reset ZionTCD Legacy Rising 234	Posted - 2012.10.30 02:51:00 - [28] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: I'm an LAV driver- and I love the idea! Not only does it make sense (why would anyone lend a ton of RDVs for noobs?), but it helps me get recognized as a driver. I put tons of time, ISK, and SP into getting the most out of my wide selection of LAV fittings, but right now, people can't find me (or people like myself) out of the packs of random blues using starter fit LAVs. Maybe after something like this, I can get a decent gunner. THIS!!!. i know the feel but draining WP for vehicles isn't the way to go.
Hobos-N-Guns Soldiers Of One Network Orion Empire 44	Posted - 2012.10.30 03:41:00 - [29] - Quote Th3rdSun wrote: Hobos-N-Guns wrote: Quote: Sounds like a bad idea. Not only will I have to skill into Dropships to be a pilot, I'll have to skill into infantry skills to get the WP to get my vehicle after the first one dies? Oh and then I've got to find 300k-1Million ISK to actually pay for the damn thing. Also, how is it pretty stupid when theres two dropships and a tank in a game? Wait, the enemy team doesn't have anyone that spec'd into a vehicle? What a damn shame. If you can buy it, you should be able to use it.... +1 And you will be able to use it...if your team plays like a team and earns the WP to use it. Hell,you can buy prototype dropsuits and weapons,and any thing else without the skills to use to actually use them,so that argument doesn't really hold water. So reward better teams who are winning by giving them access to the vehicles, tanks, dropships. Not much of a balance to the game if you go that route. Im not sure who you are teaming up with, but the people i team up with are smart enough to buy only stuff they can use
Hobos-N-Guns Soldiers Of One Network Orion Empire 44	Posted - 2012.10.30 03:49:00 - [30] - Quote mikegunnz wrote: Not sure about how I feel about the WP idea. Others have mentioned limiting the number of vehicles on the map at any given time... IMO, this is probably the easiest solution. No more than one DS, one HAV, and two LAVs at any given time. (or some combo like that, whatever is deemed appropriate) Otherwise, there needs to be ANOTHER rebalancing of AV gear vs vehicles. I've always been a proponent of having vehicles in the game, but they should be support pieces... not game changers. I remember reading about a 4 vehicle limit to a team. Though this was 3 or 4 months ago.



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