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

I remember reading about a 4 vehicle limit to a team. Though this was 3 or 4 months ago.

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.

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.

All I'll tell you is that in the corp battle in the last build,we were fighting against eight,I repeat EIGHT TANKS on the opposing team.Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who won that match.

Terrible idea.

Vehicles are an asset that you train for and pay for, not a bonus you might get to use.

Thank you for stating it alot better than i did =D

+1

i thought of the same thing, but dismissed it as a bad idea.
what gives anyone the right to limit another mercs use of weapons they purchased.
i'm having a blast blowing up all the LAVs with my invested swarms.

Seems like you just don't understand the concept.You still have the mindset of "what can I do with my vehicle to improve my gameplay",instead of ,"what can I do with my vehicles to help my team win". The idea was to reduce the massive vehicle spamming by making it a privilege,NOT A RIGHT,to use your vehicles in a match.

Either way,I've already conceded that there's a better option that someone else posted that would limit vehicle ammo,requiring you to resupply it.

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!

Whilst the idea isn't a bad one, I'd prefer using a pool of war points then buying vehicles out of that kinda like table top warfare.

So if you have a proto tank it costs a lot of points to deploy it, but a standard one would not.

It would stop the "invincible" tank spam we saw in the other builds and CCP wouldn't have to nerf tanks into oblivion like everyone keeps insisting on, because the team only has limited amount of points. Sure you could have some ridiculous OP tank, but only one and that's it. If an entire team can't take out this vehicle solo, then there's something wrong with their setups imo. In my eyes, the issue has always been the quantity.

That to me is far more balanced than the system we have now of "First come first served".

Well,if what has been said it true,and there is a cap on the amount of vehicles in each match,then what's the difference?

So hypothetically,you can get into a number of matches,and never be able to call in a vehicle,so in that case,it's almost the same thing.

If you want your call of duty game with killstreaks, go play call of duty.

Dust is not CoD.

And just because you proposed this, I will spawn tanks for every single person on my team if I ever see you in a match.

If you want your call of duty game with killstreaks, go play call of duty.

Dust is not CoD.

And just because you proposed this, I will spawn tanks for every single person on my team if I ever see you in a match.

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

I am not interested in your concept of fairness, the EVE universe is not meant to be fair, nor is Dust.

If I see either of you in a match, I will drop tanks for everyone on my side. Go play Call of Duty if you want your "earn things by point generation". To further up the anty, every time a tank on my side is destroyed, I will drop ANOTHER tank for the person that died in it.

Go back to your scrublord CoD where you belong.

You'll qq and ragequit long before I run out of isk. :)

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.

I am not interested in your concept of fairness, the EVE universe is not meant to be fair, nor is Dust.

If I see either of you in a match, I will drop tanks for everyone on my side. Go play Call of Duty if you want your "earn things by point generation". To further up the anty, every time a tank on my side is destroyed, I will drop ANOTHER tank for the person that died in it.

Go back to your scrublord CoD where you belong.

lol. as it currently stands in this beta, the only cost to bring down assets is personal (per character). I'm pretty sure you've clearly underestimated my willingness to go to extremes (regularly bringing tanks for an entire team just to troll you over your dislike of the current system), and of others to support this.

not to mention, once the isk faucet turns on, this will be better for me and worse for you - that's guaranteed.

anyway, hope to see one of you CoD fanboys in a match sometime so I can begin the tank spamming.

Please deposit more of your tears into my golden chalice.

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.