|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
491
   |
Posted - 2013.05.10 14:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
No CCP your doing it wrong. Stop generalising vehicles. Shield vehicles should have a greater increase in hp than armour as armour has better reps and better hardeners so they dont need more HP as they have better EHP.
Armour vehicles use a greater amount of power so they will be greatly hindered with the new engineering skills it should stay how it was with an increase to power grid not a reduction in cpu use from modules. This leads from my above point of them not neededing more HP if they had more PG.
Which CCP employee deals with vehicles? i would like to send a detailed email on which areas theey should be looking at, or should i direct it through one of the CPM?? |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
492
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 11:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
in the end it will come down to everyone having the same builds, there will be no variation. BORING
and the HP buff will only make armour users more effective as they already have a higher EHP than shields. this will only increase the gap between them. |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
494
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 16:47:00 -
[3] - Quote
Any news on when turret angles are getting fixed?? |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
504
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 08:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ok so i read that CCP know about the turret problems also they have an issue with the weight of HAV it seems it got switched so Shield HAV have the weight of armour and are really slow acceleration. Armour have the weight of shield and are really quick acceleration. Glad this was a broken mechanic and not intended.
|
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
521
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 10:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
DeathwindRising wrote:Just in case you guys missed it, they nerfed vehicles again.... all of our turret skills had their damaged reduced from 3% per level to 1% per level.
CCP... you guys are ridiculous.
lol really?? i didnt notice this, if its true thats a bit of a stab in the back |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
533
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 14:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
NOT slap26 wrote:THE ROMAN GENERAL wrote:BTW I checked the spreadsheet #s, and I think you forgot that heavies can use damage mods, and more than a tank.
Also, the "every shield railgun HAV uses 3x dmg mods" was a myth spread around by TERRIBLE players. I'm guessing the armor tankers went, "omg I just died, he must be using 3dmg mods derp". Just check out caeli's railgun damage thread.
Part of the problem seems to be that you're balancing the game around STD AV. Why are there only standard weapons on your spreadsheet? I know some use it in pub games, but in corp battles many players use PRO AV. I hope you were not looking at STD tanks vs STD AV, because the STD HAV has better survivability than the Enforcer class.
If you want to balance the PRO HAV vs PRO AV, that is fine, but until then we need a HAV that can stand up to PRO AV. that's the thing, I have had many conversations with Caeli about vehicle balancing in dust, He posts what we talk about and it gets ignored. I have no clue who the hell CCP is listening to for their vehicle feedback.
All the new AV players |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
642
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 08:47:00 -
[7] - Quote
Are CCP actually viewing this thread??
Can we get a bit of confirmation your looking into balancing Shield vs Armour?
Any confirmation CCP are looking into balancing AV vs Vehicles?
Any news on Dropship adjustments??
All we would like is to be kept in the loop and that you are actually doing somthing, we dont need specifics just a heads up that is all |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
677
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 22:47:00 -
[8] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:where are our PROTO havs
you sound like a broken record |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
677
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 09:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
Charlotte O'Dell wrote:Sir Meode wrote:Charlotte O'Dell wrote:where are our PROTO havs you sound like a broken record At least I'm trying to get us what we want.
but its not what "we" want, its what you want.
Proto tanks aren't going to change anything |
Sir Meode
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
694
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 15:17:00 -
[10] - Quote
gamboon wrote:I have no time to look up all the stuff, neither the time to read all your posts, if I am redundant with my post I apologize but I have to get rid of my prewritten feedback:
Dropsuits
You created eve with 4 different races and got different ship types for each
Why haven't you implemented this for dust as well? (I know there is plenty of time for that.. and it will come.. I am sure.. consider this as a reminder :D)
And why arent there racespecific boni? For example, how come that amarr heavy dropsuits shoot with projectile weapons, instead of with lasers?
Another idea would be caldari boni for electronic warfare. For example an EW grenade that blocks the usage of all weapons for a certain amount of time. Or gallente that disturb your scan precision or something similar. Drones anyone?
Weapons
For instance I am not a fan of that Flaylock and Mass driver usage. In my opinion they are too simple to use. Of course people tend to utter the same about other weapons as well. But, and correct me if I am wrong, being shot by a mass driver and experiencing that splash effect which kinda blinds you for a short time, makes it almost impossible to counteract. Whereas being shot by other weapons there is no or less visual effect hindering you. I am not talking about the damage comparison, cause if my math is correct they go pretty much in line with other weapons. In other fps being shot even lets your precision go crazy.
Go home your drunk,
Or atleast in the wrong thread, This is Vehicle thread not infantry
You should really read some of the posts, if your too lazy to do even that atleast read the thread title. |
|
|
Sir Meode
Kirkinen Risk Control
Caldari State
792
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 10:28:00 -
[11] - Quote
still nothing |
|
|
| |
|