DUST Search - proto tanks and when they should come out

All Channels

General Discussions

proto tanks and when they should come out

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
calisk galern BurgezzE.T.F 315	Posted - 2013.06.21 13:55:00 - [1] - Quote tankers want to troll roll, and avers want to solo tanks, eventually tanks will surpass av's, it's inevitable. eventually the ability to solo a tank will just simply not be an option. the problem I have with this is the teams, in a pub match you are lucky to even find a single player specced into AV, let alone 2 or 3 that can communicate well enough to hit the same tank target. hell you're lucky to get more then 1 full squad in most pubs. and for what it's worth this is the saving grace for tanks at the moment, because if 3 guys got organized and targeted your tank you would not stand a chance. anyway if you let corps deploy as a corp even to pub matches, then it would be reasonable for vehicles to be more powerful, at that point, it's the corps fault for not being prepared for those vehicles, and not being organized. to prevent pub stomping in regards to the corps PLEASE implement security rankings, and the ability to resstrict which matches you wish to participate in.. 1.0 - no squds and only militia gear, game mode restrictions will be in place, only ambush for example. 0.9-0.6 space - meta level restrictions on equipment to balance this level of play to skill. no corp deploys. 0.5-0.2 space - higher meta level restrictions, no corp deploys. 0.1-0.0 - all gear allowd( proto ), and corp deploys.
PonyClause Rex TRAMADOL KNIGHTS 173	Posted - 2013.06.21 13:58:00 - [2] - Quote calisk galern wrote: 1.0 - no squds and only militia gear, game mode restrictions will be in place, only ambush for example. 80k average per match 0.9-0.6 space - meta level restrictions on equipment to balance this level of play to skill. no corp deploys. 125k average per match 0.5-0.2 space - higher meta level restrictions, no corp deploys. 200k average per match 0.1-0.0 - all gear allowd( proto ), and corp deploys. 400k average per match. Me likes
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1323	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:02:00 - [3] - Quote That better include proto dropsuits and weapons If infantry are allowed to proto pub stomp in proto dropsuits etc then so should vehicles
Blammmo Better Hide R Die D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 114	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:04:00 - [4] - Quote PonyClause Rex wrote: calisk galern wrote: to prevent pub stomping in regards to the corps PLEASE implement security rankings, and the ability to resstrict which matches you wish to participate in.. 1.0 - no squds and only militia gear, game mode restrictions will be in place, only ambush for example. 80k average per match 0.9-0.6 space - meta level restrictions on equipment to balance this level of play to skill. no corp deploys. 125k average per match 0.5-0.2 space - higher meta level restrictions, no corp deploys. 200k average per match 0.1-0.0 - all gear allowd( proto ), and corp deploys. 400k average per match. Me likes Maybe if there were 40,000 players on at a given time, heck half the time I'm on now it gets hard to find a battle during off peak times, I'm against this segregation unless dust gains a ****load more players
calisk galern BurgezzE.T.F 316	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:06:00 - [5] - Quote Blammmo wrote: PonyClause Rex wrote: calisk galern wrote: to prevent pub stomping in regards to the corps PLEASE implement security rankings, and the ability to resstrict which matches you wish to participate in.. 1.0 - no squds and only militia gear, game mode restrictions will be in place, only ambush for example. 80k average per match 0.9-0.6 space - meta level restrictions on equipment to balance this level of play to skill. no corp deploys. 125k average per match 0.5-0.2 space - higher meta level restrictions, no corp deploys. 200k average per match 0.1-0.0 - all gear allowd( proto ), and corp deploys. 400k average per match. Me likes Maybe if there were 40,000 players on at a given time, heck half the time I'm on now it gets hard to find a battle during off peak times, I'm against this segregation unless dust gains a ****load more players ask every new player how much they enjoy the game while they are in the academy, you better be quick about it because most quit as soon as they get into pub matches and get stomped all day by proto's. math making of this type is needed if the population is ever expected to grow.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 92	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:12:00 - [6] - Quote There are not enough players for that type of segregation. With average player counts where they are, there is no sense in trying to split everyone up. All you would end up with is a bunch of half populated battle servers. The game can already get boring with 16 v 16. Imagine 8 v 8. Sure you would be in roughly similar gear, but you still wouldn't be having fun.
PonyClause Rex TRAMADOL KNIGHTS 173	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:13:00 - [7] - Quote Blammmo wrote: PonyClause Rex wrote: calisk galern wrote: to prevent pub stomping in regards to the corps PLEASE implement security rankings, and the ability to resstrict which matches you wish to participate in.. 1.0 - no squds and only militia gear, game mode restrictions will be in place, only ambush for example. 80k average per match 0.9-0.6 space - meta level restrictions on equipment to balance this level of play to skill. no corp deploys. 125k average per match 0.5-0.2 space - higher meta level restrictions, no corp deploys. 200k average per match 0.1-0.0 - all gear allowd( proto ), and corp deploys. 400k average per match. Me likes Maybe if there were 40,000 players on at a given time, heck half the time I'm on now it gets hard to find a battle during off peak times, I'm against this segregation unless dust gains a **load more players Whist i agree the only way dust will get a ** load more players is to retain the ones its got and and continue to do so Its a conundrum but the longer CCP waits on sits on this the harder the recovery will be
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 564	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:15:00 - [8] - Quote You, sir, are a genius! This is a great idea! I'm going to bump this for at least the rest of the weekend!
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 564	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:15:00 - [9] - Quote Blammmo wrote: PonyClause Rex wrote: calisk galern wrote: to prevent pub stomping in regards to the corps PLEASE implement security rankings, and the ability to resstrict which matches you wish to participate in.. 1.0 - no squds and only militia gear, game mode restrictions will be in place, only ambush for example. 80k average per match 0.9-0.6 space - meta level restrictions on equipment to balance this level of play to skill. no corp deploys. 125k average per match 0.5-0.2 space - higher meta level restrictions, no corp deploys. 200k average per match 0.1-0.0 - all gear allowd( proto ), and corp deploys. 400k average per match. Me likes Maybe if there were 40,000 players on at a given time, heck half the time I'm on now it gets hard to find a battle during off peak times, I'm against this segregation unless dust gains a ****load more players There would be more players IF this were implemented. It solves itself!
PonyClause Rex TRAMADOL KNIGHTS 173	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:27:00 - [10] - Quote Its calculator time the average player count is 5k agreed? lets go with a worst case scenario and its 4k by the time any sort of implementation happens 4k divided by 4 sec status groups that is 1k players in each group 1k divided by 32 (which is a full 16v16 game) is 31.25 if we round that down to nearest whole number then you will get 31 FULL battle servers per sec status group and that is going by worst case scenario numbers, now if this was to implemented CCP would start to see happy smiley faces again and those happy smiley faces will there freinds about how they can have a happy smiley face playing this game too

Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 568	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:29:00 - [11] - Quote PonyClause Rex wrote: Its calculator time the average player count is 5k agreed? lets go with a worst case scenario and its 4k by the time any sort of implementation happens 4k divided by 4 sec status groups that is 1k players in each group 1k divided by 32 (which is a full 16v16 game) is 31.25 if we round that down to nearest whole number then you will get 31 FULL battle servers per sec status group and that is going by worst case scenario numbers, now if this was to implemented CCP would start to see happy smiley faces again and those happy smiley faces will there freinds about how they can have a happy smiley face playing this game too the numbers are going to stay low until a proper match making system is in place and this is the best idea ive heard yet
The Attorney General ZionTCD 92	Posted - 2013.06.21 14:36:00 - [12] - Quote PonyClause Rex wrote: Its calculator time the average player count is 5k agreed? lets go with a worst case scenario and its 4k by the time any sort of implementation happens 4k divided by 4 sec status groups that is 1k players in each group 1k divided by 32 (which is a full 16v16 game) is 31.25 if we round that down to nearest whole number then you will get 31 FULL battle servers per sec status group and that is going by worst case scenario numbers, now if this was to implemented CCP would start to see happy smiley faces again and those happy smiley faces will there freinds about how they can have a happy smiley face playing this game too This assumes all sorts of variables that cannot be accounted for. What percentage of players online are currently AFK? What percentage of players are currently MCC camping? What percentage of players are logged in to either chat, connect, or handle corp business? The total player count is slightly misleading. Further, your potential breakdown of people evenly to the four groups is also misleading, as anyone with proto or in a corp squad would only be playing in a single rung of this ladder. So the distribution would be uneven, with a bias towards where all the High SP people could play in the gear they worked so hard to unlock. It would be much easier to just raise the WP cap on academy battles to 100,000 or so and keep the noobs segregated that way. That owuld be a change they could implement very quickly, with minimal work, and protect the noobs from the rest of us who have been playing for a long time. They will still get rolled when they play against long term vets, but there are less and less of those around every day.
Royce Kronos Sand Mercenary Corps Inc. Interstellar Conquest Enterprises 46	Posted - 2013.06.21 15:08:00 - [13] - Quote I think this is where the disconnect for new players comes. FPSs are usually a skill based game. You can come in with worse gear, and still come out on top if you have a higher skill level. In Dust, you can have an excellent player come up against an okay player and lose because the okay player has is stacking shield extenders on a proto cal logi. This article really nails home the problem of gear scaling in Dust. There should also be some middle ground for intermediate organized squads. I don't think you should ban proto gear from all 0.8 - 0.2 matches. There should be an average meta level cap, so if you want to roll proto equipment, you can sacrifices some of your other modules to do it.


Pages: [1] :: 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.