DUST Search - CCP Blam's Presence on the Forums and HAV Buff

Allah's Snackbar wrote:

Knight SoIaire wrote:

KenKaniff69 wrote:

Knight SoIaire wrote:

Both still need to have their pros and cons, we also need the PG bonus back, because PG is what shield tanks need.

Missiles also need a buff so they're a viable tactic for taking out Gallente HAVs, Armour HAVs dont need to be touched, Shield boosters shouldn't be as good as Armour, but they should still be buffed, because Shield still has passive regen, and Shield Hardeners need a 30-40 Second active time so Active tanking is viable on shields (30-40s because Shield Hardeners are more effective than armour hardeners by 5%)

Thats not what this thread is about. Its about the situation of vehicles as a whole. We have debated that enough.

Sorry then, CCP Blam's absence is incredibly annoying.

Not knowing what state vehicles will be in, in the next update is scary, especially with so little comments from devs on the matter.

There has been some scuttlebutt that Blam is no longer with CCP, but his LinkedIn still has him with CCP.

He may simply be distracted by something else but I agree it's annoying there is not one other person on the planet who can comment on these issues.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KenKaniff69 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 116	Posted - 2013.07.17 01:20:00 - [1] - Quote As far as all of the Caldari HAV vs Gallente HAV series of threads is concerned, Whatever happens to Shield or Armor tanks, Armor should not be nerfed at all. Shield tanks need the passive regen or something to match the effectiveness of armor tanks. If we lose the tremendous repping ability of our armor tanks then AV will destroy both Armor and Shield even worse than they do now. If you show either tank any amount of AV more than standard level they are obsolete. Where is Blam? I swear I lose 1/3 tanks to glitches or bugs that are directly related to the dev side of the vehicles. Blueberries annoying me, suicide friendly LAVs, turrets glitching and flipping my tank, modules not working, and AV grenade that do 50% more damage than listed. The list goes on and on. A true company would assign a replacement if he is unable to do his job for whatever reason. These threads are useless with out Blam's presence to read them. I believe this is exactly what the devs wanted. ONLY tank drivers suggesting ways to make tanks more viable in real situations (PC) and EVERYONE ELLSE telling them that they need nerfed MORE. What has actually happened is the better tank drivers are the only ones left. This means that even with subpar HAV potential, the good players have to rely on their skills to make it work once more. CCP Blam needs to address the issues these threads bring about and implement the great suggestions. I am honestly getting sick of us doing his job by running these threads and not having the ability to do anything about it. As a matter of fact, this cannot continue, for me personally, for much longer. If he wants to neglect an entire pool of players that he is in charge of then I may just skill out into roles that have devs that at least attempt to balance them. TL;DR Shield tanks need to match armor tanks by way of a buff, not by nerfing armor tanks.
Jason Pearson Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1929	Posted - 2013.07.17 01:23:00 - [2] - Quote I want a re-spec please, tired of CCP fobbing us off, CCP's vehicle devs seem like proper mugs and it's just making for a very boring game. The only enjoyment I have from this is the social side of it, I know every decent tanker out there and it makes me feel good when I fight them, that's about it. +1
Knight SoIaire Better Hide R Die D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1315	Posted - 2013.07.17 01:25:00 - [3] - Quote Both still need to have their pros and cons, we also need the PG bonus back, because PG is what shield tanks need. Missiles also need a buff so they're a viable tactic for taking out Gallente HAVs, Armour HAVs dont need to be touched, Shield boosters shouldn't be as good as Armour, but they should still be buffed, because Shield still has passive regen, and Shield Hardeners need a 30-40 Second active time so Active tanking is viable on shields (30-40s because Shield Hardeners are more effective than armour hardeners by 5%)
KenKaniff69 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 116	Posted - 2013.07.17 01:26:00 - [4] - Quote Knight SoIaire wrote: Both still need to have their pros and cons, we also need the PG bonus back, because PG is what shield tanks need. Missiles also need a buff so they're a viable tactic for taking out Gallente HAVs, Armour HAVs dont need to be touched, Shield boosters shouldn't be as good as Armour, but they should still be buffed, because Shield still has passive regen, and Shield Hardeners need a 30-40 Second active time so Active tanking is viable on shields (30-40s because Shield Hardeners are more effective than armour hardeners by 5%) Thats not what this thread is about. Its about the situation of vehicles as a whole. We have debated that enough. Why continue or waste the thoughts when nothing will change?
Knight SoIaire Better Hide R Die D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1317	Posted - 2013.07.17 01:28:00 - [5] - Quote KenKaniff69 wrote: Knight SoIaire wrote: Both still need to have their pros and cons, we also need the PG bonus back, because PG is what shield tanks need. Missiles also need a buff so they're a viable tactic for taking out Gallente HAVs, Armour HAVs dont need to be touched, Shield boosters shouldn't be as good as Armour, but they should still be buffed, because Shield still has passive regen, and Shield Hardeners need a 30-40 Second active time so Active tanking is viable on shields (30-40s because Shield Hardeners are more effective than armour hardeners by 5%) Thats not what this thread is about. Its about the situation of vehicles as a whole. We have debated that enough. Sorry then, CCP Blam's absence is incredibly annoying. Not knowing what state vehicles will be in, in the next update is scary, especially with so little comments from devs on the matter.
Scheneighnay McBob Tribal Band Dust Mercenaries Immortals of War 2381	Posted - 2013.07.17 01:36:00 - [6] - Quote Knight SoIaire wrote: KenKaniff69 wrote: Knight SoIaire wrote: Both still need to have their pros and cons, we also need the PG bonus back, because PG is what shield tanks need. Missiles also need a buff so they're a viable tactic for taking out Gallente HAVs, Armour HAVs dont need to be touched, Shield boosters shouldn't be as good as Armour, but they should still be buffed, because Shield still has passive regen, and Shield Hardeners need a 30-40 Second active time so Active tanking is viable on shields (30-40s because Shield Hardeners are more effective than armour hardeners by 5%) Thats not what this thread is about. Its about the situation of vehicles as a whole. We have debated that enough. Sorry then, CCP Blam's absence is incredibly annoying. Not knowing what state vehicles will be in, in the next update is scary, especially with so little comments from devs on the matter. Unlike vehicles, weapon balance changes significantly every update, so you can bet plasma cannons will be a big problem when they're buffed. They're supposed to be light, short-ranged, forge guns.
Allah's Snackbar Forty-Nine Fedayeen Minmatar Republic 400	Posted - 2013.07.17 01:44:00 - [7] - Quote Knight SoIaire wrote: KenKaniff69 wrote: Knight SoIaire wrote: Both still need to have their pros and cons, we also need the PG bonus back, because PG is what shield tanks need. Missiles also need a buff so they're a viable tactic for taking out Gallente HAVs, Armour HAVs dont need to be touched, Shield boosters shouldn't be as good as Armour, but they should still be buffed, because Shield still has passive regen, and Shield Hardeners need a 30-40 Second active time so Active tanking is viable on shields (30-40s because Shield Hardeners are more effective than armour hardeners by 5%) Thats not what this thread is about. Its about the situation of vehicles as a whole. We have debated that enough. Sorry then, CCP Blam's absence is incredibly annoying. Not knowing what state vehicles will be in, in the next update is scary, especially with so little comments from devs on the matter. There has been some scuttlebutt that Blam is no longer with CCP, but his LinkedIn still has him with CCP. He may simply be distracted by something else but I agree it's annoying there is not one other person on the planet who can comment on these issues.
KenKaniff69 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 120	Posted - 2013.07.17 01:48:00 - [8] - Quote Don't get me wrong here, I wish the best for CCP Blam if he is in a difficult situation. Still, why the silence? So many good suggestions, so much proof that there is a problem, but so little feedback. Scratch that ZERO feedback.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 434	Posted - 2013.07.17 02:05:00 - [9] - Quote Absolutely agreed. Shield tanks need a buff. They need lots more regen. Triple or maybe even five times if you don't want to give them better reps. Much better acceleration. Where is whoever is on vehicle duty?
Pikachu Power Planetary Response Organisation 3	Posted - 2013.07.17 02:32:00 - [10] - Quote well, well, well, CCP. Looks like I brought the culprit to light. The community knows CCP Blam! cannot be depended on and we demand changes. We all know he made bad tanks, useless dropships, and invincible lavs. -Charlotte O'dell; the Unbannable King of QQ

The Attorney General ZionTCD 434	Posted - 2013.07.17 02:37:00 - [11] - Quote Pikachu Power wrote: well, well, well, CCP. Looks like I brought the culprit to light. The community knows CCP Blam! cannot be depended on and we demand changes. We all know he made bad tanks, useless dropships, and invincible lavs. -Charlotte O'dell; the Unbannable King of QQ Non productive like always. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAryFIuRxmQ
We are 138 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 115	Posted - 2013.07.17 04:28:00 - [12] - Quote I think he is ashamed to show his face on the forums. When was the last DEV blog that he put out? The last feedback he gave? Maybe we can get some one else to at least field a question. But today is not that day
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. CRONOS. 2536	Posted - 2013.07.17 04:31:00 - [13] - Quote Knight SoIaire wrote: Both still need to have their pros and cons, we also need the PG bonus back, because PG is what shield tanks need. Missiles also need a buff so they're a viable tactic for taking out Gallente HAVs, Armour HAVs dont need to be touched, Shield boosters shouldn't be as good as Armour, but they should still be buffed, because Shield still has passive regen, and Shield Hardeners need a 30-40 Second active time so Active tanking is viable on shields (30-40s because Shield Hardeners are more effective than armour hardeners by 5%) I get that they want to move away from giving straight major buffs to vehicles just from skills, but why did they put a 10% buff back in to cover taking that bonus off of Weaponry, but figure that that wasn't necessary for vehicles and the engineering skill?
Exmaple Core Who Gives A Flux 556	Posted - 2013.07.17 05:59:00 - [14] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: I want a re-spec please, tired of CCP fobbing us off, CCP's vehicle devs seem like proper mugs and it's just making for a very boring game. The only enjoyment I have from this is the social side of it, I know every decent tanker out there and it makes me feel good when I fight them, that's about it. But yeah, definitely agree with this, Armor doesn't need a nerf, Shields need a buff (insane reps pls)+1 tanks suck so much, we want out! respec!
Syther Shadows The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 335	Posted - 2013.07.17 06:08:00 - [15] - Quote tbh mistakes are made but thats how a company learns and in the end isnt that what ccp is all about ? i could make some large comment about how dust514's future out ways the problems of one man but im not going to you would not listen any way ccp blam did nothing wrong he is just another man trying to deal with the hardships of development dust514 is already doing what all devs fear doing change but with all these problems i can't believe people are not supporting them along more
Aeon Amadi A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S. League of Infamy 2070	Posted - 2013.07.17 07:01:00 - [16] - Quote Allah's Snackbar wrote: Knight SoIaire wrote: KenKaniff69 wrote: Knight SoIaire wrote: Both still need to have their pros and cons, we also need the PG bonus back, because PG is what shield tanks need. Missiles also need a buff so they're a viable tactic for taking out Gallente HAVs, Armour HAVs dont need to be touched, Shield boosters shouldn't be as good as Armour, but they should still be buffed, because Shield still has passive regen, and Shield Hardeners need a 30-40 Second active time so Active tanking is viable on shields (30-40s because Shield Hardeners are more effective than armour hardeners by 5%) Thats not what this thread is about. Its about the situation of vehicles as a whole. We have debated that enough. Sorry then, CCP Blam's absence is incredibly annoying. Not knowing what state vehicles will be in, in the next update is scary, especially with so little comments from devs on the matter. There has been some scuttlebutt that Blam is no longer with CCP, but his LinkedIn still has him with CCP. He may simply be distracted by something else but I agree it's annoying there is not one other person on the planet who can comment on these issues. Hearda rumor a while back from a fairly reliable source that he may have been fired.
KenKaniff69 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 132	Posted - 2013.07.17 18:09:00 - [17] - Quote I am not for rumor mills or speculation. I just want an answer as to who is running the ship for vehicle development. Good companies reload, they do not rebuild. If he was fired there should be an immediate replacement ready or someone willing to step up. Most vehicle drivers are sick of the BS we have to deal with every time we try to utilize our 10 million+ SP a piece. How hard is it to simply state WHO IS RUNNING THE SHIP?
KenKaniff69 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 132	Posted - 2013.07.17 18:15:00 - [18] - Quote Syther Shadows wrote: tbh mistakes are made but thats how a company learns and in the end isnt that what ccp is all about ? i could make some large comment about how dust514's future out ways the problems of one man but im not going to you would not listen any way ccp blam did nothing wrong he is just another man trying to deal with the hardships of development dust514 is already doing what all devs fear doing change but with all these problems i can't believe people are not supporting them along more As someone who is involved with running a business, mistakes should be avoided. Keeping your customers in the dark while they ask repeatedly for answers about their product you gave them is UNACCEPTABLE. That's like having your car be banned from the road after you bought it brand new from CCP Blam a month ago. His warranty is non existent and his help line has been disconnected. You cant sell it, drive it, or use it. This is becoming the story of vehicle pilots and their SP.


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