DUST Search - Vroom! (Or, DusterBuster's Revamp Project

Harpyja wrote:

I enjoy your hard work and it was a fun read. Let me just point out a few of my own observations.

The idea of having a pilot that can only drive (or fly) in conjunction with a gunner wouldn't be too good. I'd imagine it would take a good deal of specialization to drive the vehicle, but you won't be able to get any WPs for it by yourself. You will be dependent on a gunner, and the gunner can even have no SPs invested at all. They just hop in and start shooting the turret. I think vehicles like these should give pilots some fire-power as well, but the addition of a gunner should drastically improve the firepower of the vehicle. I imagine this being like the attack helicopters in BF3, where the pilot gets rockets and missiles while the gunner mans the undermounted cannon. It's perfect balance: the pilot can fly solo but will be mostly effective against vehicles only, but a gunner would make them effective against infantry as well.

The idea of having separate specializations of vehicles such as transport and logistics is pretty much the same thing as the above observation. Specializing into transportation or logistics would require you to be dependent on other people to get your points (whether it's transporting them or keeping them alive). The majority would go straight into the assault version because (unless I understood this incorrectly) it would be the only vehicle with which the driver will be able to kill. Instead, these non-assault vehicles should still get weapons, but the assault vehicles should get a benefit when using weapons. I imagine them being more like BF3's LAV-25s. The driver operates a light cannon and a gunner operates a heavy machine gun in addition to four passengers (which adds up to 6, which is an entire DUST squad). I think for transport and logistics vehicles, we need medium-sized turrets which the drivers operate as opposed to large turrets on the assault vehicles (for the HGVs).

So basically what I'm saying is to give drivers some sort of weaponry, regardless of the vehicle (well, aside from LGVs).

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 230	Posted - 2013.07.21 23:01:00 - [1] - Quote CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE AWESOMESAUCE! By clicking the link, it will bring you to a presentation I have shared on Google Drive. Hiya Everybody! This is the fourth piece (out of many) of my DUST 514 Revamp Project. This project goes over a large array of different aspects of the game that I, and many others, wish were improved. These are not so-called "Jesus Features", nor are they pointless ponies. They are things that truly need to be improved for this game to be successful. I am not part of the Dust is Dying crowd, but do feel that for it truly to succeed, these things need to be done. I also am a huge fanboy of CCP, and know they are more than capable of making one of the best FPSs this universe has ever seen. Here, I will answer some common questions: Q: Why did you do this on Google Drive?* A: I have A LOT of ideas I need to keep organized. Doing it on Google Drive allows me to organize them in an easy to read manner, fit them all on the same page, and easily edit it when I need to. Doing it on the forums would be . . . torture. Q: Didn't you do something similar to this before? A: I have had two other 'projects' in the past. First I had my suggestion series. That was a series of posts I made here that included several ideas of mine. Then I made my Proposal Presentation. That was a huge slideshow that contained over 60 slides and was packed full of information. This Revamp Project is sort of a hybrid of the two. It goes much more in depth than my suggestion series, but is still condensed enough not to take years to read. Q: Haven't I already seen some of these points on the forum? A: Yes. Many of the ideas I present here are not my original work. However, I refined what other people have said, and combined it to work well with other ideas. Here is some navigation to make reading the entire project easier. I plan to release many more sections of this series, and when I do the dashes below will be replaced with functional navigation. An Open Letter to CCP - - What Does That Say (User Interface) BOOM HEADSHOT! (Weapons) - Vroom! (Vehicles) -
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 230	Posted - 2013.07.21 23:01:00 - [2] - Quote -Reserved-
ALPHA DECRIPTER M.E.R.C. Conventional Forces D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 105	Posted - 2013.07.22 11:39:00 - [3] - Quote So...Many...Problems.................... ............ GET FIXED! Once again a very good read. +1 btw you misspelled "Shoot" in one of the slides as you spelled it "shout". Didn't notice any other spelling mistakes though.
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 237	Posted - 2013.07.22 13:44:00 - [4] - Quote ALPHA DECRIPTER wrote: So...Many...Problems.................... ............ GET FIXED! Once again a very good read. +1 btw you misspelled "Shoot" in one of the slides as you spelled it "shout". Didn't notice any other spelling mistakes though. Thanks, I found and fixed it.
ALPHA DECRIPTER M.E.R.C. Conventional Forces D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 114	Posted - 2013.07.22 13:53:00 - [5] - Quote Still waiting on the rest of the project. The fact that this one would salve the murder taxi issue (even b4 you got to the actual solution) without really nurfing anything is just awesome.
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 237	Posted - 2013.07.22 13:56:00 - [6] - Quote ALPHA DECRIPTER wrote: Still waiting on the rest of the project. The fact that this one would salve the murder taxi issue (even b4 you got to the actual solution) without really nurfing anything is just awesome. Haha, it is coming. My dropsuit one has been the most work so far, a lot of [possibly controversial] suggestions packed into that one. I also have one on tutorials that is about 35% complete, and I have one planned for Equipment and EWAR, and also one on scanning. They should get here soon (TM ?).
ALPHA DECRIPTER M.E.R.C. Conventional Forces D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 114	Posted - 2013.07.22 14:06:00 - [7] - Quote quick question (sry for being a noob). What's EWAR?
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 238	Posted - 2013.07.22 14:08:00 - [8] - Quote ALPHA DECRIPTER wrote: quick question (sry for being a noob). What's EWAR? EWAR is an abbreviation for electronic warfare. In EVE, there are different types of EWAR that can disrupt sensors, slow enemies down, and do all kinds of other things that do not necessarily physically harm enemies, but can still disrupt them and provide a large advantage.
ALPHA DECRIPTER M.E.R.C. Conventional Forces D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 118	Posted - 2013.07.22 14:11:00 - [9] - Quote Tactical gear eh? now I'm anxious for the damn cloak suit again.
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 239	Posted - 2013.07.22 14:16:00 - [10] - Quote ALPHA DECRIPTER wrote: Tactical gear eh? now I'm anxious for the damn cloak suit again. Me too! I do go over it a bit (in my dropsuit edition actually), but me typing about it is not the same thing as having it in game.

ALPHA DECRIPTER M.E.R.C. Conventional Forces D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 119	Posted - 2013.07.22 14:23:00 - [11] - Quote DusterBuster wrote: ALPHA DECRIPTER wrote: Tactical gear eh? now I'm anxious for the damn cloak suit again. Me too! I do go over it a bit (in my dropsuit edition actually), but me typing about it is not the same thing as having it in game. Damn I know how you feel lol It also makes me wish scouts had a second equip but just having the cloak will have to do.
Adelia Lafayette DUST University Ivy League 122	Posted - 2013.07.22 15:19:00 - [12] - Quote I would recommend borderlands style seat switching if both seats are occupied.
ALPHA DECRIPTER M.E.R.C. Conventional Forces D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 123	Posted - 2013.07.22 15:24:00 - [13] - Quote Adelia Lafayette wrote: I would recommend borderlands style seat switching if both seats are occupied. That would actually look kinda funny for a heavy to be flipping from seat to seat (it's more about the imagery and not the idea that gets to me lol)
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 240	Posted - 2013.07.22 16:24:00 - [14] - Quote Adelia Lafayette wrote: I would recommend borderlands style seat switching if both seats are occupied. Are you referring to two random passengers or the pilot? For two passengers I agree, however I think the pilot should be able to take whatever seat he wants whether or not the passenger agrees, to prevent some blueberry from stealing your dropship Thanks for the feedback.
Killar-12 Intrepidus XI EoN. 233	Posted - 2013.07.22 16:43:00 - [15] - Quote AWESOMESAUCE +1 to the OP What about tanks? the PG skill? Turret Costs? Reppers? Overdrive seems more like it should be a status like when the wind rushes past your LAV so that it is difficult to control
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 242	Posted - 2013.07.22 17:02:00 - [16] - Quote Killar-12 wrote: AWESOMESAUCE +1 to the OP What about tanks? the PG skill? Turret Costs? Reppers? Overdrive seems more like it should be a status like when the wind rushes past your LAV so that it is difficult to control My intention for overdrive was that it would be similar to the ghost boost in halo or vehicle sprint in BF3. It could be just going fast too, but since it limits your steering so severely IDK. I was going to make tanks a weaker, more maneuverable version of the HGV, but decided to keep the types of vehicles limited at first, and expand upon it later. I think the costs of the complete tank should be such that you can afford to lose a couple a match without going bankrupt, but I am going to avoid going into specifics on that for now. I think I am probably going to cover income/expenses in a future presentation. Pilots should get both a PG and CPU skill, especially since the difference between T1 and T2 are notas extreme in my presentation. And repairers should behave very similarly to how they do now. Those are all very good questions, and ones that I do not have in depth answers for at the moment. My view is simple: get it working first, and then focus on the specifics after. Thanks for the feedback.
Pje251296 KILL ORDERS 62	Posted - 2013.07.22 17:33:00 - [17] - Quote I love the vehicle interaction ideas, it sounds so much like how vehicles work in Borderlands 2, also about the pilot powers about switching seats, like Borderlands would the player have to press a button to swap seats with the other player that wants to swap? Like the idea of the transport version of the LGV, I don't understand why you can't use your gun in the passenger seat currently in the LAV.
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 243	Posted - 2013.07.22 17:37:00 - [18] - Quote Pje251296 wrote: I love the vehicle interaction ideas, it sounds so much like how vehicles work in Borderlands 2, also about the pilot powers about switching seats, like Borderlands would the player have to press a button to swap seats with the other player that wants to swap? Like the idea of the transport version of the LGV, I don't understand why you can't use your gun in the passenger seat currently in the LAV. If the person who called in the vehicle wants to switch seats, then no, no button press is required on the part of the passenger. It is the pilot's vehicle, they should have the power to sit where they want. Anybody else, yes, I suppose a button press to switch seats could be a good implementation.
Harpyja DUST University Ivy League 348	Posted - 2013.07.22 20:45:00 - [19] - Quote I enjoy your hard work and it was a fun read. Let me just point out a few of my own observations. The idea of having a pilot that can only drive (or fly) in conjunction with a gunner wouldn't be too good. I'd imagine it would take a good deal of specialization to drive the vehicle, but you won't be able to get any WPs for it by yourself. You will be dependent on a gunner, and the gunner can even have no SPs invested at all. They just hop in and start shooting the turret. I think vehicles like these should give pilots some fire-power as well, but the addition of a gunner should drastically improve the firepower of the vehicle. I imagine this being like the attack helicopters in BF3, where the pilot gets rockets and missiles while the gunner mans the undermounted cannon. It's perfect balance: the pilot can fly solo but will be mostly effective against vehicles only, but a gunner would make them effective against infantry as well. The idea of having separate specializations of vehicles such as transport and logistics is pretty much the same thing as the above observation. Specializing into transportation or logistics would require you to be dependent on other people to get your points (whether it's transporting them or keeping them alive). The majority would go straight into the assault version because (unless I understood this incorrectly) it would be the only vehicle with which the driver will be able to kill. Instead, these non-assault vehicles should still get weapons, but the assault vehicles should get a benefit when using weapons. I imagine them being more like BF3's LAV-25s. The driver operates a light cannon and a gunner operates a heavy machine gun in addition to four passengers (which adds up to 6, which is an entire DUST squad). I think for transport and logistics vehicles, we need medium-sized turrets which the drivers operate as opposed to large turrets on the assault vehicles (for the HGVs). So basically what I'm saying is to give drivers some sort of weaponry, regardless of the vehicle (well, aside from LGVs).
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 243	Posted - 2013.07.22 23:38:00 - [20] - Quote Harpyja wrote: I enjoy your hard work and it was a fun read. Let me just point out a few of my own observations. The idea of having a pilot that can only drive (or fly) in conjunction with a gunner wouldn't be too good. I'd imagine it would take a good deal of specialization to drive the vehicle, but you won't be able to get any WPs for it by yourself. You will be dependent on a gunner, and the gunner can even have no SPs invested at all. They just hop in and start shooting the turret. I think vehicles like these should give pilots some fire-power as well, but the addition of a gunner should drastically improve the firepower of the vehicle. I imagine this being like the attack helicopters in BF3, where the pilot gets rockets and missiles while the gunner mans the undermounted cannon. It's perfect balance: the pilot can fly solo but will be mostly effective against vehicles only, but a gunner would make them effective against infantry as well. The idea of having separate specializations of vehicles such as transport and logistics is pretty much the same thing as the above observation. Specializing into transportation or logistics would require you to be dependent on other people to get your points (whether it's transporting them or keeping them alive). The majority would go straight into the assault version because (unless I understood this incorrectly) it would be the only vehicle with which the driver will be able to kill. Instead, these non-assault vehicles should still get weapons, but the assault vehicles should get a benefit when using weapons. I imagine them being more like BF3's LAV-25s. The driver operates a light cannon and a gunner operates a heavy machine gun in addition to four passengers (which adds up to 6, which is an entire DUST squad). I think for transport and logistics vehicles, we need medium-sized turrets which the drivers operate as opposed to large turrets on the assault vehicles (for the HGVs). So basically what I'm saying is to give drivers some sort of weaponry, regardless of the vehicle (well, aside from LGVs). You raise a very valid point, and for that thank you. However, I am going to stick to my guns, and I will explain why: balance. This game is about teamwork, and nobody should be able to take out multiple enemies solo, whether it be an assault or a tank. Having no pilot fired weapons means it takes a crew to operate vehicles. This means that communication and coordination are required between the driver and gunner. A good team can be a powerful force, while a bad one will be useless. In my presentation, I state that it would take around three shots from AV weaponry, which means three coordinated assault suits to kill the vehicle. It should not take multiple people to kill a vehicle and only one to drive it. You bring up the point that the driver would not get enough warpoints, but I am going to argue this. The driver would get many points from just driving the vehicle, through assist points gathered from the gunner. I feel that driving for an entire match should get you just as many points as operating the turret. I forgot to mention this in my presentation (and will add it in), but I also think that unskilled players should not be allowed to operate turrets. The same level of skill should be required to use them, as there currently is to fit them. The separate specializations wouldn't all require completely different training paths. Instead, I intended for them to be modular, like strategic cruisers in EVE. I based all of my suggestions off from other games - the warthogs from Halo, the light vehicles from Planetside 2, and the humvee from BF3. I know that Dust is not meant to be identical to these games, but what works, works. Thanks again for the excellent feedback.

Terry Webber Turalyon Plus 265	Posted - 2013.07.22 23:46:00 - [21] - Quote Great slideshow, DusterBuster. +1
DusterBuster DUST University Ivy League 243	Posted - 2013.07.22 23:48:00 - [22] - Quote Terry Webber wrote: Great, slideshow, DusterBuster. +1 Thanks!


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