

CCP Wolfman

C C P

C C P Alliance



1404







Posted - 2013.08.27 09:05:00 - [1] - Quote

Hi guys,



As promised the other day here is an overview on the changes to vehicle gameplay weGÇÖre currently working on for 1.5 and beyond. What we didnGÇÖt want to do was take every element, hurriedly try to rebalance them all in 4 weeks, and then stuff them back in. So, this will be a staged process, one that we will continue to work on over the releases following 1.5. This will allow us to see how things play out in the game, get community feedback and incorporate that information in to the ongoing work. Ok, here goesGÇª



THE GOAL



Make vehicles fun.



THE PLAN



The goal is a simple one. The plan, however, is somewhat more intricate and will be implemented in a number of stages over the coming days and weeks:



Remove GÇ£noiseGÇ¥ so that we can focus on the core archetypes.

Right now there are simply too many things doing too much all at once. Module offerings will be streamlined to just the most necessary archetypes. Once weGÇÖve established a solid foundation weGÇÖll start to introduce types and build back out. Similarly, vehicle roles will be reduced and then re-implemented properly once the base interactions are working well. Skill bonuses will be adjusted.



Rebuild with a clear combat philosophy in mind.

There are a number of issues with vehicle combat at the moment, but most of these are symptomatic of a bigger issue: vehicles have no clear role on the battlefield. Vehicles need to be powerful, but not overpowered. They need to be vulnerable, but not weak. TheyGÇÖve been all of these things at various points in DUSTGÇÖs development, but theyGÇÖve never quite found their niche. We hope to correct that by:



Make base vehicles susceptible. An unfitted vehicle is little more than a weak hull. Base HP does not make a vehicle powerful. Only through fitting can a vehicle become a true threat on the battlefield.

Active vs. passive modules. There will be a far greater emphasis on active module use than ever before. The intent here is to create GÇ£waves of opportunityGÇ¥ that allow vehicles to be devastatingGÇª temporarily. Active modules will greatly enhance a vehicleGÇÖs attributes, but when they enter cooldown, the vehicle is left exposed and vulnerable to attack (more on this below). This back-and-forth allows infantry to engage vehicles, but do so knowing that the vehicleGÇÖs pilot has a short window in which he can drastically alter the outcome of any engagement.

Clear usage profiles for modules so players intuitively know and understand why itGÇÖs better to use a particular module or set of modules in a given situation.

Proper feedback so that itGÇÖs easier to understand what is happening (e.g. an HAV has activated shield hardeners) and how to counter it.

Turrets will now have finite ammunition. Vehicle vs. vehicle combat generally boils down to two vehicles parked opposite one another firing until someone pops. This is not fun. Finite ammunition allows us to make turrets more powerful while preventing them from being a constant threat; spam a target and eventually you will run out of ammo.

Expand

Once weGÇÖre confident weGÇÖve gotten the base balance right weGÇÖll start to add back in things weGÇÖve removed as well as introduce new elements to the mix. Pilot dropsuits, improved roles, increased infantry and vehicle interplay, and new turret types for a start.



Active vs. Passive modules



WeGÇÖre rebuilding everything with the idea that active modules will allow a vehicle to survive a single encounter, while passive modules increase its long-term surviveability across multiple encounters. Active modules will provide very significant bonuses, but once used their long recharge times leave a lone vehicle vulnerable to any follow-up attacks. Passive modules on the other hand provide permanent bonuses that are comparatively small. The breakdown is as follows:



Active



Large, temporary bonuses

High PG/CPU costs

Single encounter surviveability



Passive



Small, persistent bonuses

Comparatively low PG/CPU costs

Multiple encounter surviveability



Module Types



These are the modules that weGÇÖll be focusing on in our first-pass rebalance:



Armor/Shield Hardeners (A): Massive, temporary reduction to damage received.

Used to survive short, high-DPS situations. Long cool down times discourage overuse.



Armor Plates / Shield Extenders (P): Small permanent HP increase

Increases long-term sustainability at the expense of the base hullGÇÖs inherent strength (shield recharge time in the case of shields and speed in the case of armor)



Shield Boosters (A): Instant, emergency use high HP restoration in the heat of battle. Ultra-long cool down times.

Last-ditch injection of HP and a kick-start to shield recharge.



Armor Repairers (P): Speed up HP recovery outside of combat

Used to make running repairs between battles (too slow to be of real use in the heat of battle)



Damage Amplifiers (A): Massive, temporary increase to damage dealt.

Used to GÇ£punch above your weight classGÇ¥ or to restore something like parity to the playing field when hardeners are used.



Ammo Cache (P): Increases the amount of on-board ammunition available to turrets.

Used to increase ammo capacity. Useful when not near a supply depot.





Armor vs. Shields



The low HP, constant regen rate of vehicle shields previously used offered no real pros/cons. Vehicles now have much higher shield recharge rates than before, but to compensate they also have higher shield recharge delays. When taking fire shields will not regenerate (not until the second wave of module types is introduced, at any rate) requiring players to use shield boosters to kick-start shields, retreat to safety or attempt to destroy all targets and recuperate in the lull that follows. The hope is that this change will offer a readily apparent trade-off between shields and armor that allows players to pick a playstyle that suits them while not overly favoring any particular one.



Shield

Low HP ceiling, fast regen, hit-and-run.

More shields increases shield regen delay.

Once depleted, shields take a long time to kick back in.



Armor

High HP ceiling, slow regen, stand-and-deliver.

More armor slows you down.

Armor has no native regen.



Turrets

As mentioned above, weGÇÖll be adding a...



Lurchasaurus

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1017



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:13:00 - [4] - Quote

i just jizzed my pants



Aderek

HavoK Core

RISE of LEGION



40



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:15:00 - [5] - Quote

Finity ammo!

Thats very good news :|) But, where we can refill? In suply depot or HAV nanohives or nornal nanohives? :)



Good hunting!



meri jin

Goonfeet

Top Men.



247



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:18:00 - [6] - Quote

CCP Wolfman wrote:

Turrets

As mentioned above, weGÇÖll be adding ammunition to turrets.

Small turrets are no longer mandatory when fitting a vehicle. This should allow for more interesting vehicle setups than before.



I think that's enough for now! We're looking forward to hearing what you think



CCP Wolfman I think that's enough for now! We're looking forward to hearing what you thinkCCP Wolfman





If I don't have small turrets on my tank, does that mean that other players can't join my tank?

That would be a way to "lock" the tank.



Will recalling the tank refill some ammo over time? Do you have something to prevent stealing tanks, or kick out people of my tank?



Himiko Kuronaga

SyNergy Gaming

EoN.



1344



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:22:00 - [7] - Quote

All I got out of this is you're going to nerf vehicles some more by introducing more restrictions to how they work. Also the ammunition idea is terrible, to be perfectly blunt. They already overheat, they don't need another restriction.



The philosophy for how modules are working is basically how they work already. And what we've learned is that it's a pretty terrible philosophy for the investment unless you plan to make all vehicles absolutely dirt cheap.





Why don't you just copy the EVE capacitor and resistance scheme over to Dust instead of continually dumbing it down? You're underestimating the intelligence of the playerbase.



DAMIOS82

Unkn0wn Killers



27



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:22:00 - [8] - Quote

Looks interresting and kinda look forward to the different roles the vehicles will start to play. however i might aswell ask it and that is what will happen to OP AV weapons in the future, since these changes kinda makes us more of sitting ducks, just waiting to be killed or resupplied. Also will these ammo changes be implemented in the future for turrets installations, but with more hp offcourse since now there just like paper?



Lurchasaurus

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1019



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:25:00 - [9] - Quote

Himiko Kuronaga wrote: All I got out of this is you're going to nerf vehicles some more by introducing more restrictions to how they work. Also the ammunition idea is terrible, to be perfectly blunt. They already overheat, they don't need another restriction.



The philosophy for how modules are working is basically how they work already. And what we've learned is that it's a pretty terrible philosophy for the investment unless you plan to make all vehicles absolutely dirt cheap.





Why don't you just copy the EVE capacitor and resistance scheme over to Dust instead of continually dumbing it down? You're underestimating the intelligence of the playerbase.



there is truth to this.



CCP, please dont just do a rehashed version of what we already have....



dustwaffle

Gravity Prone

EoN.



337



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:25:00 - [10] - Quote

Overall, good decision making process and looks like vehicles might be worth speccing into!



Quote: Turrets will now have finite ammunition. Vehicle vs. vehicle combat generally boils down to two vehicles parked opposite one another firing until someone pops. This is not fun. Finite ammunition allows us to make turrets more powerful while preventing them from being a constant threat; spam a target and eventually you will run out of ammo.

How would the ammo be replenished? Nanohives ? I can envision rolling up to a friendly supply depot, and this would add a strategic layer to it as well. Also, would recalling vehicles and re-deploying them replenish the ammo count? If yes, this change *might* be a bit meaningless, as railtankers would just sit behind redline to sniper and recall/redeploy ad infinitum.

Quote: Shield Boosters (A): Instant, emergency use high HP restoration in the heat of battle. Ultra-long cool down times.

Last-ditch injection of HP and a kick-start to shield recharge.

Without an armor equivalent, we go back to the dropsuit trend of shield tanking > armor tanking. While this is consistent with the EVE world where shield active tanking is made for 'burst tanking' and armor is made for sustained tanking, the option to fit multiple armor reppers should be there, and maybe introduce a limiting factor like capacitor etc?



Iron Wolf Saber

Den of Swords



7774



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:26:00 - [11] - Quote

To be honest I really thought that Dropsuits would get teiricided first, but alas vehicles are in dire need of it more so than the dropsuits.



dustwaffle

Gravity Prone

EoN.



337



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:28:00 - [12] - Quote

Himiko Kuronaga wrote: All I got out of this is you're going to nerf vehicles some more by introducing more restrictions to how they work. Also the ammunition idea is terrible, to be perfectly blunt. They already overheat, they don't need another restriction.



The philosophy for how modules are working is basically how they work already. And what we've learned is that it's a pretty terrible philosophy for the investment unless you plan to make all vehicles absolutely dirt cheap.





Why don't you just copy the EVE capacitor and resistance scheme over to Dust instead of continually dumbing it down? You're underestimating the intelligence of the playerbase.

Maybe see the actual implementation instead of criticizing the design philosophy behind it before you get a chance to see what the implementation will be?



Dunno, just seems short-sighted to complain now. Feedback = good, whinage = bad.



dustwaffle

Gravity Prone

EoN.



337



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:29:00 - [13] - Quote

Iron Wolf Saber wrote: To be honest I really thought that Dropsuits would get teiricided first, but alas vehicles are in dire need of it more so than the dropsuits.

So can we understand from this post, that tiericide is on its way? \o/



Lurchasaurus

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1022



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:30:00 - [14] - Quote

dustwaffle wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: All I got out of this is you're going to nerf vehicles some more by introducing more restrictions to how they work. Also the ammunition idea is terrible, to be perfectly blunt. They already overheat, they don't need another restriction.



The philosophy for how modules are working is basically how they work already. And what we've learned is that it's a pretty terrible philosophy for the investment unless you plan to make all vehicles absolutely dirt cheap.





Why don't you just copy the EVE capacitor and resistance scheme over to Dust instead of continually dumbing it down? You're underestimating the intelligence of the playerbase.

Maybe see the actual implementation instead of criticizing the design philosophy behind it before you get a chance to see what the implementation will be?



Dunno, just seems short-sighted to complain now. Feedback = good, whinage = bad. Maybe see the actual implementation instead of criticizing the design philosophy behind it before you get a chance to see what the implementation will be?Dunno, just seems short-sighted to complain now. Feedback = good, whinage = bad.



i dont see any whining. please keep your negativity out of this great thread



dustwaffle

Gravity Prone

EoN.



337



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:32:00 - [15] - Quote

Lurchasaurus wrote: dustwaffle wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: All I got out of this is you're going to nerf vehicles some more by introducing more restrictions to how they work. Also the ammunition idea is terrible, to be perfectly blunt. They already overheat, they don't need another restriction.



The philosophy for how modules are working is basically how they work already. And what we've learned is that it's a pretty terrible philosophy for the investment unless you plan to make all vehicles absolutely dirt cheap.





Why don't you just copy the EVE capacitor and resistance scheme over to Dust instead of continually dumbing it down? You're underestimating the intelligence of the playerbase.

Maybe see the actual implementation instead of criticizing the design philosophy behind it before you get a chance to see what the implementation will be?



Dunno, just seems short-sighted to complain now. Feedback = good, whinage = bad. Maybe see the actual implementation instead of criticizing the design philosophy behind it before you get a chance to see what the implementation will be?Dunno, just seems short-sighted to complain now. Feedback = good, whinage = bad.



i dont see any whining. please keep your negativity out of this great thread i dont see any whining. please keep your negativity out of this great thread

:)



Iron Wolf Saber

Den of Swords



7774



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:32:00 - [16] - Quote

dustwaffle wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: To be honest I really thought that Dropsuits would get teiricided first, but alas vehicles are in dire need of it more so than the dropsuits.

So can we understand from this post, that tiericide is on its way? \o/ So can we understand from this post, that tiericide is on its way? \o/



I am example mating on what a tericide might look like in Dust.



Lurchasaurus

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1022



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:33:00 - [17] - Quote

CCP, how do you intend to work with the entire vehicle rework while maintaining proto AV weapons? Are we to expect worthwhile tanks while we have a base amount of modules and hulls to choose from? Do we just accept that we do not have proto stuff until you bring it in? Do you intend to temporarily remove/replace current proto AV during this period?



Torr Wrath

Subdreddit

Test Alliance Please Ignore



786



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:35:00 - [18] - Quote

Lurchasaurus wrote: Do you intend to temporarily remove/replace current proto AV during this period?



Considering that in 1.4 the mathhammer says that the most dangerous proto av got buffed? Unlikely :P But lets see what CCP has to say.



Sardonk Eternia

Multnomah Interstellar Holdings Inc.



173



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:38:00 - [19] - Quote

I hate to be a pessimist but all I read was "we have no idea how to fix vehicles so we are trying a bunch of stupid ****" it's going to be a long time before vehicles are fun to drive, boys and girls.



Lurchasaurus

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1024



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:43:00 - [20] - Quote

Sardonk Eternia wrote: I hate to be a pessimist but all I read was "we have no idea how to fix vehicles so we are trying a bunch of stupid ****" it's going to be a long time before vehicles are fun to drive, boys and girls.



while many things are basically exactly what we have right now, im guessing roles will be more exaggerated, i.e. shield tanks are weak but with regen up the ass while armor tanks are slow moving turrets.



digging the turret ammo honestly.



Lurchasaurus

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1024



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:48:00 - [21] - Quote

CCp, Please understand you will need to put in some kind of mechanism to stop people from redline sniping with a railgun with infinite ammo via uncontested RDV swaps. Do not make it stupid like making it ridiculously inconvenient to recall and call in tanks, but be aware people WILL take advantage of this.



dustwaffle

Gravity Prone

EoN.



340



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:50:00 - [22] - Quote

Lurchasaurus wrote: Sardonk Eternia wrote: I hate to be a pessimist but all I read was "we have no idea how to fix vehicles so we are trying a bunch of stupid ****" it's going to be a long time before vehicles are fun to drive, boys and girls.



while many things are basically exactly what we have right now, im guessing roles will be more exaggerated, i.e. shield tanks are weak but with regen up the ass while armor tanks are slow moving turrets.



digging the turret ammo honestly. while many things are basically exactly what we have right now, im guessing roles will be more exaggerated, i.e. shield tanks are weak but with regen up the ass while armor tanks are slow moving turrets.digging the turret ammo honestly.

As a tanker, what are your thoughts on how they should be replenished while IN battle? Other than supply depots of course.



Blaze Ashra

Holdfast Syndicate

Amarr Empire



2



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:53:00 - [23] - Quote

So what's the durations proposed for active modules cooldown and activated phases?



Zeylon Rho

Subdreddit

Test Alliance Please Ignore



2138



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:54:00 - [24] - Quote

Lurchasaurus wrote: CCP, how do you intend to work with the entire vehicle rework while maintaining proto AV weapons? Are we to expect worthwhile tanks while we have a base amount of modules and hulls to choose from? Do we just accept that we do not have proto stuff until you bring it in? Do you intend to temporarily remove/replace current proto AV during this period?



They could temporarily add ADV/PRO versions of Vehicles I guess.



Boosting Swarms to high levels temporarily might make sense in context of having possibly super tanks around just to see how hard they are to take down (how many players, swarms, etc.) and check the dynamics of vehicle combat tank-on-tank and the like.



There aren't many other practical AV options, and so it's swarms for starters. They said they'd be balancing AV and vehicles at the same time, so Forges, Grenades, and Swarms will be looked at during this time I imagine. Plasma Cannons will continue to suck.



Zeylon Rho

Subdreddit

Test Alliance Please Ignore



2138



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:55:00 - [25] - Quote

dustwaffle wrote: Lurchasaurus wrote: Sardonk Eternia wrote: I hate to be a pessimist but all I read was "we have no idea how to fix vehicles so we are trying a bunch of stupid ****" it's going to be a long time before vehicles are fun to drive, boys and girls.



while many things are basically exactly what we have right now, im guessing roles will be more exaggerated, i.e. shield tanks are weak but with regen up the ass while armor tanks are slow moving turrets.



digging the turret ammo honestly. while many things are basically exactly what we have right now, im guessing roles will be more exaggerated, i.e. shield tanks are weak but with regen up the ass while armor tanks are slow moving turrets.digging the turret ammo honestly.

As a tanker, what are your thoughts on how they should be replenished while IN battle? Other than supply depots of course. As a tanker, what are your thoughts on how they should be replenished while IN battle? Other than supply depots of course.



Logistics LAVs or Dropships with some sort of Ammo sharing module (with finite reserves).



Lurchasaurus

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1024



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:56:00 - [26] - Quote

dustwaffle wrote: Lurchasaurus wrote: Sardonk Eternia wrote: I hate to be a pessimist but all I read was "we have no idea how to fix vehicles so we are trying a bunch of stupid ****" it's going to be a long time before vehicles are fun to drive, boys and girls.



while many things are basically exactly what we have right now, im guessing roles will be more exaggerated, i.e. shield tanks are weak but with regen up the ass while armor tanks are slow moving turrets.



digging the turret ammo honestly. while many things are basically exactly what we have right now, im guessing roles will be more exaggerated, i.e. shield tanks are weak but with regen up the ass while armor tanks are slow moving turrets.digging the turret ammo honestly.

As a tanker, what are your thoughts on how they should be replenished while IN battle? Other than supply depots of course. As a tanker, what are your thoughts on how they should be replenished while IN battle? Other than supply depots of course.



obviously supply depots lol but it would be interesting to have some kind of module that can passively regen ammo at a slow rate or have an ammo transporter, like a LLAV can have a module that acts like a repair beam, only it gives ammo in the form of nanites to the tank. the module can run out obviously like a nanohive and the lav itself would have to replenish its module. Kind of like an ammo runner.



tank nanohives



other than that, it would be too unbalanced, as infantry only have nanohives and depots to resupply for themselves aswell. cant give tanks a stupid buff like that.



Himiko Kuronaga

SyNergy Gaming

EoN.



1345



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:57:00 - [27] - Quote

dustwaffle wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: All I got out of this is you're going to nerf vehicles some more by introducing more restrictions to how they work. Also the ammunition idea is terrible, to be perfectly blunt. They already overheat, they don't need another restriction.



The philosophy for how modules are working is basically how they work already. And what we've learned is that it's a pretty terrible philosophy for the investment unless you plan to make all vehicles absolutely dirt cheap.





Why don't you just copy the EVE capacitor and resistance scheme over to Dust instead of continually dumbing it down? You're underestimating the intelligence of the playerbase.

Maybe see the actual implementation instead of criticizing the design philosophy behind it before you get a chance to see what the implementation will be?



Dunno, just seems short-sighted to complain now. Feedback = good, whinage = bad. Maybe see the actual implementation instead of criticizing the design philosophy behind it before you get a chance to see what the implementation will be?Dunno, just seems short-sighted to complain now. Feedback = good, whinage = bad.





It's not whinage.



If you remove the part about ammo, basically nothing Wolfman said here is any different at all to what we currently have, except the modules will be dumbed down even further.



I don't need to see the implementation because it's already implemented. He did not announce anything new.



ChromeBreaker

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1028



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:57:00 - [28] - Quote

WHAT ABOUT THE DROP SHIPS



Lurchasaurus

SVER True Blood

Public Disorder.



1024



Posted - 2013.08.27 09:59:00 - [29] - Quote

Zeylon Rho wrote: Lurchasaurus wrote: CCP, how do you intend to work with the entire vehicle rework while maintaining proto AV weapons? Are we to expect worthwhile tanks while we have a base amount of modules and hulls to choose from? Do we just accept that we do not have proto stuff until you bring it in? Do you intend to temporarily remove/replace current proto AV during this period?



They could temporarily add ADV/PRO versions of Vehicles I guess.



Boosting Swarms to high levels temporarily might make sense in context of having possibly super tanks around just to see how hard they are to take down (how many players, swarms, etc.) and check the dynamics of vehicle combat tank-on-tank and the like.



There aren't many other practical AV options, and so it's swarms for starters. They said they'd be balancing AV and vehicles at the same time, so Forges, Grenades, and Swarms will be looked at during this time I imagine. Plasma Cannons will continue to suck. They could temporarily add ADV/PRO versions of Vehicles I guess.Boosting Swarms to high levels temporarily might make sense in context of having possibly super tanks around just to see how hard they are to take down (how many players, swarms, etc.) and check the dynamics of vehicle combat tank-on-tank and the like.There aren't many other practical AV options, and so it's swarms for starters. They said they'd be balancing AV and vehicles at the same time, so Forges, Grenades, and Swarms will be looked at during this time I imagine. Plasma Cannons will continue to suck.



they already said they will begin with a minimal amount of modules and hulls, so we are basically only allowed to use militia/standard stuff. For obvious reasons, continuing to keep proto AV is a stupid idea, esp with the 1.4 swarm buff.



the only reason this would not be the case is if we have a one size fits all tank. this would also **** many people off because we like our sagarises and suryas. not to mention the failures that were black ops tanks and the enforcers



Justicar Karnellia

Ikomari-Onu Enforcement

Caldari State



88



Posted - 2013.08.27 10:05:00 - [30] - Quote

These look like great changes, the two I like are the fact that turrets have ammo, and that supply depots will now help vehicles, so we shouldn't see indiscriminate destruction of installations/turrets/CRU's because ammo will be more of a finite resource.

