DUST Search - Tanks and Dropships take the same damage. Explain CCP

All Channels

General Discussions

Tanks and Dropships take the same damage. Explain CCP

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2314	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:06:00 - [1] - Quote So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11056	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:12:00 - [2] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. AH Now I understand. But what do you propose? Giving dropships arbitrary bonuses is ridiculous in my mind. I mean if a weapon can deal X damage to a tank which is more heavily armoured it should do the same to a dropship which is less armoured. Please elaborate further so I dont make a stupid comment. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Scheneighnay McBob Cult of Gasai 5383	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:19:00 - [3] - Quote I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say is wrong. Are you saying HAVs should be harder to damage? pé¦pâ+pé¦pâ½pâäpâ¬pâ¦pé¦pâ¼pâ+pâêpü»sñ¬S+ïpéè
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11057	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:23:00 - [4] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say is wrong. Are you saying HAVs should be harder to damage? No I think he is saying ADS need to be harder to damage by limiting the amount of damage AV options can do against them for some reason..... though I could be wrong...post isn't clear. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Vitharr Foebane Terminal Courtesy 1485	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:23:00 - [5] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say is wrong. Are you saying HAVs should be harder to damage? the opposite i'm pretty sure. Amarr: Sentinel V Scout V Assault IV Commando IV Logistics IV I place my faith in my God, my Empress, and my Laz0r
Beld Errmon 1702	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:24:00 - [6] - Quote I would suggest that Assault dropships are a tech 2 vehicle and should have a different resist profile too ordinary dropships. Pilot - Tanker - FOTM (insert here)
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2314	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:24:00 - [7] - Quote im not saying dropships need to be stronger or tanks weaker but if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11058	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:29:00 - [8] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
ZDub 303 Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3055	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:31:00 - [9] - Quote Movement speed? ADS can lolAB away while Tanks cannot. If anything its Fuel Injectors which are imbalance, not arbitrary resistance against AV for ADS. Its a freaking dropship, are you seriously trying to argue that the TTK should be similar to a HEAVY Assault Vehicle? That's like trying to argue that brick tanked heavy suits should have the same TTK from an AR as an EWAR scout. Different roles on the field dictate different TTKs.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11058	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:31:00 - [10] - Quote Beld Errmon wrote: I would suggest that Assault dropships are a tech 2 vehicle and should have a different resist profile too ordinary dropships. BAM right on the money there Beld. For clarification A T1 Punisher might have armour resistances of 30% against Explosive Damage (the main minmatar damage type) While a T2 Retribution will have an 87.5% Resistance to Explosive Damage against Armour. Just like a Wolf, Minmatar Rifer T2 hull, has a 90% resistance against EM, the Amarr main damage type, for its shields. However this would then imply that HAV T2 hulls would have increased resistances to specific damage types as well. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III

Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2315	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:32:00 - [11] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2315	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:34:00 - [12] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: ADS can lolAB away . No it cannot. If you think it can, you are not experianced enough in dropships. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
Miokai Zahou The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 302	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:35:00 - [13] - Quote Just give the ADS an increase to cpu and power grid and also one extra high/low slot. Done fixed. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
ZDub 303 Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3055	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:36:00 - [14] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: ADS can lolAB away . No it cannot. If you think it can, you are not experianced enough in dropships. Dropships can't use afterburners? That's new. Was that changed in HF Bravo? And the rest of my post?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11058	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:39:00 - [15] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? No its not fair, but neither vehicle is designed to fulfil the others role. The advantage of an HAV would in this case be its armoured hull, which should absorb fire. The cost being mobility and lack of ability to engage close range targets both aerial and on ground. The advantage of a Dropship should be its mobility, fire power, and aerial nature. The cost being less durability. To be fair I cannot argue Dropship semantics with you, so I defer to you on dropship matters, but I'm not going to agree that ADS are useless. They are the most dangerous (but not OP) thing on most maps right now. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Atiim NoGameNoLife 9775	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:42:00 - [16] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? I think it's fair in the sense that the ADS is better in terms of speed and maneuverability, while the HAV has less speed and torque in comparison. A similar balance model is found in Infantry, where weapons deal the same amount of damage to a target regardless of frame, but is balanced in the sense that the lighter the frame, the better the chances it has at evading danger. What exactly are you trying to say? I want SLAVs, not SLAVEs. "Many things in life are subjective, morality is one of them..." -HAND
Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 53	Posted - 2014.06.23 23:57:00 - [17] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: ADS can lolAB away . No it cannot. If you think it can, you are not experianced enough in dropships. Yes it can lolAB away because i do it a hell of a lot Judge just hovers 100m from the point and thinks hes safe and then wonders why he gets killed by adv swarms Anyone who uses a ADS generally will fit an ADS to GTFO of danger
Michael Arck 4845	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:02:00 - [18] - Quote Takahashi Kashuken wrote: Judge just hovers 100m from the point and thinks hes safe and then wonders why he gets killed by adv swarms I thought I was the only one who noticed this dilemma Archistrategos *Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain*
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2315	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:02:00 - [19] - Quote I play proto swarms too. I can target dropships much easier than tanks. They are easy to spot, easy to hear, slow to change direction and cannot even look up or behind themselves. Tanks are harder to target due to obstacles getting in the way, faster to change direction, much stronger and can look and fire in a different direction than they face. These two vehicles are not equal but take equal damage from AV. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 3305	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:03:00 - [20] - Quote Not this crap again. Is it just my impression or since the armor dropships lost their godmode vs swarms you are complaining about AV ALOT more? Well its a hard world when crutches are beeing taken away.

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11061	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:05:00 - [21] - Quote The dark cloud wrote: Not this crap again. Is it just my impression or since the armor dropships lost their godmode vs swarms you are complaining about AV ALOT more? Well its a hard world when crutches are beeing taken away. facepalms...... No tankers, myself included, should ever talk about crutches..... " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III*
Miokai Zahou The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 302	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:08:00 - [22] - Quote The dark cloud wrote: Not this crap again. Is it just my impression or since the armor dropships lost their godmode vs swarms you are complaining about AV ALOT more? Well its a hard world when crutches are beeing taken away. No it makes the python easy to one shoot out of the sky now. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2315	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:08:00 - [23] - Quote The dark cloud wrote: Not this crap again. Is it just my impression or since the armor dropships lost their god mode vs swarms you are complaining about AV ALOT more? Well its a hard world when crutches are being taken away. I didn't mention Armour. You did. And it does not matter what changes happen. If imbalance is created no matter the cause, then it should be addressed. So how about you address the topic. Is it balanced that tanks and dropships share the same damage profile? Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
Takahashi Kashuken Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 56	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:12:00 - [24] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: I play proto swarms too. I can target dropships much easier than tanks. They are easy to spot, easy to hear, slow to change direction and cannot even look up or behind themselves. Tanks are harder to target due to obstacles getting in the way, faster to change direction, much stronger and can look and fire in a different direction than they face. These two vehicles are not equal but take equal damage from AV. I play proto swarms - Confirmed no skill scrub with a fire and forget weapon I can target dropships much easier than tanks - Gee i wonder why? is it because they are flying in the sky where as a tank is on the ground and can hide behind a million objects They are easier to spot - Gee i wonder why? is it because they are flying in the empty sky? Easy to hear - Everything is easy to hear when you have the TV sound on Slow to change direction - Only slow if the pilot is slow Cannot even look up or behind themselves - Why do you need to look up? Why do you need to look behind? Faster to change direction - No Fire in a different direction than they face - You want a turret on top of the ADS now? These two vehicles are not equal but take equal damage from AV - Didnt you make that video where you showed and proved that DS take less damage?
Vicious Minotaur Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 976	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:15:00 - [25] - Quote Nowadays, when an ADS pilot gets the drop on me (while I have my Forge out), all I have to do is turn around, and BLAP then the ADS has to get out of Dodge, even though they caught me with my pants down. Before Bravo, ADS were the scourge of the sky. Now they just fall out of it in a flaming ball of wreckage. (at least when I am playing) I'm no pilot, and perhaps I was fighting bad pilots, but something seems off to this AVer. I am a minotaur.
Benjamin Ciscko The Last of DusT. General Tso's Alliance 2361	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:16:00 - [26] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? ADS can hit afterburner and be far out of range within seconds. Tanker/Logi
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11061	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:17:00 - [27] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: The dark cloud wrote: Not this crap again. Is it just my impression or since the armor dropships lost their god mode vs swarms you are complaining about AV ALOT more? Well its a hard world when crutches are being taken away. I didn't mention Armour. You did. And it does not matter what changes happen. If imbalance is created no matter the cause, then it should be addressed. So how about you address the topic. Is it balanced that tanks and dropships share the same damage profile? Personally yes and no. No mainly because it harkens to the ship signature system in EVE where large weapons cannot easily hit small ships, meaning fast and small ships can wholly evade the large ones guns. Yes because you have the main advantage of not being tied to a single platform. DS can move freely in the skies as they wish and have the advanage to looking down on a foe. I think more logically that yes a DS should be downed more easily than a tank providing the shots hit the targets because DS have and are designed to have less armour. If a rocket clips a small helicopter (Littlebird) it goes down. If a Rocket hits a tank it can cripple its movement systems or destroy the think in one go. Being a smaller, less armoured helicopter does not alter the missiles destructive capacity. But given that yes the ADS is essentially a T2 hull I could give concessions regarding hull damage resistances as long as you are willing to accept that other T2 hulls like LAV and HAV would receive similar benefits. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
JudgeIsABadPilot Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 1	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:17:00 - [28] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: ADS can lolAB away . No it cannot. If you think it can, you are not experianced enough in dropships. You must have really slow reaction time, then. Practice makes almost perfect, and you're far from good enough.
Mors The Butcher Red Star. EoN. 20	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:21:00 - [29] - Quote @ judge ive seen you use your dropship and die its awesome and funny and read my sig \ I'M SORRY..... I'M SORRY FOR EVERYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED TO YOU... ....AND EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO YOU
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2316	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:22:00 - [30] - Quote Vicious Minotaur wrote: Nowadays, when an ADS pilot gets the drop on me (while I have my Forge out), all I have to do is turn around, and BLAP then the ADS has to get out of Dodge, even though they caught me with my pants down. Before Bravo, ADS were the scourge of the sky. Now they just fall out of it in a flaming ball of wreckage. (at least when I am playing) I'm no pilot, and perhaps I was fighting bad pilots, but something seems off to this AVer. This is how many pilots feel. BUT at the same time we admit that we are going in the right direction. But we have swung too far this build. The repping Maddi and the Incubus we OP last build. We don't want that back., But right now, ADS are just dropping from the sky. I play both roles to full proto. I can see it. I have been the first in the past to point out when dropships were OP, then to point out when swarms needed a buff. Now we need to acknowledge that swarms have too much of an upper hand. I do think they seem about right against tanks though, with the exception of the tracking which needs a slight improvement. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion

Racro 01 Arifistan 501st Knights of Leanbox 361	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:23:00 - [31] - Quote they also do the same damage to lavs. are you going to leave them out of this or what? I mean av is not just a threat to dropships its athreat to tanks currently as well. *Elite Gallenten Soldier*
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2316	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:24:00 - [32] - Quote Racro 01 Arifistan wrote: they also do the same damage to lavs. are you going to leave them out of this or what? I mean av is not just a threat to dropships its athreat to tanks currently as well. I have not completed my LAV testing. So didn't want to make claims I could not back up. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
JudgeIsABadPilot Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:26:00 - [33] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Racro 01 Arifistan wrote: they also do the same damage to lavs. are you going to leave them out of this or what? I mean av is not just a threat to dropships its athreat to tanks currently as well. I have not completed my LAV training. So didn't want to make claims I could not back up. Fixed it for you.
Benjamin Ciscko The Last of DusT. General Tso's Alliance 2361	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:29:00 - [34] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: ADS can lolAB away . No it cannot. If you think it can, you are not experianced enough in dropships. ROFLCOPTER A rail tank can fire two shots before an afterburner is hit I've done this enough to know If I don't land 2 shots I'll have to back off recover my damage mods and come at him again, if it's a nub pilot or I have an exceptionally great location I can land 3 shots. I've worked with some of the best Forge Gunners in PC and from what I hear landing the first and second shot is easy how ever any experienced Pilot can generally escape the 3rd shot unless the Forger gets lucky so yes maybe you aren't the experienced one. Tanker/Logi
Harpyja Legio DXIV 1920	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:40:00 - [35] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. Wow. Just wow. I didn't expect this, yet again, maybe I should've at this point. E.H.P. A dropship has less EHP than a HAV. AV does the same numerical damage to both, but it may strip off 30% of a dropships EHP in one shot while only 15% off of a HAV. So, AV doesn't deal equal damage to both. It's more damaging to dropships, as it should be. CCP could've made EVERY vehicle have 2000 EHP, with the only variable be resistance. LAVs: 0%, Dropships: 25%, HAVs: 50%. But they didn't. Would've had the same effect as the current design, but they didn't and I like the current design better. Judge, you've lost all credibility to me now. You're no better than a scrub. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
JudgeIsABadPilot Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:44:00 - [36] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. Wow. Just wow. I didn't expect this, yet again, maybe I should've at this point. E.H.P. A dropship has less EHP than a HAV. AV does the same numerical damage to both, but it may strip off 30% of a dropships EHP in one shot while only 15% off of a HAV. So, AV doesn't deal equal damage to both. It's more damaging to dropships, as it should be. CCP could've made EVERY vehicle have 2000 EHP, with the only variable be resistance. LAVs: 0%, Dropships: 25%, HAVs: 50%. But they didn't. Would've had the same effect as the current design, but they didn't and I like the current design better. Judge, you've lost all credibility to me now. You're no better than a scrub. Why did you give him any to begin with?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11063	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:45:00 - [37] - Quote BOOM and what could have been and interesting and valuable discussion about balance and vehicle roles was BLOWN wide open by a certain group of individuals once again waltzing in with assertions of player supremacy and calls of "Git Gud Scrub"...... This is why we can't have nice things..... If people just jumped into the thread to discredit Judge can you just ** off..... I don't care what his intentions are but I want to discuss this at the very least without some ***** irrelevant and or non productive interference. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2899	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:46:00 - [38] - Quote While this is true and mildly logical, Assault based/centric aerial vehicles don't exactly give up much for their position. You FLY for crying out loud, you have to be prepared to give up something for that. However I am in agreement with you when it comes to Transport/Logistics centric vehicles, they just don't have the survivability to justify getting in them as a passenger. Looks like its back to FPS Military Shooter 56 Monkey Mac - Just another pile of discarded ashes on the battlefield!
devonus durga Death Dea1ers 310	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:48:00 - [39] - Quote 1lb of c4, regardless of what material it hits, has the same explosive impact against all targets. Its how that target responds that changes. Unfortunately, even a scifi setting such as dust, physics still apply. The same explosion will cause the same amount of damage to a target regardless of its materials, and its a general physical limitation, that, since they fly, helicopters planes etc have less armor then a tank. This also applies to derpships, seeing as though we might have hover capabilities in dust, the behicle in question would still require a generator of sufficient size to enable lift. This coupled with armor would greatly inhibit a vehicles mobility. So much like modern day, a balance must be achieved between the two. It would of course be possible to create a vehicle with as much armor as a tank, capable of flight, but this vehicle would be far far less maneuvaurable then a tank, as tanks only have to generate enough energy to propel them forward and backwards, while am airborne vehicle of similar weight and armor, would have to sacrifice the majority of its maneuvaurability to maintain VERTICLE lift, its horizontal movemt would be very slow\and or rather clunky and hard to handle. So, asking for one weapon to do less damage, is not only physics wise iimpossible, but also incapable of being argued that an airborne vehicle with the maneuvarability characteristics of a dropship, is better able to resist damage then a tank. Second, In modern military vehicles explosive resistance comes from reactive armor whihc is desighned to take a hit, and project the blast away from the vehicle as best it can. This usually takes the form of plates that fall off on impact, much like modern cars crumple zones that are used to guide the explosive impact into.a non deadly form. The majority of. These systems are one time use plating. In dust shields and hardners perform along a similar principle, deflecting the blast away as best it can within limits, and are then used up till restocked\recharged. Your a dropship, your ability to shrug off damage is much like a scouts; its not the ability to soak damage, but the ability to avoid damage, that gives you an edge. You already have an elevated position, stronger weapons and armor then any infantry, and are more maneuvaurable in all axises then anything else on the battlefield. If we really want a realistic damage profile, let's take the AT4 anti tank weapon used by the us military. It can one shot even our own Abrams. Then there is the javelin missle launcher, capable of targeting both ground and airborne targets, has homing capabilities, and also one shots anything on the modern battlefield. Even classic rpgs can one shot most tanks, and disable all know vehicles. The only difference is that most of the vehicle their used against are desighned to insure their passengers and pilots survival, the vehicle is almost always knocked out of commision by a single strike. Its to bad your derpships arnt desighned that way. Oh wait, nm; you guys always survive your dropship being destroyed unless we hunt you down on the ground. Proto Stompers Information Tap (x°x) tap
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11063	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:54:00 - [40] - Quote devonus durga wrote: 1lb of c4, regardless of what material it hits, has the same explosive impact against all targets. Its how that target responds that changes. Unfortunately, even a scifi setting such as dust, physics still apply. The same explosion will cause the same amount of damage to a target regardless of its materials, and its a general physical limitation, that, since they fly, helicopters planes etc have less armor then a tank. This also applies to derpships, seeing as though we might have hover capabilities in dust, the behicle in question would still require a generator of sufficient size to enable lift. This coupled with armor would greatly inhibit a vehicles mobility. So much like modern day, a balance must be achieved between the two. It would of course be possible to create a vehicle with as much armor as a tank, capable of flight, but this vehicle would be far far less maneuvaurable then a tank, as tanks only have to generate enough energy to propel them forward and backwards, while am airborne vehicle of similar weight and armor, would have to sacrifice the majority of its maneuvaurability to maintain VERTICLE lift, its horizontal movemt would be very slow\and or rather clunky and hard to handle. So, asking for one weapon to do less damage, is not only physics wise iimpossible, but also incapable of being argued that an airborne vehicle with the maneuvarability characteristics of a dropship, is better able to resist damage then a tank. Second, In modern military vehicles explosive resistance comes from reactive armor whihc is desighned to take a hit, and project the blast away from the vehicle as best it can. This usually takes the form of plates that fall off on impact, much like modern cars crumple zones that are used to guide the explosive impact into.a non deadly form. The majority of. These systems are one time use plating. In dust shields and hardners perform along a similar principle, deflecting the blast away as best it can within limits, and are then used up till restocked\recharged. Your a dropship, your ability to shrug off damage is much like a scouts; its not the ability to soak damage, but the ability to avoid damage, that gives you an edge. You already have an elevated position, stronger weapons and armor then any infantry, and are more maneuvaurable in all axises then anything else on the battlefield. If we really want a realistic damage profile, let's take the AT4 anti tank weapon used by the us military. It can one shot even our own Abrams. Then there is the javelin missle launcher, capable of targeting both ground and airborne targets, has homing capabilities, and also one shots anything on the modern battlefield. Even classic rpgs can one shot most tanks, and disable all know vehicles. The only difference is that most of the vehicle their used against are desighned to insure their passengers and pilots survival, the vehicle is almost always knocked out of commision by a single strike. Its to bad your derpships arnt desighned that way. Oh wait, nm; you guys always survive your dropship being destroyed unless we hunt you down on the ground. A very detailed summary that puts the argument into a realistic perspective. Do you have any additions for in game mechanics that could better reflect this, or more so balance vehicles in terms of damage taken vs AV fire. While I appreciate a good dose of realism OHKOing my HAV doesn't sounds like enjoyable gameplay given the proliferation of AV amongst players. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III

Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3733	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:58:00 - [41] - Quote WTF is this thread? Quote: So a Rifle or MD does the same damage to a Scout as it does to a[n] Assault. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two frames that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage? It defies logic. If Rifles or MDs are balanced against Assaults, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. Please, by all means, QQ moar when my HAV can [/i]OUTRUN A SWARM LAUNCHER OR OUTSTRAFE A FORGE[/i]. Do you propose giving ADS an identical EHP vs Infantry AV as have HAVs? I guess I'm okay with that. In the meantime, I want my railgun range + damage back, because a DS with 8k EHP and the ability to circle nearly faster than turning speed is OP AS FUCK. While we're on the topic, you're a vehicle pilot. Why would you leave OMS matches? I'm starting to think there might be something to all that crap Takahiro spouts. CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3733	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:59:00 - [42] - Quote Benjamin Ciscko wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: ADS can lolAB away . No it cannot. If you think it can, you are not experianced enough in dropships. ROFLCOPTER A rail tank can fire two shots before an afterburner is hit I've done this enough to know If I don't land 2 shots I'll have to back off recover my damage mods and come at him again, if it's a nub pilot or I have an exceptionally great location I can land 3 shots. I've worked with some of the best Forge Gunners in PC and from what I hear landing the first and second shot is easy how ever any experienced Pilot can generally escape the 3rd shot unless the Forger gets lucky so yes maybe you aren't the experienced one. You have no idea how much better this makes me feel about my FGing abilities; I can never land the third shot either :) CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Benjamin Ciscko The Last of DusT. General Tso's Alliance 2361	Posted - 2014.06.24 01:00:00 - [43] - Quote How many shots does it take to down your Drop ship 3? What about shots to your weak spot? From what I hear that's the relative number. If I was to put a complex plate and a hardener on an armor tank it would take 4 shots from an IAFG (4 complex damage mods) maybe 5 if it's not the weak spot. Drop ships are not all that much weaker than tanks given that they have much higher maneuverability than tanks so if you want more survivability are willing to take a maneuverability hit. Tanker/Logi
devonus durga Death Dea1ers 311	Posted - 2014.06.24 01:08:00 - [44] - Quote True Adamance wrote: devonus durga wrote: 1lb of c4, regardless of what material it hits, has the same explosive impact against all targets. Its how that target responds that changes. Unfortunately, even a scifi setting such as dust, physics still apply. The same explosion will cause the same amount of damage to a target regardless of its materials, and its a general physical limitation, that, since they fly, helicopters planes etc have less armor then a tank. This also applies to derpships, seeing as though we might have hover capabilities in dust, the behicle in question would still require a generator of sufficient size to enable lift. This coupled with armor would greatly inhibit a vehicles mobility. So much like modern day, a balance must be achieved between the two. It would of course be possible to create a vehicle with as much armor as a tank, capable of flight, but this vehicle would be far far less maneuvaurable then a tank, as tanks only have to generate enough energy to propel them forward and backwards, while am airborne vehicle of similar weight and armor, would have to sacrifice the majority of its maneuvaurability to maintain VERTICLE lift, its horizontal movemt would be very slow\and or rather clunky and hard to handle. So, asking for one weapon to do less damage, is not only physics wise iimpossible, but also incapable of being argued that an airborne vehicle with the maneuvarability characteristics of a dropship, is better able to resist damage then a tank. Second, In modern military vehicles explosive resistance comes from reactive armor whihc is desighned to take a hit, and project the blast away from the vehicle as best it can. This usually takes the form of plates that fall off on impact, much like modern cars crumple zones that are used to guide the explosive impact into.a non deadly form. The majority of. These systems are one time use plating. In dust shields and hardners perform along a similar principle, deflecting the blast away as best it can within limits, and are then used up till restocked\recharged. Your a dropship, your ability to shrug off damage is much like a scouts; its not the ability to soak damage, but the ability to avoid damage, that gives you an edge. You already have an elevated position, stronger weapons and armor then any infantry, and are more maneuvaurable in all axises then anything else on the battlefield. If we really want a realistic damage profile, let's take the AT4 anti tank weapon used by the us military. It can one shot even our own Abrams. Then there is the javelin missle launcher, capable of targeting both ground and airborne targets, has homing capabilities, and also one shots anything on the modern battlefield. Even classic rpgs can one shot most tanks, and disable all know vehicles. The only difference is that most of the vehicle their used against are desighned to insure their passengers and pilots survival, the vehicle is almost always knocked out of commision by a single strike. Its to bad your derpships arnt desighned that way. Oh wait, nm; you guys always survive your dropship being destroyed unless we hunt you down on the ground. A very detailed summary that puts the argument into a realistic perspective. Do you have any additions for in game mechanics that could better reflect this, or more so balance vehicles in terms of damage taken vs AV fire. While I appreciate a good dose of realism OHKOing my HAV doesn't sounds like enjoyable gameplay given the proliferation of AV amongst players. Personally? No, I don't want one hit vehicles or av, even though I run av, it would take the joy out of the fight. But arguing that its illogical for a dropship with less ehp to take less damage then a tank. By that standard scouts should get damage mitigation vs light arms fire, and is very illogical Honestly I think they have their counter balance to swarms. I forge gun a lot, and do so coupled with proto swarmers and fellow forgers. I also know ads pilots from my corp who get taken down. Most of the time, I get an ads because they got cocky, impatient, or I just got plain lucky. If they pop their shield booster and injectors I rarely get them, and though swarms do get them, its usually bc their getting hit by three to four swarmers. If a single swarmer takes out an ads. Its bc they were flying stupid, and if they get taken out by multipeles? Well you shoot enough missles at anything its going to go down. Unfortunately everything has to have its counter, to ads, its swarms. Tanks, its forge guns, infantry, its anything. Its the coordination between them that decides the over all survivability. When we squad with out ads we instantly start seeking out threats against it. We have had target markers placed on forgersand proto swarms and scouts assasinate them, had them sniped, or just straight up had the ads"s door gunners jump out on em and merc em. Team work is op, and it goes both ways, be it running av or countering av. Proto Stompers Information Tap (x°x) tap
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11063	Posted - 2014.06.24 01:25:00 - [45] - Quote Great summary there. Really good stuff. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Scheneighnay McBob Cult of Gasai 5385	Posted - 2014.06.24 01:27:00 - [46] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger or tanks weaker but if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? Ah, I've been saying this for a while. Personally, I like the idea of nerfing the damage and buffing the range on swarms to make them more dropship-specific. pé¦pâ+pé¦pâ½pâäpâ¬pâ¦pé¦pâ¼pâ+pâêpü»sñ¬S+ïpéè
GeneralButtNaked Fatal Absolution 1223	Posted - 2014.06.24 01:44:00 - [47] - Quote Dropship pilot thinks his vehicle should take less damage than other vehicles from anti-vehicle weapons. Dropship pilot does not think being able to ******* fly is in any way a suitable compromise for lower eHP numbers. Seems reasonable. I should slap you with a trout. Real AV doesn't stop until all the tanks are dead.
Nevyn Tazinas Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2014.06.24 01:53:00 - [48] - Quote As a basic forge gunner, I can't kill ADS with just my forge gun. How I normally kill them if I'm on my own (I run solo, so I often just look for the other AV fire to team up on the fly), is I wait for them to get close to a building, hit them, and then watch them panic and crash into the building. Number of them this works on is pretty high, which says things. Mainly I have to settle for driving a good ADS pilot off, and if they come at me with missiles and I don't get a clean first shot on them, I'm normally toast despite having a heavy AV weapon in my hand. ADS Side gunners also make my life hell, unless I'm sniping in which case it's tac sniper rifle and snap away and watch them fall out. Long story short.... ADS are a pain to hit when flying smart with anything, and plenty tough enough. Your only one man, you shouldn't be invulnerable to anyone solo.
Chit Hoppened The Exemplars Top Men. 339	Posted - 2014.06.24 01:56:00 - [49] - Quote Are you talking about the Damage Profile each weapon does to each type of Vehicle? Kinda like how the HMG was changed to do better Damage vs LAVs? Bringing Heavy Metal to New Eden. Cannon Fever Representative
devonus durga Death Dea1ers 312	Posted - 2014.06.24 01:59:00 - [50] - Quote After some reading it seems some of the issues stems from the speed of the vollys from swarms. I can kind of understand that as by the time the first volley hits the second and possibly third volley are already locked on and on their way, giving little time to react or get away. if this is the issue (as I'm neither swarmer nor ads) perhaps a warning alarm once missles are in flight might be in order. This wouldn't really change core gameplay, but give ads a slightly better chance to react. The other option is to increase swarms travel speed while increasing their lock on time. This would not effectivly change dps if done correctly, but as the ds would be hit sooner they woud have more time to react before the second or third salvo. (Example: 1 second decrease in travel time plus 1 second increase in lock on time would give a ds 2 extra seconds to react, while not effecting the swarms dps. However it would negativly impact close range swarming, as the speed would have less of an advantage. Tap (x°x) tap

pyramidhead 420 Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 551	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:05:00 - [51] - Quote The dark cloud wrote: Not this crap again. Is it just my impression or since the armor dropships lost their godmode vs swarms you are complaining about AV ALOT more? Well its a hard world when crutches are beeing taken away. this little girl has been crying all along, its just, nobody sees it until recently.
Michael Arck 4847	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:10:00 - [52] - Quote lol @ the deleted posts. Archistrategos *Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain*
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1379	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:13:00 - [53] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. But a stinger causes different amounts of destruction to a helicopter and a tank. And judge has a point. The vehicle community has been saying this since 1.7 dropped. You can't balance AV on HAVs alone, because that throws off the balance for drop ships and LAVs. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Izlare Lenix Last VenDetta. Dark Taboo 715	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:16:00 - [54] - Quote I just hate how my 80k soma is sooooo much more survivable than my 500k incubis. Gun control is not about guns...it's about control. The only way to ensure freedom is by having the means to defend it.
GeneralButtNaked Fatal Absolution 1225	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:22:00 - [55] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: But a stinger causes different amounts of destruction to a helicopter and a tank. Because one of them is a tank. If Judge wants tank levels of resiliency, he can get out of the sky and DRIVE A TANK. What type of retardation is spreading through this place where this even needs a thread, let alone is coming from someone that for some reason people think is a reasonable voice? Are people here actually devolving into lower forms of intelligence as the community numbers decline? Kudos to everyone pointing out how absurd this is. Everyone in agreement with flyboy should give their head a shake. Real AV doesn't stop until all the tanks are dead.
GeneralButtNaked Fatal Absolution 1225	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:23:00 - [56] - Quote Izlare Lenix wrote: I just hate how my 80k soma is sooooo much more survivable than my 500k incubis. I just hate how my Madrugar can't fly. You don't balance by ISK. Real AV doesn't stop until all the tanks are dead.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11066	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:30:00 - [57] - Quote GeneralButtNaked wrote: Izlare Lenix wrote: I just hate how my 80k soma is sooooo much more survivable than my 500k incubis. I just hate how my Madrugar can't fly. You don't balance by ISK. No ISK balance emerges on the open market. We ourselves as players balance by ISK. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11066	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:32:00 - [58] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. But a stinger causes different amounts of destruction to a helicopter and a tank. And judge has a point. The vehicle community has been saying this since 1.7 dropped. You can't balance AV on HAVs alone, because that throws off the balance for drop ships and LAVs. Does it? Are not both hulls destroyed? And I have said vehicles needed to be balanced around static AV values. First of all I am not saying ADS can't have Resistances....... they are essentially T2 hulls. But we need to be prepared that if this becomes the case we must balance all T2 by this standard. You cannot arbitrarily give one hull a damage resistance. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Pvt Numnutz Watchdoge Explosives 1538	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:41:00 - [59] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Actually it doesn't. Stingers are designed to take down aircraft, which are far less armored than tanks. Aluminum frame vs 4 inch thick steel plate. I'm not sure if stingers can lock on to tanks. Even if it could it won't go for a tanks weak point like the javelin does, which is designed to take out tanks.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11067	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:45:00 - [60] - Quote Pvt Numnutz wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Actually it doesn't. Stingers are designed to take down aircraft, which are far less armored than tanks. Aluminum frame vs 4 inch thick steel plate. I'm not sure if stingers can lock on to tanks. Even if it could it won't go for a tanks weak point like the javelin does, which is designed to take out tanks. Fair call. Would a Javelin have been a better analogy? " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III

Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1382	Posted - 2014.06.24 02:51:00 - [61] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Actually it doesn't. Stingers are designed to take down aircraft, which are far less armored than tanks. Aluminum frame vs 4 inch thick steel plate. I'm not sure if stingers can lock on to tanks. Even if it could it won't go for a tanks weak point like the javelin does, which is designed to take out tanks. Fair call. Would a Javelin have been a better analogy? But a javelin can't hit air targets. Too fast. There's a reason there are two separate weapon systems. If we could use one for both, we would, it'd be cheaper. Swarms should be for drop ships. They do reduced damage to tanks. Forges should be for tanks. They do reduced damage to drop ships. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Miokai Zahou The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 302	Posted - 2014.06.24 03:14:00 - [62] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Actually it doesn't. Stingers are designed to take down aircraft, which are far less armored than tanks. Aluminum frame vs 4 inch thick steel plate. I'm not sure if stingers can lock on to tanks. Even if it could it won't go for a tanks weak point like the javelin does, which is designed to take out tanks. Fair call. Would a Javelin have been a better analogy? But a javelin can't hit air targets. Too fast. There's a reason there are two separate weapon systems. If we could use one for both, we would, it'd be cheaper. Swarms should be for drop ships. They do reduced damage to tanks. Forges should be for tanks. They do reduced damage to drop ships. But the resources alone would be too much for rattai to do all at once? It'll be better to just add one extra high slot for the pyhon and one extra low slot for the incubus and increase the cpu and power grid for both accordingly. This way the ADS has a bit more "tank" but still fragile enough to blow up from the AV community. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11068	Posted - 2014.06.24 03:23:00 - [63] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: Pvt Numnutz wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Actually it doesn't. Stingers are designed to take down aircraft, which are far less armored than tanks. Aluminum frame vs 4 inch thick steel plate. I'm not sure if stingers can lock on to tanks. Even if it could it won't go for a tanks weak point like the javelin does, which is designed to take out tanks. Fair call. Would a Javelin have been a better analogy? But a javelin can't hit air targets. Too fast. There's a reason there are two separate weapon systems. If we could use one for both, we would, it'd be cheaper. Swarms should be for drop ships. They do reduced damage to tanks. Forges should be for tanks. They do reduced damage to drop ships. So if I eyeballed a Javelin and hit and air target.......what would happen? " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 3308	Posted - 2014.06.24 03:39:00 - [64] - Quote To be honest the main issue is i think that there are no light and heavy aircrafts (like the icons on loading screens indicate). Normal dropships are just missused for jobs which they just arent originally intended for (ADS for example). If there would be something like a gunship then we wouldnt have this silly discussion if swarms should deal the same damage. But meh CCP gave up on client side updates which means no more vehicles ever.
Ghost Kaisar The Last of DusT. General Tso's Alliance 5423	Posted - 2014.06.24 03:42:00 - [65] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? It wouldn't be balanced if tanks could FLY That Crazy Minmatar Fanatic Stabbing Heavies for the Republic since Uprising 1.1 PSN: EVL_Elgost105
medomai grey WarRavens Final Resolution. 839	Posted - 2014.06.24 04:01:00 - [66] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. ...REALY? HAVs are heavy vehicles, dropships are medium vehicles, LAVs are light vehicles. Why should a dropship be able to take the same punishment as a tank? Corrected swarm damage efficiency against incubus was not random. The 80/120 damage modifier is the norm for explosives. I say no thank you to creating special damage modifiers for dropships to give same survivability as a tank. What'll be next, LAVs with the same survivability of a tank? You can't say no with the argument you just made because the argument also applies to LAVs. Judge Rhadamanthus, you've let me down. Medium frame EHP is not medium
Argetlam Thorson Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 75	Posted - 2014.06.24 04:02:00 - [67] - Quote Harpyja wrote: CCP could've made EVERY vehicle have 2000 EHP, with the only variable be resistance. LAVs: 0%, Dropships: 25%, HAVs: 50%. But they didn't. Would've had the same effect as the current design, but they didn't and I like the current design better. You're confusing raw HP with eHP. Raw HP is the number of hit points you get. EHP is the number when you take into account resistances. If they all have 2000 eHP it would take exactly the same amount of damage taken to destroy them. If they all had 2000 raw HP, then with the damage resistances you suggested, we would see a similar system to what is in place now, where Tanks have more EHP (i.e. easier to destroy) and LAV's have less EHP making them easier to destroy.
Echo 1991 WarRavens Final Resolution. 329	Posted - 2014.06.24 04:06:00 - [68] - Quote I love how before AV was complete crap none of you DS pilots said anything about the swarm launcher but now that it can hurt you you want to nerf It. Sad part is that the swarm hasn't even been buffed bugs just got fixed. If your ships had more fitting room and an extra relavent slot you could get more HP. That's the problem not AV damage, you have fits that have 2500 HP and complain you can't 'tank' AV.
medomai grey WarRavens Final Resolution. 839	Posted - 2014.06.24 04:30:00 - [69] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: I love how before AV was complete crap none of you DS pilots said anything about the swarm launcher but now that it can hurt you you want to nerf It. Sad part is that the swarm hasn't even been buffed bugs just got fixed. If your ships had more fitting room and an extra relavent slot you could get more HP. That's the problem not AV damage, you have fits that have 2500 HP and complain you can't 'tank' AV. o/ I said lower tier swarms were under performing. And although I've acknowledged that my python is squishy, I have never made a case for it getting more EHP. Please don't group me with "those" people. Medium frame EHP is not medium
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11081	Posted - 2014.06.24 04:39:00 - [70] - Quote medomai grey wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: I love how before AV was complete crap none of you DS pilots said anything about the swarm launcher but now that it can hurt you you want to nerf It. Sad part is that the swarm hasn't even been buffed bugs just got fixed. If your ships had more fitting room and an extra relavent slot you could get more HP. That's the problem not AV damage, you have fits that have 2500 HP and complain you can't 'tank' AV. o/ I said lower tier swarms were under performing. And although I've acknowledged that my python is squishy, I have never made a case for it getting more EHP. Please don't group me with "those" people. Lol like every AVer groups me in with Spkr and Taka........ you just have to HTFU because they won't. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III

Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1384	Posted - 2014.06.24 05:09:00 - [71] - Quote True Adamance wrote: So if I eyeballed a Javelin and hit and air target.......what would happen? The javelin wouldn't fire. It requires a lock before the missile is released. And aircraft are too small and move too much for them to get one. Even if they did manage a lock, the missile is not near maneuverable enough nor fast enough to catch up. Even if the universe conspired against the pilot and made the missile hit, its made to break through thick tank armor. There's a chance the thin aluminum that aircraft use wouldn't be hard enough to set the charge off. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect 1395	Posted - 2014.06.24 07:13:00 - [72] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. Tanks - can tank damage=slow ground vehicle with high HP. Dropships - can avoid damage=fast aerial vehicle with low HP. I think the problem is just that you're used to hovering indefinitely while you farm infantry, tanking every swarm that comes your way without ever having to fall back. This was never supposed to happen and was only possible due to a bug with the resistances. Now you often have to withdraw in the face of AV. Fortunately, you have the massive advantage of extreme speed and manoeuvrability. That is what the main defence of dropships was always supposed to be, not extreme tankability.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11088	Posted - 2014.06.24 07:34:00 - [73] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: So if I eyeballed a Javelin and hit and air target.......what would happen? The javelin wouldn't fire. It requires a lock before the missile is released. And aircraft are too small and move too much for them to get one. Even if they did manage a lock, the missile is not near maneuverable enough nor fast enough to catch up. Even if the universe conspired against the pilot and made the missile hit, its made to break through thick tank armor. There's a chance the thin aluminum that aircraft use wouldn't be hard enough to set the charge off. Okay now THIS SPECIAL JAVELIN that does fire (AKA forgegun) hits a helicopter. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Derpty Derp It's All Gone Derp 189	Posted - 2014.06.24 08:36:00 - [74] - Quote I'll be honest, I'd just like to be able to see things from the air, otherwise it's really not the 'advantage' everyone makes it out to be... half the maps have no cover so you're pretty much a sitting... well flying (i suppose) duck. I can hit things from max range most of the time, I do it against fast moving jeeps all the time, now if I could just have dropsuits actually render at that range, it would be fine and we could stand a chance against the av. Also nerf swarm lockon, it's stupidly easy and the damage isn't okay for something that easy to fit and use. The hp/damage recieved is fine, brick tanking a Grimsnes can annoy the **** out of any av on the ground.
lunatis orrak Battlefield Brawlers 30	Posted - 2014.06.24 10:37:00 - [75] - Quote Took out three tanks yesterday out of my python turns out few of these tankers have little skill if they cant rep themselve all the way to the redline. CHUBBY CHASER FOR LIFE `!BEWARE MY FAT BULLDOGS! The leash is not for your protection`
Alpha 443-6732 BurgezzE.T.F 525	Posted - 2014.06.24 10:53:00 - [76] - Quote Please tell me this isn't the real judge that made this thread. Please tell me it's one of his imposters
Jack Galen Vanguardian Remnant 3	Posted - 2014.06.24 11:05:00 - [77] - Quote As an experienced pilot, I think we are the closest to a balance we have ever been. Now, in my ads, if the infantry/vehicles deem me a threat and adapt to fight back, I have to be very careful. However, if they let their guard down, I can still pwn them, fulfilling the assault role. An example is when a squad wants one tank/group taken care of. I can get in, kill it/them and get out, but if I don't show the utmost care or I linger afterwards and get greedy, I get popped. CCP GOT GUD. The only thing I would ask is to have a bit more survivability on Std transport ships, or to have logi ships back, just to be able to pick people up from heated zones and fulfil a support role with out getting screwed every time That, and don't get me started on rendering Still, I'm happy where we stand, and I think we all should be. TL;DR get a grip judge, dropships are not havs.
Alpha 443-6732 BurgezzE.T.F 526	Posted - 2014.06.24 11:10:00 - [78] - Quote I want to believe...
Jack Galen Vanguardian Remnant 3	Posted - 2014.06.24 11:14:00 - [79] - Quote medomai grey wrote: Please don't group me with "those" people. Good lord, this. I hate the reputation we've been given from lol-I-WIN pilots.
The-DON of-DOT-MAFIA The DOT MAFIA 36	Posted - 2014.06.24 11:19:00 - [80] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? fair?..lol i want a flying tank with a 120mm smooth bore.

Jack Galen Vanguardian Remnant 3	Posted - 2014.06.24 11:30:00 - [81] - Quote The-DON of-DOT-MAFIA wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? fair?..lol i want a flying tank with a 120mm smooth bore. Can you imagine...an incubus with an 80GJ PA? That's the biggest case of lolOP I've ever seen! Would be fun though
Schecter 666 73	Posted - 2014.06.24 11:38:00 - [82] - Quote 1. This would be extremely difficult to implement. 2. Such an update will not happen as dust has barely anyone working on 3. What you're trying to say is your dropship should take less damage than tanks. Swarms are already pointless against dropships Get out
RogueTrooper 2000AD Neckbeard Absolution 98	Posted - 2014.06.24 11:40:00 - [83] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? So you want a drop ship to be as effective a tank that fly's. Service with a smile
Mors The Butcher Red Star. EoN. 20	Posted - 2014.06.24 13:33:00 - [84] - Quote judge knows tankers can kill him still and av so he wants a huge buff to his ads because hes a bad pilot and when ever he comes a cross Takahiro Kashuken or Spker4thedead he leaves its hilarious I'M SORRY..... I'M SORRY FOR EVERYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED TO YOU... ....AND EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO YOU
Harpyja Legio DXIV 1924	Posted - 2014.06.24 13:42:00 - [85] - Quote Argetlam Thorson wrote: Harpyja wrote: CCP could've made EVERY vehicle have 2000 EHP, with the only variable be resistance. LAVs: 0%, Dropships: 25%, HAVs: 50%. But they didn't. Would've had the same effect as the current design, but they didn't and I like the current design better. You're confusing raw HP with eHP. Raw HP is the number of hit points you get. EHP is the number when you take into account resistances. If they all have 2000 eHP it would take exactly the same amount of damage taken to destroy them. If they all had 2000 raw HP, then with the damage resistances you suggested, we would see a similar system to what is in place now, where Tanks have more EHP (i.e. easier to destroy) and LAV's have less EHP making them easier to destroy. Fine fine fine, that's just a technicality, but you got my point. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Mobius Wyvern Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 5303	Posted - 2014.06.24 14:03:00 - [86] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. NO it does not. Lemme stop you right there. Anti-air missiles are almost all designed with fragmentation warheads that detonate by proximity and not contact. A dedicated anti-tank missile usually uses a shaped-charge explosive that heats a metal "penetrator" and forces it to melt through the hull on contact to destroy the tank from the inside. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Atiim NoGameNoLife 9795	Posted - 2014.06.24 18:04:00 - [87] - Quote Miokai Zahou wrote: Just give the ADS an increase to cpu and power grid and also one extra high/low slot. Done fixed. You mean broken beyond all belief? I want SLAVs, not SLAVEs. "Many things in life are subjective, morality is one of them..." -HAND
CommanderBolt ACME SPECIAL FORCES RISE of LEGION 1172	Posted - 2014.06.24 18:33:00 - [88] - Quote I feel dropships are in a great spot right now. I can only speak from experience with the Python (Caldari shield dropship) however I will die if I stick around decent AV, swarms or the forge both work. I do however have a problem with Vehicle Collision damage and how it is seemingly different depending on the vehicle. Investigate 9/11
Teba Gan da durrty dozenz 0	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:01:00 - [89] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. Yeah, I have never understood this. Damage application should be seperated, or at the very least modules should be seperated into air and ground. Much like the afterburner.
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 3047	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:11:00 - [90] - Quote This thread is just baffling in how it goes against common sense

Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 175	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:18:00 - [91] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Are you just pulling damage and resistance numbers from thin air? Because that is what it looks like. the only place in ccp where the air in not thin is in the dev's heads.... the air is quite thick there
ANDRONICUS TITUS Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:22:00 - [92] - Quote How do I shoot while piloting an assault dropship? Even though I have seen most of Judge Rhadamanthus videos on YouTube, I can't find one that talks about shooting as a pilot. I have used logistics dropships but apparently theres are only assault ones now.
Argetlam Thorson Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 78	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:23:00 - [93] - Quote Accidental repost.
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 3047	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:24:00 - [94] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: So if I eyeballed a Javelin and hit and air target.......what would happen? The javelin wouldn't fire. It requires a lock before the missile is released. And aircraft are too small and move too much for them to get one. Even if they did manage a lock, the missile is not near maneuverable enough nor fast enough to catch up. Even if the universe conspired against the pilot and made the missile hit, its made to break through thick tank armor. There's a chance the thin aluminum that aircraft use wouldn't be hard enough to set the charge off. Okay now THIS SPECIAL JAVELIN that does fire (AKA forgegun) hits a helicopter. Theoretically a fire ball and twisted scrap, remember this is ordnance designed to bust tanks and aircraft are all generally far far less armored since they need to fly and heavy armor runs counter to that Hell did you know a harrier jet isnt even bullet proof to small arms fire
Cat Merc Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 10417	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:31:00 - [95] - Quote Dropships can escape a lot easier and in 3D space. Tanks have 2D space, so that already limits their possible escape routes, and then smart AV players can attack in a location where there is no escape from them. Dropships can always escape if they know what they're doing. Hence tanks compensate for that with having much more HP. If a tank had the HP of a dropship, it would get instagibbed off the battlefield in no time. Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1392	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:32:00 - [96] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: So if I eyeballed a Javelin and hit and air target.......what would happen? The javelin wouldn't fire. It requires a lock before the missile is released. And aircraft are too small and move too much for them to get one. Even if they did manage a lock, the missile is not near maneuverable enough nor fast enough to catch up. Even if the universe conspired against the pilot and made the missile hit, its made to break through thick tank armor. There's a chance the thin aluminum that aircraft use wouldn't be hard enough to set the charge off. Okay now THIS SPECIAL JAVELIN that does fire (AKA forgegun) hits a helicopter. This special javelin would pass through, leaving a javelin missile sized hole in the hull. The only problem it would cause is if it hit something vital, like the rotor or the engine. Otherwise, the aircraft would continue on with a small hole in it like nothing happened. Or, more likely, the missile would bounce off the hull, leaving a nasty dent, and then land on the ground and sit there until something hit it hard enough to go off. As for the forge gun, I think it should be reworked into a javelin missile type weapon, which is still in line with Caldari philosophy who focus on missiles and supplement with rails. However, I have a workaround for reduced forge damage to drop ships. "The drop ship has a graviton field that surrounds the entire vehicle, which redirects unguided charges away from the drop ship, turning good hits into glancing blows, or even complete misses. This effectively reduces the damage an unguided projectile can do, although guided munitions can correct for the field and still impact the target." Now swarms can add to their description: "The missiles are made to detonate right before impact, ripping through light shields and armor. However, this causes problems when going against heavier defenses, as the lack of penetration means it has reduced effectiveness against thicker shields and armor." Now the two AV weapons have what they are good at. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Cat Merc Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 10417	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:34:00 - [97] - Quote Just FYI: Javelins can't even hit moving GROUND targets properly. It's quite lucky if one hits. So air targets? lolno Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 15602	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:42:00 - [98] - Quote I honestly think we need to stay away from vehicle specific weapon profiles for a bit. HP adjusting better solution for now. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Gallente Logistics =// Unlocked
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1393	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:43:00 - [99] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: So if I eyeballed a Javelin and hit and air target.......what would happen? The javelin wouldn't fire. It requires a lock before the missile is released. And aircraft are too small and move too much for them to get one. Even if they did manage a lock, the missile is not near maneuverable enough nor fast enough to catch up. Even if the universe conspired against the pilot and made the missile hit, its made to break through thick tank armor. There's a chance the thin aluminum that aircraft use wouldn't be hard enough to set the charge off. Okay now THIS SPECIAL JAVELIN that does fire (AKA forgegun) hits a helicopter. Theoretically a fire ball and twisted scrap, remember this is ordnance designed to bust tanks and aircraft are all generally far far less armored since they need to fly and heavy armor runs counter to that Hell did you know a harrier jet isnt even bullet proof to small arms fire This is where you are wrong. It would either pass through the hull, or simply bounce off. I'm making up numbers to demonstrate a point. Let's say a javelin needs 5,000 units of force to set the charge off. Thats fine against heavy tank armor, but aircraft aluminum, which is much thinner, gives way at 1,000 units of force. Thus, the metal will give before the required amount of force can be applied to the charge to set it off, leading to the first situation I told True Adamance about. The second situation, which is more realistic, is because the missile doesn't have enough fuel and speed to pierce through much of anything, relying on the charge to do the piercing for it. If the charge is not detonated, the missile wouldn't have enough force to pierce the hull under its own power, and would thus bounce off, leaving a nasty dent. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11116	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:53:00 - [100] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Delta 749 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: So if I eyeballed a Javelin and hit and air target.......what would happen? The javelin wouldn't fire. It requires a lock before the missile is released. And aircraft are too small and move too much for them to get one. Even if they did manage a lock, the missile is not near maneuverable enough nor fast enough to catch up. Even if the universe conspired against the pilot and made the missile hit, its made to break through thick tank armor. There's a chance the thin aluminum that aircraft use wouldn't be hard enough to set the charge off. Okay now THIS SPECIAL JAVELIN that does fire (AKA forgegun) hits a helicopter. Theoretically a fire ball and twisted scrap, remember this is ordnance designed to bust tanks and aircraft are all generally far far less armored since they need to fly and heavy armor runs counter to that Hell did you know a harrier jet isnt even bullet proof to small arms fire This is where you are wrong. It would either pass through the hull, or simply bounce off. I'm making up numbers to demonstrate a point. Let's say a javelin needs 5,000 units of force to set the charge off. Thats fine against heavy tank armor, but aircraft aluminum, which is much thinner, gives way at 1,000 units of force. Thus, the metal will give before the required amount of force can be applied to the charge to set it off, leading to the first situation I told True Adamance about. The second situation, which is more realistic, is because the missile doesn't have enough fuel and speed to pierce through much of anything, relying on the charge to do the piercing for it. If the charge is not detonated, the missile wouldn't have enough force to pierce the hull under its own power, and would thus bounce off, leaving a nasty dent. Thank you for explaining that.....though that is in terms of missiles......... not mass accelerated slugs. Not that I disagree with you, you have made your point. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III

Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 3047	Posted - 2014.06.24 20:58:00 - [101] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Delta 749 wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: True Adamance wrote: So if I eyeballed a Javelin and hit and air target.......what would happen? The javelin wouldn't fire. It requires a lock before the missile is released. And aircraft are too small and move too much for them to get one. Even if they did manage a lock, the missile is not near maneuverable enough nor fast enough to catch up. Even if the universe conspired against the pilot and made the missile hit, its made to break through thick tank armor. There's a chance the thin aluminum that aircraft use wouldn't be hard enough to set the charge off. Okay now THIS SPECIAL JAVELIN that does fire (AKA forgegun) hits a helicopter. Theoretically a fire ball and twisted scrap, remember this is ordnance designed to bust tanks and aircraft are all generally far far less armored since they need to fly and heavy armor runs counter to that Hell did you know a harrier jet isnt even bullet proof to small arms fire This is where you are wrong. It would either pass through the hull, or simply bounce off. I'm making up numbers to demonstrate a point. Let's say a javelin needs 5,000 units of force to set the charge off. Thats fine against heavy tank armor, but aircraft aluminum, which is much thinner, gives way at 1,000 units of force. Thus, the metal will give before the required amount of force can be applied to the charge to set it off, leading to the first situation I told True Adamance about. The second situation, which is more realistic, is because the missile doesn't have enough fuel and speed to pierce through much of anything, relying on the charge to do the piercing for it. If the charge is not detonated, the missile wouldn't have enough force to pierce the hull under its own power, and would thus bounce off, leaving a nasty dent. Only hes talking in theory and asking what the charge of a javelin would do to an air craft so all your rambling about "it wouldnt go off because" is moot since it doesnt address what hes asking IE how much damage, theoretically, would an anti tank weapon do to an air craft which is significantly weaker
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11116	Posted - 2014.06.24 21:04:00 - [102] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: Only hes talking in theory and asking what the charge of a javelin would do to an air craft so all your rambling about "it wouldnt go off because" is moot since it doesnt address what hes asking IE how much damage, theoretically, would an anti tank weapon do to an air craft which is significantly weaker That was my point. perhaps I should have established what kind of damage the payload of an Anti Tank missile would do to the hull of an aerial vehicle. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1393	Posted - 2014.06.24 21:08:00 - [103] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: Only hes talking in theory and asking what the charge of a javelin would do to an air craft so all your rambling about "it wouldnt go off because" is moot since it doesnt address what hes asking IE how much damage, theoretically, would an anti tank weapon do to an air craft which is significantly weaker Again, not much. Let's assume the round goes off, by some miracle. The way javelins pierce armor is by superheating metal, usually copper, and then forcing that liquid metal into a stream, which effectively melts a small hole through the armor. The average penetration depth is 20 inches of armor, and should it pierce all the way through, it will incinerate the tank crew inside. If it hit an aicraft, anything directly in front of the charge would be melted and useless. About the same damage would be done with the 1st situation with the javelin shaped hole, which is also the more likely scenario if a forge gun hit an aircraft. And again, I gave a workaround for forges doing reduced drop ship damage, letting them be able to be adjusted to tank slaying, and a workaround for swarms doing reduced damage to tanks, letting them be balanced against drop ships. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 15603	Posted - 2014.06.24 21:14:00 - [104] - Quote Also you guys to realize that there is a fragmentation warhead that is used in javelins that is very similar to fragmentation methods used for killing aircraft. Though mostly this is used for killing anything that isn't armored while it would still technically work just as good killing most commonly engaged armor targets. Javelins are not suited for jets due to the short range though and slow speeds but things like gunships and helicopters are more than plausible targets as long as it has a strong IF signal to which just about every helo in the world has. I mean this is no different than shooting a javelin at a tank on top of a hill. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Gallente Logistics =// Unlocked
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11116	Posted - 2014.06.24 21:17:00 - [105] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Delta 749 wrote: Only hes talking in theory and asking what the charge of a javelin would do to an air craft so all your rambling about "it wouldnt go off because" is moot since it doesnt address what hes asking IE how much damage, theoretically, would an anti tank weapon do to an air craft which is significantly weaker Again, not much. Let's assume the round goes off, by some miracle. The way javelins pierce armor is by superheating metal, usually copper, and then forcing that liquid metal into a stream, which effectively melts a small hole through the armor. The average penetration depth is 20 inches of armor, and should it pierce all the way through, it will incinerate the tank crew inside. If it hit an aicraft, anything directly in front of the charge would be melted and useless. About the same damage would be done with the 1st situation with the javelin shaped hole, which is also the more likely scenario if a forge gun hit an aircraft. And again, I gave a workaround for forges doing reduced drop ship damage, letting them be able to be adjusted to tank slaying, and a workaround for swarms doing reduced damage to tanks, letting them be independently balanced against drop ships. While I see your points I do not understand why ADS need more durability when they have the abilities of Mobility, Flight, high DPS, and moderate shielding and armour. In most other FPS the fire power and flight capabilities of a helicopter is balanced by the lack of durability of the vehicle. A dropship is not designed to be a sky tank, and is specifically designated as a medium aerial vehicle. I mean slight buffs could be given to Gallentean resistance types, and Caldari resistance types, for the hull as long as those same buffs are applied to all tech 2 vehicle hulls in future. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1393	Posted - 2014.06.24 21:37:00 - [106] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Delta 749 wrote: Only hes talking in theory and asking what the charge of a javelin would do to an air craft so all your rambling about "it wouldnt go off because" is moot since it doesnt address what hes asking IE how much damage, theoretically, would an anti tank weapon do to an air craft which is significantly weaker Again, not much. Let's assume the round goes off, by some miracle. The way javelins pierce armor is by superheating metal, usually copper, and then forcing that liquid metal into a stream, which effectively melts a small hole through the armor. The average penetration depth is 20 inches of armor, and should it pierce all the way through, it will incinerate the tank crew inside. If it hit an aicraft, anything directly in front of the charge would be melted and useless. About the same damage would be done with the 1st situation with the javelin shaped hole, which is also the more likely scenario if a forge gun hit an aircraft. And again, I gave a workaround for forges doing reduced drop ship damage, letting them be able to be adjusted to tank slaying, and a workaround for swarms doing reduced damage to tanks, letting them be independently balanced against drop ships. While I see your points I do not understand why ADS need more durability when they have the abilities of Mobility, Flight, high DPS, and moderate shielding and armour. In most other FPS the fire power and flight capabilities of a helicopter is balanced by the lack of durability of the vehicle. A dropship is not designed to be a sky tank, and is specifically designated as a medium aerial vehicle. I mean slight buffs could be given to Gallentean resistance types, and Caldari resistance types, for the hull as long as those same buffs are applied to all tech 2 vehicle hulls in future. What I think should happen is that swarms be for light vehicle destruction, like LAVs and drop ships, and forges be for tanks. Imagine if we balanced the assault rifle based on sentinel HP values. It would then be very imbalanced against mediums and light suits. By separating the two with appropriate damage resistances (swarms lose damage against tanks, forges lose damage against drop ships/labs) means we can balance v/av easier, because if we balance everything on the highest HP and ehp vehicles, then the lighter vehicles get shafted. This way, if tank v/av balance is out of whack, then we adjust the forge gun alone, which doesn't imbalance the forge gun vs drop ships and labs. If drop ship v/av needs tweaking, then we adjust swarms, which then doesn't throw tanks out of whack. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1393	Posted - 2014.06.24 21:41:00 - [107] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Also you guys to realize that there is a fragmentation warhead that is used in javelins that is very similar to fragmentation methods used for killing aircraft. Though mostly this is used for killing anything that isn't armored while it would still technically work just as good killing most commonly engaged armor targets. Javelins are not suited for jets due to the short range though and slow speeds but things like gunships and helicopters are more than plausible targets as long as it has a strong IF signal to which just about every helo in the world has. I mean this is no different than shooting a javelin at a tank on top of a hill. and ultimately if you expect it to do something out in the field you just created a demand for another contract; Things can get developed if they persistently become an issue to soldiers. Tanks have a much higher IF than choppers do, meaning its harder for a javelin to lock them, and like I said before, the missile doesn't have the speed or maneuverability to hit a chopper. Even if it did, aircraft grade aluminum is not hard enough to set off the charge. Plus, choppers have flares and such to throw off anti air missiles, which we are sorely lacking. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 15603	Posted - 2014.06.24 21:51:00 - [108] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Also you guys to realize that there is a fragmentation warhead that is used in javelins that is very similar to fragmentation methods used for killing aircraft. Though mostly this is used for killing anything that isn't armored while it would still technically work just as good killing most commonly engaged armor targets. Javelins are not suited for jets due to the short range though and slow speeds but things like gunships and helicopters are more than plausible targets as long as it has a strong IF signal to which just about every helo in the world has. I mean this is no different than shooting a javelin at a tank on top of a hill. and ultimately if you expect it to do something out in the field you just created a demand for another contract; Things can get developed if they persistently become an issue to soldiers. Tanks have a much higher IF than choppers do, meaning its harder for a javelin to lock them, and like I said before, the missile doesn't have the speed or maneuverability to hit a chopper. Even if it did, aircraft grade aluminum is not hard enough to set off the charge. Plus, choppers have flares and such to throw off anti air missiles, which we are sorely lacking. Slight problems. Javelins are pure IR. How would a helo pilot know he was being locked onto and fired upon? Unless he saw the missile separation he wouldn't know to launch flares and if you're using a top down attack he's just as prone to must humans to not looking up. His war is beneath him usually. As proven through the entire cold war, lack of training and experience does not make a technologically superior position immune to technologically inferior methods in hands of highly experienced personnel. So the whole agility argument goes out the window soon as a chopper pilot is caught idling somewhere to probably gun down your friends across the street. Also the IR signal from a helo is near the engine exhaust which on most helicopters is on the top or the tail rotor. The fragmentation warhead was specifically designed to frag against very soft targets not penetrate so even a near proximity causes it to go off for max effect. Finally Structural Paneling made with Aircraft Aluminium Grade is strong enough from most directions of impact to set most detonators off. There are exceptionally very few helicopters that can eat an anti tank munition anyways, the HInd being the only one off the top of my head due to the compartmentalized firewalls. Also if you want to attack a chopper, you do it from the top is the best way to do it. total lack of armor and generally that is where the engines are located. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Gallente Logistics =// Unlocked
Izlare Lenix BATTLE SURVEY GROUP Dark Taboo 715	Posted - 2014.06.24 21:58:00 - [109] - Quote True Adamance wrote: GeneralButtNaked wrote: Izlare Lenix wrote: I just hate how my 80k soma is sooooo much more survivable than my 500k incubis. I just hate how my Madrugar can't fly. You don't balance by ISK. No ISK balance emerges on the open market. We ourselves as players balance by ISK. It's not just about isk. I have millions of SP invested in ADS, yet a militia tank takes zero sp and doesn't die as easily. Rdvs, mccs, null cannon missiles, buildings, the ground or ramming drop ships don't insta kill tanks like they do ADS. now reps are weaker and swarms were buffed so now just about everything can quickly kill ADS. it's at the point again where flying ADS is not with it again. Very similar to when 600m red line rail tanks made ADS unflyable on many maps. Gun control is not about guns...it's about control. The only way to ensure freedom is by having the means to defend it.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11119	Posted - 2014.06.24 22:02:00 - [110] - Quote Izlare Lenix wrote: True Adamance wrote: GeneralButtNaked wrote: Izlare Lenix wrote: I just hate how my 80k soma is sooooo much more survivable than my 500k incubis. I just hate how my Madrugar can't fly. You don't balance by ISK. No ISK balance emerges on the open market. We ourselves as players balance by ISK. It's not just about isk. I have millions of SP invested in ADS, yet a militia tank takes zero sp and doesn't die as easily. Rdvs, mccs, null cannon missiles, buildings, the ground or ramming drop ships don't insta kill tanks like they do ADS. now reps are weaker and swarms were buffed so now just about everything can quickly kill ADS. it's at the point again where flying ADS is not worth it again. Very similar to when 600m red line rail tanks made ADS unflyable on many maps. But an MLT would and can destroy a 20 Million SP HAV with little issue, your MLT dropships can't fire back....unless they switch to cruise missile mode. I have issues against AV like you, I have issues with cloaked RE scouts, JLAV, ADS skill stackers, reps are weaker, hell even I lose 1 in 5 HAV to a idiotic RDV pilot. You think your vehicle class is the only one that has problems? Wake up. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III

Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1393	Posted - 2014.06.24 22:11:00 - [111] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Also you guys to realize that there is a fragmentation warhead that is used in javelins that is very similar to fragmentation methods used for killing aircraft. Though mostly this is used for killing anything that isn't armored while it would still technically work just as good killing most commonly engaged armor targets. Javelins are not suited for jets due to the short range though and slow speeds but things like gunships and helicopters are more than plausible targets as long as it has a strong IF signal to which just about every helo in the world has. I mean this is no different than shooting a javelin at a tank on top of a hill. and ultimately if you expect it to do something out in the field you just created a demand for another contract; Things can get developed if they persistently become an issue to soldiers. Tanks have a much higher IF than choppers do, meaning its harder for a javelin to lock them, and like I said before, the missile doesn't have the speed or maneuverability to hit a chopper. Even if it did, aircraft grade aluminum is not hard enough to set off the charge. Plus, choppers have flares and such to throw off anti air missiles, which we are sorely lacking. Slight problems. Javelins are pure IR. How would a helo pilot know he was being locked onto and fired upon? Unless he saw the missile separation he wouldn't know to launch flares and if you're using a top down attack he's just as prone to must humans to not looking up. His war is beneath him usually. As proven through the entire cold war, lack of training and experience does not make a technologically superior position immune to technologically inferior methods in hands of highly experienced personnel. So the whole agility argument goes out the window soon as a chopper pilot is caught idling somewhere to probably gun down your friends across the street. Also the IR signal from a helo is near the engine exhaust which on most helicopters is on the top or the tail rotor. The fragmentation warhead was specifically designed to frag against very soft targets not penetrate so even a near proximity causes it to go off for max effect. Finally Structural Paneling made with Aircraft Aluminium Grade is strong enough from most directions of impact to set most detonators off. There are exceptionally very few helicopters that can eat an anti tank munition anyways, the HInd being the only one off the top of my head due to the compartmentalized firewalls. Also if you want to attack a chopper, you do it from the top is the best way to do it. total lack of armor and generally that is where the engines are located. Again, because jevelins are not fast or ma euverabke. Real life chopper pilots do not hover in one spot and rain death. They are always moving, always. This is because the most prevalent threat they face is an RPG, which is an unguided munition, and it is certainly easier to hit a stationary target than a moving one. Even then, a chopper does not have enough of an IR signature to get a lock. The only way to hit a chopper with one is to manually aim the rocket at a chopper, which as stated above, is difficult to do. Also, the fragmentation charge you mentioned does not use fragments. There are two charges. A precursor charge to detonate any reactive armor on the tank, and the penetrative charge that functions as I've described. As choppers do not have reactive armor, the precursor does next to nothing, because the explosion is not big enough to physically damage the chopper. EDIT: And as I pointed out, the forge gun does not use explosive charges, so the comparison doesn't hold up. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 14816	Posted - 2014.06.24 22:12:00 - [112] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic. If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks. Surely the statement that the vehicles have different effective hitpoints already implies that they're tanking different levels of damage? Should a dropship really take exactly the same amount of punishment as a tank? You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake. Polka will never die.
Izlare Lenix BATTLE SURVEY GROUP Dark Taboo 715	Posted - 2014.06.24 22:15:00 - [113] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Izlare Lenix wrote: True Adamance wrote: GeneralButtNaked wrote: Izlare Lenix wrote: I just hate how my 80k soma is sooooo much more survivable than my 500k incubis. I just hate how my Madrugar can't fly. You don't balance by ISK. No ISK balance emerges on the open market. We ourselves as players balance by ISK. It's not just about isk. I have millions of SP invested in ADS, yet a militia tank takes zero sp and doesn't die as easily. Rdvs, mccs, null cannon missiles, buildings, the ground or ramming drop ships don't insta kill tanks like they do ADS. now reps are weaker and swarms were buffed so now just about everything can quickly kill ADS. it's at the point again where flying ADS is not worth it again. Very similar to when 600m red line rail tanks made ADS unflyable on many maps. But an MLT would and can destroy a 20 Million SP HAV with little issue, your MLT dropships can't fire back....unless they switch to cruise missile mode. I have issues against AV like you, I have issues with cloaked RE scouts, JLAV, ADS skill stackers, reps are weaker, hell even I lose 1 in 5 HAV to a idiotic RDV pilot. You think your vehicle class is the only one that has problems? Wake up. Tanking its so easy compared to ADS. You wake up. This game is flooded with tankers yet good ADS pilots are rare. I can get so many more kills with a blaster soma than with full proto incubis. ADS pilots have to deal with everything tanks deal with plus a lot more. If an enemy could simply call in a bpo lav, causing the RDV to insta kill a 500k tank you tankers would have your panties in a twist. You would kick and scream until it got changed just like how the way jihad lavs were changed to please tankers. Yet a milita DS can still tap and kill my ADS. Gun control is not about guns...it's about control. The only way to ensure freedom is by having the means to defend it.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 15603	Posted - 2014.06.24 22:15:00 - [114] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Also you guys to realize that there is a fragmentation warhead that is used in javelins that is very similar to fragmentation methods used for killing aircraft. Though mostly this is used for killing anything that isn't armored while it would still technically work just as good killing most commonly engaged armor targets. Javelins are not suited for jets due to the short range though and slow speeds but things like gunships and helicopters are more than plausible targets as long as it has a strong IF signal to which just about every helo in the world has. I mean this is no different than shooting a javelin at a tank on top of a hill. and ultimately if you expect it to do something out in the field you just created a demand for another contract; Things can get developed if they persistently become an issue to soldiers. Tanks have a much higher IF than choppers do, meaning its harder for a javelin to lock them, and like I said before, the missile doesn't have the speed or maneuverability to hit a chopper. Even if it did, aircraft grade aluminum is not hard enough to set off the charge. Plus, choppers have flares and such to throw off anti air missiles, which we are sorely lacking. Slight problems. Javelins are pure IR. How would a helo pilot know he was being locked onto and fired upon? Unless he saw the missile separation he wouldn't know to launch flares and if you're using a top down attack he's just as prone to must humans to not looking up. His war is beneath him usually. As proven through the entire cold war, lack of training and experience does not make a technologically superior position immune to technologically inferior methods in hands of highly experienced personnel. So the whole agility argument goes out the window soon as a chopper pilot is caught idling somewhere to probably gun down your friends across the street. Also the IR signal from a helo is near the engine exhaust which on most helicopters is on the top or the tail rotor. The fragmentation warhead was specifically designed to frag against very soft targets not penetrate so even a near proximity causes it to go off for max effect. Finally Structural Paneling made with Aircraft Aluminium Grade is strong enough from most directions of impact to set most detonators off. There are exceptionally very few helicopters that can eat an anti tank munition anyways, the HInd being the only one off the top of my head due to the compartmentalized firewalls. Also if you want to attack a chopper, you do it from the top is the best way to do it. total lack of armor and generally that is where the engines are located. Again, because jevelins are not fast or ma euverabke. Real life chopper pilots do not hover in one spot and rain death. They are always moving, always. This is because the most prevalent threat they face is an RPG, which is an unguided munition, and it is certainly easier to hit a stationary target than a moving one. Even then, a chopper does not have enough of an IR signature to get a lock. The only way to hit a chopper with one is to manually aim the rocket at a chopper, which as stated above, is difficult to do. Also, the fragmentation charge you mentioned does not use fragments. There are two charges. A precursor charge to detonate any reactive armor on the tank, and the penetrative charge that functions as I've described. As choppers do not have reactive armor, the precursor does next to nothing, because the explosion is not big enough to physically damage the chopper. EDIT: And as I pointed out, the forge gun does not use explosive charges, so the comparison doesn't hold up. RPGs shot down quite a few choppers and they're slow and have NO tracking or accuracy and a similar type of anti tank warhead. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Gallente Logistics =// Unlocked
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1394	Posted - 2014.06.24 22:26:00 - [115] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Also you guys to realize that there is a fragmentation warhead that is used in javelins that is very similar to fragmentation methods used for killing aircraft. Though mostly this is used for killing anything that isn't armored while it would still technically work just as good killing most commonly engaged armor targets. Javelins are not suited for jets due to the short range though and slow speeds but things like gunships and helicopters are more than plausible targets as long as it has a strong IF signal to which just about every helo in the world has. I mean this is no different than shooting a javelin at a tank on top of a hill. and ultimately if you expect it to do something out in the field you just created a demand for another contract; Things can get developed if they persistently become an issue to soldiers. Tanks have a much higher IF than choppers do, meaning its harder for a javelin to lock them, and like I said before, the missile doesn't have the speed or maneuverability to hit a chopper. Even if it did, aircraft grade aluminum is not hard enough to set off the charge. Plus, choppers have flares and such to throw off anti air missiles, which we are sorely lacking. Slight problems. Javelins are pure IR. How would a helo pilot know he was being locked onto and fired upon? Unless he saw the missile separation he wouldn't know to launch flares and if you're using a top down attack he's just as prone to must humans to not looking up. His war is beneath him usually. As proven through the entire cold war, lack of training and experience does not make a technologically superior position immune to technologically inferior methods in hands of highly experienced personnel. So the whole agility argument goes out the window soon as a chopper pilot is caught idling somewhere to probably gun down your friends across the street. Also the IR signal from a helo is near the engine exhaust which on most helicopters is on the top or the tail rotor. The fragmentation warhead was specifically designed to frag against very soft targets not penetrate so even a near proximity causes it to go off for max effect. Finally Structural Paneling made with Aircraft Aluminium Grade is strong enough from most directions of impact to set most detonators off. There are exceptionally very few helicopters that can eat an anti tank munition anyways, the HInd being the only one off the top of my head due to the compartmentalized firewalls. Also if you want to attack a chopper, you do it from the top is the best way to do it. total lack of armor and generally that is where the engines are located. Again, because jevelins are not fast or ma euverabke. Real life chopper pilots do not hover in one spot and rain death. They are always moving, always. This is because the most prevalent threat they face is an RPG, which is an unguided munition, and it is certainly easier to hit a stationary target than a moving one. Even then, a chopper does not have enough of an IR signature to get a lock. The only way to hit a chopper with one is to manually aim the rocket at a chopper, which as stated above, is difficult to do. Also, the fragmentation charge you mentioned does not use fragments. There are two charges. A precursor charge to detonate any reactive armor on the tank, and the penetrative charge that functions as I've described. As choppers do not have reactive armor, the precursor does next to nothing, because the explosion is not big enough to physically damage the chopper. EDIT: And as I pointed out, the forge gun does not use explosive charges, so the comparison doesn't hold up. RPGs shot down quite a few choppers and they're slow and have NO tracking or accuracy and a similar type of anti tank warhead. Which we adapted to by having choppers not stop moving. Most times when an RPG hits, the chopper is usually stationary, such as during a pick up or drop off. As well, those choppers are made for hauling, and are thus big and bulky. Much easier to hit than the Cobra attack chopper the Marine Corps uses. Usually when an attack chopper is hit, its from multiple RPGs fired at them at once, usually from different points. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 1394	Posted - 2014.06.24 22:35:00 - [116] - Quote Now that I think about it, a lot of the problem is the design of the ADS. Attack choppers (which is the closest RL analogy) are smaller than transport choppers, which is another part of why they are harder to hit. If ADS were redesigned to be smaller instead of a regular DS with a turret stuck on the nose... But that would take a client side update. Calmanndo user with nova knives: Because someone has to do it.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 15603	Posted - 2014.06.25 00:03:00 - [117] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Which we adapted to by having choppers not stop moving. Most times when an RPG hits, the chopper is usually stationary, such as during a pick up or drop off. As well, those choppers are made for hauling, and are thus big and bulky. Much easier to hit than the Cobra attack chopper the Marine Corps uses. Usually when an attack chopper is hit, its from multiple RPGs fired at them at once, usually from different points. And yet helos are still shot down by a man portable launchers. Also like you said just because US marines learned their lessons doesn't mean dirt poor third world countries (which are more likely to get shot with a javelin) are likely to still get shot down from everything such as a 40 mm grenade launcher, TOW missile. Javelins, and Stingers (try dodging the newest ones flares do not work against them and they still don't give a lock on signal against their targets) CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Gallente Logistics =// Unlocked
TEBOW BAGGINS Defenders of the Helghast Dream Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 1053	Posted - 2014.06.25 00:13:00 - [118] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: ADS can lolAB away . No it cannot. If you think it can, you are not experianced enough in dropships. Dropships can't use afterburners? That's new. Was that changed in HF Bravo? And the rest of my post? we were getting hit by swarms before hotfix bravo. it only took 2 proto ffiring in unison to down a 17 mil SP pre bravo incubus. the whole "dropships are outrunning my MLT SL" was a FX rendering issue. AKA Zirzo Valcyn
GeneralButtNaked Fatal Absolution 1232	Posted - 2014.06.25 00:31:00 - [119] - Quote Izlare Lenix wrote: True Adamance wrote: GeneralButtNaked wrote: Izlare Lenix wrote: I just hate how my 80k soma is sooooo much more survivable than my 500k incubis. I just hate how my Madrugar can't fly. You don't balance by ISK. No ISK balance emerges on the open market. We ourselves as players balance by ISK. It's not just about isk. I have millions of SP invested in ADS, yet a militia tank takes zero sp and doesn't die as easily. Someone can have 50 million SP into scout suits, but a MLT heavy suit takes zero SP and still has more HP. You want more eHP out of your dropship? Fit for tank. Still not enough for you? Drive(not fly) a tank then. Are ADS pilot entitlement issues a result of tanks getting nerfed? Real AV doesn't stop until all the tanks are dead.
Atiim NoGameNoLife 9808	Posted - 2014.06.25 03:42:00 - [120] - Quote I'm finding the entitlement of ADS Pilots in this thread to be rather hilarious. Mortifyingly stupid, but hilarious nonetheless. I want SLAVs, not SLAVEs. "Many things in life are subjective, morality is one of them..." -HAND

Espartoi Orkz Clan 254	Posted - 2014.06.25 03:55:00 - [121] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Which we adapted to by having choppers not stop moving. Most times when an RPG hits, the chopper is usually stationary, such as during a pick up or drop off. As well, those choppers are made for hauling, and are thus big and bulky. Much easier to hit than the Cobra attack chopper the Marine Corps uses. Usually when an attack chopper is hit, its from multiple RPGs fired at them at once, usually from different points. And yet helos are still shot down by a man portable launchers. Also like you said just because US marines learned their lessons doesn't mean dirt poor third world countries (which are more likely to get shot with a javelin) are likely to still get shot down from everything such as a 40 mm grenade launcher, TOW missile. Javelins, and Stingers (try dodging the newest ones flares do not work against them and they still don't give a lock on signal against their targets) So IWS have you tried to dodge one?. How was the experience?. Shoot Smash Stomp Chop. Am a Giant Realistic Flying Tiger.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11148	Posted - 2014.06.25 04:04:00 - [122] - Quote Espartoi wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Which we adapted to by having choppers not stop moving. Most times when an RPG hits, the chopper is usually stationary, such as during a pick up or drop off. As well, those choppers are made for hauling, and are thus big and bulky. Much easier to hit than the Cobra attack chopper the Marine Corps uses. Usually when an attack chopper is hit, its from multiple RPGs fired at them at once, usually from different points. And yet helos are still shot down by a man portable launchers. Also like you said just because US marines learned their lessons doesn't mean dirt poor third world countries (which are more likely to get shot with a javelin) are likely to still get shot down from everything such as a 40 mm grenade launcher, TOW missile. Javelins, and Stingers (try dodging the newest ones flares do not work against them and they still don't give a lock on signal against their targets) So IWS have you tried to dodge one?. How was the experience?. I think thats essentially a pointless questions to ask. Have you? Do you know its not easy as ***? " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III*
Apocalyptic Destroyer RestlessSpirits 0	Posted - 2014.06.25 04:13:00 - [123] - Quote You've obviously have never flown a Dropship before, as my Incubus has 3000 armor, yet can be taken out by a HMG. You don't see me complaining about tanks not taking HMG damage so please, stop your whining. ~R1P
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11151	Posted - 2014.06.25 04:17:00 - [124] - Quote Apocalyptic Destroyer wrote: You've obviously have never flown a Dropship before, as my Incubus has 3000 armor, yet can be taken out by a HMG. You don't see me complaining about tanks not taking HMG damage so please, stop your whining. What kind of idiot do you have to be to let that happen......... " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Espartoi Orkz Clan 257	Posted - 2014.06.25 04:20:00 - [125] - Quote I have a doubt. Since when this issue has been troubling?. Shoot Smash Stomp Chop. Am a Giant Realistic Flying Tiger.
Mike De Luca Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 117	Posted - 2014.06.25 04:20:00 - [126] - Quote Ok, let's see here.....maneuvers quickly IN THE AIR, takes 3 forge shots min(not sure on swarms, working on skilling into those and minmando now), almost guaranteed to hit an afterburner n be at or close to the ceiling in their redline before 3rd shot hits, and if played properly can absolutely dominate an open maps...which is most of them....yeah, so underpowered, Whining about av? Use gunners to spot em. Av needs to use others to guarantee taking you down 90% of the time, don't you think those 2 extra sets of eyes might help? No? You'd just rather whine on here in the VERY rare event you weren't paying attention n got taken out solo? Ok, makes sense. All me n most people will agree to is turning down collision damage from tapping buildings n sobering up the rdv driver. And I will say it agin slowly....TAAAAPPIIIING, not being slammed into a building by an attack, being rammed by another ds, taps, with the force equivalent to a normal landing. TL;DR They're fine except for collision damage what i think of when charging fg
The True Inferno Myrmidon Syndicate 6	Posted - 2014.06.25 04:53:00 - [127] - Quote Swarms should have different lock-on times for each vehicle, DS should take the longest(dew to the fact they re flying) and tanks should take the least(as they're on the ground). There should also be different types of swarms that are specailised to different vehicles with bonuses and penalties to each vehicle for damage range and lock-on time. Forge guns should have a slite dip for there projectiles when aiming above 10 degrees and should become more accurate when aiming down as well as a longer range. This would make them less effective against a dropship and more effective against a tank.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11152	Posted - 2014.06.25 04:57:00 - [128] - Quote The True Inferno wrote: Swarms should have different lock-on times for each vehicle, DS should take the longest(dew to the fact they re flying) and tanks should take the least(as they're on the ground). There should also be different types of swarms that are specailised to different vehicles with bonuses and penalties to each vehicle for damage range and lock-on time. Forge guns should have a slite dip for there projectiles when aiming above 10 degrees and should become more accurate when aiming down as well as a longer range. This would make them less effective against a dropship and more effective against a tank. Thats not a bad suggestion, signatures on vehicles is but another aspect of EVE vessels, and opens up the possibly of having many skills to all faster targeting speeds of automated systems as well as decreases of signatures values. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Espartoi Orkz Clan 257	Posted - 2014.06.25 05:03:00 - [129] - Quote Well as nobody has enough brain to answer i just assume that this issue is from always and if judge here is point it out just know when he is running for CPM looks you know... convenient. Shoot Smash Stomp Chop. Am a Giant Realistic Flying Tiger.
OP FOTM Commando Perkone Caldari State 9	Posted - 2014.06.25 05:04:00 - [130] - Quote they're still not listening to you are they Judge?

Mors The Butcher Red Star. EoN. 20	Posted - 2014.06.25 14:09:00 - [131] - Quote 1 this is not the real world 2 this is a game 3 judge is a bad pilot any questions I'M SORRY..... I'M SORRY FOR EVERYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED TO YOU... ....AND EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO YOU
tween tween UrAnus Air Service 7	Posted - 2014.06.25 16:00:00 - [132] - Quote Listen to what. Was off for 1,5 weeks and they launched hotfix bravo. Came home, slightly drunk and decided to see what the hotfix was all about. Mind I'm a tanker playing domination. What happen was that my tanks were all eff'd up, but I'll save that for another day. As per usual, Judge was in his dropship on the other team with Delboy and CEOpyrex in missile tanks, his own little gang. Now one thing is my railgun being completely ou outranged by these missile tanks but even as I drove back into the redline, we were loosing pretty bad. I could even poke out and look in the redline as judge just flew in and nearly wrecked my shield rail's again and again, succeeded aswell a couple of times. You write this and that about dropships, yet you fail to mention the times you farm tanks yourself and please, next time you upload a one of your pity videos, let it be from one of the times your actually "playing" the game - that is playing with Pyrex and Delboy, who cover you arse anyways most of the times.
Thang Bausch Pierrot Le Fou Industries 170	Posted - 2014.06.25 16:38:00 - [133] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: True Adamance wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: im not saying dropships need to be stronger. But if AV is balanced against one of these vehicles whith the same damage profile... how can it be balanced against the other? A Stinger missile does the same damage to an Abrams that it would to a Black Hawk if it hits does it not? Are you asking for an arbitrary resistance? Because either way it seems like the result would make one vehicle more powerful than it needs to be. Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? No its not fair, but neither vehicle is designed to fulfil the others role. The advantage of an HAV would in this case be its armoured hull, which should absorb fire. The cost being mobility and lack of ability to engage close range targets both aerial and on ground. The advantage of a Dropship should be its mobility, fire power, and aerial nature. The cost being less durability. To be fair I cannot argue Dropship semantics with you, so I defer to you on dropship matters, but I'm not going to agree that ADS are useless. They are the most dangerous (but not OP) thing on most maps right now. I fear ADS way more than tanks. Tanks are frequently easy to avoid as long as there are not an overwhelming number of infantry hunting me down while I evade the tank. buildings are the only valid hiding space from an ADS.
Bright Steel Tears Of Wars 20	Posted - 2014.06.27 13:32:00 - [134] - Quote As soon as my scout has as much EHP as a heavy I will agree for DS to have the same EHP as HAV My all MLT scout can take out a proto heavy. Millions of so (edite: SP) gives you an edge over others but doesn't make you god! The Best Worst game you can't stop playing..... DUST
Atiim NoGameNoLife 9906	Posted - 2014.06.27 15:06:00 - [135] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Lol like every AVer groups me in with Spkr and Taka........ you just have to HTFU because they won't. I don't. NoLifing DUST for the Officer Swarm Launcher. "Many things in life are subjective, morality is one of them..." -HAND
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3851	Posted - 2014.06.27 15:33:00 - [136] - Quote Atiim wrote: True Adamance wrote: Lol like every AVer groups me in with Spkr and Taka........ you just have to HTFU because they won't. I don't. Don't what? HTFU? (I keed, I keed ) CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3851	Posted - 2014.06.27 15:36:00 - [137] - Quote tween tween wrote: Listen to what. Was off for 1,5 weeks and they launched hotfix bravo. Came home, slightly drunk and decided to see what the hotfix was all about. Mind I'm a tanker playing domination. What happen was that my tanks were all eff'd up, but I'll save that for another day. As per usual, Judge was in his dropship on the other team with Delboy and CEOpyrex in missile tanks, his own little gang. Now one thing is my railgun being completely ou outranged by these missile tanks but even as I drove back into the redline, we were loosing pretty bad. I could even poke out and look in the redline as judge just flew in and nearly wrecked my shield rail's again and again, succeeded aswell a couple of times. You write this and that about dropships, yet you fail to mention the times you farm tanks yourself and please, next time you upload a one of your pity videos, let it be from one of the times your actually "playing" the game - that is playing with Pyrex and Delboy, who cover you arse anyways most of the times. My Particle Cannon hits out to 300m, and my XT-201s hit to 250m, and they do it with 48% efficiency against shields. I think you need to get good, or better yet, avoid 3v1s (which I would consider an important part of considering yourself a competent tanker). CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2341	Posted - 2014.06.27 15:47:00 - [138] - Quote OP FOTM wrote: they're still not listening to you are they Judge? Seems not. It is interesting that people think my OP says that dropships need the same defense as tanks. Pop back and read it again. I am actually talking about the fact they take the same damage. These two things sound the same but they are not. What I am pointing out is that we could tweak AV to do more or less damage to tanks than they do to dropships. Should swarms be stronger against dropships but forges weaker? Should we make tanks weak to forge guns but strong to swarms? We have to factor the ease at which each AV can track and hit its target and balance AV with this in mind. If all vehicles take the same damage then we are not considering dropships ability to run or tanks ability to take damage. We treat both vehicles the same but they just are not. I made no claims that I wanted damage reduced. Only that CCP has limited AVs options by making the damage taken the same. @ tween tween : I actually did upload a video similar to the one you describe. It is not one of the more action filled ones, I'll post one of those later. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
Echo 1991 WarRavens Final Resolution. 341	Posted - 2014.06.27 16:07:00 - [139] - Quote Why should you take less damage just because you have less HP? Please explain that. Cos I don't go around crying that my scout suit takes too much damage from infantry.
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2341	Posted - 2014.06.27 16:08:00 - [140] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: Why should you take less damage just because you have less HP? Please explain that. Cos I don't go around crying that my scout suit takes too much damage from infantry. Or more damage. I said nothing about less in the OP. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion

ZDub 303 Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3070	Posted - 2014.06.27 16:15:00 - [141] - Quote I don't understand judge, why give dropships arbitrary resistance? If their ehp is too low, simply increase their hp pool. The only reason I can think of is so that repairs are more effective and hardeners are less effective. I'll admit I don't fly dropships myself but I rarely see anyone stating that dropships take too long to recover their hp, and unlike HAVs its usually fairly simple to make your way to a supply depot to repair your armor, especially since you'll be going back for ammo constantly anyways. I see absolutely no reason to increase dropship resistance to AV other than to make things inconsistent and confusing for non theorycrafters.
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2341	Posted - 2014.06.27 16:22:00 - [142] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: I see absolutely no reason to increase dropship resistance to AV other than to make things inconsistent and confusing for non theorycrafters. Or decrease.... A tiny tweak in resistance can really help the fine tuning, It helps add to the variables other than say just missile base damage, or missile count. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14478	Posted - 2014.06.27 16:34:00 - [143] - Quote I don't really even bother flying now. A single ADV swarm is enough to kill me now if I so much as hover for a moment, it's silly. It's nice that they completely ruined large railguns, but I'm not putting 500K on the line so some idiot who can't aim can just spam missiles and take me out. I basically just don't play much at all anymore, handing balance over to the "community" was a questionable decision at best. Swarms have always needed help, but now they're just obnoxious. At least forge guns require you to aim and have an understanding of timings.
Echo 1991 WarRavens Final Resolution. 341	Posted - 2014.06.27 16:42:00 - [144] - Quote Swarms haven't changed. You just take normal damage now. If you stick around you should die why is that a hard concept to grasp?
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14478	Posted - 2014.06.27 16:47:00 - [145] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: Swarms haven't changed. You just take normal damage now. If you stick around you should die why is that a hard concept to grasp? Why is it a hard concept to grasp that a weapon that requires no aim shouldn't be incredibly effective? Should it be useful? Sure. Should a single ADV swarm neuter a dropship? Or anything? No. At least forge guns require skill to operate
Echo 1991 WarRavens Final Resolution. 341	Posted - 2014.06.27 16:58:00 - [146] - Quote Difference is it only hurts vehicles and installations, so it should be as effective as it is.
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14478	Posted - 2014.06.27 17:05:00 - [147] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: Difference is it only hurts vehicles and installations, so it should be as effective as it is. It would just be nice if they had to try, even just a little.
Echo 1991 WarRavens Final Resolution. 341	Posted - 2014.06.27 17:15:00 - [148] - Quote The swarm isn't a brainless weapon though. If I'm not close enough to a vehicle it will most likely escape. I do have to try.
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3861	Posted - 2014.06.27 17:15:00 - [149] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I don't really even bother flying now. A single ADV swarm is enough to kill me now if I so much as hover for a moment, it's silly. It's nice that they completely ruined large railguns, but I'm not putting 500K on the line so some idiot who can't aim can just spam missiles and take me out. I basically just don't play much at all anymore, handing balance over to the "community" was a questionable decision at best. Swarms have always needed help, but now they're just obnoxious. At least forge guns require you to aim and have an understanding of timings. A single volley of proto swarms can deal (and this is maxxed MinMando, 2x Cx damage mods + Prof 5) 2195 damage to armour. On the flipside, those same swarms will deal 1272 damage to shields. A hardener will reduce that damage to 1646 to armour, which, including the Incubus' base shields should be plenty to tank two shots. It should even be possible without a hardener - 3k armour should do the trick. And burning away out of the 175m lock range should sort your problems right out. I'm sorry, but I don't really see the problem here. (For reference, an Ishukone Assault FG will deal in the regions of 2000 damage to your armour with the same number of damage mods fitted (a third adds about 50 damage), while dealing 1626 to shields.) I just went off to protofits and built an Incubus with 3539 armour EHP against unproficiency'd swarms (4247 base), on top of 1187 shield EHP (950 base) for a total of 4700 EHP (5197 before resistances); including a Complex Afterburner, escaping from a fully specced Proto-Swarm-Double-Complex-Damage-Mod-Proto-MinMando should be reasonably straightforward. And if he's running all that, odds are he can't fit anything else. As for ADV swarms, they deal 1829 to armour and 1060 to shields (after resistances). I'm of the opinion that these swarms are fine, especially considering the incredibly short range they have relative to vehicle movement speed, and the vulnerability of the wearer (my friend's MinMando runs less EHP than my Ferro-tanked Assault...) CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14478	Posted - 2014.06.27 17:25:00 - [150] - Quote I'd love my second high slot back so I can have some variation in fit. Your heavy plate light rep build is nice for surviving that initial volley but your acceleration is crap even with an AB, and if you run into AV anywhere else on the field you're just going to die because your rep rate is way too low for that health pool. Hardeners are a liability now for the most part, and with heavy reps nerfed the one good Incubus build has essentially been neutered. I just don't fly right now. Assuming I actually play, I'll just wait till things even out a bit.

Sir Snugglz Red Star. EoN. 848	Posted - 2014.06.27 17:32:00 - [151] - Quote vehicles in general are suppose to have special resistances to certain weapons. Unfortunately that is not the case. They all have the same resistance to every weapon. Similar to the dropsuits, heavies have resistance to explosive stuff, i think commandoes have resistances to hybrid weapons... you get the idea. Derpships and tanks were suppose to have special resistances to swarms and forges. where one did less damage while the other weapon did a bit more to one vehicle than the other. These numbers were never fixed. But back in 1.6-1.7, the "correct" resistance (effectiveness) number would show even though the damage did not coincide with that number because the actual resistance was not being applied. Currently only the shield and armor resistances exist, no vehicle resistances. The vehicle resistances need to be added. -Pro AFKing LVL 5 -Luck is just one of my skills -Just because I make flying look easy doesn't mean it is
Atiim NoGameNoLife 9913	Posted - 2014.06.27 19:47:00 - [152] - Quote Sir Snugglz wrote: vehicles in general are suppose to have special resistances to certain weapons. Unfortunately that is not the case. They all have the same resistance to every weapon. Source? Sir Snugglz wrote: Similar to the dropsuits, heavies have resistance to explosive stuff, i think commandoes have resistances to hybrid weapons... you get the idea. Commandos don't have any resistances to weapon damages. However, if we were going to base resistances on how they are with Dropsuits, only the HAVs would receive resistance bonuses, not the ADS. Sir Snugglz wrote: Derpships and tanks were suppose to have special resistances to swarms and forges. where one did less damage while the other weapon did a bit more to one vehicle than the other. Again, source? Sir Snugglz wrote: These numbers were never fixed. But back in 1.6-1.7, the "correct" resistance (effectiveness) number would show even though the damage did not coincide with that number because the actual resistance was not being applied. If your referring to the 55% efficiency Swarm Launchers had against Dropships, then the resistance was indeed being applied. However, that was (openly stated by CCP) a glitch, and was fully addressed in Hotfix Bravo. Sir Snugglz wrote: Currently only the shield and armor resistances exist, no vehicle resistances. The vehicle resistances need to be added. And why do they need to be introduced? What purpose would that serve other than to make AV ineffective against Dropships (and other vehicles as well). I'm starting to think that ADS pilots are becoming a bit too entitled. NoLifing DUST for the Officer Swarm Launcher. "Many things in life are subjective, morality is one of them..." -HAND
Atiim NoGameNoLife 9914	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:03:00 - [153] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: Swarms haven't changed. You just take normal damage now. If you stick around you should die why is that a hard concept to grasp? Why is it a hard concept to grasp that a weapon that requires no aim shouldn't be incredibly effective? Should it be useful? Sure. Should a single ADV swarm neuter a dropship? Or anything? No. At least forge guns require skill to operate Swarm Launchers do require skill to use. NoLifing DUST for the Officer Swarm Launcher. "Many things in life are subjective, morality is one of them..." -HAND
trollface dot jpg The Bacon Corporation 167	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:06:00 - [154] - Quote Atiim wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Can I ask you this question : If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not? I think it's fair in the sense that the ADS is better in terms of speed and maneuverability, while the HAV has less speed and torque in comparison. A similar balance model is found in Infantry, where weapons deal the same amount of damage to a target regardless of frame, but is balanced in the sense that the lighter the frame, the better the chances it has at evading danger. What exactly are you trying to say? ^This. Also, why are you trying to make CCP bust the game again by messing with damage resistances again? If you want an eHP bump, don't beat around the bush by calling it a resistance bonus, ask for a freakin' eHP bonus. Also, no to flying vehicles with comparable eHP to tanks, OHK missiles (2HK's with rails) that can out run swarms and GTFO of AV's reach in less than 5 seconds. Lastly, slow down tanks. Working at cutting through all that eHP means jackshit when it can get gone almost as fast as an ADS and has full advantage of all ground objects for catching swarms and blocking forge/ PLC shots. (granted the tank's options for directions to leave by are much more limited) RIP MAG, you will be missed. MAG Vet ~ Raven
Baal Omniscient Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 1842	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:24:00 - [155] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: Difference is it only hurts vehicles and installations, so it should be as effective as it is. It would just be nice if they had to try, even just a little. Sorry buddy, but I DO try. With an SMG I have to try to beat every Cal-Scout, Gal-Scout, heavy, RR roof camper, ScR cloaker, RE Minja and armor tanked assault that see's me firing my giant flare gun off into the air hoping to scare a vehicle off of my team because these days only 1 out of every 20 vehicles actually sticks around to fight, and that 1 is usually a triple hardened Gunloggi. 90% of my time spent in my AV fit is spent fighting off infantry so I can TRY to get a shot off before getting RE'd or cloak-shottied in the back. If it was a straight up fight between a vehicle and 2 AV guys I might agree (or if the swarm had SOME form of anti-infantry use I might agree) but it never is unless the ADS's team is just plain terrible. The swarm is a tactical AV weapon, requiring you to position yourself in a "safe" place and be smart about when and where and in what direction you fire. You have to be good enough to survive against infantry with only a sidearm and be especially careful (or lucky enough) not to get surrounded by or to turn the corner on a group of enemies, meaning you have to have GREAT situational awareness to do really well. In the sky you have to worry about vehicle turrets, forge guns, swarms and the occasional PLC hotshot. On the ground, the swarmer has to worry about all of that PLUS every other weapon in the game, including campers using the same AV that's hitting you in the air, without a main weapon to fight back with. PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 Cross Atu for CPM1 Winmatar Assault & Proficiency 5 Swarms Since Uprising 1.0
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14481	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:35:00 - [156] - Quote Vehicles don't stick around because they're dead if they do. You have to just make passes and gtfo or everyone and their grandma will blast you into nothing. The things you mention for swarm launchers generally apply to forge guns as well, though in some cases you can slug it out with infantry using a forge gun. It would be really nice if every actual AV weapon wasn't anti armor lol. It's just disheartening when a single ADV swarm launcher can punch straight through all your armor in no time flat because hardeners are a joke and even reps are pretty pointless now. I rarely ever hug the flight ceiling, and now you basically have to. There's no reason to act as troop transport in most cases in this game, as it's just a liability to you as a pilot, now more than ever. You can't sit still at all, so yet again, missiles rain supreme because you will never ever be able to use rails or blasters against infantry effectively, even with a proper first person cam. As if it wasn't bad enough trying to run side guns before with paper fits, now you're just begging to get shot down by anyone with 200k sp and 50k ISK. I'm really thankful for the ISK Baal and I'm not trying to bash on your craft, but after watching how fast my armor vanished to an ADV swarm, I have lost all desire to fly right now. Go Python or go home.
ZDub 303 Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3071	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:43:00 - [157] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: I see absolutely no reason to increase dropship resistance to AV other than to make things inconsistent and confusing for non theorycrafters. Or decrease.... A tiny tweak in resistance can really help the fine tuning, It helps add to the variables other than say just missile base damage, or missile count. I understand your point about using resistances as a tool for fine tuning ehp... but resistance has some serious consequences that need to be taken into account before being changed. By changing base resistance you mess with the efficacy of almost every module that exists. HP modules become worth more automatically, repair modules the same. Resistance modules become worth less as base resistance acts in a similar manner as natural diminishing returns on hardeners. I would highly suggest the devs to be very careful when tuning based on resistances vs. base hp. Is it a tool? Possibly, but it may be more trouble than its worth to deal with. If anything I would support adding in skills to increase base resistance. HAV Operation should have one for sure, possibly Dropship Operation as well. Or Marauder variants should be added instead, either way. In this case though, its easy to see where that resistance is coming from and why its there. Just saying a vehicle should have modified resistance simply because its a specific type of vehicle? I think its a bad idea. If there was different classifications of AV, I could see it. Light AV vs Heavy AV for example, with associated resistances based on vehicle type. Once again, there is a clear distinction for its presence and not 'just cause I felt like it'.
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 3052	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:43:00 - [158] - Quote Anyone else like how he flip flopped saying now drop ships should have less defense against swarms since the crowd turned against him
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2342	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:46:00 - [159] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: Anyone else like how he flip flopped saying now drop ships should have less defense against swarms since the crowd turned against him GO read the OP. Stop, then read it again. Then explain to me, so I know you read it the difference between damage profiles and Defence and why they are so different when it comes to balance. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
ZDub 303 Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3072	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:50:00 - [160] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Delta 749 wrote: Anyone else like how he flip flopped saying now drop ships should have less defense against swarms since the crowd turned against him GO read the OP. Stop, then read it again. Then explain to me, so I know you read it the difference between damage profiles and Defence and why they are so different when it comes to balance. You need to better explain your original post. If AV is balanced around one vehicle vs another. How is it unbalanced? Your thread would go over with even some basic quantitative explanation of your post. It just sounds like you're whining that AV is OP against your ADS.

DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14482	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:52:00 - [161] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Delta 749 wrote: Anyone else like how he flip flopped saying now drop ships should have less defense against swarms since the crowd turned against him GO read the OP. Stop, then read it again. Then explain to me, so I know you read it the difference between damage profiles and Defence and why they are so different when it comes to balance. You need to better explain your original post. I've AV is balanced around one vehicle vs another. How is it unbalanced? Your thread would go over with even some basic quantitative explanation of your post. It just sounds like you're whining that AV is OP against your ADS. Double the cost of HAVs with less HP. Seems everyones answer is fly around in circles with an AB the whole match.
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 3053	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:52:00 - [162] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Delta 749 wrote: Anyone else like how he flip flopped saying now drop ships should have less defense against swarms since the crowd turned against him GO read the OP. Stop, then read it again. Then explain to me, so I know you read it the difference between damage profiles and Defence and why they are so different when it comes to balance. "If AV hits tanks and dropships for the same damage. Yet one can have vastly more HP than the other does this seem like a fair balance or not?" First page, from you, saying things are unfair for drop ships because they take the same damage and the rest of the thread is you saying it needs to be fair Only when people are overwhelmingly speaking against arbitrary bonuses to drop ships do you specify that you want DS defenses nerfed and say it was all just tweaking damage profiles and you didnt really want a buff in which case that was something that could have been clearly and easily specified in your OP rather than saying it after the fact which looks bad on you Got caught with your hand in the cookie jar mate, you could at least man up to it and not try this mealy mouthed BS to worm your way back to public favor
Atiim EnvyUs. 9917	Posted - 2014.06.27 20:56:00 - [163] - Quote trollface dot jpg wrote: Also, no to flying vehicles with comparable eHP to tanks, OHK missiles (2HK's with rails) that can out run swarms and GTFO of AV's reach in less than 5 seconds. [...] To put this into a more detailed perspective, lets look at the numbers. Air Speed of Incubus: 50m/s Air Speed of Python: 75m/s Air Speed bonus given by Afterburners: 150%m/s Lock Range of Swarm Launchers: 175m Absolute Range of Forge Gun: 300m Absolute Range of 80GJ Railgun: 300m Absolute Range of 80GJ Blaster: 300m So with that in mind, an Incubus with an Afterburner moves at 75m/s, and a Python moves at 112.5m/s. Meaning, that it takes an Incubus 2.3s to evade SLs, and 4s to -completely- (I put emphasis on the completely because being hitting an ADS at ranges such as 290m is not likely) evade every other AV weapons. As for Pythons, they can evade a SL's lock range in 1.5s, and completely evade every other AV weapon in 2.6s. Now let's compare that to HAVs. Movement Speed of Gunnlogi: 19.5m/s Movement Speed of Madrugar: 22.5m/s Movement Speed bonus given by Fuel Injectors: 25%m/s Now with that in mind, the Gunnlogi can evade a SL's lock range in 7.2s, and every other AV weapon in 12s. Madrugars on the other hand, can evade a SL's lock range in 6.2s, and every other AV weapon in 10.6s. Now that I've done my explanations, I'll quickly recap on what the numbers I've given. Evasion time of vehicles (Swarm Lock Range / AV Absolute Range) Incubus (2.3s / 4s) Python (1.5s / 2.6s) Gunnlogi (7.2s / 12s) Madrugar (6.2s / 10.6s) What does this mean you ask? It means that the Assault Dropship has a far greater than the HAV, because it can evade fire (or lock) from AV weapons far faster (and easier) than the Heavy Attack Vehicles. This, is what justifies the lower HP A/DSs have when compared to their HAV counterparts. Just like the Scouts/Light Frames (though in correlation to Dropsuit Frame sizes, ADSs would actually fall under the Medium Frame category), you sacrifice HP for an increased ability to evade danger. If you want to have resistances which allows you to "tank" through more damage, then you should be forced to sacrifice more speed as well. [Source: ProtoFits] NoLifing DUST for the Officer Swarm Launcher. "Many things in life are subjective, morality is one of them..." -HAND
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2342	Posted - 2014.06.27 21:13:00 - [164] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: First page, from you, saying things are unfair for drop ships because they take the same damage and the rest of the thread is you saying it needs to be fairr Nope. You still don't quite get it. Look at the op. I never mentioned dropship weakness in it at all. Then look at my next post where I offer more clarification. I did not mention that things were unfair for dropships. None of those words are there. I never flip flop either. My posts on the first page clearly outline my topic. The stuff you are talking about is from other people putting their words into my mouth. I actually say this " If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks." See how I do not favor tanks or dropships here. I am talking about total vehicle balance. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 3054	Posted - 2014.06.27 21:19:00 - [165] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: Delta 749 wrote: First page, from you, saying things are unfair for drop ships because they take the same damage and the rest of the thread is you saying it needs to be fairr Nope. You still don't quite get it. Look at the op. I never mentioned dropship weakness in it at all. Then look at my next post where I offer more clarification. I did not mention that things were unfair for dropships. None of those words are there. I never flip flop either. My posts on the first page clearly outline my topic. The stuff you are talking about is from other people putting their words into my mouth. I actually say this " If swarms or Forges are balanced against tanks, then they are not against dropships. If they are fair against dropships then they are not against tanks." See how I do not favor tanks or dropships here. I am talking about total vehicle balance. From the rest of OP "So a forge or swarm does the same damage to a dropship as it does to a tank. So CCP. Explain how you feel that two vehicles that have vastly different effective Hit Points should take the same damage from AV? I defies logic." This combined with the rest of OP which you were so kind to quote clearly implies you think there is an imbalance and unfairness in the system because both vehicles receive the same amount of damage despite having different EHP totals Of course this is all ignoring the fact that differing EHP totals means there is absolutely no need for damage resistances to be implemented at all to make DS more vulnerable as you later tried to say since by virtue of having a lower EHP they have a lower defense against these weapons which kills the argument that you tried to make later on in this thread leaving only you saying, essentially, I dont want to die as much and heres some convoluted reasoning to hide that fact Hand, cookie jar, etc etc
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2342	Posted - 2014.06.27 21:22:00 - [166] - Quote I give up. If you can get that from the OP then I do not think it is possible to continue this discussion with you. YOu seem to be reading words that are in your head,not on the screen. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 3054	Posted - 2014.06.27 21:26:00 - [167] - Quote See now try bowing out with less self righteous whining, people will respect you more
Baal Omniscient Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 1844	Posted - 2014.06.27 21:51:00 - [168] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Vehicles don't stick around because they're dead if they do. You have to just make passes and gtfo or everyone and their grandma will blast you into nothing. The things you mention for swarm launchers generally apply to forge guns as well, though in some cases you can slug it out with infantry using a forge gun. It would be really nice if every actual AV weapon wasn't anti armor lol. It's just disheartening when a single ADV swarm launcher can punch straight through all your armor in no time flat because hardeners are a joke and even reps are pretty pointless now. I rarely ever hug the flight ceiling, and now you basically have to. There's no reason to act as troop transport in most cases in this game, as it's just a liability to you as a pilot, now more than ever. You can't sit still at all, so yet again, missiles rain supreme because you will never ever be able to use rails or blasters against infantry effectively, even with a proper first person cam. As if it wasn't bad enough trying to run side guns before with paper fits, now you're just begging to get shot down by anyone with 200k sp and 50k ISK. I'm really thankful for the ISK Baal and I'm not trying to bash on your craft, but after watching how fast my armor vanished to an ADV swarm, I have lost all desire to fly right now. Go Python or go home. I completely understand where you are coming from with this, as I've been toying with ADS's myself using only basic modules and next to no core skills. I try my best to not bash ADS pilots (I've failed a few times recently due to a couple of them being overly arrogant and snooty, but i digress) as there is a lot of frustration for us to be had on the ground as well. Here's a story about life on the ground:You are engaging the enemy with your squad. It's a drag out fight, the enemy keeps spawning back faster than you can kill them off but you are holding your ground and keeping them pinned inside the letter.... and here comes an ADS blasting your squad to pieces from behind. You regroup with a couple of you pulling AV on a letter nearby ready to hit that letter as fast as you can, and in comes said enemy squad to the letter you just regrouped on ready for revenge, only now you have 2 guys with only sidearms. After some back-and-forth fighting to hold the point and the squad softens you up..... here comes the ADS again.... enemy squad takes the letter before you can all spawn back. So your whole squad pulls out AV in the ground spawn, hops in LAV's to go take out that ADS, and the forge camping a roof takes out one of your convoy and a tank pulls up to your other car as it gets into cover from the forge. The swarmers get 2 volley's off a piece, the forger stands too close to the LAV while charging and gets blown up with the car when the tank kills it, then the tank takes off. The swarmers attempt to chase the tank down... and then missiles start raining from the sky again.... Here's a story about life in the air, in the same battle: You see a group of blues having trouble with an enemy squad that is pushing in on their position, so you fly low and start pounding them with missiles, getting a kill and a couple of assists. As soon as the last red dies you are rocked hard to the side as a forge gunner on the roof next to you that hadn't rendered until just then charges another shot. You take off right as you hear swarms fire behind you. You activate your afterburner and make for the flight ceiling... right as the forge hits you again. It rocks your ship hrd to the side again, slowing it just enough that the swarms catch you and brush off what armor you had remaining. So you go pick up a forge gunner from your squad and set him on a HIGHER roof and he forge guns the other forger off of the other roof. Hooray, freedom! You see a scuffle around a letter below and drop down to give some cover fire, scoring a couple more assists and a few equipment kills. Suddenly, a large rail turret that no one blew up starts auto firing on you, tagging you twice before you can react and hit your afterburner. You tell your tanker squadmate about it as you hover at the flight ceiling recovering your HP. He rolls out and blows up the turret, only seconds later to request help with a bunch of AV chasing him down.... The life of ADS pilots and swarmers is pretty much the same. We could both choose to just run on the ground as infantry, but the playstyle we WANT is not here. As I said in another thread, this games needs either AI or capsuleer controlled drones of various sizes attacking the infantry on both sides. THIS would breathe life into the game as well as give vehicles and AV players something to do other than the same boring crap we do now (shoot at eachother). AV players AND vehicles could fight drones as well as each other, and bring some real utility to tanks, dropships and AV players in this low match-size game. Swarms and ADS currently: "I can grab a few points here and there, loose a crapton of ISK, MAYBE end up top 10, and be frustrated all match long unless the enemy completely sucks because I'm pretty much useless to my team." And after (Ik, not gonna happen...) Drones:"I'm fighting to keep the drones off of our infantry and to keep the enemy's vehicles and AV from killing drones near THEIR players. I have purpose!" PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 Cross Atu for CPM1 Winmatar Assault & Proficiency 5 Swarms Since Uprising 1.0
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14484	Posted - 2014.06.27 21:57:00 - [169] - Quote I wish I had never immersed myself in the EVE universe. I would have picked Python instead of Incubus as its hands down 100% the superior ship. Flying Incubus now just feels like pain. As I've said numerous times before, you're one of the few swarm launchers I've ever feared because you actually use tactics and teamwork. I'm just disheartened by the state of things and I'm just counting down the days till the Destiny beta at this point. I'm just tired of this constant teeter totter that is DUST and I honestly just want off at this point. It's too much.
Baal Omniscient Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 1845	Posted - 2014.06.27 22:08:00 - [170] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: I wish I had never immersed myself in the EVE universe. I would have picked Python instead of Incubus as its hands down 100% the superior ship. Flying Incubus now just feels like pain. As I've said numerous times before, you're one of the few swarm launchers I've ever feared because you actually use tactics and teamwork. I'm just disheartened by the state of things and I'm just counting down the days till the Destiny beta at this point. I'm just tired of this constant teeter totter that is DUST and I honestly just want off at this point. It's too much. Also, I came to DUST for Drones and massive planets, both of which will never happen in DUST I understand. If I had the IRL money I'd be on Destiny too when it hits.... unfortunately it's likely I'll be stuck in Dust until PS2 hits ps4..... There's so much wasted potential here, and so much capacity for community among the players, even with such a simple chat system setup. That in my opinion was the biggest success of CCP, putting this chat window system into an FPS game. If it weren't for it, this game wouldn't have lasted half as long. The connections that grew between the playerbase because of it is what has kept most of us here as long as we have been. And don't compliment me like that, you'll make me blush.... =( ^,_,^ )= PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 Cross Atu for CPM1 Winmatar Assault & Proficiency 5 Swarms Since Uprising 1.0

Yokal Bob NoGameNoLife 495	Posted - 2014.06.27 22:09:00 - [171] - Quote laughing that this thread actually exists assualt vehicle > heavy assault vehicle ^flies out of range > ^TANKS damage (duh) If its not anime, its not real
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14486	Posted - 2014.06.27 22:17:00 - [172] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I wish I had never immersed myself in the EVE universe. I would have picked Python instead of Incubus as its hands down 100% the superior ship. Flying Incubus now just feels like pain. As I've said numerous times before, you're one of the few swarm launchers I've ever feared because you actually use tactics and teamwork. I'm just disheartened by the state of things and I'm just counting down the days till the Destiny beta at this point. I'm just tired of this constant teeter totter that is DUST and I honestly just want off at this point. It's too much. Also, I came to DUST for Drones and massive planets, both of which will never happen in DUST I understand. If I had the IRL money I'd be on Destiny too when it hits.... unfortunately it's likely I'll be stuck in Dust until PS2 hits ps4..... There's so much wasted potential here, and so much capacity for community among the players, even with such a simple chat system setup. That in my opinion was the biggest success of CCP, putting this chat window system into an FPS game. If it weren't for it, this game wouldn't have lasted half as long. The connections that grew between the playerbase because of it is what has kept most of us here as long as we have been. And don't compliment me like that, you'll make me blush.... =( ^,_,^ )= You only need $5 to get into the Destiny Beta, assuming you have a PS4. I actually thought PS2 was already on PS4, maybe I'll check it out on PC after all. I'm just getting a little bitterness out before I wander away from the game and forums again. I used to be this wicked fan of CCP and would talk them up to everyone and now I can't even stomach the thought of CCP lately. They have entirely turned me away. There are just too many awesome, high quality games coming down the pipe for me to care anymore. NO MANS SKY HAVE MY BABIES!!!!
Rubber Banndit Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.06.27 22:39:00 - [173] - Quote I think the biggest problem here, is that Dust Players are not, have not been, and will not be in a position to understand what the hell you are talking about if they have not played EVE. They just aren't versed in the Damage Resistance knowledge that would make proper balances possible to Dust(Legion). Especially the CoDbags who think "shoot gun=kill everything" they don't know about Amarr/Caldari and Minmatar/Gallente Alliances or what that means unless an EVE player told them or they did independent research. So, to the point, any discussions regarding: Balance, Resistance, or Effective Damage are lost on players who still haven't even left Beta testing and don't understand that this game will NEVER be a polished product, EVER. It's not OP or imbalanced because it's hard to kill with the weapon you choose to use as ALL the items that should be in the game simply aren't (Precision Rifles?) We probably will never have Amarr, Gallente or Minmatar Heavy AV (HMG is b a r e l y AV) not to mention any other Light AV other than Swarms and to a degree Plasma Cannons. remember, the current state of vehicles is only half finished because of the rollback a few months ago. so why are we trying to balance half a puzzle box? where's destructable environment, Mtacs, deployable turrets, 36v36 combat, player market, vehicle locks(real ones), NEW MAPS? Balance is not possible without a complete roster of assets
Baal Omniscient Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 1845	Posted - 2014.06.27 22:42:00 - [174] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I wish I had never immersed myself in the EVE universe. I would have picked Python instead of Incubus as its hands down 100% the superior ship. Flying Incubus now just feels like pain. As I've said numerous times before, you're one of the few swarm launchers I've ever feared because you actually use tactics and teamwork. I'm just disheartened by the state of things and I'm just counting down the days till the Destiny beta at this point. I'm just tired of this constant teeter totter that is DUST and I honestly just want off at this point. It's too much. Also, I came to DUST for Drones and massive planets, both of which will never happen in DUST I understand. If I had the IRL money I'd be on Destiny too when it hits.... unfortunately it's likely I'll be stuck in Dust until PS2 hits ps4..... There's so much wasted potential here, and so much capacity for community among the players, even with such a simple chat system setup. That in my opinion was the biggest success of CCP, putting this chat window system into an FPS game. If it weren't for it, this game wouldn't have lasted half as long. The connections that grew between the playerbase because of it is what has kept most of us here as long as we have been. And don't compliment me like that, you'll make me blush.... =( ^,_,^ )= You only need $5 to get into the Destiny Beta, assuming you have a PS4. I actually thought PS2 was already on PS4, maybe I'll check it out on PC after all. I'm just getting a little bitterness out before I wander away from the game and forums again. I used to be this wicked fan of CCP and would talk them up to everyone and now I can't even stomach the thought of CCP lately. They have entirely turned me away. There are just too many awesome, high quality games coming down the pipe for me to care anymore. NO MANS SKY HAVE MY BABIES!!!! Oh, and I have to buy an Xbox One for one game, which upsets me.....Phantom Dust is coming back....other than Morrowind, that was probably the best Xbox game I ever played, and it was $20 brand new. I am so god damn pumped for that game. My disability payments just ended, so I'm jobless and pennyless. 5$ to me is like 20 packs of ramen, not a beta code. I have a ps4 I got with income taxes though, so ps2 is within my grasp. I shudder to think that Xbox might actually make a game I couldn't live without. Unless they come out with a Darksiders 3 or a Mercenaries 3 as an Xbox exclusive, there's no way I'd even entertain the idea. I'm very, VERY biased. PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 Cross Atu for CPM1 Winmatar Assault & Proficiency 5 Swarms Since Uprising 1.0
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14490	Posted - 2014.06.27 22:51:00 - [175] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: My disability payments just ended, so I'm jobless and pennyless. 5$ to me is like 20 packs of ramen, not a beta code. I have a ps4 I got with income taxes though, so ps2 is within my grasp. I shudder to think that Xbox might actually make a game I couldn't live without. Unless they come out with a Darksiders 3 or a Mercenaries 3 as an Xbox exclusive, there's no way I'd even entertain the idea. I'm very, VERY biased. I've been on the poor train the past 2 years so I understand completely. People look at you like you have 3 heads when you tell them you have no income, at all. Diplomacy was my income >_< Getting a ****** job and starting to pay down debts, just hoping my back holds out. Phantom Dust was basically one of the coolest, most original games I've ever played, and I definitely don't want to miss out on a new one. Hopefully it's still a year or so away so I have plenty of time lol.
Temias Mercurial Knights Of Ender Proficiency V. 98	Posted - 2014.06.28 03:01:00 - [176] - Quote In the likelihood that we'll never receive a HAV air-based vehicles (or gunships) this is worth discussing... but people seem be to a tad too ignorant of intellectually based and objective conversation. An idea and possible explanation to adjusting forge gun damage towards dropships could be calculated into kinetic force from the forge projectile. As the dropship is airborne, the kinetic damage could possibly be reduced, as it is not being slammed into the ground. With this, dropships may need to be shoved in the direction of the launched forge projectile (not bounced around like swarms, just moved in a single direction). In accordance to this, tanks and LAVS are more susceptible to forge gun damage, as the kinetic force is not dispersed into the air, but is absorbed through the vehicle and the ground, taking the full potential damage. Locking times for swarm launchers could be adjusted towards vehicle speed and type. Tanks, as a large vehicle, naturally will have short lock-on times, dropships would be longer, and LAVS could be a pain to do so. However, this should only apply when the vehicle is moving. A default lock-on time can be applied for stationary vehicles. To clarify, even if a tank is moving faster than a non-stationary LAV, the LAV will still have a longer lock-on time, which is in accordance to it's type. A default time can be applied towards vehicle types, and their speed simply stack onto or multiply them (nothing beyond 2 or 3 more seconds). This could present new skills and varients for both weapons, such as increased missile speed and decreased lock-on time when a target has achieved a certain speed (sounds goofy, but think of it as a temporary power-up that requires a prerequisite). Thoughts?
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11314	Posted - 2014.06.28 03:07:00 - [177] - Quote The more I think about it....the less I think anything will actually change in terms of ADS gameplay. If you will indulge me for a second and suggest that AV is not balanced against ADS as it is designed to directly combat tanks.... the only ways of balancing it aside from the varying lock on timers for swarms is to start applying specifically designated roles for AV weapons. However when you consider that an Anti Dropship weapons will need to be designed when the split emerges the weapon will do tis job effectually against Dropships and no other targets, in the end you will still be downed in 2-3 shots...... If you seek resistances for your vehicle on the grounds that you have less total HP and swarms are balanced against HAV all you are doing is seeking to make ADS the HAV of the Skies essentially in my mind make them the most OP vehicle ever to have existed in this game...... HAV durability on a vehicle that can fly....... Correct me if I am wrong because that is how this thread has been conveyed to me.... I haven't actually been able to find a Rhadamanthus post where he expresses options on what he wants. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
Riptalis Horizons' Edge Proficiency V. 28	Posted - 2014.06.28 06:24:00 - [178] - Quote For my Python I would like more PG & CPU with an extra High slot module. That would be nice. Or at least just the increase of PG & CPU. Logistics ak.0 ADS Pilot PSN: Riptalis
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 298	Posted - 2014.06.28 07:14:00 - [179] - Quote Not being a vehicle person, this entire conversation is a bit lost to me. However, It seems I am not the only one confused. Judge, your OP post may be clear to you, but I think you need to clarify further what your getting at, preferably with a proposed solution to the problem. You know, CCP Rattati absolutely loves spreadsheets and numbers
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2347	Posted - 2014.06.28 07:40:00 - [180] - Quote Regis Blackbird wrote: Not being a vehicle person, this entire conversation is a bit lost to me. However, It seems I am not the only one confused. Judge, your OP post may be clear to you, but I think you need to clarify further what your getting at, preferably with a proposed solution to the problem. You know, CCP Rattati absolutely loves spreadsheets and numbers The conversation has gone all over the place. What is has shown is that people don't quite understand vehicle HP/EHP/Resistance and how it has been and is being used as a balance tool. I know how much each missile does for each swarm build. I also know the shield to armour crossover damage of a swarm missile. This particular value of 259 damage (minmando), as a result of a tanks base 1200 armour is one large cause of balance problems. This threshold itself is very important but I am not sure how many people are aware of it. This is where adding or subtracting as little as 50 points from Armour can keep a tank alive for 1 whole volley more. This is why the tank vs dropships issue is rally important, because an incubus has 960 shields. I have looked thorough this thread and the forums, and have not seem the correct damage numbers anywhere. People have strong opinions, but need more information. My video on it, sitting on my desktop, is pretty boreing. I wonder how many people would care to watch another math filled video? Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion

Mortedeamor NoGameNoLife 1672	Posted - 2014.06.28 07:42:00 - [181] - Quote if you think about it logically dropships and lavs being much lightr armored and much more exposed should take more dmg from av than tanks...i know thats not where you were going with judge but still..i think it would be hilarious if that is what ccp took from this thread.
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2347	Posted - 2014.06.28 08:07:00 - [182] - Quote also.... I cheat anyway in my DEV provided re-skinned flying tank. Judge For CPM 1 youtube Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11316	Posted - 2014.06.28 08:13:00 - [183] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: also.... I cheat anyway in my DEV provided re-skinned flying tank. If only CCP would give us back the Nanofibre hulls and Broken Nitrous injectors...... we HAV's could scramble our fighter wings " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 298	Posted - 2014.06.28 08:28:00 - [184] - Quote Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: My video on it, sitting on my desktop, is pretty boreing. I wonder how many people would care to watch another math filled video? I would.
Riptalis Horizons' Edge Proficiency V. 28	Posted - 2014.06.28 08:58:00 - [185] - Quote Regis Blackbird wrote: Judge Rhadamanthus wrote: My video on it, sitting on my desktop, is pretty boreing. I wonder how many people would care to watch another math filled video? I would. +1 Logistics ak.0 ADS Pilot PSN: Riptalis
Judge Rhadamanthus Amarr Templar One 2347	Posted - 2014.06.28 09:29:00 - [186] - Quote Ill put it out then. I put the math onto the TV screen in the mec quarters, hoping to fool people into thinking it was slightly more interesting. Judge for CPM 1 Twitter @Judge_EVELegion
Grimmiers 601	Posted - 2014.06.28 10:42:00 - [187] - Quote Maybe standard dropships could get a resistance bonus. I suggested dropships taking less damage from rail rounds, but with added impulse so it's still good on an incubus.
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14499	Posted - 2014.06.28 13:58:00 - [188] - Quote Grimmiers wrote: Maybe standard dropships could get a resistance bonus. I suggested dropships taking less damage from rail rounds, but with added impulse so it's still good on an incubus. Railguns have been neutered. Right now my only complaint is how obnoxious swarms are vs Armor at the moment. Every damn thing does bonus damage to armor except plasma cannon, which isn't exactly a good anti dropship weapon, especially considering it's good vs the ship with the lower profile, higher speed, and better maneuverability. A single ADV swarm is enough to completely deny my Incubus in most cases now. It's obnoxious.
Atiim EnvyUs. 9944	Posted - 2014.06.28 14:00:00 - [189] - Quote Grimmiers wrote: Maybe standard dropships could get a resistance bonus. I suggested dropships taking less damage from rail rounds, but with added impulse so it's still good on an incubus. And again, what purpose would giving Dropships a resistance bonus serve other than to make AV weapons ineffective against them? Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND
Atiim EnvyUs. 9944	Posted - 2014.06.28 14:05:00 - [190] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Grimmiers wrote: Maybe standard dropships could get a resistance bonus. I suggested dropships taking less damage from rail rounds, but with added impulse so it's still good on an incubus. Railguns have been neutered. Right now my only complaint is how obnoxious swarms are vs Armor at the moment. Every damn thing does bonus damage to armor except plasma cannon, which isn't exactly a good anti dropship weapon, especially considering it's good vs the ship with the lower profile, higher speed, and better maneuverability. A single ADV swarm is enough to completely deny my Incubus in most cases now. It's obnoxious. So if your having a problem with an explosive weapon being as effective as it's supposed to be against Armor, why not simply stop using armored vehicles? That's like someone using a Minmatar Assault saying Scrambler Rifles are overpowered. The complaint holds no merit, as they are intentionally designed to be extremely effective against that "tank" style, and are equally ineffective against the other. Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND

DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14500	Posted - 2014.06.28 14:10:00 - [191] - Quote Atiim wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: Grimmiers wrote: Maybe standard dropships could get a resistance bonus. I suggested dropships taking less damage from rail rounds, but with added impulse so it's still good on an incubus. Railguns have been neutered. Right now my only complaint is how obnoxious swarms are vs Armor at the moment. Every damn thing does bonus damage to armor except plasma cannon, which isn't exactly a good anti dropship weapon, especially considering it's good vs the ship with the lower profile, higher speed, and better maneuverability. A single ADV swarm is enough to completely deny my Incubus in most cases now. It's obnoxious. So if your having a problem with an explosive weapon being as effective as it's supposed to be against Armor, why not simply stop using armored vehicles? That's like someone using a Minmatar Assault saying Scrambler Rifles are overpowered. The complaint holds no merit, as they are intentionally designed to be extremely effective against that "tank" style, and are equally ineffective against the other. Yea, I'm not about to play for months on end to fly in a ship of the race that I despise, just so I can avoid a single weapon. I can't exactly just flip from one ship to the other. I'd rather the weapon were just a little less insanely good against armor. I'm just counting down the days till the Destiny beta, and then so many great games will be coming out that I won't have to worry about this clusterfuck anymore. In the meantime, I'll voice my opinion that an ADV auto aim weapon probably shouldn't completely deny a 500K difficult to operate efficiently vehicle.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one 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.