Rattati, ran out of characters to do a quote. What I would recommend as we currently can't do B or C is re introducing turret variants. Give us an av and an ai of each turret and maybe a half way in between. Av should be high direct damage but no splash. Ai is moderate splash damage with not much higher direct damage. You are trying to encourage ads to strafe. This means we need a similar mechanic to the large Missile turret for all our turrets. We need to fire a lot of damage over about a second or two and then take a while to reload. Then the ads skill can be too increase mag size to increase the length of the strafe we can do.

One suggestion for the av variants is you could have no magazines. Total ammo such that the total damage of proto max skills can kill a heavily tanked proto tank if most of the shots hit. Then you have to go to a supply depo to rearm. This also means the tank can dodge some of your fire then doesn't have to worry about you for a bit. (Don't make it so we can kill the tank in like 5 seconds though. At least 20 seconds of hovering to kill it so if there is any enemy av the tank will survive as the ads gets thrown off course by the av)

Sounds very interesting, indeed. Huge DPS, very small clips, long reload times for tank hunting.

Are you suggesting AV missile variants with no splash. I like it, but there won't be a rail anti infantry version, though, I don't see how that would fit.

This is getting the creative juices flowing.

Sounds very interesting, indeed. Huge DPS, very small clips, long reload times for tank hunting.

Are you suggesting AV missile variants with no splash. I like it, but there won't be a rail anti infantry version, though, I don't see how that would fit.

This is getting the creative juices flowing.

A) I am fine with a small transport capability. Is removing that down to lets say pilot plus 2 gunners viable and feasible?

D) I disagree, an ADS can cover way more ground, sure a LAV can too, but again, I don't like shoehorning, the ADS can do that fine even though its not an Apache job.

I like the splash damage increase instead of ROF, but we can increase dps by increasing damage instead of ROF on incubus, making them less spammy and more powerful. The spam makes it way easier to kill infantry than high powered and fewer shots. We can also introduce a slight dispersion to rails so less accurate against infantry.

What is the effective DPS to kill a Madrugar, that remains unanswered.

A) I point to Dergle and Boss SobanRe as the optimal way an ADS should behave. Dergle flies, Boss guns, and together they do far more damage than a solo pilot can do. I'd go as far to say as remove the side guns and make the front turret a gunner seat, if that is feasible. If you want to keep transport capability, I'd say leave in the passenger seats. But the most effective ADS I've seen is a pilot and gunner. We should emphasize that.

D) Shoehorning isn't necessarily a bad thing. The right tool for the right job. Sure, an ADS can fly over and see whats on the other side of that hill, but his specialization isn't to scout, it is to attack. I feel like that would be giving the ADS too many hats to wear at once. I feel like we should focus on the assault part of assault dropship. As an infantry example, we don't want sentinels to do recon, or scouts to do frontal assaults. Each suit has its job, while not doing so well in other jobs.

More damage is a good suggestion as well for tank busting, however keep in mind that the bonus applies to both rails and blasters. If we go with my suggestion of 12.5% hybrid damage per level, that's a total increase of 62.5% damage on blasters. That would be a monster against infantry, especially once blasters get their necessary tweak to dispersion. We could add dispersion to rails, but then that defeats the purpose of them being long range. A difficult problem for sure, each solution having its pros and cons.

As far as how much DPS needed to bust a Maddy, a Maddy has base 5200 helth all told. A single gun run should last 2-4 seconds. Let's assume 3 for the purposes of this experiment. 5200/3 is 1733.33 DPS to bust in a single run, assuming no reppers and such. I can point out that in Charlie, a maxed out Incubus pilot with a maxed out gunner could down a Maddy in a single pass, so we would need to get comparable DPS to Charlie to realize this vision.

A) ...I'd go as far to say as remove the side guns and make the front turret a gunner seat, if that is feasibleGǪ

I like the idea of python be anti- infantry and incubus be anti- vehicle. If the HAVs aren't anti infantry (which sounds ridiculous), some vehicle needs to be. Otherwise what's the point?

I am in favor or shoehorning because I want to have a job to do and I want to do it well. I do not want to be mediocre at everything in my ADS.

Do this if you want to kill the ADS.

I can tell you that this will remove ADS from competitive play (PC) and make it used only by fringe pilots with their friends in pubs. A gunner manned forward turret will never be as effective as a pilot manned turret because of the crazy amount of communication and coordination needed. Not to mention you're sacrificing 1/8th of the personnel on a team for something that can only be equally effective.

Yes, I would like to deploy a few tactical tweaks over next two weeks, concerning the viability of dropships.

Let's state a few data points.

1) Fact. The sky did not fall down, the ADS is not being instapopped all over the place, that much is clear. So swarm vs ADS does not need any specific attention. It's scarier for sure for pilots, but not untenable.

2) Small Blaster Turrets are better in Delta, our data shows that clearly

3) Incubus is less efficient than the Python, in effective kills per spawn, or K/S. (i.e. Shield better than Armor)

4) Myron is less efficient than the Grimsnes in K/S. (Shield better than Armor)

3 and 4a) K/S is not an absolute measure of dropship efficiency as they are used for different things, but they are still a useful metric. WP/S is another and ISK destroyed/ISK lost is the third. Any other smart metric that comes to mind?

3a) Can a veteran pilot please post indisputably competitive fits for all 4 dropships for us to study internally. Protofits link will do nicely.

4) Yet, people complain that the Python is worse than the Incubus, even after the rail ROF nerf.

Let's get to some more discussions.

Players have been asking, "what is the role of the ADS", and to that I only have one answer, "we provide the sandbox, you play in it". We have no intent to shoehorn in an exact playstyle. We have broadly defined the HAV Large Turrets to be "AV", and that's it. Same goes for the Dropships, they should be durable and slow, and be able to deliver their payload of a full squad to an objective while under fire, and while suppressing enemy infantry, basically a Huey.

However, we can define some gameplay where the ADS should excel. Of course the Apache is the "blueprint" for the Close Combat Infantry suppression and/or Tank hunting, and the AC-130 for long range suppression.

A) First contact. ADS, being the most mobile unit, rapidly deploys two 2 man units on Objectives with uplinks, while the rest wait to spawn, or even 3-4 solo units. It can then reinforce weak spots and support infantry, that in turn supports the ADS against infantry AV.

B) Harass and Suppress enemy airforces by destroying recently delivered dropships on the ground

C) Destroy enemy HAVs - the firepower should be enough to to identify a hostile target, and take it out in a single run, even under light Anti-Air resistance. If an HAV is deployed in the middle of the map, the ADS should be able to take it out unless 2 Anti-Air units are defending it (give or take), if an HAV is deployed in the redzone and comes rumbling into battle, the ADS should be able to put a hurt on even the toughest Madrugar. If the ADS flies into a trap and 2 Small Turret gunners pop out with Forges or Swarms, the ADS should probably be destroyed.

D) Recon - Utilizing speed and equipping scanners to provide intel

E) Objective Suppression, stay out of the 175 meter lock range, at 300 out of Forge Range and pummel an objective or spawnpoint with missile fire/rail fire

F) All the Delta changes were intended to do was reduce the ADS's OP efficiency at almost everything, Now we can carefully bring tactically chosen efficiencies back.

These are a few playstyles that should work. I hear that the Incubus ROF is not enough currently to properly be able to do C). What is the effective ROF necessary at full skills, to be able to kill a fully skilled solo Madrugar in a "single" strafing run, or DPS necessary? Can it be done by Pilot alone? At 2 or 3 gunners, it should be relatively easy as you have invested 3 players to kill 1 in the HAV, the HAV should then have 2 Anti Air infantry to defend him. Tank players, where is your line, you don't want to be instapopped do you?

Please support your ROF/DPS proposals with the fits you are using and also the Madrugar/Gunnlogi you are attacking.

Clearly you've never encountered an incubus duo in PC. Well, at least pre-Charlie.

A vehicle should be better than a dropsuit in firepower, but require multiple people to man. I honestly feel like vehicles are in this state of being unnecessary, since they do nothing a dropsuit can't do. But they should be as effective as multiple dropsuits, while taking multiple dropsuits to man. Also, this means we can make it take multiple AV to shoot down.

To Grey: I feel like ADS were supposed to be Apache's, but were gone about it wrong. A true attack aerial vehicle would be a light aircraft, basically a LAV in the sky. As it stands, we need a dedicated aerial attack craft. ADS can fill that role, at least until Legion comes out and we can create new content. As far as incubi being the answer to everything in the sky, yeah that's the point. The incubus is the vehicle killer, to include dropships. ADS should be Apache's sacrificing transport for more attack abilities. SDS are Huey's, door guns to support infantry, but mainly focused on getting troops from one place to another quickly. scouting is easily done with refurbished SLAVs. Everything has it's place.

A) First contact. ADS, being the most mobile unit, rapidly deploys two 2 man units on Objectives with uplinks, while the rest wait to spawn, or even 3-4 solo units. It can then reinforce weak spots and support infantry, that in turn supports the ADS against infantry AV.

B) Harass and Suppress enemy airforces by destroying recently delivered dropships on the ground

C) Destroy enemy HAVs - the firepower should be enough to to identify a hostile target, and take it out in a single run, even under light Anti-Air resistance. If an HAV is deployed in the middle of the map, the ADS should be able to take it out unless 2 Anti-Air units are defending it (give or take), if an HAV is deployed in the redzone and comes rumbling into battle, the ADS should be able to put a hurt on even the toughest Madrugar. If the ADS flies into a trap and 2 Small Turret gunners pop out with Forges or Swarms, the ADS should probably be destroyed.

D) Recon - Utilizing speed and equipping scanners to provide intel

E) Objective Suppression, stay out of the 175 meter lock range, at 300 out of Forge Range and pummel an objective or spawnpoint with missile fire/rail fire

F) All the Delta changes were intended to do was reduce the ADS's OP efficiency at almost everything, Now we can carefully bring tactically chosen efficiencies back.

Rail variant with a low charge time, low damage, high clip fully automatic. Different reticle, small amounts of splash. Like a long range blaster. Due to its nature it would be a hybrid of ai and aa except not excel at both (like missiles do). Just throwing it out there I'm neutral to all this.

Pt. 1

A: This is probably the primary purpose of ADSs. I frequently deploy tactical assets (teammates) in specific locations (usually up high) along with giving whatever equipment support is needed as well. They give me ground support and I give them arial support. It works amazingly and we regularly keep air- and vehicle-superority. I've also theory crafted an attack squad of 2 ADSs and 4 ground infantry (6 total) that all move and attack together, but I've never had anyone willing to follow the plan for long.

B: This bothers me a bit because it sounds like you're insinuating ADSs aren't meant for air-to-air combat. ADSs (specifically a rail Incubus) should be the absolute best counter to other ADSs (mainly because they can take away the ADSs main defense: running away). But yes, ADSs should rule the skys as well as rule the high ground by destroying enemy equipment.

C: This is also bothering. Being able to take out a tank in a "single run" is serious firepower. If we define "single run" Gëñ30s, that means tanks are utterly screwed against an ADS in every case. Currently, I think the way things are now are fine: the ADS can easily whittle down a tank without support, but the tank also has the opportunity to run to a redline or under cover. Anything more would be a serious blow to tankers that I don't support.

You are also mistaken about how many AVers it takes to effectively fend off an ADS. It only takes 1 of any kind of AV to "defeat" an ADS (defeat = prevent from doing what it would normally do without interference, usually forcing the ADS to flee immediately and return later to fight the AV). It is impossible for an ADS to kill a tank while taking fire from a single swarmer or forge, almost without regard to tier of AV. A Python will die in about 10sec (4x 1.05s for lock, 4s for reload, 1-2sec for travel time) to a single equally tiered swarmer, so unless you think an ADS can kill a tank in that time it's not going to happen.

D: This is another role that the ADS is perfect for and executes perfectly. The high vantage point is perfect for viewing a whole battlefield and assessing where vehicles are or troops are moving to and from and its firepower and quickness allow it to address certain threats by itself. In PC I regularly call out enemy tank positions for tankers and AVers as well as DS drop locations and possible destinations before they arrive.

E: You're not hitting anything, even a tank, at 175m with a missile. Much less could you hit anything at 300m with a small rail. Typical max ADS engagement range, even with rails, is 80--90m, and that's with horrible efficiency.

F: Let's categorize these roles as things that are innate to ADSs and what is dependent on modules:

Native: A (transport), D (recon)

Fitted: A (close-air support/ AI), B (Anti-air), C (AV)


For AI, AA, and AV, the utility and effectiveness of the ADS lies in its turret. Defensive mods for ADSs now are only to provide enough ehp to surviving escaping AV as it is almost impossible to fight back AV unless you know exactly where the AVer is and deal with them immediately. Utility mods (mCRUs, scanners, ammo, etc) are almost never used because they take up too much fitting (either PG/CPU or just a slot) to make up for what they take away. It's all in the turret.

As such, turrets should then be altered to define what role the ADS is going to play. The best way I can think of doing this would be to (re)introduce turret variants with these specific roles in mind (as well as considering the roles of LAVs, tanks, and regular DSs). I've already mentioned above as to what missiles and blasters could look like, as for rails, I thought of these earlier:

Compressed Rail: low RoF, high damage, moderate heating, long range, low tracking/rotation. Anti-tank at sniping ranges, possibly anti-air by LAVs or DSs as well. Perhaps consider giving an efficacy nerf against infantry targets.

Burst Rail: fires a burst of 3-5 rail shots, charges up for each burst, fairly quick heat up (3-4 bursts max), high dispersion and low range (about 100m accurately against tanks and the long side of a DS), slight AI usage at closer range.

Clearly you've never encountered an incubus duo in PC. Well, at least pre-Charlie.

A vehicle should be better than a dropsuit in firepower, but require multiple people to man. I honestly feel like vehicles are in this state of being unnecessary, since they do nothing a dropsuit can't do. But they should be as effective as multiple dropsuits, while taking multiple dropsuits to man. Also, this means we can make it take multiple AV to shoot down.

I have. They're only really effective because of the RoF stacking bug. Other than that they're just a faster, less tanky Grimsnes. When I do fight them I have more trouble against the pilot gunner than the side gunner because the pilot can track me easier and keep up with my evasive movements because he know immediately how to move the dropship to keep on me. This is much less efficient when the pilot has to keep the DS steady or aimed for a side gunner, much less a forward gunner.


But 2 individual dropsuits Gëá 2 coordinating in a DS. Things gets far more complicated and inefficient the more people that get involved (see governments for a good example). Imagine it like someone's aiming and shooting your gun while you move about on the ground, perhaps with perfect teamwork you can be as good as you would be normally, but you're still only just as good.

To achieve that kind of teamwork will also require a lot of practice between two people, meaning that not just any blueberry, or any corp member or friend for that matter, can jump into your ADS and be as efficient as those that have practiced together. Every person has their individual nuances, preferences, habits, etc. that are all part of how they work together with others and are really magnified with something as intricate as ADS gunning.

All points you bring up are correct. Now, take your dropsuit needing two people to control. Now imagine that dropsuit has access to a weapon doing 2.5x the damage of a regular rifle. Suddenly becomes more worth it, huh?

And the skill stacking "bug" should be the focus. Both pilot and gunner need to train skills. Your right, not just anybody can hop in and gun. The two must work together, train together, to become a coordinated team. How is this not in line with a team based game like Dust?

The skill stacking isn't going away. So why not make it the focus of the ADS? Your gunner needs to invest the same so as the pilot, they must work together and train together in order to be come as one... And are rewarded by being more effective than they would be running g together on the ground.

This is how we can make vehicles worth it. 2 people in a drop ship are worth more than 2 people on the ground, only after the team has put in time together to know how they act and learn to function as a team. This cannot be a bad thing.

Sounds very interesting, indeed. Huge DPS, very small clips, long reload times for tank hunting.

Are you suggesting AV missile variants with no splash. I like it, but there won't be a rail anti infantry version, though, I don't see how that would fit.

This is getting the creative juices flowing.

Very true Ghazbaran, on the subject, what damage type are small missiles? Very recently Rattati revealed large missiles AND swarms counted as PROJECTILE damage, which completely blew my mind. Can we get the scoop on small missiles, please? Are they also projectile?

I would like to point out one inherent drawback to the missile launcher that we all have "learned to deal with" that I would like to see fixed in the near future somehow. The natural small latency of the game (too negligible to even call lag) creates the effect causing the missile to "spawn" right beside the turret after having fired it. Missiles NEVER seem to fire directly from the turret but rather somewhere around it depending on how the ship is moving. This is the source of the bug that causes gunners to kill themselves in pubs and get banned from factional warfare when they damage their own ship. This occurs when the dropship is moving sideways and the missile is "spawned" inside the ship, firing towards the gunner who pulled the trigger. This is also the biggest difficulty with firing while moving. Most pilot/gunner combos have learned to deal with this and try to stop moving the ship before beginning to fire on the ennemy, which eliminates the effect completely, allowing reliable aim.

That's exactly the issue, the dropship itself should not be the deciding of what it is used for, but how it is fitted. Giving a balance weapons so that depending how they are fitted will give both ADS and future ADS for the other racial ones role specifics depending what they have equipped, just how it goes for those on the ground and other vehicles as well. As it stands the Incubus already can fit modules better. We are trying to make both dropships usable. Those dedicated pilots will have more to do, and those who wish to only dedicate themselves to one type of dropship will also benefit from this. This is what I hope everyone understands and not just go to keeping the dropships status quo.

I see where you're coming from, but let's give an infantry example. What if sentinels want another role besides being shoehorning into point defense? Should we give them better speed and ewar so they can be good at that too? No, we would tell them to get a scout suit. The same applies here. If you want to kill infantry, bring out a Python. If you want to bust tanks, an incubus. If you want to transport squads, a grimsnes. The right tool for the right job.

The same goes for vehicles. We should have a drop ship that specializes in transport. Another that specializes in infantry suppression. Another that specializes in vehicle hunting. Another that specializes in staying power. The right vehicle for the right role. This is why I want ADS to focus on attack. Leave scouting to scouts and transporting to transport DS. The assault drop ship should assault.

You seem to be saying two different things: either that the ADS should be considered a role, like a Sentinel, Scout or Assault; or that each racial ADS should be considered a role.

The former, perfectly legitimate; the latter most definitely not.

The issue from reading your post is that you said the Incubus's role should be tankbuster while the Python should e infantry suppression: that's like saying a CalScout should be a sniper while a GalScout should be AV - both are and should be EWar platforms: both ADSs should be assault platforms (hence the name...)

It's more like this: MinLogi focuses on keeping everyone repaired. CalLogi focuses on keeping everyone supplied with ammo, and some repair. GalLogi focuses on giving everyone intel. AmLogi focuses on keeping spawnpoints up and running.

They all do logistics, but they all do it in different ways. Likewise, the ADS should assault, but the Python does it by suppressing infantry with missile fire, and the Incubus does it by keeping vehicles destroyed. Same job, different methods.

Why don't you just add the turret variants which rattati seemed quite keen on, then both can do each others role, admittedly without the racial skill bonuses. Therefore it will be very similar to your logi example, as I can still equip and use a rep tool on my gal logi, but I won't be as efficient as the min logi. Same as I could still equip the av rail variant to my python but I won't get whatever the skill bonus is (rattati I suggest increasing ammo per mag so each burst/strafing run can last longer)