DUST Search - Sticky:Hotfix Delta

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:Hotfix Delta - Dropships

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 8 post(s)

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 8214	Posted - 2014.09.28 09:18:00 - [1] - Quote Pilots and anti-Pilots some numbers are in. Overall it seems that we successfully toned down the Assault Dropship power, and buffed the Dropship power. Looking at dropships compared to other vehicles, we are fairly happy with how the Python is playing out right now. There is a good solid spike of efficiency for the Small Blaster as well, correlating with the Grimsnes taking a leap upwards. The Incubus is still very powerful but not as powerful as the Python. The Myron is just not very good at all, and nothing changed with the increased EHP/PG/CAP and Turret changes. Let's explore together simple ways to tweak these two. Personally, not a fan of the rapid fire railgun turrets, please keep that in mind. Also keep in mind that the ROF on railLAV's was reduced on purpose, due to infantry sniping. Maybe a combination of increasing the Incubus bonus to ROF slightly, or simply removing the 70% rail turret inefficiency against vehicles and then increasing chargeup time rather than decreasing ROF to balance? Or heat? On the Myron/Grimsnes, someone advocated more maneuverability without increased speed, sounds like a fine idea. Experienced Myron pilots, what about it's fitting style or bonuses makes it so much worse than the Python. (A similar question but off topic, the Gunnlogi is quite less efficient than the Madrugar, bonus points to explain why) Appreciate the feedback "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Crimson ShieId Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 959	Posted - 2014.09.28 09:28:00 - [2] - Quote Just coming in for the tank bit as I don't pilot dropships beyond militia. The answer is simple though, the fact that the Madruger has a constant rep rate versus a Gunlogi, which takes time for its' shields to begin recharging is what makes the Maddies more effective. An example that could be used to clarify this would involve a Min scout with proto knives. Now, against a Maddy with, say... a single complex heavy repair unit, the knives might be able to outdamage the reps, but even if he can squeeze off those slashes perfectly, it's going to take him awhile to chip away at the tanks' health, even if it isn't moving at all. A Gunlogi on the other hand would only take a few moments, because the shields have a recharge delay and therefore the tank doesn't get its' health back as long as the scout keeps slashing away. I personally prefer Gunlogis and Sicas over Somas and Maddies due to the maneuverability and the way the modules work, but the vast majority of players will stick to armor tanks due to that single factor of having constant health regen, even if it is a tad slower. Nova Knives are best sidearm.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 8214	Posted - 2014.09.28 09:30:00 - [3] - Quote I think we should also establish a few rules of thumb Small Turrets Blaster: Anti-Infantry Railgun: Anti-Vehicle Missiles: Dual Purpose Current Best to Worst by Type Anti Infantry Pilot: Missiles, Blaster, Rails Sidegunner - Dropship: Blaster, Missile, Rails Sidegunner - ADS:Blaster, Missile, Rails Anti Air Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster Anti Vehicle Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster Or something along those lines, to see if there are holes/unintended inefficiencies. Feel free to edit this, or expand, this is just to get the discussion going, please don't go off the rails because of my selections. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1322	Posted - 2014.09.28 09:40:00 - [4] - Quote Small rails are less effective than missiles because 1) their damage is considerably less per shot than missiles - they need to land more shots on target than missiles do to do comparable damage, this is very very hard to do and 2) they don't have splash - you must land every shot directly on target to do damage. A small splash range would help rails immensely, the other option is to slow their rate of fire a bit more and increase damage comparably. Myron underperforms for the exact same reasons that gunnlogi's do - armor vehicles rep constantly no matter what, shield vehicles taking any damage stops their reps for fairly lengthy durations of time... also it's entirely possible to lose all of your hp by bouncing up and down on the ground very quickly. Gunnlogi's underperform because they do not rep constantly - any 'actual' damage shuts off their tank. If it were possible to do in game, I'd suggest making all shields rep x value every y seconds inherently (say, 450 shields every 3.5 seconds) with modules that can either increase the x value or reduce the y value - this is in no way true to eve, where shields passively repair constantly and their reps get stronger up until 33% where tank is 'broken' and shield boosters repair decent amounts very quickly but at extreme capacitor costs). The current system just doesn't work - because armor does regenerative tanking better. Armor in eve doesn't have passive repairs, it has to be activated and it has long cycle times (repairing at the end of a cycle) but has reasonably high rep values, most importantly their repairing is extremely capacitor efficient. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
CamClarke 0uter.Heaven 144	Posted - 2014.09.28 09:45:00 - [5] - Quote CCP Rattati, this is slightly off-topic but related, is there any chance you could adjust how hard you need to press L1 for full thrust? I noticed you (or someone, anyway) enabled the pressure differential sensitivity on dropship thrust, which has been a source of complaints of "sluggishness". Right now it feels like I have to really dig in there now which feels awkward when it used to only take a light touch. Pythons are otherwise doing okay still...I guess...when they're completely unopposed except by one MLT swarmer.
nicholas73 Glitched Connection 225	Posted - 2014.09.28 10:02:00 - [6] - Quote The gunnlogi still can't aim as low as the madrugar, please fix that. Why Madrugars are better, well the madrugar can have a fuel injector and a scanner, while still utilizing all of their low slots for their primary armour modules, on the other hand the gunnlogi after fitting the primary shield modules on the high slots cannot fit anything they can utilize on the low slots. Also, madrugars can already have 200 HP/s repair without any delay (as well as have a hardener or armour plate), while the shield tanks have to wait for that delay, which can be crucial. Proud member of Glitched Connection
Derrith Erador 2750	Posted - 2014.09.28 11:47:00 - [7] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Pilots and anti-Pilots some numbers are in. Overall it seems that we successfully toned down the Assault Dropship power, and buffed the Dropship power. Looking at dropships compared to other vehicles, we are fairly happy with how the Python is playing out right now. There is a good solid spike of efficiency for the Small Blaster as well, correlating with the Grimsnes taking a leap upwards. The Incubus is still very powerful but not as powerful as the Python. The Myron is just not very good at all, and nothing changed with the increased EHP/PG/CAP and Turret changes. Let's explore together simple ways to tweak these two. Personally, not a fan of the rapid fire railgun turrets, please keep that in mind. Also keep in mind that the ROF on railLAV's was reduced on purpose, due to infantry sniping. Maybe a combination of increasing the Incubus bonus to ROF slightly, or simply removing the 70% rail turret inefficiency against vehicles and then increasing chargeup time rather than decreasing ROF to balance? Or heat? On the Myron/Grimsnes, someone advocated more maneuverability without increased speed, sounds like a fine idea. Experienced Myron pilots, what about it's fitting style or bonuses makes it so much worse than the Python. (A similar question but off topic, the Gunnlogi is quite less efficient than the Madrugar, bonus points to explain why) Appreciate the feedback My findings on the Python: 1) The ROF bonus given to us is still, IMO, negligible compared to the raw ROF. ROF is as follows: 1.20= Raw Rate of Fire 1.20-.18= Rate of Fire bonus on Python I'll stand by what I said before that the ROF is unnoticeable. I find that the benefits around the incubus are better than python with the current ROF. 2) Findings on Incubus: That thing got mauled hardcore. The ROF is the one thing that kept that thing as dangerous as it was. You said you weren't a fan of rapid fire incubus, but that's the only way I saw that thing being a threat to me. In order to make it a threat again, I'd say improve all three above aspects you proposed. I'm afraid I've become an ADS purist, and absolutely refuse to fly grimsnes and Myron, so I cannot offer any useful insight. The preacher of Betty White, may her pimp hand guide me.
Skybladev2 LUX AETERNA INT RUST415 121	Posted - 2014.09.28 12:16:00 - [8] - Quote I agree with previous posts: Myron have to 'attack' and defend both with high slots. Low slots are useless for that ship, especially when you removed overdrives (I had to use it in my old Python fits pre 1.7) So let's view my Grimsnes fit: High Slots: 1x Active Scanner or 1xMCRU (for team assist) 1x Afterburner (as defensive module to avoid damage) Low slots: 4 x Armor Repairers (to stand for low DPS and returning in battle faster when took heavy damage) Compare to Myron: High slots 1 x Afterburner (shield dropships have to avoid damage even harder, because they lesser tanked) 1 x Active Scanner or 1xMCRU (for gaining WP) 2 x (Tanking modules) Low slots: Armor modules? - they are useless, because armor plates slow down Myron. Also Myron havs low base armor HP. CPU Enhancers? - Myron have more CPU than Grimsnes Damage Control Units? - I do not fit turrets to Myron to save CPU/PG. Also, random blueberries are useless in most cases. PG modules? - maybe, but this is not an attack/defense module. Most turret upgrades are not applicable to my playstyle without turrets, so I do not fit it too. As summary, I say that Myron need afterburner just as armor dropships, but this -1 high slot weakens it much more. Maybe you should move Active Scanner and/or MCRU to low slots? Also, I would like to mention that differentiating swarms with fast/weak and slow/strong will be cool idea in general, as buffing swarms hurts pilots stronger, than tankers. It also makes more choices for players as well as new branching for learning curve. <[^_^]>
Alexia Hale Volus Industries 0	Posted - 2014.09.28 12:39:00 - [9] - Quote I used to fly a Myron pre 1.7, but I stopped once the passive torque modules were removed from the market (Overdrives I think). On the rare occasion I actually brought in a ship post 1.7 I used a python or incubus because of how much more responsive they were to fly. I'm pretty terrible with the pilot mounted gun, but I still preferred the python for when I had a gunner because of how much easier it was to maneuver around obstacles. Pre 1.7 I was too broke to bring in pythons more than on rare occasions, so I stuck with the Myron. I lost enough isk back then, so I ran ground 1.7 and on. I do gun fairly often now, and I find the grimsnes the most pleasant for it. Its a very stable platform to shoot from compared to caldari ships. Gallente ships do take a bit longer to shift momentum, but they have the benefits of constant reps and they don't need to give up primary tank to fit an afterburner. I'd suggest giving the caldari ships a small turret rotation speed bonus. It would help the gunner keep the gun from colliding with the drop ship when turning, and make strafing runs a bit easier for the gunner. They need to have ways to capitalize on their superior handling compared to gallente ships (especially when it makes aiming a bit more jarring for the gunner). Bringing back overdrives and shield recharger modules would also be a nice tweak to shield vehicles, but I don't know if that can be done server side. I still have a few overdrives in my assets though. I prefer to use missiles as the gunner because I can easily see their trail and adjust my next shot accordingly. The splash is needed to take out equipment, too. Considering many pesky areas can only be reached by ship a way to take out equipment in a timely fashion is important(trying to do so with a rail was hard even when it had splash). Rails just feel wonky/unreliable as to where they hit compared to where the reticule is (reminds me of my love/hate relationship I've had with my shotgun since I started in uprising 1.1). They are handy in dogfights at least since missiles aren't the most accurate while the pilot is taking evasive maneuvers (taking into account distance to the target, predicting how they will move, and how my pilot will move). I've only spent a few matches with the blasters, but I'm enjoying them. Still getting used to them, but I've had at least moderate success gunning from a saga-ii, sica, and grimsnes. Small blasters make me really miss heat sinks Seems like I'm constantly overheating or reloading, but I'll get better at managing heat build up and clip size as I use it more. The spare ammo bonus is much appreciated! TL;DR Give caldari ships a turret rotation speed buff for the gunners. Either bring back overdrives or give the Myron better acceleration/thrust. Gallente ships are more stable to gun from and have constant regen. Caldari ships need to capitalize on their better maneuverability.
BL4CKST4R La Muerte Eterna Dark Taboo 3162	Posted - 2014.09.28 12:42:00 - [10] - Quote For the Grimsnes and Myron I believe the issue is number chasing, although armor is less resilient to AV Grimsnes has higher numbers and therefore most will assume it is better. Of course there is another idea I have, and that is that the Grimsnes has higher top speed than a Myron so coupled with a AB you can escape much quicker on a Grimsnes than on a Myron. The incubus has just a tiny dot as a reticle, it is difficult to aim with it not impossible specially if your aiming at a tank but a better reticle would help. As for the Madrugar it is number chasing + AA so it will score more points quicker before it is destroyed than a rail tank, especially now that a rail tank has little to no AA capabilities. I personally do not use Madrugars at all only Gunnlogis to me Madrugars are way to slow rotating and in a map with lots of AV it is a waste of ISK because escaping is difficult, for me at least. Of course now we are seeing the rise of Missile launchers on Gunnlogis taking up the role of mid range AV and close range AA very efficiently. The reason we don't see more of these is due to the high SP cost of using missile launchers, maybe reducing the SP requirement and we might see more Gunnlogis in the field. supercalifragilisticexpialidocious

Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 755	Posted - 2014.09.28 12:48:00 - [11] - Quote In the case of the Myron I think we need some more time to discover what we can do with it now. I went through about 10 Myrons just yesterday trying different stuff. I think there's a way to make it work somehow, but I'm not quite sure yet. Some random unfinished thoughts: - The Grimsnes doesn't have to sacrifice tank for the AB or mCRU (important for pubs). 6.5k hp passive + 95 hp/s reps + cpx AB + ADV turrets + CRU is a very good package. - The Myron has the upper hand on regeneration, but it's tough to put that into action when all threats on the battlefield are high in alpha damage. It can barely even tank three volleys from a damage amped wiyrkomi SL. - There's something wrong with shield extenders: If I fit a Myron and a Grimsnes both with two cpx PG units then the Grimsnes has two slots left for tank and the Myron has 4 slots left. When I'm done twidling around the Grimsnes has more tank than the Myron. What went wrong? - Shield regen is patently difficult to put into practice. I made some good experiences with a quadruple cpx shield-booster fitting. That fit shrugs off non-assault forgeguns and comes out standing even against assault variants. Then a damage amped railgun comes along and you're dead in two seconds (three shots) while the Grimsnes is afterburning to safety. - Shield hardeners are awesome while they are active, but their cooldown is crippling. If you want to be useful you have to cycle at least two of them. In that case your ability to tank high-alpha damage is on par with a armor DS, except that your ship is much harder to fly and has a downtime of 15 seconds once a minute. Generally, due to the fact that a railgun could 3 shot you any time during the match dropships are pretty much incompatible with the waves of opportunity design. If somebody called out targets via voicecoms a pilot could activate a hardener, kill two guys and spend the next 45 seconds waiting for the cooldown to end, but then he would be much more useful if he had been on the ground together with the person who called the target. If there was a vehicle module hotfix I'd like to see shield hardeners tuned towards where armor hardeners are and then give more raw hp to shield extenders. Alternatively large rails could have their DPS-curve flattened. I think in a HAV-fight a rail only applies it's long-term DPS anyway since it has to manage heat. The only thing that actually gets killed by the rail's 4 shot DPS-burst is the dropship, I think. At least to me the possibility of a damage amped large rail showing upany time during a match puts a lot of pressure towards high passive hp fits + AB, which the Myron can't do unless you shield harden, which makes you completely useless ~75% of the match.
Skybladev2 LUX AETERNA INT RUST415 121	Posted - 2014.09.28 13:13:00 - [12] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: - The Myron has the upper hand on regeneration, but it's tough to put that into action when all threats on the battlefield are high in alpha damage. It can barely even tank three volleys from a damage amped wiyrkomi SL. I totally agree, the biggest threat for DS is forgeguns, which renders shield drophips weaker by default in tanking it, even with buffed base shield HP. Forges have high alpha + increased damage profile against shields, and low base armor of Myron greately decreases it surivability. Grimsnes tanking is much better - it has decreased damage profile against forgeguns and high enough base armor HP to tank swarms. <[^_^]>
Skybladev2 LUX AETERNA INT RUST415 121	Posted - 2014.09.28 13:14:00 - [13] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: - The Myron has the upper hand on regeneration, but it's tough to put that into action when all threats on the battlefield are high in alpha damage. It can barely even tank three volleys from a damage amped wiyrkomi SL. I totally agree, the biggest threat for DS is forgeguns, which renders shield drophips weaker by default in tanking it, even with buffed base shield HP. Forges have high alpha + increased damage profile against shields, and low base armor of Myron greately decreases it surivability. Grimsnes tanking much better - it has decreased damage profile against forgeguns and high enough base armor HP to tank swarms. <[^_^]>
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 3dge of D4rkness. 0	Posted - 2014.09.28 13:29:00 - [14] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Looking at dropships compared to other vehicles, we are fairly happy with how the Python is playing out right now. The Incubus is still very powerful but not as powerful as the Python. It's been asked before and not been answered: what is the purpose of the ADS and each of the two we currently have? Is it intended to be a ground attack craft with limited transport capability, or a transport with slightly increased offensive power? If it is a transport primarily, then the SP costs for the various skills are far too high: 2.48m SP for a 15% ROF increase is pretty worthless - you're much better off just using a standard dropship, which is now tougher (which is fine) so can actually feasible insert/extract squads. If it is a ground attack craft primarily, then the bonuses are fairly weak, considering you have previously described wanting ADSs to be somewhat hit-and-run: with the ROF bonus as is, the running is doable but the hitting is sketchy at best. This is the sort of thing that needs to be determined or the ADS will forever float in a limbo: what role is the ADS supposed to perform on (above) the field? CCP Rattati wrote: Personally, not a fan of the rapid fire railgun turrets, please keep that in mind. Also keep in mind that the ROF on railLAV's was reduced on purpose, due to infantry sniping. Maybe a combination of increasing the Incubus bonus to ROF slightly, or simply removing the 70% rail turret inefficiency against vehicles and then increasing chargeup time rather than decreasing ROF to balance? Or heat? It was my understanding that the hit efficacies had been changed already: is that not so? Also, have you found what is causing the Incubus's bonus to apply incorrectly? If your concern for rapid fire railguns is that they are too effective against infantry, would the Incubus not be fine for an increased ROF, considering how difficult it is to hit infantry in an ADS? If not ROF, as presumably a damage bonus would also be out, then what effectiveness bonus would be useful? Heat build-up? Cool down speed? Those are still fairly lame for such a large SP sink. Returning to my first point: what is the intended role of the Incubus? CCP Rattati wrote: The Myron is just not very good at all, and nothing changed with the increased EHP/PG/CAP and Turret changes. On the Myron/Grimsnes, someone advocated more maneuverability without increased speed, sounds like a fine idea. Experienced Myron pilots, what about it's fitting style or bonuses makes it so much worse than the Python. Others have pointed out the glaring weakness of the Myron: all the good utility modules are in the high slots, which the Myron needs for tanking modules. This is the same issue with dropsuits and low slots having the vast majority of utility modules. CCP Rattati wrote: (A similar question but off topic, the Gunnlogi is quite less efficient than the Madrugar, bonus points to explain why) As others have said, shield regen is broken by relatively small hits, making the Gunnlogi (and also the Myron and Python) much less sustainable. Personally, I'd suggest that shield regen delays be greatly reduced but also cut the recharge rates to match and either entirely remove or vastly increase the regen-halting benchmark.
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 3dge of D4rkness. 0	Posted - 2014.09.28 13:38:00 - [15] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I think we should also establish a few rules of thumb Quick clarification: are these what you want them to be, or are these what your statistics say they are? CCP Rattati wrote: Anti Air Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster The main reason I ask is because of the highlighted section: pilot missiles are reasonable in an AA capacity (as befits the dual purpose role) but rails are far more reliable due to much greater travel speed and generally better application of damage. I don't consider this to be unreasonable, although the bugged Incubus makes this currently untenable due to the lower applicable damage than a regular DS's rails.
TH1EFOFSOuLS Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 30	Posted - 2014.09.28 14:17:00 - [16] - Quote Listen to me rattai. The Myron is fine I prefer it over my grim it is a beast dropship for transport and co-op gunning and I love the way it handles. People don't like the Myron because they don't have their fittings into vehicles like the vehicle guys do. If your going to do anything to the Myron to help the people that cant spec into vehicles because they want to go into another proto just buff EHP or CPU PG that is it. I am perfectly happy with my Myron and grim set up and if I hear anymore talk about it changing im going to show you just how well these things do in the hands of people who actually speced into them.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2134	Posted - 2014.09.28 14:25:00 - [17] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Pilots and anti-Pilots some numbers are in. Overall it seems that we successfully toned down the Assault Dropship power, and buffed the Dropship power. Looking at dropships compared to other vehicles, we are fairly happy with how the Python is playing out right now. There is a good solid spike of efficiency for the Small Blaster as well, correlating with the Grimsnes taking a leap upwards. The Incubus is still very powerful but not as powerful as the Python. The Myron is just not very good at all, and nothing changed with the increased EHP/PG/CAP and Turret changes. Let's explore together simple ways to tweak these two. Personally, not a fan of the rapid fire railgun turrets, please keep that in mind. Also keep in mind that the ROF on railLAV's was reduced on purpose, due to infantry sniping. Maybe a combination of increasing the Incubus bonus to ROF slightly, or simply removing the 70% rail turret inefficiency against vehicles and then increasing chargeup time rather than decreasing ROF to balance? Or heat? On the Myron/Grimsnes, someone advocated more maneuverability without increased speed, sounds like a fine idea. Experienced Myron pilots, what about it's fitting style or bonuses makes it so much worse than the Python. (A similar question but off topic, the Gunnlogi is quite less efficient than the Madrugar, bonus points to explain why) Appreciate the feedback How is the Gunnlogi less efficient than the Maddy? Because it has too much downtime with cooldown. There's no interruption to armor rep, yet you need 2 shield hardeners active to keep your shield up against ADV swarms. And also, you changed the railgun damage profile to do less to shields, and more to armor. That's another leg up the G'logi has against the Maddy. Plus with the fitting requirements, it's much easier to fit 2 damage mods on a G'logi, possibly complex damage mods at that, so you get near 40% extra damage considering stacking penalties. CPU and PG expansion mods are lot slot mods, so you can sacrifice an armor rep, plate or hardener to fit those complex damage mods plus a hardener. Overall, the Gunnlogi is far, far superior for destroying all vehicles over the Madrugar. The only problem is it's aforementioned down time. Do you fly dropships at all? Have you spent enough time to learn how to fly an ADS before Delta, learning how to maneuver them to get the best angle? Going further, what's their intended role now? I'd rather have the old fire rate for the Python back with half the missile damage across all tiers. I prefer a faster fire rate over more damage. It allows for more margin of error, especially when dealing with AV infantry. The Python is pretty squishy, especially if there's any reds on the field with at least ADV forge guns. You could have someone who's surprisingly good at doing no-math calculations with forge projectile travel time and ship flying speed and vector using just a STD level breach forge, and deny a 300m half sphere to all dropships in the sky. And that's just one person. Couple it with just one person using swarms, able to get off 2 volleys, and that's a dead ship. It's now next to impossible to escape swarms, unless you have boots on the ground to tell you when to go away, because that's the only way to escape the third volley. They still go around corners fairly well too. Also, rendering still sucks. At 200m, nothing appears. At 100, you're lucky if some stuff appears. Even at 50 or 75m, half the time they'll render, half the time they won't. And there's also still invisible swarms. The Incubus can't kick out enough DPS to effective deal with vehicles anymore. Plus, actually having the Gal ADS skill greatly hinders the amount of rounds you can fire, which reduces effective DPS. Is the ADS meant for quick transport? We had that with the Logi dropships. Problem was, they flew like bricks. Very slow and too little maneuverability. They also had a built-in MCRU, which didn't get any sort of passive bonus to the respawn time. If you want quick transport, bring those back with increased maneuverability, and make the passive bonus for quicker spawning. You could give them 4/2 or 2/4, increased base HP, 6 passenger slots, but no turrets. Vehicles constantly get pushed aside so infantry can get appeased. You could spend some time getting into squads with pilots to hear what we have to say. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2171	Posted - 2014.09.28 15:35:00 - [18] - Quote From my other thread: remove/tone down the hardener animation on the side turrets (this goes for all vehicles). It severely obscures the view of the gunner. A Grimsness can be buffer/rep-tanked with out hardeners, so this may be the reason for the increase Grimsness use over the Myron as the Myron is almost forced to use a hardener to achieve decent ehp values. Honestly, other than that and the agility buff I asked for, they're really good. The can have more instantaneous ehp than any DS with mods active (as shield vehicles should be), as the hardener/booster combo works very well too. Honestly, I think people in the game just have a hard-on for armor vehicles for some reason (I don't like any of them, they're slow and ugly). Dust was real! I was there!
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2172	Posted - 2014.09.28 15:47:00 - [19] - Quote Also, reiterating my ideas for mCRUs (+1 new one): The new one: remove the module entirely and make it an innate mod to the STD DSs (and LDSs if they're reintroduced). The fitting on them is too much. Even if you removed the PG/CPU entirely, it's not worth sacrificing, in the Myron's case, 1/4 of all its potential defensive slots. Also, I'm really against using the mod on things like tanks and LAVs. I think this would be the best path, but ONLY if the next two recommendations are met as wellGÇª Toggle-ability. I don't always want blueberries spawning and hanging out in my DS. Until I get the ability to kick them out and/or they can tell me where they want to go, I need a way to prevent them from getting in in the first place. Make it turn on and off with out duration or cool down. [*]Spawn time skill bonus. Currently there's no benefit to skilling up the mCRU skill since there's no bonus or higher tiered mods. Changing the skill to -10% spawn time per level (lvl5 = 5sec, equal to the best links, balanced due because of the skill and hardware requirements) would make the mCRU a powerful logistics asset. Dust was real! I was there!
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1835	Posted - 2014.09.28 17:25:00 - [20] - Quote Going to ask again: what is the ADS intended role? We can't tell you if its performing properly or not if we don't know what its supposed to be doing. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me

Bright Cloud Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 358	Posted - 2014.09.28 17:42:00 - [21] - Quote the dropship difference between the myron and the grimsness is mainly that you have to choose between active and passive tanking. On the grimsness you can stack plates/reps while the myron only is viable if you stack hardeners. And because hardeners are a time limited thing its difficult to manage them in a fight. Dont get me wrong shield dropships are probs the safest option if you just need to get a area and then quickly move out. Like activate 3 hardeners while moving in, drop people in there and move out with a AB. The high resistance you get will help out tremenously vs AV. Bright is the opposite of dark! Who would have thought of that?!
CLONE ALPHA 001 G.L.O.R.Y Dark Taboo 35	Posted - 2014.09.28 22:57:00 - [22] - Quote i dont understand what the problem is with using 20gj rails to shoot infantry with why would you want to limit the weapon that way?
Gabriel Ceja Knights of Eternal Darkness League of Infamy 60	Posted - 2014.09.28 23:23:00 - [23] - Quote With the nerf to the ADS rate of fire bonus to only 3% per level it has made going to level 5 a little pointless and has brought on complaints from the pilots who did have the skill at level 5 already So now that there is only a small difference between level 5 rof and standard rof how about changing the rof bonus to a reloading bonus like maybe 5% per level "Throw on the flux capacitor." activates fuel injector "WOOOOOO!!!"
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 3dge of D4rkness. 2	Posted - 2014.09.29 00:11:00 - [24] - Quote Gabriel Ceja wrote: With the nerf to the ADS rate of fire bonus to only 3% per level it has made going to level 5 a little pointless and has brought on complaints from the pilots who did have the skill at level 5 already So now that there is only a small difference between level 5 rof and standard rof how about changing the rof bonus to a reloading bonus like maybe 5% per level Not intending to offend, but that suggestion in no way helps the ADS perform strafing runs, which is something Rattati has said that ADSs should be doing. ROF is *the* bonus for that. A 6% bonus would be a very solid middle ground: (PRO Turrets) Missiles: STD: ROF 50; 0.83 missiles/second; DPS (Splash) 297.91 3%: ROF 57.5; 0.958 missiles/second; DPS 342.6 6%: ROF 65; 1.083 missiles/second; DPS 387.29 Railguns: STD: ROF 92; 1.53 shots/second; DPS 665.77 3%: ROF 105.8; 1.763 shots/second; DPS 765.6 6%: ROF 119.6; 1.993 shots/second; DPS 865.5 Blaster: STD: ROF 1200; 20 shots/second; DPS 1144 3%: ROF 1380; 23 shots/second; DPS 1315.6 6%: ROF 1560; 26 shots/second; DPS 1487.2 This would actually be a somewhat meaningful increase. An alternative suggestion would be to scrap the ROF bonus entirely and look at alternative methods of increase the effectiveness of an ADS. Here's an idea from earlier, based on the scout bonus: 3/5% fitting reduction/level for shield/armour hardeners. 3/4% bonus resistance/level to shield/armour hardeners. What would this do: - increase the resilience of an ADS during the uptime of a hardener; - reduce total buffer tank by encouraging hardener fits; - not increase the direct killing power of the small turrets; - allow an ADS to maintain a short period of resilience under fire in which to insert/extract infantry or suppress/kill enemies before being forced to retreat on cool down. Potential downside could potentially make triple hardener fits OP like 1.7, though could the skill include an inbuilt penalty to cool down for the same module? So the module gets +X resistance bonus but simultaneously gets a +Y% increase to cool down duration as the ADS 'strains the capacitor' or something? Anyway, that's a sideways thought I figured would EB worth throwing out there.
Gabriel Ceja Knights of Eternal Darkness League of Infamy 60	Posted - 2014.09.29 01:14:00 - [25] - Quote Halla Murr wrote: Gabriel Ceja wrote: With the nerf to the ADS rate of fire bonus to only 3% per level it has made going to level 5 a little pointless and has brought on complaints from the pilots who did have the skill at level 5 already So now that there is only a small difference between level 5 rof and standard rof how about changing the rof bonus to a reloading bonus like maybe 5% per level Not intending to offend, but that suggestion in no way helps the ADS perform strafing runs, which is something Rattati has said that ADSs should be doing. ROF is *the* bonus for that. A 6% bonus would be a very solid middle ground: (PRO Turrets) Missiles: STD: ROF 50; 0.83 missiles/second; DPS (Splash) 297.91 3%: ROF 57.5; 0.958 missiles/second; DPS 342.6 6%: ROF 65; 1.083 missiles/second; DPS 387.29 Railguns: STD: ROF 92; 1.53 shots/second; DPS 665.77 3%: ROF 105.8; 1.763 shots/second; DPS 765.6 6%: ROF 119.6; 1.993 shots/second; DPS 865.5 Blaster: STD: ROF 1200; 20 shots/second; DPS 1144 3%: ROF 1380; 23 shots/second; DPS 1315.6 6%: ROF 1560; 26 shots/second; DPS 1487.2 This would actually be a somewhat meaningful increase. An alternative suggestion would be to scrap the ROF bonus entirely and look at alternative methods of increase the effectiveness of an ADS. Here's an idea from earlier, based on the scout bonus: 3/5% fitting reduction/level for shield/armour hardeners. 3/4% bonus resistance/level to shield/armour hardeners. What would this do: - increase the resilience of an ADS during the uptime of a hardener; - reduce total buffer tank by encouraging hardener fits; - not increase the direct killing power of the small turrets; - allow an ADS to maintain a short period of resilience under fire in which to insert/extract infantry or suppress/kill enemies before being forced to retreat on cool down. Potential downside could potentially make triple hardener fits OP like 1.7, though could the skill include an inbuilt penalty to cool down for the same module? So the module gets +X resistance bonus but simultaneously gets a +Y% increase to cool down duration as the ADS 'strains the capacitor' or something? Anyway, that's a sideways thought I figured would EB worth throwing out there. Don't worry no offense taken as you have made some valid points and feedback like this is how we help make progress. I do like that idea of the fitting reduction per level it would help out a lot since I have to use cpu/pg mod to fit 3 Proto turrets on my incubus or python "Throw on the flux capacitor." activates fuel injector "WOOOOOO!!!"
TH1EFOFSOuLS Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 32	Posted - 2014.09.29 03:03:00 - [26] - Quote I know I would be mad if I was someone who spent some what... 1.2 mil SP on a punk 3% increase on ROF on my ADS and didn't get a respec. I would have rather put that into small railgun fittings 5
Devadander Woodgrain Atari 122	Posted - 2014.09.29 12:28:00 - [27] - Quote I didn't make a gunship because we have ADS. But as a Logistics the gimmy outperforms for one reason in my mind. Mobile CRU is a high slot. Grimmy gets 5300+ armor, one gun, and still squeezes a CRU. Myron, I didn't even finish the fit. Turrets, I'm liking where blaster is atm. Still feels short range for DS use but meh, at least it kills now. Missiles are missiles. Rails are the sticky part. Some people are just dead eyes. And keeping them from using it on infantry will mean nerfing it till its useless. Buff it and it slays vehicles in seconds. However atm they are way broken. Large 80gj can pump out 5 I think before OH, small gets 4-5 it seems. This is wrong. Maybe lower dmg and heat? I honestly don't know, like I said, sticky. Maddy can flip a gunny null perspiration. That's kinda broken. High slots are open to things like turbo, cru, scanners, dual tanking, and dmg mods for maddy. Whereas the gunny gets to pick from dual tank, or more bullets... My .02isk "Tossin uplinks and runnin fer my life" ~ Gunny blownapart "Lets group up and push an objective" ~ No blueberry ever
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2194	Posted - 2014.09.29 13:40:00 - [28] - Quote It looks like a lot of people, and I agree with them, say that a lack of useful low slot modules is affecting the Myron and Gunnlogi. The only useful modules are PG/CPU extenders, but not all of my Gunnlogi fits fill both slots with fitting extenders (sorry, I don't fly Myrons). Ammo expansion units are a post-combat luxury. I'd like to see the return of chassis modules (inertia stabilizers, overdrives, nanofiber structures...) that we can fit in the lows for better combat abilities. The problem as I see it is that Madrugars can utilize their high slots for combat purposes (fuel injector and damage amp) whereas the Gunnlogi can't utilize it's low slots for combat purposes. Though like the first reply, I also prefer Gunnlogi over Madrugar for maneuverability. I also agree with them on passive recharge rates for armor and shield, where Madrugars can get a higher constant regen than Gunnlogis whose regen can be interrupted. This is a tricky subject though and I prefer baby steps such as reintroducing the chassis modules first. Then if needed, make the shield depleted recharge delay skill apply to regular delay as well. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2179	Posted - 2014.09.29 14:48:00 - [29] - Quote Another thing to consider as to why armor vehicles are so much better than shields is the benefit of defensive skills The limiting factor for fitting for both armor and shield is PG. Rarely do I need a CPU mod and I only need my lvl4 shield fitting for a few fits among all the vehicles in the game. Additionally, because the PG for armor mods is significantly greater than the CPU of shield, the get the same percent but more reduction. The repair boosters are also horribly skewed to benefit armor vehicles. The armor repair is already good, and adding 25% on top of that is a huge benefit. The shield skill is pretty much worthless for a shield vehicle. It only benefits depleted shield delay, which means you're pretty much dead anyway, if not then you're not in any danger anyway so 2-3 fewer sec isn't really much use. Even if it was changed to include a bonus to regular shield regen time, you'll still need to be away from any significant danger for an extended time. Not only is it pretty worthless for shield vehicles, but it benefits armor more because it brings back their shield buffer back quicker, and because their delay is longer, they get more benefit. Lastly, and I never understood why this was brought in, is the armor composition skill. For some reason, this was introduced in HF Bravo with no discussion or mention. It gives a huge 50% reduction to the speed penalty of armor plates, their only penalty. This huge benefit, and yet shield get nothing. It is worth considering considering changing shield and armor skill bonuses, and even introducing another shield skill. Dust was real! I was there!
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 49	Posted - 2014.09.29 15:44:00 - [30] - Quote Be careful when buffing the Myron, I don't understand the numbers you got considering how much tank they can have. I wouldn't say no to more maneuverability, but mine has become very hard to kill. A buff I would find acceptable: Armor repair Vehicles have a skill to boost the EFFECTIVENESS of armor repair, give shields a skill to boost the effectiveness of Shield Boosters, to match. This would really make my day. Make the Shield Hardener effect clip out on the turret so the gunner doesn't see that stuff. It causes HEAVY visual lag close up like that and makes shots go way off target. This probably can't be done in a hotfix though :( Fix the bugs regarding turret PG CPU not having been implemented as you intended in Delta (goes without saying, I'm sure you're already on that one)

Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1842	Posted - 2014.09.29 15:54:00 - [31] - Quote Shield skill needs to change from depleted regen delay to a regen amount. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3279	Posted - 2014.09.29 15:55:00 - [32] - Quote Hey Rattati, I dunno how useful this is to your purposes, but I have a buncha practical application testing i did based around the dropship nerfs. If you haven't taken a look, here's the post-nerf stuff. I'm interested to hear if any of this is useful @CCP Rattati and ADS drivers. Test nerds needed. ADS TTK test Day 1. Ideal conditions to kill Sentinels. ADS TTK Day 2: Python with small missiles [COMPLETE] ADS TTK Day 3 Thunderdome Test: No, none of it is pro-whining, just sharing my findings with the group, as well as my thoughts. Overall I don't think that the small blaster's poor performance as a pilot weapon on an ADS is the fault of the gun, but the limitations of the platform. But I did notice that in addition for it being insanely hard for dropship pilots to keep on target it overheats INSANELY fast. Most of the tests me and Resistance did with it had the gun overheating in almost every test run.
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 3dge of D4rkness. 4	Posted - 2014.09.29 15:57:00 - [33] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: A buff I would find acceptable: Armor repair Vehicles have a skill to boost the EFFECTIVENESS of armor repair, give shields a skill to boost the effectiveness of Shield Boosters, to match. This would really make my day. I agree with that. I'd suggest two things: - alter the Shield Regeneration skill to affect both recharge delay and depleted recharge delay (instead of only depleted) - add a recharge rate skill which increases the rate at which shields recharge or increases the threshold at which shield regeneration stops. Either and/or both of those would greatly help the regenerative tanking capabilities of the Myron, Python and Gunnlogi.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 50	Posted - 2014.09.29 16:07:00 - [34] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Hey Rattati, I dunno how useful this is to your purposes, but I have a buncha practical application testing i did based around the dropship nerfs. If you haven't taken a look, here's the post-nerf stuff. I'm interested to hear if any of this is useful @CCP Rattati and ADS drivers. Test nerds needed. ADS TTK test Day 1. Ideal conditions to kill Sentinels. ADS TTK Day 2: Python with small missiles [COMPLETE] ADS TTK Day 3 Thunderdome Test: No, none of it is pro-whining, just sharing my findings with the group, as well as my thoughts. Overall I don't think that the small blaster's poor performance as a pilot weapon on an ADS is the fault of the gun, but the limitations of the platform. But I did notice that in addition for it being insanely hard for dropship pilots to keep on target it overheats INSANELY fast. Most of the tests me and Resistance did with it had the gun overheating in almost every test run. Dust community can't thank you enough for your attitude and dedication. I hope to meet you out on the field sometime, it would be an honor.
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 4403	Posted - 2014.09.29 18:17:00 - [35] - Quote A bit tangential, but do afterburners on the Nullibar Dropship (itGÇÖs a Myron right?) only apply additional thrust to the rear engines? I was trying to get to the top of the tower in the King of the Hill domination map (Fracture Road) using a Nullibar Dropship the other day and it was like trying to ride a bucking bronco. Every time I hit the thrust it would flip forward and I would have to let off the thrust and pull the stick back until I was staring at the sky to correct. ThatGÇÖs another thing, maneuvering the ship does strange things to your perspective as well. I have flown normal Myrons and they donGÇÖt behave like that. DonGÇÖt spend too much time on this, I mean, who buys Nullibar Dropships? But if you can figure it out without wasting too much time it would be nice to get a fix. I won one of those special packs when I was added to the DUST Wall of Fame for my community efforts, and it came with 50 Nullibar Dropships. I still got about 40 left. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
Right-wing Extremist Nos Nothi 1408	Posted - 2014.09.29 18:45:00 - [36] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: (A similar question but off topic, the Gunnlogi is quite less efficient than the Madrugar, bonus points to explain why) Armor repairers are passive and never stop. Shield regen takes a couple of seconds of no incoming damage before you benefit from it. Shield boosters also require a moment of no incoming damage - if you activate it while you're being shot at (like in Eve Online), nothing happens. The shield booster enters cooldown, but you do not get your shield HP boost. The Gunnlogi only has two low slots, and I dunno about all fitting optimizations being at 5 but for myself, I can only fit one basic heavy rep on a Gunnlogi, the other low slot is a CPU mod. What this means for me, is that the Madrugar I'm shooting at ducks behind a building or hill or other obstruction and when he comes out, his armor is fully repped and his shield hp is nearly full again, while my shield HP might be full but my armor is still in a shambles, even on the fit where I've got that armor repper installed (which I only do on the maps like Border Gulch or Fracture Road where I have no supply depot to repair at unless the team is holding Delta or Alpha respectively (Delta on BG, Alpha on FR - on those maps, one side has a SD accessible at the ground spawn and the other doesn't, because you guys did not successfully address this problem in HF Delta). That's what makes the Madrugar so much better. I chose the Gunnlogi for its innate speed and maneuverability, but it is far less survivable than a Maddy with any skill in armor repair. The shield booster needs to work even when you're taking damage - I suspect it's tied to the depleted regen mechanics, which is stupid if that's true. OR armor repair mods need to be active rather than passive, with a suitable cooldown so that these tanks aren't just running around going "lala la lala" with a nonstop repair rate over 200 hp/second. I can tell you that as soon as I've got the fitting optimizations all sorted to be able to fit a decent Madrugar, I won't be using my Gunnlogis very much at all anymore. Rail Maddy, Blaster Maddy, Missile Maddy - the only thing the Gunnlogi outshines them in is survivability vs. Missile Tanks, and that's only if you have two hardeners to stand up to the XT-201 launcher. Jaceon Pale-eye. And you shall know me by the sound of Charge SR bullets whizzing by your head as I miss repeatedly.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 757	Posted - 2014.09.29 20:12:00 - [37] - Quote Here are two very basic avenues out of the situation right now: A. Make active shield tanking possible: Ideas: Buff shield boosters, disable their ability to start native regen (All active tanking is done through the boosters themselves, maybe split their effect into smaller cycles so there's a chance of bursting through their effect. Disabling the native regen activation removes any possible bugs associated with that feature.) B. Make passive shield tanking possible: Ideas: Align native hp with armor vehicles, align shield extenders with armor mods, align shield hardeners with armor hardeners (A passive shield fit should get the same hp a passive armor fit that regens in the same amount of time. Their playstyles will still be different since shield vehicles don't regen in combat.) Out of curiosity: In Eve Online, what does a shield tank look like and which low slot modules are used for passive and active tanks? (When I tried Eve for 6 months, I only ever delved into armor tank theory.)
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2186	Posted - 2014.09.29 20:57:00 - [38] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: Out of curiosity: In Eve Online, what does a shield tank look like and which low slot modules are used for passive and active tanks? (When I tried Eve for 6 months, I only ever delved into armor tank theory.) [Disclaimer, I am a noob in Eve and this is just the culmination of my admittedly limited experience. For more detailed and accurate data, check a more knowledgable player or perhaps Eve University. Other Capsuleers are encouraged to correct or add on.] For passive buffer tanks, shield extenders are used in combination with what equates to shield hardeners in Dust (though they take cap rather than have on-off durations). Low slots are almost always used for damage mods and fitting mods. (There are almost no shield mods in low slots, and the ones that exist have bad ) .The idea is to have high buffer and higher dps in order to out last the enemy. (This is the opposite philosophy of armor buffer tanking, where you hope to out last the incoming damage while applying your own. This is because damage mods and armor mods are low slots) Though used more for PvE, passive rep tanked shield tanks are also used. These take advantage of the shield regen mechanics, where that shield will always regen for the same amount of time, so having a 100hp tank and a 10,000 hp tank will always regen in the same amount of time for the same ship. This, in combination with a huge buffer tank (shield extenders), regen mods (usually shield power relays because of the lack of need for capacitor, similar to Dust's shield rechargers), and resistance hope to curb the damage done from rats (again typically this isn't possible in a PvP setting). Active tanking requires the use of shield boosters and ancillary shield boosters. Shield boosters require a lot of capacitor to use for extended periods of time but provide a decent boost to shield hp every cycle. They typically use of a cap booster to keep cap level up (mid slot). Ancillary booster work in the same way, providing a much larger boost to hp, but require A LOT more cap. Thankfully, they can be loaded with cap booster charges instead of relying on your own cap (though there is a crazy long reload time). Another mod that is important is the shield boost amplifier that boosts the amount of hp the shield boosts give per cycle. Lows are again used mainly for damage mods. All in all, there are almost no shield mods for low slots, and the only ones that are available reduce base shield hp or max cap. Dust was real! I was there!
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 757	Posted - 2014.09.29 21:14:00 - [39] - Quote Thanks for that. I'm fairly certain that adopting Eve-style fitting philosophy in the mid- to long-term is going to improve the situation. Maybe it isn't for the short-term though.
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2186	Posted - 2014.09.29 21:25:00 - [40] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: Thanks for that. I'm fairly certain that adopting Eve-style fitting philosophy in the mid- to long-term is going to improve the situation. Maybe it isn't for the short-term though. I wish CCP would adopt more of Eve's fitting design: less emphasis on hp and more emphasis on resist, more active mod choices, more defined separation between shield and armor fitting philosophies, etc. I'm in the middle of making a huge post that will have pretty much everything vehicle mods need, so we'll see how that turns out. Dust was real! I was there!

Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH 166	Posted - 2014.09.29 23:31:00 - [41] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Stefan Stahl wrote: Thanks for that. I'm fairly certain that adopting Eve-style fitting philosophy in the mid- to long-term is going to improve the situation. Maybe it isn't for the short-term though. I wish CCP would adopt more of Eve's fitting design: less emphasis on hp and more emphasis on resist, more active mod choices, more defined separation between shield and armor fitting philosophies, etc. I'm in the middle of making a huge post that will have pretty much everything vehicle mods need, so we'll see how that turns out. Most of the Possible Load Outs on Eve + Descriptions *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1329	Posted - 2014.09.30 02:45:00 - [42] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Stefan Stahl wrote: Out of curiosity: In Eve Online, what does a shield tank look like and which low slot modules are used for passive and active tanks? (When I tried Eve for 6 months, I only ever delved into armor tank theory.) [Disclaimer, I am a noob in Eve and this is just the culmination of my admittedly limited experience. For more detailed and accurate data, check a more knowledgable player or perhaps Eve University. Other Capsuleers are encouraged to correct or add on.] For passive buffer tanks, shield extenders are used in combination with what equates to shield hardeners in Dust (though they take cap rather than have on-off durations). Low slots are almost always used for damage mods and fitting mods. (There are almost no shield mods in low slots, and the ones that exist have bad ) .The idea is to have high buffer and higher dps in order to out last the enemy. (This is the opposite philosophy of armor buffer tanking, where you hope to out last the incoming damage while applying your own. This is because damage mods and armor mods are low slots) Though used more for PvE, passive rep tanked shield tanks are also used. These take advantage of the shield regen mechanics, where that shield will always regen for the same amount of time, so having a 100hp tank and a 10,000 hp tank will always regen in the same amount of time for the same ship. This, in combination with a huge buffer tank (shield extenders), regen mods (usually shield power relays because of the lack of need for capacitor, similar to Dust's shield rechargers), and resistance hope to curb the damage done from rats (again typically this isn't possible in a PvP setting). Active tanking requires the use of shield boosters and ancillary shield boosters. Shield boosters require a lot of capacitor to use for extended periods of time but provide a decent boost to shield hp every cycle. They typically use of a cap booster to keep cap level up (mid slot). Ancillary booster work in the same way, providing a much larger boost to hp, but require A LOT more cap. Thankfully, they can be loaded with cap booster charges instead of relying on your own cap (though there is a crazy long reload time). Another mod that is important is the shield boost amplifier that boosts the amount of hp the shield boosts give per cycle. Lows are again used mainly for damage mods. All in all, there are almost no shield mods for low slots, and the only ones that are available reduce base shield hp or max cap. Actually shields in eve have one of the largest number of fitting possibilities and slot useage, You use Highs for weapons (and try to stick to low cap use weapons like missiles or rails) mediums for shield modules (extenders, boosters, boost amplifiers, hardeners, passive resist modules, shield rechargers, and capacitor modules) and low slots for stuff like power diagnostic modules (which simultaneous increase powergrid, capacitor, shield and reduce capacitor and shield recharge) / capacitor flux coils. It really depends on your setup, as passive shield tanks require the most amount of slots, buffer and active mounts mostly just in mediums (with some capacitor stuff in lows).... Comparatively armor mounts mostly just in lows (as it only has active tanks) with a few mediums for capacitor. Armor and shield are both very comparable in overall tank strength, but they each make some very different tradeoffs and have rather wildly differing pro's and cons. A matari active shield tank on a shield boost bonused ship can press one button and get like 90% of its shield back if it's mounting an XL booster, A caldari passive tanked resist bonused ship can take the beating of a lifetime without having its shield drop below 40%. A Gallente active armor tanked ship (like a hyperion) might have 3 different reppers running (In particular ancilliary reppers or regular reppers with shield boost charges) and never drop below 85%.... until its capacitor fails at which point it explodes, an Amarr active tanked resist bonused (or buffered ship) might never seem to take damage and even when its capacitor fails it will take quite some time to actually die. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3293	Posted - 2014.09.30 06:13:00 - [43] - Quote Small rails need to hit harder, not faster. But I think that none of the vehicle woes come from the weapons, not their HP. all of the vehicle weapons have been nerfed to crap because people don't want them farming infantry kills. Unfortunately the very designs pretty much are custom tailored for doing so. Blaster turrets: even the large turrets fire like machineguns. Machineguns are the ideal platform for farming infantry. Rail turrets: under-damaged and feel more like sniper rifles than anything. Hell the large rails are basically big bolt pistols. Seriously, the firing mecjanics are identical. In fact the only weapon platform that feels like a vehicle weapon full stop are missiles. Small blasters are ok. But all of the vehicle weapons feel like scaled up infantry weapons. The large turrets do not behave like cannons. You want to make tanks and dropships less kill farmy? Make the cannons act like CANNONS.
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1820	Posted - 2014.09.30 10:53:00 - [44] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I think we should also establish a few rules of thumb Small Turrets Blaster: Anti-Infantry Railgun: Anti-Vehicle Missiles: Dual Purpose Current Best to Worst by Type Anti Infantry Pilot: Missiles, Blaster, Rails Sidegunner - Dropship: Blaster, Missile, Rails Sidegunner - ADS:Blaster, Missile, Rails Anti Air Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster Anti Vehicle Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster Or something along those lines, to see if there are holes/unintended inefficiencies. Feel free to edit this, or expand, this is just to get the discussion going, please don't go off the rails because of my selections. Rattati , small blasters are now great for the side gunners but they are horrible to use as the ADS main forward gun. They are just too accurate. Also I have been trying to hover less with my Python and instead opt more for strafing runs which are amazing fun, however the slow single shooting missiles DO NOT in any way work with a strafing mentality. Any chance we could get a 3 missile burst back like we used to have? Your stats may say that the Python is the king ADS again but thats only because hovering over noobs / infantry with NO AV is rewarding for a missile pilot. All other situations , not so much. Why not let the ADS be an actual strafing gun ship? Or you know, at least give us a few variants on the small turrets so we can try new things. (Just to state my opinion, I am very happy with the overall ADS balancing VS Infantry as a Python pilot, I have to fly very smart now if I want to actually live) With that above bit being said - ADS vs ADS fights are lol worthy due to the lack of RoF / Damage. Yea, would REALLY LOVE to see a few small turret variations. Give us the incentive to do new stuff with the ADS! "Also I think knives are a good idea, big f**k-off shiny ones" "Guns for show, Knives for a pro" MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
a brackers molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 81	Posted - 2014.09.30 12:17:00 - [45] - Quote Rattati I know it's a complete change but you want ads to be strafing, they need high rof. What you want for a staffing ship for all three guns is the mag to be empty in about 1 second, take 5 or 6 seconds to reload (8 max) and do enough damage to keep actually be able to damage tanks when they will shield rep for that time. Therefore all light turrets should do approximately 3 - 3.5 k damage per mag. And have the splash damage enough that if you are trying to hit a particular target and you are aiming as you fly, you'll kill the person. (Ie if say 50% of a mag lands within range of an armor tanked logi or commando you are likely to kill them. This means if you do a literal strafing run just hitting everything along the line you are flying along for the 1 second you will fire, you are unlikely to get any kills but will cause some damage to everyone. (Missile should work like large Missile currently does on tanks, rail should be slightly faster firing than pre Delta, and have its splash damage back, but have a much smaller mag and Blaster should have slightly wider splash and more damage with a much smaller mag. Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter
a brackers molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 81	Posted - 2014.09.30 12:19:00 - [46] - Quote Or as the person two up said burst variants would help Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter
Vulpes Dolosus molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 2191	Posted - 2014.09.30 12:28:00 - [47] - Quote You really shouldn't be strafing in an ADS unless you're trying to destroy enemy equipment with a lot of AV on the field. Orbiting is more practical: it makes you harder to get hit by rails, can make it difficult for infantry below you to find you, keeps your velocity up for quick escapes, keeps your turret targeted on the enemy, and looks pro. Here's a quick guide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2u2xnlCyWkg&index=2&t=2m27s Dust was real! I was there! My current background
Derrith Erador 2766	Posted - 2014.09.30 12:37:00 - [48] - Quote Has anyone else noticed that Rattati hasn't said much of anything while we've been going over random numbers ourselves? It seems kind of odd to me. Are you even watching? The preacher of Betty White, may her pimp hand guide me.
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1823	Posted - 2014.09.30 12:51:00 - [49] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: You really shouldn't be strafing in an ADS unless you're trying to destroy enemy equipment with a lot of AV on the field. Orbiting is more practical: it makes you harder to get hit by rails, can make it difficult for infantry below you to find you, keeps your velocity up for quick escapes, keeps your turret targeted on the enemy, and looks pro. Here's a quick guide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2u2xnlCyWkg&index=2&t=2m27s Aye I hear you bro, but this was the entire mindset CCP Rattati and others had when discussing ADS balance. They say we must learn to do strafing runs more and not hover so much. (I dont mean actual left to right strafing, I mean attack runs like proper aircraft) All I was saying is that if we had a burst small missile or something like that back, strafing runs would actually be viable. As it stands you are totally right, you can knock out equipment with that single missile or two you managed to get fired off during the attack run, but otherwise the damage you can deal is totally symbolic and not of any real substance. Thanks for the link but I have been flying dropships for quite some time, I am not a top end PRO for sure but I defo understand the nuances of Python flight. "Also I think knives are a good idea, big f**k-off shiny ones" "Guns for show, Knives for a pro" MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 3dge of D4rkness. 5	Posted - 2014.09.30 13:23:00 - [50] - Quote Derrith Erador wrote: Has anyone else noticed that Rattati hasn't said much of anything while we've been going over random numbers ourselves? It seems kind of odd to me. Are you even watching? [Conspiratorial]It's because he simply doesn't care about pilots and any attempts to properly balance the ADS goes unheard, because he just plainly doesn't want them to be useful.[/Conspiratorial] ... ... ...only half joking... I'm half expecting him to state, down the line, that we still didn't participate in the discussion.

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3312	Posted - 2014.09.30 13:50:00 - [51] - Quote Orbiting in a dropship around me is like wearing a meat suit to go and hug a starving tiger. Nothing like advertising easy kills.
Vulpes Dolosus molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 2194	Posted - 2014.09.30 13:56:00 - [52] - Quote CommanderBolt wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: You really shouldn't be strafing in an ADS unless you're trying to destroy enemy equipment with a lot of AV on the field. Orbiting is more practical: it makes you harder to get hit by rails, can make it difficult for infantry below you to find you, keeps your velocity up for quick escapes, keeps your turret targeted on the enemy, and looks pro. Here's a quick guide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2u2xnlCyWkg&index=2&t=2m27s Aye I hear you bro, but this was the entire mindset CCP Rattati and others had when discussing ADS balance. They say we must learn to do strafing runs more and not hover so much. (I dont mean actual left to right strafing, I mean attack runs like proper aircraft) All I was saying is that if we had a burst small missile or something like that back, strafing runs would actually be viable. As it stands you are totally right, you can knock out equipment with that single missile or two you managed to get fired off during the attack run, but otherwise the damage you can deal is totally symbolic and not of any real substance. Thanks for the link but I have been flying dropships for quite some time, I am not a top end PRO for sure but I defo understand the nuances of Python flight. Yeah, didn't mean to demean you or anything. Hopefully someone out there finds it useful. You don't have to pure fly-by strafing runs. Just fly by, if you see someone, orbit for a sec and then fly off after they're dead. This is what I think Rattati had envisioned for ADSs. In the past, people would just hover over where the enemy was and AB away whenever they took damage. Now, pilots need to be on their toes and more tactical, catch their enemies by surprise and other things. And yeah, I'd love more variants in missiles (and other turrets as well). This could really solve the problems with meshing different weapon systems with different vehicles and game styles: Think of an accelerated missile launcher that has high direct damage and speed and longer range but low splash damage and radius. It would make a perfect anti-air type missile. Then you could have a fragmented missile with more splash area but slightly less damage both direct and splash for anti-infantry. Blasters could have a med-short range, tight dispersion, high RoF, low-ish damage variant for ground vehicles and a higher damage, lower RoF, larger dispersion, med-long range variant for dropships. Dust was real! I was there! My current background
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game 143	Posted - 2014.09.30 15:34:00 - [53] - Quote Just an update on the situation of ads: Any swarmer can basically keep an ads away except for 10 seconds every minute roughly, factoring 2 skilled complex afterburner getaways. Any 2 swarmers with adv swarms can effectively kill an ADS 100% of the time. Any swarmer combined with a forgegun/collision/tank/turret/plasma can effectively kill an ADS 100% of the time. In the matches i have been experimenting with both the incubus and the python, every match has numerous people with skilled swarm launchers, as soon as more than 1 person fires at me, the swarms catch up and kill me, even running away at full speed with a complex afterburner. IDK if this is balance or what you intended, just letting you know what is possible with a proto swarm launcher that costs 28 K isk in comparison to a 380k ADS. NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
a brackers molon labe. General Tso's Alliance 82	Posted - 2014.09.30 16:29:00 - [54] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: Just an update on the situation of ads: Any swarmer can basically keep an ads away except for 10 seconds every minute roughly, factoring 2 skilled complex afterburner getaways. Any 2 swarmers with adv swarms can effectively kill an ADS 100% of the time. Any swarmer combined with a forgegun/collision/tank/turret/plasma can effectively kill an ADS 100% of the time. In the matches i have been experimenting with both the incubus and the python, every match has numerous people with skilled swarm launchers, as soon as more than 1 person fires at me, the swarms catch up and kill me, even running away at full speed with a complex afterburner. IDK if this is balance or what you intended, just letting you know what is possible with a proto swarm launcher that costs 28 K isk in comparison to a 380k ADS. This is on par with what I have seen, hence I've stopped playing Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1113	Posted - 2014.09.30 23:22:00 - [55] - Quote Let me tell you guys a story but bare with me, as it may not seem on topic initially but it will make sense if you stick with it. So around uprising 1.2 I began playing with someone in my corp regularly who was very into tanking. He would occasionally lend me logistic LAVs to provide remote armor/shields and that was the most fun I've had in DUST. I decided to create an alt and spec into them, so I didn't need him to call them out for me all the time. Eventually, I acquired enough SP to skill into tanks and dropships. I played around with everything but was most interested in the Incubus. Never did anything fancy with it and moved on. Eventually 1.7 dropped and tanks were put into this awkward limbo of being good, but not fun like they were when we had logistics vehicles. Soon, there was nerf after nerf to the point I couldn't tank anymore with all of the bullshit two hit rail tanks and jihad jeeps and not because I couldn't stand it, I couldn't afford to. At this point, I skilled my Incubus from 2 to 4 and later on getting 5 and I almost only flew it as to avoid the Jihad jeeps and kill redline tanks. Eventually I got so proficient flying it with small rails, I could kill forge gunners off of towers and even knock groups of people off of high ground. But now, with the changes to dropships and swarms it's almost impossible to fly round without loosing a ship. I can't kill redline rail tanks anymore. I can't kill infantry anymore. I can hardly kill militia dropships before they drop off a squad of AV onto a roof. If one person has prototype swarms, I'm almost guaranteed dead before I can get out of their lock range and the hull price change is negligible when you're still loosing at least one hull per match. We, as a community have warned CCP time and time again that when you balance things, you need to take it one step at a time. Adjust the RoF and after change swarms if it wasn't helpful. It's why, until the hotfixes came out, you guys were completely unable to make a balanced product. And please, for the love of god, bumb the skill to 5%, the skill is almost useless now since the RoF on the Incubus got double nerfed Amarrica! It's Not Safe to Swim.
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 482	Posted - 2014.10.01 02:38:00 - [56] - Quote Not sure I'm playing the same game as everyone else... ~Dropship I now find it much easier to hit infantry with small rails, but can't do crap all with a small blaster anymore. Spawned in a Myron with mobile CRU and 2 small rails, since he didn't go to the roof I was hoping to get out on I decided to shoot at things instead... Out of 10 shots I landed 7 and got 4 or 5 kills... Then he went near the roof and I got out. Followed this up trying my RailBus against some infantry and managed to pop a swarmer and then farmed a drop uplink (yes I'm a scrub.) Normally I can't hit crap all with the thing. ~Tanks Gunlogi is much better than the Madruga... Maybe because if you make use of positioning and the better maneuverability the Madruga dies in seconds. Unless you're talking about vs infantry av in which case it's just the repair rate between reloads and the fact that no one bothers to aim for the weak point... 2 shots people, kills a Madruga. The price of tanks should really go down like the ads, you blow up 2 or 3 tanks and then lose one & you've lost a crap load of money... Yet kill 10 tanks and you'll get the cost of 1 back, which is a stupid requirement when I can just run a cheap forge gun and die repeatedly while pulling a huge profit. ~Swarms Are now stupidly effective, without an afterburner you're boned, with one you might escape the 3rd set. The turn speed needs even more of a drop or just a max amount of turn before it loses it's target. You can't fly behind something to evade because the lowered turn speed means it will just follow you round even more easily than before... However getting the swarms to chase you towards an object and then making a swift turn can allow them to hit the object and blow up, but you have to pretty much crash into the object anyway, so drop the turn speed down some more and we might see people evading them instead of just running as fast as we can... It sure as hell wont hurt the swarms at all, not with that ridiculous speed/acceleration.
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1853	Posted - 2014.10.01 19:16:00 - [57] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: CommanderBolt wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: You really shouldn't be strafing in an ADS unless you're trying to destroy enemy equipment with a lot of AV on the field. Orbiting is more practical: it makes you harder to get hit by rails, can make it difficult for infantry below you to find you, keeps your velocity up for quick escapes, keeps your turret targeted on the enemy, and looks pro. Here's a quick guide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2u2xnlCyWkg&index=2&t=2m27s Aye I hear you bro, but this was the entire mindset CCP Rattati and others had when discussing ADS balance. They say we must learn to do strafing runs more and not hover so much. (I dont mean actual left to right strafing, I mean attack runs like proper aircraft) All I was saying is that if we had a burst small missile or something like that back, strafing runs would actually be viable. As it stands you are totally right, you can knock out equipment with that single missile or two you managed to get fired off during the attack run, but otherwise the damage you can deal is totally symbolic and not of any real substance. Thanks for the link but I have been flying dropships for quite some time, I am not a top end PRO for sure but I defo understand the nuances of Python flight. Yeah, didn't mean to demean you or anything. Hopefully someone out there finds it useful. You don't have to pure fly-by strafing runs. Just fly by, if you see someone, orbit for a sec and then fly off after they're dead. This is what I think Rattati had envisioned for ADSs. In the past, people would just hover over where the enemy was and AB away whenever they took damage. Now, pilots need to be on their toes and more tactical, catch their enemies by surprise and other things. And yeah, I'd love more variants in missiles (and other turrets as well). This could really solve the problems with meshing different weapon systems with different vehicles and game styles: Think of an accelerated missile launcher that has high direct damage and speed and longer range but low splash damage and radius. It would make a perfect anti-air type missile. Then you could have a fragmented missile with more splash area but slightly less damage both direct and splash for anti-infantry. Blasters could have a med-short range, tight dispersion, high RoF, low-ish damage variant for ground vehicles and a higher damage, lower RoF, larger dispersion, med-long range variant for dropships. No its ok man, I appreciate the link. OH man yea me too, I would love some of those variants. And you know we used to actually have these things in the past! I remember going from standard variants in beta and the early days, to getting burst missiles and fragmented missiles to then going back to just having standard variants again. I assume that stuff is all still there somewhere. Hopefully Rattati in due course can have a look at them and get some dialogue going on what he and the playerbase would like to see. "Also I think knives are a good idea, big f**k-off shiny ones" "Guns for show, Knives for a pro" MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1734	Posted - 2014.10.01 19:46:00 - [58] - Quote Hey rattati here are some things that I think might work to change the inefficiencies of the small turrets in their specific roles. They are not big changes but will probably help to restore the balance of the ships and small turrets without having much impact on the game farther than to make the small turrets and the ADS to feel more reliable yet not overpowered. Below is an idea for each one of the statements done for turrets to make them feel more reliable. CCP Rattati wrote: I think we should also establish a few rules of thumb Small Turrets Blaster: Anti-Infantry Railgun: Anti-Vehicle Missiles: Dual Purpose Current Best to Worst by Type Anti Infantry Pilot: Missiles, Blaster, Rails Sidegunner - Dropship: Blaster, Missile, Rails Sidegunner - ADS:Blaster, Missile, Rails Till TTK on the small blaster turret is better vs the missiles, small blasters will never be better at antinfantry than missiles unless they can actually kill infantry faster at the blasters intended range taking into consideration movement and spread of the blaster turret. A reduction to splash damage of missiles and an increase to damage of blaster will do much to make blasters feel better against anti infantry than missiles. IN our testing, TTK felt better than missiles with a 15% damage increase to the small turret (enhanced damage mod) but just slightly better. The risk vs reward of the small blasters is much too unequal. They need more rewards for putting the assets at risk vs missiles which can shoot from about 200 meters and be relatively safe. CCP Rattati wrote: Anti Air Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster Anti Vehicle Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster Or something along those lines, to see if there are holes/unintended inefficiencies. Feel free to edit this, or expand, this is just to get the discussion going, please don't go off the rails because of my selections. Again here is the problem, missiles feel and function better at the anti vehicle role. Of course a lot of this has to do with the efficiency the rail has against vehicles but it also has to do with the direct damage that the rail turret does. You see the rail turret does less direct damage than the missile turret. XT = 455, Particle cannon = 435. By switching these, give the proto missile the proto rail damage and the proto rail the proto missile damage we will be the proto rail damage. The final product will look like this pro rail = 455 and pro missile will be 435. This of course is a minor change and given the fact that the rail turret has about the same RoF than the missile, if fired to avoid overheat and only 5 shots or so till overheat, the change will make the turret feel as effective as the missiles are now and tone down the missiles to make them less effective against vehicles. Both turrets should have full efficiency against vehicles. A WORD ON ASSAULT DROPSHIPS I have been thinking a lot about these changes and now that they have had time percolate in my mind I think I have a solution that might make everyone happy. The change to rate of fire is horrible because of one simple fact, it barely does anything to the efficiency of the turret. The answer then could be to simply change the bonus to damage instead of RoF. This change would greatly increase the efficiency of the turrets without completely making them overpowered. For example at level 5, the bonus damage would be 15%. This would be akin to having an enhanced damage mod on the vehicle. Given the fact that you already have a 10% increass in damage because of the ADS skill this would equate to have 5% extra damage over having a proto damage mod at level 5 ads and gallente ads. This would in no way unbalance the game since these stats are already obtainable by using a damage mod. If people are worried of the incubus pilots using a damage mod on top of the damage increases proposed then they have never used an ads. With the current AV and vehicle balance, fitting a damage mod instead of an AB on an ADS would be considered suicide at the least. FINAL THOUGHTS Small turret balance is wrong simply because the missile turret is too good at anti infantry and anti vehicle work and at the same time the rail and blaster or sub-par in their role. Buffing the blaster and switching direct damages of the missile and rail would go a long way. ADS buff should change from RoF to damage and there would be no need to do anymore changes for them to return to being useful while being considerably less powerful than pre-delta Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 146	Posted - 2014.10.01 20:19:00 - [59] - Quote idk if the missile is too good... i don't really think so even though i mainly use rail for anti-infantry and anti-vehicle on my incubus. The missile has hard time against shield vehicles, and at the end of the day an anti infantry splash turret is required. A proto swarmer can down an ads in roughly the same time as the ADS spotting him, aiming and firing 3 shots. NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1735	Posted - 2014.10.02 01:45:00 - [60] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: idk if the missile is too good... i don't really think so even though i mainly use rail for anti-infantry and anti-vehicle on my incubus. The missile has hard time against shield vehicles, and at the end of the day an anti infantry splash turret is required. A proto swarmer can down an ads in roughly the same time as the ADS spotting him, aiming and firing 3 shots. I agree with some parts but we also have to take into consideration the vision CCP wants for turrets. Currently, missiles have a hatd time against shields but so do rails which got their damage profile fixed to reflect armor based damage. Missiles do more direct damage and contain no overheat, which means they can sustain more reliable damage without micromanagement. What i mostly want to point out is that if CCP wants their vision to be clear then there should be a noticeble increase in power for rails vs vehicles and blasters vs infantry so that if a gunner/pilot or tanker/gunner combo has to choose they have clear cut options to choose from based on what they wabt to do. I know im bein a bit redundant but if CCP wants rail to be anti vehicle king and blasters to be anti infantry king then their power has to increase to reflect it. It just cant simply be, ill use missiles because I have the best of both worlds with little drawbacks. Currently rails have horrible oveeheat and git detection issues and blasters have horrible range and hit detection issues. Missiles are all well and good but they either match ( in case of rails) or outperform ( in the case of blasters) the intended roles for said turrets. I am not saying nerf missiles since this would put the lastnail in the coffinfor the current dropship meta but there has to be a clear cut line between the turret power in their specifuc roles. Blaster A/I king should not be ouperformed by any turret at this, by a large margin and rails should be significantly more usefull vs vehicles. Before the ads nerf if someone said AV ads you instantly knew they were probably going to use a rail incubus, now not so much. And when someobe sais anti-infantry all most people thing about ia missiles. Blasters still have a long way to go and i am using them with my gunner almost wvery chance we get but are convinced more and more that misssiles outperfom it by a large margin. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor

Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 72	Posted - 2014.10.03 19:09:00 - [61] - Quote 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.
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1736	Posted - 2014.10.04 03:49:00 - [62] - Quote I hope rattati is reading this. When I read there was no feedback on ADS before the change I was really disappointed because the back and forth in the forums between people wanting a nerf and people saying it wasn't needed was pretty long and heated. Many threads existed on the topic and many good ideas were expressed for and against the nerf as soon as and even before CCP said that pilot stacking was a bug. That being said I know the devs aren't all knowing and won't be on the forums 24/7 like many of the forums warriors; some who play the forums more than the actual game but, I do hope CCP Rattati is looking at this thread. Not many pilots will be here since most are dedicated players, not forum warriors and on top of that many are very unhappy with the changes. A post every other day or so, covering at least the most important, eloquent or even thought out posts would be welcome to give pilots and their gunner some reassurance that the topic, even though considered settled by CCP is still being evaluated. That being said, usage on the dropships and ADS may not even go down that much simply because you cannot keep birds out of the sky. The ADS and dropship community love to fly and since that is what most of them are skilled into they will continue to do so because the flying mechanic of this game are actually very good and entertaining. There have been matches, back before I was very serious about dropshipping that I would just fly through the map and do tricks; the flying system is that well made. So pat yourselves on the back for that one but remember that these people need to be rewarded for their patience as they have kept flying even at the worst of states in vehicle balance. Like I said; A peak here and there just to let us know that this thread, even though it's not that active, is being followed because the content of it represents a, as good as it gets, in terms of feedback after the pilot community got the stick and were told they said nothing when they actually did say things, many times, on the forums. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1736	Posted - 2014.10.04 04:26:00 - [63] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Pilots and anti-Pilots The Myron is just not very good at all, and nothing changed with the increased EHP/PG/CAP and Turret changes... ...(A similar question but off topic, the Gunnlogi is quite less efficient than the Madrugar, bonus points to explain why) Appreciate the feedback Hello, I haven't posted about this specific thing because I wanted to ask myself what makes it so difficult to use these shield focused vehicles and I think that I might have a good Idea as to why. This might not be the whole issue but I can really say that it's what makes it problematic and here I go: The problem with shield vehicles in general is that the modules equipped to them cost too much powergrid. I can fit a ship/tank with everything I need without hitting the cpu cap, mind you I do not have skills for shields but can't do a thing with it without having to equip some complex powergrid expansions. MYRON The fitting costs of shields on the powergrid side are too high to be able to make a meaningfull dropship fitting. SHIELD REGEN The current passive regen of shields can be matched by armor reps which are currently not interrupted by damage. The reduction to powergrid cost of shield modules and the increase in passive regen to outperform that of the armor modules by a significant amount and make shield vehicles true skirmishers might be the thing that is needed to put them up to scratch. IMPLEMENTATION Switch the skill that reduces CPU cost to powergrid, augment CPU on shield vehicles if necessary to compensate. include a third shield skill that increases regen of shield by 10% just as the third armor skill was included at a 10% value REASONING Powergrid is a big limiting factor to shield vehicles because of the high powergrid requirements for shield modules. This would help make fitting more confortable but would also make players have to skill to achieve this. By making a 10% per level skill for shield regen, we increase shield regen by 50% at maximum levels. Taking into consideration that shields regen at about 200 we can safley asume that it would max out at about 300 shield regen per second at ballpark values of maybe 400. This number might seem high but we have to take into consideration that these tanks are supposed to be skirmishers. BALANCE This being said, the introduction of more regen and easier fitting options migh lead to a change in paradigm when using shield based vehicles and might make them a bit overwhelming if done wrong. Augmenting regent rate and making fitting easier might permit some tanks to flourish just stacking shield extenders. To fix this I would also like to suggest a penalty to shield extender of 1, 2 and 3% shield regen delay for basic, adv and proto respectively. Numbers could be increased if fittings become too powerful but the idea is to make shields viable. OTHER IDEAS Half shield booster cooldown, slash shield reps by 1 third increase shield vehicle speed? Add shield rechargers back to the game to make shield fitting viable\ Add vehicle shield regulators (could create a nice dynamic) Make shield hardeners able to stop damage from stopping shield passive shield regen while active I'm a real fan of this one Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 9	Posted - 2014.10.04 09:40:00 - [64] - Quote XxGhazbaranxX wrote: I do hope CCP Rattati is looking at this thread. Honestly, it really looks like Rattati just doesn't care about the ADS. We've been nerfed while AV gets buffed and now we're'fine' yet no pilot I've spoken to has been happy with the changes - our ability to influence the battle is now limited to pretty much murdering only defenceless infantry and clearing rooftop uplinks. ROF nerf means vehicles simply don't care and it's nigh impossible to prevent a dropship getting anywhere now. If Rattati actually gave half a damn about us, he would have said something, considering that he has been on the forums since his last post here on the 28th. We're not killing anything but defenceless infantry, and we should be glad for the privilege Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 8434	Posted - 2014.10.04 13:37:00 - [65] - Quote I'm still listening "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Halla Murr Skullbreakers 9	Posted - 2014.10.04 14:02:00 - [66] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm still listening That's reassuring Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2218	Posted - 2014.10.04 18:21:00 - [67] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm still listening What do you still want to know? Most of what you asked about has been discussed, is there anything specific you're still looking for? I've just figured by this point with your lack of posting you're compiling possible changes. Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
nicholas73 Glitched Connection 239	Posted - 2014.10.04 20:30:00 - [68] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm still listening There is nothing to listen to anymore here. ADS is still effective at taking out infantry, not so viable for taking out tanks anymore, but it should be like that. Tanks can't shhot up on a hovering dropship. A good ADS pilot knows when to back and how to kill infantry at range, I still see quite a few good ADS pilots out there. The current change eliminates scrubs who just proto out everything cause they have the SP and the ISK to burn and just spam to farm kills (without having any actual skill). Just hit the afterburner and fly. Can't do that anymore can you scrubs, so they're complaining. To need to pay any attention to them. TL;DR: ADS is fine, an experienced pilot is still pretty effective and with the new changes tryhard scrubs who can't fly have been eliminated. Proud member of Glitched Connection "Only idiots start a fight they can't win" - Sora (No Game No Life)
CeeJ Mantis Mantodea MC 36	Posted - 2014.10.04 21:43:00 - [69] - Quote All this talk about ADS and how they are more to be used as assault vehicles. Personally, I find my ship is better as a squad transport vehicle. I can quickly get my teammates to an LZ, they drop out while the gunners clear people out, then they hop out, and I focus priority targets. Then we load up and move on to the next objective. Fast insertion with extra firepower. I can focus down heavies, scouts, and other high priority targets with my main gun, while they mop up. Can't focus on dodging the ship and the infantry. I like the idea of vehicles being a squad support tool with a set objective. Use the tank to break through their defenses to help your infantry advance, not be a tank and roam around killing without purpose. Be a transport that can support your infantry, not just a floating weapons platform that goes solo. They should be things you use when you need them, and when 4 guys with AV show up, you put your toys away or move to another part of the battlefield. Vehicles are a force multiplier. They get to ignore many common weakness (HMGs, shotgun scouts, RE, rail rifles, snipers, etc) and gain new abilities and greater firepower for the weakness to AV. Weapons designed to kill them. They need support to work well, and think they should be balanced around this idea. Longest plasma cannon kill: 236.45m
TH1EFOFSOuLS Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 46	Posted - 2014.10.04 21:46:00 - [70] - Quote lol

Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2800	Posted - 2014.10.05 03:31:00 - [71] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm still listening Derrith Erador wrote: Atiim wrote: Honest question. Do people really feel that ADSs are underpowered, or are you pushing a personal agenda? Honest answer. It entirely depends who you're talking to. My opinion, it will take a bit of... how shall we say, time to explain. The rail incubus got it in the butt... hard. I can say nothing more on that. My next issue is this, the rocket incubus is still better than the python, here's why: The rockets has a raw ROF of 1.20 seconds, let's take a look at what that is on the python: Python Rof: 1.20-.18=1.08 incubus ROF: 1.20 It has a minimal ROF difference for the SP cost of a proto suit. Next issue, despite being more resistant to most meta forms of AV, Python is still vastly outclassed by incubus: You'll have to look at the below fits to see what I'm talking about. My incubus fit My python fit, I call her Laira As it is right now, the incubus can fit all proto modules on low and high with level 4 armor optimization. You'll have to take into account protofits hasn't yet put the reduced PG/CPU of the turrets, which is why I put points into optimization, which aren't needed at all. My issue is that no matter what I do, I cannot fit all proto modules on my python. No amount of fitting optimizations or vehicle shield optimization will help. Admittedly, I have shield OP at 3, but I didn't need more than 2. Next issue at hand, despite the python being resistant to most forms of meta AV, the tank on the incubus more than makes up for it. The regen on the incubus is instant, where on the python I have to wait a few seconds to get the regen kicking, admittedly it is more per second, but that 3-7 seconds my python is out of shields, she's screwed if a sniper shoots my unshielded hull (yes, light weaponry has full effect on shield ADS armor). the incubus does not have this issue. An incubus may be slower, but by sinking SP into that skill that lowers the weight of plates (I don't remember the name), it can be lowered to 5%, which on an ADS is negligible. My other issue is collision damage. We all know incubus can fly into walls without a problem sometimes, but do that crap with a python and you'll be singing "the roof is on fire" pretty quick. Especially on that God forsaken Gallente research facility, the collision is completely ridiculous on that map. So my honest question to you is this. If you were a diehard pilot, which makes more sense to fly? I still fly the python out of principle, but I think the evidence speaks for itself. My honest answer to your above is this, I do have a personal agenda on this, but I do believe it is a well founded personal agenda. So I just copied all that because I'm too lazy to type up a 50 page essay on my top WTF moments in Dust. The preacher of Betty White, may her pimp hand guide me.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3398	Posted - 2014.10.05 16:19:00 - [72] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I'm still listening was the info I linked earlier at all helpful? If so I'll continue poking at stuff like that where and when I can. if that format isn't helpful I'd like to know so I'm not wasting my time.
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 10	Posted - 2014.10.05 17:16:00 - [73] - Quote nicholas73 wrote: There is nothing to listen to anymore here. ADS is still effective at taking out infantry, not so viable for taking out tanks anymore, but it should be like that. Tanks can't shhot up on a hovering dropship. Please explain why an ADS should not be effective against HAVs - an AR user cant hurt a sniper at 200m+, so surely a aniper should not be able to hurt an AR user by your logic. Obviously that is stupid: an HAV can quite comfortably kill an ADS, but how they engage is a big thing - an ADS is not immune, just because it is hovering over an HAV because either that HAV can manoeuvre to get a line on the ADS or othr enemies can attack, just like the AR/sniper example. Cureently, an ADS can only kill vehicles that ignore you entirely or that are grievously wounded by other enemies. [quote=nicholas73TL;DR: ADS is fine, an experienced pilot is still pretty effective and with the new changes tryhard scrubs who can't fly have been eliminated.[/quote] 'Pretty effective' is a very loose term. Currently,an ADS can pretty much only kill infantry that are milling about. Bring out any AV and an ADS has an uphill struggle. If it's a Forge Gun, the ADS is likely screwed and if it's a vehicle there ADS will either get shot down,forced to do nothing or hover doing nothing effectual to it. In my mind that's not 'pretty effective' that's catering to only the infantry farmers! Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
NextDark Knight Hellstorm Inc General Tso's Alliance 473	Posted - 2014.10.05 23:04:00 - [74] - Quote CCP Rattati, is it possible via a hotfix to attach nanohive resupply properties to a vehicle? Example being while a Eynx has a toon active it can provide resupply like a supply depot? Is something like that a client side adjustment? Also if possible can that property be attached to a active module? Also, do we have code for firing from dropships without a client side update? I know that has been thrown around by other devs but we never seen anything of it. Over 50 Million SP and almost full proto in all Caldari Suits. No matter how hard CCP tries Dust just won't die on PS3/4
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2223	Posted - 2014.10.05 23:19:00 - [75] - Quote NextDark Knight wrote: CCP Rattati, is it possible via a hotfix to attach nanohive resupply properties to a vehicle? Example being while a Eynx has a toon active it can provide resupply like a supply depot? Is something like that a client side adjustment? Also if possible can that property be attached to a active module? Also, do we have code for firing from dropships without a client side update? I know that has been thrown around by other devs but we never seen anything of it. I think this would be much better suited for an LLAV. Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
NextDark Knight Hellstorm Inc General Tso's Alliance 474	Posted - 2014.10.05 23:34:00 - [76] - Quote Just wonder if that kind of customization is possible with current build. Didn't think about having it on the LLav but really just wondering if it can be put on anything. I'd prefer the shield rep back honestly .. Also is it possible to have cloaks on the Stealth tanks with the current code? Over 50 Million SP and almost full proto in all Caldari Suits. No matter how hard CCP tries Dust just won't die on PS3/4

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 8462	Posted - 2014.10.06 04:21:00 - [77] - Quote 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 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. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

medomai grey WarRavens Capital Punishment. 1008	Posted - 2014.10.06 04:40:00 - [78] - Quote CCP Rattati, I think it would be faster to go in game and get another player to lend you ADSs to experience it for yourself. Don't ask me because I'd charge you isk for each one. Trying to balance the interactions between A and B while only having experience with A seems... difficult. What percentile of Dust514's infantry arsenal belongs to the category of machine guns?

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 8463	Posted - 2014.10.06 04:49:00 - [79] - Quote medomai grey wrote: CCP Rattati, I think it would be faster to go in game and get another player to lend you ADSs to experience it for yourself. Don't ask me because I'd charge you isk for each one. Trying to balance the interactions between A and B while only having experience with A seems... difficult. Let's get one thing straigh, this is not about me. Period. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

iKILLu osborne ripley's believe it or die 387	Posted - 2014.10.06 05:10:00 - [80] - Quote i tank more so as a hobby and i can say for a fact the small rail rof needs brought up a wee bit on incubus cause i can literally rep through the damage lp cal scout i demand it

Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH 169	Posted - 2014.10.06 05:26:00 - [81] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. Proto Incubus & Python Fittings *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
medomai grey WarRavens Capital Punishment. 1008	Posted - 2014.10.06 05:54:00 - [82] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: medomai grey wrote: CCP Rattati, I think it would be faster to go in game and get another player to lend you ADSs to experience it for yourself. Don't ask me because I'd charge you isk for each one. Trying to balance the interactions between A and B while only having experience with A seems... difficult. Let's get one thing straight, this is not about me. Period. It's about trying to achieve balance, the job you were tasked with. If you took offence to my post, know that it was not written with the intent as an insult. I was merely suggesting a method of getting a better view of the "bigger picture". And you are putting effort into seeing a "bigger picture" to achieve a more balanced game; I respect that. You were right in that the ADS rate of fire bonus was oddly high. But you lacked the ADS experience to know how adversely it would affect ADS's effectiveness against other vehicles. Having experience with not only ADS, but all items in Dust514 will go a long way in helping you balance items. Increasing the rate of fire bonus isn't the only solution to increasing ADS effectiveness against vehicles. For example, you could tweak the damage efficiencies against vehicles; although I am strongly against that idea because it's counter intuitive. What percentile of Dust514's infantry arsenal belongs to the category of machine guns?
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH 169	Posted - 2014.10.06 06:08:00 - [83] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. For dumb fire missiles based on all my Caldari/MIssile fittings its about DPS and being able to tap the trigger once in a while to get a precision shot. This is exclusively done to ground targets though. When we had more variations of turrets, like accelerated missile turrets, cycled missile turrets, and fragmented missile turrets, Cycled was the ideal turret to attack ground vehicles with because it had a really great 3 shot that could do enough DPS to an HAV from a dropship without really needing to take a hefty amount of damage. The previous changes when they were first introduced with the full auto turrets felt much better than previous. My issue with the current missile turrets is the interval time between the next shot and the splash damage range/radius when dealing with Heavies, AV, and vehicles in general. With rail turrets I more about the amount of damage per shot. Previously Small rail Turrets on an incubus didn't give shield dropships much to counter against it. As it stands the game only has one dropship gun available to dropships and it favors the Incubus. I would rather see something along Eve online's Heavy Ion Blaster cannon introduced for the Incubus and give the Caldari their Rail turret back. Python -vs- Incubus overall, the incubus dropship out performs it in the ways it can be fitted. With the python I always find myself grabbing modules from the HAV's trade, mostly Heavy Shield Extenders. The incubus can use all the modules that are intended for it and be successful. For a good - expert python pilot they are always needing roughly around 3,000 shield HP due to how AV/HAV"S can rip through the little 900HP Of armor I just don't feel like that even really counts. I use that as a marker to let me know I am 1 tap away from death. I think that the way A/V tears through the Incubus armor even when fitted with 1 or more armor plates could probably need some attention. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 8474	Posted - 2014.10.06 07:37:00 - [84] - Quote medomai grey wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: medomai grey wrote: CCP Rattati, I think it would be faster to go in game and get another player to lend you ADSs to experience it for yourself. Don't ask me because I'd charge you isk for each one. Trying to balance the interactions between A and B while only having experience with A seems... difficult. Let's get one thing straight, this is not about me. Period. It's about trying to achieve balance, the job you were tasked with. If you took offence to my post, know that it was not written with the intent as an insult. I was merely suggesting a method of getting a better view of the "bigger picture". And you are putting effort into seeing a "bigger picture" to achieve a more balanced game; I respect that. You were right in that the ADS rate of fire bonus was oddly high. But you lacked the ADS experience to know how adversely it would affect ADS's effectiveness against other vehicles. Having experience with not only ADS, but all items in Dust514 will go a long way in helping you balance items. Increasing the rate of fire bonus isn't the only solution to increasing ADS effectiveness against vehicles. For example, you could tweak the damage efficiencies against vehicles; although I am strongly against that idea because it's counter intuitive. I knew, but the community refused to propose ideas or numbers to affect the decision. Noone can be an expert in everything and I don't pretend to. However, thinking that my ability with the ADS or that I need to see something with my own eyes, to properly balance, is silly. You are the experts, you describe the problem and how to change it, or in this case, you admit there is a problem and propose ways to reduce the problem. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1885	Posted - 2014.10.06 07:55:00 - [85] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. Finally!!!!!! A) I think this shouldn't be a function of the ADS. It should be an attack vehicle with no passenger support save a gunner. Apache's job is to kill, Huey's is to transport. B and C) that's going to necessitate returning things to how they were. Or how about this: Here's the thing, you can't have a gun be both AV and AP. That's the large blaster with no dispersion. So what you need to do is specialize each drop ship with a role. Python is about infantry suppression with missiles. Therefore, give them a splash radius bonus instead of ROF. Say 10% per level, like the old ROF skill. This ups a 2.5m splash to 3.75m, which if I remember correctly is about the range of a standard nanohives resupply for visual aid. Now it can kill infantry easy, but suffers against vehicles, lacking the DPS to break their tank. Now the incubus could be the vehicle buster. In order to bust vehicles in a single run, you either need to return the ROF bonus and unnerf small rails to their old ROF, or you need to give incubi a large (~12.5%) bonus to hybrid damage. It needs high DPs to bust tanks in a single run. There is no way around it. D) Again, ADS are Apache's. They don't do recon, they attack. You call them in after the recon ship provides the Intel. I'd say a return of SLAVs would fill this role nicely. E) Again, this would be the Python's role. The incubus could do it, but the Python would do it better. With a splash radius bonus, it makes suppression much easier. F) And again, if you want them to kill tanks in a single pass, we need to way ramp up their DPs, which means they will slaughter infantry. There's no way to stop this. My suggestions mean that the high DPs one will have some difficulty engaging infantry, but in the end, the high DPs needed to bust tanks is high enough to rip apart infantry. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 8481	Posted - 2014.10.06 11:47:00 - [86] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: 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. Finally!!!!!! A) I think this shouldn't be a function of the ADS. It should be an attack vehicle with no passenger support save a gunner. Apache's job is to kill, Huey's is to transport. B and C) that's going to necessitate returning things to how they were. Or how about this: Here's the thing, you can't have a gun be both AV and AP. That's the large blaster with no dispersion. So what you need to do is specialize each drop ship with a role. Python is about infantry suppression with missiles. Therefore, give them a splash radius bonus instead of ROF. Say 10% per level, like the old ROF skill. This ups a 2.5m splash to 3.75m, which if I remember correctly is about the range of a standard nanohives resupply for visual aid. Now it can kill infantry easy, but suffers against vehicles, lacking the DPS to break their tank. Now the incubus could be the vehicle buster. In order to bust vehicles in a single run, you either need to return the ROF bonus and unnerf small rails to their old ROF, or you need to give incubi a large (~12.5%) bonus to hybrid damage. It needs high DPs to bust tanks in a single run. There is no way around it. D) Again, ADS are Apache's. They don't do recon, they attack. You call them in after the recon ship provides the Intel. I'd say a return of SLAVs would fill this role nicely. E) Again, this would be the Python's role. The incubus could do it, but the Python would do it better. With a splash radius bonus, it makes suppression much easier. F) And again, if you want them to kill tanks in a single pass, we need to way ramp up their DPs, which means they will slaughter infantry. There's no way to stop this. My suggestions mean that the high DPs one will have some difficulty engaging infantry, but in the end, the high DPs needed to bust tanks is high enough to rip apart infantry. 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. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

jerrmy12 kahoalii G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1622	Posted - 2014.10.06 11:51:00 - [87] - Quote To kill a madrugar, you would have needed xt missiles with python level 5 pre nerf, not sure of the dps on that. Closed beta vet. Call me TrolLuna or Trollmare Moon, Reference link
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2223	Posted - 2014.10.06 13:00:00 - [88] - Quote Here are some of my favorite fits: Myron: Decent passive buffer. Strong active tank. Only problem (as I have said before) is that the hardener visual affect blocks a gunners view too much, making it extremely difficult to fight back AV. If it could be removed from turrets or (more likely) toned down and made more transparent, it would help a lot. Active Grimsnes: Haven't tried this, was just theorycrafting but it looks pretty good. Extra shielding in a pinch, armor hardener increases reps to about 167ehp/s. 5767ehp before reps. However, it also has the problem of hardeners blocking gunners' view. Python: The tried and true. Best fit imo. I have noticed other pilots using a complex light shield booster over the light extender and have been wanting to try it myself. I've considered changing my tactic to always have an AB running and retreat when it's recharging, using the booster as emergency ehp. The "Rattati Semapi Noticed Me": Haven't really had much success as far as team usage, but I still think it's worth keeping around. Maybe one day it will. (Though I still want a PG reduction for the mCRU to fit a better AB, among other reasons) Incubus: Best Incubus fit. Can fit all proto turrets. (Requires armor fitting 3 with basic AB, 4 for ADV AB). I'll post a proper reply later today, I have classes for now. One thing I'd wish you'd consider is introducing turret variants to fill specific roles. Some ideas: Accelerated Missile: AV specialized; high direct damage, low splash damage and radius, faster with longer range for air-to-air. Fragmented Missiles: AI specialized; larger radius and moderate splash damage, lower direct damage, shorter range (150-175 perhaps). Scattered Blaster: For LAVs and tanks; very high rof and moderate RoF (highest dps), short range with considerable dispersion, fast rotation speed. Condensed Blaster: For DSs; low RoF with higher damage per shot (still lower DPS than above), longer range and tighter dispersion, very low rotation speed (near rail level, to prevent use on LAVs, DS gunners don't need to turn as fast because of the longer ranges they'll be engaging and their limited turning anyway). [Rails TBD] Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
a brackers Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 82	Posted - 2014.10.06 13:18:00 - [89] - Quote 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) Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter
a brackers Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 82	Posted - 2014.10.06 13:20:00 - [90] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Here are some of my favorite fits: Myron: Decent passive buffer. Strong active tank. Only problem (as I have said before) is that the hardener visual affect blocks a gunners view too much, making it extremely difficult to fight back AV. If it could be removed from turrets or (more likely) toned down and made more transparent, it would help a lot. Active Grimsnes: Haven't tried this, was just theorycrafting but it looks pretty good. Extra shielding in a pinch, armor hardener increases reps to about 167ehp/s. 5767ehp before reps. However, it also has the problem of hardeners blocking gunners' view. Python: The tried and true. Best fit imo. I have noticed other pilots using a complex light shield booster over the light extender and have been wanting to try it myself. I've considered changing my tactic to always have an AB running and retreat when it's recharging, using the booster as emergency ehp. The "Rattati Semapi Noticed Me": Haven't really had much success as far as team usage, but I still think it's worth keeping around. Maybe one day it will. (Though I still want a PG reduction for the mCRU to fit a better AB, among other reasons) Incubus: Best Incubus fit. Can fit all proto turrets. (Requires armor fitting 3 with basic AB, 4 for ADV AB). I'll post a proper reply later today, I have classes for now. One thing I'd wish you'd consider is introducing turret variants to fill specific roles. Some ideas: Accelerated Missile: AV specialized; high direct damage, low splash damage and radius, faster with longer range for air-to-air. Fragmented Missiles: AI specialized; larger radius and moderate splash damage, lower direct damage, shorter range (150-175 perhaps). Scattered Blaster: For LAVs and tanks; very high rof and moderate RoF (highest dps), short range with considerable dispersion, fast rotation speed. Condensed Blaster: For DSs; low RoF with higher damage per shot (still lower DPS than above), longer range and tighter dispersion, very low rotation speed (near rail level, to prevent use on LAVs, DS gunners don't need to turn as fast because of the longer ranges they'll be engaging and their limited turning anyway). [Rails TBD] Python, why not do advanced heavy shield extender and basic heavy shield extender. Cheaper and more hp Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 8492	Posted - 2014.10.06 13:37:00 - [91] - Quote a brackers wrote: 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. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2225	Posted - 2014.10.06 13:38:00 - [92] - Quote ^Lose <200ehp, have to sacrifice Cplx AB for STD, and needs high turret fitting Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
BL4CKST4R La Muerte Eterna Dark Taboo 3197	Posted - 2014.10.06 14:30:00 - [93] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: a brackers wrote: 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. 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. supercalifragilisticexpialidocious
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2225	Posted - 2014.10.06 15:16:00 - [94] - Quote Ideas for rails: Compressed rail: high damage, low RoF, heats fast. Now the fun one: Burst rail: anti-tank; 3-5 burst, charges each shot (like bolt pistol), over heat after 3-4 bursts, significant dispersion (should be able to hit a still tank from about 50m easily) Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1899	Posted - 2014.10.06 15:50:00 - [95] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: a brackers wrote: 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. I would absolutely love it if we balance by introducing some basic roles by small turret variations! A tank hunter setup with little to no splash on missiles but greater direct damage would be sweet. I think that it is great to make an ADS pilot pick his role. Just like the infantry man has to. If we can balance more precisely using turrets instead of direct bonuses, that seems to have the added benefit for newer players as well. "Also I think knives are a good idea, big f**k-off shiny ones" "Guns for show, Knives for a pro" MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1887	Posted - 2014.10.06 16:40:00 - [96] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH 169	Posted - 2014.10.06 16:48:00 - [97] - Quote TTK on a militia HAV is roughly 3 to 4 minutes, with about 3 to 4 reloads using advanced missile turrets currently. Summer Sault HAV (Gallente, not sure what type it was), user. Ambush OMS on opposite team of me if you need the data. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH 169	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:04:00 - [98] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: 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. On some of these things I don't agree at all, like making the assault dropship only function with two or more people. The game is being balanced for 16 vs 16. Plus I have always viewed the ADS as not an Apache, but a little bird/blackbird helicopter. The pilot hones the main gun, while he can still drop off two infantry in strategic places. I am not sure Alena understands that arial vehicles were first used to scout the area until someone decided to bring a fire arm aboard. Now we have a more complex system of arial fighting. Scouting form the air and killing things from the air is one in the same for the Assault dropship. As Alena said, I am all for buffing the damage for the small rail turret. The RoF is fairly comfortable as it is, perhaps it could get a small nudge more but too much and the Gallente ADS will the the answer to all questions in the sky. I am all for the missile turret changes, but the blast radius needs to be no less than 5 meters. That is a reasonable distance to at least pull off a decent shot, adding speed, angle, 63 meters to 90 meters, and time towards the target you are aiming at. With that at least the dropship should have a better chance against infantry if we are going to go back to making different missile variants. I think we can make blaster variants for the incubus. I'm still all about giving the Caldari their rail turret back and making a Gallente suited weapon to do the Anti vehicle job. That should make the two vehicles balance out a bit more. You guys can even adjust one blaster to shoot similar to a rail with high damage low rate of fire to bust through vehicle armor. This should bring the game in the vision you are hoping to achieve at CCP. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2226	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:11:00 - [99] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: A) ...I'd go as far to say as remove the side guns and make the front turret a gunner seat, if that is feasibleGÇª 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. Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Dergle Kiith Sobani 39	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:31:00 - [100] - Quote 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. DUST is not a democracy! Ain't nobody want to hear your problems, Everyone got problems.

Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH 170	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:39:00 - [101] - Quote Dergle wrote: 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. 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. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 759	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:43:00 - [102] - Quote Here's my pubbie Grimsnes for reference: http://www.protofits.com/fittings/shared/0/8258 (mCRU, cpx AB, cpx repper, 2x pro turret, 6.5k hp passive) I have shield fitting skills maxed, but I don't have a competitive Myron fit. The only fit I made that can tank 4 shots from an IAFG (happens almost every match these days) is this (quadruple cpx light shield booster fit). Also for reference, I haven't yet encountered an ADS that would've been able to destroy my Grimsnes. Many ADS actually have to flee from my mighty blueberry-gunners (the ones that don't know why we're hovering 15 meters from a red objective for two minutes). As such I recommend that the base stats of small railguns should only be buffed with a lot of care. I'd prefer the Incubus skill to grant a straight damage buff to blasters and rails and the python skill to grant a splash radius buff. As it stands an ADV railgun doesn't have enough oomph to kill a 4.5k Grimsnes dropship without overheating (I think it's about 3k damage until overheat). On the other hand I don't think it should be able to. The advantage of being in a dropship is not that you have ton's of DPS but that you can pummel your victim with impunity until your hard counter comes along.
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1890	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:44:00 - [103] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: A) ...I'd go as far to say as remove the side guns and make the front turret a gunner seat, if that is feasibleGÇª 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. 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. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2157	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:59:00 - [104] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. I downed a Python two days ago with two Wiyrkomi Breach shots. There's literally nothing wrong with AV, and as usual vehicles are still underpowered. Experience means nothing anymore, because people will still get on here and complain they can't solo someone like me with MLT swarms. And then you'll nerf vehicles again, while at the same time buffing AV. Why not just delete vehicles already? We're heading down that path quickly right now anyway, why not just finalize it? I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH 170	Posted - 2014.10.06 19:00:00 - [105] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: A) ...I'd go as far to say as remove the side guns and make the front turret a gunner seat, if that is feasibleGÇª 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. 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. There is still one more dropship type that is just sitting at CCP Shanghai, "Bomber Dropships." I feel that one will be more apache oriented. The biggest thing about the apache is it has a great deal of armor, and weapons. They have multiple weapon systems to cycle through. Lock on missiles, Cannon, rocket pod, and chaff/flair system. I do feel though that the standard dropship is similar to a HUEY. Oh and we must not forget every pilots unicorn! The infamous fighter jets of Dust 514 we are all hoping gets added to the game. That will be the light arial attack vehicle for sure. Making the Incubus the answer to all isn't balancing anything though. There is no full circle here but only a half of one if the game goes about this way. I can fly both, and flying my incubus with a rail is liking clubbing baby seals against caldari dopships and all ground vehicles. We need to see dropships from both sides either fitted with weapons to attack ground targets or weapons designed to attack air targets. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2226	Posted - 2014.10.06 19:05:00 - [106] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. 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) An unfitted or MLT fitted ADS can preform transport (A) and recon (D) just as well as a high grade fit (though the pilot's skill is highly dependent on both these). Personally, these roles are preformed well by the ADS currently and don't need much work. The only thing I'd as for are the fixes to rendering, my prior mentioned changes to mCRUs and vehicle scanners, and perhaps "empty seat" mods to use instead of turrets to fit more people. 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. Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
a brackers Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 83	Posted - 2014.10.06 19:15:00 - [107] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: a brackers wrote: 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. 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. Sounds good if we can have variants on all of them. Yh I was suggesting the av Missile had little or no splash. as person above me said you could have ai rails. Basically you want all variants to have small mags with high damage per second and long reloads to promote hit and run and strafing. Ranges:rails> missile> blaster therefore dps: Blaster> Missile> rail. I would also suggest the time you can fire per mag: blaster > Missile> rail. However for this to be fair the draw distance should be increased for turret users if possible. Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH 170	Posted - 2014.10.06 19:17:00 - [108] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: A) 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. 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. I like a lot of this Vulpes but I am against 1 type of dropship better than the other always, when it deals with them both being in the air. We need them both ADS able to engage each other. I think if we have more variations of blaster turrets this would be a huge help in the right direction. I'm imagining a Blaster that is high on damage like the rail so when you have another vehicle all across your screen within the pipper you can lat it rip! This would also play with the Incubus being the straight moving vehicle. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2228	Posted - 2014.10.06 19:19:00 - [109] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: A) ...I'd go as far to say as remove the side guns and make the front turret a gunner seat, if that is feasibleGÇª 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. Clearly you've never encountered an incubus duo in PC. Well, at least pre-Charlie. 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. Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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. 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. Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1890	Posted - 2014.10.06 20:02:00 - [110] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: A) ...I'd go as far to say as remove the side guns and make the front turret a gunner seat, if that is feasibleGÇª 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. Clearly you've never encountered an incubus duo in PC. Well, at least pre-Charlie. 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. Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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. 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. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me

Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2228	Posted - 2014.10.06 20:25:00 - [111] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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? No, because either it's not worth doing or singe ADSs will be labeled OP. What are you going to do? Currently with the 15% RoF, you only get 30% more RoF with a gunner (which isn't much, also only from one gun since the pilot won't be shooting). The only way it would be worth it is if either the RoF bonus as super high (which was the "problem" pre-Delta) or somehow stacking was exponential or something. In any case, it's not a question of numbers, but of application, which I think it fails at. Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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? I'm just saying that it will really kill the ADS. I'm sure most of the current pilots will either give up their ADSs or only fly once in a while with friends. It will completely take away from the ADS's tactical effectiveness and thus its usage. Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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. Because people suck at gunning. Because it's a huge SP/time investment with little to no benefit. Because I don't want my primary role I've spent countless ISK and hours perfecting to be deponent on if my gunner I've trained with is on/willing to play or not. Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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. Again, they will never be as effective as a singe gunner without imbalance one way or another. Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
CELESTA AUNGM Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 289	Posted - 2014.10.06 20:55:00 - [112] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: a brackers wrote: 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. 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. You won't need to use too much creative juices on this one. The idea of small turrent variants was well established and proved very attractive to players back before the Logi-vehicle removal took place. Accelerated / Compressed/ Stabilized / Scatter / Regulated etc were the core of DS fitting, and a GREAT way to take pride in the personilzed schemes each vehicle player came up with for her ship. A few other vehicle players mentioned that this would be an excellent way to resolve ADS versus Transport conflicts, by further SEPARATING them into different catagories that each have their own collection of turret variants. Finally, the entry-level DS should be mounted with only ONE of these turret varients, as a FIXED standard turret that cannot be removed or upgraded to another variant. This gives players a standard vehicle to progress out of, and a clear ADS or Transport fork-in-the-road that they must choose to progress into. Re-introducing small turret variants is a win for everyone, new players or older one. Universe of good wishes for the 49, especially CCP Eterne... No story can have life without writers and publishers.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 77	Posted - 2014.10.06 21:06:00 - [113] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: 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. Rattati, care to answer the question in first paragraph, please? This is relevant to the armor vehicle vs shield vehicle discussion.
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1895	Posted - 2014.10.06 21:14:00 - [114] - Quote Gabriella Grey wrote: Dergle wrote: 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. 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. Real world example. We don't have a single tool that is mediocre at every job. We have many tools that specialize in o e job. We have a tool that specializes in hammering in nails. Another tool specializes in darling holes or screws. Another tool that specializes in wrenching nuts tigbt. We don't want one tool that does those 3 jobs decently. We want 3 separate tools that do one job really well. Same for dropsuit. We have one suit that specializes in scouting an area and providing recon. One suit that specializes in sentinel duty and point defense. One suit that specializes in assaulting an objective. Another suit that specializes in providing logistical support. Each has its own job. In fact, these suits are called OP when they step I to another suits role, like scouts and before that logos being better at assaulting than assaults. 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. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1902	Posted - 2014.10.06 21:47:00 - [115] - Quote Someone earlier in the thread mentioned giving the ability for a seated gunner in an ADS to control the actual front mounted pilots turret in an ADS. I have to say, I would actively go looking for good gunners on my alt with the ADS, maybe even join a dedicated corp for drop-shipping and gunning. As long as the solo pilot can still do his thing, having a dedicated gunner on that front turret would far surpass what any solo pilot can achieve. (I think a lot of people like the ideas of more turret variations as well ) "Also I think knives are a good idea, big f**k-off shiny ones" "Guns for show, Knives for a pro" MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 10	Posted - 2014.10.06 21:56:00 - [116] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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...) Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1896	Posted - 2014.10.06 22:13:00 - [117] - Quote Halla Murr wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
a brackers Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 83	Posted - 2014.10.06 23:13:00 - [118] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Halla Murr wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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) Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1898	Posted - 2014.10.06 23:47:00 - [119] - Quote a brackers wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Halla Murr wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: 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) Then that brings up things like an AP large blaster. As much as I'd like to bring in turret variants, we can barely balance the few we have. The reason CCP took them out was because vehicles were a gobbled mess, some mods Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2232	Posted - 2014.10.07 01:13:00 - [120] - Quote The blaster counts as the Incubus's AI weapon and railgun counts as its AV. Missiles are multi-tools but should have a AI and AV specific missile (not saying rails and blasters can't have variants, but they'd be more tailored to what vehicles they kill better for rails and range/dps or something for blasters). Dust was real! I was there! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~

MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1344	Posted - 2014.10.07 02:01:00 - [121] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: A) ...I'd go as far to say as remove the side guns and make the front turret a gunner seat, if that is feasibleGÇª 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. 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. Dergle and sobanre abused skillstacking mechanics to their own benefit. ALL vehicles should be viable roles for a single player - I don't want to be forced to have people I don't know, or cannot communicate with in my vehicle if I don't want to be in a squad requiring that puts dropships in the position of tanks in 1.6 where they were constantly frustrated by useless people getting in their vehicles. Should vehicles be ultimate murdermachines with just a single player? No, but there needs to be some meaning to my skillpoint investment (Significantly more SP cost than simply skilling into another proto suit) It should never be a 'requirement' of anything to have multiple people inside it to be effective - this was many players complaints about AV and it was also the complaint of many players about vehicles previously. Pointing to an example of two people who were abusing an unintended bug as how something 'should' function is incredibly poor form. If I had side turrets on my dropship when I was with a squad it was to allow me to move my whole squad from point a to point b and have them capable of firing at stuff - but they were always more effective on the ground with me providing overwatch/suppression with a single turret. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 208	Posted - 2014.10.07 08:23:00 - [122] - Quote http://www.protofits.com/fittings/index/0/8270 A beast mode solo Madrugar. Ion Cannon, 2 Complex plates, 1 complex light rep, basic fuel injector, 8970 eHP. If you want it to be done on a single pass it would have to do roughly 9K in a couple of seconds. Not to be a downer, but all of your ideas for tactically rebalancing the ADS is pointing right back at the pre delta ROf/ turrets. - The Pilot needed proto turrets (rail or missile) and ADS level 5 to kill tanks. - To kill tanks relatively quickly you needed two stacked players both with Level 4-5. Me and Ghaz flew together plenty of times, Level 3 + Level 5 was not enough, even with proto turrets. - A pilot couldn't spam shots with a rail turret to kill infantry. You had to be dead on accurate. Rail turrets were used for the gunners. - The python was the platform for killing infantry, the incubus the platform for killing vehicles. This being said IMO its a terrible idea to have a hard counter that is out of the players hands. Defending an HAV should NOT depend having AV infantry sitting in your tank. IMO: - There is no reason to sacrifice HP to fit scans on an ADS; The only proper recon fit i made was the Grimnes with dual scans. - ADS should not kill tanks on a single pass. This is extremely unfair to tankers. - Pilots/ Tank drivers shoud not be forced to rely on the goodwill of other players. There is no ADS/ Tank counter to AV infantry. There is no two ways around it, no matter what you buff to kill tanks, anything that can point and shoot will be used on infantry as well. Look at the Plasma cannon and the Forge Gun. Both AV weapons used to kill the troops. People still snipe with the large rail turret. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH RUST415 176	Posted - 2014.10.07 15:11:00 - [123] - Quote Great post Tesfa, I think this goes back to what I have been saying since before uprising when HAV's could drive off of the towers on the harvest map, repair and still survive from being shot at by small turrets on the dropship. HAV's and AV has never been balanced with the other vehicles. AV takes so much damage because before it was only accounted to breaking through the HAV's health points. Back then dropships couldn't even fit the heavy modules they can now let alone equip the medium shields and armor plates that were taken out or removed. if CCP wants to balance this game out on the vehicle side they do need to start at HAV's and AV, not at dropships first. Though dropships still need more variation of turrets again. Very few have even come to grips that the Small Rail Turret is the only turret that does a ton of damage to shields but not armor. It wasn't intended to be made like this before last year. It's caldari technology, as same goes for missiles. CCP needs to "fork over" the Caldari things back to the Caldari and make a meaningful Gallente small turret designed to destroy vehicles. The easiest way would be to make a heavy damage blaster with a low RoF. In all fairness they can even make a plasma cannon like large turret to come into perspective of large rail turret and make those vehicles as well come to full circle. Then they can be perfectly wide open to add whatever vehicle or racial variant they want, but Ratatti has to kick his team into gear! He may even have to micromanage them to get the results if that is needed to get his results. I understand he is in a tough position because vehicles have never been balanced until the patch that came out last December in 2013. I won't say the balance was the perfect one but it for sure made things better than they were before. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 212	Posted - 2014.10.07 18:06:00 - [124] - Quote For the rail turret or any av turret, I was thinking of something along the lines of the real life example of the 23mm anti tank cannon mounted on soviet fighters in WW2. Slow firing, massive punch. Two or three passes should do it, but then the over heat mechanic as either got to go or be severely changed. I dont mind the python being given rail turrets as long as my incubus has something in return.I believe each ship should be able to do AV or AI as needed. I was wondering if any other pilots would be happy with replacing the ROF skill with something else. Its useless as it is now, and if it isnt going to be changed back then something else more apropriate for ships? The ADS gunner pilot combo is dead already, and I don't see it coming back. Random Ideas: - Inc: Blaster turret range increase/ dispersion decrease 10% per level: High ROF proto pilots have more range to stand off and engage, less disppersion to maintain close range accuracy - Rail turret - direct damage per level/ Reduced heat buildup per level 10%: Low ROF but reduced heat buildup means more shots before overheating. Direct damage boosts the stopping power enough so that a Proto pilot can kill tanks where LAVs and lower skilled pilots cannot spam small rails and wreck the tankers Python: Blast radius per level 10%: Less time on station to fight infantry mean less accurate shots, and yet gives pilots the same splash as the Mass Driver - ROF 5% or more per level: The only way missile ships can put enough DPS down to bother a tank is to buff the ROF. Not so much as the rails but enough to give the tanker some concern I would reduce direct missile damage a bit, just enough that a sentinel should be a three or 4 shot. A high rate of fire should let Proto Python players do this quickly, low level pilots or incubus pilots would have a hard time. Bringing back all of the old turrets would be a dream, if its on the table. If not than tweaking these turrets is the best we can hope for. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 24	Posted - 2014.10.08 13:14:00 - [125] - Quote @Rattati particularly but everyone here discussing ADSs and variant turrets: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=177189&find=unread Some numbers and design intentions for variant turrets as well as alternative ADS skills. Would like to get more comments/criticism. Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2816	Posted - 2014.10.08 18:27:00 - [126] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Let's get one thing straight, this is not about me. Period. Au contraire, my good man. Not only did you implement these changes, you also endorsed them. You're in too deep, know too much (good conspiracy punch line). CCP Rattati wrote: I knew, but the community refused to propose ideas or numbers to affect the decision. Uh, I'm not a part of the community? Granted, among the pilots, I'm a bit of a recluse, but I'm still a part of the community, and have proposed numbers. CCP Rattati wrote: 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) Myron is less efficient than the Grimsnes in K/S. (Shield better than Armor) 4) Can a veteran pilot please post indisputably competitive fits for all 4 dropships for us to study internally. Protofits link will do nicely. 5) Yet, people complain that the Python is worse than the Incubus, even after the rail ROF nerf. 6) Destroy enemy HAVs Please support your ROF/DPS proposals with the fits you are using and also the Madrugar/Gunnlogi you are attacking. Anyway, on to my points. Apologies for taking so long to reply, however, I have a few IRL issues to deal with which keep me from Dust for the time being (until October 20th). 1) You really should lower the flight ceiling, I'm getting kind of sick of having to fight an incubus in my python over 800 meters in the air. 2) I can't really offer any personal experience on this, but when I have people gun in my ADS and tank, they still prefer rockets on ADS, and rails on tank/ADS. I don't have any personal experience as I've not had the opportunity to test it myself, but I'd lay the blame on the dispersion for that, if I had to make a guess. 3) I usually fly the myron more often than I do the Grimsnes, but coming from the ADS field and the DS field, I can tell you why people prefer the Grimsnes over the myron. It is not primarily because you get more tank on the Grimsnes, that is one of the reasons, don't get me wrong. But the main reason is because both the Incubus and Grimsnes get more PG fitting space than their Caldari counterparts. Dropships are very PG dependant, and the Myron and Python just don't get enough PG love to be considered better than the Gallente DS/ADS, hence one of the reasons I argue that rocket incubus is better than python. 4) I'll get that, thank you very much. My baby Laira (Python) Anaxes (Incubus) Moochies Myron fitting (I adopted his design) My Grimsnes fit Keep in mind that in protofits, we haven't gotten our PG/CPU reduction in their yet, if I'm correct, that should be the meta fit I'd run with the Grim. 5) I complain that the levels I skilled into the python aren't worth what I sunk into it. The above incubus fit is superior in all scenarios to my python save ONE scenario, when I'm squaring off against a minmando. Numbers for this are as follows: Per level of python skill, I get an ROF bonus of .036 per level. in every swarm vs ADS fight, it takes me 3 shots maximum splash to kill said swarmer. My current ROF is one missile every 1.08 seconds, that is level 5. Swarm Op. level 5 takes 1.05 seconds to lock on to an ADS, then I'd guess .25 (?) seconds to launch them. adding that together, it comes to 1.3 seconds to lock and fire. It takes our missiles 1.2 seconds to hit said swarm per volley. The ROF will not do much of anything to help me in fighting that swarmer, I still get 3 shots off just like him. Let's assume I miss once or twice and the swarmer is lucky enough to get a reload in. Accounting for max reload speed and minmando reload speed Reload speed of swarm is 4.5 seconds, cut that in half you get a reload speed of 2.25 seconds, the ROF bonus will come into play, but only into level four. Level four ROF: 1.20-0.144= 1.054*2=2.108 volleys per second. We get two volleys off with level four pythons, getting level 5 isn't worth it in this scenario. Let's look at forges now. The Assault forge is a favorite amongst forgers, myself included. With max operation level, an assault forge gets a charge time of 2.25 seconds per shot, identical to the swarms reload speed, so I think doing the math would be a little redundant on this. Reload speed isn't worth doing because I don't have enough typing space left for it. Let's look at the maddy: Derriths maddy This fit here will get 344 reps per seconds: doing the math on that Rocket shoots 3 shots to strip maddy of shields, rest of 5 hit every 1.02 seconds, meaning he still gets to get a rep every time I hit him. Rocket does about 600 damage to armor give or take (with ADS damage buff), he reps 344 of that every time, meaning I'm only doing about 254 damage to a maddy. That's not accounting for my reload time, which neither dust or protofits has reload speed specs on missiles, so I had to guess about 3 seconds, he's already getting 1032 reps after that, nullify nearly two of my shots. This is assuming the maddy driver is a tard and lets me shoot him. Let's look at my FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1739	Posted - 2014.10.08 19:11:00 - [127] - Quote I think we need to consider the gallente ads skill to grant damage instead of RoF because ifantry sniping. It was amazingly fun but not for the guy getting torched. 3% damage should be changed to 5 but with is different skill system. OUT OF THE BOX THINKING FOR SPECIALIZED ROLES IDEA I suggest CCP take the % total bonus and devide it by the amount of sp requiered for for each level. Lets say 2,400,000 is what it roughly takes to reach level 5. So for the sake of math if it takes 600,000 to get from level 3 to level 4, which is around 25% of the total maximum bonus the level 4 should give you a 5% damage increase, while getting it from level 4 to 5 should yeald a better percentage increase. ADDED NOTE This might be a good incentive for specialization because it sp based. Getting things to level 5 grants a huge bonus to efficiency and would reward specialization for really specialized roles. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
Bremen van Equis Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation 3	Posted - 2014.10.08 19:47:00 - [128] - Quote I fly an Incubus: HS: PRO AB LS: Enhanced PG Upgrade LS: Complex Lgt Armor Rep LS: Complex 120mm Plate Turret: Proto Missile or Proto Rail, depending on the situation...or advanced if I'm feeling stingy. No gunner. I drop uplinks strategically, so never risk transporting blueberries that inevitably HIJACK MY DROPSHIP for a short and sadly entertaining joyride. Since delta I pretty much limit Rail use for Air to Air if the opposing pilot(s) are decent, missiles for everything else. I don't destroy many tanks without help, but I can definitely push them back into the little tank holes they crawled out of. I tried tank busting with the rail but the overheat makes it nearly impossible. I don't use rails on infantry, I've gotten a couple of lucky shots, but when I'm rail equipped I'm hunting drop ships and harassing tanks. Installations are impossible to take out alone, but an easy infantry kill if a red dot is silly enough to try to man it. Usually I just wait until I see a tank working on one then lend a hand, but mostly I'm avoiding/evading. As for AV infantry... I don't go near them if I'm rail equipped. If they're putting up a wall of swarms, I'll fly through, hoping to get a kill or two to keep them from thinking they're invincible with those things. I notice a lot more swarms than forge guns since delta...of course. The nerf to swarm turning is a total LOL fest. Those things will follow you like Kahn vowed to follow Kirk. Around the moons of so and so, and up the bum of what's its face. Once they're in the air, doesn't matter how much terrain/building/etc. you put between you, they're hitting home. I can hang on for two or three if I'm ambushed. Mostly I turn on the gas and hope my maxed shield regen skill saves my bacon if I've already taken dmg. Rail tanks are tough, feels like they can take me down in 3 shots sometimes...three QUICK shots...man some of those guys can fire fast!! It doesn't take long if they've got a bead and I'm changing directions or hovering. Skill Levels: ADS: 5 Gall ADS: 3 Armor: 5 Armor Fit: 5 Armor Comp: 5 Armor Regen: 5 Core Upgrades: 5 Core Grid: 3 Core Calibration: 2 Shield: 3 Shield Regen: 5 Missile/Rail: 5 Delta was jarring, but I'm still flying and flying effectively. I could have sworn my maneuverability got nerfed the day the hotfix dropped, but that seems to have straightened itself out. I definitely need to fly smarter, and this has made me a better pilot, so thanks CCP. A solo ADS pilot needs to be smart AND bold. Get in there low in the city to turn the tide of a losing engagement...they won't be carrying AV during a pitched ground battle for those city points. Nothing gets the blueberries to charge better than seeing a crazy ADS pilot swooping down a corridor to push a tank back and pop a few heavies along the way. And while I won't give respect to swarm AV like I do a good forger, I definitely keep alert and on the move... fly through once and they all light up...come back in low from the other direction and send them back to the vats!! Oh and for all you Richie Rich's who ram first and shoot ...well...badly? Crunch all you want...I'll make more. I am Bremen van Equis, Incubus pilot...it says so on my jacket.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2014.10.08 20:49:00 - [129] - Quote XxGhazbaranxX wrote: [...] include a third shield skill that increases regen of shield by 10% just as the third armor skill was included at a 10% value Agreed on all parts with what you said Ghazbaran. As I mentioned in my previous post though, I would rather see shield regen improved via module efficiency increase so that it matches armor more accurately. In this case, I would like to see a skill that can improve the powerof the shield booster by % per level to match how armor repair improves repair modules by % per level. This way a shield vehicle has to use boosters to feel the bonus the way an armor vehicle has to use an armor repair module to feel his. Also can we please get an answer about the DAMAGE TYPES on missiles ?? now that we know swarms and large missiles are projectile instead of explosive, we have to come to terms with the fact we are suddenly doing a lot less damage to shields with the profile change. Is this also the case for the small missile launcher??
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game RUST415 505	Posted - 2014.10.08 21:49:00 - [130] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. The small missiles already are av, they're just as good if not better for taking out a tank/Lav/dropship the only thing the small rail has an advantage on is shooting a fleeing ads, if an ads sits there in the air shooting at you 1 missile hit will have them pointing at something else. Small missiles are the reason infantry cry about the ads, side turrets are the only place that other turrets are better and that's only because half the side turret users blow themselves up when using missiles. Even your numbers point to the Python being better than the Incubus, so how is throwing the Python an even bigger advantage going to help?

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3495	Posted - 2014.10.09 10:05:00 - [131] - Quote From an AV point of view, I do have to honestly add that I do not feel threatened by vehicles right now. Yes I am the paper to their rock, but when I am running AV fits, even my crappy swarm and (rarely) PLC fits it feels more like a mugging than a fight. The ADS is about on par with the minmatar commando so long as the pilot can spot snd focus his full attention upon the swarm/PLC/Forge gunner. This is not always the case. As it stands my basic swarm minmatar commando was about and even fight with the test ADS. Had I been running wiyrkomi swarms it would have been utterly one-sided no matter what he could do. He could not fire missiles fast enough to reasonably stop me from throwing volley after volley at him. Add to this I can time shots to bounce dropships off buildings and things get rather ugly even with basic swarms or PLC. While yes, I agree that ADS should be both threatened by all AV in earnest, there is no real balance without the ability to fight back with a modicum of effectiveness. In my opinion right now the rate of fire bonus on the ADS is too low and because of this the overheat on rails and blasters is too fast. Was +50% entirely too much? Yes, absolutely, but between the swarm speed buff and the afterburner nerf ADS seem far less difficult to destroy. But in my opinion bringing the ADS fire rate up to 5% per level will allow aggressive and proactive pilots to effectively focus on and fight back against AV gunners they can spot. They do so at the risk of encountering a career vehicle killer, or multiple AV gunners, but I would like to see the event more of a battle and less binary. I would also request a look at the overheat meckanics on vehicle weapons. They seem to be inordinately hot since ammo has been added to vehicles. Originally the heat was implemented to compensate for unlimited ammo. Now the vehicles have proper magazines. I have said before and will say again: AV vs. V is in a great spot. V vs. AV is not, however. The weapon systems are not living up to the expectations that should be attached to them. Most notably the small blaster is crap on the ADS nose port and the overheat on the railgun keeps an ADS from keeping ahead of a single rep vehicle's armor recovery. Slowing down the overheat and bringing up the rate of fire to 5% per level should allow small turrets significant firepower without jumping into "too effective."
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3495	Posted - 2014.10.09 10:15:00 - [132] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. The tanks also suffer from their guns not behaving like cannons. But the described missile mechanics fit modern antitank design philosophy. Most collateral damage done by antitank weapons is caused by what is called a "catastrophic kill." When the magazine cooks off and blows the turret 100 feet into the air and sends pieces of tank slinging like shrapnel. Most antitank weapons blow a hole the width of a jumbo hot dog, liquefy the crew with heat and overpressure and cause what's left of them to shoot out the hole. The expected collateral damage is minimal unless the turret jumps off the hull. But back to my original point. Can vehicle weapons be made more like cannons? Exception being the small blaster. But until the large blaster stops being a rapid heavy machinegun and the railguns stop behaving like a bolt pistol we will not get the vehicles to become heavy support rather than infantry kill farming engines. Thanks for reading.
Apothecary Za'ki Biomass Positive 983	Posted - 2014.10.09 13:48:00 - [133] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Small rails are less effective than missiles because 1) their damage is considerably less per shot than missiles - they need to land more shots on target than missiles do to do comparable damage, this is very very hard to do and 2) they don't have splash - you must land every shot directly on target to do damage. A small splash range would help rails immensely, the other option is to slow their rate of fire a bit more and increase damage comparably. Myron underperforms for the exact same reasons that gunnlogi's do - armor vehicles rep constantly no matter what, shield vehicles taking any damage stops their reps for fairly lengthy durations of time... also it's entirely possible to lose all of your hp by bouncing up and down on the ground very quickly. Gunnlogi's underperform because they do not rep constantly - any 'actual' damage shuts off their tank. If it were possible to do in game, I'd suggest making all shields rep x value every y seconds inherently (say, 450 shields every 3.5 seconds) with modules that can either increase the x value or reduce the y value - this is in no way true to eve, where shields passively repair constantly and their reps get stronger up until 33% where tank is 'broken' and shield boosters repair decent amounts very quickly but at extreme capacitor costs). The current system just doesn't work - because armor does regenerative tanking better. Armor in eve doesn't have passive repairs, it has to be activated and it has long cycle times (repairing at the end of a cycle) but has reasonably high rep values, most importantly their repairing is extremely capacitor efficient. agree. the splash on missles is stupid its like 2.5m or something or atleast feels like it when being strafed while im beating feet [[LogiBro in Training]] Level 2 Forum Pariah
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3509	Posted - 2014.10.09 14:40:00 - [134] - Quote Bluntly I think vehicles should hit significantly harder and splash more but fire slower. The reasoning being that the closer a weapon behaves to an HMG or auto rifle or sniper weapons the more useful they are for infantry farming rather than suppression. The firing profile of the railgun almost perfectly matches the bolt pistol. The large blaster acts like a modern .50 cal machinegun. I think weapons for vehicles need to behave significantly differently from infantry weapons or else a farming mindset will always result.
Bright Cloud Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 405	Posted - 2014.10.09 15:30:00 - [135] - Quote To be honest the rate of fire bonus at the moment is just useless. You should change the bonuses completely cause at the moment they are not appealing to spec into. Caldari ADS: 5% blast radius increase for missiles and 3% direct impact increase Gallente ADS: 5% increase of direct impact damage and 3% less heat build up per lvl for hybrid weapons (blasters+rails) Missiles are getting their usefullness increased cause splash damage is easier to apply vs infantry and a bit better damage on direct impact. Small rails are getting more oomph vs vehicles, blasters gain more damage vs infantry and you can keep firing for longer without overheating. The ammo bonuses are a bit wasted in my opinion cause there is allready a other skill that enhance the capacity for this. Bright is the opposite of dark! Who would have thought of that?!
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 29	Posted - 2014.10.09 15:49:00 - [136] - Quote Looking for more feedback on some ideas: Vehicle Skills and Turret Variants. I think you'll be interested in this Bright Cloud, considering your last post. Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 80	Posted - 2014.10.09 19:46:00 - [137] - Quote Rattati, definitely check out Halla Murr's thread. The dropship skill tree and bonuses he suggests are perfect. Halla Murr wrote: Part 2:Assault Dropship Skills [...] Assault Dropships Skill - Assault Dropship role bonus: applies to all racial Assault Dropship skills +2% to small turret damage per level. [As the previous Assault Dropship skill provided, but more in line with the current Dropsuit skills.] \- Gallente Assault Dropships: -5% to small railgun heat build-up and +20% to small blaster splash radius per level. [Improves the Incubus's ability to apply damage to targets.]] [...] \- Caldari Assault Dropships: +10% splash radius and missile speed to small missile turrets per level. [Increases the application of the Python's primary weapon against both aerial and ground targets.] [...] I am particularly fond of missile travel speed bonus.
La Lore Sleipnier THE PR0T0TYPE 126	Posted - 2014.10.10 10:33:00 - [138] - Quote Not bad but missile are multipurpose weapon and without the ROF a python alone can't kill a tank. And the swarms must be nerfed, before delta the wyirkomi were lethal and militia was a moskito, now even militia are an ADS killer... Soy una hoja al viento a merced de los elementos... https://dust514.com/recruit/MfQjol/
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3540	Posted - 2014.10.10 11:46:00 - [139] - Quote Every weapon should be a killer under the correct circumstances. I may be on the side of bringing up vehicular firepower, but my sympathy only goes so far. Just like proto gear retains no guarantee of immunity to militia gear, there should be no guarantee of immunity to militia AV for vehicles, even specialist vehicles like the ADS.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2842	Posted - 2014.10.10 15:28:00 - [140] - Quote Bright Cloud wrote: To be honest the rate of fire bonus at the moment is just useless. You should change the bonuses completely cause at the moment they are not appealing to spec into. Caldari ADS: 5% blast radius increase for missiles and 3% direct impact increase Gallente ADS: 5% increase of direct impact damage and 3% less heat build up per lvl for hybrid weapons (blasters+rails) Missiles are getting their usefullness increased cause splash damage is easier to apply vs infantry and a bit better damage on direct impact. Small rails are getting more oomph vs vehicles, blasters gain more damage vs infantry and you can keep firing for longer without overheating. The ammo bonuses are a bit wasted in my opinion cause there is allready a other skill that enhance the capacity for this. On the caldari bonus, I can't tell you how much I'm against the splash radius increase. Adding splash takes away a decent portion of skill it takes to lead that target with rockets. But that's just my opinion, I've always prided myself on being a decent shot in an ADS, I wouldn't want shots that shouldn't have hit to hit. I like the Gal ADS bonus though, if people are dead set on removing the ADS ROF bonus. Seems like a good trade. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.

Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2842	Posted - 2014.10.10 15:32:00 - [141] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Every weapon should be a killer under the correct circumstances. I may be on the side of bringing up vehicular firepower, but my sympathy only goes so far. Just like proto gear retains no guarantee of immunity to militia gear, there should be no guarantee of immunity to militia AV for vehicles, even specialist vehicles like the ADS. Normally I'd agree with that. But the problem I have with that is that most militia forges and swarms have 0 SP sunk into them, I'd be all for militia packing a greater punch, if the people using the militia gear actually sunk a good chunk of SP into the swarms, forge, or PLC. ADS have a vast SP pool to fill as of now to make themselves deadly, I see no reason that AV shouldn't have to do the same. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 86	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:06:00 - [142] - Quote Swarms should not be nerfed, I honestly believe they should be buffed FURTHER but countermeasures should be implemented. The whole DS vs Swarms battle NEEDS to be more interactive. Right, the swarm launcher user needs only lock on and fire without the slightest thought, and the drop ship pilot can only "take the damage" while moving out of lock on range. It's a very binary situation that takes the human element right out. I have an idea for a countermeasure system but I am not sure how interested Rattati is on it. I get the feeling he would rather focus on other things.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3547	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:07:00 - [143] - Quote Derrith Erador wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Every weapon should be a killer under the correct circumstances. I may be on the side of bringing up vehicular firepower, but my sympathy only goes so far. Just like proto gear retains no guarantee of immunity to militia gear, there should be no guarantee of immunity to militia AV for vehicles, even specialist vehicles like the ADS. Normally I'd agree with that. But the problem I have with that is that most militia forges and swarms have 0 SP sunk into them, I'd be all for militia packing a greater punch, if the people using the militia gear actually sunk a good chunk of SP into the swarms, forge, or PLC. ADS have a vast SP pool to fill as of now to make themselves deadly, I see no reason that AV shouldn't have to do the same. Killing someone with MLT or STD swarms or STD/MLT Forge Guns is dumb luck. I can only pull it off if a dropship is already wounded severely or is right next to a building i can bounce them off of. In my testing my STD swarm failed to break through the python and kill it except when I thumped him off of a tower. The only way an ADS pilot is going to die to a solo MLT swarm is if he's a dumbass. I am not a dumbass, and I spiked my STD swarm to doing 990 shield damage, but i still could not kill the ADS. Same with MLT forge guns. If I take out an ADS with an MLT forge then it's because the pilot was literally a shot away from dead, or I bounced him off the walls. And I'm more or less maxed on forge gun efficacy. My prototype forge guns? I'll make a dropship pilot **** his pants from shot 1. If I'm using a breach I can properly induce a full on panic attack if I can line up the weakspot. But dropship pilots dying to STD and MLT swarms are idiots. It means they're sitting still or trying to get creative with a small pack of AV guns. Plus inevitably, the killfeed does not show what ELSE may have hit you. I've seen a ADS go down to a swarm immediately after I hit it with a breach forge. It was rather impressive.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2843	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:25:00 - [144] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Derrith Erador wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Every weapon should be a killer under the correct circumstances. I may be on the side of bringing up vehicular firepower, but my sympathy only goes so far. Just like proto gear retains no guarantee of immunity to militia gear, there should be no guarantee of immunity to militia AV for vehicles, even specialist vehicles like the ADS. Normally I'd agree with that. But the problem I have with that is that most militia forges and swarms have 0 SP sunk into them, I'd be all for militia packing a greater punch, if the people using the militia gear actually sunk a good chunk of SP into the swarms, forge, or PLC. ADS have a vast SP pool to fill as of now to make themselves deadly, I see no reason that AV shouldn't have to do the same. Killing someone with MLT or STD swarms or STD/MLT Forge Guns is dumb luck. I can only pull it off if a dropship is already wounded severely or is right next to a building i can bounce them off of. In my testing my STD swarm failed to break through the python and kill it except when I thumped him off of a tower. The only way an ADS pilot is going to die to a solo MLT swarm is if he's a dumbass. I am not a dumbass, and I spiked my STD swarm to doing 990 shield damage, but i still could not kill the ADS. Same with MLT forge guns. If I take out an ADS with an MLT forge then it's because the pilot was literally a shot away from dead, or I bounced him off the walls. And I'm more or less maxed on forge gun efficacy. My prototype forge guns? I'll make a dropship pilot **** his pants from shot 1. If I'm using a breach I can properly induce a full on panic attack if I can line up the weakspot. But dropship pilots dying to STD and MLT swarms are idiots. It means they're sitting still or trying to get creative with a small pack of AV guns. Plus inevitably, the killfeed does not show what ELSE may have hit you. I've seen a ADS go down to a swarm immediately after I hit it with a breach forge. It was rather impressive. Ah, now I get what you mean. And I've had situations where that kind of crap happened to me, my first thought was "God, I'm stupid". FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 35	Posted - 2014.10.10 20:53:00 - [145] - Quote La Lore Sleipnier wrote: Not bad but missile are multipurpose weapon and without the ROF a python alone can't kill a tank. I recommend having a read through of the whole thread that Kaeru is quoting from: Vehicle Skills and Turret Variants I'd like to get more feedback in that thread, if at all possible, from as many pilots and AV players as I can. I think the skills and variants would help make a much more varied and balanced field for V/AV play. Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
Nirwanda Vaughns 804	Posted - 2014.10.10 21:36:00 - [146] - Quote shields are still far too resilient to swarms/forges. poor armour tankers crumble whereas shields are far too powerful and our proficiencies are pretty much wasted. a small tweak to the damage profiles would help the final balance. instead +/- 20% bring it to 10% and it'll help increase armor vehicle survivability more and make it a touch easier to take down shield based vehicles. between chat mates we'll take down 10 armor vehicles over 1 or none shield. only time a shield vehicle seems to go down is via pilot error (flying into a building, reversing into a structure and gettign stuck ect Never argue with an idiot. they bring you down to their level and beat you through experience proud C-II bpo owner
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH RUST415 180	Posted - 2014.10.11 01:28:00 - [147] - Quote Nirwanda Vaughns wrote: shields are still far too resilient to swarms/forges. poor armour tankers crumble whereas shields are far too powerful and our proficiencies are pretty much wasted. a small tweak to the damage profiles would help the final balance. instead +/- 20% bring it to 10% and it'll help increase armor vehicle survivability more and make it a touch easier to take down shield based vehicles. between chat mates we'll take down 10 armor vehicles over 1 or none shield. only time a shield vehicle seems to go down is via pilot error (flying into a building, reversing into a structure and gettign stuck ect This is very incorrect. Having a hefty amount of skill points in both the Incubus and Python this thought is misplaced. I think it is more so on the lines that the Incubus takes too much damage from the weapons like swarms and forge guns. I have yet to see anyone successfully shoot at me with a plasma cannon so I will hold out on saying that perhaps it is just as strong. A/V and HAV's need to be balanced with all the other vehicles. Once that happens we will have a much clearer picture of whats going on with damage profiles for the Incubus and Python. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 36	Posted - 2014.10.11 17:38:00 - [148] - Quote Gabriella Grey wrote: Nirwanda Vaughns wrote: shields are still far too resilient to swarms/forges. poor armour tankers crumble whereas shields are far too powerful and our proficiencies are pretty much wasted. a small tweak to the damage profiles would help the final balance. instead +/- 20% bring it to 10% and it'll help increase armor vehicle survivability more and make it a touch easier to take down shield based vehicles. between chat mates we'll take down 10 armor vehicles over 1 or none shield. only time a shield vehicle seems to go down is via pilot error (flying into a building, reversing into a structure and gettign stuck ect This is very incorrect. Having a hefty amount of skill points in both the Incubus and Python this thought is misplaced. I think it is more so on the lines that the Incubus takes too much damage from the weapons like swarms and forge guns. I have yet to see anyone successfully shoot at me with a plasma cannon so I will hold out on saying that perhaps it is just as strong. A/V and HAV's need to be balanced with all the other vehicles. Once that happens we will have a much clearer picture of whats going on with damage profiles for the Incubus and Python. Most of the imbalance of the profiles comes from the fact that we have primarily armour based AV weapons. We have a single heavy AV weapon, which is anti-armour; we have two light AV weapons, of which one is substantially easier to use and which is anti-armour; the only anti-shield AV weapon has been terrible for a long time and is still very difficult to use against vehicles. Introducing Amarr/Minmatar light AV and Gallente, Amarr and Minmatar heavy AV would go a long way to providing a more balanced field for V/AV combat. Without it, we are trying to make anti-armour AV weaponry too effective against shields which would have the knock on effect of making armour vehicles unviable. Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
Lightning35 Delta514 48TH SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCE 95	Posted - 2014.10.11 20:57:00 - [149] - Quote I feel in ibis is better than Python. At least for me, it's more effective. If you know how to fly both, at the end it comes up to which can last longer in the air, supporting his teammates. And that's the incubus. But since you mention that the incubus and Myron need improvements, I'd say give the incubus a small. (Notice how I said small) speed buff. For the Myron..................also give it a small speed buff, as well a a TINY armor increase a rep bonus to armor. A tiny present of increased armor rate. If armor reps are applied that is. 37 kills with nova knives
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3597	Posted - 2014.10.11 21:20:00 - [150] - Quote Gabriella Grey wrote: Nirwanda Vaughns wrote: shields are still far too resilient to swarms/forges. poor armour tankers crumble whereas shields are far too powerful and our proficiencies are pretty much wasted. a small tweak to the damage profiles would help the final balance. instead +/- 20% bring it to 10% and it'll help increase armor vehicle survivability more and make it a touch easier to take down shield based vehicles. between chat mates we'll take down 10 armor vehicles over 1 or none shield. only time a shield vehicle seems to go down is via pilot error (flying into a building, reversing into a structure and gettign stuck ect This is very incorrect. Having a hefty amount of skill points in both the Incubus and Python this thought is misplaced. I think it is more so on the lines that the Incubus takes too much damage from the weapons like swarms and forge guns. I have yet to see anyone successfully shoot at me with a plasma cannon so I will hold out on saying that perhaps it is just as strong. A/V and HAV's need to be balanced with all the other vehicles. Once that happens we will have a much clearer picture of whats going on with damage profiles for the Incubus and Python. What do you mean AV/HAVs need to be balances with other vehicles? Dropships should not have the EHP of a tank. LAVs are too tanky, they should be suicide vs. AV unless properly tanked (which I think three people who still play do)

Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH RUST415 186	Posted - 2014.10.12 16:06:00 - [151] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Gabriella Grey wrote: Nirwanda Vaughns wrote: shields are still far too resilient to swarms/forges. poor armour tankers crumble whereas shields are far too powerful and our proficiencies are pretty much wasted. a small tweak to the damage profiles would help the final balance. instead +/- 20% bring it to 10% and it'll help increase armor vehicle survivability more and make it a touch easier to take down shield based vehicles. between chat mates we'll take down 10 armor vehicles over 1 or none shield. only time a shield vehicle seems to go down is via pilot error (flying into a building, reversing into a structure and gettign stuck ect This is very incorrect. Having a hefty amount of skill points in both the Incubus and Python this thought is misplaced. I think it is more so on the lines that the Incubus takes too much damage from the weapons like swarms and forge guns. I have yet to see anyone successfully shoot at me with a plasma cannon so I will hold out on saying that perhaps it is just as strong. A/V and HAV's need to be balanced with all the other vehicles. Once that happens we will have a much clearer picture of whats going on with damage profiles for the Incubus and Python. What do you mean AV/HAVs need to be balances with other vehicles? Dropships should not have the EHP of a tank. LAVs are too tanky, they should be suicide vs. AV unless properly tanked (which I think three people who still play do) No it shouldn't and the reason why dropships are fitting extended health points is because of A/V And HAV's not being balanced. A very simple question to answer seeing that you are an active A/V user. Why is it you do not see dropships using only light shield extenders or without heavy armor repairs etc? It's because A/V's damage output is to break through HAV armor/shields, not with dropships and LAV armor/shields. Then we haven't even went into the dropships module slots available are very limited. I don't think I really have to go further into this to explain. If HAV's can either come down a bit in Health points or all vehicles move up then there will be better balance however CCP cuts it. LAV should not be suicide against AV. It's still a vehicle and we are not shooting for realism here, we are looking for enjoyment factor. If that would be the case Dropships and HAV's would be totally acceptable to be along realistic lines vs A/V. I Haven't seen an LAV KIll someone using A/V but I still do not agree that their health points is exactly correct or their speed/acceleration profile. *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Skybladev2 LUX AETERNA INT RUST415 124	Posted - 2014.10.12 18:35:00 - [152] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: We have no intent to shoehorn in an exact playstyle. This is good. CCP Rattati wrote: 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". This is bad, because you were asked different thing. CCP Rattati wrote: 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. A) Ok, exists. B) This is very rare occasion. But even if you can be on time when someone dumb enough calls in dropship outside redline, you have little chance to destroy it quickly enough. But ok, this can happen. C) I'm too inexpirienced pilot to destroy tank even without Anti-Air resistance alone (aiming is awful). But this always too attractive target, so this must be primary ADS role. D) Ok, do it quite often. E) No. When you stay out of the 175 lock range you 1) Can not see ground troops - they just not rendering 2) Aiming it to inaccurate at that distance, you should move your crosshair and ship with godlike precision. 3) Forges are sniping even over 400m, I wrote that this is to cool for AV operators and suggested to intruduce some deviation in forge projectiles. F) Don't understand what that point means in terms of type of gameplay. So, I see only 2 true roles for dropships: A and D. ADS can utilize C role (depending on pilot's skill). You will not see any considerable usage of dropshps for transporting troops while drop uplinks exist. People tend to spawn at specific point and do not wait to communicate with pilot, because it is much easier and more predictable. But if you completely remove uplinks then you will see, that people will start using vehicles (especially dropships as they have superior capacity, speed and height accessibility) for another purpose - transporting. But I think this will never happen, so I just vote for mCRU to produce WP for spawning. This can be the third type real gameplay for pilots. Of course, spawn time for mCRUs must be competitive to troops uplinks, so I expect different tiers for mCRUs. Higher levels will spawn faster, but cost more PG/CPU. <[^_^]>
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 157	Posted - 2014.10.12 22:14:00 - [153] - Quote Ads is constantly called a "hit and run role" You mention that we should be doing damage and getting out, not being very survivable. The reality is we are weak, low dps and easily countered with high skill low reward. Even a soma or basic scout can get higher score than ads easily. We should have a high rof bonus to allow us to hit very hard, however not be very survivable... Note this does not mean we aren't able to survive av, this means we can't tank av while still... If an ads runs as soon as the first volley of swarms hits, we should be able to escape Give the ads a high damage potential, it is impossible to kill rep rugrats with ads currently and the rail incubus is obsolete now. Meanwhile swarms have too high of a damage range, last match I got killed by swarm at 482 m. This is impossible by statistics but I swear to you it happened. Swarms should detonate midair at 300M like forge rounds... Drop ships can't fire from 300 m anyway so it makes sense. It is not a question of increasing damage and keeping stats same... The present av is very effective against tanks, so how do flimsy ads stand a chance... Ads should have different profile, allowing swarms and forges to impact more easily on the large less manouverable tank frame while having trouble impacting midair on ads. The swarms need to be reconsidered. Everyone's speccing into them as they are the win all end all NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3617	Posted - 2014.10.13 11:47:00 - [154] - Quote Quote: 3) Forges are sniping even over 400m, I wrote that this is to cool for AV operators and suggested to intruduce some deviation in forge projectiles. This is a falsehood. Forge gun abolute max range is 320 meters.. 80 meters shorter than swarm flight range. Forge projectiles deviate. The reticle shake on the assault forge, which I must add is the only functional forge gun for AV in general causes shot deviation. The gun never stabilizes and I have missed stationary turrets behind partial cover because the exposed ares isn't big enough to cover the full deviation range. Thw guns that go laser stable do so at the end of the charge cycles and do not charge fast enough to hit an evading dropship three times unlesa he hovers steady through BOTH of the initial hits and does not start reacting until the third shot is charging. Finally forge guns fire an actual projectile and are not hitscan. Forge gunners must lead moving ADS precisely. Please hover more.
Kuruld Sengar Wirykomi Wolf Pack 10	Posted - 2014.10.14 15:11:00 - [155] - Quote One thing to note for the Myron is that the high slots tend to be utilities, and reduce the shield tanking potential. The grimsnes can ank/rep tank and still fit these utilities while the myron generally needs cpu enhancers in the low slots. The current setup does allow for pretty good infantry transport, but with the bonus to swarm speed and the reduced tanking if the afterburner is fitted possibly along with the mobile CRU, the Myron is just not as survivable as the Grimsnes which can fit 4x complex light armor rep to indefinitely tank single enemy AV. It has been able to tank all infantry AV but assault forge gunsso far with a little bit of movement to avoid becoming a sitting target. One effective fitting I use is the Myron with 4x enhanced shield hardener, or 3x shield hardener with afterburner/cru (hardeners scaled to match cpu/pg) Maybe increasing the shield base value further, or increasing the acceleration to max speed so that the follow up shot from rails/forge are less likely to hit? This in no way means an increase in speed, just initial acceleration so the Myron spends less time sitting still while it slowly gains vertical momentum to escape AV.
Airborne Army Pure Evil. Capital Punishment. 0	Posted - 2014.10.14 16:06:00 - [156] - Quote Having consulted with all the ads pilots I know and being an advocate of forge/swarm level 5 prof 3 use I digress that i don't speak for only myself when I say that the ADS is in a much worse position than any other play style right now. It simply doesn't have much going for it at all.... As a regular PC pilot I have to say, my role in pc is nothing more than a glorified lav now. I transport troops, drop uplinks and clear uplinks... I am unable to kill all rep madrugars and have trouble taking down any shield tanks without proper av support as they can simply use cover, get out and fire swarms or retreat. Every time someone pulls out swarms against an ads we have no warning of imminent impact, I understand tanks have a proximity explosive beeping warning, that is why I believe one simple and incredibly useful countermeasure that does not affect ads stats would be the introduction of a "lock warning" similar to most if not all modern aircraft. The swarm is not a random fire weapon and therefore it's lock should be detected as a precursor to impact. This would also in fact help get rid of the problem of swarms not rendering as not only will swarmers be unable to have 2 volleys in the air before a pilot realises he is in for certain death, but also it will highlight potentially dangerous areas to pilots, allowing for more tactical gameplay between the av deterrent and the ads threat. Forge guns do not have a proximity warning as they are skilful and player targeted weapons. Having swarms that deal lethal damage without warning is similar to a heat seeking bolt pistol... A bolt pistol needs only 3 rounds to kill most medium tank frames, why would you allow such a ludicrously easy weapon to exist... My second point is about ads manouverability, having conferred with a lot of pilots, sadly most of which have stopped flying since there is really nothing an ads can do once a swarm launcher gets the first shot off from some obscure position where he doesn't even render, is that without the afterburner it feels like damage causes the same "stunlock" effect that hmgs were so notorious for, without the afterburner a drop ship really doesn't have the ability to escape at all, it's a sitting duck. Personally I feel this shouldn't be the case, it should be risky flying without the afterburner but not to the point that it feels like a brick without it. I feel some climb factor aspect of drop ships was covertly nerfed in delta which means even a large blaster turret poses a huge threat even over 100M. Lastly I feel that swarms need a slight tone down in terms of either maximum flight range or manouverability/speed aspects... The afterburner claims to provide a 150% thrust increase yet swarms still catch up rather easily with an afterburner on in a dropship speeding away as fast as possible. I remember rattati published a graph showing that the third volley of swarms would not impact unless the pilot lingered yet I fear this is not the case, most of the time the third volley hits causing the pilot to lose his/her respective ship unless it is a clumsy over tanked fit in which case it lacks in manouverability and recharge times. All in all I feel that av is currently too easy, since my rof was nerfed so I can't deal with tanks anymore I have specced into a prof 3 commando swarmer which really chews up tanks, let alone the significantly weaker drop ships which don't have a chance to counter me. The forge is in a good strong position however I feel swarms are maybe too high damage for their simplistic nature, they are often fired from supply depots, wielded by commandos or high uplink squatters who are unable to be attacked due to the strength and ferocity of their weapons. In addition the introduction of significantly more powerful sidearms has nullified the excuse that swarmers in medium suits sacrifice anti infantry potential as the sidearms are hugely effective, being more popular than some light weapons such as scr and laser in particular. However that is another matter, I hope you look upon the feedback I provide as the opinion of most ads pilots, some claim to be immune but I put that down to their inflated egos rather than a genuine field performance. Regards, Airborne army
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 44	Posted - 2014.10.14 17:05:00 - [157] - Quote Airborne Army wrote: Every time someone pulls out swarms against an ads we have no warning of imminent impact, I understand tanks have a proximity explosive beeping warning, that is why I believe one simple and incredibly useful countermeasure that does not affect ads stats would be the introduction of a "lock warning" similar to most if not all modern aircraft. The swarm is not a random fire weapon and therefore it's lock should be detected as a precursor to impact. This would also in fact help get rid of the problem of swarms not rendering as not only will swarmers be unable to have 2 volleys in the air before a pilot realises he is in for certain death, but also it will highlight potentially dangerous areas to pilots, allowing for more tactical gameplay between the av deterrent and the ads threat. Forge guns do not have a proximity warning as they are skilful and player targeted weapons. Having swarms that deal lethal damage without warning is similar to a heat seeking bolt pistol... A bolt pistol needs only 3 rounds to kill most medium tank frames, why would you allow such a ludicrously easy weapon to exist... I am definitely for a lock-on warning. Unlike Forge Guns and Plasma Cannons (and presumably the Gal/Min Heavy weapons) the Swarm requires little skill to actually fire effectively. A lock-on warning would reduce the surprise effectiveness of such a low skill entry weapon. Airborne Army wrote: My second point is about ads manouverability I agree that ADS (and NDS) manoeuvrability could do with some modification. Primarily, the issue is that when hit by AV the dropship bucks wildly requiring skill to regain control (depending on how violent the impulse effect is) and can quite often force a retreat after a single hit renders the DS (A or N, regardless) is incapable of steadying long enough to fire, because the next shot is inbound already. Essentially, a small reduction to impulse effects would go a long way to helping the ADS and I think that closing the gap in NDS/ADS manoeuvrability would go a long way to helping the NDS out across all situations, more than fiddling with EHP numbers would do. Airborne Army wrote: Lastly I feel that swarms need a slight tone down in terms of either maximum flight range or manouverability/speed aspects... Agreed. The Delta 'nerf' to Swarm turning radius has been utterly moot: reducing the radius to something like 60 degrees (from the 90 pre-Delta/80 post-Delta) would go a long way to making them actually avoidable through skill. As is currently, I have used my afterburner and made some wild manoeuvres to try and escape locked-on Swarm volleys...only to have them not give a damn and simply circle around and still impact on me. What is the point in trying to evade when even my best efforts are irrelevant? Forges I can dodge, because they require player skill to fire - Swarms are fire and forget, and while there is an element to when and how to launch there is no player input afterwards: a good pilot should be able to do something about auto-tracking through intelligent and radical manoeuvring since we have no access to countermeasures. Airborne Army wrote: The afterburner claims to provide a 150% thrust increase yet swarms still catch up rather easily with an afterburner on in a dropship speeding away as fast as possible. Afterburner Thrust bonus is applied to acceleration. Essentially, Afterburners do nothing to increase top speed; instead, they increase your ability to accelerate, making turning and manoeuvring much more effective because lost speed is regained much more rapidly. I recommend you watch this video that Judge made, if you have not already: Circle of Hate, which showcases the Afterburner situation quite clearly. If you have already, then may I suggest you rewatch it, because it shows how Afterburners don't increase top speed Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 86	Posted - 2014.10.14 18:16:00 - [158] - Quote Halla Murr wrote: [...] I agree that ADS (and NDS) manoeuvrability could do with some modification. Primarily, the issue is that when hit by AV the dropship bucks wildly requiring skill to regain control (depending on how violent the impulse effect is) and can quite often force a retreat after a single hit renders the DS (A or N, regardless) is incapable of steadying long enough to fire, because the next shot is inbound already. [...] Just a note about this point, as an ADS pilot, I would prefer the wild bucking of the ship STAY when getting hit by weapons that merit the behavior. I personally find it adds way more to the immersion and wouldn't be fun to have this removed. It adds risk to flying too close to the ground or to walls when AV might be present, and it gives even the militia variants of a weapon a CHANCE to take me out if he hits me at just the right angle to make me hit something in my surroundings.
Halla Murr Skullbreakers 46	Posted - 2014.10.14 18:38:00 - [159] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: Halla Murr wrote: [...] I agree that ADS (and NDS) manoeuvrability could do with some modification. Primarily, the issue is that when hit by AV the dropship bucks wildly requiring skill to regain control (depending on how violent the impulse effect is) and can quite often force a retreat after a single hit renders the DS (A or N, regardless) is incapable of steadying long enough to fire, because the next shot is inbound already. [...] Just a note about this point, as an ADS pilot, I would prefer the wild bucking of the ship STAY when getting hit by weapons that merit the behavior. I personally find it adds way more to the immersion and wouldn't be fun to have this removed. It adds risk to flying too close to the ground or to walls when AV might be present, and it gives even the militia variants of a weapon a CHANCE to take me out if he hits me at just the right angle to make me hit something in my surroundings. I agree about the principle of the matter, though sometimes the impulse is insane, like flipping your nose so your whole ship is perpendicular to the ground, or sometimes flipping you almost entirely onto your top. While I do like the fact that flying isn't easy or simple, especially when faced with AV, the impulse effects can be a little too extreme. What I mean by a small reduction to impulse effects is exactly that: small. Main of Kallas Hallytyr. ADS, Logistics, Scout, Commando and Assault.
Airborne Army Pure Evil. Capital Punishment. 1	Posted - 2014.10.14 22:22:00 - [160] - Quote I mean the description is misleading halla, judge spoke to me about this over 2 months ago yet ccp blatantly lead people to assume something that isn't true through the ambiguity of their linguistic choices. What I meant was that a dropship accelerating to top speed that fast should theoretically be able to outrun swarms as the swarms have a marginal speed increase on paper, and the dropship gets a head start, however this is not the case and swarms catch up to drop ships rather easily. As such the presentation of the afterburner as an escape/counter measure module is deliberately misleading on CCPs part and this ambiguity is what lead to the nerf of speed/afterburners/manouverability in the first place arguably to some degree.

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3652	Posted - 2014.10.16 09:45:00 - [161] - Quote Getting out of lock range should be the priority, not outrunning the second volley. Outrunning swarms isn't something that should be a thing. However, the counterpoint to that statement is that I had been hoping CCP would drop the swarm turn rate from 90 to 60, maybe 65/70. Maneuvering should be en route not at the target point. They should also chase the dropship itself not the last place they had direct line of sight then correct. That way swarms become a skillshot weapon. IE the dropship pilots, tank and LAV drivers can deny you your shot by being skilled. This makes swarms more useful at the longer lock ranges but problematic to pump rounds into a fast-maneuvering ADS on top of you. In short, a fight ensues rather than a mugging.
Taurion Bruni D3ATH CARD RUST415 275	Posted - 2014.10.16 13:54:00 - [162] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: medomai grey wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: medomai grey wrote: CCP Rattati, I think it would be faster to go in game and get another player to lend you ADSs to experience it for yourself. Don't ask me because I'd charge you isk for each one. Trying to balance the interactions between A and B while only having experience with A seems... difficult. Let's get one thing straight, this is not about me. Period. It's about trying to achieve balance, the job you were tasked with. If you took offence to my post, know that it was not written with the intent as an insult. I was merely suggesting a method of getting a better view of the "bigger picture". And you are putting effort into seeing a "bigger picture" to achieve a more balanced game; I respect that. You were right in that the ADS rate of fire bonus was oddly high. But you lacked the ADS experience to know how adversely it would affect ADS's effectiveness against other vehicles. Having experience with not only ADS, but all items in Dust514 will go a long way in helping you balance items. Increasing the rate of fire bonus isn't the only solution to increasing ADS effectiveness against vehicles. For example, you could tweak the damage efficiencies against vehicles; although I am strongly against that idea because it's counter intuitive. I knew, but the community refused to propose ideas or numbers to affect the decision. Noone can be an expert in everything and I don't pretend to. However, thinking that my ability with the ADS or that I need to see something with my own eyes, to properly balance, is silly. You are the experts, you describe the problem and how to change it, or in this case, you admit there is a problem and propose ways to reduce the problem. The reason we cannot define the problem with numbers is because, on paper, everything looks balanced. Our problem with flying, although sometimes over-dramatized, come from the real game experience. For example, a one on one fight between an ADS and AV may look balanced on TTK and the ability to escape, but due to a multitude of issues such as hit detection with vehicles and Rendering problems, its difficult to accurately determine the situation. nothing about your statistics also claim for the Jet Ramming that has become an issue for pilots. even though you have superior movement and speed, they can easily sneak up on you from above, as you cannot hear or see them until it is too late to react. Numbers are only half the battle, to understand the game fully, you need to listen to the pilots personal experiences. Python Pilot // Minmatar Assault Adapt or Die!
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1751	Posted - 2014.10.16 19:37:00 - [163] - Quote Taurion Bruni wrote: The reason we cannot define the problem with numbers is because, on paper, everything looks balanced. Our problem with flying, although sometimes over-dramatized, come from the real game experience. For example, a one on one fight between an ADS and AV may look balanced on TTK and the ability to escape, but due to a multitude of issues such as hit detection with vehicles and Rendering problems, its difficult to accurately determine the situation. nothing about your statistics also claim for the Jet Ramming that has become an issue for pilots. even though you have superior movement and speed, they can easily sneak up on you from above, as you cannot hear or see them until it is too late to react. Numbers are only half the battle, to understand the game fully, you need to listen to the pilots personal experiences. This is very true. Even though numbers seem balanced, as was the case with the bolt pistol in the delta patch, in the wild it behaves differently than expected Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 91	Posted - 2014.10.16 20:16:00 - [164] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Getting out of lock range should be the priority, not outrunning the second volley. Outrunning swarms isn't something that should be a thing. However, the counterpoint to that statement is that I had been hoping CCP would drop the swarm turn rate from 90 to 60, maybe 65/70. Maneuvering should be en route not at the target point. They should also chase the dropship itself not the last place they had direct line of sight then correct. That way swarms become a skillshot weapon. IE the dropship pilots, tank and LAV drivers can deny you your shot by being skilled. This makes swarms more useful at the longer lock ranges but problematic to pump rounds into a fast-maneuvering ADS on top of you. In short, a fight ensues rather than a mugging. This is what I have been hoping for. Swarms should be deadly, very deadly, but they need to be more about "predicting" where to go to meet their target rather than follow their trail perfectly (by calculating the projected point of impact based on current maintained vector of target). This way, a violent twist from a dropship or a hand brake from a speeding tank has a chance to send the swarm in the wrong direction or into a nearby structure. EDIT: Can't stress that I want this enough. Make swarms absolute murder machines, but make dodging them a thing.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1120	Posted - 2014.10.17 19:29:00 - [165] - Quote So after Delta came out, I've hardly touched my vehicle character. Why would I? There's nothing left that's even worth using it for. My Incubus V, Small Railgun V, Reload V, Prof V, Fitting OP V and Ammo V is completely useless now. Even though the bullshit bugs that I had to endure, auto-repeating lagging railgun of overheat? Yet you give the Incubus a bonus to the WORST turret that could possibly go onto the front turret of an ADS. I've spent entire matches trying to only use an Ion Cannon on the front of my Incubus and It's so difficult to do it's not even worth my time. You can't kill vehicles, you can't kill infantry so what's it for? Hell I've dropped more ISK on vehicles than 99% of the people who've played DUST will ever even see, yet you listen to the 10 day old character who's **** militia tank I just killed? Thanks CCP. Tanks are . Dropships are . LAVs are ** Thanks Amarrica! It's Not Safe to Swim.
Mobius Wyvern Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 5332	Posted - 2014.10.17 22:39:00 - [166] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Pilots and anti-Pilots some numbers are in. Overall it seems that we successfully toned down the Assault Dropship power, and buffed the Dropship power. Looking at dropships compared to other vehicles, we are fairly happy with how the Python is playing out right now. There is a good solid spike of efficiency for the Small Blaster as well, correlating with the Grimsnes taking a leap upwards. The Incubus is still very powerful but not as powerful as the Python. The Myron is just not very good at all, and nothing changed with the increased EHP/PG/CAP and Turret changes. Let's explore together simple ways to tweak these two. Personally, not a fan of the rapid fire railgun turrets, please keep that in mind. Also keep in mind that the ROF on railLAV's was reduced on purpose, due to infantry sniping. Maybe a combination of increasing the Incubus bonus to ROF slightly, or simply removing the 70% rail turret inefficiency against vehicles and then increasing chargeup time rather than decreasing ROF to balance? Or heat? On the Myron/Grimsnes, someone advocated more maneuverability without increased speed, sounds like a fine idea. Experienced Myron pilots, what about it's fitting style or bonuses makes it so much worse than the Python. (A similar question but off topic, the Gunnlogi is quite less efficient than the Madrugar, bonus points to explain why) Appreciate the feedback A. The Nerf was too much B. That's due to the RoF bonus being so essential to making the ADS viable Bring back turret variants. We could have the current Small Missiles be the Fragmentation variant, for example. The Accelerated missiles could be brought back with greater range but little-to-no splash damage, and far higher direct damage to allow an ADS to still be semi-useful against vehicles. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 237	Posted - 2014.10.17 22:49:00 - [167] - Quote THUNDERGROOVE wrote: So after Delta came out, I've hardly touched my vehicle character. Why would I? There's nothing left that's even worth using it for. My Incubus V, Small Railgun V, Reload V, Prof V, Fitting OP V and Ammo V is completely useless now. Even though the bullshit bugs that I had to endure, auto-repeating lagging railgun of overheat? Yet you give the Incubus a bonus to the WORST turret that could possibly go onto the front turret of an ADS. I've spent entire matches trying to only use an Ion Cannon on the front of my Incubus and It's so difficult to do it's not even worth my time. You can't kill vehicles, you can't kill infantry so what's it for? Hell I've dropped more ISK on vehicles than 99% of the people who've played DUST will ever even see, yet you listen to the 10 day old character who's **** militia tank I just killed? Thanks CCP. Tanks are . Dropships are . LAVs are ** Thanks As a formerly primarily AV ADS ppilot i feel your pain brother. I used to get pissed at the python pilots trying to beat up my team fromthe air, jump into an incubus and then show them what air supremecy is really all about. Post delta, i've had to switchup my playstyle from AV to AI only. And you know what? my mercy has been removed from the infantry that connot fight back (hence;yprevious AV playstyle) to ruthlessly murdering cnuts. Its what they wanted and its what i'm giving to them. If you can pperfect a stuka-esque dattack run, you'lll be in a good postion to outrun any counter attack AV since you are already flying at tio speed.Kills will be att a mini:umthough,but the psychilogial factor of an airborse enemy does zonders, GG snf flu dsfe Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 776	Posted - 2014.10.18 16:39:00 - [168] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: I have shield fitting skills maxed, but I don't have a competitive Myron fit. After I finished swooning over the purple goodness I recently acquired I found some time to do further NDS research. I tried to come up with a fitting that would come as close as possible to my pubbie-Grimsnes. The result of my research is this Myron fitting: http://www.protofits.com/fittings/shared/0/8259 Contains: (in case the link doesn't work) 1x std AB 1x cpx shield booster 1x cpx heavy shield extender 1x mCRU 2x cpx PG unit 2x std missile turret Including the shield booster that makes for 6010 raw hp. My still current Grimsnes fitting (link) has 6.5k raw hp. Using the efficiencies of rail- and forgeguns we get 6422 ehp for the Myron and 6160 ehp for the Grimsnes. The situation gets better for swarms. Both fittings can regen during the attack, the Grimsnes at ~94 hp/s from the repper and the Myron at 224 hp/s from the booster. That puts them at very equal terms. The differences between the two fittings are: - The Myron has worse armament (STD vs PRO) - The Myron has one more active module - which is a cause for error - The Myron has a downtime of ~34s from the basic afterburner while the Grimsnes comes back after ~27s. On the other hand the Myron generally comes back fully regenerated while the Grimsnes might still be repping from the last engagement. By the way, the fitting above requires perfect fitting skills for all involved modules. Yes, that includes small missile turret proficiency 5. Just like the Grimsnes fitting. In conclusion I think the Myron could use a minor PG bump. [Edit] I forgot to mention - in actual gameplay it performs just as you'd expect from the numbers. It can tank a salvo from an advanced railgun and feels slightly under-armed for a Gunship. Those additional 7 seconds of downtime are aggrevating when, on the way out, you realize you just fled from a MLT swarmer - what can I say, as a pilot I'm a wuss . Finally a fitting that makes use of that fitting prof 5.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 778	Posted - 2014.10.18 19:32:00 - [169] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: The differences between the two fittings are: - The Myron has worse armament (STD vs PRO) Scrap that. More theorycrafting revealed this fitting. Features: - cpx AB - mCRU - enh heavy shield extender - cpx light shield booster - 2x cpx PG unit - pro missile turret - pro railgun 5692 raw hp, 6064 ehp against rail- and forgeguns. Shield regen between shots (after initial shield boost) not included. Again compared to the Grimsnes' 6160 ehp + reps. Against swarms the Myron does even better. Conclusion: Between this and the fitting before the two racial NDS are completely identical when the resists of current AV and turrets are accounted for. No change required. Disclaimer: I didn't fly this fitting yet, just came up with the concept a minute ago. For pubs I may prefer the one with more ehp but only std armament.
jace silencerww Seykal Expeditionary Group Minmatar Republic 61	Posted - 2014.10.20 02:19:00 - [170] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I think we should also establish a few rules of thumb Small Turrets Blaster: Anti-Infantry Railgun: Anti-Vehicle Missiles: Dual Purpose Current Best to Worst by Type Anti Infantry Pilot: Missiles, Blaster, Rails Sidegunner - Dropship: Blaster, Missile, Rails Sidegunner - ADS:Blaster, Missile, Rails Anti Air Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster Anti Vehicle Pilot: Missiles, Rails, Blaster Sidegunner - Dropship: Rails, Missile, Blaster Sidegunner - ADS: Rails, Missile, Blaster Or something along those lines, to see if there are holes/unintended inefficiencies. Feel free to edit this, or expand, this is just to get the discussion going, please don't go off the rails because of my selections. lol missile are the only anti infantry worth using as apilot. blasters you have to get within 20-30 meters and rail turrets we are looking through the dropship and are guessing when to shoot. the big question is "YOU THINK THE ROF NERF WAS A GOOD THING?" Solo ads can NOT do enough damage against tanks to kill them as they should be able to. even so of the best ads pilots are barely able to kill ok at best tankers. the messed up part as a pilot with a gunner I can do more damage and kill tanks better than in my ads. blasters on dropships are a JOKE. the old longer range stable ones were worth using.

Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 785	Posted - 2014.10.20 14:42:00 - [171] - Quote The Myron is now my go-to dropship. With the CRU it's equal in performance to a Grimsnes and without it it has two cpx shield booster that enable it to hang around much longer or tank much better. Or fit a cpx damage mod and advanced turrets to achieve better gank but equal tank. Buff Grimsnes?
Tread Loudly 2 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 53	Posted - 2014.10.20 21:59:00 - [172] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Pilots and anti-Pilots some numbers are in. Overall it seems that we successfully toned down the Assault Dropship power, and buffed the Dropship power. Looking at dropships compared to other vehicles, we are fairly happy with how the Python is playing out right now. There is a good solid spike of efficiency for the Small Blaster as well, correlating with the Grimsnes taking a leap upwards. The Incubus is still very powerful but not as powerful as the Python. The Myron is just not very good at all, and nothing changed with the increased EHP/PG/CAP and Turret changes. Let's explore together simple ways to tweak these two. Personally, not a fan of the rapid fire railgun turrets, please keep that in mind. Also keep in mind that the ROF on railLAV's was reduced on purpose, due to infantry sniping. Maybe a combination of increasing the Incubus bonus to ROF slightly, or simply removing the 70% rail turret inefficiency against vehicles and then increasing chargeup time rather than decreasing ROF to balance? Or heat? On the Myron/Grimsnes, someone advocated more maneuverability without increased speed, sounds like a fine idea. Experienced Myron pilots, what about it's fitting style or bonuses makes it so much worse than the Python. (A similar question but off topic, the Gunnlogi is quite less efficient than the Madrugar, bonus points to explain why) Appreciate the feedback I'm not the best of Pilot's however as far as the gunlogi goes I'd say the main problem is turret rotation. This isn't how fast it can turn but how far up/down it can move it's cannon. The Madrugar can look so far down in fact it's turret basically goes through the hull of the HAV, where as the Gunlogi can only go about half as far. This being said it gives an added advantage to the Madrugar as far as tactics go thus making it more favorable. (I hope that helped some) I Like Tanks, Nova Knives and MagSec SMG's.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3770	Posted - 2014.10.20 22:32:00 - [173] - Quote Turret rotation is the same on a madrugar. If you run a blaster it rotates the fastest. Rails rotate slowest if I recall. Turret type dictates tracking speed, not hull type. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Tread Loudly 2 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 53	Posted - 2014.10.20 22:48:00 - [174] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Turret rotation is the same on a madrugar. If you run a blaster it rotates the fastest. Rails rotate slowest if I recall. Turret type dictates tracking speed, not hull type. Well not to be rude but you didn't read my entire post I said that it is not this type of rotation but it is how far up/down it is able to move it's cannon I Like Tanks, Nova Knives and MagSec SMG's.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 3790	Posted - 2014.10.21 14:00:00 - [175] - Quote Tread Loudly 2 wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Turret rotation is the same on a madrugar. If you run a blaster it rotates the fastest. Rails rotate slowest if I recall. Turret type dictates tracking speed, not hull type. Well not to be rude but you didn't read my entire post I said that it is not this type of rotation but it is how far up/down it is able to move it's cannon Use elevation/depression to describe that and avoid confusion please. When the words "turret" and "rotation" are used together I automatically infer lateral movement, not vertical. Plus I was exhausted when I read your post. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.


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