DUST Search - To Rattati: on roles

True Adamance wrote:

Alena Ventrallis wrote:

As far as tanks go, I disagree that they should be AV only. Let's be honest, what exactly is there for them to kill? If we had MAVs and jets and what have you, I'd understand having them be AV only, but as it stands, they have LAVs (laughably unused save for expendable transport) drop ships (which only rails and missiles truly threaten) and other tanks (which, if there are no vehicles, why call one out at all?)

I think large blasters should be reworked as AP large turret. However, the old blasters from 1.7 were (insert proper descriptor) OP. I would thus reduce their damage and reduce their max dispersion. In this way, they can now more easily attack infantry, while being more vulnerable to other tanks. But that's just me.

But I agree with True. All vehicles are just kind of here. They have no defined role beyond slaying.

They are not AV only units, they are primarily designated Vehicle Killers.

That is not to say that swatting infantry with a well placed explosive shell is not impossible, or that a Tank should not be modified to support a pilot controlled coaxial turret.....however I am suggesting that Tanks do what Tanks main guns were designed to do first and foremost, then engage infantry units secondly.

Because my suggestion relies of reduced turret tracking speeds I see no reason an HAV should not be able to switch to a fixed light turret mounted on the cuppola in the same manner infantry get a secondary wepaon. However this means forgoing your primary fire power for the duration of use, using a slow tracking low damage AI turrets, and compromising your fitting capacity by mounting a small turret.

I often do this anyway on my Missile HAV, switching out to a 20gj Railgun and popping infantry. I however see no reason to actually leave the main drivers seat to do this thought.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1938	Posted - 2014.10.15 21:32:00 - [1] - Quote Rattati, You said here, Quote: 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. I feel that this is a flawed statement. Let's look at sentinels. Should they be able to run EWAR the same as a scout? No, of course not. His role is not to run ewar. It is to run point defense. He is not meant to fit dampeners and enhancers. It is in this light that me and others ask for the role of the ADS. We want to have a designated job, and we want to do that job well. The sandbox comes from accomplishing that job in a myriad of ways, but I don't try and do a front line assault with my scout for the same reason I don't try and be stealthy in my sentinel. We have had some discussion about things we can do to improve ADS, and you seemed keen on the idea of Python as infantry slayer and Incubus as vehicle slayer. But I would really like to nail down what we as ADS pilots are to do. I think saying we can attack, scout, transport is giving us too many hats to wear at once. We should let the transport DS be for transport, and have the ADS do a separate job. Just like we let the scout be good at scouting and the logi good at logistics. So I ask you: in order to balance ADS and give them a place on the battlefield, what should their role be? Until we have defined a clear role for them, we can't begin to try and balance them because we don't know what they are to be balanced against. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1939	Posted - 2014.10.15 22:21:00 - [2] - Quote As far as tanks go, I disagree that they should be AV only. Let's be honest, what exactly is there for them to kill? If we had MAVs and jets and what have you, I'd understand having them be AV only, but as it stands, they have LAVs (laughably unused save for expendable transport) drop ships (which only rails and missiles truly threaten) and other tanks (which, if there are no vehicles, why call one out at all?) I think large blasters should be reworked as AP large turret. However, the old blasters from 1.7 were (insert proper descriptor) OP. I would thus reduce their damage and reduce their max dispersion. In this way, they can now more easily attack infantry, while being more vulnerable to other tanks. But that's just me. But I agree with True. All vehicles are just kind of here. They have no defined role beyond slaying. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1939	Posted - 2014.10.15 22:38:00 - [3] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: As far as tanks go, I disagree that they should be AV only. Let's be honest, what exactly is there for them to kill? If we had MAVs and jets and what have you, I'd understand having them be AV only, but as it stands, they have LAVs (laughably unused save for expendable transport) drop ships (which only rails and missiles truly threaten) and other tanks (which, if there are no vehicles, why call one out at all?) I think large blasters should be reworked as AP large turret. However, the old blasters from 1.7 were (insert proper descriptor) OP. I would thus reduce their damage and reduce their max dispersion. In this way, they can now more easily attack infantry, while being more vulnerable to other tanks. But that's just me. But I agree with True. All vehicles are just kind of here. They have no defined role beyond slaying. They are not AV only units, they are primarily designated Vehicle Killers. That is not to say that swatting infantry with a well placed explosive shell is not impossible, or that a Tank should not be modified to support a pilot controlled coaxial turret.....however I am suggesting that Tanks do what Tanks main guns were designed to do first and foremost, then engage infantry units secondly. Because my suggestion relies of reduced turret tracking speeds I see no reason an HAV should not be able to switch to a fixed light turret mounted on the cuppola in the same manner infantry get a secondary wepaon. However this means forgoing your primary fire power for the duration of use, using a slow tracking low damage AI turrets, and compromising your fitting capacity by mounting a small turret. I often do this anyway on my Missile HAV, switching out to a 20gj Railgun and popping infantry. I however see no reason to actually leave the main drivers seat to do this thought. I am all for this idea of a coaxial turret. My thoughts are only because there are next to no vehicles for tanks to destroy beyond each other, so having one that was better at AP would give missiles and rails an actual reason to go and kill it. As it stands its basically world of tanks with swarms and forges thrown into the mix. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1939	Posted - 2014.10.15 22:51:00 - [4] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: This doesnt stop the said sentinel from fitting ewar still. Would he ever be as good as a scout? No. But hes going to be better than every other sentinel out there. And he is going to not be as good as a scout, nor be as tanky as another sentinel. Because he was not intended to use ewar. You can... but why would you want to? Quote: ADS are not Gunships, Bombers, or Attack Choppers. Does that stop them from trying to be used or flown like one? No. Which is my point. They have no defined role. Thus they are hard to balance, because we have not defined what it is they are supposed to do. Quote: When an ADS nullifies the need for any other role this is where the box wall comes in to say no, you are not god. ADS had not changed since 1.7 first dropped. I still have yet to hear how they became OP when they never changed in over 8 months or whenever it was that 1.7 dropped. But once again, we cannot say whether they were OP or not because WE DID NOT DEFINE WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING IN THE FIRST PLACE. If they were supposed to be infantry slayers, then they were doing their job perfectly. No need for a change. That's the crux of the entire issue. I keep hearing they were overperforming... but not hearing how they are supposed to perform. If as an ADS pilot I am not meant to kill infantry and instead do something else, then by all means tell me. I want to find out what Rattati wants the ADS to do, and then we can talk about balancing around performing that job. Just like currently we as a community are talking about balancing scouts around being ewar platforms and not as assault suits with a cloak bonus. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1942	Posted - 2014.10.16 02:30:00 - [5] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: There is a thread in Feedback and Discussion about this very topic https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2391233#post2391233 I see what you did there! However, I feel like that thread has about 3-4 different topics going on, and I quoted you from that very thread in the OP. This is more of a call for ADS - and really all vehicles - to be given a defined role. I feel like a lot of the imbalance is because they lack that role. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1944	Posted - 2014.10.16 02:54:00 - [6] - Quote Apocalyptic Destroyer wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: This doesnt stop the said sentinel from fitting ewar still. Would he ever be as good as a scout? No. But hes going to be better than every other sentinel out there. Please tell me How a EWAR stacking sentinal would be better than a Proto Sentinel with a Gastuns ? Do Tell He's so.ply saying you can. Of course, you CAN... But why would you want to? I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1945	Posted - 2014.10.16 04:18:00 - [7] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Or maybe I forgot a word. meant to say his scan. As for the roles I declared off limits The answer is that what you guys want is an Assault Dropship. let the fighter pilots, bombers, and gunship pilots get their own things later on. You need to focus on what an assault dropship means. Literally the entire point of this thread is for CCP to establish just that. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1959	Posted - 2014.10.17 23:07:00 - [8] - Quote Auris Lionesse wrote: Apocalyptic Destroyer wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Let me clarify. and ADS SHOULD NOT BE A BOMBER, FIGHTER, GUNSHIP, STRATEGIC BOMBER, OR ATTACK CHOPPER. It should by all accounts be an assault dropship. Hence his wording "Better than every other Sentinel Out there" You need to work on your wording. Not only that IWS is probably what I find to be is one of the most annoying CPM's out there. Really, since you're saying and emphasizing "by all accounts be an assault dropship" We're here trying to f**ng find out what that role in particular is. So, If you won't give us, The ADS Pilots an answer, then by all means step the f* off . i warned you guys not to vote for him again. i voted for people i never even heard of over him. hes really the last remnant of the failure that was cpm0 I'd like to keep this discussion on topic. We won't get an answer if it devolves into bickering over unrelated issues. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1959	Posted - 2014.10.18 00:47:00 - [9] - Quote NIETZCHES OVERMAN wrote: True Adamance wrote: I feel the same way about tanks. While I appreciate CCP's willingness to let me "play my way" (something not yet come to pass) I'd rather see vehicles have their roles like infantry suits. From there anything beyond that role that we can achieve is much more satisfying....I mean in EVE every ship has a role, every variant a niche. An Omen deals with Efficient capacitor management of Laser weapons A Maller deals with Armour Resistance Values and High EHP An Augoror/ Guardian mostly deals with Repairs and Logistics An Arbitrator is normally a Drone boat. In Dust A Soma has no specific role A Madrugar has no specific role A Sica has no specific role A Gunlogi has no specific role This is not Eve. Its Dust, we are a diffrent game. Perhaps you've heard of us. True still has a point. Vehicles do not have roles, which is part of why balancing them is so difficult. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1961	Posted - 2014.10.18 04:11:00 - [10] - Quote More to the point, many are saying that the ADS SHOULD act like an Apache, and lose the passenger seats for more attack and defensive power. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive

Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1963	Posted - 2014.10.18 06:32:00 - [11] - Quote The ADS does not act like the Apache, but my point is that it SHOULD. We have a transport DS, we need an attack one. Personally I think the ADS should be light aircraft, small and maneuverable with some firepower but very fragile. But the point is, regardless of how we use it, CCP has never defined what the ADS, and all vehicles for that matter, are supposed to do. Imagine if there was a dropsuit that kind of had the tank of a sentinel and kind of the ewar of a scout. Too many hats means those hats are all too gimped to be worth it. ADS need one hat to wear, and in my opinion that role should be to attack. Like the Apache. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1966	Posted - 2014.10.19 01:45:00 - [12] - Quote B ump. I'm interested to hear Judge weigh in. I don't want it I just need it To breath, to feel, to know I'm alive