DUST Search - ADS delta 1.1 hotfix feedback

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

ADS delta 1.1 hotfix feedback

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1779	Posted - 2014.10.30 02:19:00 - [1] - Quote Hello CCP, The incubus feels a lot more reliable with that overheat fix. That being said, it still feels like it steel needs a bump to the bonus from 3 to 5%. That would make it feel a bit more reliable and not make it overpowered. This being said, the blaster is still less efficient than the rail or the missiles at killing infantry. Somethingnneeds to be done since blasters are supposed to be anti-infantry. So much so that they have a huge penalty againts vehicles. CCP must increase damage by 15% ( same as adv damage mod ) and reduce the spread by a significant amount since the reticule is still pretty big. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14775	Posted - 2014.10.30 02:29:00 - [2] - Quote Blaster will neverbe adequate for anything as a front gun unless it gets a massive AV buff, or the ADS gets a swiveling turret camera, as opposed to the obnoxious fixed camera that they forced on us. Ten Year Plan (pâÄa¦át¢èa¦á)pâÄs+íGö+GöüGö+
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1779	Posted - 2014.10.30 02:31:00 - [3] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Blaster will neverbe adequate for anything as a front gun unless it gets a massive AV buff, or the ADS gets a swiveling turret camera, as opposed to the obnoxious fixed camera that they forced on us. As a side turret. Rails are still better by a large margin as a side turret. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2402	Posted - 2014.10.30 04:37:00 - [4] - Quote If CCP is so worried about the rail being used as an AI weapon, why don't they just nerf the damage it does against infantry? They've already shown that they can do it against vehicles, would it be so hard to just reverse this? The damage needs to be much higher on the rails, and by reducing their effectiveness on dropsuits it allows the rails to be tailored to attacking vehicles. Personally, I'd rather see a base damage buff and change the Incubus skill to a heat build-up/cooldown bonus. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 74	Posted - 2014.10.30 05:03:00 - [5] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Personally, I'd rather see a base damage buff and change the Incubus skill to a heat build-up/cooldown bonus. As a wannabe ADS pilot (mostly because I'm halfway broke for a pilot... also I'm mostly bad at flying), well... I only have one thing to say to this idea: MUCH WANT. VERY COOL. Then can shoot tank with much yes, and make tank happy dead. Most of this is due to the fact that I can't stand the KB/M controls for derpships, and so I try and do okay at flying with a DS3. /ragey moment about derpship KB/M controls Buff Logis \| Nerf Goldfish
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 280	Posted - 2014.10.30 09:17:00 - [6] - Quote If we keep raising the base damage to deal with tanks (and militia/ standard dropships since they have the same HP as a tank now), the rail turret ceases to be a small turret and starts to behave like a large rail turret. I would rather have more shots in a small amount of time, especially when it comes to dogfighting. You can do everything right in terms of air to air, height advantage, speed advantage, element of surprise, and still my proto rail turret will give any dropship enough time to stop, turn around , fire back a few rounds or ram me and simply coast back to their red line. IMO The first pass should be crippling, the second should be fatal. Instead its the first pass maybe takes down shields, the second on 1 third of his armor, the third one another third of armor, the fourth might be the killing blow, on a stationary militia dropship. Thats with a Proto rail with a laughable 9% increase in ROF. Imagine how long it takes with a grimness or gorgon dancing around trying to ram me with a hardener/armor reps. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 182	Posted - 2014.10.30 10:59:00 - [7] - Quote Quite frankly the milliseconds of difference the skill imparts are wholly inadequate to help anyone. NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
DarthPlagueis TheWise 157	Posted - 2014.10.30 11:05:00 - [8] - Quote Ghaz, good to see you, hope to squad with you soon (not on this character) destiny sux

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 9756	Posted - 2014.10.30 11:09:00 - [9] - Quote XxGhazbaranxX wrote: Hello CCP, The incubus feels a lot more reliable with that overheat fix. That being said, it still feels like it steel needs a bump to the bonus from 3 to 5%. That would make it feel a bit more reliable and not make it overpowered. This being said, the blaster is still less efficient than the rail or the missiles at killing infantry. Somethingnneeds to be done since blasters are supposed to be anti-infantry. So much so that they have a huge penalty againts vehicles. CCP must increase damage by 15% ( same as adv damage mod ) and reduce the spread by a significant amount since the reticule is still pretty big. Excellent. Thanks for the feedback. Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 848	Posted - 2014.10.30 11:17:00 - [10] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Excellent. Thanks for the feedback. Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? Heat fix has made the Railgun Incubus more useful, can actually shoot down dropships again. Swarms: no appreciable change. They still circle buildings. The biggest issue is that by the time you can react to a swarm volley, they are usually too close for any so of manoeuvre to make any difference. Edit: out of curiosity, have you had a chance to look at This Thread? I think there are some thoughts in there that are worth considering (but then I'm biased ) Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 9758	Posted - 2014.10.30 11:30:00 - [11] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Excellent. Thanks for the feedback. Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? Heat fix has made the Railgun Incubus more useful, can actually shoot down dropships again. Swarms: no appreciable change. They still circle buildings. The biggest issue is that by the time you can react to a swarm volley, they are usually too close for any so of manoeuvre to make any difference. Edit: out of curiosity, have you had a chance to look at This Thread? I think there are some thoughts in there that are worth considering (but then I'm biased ) Seems exaggerated, you get hit by the first, the second may be in the air but by the third you should be actively avoiding it. If the third swarm is not as maneuverable, it may be a big factor in survivability. Even just losing 1 or 2 of the missiles from the swarm into a building or hill. Now I have, and stored the link on our Crowdsourcing Trello board. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Bright Cloud Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 465	Posted - 2014.10.30 11:40:00 - [12] - Quote Swarms still murder dropships and the turn radius nerf was probs just a buff to LAV's cause a dropship cant do a 90 degree turn while flying full speed. Thats just not possible with the current game physics. Small blasters are very good on LAV's and HAV's but are horrid on dropships (no stable plattform and constantly moving). They sure pack quite alot of firepower vs infantry but on the front gun on a incubus its literally useless. You simply doesnt have the precision thats needed due to the camera automatically recenter. Missiles are still much better for dropships cause of the rather large splash radius. Bright is the opposite of dark! Who would have thought of that?!
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 851	Posted - 2014.10.30 11:46:00 - [13] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Seems exaggerated, you get hit by the first, the second may be in the air but by the third you should be actively avoiding it. If the third swarm is not as maneuverable, it may be a big factor in survivability. Even just losing 1 or 2 of the missiles from the swarm into a building or hill. Exaggerated, not especially. 1.9 will, hopefully, fix rendering issues but prior to then it is difficult to actually see them being launched which makes evasive action extremely difficult, not to mention time consuming, which actually plays into the hands of the Swarmer. The thing with the swarm volleys is this: the first lock-on time is utterly irrelevant when the dropship is unaware (which is 98% of the time, due to the size of infantry at standard engagement range) because there is no indication of being under attack. At operation 5, you have about 1.2s between the first volley being launched and the second following it. Total time from, "Oh crap, I'm under fire" to third volley launch is around 2.5-3s. A swarm can lock the first volley and have the second volley fired by the time you get hit. The third volley is in the air and the launcher being reloaded while you react to being hit, counter the impulse effects of the hits and consider trying to manoeuvre. Swarms don't appear to slow down when they turn, unlike a dropship which means that every turn causes the Swarms to catch up even faster. What it boils down to is that flat out running to the 400m range is much simpler and vastly more likely to keep you alive - engaging a Swarmer is difficult, especially under fire and if you throw in evasive manoeuvres then your accuracy is in the toilet. (Edit: more to the point, running away gets you past the 175m lock-on range before the second clip is loaded, while staying, trying to evade and attempting to engage is likely to feed you three more volleys.) One thing that would be useful for improving feedback: how far does a swarm need to travel before it can turn? How does the swarm missile actually operate? From my perspective, it looks like it only has to travel a couple of metres before it gets to turn which, if true, makes the small turning nerfs irrelevant because a dropship has worse handling and has to slow down to attempt to outmanoeuvre them. CCP Rattati wrote: Now I have, and stored the link on our Crowdsourcing Trello board. Cool. Just trying to provide alternatives, like you asked for. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 283	Posted - 2014.10.30 11:53:00 - [14] - Quote To be honest its very difficult to gauge, i tend to fly in first person a lot, and if there is a nest of nanohives and uplinks i make a long strafing run from about 200-300 meters up, (in order to reach full speed without activating the burner) gett off two maybe three misiles before i have to pull up and depending on the map bank behind the nearest obstacle. This is too keep my speed at a maximum so that i can get in and out of swarm lock range before multiple salvos can be launched. I have seen swarms fired in the opposite direction bank around and hip my ship, and i have seen swarms spin around my ship for a second or two then explode. So far, i have not been able to scrub missiles on any map except for the city socket in grid F5/F6 and G5/G6 (couldn't find it as the central socket, but it the central socket on some domination/skirmish maps like skim juntion). I manage to lose missiles there because AV nests don't have any long range line of sight. Its very difficult to fire swarms from the highest tower, because of thier jump barriers, the smaller buildings also have thier line of sight blocked by the large tower and barriers of thier own. And the supply depot is tucked into a corner. On that map i fly at around 15-50 meters altitude inside of the city, basically through the low hanging archways. I'm not flying at 90 degree angles, but a stationary AV player is always at right angles to me. This isnt the case in any open sky maps, especially with roof top campers there are no right angles to lose them at. I doubt the turn radius is the issue, because swarm don't overshoot and then waste time turning back around. Making sharp turns kills dropship speed and then your hit. Flying at the topspeed to keep your underfire dropship out of swarm range means you're not making turns in excess of 45 degrees and even then Missiles still cut you off, moving faster than you do, and then they hit. tl;dr no real changes noticed yet. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH RUST415 206	Posted - 2014.10.30 12:53:00 - [15] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Excellent. Thanks for the feedback. Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? Heat fix has made the Railgun Incubus more useful, can actually shoot down dropships again. Swarms: no appreciable change. They still circle buildings. The biggest issue is that by the time you can react to a swarm volley, they are usually too close for any so of manoeuvre to make any difference. Edit: out of curiosity, have you had a chance to look at This Thread? I think there are some thoughts in there that are worth considering (but then I'm biased ) Seems exaggerated, you get hit by the first, the second may be in the air but by the third you should be actively avoiding it. If the third swarm is not as maneuverable, it may be a big factor in survivability. Even just losing 1 or 2 of the missiles from the swarm into a building or hill. Now I have, and stored the link on our Crowdsourcing Trello board. I noticed the change to swarm turning. Several times I was able to loose at least a few volleys from prototype swarms. It's still not quite their yet. Some issues I noticed was swarms I had lost a while ago would suddenly come hitting my dropship. Another issue I faced was after the swarms turned their speed seems to pick back up after turning not allowing even with the afterburner active to avoid the volley. The turning radius of swarms seems to be close so I would say maybe perhaps adding anywhere from an additional 5% to 10% should have it in a great place for both sides. Now all dropships need is work on turrets! *Always Grey Skies* Leader of the Alpaca Commandos
Francois Sanchez Prima Gallicus 120	Posted - 2014.10.30 12:59:00 - [16] - Quote About small blasters, I think the main problem is the spread and the range, which are fine on ground vehicles, but on dropships they force you to get really close. You're then extremely exposed to everything, tanks, turrets, grenades and if somebody shows up with a forge gun or a swarm you're basically dead. As they're fine on ground vehicles, maybe it would be cool to change the incubus bonus to spread reduction and extra range for small blasters
Harpyja Legio DXIV 2212	Posted - 2014.10.30 13:39:00 - [17] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: If CCP is so worried about the rail being used as an AI weapon, why don't they just nerf the damage it does against infantry? They've already shown that they can do it against vehicles, would it be so hard to just reverse this? The damage needs to be much higher on the rails, and by reducing their effectiveness on dropsuits it allows the rails to be tailored to attacking vehicles. Personally, I'd rather see a base damage buff and change the Incubus skill to a heat build-up/cooldown bonus. So whatever happened to the whole idea of having small turrets for AI and large turrets for AV? People complained that the large blaster was too good at AI (personally I thought it was fine, except that it was too good at AV) so they had it nerfed. People told us to fit small turrets on our HAVs if we wanted AI. We did. And people still complained and got the small rails nerfed. Now you want to make small rails AV focused? Either keep small turrets AI focused or make each turret type have a certain focus (i.e. large and small blasters for AI). Choose one and stick with it, and don't get butt hurt when people adapt to changes (not talking to you Vulpes, just people in general). "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1782	Posted - 2014.10.30 14:18:00 - [18] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: XxGhazbaranxX wrote: Hello CCP, The incubus feels a lot more reliable with that overheat fix. That being said, it still feels like it steel needs a bump to the bonus from 3 to 5%. That would make it feel a bit more reliable and not make it overpowered. This being said, the blaster is still less efficient than the rail or the missiles at killing infantry. Somethingnneeds to be done since blasters are supposed to be anti-infantry. So much so that they have a huge penalty againts vehicles. CCP must increase damage by 15% ( same as adv damage mod ) and reduce the spread by a significant amount since the reticule is still pretty big. Excellent. Thanks for the feedback. Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? Swarms still hit behind cover. I think the old radius, before messing with the radius stat, was better because we coul actually hide behind buildings and they would hit the obstruction instead of going around and whipping me silly. But i dont know what is trying to be achieved: using up distance in the turn? giving the ads a chance to use agility? Either way, swarms feel like they are flying longer distances than intended and ive been killed at 485 meters which is 85 meters too far. Ads and ds are dropping pretty quick, with my 6500 hp grimsnes being three shot by fully specced mimmandos. Ads feels like a glass cannon without the cannon part so if we could just get a bit more of a bonus that would be great, maybe even switch the bonus to damage and not RoF. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14776	Posted - 2014.10.30 14:24:00 - [19] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: If CCP is so worried about the rail being used as an AI weapon, why don't they just nerf the damage it does against infantry? They've already shown that they can do it against vehicles, would it be so hard to just reverse this? The damage needs to be much higher on the rails, and by reducing their effectiveness on dropsuits it allows the rails to be tailored to attacking vehicles. Personally, I'd rather see a base damage buff and change the Incubus skill to a heat build-up/cooldown bonus. So whatever happened to the whole idea of having small turrets for AI and large turrets for AV? People complained that the large blaster was too good at AI (personally I thought it was fine, except that it was too good at AV) so they had it nerfed. People told us to fit small turrets on our HAVs if we wanted AI. We did. And people still complained and got the small rails nerfed. Now you want to make small rails AV focused? Either keep small turrets AI focused or make each turret type have a certain focus (i.e. large and small blasters for AI). Choose one and stick with it, and don't get butt hurt when people adapt to changes (not talking to you Vulpes, just people in general). Small rails have always been an AV weapon Ten Year Plan (pâÄa¦át¢èa¦á)pâÄs+íGö+GöüGö+
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1782	Posted - 2014.10.30 14:33:00 - [20] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Excellent. Thanks for the feedback. Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? Heat fix has made the Railgun Incubus more useful, can actually shoot down dropships again. Swarms: no appreciable change. They still circle buildings. The biggest issue is that by the time you can react to a swarm volley, they are usually too close for any so of manoeuvre to make any difference. Edit: out of curiosity, have you had a chance to look at This Thread? I think there are some thoughts in there that are worth considering (but then I'm biased ) Seems exaggerated, you get hit by the first, the second may be in the air but by the third you should be actively avoiding it. If the third swarm is not as maneuverable, it may be a big factor in survivability. Even just losing 1 or 2 of the missiles from the swarm into a building or hill. Now I have, and stored the link on our Crowdsourcing Trello board. I think i got it. We are not losing swarms behind cover because they swerve more openly. The higher the radius the bigger the ark, the more they evade builings and hit you. Make then have tighter turns like before. Before this whole radius business i used to be able to make them hit buildings. Both changes to radius have to be changed back and another 10% reduction to turn radius. So instead of the + 10 you were doing i think we have to go -10 for a total of -30. -30 because you gave it two consecutive + 10 on different occassion so we need to bring it back to the old turning radius and then subtract 10 from it. REASONING Just like the hmg where everyone thought it needed to be more accurate and it turned out being that it needed to be less accurate, the same is happening with the swarms. CCP and the community think they need to turn less agressively when the opposite is needed. If the swarms turn more agressively they will hit beuildings more often instead of flying around them. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor

XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1784	Posted - 2014.10.30 14:39:00 - [21] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Small rails have always been an AV weapon Yup, but they still outperform small blasters as AI for gunners. Some people are calling for reduced damage against infantry but the reality is that this would still not make the blaster a better choice against infantry. If rails are nerfed against infantry, people will just use missile because they too are better at anti infantry work than blasters. Blasters need a decent buff if CCP want players to consider them anti infantry Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 858	Posted - 2014.10.30 14:44:00 - [22] - Quote XxGhazbaranxX wrote: Just like the hmg where everyone thought it needed to be more accurate and it turned out being that it needed to be less accurate, the same is happening with the swarms. CCP and the community think they need to turn less agressively when the opposite is needed. If the swarms turn more agressively they will hit beuildings more often instead of flying around them. I think you may be on to something here... Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
TRULY ELITE WarRavens Capital Punishment. 73	Posted - 2014.10.30 16:00:00 - [23] - Quote I never understood why the small blaster wasn't just a front loaded HMG, same clip, same damage maybe add more range and then change the DMG profile to match blasters. OR Minmatar small turret anyone??
VikingKong iBUN Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 144	Posted - 2014.10.30 16:38:00 - [24] - Quote TRULY ELITE wrote: I never understood why the small blaster wasn't just a front loaded HMG, same clip, same damage maybe add more range and then change the DMG profile to match blasters. OR Minmatar small turret anyone?? Yes. Then change the Caldari small turret into a forge gun. Racial parity.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 126	Posted - 2014.10.30 17:40:00 - [25] - Quote The ideal for swarms would be if turning costed extra "fuel" which would effective shorten their range. I've been holding back this suggestion because I know the Devs have al lot on their plate, but here is a basic outline of it. Instead of a hard coded range of 400meters, let's say swarms have 400 hit points, and lose 1 hit point for every "meter of thrust" that propels the swarm. If the swarms has to travel in a perfectly straight line, it will reach 400 meters, but if it has to turn 90 degrees at some point along that path, it has to spend meters of thrust to change it's velocity, lowering it's HP, and reducing it's range. What I want is the ability to scrub swarms by making them either break lock mid way through extreme maneuvers, or make them "lose fuel" through excessive vector changes. If these things were remotely possible, I would also like to see an increase in their payload.
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2416	Posted - 2014.10.30 17:46:00 - [26] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: The ideal for swarms would be if turning costed extra "fuel" which would effective shorten their range. I've been holding back this suggestion because I know the Devs have al lot on their plate, but here is a basic outline of it. Instead of a hard coded range of 400meters, let's say swarms have 400 hit points, and lose 1 hit point for every "meter of thrust" that propels the swarm. If the swarms has to travel in a perfectly straight line, it will reach 400 meters, but if it has to turn 90 degrees at some point along that path, it has to spend meters of thrust to change it's velocity, lowering it's HP, and reducing it's range. What I want is the ability to scrub swarms by making them either break lock mid way through extreme maneuvers, or make them "lose fuel" through excessive vector changes. If these things were remotely possible, I would also like to see an increase in their payload. Excellent idea, but don't change the payload. They're already good enough to take on tanks and destroy LAVs, both of which dont benefit from this change. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 126	Posted - 2014.10.30 17:56:00 - [27] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Excellent idea, but don't change the payload. They're already good enough to take on tanks and destroy LAVs, both of which dont benefit from this change. You do bring up an excellent point.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 813	Posted - 2014.10.30 18:03:00 - [28] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? There is an issue with 'observing swarm behavior' from a pilot's perspective. If you can see them coming you're likely hovering and thus not being evasive. If you're running from them you can't see them. Can you pull data from the game on how often swarm missiles actually reach their target? Are those numbers different for HAVs and DS? On the topic itself: Personally I don't see a use-case for evading swarms as a pilot. Either we nerf swarms until they have the maneuverability of a MLT DS (those hit often enough!) or swarms will always be able to hit their target. If I cover behind a building I do it to break the lock on the third volley. However that strategy is only possible within ~2-3 s of the first swarm being launched, thus only if I spotted the launch itself or if I know that the swarmer is very close for some other reason. Swarms that are in the air are expected to hit 100% from my point of view. Anyways, since my gunship Myron can tank three volleys from a single source (boosters! ) I'll try to keep an eye on swarm missile behavior this weekend. Do you accept invoices for costs incurred during data acquisition?
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution 1148	Posted - 2014.10.30 18:06:00 - [29] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: If CCP is so worried about the rail being used as an AI weapon, why don't they just nerf the damage it does against infantry? They've already shown that they can do it against vehicles, would it be so hard to just reverse this? The damage needs to be much higher on the rails, and by reducing their effectiveness on dropsuits it allows the rails to be tailored to attacking vehicles. Personally, I'd rather see a base damage buff and change the Incubus skill to a heat build-up/cooldown bonus. Why does that matter? If you die to a small rail from the front of an incubus, the pilot deserved that kill. It's not easy and it's very unreliable. Amarrica! It's Not Safe to Swim.
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 185	Posted - 2014.10.30 18:27:00 - [30] - Quote Flying close to buildings to avoid swarms is begging to be thrown about by their impact into the building leading to certain death NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr

Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 817	Posted - 2014.10.30 18:40:00 - [31] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: Flying close to buildings to avoid swarms is begging to be thrown about by their impact into the building leading to certain death I love it when - due to lag - the missiles locally pass under you and then push you in the direction of the swarmer rather than away from it. That always screws with me. That's a consequence of hit detection being server side but knockback being computed locally. It's a good reason not to try your luck swarms by covering behind buildings.
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game RUST415 618	Posted - 2014.10.30 18:43:00 - [32] - Quote I sure as hell didn't notice any changes to the swarms... I'm thinking the turn speed variable doesn't do what it's supposed to. I think you should just remove the locking feature all-together and make them fire like a small missile launcher, with higher damage and less shots.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 127	Posted - 2014.10.30 18:49:00 - [33] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: I sure as hell didn't notice any changes to the swarms... I'm thinking the turn speed variable doesn't do what it's supposed to. I think you should just remove the locking feature all-together and make them fire like a small missile launcher, with higher damage and less shots. This existed in the game at one point. It wrecked infantry worse than anything else you can imagine.
XxVEXESxX 35	Posted - 2014.10.30 19:22:00 - [34] - Quote Ads is now getting away from one launcher. Barely. Seen one out run three volleys two times in a row. Must have had 50hp at the end of each engagement. Last volly of swarms couldnt turn to hit and blew up mid air. Wyk swarms locked on to ads from about 90 to 100+ m each time. Now I dont have max skills nor do I know if the pilot does too but its a noticeable change from the hotfix from my perspective. Hope this helps Rattati. PSN: XxVEXESxX Minmatar loyalist MK.0 A/C/L
Darth-Carbonite GIO Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 1215	Posted - 2014.10.30 20:48:00 - [35] - Quote The swarm changes are not noticeable. Afterburning straight up is still a better tactic than actually performing evasive maneuvers, unfortunately. The Rail Incubus, however, has been vastly improved. It is once again viable in PC, and flying with a gunner is no longer suicide. Thanks, Rattati o7 1.9 Fixes This Judge Rhadamanthus is my Hero
Darth-Carbonite GIO Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 1215	Posted - 2014.10.30 20:59:00 - [36] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Personally, I'd rather see a base damage buff and change the Incubus skill to a heat build-up/cooldown bonus. Respectfully disagree. I believe the rail's anti-vehical damage is fine, and handles tanks and dropships effectively. Small rails are also not much of a problem against infantry either, which is good as that is not their role. If you insist on killing infantry with small rails, you need to fit a side-gun, as killing infantry with a front mounted rail is difficult, to say the least. Fitting sid-guns then reduces your maximum tanking ability making you an easier target for infantry swarms. Balance. TLDR: Rails are meant for AV and do not pose much of a threat to infantry. 1.9 Fixes This Judge Rhadamanthus is my Hero
Darth-Carbonite GIO Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 1215	Posted - 2014.10.30 21:02:00 - [37] - Quote Francois Sanchez wrote: About small blasters, I think the main problem is the spread and the range, which are fine on ground vehicles, but on dropships they force you to get really close. You're then extremely exposed to everything, tanks, turrets, grenades and if somebody shows up with a forge gun or a swarm you're basically dead. As they're fine on ground vehicles, maybe it would be cool to change the incubus bonus to spread reduction and extra range for small blasters This is very true. Blasters on ground vehicles are great, and my gunners love them. Put blasters on a dropship though, and you're looking at a lot of frustration. 1.9 Fixes This Judge Rhadamanthus is my Hero

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 9782	Posted - 2014.10.31 00:33:00 - [38] - Quote Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: The swarm changes are not noticeable. Afterburning straight up is still a better tactic than actually performing evasive maneuvers, unfortunately. The Rail Incubus, however, has been vastly improved. It is once again viable in PC, and flying with a gunner is no longer suicide. Thanks, Rattati o7 Very good to hear. Swarms have two balancing factors, "travel distance" and "max radius from origin", so there are two ways to escape, get out of the max radius, or evade it long enough. By decreasing turn radius, the theory is that if the ads manages to swerve/slalom around, the missile needs to travel a longer distance to keep up and will eventually run out of fuel (exceed max travel distance). "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 2092	Posted - 2014.10.31 00:43:00 - [39] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: The swarm changes are not noticeable. Afterburning straight up is still a better tactic than actually performing evasive maneuvers, unfortunately. The Rail Incubus, however, has been vastly improved. It is once again viable in PC, and flying with a gunner is no longer suicide. Thanks, Rattati o7 Very good to hear. Swarms have two balancing factors, "travel distance" and "max radius from origin", so there are two ways to escape, get out of the max radius, or evade it long enough. By decreasing turn radius, the theory is that if the ads manages to swerve/slalom around, the missile needs to travel a longer distance to keep up and will eventually run out of fuel (exceed max travel distance). Hey Rattati... what's your opinion on ADS being able to outmaneuver swarms? Like with good piloting, we can actually get them to miss us completely and they fly off in a straight line? Like they lose their lock? Proof that Rattati/CCP do listen to the playerbase.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 294	Posted - 2014.10.31 01:45:00 - [40] - Quote I'm not a dropship pilot. In fact I ask dropship pilots to educate me on how they fly. But as someone who has a character that uses swarms I will say this. I can pretty much shoot them whenever I want. I have seen some crazy dropship manuevers. Some serious spiral swinging drifting in the air curves of beauty. And my swarms follow them -- which seems odd to me. Seems to me that Swarms should have a VERY limited turning radius. I like the speed on them. I think they should outrun dropships significantly. But they turn way too fast. At the end of one of those amazing sideways flying air skids the missles should be way past the ship and still trying to turn to retarget. I shouldn't be able to fire my volley at the end of the movement -- I should have to wait until the dropship levels off and isn't screaming around a corner like a bat out of hell. This will also limit the scenario where we have multiple swarms from the same person in the air as a skilled swarm user will put up 2 volleys and then wait to see the reaction. Seems to me that would kill ADS' that sit there and try to hover/smash everyone and would allow skilled pilots to escape while still stalling/deterring them.

SponkSponkSponk WarRavens Capital Punishment. 1088	Posted - 2014.10.31 03:09:00 - [41] - Quote If swarmed moved faster, then the turn rate would be more of an issue because overshooting would actually happen. Dust/Eve transfers
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 187	Posted - 2014.10.31 11:58:00 - [42] - Quote Personally i wouldnt mind a scenario where swarms travel fast, accelerate fast and hit hard, however if a dropship out turns them they have to do a long arc to regain their initial top speed. NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 39	Posted - 2014.10.31 14:38:00 - [43] - Quote 1. I can now fire 10 shots with the Incubus but i overheat on the 10th shot 2. I feel 10shots is enough to bother an enemy vehicle but not kill it, rep madrugars are a problem but even if i miss 1 shot then it goes downhill along with my ADS 3. The ADS skill is still very poor for 2.4mil SP and is not worth the time to gather such a large amount of SP 4. Missiles are better on the Incubus than the Python due to differences in the ship 5. Swarms still do not render so tuning the turning radius is a mute point when i cannot see the missiles to begin with, if they do render i still see them go around corners in most cases
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 817	Posted - 2014.10.31 15:14:00 - [44] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? Do you have any information as to how the "maximum swarm turn angle" should be interpreted? Earlier I was trying to check whether the value you modified could be interpreted as "swarm missile turn angle per second", so I excel'ed out the approach of a swarm missile on a DS that is closing in on the swarmer (head on) at 50 m/s at an altitude of 75 meters (here's a a graph). Turns out in the given scenario the missile would've been trying to turn at over 90-¦/s at one point during the ascend. On the other hand I've never seen a swarm missile have trouble hitting a dropship neither before hotfix delta nor after it. I have two explanations for this: - The "maximum swarm turn angle" is a different parameter entirely. - DS can out-maneuver swarm missiles, but in scenarios where that is effective (e.g. running at the swarmer) the missile can afterwards outpace the DS once it's heading in the right direction. Pilots can effectively buy themselves a second or two of time before impact by making the missile go wide, but that doesn't help unless those 1 or 2 seconds make the missile run out of time or distance. I'll try to make some hands-on observations if I get a chance to go online today.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 129	Posted - 2014.10.31 16:48:00 - [45] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: The swarm changes are not noticeable. Afterburning straight up is still a better tactic than actually performing evasive maneuvers, unfortunately. The Rail Incubus, however, has been vastly improved. It is once again viable in PC, and flying with a gunner is no longer suicide. Thanks, Rattati o7 Very good to hear. Swarms have two balancing factors, "travel distance" and "max radius from origin", so there are two ways to escape, get out of the max radius, or evade it long enough. By decreasing turn radius, the theory is that if the ads manages to swerve/slalom around, the missile needs to travel a longer distance to keep up and will eventually run out of fuel (exceed max travel distance). Rattati, during one of the balance passes you mentioned that the max distance of the swarms was from the launch location and not travel distance. Can you confirm that the swarms can "run out of fuel" before reaching the end of their life timer by going in circles? I was under the impression that after they launched, you had to get 400m away from the origin to lose them, and making them circle around within that 400m would just lead to their life ticker counting to 0. Please confirm?
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 129	Posted - 2014.10.31 16:52:00 - [46] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: [...] Swarms have two balancing factors, "travel distance" and "max radius from origin", so there are two ways to escape, get out of the max radius, or evade it long enough. By decreasing turn radius, the theory is that if the ads manages to swerve/slalom around, the missile needs to travel a longer distance to keep up and will eventually run out of fuel (exceed max travel distance). This also needs a bit of clarification, most of us believed that the max turn radius meant how wide the turns had to be for the swarm missile to change direction. If I am understanding you correctly on this, after the inital launch, they CAN'T turn more than 70 degrees in any direction ?
Victor Moody Stahl Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 75	Posted - 2014.10.31 16:58:00 - [47] - Quote As far as I know, based on the patchnotes in the Google Docs spreadsheet, the value for the swarm angles was always given as "Max Turn Angle", with no mention of turn radius. As such, I would contend that yes, you are indeed understanding Rattati correctly in that swarm missiles are not capable of making a turn that is greater than 70 degrees in any one direction. Ideally, that would be "at all", but if it's only at initial launch then it's still a good start. Buff Logis \| Nerf Goldfish
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 818	Posted - 2014.10.31 19:04:00 - [48] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: I'll try to make some hands-on observations if I get a chance to go online today. Apparently there are less pilots about when I'm using a SL than when I'm using a DS... Anyway, this looked like a nice problem and I'm on my day off, so I pulled matlab on this. Under the assumption that we're talking about the "Swarm Launcher missile maximum turning angle per second" I wanted to compare how much of an advantage we get by turning this from 90-¦/s to 70-¦/s. I have a similar concept in on e of my projects so I wanted to look into it. As the scenario I chose to look - again - at a DS that is going at full speed (50 m/s) towards a Swarmer at a constant height of 75 m. As soon as within range the Swarmer launches a single volley at the DS. The missiles then attempt to home in on the DS as it passes over the position where they were launched. Missile acceleration and maximum turning angle per second are both considered. Here's an updated graphic, now at a simulation speed of 10 ticks per second. The dropship starts from the right (red line), the Missile starts from the center (blue line). Regardless of maximum turning angle per second the missile soon catches up to the DS and hits it. Reducing the maximum turning per second from 90 to 70-¦/s buys the DS pilot 0.7 s of time. I'm not going to tweak this until I don't get any hits anymore because the DS isn't being evasive in this example. If anyone can show me what an evasive maneuver looks like for a DS and provide descriptive numbers I can incorporate this. The math I used is 3d, so anything goes. P.S.: Don't forget that we might be talking about a different variable entirely. This is mostly for my amusement. Though it would explain why we haven't seen much of a difference in the Swarm's ability to hit dropships.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 880	Posted - 2014.10.31 19:46:00 - [49] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: By decreasing turn radius, the theory is that if the ads manages to swerve/slalom around, the missile needs to travel a longer distance to keep up and will eventually run out of fuel (exceed max travel distance). The dropship is incapable of making significant enough swerves in a timely fashion: by turning, you're losing forward momentum, giving the swarm time to catch up. And even when you're using your afterburner to full effect, that loss of distance is, somewhat literally, fatal. I think that increasing the time travelled between turns/reducing the turn radius further would be what's needed. I hate to say it again, but it would be useful for you to experience this firsthand. I'm not especially good at putting my piloting experience in to words, though Stefan seems to be on to something. @Stefan: I think one manoeuvre that pilots would try would be to flip the ship to being perpendicular to their line of travel while letting go of the thrust (to prevent it being a curve) and then hitting thrust under an afterburner to get as radical a course change as possible. Not sure if that's clear enough for you... Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 820	Posted - 2014.10.31 21:02:00 - [50] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: @Stefan: I think one manoeuvre that pilots would try would be to flip the ship to being perpendicular to their line of travel while letting go of the thrust (to prevent it being a curve) and then hitting thrust under an afterburner to get as radical a course change as possible. Not sure if that's clear enough for you... Do you have any idea how long an afterburning ADS takes to reach full speed? Even if it loses height while at it. If I know that I can tell you whether that maneuver is viable.

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 880	Posted - 2014.11.01 02:26:00 - [51] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: @Stefan: I think one manoeuvre that pilots would try would be to flip the ship to being perpendicular to their line of travel while letting go of the thrust (to prevent it being a curve) and then hitting thrust under an afterburner to get as radical a course change as possible. Not sure if that's clear enough for you... Do you have any idea how long an afterburning ADS takes to reach full speed? Even if it loses height while at it. If I know that I can tell you whether that maneuver is viable. Um, not sure. I'd estimate 1.5s to change direction, but that is pulled straight out of my butt...I don't think much height is lost though. Would yo be able to chart several acceleration times? 1s, 2s and 3s? Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 301	Posted - 2014.11.01 05:51:00 - [52] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: The swarm changes are not noticeable. Afterburning straight up is still a better tactic than actually performing evasive maneuvers, unfortunately. The Rail Incubus, however, has been vastly improved. It is once again viable in PC, and flying with a gunner is no longer suicide. Thanks, Rattati o7 Very good to hear. Swarms have two balancing factors, "travel distance" and "max radius from origin", so there are two ways to escape, get out of the max radius, or evade it long enough. By decreasing turn radius, the theory is that if the ads manages to swerve/slalom around, the missile needs to travel a longer distance to keep up and will eventually run out of fuel (exceed max travel distance). Rattati, during one of the balance passes you mentioned that the max distance of the swarms was from the launch location and not travel distance. Can you confirm that the swarms can "run out of fuel" before reaching the end of their life timer by going in circles? I was under the impression that after they launched, you had to get 400m away from the origin to lose them, and making them circle around within that 400m would just lead to their life ticker counting to 0. Please confirm? It looks like both. He said that they are limited by travel distance (how many meters they travel) AND radius. So say a dropship flies in a strait line away from the swarm and has enough of a headstart to stay ahead of the missles. When said DS hits max radius the missles disappear. OR say a DS pilot with excellent skills circles at pretty much the same distance from the swarm launcher using his mad awesome dodge skills to keep making the missles miss. After said missles have travelled x distance (in attempting to hit the DS, missing, and reorienting) then they go poof even if the DS is just as close (or closer) to the swarmer as it always was. Hence a lower turn radius on the missles allow DS to avoid missles much like a fighter jet would in real life.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 285	Posted - 2014.11.01 08:47:00 - [53] - Quote Imp Smash wrote: Hence a lower turn radius on the missles allow DS to avoid missles much like a fighter jet would in real life. ^^ Not a good analogy; Fighters deploy heat and electronic countermeasures to confuse missile systems, and do not rely on turning speed alone. Back to Dust though In order to out turn a missile you have to pull off manuevers tighter than 70 degrees. "Skill" here is a moot point, getting a dropship to change momentum (very different from fliping the nose around) at turns tighter than that causes one to lose speed (pretty mcuh stop dead in its tracks, thats what i use when i want to stop not out turn a missile) and boom missile hits. Tight turns are at low speeds, yet this only applies to the dropship and not the missile chasing it. Missiles make 70-¦ turns at maximums speed, whereas i can barley manage to keep top speed up at turns under 45-¦ Currently, missiles move much faster than a dropship (especially vs the incubus with the 12% speed penalty for 120Mmm complex plates, and turns tighter than one. The countermeasure for pilots vs swarms is to get out of lock on range before the swarmer gets off volley either 3 or 4, missiles in the air will consisntently nail you; TL;DR No matter how hard you turn, you will never lose a lock, no matter where you choose to fly, the missile will get there before you do. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Bright Cloud Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 489	Posted - 2014.11.01 09:49:00 - [54] - Quote Rattati honestly disaible auto recentering of the camera on the ADS. The main issue every pilot has is that when you move your camera down a little bit to get your reticule onto a enemy it just bumbs back to its starting position and it does that every damn time. Accurate firing is almost impossible with that mechanic so i would say you implement a option on dropship controlls to turn off auto centering. It serves no purpose except to annoy the living hell out of the pilots. Bright is the opposite of dark! Who would have thought of that?!
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 191	Posted - 2014.11.01 12:54:00 - [55] - Quote Yesterday I had a swarm chasing me, I was down to 900 armour and had a head start so I thought... Let's test out rattatis Theory.... So I was flying backwards away from this swarm and I did a loop the loop... And the swarms completely ignored my loop and hit me where I ended up in my loop..... This is the problem... They aren't behaving as heat seeking missiles at times but as some sort of psychic prediction devices that work out where you're going to go after your manouver... It's actually quite stupid trying to pull off manouvers to outrun them because their top speed feels much higher than the dropships when they are coming at you, able to catch up quickly and easily. NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 191	Posted - 2014.11.01 12:56:00 - [56] - Quote On this note however I'm willing to spend up to 10 pythons trying out various manouvers to outrun swarms... Please let me know if you have any suggestions or ideas for potential good ones. NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 880	Posted - 2014.11.01 17:43:00 - [57] - Quote Bright Cloud wrote: Rattati honestly disaible auto recentering of the camera on the ADS. It serves no purpose except to annoy the living hell out of the pilots. This. A thousand ***** times this. I cannot count how many times I've missed shots because of this mechanic, and sometimes it is incredibly important (duelling AV, for example) and it renders long range bombardment essentially impossible. manboar thunder fist wrote:** On this note however I'm willing to spend up to 10 pythons trying out various manouvers to outrun swarms... Please let me know if you have any suggestions or ideas for potential good ones. Here's a manoeuvre: 1. Get hit by volley #1 2. Run out of lock-on range, getting hit by volleys #2 and #3 3. Land 4. Recall 5. ??? 6. Profit! Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 193	Posted - 2014.11.01 19:19:00 - [58] - Quote What is the point of redline rail turrets with 12000 HP with blaster turrets covering them.... On the line harvest/tower map they are constantly manned by noobs who make life hell for dropships.... From the comfort of their own redline..: they run forge gun heavies so I can't even fly over and shoot them off! Remove them or move the turrets! NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
medomai grey WarRavens Capital Punishment. 1076	Posted - 2014.11.01 21:58:00 - [59] - Quote SponkSponkSponk wrote: If swarmed moved faster, then the turn rate would be more of an issue because overshooting would actually happen. In real world physics, yes. In gaming world physics defined by the programmer, no. How to balance cloaks.
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1254	Posted - 2014.11.01 23:49:00 - [60] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: The swarm changes are not noticeable. Afterburning straight up is still a better tactic than actually performing evasive maneuvers, unfortunately. The Rail Incubus, however, has been vastly improved. It is once again viable in PC, and flying with a gunner is no longer suicide. Thanks, Rattati o7 Very good to hear. Swarms have two balancing factors, "travel distance" and "max radius from origin", so there are two ways to escape, get out of the max radius, or evade it long enough. By decreasing turn radius, the theory is that if the ads manages to swerve/slalom around, the missile needs to travel a longer distance to keep up and will eventually run out of fuel (exceed max travel distance). Rattati, during one of the balance passes you mentioned that the max distance of the swarms was from the launch location and not travel distance. Can you confirm that the swarms can "run out of fuel" before reaching the end of their life timer by going in circles? I was under the impression that after they launched, you had to get 400m away from the origin to lose them, and making them circle around within that 400m would just lead to their life ticker counting to 0. Please confirm? Whether you measure by time or distance it is the same. The swsrms travel distance/time is a constant. Meaning the swarms go 400 meters regardless of flight path and then expire Because, that's why.

Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 1257	Posted - 2014.11.01 23:51:00 - [61] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: What is the point of redline rail turrets with 12000 HP with blaster turrets covering them.... On the line harvest/tower map they are constantly manned by noobs who make life hell for dropships.... From the comfort of their own redline..: they run forge gun heavies so I can't even fly over and shoot them off! Remove them or move the turrets! I use them, I am AV and I agree. On a couple maps they are way too low risk high reward. Because, that's why.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 306	Posted - 2014.11.02 07:25:00 - [62] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: Imp Smash wrote: Hence a lower turn radius on the missles allow DS to avoid missles much like a fighter jet would in real life. ^^ Not a good analogy; Fighters deploy heat and electronic countermeasures to confuse missile systems, and do not rely on turning speed alone. Back to Dust though In order to out turn a missile you have to pull off manuevers tighter than 70 degrees. "Skill" here is a moot point, getting a dropship to change momentum (very different from fliping the nose around) at turns tighter than that causes one to lose speed (pretty mcuh stop dead in its tracks, thats what i use when i want to stop not out turn a missile) and boom missile hits. Tight turns are at low speeds, yet this only applies to the dropship and not the missile chasing it. Missiles make 70-¦ turns at maximums speed, whereas i can barley manage to keep top speed up at turns under 45-¦ Currently, missiles move much faster than a dropship (especially vs the incubus with the 12% speed penalty for 120Mmm complex plates, and turns tighter than one. The countermeasure for pilots vs swarms is to get out of lock on range before the swarmer gets off volley either 3 or 4, missiles in the air will consisntently nail you; TL;DR No matter how hard you turn, you will never lose a lock, no matter where you choose to fly, the missile will get there before you do. Then obviously the way forward is to nerf swarm turn radius more. So that dropships can outmanuever them but have to stop shooting at people for a bit while they dodge, dip, duck, and dodge.
Juno Tristan Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 133	Posted - 2014.11.02 11:32:00 - [63] - Quote Can we get an active module that jams lock-ons, nothing excessive but 10 seconds (basic/no skill) to clear rooftops and escape
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 820	Posted - 2014.11.02 12:01:00 - [64] - Quote I twiddled around with matlab a bit to see how maneuverable a DS has to be to be able to dodge a missile. As the basic scenario I chose a SL in the center of the coordinate system and a static DS 150 east of it at the same height (to facilitate visualization in 2D). The swarmer launches a missile that tracks at a given maximum turn rate. The DS has the task of maneuvering such that it maximizes angular velocity towards the missile at any moment. Notice that this is not optimal behavior. Ideally you'd want a combination of dodging until the SL passes you and then fleeing to outlast it's fuel reserve. This test is merely looking into how well a DS can outmaneuver swarms, not on optimal flight strategy. I plotted three scenarios: A) - The missile has a maximum turn rate of 70 -¦/s (as of right now) - The DS has a maximum acceleration of 10 m/s (as of right now without AB) B) - The missile has a maximum turn rate of 70 -¦/s (as of right now) - The DS has a maximum acceleration of 25 m/s (I think that's how the 150% bonus of the AB works) C) - The missile has a maximum turn rate of 48 -¦/s (fantasy number) - The DS has a maximum acceleration of 25 m/s In C I chose the maximum turn rate like that because that's the first time I don't get an impact on the DS. For reference, I count as an impact when the missile is within 10 m of the DS center of mass, which I think is reasonably close to how it works in the game. Anyway, here are the plots. A-B-C are left to right. We're looking top-down on the battlefield. In each plot the missile starts in the center and the DS starts on the right. Impact is indicated if it happens, in C you can see there is no impact. I can share that A and B are pretty much what it looks like from a DS perspective with and without the afterburner. I managed to test this for a while thanks to a couple of stubborn MLT SL users yesterday evening (no redberries where harmed during this particular experiment ). I did this mostly for the fun of it. There's some neat math involved that'll be helpful to me in other projects. I'm sharing though to show how you can design the gameplay using a quick mockup simulation. This reduces turn-around times significantly. I can show you the approximate effect of 100 combinations of values within an hour. On the live server you'd have to test each combination for two weeks to get conclusive data. Anyway, if my assumptions turn out to be true (1. we're discussing maximum SL turn rate and 2. that's actually how afterburners work) I've shown that even if right now a successful dodge is unlikely (confirmed ingame), we aren't far away from a point where this may become possible. However I can't say anything about whether attempting to dodge three consecutive swarms is ever going to work or what the effect of this is going to be on the SL's effectiveness against HAVs and LAVs.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 9933	Posted - 2014.11.02 12:50:00 - [65] - Quote Matlab, my all time favorite software I am more than willing to try further reductions of swarm radius. I would even want ADS pilots to be able to outrun/last them without AB. Those who want an easier way out and lose a slot can use the AB, but the ones that fancy their chances might throw something else in that slot and try their luck at outmaneuvering them with higher skill. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 822	Posted - 2014.11.02 14:24:00 - [66] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Matlab, my all time favorite software You know things get serious when during a discussion someone pulls out his laptop and boots matlab. That's an engineer's version of raising your fists. Anyway, regarding ABs and out-maneuvering missiles: Trouble is that the AB increases acceleration, not top speed. So right now ABs are what you'd use to out-maneuver missiles. We could change that and get a very different game where a pilot has two options: A) Have ABs grant a straight line speed bonus so you can outrun swarms in a straight line Right now a 20% speed bonus would be sufficient. It'd take a DS 6 seconds to get to missile speed and be safe forever. If it is deemed necessary to have ABs grant an acceleration bonus it could be worthwhile to think about it also conveying a malus to moment of inertia. That way you accelerate fast in a straight line but can't really turn all that well. B) Fit engine upgrades (the old ones with the torque bonus) and nanofibre structures (the old ones with the mass reduction) to outmaneuver swarms We'd have to go comparatively low on the missile turnspeed unless we want such a DS to feel like constantly having a current AB on. At 70 -¦/s a swarm does a full circle in about 5 seconds. That means you'd have to dodge every missile volley twice. At 40 -¦/s a missile would be capable of doing exactly one circle in it's 9 second lifespan. [Edit] Also, you go and have Sunday. Sundays are not the time where you do work related stuff.
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1813	Posted - 2014.11.02 16:35:00 - [67] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Matlab, my all time favorite software I am more than willing to try further reductions of swarm radius. I would even want ADS pilots to be able to outrun/last them without AB. Those who want an easier way out and lose a slot can use the AB, but the ones that fancy their chances might throw something else in that slot and try their luck at outmaneuvering them with higher skill. If you make us ads pilots outlast the swarms without turning the ab on you are going to have a full blown riot from the Swarm users. Keeping that ab necesary is a must to apease the masses. Lets keep the ab necesary and keep tweeking the turning radius maybe tweek the acceleration/deceleration while turning, fuell loss, momentum loss. Stuff like that. Anything that is done, for the sake pf balance the ab should remain necesarry. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
crazy space 1 K-A-O-S theory 2570	Posted - 2014.11.02 18:48:00 - [68] - Quote XxGhazbaranxX wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Matlab, my all time favorite software I am more than willing to try further reductions of swarm radius. I would even want ADS pilots to be able to outrun/last them without AB. Those who want an easier way out and lose a slot can use the AB, but the ones that fancy their chances might throw something else in that slot and try their luck at outmaneuvering them with higher skill. If you make us ads pilots outlast the swarms without turning the ab on you are going to have a full blown riot from the Swarm users. Keeping that ab necesary is a must to appease the masses. Lets keep the ab necessary and keep tweeking the turning radius maybe tweek the acceleration/deceleration while turning, fuell loss, momentum loss. Stuff like that. Anything that is done, for the sake pf balance the ab should remain necessary. How about a middle ground? Each missile fired in a single volley travels at a slower velocity. All swarms have the same turn rate. This makes the 1st missile faster than a dropship, but the 2nd and 3rd swarms can be outrun. Single shot swarms on the otherhand could be introduced with faster velocity and better turn radius, but single shot. Remember during Skirmish 1.0 when you could blow people up with free fire swarms? Dumb fire missiles should be a thing, why can't I go out with an AV weapon that is non-homing? i suppose it may overshadow the role of the Forgegun, but if that weapon was made to do more damage the close the projectile impacts both weapons could have a niche. Also when will you let us fire from dropships ;_;
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 195	Posted - 2014.11.02 19:03:00 - [69] - Quote Heavys should be able to fire hmgs from the passenger seats of dropships ;) NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
Spectral Clone Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 3000	Posted - 2014.11.02 20:15:00 - [70] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Matlab, my all time favorite software I am more than willing to try further reductions of swarm radius. I would even want ADS pilots to be able to outrun/last them without AB. Those who want an easier way out and lose a slot can use the AB, but the ones that fancy their chances might throw something else in that slot and try their luck at outmaneuvering them with higher skill. +1 for Matlab, I work in it daily. EVE: Legion, also known as: Schroedinger's Game, EVE: Limbo, or just "Not-a-game-yet".

Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 136	Posted - 2014.11.02 22:37:00 - [71] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Matlab, my all time favorite software I am more than willing to try further reductions of swarm radius. I would even want ADS pilots to be able to outrun/last them without AB. Those who want an easier way out and lose a slot can use the AB, but the ones that fancy their chances might throw something else in that slot and try their luck at outmaneuvering them with higher skill. I would really love it if the afterburner was not absolutely necessary, though risky to not use it. (I actually already do not run an afterburner with great success). I JUST played a match where I was out about 350 meters away from the swarmer, and was into armor in a myron. I ducked behind a building in my red line, but the swarms had flown so wide they were not coming from the swarmer's original location, and hit me from the side for the kill. This leads me to an interesting thought, we were discussing a lock warning earlier this month. Well in many other games the missile warning also tells you where the missiles are coming from. Since we can't turn our heads in game to look behind us (perhaps a look behind button is a feature idea???), the missile warning could also have a directional indicator so we know what angle to take cover at. Alternatively, if we could look behind us, we could also see what angle the swarms are coming in from.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 136	Posted - 2014.11.02 22:39:00 - [72] - Quote crazy space 1 wrote: How about a middle ground? Each missile fired in a single volley travels at a slower velocity [...] I am not really a fan of this idea, no reason for the missiles to fly at different speeds, and a minmatar commando would even be able to overlap two volleys where the first missiles would end up hitting together and then the rest would lag behind, it wouldn't be very good.
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH RUST415 206	Posted - 2014.11.03 02:52:00 - [73] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: The swarm changes are not noticeable. Afterburning straight up is still a better tactic than actually performing evasive maneuvers, unfortunately. The Rail Incubus, however, has been vastly improved. It is once again viable in PC, and flying with a gunner is no longer suicide. Thanks, Rattati o7 Very good to hear. Swarms have two balancing factors, "travel distance" and "max radius from origin", so there are two ways to escape, get out of the max radius, or evade it long enough. By decreasing turn radius, the theory is that if the ads manages to swerve/slalom around, the missile needs to travel a longer distance to keep up and will eventually run out of fuel (exceed max travel distance). Swarms shooting at the dropship from a 90-Ü angle while moving should be a great starting point.Swarms should also be able to be passed head on, but shouldn't be the easiest. Something that can make all of this possible could be adding somewhere in the programming where time needed to adjust can cause the missiles to loose the lock, forcing them to continue in the direction of where they lost their lock-on. Then from there I believe the business of adding different variant of swarms should be open for business. You can add swarms that have stronger pay load but bad steering, swarms that have great turning/homing but do not work well in long range, and a generic type that is between the other two. That way the different variants will make it challenging for swarm users and the pilot to escape damage or change their engagement according to the type of swarms. * Don't forget about turrets Rattati * *Gabriella Grey* "Amarr Ace Pilot" Saracen Squadron 7th Fleet Division
Maken Tosch Dust University Ivy League 10058	Posted - 2014.11.03 03:34:00 - [74] - Quote The problem with this idea is that it will require overhauling all of the bonuses of all of the vehicles that can be affected by the suits so that balance is maintained. This is because the vehicle bonuses we see today have been balanced under current conditions. I don't think they were balanced with suits affecting them later on in mind. So if we seriously want pilot suits affecting vehicles, which I'm ok with as well, then everyone here is in for a long wait. On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
Mobius Wyvern Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 5384	Posted - 2014.11.03 13:34:00 - [75] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: XxGhazbaranxX wrote: Hello CCP, The incubus feels a lot more reliable with that overheat fix. That being said, it still feels like it steel needs a bump to the bonus from 3 to 5%. That would make it feel a bit more reliable and not make it overpowered. This being said, the blaster is still less efficient than the rail or the missiles at killing infantry. Somethingnneeds to be done since blasters are supposed to be anti-infantry. So much so that they have a huge penalty againts vehicles. CCP must increase damage by 15% ( same as adv damage mod ) and reduce the spread by a significant amount since the reticule is still pretty big. Excellent. Thanks for the feedback. Have you experienced a change in Swarm efficiency, now that we nerfed their turn radius by another 10%? The Small Blaster is currently suffering from the same issue that the HMG used to have of only shots centered on the center dot of the reticle hitting the target. I've been shooting at infantry with an Incubus in First-Person to make sure of this, and all the shots rendered as landing somewhere inside of the circle do no damage unless the tiny center dot is directly on the target. Effectively, the dispersion isn't applying properly. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 198	Posted - 2014.11.03 15:09:00 - [76] - Quote In battlefield three the only way to avoid a missile lock was to estimate the position of the lock and fly low and fast spiralling directly towards it, so the missile did not have it's momentum built up and missed barely. This may not be viable for DUST but one thing we can conclude is that the turning radius for swarms needs to be chopped by atleast half, their greater speed means once they have turned, they will catch up to a dropship. i suggest we try this reduced drastic number to see whether the change really makes a difference or not, if it is too much we can always revert it in a midweek hotfix patch. NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 61	Posted - 2014.11.03 15:25:00 - [77] - Quote XxGhazbaranxX wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Matlab, my all time favorite software I am more than willing to try further reductions of swarm radius. I would even want ADS pilots to be able to outrun/last them without AB. Those who want an easier way out and lose a slot can use the AB, but the ones that fancy their chances might throw something else in that slot and try their luck at outmaneuvering them with higher skill. If you make us ads pilots outlast the swarms without turning the ab on you are going to have a full blown riot from the Swarm users. Keeping that ab necesary is a must to apease the masses. Lets keep the ab necesary and keep tweeking the turning radius maybe tweek the acceleration/deceleration while turning, fuell loss, momentum loss. Stuff like that. Anything that is done, for the sake pf balance the ab should remain necesarry. 1. Swarm users will cry anyways 1a. Swarm users cried when we used the AB to escape swarms in the 1st place, problem is that we have no other way of outrunning them or escaping the danger 2. Swarms have mulitple problems, turning 270deg on the spot and instant top speed, avoidng cover and tracking to where the vehicle was and not where it is now, invisible missiles, broken lock on ie through cover 2a. Recent swarm buff means if you are hit by the 1st the 2nd is in the air and the 3rd is being launched/in air, even worse when invisible and that 3rd volley 99% of the time hits 2b. I dont expect invisible swarms to be fixed on the 4th of Nov, this problem has been with us for well over a year back in the 1.0 days 3. No countermeasures for vehicles 4. Rattari idea of ADS and possibly other DS being able to outrun/last swarms with no AB is actually a good idea 4a. It means we do not have to rely on 1 module all the time 4b. It means that evasive manouvers coupled with less agile swarms means that ADS/DS could pull tight turns and throw off swarms to an extent causing them to take longer turns 4c. The python suffers from having 1 slot always being the AB
Spkr4theDead Red Star. EoN. 2315	Posted - 2014.11.03 15:29:00 - [78] - Quote Harpyja wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: If CCP is so worried about the rail being used as an AI weapon, why don't they just nerf the damage it does against infantry? They've already shown that they can do it against vehicles, would it be so hard to just reverse this? The damage needs to be much higher on the rails, and by reducing their effectiveness on dropsuits it allows the rails to be tailored to attacking vehicles. Personally, I'd rather see a base damage buff and change the Incubus skill to a heat build-up/cooldown bonus. So whatever happened to the whole idea of having small turrets for AI and large turrets for AV? People complained that the large blaster was too good at AI (personally I thought it was fine, except that it was too good at AV) so they had it nerfed. People told us to fit small turrets on our HAVs if we wanted AI. We did. And people still complained and got the small rails nerfed. Now you want to make small rails AV focused? Either keep small turrets AI focused or make each turret type have a certain focus (i.e. large and small blasters for AI). Choose one and stick with it, and don't get butt hurt when people adapt to changes (not talking to you Vulpes, just people in general). You know what these people are like. I may be missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I didn't call for a tank nerf before Uprising 1.7. - Atiim
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4367	Posted - 2014.11.03 15:44:00 - [79] - Quote I will admit there has been some straight stupidity in demands for vehicle nerfs in the past. Back to my regularly sceduled bashing of vehicular losers... I mean pilots of course. EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 310	Posted - 2014.11.06 00:57:00 - [80] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Matlab, my all time favorite software I am more than willing to try further reductions of swarm radius. I would even want ADS pilots to be able to outrun/last them without AB. Those who want an easier way out and lose a slot can use the AB, but the ones that fancy their chances might throw something else in that slot and try their luck at outmaneuvering them with higher skill. I would really love it if the afterburner was not absolutely necessary, though risky to not use it. (I actually already do not run an afterburner with great success). I JUST played a match where I was out about 350 meters away from the swarmer, and was into armor in a myron. I ducked behind a building in my red line, but the swarms had flown so wide they were not coming from the swarmer's original location, and hit me from the side for the kill. This leads me to an interesting thought, we were discussing a lock warning earlier this month. Well in many other games the missile warning also tells you where the missiles are coming from. Since we can't turn our heads in game to look behind us (perhaps a look behind button is a feature idea???), the missile warning could also have a directional indicator so we know what angle to take cover at. Alternatively, if we could look behind us, we could also see what angle the swarms are coming in from. This is pretty good though. A directional warning indicator denoting lock (present to great success in other games) would give pilots the ability to decide fight or flight. Then you wouldn't need to nerf swarms at all as it'll become more an issue of pilot skill.

Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 898	Posted - 2014.11.06 02:36:00 - [81] - Quote Personally, I'm fine with Swarms being powerful; being faster than me; being easy to use and cheap to boot. What I want is to be able to fight. Currently, a strafing run is a high speed way to fire one or two missiles pathetically inaccurately. Even with the target scanned, when you're screaming in at 200km/h and have to hit within 2.5m while still at 60-100m it's not easy: and when you only get one/two shots in that window, you're basically doing nothing. If my missile turret was 40 missiles, firing like the Large Missile turret and with the corresponding reduction in damage, then I'd be able to saturate an area as I fly past. Hell, make me even more fragile, I don't care as long as I can actually do what I'm supposed to be doing. With that kind of turret I can actually perform a strafing run whilst simultaneously deploying shock troops into the blitzed and bombed area. Then turn around, provide more firepower and pick them up afterwards. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 146	Posted - 2014.11.06 18:59:00 - [82] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Personally, I'm fine with Swarms being powerful; being faster than me; being easy to use and cheap to boot. What I want is to be able to fight. Currently, a strafing run is a high speed way to fire one or two missiles pathetically inaccurately. Even with the target scanned, when you're screaming in at 200km/h and have to hit within 2.5m while still at 60-100m it's not easy: and when you only get one/two shots in that window, you're basically doing nothing. If my missile turret was 40 missiles, firing like the Large Missile turret and with the corresponding reduction in damage, then I'd be able to saturate an area as I fly past. Hell, make me even more fragile, I don't care as long as I can actually do what I'm supposed to be doing. With that kind of turret I can actually perform a strafing run whilst simultaneously deploying shock troops into the blitzed and bombed area. Then turn around, provide more firepower and pick them up afterwards. This also sounds like a great option, though radically different, +1
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 215	Posted - 2014.11.06 23:19:00 - [83] - Quote Completely change ads. Or add a hit and run variant, higher speed lower survivability +bomb bay. For this Remove small turret bonuses Add a bomb bay that can drop different types of bombs at speed in a strafe dive. Precision bomb- 2500 dmg in a 2.5 m range Cluster bomb- 5000 dmg spread over 20 m (random areas f high dmg concentration) Flux bomb- 5000 flux damage over 30 m For the "fighter" ads add more HP (500 more) and give an ammo and damage bonus. NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES nerf life Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.