DUST Search - [ALL CALL] Dropship pilots

Breakin Stuff wrote:

Gabriella Grey wrote:

I see what you are trying to do, but from the statistics giving the Incubus and Python more health points to withstand damage is not going to balance dropships with other vehicles, and will inevitably cause more unseen issues like armor hardeners, and shield hardeners produced to withstand A/V attacks. A good example to this is the following two fittings:

Python 1

Python 2

Both of these dropships roughly can take the same amount of damage, but the dropship with more shielding is far better than the one with the hardener because of the huge vulnerable down time for the hardener to be ready again. Both of these fittings are max skill python fittings that focus on practicality and have been proven in use, with the top fitting being your current best Python fitting.

Oddly enough I'm taking things like that into account. I'm well aware of the limitations of hardeners. I was trying to make sure that I wasn't going to gimp the python or Incubus' ability to load a sufficient tank to survive a reasonable level of attack from a single, skilled Av gunner. If a rail tank gets a bead on you, all bets are off.

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6555	Posted - 2015.01.17 17:05:00 - [31] - Quote Gabriella Grey wrote: I see what you are trying to do, but from the statistics giving the Incubus and Python more health points to withstand damage is not going to balance dropships with other vehicles, and will inevitably cause more unseen issues like armor hardeners, and shield hardeners produced to withstand A/V attacks. A good example to this is the following two fittings: Python 1 Python 2 Both of these dropships roughly can take the same amount of damage, but the dropship with more shielding is far better than the one with the hardener because of the huge vulnerable down time for the hardener to be ready again. Both of these fittings are max skill python fittings that focus on practicality and have been proven in use, with the top fitting being your current best Python fitting. Oddly enough I'm taking things like that into account. I'm well aware of the limitations of hardeners. I was trying to make sure that I wasn't going to gimp the python or Incubus' ability to load a sufficient tank to survive a reasonable level of attack from a single, skilled Av gunner. If a rail tank gets a bead on you, all bets are off. Also, found the logi tourist! Please cry directly into the bucket. -Ripley Riley
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution 9257	Posted - 2015.01.17 17:06:00 - [32] - Quote Whoever said the controls were bad for Dropships back then makes me laugh. The controls back then gave you a whole lot more control over the ships movement than the controls now. They simplified the controls so they could get more dumbberries to take to the skies (and crash right back down) if they kept the old control scheme and the new one as options I would have been perfectly fine with that. But no, I'm at work so sadly I can't take the time out to give you the post you want. I'm a Blaster Incubus, my only purpose in life is to kill Pythons and its damn good at it. CCP holds the Caldari's hand so this doesn't happen again.
Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH RUST415 227	Posted - 2015.01.17 17:16:00 - [33] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Gabriella Grey wrote: I see what you are trying to do, but from the statistics giving the Incubus and Python more health points to withstand damage is not going to balance dropships with other vehicles, and will inevitably cause more unseen issues like armor hardeners, and shield hardeners produced to withstand A/V attacks. A good example to this is the following two fittings: Python 1 Python 2 Both of these dropships roughly can take the same amount of damage, but the dropship with more shielding is far better than the one with the hardener because of the huge vulnerable down time for the hardener to be ready again. Both of these fittings are max skill python fittings that focus on practicality and have been proven in use, with the top fitting being your current best Python fitting. Oddly enough I'm taking things like that into account. I'm well aware of the limitations of hardeners. I was trying to make sure that I wasn't going to gimp the python or Incubus' ability to load a sufficient tank to survive a reasonable level of attack from a single, skilled Av gunner. If a rail tank gets a bead on you, all bets are off. Yeah as it stands the python needs a bit of love to shield points. the measly 900armor hp can be taken out by a sniper rifle. Most python users do not even count the 900 armor hp. CCP needs to start off with swarm turning radius, forge damage, HAV fittings, HAV collision physics, HAV acceleration, LAV's speed, and Dropship turrets. If they can fix those things together vehicles will be much more balanced and extremely close to their vision. But first CCP has to acknowledge these things are the problems. *Gabriella Grey* "Amarr Ace Pilot" Saracen Squadron 7th Fleet Division
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6556	Posted - 2015.01.17 17:27:00 - [34] - Quote Bluntly forge guns are the only balanced AV weapon in the game Also, found the logi tourist! Please cry directly into the bucket. -Ripley Riley
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 913	Posted - 2015.01.17 18:07:00 - [35] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Whoever said the controls were bad for Dropships back then makes me laugh. The controls back then gave you a whole lot more control over the ships movement than the controls now. They simplified the controls so they could get more dumbberries to take to the skies (and crash right back down) if they kept the old control scheme and the new one as options I would have been perfectly fine with that. I wholeheartedly agree. The current control scheme is terrible - even if I learned to be proficient with it, it is still terrible. Breakin Stuff wrote: What I mean is swwarms are a binary equation based on positioning. If you can launch while almost directly under the belly it'spushing foregone conclusion. Minmando reload speeds mean jack on a three shot splash. But a hold the lock setup would allow better control for both the swarm gunner and pilot. I'm not saying I hate swarms by concept or even implementation. I hate crunching the numbers on them because the "always hit" aspect makes my brain crack when fiddling with numbers. Yes I realize always hits is an exaggeration. It's just a pain in the ass. I think Rattati was looking to tweak the swarm missile turn rate and DS mobility until evasion would be a thing. I looked at the issue with Matlab and concluded that we're not far from a point where an ADS with AB can outmaneuver swarms but never got to report my findings. Just for fun here's a thread that came out of my number-twiddling. All in all I think tweaking swarm missile turn radius a bit and granting DS a ~50 meter scan radius for missiles would already bring us a huge step towards evasion of swarm missiles - at least for ADS with AB. That and directional launching (as per the linked thread) would be my preferred options to make swarms more interesting to play with from both the swarmer's and the pilot's perspective.
Operative 1174 Uuali Y.A.M.A.H 369	Posted - 2015.01.20 19:01:00 - [36] - Quote Give bonuses to ADS small turrets to make then viable as strafing vehicles. Missiles would get more splash, less direct damage. Rails would get slight spread. Blasters would get their hit detection fixed and a higher RoF with reduced spread. I'm better than laser focused; I'm hybrid focused.
Jammeh McJam Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 168	Posted - 2015.01.20 19:22:00 - [37] - Quote All dropships need is to be reversed to how they were before the swarm buff and dropship nerf, while also adding in all of the old modules and turret variants. From there, changes can be made TO THE SWARMS, so that they are efficient at taking down dropships but dropships aren't made useless in the process. The swarm buff and dropship nerf made dropships incredibly hard to use even with one swarmer on the field because the ADS lost most of it's ability to fight back. - Return turret RoF to how it was before the changes. - Return swarms to how they were before the changes. - Return afterburners to how they were before the changes. - Add in all of the old modules and turret variants that were taken away ages ago. - Once done, buff swarms accordingly WITHOUT touching the dropships. Hopefully this will make swarms good against dropships without the dropship losing all offensive and defensive capabilities it may have against swarms. "We may be small and disorganized, but we're still gonna kill you" - Intergalactic Super Friends MAG ~ Raven vet
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15600	Posted - 2015.01.20 19:40:00 - [38] - Quote i think having 2/3 and 3/2 slot layouts would help a lot. My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
TEBOW BAGGINS GREATNESS ACHIEVED THRU TROLLING 1552	Posted - 2015.01.20 20:11:00 - [39] - Quote if they're not gonna nerf swarm track then a simple lock on tone warning to the pilot as the SL is locking on would do wonders AKA Zirzo Valcyn AFKing since 2012
Sir Snugglz Red Star. 1139	Posted - 2015.01.20 21:02:00 - [40] - Quote In terms of modules, derpships should not be able to fit 120mm plates or anything considered heavy. While I cannot give exact numbers i hope this actually helps. Pg/cpu should be designed to where derpships can only fit medium shield/armor (only modules that i know that have different sizes). While HAV should rely solely on heavy modules. This means that base armor/shields will also have to changed as currently if we forced derpships to use medium modules they will be paper airplanes. and of course same would have to be done to hav. add numbers later suppose to be teaching... -Pro AFKing LVL 5 -Luck is just one of my skills -Just because I make flying look easy doesn't mean it is

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16710	Posted - 2015.01.20 21:13:00 - [41] - Quote Sir Snugglz wrote: In terms of modules, derpships should not be able to fit 120mm plates or anything considered heavy. While I cannot give exact numbers i hope this actually helps. Pg/cpu should be designed to where derpships can only fit medium shield/armor (only modules that i know that have different sizes). While HAV should rely solely on heavy modules. This means that base armor/shields will also have to changed as currently if we forced derpships to use medium modules they will be paper airplanes. and of course same would have to be done to hav. add numbers later suppose to be teaching... Someone suggested the invention of 90mm plate to give dropships their own size of plating? Is that something you guys would be interested in? *"He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6637	Posted - 2015.01.20 21:17:00 - [42] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Snugglz wrote: In terms of modules, derpships should not be able to fit 120mm plates or anything considered heavy. While I cannot give exact numbers i hope this actually helps. Pg/cpu should be designed to where derpships can only fit medium shield/armor (only modules that i know that have different sizes). While HAV should rely solely on heavy modules. This means that base armor/shields will also have to changed as currently if we forced derpships to use medium modules they will be paper airplanes. and of course same would have to be done to hav. add numbers later suppose to be teaching... Someone suggested the invention of 90mm plate to give dropships their own size of plating? Is that something you guys would be interested in? If you give me numbers that aren't batsh*t crazy and I'll add 'em. Medium shield extenders should probably be a thing too. Also, found the logi tourist! Please cry directly into the bucket. -Ripley Riley
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 16710	Posted - 2015.01.20 21:18:00 - [43] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: True Adamance wrote: Sir Snugglz wrote: In terms of modules, derpships should not be able to fit 120mm plates or anything considered heavy. While I cannot give exact numbers i hope this actually helps. Pg/cpu should be designed to where derpships can only fit medium shield/armor (only modules that i know that have different sizes). While HAV should rely solely on heavy modules. This means that base armor/shields will also have to changed as currently if we forced derpships to use medium modules they will be paper airplanes. and of course same would have to be done to hav. add numbers later suppose to be teaching... Someone suggested the invention of 90mm plate to give dropships their own size of plating? Is that something you guys would be interested in? If you give me numbers that aren't batsht crazy and I'll add 'em. Medium shield extenders should probably be a thing too. I'll ask Pokey or Thaddeus. It's one of their ideas. "He spoke, and we made it so all worlds were one, all peoples were one, all faiths, creeds, and nationalities were one.
TEBOW BAGGINS GREATNESS ACHIEVED THRU TROLLING 1552	Posted - 2015.01.20 21:29:00 - [44] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Snugglz wrote: In terms of modules, derpships should not be able to fit 120mm plates or anything considered heavy. While I cannot give exact numbers i hope this actually helps. Pg/cpu should be designed to where derpships can only fit medium shield/armor (only modules that i know that have different sizes). While HAV should rely solely on heavy modules. This means that base armor/shields will also have to changed as currently if we forced derpships to use medium modules they will be paper airplanes. and of course same would have to be done to hav. add numbers later suppose to be teaching... Someone suggested the invention of 90mm plate to give dropships their own size of plating? Is that something you guys would be interested in? not really because i spent a lot of SP to be able to fit heavy plate AKA Zirzo Valcyn AFKing since 2012
Sir Snugglz Red Star. 1139	Posted - 2015.01.20 21:33:00 - [45] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Sir Snugglz wrote: In terms of modules, derpships should not be able to fit 120mm plates or anything considered heavy. While I cannot give exact numbers i hope this actually helps. Pg/cpu should be designed to where derpships can only fit medium shield/armor (only modules that i know that have different sizes). While HAV should rely solely on heavy modules. This means that base armor/shields will also have to changed as currently if we forced derpships to use medium modules they will be paper airplanes. and of course same would have to be done to hav. add numbers later suppose to be teaching... Someone suggested the invention of 90mm plate to give dropships their own size of plating? Is that something you guys would be interested in? Yes. Also, pg and cpu need to be changed. Shield extenders should be more cpu and require less pg. And armor should require more pg and reduced cpu. Example: I shouldn't have to use pg modules to fit extenders. I should require cpu modules to make up the little cpu i would be missing for that extender. Makes sense? Likewise, Vehicles need to be modified as well. Caldari vehicles should easily be able to equip CPU related modules. Galente (PG). I should not have to worry about pg to equip CPU based modules. just a thought. Those that do not fall under CPU based or PG based modules, what i would call general modules that can go into both types of vehicles will have a balanced requirement for both cpu and pg, where both are in between their respective maximums and minimum. Examples (exaggerated) : CPU- based modules (like shield extenders) 500CPU and 10 PG PG- based modules (like armor) 10 CPU and 500 PG Universal modules (after burner/scanners): 250 CPU and 250 PG Same would have to apply to turrets, a revamp to say the least. Blasters have a high pg requirement (like it is now) but a low cpu. Rails high cpu but a tiny pg, and missiles somewhere in between for both (not to high not too low). -Pro AFKing LVL 5 -Luck is just one of my skills -Just because I make flying look easy doesn't mean it is
Sir Snugglz Red Star. 1139	Posted - 2015.01.20 21:40:00 - [46] - Quote TEBOW BAGGINS wrote: not really because i spent a lot of SP to be able to fit heavy plate Im not saying to change SP requirement. A medium vehicle should not be able to equip heavy modules. Just like you cant put a large turret on one. Also, we would need to implement medium turrets as well... for this to work -Pro AFKing LVL 5 -Luck is just one of my skills -Just because I make flying look easy doesn't mean it is
DUST Fiend Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 15600	Posted - 2015.01.20 21:55:00 - [47] - Quote Sir Snugglz wrote: TEBOW BAGGINS wrote: not really because i spent a lot of SP to be able to fit heavy plate Im not saying to change SP requirement. A medium vehicle should not be able to equip heavy modules. Just like you cant put a large turret on one. Also, we would need to implement medium turrets as well... for this to work I strongly disagree. We need more fitting options, not less. Plus, how can you take away heavy modules without giving us medium modules? My YouTube (currently inactive) Homeless Dropship Enthusiast "See You Space Cowboy"
Sir Snugglz Red Star. 1139	Posted - 2015.01.20 22:00:00 - [48] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Sir Snugglz wrote: TEBOW BAGGINS wrote: not really because i spent a lot of SP to be able to fit heavy plate Im not saying to change SP requirement. A medium vehicle should not be able to equip heavy modules. Just like you cant put a large turret on one. Also, we would need to implement medium turrets as well... for this to work I strongly disagree. We need more fitting options, not less. Plus, how can you take away heavy modules without giving us medium modules? There's more to it. there's more post. I stated that we would need medium modules... -Pro AFKing LVL 5 -Luck is just one of my skills -Just because I make flying look easy doesn't mean it is
TEBOW BAGGINS GREATNESS ACHIEVED THRU TROLLING 1552	Posted - 2015.01.20 22:43:00 - [49] - Quote Sir Snugglz wrote: TEBOW BAGGINS wrote: not really because i spent a lot of SP to be able to fit heavy plate Im not saying to change SP requirement. A medium vehicle should not be able to equip heavy modules. Just like you cant put a large turret on one. Also, we would need to implement medium turrets as well... for this to work as long as they keep in mind that some pilots do have some success running buffer/rep which i fear might be butchered if they assume everyone is running hardeners.. it just feels apprensive to me to have my heavy plate remove, am i able to refit to run an MCRU proto turret and 5300 armor/100 rep or am i forced to go hardeners in the new system because i loose my armor HP to medium plates? AKA Zirzo Valcyn AFKing since 2012
Breakin Stuff Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 6643	Posted - 2015.01.21 06:15:00 - [50] - Quote I'm actually proposing 30% increase to fitting for STD dropships. 15% to militia. Also, found the logi tourist! Please cry directly into the bucket. -Ripley Riley

Gabriella Grey THE HANDS OF DEATH RUST415 229	Posted - 2015.01.22 00:51:00 - [51] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: I'm actually proposing 30% increase to fitting for STD dropships. 15% to militia. Only dropships that have fitting issues currently is the ADS variants. As stated previously, giving dropships more health points will not quick fix their issues. *Gabriella Grey* "Amarr Ace Pilot" Saracen Squadron 7th Fleet Division


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page