And Gunships that HAV's can't defend against. You can seriously hover over them and blow them up. Running away doesn't even help it seems, as you can still just fire away at them to kill them. This is highly unreasonable and needs to get fixed (a raise in turret elevation would help).


BLUB

Broken mechanics do not justify other bad mechanics.

And Gunships that HAV's can't defend against. You can seriously hover over them and blow them up. Running away doesn't even help it seems, as you can still just fire away at them to kill them. This is highly unreasonable and needs to get fixed (a raise in turret elevation would help).


BLUB

Didn't read it all but... best.

Main turret shooting up? No...

Top Small Turret Shooting up? Yes...very yes...please

The Top Gun to function as a deterrent, but not something that flat out kills it

You aren't looking from the perspective of both sides, I can tell you aren't an ADS pilot. The HAV can absolutely fight back, you're either just too stupid or lazy to actually get in a position to shoot it. If killing tanks with an ADS is so easy then why don't you do it?

This seems to be the crux of your argument.

ADSs are primarily being used to harass and attack gunship-style because they are nigh worthless as transports and 'supporting fire' (supporting fire, aka, acting like a gunship) is something they can actually provide, because the maps and mechanisms of the game make it either irrelevant (because maps are so small) or because there are awful blocks in between players making truly useful communication nigh impossible.

Tell me how often you see a Railgun ADS dominating both vehicles and infantry, and if a missile ADS is destroying every HAV in sight without any threats present, then the enemy team is simply trash.

8 seconds is the time it take to empty a small missile clip: I didn't say 8 seconds to kill, because that threatens only absolute shitfits - 8 missiles is 4004 damage. An unfit Sica takes 6 XT-1 missiles to completely strip shields and the remaining two do not destroy all of its armour. That's a completely unfit Sica. A completely unfit Soma takes three to strip shields, then the remaining five still don't kill it.

Than mathz

I'm trying to have a decent conversation here okay.

I'm not going to rage back you, i'm going to edumacate you.

You want AAA defense? Thats what small turrets are for. Top turret gives excellent elevation and protection against Dropships, and can be just as powerful as the weapon the dropship is firing at you with.

If you don't want to fit some Anti air defense, tanks still have cover from the air with buldings and and sockets to drive under and around, friendly turret installations are enough to drive away any ADS, and a massive eHP buffer to find recover from any alpha damageand get away.

I've never had a problem in a tank vs Dropships because i know how they (dropships) move. Python are inefecctual, and even rail incubus are not a problem, once you get into an area that forces the pilot to manuever around you, he's lunch meat. Killed far more dropships with tanks than ever having being killed by a dropship in a tank.

So force teamwork onto the HAV, but not the ADS. No

Already refuted the buildings thing, it just doesn't work. If you can't do basic manuvers like fly sideways, Then you shouldn't really be telling me how to fly. Also, going into cities is a trap for HAV's due to AV (as I've said at least 3 times here).

I usually ignore turrets, or kill them with my ADS in spare time (also broken).

You must fight against ****** pilots, a ADS can easily outmaneuver any HAV. You know, absolute advantage due to height.

I'm trying to have a balanced game.

I'm trying to have a balanced game.

Again, that would imply that a HAV has to rely on teamwork to deal with a target (ADS), while a ADS does not (because it can easily just run away).

And Gunships that HAV's can't defend against. You can seriously hover over them and blow them up. Running away doesn't even help it seems, as you can still just fire away at them to kill them. This is highly unreasonable and needs to get fixed (a raise in turret elevation would help).


BLUB

No, you're simply trying to nerf something that isn't, despite your 'refutations' (which are just you saying "No") isn't over performing.

That Maddy fit takes a long time to die, and perfect accuracy is not what happens unless the tank driver is bad. You have yet to 'prove' anything about your claim other than provide anecdotes about your experience killing HAVs with your ADs which are, frankly, laughable as proof. Ssripously, what Maddy doesn't have a rep that isn't tpuhgher in some other, major way?

You have provided no evidence with which to support your claims, like a video yours or someone else's, which demonstrates a missile ADS utterly dominating all forms of ground-based life. Until then, you're just being a whiny ***** making opinion out to be fact and constantly having a go at any trying to actually be reasonable.

Dropships have to sit there and hit tanks forever to kill them. Dropships have to get very low to the ground to do this, so unless the tank is alone, they will almost certainly start taking fire from something very quickly and have to stop attacking the tank. Tanks are much, much, much, much better than anything else in the game at demolishing dropships. There is no balance problems with dropships attacking tanks. There are huge balance problems with tanks attacking dropships (they kill them faster than 2 forge gunners working together, which I think is way, way overboard).

The Dropship/Tank dynamic does need a nerfing, but not on the dropship side.

By your biased standards ADS being OP gunships while still being transport albeit not refined is okay. I give zero fucks about your standards. Your entire argument is "I like it being a floating HAV that is neigh impossible to kill because it isn't up to par on what it actually should be doing", and that's broken.

I've already stated my evidence, prove otherwise, you've so far haven't. What, you're denying that a HAV can aim high enough to hit a ADS?

No, everything does not.

Infantry can turn around or look up

DS's can look both down and up

only LAV's can't really defend against most things, which they can greatly avoid with like DS's, speed. So only HAV's has one true blind spot.

Try again.

An HAV fulfills the role of a Main Battle Tank correct? Last I checked, the turret elevations on an abrams tank where approx +20/-10 degrees, which is very similar to what we have currently. Additionally, simple situational awareness and target prioritization will keep any Assault Dropship platform from being able to effectively engage you, assuming it's a solo situation. If there is an event where you are too distracted, or there is a higher priority target for you to engage, than that is teamwork on the part of the ADS and team (usual other threat will be an HAV in this case), and can reasonably be expected to require teamwork to counter effectively (barring strategic thinking, such as the forward and back method, or moving to positions where the ADS would be at high risk to follow).

In short, and reasonably aware tanker should be able to eliminate any solo ADS threat, provided we assume that the HAV turrets get re-balanced to be equally effective at AV, and assuming that the tanker avoids getting tunnel visioned. Let's bear in mind Godin, that the presence of our HAVs requires infantry to consider special strategies in order to properly counter or avoid engagements, cannot we expect the same to be applied to us in at least a few circumstances?

Now I could see a case for increased elevation on turrets with closer range (such as the blaster, or possibly the missile turret) to help compensate for that range problem, but only a small amount (possibly +10 degrees on the high end of things)

ADS as they should be balanced now, should focus on the assault part of their name, to the exclusion of transport. Right now we are giving them too many hats to wear: transport, assault, etc. We need to give them one job, and have them do that job well. That leads to combined arms tactics; various people who specialize in different areas come together to become something more than the sum of their parts.

Have you ever tried looking directly up in a DS, normally you're crashing into the ground a*s first before you get to fire a shot

Last I checked Abrams had several systems to defend against aerial attacks as well, so irrevelant.

Seeing as the only possible way to defend against them is either

1: See them coming and kill them before they get there (only possible for really the rail).

2: Get way back into the redline so it can't reach you (simply isn't possible in a reasonable amount of time on some maps)

3: Hope that someone will take them out for you (so basically getting lucky)

as you can't effectively kill it due to turret elevation, There isn't any real good, effective ways to deal with a ADS in a HAV. An ADS has much better movement and aiming, and can easily deal with a HAV shooting at it however (even a rail at range, provided the Pilot can do some maneuvering).

See, here's the problem with that statement: For infantry to deal with us, they have two choices:

1: maneuver through cover, hide, or run

2: Equip AV and either push the vehicle away, or kill it.

Both are very good options, as both leads to the HAV becoming either less of a threat (due to not being able to hit you), or not a threat at all (either it or the infantry ran, or it died). that isn't the case with ADS's, as it's faster than you, and in the air, so hiding and/or running is them impossible other than VERY few cases. Fighting back, as I have shown is not a thing, unless the pilot is for some reason flying too low. So that leaves you with little to no options other than die, which is why it's broken. Of course, you seem to be reasonable enough to understand that not every turret is able to even deal with ADS's (Rockets somewhat, and definitely blasters),

Also, I'd like to reiterate that I don't believe ADS's are OP, as that would imply that they either do their job plus some, or they do their job TOO well compared to other vehicles of the same type (for example, a Logi being a logi and assault, or a Gal Logi being the best Logi, period). It's backwards from the first one, doing a job of another vehicle type too well (Gunship), but it sucks as a actual combat-oriented DS (as in actually ferrying infantry around and supporting said infantry, not going around killing everything in sight like a flying HAV of old).

I know what your saying about the ADS role not being well defined...originally they where supposed to be dropships with some manner of fire support, but that has largely evolved into a full gunship over time...unless we get CCP to weigh in on where they want them, I'm content with their current pseudo-dropship/pseudo-gunship role as is, but would like to see them get something more concrete before we design systems that could kill transport dropships as well, and eliminate that role in it's entirety.

I do hate when ads pilots retreat to redline and recall...

Other than derrith... I know he'd be switching to a rail inky to 1v1.

^ i do enjoy a good challege after all.

Edit: honestly godin, i agree with your last post. I'm not a vet no no, but balance is something we all want to achieve.

Man, if i ever came off like i was attacking you I apologize.

As for ADS's, it seems that you wnat them to be useful in some sort of wa, and since it isn't supported in its intended role, you think it's fine for it to stay as a Gunship, until it's fixed. Obviously these things would come all at once. I would never advocate that we simply nerf and buff, I want them fixed, period.