Kallas Hallytyr wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:Not necessarily. More so, that was asking why is a secondary function regarded as the primary function. I'm fine with ADS's being able to, but it shouldn't be as good vs. taking on them with AV or a HAV (even MAV's should be better, seeing as MAV's will probably have medium turrets). If I wanted them not to at all, I would have stated "Why are they taking them at all, period", or "why can they?". Again, you're misunderstanding what I'm trying to get across.
I even have a goal at the very top of the thread: "To allow Pilots in HAV's to reasonably engage Pilots in ADS's with their Large turrets without breaking the balance between them, and to allow ADS's to still earn a decent amount of WP's.". There's a thing called reading.
Why is the ADS engaging? To threaten the HAV with death and thus giving it a new priority target and/or forcing it to withdraw?
Thee current balance is that an ADS requires a fairly long time to kill an HAV. Adjust the turret elevation will make HAVs immensely less vulnerable to aerial threats by being able to apply their far higher firepower. As before, the HAV has the advantage in firepower and resilience, so removing the ADSs one advantage (insofar as an engagement is concerned) then the ADS will never have the potential to win.
That's like saying a scout will always show up on a sentinel's passive scans, and that's fair because the weakness of sentinels has now been made so that the scout's advantage is no longer there.
Increasing turret elevation
would upset the balance by making HAVs too effective at removing dropships (of
all stripes) unless your possible DS buffs include buffing their EHP up to HAV levels and making their firepower much more HAV-like so that they can actually compete.
---
What's the point of an assault variant of something if it's not going to be of any use when assaulting? You've said before that an ADS should run before it gets engaged by AV, so in what way is it better at assaulting? A normal DS can provide supporting fire, and if it's EHP means it must run, then the ADS is pointless, since it's worse at transporting and incapable of actually providing any useful fired support.
And with these changes, that's still valid. Distracting a target is a valid thing, endangering something to get it to withdraw is a valid thing. Currently, they engage to kill similar of a HAV, which is what I'm saying shouldn't necessarily be the case. Also, I should be able to reasonably engage back (hence the changes).
And again, why is it trying to act as a Gunship instead of either flying in and giving some support fire to infantry or dropping some off? Why is it being direct offensive instead of support?
You're describing win as what exactly? Kill? If so, then no. The objective doesn't always have to be kill. Simply distracting the HAV can be enough (and it shouldn't be the main goal of the ADS, as again, it's not a gunship) to support the troops on the ground, say for example to let a LAV full of guys escape a HAV shooting at it..
About the passive scans, as I pointed out before, scans don't really work, and I assume you mean visability, in which there's a problem with that notion:
1: Lots of times, people don't look up (yes, I know, it's really odd, but I've somehow sneak up on people)
2: At a certain height, people might not even see you unless they are infantry
3: All the turrets are different in function, so it's not always like a heavy with a HMG (and a heavy with a HMG will easily be able to engage that scout unless it's a shotty or NK to the back, but the TTK for infantry is so low and the combat is so vastly different it doesn't really compare well in the first place). More like a Heavy with either a Sniper (rail), a MD (Rocket), or a Shotgun (blaster) against a Scout with a SMG or PR.
So that's not really comparable. Also, ADS's can easily engage and reengage when and wherever they want, so that's a non issue.
Why is it a Assault Platform? Well, The pilot can shoot at targets, giving the people it's supporting breathing room. As soon as AV or a HAV engages it, the ADS would want to leave, or risk losing the ship, seeing as it's weaker in the hull. iirc, there was talks of adding flux hardeners, and those would work well for your problem of them having to leave as soon as AV starts firing, giving them extra time to stay and fight (maybe say 5-15 seconds of additional time vs. AV or a HAV of similar meta?). Hell, you could even have flux reppers that can get much of your HP back quickly, so you could duck in , pop it wuckly, and keep on fighting a little longer. So basically, it's good at supporting, but not actively hunting.
See, I don't think you understand; a DS is simply not a HAV. They are completely different types of hulls, and covering the exact same role doesn't really work for balance. Why are you trying to actively combat a HAV with a DS, and not AV or I don't know, a HAV maybe? Futhermore, why aren't you using it as a DS? Yes, I'm asking this question again, because I really want to know.