DUST Search - Dropships: the future

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Dropships: the future

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 406	Posted - 2015.03.14 16:11:00 - [1] - Quote The recent changes to AV, tanks and how the game performs in a fight have all drastically affected the usage and effectiveness of dropships in combat. This thread has been created to help CCP understand the current situation and facilitate them in making the right decisions in dropship changes for the future. A brief overview: With tanks becoming a lot stronger recently it is currently difficult to combat a tank using a dropship, add to this the prolific increase in av usage to deal with tank spam this leaves dropships in a vulnerable position. The major problem I foresee is an increase in av effectiveness or changes to vehicle balance that affect the dropship without being intended. For example, since madrugar are once again the tank of choice the effectiveness of anti armour av or armour modules will have to be adjusted to create balance. However, no changes were made to the incubus (no slots, ehp etc) to put it on par as a competitor in the vehicle field. This means that if people can take out highly ranked madrugars, they will have no problem taking out incubi. The shield tanks were also recently nerfed, this included an increase to shield hardener fitting cost. This has impacted the Python and has made Python fits weaker as no fitting increase was given to the Python. Right now dropships are being largely ignored, and having spoken to many ads pilots there is a widespread consensus that since dropship pilots are a minority in the game their views are being ignored. This is also perhaps because Judge Rhadamanthus has brought little change to the effectiveness of dropships, despite being a perfectly vocal advocate for the dropship community. I have considered many options and really, it comes down to two. 1. Dropship tiers Just as the hav has tiering, the dropship should be given basic, advanced and proto variants. The Python should have a 4/2 like the gunnlogi and the incubus a 3/4 like the madrugar. This would add a lot more variety to dropship fitting styles and especially allow the usage of subsystem modules such as scanners, heat sinks and dispersion reduction modules without the need to create a fit that has no survivability, or indeed, viability. 2. Skill increase In order to compensate for the jump in HAV effectiveness I propose the dropships be given increased bonuses. In my opinion the Python should have an overall 30% fire rate increase skill, doubling the effectiveness of the current skill and allowing it to be worth investing in. The incubus cannot be given a fire rate bonus due to the rapid fire nature of railguns, therefore I propose the creation of two separate incubus skills: one with 50% dispersion reduction and another with 30% heat reduction. these bonuses would definitely bring the small blaster and rails back into the field without definitively making them overpowered. On the note of turret balance: From numerous attempts I have gathered experience which points to three conclusions: 1. Armour tanks cannot be destroyed by pythons as they can outrep and out harden them indefinitely. 2. Shield tanks cannot be destroyed by incubi because they have enough hardening and shield hp to combat. 3. Small blaster turrets are completely useless. Solutions: 1. We really need the anti HAV missile which should have little splash damage but greatly increased direct damage. This will create balance as tank users won't be invincible to dropships as they currently are. 2. The damage of small rails vs HAVs specifically needs to be tweaked, this could be done through the heat reduction skill 3. Small blasters require greater bullet magnetism and much reduced dispersion, any sort of dispersion change needs to be carefully considered. The recent inverse dispersion change is not effective as the gunner/pilot constantly needs to burst fire to adjust for target position, I propose the opposite, the blaster becomes like a mini gun, almost like the assault HMG but with greater effectiveness towards infantry. The assault hmg was really what a mini blaster turret should be like. I therefore propose the assault HMGs firing style with a 150 m range, significantly reduced dispersion and the current fire rate. All these ideas are obviously debatable but I would remind you to keep the discussion civil and topic focused. Regards. "If there is a strafe nerf in this game, remove hit detection"- manboar 2014
Rakr'Dashia Rah GRIM MARCH Grim Enterprises 0	Posted - 2015.03.14 17:18:00 - [2] - Quote A Python camped our spawn last night, 4 people pulled out swarms. A few Plasma Cannons, not to mention a missle turret and blaster. We all lit the thing up, it turned flew around a building and popped back out, full shields and armor and continued to destroy us. I think the guy went 20 odd/ and 4. Im not saying dropships are in a good place or they shouldnt be looked at, but give it some time. The way I see it any buff for assault dropships would make them op to infantry, technically you're not supposed to be able to kill a proto tank with an ASSAULT(lightwieght low health/ hit and run tactic) dropship. If a tank killer is what you want, wait for CCP to release heavy dropships. Threatened subconscious snake, repressed into striking coil... Surfacing that black second, ascending with the boil.
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. 4212	Posted - 2015.03.14 17:58:00 - [3] - Quote My Incubus and Python fittings are broke due to the hardener resource changes. DS will need looking at seperate to HAVs and they have problems unique to them. You also put your trust in judge which was a bad idea form the get go, i would say i told you so but the entire community already knows. Your ideas are fine but until HAVs are done i don't expect DS to be touched until after. Disclaimer: The above post is respectful, contains no ranting, contains no personal attacks, contains no trolling, contains no racism, contains no discrimination, contains no profanity, contains no spamming. This post is an opinion and is related to DUST514 CCP Rattati - "One giant vehicle nerf with more power to AV", you have got to be kidding...''
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 408	Posted - 2015.03.14 19:15:00 - [4] - Quote Rakr'Dashia Rah wrote: A Python camped our spawn last night, 4 people pulled out swarms. A few Plasma Cannons, not to mention a missle turret and blaster. We all lit the thing up, it turned flew around a building and popped back out, full shields and armor and continued to destroy us. I think the guy went 20 odd/ and 4. Im not saying dropships are in a good place or they shouldnt be looked at, but give it some time. The way I see it any buff for assault dropships would make them op to infantry, technically you're not supposed to be able to kill a proto tank with an ASSAULT(lightwieght low health/ hit and run tactic) dropship. If a tank killer is what you want, wait for CCP to release heavy dropships. That's not a viable option since assault dropships are the dropships that can kill, the others are transport dropships. I'm not saying we need ads to be a hard counter to tanks, I'm just saying that it shouldn't be impossible to kill them. "If there is a strafe nerf in this game, remove hit detection"- manboar 2014
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5399	Posted - 2015.03.14 19:56:00 - [5] - Quote Im curious about what changes to AV you find to have a significant impact on your dropship. AV grenades damage was unchanged and are too short range to hit dropships in almost all situations. While PLC does more damage now, the difficulty to land consecutive shots on a moving dropship has remained unchanged. Assault HMG has fairly limited range as well (60+ m) which is typically shorter than a dropship's operational elevation. Swarms were unchanged in Echo. Forge Guns were unchanged in Echo. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3163	Posted - 2015.03.14 20:36:00 - [6] - Quote Rakr'Dashia Rah wrote: A Python camped our spawn last night, 4 people pulled out swarms. A few Plasma Cannons, not to mention a missle turret and blaster. We all lit the thing up, it turned flew around a building and popped back out, full shields and armor and continued to destroy us. I think the guy went 20 odd/ and 4. Im not saying dropships are in a good place or they shouldnt be looked at, but give it some time. The way I see it any buff for assault dropships would make them op to infantry, technically you're not supposed to be able to kill a proto tank with an ASSAULT(lightwieght low health/ hit and run tactic) dropship. If a tank killer is what you want, wait for CCP to release heavy dropships. Not that I don't believe your story, but I don't believe it. That said, I think the balance between swarms and ADSs is fine as is, with improvements only needed for pilot target identification and acquisition (i've suggested that AV show up on pilot's HUD when they're attacking within 100m). Rattati has stated why ADSs are supposed to be able to counter tanks. Personally, I haven't had much more trouble than usual against the new tanks, but I could see some room for improvement for both rails and missiles (specifically, slightly more damage/a better RoF bonus from the Incubus and the proposed AV specific missiles, respectively). Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 1039	Posted - 2015.03.14 20:40:00 - [7] - Quote As a DS pilot I consider hotfix echo a buff, actually. The railgun heat nerf means that you need a heatsink active to deliver 4 shots. Shield HAVs are going to struggle to make that sacrifice. Additionally blasters seem to be more prevalent which makes rails even rarer. All other forms of AV have become more prevalent, but they can't deliver 8k hp of damage in less than 4 seconds. I don't mind a couple of Swarmers of FGers. There's a good balance there - if I do something stupid I die, if they do something stupid they die.
Kierkegaard Soren Corrosive Synergy RISE of LEGION 728	Posted - 2015.03.14 21:31:00 - [8] - Quote Dropships have always made me scratch my head; general concesus from the forums is that they are woefully underpowered and largely ignored, but I find them to be absolute monsters on the battlefield when they're being handled by a capable pilot. Which is not to say that manboars points are any less valid, because these things have been said over and over again, but for me they seem pretty viable. At least within the spheres of pubs and factional. I don't see many of them taking on tanks though, and I think if they could bonused to become dedicated tank hunters then ADS would have a natural place in the game. Dedicated Commando. "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing."
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3067	Posted - 2015.03.14 21:35:00 - [9] - Quote Rakr'Dashia Rah wrote: A Python camped our spawn last night, 4 people pulled out swarms. A few Plasma Cannons, not to mention a missle turret and blaster. We all lit the thing up, it turned flew around a building and popped back out, full shields and armor and continued to destroy us. I think the guy went 20 odd/ and 4. I don't believe that for a second. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
wiseguy12 Y.A.M.A.H 101	Posted - 2015.03.14 21:50:00 - [10] - Quote I just want to point out not all pilots are heavily skilled into vehicles so. Pilots stop focusing on just ADS. I understand your plight as I am an avid norm drop ship pilot. Must say AV nades are good at killing drop ships. And have you seen sleek AV nades on jumpy suits. So my point is AV is very effective know against drop ships. Tanks are good and require just about proto AV to kill them. Pro Caldari assault and sentinel. Proto magsec, Forgegun, sniper, HMG, and Rail Rifle Onuoto Uakan

Francois Sanchez Prima Gallicus 336	Posted - 2015.03.14 22:11:00 - [11] - Quote Dropships need more CPU/PG for sure. You can't even use the new shield regulator on a python without messing up the entire fit. I love the spread reduction skill, I actually proposed it months ago but it got completely ignored. The feeling you have when firing the small blaster from a droship is awesome, but then you see that the guy who was in the center of your reticle didn't take any damage... And of course if we do that for the small blaster the heat reduction for the rail turret seems logical, even if I don't mind the fire rate bonus actually. However I'm against doubling the fire rate bonus of the python. I do understand something needs to be done to use missiles against tanks, but that extra fire rate would make destroying infantry way too easy. I realised how powerful ADS were becoming once you have gunners with you, especially to hunt vehicles, but sadly the CPU/PG cost to make that properly. Maybe a change similar to what they did for HAVs (increasing the CPU and PG but making the turrets mandatory) would be the solution to bring back ADS at a competitive level.
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 438	Posted - 2015.03.14 22:40:00 - [12] - Quote Rakr'Dashia Rah wrote: If a tank killer is what you want, wait for CCP to release heavy dropships. That's not going to happen, just like jets are not going to happen. So therefore the current assets have to fill that role. ADS Ramming Revenge! Plasma Cannon Rampage
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 411	Posted - 2015.03.14 23:47:00 - [13] - Quote Francois Sanchez wrote: Dropships need more CPU/PG for sure. You can't even use the new shield regulator on a python without messing up the entire fit. I love the spread reduction skill, I actually proposed it months ago but it got completely ignored. The feeling you have when firing the small blaster from a droship is awesome, but then you see that the guy who was in the center of your reticle didn't take any damage... And of course if we do that for the small blaster the heat reduction for the rail turret seems logical, even if I don't mind the fire rate bonus actually. However I'm against doubling the fire rate bonus of the python. I do understand something needs to be done to use missiles against tanks, but that extra fire rate would make destroying infantry way too easy. I realised how powerful ADS were becoming once you have gunners with you, especially to hunt vehicles, but sadly the CPU/PG cost to make that properly. Maybe a change similar to what they did for HAVs (increasing the CPU and PG but making the turrets mandatory) would be the solution to bring back ADS at a competitive level. The reason I would propose a direct rof buff is because the current 15% skill does nothing for missiles, a fraction of a second faster "If there is a strafe nerf in this game, remove hit detection"- manboar 2014
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5400	Posted - 2015.03.14 23:58:00 - [14] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Rakr'Dashia Rah wrote: A Python camped our spawn last night, 4 people pulled out swarms. A few Plasma Cannons, not to mention a missle turret and blaster. We all lit the thing up, it turned flew around a building and popped back out, full shields and armor and continued to destroy us. I think the guy went 20 odd/ and 4. I don't believe that for a second. Same. 1 Volley of even Standard Swarms does about 1040 damage, so if there were 4 of you that's 4160 damage per volley. Chances are you can typically get 2-3 volleys off before the dropship gets out of range, so the 4 of you should have dealt around 8320-12480 damage with the swarms alone. Plus there were plasma cannons, a blaster, and a missile turret adding some additional damage. How much HP did this thing exactly have? Because I really think you're exaggerating "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC Bad Intention 929	Posted - 2015.03.15 00:17:00 - [15] - Quote Not much of a pilot myself but a damn good ADS pilot I know is completely pissed at whatever "tweaks" were imposed on dropships. His fits are ****, his slot layouts are **, the whole angle of gameplay he found most rewarding (flying ADS's) just ****. Idk enough about piloting to say what or where the fixes need to be, but some rollback of whatever this patch did needs to happen. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5400	Posted - 2015.03.15 00:53:00 - [16] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Not much of a pilot myself but a damn good ADS pilot I know is completely pissed at whatever "tweaks" were imposed on dropships. His fits are ****, his slot layouts are **, the whole angle of gameplay he found most rewarding (flying ADS's) just **. Idk enough about piloting to say what or where the fixes need to be, but some rollback of whatever this patch did needs to happen. What changed was a change to the fitting cost of shield hardeners, namely in response to the HAV re-balance. The effect it had on the ADS was purely collateral. If the change to fitting is deemed necessary for HAV balance, then the appropriate measure would to not 'roll back' the changes, but rather address the issue at hand which would seem to be ADS fitting in regards to the new shield hardeners. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
CELESTA AUNGM Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 461	Posted - 2015.03.15 01:16:00 - [17] - Quote Part of me is glad to see DS threads like this calmly commence,GÇª but I think it is a bit too early to make any suggestions without getting your nose out of joint when CCP mostly ignores these early thread-ideas. Don't misunderstand me,GÇª I anticipate the devs will ignore these threads NOT because they have contempt or lack of value in these ideas. They will HAVE to ignore them, because your ideas are based on keeping the current Dropship profiles and "roles" we have now. GÇªMy expectation is that the current DS models can't survive in the new Echo-style vehicle gameplay. Hoping that DS players can fit on the battlefield simply doing sporadic transport (with much uplink-delivery now challenged by the new moonjumpers), and Air-HAV (the fantasy that some ADS drivers have been enjoying, that may soon be challenged by plasma-A/V training),GÇª that's something that I don't think we should rely on and try proposing readjustments for. Instead, I'm betting (and personally hoping) CCP has decided to rework the whole DS "purpose/possibilities" mindset in the game. They may have already made that decision. We'll find out soon. If Lavs have just been re-presented to us as vehicles we should be considering for Recon-Scanning and less fattie-cabGÇª And the decision has just been made that your full-size HAV MUST have free seats to allow teammate interaction, or drive a snub-nose version that comes with a fitting-penaltyGÇª Dropships are bound (and need) to have all new suggested purposes as part of their restoration in the game. Perhaps mobile-supply depot for infantry and vehicles, or mobile-triage for infantry, or jobs that truly funnel us towards more blue-assist and a bit less red-hunt. Might not be a good idea to put yourself through too much effort trying to re-stat the air vehicles we own now. Universe of good wishes for the 49, especially CCP Eterne... No story can have life without writers and publishers.
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2972	Posted - 2015.03.15 04:18:00 - [18] - Quote It's odd, I've been one shot by proto AV in my Grimises against AV as well as my proto Maddy, odd because neither should be. Anyways, DS's need role buffing, yes. Making ADS's HAV hunters is just silly. They aren't gunships. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 173	Posted - 2015.03.15 04:30:00 - [19] - Quote After how quick my ADS gets tanks when it's a "eyes/feet" (dropship + tank team) situation ... I'm kinda sceptical on tanks. All I know, ADS should go 4/2 , 2/4. Add utility mods to low slots. ADD PG TO THE PYTHON jeez. The hardener nerf just makes me step down to triple enhanced... Just a long down time sadly :/ Tower swarms, no escape from the triple hardened. Also, I've found triple hardened the most viable transport python because I can pick up in the thick of things, and engage Swarms if I must. 5 shot from a particle cann also. Essentially, triple harden IS the support python of choice. No need to suicide ship to reach the roof Yknow? Entering the void and becoming wind. Message for 1v1 air to air
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 913	Posted - 2015.03.15 04:47:00 - [20] - Quote Has anyone tried a heat mod with a small rail? I think it might take down a tank. I've managed to down a few basic and militia tanks with my rail LAV (not using heat sync, obviously, as anything other than shield extender ends in death!) Also the 40% armour hardener has made me fall in love with mah Bus all over again! Screw you protato swarms, you can't kill me : O

The Final Fantasy DETHDEALERS RISE of LEGION 23	Posted - 2015.03.15 06:45:00 - [21] - Quote Rakr'Dashia Rah wrote: A Python camped our spawn last night, 4 people pulled out swarms. A few Plasma Cannons, not to mention a missle turret and blaster. We all lit the thing up, it turned flew around a building and popped back out, full shields and armor and continued to destroy us. I think the guy went 20 odd/ and 4. Im not saying dropships are in a good place or they shouldnt be looked at, but give it some time. The way I see it any buff for assault dropships would make them op to infantry, technically you're not supposed to be able to kill a proto tank with an ASSAULT(lightwieght low health/ hit and run tactic) dropship. If a tank killer is what you want, wait for CCP to release heavy dropships. is this one of those "omg pythons are so op the guy went 80/0 and no matter how much av we had we couldn't bring it down" story? cus my python has like the standard hp of a python fit which is 2555 and 1 shot of a pro swarm leaves me at like 5 shields already.... idk why ppl exaggerate to much paintings like this makes everybody call nerf on them :/
DUST Fiend 16058	Posted - 2015.03.15 07:06:00 - [22] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: Right now dropships are being largely ignored This has quite literally been the case from the very beginning. There just aren't enough of us dedicated pilots, so we're at the bottom of CCPs "to care" meter. Contests, Sales, Writing etc Fly Safe
The Final Fantasy DETHDEALERS RISE of LEGION 23	Posted - 2015.03.15 07:37:00 - [23] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: manboar thunder fist wrote: Right now dropships are being largely ignored This has quite literally been the case from the very beginning. There just aren't enough of us dedicated pilots, so we're at the bottom of CCPs "to care" meter. naa they just gave up in vehicles altogether...sadly
Travis Stanush Y.A.M.A.H 443	Posted - 2015.03.15 15:18:00 - [24] - Quote The Final Fantasy wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: manboar thunder fist wrote: Right now dropships are being largely ignored This has quite literally been the case from the very beginning. There just aren't enough of us dedicated pilots, so we're at the bottom of CCPs "to care" meter. naa they just gave up in vehicles altogether...sadly sadly you still have better chances at getting buffed than logis (looks at 70 page feedback thread) No I will not show you where they touched me!!!
The Final Fantasy DETHDEALERS RISE of LEGION 25	Posted - 2015.03.15 17:27:00 - [25] - Quote Travis Stanush wrote: The Final Fantasy wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: manboar thunder fist wrote: Right now dropships are being largely ignored This has quite literally been the case from the very beginning. There just aren't enough of us dedicated pilots, so we're at the bottom of CCPs "to care" meter. naa they just gave up in vehicles altogether...sadly sadly you still have better chances at getting buffed than logis (looks at 70 page feedback thread) at this rate logi has a better chance to get buff in the right way , just look at the armor / shield tank fiasco
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC Bad Intention 931	Posted - 2015.03.15 20:13:00 - [26] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Not much of a pilot myself but a damn good ADS pilot I know is completely pissed at whatever "tweaks" were imposed on dropships. His fits are ****, his slot layouts are **, the whole angle of gameplay he found most rewarding (flying ADS's) just ****. Idk enough about piloting to say what or where the fixes need to be, but some rollback of whatever this patch did needs to happen. What changed was a change to the fitting cost of shield hardeners, namely in response to the HAV re-balance. The effect it had on the ADS was purely collateral. If the change to fitting is deemed necessary for HAV balance, then the appropriate measure would to not 'roll back' the changes, but rather address the issue at hand which would seem to be ADS fitting in regards to the new shield hardeners. Whatever it is, wherever it is, it needs to be fixed quickly please. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
manboar thunder fist Dead Man's Game RUST415 416	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:41:00 - [27] - Quote The problem, pokey, is that CCP is buffing and nerfing av and tanks left right and centre to achieve balance but no consideration for dropships is being put in. This leads to more bad than good since av will always increase and tanks get better, and as tanks get better nerfs will come to modules. This all affects the dropships so why aren't they being considered? Are we just a side effect? "If there is a strafe nerf in this game, remove hit detection"- manboar 2014
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 185	Posted - 2015.03.16 00:06:00 - [28] - Quote I'll be blunt. No one cares about us... We're last on the list. We are the smallest, hardest group of people and no one wants something hard to learn other than us. I'm sorry. Even I'm sad myself About how our minority rights are being trashed by majority rules. Entering the void and becoming wind. Message for 1v1 air to air
Kaeru Nayiri Ready to Play 642	Posted - 2015.03.16 00:19:00 - [29] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Rakr'Dashia Rah wrote: A Python camped our spawn last night, 4 people pulled out swarms. A few Plasma Cannons, not to mention a missle turret and blaster. We all lit the thing up, it turned flew around a building and popped back out, full shields and armor and continued to destroy us. I think the guy went 20 odd/ and 4. Im not saying dropships are in a good place or they shouldnt be looked at, but give it some time. The way I see it any buff for assault dropships would make them op to infantry, technically you're not supposed to be able to kill a proto tank with an ASSAULT(lightwieght low health/ hit and run tactic) dropship. If a tank killer is what you want, wait for CCP to release heavy dropships. Not that I don't believe your story, but I don't believe it. That said, I think the balance between swarms and ADSs is fine as is, with improvements only needed for pilot target identification and acquisition (i've suggested that AV show up on pilot's HUD when they're attacking within 100m). Rattati has stated why ADSs are supposed to be able to counter tanks. Personally, I haven't had much more trouble than usual against the new tanks, but I could see some room for improvement for both rails and missiles (specifically, slightly more damage/a better RoF bonus from the Incubus and the proposed AV specific missiles, respectively). +1, I'm with Vulpes. It's not nearly as bad as the OP makes it out to be. Know what cannot be known.
Kaeru Nayiri Ready to Play 642	Posted - 2015.03.16 00:21:00 - [30] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: The problem, pokey, is that CCP is buffing and nerfing av and tanks left right and centre to achieve balance but no consideration for dropships is being put in. This leads to more bad than good since av will always increase and tanks get better, and as tanks get better nerfs will come to modules. This all affects the dropships so why aren't they being considered? Are we just a side effect? Perhaps you missed the part where Rattati said they are doing large turrets and tank hulls now, small turrets and dropships next ?? Be patient. Fanfest soon, then there will certainly be new discussions opened up to talk about the new AV small missile launcher, and dropships in general. He literally said so at the start of this tank business. Know what cannot be known.

Grimmiers 817	Posted - 2015.03.16 00:37:00 - [31] - Quote tanks and lavs having less base hp make it easy to cripple a vehicle before they can recover, or harden with a rail incubus. The small blaster has been butchered with ever change. It was most effective when there was larger splash damage and more variants where some worked better on a dropship and others on a jeep. I would even accept a mod that increases magnatism, or splash range at this point if it would make the blaster more effective at a cost. I'm hoping the actual dispersion will be a lot smaller so it's not hard to hit a target while stationary and impossible while moving.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18887	Posted - 2015.03.16 04:11:00 - [32] - Quote Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5433	Posted - 2015.03.16 04:18:00 - [33] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player This is why I still buy boosters. I don't care about the SP. I just want to fund your paycheck so I can read these kinds of posts. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 189	Posted - 2015.03.16 04:33:00 - [34] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Ratt, i wish it was that easy. We aren't at the bottom with you but with everyone else? It's just "IT FLIES? KILL IT WITH FIRE!" Imagine the uproar that comes with someone asking for a buff to ADS of any kind. Whether it be fair or not, people just don't like us. That's what I mean by our rights being trashed by the majority. If you know what i mean. So, i just think it's simply human nature to not try something (with good intentions) that's just going to attract negative attention. Some nerf swarm threads are reasonable, have good explanations, and other things of the ilk; but, there's a reason why it gets out of hand. One person comes with some pitch forks, and starts handing them out to their friends. Then, the same on the other side and BOOM. No more reason. It happens so often we just don't do it anymore, we don't want to travel down that path again to see more forks Yknow? Now that doesn't justify anything, but i hope you understand how we feel. Maybe you do, maybe you don't. I don't know, but I'll just call it how I see it. Entering the void and becoming wind. Message for 1v1 air to air
The Final Fantasy DETHDEALERS RISE of LEGION 30	Posted - 2015.03.16 04:42:00 - [35] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Not gonna lie last time we tried to explain how to balance ads with av you chose to listen to Av over actual pilots and the result now is the almost never escaping swarms that can 2~3 shot us. Well at least xeno what his face isn't here going on about how every ads is going 80/0 ! plasma bomber spotted
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2972	Posted - 2015.03.16 04:57:00 - [36] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Ratt, i wish it was that easy. We aren't at the bottom with you but with everyone else? It's just "IT FLIES? KILL IT WITH FIRE!" Imagine the uproar that comes with someone asking for a buff to ADS of any kind. Whether it be fair or not, people just don't like us. It's the nature of not willing to give on anything is why people usually don't like DS pilots, generally. They say a lot of unreasonable things, and when told so, or asking for a compromise, they do a sparky and just say, "No, you're simply wrong.". That's how it has been since day one pretty much. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3179	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:08:00 - [37] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player What about Pokey's spreadsheet suggesting LAV slot progression and my and others' numerous posts about the state of LAVs? Yet you haven't commented on LAV buffs other than "only increasing PG/CPU," which we believe won't solve their issues. Can we at least start looking toward reintroducing the variants to reward those who invest the SP and risk the ISK? Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1389	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:09:00 - [38] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. I love that this thread gets a Blue Tag while several other reasonable threads about Swarm and/or ADS balance get ignored. I especially love that the Blue Tag is essentially, "lol be quiet and do the things you've already done so in can ignore them again." Love, Bittervet. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
ReGnYuM Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 3579	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:12:00 - [39] - Quote Are Pilots really pulling the Feedback inequality card I am primarily a infantry player, and I think ADS are in a good place.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18901	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:12:00 - [40] - Quote The Final Fantasy wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Not gonna lie last time we tried to explain how to balance ads with av you chose to listen to Av over actual pilots and the result now is the almost never escaping swarms that can 2~3 shot us. Well at least xeno what his face isn't here going on about how every ads is going 80/0 You really want to bring that up as "ads pilots being the victims" . The result is actually not terribly OP dropships that still have a place in PC, and good pilots can easily go 20 KDR in pubs. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"



CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18902	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:14:00 - [41] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. I love that this thread gets a Blue Tag while several other reasonable threads about Swarm and/or ADS balance get ignored. I especially love that the Blue Tag is essentially, "lol be quiet and do the things you've already done so I can ignore them again." Love, Bittervet. I love the assumption of "ignored". Where is the consolidated ADS thread with numbers so I can feast my eyes on it? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 191	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:28:00 - [42] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Shamarskii Simon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Ratt, i wish it was that easy. We aren't at the bottom with you but with everyone else? It's just "IT FLIES? KILL IT WITH FIRE!" Imagine the uproar that comes with someone asking for a buff to ADS of any kind. Whether it be fair or not, people just don't like us. It's the nature of not willing to give on anything is why people usually don't like DS pilots, generally. They say a lot of unreasonable things, and when told so, or asking for a compromise, they do a sparky and just say, "No, you're simply wrong.". That's how it has been since day one pretty much. IDK man, some AV guys are pretty ignorant just like some ADS guys. Thankfully with respec's the ignorance per ADS is getting lower per se... but I'm not sure about the other side. But what about the reasonable? They still aren't listened to. I think it's that we feel unheard, that no one else wants us to live. It drove some into respec or simply being mad because somethings aren't resolved/fixed. Now, i can't apologize for the ignorant ones sadly... They should. But, the reasonable deserve a chance. like you've said before, "when people fight for what they love, blood, tears, or even bullets are exchanged to protect it" ^ not exact quote And simply some of us on the ADS side feel we fought so long, but are still losing. I don't know where I went with this... But it feels like I'm understanding the whole hate between the two better. Entering the void and becoming wind. Message for 1v1 air to air
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 55	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:37:00 - [43] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: The Final Fantasy wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Not gonna lie last time we tried to explain how to balance ads with av you chose to listen to Av over actual pilots and the result now is the almost never escaping swarms that can 2~3 shot us. Well at least xeno what his face isn't here going on about how every ads is going 80/0 You really want to bring that up as "ads pilots being the victims" . The result is actually not terribly OP dropships that still have a place in PC, and good pilots can easily go 20 KDR in pubs. You have to be at the top of your game w maxed skills to get a 20 KDR, and even then you'll be running from swarms most of the match waiting for your mods to cooldown. Snipe Yo Ass.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9942	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:38:00 - [44] - Quote WHAT!? You mean I can't go 9000-1 in Pubs in my Python Anymore!11?!1/1 This is an Outrage of the utmost Caliber! *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood RISE of LEGION 191	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:43:00 - [45] - Quote Alright Ratt, since I know you're here. Tell us, just what do you want us to see in the dropship? why not join in with us to solve it rather than wait for someone else. it's too vague for the numbers you are looking for per se. We all can agree on that. Maybe it's not enough for someone to transport. Too much risk for little reward. "the courage of one person can change the tide of battle" -tired... Sorry for not having coherent posts... - Entering the void and becoming wind. Message for 1v1 air to air
The Final Fantasy DETHDEALERS RISE of LEGION 32	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:51:00 - [46] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: The Final Fantasy wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Not gonna lie last time we tried to explain how to balance ads with av you chose to listen to Av over actual pilots and the result now is the almost never escaping swarms that can 2~3 shot us. Well at least xeno what his face isn't here going on about how every ads is going 80/0 You really want to bring that up as "ads pilots being the victims" . The result is actually not terribly OP dropships that still have a place in PC, and good pilots can easily go 20 KDR in pubs. Even tho you do have the data I rarely see ads on the Fields But we are victims that's why there at least like 10 topics on ads everyday, if vehicles were properly balance we wouldn't have so much nerf Av and buff vehicles threads and I get it it hard to balance vehicles but still it seems you like to favor more towards Av than vehicle ppl themself ! plasma bomber spotted
The Final Fantasy DETHDEALERS RISE of LEGION 32	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:55:00 - [47] - Quote hails8n wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: The Final Fantasy wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Not gonna lie last time we tried to explain how to balance ads with av you chose to listen to Av over actual pilots and the result now is the almost never escaping swarms that can 2~3 shot us. Well at least xeno what his face isn't here going on about how every ads is going 80/0 You really want to bring that up as "ads pilots being the victims" . The result is actually not terribly OP dropships that still have a place in PC, and good pilots can easily go 20 KDR in pubs. You have to be at the top of your game w maxed skills to get a 20 KDR, and even then you'll be running from swarms most of the match waiting for your mods to cooldown. Tbh all these 20/0 score was mostly done by the top pilots which is like what 5 ppl every one else got like 7/0 6/0 and in the mean time there's that top 4 players in the match going 22/0 ! plasma bomber spotted
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2974	Posted - 2015.03.16 06:34:00 - [48] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Shamarskii Simon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Ratt, i wish it was that easy. We aren't at the bottom with you but with everyone else? It's just "IT FLIES? KILL IT WITH FIRE!" Imagine the uproar that comes with someone asking for a buff to ADS of any kind. Whether it be fair or not, people just don't like us. It's the nature of not willing to give on anything is why people usually don't like DS pilots, generally. They say a lot of unreasonable things, and when told so, or asking for a compromise, they do a sparky and just say, "No, you're simply wrong.". That's how it has been since day one pretty much. IDK man, some AV guys are pretty ignorant just like some ADS guys. Thankfully with respec's the ignorance per ADS is getting lower per se... but I'm not sure about the other side. But what about the reasonable? They still aren't listened to. I think it's that we feel unheard, that no one else wants us to live. It drove some into respec or simply being mad because somethings aren't resolved/fixed. Now, i can't apologize for the ignorant ones sadly... They should. But, the reasonable deserve a chance. like you've said before, "when people fight for what they love, blood, tears, or even bullets are exchanged to protect it" ^ not exact quote And simply some of us on the ADS side feel we fought so long, but are still losing. I don't know where I went with this... But it feels like I'm understanding the whole hate between the two better. There has been many people that uses AV that wishes to insta gank vehicles, yes. That is irrelevant. I've seen pilots suggest things such as being able to easily crush infantry without taking damage to being able to kill a HAV in 10 seconds or less (so being able to basically fly around with a large turret). They ask for too much, and when people says no, they do this almost 1st world armchair feminist like **** where they claim they are being oppressed to get what they want. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1391	Posted - 2015.03.16 06:49:00 - [49] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I love the assumption of "ignored". Where is the consolidated ADS thread with numbers so I can feast my eyes on it? The assumption of ignored is because threads like this, which are expressing resentment, get a Dev coming in and having a go where other threads that express reasonable ideas (some are better than others and some need work, but the ideas and presentation are reasonable) get 'ignored' - maybe instead of commenting on a negative thread, you can comment on a positive thread, even if it's a simple, " I have looked at this" post. There's no big thread, that I'm aware of, but there are many related suggestions: Juno Tristan's Swarm operation changes. While not specifically an ADS thread, it is a large factor of why DS pilots so vehemently hate Swarms - that they are so incredibly simple to use while being arguably the most effective AV weapon. This thread talks about changing it such that both Swarmer and all vehicle users can use some skills in the fight. My own thread about Small Missiles and ADSs given after you asked for community proposed stats. Intended to separate AP and AT small missiles to make them less jack-of-all-trades and make the AP variant much more strafing run-y. Another of my own, about the skills involved in the ADS tree and also some work on small turret variants. Thread by Breakin Stuff asking for help with modifying DS modules and stats. Godin Thekiller's ideas about bonusing Dropships to make people want to be transported. Another quality of life change suggested by DUST Fiend. A warning system for already travelling Swarms since, again, they are the biggest offenders in V/AV non-enjoyment. An idea to increase the efficacy of teamwork in a dropship by Kaeru Nayiri. Some feedback and a conclusion from Foxhound Elite about dropship HP There are some older threads that I do not have the energy to dredge up from the depths of the forum (from now on I'll have to use my Favourites/Subscribing more aggressively) but hopefully these show you that there are many ideas that are not merely whinging and are actually contributory in respectful ways...that apparently get ignored when you're perfectly happy to come and rag on a thread like this. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7639	Posted - 2015.03.16 06:51:00 - [50] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Hang on, i really have nothing to add to the conversation, i simply find this post hilarious and amazing. Please carry on with the waaaaahmbulance ride. AV

Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2974	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:08:00 - [51] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Hang on, i really have nothing to add to the conversation, i simply find this post hilarious and amazing. Please carry on with the waaaaahmbulance ride. lel click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18908	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:14:00 - [52] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I love the assumption of "ignored". Where is the consolidated ADS thread with numbers so I can feast my eyes on it? The assumption of ignored is because threads like this, which are expressing resentment, get a Dev coming in and having a go where other threads that express reasonable ideas (some are better than others and some need work, but the ideas and presentation are reasonable) get 'ignored' - maybe instead of commenting on a negative thread, you can comment on a positive thread, even if it's a simple, " I have looked at this" post. There's no big thread, that I'm aware of, but there are many related suggestions: Juno Tristan's Swarm operation changes. While not specifically an ADS thread, it is a large factor of why DS pilots so vehemently hate Swarms - that they are so incredibly simple to use while being arguably the most effective AV weapon. This thread talks about changing it such that both Swarmer and all vehicle users can use some skills in the fight. My own thread about Small Missiles and ADSs given after you asked for community proposed stats. Intended to separate AP and AT small missiles to make them less jack-of-all-trades and make the AP variant much more strafing run-y. Another of my own, about the skills involved in the ADS tree and also some work on small turret variants. Thread by Breakin Stuff asking for help with modifying DS modules and stats. Godin Thekiller's ideas about bonusing Dropships to make people want to be transported. Another quality of life change suggested by DUST Fiend. A warning system for already travelling Swarms since, again, they are the biggest offenders in V/AV non-enjoyment. An idea to increase the efficacy of teamwork in a dropship by Kaeru Nayiri. Some feedback and a conclusion from Foxhound Elite about dropship HP There are some older threads that I do not have the energy to dredge up from the depths of the forum (from now on I'll have to use my Favourites/Subscribing more aggressively) but hopefully these show you that there are many ideas that are not merely whinging and are actually contributory in respectful ways...that apparently get ignored when you're perfectly happy to come and rag on a thread like this. Point taken to post at least once, I read every single one of these. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

CELESTA AUNGM Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation 478	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:15:00 - [53] - Quote GÇªGÇªGÇª.. GÇªGÇªGÇª. GÇªGÇªGÇª.. How many pages was the dev-thread for HAV Progression? 100+ pages? I didn't read through much of it, but I can imagine the discussion was as heated as Rattati hinted it was. I still think, right now is a little too early for individual players (ANY of us) to stand up and post "facts" about the Dropship's quality and things it deserves. It's always a bad idea to (and too easy to) fall into the impression that you're representing the views of your fellow vehicle-players. Especially when it comes to the DS. I get a feeling that, if we trace Dust 514 back far enough, we'll find that DS players (yep, I will count myself as guilty too) were the first players to get nipple-fixation over their Dust toy, and, wellGÇªum, we are guilty of letting our cocky idea of flying get in the way of: --Agreeing on some fundamentals that we like about the fitting-slots and module-stacking, which can help the devs toward creating a Progression the way they've established for HAVs. --Getting CCP a consensus set of "jobs" or functions for the DS, which had begun being debated back in 2013, but repeatedly gets derailed in a gasoline fire. --Earning much healthy social-cooperation or gameplay respect from the players who drive OTHER vehicles or who happen to do OTHER jobs in this infantry-game besides "Dropship Piloting". I personally don't think these player-authored threads will survive any better than the 2013 threadsGÇª not until Rattati starts his own official Dropship-Progression thread. And even then, pleaseGÇª. we're gonna have to swallow a LOT of humble pie amongst ourselves in order to manage a serious thread. Let the Devs handle the cpu/pg reworking, and perhaps let them handle the modules and Skilling rework too. Take a breather and lay off the AVers a bit (they aren't as big an enemy to us as we have been to ourselves). I know we've often felt ignored before,GÇª but this time finally the devs DO want to start discussing the DS; maybe let's let Rattati choose which parts they want to discuss and how. (ugh, I'm sounding like Gandhi, or something) It's just that, if HAV-Progression took 100 pages to debate, I just don't want our chance at restoring DS to end up 500+ pages and a Dev-failure due to too much of our own,GÇª.well, "pilot righteousness". Universe of good wishes for the 49, especially CCP Eterne... No story can have life without writers and publishers.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1391	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:22:00 - [54] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Point taken to post at least once, I read every single one of these. Great, and thank you. It's hard staying positive when it feels like you're being ignored. Obviously, some suggestions are better than others and some are dumb or amazing. Still, it'd be useful to know that they've been looked at at the very least. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2395	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:47:00 - [55] - Quote CELESTA AUNGM wrote: GÇªGÇªGÇª.. GÇªGÇªGÇª. GÇªGÇªGÇª.. How many pages was the dev-thread for HAV Progression? 100+ pages? I didn't read through much of it, but I can imagine the discussion was as heated as Rattati hinted it was. I still think, right now is a little too early for individual players (ANY of us) to stand up and post "facts" about the Dropship's quality and things it deserves. It's always a bad idea to (and too easy to) fall into the impression that you're representing the views of your fellow vehicle-players. Especially when it comes to the DS. I get a feeling that, if we trace Dust 514 back far enough, we'll find that DS players (yep, I will count myself as guilty too) were the first players to get nipple-fixation over their Dust toy, and, wellGÇªum, we are guilty of letting our cocky idea of flying get in the way of: --Agreeing on some fundamentals that we like about the fitting-slots and module-stacking, which can help the devs toward creating a Progression the way they've established for HAVs. --Getting CCP a consensus set of "jobs" or functions for the DS, which had begun being debated back in 2013, but repeatedly gets derailed in a gasoline fire. --Earning much healthy social-cooperation or gameplay respect from the players who drive OTHER vehicles or who happen to do OTHER jobs in this infantry-game besides "Dropship Piloting". I personally don't think these player-authored threads will survive any better than the 2013 threadsGÇª not until Rattati starts his own official Dropship-Progression thread. And even then, pleaseGÇª. we're gonna have to swallow a LOT of humble pie amongst ourselves in order to help the devs keep the thread viable. Let the Devs handle the cpu/pg reworking, and perhaps let them handle the modules and Skilling rework too. Take a breather and lay off the AVers a bit (they aren't as big an enemy to us as we have been to ourselves). I know we've often felt ignored before,GÇª but this time finally the devs DO want to start discussing the DS; maybe let's let Rattati choose which parts they want to discuss and how. (ugh, I'm sounding like Gandhi, or something) It's just that, if HAV-Progression took 100 pages to debate, I just don't want our chance at restoring DS to end up 500+ pages and a Dev-failure due to too much of our own,GÇª.well, "pilot righteousness". Some people on either side of the discussion can be real **ing idiots, and there's people who really like trying to get others worked up. That said going straight from last patch to this one I found all of my previously fit shield dropships 'broken' because of the changes to hardener CPU/pg changes. In the immediate I think giving the python +20 CPU & pg would fix some things. As far as other things I'd really like to see dumbfired single projectile but homing against vehicles @ ~40-50m swarms (imagine its a plc with no arc that shoots av grenades). Beyond that I think that the single shot dmg on rail tanks is a bit too high and I'd like to see current dmg/shot and heat halved, while RoF, mag size, and ammo are doubled. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.** I have a few alts.
Kaeru Nayiri Ready to Play 658	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:52:00 - [56] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I love the assumption of "ignored". Where is the consolidated ADS thread with numbers so I can feast my eyes on it? The assumption of ignored is because threads like this, which are expressing resentment, get a Dev coming in and having a go where other threads that express reasonable ideas (some are better than others and some need work, but the ideas and presentation are reasonable) get 'ignored' - maybe instead of commenting on a negative thread, you can comment on a positive thread, even if it's a simple, " I have looked at this" post. There's no big thread, that I'm aware of, but there are many related suggestions: Juno Tristan's Swarm operation changes. While not specifically an ADS thread, it is a large factor of why DS pilots so vehemently hate Swarms - that they are so incredibly simple to use while being arguably the most effective AV weapon. This thread talks about changing it such that both Swarmer and all vehicle users can use some skills in the fight. My own thread about Small Missiles and ADSs given after you asked for community proposed stats. Intended to separate AP and AT small missiles to make them less jack-of-all-trades and make the AP variant much more strafing run-y. Another of my own, about the skills involved in the ADS tree and also some work on small turret variants. Thread by Breakin Stuff asking for help with modifying DS modules and stats. Godin Thekiller's ideas about bonusing Dropships to make people want to be transported. Another quality of life change suggested by DUST Fiend. A warning system for already travelling Swarms since, again, they are the biggest offenders in V/AV non-enjoyment. An idea to increase the efficacy of teamwork in a dropship by Kaeru Nayiri. Some feedback and a conclusion from Foxhound Elite about dropship HP There are some older threads that I do not have the energy to dredge up from the depths of the forum (from now on I'll have to use my Favourites/Subscribing more aggressively) but hopefully these show you that there are many ideas that are not merely whinging and are actually contributory in respectful ways...that apparently get ignored when you're perfectly happy to come and rag on a thread like this. +1 Kallas so many of these have no blue tag :( Pilots, stop crying and start thinking please. We're next on the balance pass, and if you don't start being pragmatic, Rattati is going to ignore us again. I am REALLY SICK AND TIRED of good threads getting DROWNED by you people that just complain. Rattati, please necro one of the threads that Kallas posted and let's talk about them. Even a "this can't be done" is better than silence most of the time. Know what cannot be known.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5441	Posted - 2015.03.16 08:26:00 - [57] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: The problem, pokey, is that CCP is buffing and nerfing av and tanks left right and centre to achieve balance but no consideration for dropships is being put in. This leads to more bad than good since av will always increase and tanks get better, and as tanks get better nerfs will come to modules. This all affects the dropships so why aren't they being considered? Are we just a side effect? Also bear in mind that there are many of us and very few developers. We have a hell of a lot more time collectively to talk and think about this stuff and each group can focus on its own project, this is not quite as true for Rattati and company. I mean take it from me, I try to be as involved in as many projects as possible but I'm often exhausted and have to back off of what I would like to work on simply because I don't have enough hours in the day. And the thing is Rattati for certain puts in more hours than I do and has his hands in even more projects. That being said, I don't know how the guy doesn't die from sleep deprivation. I'm not defending his choice of prioritization, god knows I'm about at my wits end that Logistics have been ignored for so long despite there being extensive discussion and proposals regarding Logistics. However, it's abundantly clear to me by my own personal experience that there are simply not enough hours in the day to address everything at once, hell there's not enough time to really touch on everything in a given week, much less to do meaningful work. However what you should take away from this is that even if you feel that his priorities are wrong (and lets be honest, everyone want's to be first, that's human nature) the fact the remains that its impossible to put everyone first in line. I mean if you have an issue with the prioritization, that's totally legit, but being aggressive or accusatory will not net you the desired result. Keep in mind Rattati doesn't sleep much, so ticking him off is going to get you the finger. God knows when I'm tired everyone who fucks with me can go ** themselves instead. Now for the topic of the dropships, I don't fly them, so I can't really comment much. I can tell you however that HAVs were messed up, REALLY messed up, and they're in a lot better place right now. While you can't design in a vaccum, its also impossible to fix the entire system and everything at the same time. So like, he felt that resource cost of the shield hardener needed to be ramped up, but trust me when I say that further tweaking is going to be needed to get Armor/Shield hardeners working properly for HAVs. If Dropships need a little extra resources to temporary compensate for the Shield hardener cost? Totally legit thing to ask for, so ask for that. However since they will most likely be tweaked more once we have some more data, I don't think it would be wise to really start messing with dropships in any significant manner until we get those hardeners in a better place. If dropships need some temporary measures to cope with the changes? Sounds fine to me. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
hails8n DEATH BY DESTRUCTION 55	Posted - 2015.03.16 09:09:00 - [58] - Quote CELESTA AUNGM wrote: GÇªGÇªGÇª.. GÇªGÇªGÇª. GÇªGÇªGÇª.. How many pages was the dev-thread for HAV Progression? 100+ pages? I didn't read through much of it, but I can imagine the discussion was as heated as Rattati hinted it was. . As heated as an Alaskan hooker wo teeth. Snipe Yo Ass.
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 448	Posted - 2015.03.16 09:11:00 - [59] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player There are threads, but they tend to get ignored. Asking for an increase in CPU or PG if the change to upgrades went through In terms of posting more numbers, most of the reasonable threads don't have a problem with the swarm launcher DPS, a full proto clip to take out a non active tanked incubus is fine, the problem is with them being so difficult to evade. Serious threads are posted and again they are ignored (a 'nope', not viable would be fine) Swarms use extra Fuel to turn We need a stickied blue tag post in order to get some consolidated feedback (but i fear how quickly it could descend) ADS Ramming Revenge! Plasma Cannon Rampage
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5441	Posted - 2015.03.16 09:12:00 - [60] - Quote hails8n wrote: CELESTA AUNGM wrote: GÇªGÇªGÇª.. GÇªGÇªGÇª. GÇªGÇªGÇª.. How many pages was the dev-thread for HAV Progression? 100+ pages? I didn't read through much of it, but I can imagine the discussion was as heated as Rattati hinted it was. . As heated as an Alaskan hooker wo teeth. approximately 95% of the thread was people trying to win a screaming match. I'm not even exaggerating. Seriously most of it was garbage bickering. I still have nightmares about it. I was there. It was real. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 937	Posted - 2015.03.16 11:07:00 - [61] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: manboar thunder fist wrote: The problem, pokey, is that CCP is buffing and nerfing av and tanks left right and centre to achieve balance but no consideration for dropships is being put in. This leads to more bad than good since av will always increase and tanks get better, and as tanks get better nerfs will come to modules. This all affects the dropships so why aren't they being considered? Are we just a side effect? Also bear in mind that there are many of us and very few developers. We have a hell of a lot more time collectively to talk and think about this stuff and each group can focus on its own project, this is not quite as true for Rattati and company. I mean take it from me, I try to be as involved in as many projects as possible but I'm often exhausted and have to back off of what I would like to work on simply because I don't have enough hours in the day. And the thing is Rattati for certain puts in more hours than I do and has his hands in even more projects. That being said, I don't know how the guy doesn't die from sleep deprivation. I'm not defending his choice of prioritization, god knows I'm about at my wits end that Logistics have been ignored for so long despite there being extensive discussion and proposals regarding Logistics. However, it's abundantly clear to me by my own personal experience that there are simply not enough hours in the day to address everything at once, hell there's not enough time to really touch on everything in a given week, much less to do meaningful work. However what you should take away from this is that even if you feel that his priorities are wrong (and lets be honest, everyone want's to be first, that's human nature) the fact the remains that its impossible to put everyone first in line. I mean if you have an issue with the prioritization, that's totally legit, but being aggressive or accusatory will not net you the desired result. Keep in mind Rattati doesn't sleep much, so ticking him off is going to get you the finger. God knows when I'm tired everyone who fucks with me can go ** themselves instead. Now for the topic of the dropships, I don't fly them, so I can't really comment much. I can tell you however that HAVs were messed up, REALLY messed up, and they're in a lot better place right now. While you can't design in a vaccum, its also impossible to fix the entire system and everything at the same time. So like, he felt that resource cost of the shield hardener needed to be ramped up, but trust me when I say that further tweaking is going to be needed to get Armor/Shield hardeners working properly for HAVs. If Dropships need a little extra resources to temporary compensate for the Shield hardener cost? Totally legit thing to ask for, so ask for that. However since they will most likely be tweaked more once we have some more data, I don't think it would be wise to really start messing with dropships in any significant manner until we get those hardeners in a better place. If dropships need some temporary measures to cope with the changes? Sounds fine to me. Vulpes Dolosus wrote: What about Pokey's spreadsheet suggesting LAV slot progression and my and others' numerous posts about the state of LAVs? Yet you haven't commented on LAV buffs other than "only increasing PG/CPU," which we believe won't solve their issues. Can we at least start looking toward reintroducing the variants to reward those who invest the SP and risk the ISK? To be fair, that spreadsheet is hardly ready for Rattati digestion and I haven't really posted it up as finalized idea. While I really want LAVs to be viable and working properly, and I would love to see them working properly (they're really not working, not in Delta and certainly not in Echo) let's finish the HAVs best we can, tackle whatever rammifications the HAV rework had on Dropships, and then focus on LAVs. I think that if he wants to do a tentative increase to LAV slot layout to make fit LAVs more survivable for the time being, that's fine as long as the understanding is that it needs to have a proper pass once the HAVs and Dropships are working properly. Sadly I can't really do for Dropships so I'll keep working on HAVs and LAVs for the time being. its better to be ignored than to get attention and receive the heavy handed nerfs tanks got since... uprising 1.0 if i could go back in time and remove evil from the world... ****, stalin, CCP Blam!, apartheid, and the devil would be on my list
Miokai Zahou WarRavens 455	Posted - 2015.03.16 11:43:00 - [62] - Quote I don't really mind where the ADS is at the moment but if you could introduce a Proto hulls and Advance hulls of the ADS with increase in CPU and PG just like how you went with the HAV hulls, that would be nice. Also if you do so can you streamline all the hulls (ADS) so they have the same fitting slots just like the HAVS e.g: ADS Python: Basic/Advance/Proto: 4H/2L CPU/PG adjusted to hulls specifications and adjust pricing accordingly. As I see it this could be an option to better fix the current state that both ADS hulls have which is CPU/PG and slot layout instead of needing to full immerse into figuring out how to work around certain glaring issues such as invisible swarms (for now). I personally would be glad to fly around a proto ADS hull which I need to make considerable sacrifices to offensive capabilities to be a tankie scanner lighting up the map for my team mates to find the enemy and make quick pick ups and quick extractions in hot zones without being 'too' worried of being two hit killed by basically anything. (please not i said considerable sacrifices to offensive combat which equals to no turrets but pure defense and extraction). Lets place the same hull progression on the ADS just like the HAVs Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head. pâ+(n+ƒ-ön+ƒ)n+ë
Lady MDK Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 326	Posted - 2015.03.16 11:53:00 - [63] - Quote Game needs air unit thats a real anti ground vehicle/infantry area of denial unit... Bring in the fighter bombers ccp! Anyone getting annoyed by reading of the above post should consider the following. I don't care so neither should you :)
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 1041	Posted - 2015.03.16 12:07:00 - [64] - Quote Miokai Zahou wrote: I personally would be glad to fly around a proto ADS hull which I need to make considerable sacrifices to offensive capabilities to be a tankie scanner lighting up the map for my team mates to find the enemy and make quick pick ups and quick extractions in hot zones without being 'too' worried of being two hit killed by basically anything. (please not i said considerable sacrifices to offensive combat which equals to no turrets but pure defense and extraction). Have you considered flying a Grimsnes? ~7.5 kehp against both rails and Swarms, AB, an enhanced scanner and two adv turrets for self defense and supporting fire. Downgrade turrets to upgrade scanner. Or run a rep-fit at 310 hp/s with an AT-1 launcher, AB and a pro scanner. As for an answer to Rattati: I'll come up with suggestions featuring hard numbers next time. But I wouldn't mind some direction to take this in. Are new features a thing we can ask for? Should we focus on changing parameters? And how are we going to test our proposed changes? Every time I want to analyse swarms I have to rely on my self-written model of how swarms behave in Matlab. Very few of us are in a position to validate our ideas and put them into numbers.
Miokai Zahou WarRavens 455	Posted - 2015.03.16 12:29:00 - [65] - Quote Stefan Stahl wrote: Miokai Zahou wrote: I personally would be glad to fly around a proto ADS hull which I need to make considerable sacrifices to offensive capabilities to be a tankie scanner lighting up the map for my team mates to find the enemy and make quick pick ups and quick extractions in hot zones without being 'too' worried of being two hit killed by basically anything. (please not i said considerable sacrifices to offensive combat which equals to no turrets but pure defense and extraction). Have you considered flying a Grimsnes? ~7.5 kehp against both rails and Swarms, AB, an enhanced scanner and two adv turrets for self defense and supporting fire. Downgrade turrets to upgrade scanner. Or run a rep-fit at 310 hp/s with an AT-1 launcher, AB and a pro scanner. I have but DS are just too slow for my liking as I'm more of a speed scanner, commando squad drop off/pickup sort of guy that can do some supporting fire for the 2 man specialist team. Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head. pâ+(n+ƒ-ön+ƒ)n+ë
BAMM HAVOC Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 757	Posted - 2015.03.16 12:37:00 - [66] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Point taken to post at least once, I read every single one of these. Rat man, dude.... chill out. You work to much as it is anyways, you stress after every single "hotfix" on a forum that always toxic. Here is some free advice that you have not asked for, beer cures most things in life for everything else there is bacon. Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 *YOU TUBEZ* *BLOGZ*
G Clone Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 31	Posted - 2015.03.16 12:46:00 - [67] - Quote BAMM HAVOC wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Point taken to post at least once, I read every single one of these. Rat man, dude.... chill out. You work to much as it is anyways, you stress after every single "hotfix" on a forum that always toxic. Here is some free advice that you have not asked for, beer cures most things in life for everything else there is bacon. Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 I'd say to go sit in a sauna for a while - but I guess dogs (Rattati...) shouldn't really go to saunas due to limited amount of sweatglands (e.g. their nose). Have previously suggested the web/forum-team to have a way to mark that a Dev read(!) the thread, possible with a count of how many devs read it (or simply a semi-random number, to get people randomly excited). It really would help calming down "some people".
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2396	Posted - 2015.03.16 14:11:00 - [68] - Quote BAMM HAVOC wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Point taken to post at least once, I read every single one of these. Rat man, dude.... chill out. You work to much as it is anyways, you stress after every single "hotfix" on a forum that always toxic. Here is some free advice that you have not asked for, beer cures most things in life for everything else there is bacon. Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 Would second this, rattati does good stuff even if I don't always like it. This patch has been pretty good. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
BAMM HAVOC Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 758	Posted - 2015.03.16 15:33:00 - [69] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Rat man, dude.... chill out. Things become clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 . I'm not commenting on weather this hotfix is good or bad, I am commenting on the issue of Rat Man getting a little ... testy, after being on these forums for to long, particularly after a hotfix. So as a concerned member of the Dust514 community I am showing him the way toward enlightenment. Beer has many curative properties in this case frustration/workaholism and so on. Where as bacon is just good soul food ... And I stand by my moto/mantra/what ever it is ... Beer cures most things in life, for everything else there is Bacon. *YOU TUBEZ* *BLOGZ*
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3071	Posted - 2015.03.16 16:59:00 - [70] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: the effectiveness of anti armour av or armour modules will have to be adjusted to create balance. The answer is not to nerf everything. You don't achieve "balance" by nerfing. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff

Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3071	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:09:00 - [71] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: It's the nature of not willing to give on anything is why people usually don't like DS pilots, generally. They say a lot of unreasonable things, and when told so, or asking for a compromise, they do a sparky and just say, "No, you're simply wrong.". That's how it has been since day one pretty much. Compromise, meaning "pilots give up X, Y and Z while AV gains A and B." That's not compromise. There is no compromise with AV, it's all take take take. Breaking down points and pointing out why they're wrong and bad is not "no you're simply wrong." I explain why they're wrong, sometimes providing examples with my own experiences when needed. Then Pokey comes up with his favorite word, "anecdotal evidence," while he doesn't have any because he's never used vehicles. He asked me the greatest question ever a little while ago. "Why were tanks better in Chromosome?" That told me everything I needed to know about his "experience with vehicles." He doesn't have any. He's a spreadsheet warrior. His compromise is "I want to take away X, Y and Z from you because reasons." By the way, are you losing your own tanks to tanks with damage mods? Do you think that's fair? Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3071	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:17:00 - [72] - Quote BAMM HAVOC wrote: Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 Drinking beer for that is terrible advice. I've done some stupid things while drunk. You say some really stupid s***. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2396	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:19:00 - [73] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: BAMM HAVOC wrote: Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 Drinking beer for that is terrible advice. I've done some stupid things while drunk. You say some really stupid s*. Yeah, but you do a lot of stupid stuff when you aren't drunk, so you've hardly set the bar high for yourself as an example. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.** I have a few alts.
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3071	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:33:00 - [74] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player My answer is either an innate resistance to AV, or more base HP. If you're looking at resistance, attach it to ADS operation and make it 2% per level. For base HP: Python base HP is around 1500. Could make it around 1800, maybe 1768 or so, you guys don't come up with flat numbers, dunno why. Incubus is around 2300, could make it 2460 or so. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Spkr4theDead Red Star. 3073	Posted - 2015.03.16 19:55:00 - [75] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: BAMM HAVOC wrote: Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 Drinking beer for that is terrible advice. I've done some stupid things while drunk. You say some really stupid s***. Yeah, but you do a lot of stupid stuff when you are drunk, so you've hardly set the bar high for yourself as an example. Unless you're drunk far more often than I'd imagine. Nope. Confirming that pilot input is not, and never was, valued. - Breakin Stuff
Demandred Moores Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 40	Posted - 2015.03.16 20:06:00 - [76] - Quote Prior to this hotfix I was capable of going 20+ kills and not dying, I used a harder enhanced heavy shield extender and complex burner. Yes this fit isn't viable anymore and that sucks but I'm fully capable of flying my python with a complex booster which comes back much faster and allows me to re-engage quickly. That being said I don't feel my ads is in a good place overall. For example I wouldn't have even spec'd into it if I was a new player because of the cost of learning how to fly and the experience needed to be good at it both sp wise and actual talent. I find I can get 3+ù as many kills with my tanked viper and good gunners plus fitting a mobile cru. Progression is needed to get cheaper less effective fits in the game so people can learn. Also the end result being the proto ads vets are calling for with the 4/2 and 2/4 loadouts with reasonable restrictions on fittings so as not to tank too much but focus on regeneration and recon capabilities. I find av is in a good place as I can get away from swarms unless I'm careless or they spam too many at once in which case I'm helping the battle by keeping them from focusing on the objective. I suggest balancing tiers of ads around the av as apposed to any further changes to av. I would throw out numbers but I'm on my phone and hungover so please forgive any mistakes in grammar or spelling as that's not what we're here to talk about.
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2977	Posted - 2015.03.16 21:17:00 - [77] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I love the assumption of "ignored". Where is the consolidated ADS thread with numbers so I can feast my eyes on it? The assumption of ignored is because threads like this, which are expressing resentment, get a Dev coming in and having a go where other threads that express reasonable ideas (some are better than others and some need work, but the ideas and presentation are reasonable) get 'ignored' - maybe instead of commenting on a negative thread, you can comment on a positive thread, even if it's a simple, " I have looked at this" post. There's no big thread, that I'm aware of, but there are many related suggestions: Juno Tristan's Swarm operation changes. While not specifically an ADS thread, it is a large factor of why DS pilots so vehemently hate Swarms - that they are so incredibly simple to use while being arguably the most effective AV weapon. This thread talks about changing it such that both Swarmer and all vehicle users can use some skills in the fight. My own thread about Small Missiles and ADSs given after you asked for community proposed stats. Intended to separate AP and AT small missiles to make them less jack-of-all-trades and make the AP variant much more strafing run-y. Another of my own, about the skills involved in the ADS tree and also some work on small turret variants. Thread by Breakin Stuff asking for help with modifying DS modules and stats. Godin Thekiller's ideas about bonusing Dropships to make people want to be transported. Another quality of life change suggested by DUST Fiend. A warning system for already travelling Swarms since, again, they are the biggest offenders in V/AV non-enjoyment. An idea to increase the efficacy of teamwork in a dropship by Kaeru Nayiri. Some feedback and a conclusion from Foxhound Elite about dropship HP There are some older threads that I do not have the energy to dredge up from the depths of the forum (from now on I'll have to use my Favourites/Subscribing more aggressively) but hopefully these show you that there are many ideas that are not merely whinging and are actually contributory in respectful ways...that apparently get ignored when you're perfectly happy to come and rag on a thread like this. Point taken to post at least once, I read every single one of these. What did you think of them? click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2979	Posted - 2015.03.16 21:53:00 - [78] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: It's the nature of not willing to give on anything is why people usually don't like DS pilots, generally. They say a lot of unreasonable things, and when told so, or asking for a compromise, they do a sparky and just say, "No, you're simply wrong.". That's how it has been since day one pretty much. Compromise, meaning "pilots give up X, Y and Z while AV gains A and B." That's not compromise. There is no compromise with AV, it's all take take take. Breaking down points and pointing out why they're wrong and bad is not "no you're simply wrong." I explain why they're wrong, sometimes providing examples with my own experiences when needed. Then Pokey comes up with his favorite word, "anecdotal evidence," while he doesn't have any because he's never used vehicles. He asked me the greatest question ever a little while ago. "Why were tanks better in Chromosome?" That told me everything I needed to know about his "experience with vehicles." He doesn't have any. He's a spreadsheet warrior. His compromise is "I want to take away X, Y and Z from you because reasons." By the way, are you losing your own tanks to tanks with damage mods? Do you think that's fair? I wasn't actually talking about you, but you've been on record for saying that you're unwilling to change your mind about anything. Regardless of the said change, that's silly. I've seriously seen you simply say "You're wrong" several times, or berating people for not being a pilot, when they actually have experience in using vehicles, not enough to be a pilot of course, but well enough to understand them. Master Splinter is getting better at balancing as well. Yes, he has made mistakes, everyone does. He's trying to listen well however, and is listening to us more and more. Telling someone " You haven't done ** for us, ** off" doesn't help either. And yes, saying "There was one time in which I was easily killed by X" is anecdotal evidence. Over time it is more solid, even more so if multiple people in isolated incidents are seeing similar things. It's pretty much a process of making theories for balancing the game. Oh, and btw, Pokey has actually used vehicles. I can confirm that. Yes, he hasn't. He stated such. That's why he went so far as to skill for it on his own personal characters (Well, we think he did), and talked to pilots of all kinds, and AV people. He wanted to know how they worked from all angles. Which is fine, but he needs to, and as far as I see, is trying to understand that simply adjusting numbers on a spreadsheet and saying okay is now enough, but testing the numbers and having a period of field testing (which is currently happening) as well to get the best possible solutions. I think a HAV fitted with damage mods is fine. I think someone fitting a pre echo particle cannon/XT with two damage mods is a scrublord. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Denchlad 7 Negative-Feedback. 1830	Posted - 2015.03.16 22:44:00 - [79] - Quote I think the real issue is none of us really know how to balance Dropships. Numbers, yeah, we could probably establish that. But with the issues every pilot has with Swarms, I highly doubt it would work. I think we need to modify Swarms so that they make us pilots rage less but are still effective. Then, potential balance changes. "Dench stop hitting your head you Caldari pinball" - m621 zma Currently on Dust hiatus.
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 8601	Posted - 2015.03.16 22:58:00 - [80] - Quote Spkr4theDead wrote: BAMM HAVOC wrote: Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 Drinking beer for that is terrible advice. I've done some stupid things while drunk. You say some really stupid s***. I can't even imagine what that would sound like coming from you... Are you drunk when you post on the forums? I need a point of reference here. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5463	Posted - 2015.03.16 23:32:00 - [81] - Quote Denchlad 7 wrote: I think the real issue is none of us really know how to balance Dropships. Numbers, yeah, we could probably establish that. But with the issues every pilot has with Swarms, I highly doubt it would work. I think we need to modify Swarms so that they make us pilots rage less but are still effective. Then, potential balance changes. The issue being of course is that Swarms are still the only reliable Anti-Dropship Light Weapon, so if those are fundamentally flawed, its going to be impossible to balance dropships around AV. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9164	Posted - 2015.03.16 23:43:00 - [82] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Shamarskii Simon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Ratt, i wish it was that easy. We aren't at the bottom with you but with everyone else? It's just "IT FLIES? KILL IT WITH FIRE!" Imagine the uproar that comes with someone asking for a buff to ADS of any kind. Whether it be fair or not, people just don't like us. It's the nature of not willing to give on anything is why people usually don't like DS pilots, generally. They say a lot of unreasonable things, and when told so, or asking for a compromise, they do a sparky and just say, "No, you're simply wrong.". That's how it has been since day one pretty much. IDK man, some AV guys are pretty ignorant just like some ADS guys. Thankfully with respec's the ignorance per ADS is getting lower per se... but I'm not sure about the other side. But what about the reasonable? They still aren't listened to. I think it's that we feel unheard, that no one else wants us to live. It drove some into respec or simply being mad because somethings aren't resolved/fixed. Now, i can't apologize for the ignorant ones sadly... They should. But, the reasonable deserve a chance. like you've said before, "when people fight for what they love, blood, tears, or even bullets are exchanged to protect it" ^ not exact quote And simply some of us on the ADS side feel we fought so long, but are still losing. I don't know where I went with this... But it feels like I'm understanding the whole hate between the two better. Speaking as someone who used a Plasma Cannon for AV up until probably Hotfix Charlie, I'm pretty sure all of my arguments against the ADS were completely sound and logical as opposed to uhh... 'ignorant'... Not saying anything about you or what you're saying, just defending my arguments =P Just saying, there's a reason I switched over to Swarm Launchers. There's also a reason I stopped throwing out my opinions in AV vs Vehicle threads (literally no-one on the Vehicle side cared to listen to the woes of a PLC user). Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
BAMM HAVOC Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 762	Posted - 2015.03.17 01:18:00 - [83] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: BAMM HAVOC wrote: Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 Drinking beer for that is terrible advice. I've done some stupid things while drunk. You say some really stupid s*. I can't even imagine what that would sound like coming from you... Are you drunk when you post on the forums? I need a point of reference here. I am always drunk when I post on these forums, yes. It helps ... YOU TUBEZ BLOGZ**
Night 5talker 514 Dead Man's Game RUST415 364	Posted - 2015.03.17 08:17:00 - [84] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: The recent changes to AV, tanks and how the game performs in a fight have all drastically affected the usage and effectiveness of dropships in combat. This thread has been created to help CCP understand the current situation and facilitate them in making the right decisions in dropship changes for the future. A brief overview: With tanks becoming a lot stronger recently it is currently difficult to combat a tank using a dropship, add to this the prolific increase in av usage to deal with tank spam this leaves dropships in a vulnerable position. The major problem I foresee is an increase in av effectiveness or changes to vehicle balance that affect the dropship without being intended. For example, since madrugar are once again the tank of choice the effectiveness of anti armour av or armour modules will have to be adjusted to create balance. However, no changes were made to the incubus (no slots, ehp etc) to put it on par as a competitor in the vehicle field. This means that if people can take out highly ranked madrugars, they will have no problem taking out incubi. The shield tanks were also recently nerfed, this included an increase to shield hardener fitting cost. This has impacted the Python and has made Python fits weaker as no fitting increase was given to the Python. Right now dropships are being largely ignored, and having spoken to many ads pilots there is a widespread consensus that since dropship pilots are a minority in the game their views are being ignored. This is also perhaps because Judge Rhadamanthus has brought little change to the effectiveness of dropships, despite being a perfectly vocal advocate for the dropship community. I have considered many options and really, it comes down to two. 1. Dropship tiers Just as the hav has tiering, the dropship should be given basic, advanced and proto variants. The Python should have a 4/2 like the gunnlogi and the incubus a 3/4 like the madrugar. This would add a lot more variety to dropship fitting styles and especially allow the usage of subsystem modules such as scanners, heat sinks and dispersion reduction modules without the need to create a fit that has no survivability, or indeed, viability. 2. Skill increase In order to compensate for the jump in HAV effectiveness I propose the dropships be given increased bonuses. In my opinion the Python should have an overall 30% fire rate increase skill, doubling the effectiveness of the current skill and allowing it to be worth investing in. The incubus cannot be given a fire rate bonus due to the rapid fire nature of railguns, therefore I propose the creation of two separate incubus skills: one with 50% dispersion reduction and another with 30% heat reduction. these bonuses would definitely bring the small blaster and rails back into the field without definitively making them overpowered. On the note of turret balance: From numerous attempts I have gathered experience which points to three conclusions: 1. Armour tanks cannot be destroyed by pythons as they can outrep and out harden them indefinitely. 2. Shield tanks cannot be destroyed by incubi because they have enough hardening and shield hp to combat. 3. Small blaster turrets are completely useless. Solutions: 1. We really need the anti HAV missile which should have little splash damage but greatly increased direct damage. This will create balance as tank users won't be invincible to dropships as they currently are. 2. The damage of small rails vs HAVs specifically needs to be tweaked, this could be done through the heat reduction skill 3. Small blasters require greater bullet magnetism and much reduced dispersion, any sort of dispersion change needs to be carefully considered. The recent inverse dispersion change is not effective as the gunner/pilot constantly needs to burst fire to adjust for target position, I propose the opposite, the blaster becomes like a mini gun, almost like the assault HMG but with greater effectiveness towards infantry. The assault hmg was really what a mini blaster turret should be like. I therefore propose the assault HMGs firing style with a 150 m range, significantly reduced dispersion and the current fire rate. All these ideas are obviously debatable but I would remind you to keep the discussion civil and topic focused. Regards. I don't think I could physically agree with you any more. my fits haven't taken too much of a hit as I have max'd out the vehicle upgrades tree essentially. Only thing I've had to do on one fit is to drop a second complex hardner to enhanced. I love the ideas for the incubi. I think that 150m range though may be a little bit much, but I've not been dropshipping long, so perhaps I am missing something there? Nice post! As both an infantryman and dropship pilot I think these would be adequate changes. CCP, please think about this perhaps for Update Foxtrot Gaming Freek DUST 514 YouTube Channel
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5470	Posted - 2015.03.17 08:38:00 - [85] - Quote BAMM HAVOC wrote: One Eyed King wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: BAMM HAVOC wrote: Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 Drinking beer for that is terrible advice. I've done some stupid things while drunk. You say some really stupid s*. I can't even imagine what that would sound like coming from you... Are you drunk when you post on the forums? I need a point of reference here. I am always drunk when I post on these forums, yes. It helps ... The bacon is important too. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7643	Posted - 2015.03.17 09:58:00 - [86] - Quote manboar thunder fist wrote: The recent changes to AV, just going to throw this out there... WHAT Changes to AV have affected dropships? The only thing that has changed is the AV nade count. Not trolling when I say if that has seriously affected the utility of dropships, there's a pilot error problem. Because there has been no other change to AV. So your thesis statement confuses me. AV
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7643	Posted - 2015.03.17 10:02:00 - [87] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player The shield hardener cost really messed up a lot of dropship fittings. Can dropship resources please be adjusted to allow pilots to utilize their standard fittings please? God help us all when I'm the one who has to do the right thing rather than trying to cuss out the guy who has the power to delete dropship classes from the game. AV
BAMM HAVOC Carbon 7 Iron Oxide. 763	Posted - 2015.03.17 12:13:00 - [88] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: BAMM HAVOC wrote: One Eyed King wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: BAMM HAVOC wrote: Things start becoming clearer after 6 or 7 pints. o7 Drinking beer for that is terrible advice. I've done some stupid things while drunk. You say some really stupid s*. I can't even imagine what that would sound like coming from you... Are you drunk when you post on the forums? I need a point of reference here. I am always drunk when I post on these forums, yes. It helps ... The bacon is important too. Amen to that brother o7 YOU TUBEZ BLOGZ**
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 1057	Posted - 2015.03.17 13:49:00 - [89] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: The shield hardener cost really messed up a lot of dropship fittings. Can dropship resources please be adjusted to allow pilots to utilize their standard fittings please? I think what Rattati meant with his post were suggestions in the form of: "Shield hardener fitting requirements were increased. This caused an unintended nerf of shield DS. I suggest the following changes: - Buff Python CPU/PG to 806,5/838 (compensates for one pro shield hardener after shield fitting optimization 5) - Buff Myron CPU/PG to 781,5/828 (compensates for one pro shield hardener after shield fitting optimization 5) - Don't buff Viper (std shield hardener weren't modified)"
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2405	Posted - 2015.03.17 14:35:00 - [90] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: manboar thunder fist wrote: The recent changes to AV, just going to throw this out there... WHAT Changes to AV have affected dropships? The only thing that has changed is the AV nade count. Not trolling when I say if that has seriously affected the utility of dropships, there's a pilot error problem. Because there has been no other change to AV. So your thesis statement confuses me. Well there's been changes to hardeners, so obviously that's an AV buff!!!.... Oh and PLC's got stronger too! I also don't understand the thesis statement. I have had a lot of my fits invalidated though by the changes to resource costs and prior to this patch it was practically impossible to use dropships anyways due to how powerful swarms were. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7651	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:32:00 - [91] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: manboar thunder fist wrote: The recent changes to AV, just going to throw this out there... WHAT Changes to AV have affected dropships? The only thing that has changed is the AV nade count. Not trolling when I say if that has seriously affected the utility of dropships, there's a pilot error problem. Because there has been no other change to AV. So your thesis statement confuses me. Well there's been changes to hardeners, so obviously that's an AV buff!!!.... Oh and PLC's got stronger too! I also don't understand the thesis statement. I have had a lot of my fits invalidated though by the changes to resource costs and prior to this patch it was practically impossible to use dropships anyways due to how powerful swarms were. Considering how often that the PLC is effective against dropships it's hard to remember they exist in the context of the topic. AV
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK 3236	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:39:00 - [92] - Quote Rakr'Dashia Rah wrote: A Python camped our spawn last night, 4 people pulled out swarms. A few Plasma Cannons, not to mention a missle turret and blaster. We all lit the thing up, it turned flew around a building and popped back out, full shields and armor and continued to destroy us. I think the guy went 20 odd/ and 4. Im not saying dropships are in a good place or they shouldnt be looked at, but give it some time. The way I see it any buff for assault dropships would make them op to infantry, technically you're not supposed to be able to kill a proto tank with an ASSAULT(lightwieght low health/ hit and run tactic) dropship. If a tank killer is what you want, wait for CCP to release heavy dropships. Impossible! One shot from a PLC user will make a python GTFO or pull range. Even a standard PLC is dealing substantial shield damage right now. I don't use the python often but I know from past experience that around 3k shields give or take is what most have. One shot of the PLC is nearly half that, hit them in the sweet spot on their thrusters and its even more damage (Before hardeners of course, if they even fit them now?) On top of that you say you had 4 people firing with swarms, a missile turret and blaster........ that's enough damage to kill it outright on the first salvo isnt it!? lol Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? SCV Ready!
wiseguy12 Y.A.M.A.H 102	Posted - 2015.03.17 20:47:00 - [93] - Quote I suggest a whole new variant of modules that only affect drop ships. They'll have the old module fittings with current performance. Pro Caldari assault and Amarr sentinel. Proto SMG, sniper, HMG, Scrambler and Assault Rifle Onuoto Uakan
Velvet Overkill SI6MA Learning Alliance 142	Posted - 2015.03.17 21:23:00 - [94] - Quote I have a new thread about DS vs AV. Using this account until The-Errorist is unbanned on April 10th.
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2984	Posted - 2015.03.17 22:04:00 - [95] - Quote Denchlad 7 wrote: I think the real issue is none of us really know how to balance Dropships. Numbers, yeah, we could probably establish that. But with the issues every pilot has with Swarms, I highly doubt it would work. I think we need to modify Swarms so that they make us pilots rage less but are still effective. Then, potential balance changes. Make them faster, but turn slower. Then they can be dodgable, and can crash into **** easier, not hit dime turns. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2984	Posted - 2015.03.17 22:07:00 - [96] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: manboar thunder fist wrote: The recent changes to AV, just going to throw this out there... WHAT Changes to AV have affected dropships? The only thing that has changed is the AV nade count. Not trolling when I say if that has seriously affected the utility of dropships, there's a pilot error problem. Because there has been no other change to AV. So your thesis statement confuses me. Well there's been changes to hardeners, so obviously that's an AV buff!!!.... Oh and PLC's got stronger too! I also don't understand the thesis statement. I have had a lot of my fits invalidated though by the changes to resource costs and prior to this patch it was practically impossible to use dropships anyways due to how powerful swarms were. Considering how often that the PLC is effective against dropships it's hard to remember they exist in the context of the topic. I actually had a moment earlier, where several PLC's were shot at me like RPG's in some military flick. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1410	Posted - 2015.03.17 22:12:00 - [97] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: I actually had a moment earlier, where several PLC's were shot at me like RPG's in some military flick. GalComs can put up a worrisome flak field, but PLCs are just bad at AA duty. Projectile speed plus drop makes it hard to nail such a mobile target. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Francois Sanchez Prima Gallicus 343	Posted - 2015.03.17 22:27:00 - [98] - Quote I'd like you guys to check this and tell me what you think : https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=196627&find=unread
a brackers Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 94	Posted - 2015.03.17 22:45:00 - [99] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. I love that this thread gets a Blue Tag while several other reasonable threads about Swarm and/or ADS balance get ignored. I especially love that the Blue Tag is essentially, "lol be quiet and do the things you've already done so I can ignore them again." Love, Bittervet. I love the assumption of "ignored". Where is the consolidated ADS thread with numbers so I can feast my eyes on it? I've created a large post with lots of numbers where I did exactly what CCP did for tanks to all types of dropships (looked at how much pg and cpu each bit of equipment uses and based the pg and cpu values off them) It is right here Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter
Skybladev2 LUX AETERNA INT RUST415 174	Posted - 2015.03.18 12:37:00 - [100] - Quote I always wonder how devs tell about Vehicles and AV weapons balancing meaning only tanks and leaving behind Dropships and LAVs. And every time they pass one part of the equation they seem to ignore other parts. As a reminder: 1. HAV vs HAV can not be balanced without HAV vs DS and HAV vs LAV as well. 2. Vehicle vs AV means HAV + DS + LAV. Not HAV vs AV. Not DS vs AV. Not LAV vs AV. 3. Vehicle vs Vehicle can not be balanced without Vehicle vs Infantry (this means turrets balance mostly). 4. Mixed AV weapons (Plasma Cannon, Forgeguns) must be balanced against Infantry + Vehicles = Infantry + HAV + LAV + DS. Not Infantry + HAV. Not HAV + LAV. All 4 types of targets. <[^_^]>

Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1941	Posted - 2015.03.18 12:56:00 - [101] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: The Final Fantasy wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Not gonna lie last time we tried to explain how to balance ads with av you chose to listen to Av over actual pilots and the result now is the almost never escaping swarms that can 2~3 shot us. Well at least xeno what his face isn't here going on about how every ads is going 80/0 You really want to bring that up as "ads pilots being the victims" . The result is actually not terribly OP dropships that still have a place in PC, and good pilots can easily go 20 KDR in pubs. I can have a 50/0 KD/R in pubs too when playing noobs. What you fail to realize is that we only pull out ADS when there is no threat. It's just like when people pull out officer gear in pubs because there is no threat. I can easily go 30+ Kills in a match with 20+ KDR in a 50k isk Amarr Assault whereas trying to get even 20 kills in an ADS and not even dying once can only be achieved when playing incompetent players. Not to mention, I can die 7 times in my ADV suit compared to once in my ADS. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
Greiv Rabbah M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command 266	Posted - 2015.03.18 19:02:00 - [102] - Quote CELESTA AUNGM wrote: GÇªGÇªGÇª.. GÇªGÇªGÇª. GÇªGÇªGÇª.. How many pages was the dev-thread for HAV Progression? 100+ pages? I didn't read through much of it, but I can imagine the discussion was as heated as Rattati hinted it was. I still think, right now is a little too early for individual players (ANY of us) to stand up and post "facts" about the Dropship's quality and things it deserves. It's always a bad idea to (and too easy to) fall into the impression that you're representing the views of your fellow vehicle-players. Especially when it comes to the DS. I get a feeling that, if we trace Dust 514 back far enough, we'll find that DS players (yep, I will count myself as guilty too) were the first players to get nipple-fixation over their Dust toy, and, wellGÇªum, we are guilty of letting our cocky idea of flying get in the way of: --Agreeing on some fundamentals that we like about the fitting-slots and module-stacking, which can help the devs toward creating a Progression the way they've established for HAVs. --Getting CCP a consensus set of "jobs" or functions for the DS, which had begun being debated back in 2013, but repeatedly gets derailed in a gasoline fire. Hey --Earning much healthy social-cooperation or gameplay respect from the players who drive OTHER vehicles or who happen to do OTHER jobs in this infantry-game besides "Dropship Piloting". I personally don't think these player-authored threads will survive any better than the 2013 threadsGÇª not until Rattati starts his own official Dropship-Progression thread. And even then, pleaseGÇª. we're gonna have to swallow a LOT of humble pie amongst ourselves in order to help the devs keep the thread viable. Let the Devs handle the cpu/pg reworking, and perhaps let them handle the modules and Skilling rework too. Take a breather and lay off the AVers a bit (they aren't as big an enemy to us as we have been to ourselves). I know we've often felt ignored before,GÇª but this time finally the devs DO want to start discussing the DS; maybe let's let Rattati choose which parts they want to discuss and how. (ugh, I'm sounding like Gandhi, or something) It's just that, if HAV-Progression took 100 pages to debate, I just don't want our chance at restoring DS to end up 500+ pages and a Dev-failure due to too much of our own,GÇª.well, "pilot righteousness". This is an incredibly well put post. The last time drop ship pilots came together and agreed on something, they kept the ads from getting removed from the game. None of the other pilots managed to do the same and more vehicles got taken out than what was announced. Now for over a year we've had practically no vehicle variation while ads pilots kept their ships, bickering and crying all the way. If pilots come together and form a united consensus about whats needed for dropship piloting, everyone can get their way. Its been proven already so get with the program here Sebiestor scout, MTAC pilot, Merc w/ a face
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1418	Posted - 2015.03.18 19:05:00 - [103] - Quote Greiv, maybe you missed the rash of vehicle and specifically dropship related threads that have popped up over the last few days Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2987	Posted - 2015.03.19 01:20:00 - [104] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I actually had a moment earlier, where several PLC's were shot at me like RPG's in some military flick. GalComs can put up a worrisome flak field, but PLCs are just bad at AA duty. Projectile speed plus drop makes it hard to nail such a mobile target. Obvious, but 1: It was still badass 2: Flak fields are scary. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2987	Posted - 2015.03.19 01:21:00 - [105] - Quote Skybladev2 wrote: I always wonder how devs tell about Vehicles and AV weapons balancing meaning only tanks and leaving behind Dropships and LAVs. And every time they pass one part of the equation they seem to ignore other parts. As a reminder: 1. HAV vs HAV can not be balanced without HAV vs DS and HAV vs LAV as well. 2. Vehicle vs AV means HAV + DS + LAV. Not HAV vs AV. Not DS vs AV. Not LAV vs AV. 3. Vehicle vs Vehicle can not be balanced without Vehicle vs Infantry (this means turrets balance mostly). 4. Mixed AV weapons (Plasma Cannon, Forgeguns) must be balanced against Infantry + Vehicles = Infantry + HAV + LAV + DS. Not Infantry + HAV. Not HAV + LAV. All 4 types of targets. So basically what I've been everything: Everything should be balanced against everything. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars 293	Posted - 2015.03.19 01:47:00 - [106] - Quote I got a alt that has assault dropships. I noticed that every time I tried to aim down with the Assault Drop ship, the camera cursor/aim reticle would automatically push itself up again. This made it very hard to aim and defend myself with my front missile turret against other vehicles and infantry. I find the feature of the camera auto centering constantly to the horizontal plane very irritating. Please remove/disable that camera feature to help ADS pilots use there vehicles to there highest potential. In summary, I would like my Assault dropships 3rd person camera to stay still without user input (after I have adjusted the cursor position downward by a certain amount) and not 'autonomously move' up until it is parallel to the horizontal axis with reference to the map.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1426	Posted - 2015.03.19 09:13:00 - [107] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I actually had a moment earlier, where several PLC's were shot at me like RPG's in some military flick. GalComs can put up a worrisome flak field, but PLCs are just bad at AA duty. Projectile speed plus drop makes it hard to nail such a mobile target. Obvious, but 1: It was still badass 2: Flak fields are scary. As it like this? https://scifiinterfaces.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/vlcsnap-2014-12-09-21h15m14s193.png?w=545&h=307 Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7662	Posted - 2015.03.19 09:59:00 - [108] - Quote Let's be blunt. AV is going to need to be adjusted to deal with HAVs (excluding swarm launchers). This is a simple fact. This means in turn that dropships will need to be adjusted so they do not become relegated to the scrap heap. This is another simple fact. If the discussion can remain civil (something woefully lacking in the past, on all sides) we might actually get some progress. Generally the argument sticking point is that certain pilots want to have the EHP of an HAV and civility usually takes a sharp turn for the worse. But buffs can include things like intuitive controls and better shooting mechanics. If you can actually reliably land shots on a forge sent, you can kill him faster than he can kill you. But the problems with dropships are vastly more involved than simple EHP. Most of the problems result from poor fitting, which has been acknowledged in multiple places and clunky controls which are the opposite of intuitive. Yes I realize some pilots can be amazing maneuvering. But there needs to be simpler control options for beginners. A "novice" mode as it were. There needs to be more reliable shooting mechanics. It's too easy to have someone in a sentinel suit avoid fire when you are RIGHT ON TOP OF HIM. I'm also of the opinion that collision damage should be set to zero while shields are online. Armor on armor impact only For collisions. Not because I think crashes are unfair. But because shield dropships explode when a five year old flings a ffistful of gravel at them even when they take a damn railgun shot to the face and keeps going. There's a lot of options for fixing dropships and keeping them viable even with buffed AV in play. I am More than happy to offer suggestions and do math to assist. The more constructive you guys are the more I'm interested in helping. The more righteous outrage I have to deal with the more interested I am in outright antagonism. AV
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1428	Posted - 2015.03.19 12:07:00 - [109] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: But buffs can include things like intuitive controls and better shooting mechanics. If you can actually reliably land shots on a forge sent, you can kill him faster than he can kill you. But the problems with dropships are vastly more involved than simple EHP. Most of the problems result from poor fitting, which has been acknowledged in multiple places and clunky controls which are the opposite of intuitive. While I agree with almost everything, I have to point out that nonnumerical changes are incredibly hard to express, interpret and provide feedback on. We, the players, don't see the mechanics and inner workings of the game and thus cannot necessarily provide informed input and even if we could, there's so much involved with movement and mechanics that certain changes might just not help. It's one of those grey areas where we just can't help CCP as much as anyone might want to. At the same time, and no slight intended towards Rattati, but we need him to get in a ship and fly. Quite frankly, it's almost impossible to fully understand how the game plays as a pilot unless you fly. Essentially, we need the guy driving the actual changes to understand what he's talking about because numbers dont fully express pilot experience since flying is so vastly different to ground play (even vehicle ground play.) Not trying to disassemble your point, I'm perfectly happy to help and try and contribute, but I felt that it was necessary to point out how incredibly different flying is and how the mechanics involved are opaque, compared to simple number tweaking of HP/Damage. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7667	Posted - 2015.03.19 12:14:00 - [110] - Quote I actually have an idea. Remember I fight dropships routinely. I don't feel under threat by them (even ADS) routinely. A close quarter duel between my calsent and MrShooter01 while he had me dead to rights resulted in me kicking his ass even though he could drop the six proto missile splashes to kill me much faster than I can charge and fire three forge shots To drop him. I still only got hit twice. This is hardly an uncommon occurrence. Plus whenever I fly them I crash. AV

Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 930	Posted - 2015.03.19 12:32:00 - [111] - Quote WeapondigitX V7 wrote: I got a alt that has assault dropships. I noticed that every time I tried to aim down with the Assault Drop ship, the camera cursor/aim reticle would automatically push itself up again. This made it very hard to aim and defend myself with my front missile turret against other vehicles and infantry. I find the feature of the camera auto centering constantly to the horizontal plane very irritating. Please remove/disable that camera feature to help ADS pilots use there vehicles to there highest potential. In summary, I would like my Assault dropships 3rd person camera to stay still without user input (after I have adjusted the cursor position downward by a certain amount) and not 'autonomously move' up until it is parallel to the horizontal axis with reference to the map. Oh god no... No camera tweaks... We've had that mess before. Time and time again you'd load up a patch just to find the camera in some new awkward position. I vote we leave the camera alone... Better the evil you know.
Balistyc Farshot The Exemplars 106	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:31:00 - [112] - Quote I can't find the thread, but the best ADS fix I saw was removing the pilot's ability to fire at all and make a gunner seat that fires the nose turret. Then the ADS is not a cobra helicopter but instead a black hawk which needs a second gunner to really leverage the flying platforms. Then all the additions and buffs can be added because it is in the spirit of a cooperative vehicle. I think the thread got down to creating the only ADS weapon as wing mounted swarms for AV. Everything else was up to the crew. This could be applied to tanks as well. The driver does not fire the main cannon in that situation, it is the main gunner and you can even make the skills of the gunner add to the vehicle performance (In the Tanks Dev Thread). Then being a pilot is being a pilot. You are here to fly or drive. Don't expect to be a one man killing machine inside your vehicle. Even an LAV can't drive and shoot without help, so why not apply the same mechanic to tanks and ADS? Now to start shotgunning and REing again, everyone will love this play style. Face Palm!
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7669	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:36:00 - [113] - Quote Balistyc Farshot wrote: I can't find the thread, but the best ADS fix I saw was removing the pilot's ability to fire at all and make a gunner seat that fires the nose turret. Then the ADS is not a cobra helicopter but instead a black hawk which needs a second gunner to really leverage the flying platforms. Then all the additions and buffs can be added because it is in the spirit of a cooperative vehicle. I think the thread got down to creating the only ADS weapon as wing mounted swarms for AV. Everything else was up to the crew. This could be applied to tanks as well. The driver does not fire the main cannon in that situation, it is the main gunner and you can even make the skills of the gunner add to the vehicle performance (In the Tanks Dev Thread). Then being a pilot is being a pilot. You are here to fly or drive. Don't expect to be a one man killing machine inside your vehicle. Even an LAV can't drive and shoot without help, so why not apply the same mechanic to tanks and ADS? I have issue with this solution for the same reason I object to it for tanks. The entire financial burden for the vehicle rests upon the pilot. Yet he must be dependent upon someone else to operate his equipment and not be a dumbass. Or to at least have the courtesy of having skilled appropriately. This is asking a lot, to the point of being unreasonable. AV
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1429	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:40:00 - [114] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: I have issue with this solution for the same reason I object to it for tanks. The entire financial burden for the vehicle rests upon the pilot. Yet he must be dependent upon someone else to operate his equipment and not be a dumbass. Or to at least have the courtesy of having skilled appropriately. This is asking a lot, to the point of being unreasonable. Agreed. That said, I would love to see a variant that worked that way for both HAVs and DSs! Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 935	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:48:00 - [115] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: I have issue with this solution for the same reason I object to it for tanks. The entire financial burden for the vehicle rests upon the pilot. Yet he must be dependent upon someone else to operate his equipment and not be a dumbass. Or to at least have the courtesy of having skilled appropriately. This is asking a lot, to the point of being unreasonable. Agreed. That said, I would love to see a variant that worked that way for both HAVs and DSs! This ^ ^ A vehicle designed to require 2 people to operate, would surely be allowed the survivability to require 2 people to take it out with AV. A lot of people wanted that & currently if you are screwing around with a co-gunner, your fit is totally gimped.
Maiden selena MORTIMOR Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 337	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:52:00 - [116] - Quote Shamarskii Simon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Ratt, i wish it was that easy. We aren't at the bottom with you but with everyone else? It's just "IT FLIES? KILL IT WITH FIRE!" Imagine the uproar that comes with someone asking for a buff to ADS of any kind. Whether it be fair or not, people just don't like us. That's what I mean by our rights being trashed by the majority. If you know what i mean. So, i just think it's simply human nature to not try something (with good intentions) that's just going to attract negative attention. Some nerf swarm threads are reasonable, have good explanations, and other things of the ilk; but, there's a reason why it gets out of hand. One person comes with some pitch forks, and starts handing them out to their friends. Then, the same on the other side and BOOM. No more reason. It happens so often we just don't do it anymore, we don't want to travel down that path again to see more forks Yknow? Now that doesn't justify anything, but i hope you understand how we feel. Maybe you do, maybe you don't. I don't know, but I'll just call it how I see it. Minmando av here ..Both style dropships got incredibly weak with the patch any drop ship that comes close to my minmando swarms dies. ..it's a problem someone propose changes for them to Rattati that brings them back as atm they are swatted out of the skies like a fly I don't fly so I could say what's wrong but from an av perspective durp ships are weak no im not a mortedeamor alt..im her slave When my master is banned I represent her wishes and that of the Mortimor famil
Maiden selena MORTIMOR Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 337	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:54:00 - [117] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: I have issue with this solution for the same reason I object to it for tanks. The entire financial burden for the vehicle rests upon the pilot. Yet he must be dependent upon someone else to operate his equipment and not be a dumbass. Or to at least have the courtesy of having skilled appropriately. This is asking a lot, to the point of being unreasonable. Agreed. That said, I would love to see a variant that worked that way for both HAVs and DSs! This ^ ^ A vehicle designed to require 2 people to operate, would surely be allowed the survivability to require 2 people to take it out with AV. A lot of people wanted that & currently if you are screwing around with a co-gunner, your fit is totally gimped. Logistics dropships and tanks ..common. ccp bring back spider tanking no im not a mortedeamor alt..im her slave When my master is banned I represent her wishes and that of the Mortimor famil
Balistyc Farshot The Exemplars 106	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:54:00 - [118] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Let's be blunt. AV is going to need to be adjusted to deal with HAVs (excluding swarm launchers). This is a simple fact. This means in turn that dropships will need to be adjusted so they do not become relegated to the scrap heap. This is another simple fact. If the discussion can remain civil (something woefully lacking in the past, on all sides) we might actually get some progress. Generally the argument sticking point is that certain pilots want to have the EHP of an HAV and civility usually takes a sharp turn for the worse. But buffs can include things like intuitive controls and better shooting mechanics. If you can actually reliably land shots on a forge sent, you can kill him faster than he can kill you. But the problems with dropships are vastly more involved than simple EHP. Most of the problems result from poor fitting, which has been acknowledged in multiple places and clunky controls which are the opposite of intuitive. Yes I realize some pilots can be amazing maneuvering. But there needs to be simpler control options for beginners. A "novice" mode as it were. There needs to be more reliable shooting mechanics. It's too easy to have someone in a sentinel suit avoid fire when you are RIGHT ON TOP OF HIM. I'm also of the opinion that collision damage should be set to zero while shields are online. Armor on armor impact only For collisions. Not because I think crashes are unfair. But because shield dropships explode when a five year old flings a ffistful of gravel at them even when they take a damn railgun shot to the face and keeps going. There's a lot of options for fixing dropships and keeping them viable even with buffed AV in play. I am More than happy to offer suggestions and do math to assist. The more constructive you guys are the more I'm interested in helping. The more righteous outrage I have to deal with the more interested I am in outright antagonism. This was the best post I have seen from Breakin. Wow! Watch that last line because the more antagonistic you get the more we stop reading what you type. He has some great points here. The controls are awful and could be reworked or allow us to set them. The shields piece would be nice to apply to all vehicles. I have lately blown up twice taking an LAV at full speed up a ramp, hit the lip due to a load lag making the curb higher than the tires go up and I blow up. Same with light posts in a DS has happened to me before. ADS hitting a sentinel, I have a different opinion which is apply LAV mechanics to the ADS/DS and Tanks. You get a small turret or preferably anti vehicle weapons as the pilot. Everything else needs a crew to fire, then buff the guns because there is the skill, getting a good gunner and committing 2 mercs to a rolling/flying vulnerability. Pilots fire chaffs, check the scans, monitor the EHP. If we commit the ADS a 1 man vehicle like the tanks, then give the pilot 2 small guns equivalent to Light weapons, improve maneuverability, and make it a flying LAV. Done, no one would complain because a single AV grenade or 2 swarms would eat it, but it would maneuver like a humming bird. The scout ADS (I am stealing this spec from other good vehicle based games). I like where swarms are. I think the DS should get a module that lets it know when a lockon is even being started and track missiles. Then provide them with counter measures as a separate module (ADS/DS should not have hardeners IMO). The DS could use a speed buff because it is fairly slow or improve the AB. Now to start shotgunning and REing again, everyone will love this play style. Face Palm!
Maiden selena MORTIMOR Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 337	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:56:00 - [119] - Quote Balistyc Farshot wrote: I can't find the thread, but the best ADS fix I saw was removing the pilot's ability to fire at all and make a gunner seat that fires the nose turret. Then the ADS is not a cobra helicopter but instead a black hawk which needs a second gunner to really leverage the flying platforms. Then all the additions and buffs can be added because it is in the spirit of a cooperative vehicle. I think the thread got down to creating the only ADS weapon as wing mounted swarms for AV. Everything else was up to the crew. This could be applied to tanks as well. The driver does not fire the main cannon in that situation, it is the main gunner and you can even make the skills of the gunner add to the vehicle performance (In the Tanks Dev Thread). Then being a pilot is being a pilot. You are here to fly or drive. Don't expect to be a one man killing machine inside your vehicle. Even an LAV can't drive and shoot without help, so why not apply the same mechanic to tanks and ADS? That would ruin tanks lol who wants to do nothing but drive a tank can't shoot or operate any if the guns no im not a mortedeamor alt..im her slave When my master is banned I represent her wishes and that of the Mortimor famil
Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 937	Posted - 2015.03.19 15:59:00 - [120] - Quote Maiden selena MORTIMOR wrote: Minmando av here ..Both style dropships got incredibly weak with the patch any drop ship that comes close to my minmando swarms dies. ..it's a problem someone propose changes for them to Rattati that brings them back as atm they are swatted out of the skies like a fly I don't fly so I could say what's wrong but from an av perspective durp ships are weak As a pilot myself (who is doing more flying now than before Echo) I would say the Bus is better, simply because of the hardener buff. I could see myself forgoing armour reps in favour of more armour, just because I know 1 swarmer can't blow me out of the air without a reload... And frankly if you have to reload (no matter how fast) I've had ample time to blow you up. It's like the good old days, people have been pulling out forge guns and having a few duels with me. As for the Python, the long overdue PG increase (or just making light shield extenders worthwhile) would do it wonders, but without any shield AV worth firing at them, they're still in perfectly good shape. Maybe lowering the knockback would help, as they do have a tendency to flip upside down when they get shot.

Maiden selena MORTIMOR Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 338	Posted - 2015.03.19 16:14:00 - [121] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: Maiden selena MORTIMOR wrote: Minmando av here ..Both style dropships got incredibly weak with the patch any drop ship that comes close to my minmando swarms dies. ..it's a problem someone propose changes for them to Rattati that brings them back as atm they are swatted out of the skies like a fly I don't fly so I could say what's wrong but from an av perspective durp ships are weak As a pilot myself (who is doing more flying now than before Echo) I would say the Bus is better, simply because of the hardener buff. I could see myself forgoing armour reps in favour of more armour, just because I know 1 swarmer can't blow me out of the air without a reload... And frankly if you have to reload (no matter how fast) I've had ample time to blow you up. It's like the good old days, people have been pulling out forge guns and having a few duels with me. As for the Python, the long overdue PG increase (or just making light shield extenders worthwhile) would do it wonders, but without any shield AV worth firing at them, they're still in perfectly good shape. Maybe lowering the knockback would help, as they do have a tendency to flip upside down when they get shot. I've yet to see any armor dropship survive a full clip from my swarms I dunno anything about knock back i don't fly no im not a mortedeamor alt..im her slave When my master is banned I represent her wishes and that of the Mortimor famil
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK Rise Of Legion. 3250	Posted - 2015.03.19 18:28:00 - [122] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: The Final Fantasy wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Why don't you instead of complain that you are the bottom of the barrel (which is untrue) just propose numbers. This dropships +X, this Dropship +Y, swam launcher range - X. 2 pages of feeling sorry for yourselves is not going to help at all. For example: This Shield Hardener cost really messed up my fittings as I rely on them to tank 3 shots with X. Is it possible to increas PG by 10 because the nerf was meant for triple hardened Gunnlogis. Thanks, Smart player Not gonna lie last time we tried to explain how to balance ads with av you chose to listen to Av over actual pilots and the result now is the almost never escaping swarms that can 2~3 shot us. Well at least xeno what his face isn't here going on about how every ads is going 80/0 You really want to bring that up as "ads pilots being the victims" . The result is actually not terribly OP dropships that still have a place in PC, and good pilots can easily go 20 KDR in pubs. Ratatti you make me laugh sometimes dude! I agree mostly with what you have said HOWEVER - I have to be bluntly honest and say it is a long time since I saw an ADS pilot do as well as that in a pub match. Anecdotal evidence of course. Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? SCV Ready!
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2993	Posted - 2015.03.19 20:32:00 - [123] - Quote Derpty Derp wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: I have issue with this solution for the same reason I object to it for tanks. The entire financial burden for the vehicle rests upon the pilot. Yet he must be dependent upon someone else to operate his equipment and not be a dumbass. Or to at least have the courtesy of having skilled appropriately. This is asking a lot, to the point of being unreasonable. Agreed. That said, I would love to see a variant that worked that way for both HAVs and DSs! This ^ ^ A vehicle designed to require 2 people to operate, would surely be allowed the survivability to require 2 people to take it out with AV. A lot of people wanted that & currently if you are screwing around with a co-gunner, your fit is totally gimped. a HAV with the tnak of say 2 HAV's, or somewhere between one and two HAV's (leaning towards 2) would be unkillable. same for a DS. and balancing AV to suit them and not single pilot vehicles would be silly as hell. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2993	Posted - 2015.03.19 20:33:00 - [124] - Quote Maiden selena MORTIMOR wrote: Derpty Derp wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: I have issue with this solution for the same reason I object to it for tanks. The entire financial burden for the vehicle rests upon the pilot. Yet he must be dependent upon someone else to operate his equipment and not be a dumbass. Or to at least have the courtesy of having skilled appropriately. This is asking a lot, to the point of being unreasonable. Agreed. That said, I would love to see a variant that worked that way for both HAVs and DSs! This ^ ^ A vehicle designed to require 2 people to operate, would surely be allowed the survivability to require 2 people to take it out with AV. A lot of people wanted that & currently if you are screwing around with a co-gunner, your fit is totally gimped. Logistics dropships and tanks ..common. ccp bring back spider tanking a LHV doesn't make sense, ass they are much too slow. and this post implies that LDS'sare actually good at repping anything, in which I laugh at you. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Velvet Overkill SI6MA Learning Alliance 151	Posted - 2015.03.20 16:34:00 - [125] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Maiden selena MORTIMOR wrote: Derpty Derp wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: I have issue with this solution for the same reason I object to it for tanks. The entire financial burden for the vehicle rests upon the pilot. Yet he must be dependent upon someone else to operate his equipment and not be a dumbass. Or to at least have the courtesy of having skilled appropriately. This is asking a lot, to the point of being unreasonable. Agreed. That said, I would love to see a variant that worked that way for both HAVs and DSs! This ^ ^ A vehicle designed to require 2 people to operate, would surely be allowed the survivability to require 2 people to take it out with AV. A lot of people wanted that & currently if you are screwing around with a co-gunner, your fit is totally gimped. Logistics dropships and tanks ..common. ccp bring back spider tanking a LHV doesn't make sense, ass they are much too slow. and this post implies that LDS'sare actually good at repping anything, in which I laugh at you. Derisive comments asside, back when there were remote repping modules, the speed/mobility of HAVs was not a problem because their targets were also HAVs. Also repping tanks and other dropships with a dropship wasn't that bad. Using this account until The-Errorist is unbanned on April 10th. AV vs Dropship
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2993	Posted - 2015.03.20 20:44:00 - [126] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I actually had a moment earlier, where several PLC's were shot at me like RPG's in some military flick. GalComs can put up a worrisome flak field, but PLCs are just bad at AA duty. Projectile speed plus drop makes it hard to nail such a mobile target. Obvious, but 1: It was still badass 2: Flak fields are scary. As it like this? https://scifiinterfaces.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/vlcsnap-2014-12-09-21h15m14s193.png?w=545&h=307 Eh, not really, more PLC shots were flying than that, and much closer. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 2993	Posted - 2015.03.20 20:52:00 - [127] - Quote Velvet Overkill wrote: Derisive comments asside, back when there were remote repping modules, the speed/mobility of HAVs was not a problem because their targets were also HAVs. Also repping tanks and other dropships with a dropship wasn't that bad. a LLV did the same job, and more much better. And was also already based on, you know, repping ****. And LDS's were based upon transport, never repping. Also, I'd like to see you make a case with evidence that shows such. I've not seen such yet, but seen the exact opposite. And lastly, every single logistic vehicle shouldn't be good at doing every single logistic role. Oh, still giggling on the fact that you think that a Repping DS was okay... 10 minutes after I read it click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [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.

"If there is a strafe nerf in this game, remove hit detection"- manboar 2014

"If there is a strafe nerf in this game, remove hit detection"- manboar 2014

"If there is a strafe nerf in this game, remove hit detection"- manboar 2014

"If there is a strafe nerf in this game, remove hit detection"- manboar 2014

SCV Ready!

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

SCV Ready!