Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
207
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 11:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
To be able to consider a suitable system for acquiring dropship WP, we must understand the fundamental roles of a dropship and its pilot. It is generally accepted that a dropship is easily destroyed by advanced AV equipment; even militia gear can harass a well fit dropship effectively. Therefore, the first and foremost role of the pilot is keeping the dropship alive. I have suggested WP for survival, however that didnGÇÖt seem to go down too well, and from this IGÇÖve realized that, and am quite proud that, pilots will stand eye to eye with the risk of destruction if it means a few glorious minutes of doing their job.
In fact, all the suggestions for an effective WP system for dropships have already been mentioned, and reading through for the past few months, these are the ideas that have really stuck.
Therefore, the following is simply a compilation of many different ideas from many different people, perhaps not all pilots, but all definitely dedicated to the success of the game. I doubt anything here is truly an original idea of my own, besides perhaps how IGÇÖve ordered things.
1) Disruption A main role of the dropship is disruption. This ranges from providing covering fire, causing enemies attentions to be distracted, diverting enemy movement, destroying turrets and other installations, defending objectives and even harassing enemy HAVs. Currently, the only WP we pilots gain from disruption is Vehicle Kill Assist points. This simply does not reflect the risk a pilot is going through when engaging enemies or hostile turrets/vehicles in the midst of battle. To address this:
-Pilot Assist WP: Vehicle Kill Assist WP should be altered to Pilot Assist for pilots (can be applied to all vehicles). The pilot plays a vital role, the vital role, of bearing the responsibility for the vehicle itself as well as its passengers at any given time. They are not passengers who are simply hoping on for some free WP after a rough haul. There should be recognition of their actions, since they can turn the tide of a battle and, if enough battles are turned, perhaps the whole war. Pilot Assist points should be the exact number of points the gunner acquires for performing any actions that acquires WP. Perhaps an exception should be tanks, whose pilots wield a giant kittening turret of their own.
2) Deployment One of the most widely acknowledged, but least performed roles (currently) of the dropship is to deploy troops rapidly and en masse upon a single point in the map. This is due to the lack of incentive when weighed against the risk. The skies of New EdenGÇÖs planets are unpredictable at best. Losing a full dropship of blueberries because of one unaccounted railgun tank hiding in the hills is always possible. To provide incentive that outweighs this loss, there must be more than a simple WP acquisition.
-Ejection Feature: Drawing on ideas of many previous pilots, the eject button. However, this is altered slightly. The ability for a pilot to eject all passengers only becomes available when the dropship is at 0 shields and 0 armour, and is in the stage where control is lost, the only possibility being explosion. This allows the pilot to fulfill his responsibility for the safety of the passengers sitting inside, unaware of the dangers swirling around the battlefield. More pilots will take their ships out to hot drop zones if they know that if worse comes to worse, they can eject a full ship of blueberries onto the battlefield relatively safely.
-Deployment GÇ£GoGÇ¥ light feature: Pvt Numnutz explains it quite nicely here https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=57803
-Dropship GÇÿdoorsGÇÖ: Currently, we donGÇÖt exactly have any true control over them. It would be nice if we did. The effects could be as followed: Dropship doors open: Passengers can enter/exit. Gunners have full maneuverability of turrets. Gunners have unimpeded vision. Gunners are unprotected. Dropship is slightly more unstable in flight.
Dropship doors closed: Passengers may not enter/exit, but may switch seats. Turrets have restricted maneuverability. Gunners are protected (headshots could still be viable, if not too hard to implement). Gunners have limited vision. Dropship more stable, perhaps faster in flight; more aerodynamic.
-Deployment WP: 5 WP for deployment/ejection, with a cap of 200, with the WP amounts counting towards the cap resetting every x minutes. Of course, deploying blueberries back at the MCC as opposed to a safe area that can easily be used to provide covering fire over a contested letter are very different things.
-Deployment Assist WP: Once again using an idea thought up by fellow pilots, pilots should acquire WP for the actions performed by deployed mercenaries. 10 WP per kill, 20WP for hacking neutral objectives, 20WP for hacking enemy objectives, 30WP for stopping enemy virus uploads to objectives, and 30WP for vehicle destruction. There should be a time limit of around 30 seconds for these actions to count towards points for the dropship.
|
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
207
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 11:06:00 -
[2] - Quote
3) Designation Okay, okay. I wanted to continue the alliteration. Basically, this is for pilots whoGÇÖve installed CRUs on their ships. To be able to have a mobile spawn point to designate is invaluable. For pilots who go the extra mile, who sacrifice tanking and increase the risks, who increase the responsibility and really want to challenge their own skills, the rewards should be greater.
-Designation WP: +15 WP per spawn into a vehicle with a CRU, with a cap of 105 WP, resetting in 2x minutes once the cap is reached. Therefore, this cap differs from the deployment WP cap in that it begins its reset countdown of 2x minutes only once the cap is met, instead of having a set reset time every x minutes.
With this system, a pilot gains less points from being designated as a spawn point than deploying. This, hopefully, forces pilots to consider their role. Whilst safety is always important, having a mobile spawn point is useless if we circle the base in our safe zone.
4) Additional features
-Flight instruments GÇô Dropship HUD: If we had attitude indicators, speed indicators (m/s?) and altimeters, things would become so much more fun, not to mention immersive. ItGÇÖd make precise maneuvers possible, eliminating much guesswork. WeGÇÖd be able to understand to a greater, more A pilot has much to keep his mind on, and some instruments to ease the task would be blissful. I wouldnGÇÖt mind if dropships werenGÇÖt given some bonus hp if we had flight instruments.
-Counter measures: IGÇÖll expand slightly on the idea thatGÇÖs been everywhere. I read it everywhere. Everywhere! Passive and active countermeasures would make the skies so much more extraordinary to gaze at. I can just imagine the heavy stop firing at a shotgun scout as they both look up to see a camouflaged dropship explode, another one burst through its flaming ruins, deploying flares to redirect swarms into an enemy dropshipGǪ marvelous.
So, firstly, what all pilots have wanted in countermeasures:
Active countermeasures in the form of active modules, launching whatever must be launched to misdirect swarm missiles. Also hoped for are active modules which engage cloaking capabilities, probably at the cost of some degree of shields reduction and long cooldowns, which hide the dropship from view.
In addition to this, passive countermeasures in the form of radar-absorbent paint and camouflage patterns, would definitely be beneficial. If paint was allowed to be applied for such tactical reasonsGǪ gosh, IGÇÖm drooling. Another possibility for countermeasures, if it does seem overpowered, is to have flare turrets. Gunners fire these countermeasures against swarms. Perhaps some WP may have to be awarded to keep the gunner entertained. - This is a work in progress; which was started when the first pilots took to the skies of New EdenGÇÖs planets. I am merely trying to put everything together and see how it all works out.
Once again, this is not my work; credits go to all dropship pilots. |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
207
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 11:07:00 -
[3] - Quote
To change/add to this work:
Changes: Quote the part you want to change, then post your edited version below.
Additions: Quote where you want to insert your addition, highlighting the exact area with an asterisk (*), then post your addition below the quote.
Suggestion/Feedback/Comments: Post as many as you would like.
_________________________
IGÇÖve never done something like this before, and I donGÇÖt think IGÇÖve seen something like this either. If this reaches completion, where as many pilots is satisfied with it as possible, perhaps I will create the complete version in the request section of the forum.
|
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
217
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 11:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
said this twice today so dont mind saying it again...
Drop ships need Wp's (as OP or similar) OR a reduction in cost.
More acceleration (low speed maneuvering is like trying to move a very big boat)
more HP, atm you sneeze to hard and they fall out out of the sky
weapons that shoot in the vague direction you aim them |
WyrmHero1945
IMPSwarm Negative-Feedback
31
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 15:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
I'm liking everything so far, the WP cap is genius for anti-farming. Please add remote repair/shield transfer WP!!! (if they don't exists) |
RydogV
Shadow Company HQ
102
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 16:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
I would not mind seeing a new type of turret for Dropships only. Some kind of hybrid between missiles and blaster. Maybe something with explosive shells and decent rate of fire that has limited splash damage and is effective against Infantry.
Or a standard blaster with a larger circular reticule that at least gives suppression points or a larger hit box that supports that fact that this an area weapon and not a point weapon.
Gunning in a moving dropship is crazy hard and the level of damage inflicted on infantry...even just standard assault class mercs with current blaster or missile turrets is pretty minimal. Since this is only way for a pilot to get points, door gunning should be a more effective enterprise. Especially considering the frailty of most Dropships and the amount of time they are forces to retreat when damaged. Kill opportunities are nominal at best, so they should at least be effective. |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 21:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
Edits:
v0.1 Added Dropship Handling; acceleration, under Additional features Added Vehicle Assist WP, under Disruption Added Unique Turrets, under Disruption Underlined/bolded important points Centred headers Edited suggestions/feedback/comments Updated title Shortened introduction
-
All opinions are welcome; I'll only be refusing to add obvious rubbish.
It's up to you guys to decide what stays and what goes, or is altered slightly. |
Hunter Junko
WARRIORS 1NC
48
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 00:36:00 -
[8] - Quote
I'd like to contribute.
"Additional features- Countermeasures*"
Not just the idea itself but different variations of said countermeasures:
Here goes:
Proposition: Ideas toward Aerial Defense.
WARNING: attempting to implement more than one countermeasure will render aerial vehicles highly unstable, due to conflicts between differences in aerial and defensive design.
Table of contents
* EM Dispersion Flares
* Direct Energy Barriers
* Active EM plating
* Nanocarbonite coating
* Kraken Defense System
* GÇ£PatsyGÇ¥ EM Signature software
EM dispersion Flares.- an effective countermeasure against swarm launchers. Each set of flares contain the exact EM signature as the dropship it is deployed from; confusing swarm rockets into attacking the flares instead of the dropship. However the technology is not perfected and some rockets will slip past this defense, enabling light dam-age.
At higher levels it can divert oneGÇÖs EM signature to another Location out of harmGÇÖs way for the pilot. The weakness-es flares contain are that of a large amount of PG required, and the high reloading time for each flare.
Directed Energy Barriers.
A defense System design to counter against rail gun-based weaponry. Once activated a certain amount of CPU is required to create an concentrated barrier similar to a spike. Once a forge or rail gun based round is detected, the Spike intercepts the oncoming round and attempts to expand the concentrated round over a large surface area. The result is that of a weaker impact, and thus reduced dropship damage. On higher levels, it can completely dissipate a forge round from a distance, so that no damage can be inflicted. in addition there are some designs that enable you to detect multiple incoming forge rounds.
Its only weakness is a short range distance; the on-board sensors cannot effectively detect a forge round at distances
less than 100 meters. In addition, the recharge rate for the D.E.B. is high, thus only permitting pilot who are flying into Risky Situations.
Active EM plating
A Countermeasure designed against Hybrid-based weapons (Blaster installations). This Defense module is effective in the fact that it counteracts the electromagnetic shell housing the superheated plasma. Once activated, a high con-centration of Electromagnetic signature is emitted from the dropship. If a hybrid round impacts, a constant EM sig-nature weakens the E.M. shell exponentially The result is the round disintegrating, venting superheated plasma at a farther distance from the dropship, protecting the pilot and his crew. The effect is passive but requires a moderate amount of PG/CPU. At higher levels, the A.E.M.P. can dissipate Hybrid rounds from a farther distance away
Nanocarbonite coating
Effective against Laser-based weaponry, This countermeasure is painted over the dropship, rendering a mild black tint against its original color. However, it is highly effective against lasers due to the fact that as a laser weapon is fired at the dropship; the coating activates, Stabilizing the directed EM radiation into levels acceptable for mild shield absorption. This is the only countermeasure that can be combined with another active countermeasure.
At higher levels, it can be used to nullify any laser damage to the armor.
Its only drawback is that it takes a long time to rebuild the Coating, as nanites have difficulty replicating the compo-site. Another drawback is that it is highly expensive, thus application of the coating is a risky venture For both the pilot and the dropship.
Kraken Defense System
The GÇ£KrakDefGÇ¥ as it is known informally is a lightly-effective countermeasure against all methods of weaponry. It is effective by suspending armored plates around the dropship using directed gravity nullification, the same technology in operating space elevators. When a round of an incoming object is discovered, the plating automatically moves to intercept the incoming rounds/rockets. Upon impact, the plating suffers damage until it is GÇ£recalledGÇ¥ into the drop-ship for repair. At higher levels the KrakDef permits the ability to deploy more armored plates . A weakness against this system is high CPU/PG requirements. Another considerable weakness Is that if the KrakDef System is de-stroyed, it must take a long time to rebuild the damaged plating.
"Patsy" Em Signature Software. (officer tier Countermeasure)
An unorthodox countermeasure developed by a crafty engineer while experimenting with covert equip-ment. This countermeasure renders your dropship a GÇ£friendlyGÇ¥ to your opponent. Only a skilled eye can determine that your dropship is an enemy, such as a sniper with a high scan precision Level. Higher versions of this software enable your dropship to be detected by allies as friendly, and by Enemies as friendly, incluing increased duration of the software package.
|
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
214
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 06:51:00 -
[9] - Quote
v0.15 Replaced my countermeasures with Hunter Junko's.
-
Stupidly, I forgot to reserve some more spots. I'm running out of character space, so perhaps someone could find something to change/delete from this compilation? Is anything here not worth it? I don't see anything, but then again, the devil does not notice its own evil, even when it makes up its name.
But seriously, I don't think the proposed WP system and features list is perfected yet... is it? |
Syther Shadows
CowTek
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 07:10:00 -
[10] - Quote
I rate this thread
5/5 would swarm lunch any day.
(speaking of swarmys why are they a main weapon they can't even lock onto heavy suits...) |
|
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
217
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 11:16:00 -
[11] - Quote
Just a thought:
I was thinking perhaps remove designation WP altogether, and increase the amount of WP gained from deployment and disruption.
Gaining WP for people spawning in, I feel, will encourage a pilot to fly extremely cautiously, bordering on the point of probably being considered cowardly, until the cap for designation WP is hit, then progress to accumulate deployment or disruption WP. This shouldn't be the case. I feel now that perhaps spawning into a dropship shouldn't be rewarded. It would detract from the element of surprise and speed that are a dropships most potent weapons. Fly in, leave burning flames and dead clones, then fly out. Hard and fast. Also, I feel as if it's forcing people to spec into the Logistics dropships or buy a CRU, limiting their fitting capabilities, just for some extra points. I don't like that.
The reason I included it was because it seemed popular, but.... Warpoints from spawning, now that I think about it, doesn't exactly reward the more effective style of dropship usage.
Opinions on this?
|
martinofski
Rebelles A Quebec
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 15:23:00 -
[12] - Quote
Glad this is up, showing some really good ideas all in one well organized topic.
Here's an Idea I thought about
Additions: Add a hovering button, where the pilot can select hover and control a "pilot reserved" gun instead of piloting, something like a HMG with dispersion. Making it possible for the pilot to make some point on it's own, but putting him in a risk of getting hit by any AV, since he is basically stopped in the air.
|
Knight SoIaire
Better Hide R Die
55
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 15:34:00 -
[13] - Quote
Please, for the love of god, just add a kick out button, it kicks out anyone not using a turret. Was hovering over an Objective today, nobody got out! What the hell were they doing? |
martinofski
Rebelles A Quebec
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 15:38:00 -
[14] - Quote
Sometime, I swear I would love to eject the gunners as well, they always shoot everywhere, CRUs, Supply depots, Blueberry jeeps and the Ennemy MCC...I hate gunners from pub match (most of them to what I wrote above). Didn't you know it make me glow on the radar more? |
Hunter Junko
WARRIORS 1NC
50
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 20:49:00 -
[15] - Quote
Vyzion Eyri wrote:Just a thought:
I was thinking perhaps remove designation WP altogether, and increase the amount of WP gained from deployment and disruption.
Gaining WP for people spawning in, I feel, will encourage a pilot to fly extremely cautiously, bordering on the point of probably being considered cowardly, until the cap for designation WP is hit, then progress to accumulate deployment or disruption WP. This shouldn't be the case. I feel now that perhaps spawning into a dropship shouldn't be rewarded. It would detract from the element of surprise and speed that are a dropships most potent weapons. Fly in, leave burning flames and dead clones, then fly out. Hard and fast. Also, I feel as if it's forcing people to spec into the Logistics dropships or buy a CRU, limiting their fitting capabilities, just for some extra points. I don't like that.
The reason I included it was because it seemed popular, but.... Warpoints from spawning, now that I think about it, doesn't exactly reward the more effective style of dropship usage.
Opinions on this?
i agree with Vry on "spawning". true it is a pilots decision to add a mobile CRU unit onto his dropship, but it is the soldiers who choose to spawn in my dropship. therefore, Acquiring WPs by this , i would feel like it would be abused. (IMO)
my opinion on acquiring WP would be to categorize the amount of WP earned per flight, depending on what the situation demands and the amount of risk it has to a pilot and his/Her dropship's survival as a contributing Factor.
low risk WP Pilot- landing and acquiring troops from the redline and then bringing them over to where the they would not be required, like at a secured area. this earns you minimal WP becasue you are not placing yourself in danger.
Gunner(s) - Any kills made with a gunner earns Minimal Disruption WP, because it is not ordered to and the gunner is "Weapons free" until ordered otherwise.
Medium risk WP Pilot- Usually deployment of your "Package" the squad you have in your ship. once you get to an area that is needed , you can usually ask the soldiers to drop there, or you "kick" them out.
i don't add pickups to medium because it would be
1. overused. and 2. if people are asking for a casual pickup, the pilot is landing in secured space; there is no risk to the pilot and vice versa. there might be situations where some sneaky bastard pops a shot off while your landing,but that might be an exception.
Gunner(s)- a gunner has to be ordered to fire on a general location in order to earn medium Disruption points.
High Risk WP *Emergency landings* Pilot and Gunner- Landing in "Hot areas" where there is a slim chance of survival for both the pilot and the dropship. this could be implemented by a request-receive method. a soldier in the thick of battle requests an emergency pickup /reinforcement for him and whats left of his squad, the pilot responds .
Picking up/deploying soldiers this way earns more WP than the rest, because you are risking your Ship which is almost four-seven times the cost of a standard grunt. you have to be compensated in as much WP for contributing to the battle on the ground.
Gunner(s)- "Paving the way" using the same request-receive mechanic. a grunt needs some supporting fire, call a pilot with gunners, highlights an area and the gunners do the rest, earning what Vryizon would call "Disruption" WP. This is high risk because you do not know if someone in that area has a forge gun a swarm launcher, or any method of AV operations. you, as a pilot is placing your trust in your gunner(s) into providing accurate fire at that general area, assisting the boots on the ground.
to Vyzion- this is my take on it but if the pilots agree with this, the i take no credit for this idea. |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
228
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 21:30:00 -
[16] - Quote
v0.30 Removed "Ejection Feature" and expanded on Deployment "Go" light Combined "Go" light feature with Dropship 'doors' feature Removed "Designation WP"
Vyzion Eyri wrote:Designation WP: +15 WP per spawn into a vehicle with a CRU, with a cap of 105 WP, resetting in 2x minutes once the cap is reached. Therefore, this cap differs from the deployment WP cap in that it begins its reset countdown of 2x minutes only once the cap is met, instead of having a set reset time every x minutes. Changed "Pilot Assist WP" to "Disruption WP" Increased WP from deployment/ejection from 5 to 10 Increased Deployment WP cap from 200 to 320 Added "Alternative Systems" section for bigger contributions from pilots Added link to Hunter Junko's WP system to Alternative Systems
___
It's not looking too bad so far.
@martinofski:
I'm unsure about implementing a 'hover' feature; if we can get out dropships to automatically hover, what's to stop us from making it automatically fly? And personally as a pilot, I don't mind being stuck on the controls until I either leave my dropship or my dropship explodes. It feels good, piloting a dropship. I'm happy to let my gunners gun. Also, being shot out of a gunner seat and leaving my dropship hovering in the air like Yoda's hamburger, ready to be devoured, isn't appealing.
However, other pilots may agree with you. I leave it up to them. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 21:43:00 -
[17] - Quote
Vyzion Eyri wrote:4) Additional features Dropship Handling: Acceleration (in a forward direction) should scale more obviously with the angle the dropship makes with the ground. Parallel to the ground, 0% of movement is forward. Perpendicular (90 degrees) to the ground, 100% of thrusters apply forward motion, with a simple scale of 1.1% increase in acceleration per degree.
As a more accurate thruster force, I suggest that the forward force be proportional to the sine of the angle. This could be performed using a lookup table if calculation load would be considered too heavy.
|
iceyburnz
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
292
|
Posted - 2013.03.06 22:08:00 -
[18] - Quote
Isn't there a features and idea section of the forum.
*checks*
Yes. Yes there is.
*nods to himself* |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
229
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 02:43:00 -
[19] - Quote
iceyburnz wrote:Isn't there a features and idea section of the forum.
*checks*
Yes. Yes there is.
*nods to himself*
Requests and feedback. This is a discussion of a possible request; incomplete. Hence the work in progress. |
Nguruthos IX
Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire
78
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 03:05:00 -
[20] - Quote
Hunter Junko wrote:Vyzion Eyri wrote:Just a thought:
I was thinking perhaps remove designation WP altogether, and increase the amount of WP gained from deployment and disruption.
Gaining WP for people spawning in, I feel, will encourage a pilot to fly extremely cautiously, bordering on the point of probably being considered cowardly, until the cap for designation WP is hit, then progress to accumulate deployment or disruption WP. This shouldn't be the case. I feel now that perhaps spawning into a dropship shouldn't be rewarded. It would detract from the element of surprise and speed that are a dropships most potent weapons. Fly in, leave burning flames and dead clones, then fly out. Hard and fast. Also, I feel as if it's forcing people to spec into the Logistics dropships or buy a CRU, limiting their fitting capabilities, just for some extra points. I don't like that.
The reason I included it was because it seemed popular, but.... Warpoints from spawning, now that I think about it, doesn't exactly reward the more effective style of dropship usage.
Opinions on this?
i agree with Vry on "spawning". true it is a pilots decision to add a mobile CRU unit onto his dropship, but it is the soldiers who choose to spawn in my dropship. therefore, Acquiring WPs by this , i would feel like it would be abused. (IMO) my opinion on acquiring WP would be to categorize the amount of WP earned per flight, depending on what the situation demands and the amount of risk it has to a pilot and his/Her dropship's survival as a contributing Factor. l ow risk WPPilot- landing and acquiring troops from the redline and then bringing them over to where the they would not be required, like at a secured area. this earns you minimal WP becasue you are not placing yourself in danger. Gunner(s) - Any kills made with a gunner earns Minimal Disruption WP, because it is not ordered to and the gunner is "Weapons free" until ordered otherwise. Medium risk WP Pilot- Usually deployment of your "Package" the squad you have in your ship. once you get to an area that is needed , you can usually ask the soldiers to drop there, or you "kick" them out. i don't add pickups to medium because it would be 1. overused. and 2. if people are asking for a casual pickup, the pilot is landing in secured space; there is no risk to the pilot and vice versa. there might be situations where some sneaky bastard pops a shot off while your landing,but that might be an exception.Gunner(s)- a gunner has to be ordered to fire on a general location in order to earn medium Disruption points. High Risk WP*Emergency landings* Pilot and Gunner- Landing in "Hot areas" where there is a slim chance of survival for both the pilot and the dropship. this could be implemented by a request-receive method. a soldier in the thick of battle requests an emergency pickup /reinforcement for him and whats left of his squad, the pilot responds . Picking up/deploying soldiers this way earns more WP than the rest, because you are risking your Ship which is almost four-seven times the cost of a standard grunt. you have to be compensated in as much WP for contributing to the battle on the ground. Gunner(s)- "Paving the way" using the same request-receive mechanic. a grunt needs some supporting fire, call a pilot with gunners, highlights an area and the gunners do the rest, earning what Vryizon would call "Disruption" WP. This is high risk because you do not know if someone in that area has a forge gun a swarm launcher, or any method of AV operations. you, as a pilot is placing your trust in your gunner(s) into providing accurate fire at that general area, assisting the boots on the ground. to Vyzion- this is my take on it but if the pilots agree with this, the i take no credit for this idea. Also A good idea Vyzion, would be to add the link to the post within the thread, that way users can click the link and will lead to a pilot-made contribution in the thread, adding a short summary would also be nice to give us readers a idea behind said contribution. also saves alot of valuable space.
I'm sorry but aside from the fact this would be a coding nightmare (And I'd like to see new content and fixes sooner than SoonTM)
Problem with setting these types of limits and paramaters for warpoints is it really limits and destroys the versatility of pilot freedom.
The more versatile WP can be gained, the better. I'd prefer my options when flying to be more versatile. |
|
Bojo The Mighty
Bojo's School of the Trades
522
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 04:20:00 -
[21] - Quote
Rework 1st Person Mode: No one uses it for a reason.
1st person needs to reflect 1st person in many other games, even our LAVs have proper first person! Dropship camera needs to be replaced with a cockpit view and not-so tunnel vision. A wider viewing angle and hopefully the ability to rotate camera without rotating the dropship. It's the future, so I'm sure cameras are all over the dropships, so having TV Monitors withing the cockpit to televise a window would be appropriate (So when you look down, you will see the ground via a monitor just above your lap.
I'll be back with some more. This is minor but first thing off the top of my head. 1st person DS flying sucks. |
Rusticuls
NECROMONGER'S
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 10:34:00 -
[22] - Quote
I still think there needs to be a fighter. Single cockpit gun turret with swarm like missles. This could solve the tank problem and the drop ship problem in one swoop. Drop ships should be tanks in the sky. But right now they are more like LAVs, introduce an LAV and beef up the drop ships a little bit and we could get some serious dogfighting in the game. |
zibathy numbertwo
Nox Aeterna Security
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 11:00:00 -
[23] - Quote
Vyzion Eyri wrote:
Unique Turrets (Feature):1) Hybrid between missiles and blaster. Explosive shells and decent rate of fire that has limited splash damage and is effective against Infantry.
2)Standard blasters with a larger circular reticule (akin to the HMG) that at least gives suppression points or a larger hit box that supports that fact that this an area weapon and not a point weapon.
Not sure if you know much about EvE, but I think what you're looking for are "projectile" weapons. Which is what Minmatar use. You can use explosive ammo with projectile weapons. |
Skihids
Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising
1001
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 21:19:00 -
[24] - Quote
I mentioned this in another thread:
Tying the camera control to the Yaw stick in the DS means you can't turn when looking down from directly above. I'm not sure what the best solution is, but letting me toggle the viewpoint or have the camera not reposition with the stick might be better, though you would probably need a toggle to the default position.
The ultimate customization would allow me to add rudder pedals and other control devices. You already support the M/K, so allow me to build my own cockpit with dedicated buttons that trigger each module.
The keyboard doesn't have this restrictive control linkage, so it's only fair that DS3 users have a way to remove the limitation. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
547
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 22:17:00 -
[25] - Quote
Bojo The Mighty wrote:Rework 1st Person Mode: No one uses it for a reason.
1st person needs to reflect 1st person in many other games, even our LAVs have proper first person! Dropship camera needs to be replaced with a cockpit view and not-so tunnel vision. A wider viewing angle and hopefully the ability to rotate camera without rotating the dropship. It's the future, so I'm sure cameras are all over the dropships, so having TV Monitors withing the cockpit to televise a window would be appropriate (So when you look down, you will see the ground via a monitor just above your lap.
I'll be back with some more. This is minor but first thing off the top of my head. 1st person DS flying sucks. agreed, i looked at it once and just switched back instantly, the field of view is way to small, you can't see any of the hazards around your dropships, and i'm guessing that it would be pretty hard to judge distance from the ground if you ever tried landing in 1st person view |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
549
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 23:39:00 -
[26] - Quote
re-read the thread and i didn't see this so i'm going to post it here, it's a possible addition to the countermeasures that i've seen other pilots post about.
Threat detection passive sensor modules and/or skills that allow you to detect incoming AV threats.
I'm thinking along the lines of some kind of sensor modules that allow you to detect the charge up of a forge gun or the missile lock of a swarm launcher before the missiles are launched. you could have multiple tiers offering things like wider range, quicker detection eg standard module allows you to detect a forge gun when it's at 75% of its charge, advanced at 50% etc, and in the swarm launchers case it would just tell you as soon as it's locked on because i can't see a way of applying a similar system to them.
for the skills you could tie them in with the existing scanning skills or create a unique subset for vehicles which would unlock advanced modules, offer passive bonuses to things like scan radius, module effectiveness etc
this is just a rough idea so please add to it |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
233
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 11:44:00 -
[27] - Quote
v0.40
Re-ordered sections into WP SYSTEMS and FEATURES, for ease of discussion. Added HANDLING ALTERATIONS section. Rearranged content accordingly to fit into above sections Removed "Unique Turrets" Removed list of Hunter Junko's countermeasures in favour of a link to his post for space Updated acceleration proposal based on Buster Friently's suggestion Added First Person View to Handling Alterations Added Camera Control to Handling Alterations Added Control device customisation to Handling Alterations
-
Looking good. If pilots want to post their dream WP system, we could use the differences between all of our decisions and opinions to find the perfect system that we would all be happy with.
Or simply point out something that really appeals to you, or a flaw, in my system, so I know when I'm re-reading over and over what to keep and what to remove.
This thread was started initially to create something I could put in the Requests section for CCP to read and eventually utilise. I now realise that whilst it may not be the case, since CCP has probably been reading our dropship threads and constructing their own awesome upgrades, this thread can serve another purpose.
To remind us of who we are, my fellow pilots. We are no slaves, bound to transport squads to battle zones. We are no barbarians, flying fellow bloodthirsty mercenaries over the battlefield to slay enemies. We are not even mercenaries, married to war and fueled by ISK! We are PILOTS! Free as the birds we fly with, serene as the skies that we fly through, calm as the air that does not stir over the raging battle below.
We will rise and rise again, until dropships become DRAGONS! - Quote modified from original in the movie Robin Hood. |
|
CCP Eterne
C C P C C P Alliance
944
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 11:49:00 -
[28] - Quote
This is really good stuff. I'm moving it to Feedback/Requests. Very nice. |
|
KalOfTheRathi
CowTek
198
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 12:12:00 -
[29] - Quote
Would one of you consistent DS pilots answer a question for me?
If you are the Squad Leader and set the Defense Order on your DS how do you do for WP over a Skirmish?
And if you have the resources to experiment, how does it work out if you have a Ground Merc be the Squad Leader and they set the Orders?
My experience is mostly with HAVs but Squad Orders can dramatically increase the WP rewards as you already know. The problem is, of course, the Driver (or in your case, Pilot) has little time available to deal with Squad Leader duties. The OP made me wonder if there was Any way to compensate for it. The Ground based SL for a HAV does fine as does the Driver. Since there seems to be little to no reward for the Pilots the same may not be true for a Drop Ship squad.
I will watch this thread if any of you should try it. Or post your results in the Training Ground would work as well. |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
233
|
Posted - 2013.03.08 13:42:00 -
[30] - Quote
KalOfTheRathi wrote:Would one of you consistent DS pilots answer a question for me?
If you are the Squad Leader and set the Defense Order on your DS how do you do for WP over a Skirmish?
And if you have the resources to experiment, how does it work out if you have a Ground Merc be the Squad Leader and they set the Orders?
My experience is mostly with HAVs but Squad Orders can dramatically increase the WP rewards as you already know. The problem is, of course, the Driver (or in your case, Pilot) has little time available to deal with Squad Leader duties. The OP made me wonder if there was Any way to compensate for it. The Ground based SL for a HAV does fine as does the Driver. Since there seems to be little to no reward for the Pilots the same may not be true for a Drop Ship squad.
I will watch this thread if any of you should try it. Or post your results in the Training Ground would work as well.
The thing is, we as pilots are unclear as to what role exactly we're meant to play. WP is gained when gunners get points and if we flatten people, but why only then?
That's the same as a tank or LAV, which are, as their name suggests, attack vehicles. Our craft are not Aerial Attack Vehicles, we're dropships. Our DSs are not intended for such barbaric purposes.
Squad orders increase our war point gain slightly, and on a good game, this is dramatic. But what is a good game currently?
Flying in circles, not getting blown up, and having giant blobs of red that gunners can go wild on.
Besides flying, it sounds exactly like what a tank or LAV would want to do.
So what we actually want is not more WP, but recognition in the form of WP for doing what dropships are meant to do: drop ****.
and @Eterne: thanks, I suppose. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |