@Shouper

Gunships should be light aircraft not Heavy aircraft, that way they can stay closer to the infantry without being an easy target. If they were Heavy aircraft then their size and lock time(if different lock time is ever implemented) would make them poorly suited to staying near the ground to support infantry. A smaller Air to Ground vehicle would present a smaller target and could more easily maneuver around in tighter spaces infantry frequent like streets. If it was a heavy craft then it couldn't get as close increasing the change to miss your target. there also the fact that you want your gunship to be harder to detect so that way infantry can just take cover prepare for your arrival. Infantry will have more than enough firepower to tear anything out of the skies so trying to tank it is not a good idea, especially for a vehicle that has to actively be near hostile targets to work.

Fighter/bombers should be heavy so they can maximize the damage they do in a single strike and so they can more easily rule the skies. if a gunship was bigger than them then there is a change that a gunship could out do a fighter, which is bad for a fighter.

I would personally figure that a Gunship would be a Light aircraft, Fighter a medium, and Attacker a Heavy. Kinda fits how those are sized IRL, and means that you can make an educated guess as to what you're dealing with when looking at the icon on the radar. I still think it'd be nice to have a separate icon for VTOL assets, but one step at a time.

well, LAAs are fighters, they even had a video of a CCP employee flying a gallante varient so they aren`t gunships.

I would personally figure that a Gunship would be a Light aircraft, Fighter a medium, and Attacker a Heavy. Kinda fits how those are sized IRL

Link and even if they are nothing is set in stone yet. It would make sense for a gunship like vehicle to be a light aircraft so it can maneuver and stay on the infantry. where as a fighter should rule the open skies with lots of damage potential.

here ya go my freind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ED-YF-v7WCw @ the 5:20 mark he calls it in.

although it is on the old engine I will bet on that the avrage LAA will be:

1 passenger (whom is the pilot), 2 small turrets, always accelorating but might have the option to slow or speed up its speed by small mesures, high altidtude capibilitys. most liekly a SS turret module since you can have an S and another S turret module (becuse the must be the same turret).

good for strafe runs, railgun LAAs with compressed + damage mods will most liekly be able to take out a tank if positions right (I fly DSes and knowing S railguns are getting buffed to be ebtter precise damage then S missles, and the tanks that are profisinaly fitted (Gunlogis and Sagerises) I can tell that since both shots hit the same spot).

beside the standard varient I would assume an Enforcer like varient is most likely.

seeing how CCP has the tanks I would assume a HAA would be the gunship.

Well, when I think Gunship, I think a Cobra or Apache. Or a Hokum or Tiger if you're in Europe.
Even the smallest Fighter aircraft we make today have a larger body than an attack helicopter due in part to the fact that you want it to be as narrow at the front as possible to make it harder to shoot down.

As far as weapons, I would think that aerial vehicles and possibly even MTACs would require a new class of body-mounted fixed-aim weapons, especially when you consider that guided air-to-air missiles are pretty much a necessity.

You wouldnt need completely new mechanics for the weapon systems on these.

LAA (1 person)
3 Fixed hardpoints (not moveable turrets)
1 x medium front mount that is a blaster
2 x small mounts that could either be dumbfire missles or lock on swarms (same damage potential)

The damage from these should not be able to one-shot a tank. The speed/maneuverability should make up for the damage difference.

VTOL Gunship (2 person)
3 slots - 1 turret and 2 x hardpoints
Introduce a weapon that is similar to the HMG for the turret with a little bit more of a range buff but more bullet spread (same damage)
2 x small mounts that have same options as LAA
1 x pilot who manages the 2 x small mounts
1 x gunner who manages the turret

You wouldnt need completely new mechanics for the weapon systems on these.

LAA (1 person)
3 Fixed hardpoints (not moveable turrets)
1 x medium front mount that is a blaster
2 x small mounts that could either be dumbfire missles or lock on swarms (same damage potential)

The damage from these should not be able to one-shot a tank. The speed/maneuverability should make up for the damage difference.

VTOL Gunship (2 person)
3 slots - 1 turret and 2 x hardpoints
Introduce a weapon that is similar to the HMG for the turret with a little bit more of a range buff but more bullet spread (same damage)
2 x small mounts that have same options as LAA
1 x pilot who manages the 2 x small mounts
1 x gunner who manages the turret

As to the first part, the only missiles we have right now are dumbfire.

Overall, I think a new weapon class would be the best way to go with this. Since the current vehicle weapons we have are referred to as "Turrets" specifically, I wouldn't be surprised if hard-mounted weapons are introduced later when there are vehicles that can use them.

New weapon classes are fine but I am just saying that the mechanics for them are already in place.

Swarms - lock on missles
HMG - basically the same framework for a nose turret like an Apache style gunship would have.
Dumbfires - same mechanics as a swarm without lockon. You would get more per shot but there would be no guidance and would be weaker against vehicles.

This would also give LAA pilots different paths to skill into as it would either be an anti-infantry strafing vehicle or an anti-vehicle precision striker.

Right.

Personally, I find close-air-support boring as sin. I'm gonna be the one gunning down all those LAAs.

Well, its all about options just like with everything else in DUST. It will give people even more choices in how to win a district

Oh hell yeah, I'm all over that.

Lvl 3: Fighter - The Fighter will be the main vehicle to gain and maintain air superiority by focusing on air to air combat with a single pilot controlling a variety of weapons that can only attack aerial vehicles. The Fighter should also have slots for various countermeasures

Lvl 4: Fighter Bomber - This will be a heavy and slower version of the fighter and will be have two seats a pilot and co-pilot. The pilot will be the one flying and maneuvering onto the targets he will also have control over limited air to air weapons (choose wisely). The co-pilot will be the one in-control of all air to ground weapons and will need to guide the pilot onto the target. The co-pilot will also be in charge of countermeasures.

ALL OF MY WANT!

Please listen to this man CCP, Give us fixed wing aircraft!(I can't fly those damn dropships!)

Id be happy with a smaller close air support version of the drop ship that is actually meant to attack ground targets. I also wouldn't mind a drop ship that could take a bit more damage.

I would rather the Close air support be smaller so it can better maneuver in streets or so I can get to infantry under those huge rigs.

I would just like to know if this is in the plans for the next build or two (after Uprising) or if its just a rough sketch of things to come.

IE - should I focus on infantry right now and not worry about a pilot suit or should I go HAV/DS and level up the pilot suit so I will be ready when there are aerial vehicles available besides the sky taxi

the Assault DropShip varient (unknown if its standar, advance or proto, but there will be Caldari and Gallante) will be coming in Uprising (May 6th) aswell as the Gallante Pilot DropSuit.

Also to the guy talking about the bomber and stuff check this out, its a jet fighter and 1 of thye varients has a turret on the bottum: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=69385&find=unread

Thats the thing though. I have zero interest in being a sky taxi driver even if it does have a small turret on the front of it. The DS would also do nothing for my learning curve as the mechanics would be different between a slow VTOL and a fixed wing fighter.

sorry, I think I quoted the wrong post.

No worries. I just wish we could get some involvement from a DEV to even let us know if this is something that will happen in the next couple builds or not.