DUST Search - Bomber Dropship = Fighter Pre-Nerf

Canari Elphus wrote:

Aeon Amadi wrote:

Ive always had the ideal that until we see numbers, you cant honestly say if something is going to be good or bad. This is just crystal balling something that sounds intriguing and turning it into something awry, making problems where problems dont exist.

If you want advice on making Dropships last, should hit up Internal Error. its interesting to watch an Assault Drop Ship work in thehands of a capable pilot. I highly doubt a specialize dropship that is slow and bulky as it is (not to mention overtly large) is going to replace the role of a fast attack fighter. Fighters will probably be cheap, single man vehicles that cant really take a punch. A flying scout, for instance.

Theyll have their individual playstyles but saying its a fighter pre-nerf is like comparing Scouts to Assault - Assault is better overall but damnit if you can keep up with the sheer speed of the Scout.

Not trolling here but have you seen the drawings for the Gal fighter?

Its a two man ship that has front turrets and an underbelly one. It is about the same mass as a HAV and has both standard and hover mode. I highly doubt that they will be cheap at all. I expect them to have about the same pricing as HAVs.

I dont think anyone is complaining about fighters but you have some very experienced people (in this and other games) that are giving advice about how their possible stats and roles before they are implemented. After all of the issues with dropships, people dont want to see another half-baked aerial vehicle.

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
TEXA5 HiTM4N ROGUE SPADES EoN. 88	Posted - 2013.07.10 06:50:00 - [31] - Quote I think we should stop giving feedback to blam and wolfman. they always ignore us and give us something no one asked for. At least foxfour and his team listen.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. CRONOS. 2402	Posted - 2013.07.10 07:26:00 - [32] - Quote TEXA5 HiTM4N wrote: I think we should stop giving feedback to blam and wolfman. they always ignore us and give us something no one asked for. At least foxfour and his team listen. Cutting off the feedback won't help anything, man. If anything, that might make this even more likely to go the way I fear.
Aizen Intiki Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 133	Posted - 2013.07.10 07:34:00 - [33] - Quote And HAV's have another Dropship problem; they can already hover us and fire down on us, this is just stupid
Dr Allopathy Raging Pack of Homos 120	Posted - 2013.07.10 07:44:00 - [34] - Quote I don't see how it's an issue. People won't mind Caldari redline tanks sniping BDS to hell. edit: Aizen Intiki wrote: And HAV's have another Dropship problem; they can already hover us and fire down on us, this is just stupid If you can't take it down through teamwork or maneuvering, then you should work on your driving.
2-Ton Twenty-One Internal Error. League of Infamy 693	Posted - 2013.07.10 09:04:00 - [35] - Quote I feel the way of thinking of DS is wrong, instead we should think of them by their air class. really a dropship is just a LAV by a dif name, expanding the roles it can perform I don't feel is a bad option especially with how much SP already has to be invested with them. I would say when looking to the future we should think of them more like drop suits. And the Drop ship version of a air vech should be the Logi suit of the air. able to do a little bit of everything. I don't feel adding options to it now is taking away from options in the future. DS need re-balancing VS ground infantry AV that's for sure. But that could also be just because a FG is a hard counter to the fact that we ONLY have dropships and no other air vech. Hitting a fast moving small air vech with a forge gun would be quite difficult. Expessialy if said small air veh can tank a FG round and fly out rep and fly back in. DS are slow and big so its a easy FG target, other air veh will probably be way smaller single seaters.
Canari Elphus Pro Hic Immortalis League of Infamy 173	Posted - 2013.07.10 10:21:00 - [36] - Quote If memory serves me, the Gallente fighter that they have mocked up will have a hover mode to it so if there is a bomber variant of that then we will still have the same issue. I still stand by my origional proposal for weapons on fighters. Create new classes of weapons that would be 'medium' turrets that have less damage but longer range than what tanks currently have. Pilot - They would be able to cycle between two weapons. - Missiles (choose to equip either dumbfire ground missiles or lock-on swarm-type for AV) - Fixed position front turret (this gives strafing ability but limits the ability to camp) Gunner - Would have a rotating turret under the craft The fighters would speed tank so that they dont become hover-mode killers. Dropships need to be dropships. Their job is to quickly move troops to a forward objective. I think that CCP needs to do a massive rethink on them when they plan on bringing in fighters. Dropships will become extremely important if we get larger maps where you will need them to effectively be able to move from one objective to the next. Fighters need to be escort/interceptors for dropships and then provide harassment at objectives. The new AA Tank that was proposed would be balance against them at the objective.
Foxhound Elite Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 274	Posted - 2013.07.10 10:44:00 - [37] - Quote Yesterday when I was flying my dropship around, one of my squad mates started sounding a bit pressured on comms. He was being charged by a large group of the enemy and was more or less, pinned down. Another of my squad mates went into the fray to help but only ended up pinning himself down too... I knew what had to be done, so I swooped in , parked myself in between the enemy and my squad mates, successfully evacuating them from the entrenching enemy horde, but had been hit by two AV grenades while taking off, ... now we barely made it out alive, seeing as I was flying my assault dropship variant at the time and a third AV grenade would have finished us off (which is a bit ridiculous in my opinion)... long story short, I successfully rescued two of my squad mates from losing their clones and that, not the front-mounted turret being able to one-shot unsuspecting infantry, gave me the most satisfaction in the game so far. I love flying dropships, ask anyone in my corp; it's what I do. The problem is, I can rarely do this because I'm usually shot down by a railgun tank, buried in the red-line, a single forge gunner (let alone more than one), even swarm launchers are a major threat. They need to fix the current dropships before adding in new ones. Give them a HP buff, more resistances, make them cheaper,... SOMETHING, for christs sake! I've said this in multiple forum posts already and have yet to hear anything back yet.
Aeon Amadi A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S. League of Infamy 1917	Posted - 2013.07.10 10:58:00 - [38] - Quote Ive always had the ideal that until we see numbers, you cant honestly say if something is going to be good or bad. This is just crystal balling something that sounds intriguing and turning it into something awry, making problems where problems dont exist. If you want advice on making Dropships last, should hit up Internal Error. its interesting to watch an Assault Drop Ship work in thehands of a capable pilot. I highly doubt a specialize dropship that is slow and bulky as it is (not to mention overtly large) is going to replace the role of a fast attack fighter. Fighters will probably be cheap, single man vehicles that cant really take a punch. A flying scout, for instance. Theyll have their individual playstyles but saying its a fighter pre-nerf is like comparing Scouts to Assault - Assault is better overall but damnit if you can keep up with the sheer speed of the Scout.
Canari Elphus Pro Hic Immortalis League of Infamy 174	Posted - 2013.07.10 11:24:00 - [39] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Ive always had the ideal that until we see numbers, you cant honestly say if something is going to be good or bad. This is just crystal balling something that sounds intriguing and turning it into something awry, making problems where problems dont exist. If you want advice on making Dropships last, should hit up Internal Error. its interesting to watch an Assault Drop Ship work in thehands of a capable pilot. I highly doubt a specialize dropship that is slow and bulky as it is (not to mention overtly large) is going to replace the role of a fast attack fighter. Fighters will probably be cheap, single man vehicles that cant really take a punch. A flying scout, for instance. Theyll have their individual playstyles but saying its a fighter pre-nerf is like comparing Scouts to Assault - Assault is better overall but damnit if you can keep up with the sheer speed of the Scout. Not trolling here but have you seen the drawings for the Gal fighter? Its a two man ship that has front turrets and an underbelly one. It is about the same mass as a HAV and has both standard and hover mode. I highly doubt that they will be cheap at all. I expect them to have about the same pricing as HAVs. I dont think anyone is complaining about fighters but you have some very experienced people (in this and other games) that are giving advice about how their possible stats and roles before they are implemented. After all of the issues with dropships, people dont want to see another half-baked aerial vehicle.
Aeon Amadi A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S. League of Infamy 1917	Posted - 2013.07.10 14:07:00 - [40] - Quote Canari Elphus wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Ive always had the ideal that until we see numbers, you cant honestly say if something is going to be good or bad. This is just crystal balling something that sounds intriguing and turning it into something awry, making problems where problems dont exist. If you want advice on making Dropships last, should hit up Internal Error. its interesting to watch an Assault Drop Ship work in thehands of a capable pilot. I highly doubt a specialize dropship that is slow and bulky as it is (not to mention overtly large) is going to replace the role of a fast attack fighter. Fighters will probably be cheap, single man vehicles that cant really take a punch. A flying scout, for instance. Theyll have their individual playstyles but saying its a fighter pre-nerf is like comparing Scouts to Assault - Assault is better overall but damnit if you can keep up with the sheer speed of the Scout. Not trolling here but have you seen the drawings for the Gal fighter? Its a two man ship that has front turrets and an underbelly one. It is about the same mass as a HAV and has both standard and hover mode. I highly doubt that they will be cheap at all. I expect them to have about the same pricing as HAVs. I dont think anyone is complaining about fighters but you have some very experienced people (in this and other games) that are giving advice about how their possible stats and roles before they are implemented. After all of the issues with dropships, people dont want to see another half-baked aerial vehicle. Yeah, amazingly enough the Plasma Cannon had a holographic sight in the picture but it doesnt have it. Concept art and demo renders are never good sources of information, theyre just that: concept. Andif were using concept as our primary sourceof evidence, the 2009 fanfest vid showed it was a single pilot as far as anyone knew. Honestly, I think its mostly selfinterested. Assault and Heavies are very similar in role but have unique differences and Imsure the bomber dropshipand the fighter will be as well.

TEXA5 HiTM4N ROGUE SPADES EoN. 90	Posted - 2013.07.11 22:18:00 - [41] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: TEXA5 HiTM4N wrote: I think we should stop giving feedback to blam and wolfman. they always ignore us and give us something no one asked for. At least foxfour and his team listen. Cutting off the feedback won't help anything, man. If anything, that might make this even more likely to go the way I fear. I agree. I am just fed up with the guys that handle the balance of this game.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. CRONOS. 2423	Posted - 2013.07.12 00:31:00 - [42] - Quote TEXA5 HiTM4N wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: TEXA5 HiTM4N wrote: I think we should stop giving feedback to blam and wolfman. they always ignore us and give us something no one asked for. At least foxfour and his team listen. Cutting off the feedback won't help anything, man. If anything, that might make this even more likely to go the way I fear. I agree. I am just fed up with the guys that handle the balance of this game. I'm starting to understand that frustration, but if the new work on Planetary Conquest is any indication, they're really working at trying to improve.
gbghg L.O.T.I.S. RISE of LEGION 2612	Posted - 2013.07.12 01:13:00 - [43] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: TEXA5 HiTM4N wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: TEXA5 HiTM4N wrote: I think we should stop giving feedback to blam and wolfman. they always ignore us and give us something no one asked for. At least foxfour and his team listen. Cutting off the feedback won't help anything, man. If anything, that might make this even more likely to go the way I fear. I agree. I am just fed up with the guys that handle the balance of this game. I'm starting to understand that frustration, but if the new work on Planetary Conquest is any indication, they're really working at trying to improve. We know that they're trying to improve thongs it's just we don't see any indication of their work other than stealth nerds or huge changes which they spring on us in updates. Take team true grit as an example, they laid out how PC was going to work, they then created some feedback threads which were absolutely huge, they took our feedback reworked the numbers and threw them back out there, then they listens to our feedback again and made further changes. And them there's the dev blogs, they showed us the changes they were bringing, and they give us plenty of time to read through and look for any bad things or exploits we can use. They don't act like we're looking over their shoulder and throw everything singles thing they think of at us, they take a few ideas they think could work and want feedback on and present them to us to discuss and argue about and make threadnaughts. If the other dev teams like blam!'s one could even be halfway like that I would be infinitely happier.
CharCharOdell Shining Flame Amarr Empire 455	Posted - 2013.07.12 02:12:00 - [44] - Quote i wouldnt worry. it's vehicle, and therefore wont be very usefull
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. CRONOS. 2425	Posted - 2013.07.12 06:23:00 - [45] - Quote CharCharOdell wrote: i wouldnt worry. it's vehicle, and therefore wont be very usefull Unlimited free ****** vehicles for everyone. Instant balance.
Krom Ganesh Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 182	Posted - 2013.07.12 06:35:00 - [46] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: The days of the "Strategic Bomber" are pretty much gone. My country is currently continuing to downscale its force of B-52s, for instance. I think the Fighters, despite their name, will be able to fill this role just fine. You rarely see the use of larger bomber aircraft due to the prevalence of anti-air,... Just as a note, large bombers fell out of favor mainly because of two reasons. First, due to advances in technology, we were able to create larger impacts in smaller packages, thus not as much space for the same amount of boom. Secondly, we developed smart bombs that are accurate within 3m so we don't have to blow up a quarter mile just to make sure we hit a single target.


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page