+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? (/showthread.php?tid=2880)
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - Dab - 06-06-2007
Can't do that. Ramming someone does a factor of damage, with some input from your speed if I remember correctly. Simply said; If it does damage to your shield, it'd do damage to your hull. Plus, you'd have to legalize ramming, which would cause way to many problems.. Plus, then if a fighter with no hull hits a BS, it dies instantly.. Some might say its realistic, but its not entirely possible to avoid hitting a BS once or twice if your trying to shoot it in a fighter. Especially if the guy is shooting you, you end up dodging a bolt and hitting the hull. Either way, it is one of the too many possible death knells of fighters. Which is quite unfortunate, and I blame Microsoft for screwing so many things up in such a wonderful game.
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - Archelon - 06-07-2007
Ok - my 2 cents. Get rid of this rule. It does nothing but give someone a reason to take screen shots and scream in the forums. Shield running too.
Engine kills while in cruise is a tactic, plain and simple. You either learn to use it or you don't. You could jump to cruise, circle around to your enemy's back and kill engines (yes - giving you an advantage). But your opponent has the same ability. Smaller ships are more maneuverable than larger ships, but the balance is in the size of the shield - the bigger the ship, the harder to kill - balance is built in on uneven ship classes. For the case where two ships are of even size, they both have similar capabilities and again the argument is mute. I've used cruise in an attempt to escape, my enemy pursued me in cruise. He killed engines (both of us flying straight and level) and fired his fully CODENAME loaded fighter on me - I died. Is this illegal? I say no. He used a tactic to catch me and I got caught in chat (my fault for not paying attention).
Shield running? Ridiculous rule. You only have so many bats/bots on board. Shield running is a tactic to get some shield back. Again - a tactic. Normally gets defeated with CDs and eventually the first guy or gal who uses up all his or her bats/bots ends up dead. Balance is in tact since both players can do the same.
[SARCASM]
Ok - if we are going to keep these rules, maybe we should address odds. If you are a lone fighter up against three or four other fighters, or maybe a couple cap ships, you don't have much of a chance to survive. All you can do is attempt to fight or run (fight or flight). You try to run and you get accused of shield running. "Get the screen shot so we can report him!" Should we create a new rule that limits the number of combatants against a lone fighter?
[/SARCASM]
I hope you noted the sarcasm above, but at the same time get my point. Most rules make since (like level 30 and level 40 rules, Neutral and Freelancer ID rules, etc). But these two rules make no since to me. Balance is in the ability of the pilot to execute these maneuvers, nothing else. As Korrd said above, the only thing right now that determines the winner is the size of the gun. I say lets even the odds against the big guns. Lets even the odds of the lone fighter who's outnumbered.
EDIT: An aside - might want to also address F1 while traversing a jumpgate or jumphole. This is a flaw in the game code, not a tactic. F1 while traversing a jumpgate or jumphole slingshots a player to the far side of the system he / she's entering (extending the range between them and their pursuer).
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - Eppy - 06-07-2007
Quote:Yes, but the Mortar was an explosive weapon, a torpedo. Now, it's an energy weapon. Flaks still remain though.
Oops. Sorry. I haven't used mortars in a looong time.
_____
And like I said-We should allow the so-called "shield-running," but ONLY in Fighter-versus-Capship situations, with the fighter doing the running. That's an accepted tactic.
The Jumphole/F1 trick we shouldn't even think about. Remember, a gu's gotta have somewhere to run to.
Cruise/Engine Kill against fighters is a dirty trick. Bad. Fighters against capships, though? Heck yah. Exploit every advantage you've got.
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - Korrd - 06-07-2007
No. Its annoying and makes the fight last forever. Specially on fighter vs BS situation. The fighter is already hard to hit.
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - Eppy - 06-07-2007
I know, but I like it that way. It makes things more interesting. And besides, capships shouldn't need to use all of their hardpoints for an effective missile screen.
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - Archelon - 06-07-2007
' Wrote:No. Its annoying and makes the fight last forever. Specially on fighter vs BS situation. The fighter is already hard to hit.
Yes - and at some point they should call it a stalemate and move along. There's nothing that I've read where a battle has to end with one ship dead.
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - Eppy - 06-07-2007
Oh, poo. You people aen't fun anymore. Fine, you win.
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - bluntpencil2001 - 06-07-2007
Archelon is right to a point.
But everyone knows stalemates aren't fun.
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - Eppy - 06-07-2007
EXACTLY! See? Support. Somebody should ALWAYS be blown up.
Is the engine kill from cruise rule required? - bluntpencil2001 - 06-07-2007
Well, not always. But this would end up with everything ending in running.