Are ships too tough?

[VoluptaBox]

Decreasing b/b seems the perfect solution. It would make fights shorter without making mines and MRs unreasonable.

[Jack_Henderson]

like I suggested: less botts and batts or lose armor mulipliers or make em weaker. Advantages, imho:

- GBs may actually do their jobs: annoy snubs and be a proper dangerous escort against snubs

- Solaris and flak really become dangerous and do their job. even in their current form. Same can maybe even be said of flak

- dogfights won't take 30 minutes per fighter IF he doesnt run and retocks.

- Light fighters actually beome dangerous

- bombers lose their omi-potence and have to start actually worying about getting hit.

- transports may be able to bite back a bit more. because right now, their combat abilities are laugable. even for a transport ship.

- ships will become cheaper. as right now, the UAU 8 is 15 mils, for a ship that costs 1-3 mils... This might even stimulate snub useage

------

con however is: NPCs will actually become a threat to player snubs. In some scenarios that's good. In others, it will become a pain.

and the most obvious con: the lesser pilots may be mowed down in great numbers. 20 seconds of action, 4 hours of waiting.

Sounds really good.

About the cons:

> Turn off the ridiculously deadly NPCs (Gallia! OC Sabres with insta-shield-gone weapons, ...). They add nothing to the game. You can leave them to spawn for missions where hard NPCs are actually fun. They are no fun in the lane.

> Change the 4h rule to a reasonable 1 or 2 hours. If you die more often and quicker, the "punishment" doesn't have to be that harsh.

---

+ IMG| DISCORD: https://discord.gg/TWrGWjp
+ IMG| IS RECRUITING: Click to find out more!

[Jinx]

well - its a funny thing about the 4 hours....

back in 4.82 - there was no rule for it - there was a gentlemens consideration when to "re-engage" ... usually when the conflict was well over....

why is it four hours? - and thats the ironic part - cause fights sometimes take so long that making it 2 hours could result in players who died quickly re-engaging into the SAME fight again. ( if you think about the reasoning - you cannot help but smirk a little ) ... so 4 hours was decided to be long enough so that every conflict was .... well over.

if fights go faster - the death penalty can be reduced, too - thats simply causality.


i m not sure if we need to reduce bats / bots of capships at all - after all... fighters / bombers can usually replenish 2.5 times....

i believe all caps can only replenish 1.2 times or so.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[Curios]

Remove bots\bats from fighters\bombers so they can't trade them and getting filled from BS

---

[Dane Summers]

I agree with most of the above - reduce b\b - up the weap speed - reduce multplier of armor

I like short fights - honestly, mixing it up with another fighter should be quick, brutal, and bloody - bombers who go without escort fighters should be easy meat - and to increase the amount of investiture in living or dying, keep the 4 hour limit - there should be a stiff downside to dying so you wont want to be killed.

it helps make the game a little more believable, PvP less frustrating, and all fighter classes useful.

---

[Curios]

Well, if fighter fights will go in a way of a bloody mess with huge input of random in result it will be good to reduce the time of no_enter for fighters\bombers down to 2 hours from 4 hours, capitals will be off from system for 4 hours as it is now. Some RP reason - Fighter is easier to replace then a battleship.

---

[SevereTrinity]

Remove bots\bats from fighters\bombers so they can't trade them and getting filled from BS

Actually, this is an awesome idea. Up snub's armour by a lot, maybe 4/5 times as much, remove bots and bats, maybe buff shields a little, and roll with that. Fights take less time, and the utterly absurd idea of 'snubcraft carrying eight times as many hull plates as they have on naturally as replacements' is gone.

[Trim]

Minespam > all.

But seriously, imagine if ship's armours were reduced by say even a quarter, most ships would be insta nuked. How's that fair on anyone who has a decent amount of skill fighting against a dual mine spatial for example.

(Good idea, must make duel mine spamming spatial)

[Vogel]

This topic has come up repeatedly, and is repeatedly rebuffed because people don't want to be "insta-killed" and "skill has to matter", and all of these other things that don't seem to line up when one factors in lag, and the fact that it'd take in upwards of 2 minutes of solid firing at a stationary fighter to kill it, or that the SNAC is treated as an insta-kill weapon anyway.

And then you have "solutions" which solve nothing, like cutting down bots but uprating armor, which is just a linear exchange and solves nothing, same when people suggest uprating the guns, and then the armor in turn. Where do you think the mini-razor came from? It's called a self-sustaining problem resulting from a lack of conscientious game-building by modders who took an RPG progression system and boiled it down to "everybody's the highest level," at which point, in single-player, means you're able to dominate anything and anyone.

[Hone]

if your worried about mines, dont follow them when your shields are down, theres no need to up fighter armour EVEN MORE.

How about if we dont remove armour upgrades we give them agility penalties, increasing as armour size increases.

Or remove equipment limits, have them take up cargo space, make cap missiles use ammo, an let people choose wether to use an armour upgrade, or leave more room for equipment.

---

User was banned for: Griefing others
Time left: (Permanent)