i m not too much into pvp, - i do OK in a one on one, and usually manage to escape when the odds are against me - still, we did have some issues with fighter classes overlapping in classes and specs... so here is just a thought.
to make fighters a lot more different than they are now, without taking away their usefulness nor rendering some of them "uber" or "useless" - the following thoughts came to my mind:
- light fighters:
they don t need vastly greater turn rates than other fighters, in terms of thrusting and all, they should do just as their heavier counterparts, so - what if we decreased their turn rates a little but VASTLY increased their strafing speed. - so light fighters would be piloted very different from other ships of the fighterclass, relying more on strafing than flying circles or making rediculous G-changes.
- (very) heavy fighters:
should be the perfect compromise between LFs and bombers - with equal strafing and turning. mind VHFs sort of belong to that class, too. - and its the greatest and most popular shipclass in disco whatsoever - so VHFs/ HFs can remain untouched by that - they are good the way they are.
- bombers:
how about... just a thought... to take away their strafing ability allmost completely. - keep their turn rates, but take their strafing. - so they require the whole ship to dodge - might put them in line with being less able to defend themselves in a fight vs. fighters ... and they ll need to dodge by directional changes against warships - making firing the SN harder but not less effective.
i don t suggest that really / seriously - but its a thought, - any input on that one? - so LFs rely on strafing much, VHFs are balanced and bombers rely on their turn rates. - i wouldn t want to take the bombers capabilities against warships - but take away some of their allround power.
had that feeling cause atm, i feel pretty happy, when i get a corsair in a titan attack my BHG bomber ( i don t attack first without a contract, but i can rely on a lot of pirates to attack me first - so there is no shortage on pvp practice ) - i actually feel superior to some VHFs - and that feels wrong. i know i can outstrafe their 600 ms shots ( on pilots as skilled as i am ) and i can hit them easier with my 750 ms shield breakers - and then rip them apart with my missiles. - and all the time i have the feeling that i should t feel so confident against one of the supposd to be best VHFs by a faction that is expert in shipbuilding.
old thread indeed - if it was possible to give ships different cruise ignition speeds - it would truely be nice to see LFs charge in like 2 seconds - while battleships needed 30 seconds. - not sure if thats possible though.
the idea about nerfing bombers strafe turned out that most bombers appear to rather strafe to avoid capship fire than turning. - so in that case, yea - it would be nerfing the turn rate. but its not about the warships in that case. i d like to keep their ability to dodge warship fire but be more vulnerable to fighter fire. so, whatever they do to avoid capship fire should stay for that matter.
In my experience, bombers can (generally) turn in comparable time to fighters. Lots of bombers can turn quite fast, and can easily bring their superior weapons to the attacking Fighter. Fighters have higher strafes than bombers, so it's more likely that fighters would be dodging the bomber rounds instead of the other way around.
If bomber turning rate was reduced, it would mean they'd have to brave more fire in jousting situations while turning. Currently, the effect can be seen when Light fighters engage bombers. The two joust, the bomber starts turning and the light fighter is already shooting. Maybe this effect can be replicated, but not too extreme (like a Light Fighter vs Bomber). A good bomber pilot should be able to beat a bad fighter pilot, after all.
I guess I am looking at this wrong because in real life a fighter will destroy a bomber. In freelancer bombers are heavy hitting but yet still agile fighters.
As a Junker I have seen alot of Xenos flying around in bombers (a fairly agile bomber) whats the ship to take to beat them?
Value (default) = 5 (seconds)
Value (proposed) = 2.5
One would need to identify which engines are equipped by the light fighter class.
Not hard to do.
As for making larger ships have larger ramp up times for cruise?
Nice in theory - but with cruise disruption and Train CDs - a large ship would NEVER escape combat.
I offer the differentiation to help LFs fulfil their role as interceptors.
Remember that the bomber class is actually divided into two subclasses: light (catamaran, etc.) and heavy (thor, etc.).
The BHG bomber is one of those light bombers in terms of speed and small hitbox, which is why it feels superior to VHFs. But the kicker is: whenever a VHF jousts a bomber the VHF is at a disadvantage, because of the bombers brute force (superior armour, weaponry).
What I see as a fair balance point: bombers should NOT be able to outturn a fighter, otherwise they can get a fighter in their screen far more easier and fire that instakill torp+SN. A VHF should be able to stay on a bombers tail indefinitely, and pummel it with guns rather than be forced to joust it all the time where it is easily killed by a bomber who knows what he is doing. If bombers get a turn rate increase, this will only help them in anti fighter duties while a strafe decrease will worsen them against capships.
Bombers are fine as they are, although the light bombers could use some nerfs while the heavies (especially the Thor and Barghest) could use some hard strafing and powerplant buffs.
![[Image: just_a_signature_by_sjrarj-d63yjsx.png]](https://img00.deviantart.net/ca73/i/2013/123/e/a/just_a_signature_by_sjrarj-d63yjsx.png)
![[Image: GMG_banner.png]](http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/thenoseyshadow/GMG_banner.png)
![[Image: GatewaySig.png]](http://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk32/beander2/GatewaySig.png)
![[Image: sig-9566.jpg]](http://www.clintonio.com/sig-9566.jpg)