Heavy Fighter's Cruise Speed

[Narcotic]

Right now, you rarely see anyone flying Heavy Fighters, since they lack everything but a bit more agility. So I thought why not increasing their cruise speed to 375 m/s?

So we'd have:

VHF: 350 m/s
HF: 375 m/s
LF: 400 m/s

Overpowered? No. Reasonable? Yes.

---

To keep the discussion going, I'll drop another idea into here:

"Nerv Battleships to 300 m/s and Cruisers/BC to 325 m/s?" What do you say?

---

Lee's Logs | Lee's Diary | Nat's Story | AI Shodan | Rogue Clyde | Braun's Logs | The Narcotic | The Pandora | Biographies | Feedback

[Ursus]

The main attributes are speed/agility, hull/shield, powerplant, weapon hardpoints. HF class is is tied with VHF class on speed/agility, and is weaker in each of the other three categories. There is no reason to play HF. A slight bit of speed would make it a bit less stupid to fly one, but an HF will still lose most of the time due to lack of firepower, and still be unable to shoot down a bomber with freighter shields before the bomber killed a target. Balance is that bad.

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[Challenger]

Up the cruise speed to 375, and give each HF a second CM slot. That HF-class vessels are inferior to VHF is sensible in-RP; they require fewer resources to make and cost less, so they should fold like paper planes in a straight up fight with their more robust siblings. Their only advantages should be maneuverability, raw engine output, and (perhaps) cloak fuel consumption.

[Ursus]

Their only advantages should be maneuverability, raw engine output, and (perhaps) cloak fuel consumption.

HF would definitely be better served with VHF powerplant and 10/9 weapons instead of a speed boost. They would still be weak hull/shield, but they could get behind something and shoot the damn thing down.

Personally I think VHF class should have agility reduced across the board by about 10% *AND* should be the only class with mines and fighter torp slots. HF should be the shooter class, VHF should be the utility fighter.

But you cant do that either because some of the light bombers are already better than VHFs

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[Challenger]

Their only advantages should be maneuverability, raw engine output, and (perhaps) cloak fuel consumption.

HF would definitely be better served with VHF powerplant and 10/9 weapons instead of a speed boost. They would still be weak hull/shield, but they could get behind something and shoot the damn thing down.

Personally I think VHF class should have agility reduced across the board by about 10% *AND* should be the only class with mines and fighter torp slots. HF should be the shooter class, VHF should be the utility fighter.

But you cant do that either because some of the light bombers are already better than VHFs

If you're going for even fights between HF and VHF-class fighters, then you're absolutely right. However, I'm still not convinced that this is a reasonable premise for balance. In my mind, choosing a smaller fighter is appropriate when combat should be avoided. If I expect a scrap, I'd be nuts to take out anything short of an armored VHF.

But on the other hand, I could be misunderstanding the balance goal here. Are heavy fighters supposed to be able to take down VHFs?

[Ursus]

But on the other hand, I could be misunderstanding the balance goal here. Are heavy fighters supposed to be able to take down VHFs?

If the 'goal' is to have people fly HFs, then yeah.

The point of balance for snubs is that their guns fire forward, meaninig they have to point the whole ship at the target. If an HF and a VHF point noses at each other then the big ship should win because more guns and more hull. But if the HF is able to get behind the VHF and point at his engine, the HF should be able to dominate. HF as a class lacks the agility (which is identical with VHF class) and the powercore and firepower to do that currently, it struggles to get into position and then ... nothing ... the guns suck and the power runs out very quickly.

ps--disclaimer again, it aint happening, due to lots and lots of ingrained factors (not enough faction HFs to replace current VHFs, for example, lack of bomber balance, for another)

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[Narcotic]

I wouldn't change anything but their cruise speed. Anything else would require too much balancing.

However, it's true - as the HFs are now, they're only useful in groupfights (where VHFs do even better).

---

Lee's Logs | Lee's Diary | Nat's Story | AI Shodan | Rogue Clyde | Braun's Logs | The Narcotic | The Pandora | Biographies | Feedback

[Challenger]

The point of balance for snubs is that their guns fire forward, meaninig they have to point the whole ship at the target. If you are able to get behind your target and point your ship at his engine, you should be able to dominate. HF as a class lacks the agility (which is identical with VHF class) and the powercore and firepower to do that currently. So basically you would want something where LF>HF>VHF>bomber>caps with some tweaking to prevent OPness, but thats not how it works here and instead we have LB>everything>VHF>other-fighters

I see, my error was in framing fighter combat as similar to capital ship slugging matches; a constant exchange of blows. In reality the instantaneous advantage during snub fights should go to the combatant who can control positioning, which would favor lighter and more agile ships.

This makes sense. I like it.

[Ursus]

Okay. HF would become slightly more interesting if it were able to run away once it broke CD range.

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[Anaximander]

I'm with Ursus on this one.

And naturally against any more cap nerfs, Blodo already said they're gonna nerf cloaks to some degree next update and perhaps Jump Drives after that. Nobody in their right mind would want to fly a cap with 0 chance of escape - if caps were rebalanced to be proper tanks, then maybe, but no more nerfs towards caps the way they are now.