Forums » Suggestions
I'd love to have the wuss cannon then i can fly backwards and shoot at the strike force till my bat goes dead.
I think the UIT (as traders) are a little more balanced now with their new TPG XC. As for military hardware balance (prom/valk), the UIT should not have the same military presence as the nations anyways. If they want to fight and have access to military grade ships they should be forced to pick a side in the war.
What the UIT should get (in addition to the XC) is a better trade benefit from being able to safely cross serco/itani space. With the new faction changes that are coming soon(tm) the UIT will be pretty much the only ones that get neutral standing with both nations? As such they will be able to trade goods between the two nations for huge profit (lets say double what they would get trading between other systems?).
EDIT: The UIT only get their bonus credits from trade if they DON'T choose a side in the war (thus no military grade ships/weapons). If they choose a side they lose standing with the other side and whatdoyaknow, they can't trade across red/blue space =(
What the UIT should get (in addition to the XC) is a better trade benefit from being able to safely cross serco/itani space. With the new faction changes that are coming soon(tm) the UIT will be pretty much the only ones that get neutral standing with both nations? As such they will be able to trade goods between the two nations for huge profit (lets say double what they would get trading between other systems?).
EDIT: The UIT only get their bonus credits from trade if they DON'T choose a side in the war (thus no military grade ships/weapons). If they choose a side they lose standing with the other side and whatdoyaknow, they can't trade across red/blue space =(
Yea, more rewards for wussies so more players go UIT.
How about we declare Serco and Itani NPC factions and everyone just plays UIT then?
How about we declare Serco and Itani NPC factions and everyone just plays UIT then?
Wussies? You mean traders? Is that not what the UIT are supposed to be? Not everyone in this game is here to fight, I always thought that's what the UIT faction was for... Those people that would rather make money than kill. If some of the current UIT didn't know this I'm sure the devs would be happy to switch them over to the serco side. The red/blue would get more balance leading to more conflict/war situations, and I would get more red dots on my radar to shoot at, and all would be good =)
I guess what's really needed is something for those rich UIT to spend their (more easily then red/blue acquired) credits on... I personally like the idea of hired fighter escorts, it's been discussed much and many are worried about exploits. If we can come up with solutions for non-exploitable escorts maybe?
All this and my previous survey idea (which would make new UIT players those that ARE mostly interested in just becoming rich) and maybe that group stats idea ( http://vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/15431 ) (yes, I know this may qualify me as a forum whore with a big ego) to help them rich yellow players manage groups of other players they can pay off ;)
The one thing I don't think should be pushed forward is for the UIT to have equivalent firepower of serco or itani military. I'm sorry but the truth is plain and simple, and it may hurts some of those UIT that chose the wrong faction to being with, the UIT are traders NOT warriors. If you don't believe me just read the damn backstory.
On a side note, we really should have that pirate faction (unaligned or whatnot that starts with KOS with everyone but Corvus where they start at full standing?). Pirate faction should require that you have an alt on the account with minimum 100/500 PK's, to ensure we don't get noobs that start out in grey with KOS from every faction but corvus.
As for serco/itani not getting bonuses? They should each get a special weapon, itani a light energy blaster (neutIV?), serco a heavy weapon (adv AGT?).
I guess what's really needed is something for those rich UIT to spend their (more easily then red/blue acquired) credits on... I personally like the idea of hired fighter escorts, it's been discussed much and many are worried about exploits. If we can come up with solutions for non-exploitable escorts maybe?
All this and my previous survey idea (which would make new UIT players those that ARE mostly interested in just becoming rich) and maybe that group stats idea ( http://vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/15431 ) (yes, I know this may qualify me as a forum whore with a big ego) to help them rich yellow players manage groups of other players they can pay off ;)
The one thing I don't think should be pushed forward is for the UIT to have equivalent firepower of serco or itani military. I'm sorry but the truth is plain and simple, and it may hurts some of those UIT that chose the wrong faction to being with, the UIT are traders NOT warriors. If you don't believe me just read the damn backstory.
On a side note, we really should have that pirate faction (unaligned or whatnot that starts with KOS with everyone but Corvus where they start at full standing?). Pirate faction should require that you have an alt on the account with minimum 100/500 PK's, to ensure we don't get noobs that start out in grey with KOS from every faction but corvus.
As for serco/itani not getting bonuses? They should each get a special weapon, itani a light energy blaster (neutIV?), serco a heavy weapon (adv AGT?).
Holy Gods, did you just suggest giving an advanced AGT to the SCP flying race?
Look.. guys.. seriously. The point of this thread is simple numbers. The Itani get two unique ships. The Serco get two unique ships. Why must the Union have only one? The WTD already exists, so why not make it viable again?
The reduced drain is a great idea, but in combat the WTD still falls short of the cargo variant in maneuverability. Can't the thrust to mass ratio be made equal? Is that so hard?
MkIII: 235/5500 = 4.27%
WTD: 220/5300 = 4.15%
It sounds small, but it makes a massive difference. To make the ratio equal, the hog TD only needs an increase to 226ish. 230 to make the ship the elite version of the hull.
The reduced drain is a great idea, but in combat the WTD still falls short of the cargo variant in maneuverability. Can't the thrust to mass ratio be made equal? Is that so hard?
MkIII: 235/5500 = 4.27%
WTD: 220/5300 = 4.15%
It sounds small, but it makes a massive difference. To make the ratio equal, the hog TD only needs an increase to 226ish. 230 to make the ship the elite version of the hull.
It's because UIT are first and foremost traders. I think it's extremely logical that the two warring factions would have more ship designs that are viable, and ship designs that are more viable. The UIT have plenty advantages, but what they lack is their own effective ship building techniques. If the WTD was removed from the game, and never replaced, I could call that fair.
Besides, since it's drain was decreased it's now more effective than the Mk IV in terms of turboing, and more effective than the Mk II in terms of thrust to mass ratio, making it a unique variant with strengths arguably suited to that of an interceptor. I was supportive of this thread before the recent fix, but now, sir you go too far!
Besides, since it's drain was decreased it's now more effective than the Mk IV in terms of turboing, and more effective than the Mk II in terms of thrust to mass ratio, making it a unique variant with strengths arguably suited to that of an interceptor. I was supportive of this thread before the recent fix, but now, sir you go too far!
I duno, I do agree that the TD could use a bit more of a boost, though not in thrust, but in torque.
So the faction that lives 100% in space has inferior ship building techniques? That's plain stupid. The obvious answer is that their neutrality deals with both warring nations prevents them from building fighters as good as the valk or prom; otherwise, that fighter would soon be seen in Deneb, on both sides, as unscrupulous merchants sell them without regards for the consequences.
I don't think the UIT have an imbalance of fighters, anyway. They have a ton of variants available around their space like the rev C, Orion Hornet, Atlas X, Axia Wraith and so on. If anything, they have too much ships, fighters or otherwise.
Still, I wouldn't mind seeing the TD tweaked so it could actually be useful; as it stands there are better alternatives everywhere. Just don't say it must be done because there's an "imbalance against the UIT".
Itani and Serco benefits should (should, mind you) come whenever military service becomes playable, somewhen soon(tm).
I don't think the UIT have an imbalance of fighters, anyway. They have a ton of variants available around their space like the rev C, Orion Hornet, Atlas X, Axia Wraith and so on. If anything, they have too much ships, fighters or otherwise.
Still, I wouldn't mind seeing the TD tweaked so it could actually be useful; as it stands there are better alternatives everywhere. Just don't say it must be done because there's an "imbalance against the UIT".
Itani and Serco benefits should (should, mind you) come whenever military service becomes playable, somewhen soon(tm).
The new faction system makes a lot of the corporation ships more unique to UIT and allies. Due to this, you're right Jex.
Jex is also right on another point, the UIT build many of the ships that the war consumes. Their ships cannot simply be inferior.
Yall are using the letter of my post to defeat the spirit again. What is the point of my thread? I'll repeat some earlier posts, since there is so much off topic here that people can't find it anymore.
Every vulture model gets better than the one before. mk1 through mk4, and the faction unique variants, each is an improvement on the last. In the hog, this is not true. As far as combat ability, the order for the Warthog platform is 1, 2, TD, 4, 3.
Sure, you can say the TD and mk4 are specialized, but why should anyone pay so much more for a TD to chase people when the mk2 does that better? Why spend more on a mk4, when the mk3 might not need the extra armor due to maneuverability?
In truth the mk3 vs. mk4 is so small a difference that I choose based upon what the station sells. The TD is a special variant, however, so there ought to be a reason to travel to a UIT station and buy one. As it stands, there isn't one.
The essence of this thread in one sentence: Please make the TD the hands-down best warthog in the game, as it should be; not just another option.
Jex is also right on another point, the UIT build many of the ships that the war consumes. Their ships cannot simply be inferior.
Yall are using the letter of my post to defeat the spirit again. What is the point of my thread? I'll repeat some earlier posts, since there is so much off topic here that people can't find it anymore.
Every vulture model gets better than the one before. mk1 through mk4, and the faction unique variants, each is an improvement on the last. In the hog, this is not true. As far as combat ability, the order for the Warthog platform is 1, 2, TD, 4, 3.
Sure, you can say the TD and mk4 are specialized, but why should anyone pay so much more for a TD to chase people when the mk2 does that better? Why spend more on a mk4, when the mk3 might not need the extra armor due to maneuverability?
In truth the mk3 vs. mk4 is so small a difference that I choose based upon what the station sells. The TD is a special variant, however, so there ought to be a reason to travel to a UIT station and buy one. As it stands, there isn't one.
The essence of this thread in one sentence: Please make the TD the hands-down best warthog in the game, as it should be; not just another option.
Alright Jex, I was hoping that you wouldn't call me into specificis, as if I hadn't thought of that OBVIOUS logic puzzle you pointed out about the UIT living in space, thus being good at space ships, blah blah, etc. First off, you're wrong, and you should think things through first. Second off...
I didn't say that they have inferior ship building techniques... I said that they lack their own effective ship buildings techniques. I worded it that carefully, because I knew that some asshole would try to point out that maybe, if you tried very hard, you could intepret what I said to be a false statement, instead of thinking that since the Itani and Serco are at war, of course they're going to have better ship designs for war. Of course the UIT at great at chillin' in space. They're skilled at making big hunks o' metal that fly from point A to point B, and they're skilled at making a whole lot of these for everyone in the universe. What they're not skilled at is designing ships that are effective in, which is to say, designing ships that work well for the goal intended, in this case, war.
(Besides, living in space is actually a disadvantage. A nation that has planets for resources will be better at *anything* they choose to be, in comparison with a nation that has to chip ice off of rocks for water. The Itani have more stations in space than the UIT do anyways. Who cares if the UIT live 100% in space? In comparison, the Itani live 150% in space, *AND* 300% on planets. But obviously, as you so logically pointed out, it's the percentage of people in a nation that determines it's potential output, not the actual population, right? If LeberMac declares himself his own nation, and spends his days wittling sticks aboard his Behemoth in orbit around Sedina, he's *obviously* going to be far superior in Starship construction than the Itani Nation, because 100% of his nation's population is in space.)
If you had used your cognitive process to consider what this thread is about, Aramarth is suggesting that the WTD be brought up to the combat standards of the IBG, or the SGV, and here's why; it's assumed that every ship in this game is more or less balanced. The best Centaurion is about as good as the best Vulture, which is about as good as the best Warthog. They all have their unique advantages, but overall the game is fair. Now, the Serco and Itani variants of their light fighters are definately the best variant available. If the Warthog TD were to become the best variant of Warthog, it would therefor be brought up to the standards of the two warring nations' fighters. That's absurd!
Now, something you both seem to be stuck on is the idea that the TD is the worst variant possible. These are the ways that it's better than the Mk III:
-Better Armour
-Faster Turbo
-Lighter Weight
Mk IV:
-Less Turbo Drain
-Lighter Weight
Mk II:
-Better Armour
-Lighter Weight
Mk I:
-Everything
So, for the last freakin' time, it's a decent ship! If you don't like it, don't fly it. It's the best at what it does, and although there are other variants that are better at some of the things it does, there is no variant which is better in all ways. Aramarth, quit playing language Kung Fu. The essence of this thread when you started it was how the TD was in no way better than the Warthog Mk IV. The Devs heard you. They fixed it. The end.
I didn't say that they have inferior ship building techniques... I said that they lack their own effective ship buildings techniques. I worded it that carefully, because I knew that some asshole would try to point out that maybe, if you tried very hard, you could intepret what I said to be a false statement, instead of thinking that since the Itani and Serco are at war, of course they're going to have better ship designs for war. Of course the UIT at great at chillin' in space. They're skilled at making big hunks o' metal that fly from point A to point B, and they're skilled at making a whole lot of these for everyone in the universe. What they're not skilled at is designing ships that are effective in, which is to say, designing ships that work well for the goal intended, in this case, war.
(Besides, living in space is actually a disadvantage. A nation that has planets for resources will be better at *anything* they choose to be, in comparison with a nation that has to chip ice off of rocks for water. The Itani have more stations in space than the UIT do anyways. Who cares if the UIT live 100% in space? In comparison, the Itani live 150% in space, *AND* 300% on planets. But obviously, as you so logically pointed out, it's the percentage of people in a nation that determines it's potential output, not the actual population, right? If LeberMac declares himself his own nation, and spends his days wittling sticks aboard his Behemoth in orbit around Sedina, he's *obviously* going to be far superior in Starship construction than the Itani Nation, because 100% of his nation's population is in space.)
If you had used your cognitive process to consider what this thread is about, Aramarth is suggesting that the WTD be brought up to the combat standards of the IBG, or the SGV, and here's why; it's assumed that every ship in this game is more or less balanced. The best Centaurion is about as good as the best Vulture, which is about as good as the best Warthog. They all have their unique advantages, but overall the game is fair. Now, the Serco and Itani variants of their light fighters are definately the best variant available. If the Warthog TD were to become the best variant of Warthog, it would therefor be brought up to the standards of the two warring nations' fighters. That's absurd!
Now, something you both seem to be stuck on is the idea that the TD is the worst variant possible. These are the ways that it's better than the Mk III:
-Better Armour
-Faster Turbo
-Lighter Weight
Mk IV:
-Less Turbo Drain
-Lighter Weight
Mk II:
-Better Armour
-Lighter Weight
Mk I:
-Everything
So, for the last freakin' time, it's a decent ship! If you don't like it, don't fly it. It's the best at what it does, and although there are other variants that are better at some of the things it does, there is no variant which is better in all ways. Aramarth, quit playing language Kung Fu. The essence of this thread when you started it was how the TD was in no way better than the Warthog Mk IV. The Devs heard you. They fixed it. The end.
Do you realize that lighter weight doesn't mean anything given lesser thrust? Or are you too busy being the only one who is allowed to have an opinion? I did the math and posted it for heaven's sake. The TD is not the 'best' at anything, unless you're saying it is the best at being first loser at everything.
Ways it is third place (or worse) among hogs:
Turbo drain:
Hog2 is infini, Hog is infini, Hog3 is 55, TD goes here.
Thrust to mass ratio (read: ability to dodge):
Hog3, Hog4, TD
Cargo:
Mineral Hog, Hog3, all others
And what of the armor argument? The hog 4 is more maneuverable, meaning it will get hit less, thereby having, in a virtual sense, more armor.
"I said that they lack their own effective ship buildings techniques"
For the second time, do you realize that the Union builds the very ships that the Itani and Serco use? If their shipbuilding techniques are less effective, every ship in the game has the same disadvantage, save the faction uniques. Read the backstory again please.
The Warthog Territorial Defender is not the best Warthog at anything and that is the reason I revived this thread. If it is not the best at something, why fly to the few UIT stations to buy one? With a mere five more points of thrust, it can be worth it.
Ways it is third place (or worse) among hogs:
Turbo drain:
Hog2 is infini, Hog is infini, Hog3 is 55, TD goes here.
Thrust to mass ratio (read: ability to dodge):
Hog3, Hog4, TD
Cargo:
Mineral Hog, Hog3, all others
And what of the armor argument? The hog 4 is more maneuverable, meaning it will get hit less, thereby having, in a virtual sense, more armor.
"I said that they lack their own effective ship buildings techniques"
For the second time, do you realize that the Union builds the very ships that the Itani and Serco use? If their shipbuilding techniques are less effective, every ship in the game has the same disadvantage, save the faction uniques. Read the backstory again please.
The Warthog Territorial Defender is not the best Warthog at anything and that is the reason I revived this thread. If it is not the best at something, why fly to the few UIT stations to buy one? With a mere five more points of thrust, it can be worth it.
The Warthog Territorial Defender is the ship for people who want the armour of a Mk IV with a better engine for turboing. You don't know how the Thust/Mass ratios work, and neither do I, but I can tell you straight off that it's not linear. My instincts tell me that the 15 more thrust the Mk IV has becomes less important as a ship approaches it's max speed.
Although the TD is not best at anything, it is a good mix between the Mk II and Mk IV. It's got a devent mix of both of those variants' qualities. You're (*Your >.<) logic in this area is flawed... If there were several more variants all with one extremely good quality, but with 200 armour, you could say that the WTD is a terrible ship, because it's not the best at anything. Rather, it's the second best, or even 3rd! No, the truth is that while it's not the best, it's a good average mix between other variants, not necessarily by numbers, but by performance.
The Union doesn't build every ship in the universe, Aramarth. Go open up the backstory, and see how many dozens of times it describes Serco and Itani manufacturing their own weapons of war.
Although the TD is not best at anything, it is a good mix between the Mk II and Mk IV. It's got a devent mix of both of those variants' qualities. You're (*Your >.<) logic in this area is flawed... If there were several more variants all with one extremely good quality, but with 200 armour, you could say that the WTD is a terrible ship, because it's not the best at anything. Rather, it's the second best, or even 3rd! No, the truth is that while it's not the best, it's a good average mix between other variants, not necessarily by numbers, but by performance.
The Union doesn't build every ship in the universe, Aramarth. Go open up the backstory, and see how many dozens of times it describes Serco and Itani manufacturing their own weapons of war.
My instincts tell me that the 15 more thrust the Mk IV has becomes less important as a ship approaches it's max speed.
Physics, however, tell the rest of us that F = ma. So, yes, it's linear, and yes, it counts the same at 0 m/s and at 65 m/s. Even more so in a drag-less environment like the space.
And even if we want to follow your (or "you're", if you prefer) logic, you usually dodge at relatively low speed, and hardly at max speed.
Physics, however, tell the rest of us that F = ma. So, yes, it's linear, and yes, it counts the same at 0 m/s and at 65 m/s. Even more so in a drag-less environment like the space.
And even if we want to follow your (or "you're", if you prefer) logic, you usually dodge at relatively low speed, and hardly at max speed.
The Union doesn't build every ship in the universe, Aramarth. Go open up the backstory, and see how many dozens of times it describes Serco and Itani manufacturing their own weapons of war.
I didn't say every ship in the universe. There you go doing what you accused us of, not reading.
They do build virtually all the capital ships. That little piece of information just crushes your 'effective techniques' argument alone. The UIT are contractors, they build what the Serco and Itani pay them to build, and their techniques are not lacking in any way compared to the Serco (who design ships from the tech the Union gets from the Itani), if indeed when compared to the advanced Itani. They don't need to build every ship in the universe, but realize: the Vulture you buy in Sol is identical to the same model bought in Dau. Their manufacturing ability is thus identical on all the non-unique ships.
And don't give me that 'we don't know' about the thrust. Try flying a few ships. Fly a vulture mkII and then a vulture mkIII and tell me that the change in thrust to mass ratio doesn't make a difference. I was flying a mkI vulture at the beginning of this week, and strafing was agonizing compared to the responsive SVG I am used to. Not turbo, not 'high speed maneuvering', I'm talking basic strafing to avoid collector bots while shooting back with an Ion cannon.
Now Mynt, read carefully. You don't have to agree, but don't come in here and tell us/me that we/I have to accept anything. We/I have every right to suggest that they change more, as this is the suggestion forum. You've presented that you think the change is good enough, and the rest of your typing in this thread is basically just venom to drown out the argument I'm trying to present to the Devs. That is enough, you've been heard. Move along.
For those entering this thread and lost, the topic is here.
I didn't say every ship in the universe. There you go doing what you accused us of, not reading.
They do build virtually all the capital ships. That little piece of information just crushes your 'effective techniques' argument alone. The UIT are contractors, they build what the Serco and Itani pay them to build, and their techniques are not lacking in any way compared to the Serco (who design ships from the tech the Union gets from the Itani), if indeed when compared to the advanced Itani. They don't need to build every ship in the universe, but realize: the Vulture you buy in Sol is identical to the same model bought in Dau. Their manufacturing ability is thus identical on all the non-unique ships.
And don't give me that 'we don't know' about the thrust. Try flying a few ships. Fly a vulture mkII and then a vulture mkIII and tell me that the change in thrust to mass ratio doesn't make a difference. I was flying a mkI vulture at the beginning of this week, and strafing was agonizing compared to the responsive SVG I am used to. Not turbo, not 'high speed maneuvering', I'm talking basic strafing to avoid collector bots while shooting back with an Ion cannon.
Now Mynt, read carefully. You don't have to agree, but don't come in here and tell us/me that we/I have to accept anything. We/I have every right to suggest that they change more, as this is the suggestion forum. You've presented that you think the change is good enough, and the rest of your typing in this thread is basically just venom to drown out the argument I'm trying to present to the Devs. That is enough, you've been heard. Move along.
For those entering this thread and lost, the topic is here.
This game doesn't use physics, Syylk.
Their manufacturing ability is thus identical on all the non-unique ships.
Gee, ya' think? So, where does that prove that the UIT have the technique to build a Valkerye or Promotheus again? UIT are mediocre at best, in terms of building one, very excellent small ship. That's why the WTD, a very small and potentially excellent ship, is mediocre at best. The Itani and Serco are pretty good at doing that on the other hand, hence why the IBG rocks your socks off, and the WTD does not. Get it yet?
Now Mynt, read carefully. You don't have to agree, but don't come in here and tell us/me that we/I have to accept anything. We/I have every right to suggest that they change more, as this is the suggestion forum. You've presented that you think the change is good enough, and the rest of your typing in this thread is basically just venom to drown out the argument I'm trying to present to the Devs. That is enough, you've been heard.
That would be very touching if you had been actually suggesting a change. To the quotes!
-"Please increase the thrust of the Warthog Territorial Defender to what it should be, equal to or better than the Warthog mkIV"
-"I do not argue for giving the WTD a different or better role, I argue for giving it a role period."
-"Can't the thrust to mass ratio be made equal?"
-"Please make the TD the hands-down best warthog in the game, as it should be; not just another option."
I see alot of begging, questioning the validity of the Devs to make this game fair, and arguing. Accept this for a change; You have the right to suggest anything you damn well please, and so do I. Anyways, this thread is escaping the realm of logic, and entering the realm of colorful, irrelevant descriptions. For your benefit, I'll show you one more example of the cognitive process in hopes that you'll swallow your pride and try it yourself. The first step is to read that last statement as if it weren't utterly dripping with vituperation.
"and strafing was agonizing compared to the responsive SVG I am used to. "
Nevermind that the Gaurdian is better than the Mk I Vulture in both thrust, and mass, and therefor not suited for analogy to my suggestion that maybe, the way game mechanics are currently set up, the lighter weight on the WTD may make up for it's lower thrust because it's a possibility that the acceleration, and more importantly, the speed of a ship in this game is not determined through a strictly linear equation.
Abandon all reasoning ye who enter here.
Their manufacturing ability is thus identical on all the non-unique ships.
Gee, ya' think? So, where does that prove that the UIT have the technique to build a Valkerye or Promotheus again? UIT are mediocre at best, in terms of building one, very excellent small ship. That's why the WTD, a very small and potentially excellent ship, is mediocre at best. The Itani and Serco are pretty good at doing that on the other hand, hence why the IBG rocks your socks off, and the WTD does not. Get it yet?
Now Mynt, read carefully. You don't have to agree, but don't come in here and tell us/me that we/I have to accept anything. We/I have every right to suggest that they change more, as this is the suggestion forum. You've presented that you think the change is good enough, and the rest of your typing in this thread is basically just venom to drown out the argument I'm trying to present to the Devs. That is enough, you've been heard.
That would be very touching if you had been actually suggesting a change. To the quotes!
-"Please increase the thrust of the Warthog Territorial Defender to what it should be, equal to or better than the Warthog mkIV"
-"I do not argue for giving the WTD a different or better role, I argue for giving it a role period."
-"Can't the thrust to mass ratio be made equal?"
-"Please make the TD the hands-down best warthog in the game, as it should be; not just another option."
I see alot of begging, questioning the validity of the Devs to make this game fair, and arguing. Accept this for a change; You have the right to suggest anything you damn well please, and so do I. Anyways, this thread is escaping the realm of logic, and entering the realm of colorful, irrelevant descriptions. For your benefit, I'll show you one more example of the cognitive process in hopes that you'll swallow your pride and try it yourself. The first step is to read that last statement as if it weren't utterly dripping with vituperation.
"and strafing was agonizing compared to the responsive SVG I am used to. "
Nevermind that the Gaurdian is better than the Mk I Vulture in both thrust, and mass, and therefor not suited for analogy to my suggestion that maybe, the way game mechanics are currently set up, the lighter weight on the WTD may make up for it's lower thrust because it's a possibility that the acceleration, and more importantly, the speed of a ship in this game is not determined through a strictly linear equation.
Abandon all reasoning ye who enter here.
"Abandon all reasoning ye who enter here."
I tried. I did. Forum Mod, due to http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard?agree=y I'd like his posts removed please.
I tried. I did. Forum Mod, due to http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard?agree=y I'd like his posts removed please.
Hmm...this is all fine and dandy, but what about the hive?
They probably have something to say about the strange lack of UIT ships.
http://design.vendetta-online.com/wiki/index.php?title=Hive
They probably have something to say about the strange lack of UIT ships.
http://design.vendetta-online.com/wiki/index.php?title=Hive
After doing some testing myself, I've come to the conclusion that the warthog TD is just not a viable option. 15 thrust is a pretty large difference when dealing with a ship that has low thrust to begin with. The mass difference does not adequately compensate. I'm not even sure if it does what it has been claimed to do in turbo "better" than the III or IV. It might be able to turbo SLIGHTLY longer, the drain difference is pretty miniscule. But the thrust difference certainly outweighs the mass difference in terms of acceleration and manuverability. So basically what this means is that it is less deadly in combat than a MkIV, an easier target than a MkIV, slower than a mkIV, but can turbo for a slightly longer period of time than a mkIV. And strangely enough, the MkIV is less effective than the mkIII or II in combat.
I'm not saying it needs to be on par with an IBG or an SVG. But if it's worse than regular hog variants, there's no reason to use it and it may as well be taken out of the game. If you want it to be better at turboing and worse at combat, then do it. Reduce its drain more and give it more turbo thrust. My point is that it doesn't have to be THE BEST hog out there in terms of all stats. But it should be the best at SOMETHING and it currently isn't, unless you're running a long distance race without weapons. Or it can be a Jack of all trades, but it currently isn't that either. It needs further adjustments to better suit it for whatever role the devs intended for it. I'd list some suggestions myself, but I don't know which role they want it to play exactly.
For a Jack of all trades: give it less armor, less mass and less drain but more thrust than a mkIV. The mkIV will be tougher, but the TD will be harder to hit.
And I wouldn't worry about them becoming on par with IBGs and SVGs. Unless there are some DRASTIC changes, the IBG and SVG will always be superior to Hogs, at least in 1 on 1 combat. In 2 on 2, I'd take a hog over a IBG anyday. 2 Hogs covering eachother with gatling turrets are VERY deadly (ask crazyspence). They're just mediocre ships for 1 on 1s, but in group battle, the combination of mobility and the ability to hold a gat turret makes them very deadly. Don't let one sneak up behind you. IMO, they fill a role that isn't very popular yet because of the lack of players to provide for less 1 on 1's and more group battles. But they do have a role. Once we see more group battles I think we'll see more hogs.
I'm not saying it needs to be on par with an IBG or an SVG. But if it's worse than regular hog variants, there's no reason to use it and it may as well be taken out of the game. If you want it to be better at turboing and worse at combat, then do it. Reduce its drain more and give it more turbo thrust. My point is that it doesn't have to be THE BEST hog out there in terms of all stats. But it should be the best at SOMETHING and it currently isn't, unless you're running a long distance race without weapons. Or it can be a Jack of all trades, but it currently isn't that either. It needs further adjustments to better suit it for whatever role the devs intended for it. I'd list some suggestions myself, but I don't know which role they want it to play exactly.
For a Jack of all trades: give it less armor, less mass and less drain but more thrust than a mkIV. The mkIV will be tougher, but the TD will be harder to hit.
And I wouldn't worry about them becoming on par with IBGs and SVGs. Unless there are some DRASTIC changes, the IBG and SVG will always be superior to Hogs, at least in 1 on 1 combat. In 2 on 2, I'd take a hog over a IBG anyday. 2 Hogs covering eachother with gatling turrets are VERY deadly (ask crazyspence). They're just mediocre ships for 1 on 1s, but in group battle, the combination of mobility and the ability to hold a gat turret makes them very deadly. Don't let one sneak up behind you. IMO, they fill a role that isn't very popular yet because of the lack of players to provide for less 1 on 1's and more group battles. But they do have a role. Once we see more group battles I think we'll see more hogs.