Forums » Suggestions
I wasn't saying give everyone everything. I was saying give, itani x1, serco scps, but also have corvus sell an extremely reduced version of these it hacked together from intact ships found on the battle field, e.g. ones whose engines were blown out (backstory). Not reduced enough to make them useless, but reduced enough to make a difference.
You see, if you change them a little, e.g. instead of 21k armor, there'll be 20500 armor in SCP, then it will be still the same vessel, in general the same result in PvP.
But as I said if you start to nerf characteristics to make them different..
my quotation but this won't balance PvP when one player without Itani standings will pilot nerfed valk and another player with X-1. Same with Pormetheus. SCP is SCP while it has 21k armor and 525 thrusts.. If you take off armor or thrusts or make it heavier, this ship will be everything: Wraith guardian, revenant or even ragnarok, but this won't be SCP anymore.
You see, if you change them a little, e.g. instead of 21k armor, there'll be 20500 armor in SCP, then it will be still the same vessel, in general the same result in PvP.
But as I said if you start to nerf characteristics to make them different..
my quotation but this won't balance PvP when one player without Itani standings will pilot nerfed valk and another player with X-1. Same with Pormetheus. SCP is SCP while it has 21k armor and 525 thrusts.. If you take off armor or thrusts or make it heavier, this ship will be everything: Wraith guardian, revenant or even ragnarok, but this won't be SCP anymore.
Increase valk turbo drain to 60
+1
There is another possible solution, you know.
Revert to the SCP of two or three nerfs ago; inability to dodge multiple incoming valks from different angles = fixed.
Revert to the SCP of two or three nerfs ago; inability to dodge multiple incoming valks from different angles = fixed.
"Revert to the SCP of two or three nerfs ago"
+ a whole lot to the good Doctor.
+ a whole lot to the good Doctor.
In this, as with the SCP nerf before, I am against the nerfing of the Valk.
There is nothing wrong with it. The problem is either with the SCP or a lack of something in the Serco inventory that benefits group action.
If you want the Skoda version of the Valk, however, all you have to do is give the Maud X a tweak in speed and spin, maybe at the cost of cargo.
There is nothing wrong with it. The problem is either with the SCP or a lack of something in the Serco inventory that benefits group action.
If you want the Skoda version of the Valk, however, all you have to do is give the Maud X a tweak in speed and spin, maybe at the cost of cargo.
The only reason I would be against putting the old SCP in again is that it would tip the balance in 1 on 1 combat again. The tricky part about this situation is we need to find a way to even the equation in group combat without changing the balance much in 1 on 1 combat, where the prom is already dominant.
I still think creating a new kind of turret, one that's actually useful, and slapping it on the prom would help a great deal in combination with a slight nerf to the valk's thrust while giving it a boost in armor. I think the turbo drain and top speed on the valk is fine. It fills the role of long range armored assault fighter very well. What we need to do is make it not fill the role of a light stunt-fighter as well. That should be a role reserved for the IBG.
We have to keep an eye on how these changes will affect single combat. If we nerf the valk too much due to its abilities in group combat, we run the risk of making it underpowered in 1 on 1 combat. If we buff the prom too much, it becomes the monster that it used to be in 1 on 1 combat. We need to balance group combat somehow without adjusting single combat much.
I still think creating a new kind of turret, one that's actually useful, and slapping it on the prom would help a great deal in combination with a slight nerf to the valk's thrust while giving it a boost in armor. I think the turbo drain and top speed on the valk is fine. It fills the role of long range armored assault fighter very well. What we need to do is make it not fill the role of a light stunt-fighter as well. That should be a role reserved for the IBG.
We have to keep an eye on how these changes will affect single combat. If we nerf the valk too much due to its abilities in group combat, we run the risk of making it underpowered in 1 on 1 combat. If we buff the prom too much, it becomes the monster that it used to be in 1 on 1 combat. We need to balance group combat somehow without adjusting single combat much.
it would tip the balance in 1 on 1 combat again
So what? The SCP is already widely acknowledged as the prime 1v1 combat ship.
So what? The SCP is already widely acknowledged as the prime 1v1 combat ship.
One thing that might help with the prom would be to give it a much weakened version of the Hive Queen shield. The idea here is to up the armour of the prom, so that occasional hits don't hurt it, but a series of solid hits will clobber the shield and leave the prom vulnerable.
The shield generator could, or should be a mission produced artefact, which would require bits from Hive Queens (tech adopted from them, in fact) to build; it should only be available in Serco stations.
Limitations: the ship shield generator would draw a constant low level of power from the ship cells, so it should not be possible to run one continuously, nor to jump with one activated. The shield unit would be purely a combat system, short-term use only, with a nasty habit of blowing up if over-used in combat.
The shield generator could, or should be a mission produced artefact, which would require bits from Hive Queens (tech adopted from them, in fact) to build; it should only be available in Serco stations.
Limitations: the ship shield generator would draw a constant low level of power from the ship cells, so it should not be possible to run one continuously, nor to jump with one activated. The shield unit would be purely a combat system, short-term use only, with a nasty habit of blowing up if over-used in combat.
@lecter: That's true, but then the advantage that the Serco have in 1 on 1 is increased even more. Assuming we are also able to balance group combat, then the Itani are at a distinct disadvantage. They would be inferior in single combat and only even in group combat, leaving them with no advantages in any situation while the serco have a significant one.
@wyrm: thats an interesting idea. But I would be worried about the effect on 1 on 1 combat for the above reasons.
@wyrm: thats an interesting idea. But I would be worried about the effect on 1 on 1 combat for the above reasons.
I don't like the idea of only Serco getting a shield, either. Perhaps one on an Itani bomber that has been mentioned.
This relates to an idea I had a while back: A second 'Other' port.
Give certain ships (a weakened behemoth with slightly lower cargo, a Prom varient, a Rag varient, maye a Centaur varient) a second other port, in which a shield generator could be placed. Another powercell would be forbidden here, maybe "Power Overload" being the reason. The shields could either be manufactured, requiring quite a bit of effort, or bought at capitol stations, for a high price and high licenses (I'm not sure which might be better, though I like Wyrm's idea of Queen parts). The shield generators themselves would be heavy, require constant energy drain, and produce weak protection, perhaps as below:
Shield Generator | MkII | MkIII
Mass: 3,000kgs | 2,800kgs | 2,800kgs
Energy/sec: 20/35 | 17/30 | 20/33 (first number being energy/sec while _not_ charging, second number while charging)
Max Charge: 10,000 | 12,000 | 14,500
Recharge: 2500/s | 3000/s | 4000/s
*Price: 70,000c | 90,000c | 125,000c (experimental tech on this low scale, pricy.)
*Licenses: 9/8/8/4/- | 10/9/8/4/- | 10/10/9/4/-
**Max duration: 120 seconds.
Cooldown: Each second of duration able to use the shield must be recharged, 1/4 second cooldown per second duration (I am not quite sure how to put this). If you were to run the shield down to 4 seconds left before expiring, it would take 29 seconds to completely cooldown. Also, an indicator (likened to an ammo counter) of duration left would be needed. Another thing, perhaps differing rates of heating up based on activity? Multiply the duration time subtracted from overall duration by 2 while the shield is recharging, maybe.
*= Only if sold at Capitol stations.
**=Time allowed for the shield to be in an activated state without cooldown before exploding (as Wyrm suggested). When the shield generator explodes/expires, a small explosion (maybe a bit like a sunflare) would be triggered wherever the second Other port is located, causing damage, 1000-2000?
Rough ideas, will edit later.
I do realise this probably belongs to another thread, but since it's related to this issue, I'll keep it here until I can edit it enough to post it on it's own thread. I'll edit this post with a link.
This relates to an idea I had a while back: A second 'Other' port.
Give certain ships (a weakened behemoth with slightly lower cargo, a Prom varient, a Rag varient, maye a Centaur varient) a second other port, in which a shield generator could be placed. Another powercell would be forbidden here, maybe "Power Overload" being the reason. The shields could either be manufactured, requiring quite a bit of effort, or bought at capitol stations, for a high price and high licenses (I'm not sure which might be better, though I like Wyrm's idea of Queen parts). The shield generators themselves would be heavy, require constant energy drain, and produce weak protection, perhaps as below:
Shield Generator | MkII | MkIII
Mass: 3,000kgs | 2,800kgs | 2,800kgs
Energy/sec: 20/35 | 17/30 | 20/33 (first number being energy/sec while _not_ charging, second number while charging)
Max Charge: 10,000 | 12,000 | 14,500
Recharge: 2500/s | 3000/s | 4000/s
*Price: 70,000c | 90,000c | 125,000c (experimental tech on this low scale, pricy.)
*Licenses: 9/8/8/4/- | 10/9/8/4/- | 10/10/9/4/-
**Max duration: 120 seconds.
Cooldown: Each second of duration able to use the shield must be recharged, 1/4 second cooldown per second duration (I am not quite sure how to put this). If you were to run the shield down to 4 seconds left before expiring, it would take 29 seconds to completely cooldown. Also, an indicator (likened to an ammo counter) of duration left would be needed. Another thing, perhaps differing rates of heating up based on activity? Multiply the duration time subtracted from overall duration by 2 while the shield is recharging, maybe.
*= Only if sold at Capitol stations.
**=Time allowed for the shield to be in an activated state without cooldown before exploding (as Wyrm suggested). When the shield generator explodes/expires, a small explosion (maybe a bit like a sunflare) would be triggered wherever the second Other port is located, causing damage, 1000-2000?
Rough ideas, will edit later.
I do realise this probably belongs to another thread, but since it's related to this issue, I'll keep it here until I can edit it enough to post it on it's own thread. I'll edit this post with a link.
Both the valk and the prom are unbalanced. The prom in 1v1, and the valk in group.
The prom is a complex problem. armor, mass, etc...
The valk is perhaps a simpler problem.
The closest competitor to the valk is the corvus maud.
Bring the performance of the valk closer to the corvus maud, or any fighter of your choice, and it would be less of a problem.
Bring the performance of the prom3 closer to the corvus maud, and it would be more suitable for dealing with valks.
The prom is a complex problem. armor, mass, etc...
The valk is perhaps a simpler problem.
The closest competitor to the valk is the corvus maud.
Bring the performance of the valk closer to the corvus maud, or any fighter of your choice, and it would be less of a problem.
Bring the performance of the prom3 closer to the corvus maud, and it would be more suitable for dealing with valks.
I think that's a good standard to work with. We want to make the valk not quite as quick as it is now, but still with better performance than a corvus maud, possibly more armor as well.
As a potential way to proceed from here, what about the following:
1. Slap a turret onto the prom. But make the turret actually effective. Much more effective than the current turrets in game.
2. See how that balances the situation.
3. If the situation remains unbalanced, then start tweaking the valk. Lower thrust, raise armor and potentially increase mass.
4. Continue tweaking the valk until we can reach a good balance.
As a potential way to proceed from here, what about the following:
1. Slap a turret onto the prom. But make the turret actually effective. Much more effective than the current turrets in game.
2. See how that balances the situation.
3. If the situation remains unbalanced, then start tweaking the valk. Lower thrust, raise armor and potentially increase mass.
4. Continue tweaking the valk until we can reach a good balance.
I wouldn't compare the cormaud to the x1... x1 is 10 times slimmer, and cormaud is 25% more weight... everyone knows that the profile is what counts
I still think the best solution is to give the svg 220 infiniboost, and slap the valks with a 60 or 65 drain.
Ghost isn't complaining about the profile. He is complaining about tactical performance. Profile counts in 1v1. Tactical performance counts in group.
The cormaud is not an X-1. Since I do not blame the cormaud for this, that would leave the blame to rest on...
I am not found of the turret idea. A dev has already cited concerns of game performance.
serco desperately need a chase ship. The prom3 is the closest thing the serco currently have, it just needs to be better at it.
edit: Why is a newb like crusader commenting on pvp balance?
The cormaud is not an X-1. Since I do not blame the cormaud for this, that would leave the blame to rest on...
I am not found of the turret idea. A dev has already cited concerns of game performance.
serco desperately need a chase ship. The prom3 is the closest thing the serco currently have, it just needs to be better at it.
edit: Why is a newb like crusader commenting on pvp balance?
The X-1 does NOT have a profile anywhere NEAR as small as a CorVult. Valks have rather large forward profiles for fighters, in fact. Larger than a Cent, larger than Vults, maybe larger than a Warthog. X-1s, too, not other ones.
It occurs to me with the mention of shields that we could go by something that was hinted at...
The Serco are developing cloaking devices, and the Itani are developing sheilds for fighters. Don't know if that would help or hurt the situation but it could be fun.
The Serco are developing cloaking devices, and the Itani are developing sheilds for fighters. Don't know if that would help or hurt the situation but it could be fun.
There are a number of related issues here. Here's what I see:
+ Serco need a chase ship
+ SCPs are too vulnerable to being flanked in group combat
+ Valks's combination of armor, speed, and agility is exceptional
In my experience, X-1s take some damage when they engage, but generally they seem to be able to pick fights with impunity. I'm actually cool with their ability to disengage, but I wish they payed a heavier price for their mistakes. (Someone can only hurt you when they put themselves at risk.) Reducing its armor looks to me like the cleanest way to do that. But buffing certain other ships rather than nerfing this one is another way to address this.
I don't know whether the SVG or the prom3 would make a better chaser for Serco. I have no objections to the speeding up either. But in group combat, maneuverability is king, so Serco need one of them anointed.
Why not give a more normal spin torque to SCPs? It is the inability to turn around in a sane amount of time that hinders them in chaotic environments, right? Do we really care that much if SCPs get better at lining up flares? If we don't like it we can always take some of its armor away. :-)
+ Serco need a chase ship
+ SCPs are too vulnerable to being flanked in group combat
+ Valks's combination of armor, speed, and agility is exceptional
In my experience, X-1s take some damage when they engage, but generally they seem to be able to pick fights with impunity. I'm actually cool with their ability to disengage, but I wish they payed a heavier price for their mistakes. (Someone can only hurt you when they put themselves at risk.) Reducing its armor looks to me like the cleanest way to do that. But buffing certain other ships rather than nerfing this one is another way to address this.
I don't know whether the SVG or the prom3 would make a better chaser for Serco. I have no objections to the speeding up either. But in group combat, maneuverability is king, so Serco need one of them anointed.
Why not give a more normal spin torque to SCPs? It is the inability to turn around in a sane amount of time that hinders them in chaotic environments, right? Do we really care that much if SCPs get better at lining up flares? If we don't like it we can always take some of its armor away. :-)
The SCP turns only 19.3356% faster than a Rev 3, assuming that they both have sun/gat setups. The damned thing wouldn't be harmed by a spin torque buff. It would also make anyone who wants to equip anything other than a gat turret on their prom slightly happier.