Forums » Suggestions
Props to the OP. Seriously, damned good analysis. Now for my two cents...
I agree a Valk nerf is in order. Lowering thrust or increasing weight is one of the worst possible nerfs, however. Catching a non-cargo ship that doesn't want to be caught is already pretty near impossible; nerfing the 2nd best chase-ship's ability to chase (the best chase ship – greyhound – is designed to chase cargo ships... and even it has trouble) would be detrimental to gameplay.
Instead of nerfing the Valk's chase ability, let's lower the armor by 1-1.5k across the board, and let's give the hardest valk to hit (the x1) 57/s or 60/s drain.
While we are at it, let's bump the SVG's thrust by 10N (for 245N non-turbo and 270N turbo), and bring it's turbo drain down to 55/s. I'm also not against putting a turret on the back of the prom, though as Alloh mentioned a non-stabalized turret on the back of a fighter might prove not very effective. At the very least, the SCP should be given a built-in Shared Group Radar Extender; in group combat the SCP is akin to a stationary weapons platform (don't kid yourself... it can't effectively chase enemy fighters), and it would be nice if it could better coordinate its attacks.
These changes would diminish the valk's ability to hit and run with relative impunity. They would give the serco a fighter with which to launch hit-and-run assaults, and give the prom a better chance at defending itself against a swarm of attackers while not seriously buffing it's 1v1 capability.
Even with these changes, I believe the Itani will still be an easier role to play in group combat. However, with a better interceptor and with the semi-recent addition of radar occlusion, the Serco can use tactics to gain the upper hand.
I agree a Valk nerf is in order. Lowering thrust or increasing weight is one of the worst possible nerfs, however. Catching a non-cargo ship that doesn't want to be caught is already pretty near impossible; nerfing the 2nd best chase-ship's ability to chase (the best chase ship – greyhound – is designed to chase cargo ships... and even it has trouble) would be detrimental to gameplay.
Instead of nerfing the Valk's chase ability, let's lower the armor by 1-1.5k across the board, and let's give the hardest valk to hit (the x1) 57/s or 60/s drain.
While we are at it, let's bump the SVG's thrust by 10N (for 245N non-turbo and 270N turbo), and bring it's turbo drain down to 55/s. I'm also not against putting a turret on the back of the prom, though as Alloh mentioned a non-stabalized turret on the back of a fighter might prove not very effective. At the very least, the SCP should be given a built-in Shared Group Radar Extender; in group combat the SCP is akin to a stationary weapons platform (don't kid yourself... it can't effectively chase enemy fighters), and it would be nice if it could better coordinate its attacks.
These changes would diminish the valk's ability to hit and run with relative impunity. They would give the serco a fighter with which to launch hit-and-run assaults, and give the prom a better chance at defending itself against a swarm of attackers while not seriously buffing it's 1v1 capability.
Even with these changes, I believe the Itani will still be an easier role to play in group combat. However, with a better interceptor and with the semi-recent addition of radar occlusion, the Serco can use tactics to gain the upper hand.
+1 Atice, interesting..
I like the idea of nerfing the armor a little bit to make mistakes more costly. On the contrary, something to keep in mind is the hidden benefit of dropping the thrust instead of dropping armor is that it creates a more defined role for the IBG, which as lecter said, has no real incentive to be used over the valk.
Although, to be honest, I'm starting to lean more towards the Shedu's point of view, leaving the valk as is and giving the Serco a boost as a solution.
While we are at it, let's bump the SVG's thrust by 10N (for 245N non-turbo and 270N turbo), and bring it's turbo drain down to 55/s
Yes to this. Absolutely. SVG has long been the runt of the vult family and needs some love.
Here's an idea; I think we can all agree that the main issue at hand is the Serco do not have enough battlefield mobility to compete with the Itani. So what if we give the SCP a slight nerf to its normal thrust, but a significant boost to its turbo thrust? This would give it much greater battlefield mobility, while the nerf to regular thrust would keep it from becoming too powerful and maybe even balance it in 1 v 1 at the same time.
Although, to be honest, I'm starting to lean more towards the Shedu's point of view, leaving the valk as is and giving the Serco a boost as a solution.
While we are at it, let's bump the SVG's thrust by 10N (for 245N non-turbo and 270N turbo), and bring it's turbo drain down to 55/s
Yes to this. Absolutely. SVG has long been the runt of the vult family and needs some love.
Here's an idea; I think we can all agree that the main issue at hand is the Serco do not have enough battlefield mobility to compete with the Itani. So what if we give the SCP a slight nerf to its normal thrust, but a significant boost to its turbo thrust? This would give it much greater battlefield mobility, while the nerf to regular thrust would keep it from becoming too powerful and maybe even balance it in 1 v 1 at the same time.
Here's my current opinion:
-Increase the SVG's turbo thrust, as Ghost mentioned, while lowering its energy drain to 55 m/s.
-Increase the spin torque of the Prom III to 14 Nm, decrease its thrust to 500, and increase its turbo speed to 215 m/s.
-Increase the turbo speeds of the Proms I and II to 210 m/s, increase both of their spin torques by .5, decrease their thrusts by 5, and increase their turbo thrusts by 10.
-Decrease the SCP's thrust to 505 N, decrease its turbo energy to 57/s, increase its turbo thrust to 550 N, increase its spin torque to 12.0 Nm
-Increase IBG turbo speed to 223 m/s and decrease its energy drain to 58/s (Superlight gets 220 m/s)
-Increase valk armor by 1500, decrease turbo thrust by 15, decrease the Rune's turbo speed by 2, decrease all the turbo speeds of the valks other than the Rune by 5, and decrease thrust by 5 across the board. (I dunno about decreasing regular thrust, it would seem a little strange, to me, to have such a larger regular thrust than turbo thrust).
Thoughts?
-Increase the SVG's turbo thrust, as Ghost mentioned, while lowering its energy drain to 55 m/s.
-Increase the spin torque of the Prom III to 14 Nm, decrease its thrust to 500, and increase its turbo speed to 215 m/s.
-Increase the turbo speeds of the Proms I and II to 210 m/s, increase both of their spin torques by .5, decrease their thrusts by 5, and increase their turbo thrusts by 10.
-Decrease the SCP's thrust to 505 N, decrease its turbo energy to 57/s, increase its turbo thrust to 550 N, increase its spin torque to 12.0 Nm
-Increase IBG turbo speed to 223 m/s and decrease its energy drain to 58/s (Superlight gets 220 m/s)
-Increase valk armor by 1500, decrease turbo thrust by 15, decrease the Rune's turbo speed by 2, decrease all the turbo speeds of the valks other than the Rune by 5, and decrease thrust by 5 across the board. (I dunno about decreasing regular thrust, it would seem a little strange, to me, to have such a larger regular thrust than turbo thrust).
Thoughts?
Rather then all these massive changes, why not just give the svg some turbo thrust and lower the drain, as suggested. This gives the Serco a faster, nimble chaser to counter the valk run.
It also means that the Serco can use tactics to fight in group battles, such has having SVG escorts/interceptors flying with the heavy weapons platform (Prom)
It seems logical to me that making a minimum change, then evaluating the result would be a better route rather then making MANY changes, then trying to figure out which one of them is the one that sucks.
It also means that the Serco can use tactics to fight in group battles, such has having SVG escorts/interceptors flying with the heavy weapons platform (Prom)
It seems logical to me that making a minimum change, then evaluating the result would be a better route rather then making MANY changes, then trying to figure out which one of them is the one that sucks.
damn you people and always wanting to take shit away. there is no need to nerf anything the answer is the ADD something we already have very recent posts in other threads by people saying how much they enjoy the variety of ships and now you want to nerf them? last time i checked to get the x-1 you had to take a test (albiet you could easily cheat the system but that is for another thread)
I propose adding 2 new ships (a serco chase ship and an itani bomber) would be an infinitely better solution then nerfing pre-existing ships.
I propose adding 2 new ships (a serco chase ship and an itani bomber) would be an infinitely better solution then nerfing pre-existing ships.
+1 Peytros
I agree with Shank's idea for increasing the abilities of the IBG.
I agree with adjusting the SVG as mentioned.
Two new ships would be nice, and I think the developers mentioned they had a new recruit able to mess with ship design.
I agree with adjusting the SVG as mentioned.
Two new ships would be nice, and I think the developers mentioned they had a new recruit able to mess with ship design.
Adding ships is a good long-term solution. It's a very time consuming project for the devs to add one ship let alone two. If this is the solution we adopt, don't expect to see it actually in game for several months. Not to mention the time required to tweak the balance of each ship after they're added in.
Moreover... the valk has ALWAYS been insanely overpowered. Pretty much the only time it is not overpowered is in an 1v1 with a prom.
uh this isn't really a game breaking bug or anything ghost its been this way for a year or more plus they got the Hound in game pretty quickly.
They didn't have to create a new model for the hound. That's the time consuming part. If people are willing to wait that long for a fix (and it will be months unless they already have a model in the tubes) then I'm completely fine with it. Not to mention the fact that time spent creating new models is time not spent on developing other game features. I'm not subbed at the moment anyways so the time doesn't really matter much to me personally. I just figured people would appreciate a quick fix for the moment considering, like you said, it's been this way for a year or more.
Nothing is to say that we can't do both. Tweak the valk and the prom and add two new ships.
Nothing is to say that we can't do both. Tweak the valk and the prom and add two new ships.
The valk's tactical advantage is across the board, not just against proms. Fixing the prom won't fix the valk. I could support the lowering armor idea.
I think the serco vult is a great ship as is. the prom4 is great. the prom2 is great in it's proper role. it is the prom3 that sucks.
I think the serco vult is a great ship as is. the prom4 is great. the prom2 is great in it's proper role. it is the prom3 that sucks.
ok im just going by whats the the wiki here
The fastest valk, the IDF weighs 2900 kg and has a turbo thrust of 235 that is about .081 per kg
The X1 and the vengence have identical stats except the slight profile difference. 3000kg and 230 turbo .076 per kg
The Greyhound weigs 5000kg and has a turbo thrust of 350 or .07 per kg.
So in a straight line the above mentioned valkaries each have a 55 drain. which puts them at a full minute of turbo. I haven't flown a valk ever, but I would guess they reach full speed in no more than 10 seconds. That gives them a one shot reach of over 11km on an ultra charge and over 10km on a fast charge. Im not even adding in the distance they cover in the first 10 seconds.
10km is really far in this game, the 55 drain and 225 turbo speed of the valk makes it almost as good as infini boost. the hound might beat the IDF in a real long run, but to pass it, it'd be after that 10-11 km range, realistically, further out than that as I highballed the time for acceleration.
The fastest valk, the IDF weighs 2900 kg and has a turbo thrust of 235 that is about .081 per kg
The X1 and the vengence have identical stats except the slight profile difference. 3000kg and 230 turbo .076 per kg
The Greyhound weigs 5000kg and has a turbo thrust of 350 or .07 per kg.
So in a straight line the above mentioned valkaries each have a 55 drain. which puts them at a full minute of turbo. I haven't flown a valk ever, but I would guess they reach full speed in no more than 10 seconds. That gives them a one shot reach of over 11km on an ultra charge and over 10km on a fast charge. Im not even adding in the distance they cover in the first 10 seconds.
10km is really far in this game, the 55 drain and 225 turbo speed of the valk makes it almost as good as infini boost. the hound might beat the IDF in a real long run, but to pass it, it'd be after that 10-11 km range, realistically, further out than that as I highballed the time for acceleration.
Jesus, we need to lighten up the Hound.
couldn't agree more doc, id even sacrifice more than half its strafing thrust to drop it down by 2000kg. then it'd take off like a rail pellet.
Mmm, 1/4 of the strafing thrust. It's already a damn EC88 in that department.
Pretty sure greyhound suggestions should be in it's own thread.
The wiki must be wrong. I could have swore the X-1 had 10,500 armor.
My suggestions:
Valk MkI : Leave as is.
Vengeance: Increase turbo drain to 60
Rune : Leave as is
IDF : Reduce armor to match Rune/MkI
X-1 : Increase turbo drain to 60
Prom3: Increase turbo speed to 215
The wiki must be wrong. I could have swore the X-1 had 10,500 armor.
My suggestions:
Valk MkI : Leave as is.
Vengeance: Increase turbo drain to 60
Rune : Leave as is
IDF : Reduce armor to match Rune/MkI
X-1 : Increase turbo drain to 60
Prom3: Increase turbo speed to 215
Hound tweaks have just as much place in "The State of Vendetta PvP" as does a Valk/Prom tweak discussion :P
That still leaves the idf as a much better chaser than the ship specially designed as a chase ship.