_Ghostie_, I figured the reduction in weight would take care of the thrust/spin issues. Maybe, but I'd want to test drive first.

That's a good point. Definitely worth a test drive with your proposed changes before tweaking turbo thrust as well.

I think we should fix what we have before we add new things so nix #1 for now.

#3, #9, and #11 would endanger the Valkyrie's soul too much. We want ships that you can solo with.

#4 and #10 sound misguided. You can't make a hit and run machine out of an SCP.

I wont nix #12, but the changes are too severe and my memory of prom3s is too distant for me to evaluate it in my mind.

Something is wrong if the top tier Serco military ship isn't expected to have a major role in group combat.

Updated list in OP with Maal's votes.

I'd also like to call attention to a suggestion made in this thread: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/23635

"While I also disagree with the autopilot idea, I think missioncreek is on the right track about providing tools to assist large groups of players trying to maintain a formation. Even something like an audio que would help. Having the option to enable a warning beep like the current prox warning (except a different sound so you can differentiate between the two) play when you go beyond a certain distance from your group leader, or otherwise designated ship."

Something like this, while inconsequential on its own, could be very useful in conjunction with some of the other suggestions in this thread.

-1 to 7.

Also, at some point, can we +1 ideas?

Crusader? Why would you nix #7 ? In fact, why would you comment on pvp at all? Last I knew you where still trying to figure out how to kill a queen.

Your comment to cast supporting votes does appear to have merit.

+1...

7. Drop armor of valks but leave thrust the same.
9. Reduce valks turbo thrust, increase drain.
11. Increase weight of the valk.

also, some people like the valk for different reasons, and nerfing each valk in a slightly different way would allow more people to keep what they love about the valk. Increasing the drain of the vengeance would allow it to still be a great fighter ship, while chopping the armor on the IDF would allow it to still be a great chaser with pvp capability. The proms have a nice diversity that I feel is missing from the valks.

Increasing the drain of the Vengeance (and the X-1, right?) and lowering the armor of the IDF sounds ok to me.

I would support that idea. In addition to a slight nerf, it creates more variation between the two.

Removed idea 3. Replaced ideas 7 and 9 with new idea 13: Drop armor of IDF, increase drain of vengeance and x1. (On a side note, doesn't it make sense that the ship with less armor and greater speed have a slimmer profile? Maybe the X1 should have the stats of the IDF instead of the vengeance.)

So far, I strongly support any combination of 5, 12 and 13. I'll cast my first "x" against 8. Boosting spin torque would make the prom a god (even more than it already is) in 1 v 1.

I still support 2 and 6 as well. I think the SVG needs a little love.

I'm going to wait to record +1's until we have fewer ideas to choose from. Would like for some more people to weigh in.

I'm indifferent to option 1.

-1 to suggestion 3. Adding armor to an over-armored light fighter does not make sense to me.

-1 to suggestion 5. I think it is worth trying, however I don't think that 1) there is currently enough of a population to make it useful and 2) even with the expanded targeting range, I doubt that it would make for more than an easily avoided deterrent as the turret player will not have the luxury of being able to anticipate ship strafes and rolls while trying to target. I think its a fascinating idea and would love to be proven wrong.

I like idea 13, but I also think the SVG should get a boost. Right now, the SVG is rarely used in greyspace PvP because the CorVult is simply better. My suggestion for SVG changes:

Change max speed to 69 m/s.
Decrease drain to 57 or 54e/s.
Increase turbo speed to 225m/s.
Increase turbo thrust by 5.

Added Death Fluffy's votes.

Removed idea 6 and modified idea 2 to include a combination of buffs (to be done together or separately) to the SVG.

It would be fair to compare the SVG to the corvult, if not necessarily in this thread. I do not think that being able to buy a corvult in GR would address the concerns Ghost has raised. I do think that being able to buy a cormaud or something akin to it in GR would. The SVG is a direct competitor to the corvult and the IBG, and I wish to keep it in that role. I would be happy to support any idea that promotes close balance between the four "top guns" (IBG, Rec-C, Corvult, SVG). But as I say, I think that would deserve it's own thread. And my main point, is that trying to balance the SVG against a problem ship (valk) could create a domino effect, where we then have to rebalance the other top guns to compensate.

I pvp... or used to when I would actually bother to log in.

I would vote against changes of any kind. What's the problem? The problem is not with the ships, but with the people flying them. You say so yourself in your analysis that it requires *teamwork* to do well. Then maybe the players should get off their butts and actually fly the way that will get them victory!

Blah blah, there's not enough players, blah blah. Foo-ey! it takes 2 players to have teamwork and 2v2s are not hard to pick up.

What this game suffers from is cowboy syndrome. This is the same thing that killed games like Tribes 2 on the pubs. Basically, you had a few players that were mega-awesome at flag capping and they'd just cowboy the map. it was incidental to the entire game if you were busy being a good defender and repairing generators and doing the thankless jobs left and right so long as the cowboy could get there and back again. Anyone who played in a clan, though, would tell you right off that a well-oiled machine puts the cowboys in their place really quick.

If people want to "fix" the pvp, they need to "fix" their piloting. The ships are fine, IMO.

[CHRN]Smaug the Terrible

I agree with you Smaug,

-When valks were pulled from nation war itani mopped the floor with everyone else (seems everyone else depended on valks more than us)
-When Serco attacked Bractus m14 in a storm we installed the group radar with our storm radars and cut them off at every turn

Superior Team work yields superior results

At the moment thanks to star craft II our resolve has kind of collapsed....

Leave the ships alone, try different tactics. Nerfers always seem to think everyone should fight the same.

So, are there any players that identify themselves as primarily serco that have a problem with their ships being geared more toward 1v1 rather than group combat?
(Seriously, I'm not trying to be clever or anything, I just don't know, cause I haven't been playing.)

It's always seemed to me that serco attracts the loner type of people whereas itani attracts the buddy-making type. Seems pretty reasonable to me, then, that a group of buddy-types would kick a large amount of ass when fighting a group of loner-types, regardless of the ships involved.

@Smaug + Spence: I used to say the same thing until I invested some time in trying to play Serco.

The point of the OP is not that it takes teamwork to fly well, but that it's exponentially harder for the Serco to work together effectively than it is for the Itani. In short, Itani is easy mode, Serco is hard mode. And there's no greater reward for mastering the hard mode.

It's like having a footrace, but making one of the runners wear a 40 pound pack. It's not impossible for the racer with the 40 pound pack to win if he's good enough, but no matter how skilled he is he's still gonna have to work harder than the other runner in order to accomplish the same result. The playing field is not equal even before skill is brought into the equation.

_Ghost_ you hit the nail right on the head there.

Personally I like 2, 10 and 11.

Also, lets all not forget, once a change is made, it isnt set in stone. If it turns out to be terrible, it can always be changed back and something else tried.

Getting it perfect the first time isn't important, getting it right eventually is.

I did not have time to read ALL of this thread, as it's way too long... and I may be re-hashing someone elses thoughts so please bear with me....

This thread seems to be much about "Valk vs Prom", both in 1v1 single combat (where the prom is king) and group combat (where the valk gets the spotlight). This is all well and good, the 1v1 comparison is fair to make for a 1v1 PvP fight, but the group argument is full of holes I says... Group combat is NOT about "group of ships A is better then group of ships B", any real group is (should be?) composed of a variety of different ships. Thus it should not be "a group of valks is better then a group of proms, NERF!!!!", rather you should look at the bigger picture.

I DO agree that the Itani NEED a heavy fighter in their a arsenal, and that the Serco NEED a good chaser. But I do not think the Prom/Valk should be 1-to-1 counterparts, and each has it's strengths/weaknesses... As is I would say the itani are better at group attack/run tactics, but the serco are far better at group DEFENSE, and if you're trying to HOLD position (eg conquerable station, park your prom near one entrance or near a turret?) hit/run tactics are useless (though they are NOT useless at attack, taking out turrets or running down rags that are taking down your turrets).

But saying "the valk is better at group combat" when the groups consist of ONLY valks and ONLY proms is not fair because you're comparing apples to oranges when you should be comparing the various fruit baskets that each team is more likely to be composed of. By nerfing one/other to be more equal in group combat you will completely F*CK the "1v1" component of balance, leave the poor ships be and add more ships to balance groups, because groups are NOT about ONE type of SHIP!!!

AGREE 1. Add a ship for the Itani and a ship for the Serco to balance the difference.
(NOTE THIS IS THE ONLY SENSIBLE THING BASED ON MY ARGUMENT ABOVE)

STRONGLY DISAGREE 2. Decrease the turbo drain of the SVG and/or increase the turbo thrust.

STRONGLY DISAGREE 3. Decrease the thrust of the valk while increasing the armor.

STRONGLY DISAGREE 4. Increase the turbo thrust of the proms while decreasing their normal thrust slightly.

STRONGLY DISAGREE 5. Give the prom a new turret. One that is much more effective than current player controlled turrets.

I strongly agree with the things Drazed said.

Rethinking my vote:

000) Make Valk/Prom mutually exclusive ships. Including UIT pilots, no one should fly both!

1) Slightly increase weight, decrease armour of all Valks. Only X1, reduce spin torque. (Small change)

2) Slightly increase spin torque of Prom3. Create a Pocket Capship Prom, slower, with more armour, one turret above (top), another rear and almost no storage. Or the Skycmd gets turrets.
(if no other reason, I'd love to see a ship with offensive turret)

3) Add Group/Formation Indicator to HUD.

For other ships, leave as they are.

Before comments, I have flown and combat with all of them, but mostly alone.