Forums » General
Gah! I had been idle from this game for a while, and when i got back, i found that my turbo-tapping methods for trading and running away from those blasted s17 bots was no longer working! This I think is a slight problem, I personally would like turbo tap back...
Please State weather you are FOR or AGAINST having turbo tap back.
Please State weather you are FOR or AGAINST having turbo tap back.
Against. While turbo-tapping was effective, the heavy engine was the only one being - now medium and efficient engine are actually being used.
I myself use a medium engine when travelling through a lot of sectors (like trading) and the heavy engine at in-sector fights.
Removing turbo-tapping has actually helped balancing the game.
Regards,
Mark (Commander Jameson)
I myself use a medium engine when travelling through a lot of sectors (like trading) and the heavy engine at in-sector fights.
Removing turbo-tapping has actually helped balancing the game.
Regards,
Mark (Commander Jameson)
Against, although petitions never work, Turbo tapping is too easy to exploit with scripts and the like.
FORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
err For! =/
err For! =/
um... I don't relly care either way.
Just for the record: I never saw it as a thing only understandable to some, but I could see where some people would be confused. It's like the two kinds of people, one type conteolls speed with PWM, while the other uses voltage. Guess which one makes more money as an engeneer?
Just for the record: I never saw it as a thing only understandable to some, but I could see where some people would be confused. It's like the two kinds of people, one type conteolls speed with PWM, while the other uses voltage. Guess which one makes more money as an engeneer?
Neither. They're unionized.
FOR, if the devs absolutely refuse to raise the torque of the medium engine.
AGAINST, if the torque of the medium engine is increased.
AGAINST, if the torque of the medium engine is increased.
If you mean reverting to the situation we had before, totally against. However, I don't think the current situation is quite perfect either though I think that merely playing with engine numbers isn't going to fix anything.
So, you want them to turn the medium engine into a heavy engine?
Against
It is an EXPLOIT. It meant that since the heavy engine IS the best and the heavy engine could turbo forever, you couldn't beat it with any other engine.
It is an EXPLOIT. It meant that since the heavy engine IS the best and the heavy engine could turbo forever, you couldn't beat it with any other engine.
Against. It's ridiculous. If you want that, why not just tell them to put in an engine that goes at 500m/s without turbo. The engines need to be slow to keep dogfighting interesting. Maybe some more variety in engine tradeoffs would be nice, and maybe some very slightly faster engines or engines with a bit more torque would be nice, but it's probably best to hold off until the economy gets renormalized so we can weigh the the prices of the better engines against their benefits to keep things balanced in the test. These things can be added later.
By the way, have you tried the fast charge/efficient combination? You can turbo forever with it, albeit at a somewhat slower rate than with a beefier engine.
- Mesostel Ze
By the way, have you tried the fast charge/efficient combination? You can turbo forever with it, albeit at a somewhat slower rate than with a beefier engine.
- Mesostel Ze
No, Hunter Alpha, the speeds will still be the same. The torque will simply be increased. Right now non-special ships which borderline medium/slow agility absolutely MUST use a heavy engine if they want to have the agility boost that the 3.2.6 ship balance update provided. Valks and vultures have no noticeable penalty between the torque of a medium engine and a heavy engine, so they can actually choose between the two without any penalty.
Arolte, maybe they're SUPPOSED to have to use a heavy engine to get the high agility. Maybe there's not supposed to be a perfect enging. The eff goes far, the medium is a balance, and the heavy is fast/maneuverable. But I'll stop before you and me get the thread locked.
Against, for all the reasons stated above.
/me stuffs a medium engine with extremely high torque in Arolte's mouth
/me stuffs a medium engine with extremely high torque in Arolte's mouth
So what you're saying, Rogue, is that the Valk and Vulture are supposed to be the best ships in the game regardless of what engine you choose while everyone else gets penalized? They're supposed to be unbalanced? Wasn't the point of the 3.2.6 and 3.2.7 update to balance the ships so not one of them is overly superior over the others?
So arolte, you want an engine with more torque so the valk and vult will be better then they are now?
The point is, the valk and vult are maneuverable. Period. Messing around with the engines isn't going to change that balance because every ship would have the exact same choice of engines.
As a matter of fact giving an engine that *already* has a great deal of range when boosting a *higher* torque would make it even more unbalanced by your argument. Just imagine a ship that could boost forever and then if you finally did catch up (or when it caught up to you) it would be even more maneuverable.
The reason the heavy is balanced is that it makes for a very maneuverable ship that can't boost over long distances.
As a matter of fact giving an engine that *already* has a great deal of range when boosting a *higher* torque would make it even more unbalanced by your argument. Just imagine a ship that could boost forever and then if you finally did catch up (or when it caught up to you) it would be even more maneuverable.
The reason the heavy is balanced is that it makes for a very maneuverable ship that can't boost over long distances.
Let me make this clearer by giving you an example. Let's say there's a Valk pilot with the following setup:
heavy engine/heavy battery
And let's say there's a Hornet/Warthog pilot with the following setup:
heavy engine/heavy battery
Both the same, right? So far so good. They can both dodge each other fairly and they both have nearly identical boosting ranges. This is what it was like when everyone used a heavy engine and everyone could boost tap.
Now, let's change the Valk's setup to the following:
medium engine/fast charge battery
The Hornet/Warthog remains untouched with the heavy/heavy combo. Believe it or not, the Valk still has VERY high agility regardless of the decrease in torque. In addition to that, the Valk pilot now has the ability to outrun or escape the Hornet/Warthog with its longer range, while the Hornet/Warthog pilot is screwed when his heavy battery runs out.
Clearly the second situation offers a distinct advantage for the Valk pilot, which leads to the question of why the Valk pilot would even want to touch the heavy/heavy combo if the ship is highly agile either way? Why would you give the owner of a special ship a double advantage like that? If you equip a medium engine on to that Hornet (or any other medium/low borderline agility ship), for example, your agility will go back down to version 3.2.5 levels, which is pretty crappy for those who don't remember.
Maybe you're right. Maybe increasing the torque of the medium isn't the answer. But clearly the Valk pilot has a distinct advantage over anyone with a less agile ship, in terms of engine selection. I don't know if it's possible, but maybe the torque can be reduced a little more than every other ship when a Valk is equipped with a medium engine, to offer that same level of penalty. Right now a Valk or Vulture pilot has the luxury of using both with nothing to worry about.
heavy engine/heavy battery
And let's say there's a Hornet/Warthog pilot with the following setup:
heavy engine/heavy battery
Both the same, right? So far so good. They can both dodge each other fairly and they both have nearly identical boosting ranges. This is what it was like when everyone used a heavy engine and everyone could boost tap.
Now, let's change the Valk's setup to the following:
medium engine/fast charge battery
The Hornet/Warthog remains untouched with the heavy/heavy combo. Believe it or not, the Valk still has VERY high agility regardless of the decrease in torque. In addition to that, the Valk pilot now has the ability to outrun or escape the Hornet/Warthog with its longer range, while the Hornet/Warthog pilot is screwed when his heavy battery runs out.
Clearly the second situation offers a distinct advantage for the Valk pilot, which leads to the question of why the Valk pilot would even want to touch the heavy/heavy combo if the ship is highly agile either way? Why would you give the owner of a special ship a double advantage like that? If you equip a medium engine on to that Hornet (or any other medium/low borderline agility ship), for example, your agility will go back down to version 3.2.5 levels, which is pretty crappy for those who don't remember.
Maybe you're right. Maybe increasing the torque of the medium isn't the answer. But clearly the Valk pilot has a distinct advantage over anyone with a less agile ship, in terms of engine selection. I don't know if it's possible, but maybe the torque can be reduced a little more than every other ship when a Valk is equipped with a medium engine, to offer that same level of penalty. Right now a Valk or Vulture pilot has the luxury of using both with nothing to worry about.
No Arolte. I see why you're wrong.
A valk with a heavy engine is still MUCH MORE maneuverable than a warthog with a heavy engine.
A valk with a heavy engine is still MUCH MORE maneuverable than a warthog with a heavy engine.
Well duh. When did I ever say it wasn't? The valk is also still MUCH MORE maneuverable with an efficient and medium engine. And you've proven me wrong how?