Forums » Suggestions

Ye good auld nerfing thread

12»
Apr 11, 2005 Shapenaji link
This is a new thread to discuss things which seem either too weak, or just too damn good.

I'm not going to link to previous threads, because nearly all of them included heated arguments of some sort, and I'd like to keep the slate on this one clean as long as possible.

Try to keep from responding to previous rants. This is just a forum for people to get their ideas out. Let the devs figure out what makes sense.

For example:

The SkyCommand prom is still too powerful, as stated earlier, the
improvement of flares has made the thrust reduction somewhat moot. And the armor is just outright insane. If you see terjekv's
numbers thread, you can kinda get the idea.

I happen to feel that it needs a reduction on its own. But I think most of the issue is with the flares. The prom aims so quickly, that its very tough to dodge. And remember, they only need to hit one set for a light fighter to start having a very bad day.

3 sets of dual flares to kill a light fighter

or 2 and just a little bit of AGT fire.

so.... assuming the AGT works well (which it does) I think the second estimate is better.

Which means that the Prom only needs to hit 1 out of every 8 volleys. Most of the time they can pull off a hit in 3 volleys.

Hell, the only reason why the MGC is a viable ship right now is because rockets are so insanely powerful. They're the ultimate weapon against light fighters, and in an environment where the heavy bomber platform recieved criticism for being an armored version of the light fighter platform, that's a bit dangerous.

So revamp the iceflares and starflares (up the ammo, up the velocity), and drop the velocity on the sunflares a bit (they DID get a very large increase in speed, there's room for balance).

Does it seem odd to anyone that we're easily hitting the fastest ships in the game with weps that do large amounts of damage and buffet the ship?

-------------------------------
(End of Nerfing rant)
Post your own!
Apr 11, 2005 Sun Tzu link
A few thoughts (not as educated as Shape's, of course):

Increasing the ammo and speed of lower flares (without changing the damage rate) would be very good. At least, we could put a useful rocket launcher on a Marauder. Currently they become somewhat clumsy with a sunflare tube as they cannot really afford the extra weight.

I'm not sure about the speed of sunflares. Based on fights between centurions and Valkyries, it looks like sunflares are more or less necessary for the Valkyrie to compensate for the agility and small size of its little cousin. And those combats are balanced enough. Without flares, the Valkyrie suffers very much from its size.

The main problem with the SCP's armor, when I fight one of them in a centurion, is that I can't feel my left hand anymore by the time they have gone down to 50% or less (if I made no mistake before in dodging both AGT and rockets) and then a few flare shots seal my fate. I see only two solutions in the current state of VO: doing specific gym exercise for my left hand or dramatically improve my aim :)

And regarding the Ragnarok, could it be possible to remove the infiniboost on the MkIII? That is: increase the drain to 55 m/s, just like on the Agresso. With the big hull and infinboost, it is a perfect spam-and-run ship (if the guy stays close to a wormhole or to jumping distance). At least, leave to light fighters the possibility to punish someone who runs when he is out of ammo. That would leave the MGC set-up viable but less fit to lower skilled pilots.
Apr 11, 2005 genka link
Alright then, here I am, getting my ideas out.
I think the whole liscence levels thingy was a bad idea from the start, and if nothing else, all the equipment should move down to the first five combat levels. I also think mining was a pointless waste of everyones time and should be gotten rid of as fast as possible. Another fine idea I've formed inside my beautiful mind is that you should give me a superbus. No, Wait. TWO superbuses. And the last thought is that we've finaly gone back to the good old days of "pretty much balanced." People are whining about rockets again. They don't usually whine about rockets unless everything else is working out.
Apr 11, 2005 softy2 link
(a) Flares : I agree with Shape. (Sun Tzu : Yes sunflares make Valk a viable combat ship, but it unbalances everything else.)

(b) Proms : Nuff said already. The only ship that is capable of dealing with them is the IBG/Rev C centurions, and even then it is basically spray+pray. And the worse thing is that the centurions themselves are unbalanced already : they eat up vults and valks. I'd like to see centurions losing armor to about 5000. But right now, they are the only ship capable of standing against the heavies (including the aggresso).

(c) IBGs/Rev C : See (b). To reiterate, I'd like to see their armor reduced to 5000, but only if the heavies (proms+centaurs) are made sane.
Apr 11, 2005 Shapenaji link
Oh, I'd also like to add the point that the "spray and pray" strategy only really takes advantage of the prom's size if you're not lined up with them.

Try this:

when you're not going for a shot, take your crosshairs and put them directly on the ship itself, not the aiming reticle. Voila! as long as you keep it there, all they see is the front of your ship. (this works particularly well with vultures)

So... at long distance the prom is really not all that much bigger than a small fighter, and a close range, the AGT and Flares ought to eat you alive.
Apr 11, 2005 tramshed link
heres my thoughts.

The AGT's autoaim needs nerfed something fierce. It has decent damage, an extremely high rate of fire, decent velocity, and an autoaim cone that is roughly half the screen. The main reason the agt is so problematic currently is because you dont have to aim it. If the ship is on your screen, you are firing at it. Just imagine gauss with the autoaim of an agt. Id never die, ever.
Apr 11, 2005 CrippledPidgeon link
I dunno, reducing the AGT's autoaim would probably make it more effective than less... well to a point at least. The main reasoning is simply that the AGT's large cone is something of a liability against fast ships. It tries to aim too much and inevitably misses. The danger is if you fight someone who knows how to pick his shots, and knows when to tap the fire button and when to hold it down.
Apr 11, 2005 UncleDave link
Here's the deal with the AGT on a skycommand.

Normally, pilots have to do 2 things. Dodge and aim.

If you don't have to aim, you only have to dodge.

Therefore you may concentrate on your dodging.

If the skycommand has rockets, you only need concentrate on aiming the rockets.

Thus the balancing factor, the multitasking one would normally have to do with a heavy ship, is gone. With the AGT/flare combo, you no longer need worry about effectively managing your weapon fire, merely dodging and timing rockets. That's where the damage comes from, any experienced IBG pilot will tell you that its the rockets that are the big hitters, the end all of whoever is attacking you. 2 dual flare hits and they are severely crippled- 3 strikes and theyre out.

The AGT just doesn't do much damage on its own any more. Its *not* the AGT thats the problem, its the AGT combined with the sunflares on the skycommand.

You know why the sunflares are a problem right now?

30m prox.

If a fighter is rolling to AVOID the AGT spray, the skycommand pilot can normally drop a couple of rockets in to break the roll and score a couple AGT hits. If a fighter decides to move in for a hit-and-run rally, the skycommand fires rockets in its path. And the fighter pilot *cannot react*. There's no single unbalancing factor about the skycommand, its a deadly cocktail of weapons covering each others' weaknesses and the skycommand's extremely good stats. All it takes is one of those cogs taken out the machine and there you have it: a weakness.

Back to the 30m prox. If a fighter can't react, its unfair.

Rockets as they stand are a problem. The lesser flares are crap. The screamer's low prox and high safety fuse makes it crap. The jackhammer is suicide to mount on a single L port unless you can follow it up, plus it has low ammo. The sunflare is *still* the only really good rocket.

My proposal: make the rockets require more aiming.

Iceflares:

140m/s
20 ammo
10m prox
30m blast
0.5s repeat
400kg
700 damage
NO SAFETY FUSE

There you have a fighter-mountable rocket launcher which pales against most energy weapons for damage and accuracy, but which provides enough of a stun effect and is light enough to mount as a tactical weapon on say, a valkyrie.

Starflares:

120m/s
16 ammo
15m prox
40m blast
0.7s repeat
600kg
900 damage
40m safety fuse.

You can't RAM with these, but you can still aim them. They're heavier, they do more damage, less ammo, arguably slightly easier to hit with, and a good variation on the starflares.

Sunflares:

Current stats except...
20m prox
60m safety fuse
90m/s

Now you have DODGEABLE sunflares, no ramming, no fuse-avoiding, no messin. Proms have to aim them instead of just pointing them in the general direction. Its a *slight* change, but it will make fighters WAY more effective at tackling AGT/rocket proms.

Now the heavy rockets, what to do with them?

Jackhammer:

100m/s
16 ammo
30m prox
60m blast (with added concussion mine effect)
0.5s repeat
2000kg
2000 damage
80m safety fuse.

HERE'S your rocket spam weapon. You could mount this with impunity on a HEAVY ship. A warthog would be incapable of mounting this for obvious reasons (at least, after the warthog gets its long-promised boost'o'useful) but its a damn scary weapon, now. If you get hit by one you're going to fly out of range of any others fired. If you get inside the range, they're screwed. But if you get kept in the nasty zone, then you're going to suffer some serious hurt. Sound reasonable?

Screamer:

150m/s
16 ammo, 100 energy/shot
10m prox
20m blast
0.7s repeat
2500kg
3000 damage
200m safety fuse.

A long-range rocket, a torpedo, but again really really heavy, even more so, so you can't simply point and blast. This is what the screamer is *trying* to be, but it's not up to the job.

The rockets blended into each other when they were boosted, and the sunflare was the best of a not-very-mixed bunch. Diversity is needed if each of the rockets are to have a role.

And finally, QUIT WHINING ABOUT THE AGT.

Did anyone complain about the AGT before there were ships to mount it? (mining marauder, new-age skycommand) No. Is it that hard to realise that the problem is with the ships that mount it, and the style with which one is inclined to use it? YES the problem is that with the AGT, ships concentrate on dodging more than firing whatever else they have on board. But an AGT-only prom is now very beatable, when you add the rockets to it, it just isn't. The AGT-flare skycommand is a DEATH MACHINE OF DOOM.

You know why skycommand pilots mount the AGT? Because it's the best L port weapon there is. The devastators are surpassed almost easily by the gauss mkII in usefulness. The regular gatling cannon is still crap. And then, what other energy weapons are there for your L port? None.

This is partly down to the fact that weapon design is a little narrow-minded in its derivation. ALL the energy weapons are single-point projectiles. Why? Why not fire big spheres of energy death for the L port devastators? Why not make a stream of lightning-mine-like energy which needs a lock-on to work? Why not make pulsing beams, ringed energy waves, weapons which fire multiple shots in one tap of the button. THIS is the niche which L port energy weapons can fill. It's unexplored, and I'm guessing easy to do if the *shape* and *number* of projectiles fired changes, and the mass restricts their use accordingly.

Ugh, another Dave rant. I gotta stop with these...
Apr 11, 2005 softy2 link
Uncledave :

I like some of your changes to the flares, I agree with your comments on the reason why agt-flares-proms are hard to fight (and Shape have mentioned this many times too).

Here are the part of your post which I disagree with, in order of disagreement :

(a) starflares at 120m/s and 0.7 firing rate and iceflares at 140m/s and 0.5 firing rate
(b) AGT-Proms are beatable. Only if the prom pilot does not know what he/she is doing

(c) Quote Dave : "And finally, QUIT WHINING ABOUT THE AGT.

Did anyone complain about the AGT before there were ships to mount it? (mining marauder, new-age skycommand) No."

Actually : Yes. The most boring battles I've fought is the backrolling agt-spamming-anything (hogs, proms you name it). I usually just turn around and say bye.

/emph{However}, I will not advocate any nerf of the AGT UNTIL better L-ports weapons are available. And we've been crying for these for a while.

Finally, an assertion on Proms :

Yes, the AGT-flare-proms are uber. But you can fight them by keeping your distance, and then spray-pray. It is still very hard, but doable with lots of patience.

But :

I contend AGT-n3s-proms are more powerful than agt-flares-proms. The reason is that with n3s, the only viable method of fighting [EDIT:speeling tsk tsk] a highly maneuverable AGT platform (keep distance and spray) is no longer viable. If you try to get close : the AGT will eat you. If you try to stay your distance and ping them : they can aim as well as you (since they heve uber-strafe, they can use the strafe to aim instead). And there is no longer a "sweet distance" where a light fighter can keep the distance and the AGT can be dodged.

Anyway, try doing my experiment of taking 2 equal pilots and have them fly AGT-prom-whatever vs light fighter, and let them fight several times swapping ships each time. A ship that is 'beatable' is still unbalanced if it takes so much less "skillz" to use.
Apr 11, 2005 Jonnycat26 link
I'm one of those AGT pilots that everyone likes to complain about I guess...

Those of you who've fought me know that I don't AGT spam. Most of the time, I won't use the AGT unless you get in close. Other than that I stick with the Neuts/TPG Sparrow/small port flavor of the day.

The AGT has a purpose, and it's very good at what does. It's meant for large ships that can't manuver with the small ships. You put AGTs on a ragnarok and you don't want to have the thing pointed at you. If you can circle behind the rag, you'll eat it alive. Same thing with the Warthog... it's just not a dogfighter (well, unless I'm flying it perhaps). :)

The problem is the Prom handles like a small ship, but packs the L port weaponry which only the heavier and less nimble ships usually pack. Combined with the flares, it's not a ship you want to get close to.
Apr 11, 2005 terjekv link
Jonnycat26, you don't spam. as I've said before, spam is when you fire AGT semi-constnatly, filling space to maybe hit. you don't do that. and you're right about the problem, the Prom turns way too fast (also, look at the Atlas, sigh, but it doesn't have 21K armor at least), and anything that turns fast, can pack flares _and_ has a lot of armor, well, ouch.

so yeah, I very much agree to your post. I, and others, have tried the numbers I posted earlier in actual combat, and they do represent some _really_ scary facts. I would very much suggest people try some of the ships in different situations and ignore what you love and what you usually do. help the devs and the community make Vendetta stay alive with different ships and layouts.
Apr 11, 2005 Jonnycat26 link
I was involved in some Atlas dueling over the last few nights, and I'm suprised at how well the TPG Atlas X turns. If you put flares and an AGT on it, it does wallow a bit, but with an AGT and a TPG sparrow, it handles not bad at all. Mega Posis and a Neut and it's far more nimble than it should be.

I don't know the solution to this, and I don't know that it should involve prom nerfing. Maybe it needs it's spin torque ratched down a few nothces. And maybe the warthog needs it's weight dropped a little bit, or to have it's spin torque notched up.

When you look at this, the Atlas and the Hog have roughly the same armor (8500 for the TPG X, 9700 for the Hog TD), they both pack a large/small port, but the TPG X can hold 30 more cargo than the hog. Why is a large cargo ship able to outturn a hog? For that matter, why is the SCP able to outturn many of the other smaller ships?

Ah well.. I do enjoy seeing my hog explode. :)
Apr 11, 2005 UncleDave link
softy2:

Rocket accuracy is currently defined by its speed alone. The point with the lesser flares is they should be faster, weaker, and less inclined to actually blow up, offsetting the weight advantage.
Apr 11, 2005 softy2 link
Uncledave : Well accuracy is speed+prox, not just speed alone. And I won't mind the prox, except that the flares also knock the ships around, which is what makes flares so dangerous.
Apr 11, 2005 Apex link
the concussions that flares cause are what makes my hornet completely worthless against anything with rockets.
Apr 11, 2005 Borb II link
Flaches! They need to be fixed they could be come great anti fighter guns if the drain was downed a bit and the fire rate was upped a bit. These things could become like shotguns meaning a rev c would have to be vary good not to get hit with one, how ever the armor on bigger ships would mean that it would still not be a vary smart to try to kill them with one on your ship.
Apr 11, 2005 Cam link
Since the fighter ships have been covered...
I still think the Behemoth is "unbalanced"
It needs a thrust or armor reduction, and I'm going to try and explain my stance since everyone seems completely against me on this one :P

Let's compare trade ships before the behemoth.

The Wraith is essentially a noob trade ship, it serves a purpose of holding more cargo until you level enough to get an Atlas.
The Atlas is a fine ship, reasonable fast and agile, and decent cargo space.
The Centaur loses the Atlas' agility in favour of more cargo space.
The Marauder (UIT Special) was the exception to our trade dynamic of more cargo = less agility, It was a great ship before mass was introduced, and I think it has suffered with lack of thrust since then (although I haven't flown one in a long time)

My main point here is that there has to be sacrifices, If you want to carry more cargo you have to pay a price. If you were flying through dangerous space with cargo in the alpha/beta you'd take a Maud, or if you couldn't get a Maud, you'd take an Atlas, because the Centaur couldn't handle it too well.

This system seems balanced to me, because it forces lesser pilots to make more trips (it really isn't hard to get away from pirates).
But the Behemoth has ruined this dynamic, it has 3 times the cargo capacity of the next highest trade ship and it can get away from anyone without much worry.

People keep telling me that I'm wrong, and that a single fighter shouldn't be able to take down a large tanker, but I don't get it. Why should any 1 pilot have an advantage over any other 1 pilot? Sure in battle the Behemoth is a sitting duck, but it's not designed for that, it's designed to run, and it can outrun almost anything you throw at it.

So I'll throw my 50/50 rule out there again...
If I'm equally skilled with my ship/weapons, as my opponent is with his ship/weapons then I should have a 50% chance of winning the fight. To clarify: "winning" does not mean killing your opponent, in the case of the Behemoth it would mean safely delivering cargo, as that's it's intended purpose in the game.
Apr 12, 2005 Lord Q link
Cam,
the problem with your theory that any two ships should be balanced is that if that was the goal there would only be one ship in the game. some ships are better for certain perpuses, while a runing moth can escape most single fighters when it runs, it can't stay and fight with any real hope of sucess. You wouldn't expect a fully manned cap. ship to fall victum to a single pilet in a free bus, would you? the same is true with the moth, it is just a bit too big for most pilets to take down alone. however, if you attack moths that are already damaged (perhaps from going threw an ion storm) than you would have a better chance, or if you get a small team of attackers.

also the moth is bigger than the other trade ships. esentaly the moth is a cargo carying "patrole ship" (i define patrole ship as any vessil too small to be concidered a cap. ship, but too large to be a fighter or bomber).
Apr 12, 2005 Shapenaji link
I'm actually leaning toward some change with the Moth. Mostly because it has made the maud totally useless. It also outaccelerates many other ships, which is completely unnecessary, I mean the thing has 40000 armor. You still won't kill one if you're alone and they're smart enough to dock after they get hurt a little bit in one sector.

The thing would still do its job fine with a bit less turbothrust, while making the game more interesting for chasers.
(I pity those poor CTC'ers tryin to follow a moth that's grabbed their cargo)

I agree that it promotes group hunting, which I like
Apr 12, 2005 Borb II link
Really the UIT need a moth of their own. That way it would be good to have high UIT faction.