Forums » Suggestions

Increase turbo thrust on high-end interceptors

12»
Mar 31, 2010 ladron link
Double the turbo thrust on all of the Corvus faction ships, the X-1, the SVG, the IBG, the BioComm Vulture, the WTD, and both Raptors. I may have missed or two.

It's way too easy to run away - this is almost universally accepted. Increasing the thrust on interceptors will at least make them better suited for their roles, so stuff like this doesn't happen. We still might need to address the issue of people in interceptors running away from others, but this is at least a partial solution.
Mar 31, 2010 Aticephyr link
+1.

And interceptors running from other interceptors will always be a problem no matter what you do. Adv rails are a good solution, though.
Mar 31, 2010 ladron link
Some sort of forward-firing battery-drain or warp-dampener technology would help too, I think, but that's another topic for discussion.
Mar 31, 2010 Aticephyr link
But that's for another thread ;).
Mar 31, 2010 Dr. Lecter link
+1

Seriously, the Atlas X has more turbo thrust than the 'Hound. Where we started was a decent place, it's been shown to have serious issues, so let's move it. If it causes a lot of WTFBBQ?!111 reactions, move it back.
Mar 31, 2010 Inco link
+1

... and maybe the most repeatedly discussed design flaw. The energy required for jumping is not absolute but relative to the battery capacity. Also this gives an advantage to cheaper setups and/or infinity turbo ships, usually cargo ones. Jumping is a part of intercepting so an interceptor should be better at it.
Mar 31, 2010 peytros link
and like non combat ships should be slower n stuph
Apr 01, 2010 ShankTank link
I don't think I approve of this one. More thrust makes it harder to take someone out if they just turn around and turbo mid-fight. If you don't believe me, shoot a Hog2 that tries to run (195+m/s energy weapon aimed at a/a) then try the same scenario with an X-1. Hog 2 eats energy, X-1 completely throws off the a/a. It seems like you're trying to fix scenarios where someone not engaged in a fight over and already at top speed 2000m away can run away (which can be overcome by some smarter chasing strategies), but the fix you proposed would exasperate scenarios where a duelist or furballer inside 200m running at any moment.

You could probably increase the thrust of some more specialized ships (such as the raptor) but across the board double will just raise too many issues.

Also... and I'm pretty sure I have a thread for just this... it seems the ideal fix you want is to make the jump/warp energy required a ship-specific stat (as Inco hinted). That would fix the problem of stalemates when it comes to interceptors failing in stamina-based long distance chases without disrupting or exasperating the issue of sprinting around in valks lol.
Apr 01, 2010 zak.wilson link
I seem to recall suggesting a fast, high-thrust/high-drain Raptor a year or so ago. I stand by that suggestion; it would give one of the best looking ships in the game some purpose other than botting in storms (which a Marauder with a range-extender does just as well).
Apr 01, 2010 ArAel link
Heres an idea. Instead of making it a ship limit for energy make it based on mass, so if you're hauling more mass it takes more energy to jump. That the ships that can haul more than the others are infiniboost lets this remain a good balance as they will need to slow down long enough to reach the correct charge and then from there they can infini-turbo away and bail out of the sector.

In effect. an empty moth would be able to jump sooner than an x1 with 1 samoflange or something to that effect.
Apr 01, 2010 Kierky link
+1

This idea is a total win, and I see no drawbacks.
Apr 01, 2010 Pointsman link
Rocket ramming is a potential drawback.
Apr 02, 2010 Dr. Lecter link
All these are the less armored ships, and double damage still applies to back blast.
Apr 02, 2010 Snax_28 link
Never mind rocket ramming, these would be a rocketeer's wet dream. Having that extra bit of get up and go would tip the scales in the direction of rocket users a fair bit.

I don't know if I agree that the Corvus Maud should be included in this group, considering that it is a trade ship at heart. Plus, why does Corvus need three interceptors?
Apr 02, 2010 Strat link
Hmm... I like this idea. Heh...
Apr 02, 2010 Dr. Lecter link
Neither the IBG nor the Corvus maud should be included here. They're not interceptors. I could go either way on the X-1, really. It's a fast combat fighter...
Apr 02, 2010 Willis link
Lets just turn everything back to how it was in Alpha! =P

I big more thrust on some ships would be nice... Anything with large battery drain should have alot more thrust, that way it would actually be worth buying the ship with that drain.
Apr 02, 2010 toshiro link
Not like flares wouldn't need some love.
Apr 02, 2010 Antz link
The problem is not that interceptors are too slow, it is the transport ships that are too fast. Removing turbo from Behemoth class ships and halving the top turbo speed of Atlas, Centaur, and Revenaunt class ships should do the job nicely.

Their cargo holds would probably need scaling up appropriately to still make them worthwhile.
Apr 02, 2010 Aticephyr link
The problem is not that interceptors are too slow, it is the transport ships that are too fast. Removing turbo from Behemoth class ships and halving the top turbo speed of Atlas, Centaur, and Revenaunt class ships should do the job nicely.

While you're heart is in the right place, your head isn't. Do you really think it should take a top-of-the-line interceptor (x1) with a damned light loadout over 10 seconds to reach it's top speed?