Forums » General
I just finished a ~20minute duel with Arolte, which we fought with tri-tachyon Valks. The computer is still spinning in front of me...
First off: Very good fight, Arolte... I think i've come along a bit since getting shot down without doing any damage.
Now to the meat of the post: the lunacy that is tachyons.
The aimbot is worthless, since the best way to fight seems to be the endless shifting loop. (Hold sideways or up or down and rotate) After a while, I got to the point where if we we're both rotating in a certain way, I could use the aimbot to gauge my shots, but most of the time I spent trying to find the right offset from the reticle to actually get the tachy stream to pass over him. Of course, as soon as I did, he would shift so I was lucky if I got a hit in.
Somewhere around minute 15, I reflected on the relatively quick and brutal fighting that results from sunflares. Tachyons are slow and have to hit to do any damage - sunflares are fast and can be pretty innaccurate to hit, and do more damage than tachy. Which begs the question, can a skilled tri-tach valk take down a skilled tri-flare valk?
Probably not, if the endless plethora of anti-flarevalk threads are any guide. Or am I wrong? Has anyone had success fighting a tri-flare valk using tachyons? Or any other non-aimforyou weapon (no gauss damnit)? It seems that energy weapons rely on a great deal of luck and opponent error to get hits - Arolte got about 1/2 his hits when I screwed up my loop, and I'm sure my hits were the same way with him - does anyone have a way to maximize the chances the enemy will mess up?
Any other non-gauss/flare users out there? The only one I've consistently seen is Arolte... and that can't be a good thing :P
First off: Very good fight, Arolte... I think i've come along a bit since getting shot down without doing any damage.
Now to the meat of the post: the lunacy that is tachyons.
The aimbot is worthless, since the best way to fight seems to be the endless shifting loop. (Hold sideways or up or down and rotate) After a while, I got to the point where if we we're both rotating in a certain way, I could use the aimbot to gauge my shots, but most of the time I spent trying to find the right offset from the reticle to actually get the tachy stream to pass over him. Of course, as soon as I did, he would shift so I was lucky if I got a hit in.
Somewhere around minute 15, I reflected on the relatively quick and brutal fighting that results from sunflares. Tachyons are slow and have to hit to do any damage - sunflares are fast and can be pretty innaccurate to hit, and do more damage than tachy. Which begs the question, can a skilled tri-tach valk take down a skilled tri-flare valk?
Probably not, if the endless plethora of anti-flarevalk threads are any guide. Or am I wrong? Has anyone had success fighting a tri-flare valk using tachyons? Or any other non-aimforyou weapon (no gauss damnit)? It seems that energy weapons rely on a great deal of luck and opponent error to get hits - Arolte got about 1/2 his hits when I screwed up my loop, and I'm sure my hits were the same way with him - does anyone have a way to maximize the chances the enemy will mess up?
Any other non-gauss/flare users out there? The only one I've consistently seen is Arolte... and that can't be a good thing :P
Not only do you have more control with tachyons, but they're also the perfect weapon for chasers besides the generic tri-sunflare rammer configuration. However, they require greater skill over the popular gauss/sunflare configuration, due to the lack of proximity detonators as well as strong aimbot. So when someone taunts me for running away from a gausser/sunflarer, I just shrug it off knowing that they're the ones who are using the newbie weapons to get easy kills. Talk about irony.
Anyway, I do believe the tachyon and graviton both need to be sped up in order to compete with the "other" weapons of the game. As far as duels go, yeah it does tend to get a little tense and lengthy when the opponent decides to back off and fight seriously from a distance. It ultimately gets to the point where you have to identify your opponent's movement patterns in order to take them down. An inexperienced player will keep using the same pattern over and over, whereas an experienced one will constantly alter it to become less predictable.
While the aiming reticule becomes useless at a certain distance, due to the drastic changes in acceleration of your opponent, it actually doesn't matter that it does. Through experience you'll eventually see how your shots land in accordance to your own ship's movements, so you'll be able to compensate for that later on. Use that in conjunction with your opponents movement pattern and they're toast. As a hint, learn to center those shots while you're strafing both clockwise and counterclockwise. I eventually found out that one direction isn't enough and will often get you killed quickly.
Anyway, I do believe the tachyon and graviton both need to be sped up in order to compete with the "other" weapons of the game. As far as duels go, yeah it does tend to get a little tense and lengthy when the opponent decides to back off and fight seriously from a distance. It ultimately gets to the point where you have to identify your opponent's movement patterns in order to take them down. An inexperienced player will keep using the same pattern over and over, whereas an experienced one will constantly alter it to become less predictable.
While the aiming reticule becomes useless at a certain distance, due to the drastic changes in acceleration of your opponent, it actually doesn't matter that it does. Through experience you'll eventually see how your shots land in accordance to your own ship's movements, so you'll be able to compensate for that later on. Use that in conjunction with your opponents movement pattern and they're toast. As a hint, learn to center those shots while you're strafing both clockwise and counterclockwise. I eventually found out that one direction isn't enough and will often get you killed quickly.
I'm pretty sure I could take out Phoenix or Icarus with a dual tach vult about 50% of the time and better with a tri-tach valk, in a duel (neither of them would hang around long enough if they were losing and there's no way a vult can catch a running valk). If either of you would like to contest that feel free to offer me such a duel.
Guass is better than tachs at taking out fighters since it has such a good autoaim and is therefore harder to dodge. But if you're fighting anything slower than a maud/bus/hog (they're all the same speed or damn close enough) then it's much better to have tachs since they'll kill the target much faster than gauss possibly could meaning much less damage done to you (think of the difference between 3 sets for swarms and 8 as you're waiting for your bat to recharge with gauss).
That being said almost all non-newbs use ships that are faster since they give much better reward for skill than slower, more auto-aim dependent ships.
Given all of that I'd agree that tachs, and gravs could use a 10m/s +or- 5m/s boost in speed to give them some appeal in fighter vs fighter combat.
(ps Arolte you run from me wether I have gauss or tachs)
Guass is better than tachs at taking out fighters since it has such a good autoaim and is therefore harder to dodge. But if you're fighting anything slower than a maud/bus/hog (they're all the same speed or damn close enough) then it's much better to have tachs since they'll kill the target much faster than gauss possibly could meaning much less damage done to you (think of the difference between 3 sets for swarms and 8 as you're waiting for your bat to recharge with gauss).
That being said almost all non-newbs use ships that are faster since they give much better reward for skill than slower, more auto-aim dependent ships.
Given all of that I'd agree that tachs, and gravs could use a 10m/s +or- 5m/s boost in speed to give them some appeal in fighter vs fighter combat.
(ps Arolte you run from me wether I have gauss or tachs)
"Has anyone had success fighting a tri-flare valk using tachyons?"
Glad you mentioned this, because a tri-tachyon Valkyrie is my weapon of choice in taking down triflare Valks. I've had great success with tri-tachs, I can take down most rocket/gauss Valks no problem, except Phoenix and Icarus, and I can kill Phoenix about half the time with tri tachs.
First off, a tri-tach Valk has *over twice the firepower* of a tri-flare Valk. There is no reason a tri-tach Valk shouldn't win against a triflare rammer 100% of the time. In an out and out slugfest the Valk with flares will be dead by the time the tach Valk is down to 50%. In the words of the immortal Phoenix: "wow, tachs hurt."
The only other factor to be considered is how often you can hit with each given weapon. Flares have a huge advantage here because of their large proximity radius, and the ability to boost them up to speed without having to worry about energy. However, with the right techniques a tach warrior can neutralize this advantage.
Technique 1: Ram the rammer. Yup, you heard me right. If a Valk pilot is used to ramming, get right up in his face where your tachs are guaranteed to hit. Use arcade if it helps. With the tachs greater firepower you should win 100% of the time, especially because unlike the rammer you won't be taking splash damage from your own shots.
Technique 2: Reparte. A lot of good Valk pilots will use the "jousting method" (*cough* Icarus) of gaining some distance and boosting their flares up to speeds impossible to dodge. The counter to this tactic is to never allow the Valk pilot to boost straight at you. As soon as you hear the boost kick in, fire a stream of tach rounds at him before he can tag you... the jouster will either have to break off his attack or take some serious damage. I once used this against a noob Valk jouster who didn't break off, and he was dead in less than one second (no joke, do the math). If he does get a shot off, use physics to dodge the flares, strafing back and to the side, *never* reversing direction.
Some Valk pilots (*cough* Phoenix) have perfected the art of boosting diagonally at their target, then curving inward to fire the flares before they lose too much speed. Because the Valk in this case is not boosting directly at you, the aimbot won't hit it. To counter this you *must turn off the aimbot*, have it bound to key that's easy to reach (I use middle mouse button), and lead the targeting reticule ever so slightly. This takes practice, but it's worth learning. Try it out with a friend until you can hit easily hit each other without the aimbot. The best way to dodge when this happens is in the opposite direction of the incoming Valk's boost. i.e. if the Valk is boosting toward your left hand side, dodge right. Whatever you do, don't just keep backing up. If you have no other choice, switch to arcade to try and close the distance and use the tachs greater firepower to finish the fight quickly.
Tachs have the highest firepower of *any* weapon.
Tach shots are sometimes hard to see coming, making them ideal to use against boosting flare valks.
Unlike Gauss or Rails, Tachs are energy effecient, allowing a longer stream of fire, and more energy left to run down the retreating flare Valk ;-D.
Glad you mentioned this, because a tri-tachyon Valkyrie is my weapon of choice in taking down triflare Valks. I've had great success with tri-tachs, I can take down most rocket/gauss Valks no problem, except Phoenix and Icarus, and I can kill Phoenix about half the time with tri tachs.
First off, a tri-tach Valk has *over twice the firepower* of a tri-flare Valk. There is no reason a tri-tach Valk shouldn't win against a triflare rammer 100% of the time. In an out and out slugfest the Valk with flares will be dead by the time the tach Valk is down to 50%. In the words of the immortal Phoenix: "wow, tachs hurt."
The only other factor to be considered is how often you can hit with each given weapon. Flares have a huge advantage here because of their large proximity radius, and the ability to boost them up to speed without having to worry about energy. However, with the right techniques a tach warrior can neutralize this advantage.
Technique 1: Ram the rammer. Yup, you heard me right. If a Valk pilot is used to ramming, get right up in his face where your tachs are guaranteed to hit. Use arcade if it helps. With the tachs greater firepower you should win 100% of the time, especially because unlike the rammer you won't be taking splash damage from your own shots.
Technique 2: Reparte. A lot of good Valk pilots will use the "jousting method" (*cough* Icarus) of gaining some distance and boosting their flares up to speeds impossible to dodge. The counter to this tactic is to never allow the Valk pilot to boost straight at you. As soon as you hear the boost kick in, fire a stream of tach rounds at him before he can tag you... the jouster will either have to break off his attack or take some serious damage. I once used this against a noob Valk jouster who didn't break off, and he was dead in less than one second (no joke, do the math). If he does get a shot off, use physics to dodge the flares, strafing back and to the side, *never* reversing direction.
Some Valk pilots (*cough* Phoenix) have perfected the art of boosting diagonally at their target, then curving inward to fire the flares before they lose too much speed. Because the Valk in this case is not boosting directly at you, the aimbot won't hit it. To counter this you *must turn off the aimbot*, have it bound to key that's easy to reach (I use middle mouse button), and lead the targeting reticule ever so slightly. This takes practice, but it's worth learning. Try it out with a friend until you can hit easily hit each other without the aimbot. The best way to dodge when this happens is in the opposite direction of the incoming Valk's boost. i.e. if the Valk is boosting toward your left hand side, dodge right. Whatever you do, don't just keep backing up. If you have no other choice, switch to arcade to try and close the distance and use the tachs greater firepower to finish the fight quickly.
Tachs have the highest firepower of *any* weapon.
Tach shots are sometimes hard to see coming, making them ideal to use against boosting flare valks.
Unlike Gauss or Rails, Tachs are energy effecient, allowing a longer stream of fire, and more energy left to run down the retreating flare Valk ;-D.
*Faith in tachyons... returning..*
Nice to see that there are other non-flare/gauss people out there.
Thanks for the tips Phaserlight!
/me goes off to practice
Nice to see that there are other non-flare/gauss people out there.
Thanks for the tips Phaserlight!
/me goes off to practice
My opinion deals with the roles of weapons. Purely opinion here.
Sunflares: Secondary weapon
Tachyon, Ion, Phased, & Gravitron: Primary fighter vs. fighter weapons
Gauss: Fighter vs. larger ship weapon
Small-port homing weapons: fighter vs. fighter
Disclaimer: The opinions stated here are drastic changes.
To make these suggestions feasible, we must first see a large difference of armor between "slow" and "fast" ships. I would propose knocking the Cent, Vult, Valk, and Hornet down 1000, and giving 10k-15k more armor to the Centuar, Rag, and Prom. (Random numbers, but you get the idea)
First, I'll deal with gauss, as it's one of the worst offenders as a weapon operating outside of my stated purpose. To make gauss a more feasible anti-larger ship weapon, it must have more damage per second than tachyons. To do this, I propose to substantially boost the damage of gauss while lowering its velocity. Right now, the Gauss does 2400 damage per second. Contrast this with the tach's 4000 damage per second. I would propose increasing the gauss's damage to 5000 damage per second, while leaving the repeat rate alone. Of course, energy consumption would go up so it would be clear that this is a one-port weapon, and that it would be hard to mount in multiple configurations. Gauss would look like this
Gauss Cannon
Damage: 2500
Velocity: 120
Energy: 75/blast
Repeat: .5/second
This *is* a radical change to the gauss cannon we know, but I think it would delegate the role of "large"-ship killing to it.
Now, we deal with the grav, tach, phased, and ion. I won't touch them all in order, but just give an example layout for the tachyon. The goal here is to make tachyons an effective fighter-vs-fighter weapon. The main thing here is an increase in velocity.
Tachyon Cannon
Damage: 600
Velocity: 220 m/s
Energy: 12/blast
Repeat: 0.15 seconds
Gravitrons could be a variant, be harder hitting but slower firing. Ions blaster could be an upgraded ion cannon, and phased could have a low damage but insane repeat rate.
Now, sunflares. I think sunflares would be fixed with a cap on ammo capacity. Think, six rockets per tube. That'd make them a secondary weapon.
Homers, I think homers need radical speed boosts. Observe the current homer:
Yellow Jacket Missile
Capacity: 8 missiles
Repeat: 1.5 seconds
Damage: 1800
Splash: 30m
Detonation: Contact
Maneuverability: Low
Fuel: 12 seconds
Speed: 85 m/s
A missile's job should be to kill a target, or at least make him hard-pressed to avoid it. Here are my proposed changes, marked with an asterisk (*):
Yellow Jacket Missile
Capacity: 6 missiles*
Repeat: 10 seconds*
Damage: 3000*
Splash: 50m*
Detonation: Contact
Maneuverability: High*
Fuel: 30 seconds*
Speed: 160 m/s*
We could also introduce a new weapon, sort of a fighter vs "heavy" ship missile:
White Crow Mortar
Capacity: 2 missiles
Repeat: 15 seconds
Damage: 7500
Splash: 80m
Detonation: Contact
Maneuverability: Low
Fuel: 120 seconds
Speed: 60 m/s
This would be a small port, and make an effective anti-"heavy" ship weapon. The other homers could have similar changes made to them.
Sunflares: Secondary weapon
Tachyon, Ion, Phased, & Gravitron: Primary fighter vs. fighter weapons
Gauss: Fighter vs. larger ship weapon
Small-port homing weapons: fighter vs. fighter
Disclaimer: The opinions stated here are drastic changes.
To make these suggestions feasible, we must first see a large difference of armor between "slow" and "fast" ships. I would propose knocking the Cent, Vult, Valk, and Hornet down 1000, and giving 10k-15k more armor to the Centuar, Rag, and Prom. (Random numbers, but you get the idea)
First, I'll deal with gauss, as it's one of the worst offenders as a weapon operating outside of my stated purpose. To make gauss a more feasible anti-larger ship weapon, it must have more damage per second than tachyons. To do this, I propose to substantially boost the damage of gauss while lowering its velocity. Right now, the Gauss does 2400 damage per second. Contrast this with the tach's 4000 damage per second. I would propose increasing the gauss's damage to 5000 damage per second, while leaving the repeat rate alone. Of course, energy consumption would go up so it would be clear that this is a one-port weapon, and that it would be hard to mount in multiple configurations. Gauss would look like this
Gauss Cannon
Damage: 2500
Velocity: 120
Energy: 75/blast
Repeat: .5/second
This *is* a radical change to the gauss cannon we know, but I think it would delegate the role of "large"-ship killing to it.
Now, we deal with the grav, tach, phased, and ion. I won't touch them all in order, but just give an example layout for the tachyon. The goal here is to make tachyons an effective fighter-vs-fighter weapon. The main thing here is an increase in velocity.
Tachyon Cannon
Damage: 600
Velocity: 220 m/s
Energy: 12/blast
Repeat: 0.15 seconds
Gravitrons could be a variant, be harder hitting but slower firing. Ions blaster could be an upgraded ion cannon, and phased could have a low damage but insane repeat rate.
Now, sunflares. I think sunflares would be fixed with a cap on ammo capacity. Think, six rockets per tube. That'd make them a secondary weapon.
Homers, I think homers need radical speed boosts. Observe the current homer:
Yellow Jacket Missile
Capacity: 8 missiles
Repeat: 1.5 seconds
Damage: 1800
Splash: 30m
Detonation: Contact
Maneuverability: Low
Fuel: 12 seconds
Speed: 85 m/s
A missile's job should be to kill a target, or at least make him hard-pressed to avoid it. Here are my proposed changes, marked with an asterisk (*):
Yellow Jacket Missile
Capacity: 6 missiles*
Repeat: 10 seconds*
Damage: 3000*
Splash: 50m*
Detonation: Contact
Maneuverability: High*
Fuel: 30 seconds*
Speed: 160 m/s*
We could also introduce a new weapon, sort of a fighter vs "heavy" ship missile:
White Crow Mortar
Capacity: 2 missiles
Repeat: 15 seconds
Damage: 7500
Splash: 80m
Detonation: Contact
Maneuverability: Low
Fuel: 120 seconds
Speed: 60 m/s
This would be a small port, and make an effective anti-"heavy" ship weapon. The other homers could have similar changes made to them.
/me likes SirCamps idea
alright then, how is a fighter going to kill a heavy before it dies?
seeing as how heavies have small ports as well...
and think about fighters vs fighters
seeing as how heavies have small ports as well...
and think about fighters vs fighters
One fighter doesn't kill one heavy.
A group of fighters kill a heavy. Duh.
A group of fighters kill a heavy. Duh.
/me likes the idea, it is a step back to pre 3.x times :D
But I was rather wondering how a heavy was going to defend itself against a fighter.
I dont see any difficulty of taking down a heavy with those weapons.
cheers
But I was rather wondering how a heavy was going to defend itself against a fighter.
I dont see any difficulty of taking down a heavy with those weapons.
cheers
"(ps Arolte you run from me wether I have gauss or tachs)"
Not that I remember. I usually don't have time to check who has what weapons. If I know someone is known to use a particular weapon a lot, I'll just assume they always do. Switching to tachs spontaneous and saying all of a sudden that the person is scared of tachs outta nowhere is by far one of the funniest accusations you could make. Also, check to see if any of your teammates were around to help at the time also. Don't flatter yourself too much, in other words.
=)
Sircamps, I SO wish it was that way for the current bombers. For those people who say a heavy shouldn't be able to kill a fighter in a one on one situation, let me ask you to consider something else also. By that same reasoning that bigger ships should be far more vulnerable, would you expect a frigate to die from a single centurion?
Think about that. Yes, bombers aren't supposed to actively seek fighters and kill 'em. But they sure as hell don't stand a chance defensively right now, which is something I find discouraging for people who want to choose a bomber role without having suicidal intentions.
Oh and SirCamps, you forgot gravitons on that list. I think Celebrim mentioned something about making Tachyons a high ROF weapon, but at 200m/s. While the gravitons would fire at the current ROF, but with 220m/s. Something like that. That would be cool.
Anyway, to get back on topic... tachyons rule!! YAY!!!
Not that I remember. I usually don't have time to check who has what weapons. If I know someone is known to use a particular weapon a lot, I'll just assume they always do. Switching to tachs spontaneous and saying all of a sudden that the person is scared of tachs outta nowhere is by far one of the funniest accusations you could make. Also, check to see if any of your teammates were around to help at the time also. Don't flatter yourself too much, in other words.
=)
Sircamps, I SO wish it was that way for the current bombers. For those people who say a heavy shouldn't be able to kill a fighter in a one on one situation, let me ask you to consider something else also. By that same reasoning that bigger ships should be far more vulnerable, would you expect a frigate to die from a single centurion?
Think about that. Yes, bombers aren't supposed to actively seek fighters and kill 'em. But they sure as hell don't stand a chance defensively right now, which is something I find discouraging for people who want to choose a bomber role without having suicidal intentions.
Oh and SirCamps, you forgot gravitons on that list. I think Celebrim mentioned something about making Tachyons a high ROF weapon, but at 200m/s. While the gravitons would fire at the current ROF, but with 220m/s. Something like that. That would be cool.
Anyway, to get back on topic... tachyons rule!! YAY!!!
Heavies need Point Defense Turrets a la Master of Orion 3. Little zap things that could possibly take out incoming missiles and fighters. But they'd be better automated, seeing as how the heavy ships cant turn well, which means that the devs would have to write a Turret AI...
Arolte, I killed the Frigate in a stock bus! :D
But I agree. Bombers/gunships should be superior to fighters in terms of firepower and hull strength. One fighter (or possibly even two) shouldn't spell death for such a powerful ship. The Ragnarok would become a serious threat should it have something like 35k armor. Couple its ability to carry homers in its small ports to its ability to put out impressive gat fire (with a larger battery, of course), you get a force to be reckoned with that fighters should be wary of.
But I agree. Bombers/gunships should be superior to fighters in terms of firepower and hull strength. One fighter (or possibly even two) shouldn't spell death for such a powerful ship. The Ragnarok would become a serious threat should it have something like 35k armor. Couple its ability to carry homers in its small ports to its ability to put out impressive gat fire (with a larger battery, of course), you get a force to be reckoned with that fighters should be wary of.
And just a reminder to all who say fighters always should kill bombers... I'd suggest you talk to some of the fighter pilots in WWII. I think you'll find that more than just a few fighters were lost to bomber defensive fire. No, the bombers (as has been pointed out) did NOT go out seeking fighters... BUT they were able to defend themselves adequately.
Well, going with the whole WWII analogy, bombers have been traditionally vulnerable to fighter attacks. According to this website:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-de.html
German pilots estimated that it took between 5 and 20 20mm hits to bring down an american bomber. That's roughly what it takes now.
What our heavy ships don't have are turret defenses. Even small bombers in WWII normally had at least one turret to defend against incoming fighters.
Carrying this analogy further, the cap ships would be like WWII naval ships. In that sense, the ragnarok is kind of like the British "Swordfish" torpedo bomber.
Taken from: http://www.military.cz/british/air/war/bomber/swordfish/swordfish_en.htm
"World War II, the Fairey Swordfish remarkably remained operational until after 1945. Slow and almost defenceless, it was a successful torpedo bomber against light opposition. Swordfish crippled the italian fleet at Tarente and helped to sink the German Bismarck."
I disagree with giving the ragnarok a 10k hull boost (remember the prometheus?) but I do think it could stand to have its defenses beefed up a little. Even just having the option to configure its L-ports rear facing or front facing would help a lot. A ragnarok with one rear gatling and one front gatling could do a lot better against a fighter than one with two front gatlings.
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-de.html
German pilots estimated that it took between 5 and 20 20mm hits to bring down an american bomber. That's roughly what it takes now.
What our heavy ships don't have are turret defenses. Even small bombers in WWII normally had at least one turret to defend against incoming fighters.
Carrying this analogy further, the cap ships would be like WWII naval ships. In that sense, the ragnarok is kind of like the British "Swordfish" torpedo bomber.
Taken from: http://www.military.cz/british/air/war/bomber/swordfish/swordfish_en.htm
"World War II, the Fairey Swordfish remarkably remained operational until after 1945. Slow and almost defenceless, it was a successful torpedo bomber against light opposition. Swordfish crippled the italian fleet at Tarente and helped to sink the German Bismarck."
I disagree with giving the ragnarok a 10k hull boost (remember the prometheus?) but I do think it could stand to have its defenses beefed up a little. Even just having the option to configure its L-ports rear facing or front facing would help a lot. A ragnarok with one rear gatling and one front gatling could do a lot better against a fighter than one with two front gatlings.
I love the tachs and gravs, don't get me wrong, but I use the gauss cause it's so much CHEAPER than them. who wants to pay 30% more than their batt/engine combo and 30% OF their hull costs? Not me.
Another thought just hit me: why not give all "very high" agility ships "no armor", "high" agility ships "light armor" (absorbs 100 damage per round) "medium" agility ships "medium armor" (absorbs 200 damage per round) and "low" agility ships "heavy armor" (absorbs 300 damage per round).
Gravs would be better than tachs for taking down heavies that way, and so would gauss.
Gravs would be better than tachs for taking down heavies that way, and so would gauss.
-----
And just a reminder to all who say fighters always should kill bombers... I'd suggest you talk to some of the fighter pilots in WWII. I think you'll find that more than just a few fighters were lost to bomber defensive fire. No, the bombers (as has been pointed out) did NOT go out seeking fighters... BUT they were able to defend themselves adequately.
-----
Realism has no place in a game. This has been discussed before. The point here is power. Why pay more for a heavy ship if it's less powerful than a light one?
And just a reminder to all who say fighters always should kill bombers... I'd suggest you talk to some of the fighter pilots in WWII. I think you'll find that more than just a few fighters were lost to bomber defensive fire. No, the bombers (as has been pointed out) did NOT go out seeking fighters... BUT they were able to defend themselves adequately.
-----
Realism has no place in a game. This has been discussed before. The point here is power. Why pay more for a heavy ship if it's less powerful than a light one?
To kill frigates. Which aren't in the game yet. Fighters should counter bombers should counter frigates and so forth. Those L-Ports shouldn't be anti-fighter, they should be anti-cap - let your squadron mates or whoever fly the Valks and cover you while you take out the frigate guarding the convoy.
Last I checked, in WWII no one would sit in one spot looping for hours shooting weapons that went slower than 200 m/s, so WWII is just a plain BAD analogy for this game.
Last I checked, in WWII no one would sit in one spot looping for hours shooting weapons that went slower than 200 m/s, so WWII is just a plain BAD analogy for this game.
200 m/s is a joke. Don't weapons such as "ion" cannons go the speed of light? Yes. But we're not dealing in realism.