Forums » Suggestions
I agree wholeheartedly with Lecter.
BRING. BACK. 50 DRAIN.
I loved my Rune Valk. I loved it like Lecter loves his Chianti, or like ananzi loves communism, or like Incarnate loves Soon™.
It was a great ship and when I had it I flew nothing else, as most of you can attest. Once it lost the infiniboost, I never flew it again, and have been reduced to experimenting with Centurion variants and the Lumbering Lebertaur™ and other mostrosities which had neither the class nor the long-distance "driveability" of the Rune Valkyrie.
The infiniboost was the ONE thing that the Rune Valk had. Otherwise there's no reason to keep the ship around. It's outperformed by the IDF and Vengeance Valkyrie (Not to mention Prom and Cent) in combat.
You will all say I'm crazy, but: I say give it back the 8 cargo and the 50 drain, and give it a top speed of 230 m/s.
And maybe give it one "L" port instead of 3 "S" ports. That'll make it different enough, eh? One L port makes it more of a running-around ship than a heavyweight in combat that people will complain about. Plus you won't be able to use it with flares, although a megaposi Valk sounds yummy.
BRING. BACK. 50 DRAIN.
I loved my Rune Valk. I loved it like Lecter loves his Chianti, or like ananzi loves communism, or like Incarnate loves Soon™.
It was a great ship and when I had it I flew nothing else, as most of you can attest. Once it lost the infiniboost, I never flew it again, and have been reduced to experimenting with Centurion variants and the Lumbering Lebertaur™ and other mostrosities which had neither the class nor the long-distance "driveability" of the Rune Valkyrie.
The infiniboost was the ONE thing that the Rune Valk had. Otherwise there's no reason to keep the ship around. It's outperformed by the IDF and Vengeance Valkyrie (Not to mention Prom and Cent) in combat.
You will all say I'm crazy, but: I say give it back the 8 cargo and the 50 drain, and give it a top speed of 230 m/s.
And maybe give it one "L" port instead of 3 "S" ports. That'll make it different enough, eh? One L port makes it more of a running-around ship than a heavyweight in combat that people will complain about. Plus you won't be able to use it with flares, although a megaposi Valk sounds yummy.
Hey Leber,
Why not give the L-port armed, infinitboosting, 8 cargo, 230m/s Rune an ice-cooler, a boombox, fuel-injection system, 4 rocket launchers and a sofa too?
love
HC.
Why not give the L-port armed, infinitboosting, 8 cargo, 230m/s Rune an ice-cooler, a boombox, fuel-injection system, 4 rocket launchers and a sofa too?
love
HC.
No L-ports.
That would give too much potential for more swarm abuse.
No... just no.
That would give too much potential for more swarm abuse.
No... just no.
hehe silly sarcastic softy.
Make it heavier and give it infiniboost. 4000kg for example. That explains how it can have 8cu cargo space. Thats at least my opinion. Or removed it. Dr. Lecter has a point there. Fix it or remove it. That should apply to all broken stuff.
"Sad, little old guy with a lot of words and nothing to say" Heh. Ironic you're sayin that to ME.
Will you two please leave each other alone???
/me goes off to appeal for moving message posting limitations higher on the priority list.
/me goes off to appeal for moving message posting limitations higher on the priority list.
softy said:
Why not give the L-port armed, infinitboosting, 8 cargo, 230m/s Rune an ice-cooler, a boombox, fuel-injection system, 4 rocket launchers and a sofa too?
And dice, fuzzy dice. And a liquor rack for the tequila. Oh, and...
<sigh> I miss my Rune. Probably more than Lecter misses his.
Why not give the L-port armed, infinitboosting, 8 cargo, 230m/s Rune an ice-cooler, a boombox, fuel-injection system, 4 rocket launchers and a sofa too?
And dice, fuzzy dice. And a liquor rack for the tequila. Oh, and...
<sigh> I miss my Rune. Probably more than Lecter misses his.
Lecter proposes :
<cut music from Monty Python's "Lesson in Logic">
Somehow, however, I only hear the words from "Argument Clinic".
<cut music from Monty Python's "Lesson in Logic">
Somehow, however, I only hear the words from "Argument Clinic".
Hey FM, mind doing something here? I've been giving a lot better than I've been getting, I know. But Dr. Lecter is just being a dick. For several posts now the only thing he's done is attack me personally.
I still want the infiniboost Rune Valk back. I like infiniboost. I dunno why so many vets hate it. The only thing I can come up with is that it helps enable spamming and running like *hewhoshallnotbenamed*. You'd think pirates would enjoy having it.
Just simply reducing the current Rune's drain to 50 would suffice for me, in reality. No fuzzy dice needed.
Just simply reducing the current Rune's drain to 50 would suffice for me, in reality. No fuzzy dice needed.
You really should continue with the post deleting theme Lecter. It displays a level of humility I really didn't think existed in you. I mean, to personally censor your own rantings? Wow.
Now, get on with it and stop proving otherwise...
Now, get on with it and stop proving otherwise...
Thank you Lecter.
:)
:)
"That would give too much potential for more swarm abuse."
I doubt it... valk is a light, and swams would slow it down... besides, with only one tube of swarms it would be rather difficult to abuse it, to say nothing of the likelihood of you killing yourself with them in that paper ship.
No, an L-port would not hurt the valk...
...but infiniboost might.
I doubt it... valk is a light, and swams would slow it down... besides, with only one tube of swarms it would be rather difficult to abuse it, to say nothing of the likelihood of you killing yourself with them in that paper ship.
No, an L-port would not hurt the valk...
...but infiniboost might.
Ohhhh. Now I see why Lecter went ahead with a second round of mass post-deletions:
Gavan said:
------------------
You really should continue with the post deleting theme Lecter. It displays a level of humility I really didn't think existed in you. I mean, to personally censor your own rantings? Wow.
Now, get on with it and stop proving otherwise...
-------------------
Thank you Lecter.
:)
-------------------
So, he did it on Gavan's behalf. It all makes sense now. Everyone knows that Gavan is a jedi master and the weak-minded are subject to suggestion from him.
Gavan said:
------------------
You really should continue with the post deleting theme Lecter. It displays a level of humility I really didn't think existed in you. I mean, to personally censor your own rantings? Wow.
Now, get on with it and stop proving otherwise...
-------------------
Thank you Lecter.
:)
-------------------
So, he did it on Gavan's behalf. It all makes sense now. Everyone knows that Gavan is a jedi master and the weak-minded are subject to suggestion from him.
Back on topic, can we get a resolution on this? Knock the rune back down to 50 drain and that's it? No other changes?
NO. Valks should NOT have infiniboost. Neither should cent IIs for that matter. They're already all but uncatchable, and get from point a to point b faster than any other ships. With 55 drain, they can go far enough and fast enough on a charge that with a FC's 5-second charging time, they don't need it.
it's not that valks need infiniboost, it's that infiniboost would be nice on the Rune, and given it's curent stats adding infiniboost would have no unbalancing effects (it can already run beter than most ships, and the Rune is otherwise inferior to the other Valks)
i say give the Rune it's infiniboost, and let it be.
i say give the Rune it's infiniboost, and let it be.
It's not the drain that killed the rune but the cut in its cargo hold. 6 is plain ridiculous for an "increased cargo hold". Just compare to a (shorter) hog III. It used to be a light transport / nice fighter combo; now it's just a clumsier valk.
Um, how is a 2 cu cargo cut important?