Okay, nobody likes a backroller. Unfortunately, it's hard to blame them for using such an obviously good technique. And it's not only players, but unbots too. They just continually strafe backwards and energy spam, and turboing into this is suicide.

So to fix it up, take away their energy spam. Put an energy consumption on flying backwards. Nothing to make it impossible, just to give a big enough incentive to stop backpeddling. By putting a 25/s drain, anyone who keeps on strafing back will not be able to produce much of a threat from energy weapons.

And if they do keep backrolling, it'll allow the aggessor to turbo into a gap while while the backroller is recharging.

This could fix a consistent problem and a aid to greifers, as well as add a new element to combat.

Uhhm? Bots only try to back away from you if you're flying towards them.. they try to maintain a set distance. Personally, I've never noticed this to be a problem. The only issue with bots that I currently have.. is some of them are too hard for newbies.

I think the problem with the bots is they are psychic. they dodge too well at distance, and they only use one tactic. I liked it when the bots got into your face. How possible would it be to randomly select the set distance from a range, and to have them alter it? This way you get a huge variety of bot combat, with only a small change.

T respond to fooz, I don't think energy drain will deter backrolling, and it will cut into less irritating tactics that require backward movement.

For PvP, I just hit the brakes and let them drift awaaaay....

Then I get a few free hits in when they turbo back into range.

Aye, the problem is they keep too much distance. So much so that the ones that like to stay further away will actually stay out of their own weapon range, hence not firing while just backing up.

I was actually thinking more of PvP and greifers than bots, which I believe is supposed to be fixed soon anyways.

I disagree.

I think the issue with backrolling can be solved by introducing new types of mission objectives (see thurisaz' mission suggestion) without having to change the flight model. Sure it can be annoying in a duel, but it'll cost you the mission when it really counts.

Also, take whistler's combat tip, it's a good one.

maybe there could be some kind of long ranged missile with a long activation time, but enough speed and maneuverablility to chase down and hurt a backroller? Would also be a good anti-runner weapon...

Of course, that kind of stuff and countermeasures were being discussed around here in one of the huge suggestion threads...maybe that should be rezzed - there was some good stuff in there about bringing missiles into the game (properly) whilst keeping a good balance.

I too use the "hit the brakes and let them drift" strategy, but it still seems too consensual for fighting in this game.

I remember a famous itani pilot rolling...rolling...rolling into infinity after I hit the brakes, before logging off. The funny thing is that he was still rolling at > 2000m. That scene was worth 10 pks :D.

if you cant kill a backroller, you either lack skill or lack patience. neither one of these is a good reason to change the game.

as for you high ranked pvpers, why should the game be changed so that its even easier for you to kill people?

It's called Gemini Missiles, Souless. Very fast and maunvuerable.

I, as a rocket user, have found backrollers quite entertaining. I can turbo in under their shots and be close enough to hit them once with rockets. And while they recover, I hit them again. And again and again and again... :DDD

i'd rather see limited attatude controle added to turbo-speed manuvering. that way you can alter your vector while turboing and thus turboing after a backroler would be less suacidal.

in a thread where Incarnate suggested altering turbo energy usage, I suggested that all manuevers require energy. Thus, rolling (back or otherwise), would consume energy. non stop rollers would find themselves shorter on energy to power weapons than someone more conservitive in thier manuevers.

ananzi:

its not that it should be made easier to kill people, its that if a person engages me, and really doesn't want to die, they don't have to. And there is very little that I can do about that. That's a problem when it comes to group interaction.

There is no risk associated with engaging someone unless you're prone to getting hit with 10 neutron blasts in succession.

The problem has already shown up in Nation Wars, where the best strategy currently is to run until people ignore you.

then you might as well make every ship have the same acceleration and speed as well, since anyone in a valk who engages a ragnarok can flee quite easily

But, in order to flee, the Valk would have to run in a straight line...

and your comment assumes a particular way of dealing with the problem.

Furthermore, a valk which engages a ragnarok can be destroyed in seconds. Not so with a light fighter.

hey heres an idea, how about if we ban backrolling, we also ban 'front rolling'. after all, i get 'engaged' all the time by people who 'frontroll' and kill me, without warning, without my consent, etc, and there is 'very little i can do about it'. it gets to be a real problem with 'group interaction' because all these @#$@#$ centurions and valks fly around murdering everyone. like in the last nation war; 3 itanis all flying valks won, even though they were outnumbered by the other teams.

I think we should ban sarca...

[CONNECTION TERMINATED]

Heh, Ananzi, they won because there was no way to attack them, there was no way to follow them. They didn't straightforwardly engage. Say what you will about it being a "good strategy",

given the current rules it IS a good strategy, and that's a problem, cuz any idiot can pull it off.

I know, because I used the same strategy with 5 SVG's in nation war 10.

My comment is that Fighting currently is completely consensual. Your point doesn't disprove that.