I could start this by listing what is right about the combat model, but I might not recognize every element, and the list might get long of what I do think I know. Let us just say that the combat model is sufficiently balanced so as to highlight a few of it's remaining weaknesses. These perceived weaknesses are what I will attempt to address.

doKeyRamp:
You can check the setting of your doKeyRamp variable by typing "/set doKeyRamp". The default is 1, and you can change it by typing "/set doKeyRamp 0". A value of 1 means that when you press a strafe key, it does not present max strafe right away. Rather, it gradually increases to max over a period of about 1 second. This is useful for controlled flight, allowing smooth station docking etc. However, in combat, speed can be more important than grace, and a delay in strafe can be a handicap. The existence and function of this variable is buried in the depths of obscure documentation. It should be listed in the options menu.

Combat Turbo:
Because a fast ship can fly in circles, without serious concern of being intercepted, there is no effective method to secure a significant area of space. You can not force a pilot to leave a sector, strike force bots can not force a pilot to leave a station's no fire zone, and you can not clear a blockade from a wormhole. This weakness is directly or indirectly the cause of many complaints about combat tactics in general.

AutoAim:
There is no way to make autoaim perfect. It should not be made to predict rolling strafe. It does need at least some improvements.

AutoAim Constant Acceleration::
AutoAim should account for constant acceleration. When my target hits and holds his turbo key, autoaim should know where to fire to intercept his ship based on the assumption that he will hold his turbo key.

AutoAim Effective Precision::
One of the biggest weaknesses of AutoAim is it's precision. If a target is stationary or drifting, this precision is very effective. However, actively dodging targets often use the precision of their opponent's AutoAim to effect a very precision miss. The precision of the AutoAim makes it exactly predictable, and thus highly avoidable. This could be countered with dynamic precision, so that with a decrease in precision, AutoAim would randomly spreading it's fire into a cone, within the limits of the weapons effective aiming arc. This dynamic precision could be manual, or automatic, with automatic being controlled by periodically measurement of the minimum achieved distance to target of a max precision shot.

My Two Cents:
With but few exceptions, I run a mostly stock setup, with few binds, aliases, and no plug ins. I am a programmer by profession, but if I wanted to play a game I had to "program" to compete in, I doubt I would have chosen this one. Do we really want a game dominated by auto dodge aliases, autoaim cyclic toggle aliases, 3d glasses, and whatever other esoteric inventions that can be found? What if I decided I was willing to program myriad aliases for this game? Would you want to compete with me on that level? Please make the game even for the general audience, and effect some sort of ability to dominate territory.

Combat in VO is mostly confined to ranges of 500m or less due to the limitations of the weapons used. This makes sense for energy weapons and rockets which are, by their nature, only effective at short range but much less sense for missiles which feel nerfed to me to make them fit work within this range.

I'd like to see missiles redesigned to become long-range weapons so that combat isn't confined to the "knife fight" paradigm and control of an area of space becomes more feasible. Hearing the radar lock warning should become a butt-clenching moment but not necessarily a death sentence.

Possible changes like: making missiles useless at short range (only arms past 500m); very expensive, heavy, and limited in the number you can carry (one (small port) or three (large port) per launcher); very fast and long range (make them as fast as the fastest ship and give them long lifespans); very maneuverable (but not unavoidable with the correct tactics); high damage (enough to take out a light ship in one hit). Missiles could require active targeting which could add a radar/jammer dynamic to battles.

This would make a more "combined arms" approach to battles possible with medium and heavy ship finally having a role. Note that most of the above is from the perspective of multi-ship battles and not 1v1 battles. Since duelists tend not to use missiles anyway, there should be little impact on this segment of the VO population. Being a fairly major change in the combat model, I don't expect this to get much attention at the moment but thought I'd get my thoughts on the matter on the record while it was fresh in my mind.

thanks for the headsup on the keyramp Roda. I agree with you on the points here. I have wondered how come my aiming sucks when a person is boosting in a long straight line opposed to when he is actively dodging, now I know.

I agree with the escalating speeds AA that Roda Mentioned,
I completely agree with you...
The AA should account for Accel per sec
Because atm the Accel AA is heaps jumpy making it near impossible for most energy fire to hit.

You are spot on Roda.

Daare, I disagree with you only because I am concerned that changing missiles into effective long range weapons will only encourage more WORM-like attackers. Otherwise, for something like Border skirmish or piracy, this would add to the game.

High-cost, limited capacity, and active targeting (no fire-and-forget) would help obviate (but not eliminate) annoyances like W0RM. Finding the right range for active targeting would be the key to balancing this type of weapon - having to keep the target in the front quadrant and within 1500m would be a good place to start.

Regarding Auto Aim: I don't believe turbo acceleration is linear so that complicates matters considerably for a predictor when flight times can be counted in seconds. Also, I believe the imprecision of Auto Aim beyond a certain range has to do with network optimization (http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/2/19615#245767) rather than inherent deficiencies with Auto Aim.

Perhaps a solution is to give rockets a little more speed and range so they are more effective at mid-ranges since they are proximity fused. Thus: energy weapons for short-range, rockets for mid-range, missiles for long-range.

If auto-aim can't be worked out to satisfaction, perhaps it'd best be removed.

I believe that the autoaim feature was designed and implemented for the express purpose of eliminating any advantage gained by players creating their own rudimentary autoaim.

Question: I use a stick to control the strafe function. I ssume that the dokeyramp function/ effect does not apply. Is this correct?

Great points Roda!

I do not use a stick, so I do not know if the doKeyRamp has any effect on it. I would expect not.

Glad you gave that reply some serious thought Roda.

Y'know, about the AutoAim, you people could learn to aim with AA off instead of increasing the capacity of AA. I rarely use AA myself and perform fine without it.

Key ramping has no effect on strafing, only spinning.

It seems to me that it does affect strafing.