Bottom line, they don't need to be better, they need to just be very close.

I am totally not weighing in on this discussion at this point, I have other stuff to do, but I want to respond to this:

Inc has repeatedly said that latency issues or somesuch thing prevent making interceptors faster than 225m/s, but aside from tridents ships have to be reasonably fast.

I think maybe a more in-depth explanation of the limiting factors is needed. The latency issue I'm talking about refers to the ability of the game to reflect fast changes in the position / orientation of an enemy (limited by the speed of light through fiber). If Lecter is in Hawaii and I'm in Wisconsin, and we have say, 300ms of ping time in either direction, any change of orientation and direction I make will take at least 300ms to reach him. The discrepancy in my position change on his screen (distance I "jump") will be based on the amount of in-game distance I'm able to cover in that time, which is directly related to my speed and acceleration (most importantly, my ability to change direction and speed quickly).

The local game-client is reasonably good at predicting objects moving in a straight line, or close to it; but in combat the #1 rule is "random movements are king", if you're predictable (by the remote player, or any computer) then you're likely to be dead. The more speeds go up, the less playable the game becomes for anyone on a more latent connection. Icarus and a bunch of other European and British players left, because the high speeds just made combat too insane.. people were just jumping all over. (I don't claim my hack on top-speeds was well designed at all, I'm just saying that's why it happened, and what the trade-offs are if we re-visit this).

So, I can make ships that can go fast in one direction, as long as their ability to maneuver is drastically limited.. not just when turboing, but at any time when they're at high speed. If I make a ship do 300m/s, and then be able (as is normal) to stop turboing and engage full turbo 90-degrees off-axis, that will be an un-hittable ship for everyone who does not live within, say, 2000 miles of Milwaukee. The flight distance that individual is able to cover in-game will be too great for anyone to reasonably keep up with on a 250ms connection.

I am all for discussions about latency and top-speed and whatever, and I'm willing to re-visit all that stuff (although that's might be a broader subject for a separate thread), but let's at least start at a point of understanding the issues involved. There is no predictive algorithm that can account for a human making random motions at higher pings, and I do not want my game to be US-only or broadband-only (anyone playing over a cellular link, even on a PC, is immediately hit with an extra 150ms, and that's pretty ideal LTE. So even someone tethering in Milwaukee could find combat practically a no-go).

There are serious rocks and hard-places here; much of this is not a "design" issue, but rather a "twitch game" issue.. and it's why EVE and the other majors are not twitch titles.

Lol kierky, puts a flare on a valkryie and calls it a downside, then says the SVG is better than the X1.

You're a comedian mate.

Take your flare off and run the same numbers. many players run the widowmaker valk for that exact reason, interception.

You're an idiot. The same could be said about removing a weapon from the SVG. I put them both in very common load outs. The Valkyrie would need to equip an xgx raven and raven to match the SVG in those ratios.

Why do the Itani have two light special ships and Serco have one of heavy and one light? That seems like bias toward Serco.

Waah Waah we can't match the Itani in their specialised light ship. Cry me a fucking river and grow a pair.

When you are comparing baseline stats it has to be the exact same loadout, it's not a meaningful comparison otherwise. You're just modifying the numbers to suit your pre-determined conclusion.

So if that makes me an idiot, compare a widowmaker valk to a widowmaker SVG, and you see the difference as plain as day.

Also the answer to your question is that the Serco don't have two light ships, they have two heavy ones, and the Itani have three light ships (2900kg,3000kg,3100kg) each with their own unique models.

As I'm aware they only have one heavy special ship. Which is what I was referring to. The prometheus class of ship and the light Serco Vulture variant. The Itani have the light Valkyrie class of ship. And they also have the light Itani Centurion variant.

What you're trying to do is make the SVG the equivalent of the Valkyrie, which is fine, but then the Itani needs a Prometheus equivalent. I'm not sure what role the IBG is trying to fill, which is part of the reason I don't use it. But the fact remains that neither nation has a ship to effectively combat the Valkyrie/Prometheus.

You would think that two advanced civilisations would have this figured out by now.

No No No NO NO.

I am not trying to make the SVG the equivalent of the Valkryie at all.

Proposed New SVG stats:
Turbo Drain: 54/s
Top Speed: 225m/s

No changes to armour, no changes to manoeuvrability, no changes to ports, no changes to weight. The changes are to allow it to be an effective 2-port chaser.

Discussion about the prometheus and heavy ships is tangental. For all I care, the Itani can have one BETTER than the prometheus because tank hard hitters are just not as important as ships with chasing capability in Vendetta.

Every time this topic comes up, its gridlocked by the majority of Itani players voting it down, and the few serco who actually bother to come here voting it up.

It's time for a little of that non-partisan dev intervention to recognise how critical the chase and interception mechanics are to everyday gameplay and to intervene despite the blatant political storm surrounding the debate.

I am fine with those stats.

to quote Kierky from the other thread:

Fix it! devs. just. do it.

Having just read both this shame of a thread that Inc was totally smart to stay out of, and TRS's more suggestion-worthy original thread, I'm sad to see such bias in the replies. A simple 2 point tweak seems a reasonable thing to TRY, then evaluate.

I actually would rather see the Serco have their own line of vultures, and not the basic Mk1 thru 4, and the Itani their own line of centurions, leaving the generic knock-offs (and hot-rod customs like the CV and RevC) to UIT and greyspace, but that is another thread and another year of debate and development…

heck, if it were up to me, Serco wouldn't have any centurions and Itani wouldn't have any vultures, just to make the early player experience different, but I digress….

Yes conflict diamond, but when I start a thread that is sensible, game-play oriented suggestion as simple as a two value tweak, all I get is political garbage bias nonsense from some players and the whole thread is ultimately ignored by the devs.

We can make all the logical arguments we want, certain players will merely oppose it in principle, and then attempt to make arguments around that instead of conceding that it's worth trying.

I am sick of pussyfooting around that. I've made my points in a constructive and coherent fashion in that thread, I diplomatically made my case and refuted counter points. it's a very small change and its worth a try but still nothing happens. If someone wants to go two rounds with me about it, bring it on. I'll enjoy it more than you will.

I opposed this thread for the simple fact that it was based on buffing the serco numbers.
I am not opposed to buffing the SVG to make it a better interceptor.

They are similar... Until you remember that the valk has a 3rd port where it can equip a drain gun, flare, something to break an infiniturbo ship's momentum.

The SVG is a great interceptor if you want to touch your nose to their tummy and nuzzle them before they turbo away.

You could put the same flare or drain gun on an SVG, sure, but you lose so much DPS it further handicaps you.

It would seem that the solution (nobody will like) is to reduce the number of ships that can infiniturbo.

The OP is stupid. Look at history.

The PvP +1 Thread

and look at the result:

Oct 23, 2010 incarnate: 'kay, I increased the mass of all Valkyries by 100 (2900->3000, 3000->3100).

If you think that inc will nerf the valk, directly, or indirectly (by allowing any other ship to compete with it), then you do not understand inc. And do you know why you do not understand inc? because he does not want you to understand him. He is in charge. He does not answer to you or any other player or group of players. He does not need to explain himself, and in fact, he specifically avoids explaining himself, because he does not want you to know what he is thinking, or why he is thinking it. He has no intention of explaining himself, or bowing to your demands. you are wasting your breath. your efforts are not worth the bits and bytes used to record them. because your efforts depend on inc. and inc does not depend on you, or really, even have any common respect or consideration for you.

give it up. move on.

^ What a load of drivel.

Ghost was three times the player you will ever be, and commanded more respect from his fellow players than you can ever hope for. If he can not get the devs to fix it, no one can.

It's still drivel.

It shouldn't matter who suggests it, if its the preferable thing to do, its the preferable thing to do.

Keep on drivellin'

all I get is political garbage bias nonsense from some players and the whole thread is ultimately ignored by the devs.

Also I love dramatic BS, its who I am!

Preferable to who?

You preferring one thing, is just you. I have not seen anyone step forward and state that you speak for them too. You are alone.

Ghost volunteered to speak for many, and many signed up to be spoken for, by Ghost. And they together stated what was preferable to them, as a group. They stated what was preferable to them.

What happened was what was preferable to inc. No explanation. No discussion. No appeal.

So go ahead and knock yourself out. But history has shown, Inc does what Inc feels like doing, and he not only doesn't owe you any more than he decides, he will not tell you even how much he has decided he owes you. You are working in the dark.

Have fun.

Mecha said it yesterday, and ghost said it, as you say. Ghost also told me I should quit VO, so if I'd listened we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I never expect incarnate to implement the ideas here, my expectations in that regard couldn't be lower. He just sometimes does.

Also he's not a baby, he can forum yell at me himself he doesn't need you to drivel out the obvious on his behalf.