+1 But Instead of increasing the range over 3x what it is now, why don't we double it to 7 seconds and see how it plays out? I'd like to see this phased in at 7 seconds then longer if it is desired. At 7 seconds, the range would be 3150 for the advanced and 2800 for the others.

off topic... nobody respond here to this... If we do not have an advanced rail gun turret yet and it hasn't been suggested in the past, someone could post a thread if they like the idea. That would be fun defensive weapon on the rear of an atlas X, moth, or the new rag bomber we might get someday. Surprising an approaching pirate with a rail shot would be fun.

i don't find myself often agreeing with joylessjoker and it feels really weird to say it. but i agree with him.
anyone remember liu ching chang chong blabla? that guy spent hours grifing newbies in dau and crossed the three strikes rule like every day. 5 times. everyone ignores these rules and "repercussions" when they please. there's no good argument to put against this. it'd be a special toy for a griefer.

i can also picture what kierky is planning to do. he'll have a trident buddy of his park in an empty sector in sol and then he'll sit 4km from the station that the newbies get send to after their training and snipe them all day. that's how he rolls gentlemen.

Your argument here almost sounds like a threat, joylessjoker. As if you're going to intentionally try to drive off newbies and affect the devs' business prospects if they add a weapon that might stand a chance of tagging a fleeing greyhound at range.

Would anyone else in this thread like to talk about how many times somebody like YT-1300 or liu xing chui have turbo'd off in a 10% hull greyhound well beyond weapons range where no other ship stands a chance of closing the gap?

Hmm, I seem to be misunderstood again. My argument isn't so much that I'm against railguns with 3x extended range - I'd be fine with them if the game is ready for it. Rather, my argument is that anti griefing measures need to be buffed up before the extended range is introduced because of high potential for abuse against newbs. That's it. THAT'S IT. Nothing more or less.

I'm not sure why you're randomly crying about fleeing hounds. Everyone practices the hound hit and run tactics, including many among your ranks.

Sure they do. Everyone does because it's practically impossible to defeat if you know what you're doing. Even Ecka Estenk flies them these days.

All the more reason to add weapons to counter it.

As for whether the game is ready. It's been ready. This sort of death from afar has been around for years in the form of rockets and more recently, Avalons. Both of which are harder to dodge than a rail shot, and often do more damage.

+1 to grieving android noobs out of the game with lazy-as-shit gameplay. Do you even like this game Kierky?

+1 to rails that last forever and promote even less engagement.

Rails are fine the way they are.

for christsake failure -- what the hell is your problem? Why do you waste so much effort making up shit about non-issues? Aiming avalons at 4000m is difficult, and that's WITH a proximity. Aiming a teensy rail from that far? Please.

I don't see a huge need for this, especially given how inaccurate the rails would be at that distance. But why the hell not?

+1

There is a world of difference between avalons and railguns. Avalons move at 35m/s, and railguns 400-480m/s. Guess which gives the victim more time to notice and move out of the way? On top of that, there is a yellow dot alert on the radar for avalons, and none for railguns. I don't think it's fair to say that "it already exists in game".

Avalons move at 35m/s plus your ship's velocity. Chucked from a full-turbo greyhound, that's 260m/s. This is great fun when you aim it at a station where, unlike a railgun where you'll have to score a direct hit, the splash damage will wipe out anyone near the docks. To dodge that you have to see it coming, get to the docks or get ~300m away before it hits. To dodge a rail from the same range, you just have to not sit perfectly still all the time.

The fact that we don't see this happening constantly at every nation capitol is an example of why it's a non-issue you're arguing about.

"Plus, being able to shoot from 4000m means you can instantly warp"

You realize that 4000m at 400 m/s is 10 seconds, right? Even if we shorten that to 3000m and use the 480 m/s Advanced Railgun, that's still 6.25 seconds during which the target has to either not move at all, or move perfectly consistently.


"You are unfairly disregarding that often it only takes ONE griefing instance to make a potential years-long subscriber feel rejected and not come back."

Somebody who gives up that easily was never a potential years-long subscriber in the first place.


"How about making all newbs below levels 2/2/2/-/- temporarily invulnerable only in capital systems?"

No.

To dodge a rail from the same range, you just have to not sit perfectly still all the time.

I don't get it. You're really confusing, ARF. On one hand you're insisting that it would be THE solution to hit and run hound tactics, yet you're also claiming that railguns are so difficult and ineffective to use that someone standing still would only need to move a single millimeter to dodge. What, seriously? I don't see how it's a great counter to fleeing hounds if one would struggle to hit 89s standing still.

Honestly I don't get it when people want this extended range so bad, and then when it's pointed out that griefers would abuse it further exacerbating the low retention problem, start claiming that it would be so ineffective anyway.

If it's so ineffective and useless that it's not even good against a 89 standing still, then what's the point of arguing for it and wasting devs' time on it?

I stand by my position that we need to think of newb retention first before adding new toys. Otherwise you're just being selfish and thinking of your own short term entertainment before the big picture of a better VO community.

You don't try to hit a greyhound from 4000m standing perfectly still. You try to hit them from behind as they accelerate away from you. This is where extra range on a railgun would be useful, since your ship can't close the gap.

It's not that confusing if you stop and think about it.

The greifer/newbie retention argument is FUD

It's also worth noting that the game's angle error at that range with the rail's tiny projectile is going to introduce a ton of dice rolling. This really won't be a very spectacular change for anyone.

ARF, you seem like a very smart and knowledgeable person in general. However I'm honestly trying my best to comprehend how you think your previous two posts are not a contradiction of each other, and I'm not seeing it.

Any half competent pilot running away in a hound knows how to zig-zag slightly to avoid flares, and it works. Common sense dictates that a 89 standing perfectly still, moving a single millimeter, then standing perfectly still again is much, much, MUCH easier to hit than a hound zig-zagging erratically while turboing at top speed regardless what kind of weapon you're using.

No, it's not FUD because my argument isn't based on a fear of an imagined threat. Rather, it's based on a personal real experience. I am an experienced griefer who enjoys nothing more than ruining a newb's day. I can attest that the existing anti griefing measures are inadequate. I was going to let this thread run its course and get a new griefing toy, but no, I decided to be a better man than that and think of the bigger picture. I'm still surprised that many of you who identify yourselves as the "good guys" of VO are sweeping the shortcomings of the current system under the rug and claiming it's nothing, not an issue at all.

Why in the world would you do that? I'd expect it from kierky and pizza who tend to have the "get with the program or the highway, and I don't give a flying fuck how you feel about it" approach to newbs, but I'm surprised to see it from some of you. Perhaps you've let boredom get the best of you and you indulged in the guilty pleasure of griefing from time to time when nobody is looking, and out of pride or embarrassment you're maintaining the current system is perfectly good enough?

ARF's point (which is a re-stating of my point) is the biggest counter to failure's incessant sob story. The aiming angles are shit at 4000m. This weapon would only have legitimate application in pursuing fleeing ships -- namely swarm hounds.

I am an experienced griefer
-joylessjoker aka failure

Yeah dude. So what you are saying is that you are a major contributer to the low player retention rates through griefing and being a total dick to people who are new to the game, while at the same time you feel qualified to be seen as an advocate for newbs? This thread is less and less about the OP and more and more about how much of a total self-deluded idiot you are.

You seem to be missing by a mile what I'm really trying to say, greenie. So I'll spell it out again, really carefully and clearly for you.

I am acknowledging that my actions are a contribution to the low retention problem, and I am working to change my behavior. I am no longer griefing in the way I used to. Is this part crystal clear? Now on to the next point: from my experience as an asshat griefer, I have thoroughly tested the anti griefing measures, and I am able to say with confidence that they are less than adequate for determined griefers. I suck at pvp horrendously, and yet SFs and seekers struggle to take me out. The measures as a whole are in need of a reform. If I wanted to continue indulging in griefing, why would I be suggesting this?

I'm still failing to see how railguns would be effective against fleeing, zig-zaging hounds, especially if there's an angle bug lurking. You and ARF haven't made any effort to explain how this is so.

Low retention of newbs has fuck all to do with this suggestion. If you think it's a problem then make another thread with your suggestion. Don't fucking hijack every other thread instead.

Well, right now, anything carrying railguns is weighed down to the point where there's no way it'll be keeping up with a greyhound, so being able to take another pot shot at 2000m is a big deal.

Again to my example with Avalons. Not only do they have longer range and do more damage, they also weigh less than Adv Rails, and yet this greifing disaster situation you warn of still doesn't happen.

What's next?

+1 to L-mines with a 4000m radius? Fuck you guys are lazy.

+1 to the OP. But the accuracy needs to be improved somehow.

I like the idea of plinking rail shots at fleeing hounds and, to be honest, I think I need more of a challenge when I'm the one in the hound.

YT-1300