Forums » Suggestions
Seeing as the goliath has been changed into a more nimble and survival focused ship, i feel the larger stronger vessel overall should be slower, not as fast as its easier to build, lighter goliath cousin.
I haven't actually seen any justifications here on why the Trident is supposed to be slower?
Like, where is this "feeling" coming from?
why is a ship that's already a juggernaut capable of going the same maximum as a Goliath? Goliath should be faster, or the trident should be slower.
So, the advantage of the Goliath is that it is much easier to build. It's also "effectively" more nimble, because it's smaller. But realistically, the Goliath is supposed to be inferior to the Trident. It's like a more accessible, lower-barrier-of-entry capship.
Like, I dunno, to make an analogy.. you really wanted a BMW M3, but you ended up buying a Chevy Spark, which is more fuel-efficient and totally decent, and also much less expensive. It arguably is better at some things. It isn't supposed to be better at everything.
I'm not against this discussion or anything, I just need a much more clearly-defined argument for why there should be this clear differential between their speeds. Is that something I then have to propagate up in scale for all other capships? Do Capellas then have to inch along super slowly, for some reason?
the goliath is made to run, therefore its only balanced that the goliaths maximum turbo should be higher.
The Goliath is not "made to run". The Goliath is made to be easier to build, and have a lot of limitations, and provide people with a way to get into the whole capship thing. I'm open to further ideas and stuff, but I need more specific clarity..
I haven't actually seen any justifications here on why the Trident is supposed to be slower?
Like, where is this "feeling" coming from?
why is a ship that's already a juggernaut capable of going the same maximum as a Goliath? Goliath should be faster, or the trident should be slower.
So, the advantage of the Goliath is that it is much easier to build. It's also "effectively" more nimble, because it's smaller. But realistically, the Goliath is supposed to be inferior to the Trident. It's like a more accessible, lower-barrier-of-entry capship.
Like, I dunno, to make an analogy.. you really wanted a BMW M3, but you ended up buying a Chevy Spark, which is more fuel-efficient and totally decent, and also much less expensive. It arguably is better at some things. It isn't supposed to be better at everything.
I'm not against this discussion or anything, I just need a much more clearly-defined argument for why there should be this clear differential between their speeds. Is that something I then have to propagate up in scale for all other capships? Do Capellas then have to inch along super slowly, for some reason?
the goliath is made to run, therefore its only balanced that the goliaths maximum turbo should be higher.
The Goliath is not "made to run". The Goliath is made to be easier to build, and have a lot of limitations, and provide people with a way to get into the whole capship thing. I'm open to further ideas and stuff, but I need more specific clarity..
"I haven't actually seen any justifications here on why the Trident is supposed to be slower?
Like, where is this "feeling" coming from?"
the trident is currently the strongest ship in vo, most firepower, most armor, strongest shields, while it is wayyyy more difficult and way more effort and time consuming to make its also way easier to make when you own a goliath, or have friends who have those ships, as evident by players owning multiple dents on multiple characters. my feeling honestly comes from the way that the goliath was slowly just pushed to be a weaker and weaker capital ship, while i agree it was stupidly ridiculous that a goliath could deshield and kill a trident (with time, when three capital swarm missile turrets could be used on a goliath at one time), and then two, then one. It was way harder ,IMO, to make a goliath from an xc then a trident from a goliath, most tridents were made PRE mine nerf when you could farm, bout 1500-2000 sss in maybe an hour and a half? two? while if you were making a goliath without any capital ship you were having to kill and manually scoop sss, which was an incredibly difficult task, not impossible, but not easy either. i think that, while as a "easier" build, with less resources needed its not an easy task.
"Like, I dunno, to make an analogy.. you really wanted a BMW M3, but you ended up buying a Chevy Spark, which is more fuel-efficient and totally decent, and also much less expensive. It arguably is better at some things. It isn't supposed to be better at everything."
To add to this, you got the chevy, becuase it was full efficient and a decent and reasonably priced car, but after you used it and you worked longer, you get promoted. you got a raise and suddenly your fuel efficient car because obsolete, because the BMW M3 just became way better. it would be less of a hassle to get the BMW M3 now because:
you got a raise! more money, easier to save (trade routes as a goliath, more credits)
your hours improved! (farming became way more effecient as a goli could hold four xcs, 200 sss, and keep it protected while dealing higher dps then the moth with swarms or devastors that was used to make the goliath)
"I'm not against this discussion or anything, I just need a much more clearly-defined argument for why there should be this clear differential between their speeds. Is that something I then have to propagate up in scale for all other capships? Do Capellas then have to inch along super slowly, for some reason?"
i think that overall capship need a buff, both the trident and goliath can be deshielded by a single player, a trident needs a somewhat sorted stack of geminis and chaos swarms from a single rag? why? the trident should need ATLEAST two players stacking it to deshield it, because it does cost alot, and it seems kind of silly that this ship that took months of grinding is as easy to deshield as a goliath, on that note i think the trident shields regen and hp should be doubled, and the goliath shields should go up by half of what it is now, as i see it (but thats just how i see it)
"The Goliath is not "made to run". The Goliath is made to be easier to build, and have a lot of limitations, and provide people with a way to get into the whole capship thing. I'm open to further ideas and stuff, but I need more specific clarity.."
okay so this is interesting because over the course of this suggestion ive thought about the idea that instead of a nerf the goliath go 145, 5 faster then the trident, but the tridents HP and the shields (like i said above) should be increased, with no speed nerf. i dunno if anyone else agrees, but capital ships in general need a buff.
if anything i feel i need to open a new suggestion about buffing capital ships in general
Like, where is this "feeling" coming from?"
the trident is currently the strongest ship in vo, most firepower, most armor, strongest shields, while it is wayyyy more difficult and way more effort and time consuming to make its also way easier to make when you own a goliath, or have friends who have those ships, as evident by players owning multiple dents on multiple characters. my feeling honestly comes from the way that the goliath was slowly just pushed to be a weaker and weaker capital ship, while i agree it was stupidly ridiculous that a goliath could deshield and kill a trident (with time, when three capital swarm missile turrets could be used on a goliath at one time), and then two, then one. It was way harder ,IMO, to make a goliath from an xc then a trident from a goliath, most tridents were made PRE mine nerf when you could farm, bout 1500-2000 sss in maybe an hour and a half? two? while if you were making a goliath without any capital ship you were having to kill and manually scoop sss, which was an incredibly difficult task, not impossible, but not easy either. i think that, while as a "easier" build, with less resources needed its not an easy task.
"Like, I dunno, to make an analogy.. you really wanted a BMW M3, but you ended up buying a Chevy Spark, which is more fuel-efficient and totally decent, and also much less expensive. It arguably is better at some things. It isn't supposed to be better at everything."
To add to this, you got the chevy, becuase it was full efficient and a decent and reasonably priced car, but after you used it and you worked longer, you get promoted. you got a raise and suddenly your fuel efficient car because obsolete, because the BMW M3 just became way better. it would be less of a hassle to get the BMW M3 now because:
you got a raise! more money, easier to save (trade routes as a goliath, more credits)
your hours improved! (farming became way more effecient as a goli could hold four xcs, 200 sss, and keep it protected while dealing higher dps then the moth with swarms or devastors that was used to make the goliath)
"I'm not against this discussion or anything, I just need a much more clearly-defined argument for why there should be this clear differential between their speeds. Is that something I then have to propagate up in scale for all other capships? Do Capellas then have to inch along super slowly, for some reason?"
i think that overall capship need a buff, both the trident and goliath can be deshielded by a single player, a trident needs a somewhat sorted stack of geminis and chaos swarms from a single rag? why? the trident should need ATLEAST two players stacking it to deshield it, because it does cost alot, and it seems kind of silly that this ship that took months of grinding is as easy to deshield as a goliath, on that note i think the trident shields regen and hp should be doubled, and the goliath shields should go up by half of what it is now, as i see it (but thats just how i see it)
"The Goliath is not "made to run". The Goliath is made to be easier to build, and have a lot of limitations, and provide people with a way to get into the whole capship thing. I'm open to further ideas and stuff, but I need more specific clarity.."
okay so this is interesting because over the course of this suggestion ive thought about the idea that instead of a nerf the goliath go 145, 5 faster then the trident, but the tridents HP and the shields (like i said above) should be increased, with no speed nerf. i dunno if anyone else agrees, but capital ships in general need a buff.
if anything i feel i need to open a new suggestion about buffing capital ships in general
"i dunno if anyone else agrees, but capital ships in general need a buff."
Or we could wait and see what Inc has in store for the coming capship variants. The current capships seem about right to me. Until new ships are added like the Type S and Type P, it's all good as far as speed goes.
Or we could wait and see what Inc has in store for the coming capship variants. The current capships seem about right to me. Until new ships are added like the Type S and Type P, it's all good as far as speed goes.
i think that overall capship need a buff, both the trident and goliath can be deshielded by a single player, a trident needs a somewhat sorted stack of geminis and chaos swarms from a single rag? why? the trident should need ATLEAST two players stacking it to deshield it, because it does cost alot, and it seems kind of silly that this ship that took months of grinding is as easy to deshield as a goliath, on that note i think the trident shields regen and hp should be doubled, and the goliath shields should go up by half of what it is now, as i see it (but thats just how i see it)
This is a bit off-topic, as you say; but, I do not agree.
There's always some degree of variance between the "visions" of others for what things are supposed to be, and what I have intended, but basically the Trident and the Goliath are essentially freighters.
They are not supposed to be invulnerable, or necessarily require massed players to take on. Instead, they provide other inherent benefits.
There are other benefits to being shielded that are intended for the game, so the complete value-proposition for capital ships is not yet realized in the way that is intended.
But, what you are describing is definitely not what it intended. I've written elsewhere about how I intend to add a new Torpedo class of weapon, specifically intended to take on shielded ships. It's years overdue, because of fundamental technical problems that came up when trying to implement it, but it's still on the roadmap.
The non-trivial (but underutilized) capabilities of Gravity Mines should also be framed in the same context.
If the fundamental assertion is "Destroying a basic shielded Goliath or Trident must take at least two players", then the answer is no, that is not going to be true, and that is not my intention for the game.
There will be other ships with varying levels of capabilities, and there will be other benefits to owning capital ships, but owning a freighter is not the same as owning a battleship.
This is a bit off-topic, as you say; but, I do not agree.
There's always some degree of variance between the "visions" of others for what things are supposed to be, and what I have intended, but basically the Trident and the Goliath are essentially freighters.
They are not supposed to be invulnerable, or necessarily require massed players to take on. Instead, they provide other inherent benefits.
There are other benefits to being shielded that are intended for the game, so the complete value-proposition for capital ships is not yet realized in the way that is intended.
But, what you are describing is definitely not what it intended. I've written elsewhere about how I intend to add a new Torpedo class of weapon, specifically intended to take on shielded ships. It's years overdue, because of fundamental technical problems that came up when trying to implement it, but it's still on the roadmap.
The non-trivial (but underutilized) capabilities of Gravity Mines should also be framed in the same context.
If the fundamental assertion is "Destroying a basic shielded Goliath or Trident must take at least two players", then the answer is no, that is not going to be true, and that is not my intention for the game.
There will be other ships with varying levels of capabilities, and there will be other benefits to owning capital ships, but owning a freighter is not the same as owning a battleship.
"here's always some degree of variance between the "visions" of others for what things are supposed to be, and what I have intended, but basically the Trident and the Goliath are essentially freighters."
fair enough, i cant argue with it if it doesnt fit the vision (not sarcasm).
"They are not supposed to be invulnerable, or necessarily require massed players to take on. Instead, they provide other inherent benefits."
is there a chance you could define mass of players, if you dont mind? currently the minimum needed to take on a capital ship is two, one for pcbing, one for deshielding and killing. When i think mass amount, i think 5-10, or more. infinite turbo and capswarms usually force there to be a need of more players involved to actually take a trident down.
"There are other benefits to being shielded that are intended for the game, so the complete value-proposition for capital ships is not yet realized in the way that is intended."
i understand, and im excited to see whats next for capships, when it comes and when its able.
"But, what you are describing is definitely not what it intended. I've written elsewhere about how I intend to add a new Torpedo class of weapon, specifically intended to take on shielded ships. It's years overdue, because of fundamental technical problems that came up when trying to implement it, but it's still on the roadmap."
the torpedo weapon sounds SUPER cool (No sarcasm), and im excited for when it does come next on the roadmap. i wont ask about details.
"The non-trivial (but underutilized) capabilities of Gravity Mines should also be framed in the same context."
i disagree about it being underutilized, its been used quite a bit when hunting capital ships, the instant grid removal is extremely deadly and effective in stopping a capital ship.
"If the fundamental assertion is "Destroying a basic shielded Goliath or Trident must take at least two players", then the answer is no, that is not going to be true, and that is not my intention for the game."
goliaths really only need a single player using chainfire, which is a cool way to do it.
tridents however, cannot be killed solo. i can see where people will say they can be beaten if they stay still or something along those lines, but overall if a tridents goal is survival, a single player cant kill it. pcbs will stop it yes, but what then? the trident can use upwards of 3 capswarms i think? this makes keeping a trident pcbed hard, and then another player is needed to actually kill it. but thats even harder to do because of the mentioned capswarms. I know theres plans to shift the meta from capswarms to future capital weapons, but right now with everything factored in (turret bots, infinite turbo, etc), capital ships require at the very least two players.
(i know i repeated stuff i already said, theres just alot of information to add)
(There will be other ships with varying levels of capabilities, and there will be other benefits to owning capital ships, but owning a freighter is not the same as owning a battleship.)
cant wait to see what other benefits there will be, but right now with current weapons and current capital ship abilities (this includes the ability for a trident to equip a TU, and 3 capswarms (or 2), suddenly any trident becomes a floating kill zone, if the ability to just kill anything within a radius of the trident doesnt stop players, the capital swarms ability to one shot or two shot every ship except skyprom (i dont think it can be two shot anyway), and other capships.
im not ripping on the balance or direction VO is going currently, this is just presently the strongest loadouts of capital ships. even a goliath becomes a horrendous challenge to take down when it tries, and has a tu equipped.
fair enough, i cant argue with it if it doesnt fit the vision (not sarcasm).
"They are not supposed to be invulnerable, or necessarily require massed players to take on. Instead, they provide other inherent benefits."
is there a chance you could define mass of players, if you dont mind? currently the minimum needed to take on a capital ship is two, one for pcbing, one for deshielding and killing. When i think mass amount, i think 5-10, or more. infinite turbo and capswarms usually force there to be a need of more players involved to actually take a trident down.
"There are other benefits to being shielded that are intended for the game, so the complete value-proposition for capital ships is not yet realized in the way that is intended."
i understand, and im excited to see whats next for capships, when it comes and when its able.
"But, what you are describing is definitely not what it intended. I've written elsewhere about how I intend to add a new Torpedo class of weapon, specifically intended to take on shielded ships. It's years overdue, because of fundamental technical problems that came up when trying to implement it, but it's still on the roadmap."
the torpedo weapon sounds SUPER cool (No sarcasm), and im excited for when it does come next on the roadmap. i wont ask about details.
"The non-trivial (but underutilized) capabilities of Gravity Mines should also be framed in the same context."
i disagree about it being underutilized, its been used quite a bit when hunting capital ships, the instant grid removal is extremely deadly and effective in stopping a capital ship.
"If the fundamental assertion is "Destroying a basic shielded Goliath or Trident must take at least two players", then the answer is no, that is not going to be true, and that is not my intention for the game."
goliaths really only need a single player using chainfire, which is a cool way to do it.
tridents however, cannot be killed solo. i can see where people will say they can be beaten if they stay still or something along those lines, but overall if a tridents goal is survival, a single player cant kill it. pcbs will stop it yes, but what then? the trident can use upwards of 3 capswarms i think? this makes keeping a trident pcbed hard, and then another player is needed to actually kill it. but thats even harder to do because of the mentioned capswarms. I know theres plans to shift the meta from capswarms to future capital weapons, but right now with everything factored in (turret bots, infinite turbo, etc), capital ships require at the very least two players.
(i know i repeated stuff i already said, theres just alot of information to add)
(There will be other ships with varying levels of capabilities, and there will be other benefits to owning capital ships, but owning a freighter is not the same as owning a battleship.)
cant wait to see what other benefits there will be, but right now with current weapons and current capital ship abilities (this includes the ability for a trident to equip a TU, and 3 capswarms (or 2), suddenly any trident becomes a floating kill zone, if the ability to just kill anything within a radius of the trident doesnt stop players, the capital swarms ability to one shot or two shot every ship except skyprom (i dont think it can be two shot anyway), and other capships.
im not ripping on the balance or direction VO is going currently, this is just presently the strongest loadouts of capital ships. even a goliath becomes a horrendous challenge to take down when it tries, and has a tu equipped.
im not ripping on the balance or direction VO is going currently, this is just presently the strongest loadouts of capital ships. even a goliath becomes a horrendous challenge to take down when it tries, and has a tu equipped.
So, then, why are you suggesting that they need to be buffed?
So, then, why are you suggesting that they need to be buffed?
What I just mentioned was their damaged out put. Not their health or shields. I'm providing an example of how it already takes multiple people to take down a capital Ship, but that compared to their damage output their armor and shielding are lack luster, they arent battleships. But they lean more heavily towards combat roles then support roles, IMO.
A solution to this suggestion may be encompassed in another recent suggestion that offers potentially easier manipulation for balancing:
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37217
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37217
@YT
Or we could wait and see what Inc has in store for the coming capship variants. The current capships seem about right to me. Until new ships are added like the Type S and Type P, it's all good as far as speed goes.
Now is not the time to make suggestions, eh?
@incarnate
So, the advantage of the Goliath is that it is much easier to build. It's also "effectively" more nimble, because it's smaller. But realistically, the Goliath is supposed to be inferior to the Trident. It's like a more accessible, lower-barrier-of-entry capship.
^Under this vision the Goliath is a bit *too* equal in gameplay relevance to the Trident. So not only should the OP not happen, but the opposite should: nerf the goliath more.
Hauling capacity and the ability to have a rep/reload vessel are the most important gameplay functions of capital ships across playstyles. But if you narrow down into the two most popular uses of capital ships (hauling and combat), you'll find that there are many cases in which the Goliath is the superior choice in combat. Should that be the case?
Or we could wait and see what Inc has in store for the coming capship variants. The current capships seem about right to me. Until new ships are added like the Type S and Type P, it's all good as far as speed goes.
Now is not the time to make suggestions, eh?
@incarnate
So, the advantage of the Goliath is that it is much easier to build. It's also "effectively" more nimble, because it's smaller. But realistically, the Goliath is supposed to be inferior to the Trident. It's like a more accessible, lower-barrier-of-entry capship.
^Under this vision the Goliath is a bit *too* equal in gameplay relevance to the Trident. So not only should the OP not happen, but the opposite should: nerf the goliath more.
Hauling capacity and the ability to have a rep/reload vessel are the most important gameplay functions of capital ships across playstyles. But if you narrow down into the two most popular uses of capital ships (hauling and combat), you'll find that there are many cases in which the Goliath is the superior choice in combat. Should that be the case?
"Hauling capacity and the ability to have a rep/reload vessel are the most important gameplay functions of capital ships across playstyles. But if you narrow down into the two most popular uses of capital ships (hauling and combat), you'll find that there are many cases in which the Goliath is the superior choice in combat. Should that be the case?"
What? A trident can store TWO more xcs then a trident (or one more?) in what way is a Goliath better? A trident can shoot enough caps warms to destroy anything in the vicinity. They can deshield goliaths easily, and they can deshield other tridents in combat. Tridents can haul more the a Goliath, and provide a large enough docking bay that you don't have to forcefully push yourself against it to dock if your in a xc or moth. I'd like you to elaborate how a Goliath is superior in combat?
What? A trident can store TWO more xcs then a trident (or one more?) in what way is a Goliath better? A trident can shoot enough caps warms to destroy anything in the vicinity. They can deshield goliaths easily, and they can deshield other tridents in combat. Tridents can haul more the a Goliath, and provide a large enough docking bay that you don't have to forcefully push yourself against it to dock if your in a xc or moth. I'd like you to elaborate how a Goliath is superior in combat?
For far less time and effort, a Goliath can provide the same amount of unlimited repairs and reloads to an unlimited amount of people. It can be moved to and away from a desired location much quicker, and its loss is far less costly than a trident. From a risk standpoint, a Goliath is a much better bang for the buck in combat.
Turret firepower is a minimal consideration in combat, and despite the decreased grid and turret numbers, only a Goliath has a turret where it counts (on the back).
Turret firepower is a minimal consideration in combat, and despite the decreased grid and turret numbers, only a Goliath has a turret where it counts (on the back).
"far less time and effort, a Goliath can provide the same amount of unlimited repairs and reloads to an unlimited amount of people."
Which is good. As both have that supportive role. Honestly it doesn't seem possible that a ship of any size other then a ec should be able to get repairs while docked, size considering. It would make it less then a capship if it was the only one that couldn't provide repairs and reloads.
"It can be moved to and away from a desired location much quicker, and its loss is far less costly than a trident. Fro"m a risk standpoint, a Goliath is a much better bang for the buck in combat."
A Goliath dies extremely quickly. Entering a unrat sector and the unrats are anywhere near you when you come in, is death. While it cost less to replace then a trident, a Goliath has no means of defending itself from the unrats enmasse when you get pcbed. There's fairly little that stands in the way of a trident, as they can enter both wormhole sectors back to back with the without stopping and kill everything in sector. The trident has leagues of advantages over a Goliath. It costs more to replace a trident because a trident can equip four capital turrets and a large port.
"Turret firepower is a minimal consideration in combat, and despite the decreased grid and turret numbers,"
Turret firepower is still extremely powerful for a trident. You may not be able to equip four caps warms. But three and a caprail no? Very little in vo except teradons and up, two hive queens, or the leviathan that's an actual threat to a trident.
" a Goliath has a turret where it counts (on the back)"
The goliath does have a directly rear facing turret, yes. But it's also limited to " do I want a single capswarm, that won't really deal any damage to something or someone chasing me because after a certain turbo speed damage is reduced to 1-2%?", a capital gauss cannon that cost the same as a capship insurance but leaves you vulnerable to frontal facing anything. Or a caprail rail that has no real accuracy at range and has also got no defence to a frontal assault?
This also goes into the fact that while the trident doesn't have a directly rear turret. It does have two turrets near the front of it, and the large port. While also having a midway turret and a turret that's placed near the back. A trident using capital swarms has full 360 coverage around it and has the overall firepower to back that up.
Which is good. As both have that supportive role. Honestly it doesn't seem possible that a ship of any size other then a ec should be able to get repairs while docked, size considering. It would make it less then a capship if it was the only one that couldn't provide repairs and reloads.
"It can be moved to and away from a desired location much quicker, and its loss is far less costly than a trident. Fro"m a risk standpoint, a Goliath is a much better bang for the buck in combat."
A Goliath dies extremely quickly. Entering a unrat sector and the unrats are anywhere near you when you come in, is death. While it cost less to replace then a trident, a Goliath has no means of defending itself from the unrats enmasse when you get pcbed. There's fairly little that stands in the way of a trident, as they can enter both wormhole sectors back to back with the without stopping and kill everything in sector. The trident has leagues of advantages over a Goliath. It costs more to replace a trident because a trident can equip four capital turrets and a large port.
"Turret firepower is a minimal consideration in combat, and despite the decreased grid and turret numbers,"
Turret firepower is still extremely powerful for a trident. You may not be able to equip four caps warms. But three and a caprail no? Very little in vo except teradons and up, two hive queens, or the leviathan that's an actual threat to a trident.
" a Goliath has a turret where it counts (on the back)"
The goliath does have a directly rear facing turret, yes. But it's also limited to " do I want a single capswarm, that won't really deal any damage to something or someone chasing me because after a certain turbo speed damage is reduced to 1-2%?", a capital gauss cannon that cost the same as a capship insurance but leaves you vulnerable to frontal facing anything. Or a caprail rail that has no real accuracy at range and has also got no defence to a frontal assault?
This also goes into the fact that while the trident doesn't have a directly rear turret. It does have two turrets near the front of it, and the large port. While also having a midway turret and a turret that's placed near the back. A trident using capital swarms has full 360 coverage around it and has the overall firepower to back that up.
A Goliath dies extremely quickly. Entering a unrat sector and the unrats are anywhere near you when you come in, is death.
In almost all my "how to the kill the unrats" videos I'm flying a Goliath. Why? Because the the Goliath is best suited to the job. You jump into unrat infested wh sector, flip your goli around so the rear is facing the unrats and lock turbo in. When the unrats get close you cap rail them one by one. Usually you don't lose shields.
Tridents have a higher chance of losing shields in the same situ because the unrats are on them faster. The goli is able to keep the unrats in the rear by getting up to speed fast.
"In almost all my "how to the kill the unrats" videos I'm flying a Goliath. Why? Because the the Goliath is best suited to the job. You jump into unrat infested wh sector, flip your goli around so the rear is facing the unrats and lock turbo in. "
in your first video you started out with over 2k of distance over them, nor did you have shields as they didnt flare when you were hit, even though you removed the HUD that shows your shields and health.
in your second video "Normal day in grey" you came in with them starting directly behind you to begin with. A trident could have leveled them quicker then caprailing them one at a time.
in the third video "we all floats relaxing unrat killing video" you came within about 150-200 energy from being pcb'd, and then your fight with the trident was pre unrat buff. where the escorts dont spawn in after a certain point. and to add to this you didnt deshield the trident with a goliath, you deshielded it with a ragmklll.
"Tridents have a higher chance of losing shields in the same situ because the unrats are on them faster. The goli is able to keep the unrats in the rear by getting up to speed fast."
Exactly! but i disagree. ive seen on multiple occasions where tridents using turret bots, or fast switch turrets easily cleared a sector of unrats without losing shield. the goliath needs to run or it will die. the moment they get a pcb lock on them its over, caprail in the back or not. The goliaths only real advantage over the trident is its ability to get its maximum turbo faster. while the tridents leaning on a combat focused role of being a moving fortress.
this entire suggestion is being turned from the point of this. the speed. Which my suggestion would be that the tridents maximum be lowered.
in your first video you started out with over 2k of distance over them, nor did you have shields as they didnt flare when you were hit, even though you removed the HUD that shows your shields and health.
in your second video "Normal day in grey" you came in with them starting directly behind you to begin with. A trident could have leveled them quicker then caprailing them one at a time.
in the third video "we all floats relaxing unrat killing video" you came within about 150-200 energy from being pcb'd, and then your fight with the trident was pre unrat buff. where the escorts dont spawn in after a certain point. and to add to this you didnt deshield the trident with a goliath, you deshielded it with a ragmklll.
"Tridents have a higher chance of losing shields in the same situ because the unrats are on them faster. The goli is able to keep the unrats in the rear by getting up to speed fast."
Exactly! but i disagree. ive seen on multiple occasions where tridents using turret bots, or fast switch turrets easily cleared a sector of unrats without losing shield. the goliath needs to run or it will die. the moment they get a pcb lock on them its over, caprail in the back or not. The goliaths only real advantage over the trident is its ability to get its maximum turbo faster. while the tridents leaning on a combat focused role of being a moving fortress.
this entire suggestion is being turned from the point of this. the speed. Which my suggestion would be that the tridents maximum be lowered.
The goliaths only real advantage over the trident is its ability to get its maximum turbo faster. while the tridents leaning on a combat focused role of being a moving fortress.
I don't see why the Goliath needs to have an advantage at all.
I don't see why the Goliath needs to have an advantage at all.
Why does the goliath need to be only a stepping for the trident? Why can't it just be its own capital ship? It's already inferior in everything except for the thrust. Before, it could deshield tridents, and then it got nerfed. Which is fair enough. Then it could deshield a trident with two caps warms. Nerfed again. You say that both are freighters, since when does a larger freighter move faster then a smaller one? The larger one is already well armed and armored compared to its smaller cousin. I've given every conceivable reason for why I think the trident shouldn't have a higher max turbo, but it really doesn't matter what I say as long as you keep the direction of "its inferior. Your not suppose to like it more then the trident, as the goliath isn't going to be better in any way to a trident." a great many players have just the goliath. Because it thrusts faster then the goliath, and it gets done what it needs too. I can discuss this for weeks on end, you asked for clarification and I gave it. But at the end of the day I'd rather this thread just be locked if the defense I have to beat is "no, trident better. Goliath inferior."
Well people did complain a lot about hauling in an XC. Thus we have the goliath. Then we go to the trident and once you have the trident we would have other epic capitals with pros/cons. No?
The meta is unfinished in VO. That's why we have people only in goliaths. Once there's better ships above the goliath that can be unique like the trident then people would drop the goliath. It is simply a TPG hauling ship.
The meta is unfinished in VO. That's why we have people only in goliaths. Once there's better ships above the goliath that can be unique like the trident then people would drop the goliath. It is simply a TPG hauling ship.
since when does a larger freighter move faster then a smaller one
Actually, in that particular example, since always. Displacement hull speed increases with length.
Why can't it just be its own capital ship?
It.. is its own capital ship. It's fine. Just like the Chevy Spark in my earlier analogy. You just want it to be something it isn't, and was never intended to be.
I can discuss this for weeks on end, you asked for clarification and I gave it.
Look, I have dutifully read your posts on this topic, but frankly, I haven't gotten much value from them.
To distill it down, your position seems to be: "I want this ship to be better, so make it better, and here are a bunch of vague rationalizations to support that I want it to be better".
To make a fairly fundamental balance-shift in our capital ships, that runs counter to the intended roles of the ships, along with screwing up my plans for future capital ships, I would need a pretty robust argument.
I'm not the only one in the thread who feels like you haven't presented such an argument.
The fact that lots of people have Goliaths is not a reason for them to be made better, or Tridents to be made worse. Any more than Chevy Sparks need to suddenly be improved, or BMWs need to be slowed down. The Goliath "is what it is", and frankly.. I think it's pretty good? It's a great entry-level capital ship, and it will become even more valuable and game-relevant in the future.
The only problem seems to be when someone has mismatched expectations about what it's supposed to be. The so-called "nerfs" were simply correcting errors, that's all.
Actually, in that particular example, since always. Displacement hull speed increases with length.
Why can't it just be its own capital ship?
It.. is its own capital ship. It's fine. Just like the Chevy Spark in my earlier analogy. You just want it to be something it isn't, and was never intended to be.
I can discuss this for weeks on end, you asked for clarification and I gave it.
Look, I have dutifully read your posts on this topic, but frankly, I haven't gotten much value from them.
To distill it down, your position seems to be: "I want this ship to be better, so make it better, and here are a bunch of vague rationalizations to support that I want it to be better".
To make a fairly fundamental balance-shift in our capital ships, that runs counter to the intended roles of the ships, along with screwing up my plans for future capital ships, I would need a pretty robust argument.
I'm not the only one in the thread who feels like you haven't presented such an argument.
The fact that lots of people have Goliaths is not a reason for them to be made better, or Tridents to be made worse. Any more than Chevy Sparks need to suddenly be improved, or BMWs need to be slowed down. The Goliath "is what it is", and frankly.. I think it's pretty good? It's a great entry-level capital ship, and it will become even more valuable and game-relevant in the future.
The only problem seems to be when someone has mismatched expectations about what it's supposed to be. The so-called "nerfs" were simply correcting errors, that's all.