Python/Class 6 thruster issue? (Devs please have a look)

[Mike Evans]

Just want to let you guys know that after this goes live it's not like it's set in stone. This ship as with the others will be looked at again and changes will be made if needed. I suspect we'll be getting lots of negative feedback from the change but I also suspect it'll die down and actually it'll be okay. If not then I guess I'll be reviewing people's opinions, youtube videos, our data mining and QA and making necessary changes.

 

[Vander Mey jr.]

@Logios, it's not about your opinion, it's about how you're going about voicing it.

 

[Starbuckz]

But would not that meant that A rated are also going to be reduced by 17%? Otherwise, there is no sense in any changes if A thrusters would provide the same performance as before.

Yea sure, I guess so. But still A rated thrusters would provide more speed than just 230, right? At least a little.

 

[Aleksej]

Yea sure, I guess so. But still A rated thrusters would provide more speed than just 230, right? At least a little.

I have performed the calculations for my maxed out combat config Python earlier:

I have no issues with reducing manoeuvrability by 17%, however, would not reducing the top speed mean that the base values are going to be reduced from 250[280] to 207.5[232.4]. And if I have 280[370] now, it is going to become 232.4[307.1]. I'd say that this is going to be pretty noticeable.

I disagree, I could immediately tell a difference in 'feel' when I went from D6 thrusters to A6, and that was 'only' a 5% increase in pitch rate, and 6.3% increase in roll rate. It wasn't huge, but I was thinking "oh wow.. that's a bit more snappy".

Even 17% would be quite noticeable, but this change is going to be 26-27% change in pitch rate, which is going to kill it for trying to fight in it (it's still a great trading ship!). I'm not sure it will be fair to classify it as 'multi-role' after this change goes live. I just wish I'd never gotten to play with it in its current state, it is just too much fun!

Hold on a second. Here is the data for D6 and A6 thrusters:
6 D 16.00 A 5.670 1,080.0 1,620.0 599,242
6 A 40.00 A 7.560 1,440.0 2,160.0 16,179,531

The differences between both optimal and maximum weight are about 33%, which means that should be noticeable and about twice as noticeable as 17% difference that is going to be introduced.

 

[Yanaran]

Yea sure, I guess so. But still A rated thrusters would provide more speed than just 230, right? At least a little.

If the ratios remains the same (280/330) then my Python which currently boosts to 383 will boost to 325 after the change. So yes, much higher speed with top of the line outfit. And faster than a Conda.

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

As stated earlier, just because it will be a little more sluggish doesn't mean it won't be fit for combat. It still has strong shields and great weapon placement paired with really big guns.

We'll see - actually I have suggested reducing shield strength rather than agility somewhere myself. The point is that I personally have a strong dislike for anything but fixed weapons and the Pythons hardpoint placement in combination with its current agility made it perfect at that.

I'm sure it will be a capable trader that can defend itself when using gimbals and turrets, but the weapon placement suggested it was meant to be used with fixed weapons in mind (at least to me it did). It used to be a trader with a single hardpoint IIRC, so the new version will be closer to it - me being unwilling to fly it after the change is just a matter of personal preference when it comes to weapon systems, so I'm fine.

Admittedly, I am too bad at piloting spaceships to take a 130 million ship into open when it can be taken down by a 3-4 million Viper in a matter of seconds, so it wouldn't have been a good idea either way.

I would have preferred a substantial increase in shield and hull strength for all larger ships to make them more worthwhile in open, but I'll just fly Vipers in open for the time being and eagerly await new ships.

I'm sure there will be further adjustments to shield strength and small ships burst damage, until then, I'll happily stick with the small ships.

 

[lordg]

If the ratios remains the same (280/330) then my Python which currently boosts to 383 will boost to 325 after the change. So yes, much higher speed with top of the line outfit. And faster than a Conda.

Yeah, and how much is the Conda's with A grade thrusters? Will it be still higher? Im comparing D grade to D grade.

 

[Emissary]

It's so nice seeing Mike be so open and frank with the discussion on the ship changes and I hope this keeps up.

Good or bad news it's great to see some open thought process, and even when he admited there was an error!

 

[CmdrKull]

The vulture is going to be the dedicated heavy fighter (literally it's not going to be very good at anything else but shooting and flying) where as the Python is supposed to be more of a gun ship/heavy weapons platform.

When/where can we find out more about this 'Vulture'? I'm in the market for a bigger badder version of the Vipe. I thought that was the Python. I have no need for another trading ship until the Boa comes along.

Honestly, balancing passes are well and fine, and based on the screaming on the forums about Pythons I assume this is the right move. I'm really glad I was still saving for a 'best-gear' Python though, or this would have stung me hard. I feel for those who were slightly farther ahead of the curve than I am.

I'm not going to have my head in the sand about this either. I'll wait for updated Python YouTube videos and judge for myself, but I don't want to try to fly a Lakon9 with bigger hard points into a PvP conflict zone.

 

[Starbuckz]

It's so nice seeing Mike be so open and frank with the discussion on the ship changes and I hope this keeps up.

Good or bad news it's great to see some open thought process, and even when he admited there was an error!

Agreed, though anything else shouldn't be considered acceptable in the first place. At least not with a game that relies so heavily on its community.

 

[DocStone]

So, are we going to see massive changes to repair costs and running costs to reflect the changes you are proposing?

 

[Logios]

So now we are going to have a HUGE gap in high priced fighting ships until FD finally gets around to releasing the Vulture? Great...

@Logios, it's not about your opinion, it's about how you're going about voicing it.

I'm sorry but I'm allowed to have a negative opinion of the changes as long as I'm not trolling or calling names. This is a forum for discussion, not a hug box where everyone agrees with each other. If you want that environment then head over to tumblr.

 

[Shintai]

Just want to let you guys know that after this goes live it's not like it's set in stone. This ship as with the others will be looked at again and changes will be made if needed. I suspect we'll be getting lots of negative feedback from the change but I also suspect it'll die down and actually it'll be okay. If not then I guess I'll be reviewing people's opinions, youtube videos, our data mining and QA and making necessary changes.

Thats good to know. I would just prefer changes was made in smaller batches as needed. Rather than the usual MMO axe method.

 

[Vander Mey jr.]

@Logios: Can you please stop that? It's annoying as hell and not constructive in the least.

Edit: You're not discussing, you're dissing. There's a difference. You're dissing the game, the devs, and everyone that doesn't agree with you, with no constructive content, and in a tone that's borderline reportable, IMO.

 

[Starbuckz]

So now we are going to have a HUGE gap in high priced fighting ships until FD finally gets around to releasing the Vulture? Great...

It won't be the holy grail anymore, but that doesn't mean it won't be viable for combat and still ahead of other ships when piloted by a skilled player.

 

[Yanaran]

Yeah, and how much is the Conda's with A grade thrusters? Will it be still higher? Im comparing D grade to D grade.

Haven't tried the A thrusters on a light weight Conda but probably 280-290 or so.

edit: Just tested, 209 cruise and 278 boost 4pip top speed with a light-weight Conda on A thrusters. Combat spec will be slower.

 

[Starbuckz]

So, are we going to see massive changes to repair costs and running costs to reflect the changes you are proposing?

Why would you think those should be related?

 

[DocStone]

Why would you think those should be related?

If you are reducing the performance then you should be reducing the costs - why shouldn't they be related? If the ship no longer can go as fast, turn as quick or withstand as much damage before incurring costs then why should it cost as much to run as it did before?

 

[Logios]

@Logios: Can you please stop that? It's annoying as hell and not constructive in the least.

Edit: You're not discussing, you're dissing. There's a difference. You're dissing the game, the devs, and everyone that doesn't agree with you, with no constructive content, and in a tone that's borderline reportable, IMO.

Please just exit this conversation, you've done nothing but cry about the fact that some is disagreeing with you and you've added absolutely ZERO to this discussion.

Can we block people on this forum?

Edit: Yes we can. Blocked.

 

[Starbuckz]

If you are reducing the performance then you should be reducing the costs - why shouldn't they be related? If the ship no longer can go as fast, turn as quick or withstand as much damage before incurring costs then why should it cost as much to run as it did before?

I get that but the Python's current state was a mistake, not something that was intended in the first place. Now we will get the correct values for the (already) correct fuel and repair costs.