FDL is OP. FAS is also OP.
The solution is not that this is fine, the solution is to nerf both
That just spawns a never ending cycle. Buff em because they're underwhelming for what they are supposed to do/cost, then nerf em cos they're now a little too much compared to other ships that did not get/need a buff. Then buff them again cos no other ship is meant to fill their specific roles and now there's a black hole in the wake of their nerfing. Then ... well then we're back to where we started and we do the whole dance again.
The constant demands for nerfs and buffs in order to maintain a PvP experience that pleases all is not a solution. It is a revolving door that never stops once it's started spinning. The best PvP oriented games are the ones that understand this. They make small tweaks to refine the initial balance between the player's choices and then they leave things alone - players then have the stability to learn what works for them and how to adapt against other players' methods. The cycle of nerfing and buffing disrupts this process. Essentially changing the formula every 6 to 7 months or what not, only serves to make PvP unstable (and it absolutely messes up PvE in other ways). It is akin to constantly pulling the rug from under the player's feet just when they've finally started to adjust to the previous rug pull and all because the devs are trying to please every single person in the room.
In my opinion the solution is to have stability. Only then will the quality of PvP improve past the constant arguments of "this is OP, that is OP. But this is more OP than that OP and this... this is so OP it's OP is OP!" More in-depth ship customisation might be the solution here. I'm talking getting a little bit more into the internals, the guts of our ships. Fine tunning things like engine performance, energy distribution, power generation, weapon power draw vs shield strength, all that lovely jazz! And I use the words "fine tuning" instead of "improving" because the tuning part is essential. We don't want to have only improvements without any drawbacks.
● Want better turning rate? You'll have to sacrifice your speed by tuning your power plant to feed more power into your thrusters instead of into your engines. Vice versa if you want more straightline speed, then your agility will be minimised.
● Want less power draw from your weapons? Then you'll have to sacrifice your shield strength and ENG recharge rate. You'll be able to hit harder but in turn you'll be less able to take damage and less able to chase or run. Vice versa if you want stronger shields: you'll be sacrificing your prolonged attacking potential as well as the ability to boost a lot.
● Want better jump range because you feel the need to explore in your FDL? You'll have to sacrifice your ability to provide all that lovely power and heat management to weapons and SCBs since you'll be using all that excess power to increase jump range and save on every last drop of fuel. That means heatsinks will be of reduced effectiveness (they only drain 30% of heat as apposed to 100% of heat) and even so much as one shot of your coveted four rails will generate 70% more heat than normal. You'd have to launch two heatsinks just to fire off one volley of rails in this spec.
A simple to do yet hard to master tuning mechanic along those lines will help to eliminate the need for nerf and buff debates because it would open up the opportunity for players to have the ability to endlessly counter each other's builds. No OP can exist for long in an environment where ingenuity and creativity can be used to turn the tables - like in real life arms races/technology races. The Engineers update seems like it might just lay the foundation for such a customisation mechanic.
Anywho, that's my two cents worth on the solution to the nerf, buff debates.
, its an unbelievable ship with logic defying stats yet costs a fraction of the things its bracketed with.
