Target Lock Breaker spamming needs adjusted ASAP

[Frenotx]

How is that a problem? You either use a weapon with a higher skill floor to deal with the issue, or you sacrifice utility slots that you could be using for other things to do it for you. In this example, you either learn to use PAs effectively to deal with seeker missiles, or you sacrifice shield boosters or chaff to get a point defense or ECM.

Neither PDTs or ECM can handle staggered-launched packhounds. The problem in the context of hull tanking is this:

-If participant A points in the rough direction of participant B for a few seconds and squeezes the trigger, they are rewarded with considerable damage and the destruction of participant B's external modules. If they slip up, there is no real consequence besides just not getting an attack off that time.
-If participant B manages their distance well, leads and aims well, and predicts any upcoming movements of the target, they are rewarded with fair damage, and not getting shot with missiles. If they slip up at all, they are punished by taking significant damage and losing their weapons.

One is very easy, with a huge reward. The other is hard, with the real reward being you don't get trashed by the easy option.

 

[AzraelDirge]

Neither PDTs or ECM can handle staggered-launched packhounds. The problem in the context of hull tanking is this:

-If participant A points in the rough direction of participant B for a few seconds and squeezes the trigger, they are rewarded with considerable damage and the destruction of participant B's external modules. If they slip up, there is no real consequence besides just not getting an attack off that time.
-If participant B manages their distance well, leads and aims well, and predicts any upcoming movements of the target, they are rewarded with fair damage, and not getting shot with missiles. If they slip up at all, they are punished by taking significant damage and losing their weapons.

One is very easy, with a huge reward. The other is hard, with the real reward being you don't get trashed by the easy option.

So, the harder to use option for dealing with missiles is also more effective. Sounds like balance to me.

 

[V'larr]

I wondered when this thread would appear.

I knew right from the moment I saw this as a weapon special effect, it would break the game.

I still cannot fathom why Fdev went ahead with this back when they implemented it. But then, I can't fathom why they went ahead with Engineers from the get-go, let alone the wonky special effects system, let alone specific cases of those special effects that are clearly game-breaking.

I mean, even before Engineers, we had existing problems with the way chaff works. Which are still unresolved but now are relatively lower on the priority list.

If they wanted to make weapons more interesting in the game, then they should have changed how the *base* weapons in the game function. That may have been interesting.

Instead all we got was "Win a roulette gimmick, and you win!", which later got reduced to "Pay up ingame resources to pick a gimmick of your choice, and you win!"

More and more I'm starting to feel like the path to happiness with this game is to pretend that combat in Elite just doesn't exist.

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

Where's the fun and excitement in that?

Yeah, I know it's fun shooting each other, me and my brother used to do it for real with GAT.177's, only spring loaded but they hurt like hell and left a goodly raised lump for a few days... kids eh!

 

[V'larr]

One of the myriad reasons why engineering being so extremely powerful and "upgrade-y" is bad for the overall health of the game.

"definite upgrade"

Fdev's famous last words...?

 

[Miko]

Frontier actually need to consider how these effects work at a fundamental level; there is almost no use of 'cool-down' for really any special. Everything has 100% uptime. Target lock breaker, FSD scrambler, you name it. There needs to be some downtime to act as an offset.

I was in a type-10 and at one point it became so stupid I actually just reverted to ramming an attacking FAS as it swung close because this was more effective than nine hardpoints which constant lost lock, half of which I can't use fixed on, because Frontier believes it's sensible and realistic to put hardpoints 60 feet apart (just use turrets? yeah about that..).

Frontier develops on the "this sounds wicked cool" model. Everything sounds fantastic. My friend, it would be one of the happiest days, if they just built a bigger internal test team - and then listened to them. TLB shouldn't be able to be proc'd constantly, any more than FSD or anything else.

Frontier has a ton of 'proc' based weapon blueprints. I don't think a single one has any cool down, apart from corrosive (which on a MC means you can keep it proc'ing beyond 4 seconds; never mind then, it was the thought that counts). When I have something with 9 hardpoints at my disposal and the best way I can counter this nonsense is to just hit them with it like a brick instead, there's probably some room for improvement.

And before people scream "but you just want them gone?!" - no. 100% proc'ing isn't sane. The effects have great merit; just not 100% of the time for crying out loud. Almost everything needs a darned cool down so people actually have to do more than play 'tag'.

Or revert to using the hull, like a brick, because at least that has some ability to hit a target.

That means you were fighting poor pilots. A wing of 4 good, well coordinated medium pilots should beat any large pilot. TLB is not the reason you lose a 4v1.



You're displaying your ignorance here. FSD reset munitions do have a cooldown period, controlled by a timer on the target. It's impossible to get more than one reset on a fleeing target, as the time to reset the FSD and charge a new high wake is less than the cooldown. I agree that TLB could use a cooldown as well, but it would have to be much, much shorter than the roughly 35 seconds that the FSD reset munitions have.



And you're also displaying your ignorance. There's testing and documentation, not to mention the damn patch notes, and the torpedos themselves are also not an easy munition to hit with, between arming distance and very low travel speeds. Any competent big ship pilot can hear the missile warning, boost away, FA off flip, and target and kill the torps relatively easily.


This is why I can't take half the people crying for a nerf seriously. Coming in here, posting videos of the exact kind of terrible 4-0-2 flying with poor throttle control we're talking about and trying to hold it up as an example of why the nerf needs to happen, complaining about other special effects while being objectively wrong about how those effects work. You're coming in here asking for things to have changes made that existed from the start, as in the case of FSD reset (as seen in Sandro's comment here https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/290929-Containment-missile-FSD-breaker/page2), or have already been implemented, as in the case of torps. It used to be a much smaller number of torpedos, (as you can see in the patch notes here https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/295657-Beta-2-2-Update-5).

As I've said, I do agree TLB could use a short cooldown effect. But seriously, get your facts together and learn to fly your damn ship before you come making objectively wrong statements, and holding up blatant falsehoods as justifications for your arguments.

You're displaying you're own ignorance here because you're ignoring the principle of why people believe TLB should have some cool down effect, which you yourself agree with, but focusing more on presuming the calls for it are entirely down to one's level of poor performance in a PvP situation. You presume to know how badly a player handles their own ship when this has nothing to do with that but more specific to one's appreciation for there being an unbalanced aspect of the game here worth asking about.

If I record the next time it happens you can observe and give me your opinion. The most recent encounter was constant slam slam slam in constant succession, engines down, couldn't target anything, effectively forced to wake, which I was lucky enough to do without losing my ship and my NPC character. Thankfully torpedoes wasn't in play. But flee flee flee is all this brings to the table, which without TBL being so effective in groups wouldn't always be necessary.

The shields and firepower of the corvette can help her stay a fight against some foes.

This topic however is just a request for an adjustment, however. Nothing more sinister to the point of removing the effect entirely.

 

[jasonbirder]

You're displaying you're own ignorance

Its not IGNORANCE...the poster here (and myself and many others on the thread) feel that LARGE SHIPS are (relatively) overpowered compared to Smaller Ships...and that 1 ship should only be able to fight 1 vs 2, 1 vs 3, 1 vs 4 under exceptional circumstances - and that it should USUALLY be a losing proposition...leading at best to escape and evasion...
Yourself (and other posters on this thread) believe that Large Ships because of their relative internals/expense should be able to handle wings of small ships in an "attritional" manner...using Shields/Banks/HRPs to soak up damage whilst destroying smaller ships piecemeal...
Currently TLB is one of the mechanism that "balances" an encounter back in favour of numbers of smaller ships...which currently suffer because of the attritional nature of Elite Combat (very high defence vs offence...no alpha strike weapons)
Its not "Ignorance" merely an (entirely valid) different point of view...

 

[AzraelDirge]

The most recent encounter was constant slam slam slam in constant succession, engines down, couldn't target anything, effectively forced to wake, which I was lucky enough to do without losing my ship and my NPC character. Thankfully torpedoes wasn't in play. But flee flee flee is all this brings to the table, which without TBL bring so effective in groups wouldn't always be necessary.

I've been in situations like that. My FSD was charging as soon as my cooldown finished because I know that a 4v1 is not a viable tactical situation regardless of ship size. In fact, if it's mediums or smalls, I'll be running all the faster, because I can safely presume that the groups coming after me is skillful enough, with enough tricks up their sleeve that they don't need cutter spam to have a chance to take me. You've effectively discovered that getting ganked sucks, but you're putting that down to the weapons in play, rather than the disparity of force and skill.

I agree with you on TLB needing modification, but your justification is laughable.

 

[Miko]

Frontier actually need to consider how these effects work at a fundamental level; there is almost no use of 'cool-down' for really any special. Everything has 100% uptime. Target lock breaker, FSD scrambler, you name it. There needs to be some downtime to act as an offset.

I was in a type-10 and at one point it became so stupid I actually just reverted to ramming an attacking FAS as it swung close because this was more effective than nine hardpoints which constant lost lock, half of which I can't use fixed on, because Frontier believes it's sensible and realistic to put hardpoints 60 feet apart (just use turrets? yeah about that..).

Frontier develops on the "this sounds wicked cool" model. Everything sounds fantastic. My friend, it would be one of the happiest days, if they just built a bigger internal test team - and then listened to them. TLB shouldn't be able to be proc'd constantly, any more than FSD or anything else.

Frontier has a ton of 'proc' based weapon blueprints. I don't think a single one has any cool down, apart from corrosive (which on a MC means you can keep it proc'ing beyond 4 seconds; never mind then, it was the thought that counts). When I have something with 9 hardpoints at my disposal and the best way I can counter this nonsense is to just hit them with it like a brick instead, there's probably some room for improvement.

And before people scream "but you just want them gone?!" - no. 100% proc'ing isn't sane. The effects have great merit; just not 100% of the time for crying out loud. Almost everything needs a darned cool down so people actually have to do more than play 'tag'.

Or revert to using the hull, like a brick, because at least that has some ability to hit a target.

Its not IGNORANCE...the poster here (and myself and many others on the thread) feel that LARGE SHIPS are (relatively) overpowered compared to Smaller Ships...and that 1 ship should only be able to fight 1 vs 2, 1 vs 3, 1 vs 4 under exceptional circumstances - and that it should USUALLY be a losing proposition...leading at best to escape and evasion...
Yourself (and other posters on this thread) believe that Large Ships because of their relative internals/expense should be able to handle wings of small ships in an "attritional" manner...using Shields/Banks/HRPs to soak up damage whilst destroying smaller ships piecemeal...
Currently TLB is one of the mechanism that "balances" an encounter back in favour of numbers of smaller ships...which currently suffer because of the attritional nature of Elite Combat (very high defence vs offence...no alpha strike weapons)
Its not "Ignorance" merely an (entirely valid) different point of view...

Large end game ships should be effective to some degree at tackling multiple foes, which is why they are the "big boys" of the game that come a huge cost both in terms of time and credit investment. In saying that they shouldn't be invincible, but they should be able to laugh at a few smaller ships, much like a warship would laugh at a bunch of pirates coming at it with some gunboats.

Being jumped by gankers tooled up to ruin your day and cost you your ship is not fun. But that isn't why I posted this topic. I did not die, but weaker people have. I do fly effectively and if I see a problem with TBL then I simply post out of consideration for others who simply won't know what the heck is going on. It needs adjusted as I say. But that is only my opinion.

 

[jasonbirder]

but they should be able to laugh at a few smaller ships, much like a warship would laugh at a bunch of pirates coming at it with some gunboats.

But that's simply NOT a good example is it...

VERY simply...Large Heavily armed and armoured Ships (Battleships/Battlecruisers) became obselaete almost overnight due to their vulnerability to attack by small, cheap (disposable) numerous, heavily armed and maneuverable attackers (Aircraft)

Even taking a more nuanced view of today's navies...Large Ships are STILL vulnerable to swarm attacks, Missile Boats and Aircraft Attacks...which is why High Value Capital Ships ONLY operate as part of an integrated Battle Group...

In saying that they shouldn't be invincible, but they should be able to laugh at a few smaller ships

WHY?

 

[Arguendo]

I must admit I was a bit worried for this thread when it looked like GCI #general was leaking. Props to the posters keeping the thread on topic and not letting it be derailed. (jb, stitch and kofeyh's bromance notwithstanding )

 

[jasonbarron]

I must admit I was a bit worried for this thread when it looked like GCI #general was leaking. Props to the posters keeping the thread on topic and not letting it be derailed. (jb, stitch and kofeyh's bromance notwithstanding )

Honestly, I'm a little bit put out that I have to share Stitch with Kofeyh.

 

[Darkslayer]

I don't know what this is about. Can someone explain this TLB? How does it work?

 

[Torashuu]

Plasma accelerator special effect, you hit someone with the PA shot, they deselect any targets they had. So they need to press a button to reaquire. Because of the deselection gimballed and guided weapons do not lock on and wel have to reaquire when selecting the target again. When a stream of successive shots hit you you cannot retarget quick enough to make gimballed/guided weapons usefull. Though if you are being hit by a stream of plasma bolts id wager you have some bigger problems.

 

[Morbad]

While it's true that reverberating torps/mines are currently the only useful method to bypass shields directly (phasing sequence is too weak for that), there's another counter, though... feedback cascade. Although it doesn't bypass or destroy shields directly, it seriously reduces a big ships ability to keep its shields up, as they usually tend to have most of their total MJ stored in SCBs. Being deprived of their SCBs, the big three can't really stay much longer in a fight, than pre-engineers. If their staying-power was reduced any further they would soon become completely useless in wing combat, which is their only sensible role in PvP anyway, IMO.

Feedback cascade is something I'm almost never without in the current state of the game, if I expect to be fighting larger ships. Still, even without SCBs, defense has scaled vastly faster than offense and it's perfectly possible for one of the big three to have five times the up-front shield strength as they had before Engineers.

Regardless, before engineers, shields were even more all-or-nothing than they are now on large ships. The fundamental problem I see isn't raw shield strength, but that almost nothing can bypass raw shield strength. I'd much rather have more porous shields and shields that could bypassed without depleting their entire MJ pool. Certainty is a very bad thing for combat gameplay and shields are too reliable.

As for wing PvP, large ships have always been at a huge disadvantage here; speed differentials become more important as more ships are added. Not saying they can't be used effectively, but the side with slower ships is going to be forced on the defensive more often if they don't want to be on the receiving end of divide and conquer tactics where the faster ships are baited away and enveloped, or kited beyond range of their slower friends that are then focused. It's much more difficult to split up a group that consists of vessels of similar speeds.

 

[Darty]

And you're also displaying your ignorance. There's testing and documentation, not to mention the damn patch notes, and the torpedos themselves are also not an easy munition to hit with, between arming distance and very low travel speeds. Any competent big ship pilot can hear the missile warning, boost away, FA off flip, and target and kill the torps relatively easily.


This is why I can't take half the people crying for a nerf seriously. Coming in here, posting videos of the exact kind of terrible 4-0-2 flying with poor throttle control we're talking about and trying to hold it up as an example of why the nerf needs to happen, complaining about other special effects while being objectively wrong about how those effects work. You're coming in here asking for things to have changes made that existed from the start, as in the case of FSD reset (as seen in Sandro's comment here https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/290929-Containment-missile-FSD-breaker/page2), or have already been implemented, as in the case of torps. It used to be a much smaller number of torpedos, (as you can see in the patch notes here https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/295657-Beta-2-2-Update-5).

As I've said, I do agree TLB could use a short cooldown effect. But seriously, get your facts together and learn to fly your damn ship before you come making objectively wrong statements, and holding up blatant falsehoods as justifications for your arguments.

If you actually bothered to read all my posts instead of just quote mine me you would realize that the damage cascading feedback does was only a very small part of my argument. Also, your ability to destroy/avoid the torps doesn't mean the effect isn't poorly designed, it just means it's easier to get around the poor design.

Again, if you had actually read my posts you would realize that my issue with most of these effects isn't necessarily that they are too hard for me to counter, but that they are poor game mechanics that take more away from my experience than they add. It's not an issue of me wanting a nerf or not, it's an issue of me thinking that the entire system is fundamentally flawed and should have been implemented differently. My personal experience with TLB has been simple annoyance. I haven't really found that it was overwhelmingly OP, just that it forced me to not use certain weapons and was just a pain in the asp to fight against. A good game mechanic shouldn't outright eliminate certain builds competently and ruin the experience of the player on the receiving end. It should be fun to use and fun to avoid. Most of the special effects I have mentioned aren't and I think that's one of the reasons PVP in this game has such a bad name.

 

[dfgqsb]

Large end game ships should be effective to some degree at tackling multiple foes, which is why they are the "big boys" of the game that come a huge cost both in terms of time and credit investment. In saying that they shouldn't be invincible, but they should be able to laugh at a few smaller ships, much like a warship would laugh at a bunch of pirates coming at it with some gunboats.

Do you even know what you are talking about? If it is a single player game, then obtaining the most expensive or rarest weapons and armors should make you extremely powerful, yes you should be able to laugh at enemies with poor equipments. And this is exactly what's going on in ED PVE. Fully modded big ships are simply invincible.

But it is PVP we are talking abouthere. People should laugh at their foes when they have superior skills or tactics, not "my ship is X time more expensive than yours". While you spent your time delivering data for your rank, passengers for your bank account, cargos for the engineer or mats for your mod, others were practicing their flying, aiming and pip managements(they also need to grind cr, mats for mods and some ranks, just not as much as you do, and they need to unlock the same engineers). All I see is "My way is the best way, and I should be able to laugh at others because they are using some different method."

Skillful pilots should be effective to some degree at tackling multiple foes.

 

[Truesilver]

As this thread has long since become a more general discussion about the position of Big Ships in PvP, I'd like to spell out what I think Frontier's fundamental problem is here:

Frontier have had to give Big Ships ludicrous hit points because they haven't given them anything else.

I returned to Big Ship PvP in Beta 3.0 after a long absence in smalls and mediums ... but in 1.3 and 1.4 I flew a full-fixed max spec Anaconda.

Nothing much has really changed. TLB, cascade on the one hand ... HD booster stacking on the other hand ... it all comes back to the same thing.

The Big Ship elephant has more hit points than the tigers and wolves it faces. That's it, nothing else. More DPS? Don't make me laugh, it's not much higher in alpha and the effective sustained DPS is barely any more than Python, Clipper, FdL, FAS or now Chieftain. DPE? Same point, it's barely higher.

Once you take that all into account, then assuming competent, evasive, PvP pilots, the true 'on target' DPS is pitiful even in a 1v1.

And yet the Big Ship probably wins anyway. How? Via the game's two biggest crutches: inflated base shield and NPC aimbot SLF. Both of which by definition require no input from the player.

Take away either of those and it's just flying joke territory.

It's a shame because the Big Ship could be so much more.

Four proposals:

(1) Make weapon range scale by weapon size.

How has this never been a thing? 16 inch battleship guns do not have the same range as 8 inch guns.

When a Viper pulls a Corvette and laughs at him, the Viper's c2 lasers shouldn't have the same range as Corvette c4. When the Viper runs he should be taking smack to 6 km without modding, 12 km with long range.

(2) Introduce the full range of existing weapon variants across all sizes and combine with the range point above.

And make 'em nasty.

Yes I do mean c4 frags with eye-watering burst damage and an effective range approaching 1 km.

And I sure do mean multi-launch c4 dumbfire racks modded for penetrator special. Get in front of one (or two) of those in a hull tank or hybrid and you should expect to see what's left of your plant leaving through your canopy.

(3) Put a proper power curve on distributor size capacity and recharge.

The trivial current differences are why what I say at (1) and (2) above would actually help some mediums as much as the Big 3, otherwise. It has to be a suite of changes. Size 7 and 8 PD should really mean something, like with SCB's.

(4) Nerf the silly shield hit points.

But the point is, with bringing out the new smack, as above.

I'm not arguing for glass cannons. But I am arguing for credible threat.

A Big Ship dropping into a fight in a wake should be a moment of real threat. And there should be real threat to the Big Ship also.

I'm arguing for excitement. Unlike the current position in which there is literally nothing less threatening, nor less threatened, than the safe yet harmless, hapless, blind, cuddly, invulnerable, impotent, Big Friendly Giant.

 

[jasonbarron]

As this thread has long since become a more general discussion about the position of Big Ships in PvP, I'd like to spell out what I think Frontier's fundamental problem is here:

Frontier have had to give Big Ships ludicrous hit points because they haven't given them anything else.

I returned to Big Ship PvP in Beta 3.0 after a long absence in smalls and mediums ... but in 1.3 and 1.4 I flew a full-fixed max spec Anaconda.

Nothing much has really changed. TLB, cascade on the one hand ... HD booster stacking on the other hand ... it all comes back to the same thing.

The Big Ship elephant has more hit points than the tigers and wolves it faces. That's it, nothing else. More DPS? Don't make me laugh, it's not much higher in alpha and the effective sustained DPS is barely any more than Python, Clipper, FdL, FAS or now Chieftain. DPE? Same point, it's barely higher.

Once you take that all into account, then assuming competent, evasive, PvP pilots, the true 'on target' DPS is pitiful even in a 1v1.

And yet the Big Ship probably wins anyway. How? Via the game's two biggest crutches: inflated base shield and NPC aimbot SLF. Both of which by definition require no input from the player.

Take away either of those and it's just flying joke territory.

It's a shame because the Big Ship could be so much more.

Four proposals:

(1) Make weapon range scale by weapon size. How has this never been a thing? 16 inch battleship guns do not have the same range as 8 inch guns.

When a Viper pulls a Corvette and laughs at him, the Viper's c2 lasers shouldn't have the same range as Corvette c4. When the Viper runs he should be taking smack to 6 km without modding, 12 km with long range.

(2) Introduce the full range of existing weapon variants across all sizes and combine with the range point above. And make 'em nasty.

Yes I do mean c4 frags with eye-watering burst damage and an effective range approaching 1 km.

And I sure do mean multi-launch c4 dumbfire racks modded for penetrator special. Get in front of one (or two) of those in a hull tank or hybrid and you should expect to see what's left of your plant leaving through your canopy.

(3) Put a proper power curve on distributor size capacity and recharge. The trivial current differences are why what I say at (1) and (2) above would actually help some mediums as much as the Big 3, otherwise. It has to be a suite of changes. Size 7 and 8 PD should really mean something, like with SCB's.

(4) Nerf the silly shield hit points. But the point is, with bringing out the new smack, as above.

I'm not arguing for glass cannons. But I am arguing for credible threat.

A Big Ship dropping into a fight in a wake should be a moment of real threat. And there should be real threat to the Big Ship also.

I'm arguing for excitement. Unlike the current position in which there is literally nothing less threatening, nor less threatened, than the safe yet harmless, hapless, blind, cuddly, invulnerable, impotent, Big Friendly Giant.

No matter how hard I try, I just can't remain in a state of disagreement with you.

 

[RagingxPenguin]

As this thread has long since become a more general discussion about the position of Big Ships in PvP, I'd like to spell out what I think Frontier's fundamental problem is here:

Frontier have had to give Big Ships ludicrous hit points because they haven't given them anything else.

I returned to Big Ship PvP in Beta 3.0 after a long absence in smalls and mediums ... but in 1.3 and 1.4 I flew a full-fixed max spec Anaconda.

Nothing much has really changed. TLB, cascade on the one hand ... HD booster stacking on the other hand ... it all comes back to the same thing.

The Big Ship elephant has more hit points than the tigers and wolves it faces. That's it, nothing else. More DPS? Don't make me laugh, it's not much higher in alpha and the effective sustained DPS is barely any more than Python, Clipper, FdL, FAS or now Chieftain. DPE? Same point, it's barely higher.

Once you take that all into account, then assuming competent, evasive, PvP pilots, the true 'on target' DPS is pitiful even in a 1v1.

And yet the Big Ship probably wins anyway. How? Via the game's two biggest crutches: inflated base shield and NPC aimbot SLF. Both of which by definition require no input from the player.

Take away either of those and it's just flying joke territory.

It's a shame because the Big Ship could be so much more.

Four proposals:

(1) Make weapon range scale by weapon size. How has this never been a thing? 16 inch battleship guns do not have the same range as 8 inch guns.

When a Viper pulls a Corvette and laughs at him, the Viper's c2 lasers shouldn't have the same range as Corvette c4. When the Viper runs he should be taking smack to 6 km without modding, 12 km with long range.

(2) Introduce the full range of existing weapon variants across all sizes and combine with the range point above. And make 'em nasty.

Yes I do mean c4 frags with eye-watering burst damage and an effective range approaching 1 km.

And I sure do mean multi-launch c4 dumbfire racks modded for penetrator special. Get in front of one (or two) of those in a hull tank or hybrid and you should expect to see what's left of your plant leaving through your canopy.

(3) Put a proper power curve on distributor size capacity and recharge. The trivial current differences are why what I say at (1) and (2) above would actually help some mediums as much as the Big 3, otherwise. It has to be a suite of changes. Size 7 and 8 PD should really mean something, like with SCB's.

(4) Nerf the silly shield hit points. But the point is, with bringing out the new smack, as above.

I'm not arguing for glass cannons. But I am arguing for credible threat.

A Big Ship dropping into a fight in a wake should be a moment of real threat. And there should be real threat to the Big Ship also.

I'm arguing for excitement. Unlike the current position in which there is literally nothing less threatening, nor less threatened, than the safe yet harmless, hapless, blind, cuddly, invulnerable, impotent, Big Friendly Giant.

Exceptional ideas. Love it!