Balancing Ships

[Derath]

The thread is called "Balancing ships", so its perfectly within the context. The OP says all ships should perform equally regardless of the price, I disagree, and bring up a point in which this game fails the most.
Also, who do you think you are, dictating to others what is part of the discussion and what is not?

Its clearly not the worst of the big 3, you can see exactly where its stat budget went from the balance team, having read what you write about it your argument hinges 100% on it being worse for combat, which it is, but everything has a tradeoff

Cutter
Enormous cargo
Substantially higher topspeed for a bathtub

Corvette
2x well placed huge
faster turn-rates

Anaconda
mega jump range/general versatility.

Its a pretty standard grouping for a set of ships, combat, trading, exploration

 

[Vasious]

Generally isn't the idea to have a role for the small ships vs medium vs large, rather than try to balance them against each other in any way.

i.e
Given the Ship sizes different roles and then Balance the Sidewinder to the Eagles to the Adders in a small ship Role

---

*Disclaimer*
Above example only, I do in no way assert the Sidewinder, Eagles, and Adder need any rebalancing

 

[hunvagy]

Guess the first question is whether the OP means PvP or PvE. PvP then not much from me to add. But if PvE is meant, I have a friend in a very very rabid Imperial Eagle, who doesn't shy away from taking on anything up to a Python and usually surviving the encounter. In pieces, but surviving. Then again, fixing up an eagle costs less then refueling a Python

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

There's nothing wrong with the Eagle.

Full Combat loaded it can jump almost 20ly, which is insane for a combat ship, not to mention it's insanely agile.
Sure, it's DPS is low, and it's hull is made from tin foil. But an Eagle is never designed to take on anything big alone.

The only thing I'm surprised about is the fact the (i)Eagle is not the fastest ship in the game. Somehow FD made the decision to make the Cobra Mk3 the fastest. Personally, I think the Eagle should be able to maintain 400m/s without boost, and hit nearly 500m/s with it. As well as a very low thermal signature, making it hard to track and hit. Then it can fill the role of strike fighter.

I've used both the Eagle and iEagle, they're both good for their price, but are not really designed for solo PvE combat.
I usually just fly them for fun around canyons.

I'd love a "new" Eagle to be released, bit larger, bit stronger, faster, basically a mini FDL.

Edit:
I should add, flying in a wing of 4 Eagles, full A rated, can and WILL win in any fight in PvE.
I'm not that in to PvP, but I imagine the same case, depending on the target/skill of all involved.

 

[[VR] Deggial]

In general, I have nothing against the idea of ship progression! It gives the player something to strive for. The capabilities of all the ships are pretty well balanced in relation to their price tag.

Having this said, it is a shame that after you passed beyond these starter ships, there is no real incentive to go back to them (unless for some self-imposed dificulty or sheer hobby.)

I see two possibilities to alter this:

1. Mission-related obligatory ship choice
Some missions might only be doable in a specific ship-type. (Changing the ship after accepting the mission should be possible; some mission-givers might even lend you a ship for this mission only and keep your more expensive ship as a pawn). The reason for this could be that the mission-giver could only organize a special ID which you need to pass a security check. Or he wants that your deed looks as if done by someone else. There are many possibilities to justify a ship-change!

2. New, ship-specific modules
This is something I proposed since long and that is in fact already in the game for some ships (passenger modules and fighter hangars!), so it is very much in line with the general game design.

In the case discussed here, there could be a special module for the Eagle that makes targeting harder with gimbaled weapons (sort of an ECM).
The beauty of this would be, that those special modules are very easy to balance!
a) They only fit in certain ships, hence there is no danger of unwanted synergies with other ships.
b) The cost could be set as needed. If, for example, the proposed Eagle-ECM would lift this small fighter to the combat-capability of a Phyton... well, charge the customer 50 Mio. credits for it!
c) As the module is a high-class optional, it wouldn't change the general ship progression.

Finally, ship-specific modules would help to sharpen each ship's characteristic and make them even more recognizable and unique.

 

[Jesse Blue]

I see two possibilities to alter this:

1. Mission-related obligatory ship choice
2. New, ship-specific modules.

Unfortunately, your ideas make sense, so they will never be implemented. In the event something similar is ever considered by the devs, we'll get completely awkward mechanics that will inevitably lead to exploits, useless modules/ships, and further differentiation between the game modes.

 

[Kylby36]

OP here,

Forgot about this thread overnight... I'm not sure why people try to argue that I said that eagles should be able to take down larger targets. Please someone quote it in my original post if I'm wrong.

I'm saying that it should be harder for a larger ship to track onto a smaller ship, so that the smaller ship can still take on smaller targets in its wing while dodging the line of sight due to slow tracking. Think of the large battles in Star Wars. The large ships have a hard time hitting the smaller ships, so the smaller ships can focus on taking each other out while the big ships duke it out. I fail to see how this would be game breaking and unfair to the ships that cost more.

This would give smaller ships a purpose to wing up with bigger ships.

Not once did I say the smaller ships should be able to actually destroy the larger ship. So again, PLEASE quote it in my original post if I'm wrong. Otherwise you all need to learn how to focus on a topic better. You all get so defensive about losing your large ships that you forget to see what someone is actually saying.


I personally think it's silly that you all think big ships are supposed to = better. It's up to the pilot to decide that. But my approach doesn't even affect you guys, other than it'll take you more time to kill something while taking maybe 10% damage tops. I just hope more content in planetary landings give smaller ships some use again.

 

[shadragon]

1) Part of me says a Vulture costs over 46x the Eagle so why should they balance.
2) Part of me says even a weak ship should be a contest.

1) They don't equate and that's a good thing. All ships have pro's and con's.
2) Weak ships in a Wing make for a formidable opponent for most. I've seen Wings of 12 NPC's, Sidey's and Eagles with rail guns. I went in the other direction.

Remember that SJA is working on new AI upgrades and those may be in the next patch. Let's not give the little, umm, AI minions any more powers until we see what they are capable of.

 

[Lobstris]

'Starter ship?' 'End Game?' 'Waaah! your cheap ship shouldn't be able to damage my really expensive one that costs 1000s of times more!'- hmmm, these to me are signs that Elite: Dangerous failed to get it's simulation and economy aspects right, and became too much a standard MMO game, hampered by its p2p instancing. Sidey and Eagles in swarms should be viable against bigger ships, just through weight of numbers - but we'll never get to see it because of the wings/instancing issues. And I think I've only once seen an NPC wing of over 8 ships.

 

[Kristov]

OP here,

Forgot about this thread overnight... I'm not sure why people try to argue that I said that eagles should be able to take down larger targets. Please someone quote it in my original post if I'm wrong.

I'm saying that it should be harder for a larger ship to track onto a smaller ship, so that the smaller ship can still take on smaller targets in its wing while dodging the line of sight due to slow tracking. Think of the large battles in Star Wars. The large ships have a hard time hitting the smaller ships, so the smaller ships can focus on taking each other out while the big ships duke it out. I fail to see how this would be game breaking and unfair to the ships that cost more.

This would give smaller ships a purpose to wing up with bigger ships.

Not once did I say the smaller ships should be able to actually destroy the larger ship. So again, PLEASE quote it in my original post if I'm wrong. Otherwise you all need to learn how to focus on a topic better. You all get so defensive about losing your large ships that you forget to see what someone is actually saying.


I personally think it's silly that you all think big ships are supposed to = better. It's up to the pilot to decide that. But my approach doesn't even affect you guys, other than it'll take you more time to kill something while taking maybe 10% damage tops. I just hope more content in planetary landings give smaller ships some use again.

Thing is, small ships ARE harder to track, at least if a good pilot is at the helm and knows how to take advantage of their speed, agility and size. A wing of 4 Eagles can tear up an Anaconda or Vette or Cutter, but they need to be good to do that. A single Eagle trying that, well, if you aren't good, you're dead fast, which is really to be expected when you take a rubber dinghy up against a combat ship, which is really the proper analogy here, since the ships we have access to are all rather small really, we have no actual ships of the line after all.

 

[D4RK5T4R]

Balancing ships you say?

 

[Achilles7]

OP, I know where you are coming from, but you must remember a lot of people like to stay in their comfort zones with their big ships & gimbals - to them this game is a leisurely saunter through the park in a cardigan & slippers..hitting the target without even aiming - pointing the ship in the general direction for 100% hits on target is a joke?!
.
It is a real shame because the Eagle should be one of the best ships in the game, but is effectively unviable..it's manoeuvrability & size should give it protection in a skilled pilots hands but a Vulture with gimbals will take it down in 10 seconds!
.
FD are to blame for pandering to the lowest common denominator again! They should at the very least, reduce the firing arcs. However, If I had my way, I would make gimbals unavailable when players reach 'Master' rank! That would sort the wheat from the chaff!

 

[LameoveR]

Remove turrets.
Then even one little ship would compete Conda.

 

[Brimstone]

Funny you say that. I've read somewhere that Anaconda has special cargo racks in a frame that can more around in ship's hull, shifting it's center of mass to help maneuver

Yeah I've heard that too, and I think the dev's scrapped the idea because honestly it's very silly. Having machinery to shift cargo around would just be a waste of energy.

 

[Vasious]

Yeah I've heard that too, and I think the dev's scrapped the idea because honestly it's very silly. Having machinery to shift cargo around would just be a waste of energy.

It wasn't a game mechanics, just the entry in the elite Manual

The largest known freighter with a cargo bay designed by Beerbaum and ThruSpace Inc., the Anaconda is the only freighter fitted with Dizaner SpaceWares swing-float platforms. These load-balance metering devices enable the loadmaster to rearrange the cargo within seconds to increase maneuverability of the great ship. Equipped only with laser weaponry (the 500 Gigazap front-firing pulse), and sometimes with missiles, the Anaconda range of craft usually have fighter escorts. In trader parlance, the Anaconda is built as strong as a rogue asteroid, and steers like one.

 

[Kylby36]

This is what I don't understand... You guys say that the eagle would be too OP if it were given bigger guns and whatnot. Isn't that basically the vulture? The vulture is a little bit faster with boost when its thrusters are upgraded AND it has Large Hardpoints. It can turn as quickly as an eagle as well if you know how to use the thrusters. You guys are completely fine with the vulture being in existence, but as soon as someone wants to upgrade a ship that is quite crappy against anything that is upgraded, you're all like naw naw that's too much. The fact that a vulture can easily tear an eagle to shreds because it has such close specs is ridiculous. There's no benefit to have an eagle over a vulture.

If FD built the game with the ability to easily be in a wing with either players or AI, I wouldn't have a problem with the eagle being completely helpless against larger ships. But since the content of AI wings isn't there, there isn't any other option than to go ahead and either make a better variant of the eagle (no not the imperial eagle) or give it better hardpoints.\

Basically I'm saying that currently there is nothing for an eagle to shoot at to make it useful.