Big vs. Small

[Golemone]

In many threads I noticed that arguments took place between owners of big ships (Python, Anaconda) and owners of small ships (Viper, Vulture).

For instance, small ship pilots complained about the big ships to be too powerful, while the big ship pilots said all was well, since big ships cost a lot more. On the other hand, big ship pilots complain now about the repair cost being too high, while small ship owners say it's okay.

This might boil down to two different play styles. Dare I say, small ship owners rather enjoy going into open play and fight with other players, while big ship owners like to play in solo mode and try to build up the ultimate space ship and rule the universe? For me, as a Python pilot and an 80ies Elite veteran, that's definitely the aim. :>

The problem is, that FD tries to combine both play styles with the same rules. And I'm afraid this will never work. A Python or an Anaconda player spends a huge amount of money to have a better ship. If this ship would be as good as the money he/her spent, it would be indestructible for a small ship. Example: Maxed out Anaconda costs 500,000,000, a pimped up Viper 250,000, but the Anaconda isn't better than a Viper by the factor of 2000. I sometimes get the feeling, it's only better by a small percentage. In fact, to buy more expensive modules (some cost millions of credits!) gives the player only the illusion of having really better equipment. If it wasn't like this, new players wouldn't stand a chance against those who ground for money for a long time.

It's unfair one way and the other. What can be done? Different rules for solo and open play?

 

[Fireclown]

I can see the argument that big ships should be much tougher to take down by small ships because of the money invested.
But in the real world one small torpedo boat can sink an aircraft carrier.
But I suppose Elite isn't the real world.
Well, that was constructive ....

 

[Ian Skippy]

In many threads I noticed that arguments took place between owners of big ships (Python, Anaconda) and owners of small ships (Viper, Vulture).

For instance, small ship pilots complained about the big ships to be too powerful, while the big ship pilots said all was well, since big ships cost a lot more. On the other hand, big ship pilots complain now about the repair cost being too high, while small ship owners say it's okay.

This might boil down to two different play styles. Dare I say, small ship owners rather enjoy going into open play and fight with other players, while big ship owners like to play in solo mode and try to build up the ultimate space ship and rule the universe? For me, as a Python pilot and an 80ies Elite veteran, that's definitely the aim. :>

The problem is, that FD tries to combine both play styles with the same rules. And I'm afraid this will never work. A Python or an Anaconda player spends a huge amount of money to have a better ship. If this ship would be as good as the money he/her spent, it would be indestructible for a small ship. Example: Maxed out Anaconda costs 500,000,000, a pimped up Viper 250,000, but the Anaconda isn't better than a Viper by the factor of 2000. I sometimes get the feeling, it's only better by a small percentage. In fact, to buy more expensive modules (some cost millions of credits!) gives the player only the illusion of having really better equipment. If it wasn't like this, new players wouldn't stand a chance against those who ground for money for a long time.

It's unfair one way and the other. What can be done? Different rules for solo and open play?

Personally I don't see how 'godmode Python' fits in with Elite lore. In one of the ED novels, for example, the story starts with a Python being pirated, and the pirates having to hurry out of fear of some Vipers showing up (which maxes out at 2.500.000, you msised a zero ). Also, I don't really agree that in big ship pilots like to fly in solo, quite a few seem annoyed that they can't stomp on random other players with their trade-grinded Conda. I think that, just as with 'small ship pilots' there is a rather large diversity of reasons and goals for flying a big ship. Some want to rule in solo, some want to help others in group or open, some want to be a nuisance to others.

 

[xslam]

In real world a antiship missile can crack in half a carrier like G.Ford class.
In reald world a RPG-7 missile can rip away tank's turret.
In real world a nuclear bomb can devastate entire country.

So in real world all of them have choice between risks of destruction and benefits of superrior power.

 

[Frop]

One of the main reasons I like the current ships is that there's no definitive "win button" ship as opposed to some other games and MMOs. Sure, an A-specced Python or Anaconda is pretty dangerous, but when pitted against a wing of capable players or NPCs you're still in trouble. Asymmetrical warfare rules.

 

[Derath]

The larger ships should convey differences but not just flat out benefits, and by and large they do that - you can't threaten a viper in a python, the vipers just going to leave.

Do think the open/solo and easymode rollercoaster haven't made the more expensive ships interesting, I see more anacondas than anything else by now

 

[Vasious]

In real world a antiship missile can crack in half a carrier like G.Ford class.
In reald world a RPG-7 missile can rip away tank's turret.
In real world a nuclear bomb can devastate entire country.

So in real world all of them have choise between risks of destruction and benefits of superrior power.

Indeed, there was a never 1;1 ratio for Cost to effectiveness especially when comparing weapons.

 

[Poseidal]

I fly almost exclusively big ships (Fer-de-Lance, Clipper, Python; the smallest ship I'm seen in these days is generally the Courier). I think there is more room for the smaller, cheaper ships to be improved or given some kind of role (at least don't have some ships that are 'strictly better' than others, dedicated traders excepting)

Personally I don't see how 'godmode Python' fits in with Elite lore. In one of the ED novels, for example, the story starts with a Python being pirated, and the pirates having to hurry out of fear of some Vipers showing up (which maxes out at 2.500.000, you msised a zero ). Also, I don't really agree that in big ship pilots like to fly in solo, quite a few seem annoyed that they can't stomp on random other players with their trade-grinded Conda. I think that, just as with 'small ship pilots' there is a rather large diversity of reasons and goals for flying a big ship. Some want to rule in solo, some want to help others in group or open, some want to be a nuisance to others.

In another novel, two characters are on the bridge of an Anaconda, and there's a Cobra on the scanners:

"No match for this ship, right?"

"Depends on who's flying it."

 

[Stigbob]

Every ship has advantages and disadvantages take the viper and the python

Speed viper wins
Turn rate and thrusters viper wins
Armour python wins
Shields python wins
Masslock ability python wins
Firepower python wins
Running costs viper wins
Survivability python wins
Bling factor python wins
Rebuy cost viper wins

Its a matter of picking a ship that suits your personal playing style, if you are inclined towards tanking damage the python is best for you (and you can jump out if losing by tanking damage), if you like getting around the back and hitting subsystems the vipers your choice (and you can out-run a lot of big targets if losing). But either way you'll gain some advantages and lose others.

Then you have ships like the FDL and the clipper that combine both speed and tankiness, but don't excel at either. Play to the strengths of your current ship of choice.

 

[Soopyyy]

During times of war, the biggest threat to a tank is a mine. Mines are tiny and worth about $150.

 

[Stigbob]

During times of war, the biggest threat to a tank is a mine. Mines are tiny and worth about $150.

Molotov cocktails cost even less, and can be improvised in most homes.

 

[Brujah]

I think the problem is not the cost, but the risk:reward ratio.

If you've pumped 500 Million Credits into your Anaconda, even as an alpha backer it's going to cost you upwards of a 1,000,000 Credits to recover it if it's destroyed (Edit: In fact, unless I'm missing something it's more like 10 million). Similarly, you're going to be earning a relatively tiny reward for any kills you make.

Now compare that to even a full 4-strong wing of Vipers. Total cost: 1 Million Credits or so, with a recovery cost of, maybe, 50,000 Credits each. Relative to the cost of their ship, the rewards for destroying the Anaconda are much greater.

....

I don't know how to resolve any of that, but it feels to me that there needs to be a way of getting the right classes of ships attacking each other. Perhaps because the heat signature of a Viper is so much smaller than that of an Anaconda, the Anaconda sensors have trouble tracking it (and obviously extrapolate that across the range of ships)? If that were the case, then suddenly it's no big deal if little ships have trouble destroying big ships, because big ships can't destroy little ones either. So bigger ships can get relatively massive hitpoints that make attacks from smaller grade weapons like flea bites on a hippo's hide.

Then you get the middle-of-the-road rank ships like the Diamondback, Asp or Vulture, which are decent all-rounders which can both dogfight with the little guys and also stand up to the big guys, but obviously don't have the firepower to bring to bear against the big guys and aren't as manoeuvrable as the little guys (maybe still have some problems with targeting, but not as great).

 

[NVNM]

Ships have no specialized roles in combat. There are no bombers, no laser boats, no interdictors.

Unless this changes you'll always have to equate power with money invested.

 

[Stigbob]

Ships have no specialized roles in combat. There are no bombers, no laser boats, no interdictors.

Unless this changes you'll always have to equate power with money invested.

Any ship can be specialized for any role through outfitting in the right way.

There are anaconda explorers, python miners, sidewinder racers and type 6 PvP players.

 

[NVNM]

Any ship can be specialized for any role through outfitting in the right way.

There are anaconda explorers, python miners, sidewinder racers and type 6 PvP players.

And no matter how much you specialize a ship, it won't make all-missile loadouts or all-lasers or all-turrets more viable than on any other ship.

If you can use any ship to do any task, then none of them are specialized.

 

[xslam]

I think the problem is not the cost, but the risk:reward ratio.

If you've pumped 500 Million Credits into your Anaconda, even as an alpha backer it's going to cost you upwards of a 1,000,000 Credits to recover it if it's destroyed (Edit: In fact, unless I'm missing something it's more like 10 million). Similarly, you're going to be earning a relatively tiny reward for any kills you make.

Now compare that to even a full 4-strong wing of Vipers. Total cost: 1 Million Credits or so, with a recovery cost of, maybe, 50,000 Credits each. Relative to the cost of their ship, the rewards for destroying the Anaconda are much greater.

Do not forget take into account crew for battle group. 1 anaconda is 1 man.
4 anacondas is 4 men.

1 viper is 1 man and 4 vipers is 4 men. (i do not speak about real world here) If i could control 3 eagles simultaneousley then it could (or still couldn't) be wise to use them. Rewards are also splitted

Though i never try to excuse the small ships or their owners, inability to get money in short time is not an excuse for resulting impotency.


---
Blizzard in their starcraft did balance in this way: gigantic battlecruiser could be killed by ~4 marines. They also have separate balance for SP and MP.

 

[Stigbob]

And no matter how much you specialize a ship, it won't make all-missile loadouts or all-lasers or all-turrets more viable than on any other ship.

If you can use any ship to do any task, then none of them are specialized.

Except traders, they tend to excel at only that.

I'm currently using an all fixed laser loadout on a DBS, it works fine I got over a million for 20 minutes in a res zone just now. I don't need ammo but I need to be more careful with power, armed explorer's carry laser only loadouts due to ammo limitations.

The specialization is in the outfitting, combat survivability and claiming kills is largely down to piloting.

 

[Urbanski101]

Not sure what the problem is here.

A pimped out Viper/Vulture piloted by someone who knows what they are doing is a handful for any ship especially if the pilot of the other ship doesn't know what they are doing in pvp combat. That is the same for any game where skill is as much a factor as the kit you are sporting. In an FPS like Battlefield the guy with the best kit has an edge up to a point, it's more a case of who has better placement, can react quicker and get their shots on target (i.e. skill). It's a similar premise here although the kit/ship/loadout does play a much larger role.

If you want a 500m anaconda then the realities are that it's expensive to run but and you probably won't be able to maintain it of you only bounty hunt. However trading in the anaconda generates a river of money if you have the right trading routes. If you get jumped in your pimped out conda in by a wing of good Vulture pilots then your conda is probably toast. This is how it should be. You shouldn't expect it to be 'god mode'. The 500m you spend does not and never should equate to a ship that invulnerable to everything else, it will give you an advantage but nothing more and with all that money it's a case of diminishing returns, the best modules only give you a slight increase.

I don't like the notion of a two tiered game and would hate to see FD go down this road. More choice, more ships, more modules, better modules and the ability to really customize your loadout this is where they should be going.

Personally I don't play enough to generate the income to maintain an anaconda and I doubt I ever will, but I'm fine with that, I like the smaller/cheaper ships and I make decent profits. If you want the biggest and best, fine, it will cost you and you can still have your ass handed to you by a good pilot in a ship that costs a fraction of yours. Buyer beware. Long may it continue.

 

[Rowander]

I think the problem is not the cost, but the risk:reward ratio.

If you've pumped 500 Million Credits into your Anaconda, even as an alpha backer it's going to cost you upwards of a 1,000,000 Credits to recover it if it's destroyed (Edit: In fact, unless I'm missing something it's more like 10 million). Similarly, you're going to be earning a relatively tiny reward for any kills you make.

Now compare that to even a full 4-strong wing of Vipers. Total cost: 1 Million Credits or so, with a recovery cost of, maybe, 50,000 Credits each. Relative to the cost of their ship, the rewards for destroying the Anaconda are much greater.

....

I don't know how to resolve any of that, but it feels to me that there needs to be a way of getting the right classes of ships attacking each other. Perhaps because the heat signature of a Viper is so much smaller than that of an Anaconda, the Anaconda sensors have trouble tracking it (and obviously extrapolate that across the range of ships)? If that were the case, then suddenly it's no big deal if little ships have trouble destroying big ships, because big ships can't destroy little ones either. So bigger ships can get relatively massive hitpoints that make attacks from smaller grade weapons like flea bites on a hippo's hide.

Then you get the middle-of-the-road rank ships like the Diamondback, Asp or Vulture, which are decent all-rounders which can both dogfight with the little guys and also stand up to the big guys, but obviously don't have the firepower to bring to bear against the big guys and aren't as manoeuvrable as the little guys (maybe still have some problems with targeting, but not as great).

I think you're right on the risk/reward ratio. Currently there's no way for a combat Anaconda to recover its insurance value in less than 4-5 hours killing nonstop. On the other hand, a Viper will pay for insurance in 5 minutes, with only one or two kills.

I think it would be ok if the relative power of the bigger ships is increased in some aspects. After all, small ships dictate the rules of engagement, so they can choose to fight or flee. In the real world right now, "bigger and more expensive" combat platforms tend to dictate rules of engagement: bigger radars on big interceptor jets detect the smallest of planes hundreds of km away, modern stabilized tanks are able to engage enemy tanks 5-6km away, while smaller or not-so-capable tanks need to close that distance to 2-3km...

I would like for Elite to reflect on this and make the bigger ships more capable on that regard: a Class 8 sensor array should be capable of detecting enemy ships 10km+ away without trouble. Speed is another thing that's hardly undestandable: an F-15E (a heavy strike fighter) is known for its top speed capabilities. It turns like a brick but on a straight line is lightning fast. Why are Anacondas so sluggish with that monster engines on the back? It's ok if they turn like a brick (even worse than they are now), after all they SHOULD use turrets for defence, but those engines should pack some thrust, like the F-15E.

All in all, I think Elite is a fun game right now, but personally I would balance things differently so gameplay in big and small ships is entirely different, much more that it is right now, where differences are very very tiny.

 

[Golemone]

Trading and mining put aside, I think most players go for combat, because that's more entertaining.

I don't think we should compare ED with reality. The latter is much more complex and ED is after all a game. Why should a player grind so much money to get a big ship if there isn't proportional reward in combat qualities?

And if we compare the game with reality: I don't think you normally meet a huge battleship alone. There should be interceptors to protect it. How could that be implemented in ED without engaging 10 real life persons in a wing - with drones?

If it's down to 'buy the right ship for your play style': Why is one play style so much more expensive than another?