It would be ridiculous to expect an FA/Off reverse to instantly drop to 50% of max speed.
Nerf Reverski
- Thread starter Powderpanic
- Start date
I believe that their point is that the "star fury manoeuvre" as per my description of performing it with the Chieftain relies to a large degree on momentum balanced against thruster power.
I personally liked the original Beta balance of the Chieftain but a lot of vocal players did not so it got nerfed so it drifted less. This debate effectively would involve reversing that decision and applying similar changes across the board probably. You can not have it both ways.
The PvPers are not necessarily the best, that is just in THEIR opinion. Personally, I am inclined to agree with GH - the arrogance of the vocal PvPers as a collective group seems to know no bounds. I personally have no interest in getting into which particular group of players is actually better at combat, but the level of assumption from at least some of the PvPers is galling.
Where combat is concerned, there are numerous aspects to consider and in the context of this debate - I throw back the argument oft raised by PvPers, it is their turn to "git gud" now.
Not really. Because in the name of combat improvements folks are talking about messing with the flight model. Which messes with everything.
If ED is fully optimized for skill-forward combat, it will be broken for every other play style. What are you going to do with traders, with explorers, with smugglers or passenger captains? Follow jasonbirder's ludicrous suggestion?
Oh, yeah, that will fly like a brick on a 10G planet.
And it's all the "wannabe PvP gods" agreeing with it, as opposed to the REAL giants of ED PvP like TrueSilver who actually get the game mechanics and understands there is more to the ED universe than pewpewpew, and the "answer" would be to gradually roll back the power-creep not wildly swing a nerfbat at something as core as the flight model itself.
Look, ED is not perfect for combat. We all know that. It's not perfect for ANY play style, but ALL of them are POSSIBLE. If the galaxy isn't going to be a barren wasteland that has to continue to be the case.
Go play CQC then.
Exactly. PvP players are not "the best at elite", but they are going to be the most intimately familiar with all the intricacies and minutia of both the flight model, and combat in general. Just like how it would be good to listen to people who primarily trade when discussing trade mechanics, it's good to listen to the people who really know the flight model and combat mechanics when talking about the flight model and combat mechanics. Someone NOT doing PvP doesn't necessarily make them ignorant in this field (I mostly PvE, but spend the overwhelming majority of my time trying to master flying), but PvP players are effectively FORCED to be knowledgeable if the subject if they want to be successful.
How on EARTH can you call making the chieftain less drifty a NERF? You do realize that with good thrusters, you can make your ship move that way manually, right? Making a ship less drifty doesn't disallow it from drifting, it just gives the pilot the option to drift or not as they see fit. The Viper IV has extremely powerful acceleration, but you better believe my flight vector is ALL OVER THE PLACE when I'm fighting.
How can you keep a straight face when you are actually arguing against "drifting" type mechanics and agreeing with the principle of it being called a nerf?
Rhetorical question, but hopefully you get the point.
Yes - I thought the degree of drift on the original Beta 1 Chieftain was perfectly balanced for the ship - it is an opinion, and just as valid as any other. I explained my reasons at the time and will not revive that particular debate here - it serves little or no purpose. Similarly, I think the flight mechanics in general should not be touched - mostly for comparable reasons.
When it comes to talking about something which would affect everyone, which this thread and OP is talking about - adjusting the flight model - then everyone becomes involved.
How can you keep a straight face when you are actually arguing against "drifting" type mechanics and agreeing with the principle of it being called a nerf?
Rhetorical question, but hopefully you get the point.
Yes - I thought the degree of drift on the original Beta 1 Chieftain was perfectly balanced for the ship - it is an opinion, and just as valid as any other. I explained my reasons at the time and will not revive that particular debate here - it serves little or no purpose. Similarly, I think the flight mechanics in general should not be touched - mostly for comparable reasons.
No, what I'm saying is objective fact.
Situation 1) ship is forced to do thing A
Situation 2) ship has the option to do thing A whenever it wants to, but can also choose to do thing B instead.
Going from situation 1 to situation 2 is not a nerf- situation to is objectively more powerful. You may like the "feel" of situation 1 more, but a nerf implies a reduction in power, not simply appealing to your aesthetic preferences less.
No what you are saying is OPINION, the drift on the Chieftain was perfectly controllable - at least with HOTAS and proper management of thrust/throttle, myself and others did actually point this out at the time.
I am sick of the arrogance of those pushing opinion as fact, but this is the internet so I suppose it is to be expected.
Which other playstyles require the ability to travel at full speed with FA off in reverse ..?
![[VR] scipio_77](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/62/62064.jpg?1621626354){kind=avatar}
The physics argument makes no sense.
The only thing "stopping" acceleration in space (in reality making it neglible) is relativity (by making the relatively mass of the ship higher and increasing the amount of force needed for acceleration), and that effect is pretty much not relevant at the kind of speeds ED are operating with in normal flight. If anything, the current flight model in space (when it comes to acceleration) is behaving far too much like atmospheric flight already by imposing artificial drag in space.
The only thing "stopping" acceleration in space (in reality making it neglible) is relativity (by making the relatively mass of the ship higher and increasing the amount of force needed for acceleration), and that effect is pretty much not relevant at the kind of speeds ED are operating with in normal flight. If anything, the current flight model in space (when it comes to acceleration) is behaving far too much like atmospheric flight already by imposing artificial drag in space.
It's fine if you felt it was fine and controllable before the lateral acceleration buff. Yes, that is an opinion. I thought it was not fine. That is also an opinion. The ship being MORE controllable after the lateral acceleration increase is not an opinion, it's an objective fact. What you're arguing is like saying putting a bigger, faster engine in a car is somehow a nerf because it isn't forced to drive slowly anymore.No what you are saying is OPINION, the drift on the Chieftain was perfectly controllable - at least with HOTAS and proper management of thrust/throttle, myself and others did actually point this out at the time.
I am sick of the arrogance of those pushing opinion as fact, but this is the internet so I suppose it is to be expected.
Yes. And personally I want ED to feel something like flying a spaceship. If I wanted a WW1 fighter ace game I would go and play one. The flight model is already one of the major things that makes this a "space fantasy" game rather than "space".
Specialised segments of a larger population (Reads, "Special Interest Groups") are the bane of MMO games. - To put it bluntly.
Bad enough they exist in politics (And a bloody fine mess they've caused).
I've watched PvP bias wreck enough PvE environment gameplay in other games. -Elite: Dangerous is NOT a game that needs that kind of ridiculousness.
PvP should be one of the least considered aspects of ED.
Last edited:
To nerf FA off in reverse, they'd have to nerf FA off in general. Are you REALLY sure you want to go there?
Sure, by all means listen to "experts" at a particular thing but then, if you're smart, you also need to ask yourself if those "experts" have some vested-interest in advocating something.
Cos, I'm thinking that when a bunch of "experts" at ganking are advocating a nerf to a defensive manoeuvre, it's probably not for entirely selfless reasons.
Doesn't really answer my question, does it..?
But I'll answer yours.. They would have to modify (nerf if you prefer) the way it works when travelling backwards.. As mentioned many times before the flight model has been developed to be akin to WWII dog fighting in space and in order to achieve that liberties were taken with the flight model.. further refinement (nerfing if you prefer as it is so en vogue) would bring it closer to that originally envisioned by the developer.. purely my opinion of course.
And yeah, I'd want that if made for better combat.
ANd plenty more people do not want the flight model fracked around with because most players are "happy" with the flight model as-is. Only the PvP'ers are wanting this, and Frontier would be absolutely loopy crazy to mess around with it any more than its already-insanely stupid Star Wars flight model.