Nerf Reverski

[Han_Zen]

@Bounder.

I actually tested the 60km range, before I wrote it. I loaded my old commander that is wanted by INRA. As soon as I see the label of the attacker, I can paint it with the beam and it goes pop.

I have done the FFE mission arc about four times, so I know h game.

Combat is great in the early stages. No doubt about that. It does however quickly become clear that the ‘meta’ is powerfull beam weapons at range.
It took me two days to become Elite, the last time I tested with this play style.

This is happening in ED at the moment as well. As ships get faster and get stronger thrusters, FA-off with relative mouse is getting easier and easier to use with long range hit-scan weapons.

All this could off course be fixed with propper balancing, but that isn’t something we see much of in ED.

What is not fixable is the networking. Two fast combat ships with a big relative speed difference, would be impossible to show in their correct position.
The rubber banding we see in SC, would be nothing compared to what we would see in this this scenario.

The best we can hope for, is FA off with rotational damping. I think it’s time for this, to put joystick and controller on par eit the relative mouse.

If we are really lucky, we could get a no speed limmit option in Solo.

 

[lenna]

+1.
Not much else to add after this reply but stating its an energy fight, the one who has the most wins. If you want to win, bring moar energy.

Or learn to be a better pilot...

Some aspects of combat are instinctive though and may not be easily learnable (if learnable at all). All manoeuvres and counter manoeuvres are fair in combat.

After chatting with the person last night who I have referred to before in these forums that is a natural/instinctive space-flight combat pilot, it is worth keeping in mind that skill and ability are still factors in ED. Sure, there are circumstances where certain opponents outclass others because of general build choices but it is far from cut and dry - more energy does not necessarily win every time. With the introduction of the new tech broker weapons things are likely to become even less cut and dry over time.

Just as you should not use a knife in a gun fight, you should not use a gun in a knife fight. Though a well placed knife or bullet could still win in either case. In short, while certain ships may be more/less vulnerable than others the fundamental choice to engage-in, continue or leave a given fight remains in the players hands to a large degree. Where ED and combat in general is concerned - If you try to bite off more than you can chew and suffer for it then you deserve everything you get.

There is nothing explicitly wrong with any manoeuvre choices in ED (reverski included) and while some may consider certain tactics annoying, it does not mean it is wrong at a fundamental level.

 

[Pauciloquent]

Have you ever owned or flown a Cutter? If you had, you might have a better appreciation for it's positives and negatives.

Sounds to me that some in this thread are suffering from a severe case of ship-envy, the Cutter does not need "nerfing" IMO.

Ship-envy?

The Cutter has a bloated top speed to boost speed ratio compared to rest of the Imperial family, it should be between 1:1.25 and 1:1.35 but it is 1:1.60 how is that right?

The Cutters top speed is fine but it's boost speed it not... IMO.

 

[lenna]

Ship-envy?

The Cutter has a bloated top speed to boost speed ratio compared to rest of the Imperial family, it should be between 1:1.25 and 1:1.35 but it is 1:1.60 how is that right?

How is it wrong? And Why should boost speed be limited to effectively a third faster than base speed on ANY ship?

The Cutter's boost to base balance is not unprecedented - the Hauler, Federal Dropship, Federal Gunship, Keelback, T7, Cobra Mk IV, Vulture, T6, and Federal Assault Ship all have boost speeds around 50% or more higher than their base speed.

The Cutter may be relatively fast (boost wise) but has the worst pitch, 3rd worst in roll (T9/T10), and 4th worst yaw (T9/T10/Corvette). Effectively, it is a drag-racer - great in a straight line but manoeuvres like a brick.

 

[Powderpanic]

The Cutter may be relatively fast (boost wise) but has the worst pitch, 3rd worst in roll (T9/T10), and 4th worst yaw (T9/T10/Corvette).

Hey guess its lucky noobs can just reverse in their godships and be super awesome at PEW PEW then huh?

Powderpanic
The Voice of Griefing

 

[lenna]

Hey guess its lucky noobs can just reverse in their godships and be super awesome at PEW PEW then huh?

Irrelevant antagonistic twaddle - the Cutter is not a god ship by it's fundamental nature, but ALL the big 4 can be outfitted as god ships. It is however, not surprising that some PvPers may choose to outfit the Cutter like that (it is after-all the most expensive ship in ED).

The god ship builds are a different matter entirely and a consequence of exploiting excessive stacking of certain ship upgrades. FD have a path to a solution to that particular issue with resistance and shield ignoring weapons.

Fundamentally, those complaining about reverski are not as good at combat as they (or their entourage) claim (them) to be if they can not counter the manoeuvre in a suitable ship.

 

[Pauciloquent]

How is it wrong? And Why should boost speed be limited to effectively a third faster than base speed on ANY ship?

The Cutter's boost to base balance is not unprecedented - the Hauler, Federal Dropship, Federal Gunship, Keelback, T7, Cobra Mk IV, Vulture, T6, and Federal Assault Ship all have boost speeds around 50% or more higher than their base speed.

The Cutter may be relatively fast (boost wise) but has the worst pitch, 3rd worst in roll (T9/T10), and 4th worst yaw (T9/T10/Corvette). Effectively, it is a drag-racer - great in a straight line but manoeuvres like a brick.

A high top speed to boost speed ratio is usually reserved for ships with a relatively low top speed, the Cutter does not have a low top speed.

As for the Cutters pitch rate and to a lesser extent its roll rate I could see them both be increased by as much as 20% dependent on were it's boost speed landed - if change was on the table that is.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

you got issues, with that vid it now looks more like, my epeen hurt, pls nerf.

with how the logic of how ED works, every class is 2x it's previous class.

190t viper vs 1100t cutter.

class 4 vs 8 thrusters. His thrusters are like 16x more by this logic while the mass difference 5.7 times. seems unreasonable, probably should buff the cutters performance by thrusters with this logic even . Wanna also compare the prices? Mass doesn't matters, engine power is what matters, so you cause a lot of nonsense talk in this vid. If you think balance is achieveed because a 1/100th of credits invested ship without even any unlock grind should beat a cutter you really have some wrong vision about how progression should even work

just be happy he didn't use cheapski turrets like you, because he wouldn't even had to use any reversky to shoot you both to pieces.

 

[Chorda]

Space stations are OP too. All they do is sit there like a spinning top, with their massively overpowered lazors destroying anything they take a dislike to. Who flies these things?

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

Space stations are OP too. All they do is sit there like a spinning top, with their massively overpowered lazors destroying anything they take a dislike to. Who flies these things?

No one, they just spin around. and everyone in the control center is just spammed with the Audio of

[video=youtube;PGNiXGX2nLU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGNiXGX2nLU[/video]

 

[Vandaahl]

Besides, reverski has already been nerfed, hence the 30% speed bleed.

God I remember the first days where you could boost, disable flight assist and could reverse 4 ever at max speed

 

[lenna]

A high top speed to boost speed ratio is usually reserved for ships with a relatively low top speed, the Cutter does not have a low top speed.

I suggest you look again, as I pointed out there are several ships where that does not apply and at least a few of those are faster than the Cutter.

As for the Cutters pitch rate and to a lesser extent its roll rate I could see them both be increased by as much as 20% dependent on were it's boost speed landed - if change was on the table that is.

So effectively nerf in one area while buffing in another - essentially the usual ship don't fly exactly as I would like it too. The Cutter is the fastest of the big 4 and the least manoeuvrable which fits with it's primary focus as a trade ship/blockade runner.

You want a combat focused vessel of that class - there is the Corvette. You want a more multi-role vessel then there is the Anaconda. You want a vessel best suited for AX operations then you have the T10D. They all have their unique positives and negatives, lets not try and make them more samey than they are already.

 

[cmdr kruzer70]

Look all the OP and his friends want is basically to be able to drive a jet ski with the ability to take down a battleship in one or two shots and withstand multiple full salvos from the main guns of a battle ship. Of course he's being perfectly reasonable in also wanting a full ECM, PD suite for his jet ski as well, it's not like he's asking for a cloaking device or anything.

 

[lenna]

Look all the OP and his friends want is basically to be able to drive a jet ski with the ability to take down a battleship in one or two shots and withstand multiple full salvos from the main guns of a battle ship. Of course he's being perfectly reasonable in also wanting a full ECM, PD suite for his jet ski as well, it's not like he's asking for a cloaking device or anything.

The farce is strong with this one.

They already can have that, if they pick the right brand of jet ski.

 

[Pauciloquent]

I suggest you look again, as I pointed out there are several ships where that does not apply and at least a few of those are faster than the Cutter.

All of the ships you are talking about are small and medium ships and its only reasonable that some are faster then the Cutter, what I am talking about is relative to their class/size and the Cutter stands out in regard to this.

So effectively nerf in one area while buffing in another - essentially the usual ship don't fly exactly as I would like it too. The Cutter is the fastest of the big 4 and the least manoeuvrable which fits with it's primary focus as a trade ship/blockade runner.

You want a combat focused vessel of that class - there is the Corvette. You want a more multi-role vessel then there is the Anaconda. You want a vessel best suited for AX operations then you have the T10D. They all have their unique positives and negatives, lets not try and make them more samey than they are already.

It's not a trade ship nor a blockade runner... if anything the Clipper is the blockade runner, no the Cutter fulfills the same role Corvette... It's a naval warship nothing more nothing less.

Making the Cutter have a little less boost speed and a little more maneuverable doesn't make it the same or samey as the others,it still faster and less maneuverable than the others just not to the exaggerated level it is now... heck maybe some people find it more enjoyable to fly as it's maneuverability was and still is the main complaint of the ship... but I guess that would just be a bad thing.

 

[lenna]

All of the ships you and talking about are small and medium ships and its only reasonable that some are faster then the Cutter, what I am talking about is relative to their class/size and the Cutter stands out in regard to this.

Irrelevant - I think you miss my point about boost-speed balance, the Cutter's speed does not make it invincible and there is alot

It's not a trade ship nor a blockade runner... if anything the Clipper is the blockade runner, no the Cutter fulfills the same role Corvette... It's a naval warship nothing more nothing less.

Naval warships can fulfil different role-fits even in the same rough class/role. There are differences between the big 4. The T10D has no Huge but instead has more weapons, the Corvette has two Huge and stronger shields/hull, the Cutter has better but less internals and a greater turn of speed, the Anaconda can have the longest jump range of the big 4 if outfitted appropriately.

The Imperials and Federation take different stances on general ship design - the Federation are more stand and fight designs while the Imperial designs tend to focus more on speed. The Cutter is a good fit in this regard and is far from OP relative to the other big four.

The Cutter is a larger version of the Clipper effectively. Both can be used as blockade runners but the Cutter has better defensive and offensive capabilities - as is fitting for it's relative build cost.

Making the Cutter have a little less boost speed and a little more maneuverable doesn't make it the same or samey as the others,it still faster and less maneuverable than the others just not to the exaggerated level it is now... heck maybe some people find it more enjoyable to fly as it's maneuverability was and still is the main complaint of the ship... but I guess that would just be a bad thing.

Having actually flown ALL the big four, I disagree. I have only flown the Cutter in a Beta thus far but it is far from OP as it stands and is quite unique in it's design. It's turn of speed is perfectly justified IMO, especially given the fact that it is expensive to outfit properly - over 700M to A-Spec it. The main reason for using a Cutter over a Corvette or an Anaconda is it's turn of speed - nerf it as you suggest and that gain becomes less significant and the Cutter becomes an expensive hunk of junk by comparison.

The ONLY problem with the balance of the big four is nothing to do with their relative speed or manoeuvrability and more to do with general stacking mechanics - that issue applies to ALL of them.