Nerf Reverski

[rekurzion]

Aww cute response, it's kinda like you missed the entire point of the post but that is ok.

I am looking to make the combat more challenging and skill based. If that is something of a concept that horrorfies to you, sure go with telling me to play minecraft. KEK

Also do I think that the single removal of the OP nature of reverski is going to solve the issues with Pew Pew and the flight model and engineers and highwake and bugs and exploits and and and?.... yes it will fix it all /s

Powerpanic
The Voice of Griefing

I'll agree my response was low brow and will help in your dilemma for one last backhand because the nature of your argument suggests that you've given up being the predator and are now the prey. Instead of yelling to the gods to gimp your catch because it adapted a new defense let's try participating in evolution and adapt as well shall we? (end of low brow commentary).

one of the first tactics i learned while experimenting with the flight mechanics and FA OFF was the so called "reverski" maneuver. It gave me a distinct advantage over many engagements and i quickly learned NPC's weren't programmed to handle it very well. there have been some subtle attempts to improve this but not by much, especially so given the idea i don't think NPC's use FA OFF. i could be mistaken. but i've ran through the combat training sim which goes through each pilot rank of difficulty and i've orbited each opponent and none of them seemed capable of staying on target once they got close because their turn radius was so wide compared to my orbiting ability (even though they use thrusters which is difficult to imagine now as a fa off player, all that fighting with your own ship). the only exception is the quick reverse maneuver they do to joust. i racked up kills and rank. players too. i've probably pulled a "reverski" on someone in these forums once in my hunting days.

but gravity is a B. Or rather the lack there of.

The story goes...I pulled a young chap out of witchspace who seemed a bit to nosy in my home system. collecting bounties giving the faction i'm trying to oust influence to stay in power. thought they deserved a lesson. They are a Master. I'm an Expert at this point so my process is down. Give chase, peck at their shields from a distance (the so called "reverski"), disable their weapons with missiles then finish them off with MC's or watch em run. It was a good plan. Little did I know I was the young one. This was the only FA OFF trick I had mastered at that time but I would be taught a new one. My opponent was in a smaller and faster ship. They engaged but didn't follow in a straight line. It was as if they were gliding on different angles inching closer always out of optimal firing range. Only sporadic engine trails with little bursts of light from their thrusters. My constant vector gave my opponent the advantage if they took the aggression. And with the right loadout - which they most definitely had. Seemed like they were annoyed by this simple tactic and built a machine to counter it...

- PD's to thwart any missiles (didn't matter they were hidden from view, they were far enough away when my missiles fired they had time to position the PD's in range then quickly position back)
- ECM (running every chance it could whether i had missiles or not, when it was recharging they would evade)
- bi-weave shields that came up as fast as they went down
- tough hull
- silent run from distance
- long range lasers
- boost orbiting while in close (w/ FA OFF boosting at tops speeds is like using small thrusts to land your ship)

the biggest weakness of small/medium ships - their exposed hardpoints taking a missile to the face - was defended.

what followed was a class on using 6DOF to dance around your opponent. even at top speeds the more agile ship is still agile even if it feels slow. they continued to position themselves in strategic positions floating around me as i pivoted in place. even at speeds the battle felt slow (i'd later learn to take advantage of this slow pace). every time i engaged FA ON to escape they boosted closer and kept engaging. trying to keep up with my limited FA OFF skills left me spinning hopelessly out of control. by that point it was too late. i had lost too much speed trying to turn and i was being orbited watching my internals disintegrate.

the best skills are taught by the survivors. in the end it didn't matter how fast we were going, i was out maneuvered. I was fighting with speed and thrusters against both plus forward thrust. A massive disandvantage. since that day "reverski" became just another tactic with a counter. used by a player who has opened the door to flying free and only needs a push in the right direction to expand their experience.

For those interested I promote those who I learned from

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjgBlzLxsgbVuHfZPe0AeIg (to get a taste of how good you will never be)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6zIXu52RnA (built like an online ed course to take you from zero to hero)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrvKoUJOEw (great technical depth and for game controller users)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhCXvyI3HSA (another great dive into mechanics and understanding this newfound freedom)

Peace & Wisdom

 

[Aashenfox]

I'll agree my response was low brow and will help in your dilemma for one last backhand because the nature of your argument suggests that you've given up being the predator and are now the prey. Instead of yelling to the gods to gimp your catch because it adapted a new defense let's try participating in evolution and adapt as well shall we? (end of low brow commentary).

one of the first tactics i learned while experimenting with the flight mechanics and FA OFF was the so called "reverski" maneuver. It gave me a distinct advantage over many engagements and i quickly learned NPC's weren't programmed to handle it very well. there have been some subtle attempts to improve this but not by much, especially so given the idea i don't think NPC's use FA OFF. i could be mistaken. but i've ran through the combat training sim which goes through each pilot rank of difficulty and i've orbited each opponent and none of them seemed capable of staying on target once they got close because their turn radius was so wide compared to my orbiting ability (even though they use thrusters which is difficult to imagine now as a fa off player, all that fighting with your own ship). the only exception is the quick reverse maneuver they do to joust. i racked up kills and rank. players too. i've probably pulled a "reverski" on someone in these forums once in my hunting days.

but gravity is a B. Or rather the lack there of.

The story goes...I pulled a young chap out of witchspace who seemed a bit to nosy in my home system. collecting bounties giving the faction i'm trying to oust influence to stay in power. thought they deserved a lesson. They are a Master. I'm an Expert at this point so my process is down. Give chase, peck at their shields from a distance (the so called "reverski"), disable their weapons with missiles then finish them off with MC's or watch em run. It was a good plan. Little did I know I was the young one. This was the only FA OFF trick I had mastered at that time but I would be taught a new one. My opponent was in a smaller and faster ship. They engaged but didn't follow in a straight line. It was as if they were gliding on different angles inching closer always out of optimal firing range. Only sporadic engine trails with little bursts of light from their thrusters. My constant vector gave my opponent the advantage if they took the aggression. And with the right loadout - which they most definitely had. Seemed like they were annoyed by this simple tactic and built a machine to counter it...

- PD's to thwart any missiles (didn't matter they were hidden from view, they were far enough away when my missiles fired they had time to position the PD's in range then quickly position back)
- ECM (running every chance it could whether i had missiles or not, when it was recharging they would evade)
- bi-weave shields that came up as fast as they went down
- tough hull
- silent run from distance
- long range lasers
- boost orbiting while in close (w/ FA OFF boosting at tops speeds is like using small thrusts to land your ship)

the biggest weakness of small/medium ships - their exposed hardpoints taking a missile to the face - was defended.

what followed was a class on using 6DOF to dance around your opponent. even at top speeds the more agile ship is still agile even if it feels slow. they continued to position themselves in strategic positions floating around me as i pivoted in place. even at speeds the battle felt slow (i'd later learn to take advantage of this slow pace). every time i engaged FA ON to escape they boosted closer and kept engaging. trying to keep up with my limited FA OFF skills left me spinning hopelessly out of control. by that point it was too late. i had lost too much speed trying to turn and i was being orbited watching my internals disintegrate.

the best skills are taught by the survivors. in the end it didn't matter how fast we were going, i was out maneuvered. I was fighting with speed and thrusters against both plus forward thrust. A massive disandvantage. since that day "reverski" became just another tactic with a counter. used by a player who has opened the door to flying free and only needs a push in the right direction to expand their experience.

For those interested I promote those who I learned from

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjgBlzLxsgbVuHfZPe0AeIg (to get a taste of how good you will never be)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6zIXu52RnA (built like an online ed course to take you from zero to hero)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrvKoUJOEw (great technical depth and for game controller users)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhCXvyI3HSA (another great dive into mechanics and understanding this newfound freedom)

Peace & Wisdom

Nice post, and I agree with it 100%. However, your entire argument for not nerfing reverski is based on the fact that reverski can be countered. I don't disagree with this, but I just don't see how being able to counter a bad mechanic stops it from being a bad mechanic.

The proof is the fact that FD made ATR teleport (something I suggested a while ago to prevent players killing them in reverse, see a famous griefer's video).

The truth, as always, is somewhere in the middle. A lot of the cries for nerf are to make up for lack of skill, but just as many others want a change so that the speed of the ship isn't the be all and end all of pvp (it was at the end of 2.4).

 

[El-bizor]

I often use reverse when fighting NPC's, I have a key binded to 50% reverse. Very useful against eagles etc. After reading this thread I put it into full reverse to see what happens. My speed increased slightly upto 250m/s, less than half my forward boosting speed. Has a nerf already happened or is this still the problem?
Edit, I've read some more posts and it seems fa off is needed as well. Not noobs then as some one was saying. I can see why it annoys some people thought, being attacked then the attacker running off in reverse.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Nice post, and I agree with it 100%. However, your entire argument for not nerfing reverski is based on the fact that reverski can be countered. I don't disagree with this, but I just don't see how being able to counter a bad mechanic stops it from being a bad mechanic.

The proof is the fact that FD made ATR teleport (something I suggested a while ago to prevent players killing them in reverse, see a famous griefer's video).

The truth, as always, is somewhere in the middle. A lot of the cries for nerf are to make up for lack of skill, but just as many others want a change so that the speed of the ship isn't the be all and end all of pvp (it was at the end of 2.4).

Why should Frontier nerf FA-Off just to satisfy a minority of players?

 

[lenna]

Nice post, and I agree with it 100%. However, your entire argument for not nerfing reverski is based on the fact that reverski can be countered. I don't disagree with this, but I just don't see how being able to counter a bad mechanic stops it from being a bad mechanic.

Reverski is not a bad mechanic, it should be a staple part of any space combat manoeuvres manual. It has it's place, but perhaps gets overused by some.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Reverski is not a bad mechanic, it should be a staple part of any space combat manoeuvres manual. It has it's place, but perhaps gets overused by some.

Even Starbuck uses reverski in BSG

Looks great on-screen too!

 

[lenna]

I often use reverse when fighting NPC's, I have a key binded to 50% reverse. Very useful against eagles etc. After reading this thread I put it into full reverse to see what happens. My speed increased slightly upto 250m/s, less than half my forward boosting speed. Has a nerf already happened or is this still the problem?
Edit, I've read some more posts and it seems fa off is needed as well. Not noobs then as some one was saying. I can see why it annoys some people thought, being attacked then the attacker running off in reverse.

Personally, I use forward only throttle and have a reverse toggle on my HOTAS. I tend to use full reverse throttle to improve my pitch turns without necessarily resorting to FA/Off (occasionally I mix the two).

Your edit is on the button though - The OP is basically complaining about a certain perfectly valid FA/Off tactic that is not without it's pitfalls.

 

[Aashenfox]

Reverski is not a bad mechanic, it should be a staple part of any space combat manoeuvres manual. It has it's place, but perhaps gets overused by some.

Are you separating reverski as a tactic from 'using reverse thrust' as a tactic? I am. I am against the former, not the latter. The former involves being nearly as fast or faster in reverse than the ship you are griefing can go forwards, the other is used all the time, by almost everyone to some degree.

 

[lenna]

Even Starbuck uses reverski in BSG

Looks great on-screen too!

Personally, I normally reference Babylon 5 for the bible on Reverski - I would call it the "star fury manoeuvre" though. .

 

[DaveB]

There is so much crying in this thread over "this person is flying away from me too fast and I can't chase them".

SO STOP CHASING THEM.

And if you really MUST kill them and they are "on their way to somewhere", have some fun messing with their head... Stow your guns, transition back into SC, zero your throttle and settle down to wait, flying a slow loop at minimum speed. They can't get to anywhere else in the system without engaging SC themselves and no matter how far they stretch that normal-space instance, when they pop up back into SC they'll still be close enough at SC speeds that you'll be gnawing on their tail again in seconds. Either they give up and leave altogether (highwake to another system, all thought of their original destination abandoned) or you get to take another bite... and another, and another and....

 

[lenna]

Are you separating reverski as a tactic from 'using reverse thrust' as a tactic? I am. I am against the former, not the latter.

Yes - and both are still valid tactics. Flying with reverse thrust is not the reverski manoeuvre.

The Chieftain is good at achieving a non-FA-off reverski by combining boost, FA-Off-flip, and reverse thrust to help maintain reverse momentum.

 

[Aashenfox]

Yes - and both are still valid tactics. Flying with reverse thrust is not the reverski manoeuvre.

The Chieftain is good at achieving a non-FA-off reverski by combining boost, FA-Off-flip, and reverse thrust to help maintain reverse momentum.

Yeh, I was decent at it in the FAS too, but it's so boring, I always ive up on it and get into a turning fight, even if I have no chance. Or leave. You see that's the thing for me. It;s an opportunity to improve the experience, rather than simply say 'it's ok, it's a valid tactic'. It is, but it's cheesy and bears improvement.

 

[crushdepth]

Reverski is not a bad mechanic, it should be a staple part of any space combat manoeuvres manual. It has it's place, but perhaps gets overused by some.

Someone tell the AI pilots to stop.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Yeh, I was decent at it in the FAS too, but it's so boring, I always ive up on it and get into a turning fight, even if I have no chance. Or leave. You see that's the thing for me. It;s an opportunity to improve the experience, rather than simply say 'it's ok, it's a valid tactic'. It is, but it's cheesy and bears improvement.

Why does it bear improvement?

 

[fsdraconis]

I feel the same with regards to "Jousting".

That isn't going to change either.

In the end, you are asking to nerf a ships ability to do something it is supposed to be able to do. This being, able to have enough thrust to counter the ships forward momentum. If you remove this, ships like the Asp Explorer with its already awful reverse thrust for stopping will cease to be able to stop. And it actually has proper reverse thrust ports.

This game already has a "Arcadian" flight model. That being one of an arcade game. It does not even come close to how ships would, could, and even should move in space.

I have no interest in pvp. But the real people that are complaining about this here. Are complaining because in pvp, a player chooses to "reverski". Then you either take bait and chase. Or elect to not fall for the trap.

NPC's do not choose to reverski. I don't even have an interest to reverski. But I do use a large range of choices which with in combat can also be, to fly in reverse in my slow hulk of a ship because the faster more agile ship keeps flying in circles and this gives me a longer time on target. They, the npc, could easily boost past me. But they don't, because they have a big target in front of them flying away from them. None of my weapon choices are chosen for long range. Almost always in this case, they aim and attack the canopy.

You are making big lateral requests to further change the core of the game. When really, pvp is the reason this is a problem. Not, that your ship is at fault or the game mechanics. You just hate the fact that they have a ship designed to outpace you and you want to make it so they can't use an effective strategy with in the game physics.

So, ultimately. You are asking for the entire game reality to be altered so you do not have to adapt and counter a challenge. Either design your ship differently, use a different ship, or do something different. It is up to you to adapt. This is a pvp problem, not a game problem.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

I feel the same with regards to "Jousting".

That isn't going to change either.

In the end, you are asking to nerf a ships ability to do something it is supposed to be able to do. This being, able to have enough thrust to counter the ships forward momentum. If you remove this, ships like the Asp Explorer with its already awful reverse thrust for stopping will cease to be able to stop. And it actually has proper reverse thrust ports.

This game already has a "Arcadian" flight model. That being one of an arcade game. It does not even come close to how ships would, could, and even should move in space.

I have no interest in pvp. But the real people that are complaining about this here. Are complaining because in pvp, a player chooses to "reverski". Then you either take bait and chase. Or elect to not fall for the trap.

NPC's do not choose to reverski. I don't even have an interest to reverski. But I do use a large range of choices which with in combat can also be, to fly in reverse in my slow hulk of a ship because the faster more agile ship keeps flying in circles and this gives me a longer time on target. They, the npc, could easily boost past me. But they don't, because they have a big target in front of them flying away from them. None of my weapon choices are chosen for long range. Almost always in this case, they aim and attack the canopy.

You are making big lateral requests to further change the core of the game. When really, pvp is the reason this is a problem. Not, that your ship is at fault or the game mechanics. You just hate the fact that they have a ship designed to outpace you and you want to make it so they can't use an effective strategy with in the game physics.

So, ultimately. You are asking for the entire game reality to be altered so you do not have to adapt and counter a challenge. Either design your ship differently, use a different ship, or do something different. It is up to you to adapt. This is a pvp problem, not a game problem.

Top post. +repped.

 

[Truesilver]

I just provided a detailed explanatory post in Frenotx's semi-parallel thread. As I observe within it, reverski is really one sub-facet of what I call 'pinball' (another sub-facet of which is 'jousting') which in turn is one of the two most polar opposite approaches to ED 1v1 combat.

As the post appears relevant to both threads I'll link below for any interested.

Earlier I commented to verify the demonstrated flight knowledge and skills of the OP, without commenting directly on his propositions.

I would like to explain the issue that Frentox has identified further, without actually really joining a side in this debate.

I would also just like to note that unlike some I am very pleased with 3.0 and strongly feel that the good outweighs the bad. Yes, all this is largely Frontier seeking to repair problems caused by the hasty release of 2.1 but personally I do think we are moving in the right direction. Be that as it may:


Explanation: the two polar approaches to a 1v1

The basic issue is that there have always been two opposed approaches to a 1v1 in ED that fall at opposite ends of a spectrum. They are not the only two approaches but they are the polarities.


Approach A: “Circle-Strafe”

The approach is to attempt to keep the opponent within around 1.5 km, because beneath that distance the fire arcs cannot cover all of your relative movement, and use translational thrust to evade fire whilst using rotational inputs to keep on target yourself.

Note that circle-strafing is not about getting onto the opponent’s tail, which is impossible in ED against any ship, unless piloted by a player who has yet to learn the basics.


Approach B: “Pinball”

Note that I use the term “pinball’ rather than ‘jousting’ or ‘reverski’ because both jousting and reverski are merely two sub-facets of space pinball.

The pinball approach is to travel for most of the time in a straight line, or something close to a straight line, and when near to the opponent to disengage FA, if not already full FA-off, rotate the ship whilst maintaining most of its original vector, and fire at the opponent whilst passing.

Example: Boosting towards an enemy, then at around 1 km beginning to rotate, firing a volley of plasma or frags at around 500m, then continuing past enemy.

Reverski example: Reversing, using a secondary hit scan weapon for attrition as the enemy approaches, then doing the above when they get closer, before re-establishing the reverse.


Discussion of the needs of the two approaches

Needs of circle-strafing

The two approaches outlined above require different things of the ships and flight model.

Circle-strafing does not require much pitch or yaw, because generally even quite limited pitch and yaw will be enough to maintain good time on target. It does require very strong translational thrust. Hence the best SLF for circle-strafing is the Taipan, which has the best translational thrust and the worst rotational ability.

Straight-line boost is not much relevant to circling, save to close distance and re-establish. However, lateral boost is relevant, as in more advanced attempts is deceleration.

Needs of pinball

Pinball does not require much translational thrust. Depending upon whether it is thought preferable to attempt, or to avoid, a possible collision during the close pass, translational thrust may be used to narrow or widen the passing distance. Beyond that, it’s largely irrelevant save by more advanced users attempting to reduce enemy ToT marginally during the approach. Likewise the barrel roll in reverse, albeit neither of these actually make much difference against a skilled opponent with fixed, and especially hitscan, weapons.

Rotational ability (pitch and yaw) is key to pinball because the ability to get on target during the crucial moments of the pass, in order to deliver the burst damage, depend upon it.
Straight line boost is also key to pinball for reasons that are probably obvious.


The relevance of the above to this thread

As typical velocities of the medium combat ships (FdL, FAS, Clipper and now Chieftain) have increased (now between around 530 and 640, once between around 390 and 440) and due to what Frenotx calls ‘pitch inflation’ (the pitch buff to the FdL of ED 1.5, and the introduction of the Chieftain as a high-pitch ship, alongside the FAS and Clipper which have always had high pitch) all four of the medium combat ships now have high pitch. 4 out of 4.

Only one of the four (the FdL) has excellent translational thrust. In fact, lack of translational thrust has been used as a balancing mechanic on the others. 1 out of 4.
All four have access, via their c6 distributors, to perma- or near-perma boost.

In short, the game’s 1v1 mechanics do appear to have progressed somewhat towards pinball as a more optimal mechanic over circle-strafing. This is for the reasons above but also due to ‘the clincher’, as below.


The Clincher

Any competent pilot who wishes to pinball can at any time break a circle strafe and pinball continuously.

In contrast, there is no way for a competent pilot who wishes to circle strafe to force a pinballer to stop pinballing.

The ‘choice’, or sometimes called ‘control of the fight’, is 100% in favour of pinball. Pinball cannot be prevented and can be forced at any time. Circle-strafing can be prevented, at will, and can never be forced.

There has been clear movement in favour of pinball since ED 1.4 to date, by reason of (a) higher straight line boost speeds, (b) frequency of boost availability and (c) the game moving from 2 out of 3 combat medium ships having high pitch, to 4 out of 4, while still only 1 out of 4 has high translational thrust.


What do I think should be done about the above?

I don’t know. It depends upon whether the Developers actually want to redress the balance between the two polar 1v1 tactics, say restoring the sort of balance of ED 1.4, or not.

So, I’m not minded to join sides in this debate, neither am I offering solutions.

But I thought it might be helpful to explain what I think we are discussing, in terms of what the two approaches are, what they require, and why one has gained ground on the other.

o7

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

I just provided a detailed explanatory post in Frenotx's semi-parallel thread. As I observe within it, reverski is really one sub-facet of what I call 'pinball' (another sub-facet of which is 'jousting') which in turn is one of the two most polar opposite approaches to ED 1v1 combat.

As the post appears relevant to both threads I'll link below for any interested.

I've +repped you for that.

The thing, however, is that ship-to-ship PvP is a niche aspect of the game. There is a lot of enjoyment of FA-Off flying which doesn't involve shooting at another player's ship, and this is enjoyed by a lot more people than those who PvP.

What is being asked for in this thread, is to affect FA-Off and reverse thrust, only considering how this affects a niche aspect of the game that the majority of the player base does not indulge in.

If Frontier were to cave in to this very squeaky demand, it would affect everyone else who don't care or bother about PvP. Hence my rather angry initial few posts, as Frontier in the last two years have been bending over backwards to try to facilitate the demands of the PvP squeaky wheel - and IMO this has actually caused a lot of hassle, bother, and delay in development of the game - more time taken to satisfy the demands of the few has resulted in less time actually developing the game - it has to be the case.

And lastly - for god's sake people - this is meant to be a game set in outer space! It should be more than just a 3D arcade shoot-em-up. :/

 

[philngraves]

I've +repped you for that.

The thing, however, is that ship-to-ship PvP is a niche aspect of the game. There is a lot of enjoyment of FA-Off flying which doesn't involve shooting at another player's ship, and this is enjoyed by a lot more people than those who PvP.

What is being asked for in this thread, is to affect FA-Off and reverse thrust, only considering how this affects a niche aspect of the game that the majority of the player base does not indulge in.

If Frontier were to cave in to this very squeaky demand, it would affect everyone else who don't care or bother about PvP. Hence my rather angry initial few posts, as Frontier in the last two years have been bending over backwards to try to facilitate the demands of the PvP squeaky wheel - and IMO this has actually caused a lot of hassle, bother, and delay in development of the game - more time taken to satisfy the demands of the few has resulted in less time actually developing the game - it has to be the case.

And lastly - for god's sake people - this is meant to be a game set in outer space! It should be more than just a 3D arcade shoot-em-up. :/

3d space arcadey shooter is what sells though. People hated FE2 because the learning curve was vertical until you could mentally calculate every movement. I'm not saying I wouldn't love it, because my masochistic self would, but this is a multiplayer game.

If the 'squeaky wheel' is the pvp players, then they make up at least 30% of the vocal community. I fall into this when I feel like it, although I have stretches where I just hang out with peeps in private for weeks. Take any multiplayer game and run the numbers of players total vs players vocal in forum and you will find a shockingly small number participate in the latter. Pointing generic criticism at a faction of that minority only inflames the conversation rather than tempering it.

Oh, and I still find reverski annoying as a troll tactic, but it is still a legitimate way to play... albiet obnoxious with engineering. To those that say 'adapt' you clearly have no clue what the experience is like, so please stop projecting your ego. There is partial counters and partial deterrents to the 'Retrollski' but those counters are useless in pvp and pve content. You can't expect anyone to carry that setup around for days 'just in case...'.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

3d space arcadey shooter is what sells though. People hated FE2 because the learning curve was vertical until you could mentally calculate every movement. I'm not saying I wouldn't love it, because my masochistic self would, but this is a multiplayer game.

If the 'squeaky wheel' is the pvp players, then they make up at least 30% of the vocal community. I fall into this when I feel like it, although I have stretches where I just hang out with peeps in private for weeks. Take any multiplayer game and run the numbers of players total vs players vocal in forum and you will find a shockingly small number participate in the latter. Pointing generic criticism at a faction of that minority only inflames the conversation rather than tempering it.

Oh, and I still find reverski annoying as a troll tactic, but it is still a legitimate way to play... albiet obnoxious with engineering. To those that say 'adapt' you clearly have no clue what the experience is like, so please stop projecting your ego. There is partial counters and partial deterrents to the 'Retrollski' but those counters are useless in pvp and pve content. You can't expect anyone to carry that setup around for days 'just in case...'.

But to keep bending over backwards just to satisfy 30% of a player base (and I doubt it's even as high as 30%) is pure folly - also something will eventually break - i.e. the rest of the game for everyone else.

Also, I've said this before and I'll say it again - if you're a PvP'er and someone's annoyingly (to you) using what is a perfectly valid manoeuvre in 3D space - just walk away from the frickin' fight! There is no need to see an explosion every single time!