You were doing a bit of 'reverski' yourself. So what's your point? All I see is 3 players being owned by one ship.
Nerf Reverski
- Thread starter Powderpanic
- Start date
You were doing a bit of 'reverski' yourself. So what's your point? All I see is 3 players being owned by one ship.
All I am seeing from this is you got outmaneuvered by a Cutter. Thats not the games fault.
Gotta say, I think the Cutter jockey was playing with them.
No good reason why he couldn't just have picked them off one by one rather than just flouncing around like that.
Sorry but the OP just comes across as stroppy 'cos a big, powerful, expensive ship isn't a sitting duck for smaller ships.
There just is no possible middle ground, is there? Either the small ship has 0 advantages, or the big ship is a sitting duck. You do realize that even if a small ship has such an extreme maneuverability advantage over the big ship that the big ship could literally never point at them, the big ship would still have the significant advantage in the fight? Turrets and the SLF already exist to make up for big ship's supposed maneuverability disadvantage. High speed and reverski make this disadvantage not actually exist, which is why this dude didn't even need to bother with turrets or an SLF.
You didn't get destroyed and you didn't destroy the Cutter.
That already IS the middle ground.
You've currently got threads going where you're whining about almost EVERYTHING that prevents a big ship from being a sitting duck and it just reeks of sour grapes.
You didn't lose and he didn't win. You were locked in endless combat. That IS the middle ground in this game.
You guys were taking on a Cutter (one of the best ships in the game) that was OBVIOUSLY highly engineered and upgraded that was also being piloted by someone who knew what they were doing. Meanwhile you had a Viper, which is a decent ship for resource extraction sites and putting around in Conflict Zones. But it is definitely NOT a hunter of Big 3 ships. If you wanna be able to take it to one of the Big 3 ships you are gonna need alot more firepower than that or you need to get lucky and attack an NPC or a pilot that has no idea what they are doing.
So grab yourself a Fer De Lance, a Gunship, Assault Ship or maybe even a Python and stop blaming the game for your own choices and mistakes.
Last edited:
- and from a fun perspective. And 'mershun, 'spension of disbelief etc. But especially, from an arcade action perspective. Just look at the state of combat in ED compared to FFE - utterly lame, limp and lacklustre 1-on-1 slow pitching contests. Maybe 5 min battles per average kill, sloowly rolling and pitching thru treacle..
Rhubarb!
You already have a frame-shift drive, that already 'shifts' you neatly into any reference 'frame'... That frame's vector can be anything, whether angular (ie. that of an orbital station) or linear (such as USS's or interdictions). There's no logistical difference to generating instances using any ship's current velocity vector as the reference frame.
This is not even adding anything at all to the game, just using its current assets, albeit to much better effect.
For exactly the same reasons, you could have a button that instantly re-centers your 'blue-zone' without physically changing speed. Better yet, do away with the cursed thing completely...
Scoff, guffaw! Try reducing that by around two orders of magnitude and you're maybe in the ballpark. Even then, trying to hit a small fighter at 60 meters with a pulse laser can be excruciating.. Now, if you fired a fast missile at close range against a fast ship, it might make it 60 km away before hitting... but you couldn't hit jack with any beam weapon at 6 km, let alone 60...
You can't match an opponent's speed unless he has less thrust than you, or else uses less of it. If you're in a slower ship then tank up with shields, use turrets and missiles and cut your cloth accordingly re. vocation, mission and route selections. Either way, the action is all CQB - the only real 'stand off' weapons are missiles, but even energy bombs require close range for effectiveness.
Besides which, "having a big gun" and "keeping distance" are generally mutually-exclusive play strategies, since only the bigger slower ships can even wield the heavier weapons in the first place. Most ships, especially at the beginning of a career, you're agonising over whether you're better off with maybe a 1 MW beam plus 6 shields, vs a 4 MW and 2 shields.. but either way, if you get into a scrap you're gonna be surviving on reflexes; dodging incoming fire whilst trying to keep a bead on the enemy, while at the same time prioritising threats from multiple bogeys and dodging missiles / deploying countermeasures.
Whether you're doing top secret military missions, high-stakes contraband or assassinations, bounty hunting pirate clans, in a big ship or small, you're coming up against multitudes of enemies. Remember, attack a station in previous Elites and it didn't simply smite you with instadeath, instead launching multiple squadrons of police at you, death by a thousand stings, going down in an wild-west blaze of glory. What we're talking about here goes to the very bones of Elite, and why the ED experience is so disappointingly vacuous compared to all three of its predecessors.. it's a slide-show of the formers' gameplay.. Elite, the RPG board game..
Beam diffusion with range only adds 1 or 2 variables, not complex to implement, but again, the problem you suppose simply doesn't exist, precisely because hitting a distant fast-moving target with a narrow focused beam is much, much harder than you seem to think. Combat in all three previous games is necessarily close-ranged, and even though small fighters are faster than large freighters, the tradeoff is always speed vs firepower & armour. A pack of small fighters would be but a minor annoyance to a battle-hardened smuggler in a python or boa.. and as ever, if a player can't "control" a given "situation", maybe they shouldn't've got themselves into it... But working this out for yourself is where the game is. Where it's supposed to be, anyway. Choose a strategy, hone it & own it, or else move on and try summink else on for size.
Trying to squeeze everything together with artificially-regulated speed limits just prevents the very gameplay that should naturally emerge from the game's basic premise. The result is a game intrinsically at odds with itself and its ethos, origins and manifest destiny.. holding it back from what it wants to be, could be and should be..
If those who only seem capable of rationalising these game-destroying constraints could rinse out but half a thought on the potential merits of full unfettered freedom (Elite's very animus), maybe raise their expectations a little, i dunno, maybe we could persuade FD to open up the restrictions a bit...?
Again, the speed range currently precluded in ED is precisely that range in which everything fun, exciting and enticing about "spaceflight" actually arises. When i play Elite (in FFED3D or Pioneer), everything i do, from take-off to landing, and everything in between, necessarily involves seamlessly transitioning though those speed ranges. Because that's all Elite is, at heart - all the trading and ship-modding and subterfuge etc. are just dressings. The main course, the meat & tatties, is fusion-powered laser tanks in space, and no restrictions. Any argument for restrictions is an argument against the spirit of Elite, antithetical to its reason for existence.
So you spend most of the fight firing at the cutter with one gun, which is turreted on a viper 4 lol, and are complaining that the cutter isn't destroyed in what under 5 mins?
Yeah that made me laugh too lol
I don't even do combat in this game really and even I know better than that. Might as well have rolled the window down and shot at it with a pistol.
Last edited:
There's another video of me killing a wing assassination cutter using almost the the exact build. The only difference in the build is that between now and then, I swapped phasing sequence for oversized (+14%'more damage on the cytoscrambler), and improved my armour a bit (updated from legacy to 3.0 engineering).
Than you clearly missed something you should have noticed by now.
And you can't even fly backwards as fast as you can fly forwards.
If you need to complain about bad combat skills because folks can annoy you with such simple
manouvers you clearly are the person with the lack of combat skills.
But you still gave me a good opportunity to laugh on 04/01.
Was the best today.
Ahhh, now I see why you expected to beat a player in a cutter lol.
You just answered your own question
You could take out an NPC Cutter with a couple of Eagles if you wanted to probably, but a PLAYER CUTTER? That is an entirely different animal.
1) Any player with a Cutter most likely had to play ALOT of the game to get that ship given its rank requirement.
2) Any player that plays THAT LONG to get a specific ship is dam sure gonna upgrade it to the max (something not all NPC ships do)
3) Player ships have the benefits of optimized engineering making an already formidable ship EVEN BETTER (Something NPC ships don't do)
4) A player is not bound by the same set of predictable rules that an NPC ship is. Players can think and react and are not bound by a limit setting difficulty meter (Combat rank)
So no you are not going to be able to easily take down one of the best ships that is fully upgraded and probably engineered using one of the cheapest ships in the game.
That is not an imbalance in the game. That is an imbalance in your own expectations.
Best damn post in the whole thread.
Yep, like an idiot I watched the entire video, that is 10 minutes and 34 seconds of my life I won't get back.
I can't believe you posted that, please explain WHY? Sure the cutter flew backwards, he was probably having trouble flying anyway due to laughing so much. There was no way in hell you and your wingman would ever bring the Cutter down, the only time you got his shields low is when you rammed him In fact the Cutter pilot could have posted the same video making fun of the gnat that mildly irritated him with a single turreted burst laser. In fact I am more impressed with the restraint shown by the Cutter Commander, he could have turned and swatted you very easily, especially when you flew so long without shields.
I think it's time for the Cutter to get the python treatment... of the "Big 4" only the Cutter could perform such maneuvers - yes you can be annoying in the other "big" ships but you can't do that.
We survived the Python nerf and we can survive a Cutter nerf...
+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.
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.