Reducing fighter PvP length. Enhancing the shield type vs gun type.

[Tenacity]

Bomber
110/210

Despite the bomberwhore I've become, the last thing we need to give bombers is higher speed.

---

[ProwlerPC]

I think that (re)creating an environment where players may feel the need to switch shields every second fight is a good thing and brings back a certain Vanillla feel to it. A group geared up to go against one group one day will be successful but if they get caught by another group it's gonna hurt.

---

[Mounteblanc]

And imo, it's not the shield/damage, but the armor. If it was up to me, I'd get rid of armor upgrades.

And maybe make shields work better at a bigger cost to compensate?

I would love to see armor gone. Yes, fights would be shortened by about 2.5x, on average.

To those of you who think that a single Razor/Nuke/Other killing a VHF is bad: learn to dodge. Assuming that you don't get your mines TCD'd, and you don't fly head on into a fighter with a Razor, they can't do much to kill you.

In my opinion, the removal of armor would solve many issues. With no armor, and death happening faster, the 4-hour time limit could carry more weight. And, to address the 'Moar capspam!' argument, one SNAC would insta kill most gunboats. Two SNACs would instakill most Cruisers. Suddenly, a competent bomber becomes 2.5 times more useful.

But, hey, almost all PVP is currently balanced around armor. It won't change. D:

[\endthread derailment]

[Bolverk]

Suddenly, a competent bomber becomes 2.5 times more useful.

I.e. flying instakilling Grim Reaper. DO WANT.

[Friday]

Gotta remember though - if you get rid of armour you also alter the Small vs. Cap balance. Removing armour makes small ships weaker against ALL other ships - not just fighters and bombers.

I disagree with you Gauss. fighting isnt baed on armour alone.

It is about the Aim vs. Dodge ratio. Small fights take so long because the majority of the time is spent maneuvering - either defensively or to get a clear shot.

Bombers are dangerous because they can spend up to 95% of their time flying defensively - and 5% aiming their SNAC.

Capital ship weapons have the high speed they do precisely to overcome a certain amount of dodging that is done by small ships (and can do this at a longer range).

What Developers say is true: Increasing weapon speeds WILL reduce the defensive advantage of light craft maneuverability.

I would argue that if the lighter craft can be given other bonuses as a trade-off, then increasing projectile speeds will shorten Small vs. Small fights, without affecting Small vs. Large fights.

---

[sovereign]

I'm going to quote myself because it appears that some people are still under the impression that armor ratios are directly proportional to fight length.

They are, right up until they dip low enough that stuff starts instakilling you and negating your b/b. Then fight length takes a steep dive. If the armor reduction is balanced precariously between two ships, one will be pwnawesome compared to the other with even 100 more hull.

Do realize that DPS vs hull is not the only comparison you need to make here.

PvP would certainly be faster.

Because anything smaller than an SHF would die to a single nuke mine or mini razor.

While testing freighter combat abilities, me and a few other Hogosha learned that having nanobots is actually a curse when you're up against supernovas, because all they'll do is look pretty and refill that bomber you've been shooting at since the start of the fight. There'd be no point to regens (or combat, for that matter) with easy-to-land instakill weapons all over the place. And it's not just nukes and razors... ripper mines would pretty much eliminate HFs.

Oh, and before you suggest only a moderate armor reduction, one nuke/razor/sunslayer + two shots of anything kills uni VIII heavy fighters. Reducing the armor even down to 2.35 would make Agamas explode on contact with any of those... and that's a rather serious concern in Gallia.
Sometimes fights are long. Sometimes they're very short. Usually they're pretty good.

Don't fix what ain't broke.

If that's not getting through, I offer this:



A fight between heavy fighters that takes twenty-five minutes now will not take ten minutes if 2.5x armor is removed. It will take ten seconds.

---

[swift]

This proposal itself is not that bad, but what I've been rooting for from ground zero was the total removal of shields from the game and appropriate increasing of armor, as to not allow easy instakills but also not increase it too much so the fights aren't hours-long.
The only problem with this is cap shaking which could be dealt with in the way that caps keep their shields and get no armor increase.
Capital ships don't really shieldrun anyways.

---

<span style="font-familyalatino Linotype">

<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.

</span></span>

<span style="color:#33FFFF">The CFF</span>

<span style="color:#33FF33">CFF Communication Channel and RP Collection</span>

[... kur nubėgo?]

Remove pulse versus shields damage change ratio to zero, so that peeps would think what shield do they need.

And about decreasing fighting time. Just try to fix what is ain't broke, and you will accidently rise up a hell much more balancing issues. So - NO.

---

Omega Pirates Guild

History of OPG | Antonio "Vilkas" Devivar