Community Input: Heavy Fighters, Light Fighters

[Tachyon]

This whole discussion is doomed from the start, since if you give LFs and HFs something that makes them at least equally dangerous as VHFs, then the VHF pros will get them nerfed again anyway.

Yet the VHF pros are asking for the community's assistance to do the opposite.

Weird.

[Wesker]

Less power core so that you aren't raped by Chims that fire sunfrenzies for 30 mins while drifting behind you. Also imo doesn't make sense they can have missile slots and the same armor upgrade as vhfs, maybe nerf cargo space.

---

[Haste]

This whole discussion is doomed from the start, since if you give LFs and HFs something that makes them at least equally dangerous as VHFs, then the VHF pros will get them nerfed again anyway.

Yet the VHF pros are asking for the community's assistance to do the opposite.

Weird.

More importantly, I would argue some of the most dangerous ships (in the hands of someone who knows what he's doing) when it comes to taking on multiple enemies at once are Light Fighters such as the Liberator, Wyrm and Tanto. This has been the case for a very long time.

People suggesting thrust speed buffs: this is most probably a bad idea. It means lighter and heavier fighters will essentially be as "incompatible" in combat as gunboats and snubs: the fastest ship will have the ability to disengage at will. This works for larger ships because they have significantly different weaponry and much higher stats (plus turret zoom and all that) but I doubt it'll be very pleasant with the smaller differences between fighter classes.

If LFs remain at least as good in combat as they are now plus they get the ability to never ever get locked down and forced into combat, they'll be even more invincible than they are now. I think their "invincibility" is already quite a problem and that it should be removed in turn for other advantages over heavier fighters.

[Miaou]

I'm not going to pretend I understand balance like half the people in the thread are trying to do. I have no idea what makes ship A better than ship B. I just know that some are better than others from example.

Unless it has changed, the Black Dragon is an amazing heavy fighter. Maybe look towards that for an example?

[Vycos]

My suggestion would be:

- merge LF/HF class to HF
- give it 425 cruise speed
- the ships responsiveness to be retained so each have unique characteristic
- balance the gun slots, increase the core capacity to make them viable against VHF
- HF: pro should be: more responsive ship, 1 CD 1 CD/T slot on the bigger ships, increased number of Class 7 weapons and a core to support it across all merged HF ships, combat viable interceptor.
- HF: con should be: less hull, caped to Class 7 weapons, still slightly less fire power than VHF

[Jack_Henderson]

1st: The classes have to be unified in itself. All LF should be roughly the same. They are not. Especially when it comes to size there are huge differences that make or break a LF.

2nd: Everything that is really small is near-impossible to hit. And that's no fun for either side.

Therefore:

Upscale LF to some reasonable size. The small ones are a joke.
Make all LFs somewhat hittable (like the larger LFs).
Make them less of a "1 mistake => poof" thing. When full on health, they should barely survive a nuke mine.

---

+ IMG| DISCORD: https://discord.gg/TWrGWjp
+ IMG| IS RECRUITING: Click to find out more!

[Lythrilux]

I do somewhat agree with Dii that LFs should not really be necessarily easy to hit. Somewhat like the libbie I guess, but maybe that's a bit too extreme.
I did just have one thought though. We could downscale or replace the models of the larger LFs to make them more like libbies, tantos etc. In exchange for this, LFs could lose their CM slot.
This means that, although perhaps in a guns vs guns fight the class could be a monster if the player knows what they're doing, if a player brings missiles that LF is going to crumble horribly. An interesting strategic counter, in summary.
This could also make intercepting more dynamic, as the one being pursued would actually have somewhat of a chance to still get away rather than watching as it is futile to prevent a ship with 425 cruise speed catching your slower ship.

This was a pretty random idea sooooo... it might have some issues I guess.

---

[HuggieSunrise]

Fighters are paper. Bombers are rocks. Gunboats are scissors. isnt that what you guys where going for?

the most fun in fl i ever has in a snub was on itano circus. The pacing was incredible. I guess youll have to see for yourself. Otherwise.. without a significant overhual the fighter combat is just going to be the same it always was. Like playing quake or doom with runspeed set to 500%

[Pepe]

Uhh.. bombers are for anti-cap usage mostly. If you wanna get in a group fight with fighters, try not going into one in a bomber, cause it is very possible for that too happen.

Exactly. Disco.2015 is all about waiting on numerous e-channels (while playing some other game), answer with best fitting ships, win. But what if you are not on answering side? (not you personally mate, just saying)

I noticed nice and brave new snub pilots gladly use bombers on raids. They do not know yet what will enemy answer with. They just want to help the team against caps. They also think the team can cover them. Aren't they nice? More nice they are, more bitter they become when Disco happens to them.

My LF/BMB speed proposal offers longer life span to new players. New pilots of raiding side could fly bombers and reach some fun, defence pilots would try to get them with LFs. Old pilots can furball with VHFs as usual and harvest their blues. They don't like free bomber or LF kills anyway, right?

Who will use LFs and BMBs tomorrow, if we don't separate them somehow from VHFs and HFs?

[Yber]

Saying that a certain shipclass should be countered by a particular weapon is the same as taking the skill away from the game entirely. It's already bad enough with caps having autoaim.

---

inb4 Sirius gets renamed to XTF.