' Wrote:Gunboats is wrong with that, it would screw even the fragile balance that is around- kitting transp on 160-70 speed with 2s kills gbs like there is no tomorrow- check Geisha, then imagine 12 gunner at that speed.
Gunboats were never supposed to be an anti-transport platform. Their primary role is to fend of snubs.
As for being killed, I don't think the rather small difference between gunboats and transports (10ms) will make gunboats vulnerable to transports.
Transports lack the ability to keep up with turning gunboats, 12 gunners take about half a minute to turn around.
I've heard of Geisha being a good pirate vessel back when it had CD but I've never heard of it as being a gunboat hunter.
' Wrote:Cruisers and battleships have no CDs the last time I checked and their thrust speed is what 140 (taking Del's word) thus transports who can actually fly their bricks can manage to out run a lone cruiser or battleship. If the cap has the aid of a snub with a CD you're toast.
Cruiser does have CD, and it can use it all day with transports. Gunboat can evade cruiser by going under it and engaging the cruise drive, then poof gone before the cruiser can turn around and CD it. This is not possible with transport, since you will be dead before you make 180-degree turn to even get under the cruiser.
A little speed boost wont matter, it is nice but it wont matter. Give transport the same speed as gunboat, and a CM dropper, and it will be able to get away more often, and also wont get turned into space dust by torpedos and cruiser missiles as easily. CMs will be more useful as a balancing tool since it would make solo piracy more difficult. That is an acceptable trade for letting cruisers shoot me, and being unable to dock the same system on death. +20 speed boost alone does nothing.
Hang on a sec. Are we talking about increasing the thrust velocity of a transport so they can out-thrust a gunboat? If the transport is RUNNING AWAY can't the gunboat just turn on his cruise engines then catch up? Or am I missing something?
' Wrote:Hang on a sec. Are we talking about increasing the thrust velocity of a transport so they can out-thrust a gunboat? If the transport is RUNNING AWAY can't the gunboat just turn on his cruise engines then catch up? Or am I missing something?
It allows the lawfuls to attack the pirates, and doesn't allow the unlawful caps to pirate, but still permits them to assist their buddies in the snubs. Fair?
(For the record, I still think the concept of this rule is absurd, but the admins will never agree with me on that one... this's at least progress.)
Does it matter if it closes the gap permitting continued lane hacking and cruise disruption? It takes what, five seconds to charge a cruise engine. So in that time a transport burning 160m/s is going to get about one and a half klicks of coverage away by the time the gunboat is able to be on top of the transport again if the transport begins 1km away to start with.
' Wrote:Does it matter if it closes the gap permitting continued lane hacking and cruise disruption? It takes what, five seconds to charge a cruise engine. So in that time a transport burning 160m/s is going to get about one and a half klicks of coverage away by the time the gunboat is able to be on top of the transport again if the transport begins 1km away to start with.
Shooting down a transport is all about time. The way transports are balanced even a LF can take one down given enough time.
In real encounter the time available is limited by distance to the nearest station where a transport can dock.
If pirate wastes too much time he won't be able do deal sufficient damage to the transport to force him into complying or to destroy it.
' Wrote:if you want to test be my guest I would take any cruiser and you take any transp. I bet I would kill you in 10 of 10- this rule change would kill unlawful transportation
Unless of course the transport captain is smart enough to keep his ship out of the range of your cruisers guns. There are plenty of people who can do that. Now, if you want to just sit on the lane and wait for them to come down on top of you then you deserve what you get.
Balance issues are difficult to predict. There are many variables, and they run on the assumption that everyone has the same skill level and experience. That is not the case.
The goal for eliminating this rule is to eliminate OORP situations as well as to simplify the many rules that govern this server. Balance issues that come about as a result of this potential rule change can be addressed as the need may be. Worst case scenario, we go back to the original rule and chalk it up as an experiment that just didnt work. Nothing has to be permanent.
Many times, we hear complaints of how many rules there are here. The suggestion for eliminating Rule 6.7 should be seen as an effort to address those complaints. Whatever decision is ultimately decided on, can be undone if unforeseen problems require us to do.
I agree with removing this rule and making the speed changes.
Let us experiment and see how it goes, if it goes wrong, it can be reversed.
Traders were always assumed to have invulnerability (can come back, don't need to fear caps), well, not anymore, with this rule.
Bottom line: Go for it! Adjust if necessary, can't make progress without making bald steps, you know.