I would prefer an actual answer by staff in the Gov channels next time. Zero comments, zero discussion, zero anything for a whole week. Did everything this new change asked for just now, also expecting zero nothing as comment on this in the channel too.
Thank you for having this system when it is not attended to at all.
Regardless, good change on avoiding any extreme shenanigans in the future.
Towards the others: The day the Amaterasu will be not licensed, is the day Lucas will personally pull the plug on the physical server since its restrictive availability was a condition to the model similar to how Bristol has special rights over Bulwarks through techcell limitations and the need to techexempt for non-Bristol customers.
(11-05-2024, 08:06 AM)Emperor Tekagi Wrote: I would prefer an actual answer by staff in the Gov channels next time. Zero comments, zero discussion, zero anything for a whole week. Did everything this new change asked for just now, also expecting zero nothing as comment on this in the channel too.
Thank you for having this system when it is not attended to at all.
Regardless, good change on avoiding any extreme shenanigans in the future.
Towards the others: The day the Amaterasu will be not licensed, is the day Lucas will personally pull the plug on the physical server since its restrictive availability was a condition to the model similar to how Bristol has special rights over Bulwarks through techcell limitations and the need to techexempt for non-Bristol customers.
We definitely could and should have kept house governments more in the loop regarding this decision, we'll try to do so going forward
Posts: 2,944
Threads: 178
Joined: Nov 2009
Staff roles: Systems Developer
Appreciate the change. I wish players in governments would have done this without staff intervention, but the satisfactory outcome is the same.
People Wrote:Bustard/Amaterasu are the same as the Bulwark/Longhorn, why are they not getting the same treatment?
Key differences between the Bustard and the Bulwark:
1. The Bustard is primarily a combat ship, while the Bulwark is primarily a trade ship, and both are balanced in PvP for their role accordingly.
Despite having some similar stats, they do not perform even closely equal in PvP. The Bustard is a much better ship, because it is designed to be a combat ship. It is a battlecruiser, disguised as a liner in order to allow all IDs to fly it without breaking the rules. This also makes it a far greater threat than a Bulwark. Its cargo hold is comparable to other battlecruisers (ex. Geb, Akhetaten) and trading in one is no different than trading in most other large warships, i.e. it is not viable, therefore considering it a trade ship is pointless.
2. The Bulwark and the Longhorn's PvP balance makes them a lower threat than most combat ships. A competent gunboat player is a higher threat in PvP than either of them.
Bulwark and Longhorn have high enough cargo space to be considered trade ships. This means that the balance team intentionally made sure the ships are worse than their warship counterparts of similar size, in order to not make them overpowered. Otherwise, if the Bulwark and Longhorn were as good as, say, an LABC, it would be appropriate to either nerf them or impose bustard-like restrictions for them. Since that's not the case, you have to look at what exactly "high firepower" or "high threat" means.
Balance is not done in a vacuum. Having several high stats does not mean the ship is comparable to another similar-sized ship. You have to look at the overall package, and how it actually performs in PvP rather than checking sheets and numbers. Imagine if the Bustard was suddenly given 100 max thrust speed instead of the current 180. You could say "Oh look, it is surely a threatening warship that needs to be restricted. It has similar stats to one: size, core, core regen, hull, weapon classes, and shields. A warship!", yet in reality because of one stat being significantly different (100 thrust) the ship would be terrible in PvP. This same logic is why the Hegemon and the Barge are not restricted, despite being able to mount BC and BS equipment. They are too slow to be effective, and are at best able to survive a little bit in PvP rather than aggressively killing targets. Just using terms like "high firepower", "high damage", "high dps potential" in a vacuum is pointless.
This is precisely why a gunboat is a higher threat than any transport (barring the Bustard and Amaterasu). Despite on paper looking weaker in almost every stat, it has three important factors to compensate: agility, speed, and size. However, that alone in a vacuum does not mean anything. Snubs also have agility, speed, size going for them, and they cannot solo, or even 2v1 a competent capital ship. It's important to look at the overall package. Gunboats are nimble enough and have just enough firepower and speed in order to threaten any ship class. Bulwark and Longhorn can't. Bulwark is a battlecruiser-sized ship with a transport shield, very low core regen (lower than any cruiser, comparable to gunboats), and low gun count. It is designed to lose any prolonged engagement, forcing it to thrust to the nearest base for survival instead of chasing after the attackers, which is exactly the point of reworked transports. Weak aggressively, can hold their ground defensively, lose in a prolonged fight, capable of getting to a nearby base if they are close enough, but still die if they are far enough.
![[Image: jWv1kDa.png]](https://i.imgur.com/jWv1kDa.png)
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Gunboats![[Image: BMdBL0j.png]](https://i.imgur.com/BMdBL0j.png)
