' Wrote:Maybe take away their CMs? Then they can cruise a lot but are even easier targets for CDs and missiles in the process.
Wouldn't make a difference, seeing as CDs are near impossible to evade anyway, even with CMs.
' Wrote:yea honestly the cruise drain flat out makes the game feel more "realistic".
OH PLEASE, not the old "Its realistic" comments again. It isn't realistic, infact I think even Cannon himself turned round and said in some thread that it isn't realistic, and that it was there for balance purposes.
EDIT: Here is what I was referring to.
' Wrote:The power is drained quickly once cruise is engaging as a result of feedback from some people. People don't try to call this realistic - its not - nothing about this game is. This particular thing is about game balance and nothing else. I could make up some techbable about why the power playt drains like this but I can assure you that reality has nothing to do with it.
So please, will the "But it's realistic!" argument finally end.
the reason i put "realistic" in quotes is because yes obviously NONE of the game is realistic. since i thought that was obvious, and we knew that i wouldnt have to clarify. when we are in game we kind of accept a new reality, and that immersion is fun whether or not its REAL. to me, in that world, it seems that something like cruise engines should drain the energy of your ship. they take time to charge, they disable your guns because its using the same power source, and therefore makes logical sense that should take some time to recharge. now yes it may have not been done for that reason, but for me and im sure the other people who also play the realism card, we think that it makes that immersion FEEL more real. simply saying its more realistic is just an easy way to say all of that in one word.
i think they need something when the wiki calls light fighters capable of intercepting heavier ships, yet without light fighters being faster or remotely powerful that is not possible. the arrow can turn on a dime but couldnt kill another player in a year. it also would never be able to intercept anything. thats just boring. its info card says its irreplaceable in certain combat situations yet i cant think of one id rather have an arrow over a VHF. thats why the majority of ppl fly VHF because unless you are one of those people that is really REALLY good a LF isnt gonna get you anything but RP.
Indeed. It was never added for realism. The single major reason was the remove a rule that many players were being sanctioned for.
This wasn't to reduce admin workload either; it was to stop players from being sanctioned and non-rule breaking players from being disadvantaged when attacked by rule breaking players.
If I wanted more realism (which incidentally I see as more fun), I'd make ships require fuel to move and use jump holes, better Newtonian physics (no drag) and stuff like this.
Proud member of "the most paranoid group of people in the community"
i completely understand and agree with that cannon. i guess just looking back at it compared to when we didn't have the drain it feels more "freelancer real". id also like more realism in freelancer overall but i think thats a losing battle with the majority of disco players...
' Wrote:If I wanted more realism (which incidentally I see as more fun), I'd make ships require fuel to move and use jump holes, better Newtonian physics (no drag) and stuff like this.
I think we both know there are other options. Stop putting words in other peoples' mouths.
And it wont happen because then people would have to make sure they could get fuel, and a good deal of people would rather not have to worry about that. Also people dont want to have their movement restricted. They want to be able to go wherever they want, in whatever ship they want, whenever they want.
![[Image: qz7DdPp.png]](https://i.imgur.com/qz7DdPp.png)
![[Image: l2gnAQh.png]](https://i.imgur.com/l2gnAQh.png)
![[Image: 2hoigky.jpg]](http://i52.tinypic.com/2hoigky.jpg)