Jump To Lightspeed Archive
Thread: Question about YT-1300's
Sylia
Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:48 pm
#14
I think the real problems here are
1) Expectations
2) Lack of content
We as players have an expectation that ships such as the Nova, Decimator and YT-1300 being master level ships would be worth actually attaining and using. We expect them to be gunboats, we expect them to have a purpose.
Yet the YT-1300 is really a cargo ship, not a combat ship. Here we run into the lack of content problem. Just what use is a cargo ship, when there is no need, and no mechanism for transporting anything?
The 3 ships should IMO have vastly superior shielding to anything you could mount on the other ships. Should have far more powerfull weapons, slow firing heavy hitting sluggers as well as being able to mount fast firing anti-fighter weapons. And they should have some sort of game content, something to use them for.
Right now, they have only disadvantages over fighters and no real use for them.
Sylia
Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:52 pm
#15
Jedi69cathat wrote:
truewildman wrote:
Jedi69cathat wrote:
truewildman wrote:
Slarus wrote:
I agree but would like to point out that the multiplayer ships are in fact multiplayer meaning more then one. I think they are by design supposed to be a crew ship and not soloable. Are the other two MP ships soloable can you fire any guns on them? If you can this is most certainly unfair to privateers in that case, but I define the MP ships as crew only not solo vessels that is what the snub-fighters are for.
Agreed. There's been some extensive discussion on this issue, and it seems that the end consensus was that Han also needed a gunner, and never did go into battle solo, nor did he ever fire the guns while in the pilot's seat.
I, for one, agree with the way it is now. And I have one. Check the sig.
***Slarus, another bomb-dropping moment!! I agreed with ya!!
***
Message Edited by truewildman on 11-13-2004 02:23 PM
Message Edited by truewildman on 11-13-2004 02:28 PM
Uh yes he did.
In ESB he used a forward gun that dropped out and shot the snow troopers in the hanger before taken off.
Why couldn't the pilot have a small forwardgun that could be controled use the HAT switch or something.
Oh, wow. I stand corrected! In that whole thread not one brought that up.
However, can that gun be hardly considered space-combat worthy?
Why not?
It was on a SPACE ship. heh
Indeed, but it appeared to be more of a "smugglers special" hand blaster ... anti-personel ... to defend the cargo hold from unwanted visitors.
Golrok
Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:59 pm
#16
who was in the turret when he shot the Tie beside Vader down the trench?
NanokTaemon
Sat Nov 13, 2004 9:00 pm
#17
Golrok wrote:
who was in the turret when he shot the Tie beside Vader down the trench?
Chewbacca perhaps?
DaveG
Sat Nov 13, 2004 9:41 pm
#18
WARNING, lengthy post.
Bailicus wrote:
No No No No No.
This had a thread in beta which went on for ages. Myself? Leave it as it is. Giving any projectile weapon for the Pilot on a MPS would make all other ships once you get to master level POINTLESS.
Think Space Composite. The MPS have the HIGHEST mass allowing them to have the HIGHEST ARMOUR, BEST WEAPONS, BIGGEST SHIELDS, BEST CAPACITORS, BEST BOOSTERS, (Insert Component here).
You cannot have your cake and eat it.
[snip]...
Yeah, I was one of the key debators in the beta thread about this, and I'll explain below why it isn't really a case of having a cake and eating it (this isn't a flame, merely a dispelling of fears).
The "space composite" argument was made in that debate but it doesn't stand up. Firstly, in the ground game, composite isn't the problem, it's the god-mode inducing doc-buffs which is the problem, how do you use the analogy then? We could argue further down this road, but we'd be stretching the analogy to the point of sillyness.
The thing is though, a YT-1300 with only a single player on board would not be "uber", as people fear. It would be less effective than a fully crewed YT-1300. Hence, asking for pilot-controlled guns is not asking for some huge advantage, it is merely asking for more flexibility. Furthermore as to why it wouldn't be an advantage, is that a single pilot with forward guns would then have to fly the ship in combat as if it were a fighter. Well, while it may have the speed, it doesn't have the turn rates (correct me if I'm wrong here). ALSO, think of the repairs, if you're in there alone, you're accepting the point that you're going to have to run around the ship like a mad person sometimes fixing it yourself. Again, for being a lone pilot, we're actually putting ourselves up for a lot of disadvantages, not advantages.
Furthermore, the only option to a lone pilot currently is to get out of the pilot chair and run to the turrets. However, this isnt' quite as good as it sounds because auto pilot doesn't work. As soon as you leave the pilot chair, the ship isn't going anywhere (according to my master pilot friend), and even if it was, it's only going in a straigt line, and you've lost control of the boosters. Furthermore then, the only remaining option is to use missles, but that's no good, it costs money to fire a shot, and it's limited ammo.
In the beta debate,another claim of "uberness" wasthat a crewed YT-1300 would be less accurate than a front facing pilot controlled weapon system because it is difficult for the gunners to aim while the ship is moving. Well I am glad to say I can lay this one to rest with personal experience. I've logged a good number of hours in YT-1300 turrets now, while it is hard work on the eyes, it isn'tout of reach skill-wise. I say this onthe basis that my hand-eye coordination isn't the greatest in the world, and in twitch based games I'm never the star of the game. However, I can muster up sufficient accuracy while the ship is rolling, yawing and pitcing to earn compliments from my pilot and passengers. So on the basis of "if I can do it, over 90% of the rest of you can", then a fully crewed YT-1300 would be seriously better in combat than a lone pilot with forward guns in a YT-1300.
This is why pilot controlled guns would not cause the YT-1300 the only ship to fly. People would fly it solo because they want a certain type of experience (see below), if they really wanted a hard core solo fighter, they'd still have to choose some sort of fighter. Note, when I say pilot controlled guns, this could either be fixed forward guns, or locked turrets if there are no passengers. The latter removes the question of the pilot disrupting the gunners aiming trying to get a good shot him/herself.
Having said all that, we haven't hit the sofy juicy center of the issue yet. The whole reason that anyone raises this as an issue is this: We absolutely love (to the point of wetting ourselves) having a star ship, in which we can get up and walk around inside, to the point where we could have a ship we could call home, and even invite people aboard soemtimes. However, the only ship with which we can do this and not need a crew, is the Yacht, which some of us aren't getting for a while, add to which it isn't combat capable. It's like it's one step removed from the game, nothing can hurt it, it can't hurt anything, it can't be upgraded, and it handles like a brick in mud.
So, we are left wanting a ship we can live in, and that we can tinker with, and that we can fight with. Well, there isn't anything that quite fits the bill. The closest to these wishes is the YT-1300 (and other multiplayer ships, which I don't know as much about, but am itching to be invited aboard), but the YT-1300 imposes the dependance of a crew on us.
Hence, froma development point of view, that leaves two options:
- Give current multiplayer ships the option of being flown andfoughtinby a lone pilot.
- Add more ships, as described above.
On a personal note, and in the interests of flexibility, I applaude the following suggestion:
Herbsman wrote:
They really ought to make the firespray so you could walk around inside it. It's supposed to be a ship that can take on 4 people and has a small cargohold as well.
Message Edited by DaveG on 11-14-2004 05:01 AM
RodianOutlaw
Sun Nov 14, 2004 1:17 am
#19
I agree fixed guns on all multiplayer ships when at least your by yourself would be great...
I took a few people up in my yt-1300 last night it was fun for about 5 min lol
you would think having a crew of 3 1 pilot 2 gunners would be a big advantage over flying solo... but we found rather quickly that it took way way longer to kill anything than flying solo... Killing other fighter craft with the yt-1300 is a task... Finally to test it out I just stopped the ship and let them shoot which was way easier but my sheilds took a pounding lol... I guess perhaps going up against a gunboat or something it may be more useful... But last night was really a disappointment even sitting still the jerkiness of the turrets made it very hard to hit targets... it got to the point where we realised yeah its a fun ship to r/p in or whatver but besides that its rather uneffective in combat.. so we went back to our single seat fighters....
really devs? whats so wrong with adding 1 more gun slot at least for the pilot.... or letting the turrets be fixed forward when no one is with you? this wouldnt discourage grouping, id still bring people along that wanted to go for a ride and fight, but the fact of the matter is finding people that actually wanna be a gunner is hard, especially when everyone has their own ships, and after they realise its a pain in the azz, they just wanna land and get into their own ships again rather than dealing with the frustration....
I'd really like to use my yt-1300 alot more for solo purposes too, especially because we freelance have no unique single seat fighter in the master box...
make the turrets fixed forwward and able to be fired from the pilots seat , when no one else is aboard your ship.... make this change to all the ships like this please...
oh and the disappointment continued when as a rodian i couldnt wear my master pilot freelance helmet DOH!
isnt their enough discrimination in real life? lol
Herbsman
Sun Nov 14, 2004 1:28 am
#20
They really ought to make the firespray so you could walk around inside it. It's supposed to be a ship that can take on 4 people and has a small cargohold as well.
monochromered
Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:25 am
#21
Bailicus wrote:
No No No No No
This had a thread in beta which went on for ages.
Myself? Leave it as it is. Giving any projectile weapon for the Pilot on a MPS would make all other ships once you get to master level POINTLESS.
Think Space Composite. The MPS have the HIGHEST mass allowing them to have the HIGHEST ARMOUR, BEST WEAPONS, BIGGEST SHIELDS, BEST CAPACITORS, BEST BOOSTERS, (Insert Component here).
You cannot have your cake and eat it.
You cannot point to references because otherwise we may as well follow projectile weapons for MPS pilots to Ties not having shields . . . . . . . .
Pilots HAVE forward firing abilities. 36 Mark IV proton missiles if it flicks your bean. Or 12 Mark IV proton missiles and 24 countermeasures. The best. Anyone have any stats for these missiles?
These ships, as they are, are THE best part of the expansion.
R'ob Bail'ie
IB Inbreed
Farstar
WyrrWomble
IB Inbreed
Infinity
Have you flown in one of these lately. They fly like brick (as they should). They will not become space composite because of their maneverablity and their shear size. These ships are much easier to hit, and when you are moving your ship to line up your blaster, it will take considerable damage/
But if this still bothers you, there could bea rare lootcomponent that locks one turret forward. This componet would further "balance" the ship since it should take up comsiderable energy and mass, therefore all the best equipment will not be possible. Or another option would be to add another set of forward blaster esclusively for the pilot and to give the missle systems to the co-pilot. (God, knows that job on the ship needs more to do.)
Also I dont really see why this issue bothers people that are against it as much as it does. If you are planning on usingthis shipin a groupwetheror not there is an option to havea turret locked forward; then your game playwillnot effected at all. I for one think thier is much room for compormise. As I have said in many other threads about this issue. MPSs should have some level of usefulness if you are byyourself, but only fully effective if you are with afull group.
DaveG
Sun Nov 14, 2004 10:23 am
#22
Quite right, allowing a lone pilot to have weapon control will not effect multiplayer experiences at all. If you want to fly with a crew, then nobody and nothing that has been purposed is going to stop you!
monochromered
Sun Nov 14, 2004 2:09 pm
#24
truewildman wrote:
monochromered wrote:
Have you flown in one of these lately. They fly like brick (as they should). They will not become space composite because of their maneverablity and their shear size. These ships are much easier to hit, and when you are moving your ship to line up your blaster, it will take considerable damage/
Exactly why I feel that having forward firing guns will give pilots a false sense of ability. If it had forward firing weapons, do you know what we'd hear next? That you can't actually fight in it. A master pilot flying solo in that thing will probably not be able to fight anything above Tier 2. The YT needs the turreting abilities to do any kind of battle.
Flying solo in Kessel? Forget about it. Those Tier 5 NPC's would rip ya a new one.
PvP? Absolutely impossible.
So, what would be the benefit of having forward firing guns on a YT? Perhaps to fend off attackers to buy you time to hyperspace, but the pilot-controlled missiles are sufficient for that.
The benefit of having forward facing blasters is to allow players like myself who prefer the aesthetic of a MPSs over a single fighters to have a small increase usefulness.I like MPS because to me the area status symbol,I can usethem like a flying house, but in current state I find beinga pilot in one bloody boring. I miss being able to blast things on sight.But even if we get forward facing turrets, I dont see my self going after tier 5 in my MPS and certainly not PVPing.But if I feel like going hunting tier 3 ships by myself, I should have that option with out relying on other people. Yeah the MPS have 3launcher butit isimpractial to be landing every 10 minutes and reloading. Plus the shear cost ofall the missles I would be going though ina couplehours of hunting would just be way too much.
I dont really buy your slippery slop arguement if players get forward facing turrets, because a MPS should be only fully effective if fully manned.
Message Edited by monochromered on 11-14-2004 01:16 PM
BillyBobthe50th
Sun Nov 14, 2004 2:23 pm
#25
I think they should make the yt-1300 not a master level ship, perhaps a tier 3 or 4 ship, and put a better one at master with perhaps 4 turrets and two shields. Same with moving the nova to tier 4 or 3 and put the rebel gunboat at master which has three (big) turrets. and give the imps the lambda shuttle at tier 3 or 4 and beef up the decimator.
DaveG
Sun Nov 14, 2004 4:55 pm
#26
This is something that would remain to be seen. However, many people say this, and I can see why, which leads us to option #2 from the end of my long post. What do you think?
truewildman wrote:
Exactly why I feel that having forward firing guns will give pilots a false sense of ability. If it had forward firing weapons, do you know what we'd hear next? That you can't actually fight in it. A master pilot flying solo in that thing will probably not be able to fight anything above Tier 2. The YT needs the turreting abilities to do any kind of battle.
Flying solo in Kessel? Forget about it. Those Tier 5 NPC's would rip ya a new one.
PvP? Absolutely impossible.
So, what would be the benefit of having forward firing guns on a YT? Perhaps to fend off attackers to buy you time to hyperspace, but the pilot-controlled missiles are sufficient for that.