Jump To Lightspeed Archive
Thread: anyone else happy with the mandal motor nerf?
Its not such a huge problem for me, as I'd always planned for my PA to fly Oppressors, and with a high-speed crafted engine with YPR in the 50's and Engine Overload 4, you get speeds of 1400+ and YPR of 70+, but it just makes it all the harder for people who want to fly canon Imperial fighters to be effective.
Im of the opinion they should have gone for a hardpoint/energy/level cap system rather than hardpoint/energy/mass, with the Experimentation on chassis allowing a 1 or 2 level advancement over the base.
Cuality wrote:
just about to finish the mission tonight when they took the servers down. Now the mission that would have given me a 92.2 engine is now a mission that will give me a 79 engine.the 92.2 was low enough to where i could put it on my interceptor with little mass loss, now to get that speed i have to sacrifice insane amount of mass, instantly making my interceptor a flying rock with no shields or armor. Sad thing is that the people who have already finished the mission will keep their 92.2 engine...
Whats the Yaw, Pitch and Roll rate of those crafted engines?
Fact: Shipwrights are crafting 92-93 speed engines with a mass of 13-14K on Eclipse Server, so the top speed of the reward engine is certainly within a player's grasp at the same mass.
Fact: Cheese goes well with whine.
Aden_Nak wrote:
Fact: Shipwrights are crafting 92-93 speed engines with a mass of 13-14K on Eclipse Server, so the top speed of the reward engine is certainly within a player's grasp at the same mass.
ROBO1964 wrote:Aden_Nak wrote:
Fact: Shipwrights are crafting 92-93 speed engines with a mass of 13-14K on Eclipse Server, so the top speed of the reward engine is certainly within a player's grasp at the same mass.
Fact: Never seen one even close on Intrepid as I have spent hours looking. In fact haven't seen one on a vendor above 70 speed and I have checked about 30 or so.
Suggestion: Talk with some of the Shipwrights and ask about a custom engine.
There may be a reason they are not producing them. Perhaps there was a run of reward engines on your server, and there is no demand. Perhaps they lack the proper raw materials. I couldn't tell you for certain. But I have talked to a variety of people on a variety of servers, and they are all seeing engines in the 92-93 speed 13-14K mass range being constructed by Shipwrights. Maybe on Intrepid, due to resources, it's not cost effective to kick them out on a production scale.
Aden_Nak wrote:
ROBO1964 wrote:
Aden_Nak wrote:
Fact: Shipwrights are crafting 92-93 speed engines with a mass of 13-14K on Eclipse Server, so the top speed of the reward engine is certainly within a player's grasp at the same mass.
Fact: Never seen one even close on Intrepid as I have spent hours looking. In fact haven't seen one on a vendor above 70 speed and I have checked about 30 or so.
Suggestion: Talk with some of the Shipwrights and ask about a custom engine.
There may be a reason they are not producing them. Perhaps there was a run of reward engines on your server, and there is no demand. Perhaps they lack the proper raw materials. I couldn't tell you for certain. But I have talked to a variety of people on a variety of servers, and they are all seeing engines in the 92-93 speed 13-14K mass range being constructed by Shipwrights. Maybe on Intrepid, due to resources, it's not cost effective to kick them out on a production scale.
This is true. SW's have to make them by hand. They're not going to use up their uber resources on somethng that might not sell. But they will be more than happy to fill a custom order.
Aden_Nak wrote:
Fact: All of the existing 92.2 reward engines will decay in time.
Fact: Shipwrights are crafting 92-93 speed engines with a mass of 13-14K on Eclipse Server, so the top speed of the reward engine is certainly within a player's grasp at the same mass.
Fact: Cheese goes well with whine.
Ok Cheese boy, for one most of us arent whining. My second comment that still hasnt been answered. So what if your crafting 92-93 speed engines. What is the Yaw, Pitch and Roll rate of those engines? In the 40s i bet. So please if your going to compair your crafted engines compair them across the board. Top speed is maybe 1/5th the equation when it comes to an engine.
I dont care either way if they removed it, i just wish they would ass something when they feel there is an imbalance instead of removing something.
Would you like some tinactin for your cheese?
Message Edited by MadcowwithSARS on 11-30-2004 10:14 AM
MadcowwithSARS wrote:
Aden_Nak wrote:
Fact: All of the existing 92.2 reward engines will decay in time.
Fact: Shipwrights are crafting 92-93 speed engines with a mass of 13-14K on Eclipse Server, so the top speed of the reward engine is certainly within a player's grasp at the same mass.
Fact: Cheese goes well with whine.Ok Cheese boy, for one im not whining. My second comment that still hasnt been answered. So what if your crafting 92-93 speed engines. What is the Yaw, Pitch and Roll rate of those engines? In the 40s i bet. So please if your going to compair your crafted engines compair them across the board. Top speed is maybe 1/5th the equation when it comes to an engine.
I dont care either way if they removed it, i just wish they would ass something when they feel there is an imbalance instead of removing something.
Mmmm, Swiss Cheese. Full of holes, you see.
The PYR on the engines I have seen ranges from the 40's (abysmal) into the 60's (sweet, sweet cornering). I have seen a few engines that both break the reward engine's top speed and YPR, of course, but at a greater mass. I have some Shipwrights in my PA, and they feel certain they could top the reward engine on all stats if they had the proper materials and the proper luck. I didn't see any mention of the PYR until now, though. And honestly, flying a Longprobe as I do, that's more of a concern for me than top speed ever will be.
The reward engine, as it was, was unbalancing entire segments of gameplay, from PvE to PvP to crafting and loot. . . it was a bad idea to put it in like that in the first place, and it needed to be taken out. The reason I think you're whining is that you sound more concerned with your own personal stats than with the long term health of the game. The dev team is not (although you might not always know they think about the long term health of the game, heh). I have an alt or two I plan on taking up though a Piloting profession. I will do it sans reward engine, and in another month or two, those reward engines are going to be all burned out anyhow. Then everyone will be on a REASONABLE, level playing field.
Message Edited by truewildman on 11-30-2004 12:29 PM
Vicotnik wrote:Personally, I think it was an odd change. Seems more logically to me to boost up shipwright built engines ifthe problem was that crafted engines were inferior. As it is now, people who haven't got the 92.2 engine are pretty much screwed in PvP.I'd like to see an engine revamp, because the current system is just quite dumb. The only crafted engine that seems to be able to compete with the 92.2 engine are Mark V engines, and even these will have quite lacking pitch and yaw stats to reach speeds above that. This means that small fighters (TIE interceptors, A-wings, TIE advanceds) can't really get up to the speeds they should. As it is now, large ships have the bigger potential for high speed. That's just not right.
Umm, read a bit closer. they said they made it possible for shipwrights to make faster engines. That was part of the decision to nerf the inferno and I think it was in the same paragraph. ya gotta read past the parts that make you mad.
Wokka-wokka
Aden_Nak wrote:
MadcowwithSARS wrote:
Aden_Nak wrote:
Fact: All of the existing 92.2 reward engines will decay in time.
Fact: Shipwrights are crafting 92-93 speed engines with a mass of 13-14K on Eclipse Server, so the top speed of the reward engine is certainly within a player's grasp at the same mass.
Fact: Cheese goes well with whine.
Ok Cheese boy, for one im not whining. My second comment that still hasnt been answered. So what if your crafting 92-93 speed engines. What is the Yaw, Pitch and Roll rate of those engines? In the 40s i bet. So please if your going to compair your crafted engines compair them across the board. Top speed is maybe 1/5th the equation when it comes to an engine.
I dont care either way if they removed it, i just wish they would ass something when they feel there is an imbalance instead of removing something.
Mmmm, Swiss Cheese. Full of holes, you see.
The PYR on the engines I have seen ranges from the 40's (abysmal) into the 60's (sweet, sweet cornering). I have seen a few engines that both break the reward engine's top speed and YPR, of course, but at a greater mass. I have some Shipwrights in my PA, and they feel certain they could top the reward engine on all stats if they had the proper materials and the proper luck. I didn't see any mention of the PYR until now, though. And honestly, flying a Longprobe as I do, that's more of a concern for me than top speed ever will be.
The reward engine, as it was, was unbalancing entire segments of gameplay, from PvE to PvP to crafting and loot. . . it was a bad idea to put it in like that in the first place, and it needed to be taken out. The reason I think you're whining is that you sound more concerned with your own personal stats than with the long term health of the game. The dev team is not (although you might not always know they think about the long term health of the game, heh). I have an alt or two I plan on taking up though a Piloting profession. I will do it sans reward engine, and in another month or two, those reward engines are going to be all burned out anyhow. Then everyone will be on a REASONABLE, level playing field.
Vicotnik wrote:
MadcowwithSARS wrote:
I agree in part with your points, but what i do disagree with is this. The A-wing may be a tier 4 ship, that is only due to its maneuverability. The ship is listed as being really unstable to fly thus needing a highly skilled pilot to man. Your choice is limited in the A-wing, you can drop a powerfull engine in if you like, you just need to skimp in other areas. I however use an 88 speed and or a 75 speed looted engine, a really light, small CAP a Level 1 Reactor, a good crafted shield generator and a looted level 8 gun. if you want armor put the bare minimum on. The size difference between an A-wing and an X-wing isnt an even fair compairison. Even on the X-wing you have to pick and choose how you load it out. If your going too slow in your A-wing its due to your own decisions.
88 speed or 75 speed is not much compared to the fact that there can be 100+ speed engines crafted. You can't ever mount these on an A-wing or a TIE interceptor because they are just too big.
Sure, A-wings should be weak when it comes to shields, weapons and armor. They should also be one of the fastest ships. The problem, as I see it, is that one engine will perform very similar in a big bulky freighter and in a small, fast fighter. There is just a nominal loss of top speed when the engine is mounted to the freighter. This ensures that big ships have the better potential for actual speed, since they can spare so much mass. Small fighters like the A-wing or TIE interceptorcan't place much bigger than crafted engines with a speed of 70-90, while a B-wing or Nova without any problems at all can mount level 5 109 speed engines to their chassis. To me, this is just wrong...
I think it all would work better if the "speed" stat on engines are removed completely. Let the actual speed be a product of the engine mass and the chassis mass (with a small modifier for actual energy output, or "quality" of the engine). Place a 40k mass engine in an A-wing, and it should rocket alongat insane speeds. Place the same engine in a freighter, and it should have a fairly good cruising speed. Place a 10k engine in an A-wing, and it should have a fairly good cruising speed. Place the same engine in a freighter, and it should crawl along... Well, you get the picture I think.
Honestly i think Chassis should not dictate top speed, Acceleration sure. i know this is Star Wars and not actual Physics. An engine should reach its maximum speed no matter the size, just the time durration it takes to achieve maximum speed should be diffeent based on mass. I also agree though the ships maneuvering is correctly based on mass and innertia as it should be. But hey were all firends and disagreeing is part of the fun.
Umm, you are missing the point here. Read a bit closer. It doesn't matter that shipwrights can make faster engines now, because they also make faster top level engines. The higher the mark on the engine, the better performance. The higher mass, the better performance. This is not right, this means that bigger ships have more potential for speed. (And yes, before someone blathers on about an oppressor needing a much faster engine than an interceptor to go the same speed, that is not the point either).
Wokka wrote:
Umm, read a bit closer. they said they made it possible for shipwrights to make faster engines. That was part of the decision to nerf the inferno and I think it was in the same paragraph. ya gotta read past the parts that make you mad.
Vicotnik wrote:
Personally, I think it was an odd change. Seems more logically to me to boost up shipwright built engines ifthe problem was that crafted engines were inferior. As it is now, people who haven't got the 92.2 engine are pretty much screwed in PvP.
I'd like to see an engine revamp, because the current system is just quite dumb. The only crafted engine that seems to be able to compete with the 92.2 engine are Mark V engines, and even these will have quite lacking pitch and yaw stats to reach speeds above that. This means that small fighters (TIE interceptors, A-wings, TIE advanceds) can't really get up to the speeds they should. As it is now, large ships have the bigger potential for high speed. That's just not right.
Wokka-wokka