Jump To Lightspeed Archive

---

xTekx wrote:

The 2 hit kill is what distinguishes the Good pvp pilots from the not so good pvp pilots. The good pilots know how to avoid the hits. I prefer the damage system the way it is. If I die then I made a mistake and better not make it the second time. Its called learning. Some people seem to forget thatJTL takes real skill as opposed to the ground game where its all template based. Its why I prefer space pvp over ground pvp. I don't claim to be the best pilot out there, but i know i'm a good pilot and know what I can and can't do.

---

True, JTL benefits from a combat system where you won't need to "hammer" someone to death in PvP. But the current system pretty much creates a "composite in space" problem where only the smallest, fastest and most maneuverable ships are actually viable. Why bother flying an X-wing in a PvP situation when the A-wing does the very same thing, only better?

The PvP damage ratio vs shields needs to be looked into and balanced so that all ship types have their own strengths and weaknesses. Right now, all ships but the fastest ones really only have weaknesses.

---

Starson wrote:

Yes I do pvp quite often, and you are right, i should not have spoken about pve, on a pvp thread. Its just a point I am trying to make, bad habbits in pve tend to cross over to pvp. I do understand and use my radar all the time ( i even enlarged it for my old eyes :smileywink those new players that I take under my wing to help and teach, well thats the first lession 'situational awareness' and 'mind your shields. I can hack pvp, but I really see not point in it. They never should have taken componet damage away as well. You should pay the price for losing a battle. I relly think pvp battles should last a little longer, yes my first message was harsh, but that seems to bethe only one's that get read. One more point upon refelction, if pvp did last a little longer it would give those players that are not so ubber leet twitch pilots a little better chance.

---

---

Starson wrote:

True true, but i flew to every space sector overt this weekend, spent at least 15 min.'s in eachlooking for a fight, and never found one overt player. No of course I don't want the template grinders to rule space, but come on, I find no challenge in a 2 hit kill. I have never found a pvp'er who could shake me off his 6, when i got there. Yes my sig., says A-wing, but I still take out the x, and still same thing. And the stop, and he will fly right by trick, never happen. I pay attention, ya stop in front of me and ya die that much quicker. I just want the game to be fun, and as pvp stands now their is no reason for it, I don't have to brag to show I am a good pilot. Oh I know let me loot the ubber 3000 f/b2k mass shield ya got on your ship for my awing then i will be happy (just kidding).

---

---

Vicotnik wrote:

---

xTekx wrote:

The 2 hit kill is what distinguishes the Good pvp pilots from the not so good pvp pilots. The good pilots know how to avoid the hits. I prefer the damage system the way it is. If I die then I made a mistake and better not make it the second time. Its called learning. Some people seem to forget thatJTL takes real skill as opposed to the ground game where its all template based. Its why I prefer space pvp over ground pvp. I don't claim to be the best pilot out there, but i know i'm a good pilot and know what I can and can't do.

---

True, JTL benefits from a combat system where you won't need to "hammer" someone to death in PvP. But the current system pretty much creates a "composite in space" problem where only the smallest, fastest and most maneuverable ships are actually viable. Why bother flying an X-wing in a PvP situation when the A-wing does the very same thing, only better?

The PvP damage ratio vs shields needs to be looked into and balanced so that all ship types have their own strengths and weaknesses. Right now, all ships but the fastest ones really only have weaknesses.

---

---

Starson wrote:
I have never found a pvp'er who could shake me off his 6, when i got there.

---

---

Eaca wrote:

---

Vicotnik wrote:

True, JTL benefits from a combat system where you won't need to "hammer" someone to death in PvP. But the current system pretty much creates a "composite in space" problem where only the smallest, fastest and most maneuverable ships are actually viable. Why bother flying an X-wing in a PvP situation when the A-wing does the very same thing, only better?

The PvP damage ratio vs shields needs to be looked into and balanced so that all ship types have their own strengths and weaknesses. Right now, all ships but the fastest ones really only have weaknesses.

---

Lol, my oppressor eats a-wings for lunch. I had somebody in an a-wing, one of the better rebel pilots on my server, after he got beat a few times, went and got his x-wing, and got beat a few more times. Like I said in the above post, the only real weakness heavy fighters have is decay.

---

That says more about your skills, than it does actual chassis differences.

Besides, the Oppressor isn't that heavy. Try the TIE-bomber,for instance.

To state that the only weaknesses heavy fighters have in the current system is decay sounds a bit odd.

Basically, a small, maneuverable and well equipedship can pummle out enough damage to kill any (player) ship in just a few hits. A heavy ship like the B-wing might be able to kill any (player) ship a bit faster, but compare the speed and maneuverability on those two types of ships andthe possible shield strength, and it's fairly easy to conclude that heavy ships only have weaknesses and no viable strength. Why bother to fly a ship with more guns, when all you need is one gun? Why bother to fly a slower, less manuverable ship, when it in essence has the same defensive(and similar enough offensive)capabilities as a faster, more maneuverable ship?

---

Eaca wrote:

You're comparing light fighters to bombers. TIE Bomber isn't a heavy fighter. It's a bomber (hence the word "Bomber" in the name). B-wings are bombers as well, and some privateer ship with a really odd name is one too. Y-wings are between heavy fighters and bombers. The heavy fighters are the Oppressor, Rihkx, and Krayt. Rebels don't have any true heavy fighters, but they have the X-wing which is the only real medium fighter in the game.

---

Actually, the B-wing is technically classified as a "Heavy Assault Starfighter".

But anyway, yes I am comparing light fighters to bombers. Quite simply because there is no other place for bomber-type ships in JTL other than dogfighting.

---

Eaca wrote:

And the decay does have the worst effect on heavy fighters. Light fighters are going to go down in one hit from heavy fighters massive guns regardless of thier component condtion. 2.5k shields500 armor1200 comonent armor/HP and 2000 chassis HP doesn't matter to much when even after reduction you have a shot for 9000 average damage coming in. More on some of the larger heavy fighters with guns. However on a heavy fighter, going up against a light fighter such as an a-wing or advanced, with much lower mass, and therefore much lower potential firepower, 2.5k shields, 1k armor, 1600 component armor/HP, and 3000 chassis HP WILL protect you from a 3-4k hit, likelywith only component armor damage. However, after just 7 hits, lets say you didn't even die, you're down to 2.5k shields, 500 armor, and 900 component armor/HP, and chassis is starting to wear down. Now instead of taking a hit and only doing minor blemish to component armor, the hit is disabling a component (and lets face it, there's not many non-vital components, maybe 1 or 2 guns in a 2 or 3 gun ship, CM, booster and droid interface). 7 more deaths and you're being one shotted by a light fighter just like you one shot a light fighter, just now you have less maneuverability.

So where before, the heavy fighter had the disadvantage of being less maneuverable, but the advantage of being able to take to take a hit from the more maneuverable target and still be able to return fire. Heck they can even take 2 full hits, one fore one aft, assuming different components are hit, and still be in the fight. After a few fights, ones you don't even have to lose, just one hit, your components and armor are decaying at a very fast pace to start with, and by the time the pace slows down, it doesn't really matter, instead of a heavily armed and armored fighter, you're flying a heavily armed and tinfoiled slug. That's where your disadvantage comes in.

---

But what I am saying is that the ability of heavy ships to take more hits is not in line with the ability of smaller ships to do damage. I never denied that decay isn't a weakness of the heavier ships, only that it's the only one.

Lets take the Oppressor and the Tie-Advanced as an example, the TIE-advanced is much more maneuverable and fasterthan the Oppressor. Both ships fit two guns, but the Oppressor has much more mass. However, of these two ships, the Advanced is much more viable for PvP due to the fact that damage ratio versus player shields are not in line with what they should be. If you deck out the Oppressor and the Advanced with top of the line equipment for the mass they allow, and put two equally good pilots in both ships and lets them face off against each other, the advanced should come out victorious.

Now lets consider the B-wing: 4 gun slots, a bunch of mass, but the maneuverability of a pregnant Bantha. The strength of this ship should be that it can kill any ship in just one salvo (which it pretty much does in a PvP engagement), provided that they actually manage to get someone in their sights.But it must also be able to survive more than just a few seconds in a PvP engagement, all it takes now is for a small ship to fire just a few shots, and the B-wing is history. The problem is that there isn't enough difference between the shield strength and damage output that you can mount on the two different types of ships.

High speed and maneuverability should equal low damage and low shields.

Low speed and manueverability should equal high damage and high shields.

That's not how it is currently, now it's rather:

High speed, high maneuverability, high damage, low shields.

Low speed, low maneuverability, high damage, low shields.

---

Vicotnik wrote:

Lets take the Oppressor and the Tie-Advanced as an example, the TIE-advanced is much more maneuverable and fasterthan the Oppressor. Both ships fit two guns, but the Oppressor has much more mass. However, of these two ships, the Advanced is much more viable for PvP due to the fact that damage ratio versus player shields are not in line with what they should be. If you deck out the Oppressor and the Advanced with top of the line equipment for the mass they allow, and put two equally good pilots in both ships and lets them face off against each other, the advanced should come out victorious.

---

---

Eaca wrote:

---

Vicotnik wrote:

Lets take the Oppressor and the Tie-Advanced as an example, the TIE-advanced is much more maneuverable and fasterthan the Oppressor. Both ships fit two guns, but the Oppressor has much more mass. However, of these two ships, the Advanced is much more viable for PvP due to the fact that damage ratio versus player shields are not in line with what they should be. If you deck out the Oppressor and the Advanced with top of the line equipment for the mass they allow, and put two equally good pilots in both ships and lets them face off against each other, the advanced should come out victorious.

---

Never fought a TIE Advanced, only A-WIngs, X-Wings, dune lizards, krayts, firesprays, and a few other privateer ships that I will not try to spell. My TIE Oppressor has beat them all. My TIE Oppressor has beat them all 2 on 1. My TIE Oppressor has beat them all 3 on 1. About the only time I consecutively lose is 4 on 1 or higher. That's all in the ship that you're saying isn't PvP worthy.

---

High speed and maneuverability should equal low damage and low shields.

Low speed and manueverability should equal high damage and high shields.

That's not how it is currently, now it's rather:

High speed, high maneuverability, high damage, low shields.

Low speed, low maneuverability, high damage, low shields.

Message Edited by Tumbler2002 on 02-08-2005 10:16 AM

---

Ramona_Garcia wrote:

Yes, multis are nothing but dead meat in space. They should introduce some special level 11 shields that weigh 250K and more, making it impossible (and I mean a hard cap, not some stupid "we never expected this to happen" mess up) to mount them in fighters.

---