Pilot Archive
Thread: Couple questions about the Jedi Starfighter...
Ducimus wrote:
Im also picturing, JSF usage going through the roof at about that time
Why do you see that? I mean that while I understand the Imperials getting hit the hardest, it kind of feels like any Imp who wants to fly a JSF/Bel-22 is probably already doing so.
Shona
What i question is design paradign of imperial ships on paper vs what is acutally in practice. On paper, they give up firepower and mass, for speed and manuverablity, which gives them their edge. But does it really do so, and is it worth the trade off given how the game is in practice? This aso seems to undescore the incontinunity of the ROTW fighters such as the JSF, or bell22
Ducimus wrote:
What i question is design paradign of imperial ships on paper vs what is acutally in practice. On paper, they give up firepower and mass, for speed and manuverablity, which gives them their edge. But does it really do so, and is it worth the trade off given how the game is in practice?
That is certainly the basis of many of the Pilot Forum topics. While RotW may have broken the back of the JtL Balance, what you are asking was whether or not the balance that had existed truly balanced Mass vs Speed/Maneuverability/Handling?
As is the case with many scales where you give up one to get more of another, we tended to gravitate to the best compromises, while the ships on the extremes became specialty ships and the ones that we now boast about having flown successfully. The Duneliz and X-Wing may have been closest to the middle of that scale, while the Kihraxz and B-Wing could be considered as on the same scale but farther to the edges. My thoughts on the balance between ships have been a bit more refined since doing this thread and getting this (subjective statistical analysis) chart (vertical = Agility).
/shrug
Shona
I'm not sure if it was you or someone else I'm paraphrasing there, but that's the crux of the problem. If Mass is a limitation then high Mass ships can do things that low Mass ships can not do. If it is a mere hinderence then low Mass ships will be able to fulfill the roles of high Mass ships with small decreases in efficiency. Which one are we seeing?
To make a single-pilot heavy fighter/bomber chassis an integral part of a balanced attack force means letting them do things that single-pilot light/medium fighters can not do. It may be that the stat distribution we have on starship parts of all types have led to our ability to make our ships do things they should not be able to do. It's too easy to fit "Bomber-type" gear into a "medium" or lighter chassis.
We have been provided with a robust but flexible system, and we've been bending it as far as we can ever since it came out.
How do we stop light/medium fighters from doing things that heavies are supposed to do? Not easily. The current ability to put any component into any ship with enough mass has been a prime cause for this issue, I think.
Perhaps ships should have certs for certain types of equipment revoked. Make it impossible for any ship under XXX Mass unable to load SB2s, regardless of Pilot skill. Have, for example, L6 Weapons available to all ships, but L7 slightly restricted, L8 and 9 more so, and L10 only available to the heavier "bombers." Do the same with Armor and Shields and then there will be a better corrolation between Mass and actual Offensive ability than there is now.
I would see this balanced against a greater difference in chassis modifiers than we currently have. Give the lightest fighters Speed Modifiers of greater than 1.0, the heaviests Speeds as low as .70, and scale between.
POB ships currently work best against large target NPCs and work best with a fighter escort in the area. Shouldn't the "Bombers" have a similar situation, though not nearly as extreme? Make an arduous task for an A-Wing to take down an NPC Gunboat, without making it impossible. Make it a pain for a B-Wing to deal with an NPC Kihraxz, without making it impossible. Make it so that fighters have to slow down or risk getting too far ahead of their grouped high DPS bombers.
Anyway, that's where my thoughts led me to this evening.
Shona
SheenaBrelya wrote:
Mass is not a limitation but a mere hinderence
I'm not sure if it was you or someone else I'm paraphrasing there, but that's the crux of the problem. If Mass is a limitation then high Mass ships can do things that low Mass ships can not do. If it is a mere hinderence then low Mass ships will be able to fulfill the roles of high Mass ships with small decreases in efficiency. Which one are we seeing?
To make a single-pilot heavy fighter/bomber chassis an integral part of a balanced attack force means letting them do things that single-pilot light/medium fighters can not do. It may be that the stat distribution we have on starship parts of all types have led to our ability to make our ships do things they should not be able to do. It's too easy to fit "Bomber-type" gear into a "medium" or lighter chassis.
We have been provided with a robust but flexible system, and we've been bending it as far as we can ever since it came out.
How do we stop light/medium fighters from doing things that heavies are supposed to do? Not easily. The current ability to put any component into any ship with enough mass has been a prime cause for this issue, I think.
[snip]
i really would like to see roles for the bomber class ships, but i don't know about limiting guns, at least not with the way NPCs are currently set up. for PVP i'd say it would work if our POB cap ships were significantly shielded. but PVE... it's just not very much fun to spend so much time on a single ship, right now, taking out tier 5 content with 2 shots, to me feels about right. i got frustrated quickly with PVE in even a loaded out JSF, not because it was difficult by any means, but because it was tedious. i think part of the surge of players i'm seeing in deep space now is due to the fact that people can finally fly their light fighters and have fun in them against PVE content.
of course, that's content's fault and not a fault of the mechanics. maybe limit by cert a ships guns but also reduce shield/armor on NPCfighters only. up current heavy fighter/bomber mass by 30k and a post WO3 world would allow everyone flying the big shipsto use the big guns they have now, in addition to more shielding, making bomber types a bit more viable, and certainly viable with an escort. i don't see this dreadfully imbalancing PVE or PVP, as the major downside to heavies in PVP is the hitbox size, and in PVE they already are only really challenged by #s and "cap ship" guns.
another route would be to go the wing commander cap ship shield system, only penetrable by torpedos. i never really liked that mechanic, but it forced certain ships into roles. hey, maybe a ittle of both could be used.
i really wish we could get word about wo3. we really need to see how it plays out after that and with fixed POBs before we can see what's wrong with the system. i mean what's the big deal in at least telling us what's going to happen with it? frustrating...
glibdud wrote:
While I agree with the thesis that lighter fighters loading heavy components is a problem, I'm not a big fan of complicated artificial restrictions
quadpers0n wrote:
i really would like to see roles for the bomber class ships, but i don't know about limiting guns
Frankly I don't like the idea all that much myself, but it seemed to be a way that might have the desired results. The problem is that it is too arbitrary to implement, I think.
Ducimus wrote:
the best shield you can legimtately have is an RE'd lvl 8 reward shield that comes out to 2555 F/B. Thats the absolute best you can do,
and it fits into a 65K mass chassis, just as well as a 150K mass chassis
Yes, the fact definately came to mind when I said "Do the same with Armor and Shields and then there will be..." That Shield has done bad things to heavies, since a borderline light/medium can use it and have all the durability it could want.
glibdud wrote:
I'd settle for a WO3 fix.
quadpers0n wrote:
i really wish we could get word about wo3
Ducimus wrote:
will fixing WO3, make that paradigm work?
WO3 is the cloud that hangs over the Pilot Profession. Many, many of our discussions lead back to things like "Might fixing WO3 also fix these issues?" or "We need to see how it works with a fixed WO3 to know what really needs to be changed." The lack of Developer feedback about the issue has just meant that not only is WO3 hanging over us, but we don't know if it may someday be cleared up or if we should accept the shadows that it has thrown over our game.
Shona
Message Edited by SheenaBrelya on 08-31-2005 10:52 AM
quadpers0n wrote:kind of makes you wonder how darth platypus is planning on "taking a look at pre-rotw ships to see if they need a boost" doesn't it?
i think it's too wide of a brush to just say, "ok, up the mass!" It would really need to be examined first, closely, before id go along with it.
I think i have to toss out, i think its not just the ships, but also the enviorment in which we use them that would seem to define how that balance paradigm is working. (Good greif, maybe i shoudlnt have said that, hello CU!! )
SheenaBrelya wrote:
WO3 is the cloud that hangs over the Pilot Profession. Many, many of our discussions lead back to things like "Might fixing WO3 also fix these issues?" or "We need to see how it works with a fixed WO3 to know what really needs to be changed." The lack of Developer feedback about the issue has just meant that not only is WO3 hanging over us, but we don't know if it may someday be cleared up or if we should accept the shadows that it has thrown over our game.
ShonaMessage Edited by SheenaBrelya on 08-31-2005 10:52 AM
And yet, still the typical answer that most discussions arrive at is, "wait for WO3 to be fixed before adjusting anything". Which is a good, accurate answer, butlike most other things in SWG, i we're in wait and see mode, how long must we wait? WO3 should have been fixed within the first month of two of JTL's release. Instead the devs did nothing. So now, everybody has been playing the game with a broken mechanic, and most of us have gotten used to being that way.
Ducimus wrote:
And yet, still the typical answer that most discussions arrive at is, "wait for WO3 to be fixed before adjusting anything". Which is a good, accurate answer, butlike most other things in SWG, i we're in wait and see mode, how long must we wait?
Which will happen first? WO3 fixed, or Smugglers smuggling?
Treena_Daal wrote:
Which will happen first? WO3 fixed, or Smugglers smuggling?
My money is that this will happen before either of those two will.
SheenaBrelya wrote:
A WO3 fix would probably hurt the big fighters more than it helps. You aren't likely to see many b-wings out there, and you will likely see even less of them if they are forced to use double or triple the ammount of capacitor in order to compete.
I'm not sure you understand exactly what fixing WO3 will do. There will be two main effects...
1) Post-fix weapons running WO3 will use nine times more power than pre-fix weapons. This will mean that many ships will not be able to use their little RE'd L1 and Mark 1 Reactors to power a well equipped fighter. Large ships will have an advantage in that they will have the mass to handle an upgrade to a significantly heavier reactor. Small ships loadouts will be scrapped and rebuilt with Power as a significant concern, unlike it is now. Many ships will be totally unable to have the L3 programs running, and don't even think about throwing in a couple L4 programs.
2) Post-fix weapons running WO3 will use nine times more capacitor energy per shot than pre-fix weapons. Capacitors will turn into a significant concern, especially for ships with multiple weapons, as weapons begin to drain Caps much, much faster than they had been before. Mass will have to be given over to a stronger Cap and Reactor Power given to a decent Cap Overload program, all while Mass is also being absorbed by large Reactors, too.
Indirect effects would include a surge in demand for RE'd gear, as that is the best way to get a high output/low drain component. Also, the mass absorbed by larger Reactors and Caps will not be coming from the small Boosters, DIs and such that people are using, but from Weapons, Engines, Armor and the other items that many people are currently building ship loadouts around.
Ship DPS output will be lowered while ship performance will be decreased. People will be unhappy, but it will be the best fix that could happen to the space system, in my opinion.
Shona
(I'd say that was a little off topic, but I'm not sure there is one any more)
You're absolutely right Shona, but you did not take it far enough: the end result of a WO3 fix is that any ship mounting more than 2 laser weapons is going to be hurting...badly. Just an example - my Actis setup allows me to run EO4/WO3, with energy needs around 25k...if WO3 is fixed, that requirement will go up to about 38k. All of the equipment in question is decently RE'd. The effect on this ship if WO3 is fixed; I change to EO3. That's it. I maintain the same firepower and defensive capabilities, and the only concession I'd have to make is being more careful with how much I use the trigger...and I don't hose to start with.
Consider the effects on a Krayt/B-wing/Opp/Rihx...these ships would practically*require* one of the high gen reactors to continue operating at what we consider to be efficient by today's standards, regardless of PvE or PvP.
End result in recap: light ships lose a bit of speed and maneuverability without needing to change the loadout at all (assuming RE's...), heavy ships will almost certainly have to change at least the reactor on their loadout, big change in maneuverability/speed...and perhaps firepower as well.
Since SOE was stupid, and did not use the complete (or parts of, specifically the capacitor/weapon/shield relationships) from the X-wing series, we are left with a system that is borked at the ground level, and fixing WO3 is not going to change that...rather, I believe it will make it worse.
I think SOE knows this, and I believe this is the core reason we have not seen a WO3 fix.
In my personal opinion...I think chassis modifiers for engines, weapons, shields, and perhaps armor are in the future for space. Light ships would become faster, pack about 50% less firepower/shields, heavy ships would maintain current speed/maneuverability, and pack at least 50% more firepower/shields, in a nutshell. We would still be looking at parts for loading our ships in the exact same way (or perhaps pushing even harder, which is a good thing...), and mass would still be a factor. To put this another way...we would still be loading our ships with the exact same parts, but they would either be 50% more or less effective, depending on the chassis. The parts themselves do not change in any way.
Domingo
SheenaBrelya wrote:
Mass is not a limitation but a mere hinderence
I'm not sure if it was you or someone else I'm paraphrasing there, but that's the crux of the problem.
Shona
Hmm, probably me. I spouted out that, "Mass is not a limitation, just a minor annoyance" a few times. You illustrate your point nicely. But ahh, well, the best shield you can legimtately have is an RE'd lvl 8 reward shield that comes out to 2555 F/B. Thats the absolute best you can do,
and it fits into a 65K mass chassis, just as well as a 150K mass chassis, only in the 65K mass chassis, your smaller and faster.
Right now, i dont think the balance paradigm of a ship giving up mass in exchange to being more manuverable and faster (or vice versa) is working. The question i have now is, will fixing WO3, make that paradigm work? If you think about how it will effect ship loadouts and equipment choices its entirely plausable speculation. But i have to wonder, see, WO3 has been bugged since launch, arguably since beta. Has the ship balance paradigm ever really been TESTED throughly in the enviorments in which these ships are used without a bugged WO3?