Pilot Archive
Thread: New Ship Stats
That's why I'm rarely if ever worried about ships that depend on turrets being overpowered. They can do some things better than a lone ship, but the personnel investment won't match what they could do if its crew were all in singleplayer vessels.
Vegitaa wrote:
These are my suggested modified stats.
TIE-Adv: 80k Resources ~65k mass [SP: 2 Guns] 1 missile [Spdx 1.0 Acc 40 Dec 60 Pitch 300 Yaw 300 Roll 150]
A-Wing: 80k Resources ~65k mass [SP: 1 Guns] 1 missile[Spdx 1.0 Acc 40 Dec 60 Pitch 250 Yaw 250 Roll 125]
Grievous Fighter: 80K mass, 2 SP weapon, 1 ordnance, [Spdx 1.0 Acc 40 Dec 60 Pitch 275 Yaw 275 Roll 125]
Jedi Starfighter: 80K mass, 2 SP weapon, 1 ordnance, [Spdx 1.0 Acc 40 Dec 60 Pitch 250 Yaw 250 Roll 125]
Heavy Z-95: 65K mass, 1 SP weapon, 1 ordnance, .95 speed, 400/400/100 P/Y/R
Heavy TIE/Ln: 65K mass, 1 SP weapon, 1 ordnance, .95 speed, 400/400/200 P/Y/R
Scyk: 5k Resources ~12k mass [SP: 1 Guns] 1 missile [Spdx 0.95 Acc 50 Dec 50 Pitch 600 Yaw 600 Roll 300]
Heavy Scyk: 65K mass, 1 SP weapon, 1 ordnance, .95 speed, 400/400/100 P/Y/R
Main problem here is still the P/Y/R on the heavies. A heavy Z-95 should really not have higher P/Y/R than the A-wing, at best it should be equal IMHO.
I think the P/Y/R on the heavies must be keep slightly lower than the P/Y/R on the original ship, since it is a heavy after all. But the problem here is that they are for the most part heavy version of Newbie ships, and the newbie ships have P/Y/R ratings that's unrealistic. I'd say "balance" the Z-95 P/Y/R in comparison with the A-wing, the TIE/Ln with the tier 2 TIE, and the Scyk with possibly the Dunelizard.
To me, something similar to this might be more suitable:
Hm. After breaking it down like that, those numbers really might be a pretty good balance. The only real problem is on the Imperial end of things, and I'm just not sure there's anything that can be done about that. Low-level Imperial pilots will still have the choice of spending little on the tier 1 and 2 TIEs or more on a more effective Heavy TIE model. That might be the best possible situation we can come up with.
By the way, what's everyone think of the ARC? My take is that, all things considered, its relatively low mass (for a three-person ship, anyway) might be balanced pretty well with its speed and turning. An option might be to raise its mass to the 150-200K range and drop its maneuverability in line with the X-Wing.
To be honest, though, it might be better left alone. Turreted ships are at a disadvantage by their very nature, but that kind of maneuverability with enough mass for level 6-8 guns might be enough to create a real role for the ARC. I've thought some about whether it deserves a second ordnance slot--that would turn it into an extremely flexible multirole ship in PVP, but one that comes at a cost of a 2-3-man crew in order to operate at its top efficiency, which would be a pretty fair trade, I think. It might cut into the Longprobe's role somewhat, but given the Longprobe's 170K mass and need for a single pilot, I could see it maintaining its place in the world.
hehehe.. Y'know, I can't see changing much on the ARC (I'd have to look up a few posts to see if I suggested changing the YPR at all...)
True it has high mass, but like you said, multipassenger ship. Without good mass you'd never get worthwhile weapons into those rear turrets. I'm all for leaving it with the single forward weapon. If you give it 2 then people would just opt to unload the rear turrets and just max those 2 front guns for PvP superiority. (I know I would!)
I used my Aggresor extensively because I realized without the rear turret armed I could sink a lvl 8-10 blaster in the single forward slot. If I would have had 2 forward slots that thing would have been pretty decent in PvP.
Something to take into consideration folks, Imp's don't get a ship with 2 forward weapons till Tier 3 (Bomber 200k mass low YPR) and only one more at tier 4 (Advanced... 65k mass makes for a tight fit). All Imp ships are low on the mass end (probably how it should be though). Thats why we're all so excited about JSF and Hvy TIE/LN.
Thanks for paying attention to all this Tomo!
Message Edited by Vegitaa on 05-10-2005 02:00 PM
I was out my shiny new ARC-170 last night. My first impressions on flying it were that it looked awesome and handles fairly well too. I'm not sure of the exact stats, but it was comparable to an X-Wing. This is where i run out of good things to say!
You have nothing to fear about this ship being overpowered - its essentially useless!
99% of the time you'll have no gunner(s). This leaves you with 1 gun, which is mounted several meters wider apart than the X-Wing's. I found it hard to hit anything! Most of the time your target sits comfortably in the middle. To counter the fairly useless forward firepower setup, I mounted a level 10 gun. This made it more useable and I did get used to keeping my targets horizontal so as to improve my chances of hitting. However, with only 125K mass, this doesn't leave room for much of anything in the rear.
I took a friend up next as a rear gunner. After he stopped laughing about the ridiculous setup, we started trying to susss out the arcs of fire. The 2nd weapon mounts very awkwardly behind the cockpit, and as such it is the cockpit in the way that makes this gun so frustrating. I really don’t think you'll ever need / have use for the lower turret, let alone any spare mass to mount a gun there!
To use this currently you would probably need the following:-
1) The ability to mount an engine backwards so you can fly in reverse.
2) NPC's to man the turrets when you have no friends available.
It’s just that useless!
What would fix this ship?
1) The 2nd weapon (upper rear turret) should be mounted on top of the cockpit (there is already what looks like a hard point there). This would beef up the foward offensive capability when you have a gunner.
2) The lower rear turret moving to the current upper rear turret position.
3) An extra weapon hard point on the nose of the ship (again, it looks like there’s something there already).
4) The mass needs to be upped to around 200k
This would make the ship flyable solo; whilst making it competitive with an upper turret gunner that can fire forward and backward.
As it stands, with such a low mass, you could invest a fortune in both time and credits to get the lowest mass RE'd equipment, and you still wouldn't have a ship that is feasible in combat.
This machine really doesn't even compare to the Imperial and Privateer EP3 quest ships. How on earth this thing was designed to fight in a war with tiny droid ships is beyond me - you could never hit them with the front gun!
Now, I'm guessing these things would never happen over night, so in the mean time, the ability to re-deed the ship is a must - I can't bring myself to delete such a lovely looking ship ... but if I have to, I will!
Shame really...
Message Edited by Y0ungPadawan on 05-11-2005 09:55 AM
Vegitaa wrote:
hehehe.. Y'know, I can't see changing much on the ARC (I'd have to look up a few posts to see if I suggested changing the YPR at all...)
True it has high mass, but like you said, multipassenger ship. Without good mass you'd never get worthwhile weapons into those rear turrets. I'm all for leaving it with the single forward weapon. If you give it 2 then people would just opt to unload the rear turrets and just max those 2 front guns for PvP superiority. (I know I would!)
I used my Aggresor extensively because I realized without the rear turret armed I could sink a lvl 8-10 blaster in the single forward slot. If I would have had 2 forward slots that thing would have been pretty decent in PvP.
Something to take into consideration folks, Imp's don't get a ship with 2 forward weapons till Tier 3 (Bomber 200k mass low YPR) and only one more at tier 4 (Advanced... 65k mass makes for a tight fit). All Imp ships are low on the mass end (probably how it should be though). Thats why we're all so excited about JSF and Hvy TIE/LN.
Thanks for paying attention to all this Tomo!
(Edit: IF they change the YPR on the other reward ships, then I also suggested changing YPR on the ARC to fall inline with the rest Spdx 1.0 Acc 40 Dec 60 Pitch 275 Yaw 275 Roll 125. Currently it's YPR is higher than that I believe.)
Message Edited by Vegitaa on 05-10-2005 02:00 PM
You mean Spdx 0.95 surely? I don't think any of these ships should really have top speed considering their mass, especially the ones with tiny profiles. If they are going to carry that much more weight than an A-wing or TIE-Advanced they should be slower and less manuverable, especially when you consider the two blaster mounts they have. The way I see it the TIE-Adv and A-wing demonstrate how the pros and con's should be balanced:
Their mass andspeedare equal np there.
The TIE-Adv is more manuverable and carries an extra weapon, balancing drawback = relatively large profile.
A-wing has a small profile, balancing drawbacks, less manuverable and one less potential weapon mounted.
Now if the new reward fighters (Grievous Fighter and Jedi Starfighter) are going to sit in this category, with the adjusted stats you suggest we still have:
Equal speed. Not in itself a problem except for what it is combined with... 15K extra mass on both ships. This already means you could load heavier comps to make up for any short comings elsewhere however, those short comings are small to non-existent.
Both out perform or equal the A-wing for manuverability and carry an extra weapn slot (bear in mind how potentially lethal that is with 15k extra mass)
C.f the TIE-Adv you equal the weapon carrying capacity, and lose out marginally for manuverability however, if these are going to be your main target you have 15k's worth of extra engine space so you an throw in to equalise. Couple that with the fact both starfighters look like they have tiny profiles and I've got to ask, where is the balance in this really?
Personally I've like to see both ships rated Mass 80kSpdx0.95 Acc 40 Dec 60 Pitch 225 Yaw 225 Roll 110 and revise up or down after testing, and I meanplenty of testing.
Gift.
Message Edited by Giftmacher on 05-11-2005 02:58 AM
CuchulainnDarklight wrote:
"Older ships" such as the A-wing you mention are not OLDER they are decades YOUNGER and more advanced, there is no concievable way they would be worse designs than decades old equipment
We do not compare a 20 year old mass made standard production model with a new "mass"-made production model, we compare a current mass-made production model with the ship of the "best starfighter pilot in the galaxy" (Anakin Skywalker) which "he extensively customized to suit his demanding tastes for speed and control", which "..underwent numerous modifications [,,], meaning that its performance varied depending on its latest features or what tricked-out power plant it sported."
It's not just some random jedi starfighter, it's anakin skywalker's jedi starfighter (At least Darth Vader told me exactly this when he gave me that ship) which only *looked* like the others but was technically always state of the art as long as he owned it. If you want to play along the 'it's just not "realistic"' topic, you should look a bit closer at it
. What we have here is a completly tricked out uptodate high-tech ship which happens to come with an old looking "case" .(Quotes taken from the movie and the according entries in the starwars.com database)
But this way of arguing is silly anyway, if we start playing along this road I suggest we remove at least a-wing, b-wing and tie-advanced from JTL (two of them weren't existing at all at our point of the timeline that we are supposed to be in and the third only existed as a prototype piloted by - again - Darth Vader) and then I agree about giving the Jedi Starfighters stats that make it look like a 20 year old design
.Message Edited by darmokVtS on 05-11-2005 01:52 PM
Ugh.
If I were the Emperor, I'd have /force choked Raith Sienar for delivering that P.O.S.
darmokVtS wrote:
CuchulainnDarklight wrote:
"Older ships" such as the A-wing you mention are not OLDER they are decades YOUNGER and more advanced, there is no concievable way they would be worse designs than decades old equipment
We do not compare a 20 year old mass made standard production model with a new "mass"-made production model, we compare a current mass-made production model with the ship of the "best starfighter pilot in the galaxy" (Anakin Skywalker) which "he extensively customized to suit his demanding tastes for speed and control", which "..underwent numerous modifications [,,], meaning that its performance varied depending on its latest features or what tricked-out power plant it sported."
It's not just some random jedi starfighter, it's anakin skywalker's jedi starfighter (At least Darth Vader told me exactly this when he gave me that ship) which only *looked* like the others but was technically always state of the art as long as he owned it. If you want to play along the 'it's just not "realistic"' topic, you should look a bit closer at it
(Quotes taken from the movie and the according entries in the starwars.com database)
But this way of arguing is silly anyway, if we start playing along this road I suggest we remove at least a-wing, b-wing and tie-advanced from JTL (two of them weren't existing at all at our point of the timeline that we are supposed to be in and the third only existed as a prototype piloted by - again - Darth Vader) and then I agree about giving the Jedi Starfighters stats that make it look like a 20 year old design
Message Edited by darmokVtS on 05-11-2005 01:52 PM
I got my Heavy Z95 last night, and although I only got to play around with it for 30 minutes or so (server problems), I have to agree. I decommisioned (sp) my A-wing after only 30 minutes of flying. There are definately some issues here. I still need to try it out though, I wasn't in a group and don't know how good/bad it is doing missions. I only flew around Endor killing random stuff. I will test more tonight (hopefully with some guildies).
SixPack