Free Allegiance Forums

yes because SFs won't be able to roam with relatively high scan ranges and eye rocks/miners themselves, and sup should be roaming near likely mining sectors with carriers and it's clearly impossible to rip figs in on miner o one sector away.

the reason exp is popular is exp vs exp games are infinitely more fun and exciting than sup vs sup or sup vs tac or tac vs tac games. those variants therein involve teams halfassedly attacking miners as they ultimately turtle and sit around for hours at a time trying to end a game with tp2 or SBs. that is not the kind of gameplay that should be encouraged.

exp is high intensity action - or it should be - from game beginning to game end, fast-paced offense and defense and constant maneuvering and play through all stages of the game, none of this "maybe we'll go kill miners" "okay don't bother just sit around in base and defend everything while we wait for our tp2 scout/sbs to set up" garbage you idiot voobs seem to enjoy

The above comment payed for by the interceptor lobby

Don't get me wrong. I like flying an int a lot. I just also enjoy the different challenges flying the slow and slightly impotent fighters, and the sneaky and frankly rather crappy stealth figs bring. Boosting around in an int skull$#@!ing stuff with miniguns is fun, but it shouldn't be the alpha and omega of Allegiance.

Besides, flying an int is fun when it's a challenge. Knocking off some fuel and range from the PPs would make it more a challenge. I don't think anybody wants to nerf the fighting power of the ints. I know I don't.

Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Aug 27 2010, 11:03 AM) I don't think anybody wants to nerf the fighting power of the ints. I know I don't.

But isn't that what was proposed as an option in the very first post of this thread (and in a few varied forms thereafter)?

Zruty wrote:QUOTE (Zruty @ Aug 26 2010, 07:55 AM) 2. Another idea I came up just now, and less revolutionary, is: make miniguns do even less damage to the utility hull. This will cripple the ints' ability to rush and kill enemy miners. On the other side, it may make pushing cons easier against EXP, but hey, you can decimate the con D first, and then just keep the constructor rammed, can't you?

the.ynik wrote:QUOTE (the.ynik @ Aug 26 2010, 12:41 PM) - change damage classes/hull types so that figs don't get completely outwhored by ints. So either increase gat damage on int hull, or decrease mini damage on fig shield/hull. This would probably require adding a new hull type to avoid changing other stuff at the same time. Ints should still be better dogfighters than figs, but not by such a large margin.

DasSmiter wrote:QUOTE (DasSmiter @ Aug 26 2010, 01:00 PM) Another option that I've been thinking about is a nerf to Mini damage versus shields that would allow miners and bombers a bit more survival

And for the record, I fail to see a problem with exp. Rarely do teams ever win games with exp alone. Almost always exp teams are forced to buy a second tech in order to win. Isn't that a pretty obvious example that exp alone is not overpowered? Sure a few teams occasionally "out whore" their opponents with ints, but that is extremely rare and usually the result of other factors- like comms not buying gat2. I flew for one comm yesterday who had gat1 enh figs vs mini3 hvy ints and thereafter we had a 30 min debate in NOAT about how exp was somehow "overpowered," as if the sup commander (and team) were somehow competent.

_SRM_Nuke wrote:QUOTE (_SRM_Nuke @ Aug 27 2010, 06:38 PM) But isn't that what was proposed as an option in the very first post of this thread (and in a few varied forms thereafter)?

Ok, I'm still a bit feverish.

Let's just say I don't expect any of that happen then

Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Aug 27 2010, 04:32 AM) As a hopefully nice compromise I suggest turning booster 3 into fighter only equipment. Booster 1 and 2 would be the int options, booster 3 would be only for fighters. Could be a good idea to make an exception when it comes to Belters ints, as they are very bad even with booster 3 but marginally less so. Booster 3 isn't an overpowered piece of cheese like heavy booster, but it would give the adv sup team a way to power up their figs that the int team couldn't steal.

At this rate, all adv-level equipment except mini3 and util3 will be sup-exclusive by 2012. I'm not sure buffing adv figs vs ints is going to change anything.

_SRM_Nuke wrote:QUOTE (_SRM_Nuke @ Aug 27 2010, 11:38 AM) And for the record, I fail to see a problem with exp. Rarely do teams ever win games with exp alone. Almost always exp teams are forced to buy a second tech in order to win. Isn't that a pretty obvious example that exp alone is not overpowered? Sure a few teams occasionally "out whore" their opponents with ints, but that is extremely rare and usually the result of other factors- like comms not buying gat2. I flew for one comm yesterday who had gat1 enh figs vs mini3 hvy ints and thereafter we had a 30 min debate in NOAT about how exp was somehow "overpowered," as if the sup commander (and team) were somehow competent.

lol the amount of false premises and assumptions in this paragraph is staggering

_SRM_Nuke wrote:QUOTE (_SRM_Nuke @ Aug 27 2010, 10:38 AM) And for the record, I fail to see a problem with exp. Rarely do teams ever win games with exp alone. Almost always exp teams are forced to buy a second tech in order to win. Isn't that a pretty obvious example that exp alone is not overpowered? Sure a few teams occasionally "out whore" their opponents with ints, but that is extremely rare and usually the result of other factors- like comms not buying gat2. I flew for one comm yesterday who had gat1 enh figs vs mini3 hvy ints and thereafter we had a 30 min debate in NOAT about how exp was somehow "overpowered," as if the sup commander (and team) were somehow competent.

Sure, Exp has to go a second tech after. But if the other team goes a different tech than exp it's pretty much $#@!ed (unless the map is big) from the get-go.

My grasp of the game might not be as complete as some of you guys, but it almost seems as though it is mandatory to go Exp as a first tech because you can be sure your opponent will go Exp and you need to compete with him. Sure, you can change your approach after, but I still think it's $#@!ed up..

It almost feels like Exp is tier 1 (forget basic tech, but some exceptions like IC lt ints and belts basic figs+carriers). You bypass Exp and you're in trouble.

@D3D & Nuke. Fly more guys. With the increased mass of HTTs exp teams are winning games with never even buying bombers. Capping vs. Adv sup ftw.

_SRM_Nuke wrote:QUOTE (_SRM_Nuke @ Aug 27 2010, 08:38 AM) And for the record, I fail to see a problem with exp. Rarely do teams ever win games with exp alone. Almost always exp teams are forced to buy a second tech in order to win. Isn't that a pretty obvious example that exp alone is not overpowered? Sure a few teams occasionally "out whore" their opponents with ints, but that is extremely rare and usually the result of other factors- like comms not buying gat2. I flew for one comm yesterday who had gat1 enh figs vs mini3 hvy ints and thereafter we had a 30 min debate in NOAT about how exp was somehow "overpowered," as if the sup commander (and team) were somehow competent.

I'm pretty sure I beat that commander's dreg sup the next game by going giga spec spam.

Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Aug 27 2010, 01:29 PM) @D3D & Nuke. Fly more guys. With the increased mass of HTTs exp teams are winning games with never even buying bombers. Capping vs. Adv sup ftw.

lol? unless these figs have gat 1 dumb 1 i don't see how this is possible.

Ramming htts is mostly ineffective now. If it makes it near the hole, it's almost certainly going in.