EXP nerf
-
NightRychune
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 8:00 am
I'm the guy thats actually been around for the past 5 years.ofrogue wrote:QUOTE (ofrogue @ Nov 9 2010, 01:01 AM) Who are you and why should I listen to your objection?
I have been playing this game since 1999 in the AZ. There are some things I dislike about the current state of Allegiance, in terms of balance.
Based on your FAO account creation date, you either:
a) Have been inactive for several years (I would guess 5 or more)
b) Have been active more recently but have such a terrible reputation that you needed to make a new account so you wouldn't be ignored.
In either case, respect is earned not given. Your ideas showed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the tech paths are currently balanced.
QUOTE That being said, unless you're solap, you cannot postulate as to what interceptors are supposed to do.
I agree that figs should not be able to dominate ints in the same way that ints dominate figs at close range. However, more often than not the fig stands no chance what-so-ever - this is assuming it is piloted by a competent person.[/quote]
Please read this article about the role of Interceptor Aircraft. Direct quote:
QUOTE An interceptor aircraft (or simply interceptor) is a type of fighter aircraft designed specifically to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft, particularly bombers[/quote]
Allegiance interceptors (just like in real life!!) are intended to fly quickly to a target and kill it. They "intercept" it en route. They are supposed to be faster.
As for figs not standing a chance vs an int, it depends entirely on the competence of the pilot. An adv fig with gat3, qf3, ss3 (or dis3 if they are smart vs ints) can hold its own vs an int. If the pilot is stupid, and tries to juke and go toe-to-toe with the int, then yes he will almost always lose. We should probably nerf gunships too since you cant approach one head-on and just wtfpwn it without thinking.
As I said before (and as you didn't respond to), figs can do pretty much everything else better than ints BESIDES ship-to-ship combat. Truth be told that is one of the least important things in allegiance. DMing does not win games, it's just fun. There's no justification for making figs better at 1v1 vs ints.
Terran wrote:QUOTE (Terran @ Jan 20 2011, 03:56 PM) i'm like adept
Broodwich wrote:QUOTE (Broodwich @ Jun 6 2010, 10:19 PM) if you spent as much time in game as trollin sf might not be dead
I hated the $#@!ing heavy booster. Typical overkill solution.
Booster 3 being fighter specific would be a relatively minor tweak. Hell, maybe it would end up not being a good idea but I'd like to see it tried.
Also Icky
Booster 3 being fighter specific would be a relatively minor tweak. Hell, maybe it would end up not being a good idea but I'd like to see it tried.
Also Icky
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
Since when do we use wikipedia to balance our crafts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USCG_Long_Range_Interceptor -long range, no mini , only machine gun, no booster, good radar and a maximum of 35mps.
Hvy boost was very annoying because the fig/int difference was much bigger as it is now, and in the other direction, once hvy boost was bought.
Hvy boost was very annoying because the fig/int difference was much bigger as it is now, and in the other direction, once hvy boost was bought.
I have a johnson photo in my profile since 2010.
This one is better:lexaal wrote:QUOTE (lexaal @ Nov 9 2010, 07:57 PM) Since when do we use wikipedia to balance our crafts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USCG_Long_Range_Interceptor -long range, no mini , only machine gun, no booster, good radar and a maximum of 35mps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachem_Ba_349
The Escapist (Justin Emerson) @ Dec 21 2010, 02:33 PM:
The history of open-source Allegiance is paved with the bodies of dead code branches, forum flame wars, and personal vendettas. But a community remains because people still love the game.
@Icky
I did have some initial account problems, but that is no longer the case. I have only been active since maybe the summer of this year.
"Allegiance interceptors (just like in real life!!) are intended to fly quickly to a target and kill it. They "intercept" it en route. They are supposed to be faster."
- At no point did I say fighters should be faster than interceptors, that would make no sense.
"As for figs not standing a chance vs an int, it depends entirely on the competence of the pilot. An adv fig with gat3, qf3, ss3 (or dis3 if they are smart vs ints) can hold its own vs an int. If the pilot is stupid, and tries to juke and go toe-to-toe with the int, then yes he will almost always lose. We should probably nerf gunships too since you cant approach one head-on and just wtfpwn it without thinking."
- Gunships provide an entirely different role, independant of single pilot craft. In AZ fighters stood a significantly better chance vs. interceptors in their current shape.
"As I said before (and as you didn't respond to), figs can do pretty much everything else better than ints BESIDES ship-to-ship combat. Truth be told that is one of the least important things in allegiance. DMing does not win games, it's just fun. There's no justification for making figs better at 1v1 vs ints."
- This is a shortsighted retort. Interceptors can dominate sectors vs. a fighter team, to the point that an HTT can easily walk in and cap a station; this tactic is used to win games very often.
"In either case, respect is earned not given. Your ideas showed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the tech paths are currently balanced."
- Ultimately, the problem is that the current tech paths ARE NOT very well balanced.
I did have some initial account problems, but that is no longer the case. I have only been active since maybe the summer of this year.
"Allegiance interceptors (just like in real life!!) are intended to fly quickly to a target and kill it. They "intercept" it en route. They are supposed to be faster."
- At no point did I say fighters should be faster than interceptors, that would make no sense.
"As for figs not standing a chance vs an int, it depends entirely on the competence of the pilot. An adv fig with gat3, qf3, ss3 (or dis3 if they are smart vs ints) can hold its own vs an int. If the pilot is stupid, and tries to juke and go toe-to-toe with the int, then yes he will almost always lose. We should probably nerf gunships too since you cant approach one head-on and just wtfpwn it without thinking."
- Gunships provide an entirely different role, independant of single pilot craft. In AZ fighters stood a significantly better chance vs. interceptors in their current shape.
"As I said before (and as you didn't respond to), figs can do pretty much everything else better than ints BESIDES ship-to-ship combat. Truth be told that is one of the least important things in allegiance. DMing does not win games, it's just fun. There's no justification for making figs better at 1v1 vs ints."
- This is a shortsighted retort. Interceptors can dominate sectors vs. a fighter team, to the point that an HTT can easily walk in and cap a station; this tactic is used to win games very often.
"In either case, respect is earned not given. Your ideas showed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the tech paths are currently balanced."
- Ultimately, the problem is that the current tech paths ARE NOT very well balanced.