Free Allegiance Forums

Sushi wrote:QUOTE (Sushi @ Apr 20 2008, 07:48 PM) Figs are fine, I think. If anything needs a tweak, it's ints, and only a slight one. As it stands, they're more effective multi-role ships than fighters are. I thought that in theory, ints are supposed to be short-range defense-oriented ships while figs are for longer range, more extended, and more varied missions.

Something as simple as reducing booster capacity/increasing fuel consumption rate would help a lot to keep ints in their theoretical "role." If they burn through fuel faster, they can't travel as far, and are forced to stick with more defense-oriented roles (or pay more dearly with a long, slow flight home). It might be good to up int sig a touch as well (EoR does this and I like it).

or, perhaps increase fuel capacity slightly, increase fuel usage/boosters max speed slightly, but as a tradeoff you lower the regular top speed down about 15-20mps. Then you go faster while boosting, but you basically can't glide around everywhere since it's too slow. This would force you to either take a long time to go on an extended distance mission (like raiding miners 3 sectors away from nearest base) or *gasp* expand closer!

Yes, fighters are a bit weak, mostly because they rely upon Garrison/Starbase for half their health (shields, which the enemy will no doubt get for their own scouts at the least [exception:Belters]) and rely upon missiles to do most of their damage which are either fooled by countermeasures, or dodged most of the time (exception:Rix and TF which don't use missiles).

Drizzo wrote:QUOTE (Drizzo @ Apr 20 2008, 07:52 PM) Haven't you flown for me where I go Giga Sup vs. (Insert faction here) Exp and made hvy ints cry?

Havent you commanded against me when I go Giga Sup vs (Insert faction here) Exp and make you cry

Mr. Kltplzyxm wrote:QUOTE (Mr. Kltplzyxm @ Apr 20 2008, 06:53 PM) Do you realize how hard it is to hit an int at 750m? It's not about dm'ing an int vs. fig. It's about making figs more effective in their roles. Letting them rip easier gives the pilots a better chance at surviving an encounter better. Right now, fig vs. int = int wins. Besides, the gun range is still not a big advantage for the fig as an int's low sig will make it hard for him to utilize the range perk.

You fail at Fig vs Int 101, we will re-enroll you into the next session... Fig beats Int 75% of the time if it has the propper GA's from your wouldbe commander and is flown by a competent fig pilot..

Do they need a perk? maybe..

Do they need range? nah they already own an int if flown properly..

Do they need quicker rip time? NO, your wouldbe commander needs to plan for buying the rip GA. They already rip away from my intercepter way to easily.

why would you want to dogfight a fig on equal grounds? or more precisely, why would you want to dogfight a defending int if your swarming firepower is MUCH higher with figs?

Evincar wrote:QUOTE (Evincar @ Apr 20 2008, 10:41 PM) why would you want to dogfight a fig on equal grounds? or more precisely, why would you want to dogfight a defending int if your swarming firepower is MUCH higher with figs?

Exactly what I'm standing AGAINST. Figs should be figs, Ints should be Ints. Though I do cross the line in that Figs shouldn't have to fail AND be $#@!ed (ie. podded), when it can be given a better chance to recognize when it has failed and avoid getting $#@!ed as well.

Also, Why the hell is it that we allow ints to just boost into the shadows if they fail and be able to get a second try almost right away (with slightly less hull), while figs are unforgiven?

Noble wrote:QUOTE (Noble @ Apr 20 2008, 07:50 PM) You fail at Fig vs Int 101, we will re-enroll you into the next session... Fig beats Int 75% of the time if it has the propper GA's from your wouldbe commander and is flown by a competent fig pilot..

Given missiles in a 1v1 fight, sure. Run out of missiles and it's questionable. But try and see if the figs will win in a big 5v5 furball. There's no way any fig can do any kind of standoff fighting in larger numbers given the high sig and lower base speed.

Secondly, the GA's cost money for those advantages to get on equal footing. Exp needs nothing other than the initial build and upgrades.

Just a thought : booster does not raise signature immediately. Even the afterburners on normal jetplanes do not alter the exhaust the very moment they are powered up(and leave the engines hot for quite long after they power-off). My suggestion is to have a liniar/expoential increase in signature (with a limit of course) when the booster is used, so that there is a power-up and coold down times (hence it gives a chance to find a non boosting int, which just ran away and tries to hide).

As for the ints. I totally agree with Whiskey, int's base speed should be about half of a pod, on the other hand, I would suggest a lower fuel capacity being countered by an (~)instant(~) fuel reload. So that it is an int in itself, a raging agile ship that can shred anything into pieces, but has a REALLY hard time getting further than 1 sector away.

A GT guardian will be a good example of this.

The only thing I would like to see for figs are to decrease the sig a little bit. Figs are meant to be hit and run even if ther are in the mis-nomered Supremacy tech and hit and run they do very well indeed, a fig can unleash a lot more firepower then an int in more situations (i.e. figs are better for killing cons/miners) and being able to ripcord while boosting away means most figs can actually hit and run.

Figs are not so great at defending miners although they can camp an aleph quite well, and that is because as said before that sfs can just launch missiles from range and ints can sneak up and pulverise the figs, so either increase fig scan range or prefferably decrease sig please.

I second almost all fig perks here except the scan range. Scan range should be the dominion of scouts, period. We have too many multipurpose thingies flying around anyways.

Mr. Kltplzyxm wrote:QUOTE (Mr. Kltplzyxm @ Apr 21 2008, 12:23 AM) Here's a novel idea... how about extending gatt range to 800-900m? ~twice that for mg. That, the base speed, and the rip time thing... those alone would make a huge difference.

problem is people can't aim anyway, it's why ints are so popular, you just fly so close to the enemy you can't miss.

if they got a range perk it would need to be in particle speed, not lifespan.

but what i really want to see is the cost of seeker getting halved, comms need to buy seeker 3 more often.

1 or 0.5 sec less riptime would be good too, so many times where you get podded in the last part of the last second of the rip sequence /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" />