The EXP problem

[WhiskeyGhost]

Just because it worked years ago doesn't mean it necessarily applies in exactly the same way as it was since it's been changed. If that were true, you'd see more Rix tp1/bomber rushes, or kicking everyones asses with AoE Dis3 as TF Sup (or other tactics older vets talk about but don't happen that much nowadays).

Yes, you can pull off good coordinated tp2/SRM ab drops, but how 'often' does this happen with the ways things are? When did it become reliant to use XRM to make Sup effective against Exp? Was it a change in overall player skill/ability? or are there other things at work like changes to ships, techpaths, factions, various tweaks over time to many things, that has made it this way.

I'm just trying to state things, primarily based upon current Pickup Game experience (which makes up the biggest chunk of Alleg playtime), and trying to get people thinking about it more then anything. You can make an argument that Nerve Gas is a very effective and reliable if used in the proper situation, but that doesn't change the fact it barely works (the way it's used now) when applied unless the circumstances are already heavily in your favor.

Also, I'm sorry if i wasn't around to revel in the days when things were completely awesome /doh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":doh:" border="0" alt="doh.gif" />

[Picobozo]

QUOTE (spideycw @ May 14 2008, 05:59 PM) With light class hull how will they survive long enough to kill UTIL craft though?

They will hunt in packs like they should. They still do the same amount of damage and can still kill the escort. Now you might actually need more then 1 or 2 ints to kill all the defense and the miner. Fighters have to go through the same ordeal. The fighter may be the better ship in that situation given a low level of pilot skill, but the interceptor will now get there much faster and still be able to abort and escape if the going is too rough. The int may actually be able to escape faster and strafe around the miner more effectively with the reduced mass of light hull (still waiting on confirmation of the mass figures though).

[IB_]

Yes I want it to be more impossible to solo a defended miner while the rest of my team flys in circles.

[mcwarren4]

QUOTE (WhiskeyGhost @ May 14 2008, 05:15 PM) Just because it worked years ago doesn't mean it necessarily applies in exactly the same way as it was since it's been changed. If that were true, you'd see more Rix tp1/bomber rushes, or kicking everyones asses with AoE Dis3 as TF Sup (or other tactics older vets talk about but don't happen that much nowadays).

Yes, you can pull off good coordinated tp2/SRM ab drops, but how 'often' does this happen with the ways things are? When did it become reliant to use XRM to make Sup effective against Exp? Was it a change in overall player skill/ability? or are there other things at work like changes to ships, techpaths, factions, various tweaks over time to many things, that has made it this way.

I'm just trying to state things, primarily based upon current Pickup Game experience (which makes up the biggest chunk of Alleg playtime), and trying to get people thinking about it more then anything. You can make an argument that Nerve Gas is a very effective and reliable if used in the proper situation, but that doesn't change the fact it barely works (the way it's used now) when applied unless the circumstances are already heavily in your favor.

Also, I'm sorry if i wasn't around to revel in the days when things were completely awesome /doh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":doh:" border="0" alt="doh.gif" />

AoE Dis3, is another example of just making other tech paths more powerful to catch up with Exp rather than making Exp less powerful. It was dumb. AoE Dis3 figs ate ints and you didn't even have to directly hit them. Does tp1 work? Hell yes, if the drop is left to a capable pilot and a good plan by the commander. I still use it with Bios to this day. Does tp2 SRM work? It did not even two hours ago in a pickup game. You can chalk up the reasons as to why its not regularly used today to a number of factors, but primarily its because we've been given a win button rather than addressing the real problem. Anyway I don't think you are ever going to get my point because you are focusing on the one example I've pulled out (XRM) and trying to discount it rather than ponder what it is I'm trying to say. You've practically restated my point in your 2nd paragraph. No one is saying that we were so uber years ago. We are saying the game is continually being dumbed down by increasing tech strength across all lines rather than holding things steady and balancing it.

[WhiskeyGhost]

mcwarren,
i'm not quite good with words, i was trying to agree with you, especially on the dumbed down part actually /blush.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="blush.gif" />

[Picobozo]

QUOTE (IB_ @ May 14 2008, 09:08 PM) Yes I want it to be more impossible to solo a defended miner while the rest of my team flys in circles.

What a coincidence, I want it to be impossible for you to defeat multiple defenders and kill a major part of the enemy teams economy by yourself because of a serious imbalance of hull as well.

Glad to see we're on the main page.

[IB_]

Of course the solution is simple, stop antistacking so I have a chance of backup/teamwork.

[spideycw]

QUOTE (Picobozo @ May 14 2008, 07:33 PM) They still do the same amount of damage and can still kill the escort.

SF's and Figs both do more damage over time against things like miners and cons (due to range advantage and weapons) than ints. This is offset by them having the medium hull I thought?

[Grim_Reaper_4u]

QUOTE (spideycw @ May 15 2008, 06:58 AM) SF's and Figs both do more damage over time against things like miners and cons (due to range advantage and weapons) than ints. This is offset by them having the medium hull I thought?

Yeah but wouldn't it be smart to also nerf fig and scout dmg vs miners so as to give miners better survivability? Personally i find miners too easy to kill in both Pu games and squadgames : In squad games you can't keep em alive because 1 good rush kills your miners no matter how much d you have (usually) and in PU games 1 scout can solo a miner before anyone wakes up and goes out to defend it (let alone a fig or int finds the solo miner). Personally I'd prefer it if miners lived longer, nerfing everyones dmg vs miners (except tac) and making ints a little easier to kill would probably be a good idea and stimulate teamwork more.

[Picobozo]

QUOTE (spideycw @ May 15 2008, 12:58 AM) SF's and Figs both do more damage over time against things like miners and cons (due to range advantage and weapons) than ints. This is offset by them having the medium hull I thought?

You asked specifically how they were going to last long enough to kill a miner. My answer is that they will now have to hunt in packs and attack the defenders first (which most accomplished miner killers already do). Ints have no trouble killing miners with their current fire power and I have heard no arguments to nerf their damage dealing ability. I think the damage that mini's do is fine.

My problem is with the longevity and escape ability of an Interceptor under fire. I think the ability to take massive damage and escape rapidly away from hostiles should be mutually exclusive. Not a package deal like today's interceptor is.

All of the changes that the proposed light hull are going to make to gameplay lean toward making them less of an independent ship and more of a defensive pack animal (like pretty much every other small ship in the game has to operate). I guess we could just whine about it and bring up other issues like IB who wants an excuse to stop anti-stacking. Instead I would like to take a scientific approach and just see how it would pan out in some medium to large scale test games.

Every time this has been brought up in the past it has been shot down by a vocal minority that take a very close minded approach to how things should be balanced. Lets buck the trend and actually try to test it. We can go tit for tat with theoretical situations all day, but I would like to see actual results. Who knows it might work great and not be as bad as everybody is assuming.

It might make things more challenging, but that can be a gateway towards being more exciting and fun. And then again, I could be horribly wrong and it could suck donkey balls. I'm man enough to admit i'm wrong if i'm shown the proof. Right now all we're doing is denying a possible solution to the whole "Exp Prevalence" issue which is what I thought we were discussing in the first place.