3.14 PTU Wave 1 is out

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
Right now, the way things are, my Vanguard is going from daily driver to never leave the hangar.
It feel you man, but I think it's way too early to tell how this will all end up. They nerfed all ships when they made it so you can operate only guns or missiles, and that is reason to have two man teams, but I think what CIG doesn't get is that such coercion is going to backfire just like socialism backfires. Coercion doesn't work and it steams the shorts of free peoples.

What they need to do is provide such a large benefit to two man teams that people will team, meaning they need to put bigger and/or more guns in the turrets that only carry 2S2. When they figure it out we'll all be less pissed.

But yeah as stands, I am rethinking my commitment to the Vanguard. Still no way to tell with all the weapons ranges twisted, etc. First reaction is always bad, but lets see if it grows on us.
 

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
1,236
3,568
1,600
RSI Handle
McHale
Feeling you here. Feedback I've had/seen multiple times now is that the Vanguard and similar medium ships are *EXPECTED* to be survivable if there is a gunner in the turret, but not necessarily if the turret is empty. Personally I think this is far too limiting for the solo player and have expressed this directly, and expect to continue being a pain in the ass about it. Not how I enjoy spending my limited game time. :/
But that turret gunner is also the flight engineer, the E-War operator and the missile operator. When does that second person have time to man guns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Szioul

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
1,236
3,568
1,600
RSI Handle
McHale
It feel you man, but I think it's way too early to tell how this will all end up. They nerfed all ships when they made it so you can operate only guns or missiles, and that is reason to have two man teams, but I think what CIG doesn't get is that such coercion is going to backfire just like socialism backfires. Coercion doesn't work and it steams the shorts of free peoples.

What they need to do is provide such a large benefit to two man teams that people will team, meaning they need to put bigger and/or more guns in the turrets that only carry 2S2. When they figure it out we'll all be less pissed.

But yeah as stands, I am rethinking my commitment to the Vanguard. Still no way to tell with all the weapons ranges twisted, etc. First reaction is always bad, but lets see if it grows on us.
They squashed the gun ranges, because they want combat to be close. So close that the Hammerhead no longer has a job.

Where do you sit the second person of a two man team in a Sabre, Hornet, Gladius, Arrow, Hawk, etc.?
 

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
Vanguard can crew three though.

I don't think the issue is that the Vanguard is not survivable with just one player. I think the real issue is that the REO has to provide more utility than a second pilot in a second ship. What CIG is not taking to account is that in SC, there is an unlimited number of ships the players can fly. We didn't pay $70M for a Hornet and we can therefore have as many Hornets as we like. A single Vanguard does not provide more firepower, nor capability than two Hornets, or Sabres, etc. It would if it had a decent turret, but the turret sucks. No one wants to fire just 2 S2 guns.

I also have to note there is no longer a way to match up the chin and nose guns. They're going to have two entirely different pips and ranges, which makes half the pilot guns useless all of the time--making it a poor fighter. Why would anyone chose it over a Scorpious? Not cool, CIG. Not cool at all.
 

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
Okay so, given the new numbers for weapons, anyone here chime in. Why would you choose to fly any fighter other than the Vanduul Glaive stealthed or not, when its S5 weapons hit at much greater distance than any other fighters with much more power, and you can ram things to cut them in half? Maybe the Scorpious will be attractive when it comes out, but it's not out yet.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Radegast74

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
They squashed the gun ranges, because they want combat to be close. So close that the Hammerhead no longer has a job.
That's a good argument for all large ship turrets to have a minimum of S5 turret guns.
Where do you sit the second person of a two man team in a Sabre, Hornet, Gladius, Arrow, Hawk, etc.?
Still can't. Maybe my point above wasn't clear. I think if you want to motivate players to team up to fly heavy fighters, those fighters have to provide some sort of clear advantage over two small or medium fighters. Giving the REO control over 2S2 guns is not sufficient motivation no matter how necessary it is to lock missiles, do EW, etc. That's just IMHO but my experience is no one really flies two seaters with anyone in the second seat, so looks like the argument needs to be made for that. I'm not seeing it.

If the Vanguard REO had control over 4S3 guns you can be sure people would play the seat. The chin/nose problem that has now been created is even more FUBAR however. Making it so the pilot can NEVER use all his guns is FUBAR. They'd be better off to pull all the nose guns and add another S5 to the chin, or move them inside the nose.
 

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
1,236
3,568
1,600
RSI Handle
McHale
Vanguard can crew three though.

I don't think the issue is that the Vanguard is not survivable with just one player. I think the real issue is that the REO has to provide more utility than a second pilot in a second ship. What CIG is not taking to account is that in SC, there is an unlimited number of ships the players can fly. We didn't pay $70M for a Hornet and we can therefore have as many Hornets as we like. A single Vanguard does not provide more firepower, nor capability than two Hornets, or Sabres, etc. It would if it had a decent turret, but the turret sucks. No one wants to fire just 2 S2 guns.

I also have to note there is no longer a way to match up the chin and nose guns. They're going to have two entirely different pips and ranges, which makes half the pilot guns useless all of the time--making it a poor fighter. Why would anyone chose it over a Scorpious? Not cool, CIG. Not cool at all.
Max crew of 2 in a Vanguard. Manning the guns is a secondary function, especially on the Sentinel.
 

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
1,236
3,568
1,600
RSI Handle
McHale
That's a good argument for all large ship turrets to have a minimum of S5 turret guns.
Size 4 guns are the largest practical gun against a fighter according to the new combat model.

Still can't. Maybe my point above wasn't clear. I think if you want to motivate players to team up to fly heavy fighters, those fighters have to provide some sort of clear advantage over two small or medium fighters. Giving the REO control over 2S2 guns is not sufficient motivation no matter how necessary it is to lock missiles, do EW, etc. That's just IMHO but my experience is no one really flies two seaters with anyone in the second seat, so looks like the argument needs to be made for that. I'm not seeing it.

If the Vanguard REO had control over 4S3 guns you can be sure people would play the seat. The chin/nose problem that has now been created is even more FUBAR however. Making it so the pilot can NEVER use all his guns is FUBAR. They'd be better off to pull all the nose guns and add another S5 to the chin, or move them inside the nose.
The Vanguard REO has other duties, in addition to the guns.

Actually right now use BVRS and those size 2 nose guns have the same range, and twice, both the velocity and the dps of the Galadreen.

Now, throw a size 4 ballistic on the chin, and it matches up nicely with the nose guns.

So you have a choice you can go strictly anti-fighter, or you can go dual purpose and not use the size 5 against fighters.
 

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
3,565
10,962
2,350
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
Size 4 guns are the largest practical gun against a fighter according to the new combat model.
Given several of the S5 have speed to target amongst the highest, it's hard to understand in what sense that is true. Any ideas? Do they plan to nerf all S5 and above guns to hit?

I am trying so hard not to be angry about the changes and give them a fair chance, but it's getting harder and harder.
 
Last edited:

Bambooza

Grand Admiral
Sep 25, 2017
4,726
14,856
1,250
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
Given several of the S5 have speed to target amongst the highest, it's hard to understand in what sense that is true. Any ideas? Do they plan to nerf all S5 and above guns to hit?

I am trying so hard not to be angry about the changes and give them a fair chance, but it's getting harder and harder.
It was my understanding that the speed to target will still be the highest but the restriction will be on either the ship itself maneuverability or the turret turn rate will increase as the turret gets larger thus the effective target size will increase as the gun size increases (while it would be possible to snip smaller ships or ships flying in straight lines towards you). It's starting to play out a lot like how EVE does with their gun scaling and not being able to reliability hit smaller ships with large guns.

The other thing to take into consideration with ballistics is they were always intended to be physicalized and require resupply ships to be part of the fleet. It was part of the trade-off, a large amount of damage over a quick period with little energy requirements but you would need to fall back to a carrier or Vulcan/StarFarer. Or you can go energy for a more attrition fight with a lower ttk but faster recovery time and not requiring support ships.

I have a feeling that the ability to rearm will be coming with refuel or shortly after and that it will increase the effectiveness of ballistics again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lorddarthvik

Deroth

Grand Admiral
Donor
Sep 28, 2017
1,533
5,099
1,350
RSI Handle
Deroth1
Instead of seeing ballistics with such extremely limited ammo capacity, I'd rather see them be much more prone to overheating...like overheat after around the same quantity of rounds fired as it typically takes comparable energy weapons to drain their capacitor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cugino83

vahadar

Vice Admiral
Donor
Mar 4, 2020
1,463
4,418
500
RSI Handle
vahadar
I didn't recognise it either. According to the name panel below the display in that shot, Crusader Mercury Star Runner.
View attachment 21043
View attachment 21044
I even have one >.<. Did they rework it for this patch or am I just too used to seeing it from behind?
It is not an MSR actually but a ship a bit similar circling around Orison, you can see it clearly at multiple spots flying around the city if you have access to PTU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lorddarthvik

Cugino83

Admiral
Apr 25, 2019
1,358
4,288
700
RSI Handle
Cugino
I didn't recognise it either. According to the name panel below the display in that shot, Crusader Mercury Star Runner.
View attachment 21043
View attachment 21044
I even have one >.<. Did they rework it for this patch or am I just too used to seeing it from behind?
Thas is a StarRunner.. and no, no rework, it looks like that since it came out... minus the support standing below obviusly.

It was my understanding that the speed to target will still be the highest but the restriction will be on either the ship itself maneuverability or the turret turn rate will increase as the turret gets larger thus the effective target size will increase as the gun size increases (while it would be possible to snip smaller ships or ships flying in straight lines towards you). It's starting to play out a lot like how EVE does with their gun scaling and not being able to reliability hit smaller ships with large guns.

The other thing to take into consideration with ballistics is they were always intended to be physicalized and require resupply ships to be part of the fleet. It was part of the trade-off, a large amount of damage over a quick period with little energy requirements but you would need to fall back to a carrier or Vulcan/StarFarer. Or you can go energy for a more attrition fight with a lower ttk but faster recovery time and not requiring support ships.

I have a feeling that the ability to rearm will be coming with refuel or shortly after and that it will increase the effectiveness of ballistics again.
Yep, and I agree, but looking at Erkull it seams that the ballistic only receive an axed magazine and not a damge buff (but they have an improved range), in this situation without the phisicallized damage in game they seams a bit trashy IMHO.
Trading more damage for a limited ammo capacity will be a good chance pushing player to choose weapons basing on theyr activity AND forcing them to usem whisely... as they appear to be they will be left on the weapons shop shelf...

Instead of seeing ballistics with such extremely limited ammo capacity, I'd rather see them be much more prone to overheating...like overheat after around the same quantity of rounds fired as it typically takes comparable energy weapons to drain their capacitor.
More then the heat I'll go with a jamming chance eventually a % that will increase over with the weapon use and lack of maintenance, so you'll have a reason to spend some time/UAC on ship mantenance.
 

vahadar

Vice Admiral
Donor
Mar 4, 2020
1,463
4,418
500
RSI Handle
vahadar
675 rounds for the Revenant. That's something like 41 or 42 seconds. Crazy nerf. Who would use that now? Horrible. What a poor decision. There were so few people using gattlings already and now everyone is going to go energy. So Stupid.
Tbh it is enough. Revenants are already not something you pray and spray in 3.13. The actual ammo count in 3.13 is enough to kill more than half a dozen ships during our CFT sessions before you have to reload. It is still decent the way it is in 3.14 but you can only kill around 3-4 small ships max (with gt220 ie).
As for nobody using ballistics, well I have another opinion and quite some pvpers would agree ;)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • o7
Reactions: Bambooza and Deroth

vahadar

Vice Admiral
Donor
Mar 4, 2020
1,463
4,418
500
RSI Handle
vahadar
Thas is a StarRunner.. and no, no rework, it looks like that since it came out... minus the support standing below obviusly.
The model shown in that pic is a MSR, but the ship flying around in Orison is not, or it is a new variant.
 

Cugino83

Admiral
Apr 25, 2019
1,358
4,288
700
RSI Handle
Cugino
It is not an MSR actually but a ship a bit similar circling around Orison, you can see it clearly at multiple spots flying around the city if you have access to PTU.
StarRunner burn-in.png
Ehm... you are confusing the one on the stand with the one with the glass top fliing around... those are the so glorius space shuttle everyone is asking for during SCL eppisode... and I'll love to have one of those, for a CI tuoring ship, and entri level people trasport (the MPUV is not realy an appropriate ship for commersial flights).
 
  • o7
Reactions: Deroth

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
1,236
3,568
1,600
RSI Handle
McHale
Given several of the S5 have speed to target amongst the highest, it's hard to understand in what sense that is true. Any ideas? Do they plan to nerf all S5 and above guns to hit?

I am trying so hard not to be angry about the changes and give them a fair chance, but it's getting harder and harder.
Other than the Shotgun (800) and the tank gun (612) all of the Size 5 guns are, according to Erkul, 700m/s. Size 4 and lower are 1400m/s for the repeaters and 700m/s for the canons.

To shoot fighters you are supposed to use repeaters.
 

vahadar

Vice Admiral
Donor
Mar 4, 2020
1,463
4,418
500
RSI Handle
vahadar
Ehm... you are confusing the one on the stand with the one with the glass top fliing around... those are the so glorius space shuttle everyone is asking for during SCL eppisode... and I'll love to have one of those, for a CI tuoring ship, and entri level people trasport (the MPUV is not realy an appropriate ship for commersial flights).
@Cugino83 @Raven_King my bad you are right that is of course an MSR.
I dont know why my brain was thinking of another replied I made elsewhere about a 3.14 question about some unidentified ship looking like an MSR (the new Orison shuttle actually indeed), and when I read about the quote of the quote of Shadow Reaper I thought about that since it was also Shadow asking in that other thread :)
I thought his question about that unknown ship was in this thread here, I replied without checking the video here :)

Linking the other thread that I was refeering to hehe
 
Forgot your password?