They nerfed the Galaxy....for better or worse. - Page 2

Zumthor · 2002-11-24, 06:22 PM

What is the difference between direct and indirect damage?
Are you talking about like splash damage?
Just a little confused but thrilled that the PS guys read these forums!

Sytadel · 2002-11-24, 07:39 PM

Zumthor: I think what they mean is in the old galaxy design with the 75mm cannons, the cannons swiveled around irrelavent to the galaxy's direction, and that looked a bit wierd.

Anyway I'm all for the change, the game seems to be taking on that sci-fi realism tone in everything else, so the galaxy should follow the same rules. For the same reason, I think bombers should be used as well. But, as is the case in real life, they'd need to be highly defended by other aircraft, and obviously be very expensive. No doubt they'd require a very good pilot (or multiple pilots?) and very good commander. It's just a matter of balance ;)

Oh, yeah, I'm a friend of morphius', interested in joining that New Dawn clan.

Hamma · 2002-11-24, 08:11 PM

Hey Sytadel do you mind shrinking your sig down a few hundred pixels? (in width)

Messing up the forum layout a bit

btw, welcome

SVoyager · 2002-11-24, 09:14 PM

wow i didnt knew the devs were posting stuff here also. neeaaat!!!

oh i think the 20mm cannons plus a added tailgunner will be much better. that 6 were one big blind spot as people said. good move!

CrazyMike · 2002-11-24, 10:13 PM

All they've done is change the Galaxy from a flying tank to a personnal/vehicle carrier. I think it's a smart move. Leave the tank busting to the troops on the ground. The Galaxy should just be for moving equipment and people around.

CrazyMike

Hamma · 2002-11-24, 10:23 PM

Indeed I agree.. makes it more of an air vehicle.. plus it can defend itself a little better if its escort is gone.. or non existant

KoldFusion · 2002-11-25, 12:29 AM

I think it was a good change..... especially removing that blind spot i was alittle concerned about that. I wasn't really sure why the 75mm cannons were on there but i am happy to see the chainguns (good air D as well as suppressive fire). Would i be correct in assuming that the chainguns will still have movement? or will they be fixed in place?

NapalmEnima · 2002-11-25, 02:04 AM

Originally posted by WRH_KoldFusion
Would i be correct in assuming that the chainguns will still have movement? or will they be fixed in place?

Given that each is manned by a gunner, that's a pretty safe bet.

I don't see this as a "nerfing" at all. It's an upgrade.

It can now defend itself in the air. Those 20mm cannon are going to be much more effective in an AA role than the cannons. I wouldn't be suprised to find that a group of 4-5 galaxies flying in formation will be able to effectively defend themselves from an equal number of gunships... Overlapping fields of fire and all that.

Validuz · 2002-11-25, 02:30 AM

Originally posted by SmokeJumper
Nerf? We haven't released the game yet and we're being accused of nerfing already? Sheeeeeeeeesh. You guys are tough.

Anyway, the 20mm chainguns are actually a lot better than the 75mm cannons in almost every aspect where you would be flying the Galaxy. Using the Galaxy as a mounted gun platform to shoot at tanks would probably result in you losing a battle with those same tanks. And the chainguns are better versus infantry anyway.

The 75mm cannons were just too unwieldy to use. And it looked very strange to use indirect fire weapons from an aircraft. Plus, they were totally useless against air attackers.

So we changed them. But no way was it a nerf...even if we HAD released the game already.

Whoever this guy is, doesnt know what hes talking about ;p Pfft, never heard of the name SmokeJumper

I see a "dev" under his name, must mean devious

lol, anyway.. just figured id pick on the dev ;p

*edit* btw, just a joke, dont want this hurting my chances of bet testing anymore than they already are.. =)

<3
Valid

Sytadel · 2002-11-25, 06:49 AM

Oh whoops, sorry bout the sig. Haven't had that prob before. *fixes*

Also, what exactly does nerfing mean? I've heard a few different ones over different games. I always thought it meant rendering a unit useless, lol.

Hamma · 2002-11-25, 06:52 AM

Nerfing means they decresed the power of somthiing, In my experience nerfing has always been bad.

BTW, plz remove Validuz from the beta consideration process

j/k

Sytadel · 2002-11-25, 07:14 AM

Tanjent: Is there any word on how beta testers will be decided? I sure hope that living in Australia doesn't render my chances non-existant.

Hamma · 2002-11-25, 07:28 AM

1000.. they have mentioned they may take only American testers due to server location.. dunno what will happen however.

Tobias · 2002-11-25, 08:16 AM

nerfs can be oks, they are not bad, stop hating on the nerfs before they go get their foon homies and beat you up.

Airlift · 2002-11-25, 09:32 AM

A nerf is almost metaphysical in that it only exists in relation to those who experience it. Let's assume for a moment that the Galaxy is weaker as Tobias suggests and not stronger as Smokejumper says (nevermind that only one of them has a frame of reference). It still can't be a nerf for anyone but the internal testers because we didn't fly or shoot from the Galaxy before the balance change. In fact, you could argue that it isn't really even a balance change for us because we don't see the outcome of the changes, only the report that it was this and it was changed to that.

In any case devs, Tobias is one of those crazy Vanu. That makes him a little off right out of the gate. The real cries of nerfage will come after we get the game in our hot little hands and you start balancing against external testers.