Okies, fine. No change then whatsoever on this thread. I'm screwed if I do and screwed if I dont. So screw you all who dont like it. NO CHANGE. Server rules are as they were b4 this thread was posted...
So I am to work build plans on the 6+1 BP cycle, with no "XP", instead of the plans I was starting to formulate at work all day? Isn't this a mid-server rules change on top of a mid-server rules change???
It is DH and I's fault we didnt fully flesh this out beforehand, but some X ships will still get built and we will see what happens with them...
It's impossible for 2 people to test every combination prior to a server launch. I'm sorry my wife's pregnant, and I saved as many "brownie points" to try to play this server instead of testing for hours on end... (Baby #3's due in May, so the mood-swings are just getting into full gear)
Oh, and julin, the ISC CCX is that good. Trust me. It can take down any DN with a little skill. The VP's you'll get when flying it is worth the cost.
I have to bow to the community's opinion. I did take the I-CCX out for a spin on the test server, and tried her out in a handful of missions. Being a bit of the old-school line ship pilot (ie, not a fan of carriers or X-ships), I felt the ship was somewhat, lacking, especially in light of the hoopla that she's bringing out in this here debate. Granted, I was drawing, and regularly waxing, AI BBs when I had her, but in a way I expected no less of the ISC's philoshophy as epitimized in the best of the ISC's design line. Also, when I peeked at her 329 BPV, if that is a true representation of the ship, then it's the "pocket BB", if you want to call our CCZ a "pocket DN"...
As a ranking officer though, I still disagree with the comparison of the I-CCX against
any given pair of CXs.
If I'm guessing right, "combat density" is a fancy term which boils down to "how much damage does this ship do at a given range", like, say, range 10 in a head-on pass. Perhaps combat density also takes into account things like an average of damage over a set of given ranges, or how much it does in various arcs besides forward centerline. Someone's got to send me a definition of what this means.
Now, a little definition of my own, "staying power". Let's take the biggest of the typical 2 on 1's mentioned here, say, a BB vs. 2 DNHs. BB cripples DN #1 before it can shoot for major damage, maybe the DN gets off with a lucky "severe damaging". DN #2 sneaks up behind the BB, and offloads a full alpha. The "staying power" of the BB allows it to absorb the somewhat smaller DNH strke with severe damage, but it's not quite crippled.
Try the same in the I-CCX against a pair of the other Plasma CXs, ie, the R-FHX or G-CCX. Both ships have, as their HW suites, 2xR and 2xS torps... The ISC does as everyone predicts, and cripples CX 1 before it ever fires a shot. Without a distraction, this is 2 on 1 after all, CX 2 gets within prime strike range of the I-CCX and returns fire as the I-CCX begins to recharge. The I-CCXs slight internals advantage (what, not even 10 boxes compared to a F-CX, I'm not popping back that far in this writing) won't be much of a factor here, ie, the I-CCX is just as crippled from CX 2 as CX 1 is crippled by the ISC. This lack of extra staying power, IMO, is why I was acting the way I have been, and asking for the discount...
As promised, as the Admin has spoken (twice
), I will abide by the price of 6 BP, no matter what I feel the case may be...
Topic: X-Ship BP proposal (Read 14703 times)