Would be nice if the AX limit was removed. Something about how the mass of the ship can handle it or whatever the gently caress. Maybe add some Thargoid resistances.
False again - I did read it.you didn't even had the time to read the type 10 defender...
And they did that - but you are seemingly ignoring the"Utilising a reinforced Type-9 chassis as a STARTING POINT, Lakon overhauled and geared every aspect of the design for combat, producing a military behemoth ...
part, which (if you have been paying attention) points at the design being a relatively cheap rush job.…that could be produced in volume at short notice
Indeed, it endlessly frustrates me every time I outfit an AX ship, and the T10 would benefit immensely from it and would be much more useful in an AX CZ. Needs a shield buff but all else could stay as is as far as I'm concerned.Would be nice if the AX limit was removed. Something about how the mass of the ship can handle it or whatever the ****. Maybe add some Thargoid resistances.
Once again you just reinforce my point... even if you could put 9 AX weapons on a T10 its still bad even for AX combat, you say you have flown the T10 yet forget its biggest issue... CONVERGENCE, all AX weapons that are worth using are Fixed, you also fail to take into account of utility weapons such as Vent beams or FlakYeah - I remember that now you mention it (re AX weapons). I don't knock the Guardian weapons - a lot of my smaller ships are equipped with them, and equip Guardian SLFs on some of my ships - and I know the guardian lore BUT the lore really does fail to explain clearly why the Guardian weapons are effective against Thargoids while comparable human weapons are not. I have put it down to something to do with the nanite technology in the Guardian weapons but at the end of the day it does not really matter.
FTR the Guardians technically did not kill each other, the AI creations killed their biological creators/masters.
Regardless, one of the main limiting factors is that we are only able to fit 4 AX/Guardian weapons last time I checked. That means that however you outfit the T10D it will be unable to fully capitalise on all it's weapon mounts in counter-Thargoid operations.
I think you miss the point.Once again you just reinforce my point... even if you could put 9 AX weapons on a T10 its still bad even for AX combat, you say you have flown the T10 yet forget its biggest issue... CONVERGENCE, all AX weapons that are worth using are Fixed, you also fail to take into account of utility weapons such as Vent beams or Flak
Again, you are not taking its description into account nor are you accounting for the fact its a ship in the game a player can use with no indication it was designed to be useless, its a COMBAT ship that sucks at combat, the T10 was designed for combat while the likes of the Anaconda or Imperial Cutter where not, both do it better though.I think you miss the point.
It's not that we don't agree about T10 being imperfect - we just think it's understandable, because it's just a cheap ad-hoc technical.
Like putting some armour and guns on a bus
Of course it can't compete with more expensive, combat dedicated ships.
I flown T9 before and T10 was a step up for me as an armed freighter.
I think people tend to forget this. The Anaconda is a heavy trader by nature, while the Cutter is (iirc) a heavily-armed transport. The T10 is a 'military behemoth'. By all means it should be crushing everything in its path, rather than sitting around with a bunch of turrrts plinking at everything.the T10 was designed for combat while the likes of the Anaconda or Imperial Cutter where not, both do it better though.
No, definitely not good enough. Reasons for that:I always saw it as designed to be a platform for 4 AX multicannons. Preferably turreted. Is it not enough to go bug hunting? (serious question)
Fully outfitted, it's not really cheaper. Depending on the setup, even more expencive than the alternavites, while not performing as well.also - it's cheaper than the rest and doesn't require having any rank, so this also justifies it not being perfect to some extent.
You rush job is more important then all the other things is said about the ship being made for combat? The greatest problem of this ship in case you don't know by now is the hardpoint placement/conrvergence and if you look ate the ship belly you will see that rushed or not there is a lot of places to put hardpoints. They wanted the hardpoint placement to be poor located. Rushed job has nothing to do with that. DEV probably tought that the ship would have too many damage and now he barelly has any.False again - I did read it.
And they did that - but you are seemingly ignoring the
part, which (if you have been paying attention) points at the design being a relatively cheap rush job.
When you compare the T10D with the baseline T9, it is more combat ready and capable in pretty much every sense of the term.
My thoughts exactly... coudn't say any better. Having another ship viable in the game is a win to everyone. If it becomes powerfull they can nerf latter but make it s u c k just because of text seems really pointless.What's with the description and lore **? and like pages and pages of arguing over that stuff, it's meaningless.
Imo, game balance is where we should be looking at. Lore/descriptions can be easily changed afterwards as they are just text.
Heck, even the core internals have changed already, and our ships magically grow more optional slots in almost every patch, why are people so opposed to change ? lol
I understand the underdog charm. But if this is the goal, then the ship is massively overpriced. I mean, it comes with all the flaws it has. Yet depending on the setup it costs as much or even more than adequate setups of the other big ships. While not performing as well as they do.But that's the part I like about it - like it happens in RL, this is a design that proves to be somewhat inadequate at a role it was made for, while finds some use at other things.
I imagine I bought mine from army surplus. Unliked and abandoned.
I could fly Cutter, but I really like my crappy T10. The fact it's crappy is part of the charm for me.
Your ideas are interesting and may have merit. However, the problem is we won't see anything like that until 2020 at the earliest. The suggestions made by the OP could help the ship be more competitive in the meantime.Maybe the problem is not with the ship exactly, but the fact how turreted weapons work in game?
I mean, it would make sense that big ships are less manuoverable, so they should probably rely on turreted weapons more. You want WWI style dogfighting? Use small fighters with fixed weapons. Something between? Medium ships. Want fly big? You shouldn't hope to win by outmanouvering and fight by keeping enymy in you ironsights.
I would say big ships could use some exclusive buff to turreted weapons and even more distinctive manouverability difference from other classes.