On 2009-06-30 04:41, Bardiche wrote:

When you have a Torpedo Cruiser on your six, you want to turn down your engines, since you're not going to outrun it. If that Torpedo Cruiser does the same, you're at an impasse: first one to move is going to have the other on their intimate six. And unlike the TC, the AC does not have its six guarded by armour, only shielding.

On 2009-06-30 06:27, Banshee wrote:

Quote:

Been playing this game on and off since the open beta love it but...you are killing the faction I have played for 5 plus years...

Really now. So you have always played K'luth? Even in the open beta?

Well then, shouldnt you realise that once upon a time, they had no armour? remember that ECCM drained energy? drained energy = cloaking failure?

K'luth have always had it better since their intended original incarnation.

But like you say, go back to basics, the REAL basics, the time when Kluth took REAL skill to play, fight and win with.

Not these children tossing out their toys because they cant go head to head with Dreads in Destroyers anymore.

Sheesh.

[ This Message was edited by: Banshee on 2009-06-30 06:31 ]

On 2009-06-28 17:17, Lark of Serenity wrote:
factions dont get "punished" for anything, stop taking it like its a personal affront. if they made a balance mistake calmly point it out and give logical arguments rather than yelling about it. go do some playtests and give us the results to SHOW that kluth are underpowered somehow, all i see here is speculation and secondhand reporting. im sure the devs will look into it regardless, but it makes it a lot easier for them if you have a quantifiable result for them to look at rather than asking "what the f were you thinking," which i suspect puts them off a bit.

in any case, as someone pointed out you arent supposed to be able to sit in the middle of an enemy fleet cloaked. although i think it was funny when kluth players were following enemy fleets around for 5 systems. the fact that nebula apparently work against you should be fixed, i would agree. but kluth is the most difficult faction to play and always has been. you need to think instead of complain. someone somewhere was "fing thinking" that they did a good job and had beta tests to say so.

On 2009-06-28 22:31, Azreal wrote:

Quote:

On 2009-06-28 17:17, Lark of Serenity wrote: ...stop taking it like its a personal affront. if they made a balance mistake calmly point it out and give logical arguments....

Sorry m8, but I have to agree here. Much as I think its unbalanced, I don't think it's personal.

On 2009-06-29 02:00, JBud wrote:
K'Luth weren't Nerfed....


It only seems differant because some cannons were replaced with heavy cannons twice as powerful to help with lag...

like 4 cannons were taken out for 2 heavys

and if you mean stations, not just K'Luth, EVERY station was nerfed to end the stationspace crapola.

Don't storm out during a free trial, just check out the new stuff buddy

Good times,
-JBud

On 2009-06-28 17:22, Dr. Fattierob, M.D. PhD wrote:
Just because you have cloak doesn't make weapons pass through you. Smart players know to keep firing where you last cloaked, especially if you were moving at slow speeds.

On 2009-06-29 02:47, Lark of Serenity wrote:
THANKYOU SONO

re Kluth:
i agree with both, though i would add a further suggestion that just occured to me - the problem thats been facing balancing kluth has revolved around the cloak, the fact that the human factions need some kind of counter to it but that the kluth still rely on it for defense, so..

why not have 2 cloaking devices?

one is a consistent cloak that is used for basic movement and maneuvering into position, the second is your escape cloak - it runs for a very short amount of time with a high energy cost, but is totally impenetrable, so you get a solid 10-15 seconds of invisibility to use after an alpha attack, or if youre discovered and need a quick out. just throwing ideas out there!

On 2009-06-29 15:14, Thorium wrote:
my problems with luth

too little front and rear armor. rear armor more for the problem with damage ment for the forward arc going to the rear arc. front armor because it is the arc most useful to fire from

wepons on rear mounts. always thought this was useless. 2 cannon and 2 rupters? realy what is the point? much rather have them on the foreward only. yes i know the other factions have the same,

the mixing of long and short... luth missile boats dont need that much (if any) PD. cloak is very useful in the place of PD.
just like luth attack ships dont need long range missiles. got several cruisers and destroyers that need the roles deffined (long or short, missiles or torps, cannon or rupters)

i to would like to see more damaging alphas and longer recharge but i can see the problem of one hitting small targets.

missile in general, the long arc when fired. sure it looks good but it does nothing for hitting a target. in fact the shorter the range the more you miss because of the arc. i fail to see why the missiles cannt just fire strate out the front

edit
just had to add, imo luth should be attacking or loseing. ship roles should tightly deffined.
and ive got to agree with the thought that fighter bombers in general should just be removed so the role of the bomber and tranny will be used once more
[ This Message was edited by: Thorium on 2009-06-29 15:25 ]

On 2009-06-30 04:41, Bardiche wrote:


You raise a good point, though, which begs the question: are the ICC supposed to be able to last longer on sheer defensive power alone? I like to think they can do so right now, since being able to divert part of their defense greatly assists their ability to block concentrated fire (somewhat). A smart ICC pilot also lets armour soak up some damage first before activating shielding to prevent unnecessary energy loss, and guard the armour as it repairs again.

On 2009-07-01 11:35, DarkScorpion wrote:

Quote:

On 2009-06-30 04:41, Bardiche wrote: You raise a good point, though, which begs the question: are the ICC supposed to be able to last longer on sheer defensive power alone? I like to think they can do so right now, since being able to divert part of their defense greatly assists their ability to block concentrated fire (somewhat). A smart ICC pilot also lets armour soak up some damage first before activating shielding to prevent unnecessary energy loss, and guard the armour as it repairs again.

Actualy i disgree with bardiche's tatics of letting armour Soak up and damge due to the nature of kluth beams you wont me soaking up much damage on your amour, more like taking a good chunk of your hull too
Or with ugto system damage abitlity weapons lossing those vital shields systems it has always seem to be the case once you got icc to the point of taking any armour damage game is almost over for that ship

The active shield system needs a slight recharge increase still your active shields are ment to stop your shields folding like a house of cards at close range as they do take a lot of energy to maintain reactive has less hp but cost less to run and are what you should be using for long distance as logicaly the more distances takes longer to impact your pulse waves have more chance of coming back online and getting rid of those nasty missiles anlong with you pule beams.

On 2009-07-02 07:41, Pegasus™ wrote:
Kluth
sustained battle