Jump to content

Aegis Sabre


VoA

Recommended Posts

@Astrojak @Scotterius Ships and equipment behavior break on a daily basis and with half of the mechanics still not online yet (component system-power plants- cpu etc, stealth, maneuverability balancing, radar, overclocking, ship stats), I would caution everybody to avoid making hasty decisions based off of present performance(like melting for a SH for instance). If there is one thing we know for sure, these ships will continue to change and evolve as more variables come into play.

That being said, the sabre isn't in too bad of a spot at the moment mind the shields(same with the khartu-al) however there is still too much in the air to arrive at what the ship will and won't be. All we can go on at the moment is their intended roles as described on their ship pages and dev comments, but even that is still subject to change (see cutlass).

I have been browsing the rsi forums quite frequently as of late and if there is one common theme among backers over there, it is short sightedness. That being said, the feedback is needed now to refine the ships however everyone has a different image in their head as to how ships should perform, so keep that in mind.

I think right now CIG's current problem is marketing maneuverability when the current set of fighters with the flight model does not really allow maneuverability to have a distinct advantage like the previous flight model. They need to continue to swing the pendulum drastically to make these ships feel different.

Everyone wants to compare the sabre to the hornet in a 1v1 scenario and I'm not sure that is the right way to go about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Doopsums said:

@Astrojak @Scotterius Ships and equipment behavior break on a daily basis and with half of the mechanics still not online yet (component system-power plants- cpu etc, stealth, maneuverability balancing, radar, overclocking, ship stats), I would caution everybody to avoid making hasty decisions based off of present performance(like melting for a SH for instance). If there is one thing we know for sure, these ships will continue to change and evolve as more variables come into play.

That being said, the sabre isn't in too bad of a spot at the moment mind the shields(same with the khartu-al) however there is still too much in the air to arrive at what the ship will and won't be. All we can go on at the moment is their intended roles as described on their ship pages and dev comments, but even that is still subject to change (see cutlass).

I have been browsing the rsi forums quite frequently as of late and if there is one common theme among backers over there, it is short sightedness. That being said, the feedback is needed now to refine the ships however everyone has a different image in their head as to how ships should perform, so keep that in mind.

I think right now CIG's current problem is marketing maneuverability when the current set of fighters with the flight model does not really allow maneuverability to have a distinct advantage like the previous flight model. They need to continue to swing the pendulum drastically to make these ships feel different.

Everyone wants to compare the sabre to the hornet in a 1v1 scenario and I'm not sure that is the right way to go about it. 

@evilbyte can beat me in a sabre if I have broadswords.  

People were melting the Khartu'al after the first PTU patch.  It was nuts.  You need to give the ships some time to work on the balance.  

@Doopsums I think maneuverability is really important in this model.  Jerk just makes using the agility not as intuitive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well with the introduction of the 3rd order flight model, mass and acceleration play an important factor in vectoring. Combine that with a SH's high hit points, most players can ignore maneuvering as its pitch and yaw are more than sufficient enough to keep a target in a firing solution which results in soaking damage and having a higher dps, negating the need to "evade". It's why I was little concerned when they marketed the blade to "get on someone's six" when that advantage is virtually non existent. I think the flight model was a step in the proper direction however they still don't have ships that can truly exploit that yet. The hope is that based off of your "style of play", the ship you dog fight with will complement it. Right now 99% percent of dogfights turn into long ellipse circle fights with favor the hornet. They will get there eventually, but it's not there yet.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Nova-Prime Maneuverability is a big deal.  It helps you get better firing positions, you can more easily dodge missiles. You can choose your engagements or disengage far easier.  It is a big deal withe sabre.  You keep your top and bottom out of view and you are hard to hit.  I am working on write up a intermediate flight course. If you want, I can take you through the rough course and focus on sabre v SH? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Doopsums, i reread my post and your reply didn't make much sense, not sure why you included me? I was referring to the resent RSI debate regarding Ben's comments about the saber not being a stealth ship but rather a stealthy ship... I understand the difference but it seams many backers don't and like to bring up the original concept material as if it was written in stone. There is a thread regarding this but i couldn't find it again so i posted here, in the main saber thread. Anyways to reiterate my post, weather the saber is a stealth ship or just a ship designed to be stealthy, anyone can equip them with low emission weapons, engine and void armor similar to the ghost hornet. The combination would make for a very stealthy lethal ship.

Hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

AJ

AstroJak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was referring to your statement of people "freaking out" about mechanics such as stealth with the prowler. I then combined that with my own rant. My apologies. We are in agreeance about people holding what Ben states in a forum post or in the lore as being in "stone" when history has shown that it is not always correct coupled with mechanics not being fully implemented yet such as stealth. Basically it comes down to knee jerk reactions based off of bugged game play elements paired with pure speculation. I just saw an opportunity to rant a little bit and I was in the mood. ;-).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I played vandul swarm today with the sabre (with 4 size 2 shields) and it was great fun! It is a great alternative to the hornet. I would agree with @Doopsums that the hornet can tansform itself into a tumbling turret, and it can get kills fast with judicious use of boost and burner.  The sabre works great, using speed and agility t advoid damage. To me, it is already more survivable in open melee. To me the difference between them is profound. 

Honestly, I love this ship since 2.3...and the hornet, and the 350. I think the ship really hurt by the emergence of the sabre, was not the hornet...but the gladius?

Sounds like a fun excuse to play more :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sheilds look buggy after messing with them some more.  I went through all the waves of Vanduul swarm solo (in demo mode) on my first life.  4 are crazy strong.  I did try putting Retaliator shields on the sabre, but only sabre shields work. Now, I might be able to do the same (all waves - one life) with a nicely kitted out 350r...but it would take a much longer time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

loving the sabre!

 

do you guys run with taurantulas or broadswords? i got broadswords but i feel theyre both really close in terms of firepower and playstyle.

 

also, any tips for a mouse-aimer like me? ive tried relative mode but i dont really like it.... the massive lead i need to draw over targets is quite a pain with nose mounted guns though =D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Nicholasyt said:

loving the sabre!

 

do you guys run with taurantulas or broadswords? i got broadswords but i feel theyre both really close in terms of firepower and playstyle.

 

also, any tips for a mouse-aimer like me? ive tried relative mode but i dont really like it.... the massive lead i need to draw over targets is quite a pain with nose mounted guns though =D

I would go size two tarantulas or M4s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Nicholasyt said:

loving the sabre!

 

do you guys run with taurantulas or broadswords? i got broadswords but i feel theyre both really close in terms of firepower and playstyle.

 

also, any tips for a mouse-aimer like me? ive tried relative mode but i dont really like it.... the massive lead i need to draw over targets is quite a pain with nose mounted guns though =D

It only matters if you are pairing them with other weapons as their velocity is very different. However, the tarantula's do 50% more damage per shot while the broadswords shoot just slightly faster. So, go with the tarantulas. One thing to note is that broadswords carry a lot more ammo. So, if you are going to be in massive brawl that will take a while, you might want to equip the broadswords.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...