Restructuring internal tier balance

A continuation of my previous thread: [](< base_url >/index.php?/topic/20688-fix-tiers/)


Everyone knows Rank 4, 7 and 10 are terrible ships. Nobody I know wants to fly them, and a lot of the hatred of the new Synergy system boils down to “I’m being forced to fly crap ships!”. This is a genuine concern, and it’s disappointing that this has never been addressed.


First off, let’s look at why these ships are crap. I’m going to refer to T2 because this is where the issue first begins, but it applied across all tiers.


I believe the view Gaijin uses is that each ship must be better than the one before, which means Rank 4 must be inferior to Rank 5, which is in turn inferior to Rank 6. The idea is likely there to encourage people to rank up and not just squat at the bottom of a tier.


The flaw with that idea is that even if all ships in a tier had identical stats and module slots, higher ranked ships would always be better due to implants. You could never build a Rank 8 interceptor to be faster than its Rank 9 equivalent, nor could a Rank 5 ship ever match a Rank 6 for pure damage output.


So, even with equal ships there’s a reason to move forward.


What I propose is that Gaijin take a page out of one of the many, many, many threads about redesigning the ship tree, and do it. At the most basic level, the Tier 5 progression is what we want to see in Tiers 2, 3 and 4. A little more option to move between inty, fighter and frigate might be nice, but overall that T5 progression is solid - core ships at the start and end, secondary ships in the middle.


Now let’s talk modules. All ships should have the same number of modules within a tier. No exceptions. As I said, implants alone will encourage movement up the tree. Further encouragement can come from either giving the entry-level ship slightly weaker stats, or giving the mid and end tier ships better bonuses.


Example: Say we have the Machete - a Rank 4 Command Ship - with a +30% Command Module Range. The Machete type S - a Rank 6 Command Ship - has a +50% Command Module Range. Bam. Clear reason to fly the type S as soon as possible.


But by the same token, the default Machete is not outclassed. That bonus to module range doesn’t make the type S itself any harder to kill. Implants might, but there’s no reason that a Rank 4 Machete couldn’t beat down it’s Rank 6 counterpart.


tl;dr: Streamline the ship tree, give all ships in a tier the module slots of the top-tier ship, encourage upward movement through slight, but worthwhile changes to stats or bonuses.

Wasn’t there also a suggestion a few months ago to allow implants to be used by all ships in that tier? So if someone has the rank 8 and 9 implants in a faction, those implants will also affect the Rank 7 ship. I think that this may help make the lower ranked ships in a tier a little more appealing.


Example: Tacklers on average are supposed to be faster than gunships but (since the last patch forced me to fly the Silent Fox in order to get the Wolf MkII), the Wolf M can reach much faster speeds than the Silent Fox and has access to the Federation rank 8 implant which allows me to escape from engine inhibiting affects when I use a Restoration or Survival mod. If the Silent Fox had access to these implants, it’d still be inferior to the Machete AE, the Bear and the Parallax, but at least it’d be a little more encouraging to use. 

The problem with that idea is it is no help to people first entering the tier. Players shouldn’t have to put up with crap ships for weeks at a time before they can get a Rank 9 and then make future Rank 7 ships slightly less crap.


All ships should be fun to play. Right now it feels like the game pushes us forward through negative reinforcement. “You suck, so fly your sucky ship until it sucks slightly less, then spend money to buy a proper ship.” Instead, it should be pushing us forward with promises that “your current ship is cool, but the next ship along has features you’ll love even more!”

I stand by my opinion that all ships in the same tier should have the same ‘core’ base attributes. Same number of modules is good too.

you can differentiate between the different rank same tier ships via their ‘utility’ attributes including their bonuses




core stats = HP, energy, speed, resist

utility stats = turn speed, energy regen, shield regen, AB burn rate


ofcourse what is core or utility would differ between roles


energy regen and shield is considered core in command

sensor range and locking time for LRFs and support ships like tackler, recon and ECM etc



but the biggest differentiation would be implants and ship bonus


entry level could have none

mid level can have 1 ship bonus

top level should have 2 bonuses etc.


but the basic functionality between all 3 grades have to be about equal coz right now 2/3 of our ships are thrash.


with the change in progression mechanics - this should be given priority consideration imo


so +1

So it’s not bad enough to see Rank 4/7/10 ships in lower ranks, you want to make them MORE overpowered to top it off?


No. Until the matchmaking system is tweaked to avoid that altogether, no ship modifications.

So it’s not bad enough to see Rank 4/7/10 ships in lower ranks, you want to make them MORE overpowered to top it off?

No. Until the matchmaking system is tweaked to avoid that altogether, no ship modifications.

This change assumes fixed tiers are returned to the game, which was the “previous thread” I mentioned.

This --^