Hey everyone, thank you in advance for giving your time and consideration to this post. A quick background: I've been PVPing since 3.4. I make some flight tutorial videos and I have a PVP-focused public discord server. My org spends most of its time enjoying ship combat and we've been spending a lot of time in 3.10 figuring out the mechanics and metas. We do weekly team battles and have engaged in several scrims so we have some perspective on individual as well as team combat. Here is some feedback I've aggregated from my team mates in addition to other members of the broader PVP community. -The slower jerk is great - fights get closer and deliberate rather than janky maneuvering is encouraged. -That being said, the universal point of feedback agreed upon by my org as well as others from prominent PVP orgs was that we need more total acceleration. You can drop the jerk even more to keep fights close and PIPs stable, but give us more maximum acceleration so we can execute better maneuvers and change positions. Many of the fights are turning into circle strafes because the ships don't have enough strafe acceleration to do anything but broaden or tighten up the circle's radius. Between two of the same ship, the decisive factor is only aim when I believe ideally it should be aim + maneuvers. If there are concerns that the PIP will become too unstable by increasing ship maneuverability, increase the projectile speeds to compensate so there'll be less travel time and thus less shot leading. The arrow, bucc, and hawk are the only ships with something approaching acceptable maneuverability - the Sabre and Hornet variants are just floating turrets that get disintegrated. When maneuvers become a decisive factor in combat, more ships and loadouts will be viable because the pilot's decisions in combat will become the deciding factor rather than who can take the most shots and deal the most damage in turret-like gameplay like we have now between all but the lightest fighters. -We need a heat gauge. Now that the consequences of overheat are more detrimental than ever, we need a way to monitor our ship's heat and know when to back off the boost. -Overheat: Either make all ships lose attitude control when overheating or make all of them preserve attitude control and only lose translational control. I'm actually in favor of the former, as losing attitude control will force you to run making fights more dynamic but I think consistency would go a long way. -Fixed vs Gimbal Assist balance: With the nerf to mass drivers, gimbal assist is once again the meta for light fighter combat. Ignoring maneuverability, two things are necessary for fixed weapons to be the preferred choice for experienced pilots: 1. Aiming needs to be easy. I understand the mechanical basis for why our ships shouldn't be able to achieve maximum rotational velocity instantly. I still think they should. Aiming as it is now - with the ship taking time to reach maximum rotational speed - feels like playing an FPS with mouse acceleration on. The movement of our crosshair is not consistently correlated with the movement of our controls leading to a drifty aiming experience. This means less shots on target. 2. Given the less shots on target with fixed weapons vs GA, the increased damage and projectile speed switching to fixed weapons need to be sufficiently high to compensate. Buffing size 3 weapons across the board would achieve this. The fighters with size 4 hardpoints generally have mostly size 3 hardpoints so I don't think they will be OP if they are less maneuverable and/or less armored (i.e. Titan and 325a). -Cannons vs automatic weapons: I'm aware of the concerns that mass drivers were OP and were the meta, but high damage and low ROF weapons simply lead to more enjoyable combat experiences. You take a well timed flick shot and during the cooldown you can focus on repositioning and maneuvering. This is a lot of fun. When using fixed automatic weapons, you have to fly with more stability and less evasion because you need to keep the PIP more stable to smoothly track and land consistent fire. The best idea I heard was that cannons should be better in combat between highly maneuverable ships where you would land only a fraction of shots, but sustained fire with an automatic weapon on a less maneuverable ship would lead to a higher effective DPS. Go ahead and drop the ROF of cannons more, but we need that high alpha damage to make those few shots we land count. Furthermore, if cannons are to be the long range sniper rifle weapon, it's not the range you need to increase. It doesn't matter if the "range" of the weapon is 50,000 m if the projectile velocity of 1000 m/s means your target 2000 m away is going to have 2 whole seconds to be somewhere other than where your firing solution predicted. Effective range is determined by projectile velocity and is usually much shorter than the total distance the projectile travels before it vanishes which is what the game designates as range. If we want cannons to be the longest range weapons, they need to have the highest projectile velocity. Right now gatlings have the highest effective range. Finally, a novel gameplay suggestion: -True afterburner: If we want exciting chases and more use of epic oversteer turns, I suggest giving us a true afterburner mode. I'm not talking about boost. I'm suggesting adding another type of acceleration amplifier where we can shut off all our strafe thrusters (not attitude control thrusters) in exchange for firing our main prograde thruster at a thrust higher than what simply boosting would provide. Your ship would effectively fly like a missile, having massive forward acceleration that allows you to disengage or chase but all your turns would have to be accomplished using attitude control. If you need to do a sharp turn left, you would need to oversteer your ship past 90 degrees left to accomplish it.