This is more a topic for debate, but I've been playing with a friend lately and we've both really taken a liking to the Valkyrie. We've put roughly 100 hours into it over the past month and have basically mained this thing together for a quite a while more. We of course have various opinions, however theres one that we both mutually and fully agree on with out debate. The Valkyrie is too slow. It's basically the slowest thing in the skies next to that sky whale called Galaxy and even that's close in comparison. As a result, they basically get run down by everything. And this is with the Valk being labeled as "Fast Attack". It's our conclusion that, despite other problems, it's the one thing that keeps the Valk from feeling properly useful. The way we see it, the Valk has 2 potential rolls. Firstly (and primarily), the Valk is a rapid troop transport. Secondly, it acts as a light gun ship to support those ground troops. However, we already have 2 craft that, frankly, fill this roll so much better that the Valk isnt worth taking for either role. To compare it to it's competitors, I'll start with the gunship role which is overwhemingly and utterly dominated by the Liberator. The Lib, which is much tankier and much much better armed with a vastly better selection of weaponry, is not only natively faster, but also gets a turbo. Between it's greater number and outright better armaments, it's better durability, and superior speed and acceleration to get out when it needs to, the Lib outshines the Valk in every meaningful way when it comes to ground support. As it should, that's literally it's job. The second comparison is for the Troop Transport roll. Frankly, with the Galaxy being immensely more durable, nearly the same air speed, and able to host more than twice the number of troops, the Galaxy simply dominates as both a safer, and more effective air transport option. Coupled with this, it's arguable that the Galaxy even makes a better gunship due to it's superior selection and placement of weaponry allowing it to, if it must at least ward off lone wandering ESF's. That said, the Galaxy is much more likely to be supported due to having a much more meaningful potential impact on a battle. As for the Valk... Almost everything on it is fine ATM, though it could use some better variety for it's gun (all of which are extremely awkward to use, but still usable), the problem is that it's got almost no real way to defend itself against air, yet nearly everything in the skies can catch it making it extremely vulnerable. If a Liberator or ESF decides to engage it, the Valk has literally no options other than to engage in a fight with it. While with an engineer on board, it can technically outlast an ESF. It's still however forced to engage with it until the ESF literally runs out of ammunition, or (more commonly) gets bored. The real problem is when you encounter a Liberator and it sees you. A pro Lib team can effectively 2 shot a Valk, and theres nothing it can do once a Lib decides to engage, the Valk cant even run. This alone makes the Valk an unworth while risk when moving troops. But it's not all bad, though frankly if it wasnt for the Valks ability to have an engineer in one of the seats (taking up valuable squad space and a huge loss if they go with the rest of the small squad as it leaves the valk hugely vulnerable), the Valk would be unusable. The engineer gives the Valk considerable long term endurance, but that doesnt help or stop it from being very killable by anything meaning to do so, it just means it'll take a lot longer. Which, having talked to a few pilots, is frustrating for everyone involved. The Lib/ESF has no reason to disengage (and when it wishes to do so, should the tables turn, it can do so with impunity), and the Valk cant disengage. So, what to do? After debating a bit, we agreed that a good middle ground would be to set the Valkyrie's cruising speed to be at least equal to that of a Liberator. Even if the Valks didnt also get a turbo (we couldnt agree if they should our shouldnt), it would at least still marginally mitigate some of the air threats while not eliminating them. A Valk pilot would still need to be wary of whats around, but wouldnt simply be completely doomed along with everyone on board if they were at least able to keep away and potentially make it to friendlies. A faster Valk would also give it's transport role some much needed clarity in it's utility, being rapid response for places in need of additional support. And to be clear, I feel this is indeed it's intended main role. Different from the Galaxy, who's role is clearly defined by it's capacity to move large numbers of troops into a general area, a faster Valk's role would be much better and capable of quickly moving in smaller numbers of additional squads into more precise key locations. The Valks could quickly slip in, deliver their squads safely, and either retreat or begin to orbit to provide support. Lastly, the additional speed would make it less reliant on additional air support. Because, frankly, a 4-5 man squad simply isnt worth the time, effort or resources to dedicate support. It doesnt provide enough ground support that the same ESF's/Libs couldnt do just as well or better, and it doesnt carry enough troops fast enough to be worth how vulnerable it is in comparison to the Galaxy which is better armed and defended already. But, as it stands, even a lone ESF is enough to put a stop to whatever plans the Valk had. If it was faster, it would at least stand a significantly better chance of being able to get in and out undetected by roaming hostile aircraft.