Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => Suggestions => Topic started by: Wyvern on July 09, 2019, 11:47:58 AM

Title: Warship Balance
Post by: Wyvern on July 09, 2019, 11:47:58 AM
So, the question's come up repeatedly on the latest blog post of "Which ships need more ordnance points?"

I'm not going to try to answer that; instead, I present here a list of vanilla supposedly-war-worthy ships I won't (or don't like to) use.

Frigates
Destroyers
Cruiser
Capitals
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Wyvern on July 09, 2019, 12:02:47 PM
Oh hey.  I forgot the Venture.  It somehow didn't even occur to me that the Venture was supposed to be combat-worthy!  Um.  Oops?

Chalk that up as a second cruiser I won't use, then.  (I did make use of it back when it was a functional carrier, though!  So adding a few more ordnance points and an open fighter bay or two would be enough to make me at least consider fielding one.)
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: TaLaR on July 09, 2019, 12:58:11 PM
(all 'can kill' assessments are without skills)

Hyperion: it's worth it's price only when used properly by the player. If nerfed as you suggest, it would be simply useless. Teleporter not being limited by charges/etc is a feature - consider it in 3rd class of it's own as shielded/phase/Hyperion. Example usage: can solo the sim Paragon.
Lasher: it's perfect early game tool. Could be somewhat useful later if AI was actually competent at SO, but AI isn't. Example usage: can solo most DEs and some Cruisers.
Scarab: it can be useful to some extent when piloted by the player. But it's much harder to properly use than Hyperion or Afflictor, while being ultimately much less powerful. Example: can solo any DEs and rear-vulnerable CRs. Medusa is the most fun sample: you can bypass it's omni-shield with annihilators (launch while orbiting it with time acceleration, when executed properly they'll connect from multiple directions at roughly same time). Overall I agree that it doesn't live up to it's rarity.

Medusa: It's still the best player-piloting DE, though maybe by a smaller margin. It can kill any DE or CR, except carriers. Though Sunder and Hammerhead, while not as flexible, have easier time against some targets and are better at soloing carriers (especially Hammerhead).

Astral: Fine as is. Recall is the only thing that allows it to stand against other capitals. Nerfing Recall would make it unviable (I'd just always use Drovers/Herons instead).
Onslaught: It needs Annihilator spam to remain viable. It's already on bottom of pecking order for capitals even with them. Well... not necessary true for AI usage or vs crowds of weaker ships, but in terms of best player piloting performance in duels vs other capitals.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: SCC on July 09, 2019, 01:18:56 PM
Frigs
Destroyahs
Cruiz
Caps
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: intrinsic_parity on July 09, 2019, 01:51:03 PM
I think hammerhead and sunder are both better options for the player than the medusa for fleet combat. Hammerhead because of SO assault chain guns which is ridiculously broken, and sunder because it just kills things a lot faster (I usually throw SO on this early game as well but it doesn't need it to be really good). Every time I use the medusa, I feel like it takes forever to kill anything and my fleet is slowly losing the battle while it struggle to whittle things down with unimpressive medium energy weapons. The maneuverability is really strong the but the weapons just feel so weak. It's so slow in comparison to SO assault chain guns or a damage boosted large energy weapon. I rarely find it worthwhile to buy a medusa and I see them in the wild equally rarely so I barely use them anymore.

I think a lot of carriers are in a tough place OP wise. None of them feel like they can fit high end fighters without totally sacrificing everything else on the ship. I have to leave weapon mounts empty throw away all hull mods except the carrier ones and cut almost all vents/caps to fit the best fighters. I think most of the dedicated carriers could use some extra OP, just to make the good fighters usable without gutting the loadout. Maybe that's by design but losing OP is not the direction I would go with carriers, I don't want to have to get built in hull mods on every carrier want to use nice fighters on. Carriers feel like they are balanced around ~8 OP fighters.

The lasher is mostly in a bad place because you start with a hammerhead and a decent fleet in the tutorial. I don't think it's OP is a concern.

I would also add the doom as a ship where I never have anywhere near enough OP to put the things I want on. It could use an extra ~10-15 imo. But it's system is also super strong so it's in a weird place. I would nerf the system a bit and give it some extra OP, but that's just me.

Shrike as everyone has said is pretty bad, but honestly any ship that uses medium energy as its main damage source feels weak to some degree and I think that's because of the lack of an efficient low flux cost medium energy weapon. Shrike, wolf, tt brawler, medusa, and vigilance all depend on medium energy weapons. I think the addition of one medium energy weapon aimed at being good on these ships (low flux cost, somewhat efficient) could solve that problem by itself without major OP balance changes. Current medium energy weapons require lots of dissipation which means lots of OP is tied up in vents and some hull mods to make the ship useful at all. Theres no decision to be made there. I would like to see that change.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 09, 2019, 02:05:05 PM
Brawler is hard to justify because it has no defenses whatsoever.  It cannot defend against Salamanders, and once one of them connects, it becomes hopelessly crippled before the enemy finishes it off.

Cerberus and Hound are practically haulers that can be made to run from nearly anything.  With Makeshift Shields, they can be disposable attackers much like Enforcer, Mule, and Shrike (P).  If they die (and not used for hauling), who cares?  Past early-game, they are obsolete like nearly every other frigate.

Gremlin is the civilian phase ship.  I would bring it if I need to sneak-and-raid Sindria/Culann for blueprints, but I do not have other phase ships available (unlikely since New Maxios has all of the phase ship blueprints, and New Maxios is practically undefended).  As for combat, it is probably like the others not named Doom - good only as a glorified bomber, which only the player can use effectively.

Hermes/Mercury are from a bygone era when fleet size was determined by Logistics instead of a fleet cap.

Hyperion is not very useful today now that 1) enemy fires at phased ships (which includes teleportation) and 2) huge multi-capital fights where lack of peak performance hurts Hyperion very badly.  Today, I much rather use four Reaper Afflictor if I need an elite frigate to kill something big fast.  Endgame fights in 0.9 are much bigger than endgame fights of pre-0.8.

Lasher is decent as a frigate.  The problem is nearly every frigate becomes obsolete past early game.

Scarab would be easier to use if it had 360 front shields instead of 180 omni shields.

Wayfarer is almost obsolete as a combatant as soon as the game begins.  With Apogee start, it is usually the first to die every time, and I keep it only because of its capacity, but it gets dumped as soon as I can.  It is vulnerable to attacks from behind.

The only frigates I care to use as combatants early are Centurion and Wolf.  Late in the game, the only frigates I care about are Tempest and Afflictor.  Tempest for being fast and powerful, and Afflictor for doing Reaper cheese Harbinger used to do.

Wolf has barely enough OP with Loadout Design 3.  It needs better flux stats.


Even though Condor is inferior to Drover, it still gets the job done.  Condor is good enough to use until player can find better carriers.

Enforcers have the advantage of being ubiquitous, and they (along with Mules and Shrike (P)) form the backbone of my early game AI fleet until they get phased out by better ships later in the game.  They are decent bricks with decent firepower.  They are probably not as good as Hammerhead, and are a bit sluggish to pilot, but they work well enough earlier in the game.

Gemini is OP starved.  It is not one of those ships I want to use if I have other alternatives.  With Reserve Deployment significantly weakened in 0.9.x, it is not that good of a carrier anymore.

Medusa either should get more OP, better flux stats, or have its cost dropped to 10 or 11... or Light Needler range restored to 800.  It needs rare weapons (like railguns) to do anything useful, and even then, it is maybe slightly above par.  By the time I can obtain Medusa, it has become obsolete, and I need cruisers to fight.

Shrike is seriously OP starved, especially the superior pirate version.  I cannot fit a basic loadout without Loadout Design 3.  Even with LD3, something gets cut.  Shrike (P) is about as common as Enforcers, and they do a decent job bullying small ships.  Normal Shrike, by the time I can access those, they are obsolete.  As for Shrike, it probably should get the hybrid used by Shrike (P), and Shrike (P) could either have reduced OP or have the hybrid downgraded to energy.  As for in the game, Shrike (P) is about as common as Enforcers, and they too get used frequently early in the game, only to be replaced later.


Gryphon is simply too fragile.  I rarely use it if I loot one early and turn it into a Hammer suicide bomber, sort of like a extra large Enforcer.  The main reason I would like to use Gryphon is it is the only ship aside from Legion (XIV) and maybe Prometheus 2 that can easily aim dumb-fire large missiles like Hammers and fire them at the enemy.

Aurora needs its 0.8 flux stats back.


Astral is great.  I consider it the #2 most powerful ship in the game, behind Paragon.

Atlas 2 is really slow and awkward to use.  Very sub-optimal to use.  Good only if it is the first capital you find and you are desperate for capital-grade firepower.

Prometheus 2 feels a bit like a Blackrock capital, only much slower and without the teleporter Karkinos has.  It is still sub-par compared to other capitals, but it is not too terrible, and its DP cost of 32 seems about right.

My biggest gripe with Onslaught is the TPCs and heavy mounts do not overlap well.  If I want to outfit it for AI use, I need to focus on the TPCs, because the AI does not tilt the ship to focus fire two heavy weapons at enemies (except maybe Hellbores occasionally).  As for Annihilator Pods, they run out far too quickly in 0.9's endgame fights against ten enemy capitals and more.  I find myself gravitating toward Typhoon Reapers, Salamanders, or even Swarmers with Expanded Missile Racks.  Another big gripe is I need to put Augmented Engines on it (while I may not need to on Conquest), and with that much OP gone, it has an OP budget comparable to Conquest.  Overall, I do not mind Onslaught, and it is useful enough.

Odyssey is an annoying ship.  AI likes to burn drive into mobs while its lack of defenses make it vulnerable to damage easily.  Also, it is a bit OP starved.  Would like to see stronger shield (or more armor), better flux capacity, or more OP.  At the very least, more idiot-proof to use by AI.  Currently, Odyssey is only useful as a playership because only the player is smart enough to not burn into a mob and try to tank everything thrown at it by the enemy like the AI does.

Quote
I think a lot of carriers are in a tough place OP wise. None of them feel like they can fit high end fighters without totally sacrificing everything else on the ship. I have to leave weapon mounts empty throw away all hull mods except the carrier ones and cut almost all vents/caps to fit the best fighters. I think most of the dedicated carriers could use some extra OP, just to make the good fighters usable without gutting the loadout. Maybe that's by design but losing OP is not the direction I would go with carriers, I don't want to have to get built in hull mods on every carrier want to use nice fighters on. Carriers feel like they are balanced around ~8 OP fighters.

I would also add the doom as a ship where I never have anywhere near enough OP to put the things I want on. It could use an extra ~10-15 imo. But it's system is also super strong so it's in a weird place. I would nerf the system a bit and give it some extra OP, but that's just me.
I am not fond of carriers because they generally need to sacrifice almost everything to use fighters bigger than Talons, but despite that, they can wreck enemies.  For Astral, I use six bombers, and it only has five heavy burst lasers, and it still wrecks ships fast.  However, it is not satisfying when carriers must be practically unarmed to use fighters effectively.  In the old days, it was fun watching Heron brawl like a Wolf or Tempest while fighters did stuff, and kill ships.  Today, Heron needs to stay in the backline and let fighters do the work.

Doom does not really need much for weapons.  All it really needs are two Heavy Blasters and maybe burst PD, and between that and mines, it can do serious damage.  That said, either I need to give up Hardened Subsystems or four mortars and some vents.  Doom with LD3 is not too OP starved like some other ships, but I would not mind more OP, especially now that LD3 will be gone.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Kanil on July 09, 2019, 02:11:01 PM
I recently had a playthrough to about level 40 with just a Medusa and two Tempests, and I don't think it's bad. While it doesn't have the raw firepower of a Hammerhead, it's got great mobility and is still generally fun to pilot.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 09, 2019, 02:12:33 PM
One more thing that annoys me about Odyssey.  It is highly encouraged to focus all firepower to the left.  The right large is a synergy, and player probably wants to support the two left heavies with Locusts or MIRVs from the right.  It would be nice if the right missile was turned into a synergy or even universal (and be allowed to mount non-missiles there) so player can do two broadsides like Conquest instead of only effectively attacking things left of it.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Goumindong on July 09, 2019, 02:58:48 PM
OK so...

Not all ships in the game have to have the same purpose. You cannot "balance" a large number of ships against each other in the way you seem to be implying they should be. Some can be weaker on purpose because they're meant to be obsoleted as you progress. Some can have very specific uses

The brawler for instance is just fine. Its really good at taking out larger ships because it can fit more efficient (but less accurate) weapons in its hardpoints. The TT brawler is as well, except its super good at chasing enemies down. And of course the LP brawler is just insane.

The gryphon is another good example. Its not a front line cruiser its a finisher... And its pretty to really good at that if you have a missile skilled officer. The main advantage here is that its extreme range means that, fit with finishing weapons, it will ruin enemy ships as soon as their shields drop.

And the Medusa and the shrike... I don't know how you do poorly with these ships. They're both very very good.

Maybe the problem is that you remember the Medusa back when you ran combat skills. And now that you do not run combat skills anymore you are comparing its effectiveness back when you did to now, when you do not. Because you can still fit 2 heavy blasters on a Medusa... and it still wrecks face with 2 heavy blasters. (moreso than a hammerhead even because its teleporting allows it to more efficiently apply damage)

Quote from: Megas on July 09, 2019, 02:12:33 PM
One more thing that annoys me about Odyssey.  It is highly encouraged to focus all firepower to the left.  The right large is a synergy, and player probably wants to support the two left heavies with Locusts or MIRVs from the right.  It would be nice if the right missile was turned into a synergy or even universal (and be allowed to mount non-missiles there) so player can do two broadsides like Conquest instead of only effectively attacking things left of it.

Please stop trying to get the strongest ship in the game made stronger.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 09, 2019, 03:09:34 PM
Quote from: Goumindong on July 09, 2019, 02:58:48 PM
Please stop trying to get the strongest ship in the game made stronger.
I disagree with this.  Odyssey is okay in player hands (but strongest, I do not think so), but terrible in AI.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Eji1700 on July 09, 2019, 03:49:12 PM
Quote from: Wyvern on July 09, 2019, 11:47:58 AM
So, the question's come up repeatedly on the latest blog post of "Which ships need more ordnance points?"

I'm not going to try to answer that; instead, I present here a list of vanilla supposedly-war-worthy ships I won't (or don't like to) use.

Frigates
  • Brawler: Nope.  Just, nope.  This isn't a case of ordnance points; this is a case of it being an expendable weapons platform and I don't do expendable in my own fleet.  Special mention goes to the Tri-Tachyon variant that, if it installs max vents and safety overrides, still can't support a pair of pulse lasers.  The TT variant desperately needs an increase in flux dissipation and capacity, but otherwise these work well as things to fight; I don't think the base Brawler needs changes - even if I'm never going to use one myself.
You should use them more, they're ok.  I think they could still use some love (the TT variant is sad) but you're being overly harsh.  They fill and allright role as is.

Quote
  • Cerberus & Hound: Slightly better as extreme-range sniper platforms than the Brawler, but the lack of shields is just too much of a drawback - and installing a shield generator via hull mod actually makes them more fragile.  Suggested fix: the makeshift shield generator needs to come with either a much better efficiency - something like .6 flux per damage - or a significant improvement to flux capacity and dissipation.
  • Gremlin: Also nope.  Same reason as the Brawler: it's an expendable weapons platform and nope.
Gremlin is a great ship in human hands early game.  Take it out on a fleet that can flux things for your and you get to do some really nice alpha's then retreat it out and switch to your flagship. Dunno how the AI handles it, I should test, but seriously underrating it.

Quote
  • Hermes & Mercury: I'm not actually sure if these are even supposed to be combat-viable?  There was an era when I actually used them on occasion, but these days the niche of ultra-light harasser is much better filled with a Kite.
  • Hyperion: In the old days, this was my favorite frigate.  Then it got a teleporter that the AI can't use very well, and then it got utterly insane deployment and maintenance costs and it's just not worth it anymore.  I don't know how to fix the teleporter AI, but here are two suggestions: One, make it so that teleporting doesn't drop shields; that will cut down a lot on AI hyperions dying from just porting themselves into gunfire.  And two, give the system regenerating charges or a more significant cooldown and make the AI a bit less free with teleports; it should use them for long-distance travel (at regen rate rather than spamming), one teleport to get into attack position, and to retreat.  And even with that, I'd love to see something like a Pirate Hyperion that just loses the teleporter entirely in exchange for a bit lower maintenance cost and less of its CR eaten up on each deployment.
I feel like the hyperion is mostly fine given its niche role as "super frigate".  I just wish there was one for each tech level or team, but as a teleporting alpha striker it's insane, and yes suicidal in AI hands.

Quote
  • Lasher: These used to make good early-game SO boats - but if you go through the tutorial or take either accelerated start option, you're already past the point where I used them.  I'm not sure that there's anything exactly wrong with the Lasher per se?  But I don't find them fun to fly, nor do I find them to be particularly survivable as escorts, so I just... don't bother with them anymore.
  • Scarab: I want to like the Scarab.  It's a really neat ship!  It's just... not a good ship.  Could use a bit more flux dissipation, a bit more ordnance points, and built-in PD lasers in those useless side turret mounts that any sane player will leave empty.
  • Vigilance: In Ye Olde Days of Corvus, this was actually my favorite of the options for starting frigate.  It has not aged well.  Would benefit a lot from even a little bit more flux dissipation to support that medium energy slot... but the real problem with the Vigilance is that its ship system only really works well with salamanders, and putting salamanders on a Vigilance relegates it to a support role instead of a kill-things role.  My advice here: Drop harpoon pods back down to two missiles per salvo & give the Vigilance expanded missile racks as a free built-in hull mod.
  • Wayfarer: Not really sure what's a good solution here; the Wayfarer isn't terrible... but frigate-sized cargo ships in general are a bad deal, and if you want combat ability you're better off with a Lasher.

Agree with the rest of this for the most part.  Overall i think there's just a general issue of frigates being unimpressive even if you focus them.  Hopefully some of the new skills help that but it wouldn't hurt to have a better niche for some of these.

Quote
Destroyers
  • Condor: This thing used to be the standard for destroyer carriers.  Then the Drover showed up, and it's just better.  I don't actually think giving the Condor significantly improved combat stats is a good idea (though I'd suggest that, like the Vigilance, it should get expanded missile racks built in).  However, you know what would make me consider putting a Condor or two into my fleet?  If it had semi-decent logistical stats.  I mean, seriously, it's a converted freighter - why does it have less cargo space than the dedicated warship Drover?  Buff the Condor up to 140 cargo capacity and 80 fuel capacity, and it'll have a decent role as that thing you use when you want some fighters and are willing to trade off the Drover's system for a better logistics train and maybe some LRMs.  (And, while we're at it, drop the Drover down to 40 cargo capacity.)
I see condors as the poor mans carrier and it's mostly ok with that.  If you want to crack pirate bases loading 3+ of these up with LRMS and pirahana's is a pretty cheap and effective way to handle things, but I do think that "bringing the right fleet for the job" style play needs to be more encouraged if that's the intent.

Quote
  • Enforcer: These are probably okay?  I just don't like them.  If I happen to luck into an XIV Enforcer early, I'll use it, but that's about it.
  • Gemini: Okay, here is a ship that really, truly, just needs more ordnance points.  It has 55.  I'd like to see it with around 80 - enough to afford high quality weapons with enough points left over to get up to a decent flux dissipation and a good lot of capacitors or defensive hull mods.
  • Medusa: Another old favorite that's fallen by the wayside.  I'm not even really sure when or why or how that happened; it's not like the Medusa has gotten any worse... I guess it's just that its competition got better?  +10 or +20 ordnance points might make a difference here, pushing it into "you can fit everything you want and then a little bit extra" territory?  Or it might not, I'm really not sure.
  • Shrike: These work pretty well as opposition, but for player use they run into the same problem as the Brawler or the Gremlin: Shrikes just go pop.  Interestingly, there is in one of the mods a variant on the Shrike that I actually like: the Underworld (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=11002.0)'s Cabal Shrike - though I do think a more balanced version would have the Cabal variant's stats, but with the pirate variant's weapon slot layout.

I'll just add that I think the shrike really should be more fun to pilot.  It's the sort of ship that you'd think would shine in player hands, but it often feels like more of a struggle than it should be, maybe in part because of it's struggle with weapons loadout mixed with flankers feeling weak when enemy AI is smart enough to group up properly.

Quote
Cruiser
  • Gryphon: The only vanilla cruiser I just plain won't field (though the (non-pirate) Falcon comes close), the Gryphon just... well... does not measure up.  If I really want a large missile slot on the field, I'd rather use an Apogee; way more durability, more room for ECCM, expanded missile racks pushing it up to just as much ammo as the Gryphon starts with, and - as a nice bonus - good out-of-battle logistical stats.
    I'm not sure what the right fix here is, but I'd suggest looking into radical options.  Something like, oh, replace the ship system with fortress shield, and then give it a built-in hull mod that causes missile ammunition to slowly replenish over time (but only while CR is ticking down).  Or make it double as an EW platform, with ECM and Nav Relay built in alongside ECCM and Expanded Missile Racks.  Or introduce a Pather variant that gets a free Safety Overrides installation.  Or, I dunno, something.  Much like the Scarab, the Gryphon is a ship I want to like, but that just doesn't measure up in actual play.

I can't disagree more about this.  The gryphon is borderline broken in player hands and still a great missile support ship in AI, especially if paired with a fleet that deals good flu.  There's plenty of ways to kit it out and i'd almost never prefer and apogee for the roles i'm using them for.  Two totally different ships.

Quote
Capitals
  • Astral: When even the default variants tend to leave weapon mounts empty, you know the ship needs more ordnance points.  It also needs Fighter Recall to be limited by charges rather than flux - the best Astral variants I've found tend to leave even more of its weapon slots empty in favor of maxing out flux vents and adding capacitors so it can just spam Recall as its main attack mode.
  • Atlas Mk II & Prometheus Mk II: I haven't actually tried either of these yet.  They could be okay?  I just don't know.  I do feel like the Atlas Mk II should have more than 200 cargo capacity left over, though - as with the Condor, that's less space than dedicated warships.  Maybe five or six hundred would feel right.
  • Onslaught: Yep.  That's right.  I don't use the Onslaught.  Well, I mean, okay, if I happen to find one floating along as a derelict and it's the only capital ship I have, then I'll put something together.  But that's about it.  There are a lot of things that annoy me about the Onslaught, from the way its flux dissipation level that cannot possibly keep up with its guns, to its awkward turret arcs that frequently cause the side-mounted large ballistics to fire at a frontal target they can't actually quite swivel far enough to hit... But the thing I most dislike about it is the sheer difference in capability between an Onslaught that has 4x annihilator rocket pod (and hasn't run out of ammo yet) and literally any other variant.  Maybe it would be better if the annihilator pod had a smaller ammo count - maybe 10? - and used chunk reload mechanics to do a full restore (20 ammo in a chunk so you get full ammo even with expanded missile racks) every 20 seconds?  Or something like that?  Maybe it would be better if the rockets had just a little bit of guidance, and spread out a bit more instead of coming in a solid stream that ends up blocking incoming attacks?  Maybe... I dunno.  I just know I don't like it.

Disagree again on the Onslaught.  I've made plenty of variants that are great at just boosting in and chewing up anything that isn't fast enough to run away, or just sitting there and soaking damage relying on the builtins + some mild support to keep pressure up.  I think it's a great hull.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Alex on July 09, 2019, 06:59:56 PM
(Thank you for getting this thread going! Keeping a close eye on it.)
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Thaago on July 10, 2019, 12:04:09 AM
I find the Enforcer to be only acceptable in 'trash' fleets: its 4 missile mounts give it decent support firepower even when it has 9 D mods. As a combat destroyer though, its horribly outclassed by all of the others. I'd recommend giving it a 1.0 shield to bring it in line with the Dominator and Onslaught.

(Enforcer used to be amazing when it could stack two speed bonuses with no range penalties. Now thats not a thing and its speed is a liability,)
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: TaLaR on July 10, 2019, 12:17:24 AM
Enforcer can do ok, if it commits to attack without withholding sabots or armor/hull, but still has a lot of problems cornering a Medusa even then. Heavy armor + flaks make it much better than Medusa vs carriers too (though Hammerhead is still the best at handling carriers among DEs).
Enforcer is pretty annoying to fight against, when it has converted hangar talons (which it can easily afford due to highest OP among DEs), so I consider CH Talons default for them.

Overall theme of this ship is controlled burn of limited resources: missiles/armor/hull, it can't get a clean victory against pretty much anything. Which means AI is bad at using it, since it begins to fall back as soon as shields begin failing. While player has enough of better ships to pilot.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on July 10, 2019, 12:17:47 AM
The entire problem with the Cerberus and Hound is that makeshift shields makes them slow. That's the entire issue; they could be okay combat-freighter grade ships if makeshift shields didn't make them slow, and they were okay combat-freighter grade ships when makeshift shields didn't make ships slow.

I like the idea of giving the Condor better logistics and the Drover worse logistics.

The Scarab needs bloated stats to make up for relying on small energies. It doesn't have those bloated stats, so it's bad.

I stopped using the Medusa mostly because I can't find any of the damn things. They're not bad, they're just impossible to get your hands on before you're running a fleet of capitals and cruisers. If I luck into a Medusa blueprint early, and have also started an early colony, they're great right up until I'm in the very lategame and mashing my capitalball against other capitalballs.

I think the Shrike is fine. Good, even. I make heavy use of the Shrike in the earlygame, as it's the biggest baddest 10 burn ship and I want to go as fast as I can until I can't anymore. The AI doesn't suicide it anymore, it eats frigates alive and has the speed to avoid dueling destroyers until it can engage in a 2v1. It does exactly what it's supposed to do, and I like it a lot. The Shrike (P) is better than the base version, so either the (P) should be slightly nerfed or the base version slightly buffed, but it doesn't need too much of a change.

I flatly disagree with everything you've said about the Gryphon and the Onslaught. They're great.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Vayra on July 10, 2019, 01:33:07 AM
I was typing a reply to this but then I drank a coffee and went all-in so I put it in its own thread (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15696.0) rather than post a full page in this one, but I figured I'd link it here anyway.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Ronald Klein on July 10, 2019, 04:44:46 AM

  I've been playing this gem of a game since 2011, coming back for every major update and mostly lurking in the shadows of the forums.

  I have to say, it seems to me like OP has always been an issue. I can only remember a time way back when you had two OP boosting skills in Technology and that beautiful OP cost reduction in Combat when I felt like I had enough flexibility in my OP count to actually make "whole" ships.

  There's so much variety and freedom when it comes to customizing your ships that it just feels wrong and restrictive to have to leave weapon slots open or miss out on a crucial hullmod because there just so happens to be an even more crucial hullmod that HAS to be included or the ship is too starved of vents to be usable without a sizeable investment in them.

  This might just be me, but it seems like the engineers who design these ships would do it in such a way that they could include everything a ship needs to function properly. Instead of having to use light autocannons and mortars on an Onslaught because it is too OP starved. (as an extreme example).

  I know Alex mentioned that he would rather avoid doing something like this, but in my opinion a 25% boost to OP across the board is mandatory. I understand that the point is not to be able to have absolutely everything that would be optimal on a ship but every single ship feels like it has to make too many sacrifices to be functional.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 10, 2019, 04:53:28 AM
Quote from: ANGRYABOUTELVES on July 10, 2019, 12:17:47 AM
The entire problem with the Cerberus and Hound is that makeshift shields makes them slow. That's the entire issue; they could be okay combat-freighter grade ships if makeshift shields didn't make them slow, and they were okay combat-freighter grade ships when makeshift shields didn't make ships slow.
On the other hand, it makes fighting against them less aggravating since the enemy will use them much more than the player (at least before 0.9.1), and the AI cannot play its favorite coward games when they are slower.  If anything, Makeshift Shield Generator is more good than bad because it hurts the enemy more than me.

Quote from: Ronald Klein on July 10, 2019, 04:44:46 AM
  There's so much variety and freedom when it comes to customizing your ships that it just feels wrong and restrictive to have to leave weapon slots open or miss out on a crucial hullmod because there just so happens to be an even more crucial hullmod that HAS to be included or the ship is too starved of vents to be usable without a sizeable investment in them.

  This might just be me, but it seems like the engineers who design these ships would do it in such a way that they could include everything a ship needs to function properly. Instead of having to use light autocannons and mortars on an Onslaught because it is too OP starved. (as an extreme example).

  I know Alex mentioned that he would rather avoid doing something like this, but in my opinion a 25% boost to OP across the board is mandatory. I understand that the point is not to be able to have absolutely everything that would be optimal on a ship but every single ship feels like it has to make too many sacrifices to be functional.
I approve of this message!

As an alternative, better flux stats since a big chunk of OP tends to go into flux stats, usually vents.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Zelnik on July 10, 2019, 07:12:37 AM
I love the Onslaught, I really do

However, i just can't get it to work for me. They just don't have the capacity to stand and fight with any weapon, no matter what combo I give it.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Wyvern on July 10, 2019, 07:46:24 AM
Quote from: Megas on July 10, 2019, 04:53:28 AM
As an alternative, better flux stats since a big chunk of OP tends to go into flux stats, usually vents.
I don't think it's likely to happen - it'd be a major rebalance - but I'd be on board with removing flux vents entirely (leave the Flux Distributor hull mod though) and just buffing ships' base dissipation to where it needs to be.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 10, 2019, 09:15:57 AM
@ Wyvern:  I suggested better flux stats as an alternative to raising OP across the board since most ships want max vents.

On the other hand, I do not bother with flux stats on civilians.  I just put Efficient Overhaul and a burn mod, and call it a day.  More OP is good for everyone, not just warships.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Alex on July 10, 2019, 09:27:53 AM
(Moved this to Suggestions, feels like it belongs here more.)
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: FooF on July 10, 2019, 12:14:54 PM
My thoughts:

First, and foremost, I'm under the impression that not all ships need to be viable. The Condor is obviously an inferior, makeshift, carrier. Same with anything "Mk. II." Second, perfect parity among ships/classes isn't achievable so I'm not going to try. My biggest litmus test for all of these ships are "Do I use them, and if not, why?" Most support ships aren't listed because a transport or fuel hauler doesn't need to be balanced, IMO.

Frigates:

I consistently use Wolves, Lashers, Tempests, Centurions, Kite(A)s, and Omens. I generally don't use phase ships (or pilot them) but Afflictors are good. I have no experience with the Shade. The Monitor is fine, though I don't use it enough. Hounds are also where they need to be as expendable haulers.

Brawler - The Brawler is touted as a beefy patrol Frigate but while it has decent firepower, it's an anvil, not a hammer. The Centurion already occupies this role so I feel the the Brawler is redundant relative to the Centurion. I could live with its speed if were given Accelerated Ammo Feeders as a ship system. Whenever I have them in my fleet, they get flanked by faster frigates or die to fighters. My suggestion is bump speed by 10 and give it AAF. The TT version is in a weird spot because medium energy is just a different beast altogether. If Plasma Jets let you jump backwards, I think it'd be a decent hit-n-run platform but as it is, you jump in and get smashed.

Scarab - Suffers from "Small Energy Mount Syndrome." Outside of AM Blasters, it can't pressure shields well enough. With the changes to beams and hard flux, maybe it will find a new niche but as it stands, the Scarab is a fantastic concept with abysmal execution. If Small Energy mounts had more options, it'd be pretty cool. On the other hand, it has too many mounts (and the side mounts have terrible firing arcs) to fit with its OP/dissipation. I think the side mounts are a trap and could be removed altogether with no negative consequences. If that meant the center mount could be changed to a universal or another synergy (toying with a medium energy), I think the Scarab would have more versatility. It's a hit-n-run ship to be sure but even though it can avoid most fire in a 1v1 situation, even with Temporal Shell, it's not generating appreciable damage in the moments of opportunity it has. (This has been my complaint for the Shrike, as well). Finally, the ship is too dang rare. I never see them or get blueprints for them.

Vigilance - I don't think the Vigilance is bad, I just know that in battle its usefulness dwindles about 45 seconds in due to relying on missiles. It should have built-in Expanded Missile Racks, a la the Gryphon.

Wayfarer - Its initial premise was a decent combat hauler but like the Centurion prior to its arcs getting changed, it just couldn't bring enough firepower to bear to be worth it. It needs the Centurion treatment of having overlapping arcs. As a player ship, its frustrating. Any more than arc changes would be overkill though.

Destroyers

I frequently use Hammerheads, Sunders, Drovers, and Enforcers. They're not all equal but all are viable. I don't use Medusas but that comes down to playstyle not inadequacies of the ship. Condors are fine, as are Mules, for what they are and need to be.

Enforcer - They are currently the losers of the "Big 5" of combat Destroyers. Hammerheads are all-around better, Sunders and Medusas are more specialized, and Drovers are top-tier carriers. Enforcers are logistically more expensive and though they're bricks, they pretty much have to have two flak cannons because they don't have the dissipation for 5 medium ballistics. More often than not, Hammerheads can out DPS them due to AAF so that leaves the Enforcer in a spot where they should win the "more gun" duel but can't. My suggestion: Medium Ballistics Integration (similar to the Conquest). It doesn't fix dissipation per se but it allows the Enforcer to max its stats or hull mods as necessary. It should always be the biggest gun among the destroyers.

Shrike - "Small Energy Mount Syndrome". That's why I petitioned awhile back for the universal mount that, eventually, the (P) version got. It's not a bad ship and it doesn't die that often when I have it in my fleet but its role is limited to support. I usually throw an Ion Beam on it and let it go. I want it to be aggressive, though, and small mounts just aren't suited for it. A Heavy Blaster is also a pretty big strain on it. Perhaps I'm just trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. More OP wouldn't hurt.

Cruisers

Honestly, I have almost zero complaints with the Cruiser lineup. All have their niches, all have pros/cons, and some are better than others (*cough* Aurora) but all are good. The Gryphon is the one I use the least but I can't speak to it because I don't feel I have anything to add. I just don't like the idea of a ship that becomes mostly useless at some point in a battle. Only one thing frustrates me: the Apogee and the firing arcs of the back two medium mounts. When they were changed, the ship just just can't focus firepower at all so at a certain point in the game, I ditch it for a more reliable cruiser warship. This is intentional so I'm not going to expect anything.

Capitals

Like Cruisers, I don't have much to complain about here. I don't think there needs to be sweeping changes. I do feel the fuel consumption of Capitals is disproportionate to that of Cruisers. I don't know why an Onslaught chugs 3x the fuel of a Dominator (which is also a hog). The jump from Cruiser to Capital when it comes to travel is immense and while I get you don't want to go joyriding with battleships, its a logistical strain that feels too high.

The only capital I don't jump at a chance to use is the Odyssey. It's just a bit awkward to use and outside of the main battery, it has a ton of small mounts, which I'm not a fan of.

Strangely enough, I'd advocate for the Onslaught to have a single fighter bay, like the battleships of old. Most battleships had a recon plane or small fighter attached at the bow and the Onslaught carrying on that tradition would be interesting.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Alex on July 10, 2019, 12:24:26 PM
Thank you! Been reading through this and making a few notes.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: SCC on July 10, 2019, 12:32:39 PM
I've been thinking... Atlas and Prometheus should be the most efficient freighter/tanker in every aspect. Currently, Prometheus burns has a worse fuel/fuel consumption efficiency than Phaeton and similar thing is going on with Atlas and Colossus. Capital logistic ships already have a very steep cost of decreasing your burn speed, so much that many people don't bother with them anyway, but since they aren't the best freighter/tanker in the game, there's even less incentive to use them. Decrease their fuel consumption or increase their cargo/tanks.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Alex on July 10, 2019, 12:34:26 PM
Yeah, that's already on my list, actually! Smaller freighters/tankers being a touch more efficient is basically the prime reason for running up against the 30 ship limit.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 10, 2019, 12:45:07 PM
In my case, I have one, maybe two, Prometheus in my endgame fleet.  For hauling, I bring one Colossus (because I bring two or three Apogees as a jack, and having lots of big combat ships means not too shabby cargo space).

On the other hand, bringing three to five Afflictors for easy Reaper cheese helps push ships to the fleet limit.

However, with huge endgame fights, I can probably deploy about ten to twenty ships.  Not all at the same time, but retreating cruisers after they run out of peak performance before replacing them with (inferior) ships.

Even though Prometheus is a pig, I need its capacity when I bring three or four capital-sized combat ships.  I have scuttled Prometheus once or twice when the fleet ran low on fuel, and Prometheus was the cheapest to replace, as well as shaving off fuel consumption.  Prometheus and Atlas are just as piggy and hungry as the other capitals.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: xenoargh on July 10, 2019, 12:45:39 PM
I agree with most of that.

On the Enforcer... honestly, I think it needs a more-efficient shield and better Flux stats, rather than more OPs.  This is why it's largely fallen by the wayside; there's no good reason to SO one, so you need it to be the Tanky Destoyer... but it can't tank.  Nor does it have enough Dissipation to support all those Medium Turrets.

On the Brawler, yeah, the Flux stats, the movement speed / turn speed, the shield are all weak spots.  It's not OPs per se; those problems could get addressed with better core stats.

On the Hound / Cerebus:  over here, they get very small-arc (60-degree) forward shields with very high efficiency (0.2, crazy-high by Vanilla standards).  With Extended Shields, that gives them merely 120 degrees of coverage.  This makes up for a lot of their problems, but players need to invest in the OPs.  With the Hound, this is especially problematic, since that single Small Turret doesn't even have a 360-degree arc.  Neither ship ends up feeling invulnerable with these changes, merely able to do the job they were supposed to do.  With the Cerebus, my biggest problem has been with Burn Drive; if they miss-judge that, they die.  Still experimenting with that.

On the Onslaught:  it has all of the strengths of a Dominator... and a whole bunch of new weaknesses.  Terrible, illogical turret arcs, weapon slots it can't possibly support with Dissipation stats, a shield that feels paper-thin and is only "good" for sometimes maybe absorbing incoming Reapers (but only if they're coming straight at the front, good luck on that).  One of the issues here is Armor scaling: a Dominator in Vanilla has 1500... an Onslaught has only 1750.  This doesn't feel right; it's even less mobile and its Flux problems are even more acute.  In Rebal, that issue's solved by a global fiat; Armor damage reduction goes to 99%; this takes the Onslaught's cusp for noticeable amounts of Armor damage to a new place.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Schwartz on July 10, 2019, 12:57:03 PM
I use the Enforcer all the time, even as an AI Officer ship. It's good. I wouldn't say it's much weaker than a Hammerhead, just different. I would rather field an Enforcer than a Medusa. Medusa is too expensive for being paper thin.

I also never use Brawlers, but that's more to do with them being the wrong ship class for their intended purpose. Not because they're necessarily too weak.

Vigilance is probably the most balanced out of the bunch the OP mentioned. A bit more flux wouldn't hurt.

Lashers are still powerful flux spikers if kitted right.

I would say Astral and Onslaught are fine. Astral is a bit short on ordnance points, but it gets a borderline imbalanced ship system (if using bombers).
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Morgan Rue on July 10, 2019, 01:08:06 PM
Brawler TT:
Take a look at it's default lodout, it is actually quite nasty. It's standard kit is one Ion Beam, one Graviton Beam, Advanced Optics and two Sabot Racks. This combined with it's mobility from Plasma Jets makes it extremely obnoxious to fight and generally quite hard to kill.

Hound:
Hounds are cheap, effective and capable when outfitted properly. They fall off later, but that is to be expected. A properly kitted Hound is capable of taking down most early game targets, though it will always take damage when doing so. Usually I fit them with either long range ballistics, or a Railgun and a Light Mortar if I can find them. Short range ballistics outside of Railgun + Light Mortar are alright when manually piloted. Generally I like putting a very large number of hullmods on Hounds, so I go for cheaper weapons, leave the small mount empty or undersize the medium. The Hound doesn't have the flux stats to properly support more than low end weapons anyway.

I agree on Makeshift Shields being generally bad. The primary reason the Hound does not immediately die is that it is very fast. Makeshift shields takes this away, in addition to it not really being able to support a shield due to it's flux stats.

Scarab:
It's alright in a support role. IPDAI + ATG + Tactical Lasers makes it slaughter fighters, though it has to retreat faster than a more standard PD ship. Outside of that, it is quite bad.

I also notice the Mule and Cerberus haven't been mentioned yet.

I find the Cerberus to be a generally worse Hound, as it doesn't have the speed that the Hound has. I'll use them as freighters sometimes, I don't consider them combat capable.

The Mule probably has a bit too much OP right now, especially compared to the Gemini. It can mount whatever it wants to and a little bit more.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Grievous69 on July 10, 2019, 01:16:07 PM
I was kinda hesitant to post at first since I share a lot of opinions with these fine gentlemen but I might as well write a thought or two if the feedback is that welcome.

Ok the damned Onslaught: My god does this thing suck dissipation wise, no matter what you put on it. I think no other ship in the game will have so much flux problems even if you put the worst weapons on it. I can't imagine what it would look like when you put a high tier weapon or more on it. I'm fine with its other weaknesses, they're obviously intended. I get that it's supposed to be a low-tier cheap ship that's not super efficient, but it really needs better dissipation. I usually max vents + flux distributor and still overflux myself in 10 seconds with open market weapons.

All ships that rely on small (some even with medium) energy weapons: Again, not the ships' fault, they just need a weapon that's gonna make them viable as non-support ships. The idea of adding universals or things like that sounds kinda boring to me and it'll always play out the same, just like how every pirate Shrike needs a railgun, otherwise it's dead weight.
Odyssey kinda falls here since it has so many small energy mounts. It has only one build that works decently only in player's hands which is ok I guess, at least it's not bad as before, but build variety is what I appreciate the most.

Speaking of build variety, I think every warship should have enough OP to fit decent weapons and enough flux to support them (but not afford many hullmods) or leave out better weapons or slots completely for more hullmods. Maybe except for ships that are super specialised like phase frigates, they're kinda only good for one thing. It's hard to put into words but it's a bitter feeling when you can't outfit a ship normally and instead put bare minimum on it just so it does something in a fight. I'm sure most people get what I mean.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: xenoargh on July 10, 2019, 01:18:36 PM
Hmm.  I think the Mule has problems, personally; it can't really keep up with its Medium Energy, the shield's weak and armor isn't all that. 

Personally, I think it and the Cerebus and Venture should be able to tank armor a quite a bit better and have Omni shields with a low arc but a reasonable efficiency; then they're still going to take a lot of hits, but they can absorb some damage, too, which would partially make up for their lackluster firepower.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 10, 2019, 01:31:23 PM
I use Cerberus primarily as freighters, which they can excel at due to being able to outrun almost anything if it has all the speed mods.  With Makeshift Shields, they can serve as disposable warships.

Mules are about as ubiquitous as Enforcers.  They do not have much firepower, but they are fairly tanky and good as a brick in the early game.  As for OP, they enough for a basic loadout with Loadout Design 3.

@ xenoargh: Standard Mule traded the energy mount for composite mount recently.  Only the pirate Mule can use energy thanks to the universal.  If player only puts ballistics on the Mule, then both normal and pirate Mule are identical for combat purposes.

Re: Onslaught
Yes, dissipation is horrid, much like Legion.  It seems like whenever I want to use Onslaught, I find myself gravitating toward Heavy Needlers (if I have them, then put something cheap like Devastators in the heavies.

Quote from: Grievous69 on July 10, 2019, 01:16:07 PM
Odyssey kinda falls here since it has so many small energy mounts. It has only one build that works decently only in player's hands which is ok I guess, at least it's not bad as before, but build variety is what I appreciate the most.
Which one is that?  Plasma cannons?  High Intensity Lasers?  (I used HILs for anti-pirate in 0.9a, though I would use plasma cannons if I needed to fight capitals.)
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: xenoargh on July 10, 2019, 01:45:33 PM
@Megas:  Ah, I'd forgotten it went Composite; I think I was already re-working it in Rebal by then.  I'll go compare it's current stat-lines, too.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Morgan Rue on July 10, 2019, 01:48:24 PM
Megas, what do you consider a basic lodout for a Mule?
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 10, 2019, 02:00:36 PM
Arbalest or Heavy Mortar (or Heavy Autocannon if missing cheap stuff) in the medium mount.  Light Autocannons or Light Mortars on the sides, Vulcan at the back.  Some missiles ranging from 2 OP Hammers to 5 OP Salamanders.  Max vents.  Hullmods are Efficiency Overhaul, Reinforced Bulkheads (because no officer will pilot it and I do not want to lose loot), maybe ITU and Resistant Flux Conduits.  Leftovers go to capacitors, if any.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Grievous69 on July 10, 2019, 02:01:11 PM
Quote from: Megas on July 10, 2019, 01:31:23 PM
Quote from: Grievous69 on July 10, 2019, 01:16:07 PM
Odyssey kinda falls here since it has so many small energy mounts. It has only one build that works decently only in player's hands which is ok I guess, at least it's not bad as before, but build variety is what I appreciate the most.
Which one is that?  Plasma cannons?  High Intensity Lasers?  (I used HILs for anti-pirate in 0.9a, though I would use plasma cannons if I needed to fight capitals.)

The plasma cannon one ofc, I mean sure HILs are useful weapons but they feel much better on Paragon and Sunder. Not sure I'd even bring an Odyssey to fight measly pirate fleets. By the time you get one, you're fighting giants fleets where you need maximum firepower and durability.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 10, 2019, 02:04:45 PM
@ Grievous69:  Today in 0.9.1, sure, I buy that.  I did not play Odyssey much in 0.9.1 due to not finding the blueprint until near the very end of my game (after stealing it from Culann).  In 0.9a, when pirates did the hundred-plus small ship spam, Odyssey with HILs was more useful.  IR Pulse Laser spam to build up hard flux then HILs to meltdown wimps was very effective, and in 0.9a, wimp spam was the primary endgame enemy due to colony defenses killing everything else.

Pity plasma cannon is one of the rarer weapons, and Apogee competes for them!
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Morgan Rue on July 10, 2019, 02:51:27 PM
Quote from: Megas on July 10, 2019, 02:00:36 PM
Arbalest or Heavy Mortar (or Heavy Autocannon if missing cheap stuff) in the medium mount.  Light Autocannons or Light Mortars on the sides, Vulcan at the back.  Some missiles ranging from 2 OP Hammers to 5 OP Salamanders.  Max vents.  Hullmods are Efficiency Overhaul, Reinforced Bulkheads (because no officer will pilot it and I do not want to lose loot), maybe ITU and Resistant Flux Conduits.  Leftovers go to capacitors, if any.
You should be able to fit all of that on a Mule without LD3 or builtin hullmods no? Mule has 80 OP, what you listed is 64-80 OP I believe.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Ishman on July 10, 2019, 03:01:57 PM
I agree with almost everything mentioned here; except for the gyphon. You should *really* give it another go as a player piloted ship (in AI hands it's awful because they're awful at using missiles).

Two sabot pods in the mediums, any HE missile in the large (I like either reapers or those tanky missiles from Interstellar Imperium) - and either more sabots in the smalls, or kinetic missiles from a mod. The ballistic mounts don't matter, but I throw on lots of PD personally. Assign one destroyer or frigate to escort it that's setup to delete hounds and cerberus, and you'll be able to take on any bounty as there's no ship that can defend against sabot salvos that isn't called paragon or monitor, nothing else has the shield efficiency to afford being able to shield tank them, you can't shoot them down (they may get distracted by good enough flares or be tanked by fighter craft) as they fire from outside of almost every PD's range, and you can't afford to armor tank them as they'll EMP everything facing that side.

Admittedly it's got all around awful stats and the only thing it's got is the number of missile slots - but it's by FAR the strongest sub conquest/paragon/onslaught ship and will handily help you take out stations and guardians. (don't take it against pather stations though - the devastators & station range bonus will swat the sabots and torpedoes, you're going to have to rely on good ol plasma cannons on a paragon or conquest broadsides while hiding behind something with a real shield as per usual(or drover spam with bombers))


EDIT: Oh I almost forgot one important point - every one of the gryphon's default loadouts is ENORMOUSLY bad.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 10, 2019, 03:28:14 PM
Quote from: Morgan Rue on July 10, 2019, 02:51:27 PM
You should be able to fit all of that on a Mule without LD3 or builtin hullmods no? Mule has 80 OP, what you listed is 64-80 OP I believe.
Turns out I forgot one other thing:  flux capacity.  Turns out that Mule has terrible flux capacity (3000 base is terrible for a destroyer), and needs at least moderate capacitors to have enough capacity to fight.  I just tried to outfit Mule so-called basic loadout with cheap weapons.  Even with 88 OP, I only had enough to get basic weapons.  Loadout was Arbalest, two Light Mortars, one Vulcan, and two Swarmers for weapons.  Hullmods were Efficiency Overhaul, Reinforced Bulkheads, ITU, and Resistant Flux Conduits.  Vents was 24 and Capacitors was 10.  Not too shabby, but I do not think Mule has a lot of OP, even with Loadout Design 3, given sub-par combat stats.  It is not OP starved much, if at all, but it needs a lot of OP to shore up weaknesses, and this is not including stronger and more flux-intensive weapons many ships have trouble supporting.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: xenoargh on July 10, 2019, 04:32:54 PM
OK, took a look at the Mule in Rebal vs. Vanilla. 

Hull and Armor are the same; what changed was the Dissipation is competitive with other combat warships; granted, my numbers aren't the same, but if they were, it'd have 200 vs. 250 for the Hammerhead.  It probably doesn't need quite that many to fire its basic load and have a little overhead left for Defensive Systems 3 in Vanilla, but 200 would probably feel better than 150 does. 

The biggest changes were shield efficiency (0.33; I use a strict ratio system for Rebal shields, so smaller are always more efficient than bigger) and top speed, which I raised to 80 (not quite enough to catch high-speed Destroyers, but enough to play some kiting games).

I'd suggest those two changes for Vanilla, especially the speed thing, as a too-low speed for Destroyers puts them into a really bad place against the faster Cruisers and leaves them a little too vulnerable to faster Destroyers doing hit-and-runs.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Morgan Rue on July 10, 2019, 05:10:08 PM
Mule is supposed to be heavy, and it already has maneuvering jets. It's main combat capacity is it's extremely high armor and durable hull. The armor allows it to get by with significantly lower flux capacity, though I do also tend to give it a good number of capacitors. Due to it's low number of mounts it isn't very good at actively killing things. Early game it's an excellent barrier ship, and can hold pirates at bay for a very long time while other ships do the damage. Later in the game it's more of an auxiliary and an escort for heavier ships, as it's armor stops it from exploding too easily.

Others also use it as a platform for Converted Hangar, since it doesn't have many weapon mounts to use offensively and is usually relegated to an escort because of this.


I'm not sure Efficiency Overhaul should ever be part of a "basic kit". It seems to me like a luxury. Then again, I almost always put Expanded Hold and or Extended Tanks on my Mules. It's always a bit tight, but definitely combat capable in it's given role.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 10, 2019, 05:34:09 PM
For ships with a tight enough OP that they cannot fit Reinforced Bulkheads (e.g., Odyssey, Conquest), either I get an officer in them (for guaranteed recovery) or they get boxed in storage.  I consider guaranteed recovery a must-have to avoid loot loss.  Ideally, that means Fleet Logistics and ship crewed by player or his officers.  For ships not important enough to be piloted by someone, Reinforced Bulkheads get shoved on them if possible.

Mule is not important enough to be given to officer.  It is useful early mainly because they are everywhere (pirates use them) and can take some hits, and deal some back.

I consider Efficiency Overhaul very useful (especially since I did not have Navigation, and I used fleet of big ships), and most ships with Loadout Design 3 can squeeze that in somewhere.  Ever since 0.9.1 added Increased Maintenance and Erratic Fuel Injector, Efficiency Overhaul has become very important.  (I use mostly clunkers until endgame, so I do not reload games when I take a casualty.  At endgame, I can afford to build new pristine ships to replace ships slain in combat, those that are recovered to save the loot, before getting scuttled.)
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: intrinsic_parity on July 10, 2019, 07:14:08 PM
Just a thought on the largest haulers (prometheus and atlas) the burn speed is actually the reason I don't like using them. I think all speeds on the campaign need to be doubled by default and an option to increase them further with he toggle. It's just so painfully slow to lug them around if you don't find augmented drive fields and take the skill that gives extra burn speed. I don't think the efficiency is really the problem
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Goumindong on July 11, 2019, 11:58:29 AM
Quote from: Megas on July 10, 2019, 01:31:23 PM
Which one is that?  Plasma cannons?  High Intensity Lasers?  (I used HILs for anti-pirate in 0.9a, though I would use plasma cannons if I needed to fight capitals.)

Generally Plasma Cannons plus 1 or 2 xyphos plus all of the dissipation and capacity and hardened shields and RFC.

You can also run HIL/Tac Laser but its not as effective in player hands.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 11, 2019, 01:57:19 PM
@ Goumindong:  If I wanted to use HILs, I would not use Tactical Lasers because Odyssey has no way to put hard flux by itself.  I would use IR Pulse Lasers.  In the last release, the only endgame enemies that mattered were small ship wimp spam from pirates (and pathers) because only pirates and pathers could ignore colony defenses to do bad things to them.  Everyone else (aside from Remnants) were stopped cold by your factions' patrols, and you made enough money that bounties could be ignored if inconvenient (and there were fires everywhere).  IR Pulse Lasers and HILs cut through smaller pirates with no or weak shields fast.

Today, with capital spam, more rewarding Remnant farms, and broken Pathers, I doubt I would use HIL Odyssey today (as much).
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Goumindong on July 11, 2019, 11:09:47 PM
HIL/Tac Laser Odyssey has enough soft flux to outflux the majority of targets that arent large (and some that are). I definitely prefer the Plasma version. If you fit IR Pulse then youre range limited in hard flux to a range where, if an enemy were in that range, you would prefer to fit Plasma Cannons. And your soft flux gen is super limited outside of that range so you might as well have PC
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: TaLaR on July 12, 2019, 12:20:35 AM
Quote from: Goumindong on July 11, 2019, 11:09:47 PM
HIL/Tac Laser Odyssey has enough soft flux to outflux the majority of targets that arent large (and some that are). I definitely prefer the Plasma version. If you fit IR Pulse then youre range limited in hard flux to a range where, if an enemy were in that range, you would prefer to fit Plasma Cannons. And your soft flux gen is super limited outside of that range so you might as well have PC

Just firing 2 tac lasers is not worth losing zero flux bonus, and against most targets they have negative flux performance (you spend more on shooting than enemy on shielding - not worth it unless you actually get enough to overwhelm, and Apogee doesn't).
I'd rather take a bit armor damage and close distance quickly as worst case.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 12, 2019, 05:06:56 AM
Quote
If you fit IR Pulse then youre range limited in hard flux to a range where, if an enemy were in that range, you would prefer to fit Plasma Cannons. And your soft flux gen is super limited outside of that range so you might as well have PC
I do not always need to be in that range.  Against unshielded or weak frigates, and there were many, they die at long range.  Against moderately shielded ship like Falcon (P) or Venture that can absorb beams for a while, get in close, let the IR Pulse Lasers build up flux, then finish off with HILs.  Odyssey has the mobility to chase wimps it can outmuscle, and there were a lot of wimps in 0.9a.

I tried plasma cannons, but they were a pain to hit smaller targets that the pirates abused back in 0.9a.

I forgot to mention the IR Pulse Lasers had IPDAI.  IPDAI IR Pulse Laser is good multi-purpose.  Good stopping power against missiles (despite inaccuracy), and decent hard-flux or damage with so many IRs Odyssey can mount.  IPDAI Tactical Laser is too finnicky, does not always fire when I need it, even with all of the required hullmods.

IR Pulse Laser and HIL loadout was optimized against pirates, which was fine when the factions that used those fleets were the only ones who breached colony defenses.  Big ships that could threaten Odyssey were never a concern when my patrols kill all expeditions, and I made enough money to ignore named bounties.

But it does not matter anymore.  Pirates no longer wimp spam.  Instead, they Atlas 2 spam.  Now I probably want something else, like Paragon to pierce shields with quad lances and good shields to block wide-spread MIRV volleys.  (Conquest often gets clipped by MIRVs because shield does not extend far enough to always block all MIRVs without maneuverability bonuses.)
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Thaago on July 13, 2019, 04:51:11 PM
Onslaughts are tricky to load out because of their dissipation, but are incredibly powerful when done right. They use high tier weapon extremely well because those weapons tend to be more efficient. Railguns or Heavy Needlers are A+, or a single front Storm Needler (not all those options at once - its too much flux and kinetic, but some combination gets the job done). Using 4 Annihilator Pods is also key, unless they are specifically being built for another purpose, because they give more than enough flux free HE damage to take on heavy targets.

Its also important to fly them correctly. The TPC are great long ranged siege guns or overall pressure weapons, but are NOT shield killers. When I'm flying an Onslaught, I want to burn into kinetics range with the TPCs off, and the target off the port or starboard bow where the ship can overlap 2 large mounts and many smaller ones (and all 4 missiles). Once the enemy flux has been pushed high, I turn off my kinetics, swing the nose around, and unleash the TPCs. Faster enemies will still get wrecked because of the extreme range or TPCs. Just as important as weapon group management is vent management - the ship has enough armor to take minor hits, so doing half full quick venting that eliminates the threat of torpedo strikes while venting is a good idea.

AI piloted Onslaughts suffer somewhat from their own long range: they can blow their flux budget on a kiting enemy, and the ballistics travel slow enough to be dodged at so far away. An officer with a shot speed boosting skill and accuracy booster is essential. The AI is acceptable, but not that good, at flux management, which lowers the Onslaught's power by quite a bit.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Thaago on July 13, 2019, 05:29:19 PM
Back on topic:

I find the Wolf to be flat out underpowered now that pirates are using shielded ships and fighters. Its worth having in an early game fleet simply as a numbers filler and to lure the enemy away, and to at least damage the unshielded hounds and cerberi. It is completely obsolete against anything with shields, at best providing some flanking and missiles, at worse blocking shots. Its offense is so bad that it is mostly useless as a player ship.

There are no weapon options that let a Wolf effectively damage shields, because it does not have enough dissipation to fire its single medium gun, let alone doubling up with a front IR pulse: it has poor sustained DPS. It only has the single medium mount (and front small), and no booster system, so its only option for burst damage are Heavy Blaster or Anti-Matter Blaster: poor efficiency weapons. So its burst potential is low. With poor sustained damage and poor burst damage, the Wolf simply has a weak weapons package. In practice it can barely break the shields of the Kite, a 2 OP civilian shuttle, before its own shields are defeated by its front gun and the single dual AC on many variants! The ship can be a decent flanker because it can carry an Ion Cannon, and the Pulse Laser can deal decent armor damage against small (frigate and light destroyer) level threats: hounds and cerberi are its ideal targets.

The Wolf is very vulnerable to interceptors due to its fixed forward shields, fixed forward main gun, and weapon choices. The ship needs at least two beam PD to have a chance of dealing with Salamanders or other missile threats. But these low DPS weapons need stacking numbers to start really dealing with fighters: 2 or 3 is not enough to deal with 2 Talon wings (and forget about Sparks - they melt and destroy Wolves with impunity). Having an Ion Cannon in the front small makes the Wolf a decent flanker, but also means that its anti-fighter DPS is below the effective hull regeneration due to replacement of fighters: it CANNOT kill fighter wings fast enough to live. Add in the Wolf's paper armor (150) which makes the frag and/or light kinetics of fighters a real threat, and the ship is simply doomed.

The Phase Skimmer is a great system that keeps Wolves alive a decent amount of the time, but without offense its a half ship at best. Because its such a core part of the identity of the ship, I don't think replacing it with High Energy Focus is a good idea. Instead, the Wolf needs sustained DPS, or at least better recovery after a burst: more flux.

100 more base flux, bringing it up to 250, would be a decent start. Yes, this brings it higher than the Tempest, but Tempests have an offense boosting system on top of the Terminator drone, so effectively are still much much better. At 250 base flux and 10 vents, a Wolf still cannot fire the basic Pulse Laser and have shields up and be flux neutral. But at least its close. An SO Wolf wouldn't be able to fire a Heavy Blaster, but at least it would be closer than present.


Conversely, I think Shrikes are actually good as light Destroyers, designed to fly at burn 10 in a frigate pack or serve as more powerful frigates in battle! With 550 flux (when vents are high) it can actually support energy weapons: a heavy blaster works! Medium missile mounts are always powerful as well. This opinion is based heavily on me having bought one when I had very few other options, then being absolutely astonished at how well the AI flew and performed in it (routinely getting better than 100% in damage done in Sundog's battle ranking metric). Cheap, effective, damages the enemy, and an OK level of survivability. I did notice them become obsolete before my other destroyers, but thats ok: they are super-heavy frigates, not true destroyers, and by the time they became obsolete I wasn't using any non-specialty frigates at all.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 13, 2019, 06:22:35 PM
@ Thaago:  Agreed on Onslaught.  I end up outfitting Onslaughts much like Legion, and I favor Hellbores and Heavy Needlers on the latter.  For Onslaught, Heavy Needler spam for kinetics (more range than one Storm Needler).  Heavy mounts may get Hellbore or Devastators.  Or I may put Devastators on the side heavies (because AI focuses on TPCs and rarely tilts the ship to use two heavies) and something good like Mjolnir in the medium.  Deep mediums get Maulers.  Smalls get Vulcans or get left empty.

As for Annihilators on Onslaught, that is only good if the fight is short enough.  Against long multi-capital fight that are common at endgame, the Annihilators are spent much too quickly, and Onslaught might as well be without missiles (and 40+ OP) after about a minute of fighting.  I probably need Expanded Missile Racks, but I find I cannot afford that if I need Augmented Engines to keep campaign speed up.  For AI use, I am beginning to like Typhoon Reapers because they are not spent so quickly.  AI will use them sparingly.  Effectiveness probably depends on skills.  If I cannot rely on Reapers, then I mount few Salamanders and use extra OP to buff other stuff more.  In previous versions, Annihilators were no-brainers, but today, fights are too big for Annihilators to be effective enough for long.

For Wolf, if I have burst lasers and want to use hard flux medium, I often leave the small middle mount empty and use one pulse laser or heavy blaster.  Wolf really needs better stats.  I would also welcome the omni shield it used to have when the game was Starfarer.  It takes some practice to get used to it, but omni shield is really nice on Wolf.

Shrike can use heavy blaster, although if I use the (P) version, I like one light autocannon.  (Would like railgun, but it is too OP starved to afford it, and 700 range does not matter much when bound by 600 range heavy blaster.)

Shrike, at least the pirate version, is good because it is cheap, and you get what you pay for.  Only about 25k compared to about 50k or so for a real destroyer.

Speaking of Heavy Blaster, I do not use two heavy blasters on Medusa because it dumps flux too fast.  I tend to use one Heavy Blaster and one Ion Beam, or two Phase Lances with Advanced Optics.  I tend to favor the Heavy Blaster and Ion Beam combo due to costing less OP (or rather, I can get max vents, but I cannot with two Phase Lances plus Advanced Optics).
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: TaLaR on July 14, 2019, 02:30:27 AM
Quote from: Thaago on July 13, 2019, 05:29:19 PM
I find the Wolf to be flat out underpowered now that pirates are using shielded ships and fighters. Its worth having in an early game fleet simply as a numbers filler and to lure the enemy away, and to at least damage the unshielded hounds and cerberi. It is completely obsolete against anything with shields, at best providing some flanking and missiles, at worse blocking shots. Its offense is so bad that it is mostly useless as a player ship.
...
The Phase Skimmer is a great system that keeps Wolves alive a decent amount of the time, but without offense its a half ship at best. Because its such a core part of the identity of the ship, I don't think replacing it with High Energy Focus is a good idea. Instead, the Wolf needs sustained DPS, or at least better recovery after a burst: more flux.

You do need to dump several times worth of your flux capacity to kill anything, but Wolf s maneuverable enough for fast close range venting. Well, I do agree that moving stuff down with a melee Lasher is faster and more straightforward against ships that don't have overwhelming burst to counter you.

Phase skim is not just defense. It wins flux war by avoiding flux-expensive shots and allowing you to vent mid-fight. Triple skim allows to easily reach back of any rear-vulnerable ship and destroy it without giving a proper chance to fight back. Also allows to catch phase ships. And Wolf can even bypass omni-shields via point blank skim to defeat Medusa which is otherwise 100% impervious to Wolf.

I'm not against buffing it somewhat though. It IS severely lacking in brute force department. Killing simple shielded kite takes depressingly long.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Serenitis on July 14, 2019, 11:23:29 AM
Quote from: Megas on July 13, 2019, 06:22:35 PM
I would also welcome the omni shield it used to have when the game was Starfarer.  It takes some practice to get used to it, but omni shield is really nice on Wolf.
Omni shields on ships that need to be flown using turn-to-pointer can often be a huge hassle even when you are familiar with the behaviour.
Not really ideal on what is essentially a starter ship.

Giving the Wolf a wider shield arc would be helpful. Along with the abovementioned flux stats.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: SCC on July 14, 2019, 11:48:05 AM
Speaking of giving ships omni shields, giving the Brawler one wouldn't hurt. If it needs a buff, that would be a change that would help with its bigger issue, besides the fact that a destroyer-fighting frigate isn't particularly useful at any point.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: TaLaR on July 14, 2019, 12:24:17 PM
Quote from: Serenitis on July 14, 2019, 11:23:29 AM
Omni shields on ships that need to be flown using turn-to-pointer can often be a huge hassle even when you are familiar with the behaviour.
Not really ideal on what is essentially a starter ship.

Giving the Wolf a wider shield arc would be helpful. Along with the abovementioned flux stats.

Easy to use at basic capacity, hard to master - I see nothing wrong with applying this concept to Wolf. Omni shield was more flexible, since it allowed to deal with Salamanders for cheap by just turning shields. With fixed shield, skimmer became the only option for last moment avoidance, and it's charges are important resource needed for many other purposes.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 14, 2019, 12:58:03 PM
Quote from: TaLaR on July 14, 2019, 12:24:17 PM
Quote from: Serenitis on July 14, 2019, 11:23:29 AM
Omni shields on ships that need to be flown using turn-to-pointer can often be a huge hassle even when you are familiar with the behaviour.
Not really ideal on what is essentially a starter ship.

Giving the Wolf a wider shield arc would be helpful. Along with the abovementioned flux stats.

Easy to use at basic capacity, hard to master - I see nothing wrong with applying this concept to Wolf. Omni shield was more flexible, since it allowed to deal with Salamanders for cheap by just turning shields. With fixed shield, skimmer became the only option for last moment avoidance, and it's charges are important resource needed for many other purposes.
I used omni shielded Wolf much during the Starfarer days to defend against Salamanders.  With omni shields, small mounts can be Tactical Lasers or even non-PD.  With Front Shield, it practically needs the small mounts for PD (except maybe burst PD on sides and whatever in the middle), and rely solely on medium weapon to kill things.

Turn-to-pointer?  I use keyboard for all movement (which I guess is called tank controls).  I use mouse for panning the cam and controlling omni-shield.  The dexterity required to pilot something like Wolf with omni shield cannot be any worse than many games, especially early FPS games like Doom.

240 front shields was not bad on Wolf, and I hoped Wolf would get that after the conversion, but it did not.  Since then, I always wanted to get omni shields back on Wolf.  (Not through hullmod since that guts arc and OP total, which Wolf barely has enough with LD3, especially after ITU costs more for frigates.)

Also, AI used omni-shield very well on Wolf, blocking missiles among other things.

Medusa primarily points forward too, especially if relying on railguns to break shields.

Omni shields on Brawler would help defend against Salamanders since Damper Field seems incapable of blocking EMP.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Thaago on July 14, 2019, 05:23:40 PM
I wouldn't mind Wolf having omni back at all: that would be a very welcome extra defense against salamanders and fighters.

Its true that it is harder to coordinate the mouse position than fixed forward, but other small maneuverable ships (Tempest, Medusa, Kite, probably a few others) have it and it works just fine. (:grabs cane: and baaack in myyy daaayy we piloted our wolves with omni shields, and the mouse hadn't been invented yet! And get off my lawn! :shakes cane:)
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: xenoargh on July 16, 2019, 08:58:06 AM
On the Wolf:  it's a classic exemplar for my arguments re: Hard Flux on Beams.  The problem here was that a lot of the Pirate junk was totally ruined by 1000-range Beams; countering it with Shields has nullified that huge advantage, but at the price of exposing the central problem again.

Universals for the two fixed-point missile slots would make it a Railgun / Light Needler platform, possibly, but with tricky loadouts, as the AI would not do well with kiting if Tac Lasers were installed.  That's probably a reasonable solution with Vanilla remaining more-or-less what it is now.

As it is, I think the Wolf's OK-ish as a player-ship with Pulse Lasers or Heavy Blasters, at least early on; against Hounds or Cerebi, it can generally get to a flank and kill them.  With Hard Flux on Beams, Tac Laser can return to reasonable ranges (in Rebal over here, it's 700 atm) and still be pretty balanced; Wolf spam can burn shields, but it can be countered and it's relatively low-harm.

Later than early-game, the Wolf's sole use that I've found is as engine-killing flanker with Ion Beams.  It can work if the player's using orders intelligently to put a Wolf pack behind things that are vulnerable, but frankly, it's a lot of work to manage them.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: SCC on July 16, 2019, 09:59:28 AM
Solution to high tech ships being bad shouldn't be just giving them access to ballistics.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Thaago on July 16, 2019, 10:27:03 AM
Quote from: SCC on July 16, 2019, 09:59:28 AM
Solution to high tech ships being bad shouldn't be just giving them access to ballistics.

Unfortunately this is already the case because of how drastically superior ballistic weapons are for shield breaking. Energy has some real strengths in the medium and large mounts (and I guess a few edge cases for small energy), but shield breaking just isn't there. And while kinetic damage isn't quite as dominant as it once was due to AI improvements, ships still need 'enough' of it to get shields down.

Pirate Shrike? Considered better than a normal Shrike despite having 5 OP less, because it can mount one small ballistic.

Medusa? Relies on the two front universals for kinetic damage, and is much weaker with them as other weapon types.

Paragon? Nearly every build puts ballistics in the medium universals: typically Heavy Needlers, but HVD's on occasion for extreme range. Occasionally dual flak for fighting Anni-spam Onslaughts. And rarely beams for the 'all in' beam ship.

Pirate Mule? Medium ballistic makes it undeniably more powerful.

On the one hand I agree with you that energy weapons should be good enough that 'access to ballistics' is required. On the other hand, 'access to ballistics' is a really easy lever to pull for balance and allows for 'per ship' balancing, as opposed to reworking energy weapon balance as a whole. On the third hand, per ship balance could also just be accomplished by a change in flux stats.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: SCC on July 16, 2019, 12:51:31 PM
Normal Mule has a composite medium now, so it can mount ballistics by default, but it wasn't always the case and I get your point. There's also this issue, where ballistics are supposed to be stronger than energy weapons; better ships have to utilise worse weapons and worse ships can use better weapons is how tech division works. Of those three, in vacuum I would choose high tech ships buffs, but ideally I would see some tweaks/additions to energy weapons roster, too.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Schwartz on July 17, 2019, 01:15:40 AM
Yeah, whatever happens.. no fixing mediocre high tech ships by giving them ballistics please.
Wolf isn't too bad, but it could use slightly better flux stats. Same with Medusa. Either that or an armor bump.

Ballistics are a moving target as well. The Mauler nerf was huge. Now it's basically a platform for kinetics. Kinetics really are self-sufficient to handle opponents. If they're constantly in flux trouble and not smart enough to play around getting overloaded, then kinetics alone can stunlock them to death. In fleet action, anyway. All it takes is a couple of kinetic ships and one guy with a Heavy Blaster or a couple of Harpoons. That's not a lot.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: xenoargh on July 18, 2019, 02:42:37 AM
It's funny watching y'all going down the same road I did two years ago.

I agree that "just throw Ballistics on them" is not a real game plan.

A couple of ideas here:

1.  At some point, I think that the warping ability got nerfed a bit.  Might help to un-nerf, let the Wolf do what it's designed to do (basically, be a kite-monster support platform) better. 

It won't solve the problems with SO'd ships, though, but maybe that's OK; the Wolf shouldn't counter everything, just stuff that's slower than it is.

2.  Fix the balance on Energy weapons.  Honestly, I'm not holding my breath here. I'm pretty sure I know what needs to change.  Essentially, they're simply priced wrong for what they do and the issues with Beams not getting Hard Flux aren't going away; I tried balancing around Soft Flux and found it required some incredible counter-advantages to work out, all other things being equal. 

3.  Keep the current theme, but make it work better, in general.  One of the things about High Tech is that a few of them are quite decent right now (Aurora, Paragon) but most of them aren't feeling so hot.  Those two outliers have the advantage of being able to choose engagements; nothing else in High Tech can right now.  If we're talking about Destroyers, this is entirely my fault; I complained about the Hammerhead, it got fixed; problem is, none of the others were fixed to counter it.  Over here, the Hammerhead's a decent Midline ship, but the Medusa works and can win firefights, largely because it can shield-tank and vent while the Hammerhead's trying to recover.  The Medusa's still tricky and flimsy, though, and my AI doesn't usually use it well; I'm still working on that.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 18, 2019, 05:47:39 AM
I have no problem with ballistics on high-tech ships, if weapons and other ship stats will not change.

Wolf can probably be fixed with better flux stats, and its omni shield restored.  If not, do the Shrike (P) route and make the middle mount hybrid.  Probably still needs better dissipation so it can use its main gun for more than few seconds.

Tempest seems fine.

Hyperion can have three minute peak performance if endgame fights will stay as big as they are.  Actually, if endgame fights will be huge from now on, then peak performance needs to be higher for all ships and maximum map size raised to 1000 so that we do not fight 3v3 or 5v5, despite 300 or 500 map size.

Scarab needs to go back to its 0.7.2 glory days, with "touch-of-death" Atropos.  Maybe it can have some special missile buffs unique to it to recreate the missile power of 0.7.2 that made it good (among other things).  If not, then its Temporal Shell needs to work like Accelerated Ammo Feeder and give a flux discount.  Right now, I cannot mount more than one or two IR Pulse Lasers because it caps flux too fast while Temporal Shell is active.  (Venting breaks the shell.)  Also, 360 shields without hullmod tax.

Medusa can either have more OP (or better flux stats) or have its DP cost lowered.  It is no Drover, and it is comparable to the (cheaper) Hammerhead if Medusa has the best weapons.

I like to see hybrid on the normal Shrike.

I do not know what is so great about Aurora.  I try heavy blasters and it is okay, but nothing great, not worth 30 DP.  If I use Sabots, it kills few ships, then it is out, but AI seems rather incompetent with Sabot use.  Aurora needs high flux stats to pound away with blasters.  It was hard enough with 0.8 flux stats (12k cap), and now it has less in 0.9 (11k cap).  Honestly, I think Aurora is a mediocre and overrated ship.

Apogee seems undervalued, too powerful for mere 18 DP, at least once it gets Plasma Cannon and Locusts.  The hull itself is fine.

Odyssey needs to be AI idiot-proof.  It can use more buffs (especially more OP), but at the very least, the AI needs to stop treating Odyssey like an Onslaught heavy armor tank.  It would be nice if Odyssey's strength is not so reliant on plasma cannons.  Without them, Odyssey is really mediocre.  Also, why does it cost 45 DP?  Most other capitals are worth only 40 DP, and are generally more powerful than Odyssey.

Astral is a carrier, only good at it if it puts nearly all of its OP in fighters and some hullmods.  It has many weapon mounts, and most of them are left empty just to use bombers.  Its system is clearly optimized for bomber use.  I like to see a built-in hullmod that reduces OP cost of bombers (by about a third, 12 becomes 8 ).  Maybe remove Advanced Optics for it.  Advanced Optics is not much use if there are no weapons on it, except maybe token Burst PD.

Paragon is only worth 60 DP with extreme range loadouts.  With something less optimal like all pulse lasers, it feels like an overpriced energy Onslaught or Conquest without mobility system.  Still, with extreme range, it is very powerful.  If maximum map size will cap at 500, then Paragon should be worth less, maybe back to 50 DP.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Grievous69 on July 18, 2019, 06:39:36 AM
Quote from: Megas on July 18, 2019, 05:47:39 AM
I do not know what is so great about Aurora.  I try heavy blasters and it is okay, but nothing great, not worth 30 DP.  If I use Sabots, it kills few ships, then it is out, but AI seems rather incompetent with Sabot use.  Aurora needs high flux stats to pound away with blasters.  It was hard enough with 0.8 flux stats (12k cap), and now it has less in 0.9 (11k cap).  Honestly, I think Aurora is a mediocre and overrated ship.

I feel pretty much the same. No matter what loadout I go with, it's always that nagging voice saying ''you're paying too much for this''. I mean it's a really fun ship to pilot and I get it's best used in player's hands but even then it doesn't feel right. You go with SO, bam you're out of time, you take missiles, bam you're out of ammo. Everything else feels not quite right since you need so much flux to fire enough energy weapons. On top of all that it's nearly impossible to find in campaign. Truly overrated for 30 DP.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Schwartz on July 18, 2019, 07:39:34 AM
It may be expensive, but you're getting explosive speed, flux stats and the loadout to be able to bang on someone's windshield. That's a highly sought after combination for player ships in particular. AI I would prefer to give an Apogee to, it's super cheap and tanks well.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 18, 2019, 07:59:18 AM
Quote from: Schwartz on July 18, 2019, 07:39:34 AM
It may be expensive, but you're getting explosive speed, flux stats and the loadout to be able to bang on someone's windshield. That's a highly sought after combination for player ships in particular. AI I would prefer to give an Apogee to, it's super cheap and tanks well.
The speed is good, but that is all it has going for it.  Current flux stats are not much better than Eagle, but Aurora needs much more flux stats than Eagle thanks to very flux inefficient heavy blasters.  (If it uses anything else, its firepower takes a nosedive, or needs even more flux in case of mining blasters).  Aurora has terrible shot range for its class even without Safety Overrides (unless doing all beam loadout, in which case, I rather use Eagle).  It is one case where I might want Ion Pulser in the hardpoint because there is not much else that is useful that cannot be mounted on the turrets (if I want to specialize in energy instead of missiles).

I need to leave mounts empty just to max out flux stats, and Aurora is not performing much better than others, whether it is blaster and EMP spam, or missile spam.

As a playership, Aurora costs too much and has terrible shot range or endurance.  At its price, I rather pay a bit more and pilot Doom or a real capital.  If I had to stick with a cruiser, I rather play Apogee or Eagle (or Heron if I had fighter skills).
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: xenoargh on July 19, 2019, 08:09:15 AM
Aurora's definitely on the cusp of being genuinely useful; kind of depends on what Hull Mods you have access to, and whether (if a player-ship) you can afford to get Defensive Systems 3, rather than go SO.  SO Aurora is kind of a weird, giant vulture build; a little too fragile for my tastes, but if it can flank, it's golden.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Thaago on July 19, 2019, 10:51:11 AM
An Aurora with a proper loadout is hands down the most powerful cruiser because of its extreme speed, and it has several AI friendly configurations. It pays for that power with lower longevity.

Range is not very important for it because it can close the gap to any target it wants to attack with its system. Its an ideal player ship for the mid game and only fades in the end game because thats when 10 capital enemy fleets call for the player to have a capital of their own. I'd say its still a good player ship up to 3 enemy capitals for faction fleets (or an infinite number of pirates, who it can kill with ease).

Even after running out of missiles, a dual heavy blaster Aurora is still an acceptable combatant for the mopping up phase. It can maintain the two of them fairly well thanks to its deep flux pool, operating 340 flux negative, 555 negative with shields - thats still a good 20 seconds of fire time minus incoming damage (with no caps invested), which is 20,000 damage. At this point its the speed that makes even a no-missile Aurora decent enough - 1000 DPS is ok, similar to what an Eagle can put down, but on a much faster package.

I do think 30DP is a little high for them though - 28 is more in line with their actual performance.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Wyvern on July 19, 2019, 10:58:39 AM
I don't understand why you'd put more than one heavy blaster on an Aurora - yeah, you need one for armor-cracking, but after that one it's better to focus on more flux-efficient pulse lasers.  My personal favorite armament is two pulse lasers, four ion cannons in the hardpoints, and one heavy blaster in the medium hardpoint; small turrets get some mix of IR pulse or PD, and the rear/side turrets are empty or PD.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: intrinsic_parity on July 19, 2019, 11:23:00 AM
Quote from: Wyvern on July 19, 2019, 10:58:39 AM
I don't understand why you'd put more than one heavy blaster on an Aurora - yeah, you need one for armor-cracking, but after that one it's better to focus on more flux-efficient pulse lasers.  My personal favorite armament is two pulse lasers, four ion cannons in the hardpoints, and one heavy blaster in the medium hardpoint; small turrets get some mix of IR pulse or PD, and the rear/side turrets are empty or PD.

DPS. If you want to use the front hard point for sabots, then you lose a lot of dps without two HB. If you use that hard point for a HB and pulse lasers in the mediums, that's also a fine loaded but you will have a lot less missiles to work with. I think load outs with only one HB work fine. But you are definitely losing strike capability without those missiles.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Goumindong on July 19, 2019, 11:54:13 AM
Because the Aurora has a massive flux capacity and the mobility to extricate itself from situations in which its flux is high.

The main reason flux dumping is inefficient as a design is that most ships cannot leave a situation once they have dumped and as such flux out and die. As a result they need to have the best combination of damage and efficiency in order to maximize their total damage.

Mobile ships do not need to do this if they have better flux stats than their target. Rather they can optimize for TTK (which is harder as it depends on each incoming ship). This is why the mobile ship “line” keeps getting relatively better as ships get bigger. From the wolf not being all that great, to the medua being really good, to the aurora being amazing, to the Odyssey being transformative enlightenment

Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 19, 2019, 01:40:08 PM
Quote
Because the Aurora has a massive flux capacity and the mobility to extricate itself from situations in which its flux is high.
Aurora used to have massive flux capacity, but now it is only 11000, merely 1000 over Eagle.  That is not massive, considering how much more flux hungry energy weapons are compared to ballistics, and Eagle has no problem capping flux with ballistics and beams.  Aurora also took a dissipation hit in 0.9, less than 0.8.  It was tough enough getting Aurora to win flux wars against similar opponents (without min-maxing flux stats) without help from missiles in 0.8, and now it is even harder.

Also, running away without winning the flux war first and doing significant damage is not an advantage.  It is a stalemate, or eventual loss (due to PPT timeout) against a superior opponent.

If I pass on missiles (I tend to since AI is incompetent with the best ones), then I probably go Ion Pulser in the hardpoint, Ion Cannons in two of the hardpoints (the other two are empty due to lack of OP), and the front two medium turrets are Heavy Blasters.  Rear medium is either Heavy Burst Laser or Salamander Pod.  (Missile loadouts are lame in huge endgame fights or in AI hands, they do not last long enough in multi-round combats.)

One Heavy Blaster loadout is destroyer level firepower.  I do not want to pay 30 DP to do what even Shrike can do.  At least Doom (for 5 more DP at 35) can comfortably use two Heavy Blasters and Mines together.

I suppose current Aurora would be fine if its DP cost was lowered to 25 or a bit more.  It is too expensive at 30 DP.

High-tech mobile ships only have better flux stats because their weapons are horribly inefficient, except Medusa who can use ballistics (but less than Enforcer or Hammerhead).  They also tend to have terrible shot range and eat hard flux from ballistics users before they can attack themselves.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Thaago on July 19, 2019, 02:10:38 PM
I consider 2 HB on an Aurora mandatory because it gives fairly decent DPS while saving the other mounts for missiles and costing very few OP. Its true that the HB is more an armor cracker than a shield cracker because of its poor efficiency, but the Aurora can support two of them well enough. The ship is a little vulnerable to Remnants because it doesn't have any kinetics, but it is fast enough to mitigate that somewhat.

Every mount on an Aurora that can mount a missile should mount a missile, other than some specialized SO builds that can run triple HB (and not much else). And it should have extended racks. The AI is good enough with them when it is set to aggressive or reckless.

Consider it this way: I can build an 1100 flux dissipation warship with moderately more efficient weapons that will be a little bit better against shields and a lot worse against armor and hull (Pulse lasers are very bad against cruiser grade armor and IR pulse will be doing minimum damage), that has some missiles. Or I can build an 1100 flux dissipation warship a little worse against shields, much better against armor and hull, and that has a large and deadly missile package.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Igncom1 on July 19, 2019, 02:24:35 PM
what are grav beams and tac lasers like on these high tech ships? Worth it/not worth it?
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Megas on July 19, 2019, 02:54:20 PM
For a ship that can only use energy weapons, blasters can be as much of a shield cracker as pulse lasers because higher DPS from blasters means less DPS from the enemy taken by shields.  If the enemy overloads faster from blasters, that is less damage taken by your shields.  You shields may take less flux from using heavy blaster than from more efficient pulse lasers because the enemy could not fire as much and put as much hard flux on your shield before losing the flux war.

Beams on high tech ships can be handy at times to take out unshielded or poorly shielded enemies, like pirates.  Generally more useful on midline ships that can mix them up with ballistics.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Thaago on July 19, 2019, 03:26:56 PM
I really like gravs and tacs (and HILS!) on an all beam Paragon - very powerful, though enemies with good enough dissipation can be immune, which is a punch in the teeth. I also really like a Sunder with HIL and gravitons.

Tacs can be ok as secondary anti-fighter weapons or to create a zone effect, but I agree with Megas: I prefer those weapons on midline ships where they can be backed up by ballistics. I suppose a Medusa with 2 Gravs, 4 tacs would do 700 soft flux to shields at 1000 range at the cost of 450 flux, but its ability vs armor and hull would be pretty limited.
Title: Re: Warship Balance
Post by: Goumindong on July 20, 2019, 02:53:29 PM
Quote from: Igncom1 on July 19, 2019, 02:24:35 PM
what are grav beams and tac lasers like on these high tech ships? Worth it/not worth it?

Long range weapons are for slow ships that cannot easily single out and eliminate weaker targets