This isn't a problem I've encountered in the campaign. It was only really evident from the Starsector tournament. Let's not balance the game around that, please!
But simply increasing OP costs wouldn't really solve the problem of how much flux-free damage the Falcon (P) can do. It just flatly needs fewer medium Missile slots.
The competitors as player piloted ships would be Afflictor, Shade and Harbinger. Not saying that Falcon (P) doesn't need a nerf, but it's hardly the most absurdly powerful and DP efficient player ship.Don't forget an honorable mention for the Safety override hammerhead! It definitely has much harsher limitations, but when it shines it cleans house.
Sabotpod has 9 sec between bursts. Thats heavyac level of op. Typhoon has 15 sec chargedown. Better than heavymortar I guess. But not even in the same universe as the chaingun...
Medium missiles are balanced just fine.
And since basic Falcon doesnt, its just a "cruiser" with the worse armanent than Hammerhead. Only compared to that, (P) version looks great.
Sabotpod has 9 sec between bursts. Thats heavyac level of op. Typhoon has 15 sec chargedown. Better than heavymortar I guess. But not even in the same universe as the chaingun...
Medium missiles are balanced just fine.
I think you're underestimating instantaneous damage potential. Missiles of those kinds deal IMMENSE amounts of damage in a single burst. Gauging their power from DPS is a red herring.
And since basic Falcon doesnt, its just a "cruiser" with the worse armanent than Hammerhead. Only compared to that, (P) version looks great.
Basic Falcon has less firepower than Hammerhead. But it's still a much stronger ship in 1v1 scenario. It has more range and more effective mobility (same average, but burst is better for timed distance corrections). With enough hard flux firepower to kill Hammerhead from that range. A well piloted(which AI can fail at, admittedly) and properly built stand-off Falcon would always defeat a Hammerhead in completely one-sided manner.
And since Falcon is 9 Burn it doesn't really compete with other Cruisers anyway. Falcon is mostly an over-sized DE.
It still has very bad firepower to DP ratio though.
Thats tactics. I'm pretty much sure that player's ability to kill that op Falcon (P) in a frigate not even up for the discussion.
This isn't a problem I've encountered in the campaign. It was only really evident from the Starsector tournament. Let's not balance the game around that, please!
This doesn't come from the tournament. It comes from player-piloting in the campaign. A missile-spamming Falcon P flagship is absurdly powerful and DP efficient. The competing ships, Gryphon and Aurora, both cost more DP (i.e. have less fleet support) and have equivalent or inferior missile-power.But simply increasing OP costs wouldn't really solve the problem of how much flux-free damage the Falcon (P) can do. It just flatly needs fewer medium Missile slots.
You are probably right.
Thats tactics. I'm pretty much sure that player's ability to kill that op Falcon (P) in a frigate not even up for the discussion.
That's very basic tactic exploiting objective speed+range advantage. Not doing even this much can only be classified as AI being not good enough.
While player piloted Hammerhead can win vs Falcon in skill-less fight too, it's never as one-sided (you need to trade away quite decent amount of armor vs properly built Falcon).
Yes, any rear-vulnerable ship can be killed by humble Wolf in skill-less fight. SO or not depending on whether you need more mobility or PPT (SO against Falcon). But it's more difficult tactic, so I don't expect AI to be able to properly and reliably execute it. Trying to do it under wrong conditions is suicide. In comparison, Falcon kiting is safe and simple.
Falcon (P) has no built-in missile rack.Sorry about that, missread something.