Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Save the Venture!  (Read 8214 times)

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Save the Venture!
« on: February 09, 2016, 07:14:24 PM »

The Venture was once a very solid support cruiser but alas, the poor girl was slapped with not only Civilian-grade Hull but also Burn speed 7. That is just too much, imo! In the past I actually seriously considered grabbing a Venture due to its flight deck (this was before officers and the fighter wing fallout), good all around cargo/fuel/crew capacities and its surprisingly robust armor/hull strength and missile support.

But now, I don't really even consider it. I mean, the Dominator has a Burn speed of 8 and that thing is all armor and heavy weapons! Save the Venture!
Logged

Achataeon

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
  • ~stare~
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2016, 07:46:37 PM »

Yep. Same here. Although the difference between the two is that the Dominator is a military vessel and the venture is a civilian ship. Maybe a new hull-mod that allows for hybrid civilian/warships? I don't know what it will do but it's good to have choices.
Logged
"On average, a human has one breast and one testicle"
- Vsauce, Michael here

Doom101

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 641
  • Doom will always find you.
    • View Profile
    • Youtube channel
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2016, 06:22:45 AM »

Probably at least a hundred posts of mine on this forum are about singing the praises of the Venture, and sadly you are correct, it just isn't worth grabbing anymore, The burn speed is a non issue for me though, because you just need one tug to bring it up to speed 8. I'm not sure what it needs, possibly some extra utility that other ships are incapable of, looking at it's fluff it's not a combat ship, it's a Mining ship, used to MINE things like asteroids. Maybe the Venture and it's oft seen accompanying mining drones will get a buff when Industry is involved.
Logged
When you can't go on, just accept your doom. It comes to all, it is inevitable.

Also I totally had the name BEFORE the cruiser.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2016, 08:55:58 AM »

Slow burn speed alone kills the Venture!  Base burn of 7 on a cruiser is not acceptable.  Adding civilian-grade hull hurts too.

Venture is like a bigger Mule with a flight deck, but the Mule lacks the harmful attributes of its brethren, the Shepherd and Venture.
Logged

Copperwire

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2016, 06:18:26 PM »

The other issue is that it seems to count as a combat cruiser for AI fleet spawning purposes - same as a Mule counts as a destroyer - yet neither really has the strength to match.  If you would like to see that in action, buy a Mule early ...
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2016, 06:59:10 PM »

Mule is a hybrid, part-combat and part-freighter.  Mule does not compete with the likes of Enforcer, Hammerhead, or Medusa.  Mule has enough combat power to not be totally defenseless (like a Buffalo) and either kill weaker ships or help support your other combat ships.  Mule has noticeably more cargo space than pure combat ships, but it costs more to maintain than pure freighters.

Venture has a flight deck.  Flight decks are worth about six light mounts' worth of weapons.  Ships with flight decks have less OP and mounts than those without any decks.  Venture has about as many mounts as a destroyer (though half of the mounts are for missiles).  It is also at the high end of the durability scale for cruisers.  The Venture, slow as it is, is a brick!  Overall, Venture is about as strong as a combat cruiser.  That said, burn speed is very critical in the campaign, and if the ship needs a tug (which costs one more against your 25 ships, has no cargo capacity, and slurps as much fuel as a Dominator) to reach burn 9, that slow poke had better be at least as strong as a battleship (i.e., Onslaught or Paragon) which, sadly, Venture is not.
Logged

Copperwire

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2016, 08:54:08 PM »

Flight deck requires more of those 25 slots to use and missile slots generally have lower value then other slots.  Sure, its a brick, but would you prefer a Venture and a tug plus some fighters or a Medusa, a Buffalo, and some disposable frigates? (similar OP and slot use...)

For that matter, 2 mules cost less OP (by 1) have the same cargo capacity, more net vents/cap, similar total slots, don't need tugs, and add a lot of hull/armor.  (HB Mule is best Mule and a pair of those can kill Caps)

Apogee has almost (450 vs 500) the cargo of a Venture, so I guess it is a hybrid freighter of sorts ... only it is a self-sufficient murder machine.
Logged

Linnis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #7 on: February 11, 2016, 12:47:07 AM »

Hobestly... Venture sucks now since fighters suck now. Before ventures were a absolute beast in the early game.

Stick some hvd or maulers with a mining blaster on that thing, add some missles then with fighter support it brings it can fight destroyers all day, even tangle with other cruisers.

Then it brings its own cargo space...

When fighters are back in line...
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #8 on: February 11, 2016, 05:46:20 AM »

Flight deck requires more of those 25 slots to use and missile slots generally have lower value then other slots.  Sure, its a brick, but would you prefer a Venture and a tug plus some fighters or a Medusa, a Buffalo, and some disposable frigates? (similar OP and slot use...)

For that matter, 2 mules cost less OP (by 1) have the same cargo capacity, more net vents/cap, similar total slots, don't need tugs, and add a lot of hull/armor.  (HB Mule is best Mule and a pair of those can kill Caps)

Apogee has almost (450 vs 500) the cargo of a Venture, so I guess it is a hybrid freighter of sorts ... only it is a self-sufficient murder machine.
Missile mounts are counted equally as other mounts, even if the options are not optimal.  I have posted before that ballistics is usually superior to energy.  Missiles vary, but you have among limited spike damage (most missiles), very low and awkward DPS (Salamander or Pilum), or plain rubbish (Atropos, proximity charges).

As Linnis says, "fighters suck now."  Fighters are too weak to compete in the endgame, and ships with flight decks suffer.  I do not use fighters at all, except maybe a wing of Thunders and/or Daggers in the midgame, before I get my multi-fleet-killer Onslaught or Paragon.  In previous versions, fighters were either good or at least viable enough if not the best.

Venture with tug hurts.  For cargo capacity, this is like having two ships with 250 capacity (500 / 2 = 250).  If Venture had base burn 8 (e.g., Augmented Engines was enough for burn 9), then I would consider using it as least for capacity, and a flight deck means I can put a wing or two if convenient.  Today, if want a freighter/deck combo, Gemini is the best (if I have other ships at burn 9).

As for which I would rather to use.  I would use Medusa and friends, but only because I pilot those ships.  I would give AI Enforcers, Falcon, Eagle, and/or Dominator.  Frigates are a bit too fragile to use except as pursuit mop-up.  As for freighter, I tend to use two or three Atlas in the endgame because I need the capacity to loot what I kill during my raids.

As for Apogee, it is like a high-tech cruiser-sized Mule.  It has firepower comparable to the Falcon (or maybe more if you squeeze a MIRV launcher in).
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #9 on: February 11, 2016, 11:46:26 AM »

Hm.  I guess maybe, technically, if you put heavy blasters on that Falcon, the firepower is comparable while the Falcon's flux holds out.  But that won't take very long at all, and afterwards the Apogee is just better at everything except racing to capture points.  And I wouldn't compare the Apogee to a Mule; the Mule is barely worth fielding if you don't have anything better, while the Apogee is a top-tier combat cruiser that's only slightly less effective than a Dominator.

Personally, what I want to see is a set of "combat freighters" that are built along the lines of the Apogee & Venture - ships that may not have the focused firepower of a full combat ship, but are highly survivable and well worth deploying to battle.  It'd be more interesting for the game than just loading up on helpless freighters.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #10 on: February 11, 2016, 12:50:50 PM »

Falcon can be armed (and vent spam) much like a Medusa, or it can kite-and-snipe with a HVD+Mauler+beams.  Ballistics and beams are more useful mainly due to being more common than heavy blasters and light needlers, and excellent for kiting.

I disagree that Apogee is top-tier.  Good, yes; top-tier, no.  If you want to kite with Apogee, you either get stuck with Autopulse or Plasma cannon plus beams, maybe missiles too.  That is Falcon or destroyer-level firepower.  If it goes for short-range stuff... It gets autopulse, antimatter blasters, two heavy blasters, and insignificant PD.  Also, Aurora is lacking too unless built for missile spam, which it does very well (for now).

Similarly, Venture would be good too, if its weaknesses were not so crippling now.

Falcon and Apogee can focus about six to eight light weapons worth of sustainable firepower at enemies.  Most destroyers can comfortably focus six light weapons worth too.

Venture can do this too, if built for it.  Although given that its system and half of its mounts are for missiles, I would probably build Venture for Pilum and Salamander spam, and use two dual flak and heavy blaster for close-range.  If I want to snipe, use HVD+Mauler (or two HVDs since Pilums can do the HE damage) for assault and heavy burst laser for occasional PD.

Dominator can focus-fire nine or ten light weapons worth of ballistics (and three medium mounts of missiles) comfortably.  If it needs to give up frontal PD and go all-out offense (to solo the simulator), it can use Mjolnir+Mauler+Needler for thirteen light weapons worth of ballistics firepower.
Logged

Copperwire

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #11 on: February 11, 2016, 01:34:38 PM »

Where the Apogee shines compared to a Dom is under AI control.  It is also much harder to swarm and can dance with anything for at least a while.  It is easy to overlook the drones.  I laugh a little each time it vents and the Ion blasts keep stunning things.  In a sense, they have to be seen as adding extra cap and flux.  Never mind the whole 20% or so range boost they bring.

OP for OP - under AI control, I do not think there is a more effective BC.

I do have a hard time making one work very well without a Plasma Cannon.

@Megas - I think your take on the Apogee, and just about everything, is very different then mine - as you seem to see everything through the lens of solo fights vs huge odds.  I think that is a valid and interesting outlook.  If you would be curious, here is the variant I use for AI use in fleet battles.  I would suggest you give it a shot compared to some of the builds you seem to favor under AI control.

Front - 2 Tacs and 1 PC
Mid - 2 Burst PD
Rear - 2 Pulse Lasers
Missiles - 1 Swarmer and 1 Salamander

ITU, Acc Shields, Aug Engines, Aux Thrusters

It looks awkward and a bit unfocused, but I haven't found anything that works better under AI control.  Keep in mind I use it in the context of a larger fleet in actual battles rather then in the SIM; other things provide burst, shield stripping, and AA.  SIM wise, with a Pilot it can sink anything but the 2 true BS's.  I expect the Apogee to deal on its own against anything short of a BS, break armor in fleet fights, and act as a "tackle" for BS take-downs, and it does.  For 25 OP, nothing else will fit that roll.  It is also very Command Point efficient - it can be left to its own devices at the beginning and rarely needs orders later.  It tends to find a fight and create a front I do not have to manage.

Logged

Aeson

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #12 on: February 11, 2016, 09:01:11 PM »

Quote
For that matter, 2 mules 2 mules cost less OP (by 1), [have] more net vents/cap
I fail to see how this is an advantage, at least until you have the double vent/capacitor limit perks. You get 100 flux capacity per capacitor and 10 dissipation per vent; Mules have a base 3000 flux capacity and 150 dissipation to the Venture's base 7000 flux capacity and 300 dissipation. Assuming standard maximum vents and capacitors, your pair of Mules will have 5000x2 = 10000 flux capacity to the Venture's 10000 flux capacity, and 350x2 = 700 dissipation to the Venture's 600, with 60*2 = 120 shield upkeep on the Mules and 120 shield upkeep on the Venture; a pair of Mules will always have to spend 10 more OP (total) than a Venture will in order to reach the same . Even when you have the perk for double maximum capacitors and vents, you're only looking at 7000x2 = 14000 flux capacity for a pair of Mules to 13000 flux capacity for a Venture, and 550x2 =1100 dissipation for a pair of Mules to 700 dissipation for a Venture, and the pair of Mules is now paying 20 OP more than the Venture to get to that point. It should also be noted that the Venture's hull and armor are sufficiently tough that it can afford to be a lot less reliant on its shields than Mules can*, and that even though the overall armament of a Venture is roughly comparable to that of a pair of Mules, so much of Venture's armament is in missiles that the actual flux generation of a Venture's armament is often more comparable to that of a single Mule than a pair of Mules.

Moreover, while a pair of Mules will have more total OP than a single Venture would, they can lose a fair bit of that advantage paying for hullmods; 2 destroyer hullmods cost more OP than one cruiser hullmod of the same type, and by enough that the 20-26 more OP on a pair of Mules than on a single Venture isn't going to go all that far. I also don't see what value your "OP cost" metric has; you appear to have some specific configuration in mind when you make that comparison, as a difference of 1 OP between the armament of a Venture and the armament of a pair of Mules doesn't fit the nominal 5/10/20 OP for small/medium/large mounts (which would give a fully-armed Venture's armament an OP cost of 60 and a fully-armed Mule's armament an OP cost of 35; if instead computing leftover base OP that'd be 40 for the Venture and 25 for each Mule, plus up to 30 for the Venture and 18 for each Mule with full percentage OP bonuses, and another 12 OP for the Venture and 7 OP for each Mule with Optimized Assembly), or with basic Venture and Mule armaments (e.g. Pulse Laser + 2 Flak Cannon + 2 small Salamander + 2 Pila = 56 OP for the Venture and 3 Vulcan Cannon + 1 Pulse Laser + 2 Salamander = 32 OP for each Mule).

*Seriously. Ignoring the Dominator, the Venture has 25% more HP than the next-best cruiser (the Eagle or Aurora); ignoring the Dominator and Doom, it also has 25% more armor than the next-best cruiser (Eagle again), and given that it has ~43% more HP than the Doom it's probably fair to say that despite having equal armor ratings the effective hull strength of the Venture is considerably greater than that of the Doom. The Venture has only ~17% less HP and 25% more armor than the Conquest, and as much HP and 25% more armor than the Odyssey. While the smaller armor grid is something of an issue due to being less able to spread the damage around, the Venture's overall hull integrity is in many ways more similar to that of a light capital ship than that of a cruiser. Contrast the Mule, which has an overall hull integrity fairly solidly in the destroyer range (granted, at the heavy end of the destroyer range).
Logged

Copperwire

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2016, 12:38:59 PM »

<- Nice post.

I wasn't trying to suggest 2 Mule = 1 Venture in terms of combat, though they are fairly close.  More that the difference in combat capacity plus the other factors in play makes the Mule more useful often; Mules do not have a civ hull and can move 10 (with augmented engines) which mean they have a place in fleets a Venture would harm.

Slow fleets happen when you are willing and able to field a fleet strong enough that you do not care if things catch you.  We are talking about "Caps and Support Ships" time.  While the Venture is interesting - mainly because of its DP (15) - it does not quite stack up against other Caps.

Before that point, when you still care if things catch you, the Mule has a point - you mainly use it as a freighter, but if you bite off more then your efficient combat ships can chew you can deploy it to add bulk to your fleet.  In that roll, while it is not as efficient as a pure combat ship, it does ok.

Basically, the Mule sometimes has a place in "early mid-game" fleets, while the Venture does not a quite have a place anywhere.

Sure, if fighters started working, that might change, but even so, the Gemini benefits more from that and has better burn.

Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: Save the Venture!
« Reply #14 on: February 15, 2016, 01:49:41 PM »

I suppose I'd settle for a militarized variant that has Burn 8 and no civilian hull. Which faction would have it though? I'm thinking Sindrians would be the likeliest - don't make it require Cooperative or even Friendly (or was Welcoming the next tier?) rep as it should be a cruiser you can get earlier on.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2016, 02:03:09 PM by Dri »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2