Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vind]

Increasing speed maybe too much of a buff but shield efficiency definitely must be looked at - it is awful and does not work as an only defense for capital ship of this size.

[Megas]

No, I'd prefer it if everything got weaker, thereby restoring the specialised nature of capital ships.
The skill system introduced enormous power creep, which largely mitigates the intrinsic specialisation that each of the capital ships have. (Not to mention relegating fighters to trash tier)

I love the power creep!  I thought ships were too slow and weak and didn't have enough OP before skills.  Even with max OP from skills, some ships (e.g., Hammerhead) still do not have quite enough OP to get what they want.

Fighters being mostly worthless is a problem.

[Cycerin]

Changing firing arcs would mess with the AI and go against the ship's design. It's the most visually broadside-based ship in the game. Instead, I would simply give it a slightly narrower and harder shield, and slightly thicker armor, to help the AI not flux-lock itself from excessive shielding. The Conquest is completely fine as a player ship - if you can wrap your head around piloting it, it's quite powerful. Two large missiles and the ability to circle targets at max. range is a great asset. The Conquest simply needs to not get surrounded, and it can usually defeat any enemy, save for battles where it's forced to duel other capitals - which it can still do handily in the campaign with player skills. Could also give it Maneuvering Jets with 2 charges, so that you can get to the battle faster or choose to store one emergency charge for evasion.

Regarding not being surrounded, if you're fighting destroyers and frigates, you can actually use both broadsides at the same time to destroy swathes of enemies, which is when the ship feels most satisfying. Too bad it's more optimal to make a 1-sided loadout right now.

It would be complicated, but some sort of built-in hullmod dedicated to encouraging double broadsiding would be pretty cool for the Conquest. Current vanilla variants have abandoned symmetrical loadouts entirely, which I think is sad.

[Cik]

conquest is one of the better ships in the game, i always try to find them to use them as my flagship (usually with little success, regrettably)

it's satisfying to use, unique, and most importantly not an invincible snoozefest like the paragon.

the game needs more ships like the conquest.

[Wyvern]

Maneuvering jets with charges would be really nice, actually.  I'd probably go for three charges rather than two, but... yeah, that'd make a big difference to be able to keep a charge in reserve for dealing with, say, a burn driving Onslaught.

[Schwartz]

conquest is one of the better ships in the game, i always try to find them to use them as my flagship (usually with little success, regrettably)

it's satisfying to use, unique, and most importantly not an invincible snoozefest like the paragon.

the game needs more ships like the conquest.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Megas]

I use symmetrical configurations for Conquest.  If player wants to solo a simulator with the Conquest, it needs to use both broadsides simultaneously as much as possible.  Otherwise, it may not have enough peak performance to do the job.

[ValkyriaL]

I'd say we go around posting #MakeTheConquestGreatAgain until Alex decides to do so.

[Xanderzoo]

#MakeTheConquestGreatAgain

It would be hilarious if this started appearing in random threads.

[Bastion.Systems]

#MakeTheConquestGreatAgain

It would be hilarious if this started appearing in random threads.

Ha, just like the #frigatemenace in EVE.

[VuNut]

A thought, how would the vessel be affected by the speed bonus from it's system being partially (half? a little more?) added to the base speed and the system itself being replaced by one that only boosts manoeuvrability, but twice as much and with a longer cooldown? I could see that allowing it to make better use of it's existing arcs of fire and mitigate the vulnerability from it's blind spots.

Idea totally a rip-off of the high energy turn ability in Battlefleet Gothic.

[Linnis]

I feel like all this discussion is all based around looking at the ship in outfit screen and thinking that it will flank another captial.

But that not what the conquest is about.

The conquest is about dodging emy fire and shield tanking what cant be dodged. While having high enough amount of energy slots to ignore smaller threats.


With maneuvering thruster on when a onslaught burns drive at the conquest the conquest can turn and strafe at such a amazing rate that it will doge the first strike and fire back.

Its even maneuverable enough to doge bomber waves and pilums. No other cruisers aside from the doom can pull stunts like this off.

Even in an environment without skills the conquest then gets the ability to drive right by another captial and fight it in its back while only taking a bit of damage if done right.

This means a conquest can negate alot of the incoming fire instead of taking it on shield or armor, and its broad side setup allows it to keep on firing while doing these maneuvers, while even if you did stuff like this with a medusa, you lose alot of potential damage.


Its the shape, turn rate, and general maneuverability that makes the conquest great. Its just that without practice or in the hands of a AI its trash.

Perhaps if all ships was controlled by a player, a conquest would be the worst ship ever, but we fight AI, they will happily be abused over and over in the exact same way.

[Serenitis]

There is already a 'fix' to make the Conquest a lot more flexible and able to freely use it's guns: Use Hurricanes.

Seriously though, the only real change to the Conquest I'd be tempted to make is to widen the arcs of the forward heavy guns just enough so they can shoot straight forward if need be.