Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 15

Author Topic: Orbital Stations in Combat  (Read 96403 times)

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #150 on: September 26, 2016, 11:44:59 AM »

I was mostly referring to really old 5k range tach lance, not sure which game version it was. I think it was only 0.5 efficiency and not too damaging, but the fact that you were pretty much always threatened without notice made it quite OP.
I really wanted to try that out just to see how overpowered it really was.  I read that it had double range and DPS (but no chain EMP) compared to 0.53 version.  Since it is a beam that probably hit for soft flux, I still have doubts that it was overpowered that others claim.  I cannot find any working links here for versions before 0.53.
The original Tachyon Lance was an awesome game-changing weapon - but a large part of its (relative) power was due to the different combat environment.

Back then, you had a very small limit on deployment points that increased with nav nodes you controlled - this was the original value of the comm relay nav nodes, and back then they were the priority target, because each one you controlled meant an extra 30 deployment points of ships you could put on the field.  And since there were no CR costs, and thus no reason not to deploy everything you could, gaining control of a comm relay could make or break the battle.

With no ship systems or player skills, the fastest things around were fighters; this lead to a combat paradigm where you typically sent fighters or frigates out in the first wave to capture nav points, then followed up with heavier ships once you could afford to field them.

The original Tachyon Lance, then, meant guaranteed field superiority.  A few wings of fighters backed by even a single Sunder with a TL could completely wipe out the enemy's fighters (thanks in part to another feature of the original TL: its beam wasn't stopped by fighters or missiles, and could damage as many such targets as you could line up).  At which point you could deploy your heavier ships, and the enemy couldn't, and that was pretty much that.

It wouldn't be quite as OP now as it was then, since comm nodes are now worthless, there are frigates and destroyers that can take a TL hit or two and still get around faster than most fighter wings, and - while you would still be able to get crushing focused firepower by deploying a large number of 5k range Tachyon Lances - doing so would now have a rather significant cost in terms of CR and supplies.

* * * * *

That said, I'm personally pretty happy with the current TL; it can't snipe, but it's otherwise a good weapon.
(Current state of plasma cannon, though, needs some help.  Flux cost is too high; might be okay if it wasn't doing that three shot burst thing?  Maybe we can get back the old charge-up plasma cannon; that would be fun...)
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12159
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #151 on: September 26, 2016, 12:57:45 PM »

Yeah, field superiority was a thing back in pre-0.6.  I remember taking two Hyperion, capture all points, then kill the trickle of enemy ships with my fleet.  Then came 0.54, and leveling made auto-resolve the most efficient way to fight (since skills made your fleet stronger even there).

I did not know the original TL had passthrough like current plasma cannon.

Plasma cannon flux cost is too high, worse flux efficiency than heavy blaster (I think).  Plasma cannon is only worth it for the range (if limited to energy only).
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 24141
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #152 on: September 26, 2016, 01:06:18 PM »

Now here's a question, will there be a station variant to fight against in the simulator?

Probably not. Some types of content are spoiled by being available like that, and stations (and REDACTED) fall into that category imo.

Spoiler

                      (+++++++++++)
                  (++++)
               (+++)
             (+++)
            (++)
            [~]
            | | (~)  (~)  (~)    /~~~~~~~~~~~~
         /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  [~_~_] |  * * * /~~~~~~~~~~~|
       [|  %___________________                | |~~~~                      |
         \[___] ___   ___   ___\       IST         | |           HYPE             |
      /// [___ + /-+-\-/-+-\-/-+ \\_________|=|___________________|
    //// @-=-@ \___/ \___/ \___/  @-==-@      @-==-@      @-==-@

* independent space train, obviously.
[close]

Excellent! Have some bonus points :)


(Boy, did I ever derail this thread. Uh, sorry?)
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #153 on: September 26, 2016, 01:10:05 PM »

(Boy, did I ever derail this thread. Uh, sorry?)

I'd say you railed it. Choo-choo! :-*

Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #154 on: September 26, 2016, 01:43:03 PM »

(Current state of plasma cannon, though, needs some help.  Flux cost is too high; might be okay if it wasn't doing that three shot burst thing?  Maybe we can get back the old charge-up plasma cannon; that would be fun...)
(Forced) Burst fire never makes sense to me, especially with a high flux using weapon like the Plasma Cannon. Also another thing that doesn't help it: it has no weapon hints, which allows the AI to fire at ANYTHING, meaning wasting (massive) flux firing at fighters, drones and some times frigs...
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

Cyan Leader

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #155 on: September 26, 2016, 03:35:07 PM »

Now here's a question, will there be a station variant to fight against in the simulator?

Probably not. Some types of content are spoiled by being available like that, and stations (and REDACTED) fall into that category imo.

Oh? We can actually fight whatever this REDACTED thing is?

Thanks for the extra hype, Alex.
Logged

woodsmoke

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #156 on: September 27, 2016, 05:34:06 PM »

For Conquest, an obvious change would be to give it a decent shield. it currently has one of the worst shields in the entire game, despite supposedly being a midline ship, and without heavy armor or other powerful defensive features that could make up for it.

I'll freely admit I don't know terribly much about the theorycraft, but I honestly don't understand why everyone thinks the Conquest is so bad. I suppose if the AI is piloting it using one of the crappy assault-to-port-PD-to-starboard (or the other way around, I can never keep straight which is which) loadouts it's probably going to be pretty underwhelming, but as a player ship it's easily my favorite in the game. It's fragile, sure, but it's also fast enough to outflank the other big ships and, when properly equipped, capable of pumping out more than enough firepower to take care of everything else.

I agree it could use a bit more defense, though, preferably in the form of a larger/better shield, just to give it a bit more margin for error when things look to be going south.
Logged
The more I learn, the less I know.

Cik

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #157 on: September 27, 2016, 05:49:30 PM »

For Conquest, an obvious change would be to give it a decent shield. it currently has one of the worst shields in the entire game, despite supposedly being a midline ship, and without heavy armor or other powerful defensive features that could make up for it.

I'll freely admit I don't know terribly much about the theorycraft, but I honestly don't understand why everyone thinks the Conquest is so bad. I suppose if the AI is piloting it using one of the crappy assault-to-port-PD-to-starboard (or the other way around, I can never keep straight which is which) loadouts it's probably going to be pretty underwhelming, but as a player ship it's easily my favorite in the game. It's fragile, sure, but it's also fast enough to outflank the other big ships and, when properly equipped, capable of pumping out more than enough firepower to take care of everything else.

I agree it could use a bit more defense, though, preferably in the form of a larger/better shield, just to give it a bit more margin for error when things look to be going south.

it's burn 6, so it's as slow as an onslaught while having nowhere near the staying power, range, or killing power. hell, arguably the onslaught's even faster due to burn drive skewing things.

at burn 7 it would be an excellent ship IMO. II has the dominus battlecruiser at burn 7 and it's a really good ship.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12159
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #158 on: September 27, 2016, 05:56:52 PM »

Conquest can solo the simulator, but nowhere near as efficiently as Onslaught or Paragon.  The problem with that is Conquest has all the weaknesses of a battleship, but none of its strengths aside from firepower, and that occurs only if the Conquest can get both broadsides firing nearly at all times.

Conquest costs as much to use as a battleship, and it is also as slow as a battleship on the campaign map.  Conquest has terrible shields, and its durability is no better than the toughest cruisers.  While its firepower is good, it cannot mount flak all-around the ship like Onslaught and have perfect PD.  With Maneuverability Jets, Conquest can kite other big ships and snipe them to death, but that does not kill very quickly.  If you resort to an expensive battleship or other capital-sized combat ship, you want to utterly crush everything with ease, which only Onslaught and Paragon can do, the rest (Astral, Conquest, Odyssey) struggle more than necessary.  If you do not want to use Onslaught or Paragon, you are better off with a fleet of smaller ships.
Logged

Sy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #159 on: September 27, 2016, 06:12:47 PM »

I honestly don't understand why everyone thinks the Conquest is so bad.
i don't think it's terrible, but i also don't think it's worth costing as much as an Onslaught.


it's burn 6
(standard military capital burn speed is 7, actually. 6 for civilian capitals like Atlas, 8 for most cruisers.)
Logged

Cik

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #160 on: September 27, 2016, 06:22:17 PM »

you're probably right then

anyway, a battlecruiser shouldn't be the same speed as a battleship, strategically. that's kind of the entire point of battlecruisers.
Logged

Talkie Toaster

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 259
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #161 on: September 28, 2016, 03:32:36 AM »

As a quick further contribution to the derail:
It'd be nice if the Paragon got a unique built-in weapon like the Onslaught, in the 2 front hardpoints. I think that uniqueness is one of the things that makes the Onslaught really appealing. Plus, since the Onslaught's TPC is basically a prototype Autopulse, making it a variant Tachyon Lance with some buffed stats would be neat.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12159
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #162 on: September 28, 2016, 06:16:24 AM »

Onslaught is appealing because it is the most powerful playership in the game, beating even Paragon (slightly).  It is able to solo everything in the game worth fighting, and do it more efficiently than Paragon, the only other ship with comparable power.

If Paragon replaces hardpoints with builtin lances, they had better be overpowered to make up the loss of stronger heavy weapons.
Logged

Talkie Toaster

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 259
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #163 on: September 28, 2016, 08:37:37 AM »

Onslaught is appealing because it is the most powerful playership in the game, beating even Paragon (slightly).  It is able to solo everything in the game worth fighting, and do it more efficiently than Paragon, the only other ship with comparable power.

If Paragon replaces hardpoints with builtin lances, they had better be overpowered to make up the loss of stronger heavy weapons.
There are multiple types of appeal a ship can have. Not everyone chooses ships based solely on how optimal they are in combat; as long as their effectiveness is within a reasonable margin, many people will decide based on other factors. The Onslaught feels like a distinct centrepiece that adds something unique, whilst the Paragon doesn't really (it's just very good at doing what a lot of other ships also do). It's why people like the Conquest even though it's mechanically sub-par; it has a distinct, interesting character to it and you fly it in a unique way because of the weapon distribution.

But yeah, ideally they would be unique weapons on a par with the TPC for effectiveness. Given the Paragon's main difficulties are engagement-based, very long-ranged Tachyon Lances with the ability to ion engines reliably would give it a nice flavour as something that shapes the battlefield around it, much like a station does.
Logged

AgroFrizzy

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« Reply #164 on: September 28, 2016, 09:48:26 AM »

I prefer the paragon over the onslaught. The shielding allows it to, say, take fire from two onslaughts while your support ships deal damage. It's just so tactically viable in any given scenario. The paragon also requires one to unlock a ton of tech stuff and battle stuff to really utilize it properly, while the onslaught is super viable from the getgo. Paragon - this is the type of ship that either goes through a fight completely unscathed, or loses control under heavy fire and takes a lot of damage. The onslaught is more likely to take damage, imo, but less likely to lose control in a huge fight. Being able to boost away quickly and having so much firepower ensures that. I'd rather still use the paragon, however, because pulling off standing your ground in a colossal fight without taking any damage to the capital ship is pretty great. Still lose a bunch of CR though. Kind of want a perfectionist or 'pristine condition' hullmod for tachyon that negates any CR loss for engaging in a fight if it doesn't take any damage in the fight. It'd be a double edged sword. Cost more to maintain, cost more to replace CR for, but it's extremely smooth when everything happens optimally.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2016, 09:58:34 AM by AgroFrizzy »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 15