Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10

Author Topic: Talon balance  (Read 40817 times)

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #90 on: April 24, 2017, 11:24:03 AM »

Thats fair. They may be a bit strong atm. :P

One thing I've noticed is that while carriers are very strong one on one, they falter a bit when the fighters have to fly near a group of enemies to take out their target. Have you noticed this as well or is it the way I'm using them?

There is some degree of safety in numbers, but against large groups my carriers seem to prioritize escorting non-carrier ships (player-piloted one included).
They also switch to aggressively attacking same target as me, once it's fluxed up.
As result fighters act as powerful force multiplier where needed. Very smart of them :)
« Last Edit: April 24, 2017, 11:25:39 AM by TaLaR »
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #91 on: April 24, 2017, 11:53:30 AM »

I've been piloting a carrier a whole lot myself and have noticed the other fighters in the fleet doing well. Maybe I should go back to ship piloting and let the AI do a good job.
Logged

CrashToDesktop

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #92 on: April 24, 2017, 12:47:51 PM »

I've been piloting a carrier a whole lot myself and have noticed the other fighters in the fleet doing well. Maybe I should go back to ship piloting and let the AI do a good job.
Especially since Officers can get all 3 carrier-focused skills while the player doesn't need to - you can focus on Tech and Industry.  I generally leave the fighting to my officers nowadays just because they can get the combat-oriented skills much faster than I can, and there's more of them than me.

An officer with all 3 carrier skills maxed out is scary effective with a Drover or a Mora, let alone a Legion if he's got some combat skills.
Logged
Quote from: Trylobot
I am officially an epoch.
Quote from: Thaago
Note: please sacrifice your goats responsibly, look up the proper pronunciation of Alex's name. We wouldn't want some other project receiving mystic power.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7214
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #93 on: April 24, 2017, 12:52:27 PM »

I've been piloting a carrier a whole lot myself and have noticed the other fighters in the fleet doing well. Maybe I should go back to ship piloting and let the AI do a good job.
Especially since Officers can get all 3 carrier-focused skills while the player doesn't need to - you can focus on Tech and Industry.  I generally leave the fighting to my officers nowadays just because they can get the combat-oriented skills much faster than I can, and there's more of them than me.

An officer with all 3 carrier skills maxed out is scary effective with a Drover or a Mora, let alone a Legion if he's got some combat skills.

Oh, can the officers get the carrier skill that effects all fighters in the fleet? Or is there another 3rd one that I'm blanking on? (away from game :P)

I think the much maligned level 3 speed increase perk would be fantastic for a carrier captain: 0 flux speed boost while still having fighters engage.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #94 on: April 24, 2017, 12:55:59 PM »

Oh, can the officers get the carrier skill that effects all fighters in the fleet? Or is there another 3rd one that I'm blanking on? (away from game :P)

They can't get fleet skill (Fighter Doctrine), but they get all 3 of Carrier Command, Wing Commander, Strike Commander. Good enough for me.

Logged

Droopy The Dog

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #95 on: April 24, 2017, 02:29:48 PM »

(Login time-out ate my first post and I came back much later to repeat, so I kinda missed the bus on this conversation.)

If we're opening up the topic of damage types to make energy PD more effective at an anti-fighter role, how about EMP? Specifically a PD weight, light mount, burst emp-beam.

Now, hear me out. It would certainly be effective, in a quick sim test if I lazily pass a couple of ion beams over some approaching unshielded fighter wings I can end up with multiple wings reduced to unpowered, spinning, projectiles, pancaking themselves against my shield impotently and exploding on impact (incidentally, hillarious!) and even with shielded ones a decent number of EMP arcs go through to disrupt things. With proper point targeting things would only get more impressive. With a tweaked auto-fire priority that switches fighters after disabling rather than trying to destroy with their meager energy-damage output, medium mount ion-beams would be absolutely murderous anti-fighter weapons themselves, potentially even too good given their obscene range after hullmods.

It seems to take just a tiny splash of EMP damage to flame-out a fighter semi-reliably, so an anti-fighter oriented light weapon needn't have enough sustained damage to obsolete ion cannons in their anti-ship role whilst still filling their niche role admirably. Whilst EMP damage seems to have no effect on missiles, keeping them from being too universal in the PD arena too. So I propose a light mount, short-&-fast-ish burst, pure-emp beam, with a targeting priority for non-disabled fighters over active fighters and set to ignore missiles due to being useless against them. This missile avoidance further improves their anti-fighter role, as they'll no longer get distracted by swarmer missile spam and could even be used to make potentially underperforming decoy flares more attractive, if they could be left on the targeting list after missiles get taken off.

---

Bonus round craziness below:
Additionally/alternatively, and because the energy PD selection is rather bland presently, how about a hybrid bastardization of the overwhelming point-blank firepower of vulcan cannons and the area denial ability of flak? And by that I mean an uncontained plasma flamethrower! ;D I'm talking incredibly short range, like 50-100, whatever it takes to just barely reach outside the shield radius of your average cruiser, with a tediously slow projectile speed, so as to give it a decent lifetime and make it moderately possible for a fighter to evade even at close range. But for that you get the firepower to eliminate a near limitless number of missiles along a very narrow vector (should you be brave enough to leave your shield off!) and the ability to disrupt evasion corridors and deny airspace inside your shield bubble to swarmy fighters, without just destroying them by default or crippling strike/standoff craft.

As an added benefit, it could potentially open up more knife-fight range safety-override builds to energy mount ships and give a lore-friendly option for low-tech/pirate energy mounts (there's few cruder ways to weaponize pure energy than superheating up some junkmatter and hosing it out of a nozzle in someone's general direction. :P)
Logged

Soychi

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Ad Rem
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #96 on: April 24, 2017, 03:15:31 PM »

@ Droopy The Dog that EMP PD sounds super cool. I hope Alex makes it and it works.
Logged
ARE YOU A COWARD? This is not for you. We badly need a brave man. He must be 23 to 25 years old, in perfect health, at least six feet tall, weigh about 190 pounds, fluent English with some French, proficient with all weapons, some knowledge of engineering and mathematics essential, willing to travel, no family or emotional ties, indomitably courageous and handsome of face and figure. Permanent employment, very high pay, glorious adventure, great danger. -Glory Road, Heinlein

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #97 on: April 24, 2017, 03:28:56 PM »

definitely a late-comer to this conversation but I feel like this question bears asking:

What is the goal of a "balanced" talon? What should a wing of talon be able/unable to achieve? What should two wings be able/unable to achieve? Is there even a consensus on that front?

Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

Droopy The Dog

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #98 on: April 24, 2017, 05:22:23 PM »

I think the talon's biggest balance problem is a relative one. For the cheapest, most common fighter LPC with 0 OP cost, it's expected not to be a better generalist than any of the other more expensive/specialized craft on the menu (excluding Sparks, those little buggers are flawlessly strong en mass). 

I'm open pretty to varying levels of general fighter power, but whatever 2 wings of talons might achieve in frigate killing, I'd expect, say, 2 wings of Gladius fighters to achieve more, not less. With expectations set by the weapon mounts you might intuit an Arbalest level cost/power compromise for a loudout with slots to spare but not enough OP, not Arbalest cost with Heavy-needler best-in-class general performance. The cost in crew losses throws things off a little, since you pay for that performance in attrition costs not found in weapon mounts, of which talons are the highest, but it still feels a little off-kilter that they perform so well across roles (interception/disruption/damage) for that cost.

They're tied best-in-class with Wasps and the Sparks for speed and reinforce rate, but with 3x the health of wasps and missile spam for further increased survivability (Sparks are even more survivable, but they're also even more expensive/OP). Their speed, low profile and missile-chaff give them survivability greater than their low EHP suggests, enough to reliably deliver at least some damage even against moderate PD loudouts, and their quick reinforce rates make that a near constant trickle with a 360 coverage. Add in that the explosive damage on swarmers allows them to scale up moderately well even against heavier armour and you have a fighter wing who don't really have anything they can't do, eventually. And they're the least resource intensive in the market in all except crew costs.

All other things remaining equal I'd say increase their reinforce rate decently hard, nerfing their per-ship survivability would make them an even bigger credit sink for crew costs and they need the speed/damage to remain interceptors. That gives them kind of a niche role as the defenceless target hunters without the stamina trade blows advantageously.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12156
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #99 on: April 24, 2017, 05:31:06 PM »

Maybe Talons could be lowered from four to three per wing and they would be like classic Broadswords or old three wing Thunders.  Maybe even two per wing and they would just be budget Thunders.
Logged

DatonKallandor

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #100 on: April 24, 2017, 07:11:53 PM »

What's really putting Talons over the edge I think is that they have access to HE and the best frag weapon in the game. If the swarmers were still the old frag swarmers, Talons would not be a problem. Other fighters suffer because they don't carry their own hole-punchers or, if they do, don't carry their own hole-exploiters. Talons are all-in-one.

One interesting mechanic that I've seen a bunch of mods use is fighter afterburners - that might be a good way to differentiate cheap, low-cost fighters and high end "proper" fighters/interceptors. The ones you pay for can get to the target much quicker after being given the engage order.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2017, 07:14:06 PM by DatonKallandor »
Logged

Voyager I

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #101 on: April 24, 2017, 08:54:40 PM »

I do think part of this is that players need to calibrate their expectations to the new fighter designs.  The new Talon isn't the same ship as the old Talon, and 0 base OP cost doesn't mean they should be trivial combatants because there is already a substantial investment represented in just having a flight deck on the field; they're analogous to mounting an Arbalest over a Needler, not an empty slot.

That said, they're still at least somewhat out of line when they're outperforming more expensive craft for the same role.  They still need to be stronger than the old cannon-fodder Talons, but you shouldn't feel compelled to design fleets around countering Talon spam.
Logged

Harmful Mechanic

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1340
  • On break.
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #102 on: April 24, 2017, 11:30:09 PM »

Even 2-4 OP would be fine. I'd settle for having to pay any token amount of OP for offense-capable fighters as good as the current Talon.

The 0-OP niche seems ideally suited to stuff like the Mining Pod and drones. 3-4 PD Drones for 0-OP? Don't mind if I do!
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #103 on: April 24, 2017, 11:37:49 PM »

Fwiw, just throwing ideas at the wall here: my personal mod has talons with single burst swarmer missiles with 4 rounds, just enough staying power to bust the armour of fighters before going in with the vulcan but not enough to sustain bombardment against larger ships. Might be worth a shot for some of you
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Talon balance
« Reply #104 on: April 25, 2017, 12:02:10 AM »

Fwiw, just throwing ideas at the wall here: my personal mod has talons with single burst swarmer missiles with 4 rounds, just enough staying power to bust the armour of fighters before going in with the vulcan but not enough to sustain bombardment against larger ships. Might be worth a shot for some of you

That might work. Do they return to rearm after spending all 4?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10