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)

Author Topic: [0.8.1a] Improper FP values in ship_data.csv  (Read 1880 times)

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4661
    • View Profile
    • GitHub profile
[0.8.1a] Improper FP values in ship_data.csv
« on: November 04, 2017, 11:03:44 PM »

While poking around in ship_data.csv I noticed several ships have less or more FP than they ought to, making them unrealistically strong/weak in autoresolve.

Spoiler
Tempest: 6
This is only one point better than Lasher, Wolf, Vigilance, Brawler, Monitor and Cerberus, same as Omen and Centurion, and lower than Scarab, Lumen, Glimmer (all 8 FP), Shade (10) and Afflictor (11). I think it ought to be significantly higher, 8 at least.

Centurion: 6
I mean, does anyone think a Centurion is better than a Lasher, Wolf or Monitor? 5 FP would be generous in my book.

Wayfarer: 5
Has the same rating as combat frigates that are significantly better in actual practice. Maybe bump it down to 4.

Shade: 10
Surely it's not that good. Maybe 8-9?

Sunder: 9
Could probably stand to be a 10 to match Hammerhead and Enforcer.
(Other things with 9 FP: Mule, Gemini, Condor)

Colossus Mk.II/III: 7
7 FP is the same as the Buffalo Mk.II. That's... pretty bad.
9 FP might be right, puts them in the low end of destroyers.

Astral: 22
This is significantly lower than the other, not-obviously-better capitals: Conquest (24), Odyssey (25), Onslaught (28) and Legion (28). This would make sense if fighter wings still had their FP counted, but they don't. Suggest Astral be bumped up to 25-28.
[close]
« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 03:14:39 AM by Histidine »
Logged

MajorTheRed

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 288
    • View Profile
Re: [0.8.1a] Improper FP values in ship_data.csv
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2017, 09:45:39 AM »

Strangely enough, I found many value well priced because of two parameters which are not related to Comabat value itself : IA ablities to control it, and firepower-unrelated aspect.

Centurion
While it has not the firepower of the lasher, its hull and armor compensate largely in a fleet battle.

Wayfarer
Once again it's subpar against true combat frigate, but can still defend itsel. Add it a great cargo space and its a little be too much for 4 FP.
It is also available on civilian market. So if it was 4 FP, I fear people would spam it.

Sunder
I agree about the comparison with the Hammerhead and Enforcer. But the difference is that the IA is unable to use it properly, so pirate fleet and faction detachment should have an advantage in FP to have it.


Logged

StarSchulz

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: [0.8.1a] Improper FP values in ship_data.csv
« Reply #2 on: November 05, 2017, 11:09:48 AM »

Do any other carriers share the same problem the Astral does with wings not being calculated as FP anymore?

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23987
    • View Profile
Re: [0.8.1a] Improper FP values in ship_data.csv
« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2017, 11:59:14 AM »

Thanks! Bumped up most of these.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: [0.8.1a] Improper FP values in ship_data.csv
« Reply #4 on: November 05, 2017, 02:09:08 PM »

Tempest may be okay.  Somewhere between 6 and 8 should be fine.  Scarab is a shadow of its former self with the loss of skill power and weaker Atropos.  (Much rather use Tempest, possibly even Wolf, instead of Scarab today.)  Shade is unimpressive since it cannot ghost tank like it used to, and it pales to Afflictor.  Afflictor is almost Hyperion-nasty.  Lumen is rubbish (Scarab without time shift), except maybe as a stall boat against enemy frigates with less peak performance.  Glimmer is simply classic omni-shield Wolf that trades Phase Skimmer for High-Energy Focus (and more peak performance).  Probably rather use a Wolf due to its escape button system.

Centurion is basically a midline Lasher.  Wasn't it lowered to 4 in the last patch?  With its Damper Field gutted for Mora's sake, it is worth no more than 4, or whatever a Lasher is worth.

Wayfarer is the frigate-sized Mule or hybrid.  How much is a Mule worth compared to combat destroyers (9 vs. 10)?  4 sounds right.

Shade, I would put it at 6 at most.  If it had its old-fashioned pre-0.72 phase cloak, it would be good (as a ghost tank), but today, it is just a liability, especially with AI squandering its peak performance and CR in record time.  Anything it can do, I can probably think of another ship that can do its job either better or more cheaply.

Sunder, with cowardly AI, short-ranged energy weapons (or rare heavy beam backed by obnoxiously rare light needlers), and flimsy defenses, 9 may fine.  Unlike Enforcer and Hammerhead, the weapons it wants are not so common.

Colossus Mk# are truly awful.  Stock Hammerhead can murder these without breaking much of a sweat.  7 is not totally out-of-line, although the suggestion of 9 is not bad either.

Astral, yes, it should be comparable to every other combat capital that is not named Odyssey.  Astral is my heavy hitter if I do not have Paragon and four Tachyon Lances (assuming I built a generalist character).
« Last Edit: November 05, 2017, 02:11:48 PM by Megas »
Logged

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4661
    • View Profile
    • GitHub profile
Re: [0.8.1a] Improper FP values in ship_data.csv
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2017, 03:23:58 AM »

Good to hear, Alex!

(In case anyone is confused: the values I'm talking about here are only used in autoresolve / for fleet AI, and don't directly affect the player outside of pursuit battles, to my knowledge)

Do any other carriers share the same problem the Astral does with wings not being calculated as FP anymore?
Not that I've noticed. Condor is a 9, Drover 11, Heron 14 (same as Eagle), Mora 15 (same as Dominator).
Logged