Fractal Softworks Forum
October 02, 2014, 09:28:40 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Updated in-dev patch notes. (9/24/14)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 29
  Print  
Author Topic: Starfarer 0.51a (Released) - Live Patch Notes  (Read 64503 times)
Thaago
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1946

Quantum Mechanic


View Profile Email
« Reply #210 on: March 08, 2012, 02:17:45 PM »

Quote
... All they have to do is machinegun your shields down ...

Machine guns are indeed a shield killer if you let the enemy close to within 400 (for heavy, less for regular) distance of you. If they are faster than you and can hunt you down then you are indeed in trouble, but high tech ships are the fastest in their class so can severely punish anything that can catch them. High tech and low tech ships play very differently and must be piloted differently - I have huge problems adjusting between the two.

Energy weapons tend to have longer range and are much more accurate than their ballistic counterparts. Add into that the superiority of high tech dodging and I'd say things are about even.
Logged
Iscariot
Admiral
*****
Posts: 852



View Profile
« Reply #211 on: March 08, 2012, 02:19:54 PM »

Yep. Range + inherent speed of high tech ships is what makes energy weapons powerful, not the raw statistics of it. Although that's a bit more even now that most big guns have gotten a substantial range boost (thank you Alex).
Logged


The idea is that the various tech levels represent different - not "better" - ways to do things.
Arghy
Commander
***
Posts: 122


View Profile Email
« Reply #212 on: March 08, 2012, 03:08:21 PM »

It also has to do with shields and ammo also, omni shields can ensure you'll never get through unless the other guy makes a mistake and energy weapons never run out of ammo so your not limited in long battles and you'll eventually breach the shields but ammo dependent weapons can be waited out for you to win the battle. It should be no surprise the medusa is the best destroyer because of its all energy load out and good flux/shield, if you look at the ballistic version of the medusa you see the massive differences.

I've won many lop sided battles because i out lasted the enemys ammo so if every ballistic weapon realistically needs to include the extended mag upgrade to be feasible. Ballistic weapons should be OP but their weakness should be their ammo supply so while short term you'd destroy energy weapons in the long term they'd destroy you unless you took the upgrade.

The ballistic medusa will deal out absurd amounts of damage for very low flux debt but if you dont get the job done quickly you'd better hope you brought extended mags because all of your weapons are now useless.

A very clear balance line needs to be drawn to avoid mono setups where you only equip 4 different weapons continually because theres no reason not to. I was at first against okims(not modder biased he just is the only one with this) 4 versions of explosive large cannons all being slightly different from each other until i realized that they provided nearly unlimited equipping options for that perfect settup. Its human to standardize but its also boring as hell, i want 6 versions of hellbore cannons each with their different pros and cons and i dont want to totally skip them for the 6 versions of the tachyon lance because its clearly better.
Logged
Flare
Admiral
*****
Posts: 819



View Profile Email
« Reply #213 on: March 08, 2012, 03:13:06 PM »

In my experience, I've never had to an occurrence where my opponent nor I ran out of ammunition, even for protracted fights I tend to have a fair deal of ammunition by the end of it. I simply don't know what you're talking about of ships running out of ammunition being that much of a significant factor. I think it more or less applies only to the player doesn't it? Enemy ships don't tend to stick around for all that long in my experience. And since you're the main person that the issue centres around, using extended magazines just seems like a natural idea.

How strung out are your engagements that the phenomenon of your ships or ship running out of ammunition takes place regularly Undecided?
Logged

Quote from: Thana
Quote from: Alex

The battle station is not completely operational, shall we say.

"Now witness the firepower of this thoroughly buggy and unoperational batt... Oh, hell, you know what? Just ignore the battle station, okay?"
Iscariot
Admiral
*****
Posts: 852



View Profile
« Reply #214 on: March 08, 2012, 04:38:16 PM »

I've run out of ammo before, specifically when I was running a Hammerhead as my flagship in the midgame. Enemy ships with strong shields are hard to kill with assault cannons, especially if you're out of sabots.
Logged


The idea is that the various tech levels represent different - not "better" - ways to do things.
heuristicus
Ensign
*
Posts: 32


View Profile
« Reply #215 on: March 08, 2012, 04:47:18 PM »

One of my favourite parts of the update is the increased save speed.
Logged
MechaLenin
Ensign
*
Posts: 25


View Profile Email
« Reply #216 on: March 08, 2012, 05:09:19 PM »

Thing that is killing me is what can we expect in next update? Maybe some missions? Character skills? New system?
Logged
Arghy
Commander
***
Posts: 122


View Profile Email
« Reply #217 on: March 08, 2012, 05:19:11 PM »

When i roll with my thrasher equipped with 2 rear MG's 1 needler 2 mortars and swarmers i run out of ammo with auto pilot against 2-3 frigates--with extended mags that same settup finishes 20-30% ammo against 3-1 odds and exhausts it if you throw in well shielded destroyers.

I have ships running out of ammo regularly in almost every battle unless their given extended mags--i dont even equip MG's anymore without extended mags because i've watched my support frigates die to a missile barrage when they used all 1000 rounds. I've had my all ballistic onslaught with extended mags empty and killed 2 cruisers by ramming them--this is with okims weapons that had 1500 rounds with extended mags. Theres a great trick for ramming where the AI lowers its shields to squeeze out the flux and you can lower yours last minute for a wonderful ram.

How the hell are you not running out of ammo? i mostly let the AI fight but when it gets hairy i take over and do wonderful human things like ram or take a full broadside to overload another BS before my bombers and missiles sweep in.
Logged
j01
Lieutenant
**
Posts: 61


View Profile
« Reply #218 on: March 08, 2012, 05:58:28 PM »

(stuff)

Graviton beams are the only kinetic damage energy weapon. As per their description, they are supposed to be specifically for damaging shields, which they are horrible at, because they're beam weapons and because their damage is tiny.

Pulse lasers are indeed better at damaging shields. They generate obscene amounts of flux on your own ship, though, and the damage per shot is not very good, and ends up just being average. It is a ridiculous waste to use antimatter blasters against shields in particular unless it is a very special situation, as they generate 1500 flux on you every time you fire one, for a mere 1000 damage on enemy shields (minus shield efficiency, so much, much less on 0.8 and lower shield absorption ratios). There's a very good reason AM blasters are classified as strike weapons. Clever maneuvering on a player controlled ship can mitigate these drawbacks, however, and make it possible to take advantage of unique openings that AI would miss, but that's only relevant in small-scale, small-fleet, beginner campaign situations. We're talking about balance for the entire game here, and taking large fleets into consideration.

You also seem to have misread what I typed, as I was talking about sabots as options FOR high tech ships, not AGAINST them. With that in mind, you raise another point that strengthens my own, that they are very slow and easy to dodge and destroy.

As for your experience with pure-energy-loadout medusa, it should be easy enough, I imagine, to outlast an Onslaught's ammo supply, and/or circle around to its unshielded rear and do quick strike runs until it's dead while avoiding its attacks. That's the advantage of player-controlled ships. Of course, that was not at all my point, and furthermore is an idea that quickly falls apart when you get past the beginning campaign stages and actually have your team AI battling enemy AI.

(things)

Firstly, it does not follow that simply being fast means that a ship can punish anything that can catch it. If you meant maneuverability, that can be true for player controlled ships, which is but one small facet of the game's entirety considering potential fleet sizes, but even then a given ship can all too easily be extremely outclassed when its focus is shields at the expense of armor and hull when the enemy has plenty of kinetic damage to pour on, especially since explosive damage is commonly accompanying it in ballistics.

Secondly, there is absolutely no shortage of high range ballistics, especially kinetic damage based ones. Off the top of my head, there are railguns, needlers, hypervelocity drivers, autocannons, which range from 600 to, what, 1000 range? They are often extremely fast projectiles, have tons of ammunition, and deal way, way more damage to shields than the flux they generate on the user from firing them. And that's just in the small ballistics category. Energy weapons do not compare in range, and the ones that compare in accuracy are beams, which are useless against shields.


(words)

Again, you're only considering early game, tiny fleet sizes, and the single player-controlled ship in small scale battles. Also, there is no "ballistic medusa" in the base game, you're thinking of a mod. If it was just a reference for the sake of comparison, I would mention the ballistic version of the hyperion frigate from the same mod, which is vastly superior to its energy counterpart. Try it. 2 dual MGs in front 2 mounts, 1 annihilator pod on each of the 2 med missile mounts. Extend missile ammo for more lackadaisical barrages, and enjoy dispatching ships two size categories larger with ease because you can break their shields in seconds. Works against entire fleets, even ones containing the weaker capital ships. Just one ballistic frigate.

The medusa looks good on paper, and its maneuverability alone lends it unarguable advantages when in the hands of the player, but in practice and in actual fleet battles of even moderate size, they fall apart to the superior combination of kinetic and explosive ballistic weapons, nevermind missiles flying around that PD beams cannot even begin to handle.


All of you guys should really try pitting decent sized or higher, equal fleets of high tech ships with equal crew level against low tech fleets. The advantage of kinetic damage is obvious, and nobody survives long enough for ammo to run out except on missiles (which high tech ships often rely on to make up for their lack of armor or shield damaging capabilities).
« Last Edit: March 08, 2012, 06:03:16 PM by j01 » Logged
Wyvern
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1020


View Profile
« Reply #219 on: March 08, 2012, 10:36:31 PM »

You seem to be under the impression that endgame == large fleets - which is, certainly, one possibility (as long as you're not one of those crazy people who's gathered over 200 points of ships...), but has been stated by the devs that it's not meant to be the only option; that a captain of a single elite vessel (plus escorts) is also a perfectly viable endgame.

So yes, I'm exactly considering smaller fleet sizes, and the player controlled ship, because to me, that's what's important in this game; if I'm flying one paragon out of 12, something has gone wrong.  I'm not really interested in playing the game as just another RTS; I don't like that sort of game.
Logged
Reshy
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1039


White


View Profile
« Reply #220 on: March 09, 2012, 01:53:57 AM »

Hull mods:
  • Augmented Engines: 25% flux dissipation penalty
  • Integrated Targeting Unit: reduced cost, range bonus is 10/20/35/50%, depending on hull size
  • Advanced Optics: also reduces turret turn rate by 50%
  • Insulated Engine Assembly: also increases hull integrity by 10%
  • Armored Weapon Emplacements: also increases ship's armor rating by 10%
  • Resistant Flux Condutis: also increases flux dissipation by 10%


If a mod has a downside it should be cheaper, augmented engines are already too expensive for most ships and I feel like this will just make it useless.  Same goes with optics, your point defenses are now useless.  A lot of mods are like this, why would I put on an omni shield if i have to castrate my weapons AND have my shields be less potent in a fight against more than one enemy.  If anything, make mods wither only have bonuses at the cost of OP, or make them carry trade-offs but cost no OP.  Either or both will work, but don't ask for five to ten weapon's worth of space just to install a mod that penalizes you for it's use anyway.
Logged
Tarran
Captain
****
Posts: 303



View Profile Email
« Reply #221 on: March 09, 2012, 02:39:32 AM »

Yeah, Augmented engines being debuffed makes it pretty useless. It does not matter whether it's on large or small ships, it already eats a chunk out of flux dissipation or weapons, making the ship more fragile or weaker just for speed. Debuffing it even further like this makes the ship either unbelievably more fragile or both fragile and weaker, just for speed.

I cannot think of any ship that would benefit at the cost. Onslaught, Paragon, Medusa... It just turns a viable strategy into a bad strategy.
Logged
Reshy
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1039


White


View Profile
« Reply #222 on: March 09, 2012, 03:05:34 AM »

Wasps now cost more and have green rank, alex what happened to not messing with wasps?  It even screws with the stats, as they have penalties to their stats due to being green.


Also the new ship system that strips all the weapons off is pretty painful, do not want.  Limited and stripped of all weapons but retain most of their cost?  I didn't know the docks could be more worthless.  


I'm really not digging many of these changes, they just compounded previous problems.  Docks are just as if not more worthless than ever.  It's much harder to build up a competent fleet now due to weapon loss from board/surrendering, and just in general turns me off of playing it.  The crew loss on ships is even worse now, I don't like these changes one bit.  Back to teamfortress 2 we go~


I don't want to play a game this slow.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2012, 03:12:37 AM by JamesRaynor » Logged
Tarran
Captain
****
Posts: 303



View Profile Email
« Reply #223 on: March 09, 2012, 03:13:35 AM »

Also the new ship system that strips all the weapons off is pretty painful, do not want.  Limited and stripped of all weapons but retain most of their cost?  I didn't know the docks could be more worthless. 
Well, to be fair, the weapons are usually fairly cheap compared to the ship. So it's okay in that respect.

Though that causes a new problem: Early on in the game, weapons you can buy are few and far between.
Logged
Reshy
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1039


White


View Profile
« Reply #224 on: March 09, 2012, 03:33:37 AM »

Also the new ship system that strips all the weapons off is pretty painful, do not want.  Limited and stripped of all weapons but retain most of their cost?  I didn't know the docks could be more worthless. 
Well, to be fair, the weapons are usually fairly cheap compared to the ship. So it's okay in that respect.

Though that causes a new problem: Early on in the game, weapons you can buy are few and far between.


Because we all know that what the game needed more was an even slower start...

Just bleh, I need a save editor so I can skip all this nonsense.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 29
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!