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)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6

Author Topic: Which ships need more OPs?  (Read 11152 times)

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Which ships need more OPs?
« on: July 08, 2019, 03:57:59 PM »

Per this:
Im using good as a measure of how much I want them in my fleet not some objective measure of combat power. The 10% OP bonus takes some ships from unusable/bad to maybe good and it takes other ships from good to good+. Thats more the issue. I would not use a shrike without the OP bonus but I would think about it with one. I would happily take a paragon either way. The point is more that these extra OP have a very different effect on different ships, and some ships are really getting hurt by this change because there are OP thresholds that allow good load outs to work.

Thank you for clarifying, that makes a lot of sense!

I'd love to have some more detailed feedback about the various ships that might be in this position - just increasing the OP across the board doesn't make sense to me (because at that point, we're just moving what "normal" is), but if this is an issue for specific ships, then that's totally different. This probably isn't the thread for it, but if someone wanted to take a stab at it, I would greatly appreciate it.

(And, ahem, to discourage buffing everything: if the majority of ships were in the "needs more OP" category, that would probably be an argument for reining in the other ships...)
Let's go.

I'm going to start by saying, if you take the 10% OPs away... you may as well compute them back in for every ship, or lower Hull Mod prices.  It's going to break pretty much every mod's balance, ever, until they're also raised by 10%.

I also think that OPs could be raised a bit overall without detriment; Hull Mod diversity's pretty lacking, when just a few hit that sweet-spot between Cost and Utility, for the vast majority of ships.  But that's just me.

My personal list:

Lasher, Shrike, Omen, Heron, Enforcer, Medusa, Hound, Brawler, Buffalo Mk. II, Centurion, Cerebus, Gremlin, Gryphon, Kite, Mule, Wayfarer, Venture, Falcon



Justifications:
Spoiler
Lasher: base should be at 60 baseline; it feels starved vs. Wolf.  I always think of these two as the baseline Frigates.
Shrike: needs about 20 OPs to be truly functional for its job.  As it is, it's nearly starving at 88 OPs after the 10%.
Omen: needs at least 10 OPs to be in a good spot; it's surprisingly starved for a specialist ship.
Heron: needs maybe 15 OPs; as it is, even with the 10% bonus, it feels starved to be armed, have fighters and anything else.
Enforcer: really should be above the Hammerhead in terms of OPs; it's worse in almost every other way that matters right now.
Medusa: ditto; personally, I think it needs 10-15 more than the Hammerhead.
Hound: still a joke ship, unless we can mount shields, past early game.  Shame, it was a neat sniper back in the day.
Brawler: still feels curiously underpowered for anything, unless we're talking the free-SO Pather version, which is actually useful.
Buffalo Mk. II:  see Hound.
Centurion: looks good on paper, but is actually OP-starved; it needs more efficiency to make up for its crazy-bad turrets.
Cerebus:  see Hound.
Gremlin:  not quite enough OPs to get it done.  Needs about 10, would be actually attractive at 15.
Gryphon:  used to be cool.  Needs 15-20 so that it can do something once it's out of ammo.
Kite:  10 more OPs would make it less of a one-trick pony.
Mule:  one of those "fighting freighters", but it just can't.  Needs 20 OPs.
Wayfarer:  see Mule; maybe needs 10, but 15 wouldn't be ridiculous.
Venture:  make it great again.  Needs 25-30 to get there; has to be able to do something with the shields and Heavy Armor.
Falcon:  veeeeeeeery cuspy ship.  Thaago will probably disagree, but I think it needs 15.
[close]
« Last Edit: July 08, 2019, 04:03:41 PM by xenoargh »
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

wei270

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2019, 01:06:32 PM »

i actually would just like the hull mods be 10% cheaper this way we get incentive to try to play with them
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2019, 01:18:35 PM »

But almost any ship gains more from integrating 2 free hullmods with story points in next version than 10% we have now. Could take ITU+Hard Shields as reference point valid for majority of ships.

Integrated SO would be particularly ridiculous, as the single most expensive hullmod.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2019, 01:34:35 PM »

But almost any ship gains more from integrating 2 free hullmods with story points in next version than 10% we have now. Could take ITU+Hard Shields as reference point valid for majority of ships.

Integrated SO would be particularly ridiculous, as the single most expensive hullmod.
I think it's unfair to compare it like that. You could get 10% bonus OP just by spending 3 skill points out of 52, while story points will be a precious resource that'll have a ton of other uses. You could hoard them just for that and eventually have your whole fleet full of built in hullmods but I think that's not what Alex had in mind. I'd rather ships have build variety without any bonus things, than invest something just to make the ship feel adequate.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #4 on: September 18, 2019, 01:39:20 PM »

We've had this discussion, funnily enough, two times already! I'm surprised you missed those threads. I bring them up, mainly because I wanted to look them up and I suspect I'm not the only one, who might want to get a little refresher.
I think that instead both Enforcer and Medusa getting a buff, it's the Hammerhead that should get a nerf instead.
How are Centurion's turrets bad? It's pigeonholed into defensive roles, but its armament seems fine.
The remark about Heron not having enough OP for weapons after fitting fights is universal to nearly all carriers in my experience.

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #5 on: September 18, 2019, 01:45:20 PM »

I think that instead both Enforcer and Medusa getting a buff, it's the Hammerhead that should get a nerf instead.

Wouldn't that just obsolete DEs as class? Hammerhead is the only one I consider for AI use currently (Sunder needs TL+Optics+ITU, which you don't have at stage when it matters), otherwise Falcons make a better DE-analog.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #6 on: September 18, 2019, 02:11:16 PM »

I think that non-SO Hammerheads are appropriately strong for their current price. SO hammerheads with Assault Chainguns are insanely powerful. This is both SO being extraordinarily good on destroyers and the recent ACG changes making them OP.

On topic:
I would not mind a modest reduction in the OP of some of the hullmods, as many of them simply do not have enough of an effect for their OP cost. The 'big ticket' items are reasonably priced though.

In general though, do not need a boost of OP to compensate for the +10% being lost. I played a game recently when I did no tech as a challenge and... it was fine. Ship design was still fun. My ships were still powerful.

Lets see, what ships actually do need more OP... well, I'd say the Shrike needs 5 more, or just get the small ballistic that the pirate version has without a reduction. I disagree with every other ship on the OP's list though.

Enforcer in particular does NOT need more OP. It already has 110, 15 more than a Hammerhead. What the Enforcer desperately, desperately needs is a 1.0 shield (like other low tech) and a slight boost to its base flux stats; from 200 to 250 would be a good start. The ship's defenses are completely crippled by its weak shield: its armor is strong for a destroyer, but still easily destroyed by even medium armor piercers. Its firepower meanwhile is... bad. Really bad. It has a decent missile complement, but it can barely fire 2 medium mounts without fluxing out, and it has no offense booster. +50 base flux will at least help in getting it to power 3 mounts at a time if it uses efficient guns.
Logged

ANGRYABOUTELVES

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
  • AE ALTADOON GHARTOK PADHOME
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #7 on: September 18, 2019, 02:50:47 PM »

How can you possibly claim that all these perfectly fine ships need more OP, and yet fail to list the Scarab? It's the only ship in the game that actually needs serious buffs.
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2019, 02:57:15 PM »

Hm.  You know what I'd suggest for the Hammerhead?  A modest reduction in top speed; maybe -10 or so.  With its relatively high ordnance point total, if you want a fast Hammerhead, you can put Unstable Injector on it.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

mvp7

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #9 on: September 18, 2019, 02:57:57 PM »

I wouldn't mind if the +10% OP was made the new standard and the skill was removed entirely. It translates into very significant performance increase across the whole fleet and doesn't feel like an option but one of those skills that you simply need unless you want to make the game harder for yourself. It feels like a fake choice.

My personal list:

Lasher, Shrike, Omen, Heron, Enforcer, Medusa, Hound, Brawler, Buffalo Mk. II, Centurion, Cerebus, Gremlin, Gryphon, Kite, Mule, Wayfarer, Venture, Falcon
Personally I don't agree with most of these suggested ship specific OP increases (presuming this is on top of the the current +10% OP value). In my opinion, not every ship in a class is meant to be equal in combat and that basically seems to be the goal of these suggestions. Here are a few I especially disagree with:

Centurion is my favorite frigate in the game. It's no the best damage dealer but it's incredibly tough. I find it very useful even in the late game capital battles long after I stopped bringing in other frigates that get obliterated in seconds when targeted.

Omen has 24 points worth of integrated hullmods and it only has supply cost of 5/month. It's not meant to be a killer and it works well as support ship as it is.

I think Heron is mainly underwhelming when compared to Drover which is currently the most overpowered ship in the game.

Falcon is cheap, has low maintenance cost and works well as light cruiser. I don't take it into late game battles but it's great bang for the buck and I used it as the main cruiser of my fleet for a long time.

When it comes to armed freighters like Cerberus, Mule, Buffalo Mk.II, Venture etc. I don't think these are even supposed to be optimized for combat as their main use is cargo and utility.

I wouldn't mind some destroyer buffs. I find them the least flexible ship type in the late game as they generally seem to lack survivability, sustainable firepower, range and/or speed to survive. I'm pretty sure they get the rawest deal in hullmod prices as well. Some extra OP could be one way to help them improve at least some of those areas.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1889
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #10 on: September 18, 2019, 03:24:22 PM »

Per this:
Im using good as a measure of how much I want them in my fleet not some objective measure of combat power. The 10% OP bonus takes some ships from unusable/bad to maybe good and it takes other ships from good to good+. Thats more the issue. I would not use a shrike without the OP bonus but I would think about it with one. I would happily take a paragon either way. The point is more that these extra OP have a very different effect on different ships, and some ships are really getting hurt by this change because there are OP thresholds that allow good load outs to work.

Thank you for clarifying, that makes a lot of sense!

I'd love to have some more detailed feedback about the various ships that might be in this position - just increasing the OP across the board doesn't make sense to me (because at that point, we're just moving what "normal" is), but if this is an issue for specific ships, then that's totally different. This probably isn't the thread for it, but if someone wanted to take a stab at it, I would greatly appreciate it.

(And, ahem, to discourage buffing everything: if the majority of ships were in the "needs more OP" category, that would probably be an argument for reining in the other ships...)

Lasher, Shrike, Omen, Heron, Enforcer, Medusa, Hound, Brawler, Buffalo Mk. II, Centurion, Cerebus, Gremlin, Gryphon, Kite, Mule, Wayfarer, Venture, Falcon



OK so you think the Lasher, Brawler, Hound, Centurion, Cerberus, and Omen need OP buffs... That is every non-phase frigate except the Tempest, Scarab, Hyperion, kite, and wolf. The Wolf is 5 OP and is generally considered weak at the moment. The Tempest is 8 OP and very strong. And the Hyperion and Scarab are almost never used... So like why do these ships need more OP instead of nerfing the tempest?

I really don't understand why the Heron, one of the best carries in the game, or the Gryphon, one of the better finishing cruisers for the AI need more OP
Logged

sotanaht

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #11 on: September 18, 2019, 07:42:58 PM »

Per this:
Im using good as a measure of how much I want them in my fleet not some objective measure of combat power. The 10% OP bonus takes some ships from unusable/bad to maybe good and it takes other ships from good to good+. Thats more the issue. I would not use a shrike without the OP bonus but I would think about it with one. I would happily take a paragon either way. The point is more that these extra OP have a very different effect on different ships, and some ships are really getting hurt by this change because there are OP thresholds that allow good load outs to work.

Thank you for clarifying, that makes a lot of sense!

I'd love to have some more detailed feedback about the various ships that might be in this position - just increasing the OP across the board doesn't make sense to me (because at that point, we're just moving what "normal" is), but if this is an issue for specific ships, then that's totally different. This probably isn't the thread for it, but if someone wanted to take a stab at it, I would greatly appreciate it.

(And, ahem, to discourage buffing everything: if the majority of ships were in the "needs more OP" category, that would probably be an argument for reining in the other ships...)

Lasher, Shrike, Omen, Heron, Enforcer, Medusa, Hound, Brawler, Buffalo Mk. II, Centurion, Cerebus, Gremlin, Gryphon, Kite, Mule, Wayfarer, Venture, Falcon



OK so you think the Lasher, Brawler, Hound, Centurion, Cerberus, and Omen need OP buffs... That is every non-phase frigate except the Tempest, Scarab, Hyperion, kite, and wolf. The Wolf is 5 OP and is generally considered weak at the moment. The Tempest is 8 OP and very strong. And the Hyperion and Scarab are almost never used... So like why do these ships need more OP instead of nerfing the tempest?

I really don't understand why the Heron, one of the best carries in the game, or the Gryphon, one of the better finishing cruisers for the AI need more OP
Except the Heron is actually the worst dedicated carrier in the game (the other choices being the Drover, Astral, and Legion).  It's better than converted carriers certainly, but that doesn't say much.  Definitely a ship I think needs a buff somehow, because I feel like the Heron should be an "attack" carrier capable of both fighting and fielding fighters, similar to how the Legion is supposed to work.  The Astral and Drover are both fine as just fighter platforms.  Looking at the Heron's op next to the Drover's, it seems to be pretty heavily lacking there.  If there's ONE ship I would like to see with more OP, I'd say Heron.  There are plenty of other ships I think are hot garbage, but the Heron is probably my number one pick for "I would use this if I could just equip it better"

As for Tempest, I think that the other frigates need to be brought up.  Destroyers too for that matter.  The tempest is just barely viable in a late game fleet, whereas pretty much every other frigates (and most destroyers) is just a waste of resources.  I understand the mindset "if everything else is weak, nerf the outlier", but the problem is more along the lines that frigates are weak, not so much a case of all ships.  Unless you'd like to turn around and nerf every capital ship and most cruisers into the ground to compensate, and I don't even think 10% will cut it if you are trying to balance from that end.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2019, 07:53:30 PM by sotanaht »
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1889
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #12 on: September 18, 2019, 09:48:28 PM »

DP per fighter bay
Drover 7
Legion 10
Astral 7.6
Heron 6.6

Speed
Astral 30
Legion 30
Drover 75
Heron 80

Ship System
Astral (OK recall is the best)
Legion- none
Drover +1 fighter for fighters only
Heron +50% damage

Heron's wreck. They should be the backbone of your bomber force until you get an Astral and maybe even after since they scale better(edit: In the sense that you can more easily apportion them to the threat, not in the sense that they're necessarily more valuable for the DP though they may be)
« Last Edit: September 18, 2019, 10:21:14 PM by Goumindong »
Logged

sotanaht

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #13 on: September 18, 2019, 10:41:04 PM »

DP per fighter bay
Drover 7
Legion 10
Astral 7.6
Heron 6.6

Speed
Astral 30
Legion 30
Drover 75
Heron 80

Ship System
Astral (OK recall is the best)
Legion- none
Drover +1 fighter for fighters only
Heron +50% damage

Heron's wreck. They should be the backbone of your bomber force until you get an Astral and maybe even after since they scale better(edit: In the sense that you can more easily apportion them to the threat, not in the sense that they're necessarily more valuable for the DP though they may be)
Drovers are 6 DP per fighter bay (12 dp total), Heron is 50% damage from fighters only, so similar effect to the drover except without the ability to prevent fighter replacement loss.  Drover is also not simply +1 fighter, it adds +2 fighters for wings size 4 and up, in addition to immediately replacing all destroyed fighters or out of ammo bombers.  Drovers are MUCH better than Herons, but of course Drovers are ridiculously OP.

Legion mounts 2 large ballistic guns and has good armor/hull.  I don't particularly like the ship myself, but as a combat carrier it is actually capable of doing that job.  Astrals are straight OP with their ship system and bombers, nothing else even comes close to what they can do.  It might not look like as much on paper, but their recall system keeps bombers grouped together, so not only does it mean more bombing runs faster, but better chances of overwhelming enemy targets and far fewer losses.

The Heron, with only 100 OP for a Cruiser is extremely anemic.  The drover has 70.  So that's only +30 op in order to pay for more expensive hull mods and an extra fighter wing.  Honestly I'm still not sure more OP would be enough, with only a single offensive weapon mount, but it's a start.  Cruiser-level carriers would be nice to have, but there's absolutely no good justification for using a Heron right now.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1889
    • View Profile
Re: Which ships need more OPs?
« Reply #14 on: September 18, 2019, 11:52:29 PM »

Targeting Feed is all fighters not just fighter fighters. Unless something was changed last update

Quote
Drovers are 6 DP per fighter bay (12 dp total), Heron is 50% damage from fighters only, so similar effect to the drover except without the ability to prevent fighter replacement loss.  Drover is also not simply +1 fighter, it adds +2 fighters for wings size 4 and up, in addition to immediately replacing all destroyed fighters or out of ammo bombers.  Drovers are MUCH better than Herons, but of course Drovers are ridiculously OP.

None of that matters when fighters are deployed though and well. I suppose if you want to face tank the enemy with drovers so you can atropos spam... go right ahead and hope you get lucky.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2019, 12:27:15 AM by Goumindong »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6