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 ... 3 4 [5] 6

Author Topic: Warship Balance  (Read 10647 times)

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #60 on: July 16, 2019, 09:59:28 AM »

Solution to high tech ships being bad shouldn't be just giving them access to ballistics.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #61 on: July 16, 2019, 10:27:03 AM »

Solution to high tech ships being bad shouldn't be just giving them access to ballistics.

Unfortunately this is already the case because of how drastically superior ballistic weapons are for shield breaking. Energy has some real strengths in the medium and large mounts (and I guess a few edge cases for small energy), but shield breaking just isn't there. And while kinetic damage isn't quite as dominant as it once was due to AI improvements, ships still need 'enough' of it to get shields down.

Pirate Shrike? Considered better than a normal Shrike despite having 5 OP less, because it can mount one small ballistic.

Medusa? Relies on the two front universals for kinetic damage, and is much weaker with them as other weapon types.

Paragon? Nearly every build puts ballistics in the medium universals: typically Heavy Needlers, but HVD's on occasion for extreme range. Occasionally dual flak for fighting Anni-spam Onslaughts. And rarely beams for the 'all in' beam ship.

Pirate Mule? Medium ballistic makes it undeniably more powerful.

On the one hand I agree with you that energy weapons should be good enough that 'access to ballistics' is required. On the other hand, 'access to ballistics' is a really easy lever to pull for balance and allows for 'per ship' balancing, as opposed to reworking energy weapon balance as a whole. On the third hand, per ship balance could also just be accomplished by a change in flux stats.
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #62 on: July 16, 2019, 12:51:31 PM »

Normal Mule has a composite medium now, so it can mount ballistics by default, but it wasn't always the case and I get your point. There's also this issue, where ballistics are supposed to be stronger than energy weapons; better ships have to utilise worse weapons and worse ships can use better weapons is how tech division works. Of those three, in vacuum I would choose high tech ships buffs, but ideally I would see some tweaks/additions to energy weapons roster, too.

Schwartz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #63 on: July 17, 2019, 01:15:40 AM »

Yeah, whatever happens.. no fixing mediocre high tech ships by giving them ballistics please.
Wolf isn't too bad, but it could use slightly better flux stats. Same with Medusa. Either that or an armor bump.

Ballistics are a moving target as well. The Mauler nerf was huge. Now it's basically a platform for kinetics. Kinetics really are self-sufficient to handle opponents. If they're constantly in flux trouble and not smart enough to play around getting overloaded, then kinetics alone can stunlock them to death. In fleet action, anyway. All it takes is a couple of kinetic ships and one guy with a Heavy Blaster or a couple of Harpoons. That's not a lot.
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #64 on: July 18, 2019, 02:42:37 AM »

It's funny watching y'all going down the same road I did two years ago.

I agree that "just throw Ballistics on them" is not a real game plan.

A couple of ideas here:

1.  At some point, I think that the warping ability got nerfed a bit.  Might help to un-nerf, let the Wolf do what it's designed to do (basically, be a kite-monster support platform) better. 

It won't solve the problems with SO'd ships, though, but maybe that's OK; the Wolf shouldn't counter everything, just stuff that's slower than it is.

2.  Fix the balance on Energy weapons.  Honestly, I'm not holding my breath here. I'm pretty sure I know what needs to change.  Essentially, they're simply priced wrong for what they do and the issues with Beams not getting Hard Flux aren't going away; I tried balancing around Soft Flux and found it required some incredible counter-advantages to work out, all other things being equal. 

3.  Keep the current theme, but make it work better, in general.  One of the things about High Tech is that a few of them are quite decent right now (Aurora, Paragon) but most of them aren't feeling so hot.  Those two outliers have the advantage of being able to choose engagements; nothing else in High Tech can right now.  If we're talking about Destroyers, this is entirely my fault; I complained about the Hammerhead, it got fixed; problem is, none of the others were fixed to counter it.  Over here, the Hammerhead's a decent Midline ship, but the Medusa works and can win firefights, largely because it can shield-tank and vent while the Hammerhead's trying to recover.  The Medusa's still tricky and flimsy, though, and my AI doesn't usually use it well; I'm still working on that.
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #65 on: July 18, 2019, 05:47:39 AM »

I have no problem with ballistics on high-tech ships, if weapons and other ship stats will not change.

Wolf can probably be fixed with better flux stats, and its omni shield restored.  If not, do the Shrike (P) route and make the middle mount hybrid.  Probably still needs better dissipation so it can use its main gun for more than few seconds.

Tempest seems fine.

Hyperion can have three minute peak performance if endgame fights will stay as big as they are.  Actually, if endgame fights will be huge from now on, then peak performance needs to be higher for all ships and maximum map size raised to 1000 so that we do not fight 3v3 or 5v5, despite 300 or 500 map size.

Scarab needs to go back to its 0.7.2 glory days, with "touch-of-death" Atropos.  Maybe it can have some special missile buffs unique to it to recreate the missile power of 0.7.2 that made it good (among other things).  If not, then its Temporal Shell needs to work like Accelerated Ammo Feeder and give a flux discount.  Right now, I cannot mount more than one or two IR Pulse Lasers because it caps flux too fast while Temporal Shell is active.  (Venting breaks the shell.)  Also, 360 shields without hullmod tax.

Medusa can either have more OP (or better flux stats) or have its DP cost lowered.  It is no Drover, and it is comparable to the (cheaper) Hammerhead if Medusa has the best weapons.

I like to see hybrid on the normal Shrike.

I do not know what is so great about Aurora.  I try heavy blasters and it is okay, but nothing great, not worth 30 DP.  If I use Sabots, it kills few ships, then it is out, but AI seems rather incompetent with Sabot use.  Aurora needs high flux stats to pound away with blasters.  It was hard enough with 0.8 flux stats (12k cap), and now it has less in 0.9 (11k cap).  Honestly, I think Aurora is a mediocre and overrated ship.

Apogee seems undervalued, too powerful for mere 18 DP, at least once it gets Plasma Cannon and Locusts.  The hull itself is fine.

Odyssey needs to be AI idiot-proof.  It can use more buffs (especially more OP), but at the very least, the AI needs to stop treating Odyssey like an Onslaught heavy armor tank.  It would be nice if Odyssey's strength is not so reliant on plasma cannons.  Without them, Odyssey is really mediocre.  Also, why does it cost 45 DP?  Most other capitals are worth only 40 DP, and are generally more powerful than Odyssey.

Astral is a carrier, only good at it if it puts nearly all of its OP in fighters and some hullmods.  It has many weapon mounts, and most of them are left empty just to use bombers.  Its system is clearly optimized for bomber use.  I like to see a built-in hullmod that reduces OP cost of bombers (by about a third, 12 becomes 8 ).  Maybe remove Advanced Optics for it.  Advanced Optics is not much use if there are no weapons on it, except maybe token Burst PD.

Paragon is only worth 60 DP with extreme range loadouts.  With something less optimal like all pulse lasers, it feels like an overpriced energy Onslaught or Conquest without mobility system.  Still, with extreme range, it is very powerful.  If maximum map size will cap at 500, then Paragon should be worth less, maybe back to 50 DP.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2019, 05:50:58 AM by Megas »
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #66 on: July 18, 2019, 06:39:36 AM »

I do not know what is so great about Aurora.  I try heavy blasters and it is okay, but nothing great, not worth 30 DP.  If I use Sabots, it kills few ships, then it is out, but AI seems rather incompetent with Sabot use.  Aurora needs high flux stats to pound away with blasters.  It was hard enough with 0.8 flux stats (12k cap), and now it has less in 0.9 (11k cap).  Honestly, I think Aurora is a mediocre and overrated ship.

I feel pretty much the same. No matter what loadout I go with, it's always that nagging voice saying ''you're paying too much for this''. I mean it's a really fun ship to pilot and I get it's best used in player's hands but even then it doesn't feel right. You go with SO, bam you're out of time, you take missiles, bam you're out of ammo. Everything else feels not quite right since you need so much flux to fire enough energy weapons. On top of all that it's nearly impossible to find in campaign. Truly overrated for 30 DP.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Schwartz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #67 on: July 18, 2019, 07:39:34 AM »

It may be expensive, but you're getting explosive speed, flux stats and the loadout to be able to bang on someone's windshield. That's a highly sought after combination for player ships in particular. AI I would prefer to give an Apogee to, it's super cheap and tanks well.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #68 on: July 18, 2019, 07:59:18 AM »

It may be expensive, but you're getting explosive speed, flux stats and the loadout to be able to bang on someone's windshield. That's a highly sought after combination for player ships in particular. AI I would prefer to give an Apogee to, it's super cheap and tanks well.
The speed is good, but that is all it has going for it.  Current flux stats are not much better than Eagle, but Aurora needs much more flux stats than Eagle thanks to very flux inefficient heavy blasters.  (If it uses anything else, its firepower takes a nosedive, or needs even more flux in case of mining blasters).  Aurora has terrible shot range for its class even without Safety Overrides (unless doing all beam loadout, in which case, I rather use Eagle).  It is one case where I might want Ion Pulser in the hardpoint because there is not much else that is useful that cannot be mounted on the turrets (if I want to specialize in energy instead of missiles).

I need to leave mounts empty just to max out flux stats, and Aurora is not performing much better than others, whether it is blaster and EMP spam, or missile spam.

As a playership, Aurora costs too much and has terrible shot range or endurance.  At its price, I rather pay a bit more and pilot Doom or a real capital.  If I had to stick with a cruiser, I rather play Apogee or Eagle (or Heron if I had fighter skills).
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #69 on: July 19, 2019, 08:09:15 AM »

Aurora's definitely on the cusp of being genuinely useful; kind of depends on what Hull Mods you have access to, and whether (if a player-ship) you can afford to get Defensive Systems 3, rather than go SO.  SO Aurora is kind of a weird, giant vulture build; a little too fragile for my tastes, but if it can flank, it's golden.
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #70 on: July 19, 2019, 10:51:11 AM »

An Aurora with a proper loadout is hands down the most powerful cruiser because of its extreme speed, and it has several AI friendly configurations. It pays for that power with lower longevity.

Range is not very important for it because it can close the gap to any target it wants to attack with its system. Its an ideal player ship for the mid game and only fades in the end game because thats when 10 capital enemy fleets call for the player to have a capital of their own. I'd say its still a good player ship up to 3 enemy capitals for faction fleets (or an infinite number of pirates, who it can kill with ease).

Even after running out of missiles, a dual heavy blaster Aurora is still an acceptable combatant for the mopping up phase. It can maintain the two of them fairly well thanks to its deep flux pool, operating 340 flux negative, 555 negative with shields - thats still a good 20 seconds of fire time minus incoming damage (with no caps invested), which is 20,000 damage. At this point its the speed that makes even a no-missile Aurora decent enough - 1000 DPS is ok, similar to what an Eagle can put down, but on a much faster package.

I do think 30DP is a little high for them though - 28 is more in line with their actual performance.
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #71 on: July 19, 2019, 10:58:39 AM »

I don't understand why you'd put more than one heavy blaster on an Aurora - yeah, you need one for armor-cracking, but after that one it's better to focus on more flux-efficient pulse lasers.  My personal favorite armament is two pulse lasers, four ion cannons in the hardpoints, and one heavy blaster in the medium hardpoint; small turrets get some mix of IR pulse or PD, and the rear/side turrets are empty or PD.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #72 on: July 19, 2019, 11:23:00 AM »

I don't understand why you'd put more than one heavy blaster on an Aurora - yeah, you need one for armor-cracking, but after that one it's better to focus on more flux-efficient pulse lasers.  My personal favorite armament is two pulse lasers, four ion cannons in the hardpoints, and one heavy blaster in the medium hardpoint; small turrets get some mix of IR pulse or PD, and the rear/side turrets are empty or PD.

DPS. If you want to use the front hard point for sabots, then you lose a lot of dps without two HB. If you use that hard point for a HB and pulse lasers in the mediums, that's also a fine loaded but you will have a lot less missiles to work with. I think load outs with only one HB work fine. But you are definitely losing strike capability without those missiles.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1889
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #73 on: July 19, 2019, 11:54:13 AM »

Because the Aurora has a massive flux capacity and the mobility to extricate itself from situations in which its flux is high.

The main reason flux dumping is inefficient as a design is that most ships cannot leave a situation once they have dumped and as such flux out and die. As a result they need to have the best combination of damage and efficiency in order to maximize their total damage.

Mobile ships do not need to do this if they have better flux stats than their target. Rather they can optimize for TTK (which is harder as it depends on each incoming ship). This is why the mobile ship “line” keeps getting relatively better as ships get bigger. From the wolf not being all that great, to the medua being really good, to the aurora being amazing, to the Odyssey being transformative enlightenment

Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Warship Balance
« Reply #74 on: July 19, 2019, 01:40:08 PM »

Quote
Because the Aurora has a massive flux capacity and the mobility to extricate itself from situations in which its flux is high.
Aurora used to have massive flux capacity, but now it is only 11000, merely 1000 over Eagle.  That is not massive, considering how much more flux hungry energy weapons are compared to ballistics, and Eagle has no problem capping flux with ballistics and beams.  Aurora also took a dissipation hit in 0.9, less than 0.8.  It was tough enough getting Aurora to win flux wars against similar opponents (without min-maxing flux stats) without help from missiles in 0.8, and now it is even harder.

Also, running away without winning the flux war first and doing significant damage is not an advantage.  It is a stalemate, or eventual loss (due to PPT timeout) against a superior opponent.

If I pass on missiles (I tend to since AI is incompetent with the best ones), then I probably go Ion Pulser in the hardpoint, Ion Cannons in two of the hardpoints (the other two are empty due to lack of OP), and the front two medium turrets are Heavy Blasters.  Rear medium is either Heavy Burst Laser or Salamander Pod.  (Missile loadouts are lame in huge endgame fights or in AI hands, they do not last long enough in multi-round combats.)

One Heavy Blaster loadout is destroyer level firepower.  I do not want to pay 30 DP to do what even Shrike can do.  At least Doom (for 5 more DP at 35) can comfortably use two Heavy Blasters and Mines together.

I suppose current Aurora would be fine if its DP cost was lowered to 25 or a bit more.  It is too expensive at 30 DP.

High-tech mobile ships only have better flux stats because their weapons are horribly inefficient, except Medusa who can use ballistics (but less than Enforcer or Hammerhead).  They also tend to have terrible shot range and eat hard flux from ballistics users before they can attack themselves.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6