Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Harmful Mechanic]

The Atropos is one place where I could see vanilla using an on-hit effect to add a little more damage, since the issue with making the Atropos stronger is that it becomes more effective at battering down shields.

[xenoargh]

How about making the Atropos EMP / Ion, with a weaker damage component, splitting into a star-like distribution of EMP-dealing MIRVS?

That would fit the High Tech themes, differentiate from Harpoons, not step on the lowly, benighted Salamander too hard, etc.

I agree with the complaint that the Atropos is largely just another Harpoon; it's inherently uninteresting and making it available as Medium either makes Typhoon or Harpoon Pod obsolete (or both).  The Hammer has the advantage of being cheap, but kind of awful; it has a niche.  The Atropos can either be expensive, but good, making it a viable replacement for Reapers in all forms, or it can be quite different and find a use that's interesting.  I could see a blanket-EMP missile being very effective vs. Low Tech, personally.

[intrinsic_parity]

Atropos mostly exists to make daggers and tridents balanced. I don't think you can change atropos significantly without throwing that balance off a lot.

[Plantissue]

Atropos is not just another Harpoon. Atropos is a more reliable strike damage than the Harpoon, but at the cost that it has to be a lot closer. Harpoon is much more reliable at finishing off retreating ships. If a ship is venting there is a whole difference in range where it can safely vent from being struck by the missiles.

Atropos is fine. I don't really have a problem with it. They might be considered a bit overpriced, but they are fast and reliable against frigates and destroyers alike.

Single Atropos are overpriced at 2 OP, but 1 OP is probably too cheap, when 1 OP has single Harpoon or Hammer, not to mention 2000 damage Atropos was worth the 3 OP.  Even if modern Atropos is overpriced, there is not enough granularity for 1.5 OP, which leaves making it a bit stronger.  That is why I would like to see 1200 damage on Atropos, to be roughly two-thirds of a 0.7.2a Atropos.  (0.7.2a Atropos was an excellent missile.)  If it has to stay at 1000 damage, then it needs to hit at point-blank, but then it is simply a reskinned Harpoon that is a bit more reliable but much less range.  I think Alex tried it at 1200 damage, but it was said to be too powerful on fighters.  (Sort of like 66% Damper Field too powerful on Mora, but 50% too weak on frigates.)

I suppose that's the problem with low OP weapons. You lose fine granularity to set costs. Which reminds me that a lot of the small ballistic weapons appear to be grossly overpriced. Is the Light Autocannon really worth 4 OP when the Light Dual Autocannon is 5 OP? Both types of Light Machine Guns seem overpriced just because it has possible dual purpose. Railgun is easily massively underpriced compared with light autocannon.

[Megas]

Atropos is not just another Harpoon. Atropos is a more reliable strike damage than the Harpoon, but at the cost that it has to be a lot closer. Harpoon is much more reliable at finishing off retreating ships. If a ship is venting there is a whole difference in range where it can safely vent from being struck by the missiles.

But not too close or else Atropos bounce.  With Harpoons, I can kiss enemies and hit them point-blank if I want to fire missiles that close.

At 1000 damage, Atropos is no more strike than Harpoon, but the effective range band is too narrow, and does not include point-blank range.  The only reason Atropos is useful is because unskilled Harpoons are too slow and too easily shot down.  Without skills, Harpoons are only useful if the target is helpless, or if I kiss enemies and unload at point-blank range.

Light Autocannon is probably fine at 4 OP.  Kinetics tend to have less DPS than similar HE weapons of the same OP cost.  3 OP may be fine, although I probably would rather use two Light Autocannons than one dual in that case.  I already use two Light Mortars over one Light Assault Gun when possible.

Dual Machine Gun seems overpriced at 5 OP.  I never use it except on SO loadouts.

Railgun is fine.  I could see it going for 8 OP with current weapon balance, but it was fine for so long, and still is.

Current Light Needler is overpriced.  Old Light Needler was good.

[Plantissue]

Well, you don't want to be too close otherwise you will get caught in the explosion anyways. I regard it's speed and tracking a good boon against frigates. Having the right skills is not a good assumption to make, and so Atropos remains useful by your metric.

On the assumption that Light Dual Autocannon is worth 5 OP, the Light Autocannon is worth only 3 OP, since it is about 1 OP less flux efficient anyways. At 4 OP, I can't really find a reason to use it over the light dual autocannon except on a really flux starved ship, in which case you might as well have 1 dual autocannon as it is more flux efficient over 2 light autocannon.

The machine guns seem barely capable of stopping things like Salamanders I find. If they were cheaper they might become more useful for ships with more turrets than OP.

Railgun really needs to be 8 OP. Compared to 5 OP light dual autocannon, 7 OP is too cheap. As it is, instead of Arbalest Cannon, I use Railgun, because Railgun is overall better. That 1 less OP can be used for 1 more Flux Vent and suddenly Arbalest looks bad by comparison.

Light needler is a tricky one. On a purely damage and flux efficiency level, if railgun is worth 8 OP, the Light needler is worth about 8.5 OP. On a purely damage and flux efficiency level, and ignoring range and accuracy advantage, the Light needler is worth about 8.3 OP compared with light dual autocannon. With range and accuracy taken into account 9 is about right. That it is kind of a KE strike weapon complicates things a bit, and that small mounts generally have no real purpose for larger ships. It also seems vastly rarer.

[Megas]

Having the right skills is not a good assumption to make.

I know that because I do not get missile specialization either, but then again, I try to avoid missiles if possible.  If I want to rely on Harpoons or Reapers often, I probably should get Missile Specialization, or get an officer with the skill.

I use 4 OP light autocannon frequently on OP (or flux) starved ships or ships that need a cheap kinetic and do not necessarily need ~150 DPS per gun, especially Shrike (P) early in the game when I do not have all of the best stuff.  Still, I am not opposed to 3 OP light autocannon, although I can see why it is 4 OP.

Agreed that light machine guns are too unreliable for PD.  At least the single-barreled one is cheaper and more common than Vulcan.  I almost never use the double-barreled one.  Thaago's SO Hammerhead loadout is probably the only ship I have used it on, but I rarely use SO ships in the first place.

The main reason to use Railgun over Arbalest is OP cost.  If they both cost 8 OP, then it is a choice between efficiency vs. DPS and accuracy.

If light needler stays mostly as-is, I would not mind if light needler and railgun switched places on the OP ladder where light needler is 7 OP and railgun is the top gun at 8 or 9 OP gun.  At 9 OP, I would like to see Light Needler's old stats back when it was weak but had range.

[Thaago]

Compared to the Heavy Needler, the Light Needler has the same dps/OP and same efficiency, same armor penetration, 700 range instead of 800, and a faster firing cycle (a bit less alpha). If larger mounts are supposed to be slightly better on an OP basis, then this is fine. The main difference is 100 range, which I wouldn't mind seeing a single OP deduction for.

Compared to the Heavy Needler, a railgun has 43% better damage per OP, twice the armor penetration, 700 range instead of 800, and .9 instead of .8 efficiency (12.5% more flux per damage). It is more accurate, though needlers are already accurate enough that it doesn't make too big a difference, but much less alpha. I think this is a bit too good.

Compared to the Heavy Needler, a Heavy Autocannon has 28% more damage per OP, twice the armor penetration, the same range, 1.0 efficiency instead of .8 (25% more flux to per damage). As they are the same mount type: HAC's have 86% the DPS of Heavy Needlers per mount. But it also has much lower accuracy, so both the DPS and efficiency go down vs targets smaller than cruisers (smaller than destroyers with skills). This is an easier comparison as they take the same slot, and people have done a lot of A/B testing: Heavy Needlers are significantly better. In practice they do much more than the DPS difference would suggest due to accuracy and alpha.

I would support both light needlers and railguns being 8 OP - railguns are higher damage light multipurpose, while light needlers are higher efficiency pure anti-shield.