Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.9.1a is out! (05/10/19); Blog post: Personal Contacts (08/13/20)

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus  (Read 3855 times)

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2218
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #15 on: January 14, 2020, 09:23:51 PM »

And since basic Falcon doesnt, its just a "cruiser" with the worse armanent than Hammerhead. Only compared to that, (P) version looks great.

Basic Falcon has less firepower than Hammerhead. But it's still a much stronger ship in 1v1 scenario. It has more range and more effective mobility (same average, but burst is better for timed distance corrections). With enough hard flux firepower to kill Hammerhead from that range. A well piloted(which AI can fail at, admittedly) and properly built stand-off Falcon would always defeat a Hammerhead in completely one-sided manner.

And since Falcon is 9 Burn it doesn't really compete with other Cruisers anyway. Falcon is mostly an over-sized DE.
It still has very bad firepower to DP ratio though.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2020, 09:25:59 PM by TaLaR »
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4712
  • Quantum Mechanic
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #16 on: January 14, 2020, 09:52:01 PM »

The basic Falcon is an absolutely incredible ship for everything except getting quick kills. Its combination of high speed (faster than all but 1 Destroyer), full cruiser range, cruiser flux systems, and cruiser PPT would be completely busted if it weren't for its low overall firepower. Something like 2 heavy needlers, 1 Ion beam, lr pd lasers, and ITU is very good at locking down enemy ships while staying alive.

I agree with the OP that the Falcon P is overly strong in its pure missile configuration because it has the OP to max its capacitance rather than vents and not suffer at all in firepower. It can have a very, very tough shield on a fast platform - perfect for point blank sabot barrages.

I like the idea of removing the built in expanded racks better than penalizing the mount type however - its still an OP tax, but a less harsh one.
Logged

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #17 on: January 14, 2020, 10:40:33 PM »

Sabotpod has 9 sec between bursts. Thats heavyac level of op. Typhoon has 15 sec chargedown. Better than heavymortar I guess. But not even in the same universe as the chaingun...

Medium missiles are balanced just fine.

I think you're underestimating instantaneous damage potential. Missiles of those kinds deal IMMENSE amounts of damage in a single burst. Gauging their power from DPS is a red herring.

All ships are balanced in the terms of managing instantaneous damage potential. With four sabot pods you have 16K potential damage to shields. Thats enough to overload Dominator and Outventure but both can survive two reapers. Every gun-cruiser can survive a single reaper. And every cruiser has flux capacity to take six sabots. Only carriers and freighters (including certain modified one) are vulnerable. And, obviously, destroyers.

Here goes DPS.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2218
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #18 on: January 14, 2020, 11:14:14 PM »

Sabot pod has about the same dps as HAC. And unlike HAC, it's limited and can be countered in multiple ways. The simplest being backpedaling, since no matter how fast the launching ship is, Sabot 1st stage itself is slow.
Only point blank launches (vs PD-less opponent or covered by launching ship's shield) from a faster ship are real form of offense. Typical use by AI just buys it few seconds of survival by forcing me dodge/backpedal/etc.

AI doesn't use any anti-Sabot tactics and lets them generate overloads too easily. Eating overload vs Reaper is usually a good decision, but vs Sabot it's pure shield management mistake (intentionally not perfect reaction time is one fine, but even a mediocre player is likely to do better).

Just make Sabots produce a sound when they go 2nd stage! Being silent is pretty much the only reason reacting to them (by shield drop or phase skimmer) poses difficulty to player at all.
Logged

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #19 on: January 14, 2020, 11:43:47 PM »

And since basic Falcon doesnt, its just a "cruiser" with the worse armanent than Hammerhead. Only compared to that, (P) version looks great.

Basic Falcon has less firepower than Hammerhead. But it's still a much stronger ship in 1v1 scenario. It has more range and more effective mobility (same average, but burst is better for timed distance corrections). With enough hard flux firepower to kill Hammerhead from that range. A well piloted(which AI can fail at, admittedly) and properly built stand-off Falcon would always defeat a Hammerhead in completely one-sided manner.

And since Falcon is 9 Burn it doesn't really compete with other Cruisers anyway. Falcon is mostly an over-sized DE.
It still has very bad firepower to DP ratio though.

Thats tactics. I'm pretty much sure that player's ability to kill that op Falcon (P) in a frigate not even up for the discussion.

Firepower to DP is ok. Its Hammerhead's ratio not ok.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2218
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2020, 12:01:50 AM »

Thats tactics. I'm pretty much sure that player's ability to kill that op Falcon (P) in a frigate not even up for the discussion.

That's very basic tactic exploiting objective speed+range advantage. Not doing even this much can only be classified as AI being not good enough.
While player piloted Hammerhead can win vs Falcon in skill-less fight too, it's never as one-sided (you need to trade away quite decent amount of armor vs properly built Falcon).

Yes, any rear-vulnerable ship can be killed by humble Wolf in skill-less fight. SO or not depending on whether you need more mobility or PPT (SO against Falcon). But it's more difficult tactic, so I don't expect AI to be able to properly and reliably execute it. Trying to do it under wrong conditions is suicide. In comparison, Falcon kiting is safe and simple.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2020, 12:27:46 AM »

This isn't a problem I've encountered in the campaign. It was only really evident from the Starsector tournament. Let's not balance the game around that, please!

This doesn't come from the tournament. It comes from player-piloting in the campaign. A missile-spamming Falcon P flagship is absurdly powerful and DP efficient. The competing ships, Gryphon and Aurora, both cost more DP (i.e. have less fleet support) and have equivalent or inferior missile-power.


But simply increasing OP costs wouldn't really solve the problem of how much flux-free damage the Falcon (P) can do. It just flatly needs fewer medium Missile slots.

You are probably right.

The gryphon has far more missile power than the Falcon(p) and the aurora isnt a missile boat. As fleets get larger the gryphon becomes the premier missile finisher, being able to bring hilarious amounts of sustained, high accuracy HE finishing from safety. The Falcon(p) cannot.

The additional  idea that the regular falcon isnt a great ship is... a take.
Logged

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #22 on: January 15, 2020, 01:42:46 AM »

Thats tactics. I'm pretty much sure that player's ability to kill that op Falcon (P) in a frigate not even up for the discussion.

That's very basic tactic exploiting objective speed+range advantage. Not doing even this much can only be classified as AI being not good enough.
While player piloted Hammerhead can win vs Falcon in skill-less fight too, it's never as one-sided (you need to trade away quite decent amount of armor vs properly built Falcon).

Yes, any rear-vulnerable ship can be killed by humble Wolf in skill-less fight. SO or not depending on whether you need more mobility or PPT (SO against Falcon). But it's more difficult tactic, so I don't expect AI to be able to properly and reliably execute it. Trying to do it under wrong conditions is suicide. In comparison, Falcon kiting is safe and simple.

Any amount of destroyer's armor for a cruiser is a fair deal.

My point is that if there is a way to exploit an advantage, then player will make it work. In the end it all comes back to the simplest  "who has more dakka" question.
Logged

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2020, 02:23:50 AM »

Falcon (P) has no built-in missile rack.
Logged

Cyber Von Cyberus

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
  • A professional Idiot
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2020, 04:02:41 AM »

Falcon (P) has no built-in missile rack.
Sorry about that, missread something.
Logged
"When life gives you lemons, throw them out of the window and show life the lemonade you bought from the store yesterday"-Cave Johnson

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4712
  • Quantum Mechanic
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #25 on: January 17, 2020, 11:40:59 AM »

Grievous and Axle are quite right about the derailment: I've split the other pages off into a new thread: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=17698.0
Logged

Schwartz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
Re: Falcon (P) - Missile Malus
« Reply #26 on: January 17, 2020, 11:50:04 AM »

Falcon (P) never struck me as overpowered. It's the only pirate ship that's actually worth using - and may rival other dedicated missile builds - but so what? Other pirate ships are just early game junk threats, which makes me a little sad. Just leave Falcon (P) alone.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]