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

Author Topic: Odds and ends  (Read 4392 times)

Plantissue

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2020, 12:15:19 PM »

Thank you Igncom1. Would I be right in assuming you are personally piloting when using Wasps as a mobile set of PD lasers for a ship, as otherwise the AI would sends them out to attack other ships?

Longbow bombers have burst PD. I've witnessed Longbows on their bombing runs out-fight wasps along the way to the targeted ship. That is what I meant by blasting away wasps. I wasn't talking about their sabot missiles at all. I'd rather have Longbows for PD than Wasps. Not quite a fair comparison as Wasps are cheaper, but losing to a bomber on its attack run is just how weak wasps are. They seem to die to 1 hit to the longbow burst PD in my recollection in the chaos of combat.

For their OP, I regard Talons as better for everything Wasps can do, but with Talons having lower OP as an additional advantage. Vulcans cannons are a much better PD and Talons are a better anti fighter and talons are tougher. Though I suppose it is true that Wasps do not lose you crew, I find that losing crew is not usually a concern unless you are farming remnants.

LOL no... I've never personally piloted even a single serious battle in the game ever. I'm entirely at the mercy of the AI! The AI certainly does force feed talons to the enemy the same as it does with almost all fighters, so in that regard I guess I just find force feeding talons to be more distasteful then drone wasps? Not sure.

And yes they are very weak unless you are lucky enough to have them use their proxy mines properly! But I suppose that's just how it goes for the flimsy wasps. I suppose I could argue that tanking PD shots from longbows can help other fighters/missiles but that might be a stretch. They do die fast and quick, but are easily replaced and at no crew cost so it's honestly fine from an 'ablative armour' point of view where they being killed is basically good because it means somthing actually important is getting shot at instead.

Vulcans are very good PD but are limited by their range and accuracy, although mostly made up by making a wall of bullets. That said fragmentation damage from vulcans is very ineffective vs shield and armour, but devastating vs hull. I've had vulcans on my star ships struggle vs heavy fighters. But all of that is also kinda a moot point as the talon has swarmer SRM missiles which do HE damage!

So I'd guess in the end talons might be superior but I'm probably going to stick with wasps all the same and would definitely encourage their use! I've had battles many time sin the past where fighter attrition has left me after the battle with understaffed ships across the fleet, which just means more supplies spend on CR recovery and so on. But that can and can not be an issue depending on where you are in your game.

I'd say that wasps are still better then PD lasers mounted on a ship, and have surprisingly good energy DPS if you swarm small pirate ships, but otherwise there certainly is a trade-off for not having a pilot when compared to talons or any of the better interceptors and fighters.
Uh, ok, you don't seem aware of this but if you aren't personally piloting the ship, the AI just throw away the wasps to engage other ships and they aren't used as PD at all.  I'll be glad to be proven wrong if you can post a vid of the AI doing as you have described.

So you cannot use Wasps in the manner you just described them in the previous posts at all.
Logged

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2020, 12:17:28 PM »

Thank you Igncom1. Would I be right in assuming you are personally piloting when using Wasps as a mobile set of PD lasers for a ship, as otherwise the AI would sends them out to attack other ships?

Longbow bombers have burst PD. I've witnessed Longbows on their bombing runs out-fight wasps along the way to the targeted ship. That is what I meant by blasting away wasps. I wasn't talking about their sabot missiles at all. I'd rather have Longbows for PD than Wasps. Not quite a fair comparison as Wasps are cheaper, but losing to a bomber on its attack run is just how weak wasps are. They seem to die to 1 hit to the longbow burst PD in my recollection in the chaos of combat.

For their OP, I regard Talons as better for everything Wasps can do, but with Talons having lower OP as an additional advantage. Vulcans cannons are a much better PD and Talons are a better anti fighter and talons are tougher. Though I suppose it is true that Wasps do not lose you crew, I find that losing crew is not usually a concern unless you are farming remnants.

LOL no... I've never personally piloted even a single serious battle in the game ever. I'm entirely at the mercy of the AI! The AI certainly does force feed talons to the enemy the same as it does with almost all fighters, so in that regard I guess I just find force feeding talons to be more distasteful then drone wasps? Not sure.

And yes they are very weak unless you are lucky enough to have them use their proxy mines properly! But I suppose that's just how it goes for the flimsy wasps. I suppose I could argue that tanking PD shots from longbows can help other fighters/missiles but that might be a stretch. They do die fast and quick, but are easily replaced and at no crew cost so it's honestly fine from an 'ablative armour' point of view where they being killed is basically good because it means somthing actually important is getting shot at instead.

Vulcans are very good PD but are limited by their range and accuracy, although mostly made up by making a wall of bullets. That said fragmentation damage from vulcans is very ineffective vs shield and armour, but devastating vs hull. I've had vulcans on my star ships struggle vs heavy fighters. But all of that is also kinda a moot point as the talon has swarmer SRM missiles which do HE damage!

So I'd guess in the end talons might be superior but I'm probably going to stick with wasps all the same and would definitely encourage their use! I've had battles many time sin the past where fighter attrition has left me after the battle with understaffed ships across the fleet, which just means more supplies spend on CR recovery and so on. But that can and can not be an issue depending on where you are in your game.

I'd say that wasps are still better then PD lasers mounted on a ship, and have surprisingly good energy DPS if you swarm small pirate ships, but otherwise there certainly is a trade-off for not having a pilot when compared to talons or any of the better interceptors and fighters.
Uh, ok, you don't seem aware of this but if you aren't personally piloting the ship, the AI just throw away the wasps to engage other ships and they aren't used as PD at all.  I'll be glad to be proven wrong if you can post a vid of the AI doing as you have described.

So you cannot use Wasps in the manner you just described them in the previous posts at all.

I suppose not? I have definitely seen the AI sending fighters to protect friendly ships before but perhaps I am wrong.
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

AxleMC131

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1722
  • Amateur World-Builder
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2020, 12:19:12 PM »

Why do Thunders have full ion cannons? Claws have ones that fire half as often, which means that Thunders have nearly as much disabling power, but their extraordinary speed makes them swerve and zoom by at unpredictable angles, making them hard to intercept, then they start to disable your weaponry and unless you had burst pd lasers, it might be too late.

Don't forget that the Thunder's sheer speed is also its biggest flaw. A Thunder on an attack run gets far fewer shots of the Ion Cannon on target as it speeds past, whereas a Claw does the whole "strafing attack" thing and can focus in a much greater quantity of EMP damage reliably.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2020, 12:27:12 PM »

Huh, I thought that the AI generally escorts with fighters if its AI setting is lower than aggressive - I've used wasps as fighter defense in a low number of carriers fleet and they seems to work ok? I don't have evidence of this though. If I happen to catch wasps on stream I'll send a link. I find Wasps quite useful right up until I start fighting shielded fighters - they just lack the weaponry to do anything to them.

I also remember Alex saying he found the idea of increasing the light autocannon accuracy a good one, but now I can't find it... blech.
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2020, 12:28:21 PM »

I think you meant "its biggest virtue". A Claw rarely will zoom past the shield and hit the rear, possibly even arcing to other weapons, but Thunders can and will.

About interceptor behaviour: it varies. Sometimes they swarm the enemy, sometimes they swarm-escort friendlies. Most annoying this is that carriers focus both no matter what. It's alright for swarming the enemy and taking them one by one, but it also prevents you from having a consistent PD screen, instead of a single excessively protected ship and a bunch of ones that have no escort at all.

AxleMC131

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1722
  • Amateur World-Builder
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #20 on: January 17, 2020, 12:31:43 PM »

I think you meant "its biggest virtue". A Claw rarely will zoom past the shield and hit the rear, possibly even arcing to other weapons, but Thunders can and will.

Hehe, alright fair point. Thunders do have a tendency to blaze over the length of a ship. I guess that makes them more effective (damage-wise at least) against bigger/longer ships? That's an interesting concept.
Logged

Plantissue

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #21 on: January 17, 2020, 12:55:28 PM »

I suppose not? I have definitely seen the AI sending fighters to protect friendly ships before but perhaps I am wrong.
I've seen that, but not on its carrier unless regrouping. They seem to always be sent away. Wasps tend to die traveling along the way. Wasps need more HP.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2020, 01:02:37 PM by Plantissue »
Logged

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #22 on: January 17, 2020, 01:45:35 PM »

I suppose not? I have definitely seen the AI sending fighters to protect friendly ships before but perhaps I am wrong.
I've seen that, but not on its carrier unless regrouping. They seem to always be sent away. Wasps tend to die traveling along the way. Wasps need more HP.

I'm not going to say no to a buff on my interceptor of choice!  ;D
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #23 on: January 17, 2020, 03:46:52 PM »

I used two needlers vs. three HAC because the ship I have in mind is Phase Lance Eagle.  For other Eagle loadouts, it will be two kinetics and one HE.  For other ships, it depends on mount location and coverage.  What I use varies on what I have available and what I need.

Buying that Heavy Needler over a cheaper weapon is an opportunity cost.  It means five less OP for other things I get it instead of HAC.  So if Heavy Needler has an effective 1 to 2 OP bargain or bundle deal over HAC, not to mention Heavy Needler is a high tier item that is harder to buy from military market (and not part of the lowtech/midline pack so harder to get blueprint for), I am okay with that.

The biggest pros of needler that is not damage or OP cost are either turn speed or accuracy.  I guess a runner-up reason is the problems with heavy kinetics make heavy needler in a heavy mount a good partner with Mjolnir on non-Conquest ships, despite range mismatch (because Mjolnir is such a flux hog).

I think burst is a bit overrated, and burst is not always better than steady.  At least bursts that are a stream of weak shots and not a single high-damage shot for superior armor damage (or shield overloads against AI) like a blaster or hellbore.  As far as I am concerned, stream burst is equal or slightly better than steady, not enough to be worth more OP on its own.

With Heavy Autocannons easier to find, I use them until lategame when I can build as many needlers as I want.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2020, 03:57:06 PM by Megas »
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #24 on: January 17, 2020, 10:18:26 PM »

sharp bursts of fire is generally more desirable than steady dps.

This is only true due to how AI works (keeping shield up until near overloaded), and even that only on start of engagement. When you get enemy to high flux and want to keep them there without shield flickering your HE, steady stream is better.
Tight kinetic bursts are easy to armor tank or dodge with skimmer, AI just doesn't exploit this properly.

Then again AI is what it is and current Needler is significantly better than HAC due to efficiency. Heavy Needler doesn't pay anything for being burst anyway. Unlike Light Needler, which does pay extra OP for it and thus is inferior to Railgun in most cases.
Logged

Plantissue

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #25 on: January 18, 2020, 05:48:58 AM »

I used two needlers vs. three HAC because the ship I have in mind is Phase Lance Eagle.  For other Eagle loadouts, it will be two kinetics and one HE.  For other ships, it depends on mount location and coverage.  What I use varies on what I have available and what I need.

Buying that Heavy Needler over a cheaper weapon is an opportunity cost.  It means five less OP for other things I get it instead of HAC.  So if Heavy Needler has an effective 1 to 2 OP bargain or bundle deal over HAC, not to mention Heavy Needler is a high tier item that is harder to buy from military market (and not part of the lowtech/midline pack so harder to get blueprint for), I am okay with that.

The biggest pros of needler that is not damage or OP cost are either turn speed or accuracy.  I guess a runner-up reason is the problems with heavy kinetics make heavy needler in a heavy mount a good partner with Mjolnir on non-Conquest ships, despite range mismatch (because Mjolnir is such a flux hog).

I think burst is a bit overrated, and burst is not always better than steady.  At least bursts that are a stream of weak shots and not a single high-damage shot for superior armor damage (or shield overloads against AI) like a blaster or hellbore.  As far as I am concerned, stream burst is equal or slightly better than steady, not enough to be worth more OP on its own.

With Heavy Autocannons easier to find, I use them until lategame when I can build as many needlers as I want.
So yes, for your phase Eagle, you chose Heavy Needlers over Heavy Autocannons. There is no real reason to use Heavy Autocannon over the Heavy Needler. It's not a choice when you don't have Heavy Needler available. You chose Heavy Needlers even to the extent of leaving a useful mount empty beecause Heavy Needlers are underpriced and more OP effective compared to heavy Autocannon. You don't get 5 OP less for other things, you pretty much get 5 inbuilt flux vents with the Heavy Needler, and you usually want as much flux vents as possible. You get them free with your weapon, enabling you to get even more flux dissipation for your dps.

But yes, Megas and Talar, burst fire is not always more desirable, but is generally more desirable. I didn't include its burst fire or accuracy for that matter into the worth of the Heavy Needler anyways. Heavy Autocannon is a burst fire weapon in a way anyways, but with less burst. Heavy Needler is underpriced regardless of it.

Here is what I think, if all characteristics stay the same. Railgun should be at least 8 OP. Heavy Needler should be 17 OP. Minor quibbles, but odds and ends and all that.

Light Needler Cost is reasonable, but it's just that the Railgun is just so much better, and has higher dps and accuracy and higher damage against armour and anytime you would be considering Light Needler, you would most likely be limited in small ballistic mounts.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #26 on: January 18, 2020, 10:10:51 AM »

So yes, for your phase Eagle, you chose Heavy Needlers over Heavy Autocannons. There is no real reason to use Heavy Autocannon over the Heavy Needler. It's not a choice when you don't have Heavy Needler available. You chose Heavy Needlers even to the extent of leaving a useful mount empty beecause Heavy Needlers are underpriced and more OP effective compared to heavy Autocannon. You don't get 5 OP less for other things, you pretty much get 5 inbuilt flux vents with the Heavy Needler, and you usually want as much flux vents as possible. You get them free with your weapon, enabling you to get even more flux dissipation for your dps.
Like I said, bundle deal.  Player does not get five more vents.  He gets effectively 1+ vent and about +16% more DPS (probably a bit more in practice due to autocannon missing more at times) at the cost of 5 OP.  If I can only support weapons up to so much flux, and can afford the Needlers over HAC, then I use Heavy Needler for more damage and sometimes, turn speed and accuracy, not for more flux/dissipation.  Player still pays 200 (needler) or 214? (autocannon) in flux per weapon.  If I need OP for other things, like more hullmods to offset penalties clunkers take, then I may drop the needlers for autocannon.

Phase Lance Eagle cannot comfortably support 600+ flux worth of kinetics on top of two phase lances; flux load is too much, especially for AI.  (Found that out the hard way when I tried three autocannons first.)  400 flux (with two needlers) at the cost of up to 100+ damage (from three autocannons) is easier to work with.  If Eagle had better flux dissipation but not OP, I probably would use three autocannons.

Railgun at 8 OP may be okay.  Ideally, I like to see Light Needler regain its 800 range, but failing that, have its OP cost either match Railgun or be one less.  (I would not mind Light Needler and Railgun swapping OP costs, where needler is the 7 OP option and Railgun is 8 or 9.)  I think 17 for current Heavy Needler would be too much, just for some minor bonuses over Heavy Autocannon.  Heavy Autocannon would probably become a no-brainer again.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #27 on: January 18, 2020, 10:22:42 AM »

While skills fix this very well, the Heavy Autocannon suffers from low accuracy against destroyers and even nimble cruisers. When I count shots hit over a decent length of time (not just the first barrage, but once recoil has kicked in fully), its effective DPS is significantly lower than 214 (or its effective range is significantly under 800) - somtimes as low as 1/3 hits. While heavy needler is the superior choice, if those are unavailable I've been considering going HVD over HAC even for DPS/efficiency purposes due to its higher accuracy. The range, EMP, and shot size are just bonus.

If fighting slow cruisers or capitals, or with the recoil reduction and shot speed increase skills, this doesn't really apply of course.
Logged

Plantissue

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #28 on: January 19, 2020, 04:53:54 AM »

Megas, I asked for an example where you would use heavy autocannons over heavy needler, but instead you post some sort of heavy needler phase lance eagle build, precisely because heavy needlers are more OP effecient than heavy autocannon. I doubt that is an example you want.

We both favour the same weapons. Difference is you want your favourite weapons to not be nerfed, and though that's understandable, they should be made to their appropriate OP, so there is a greater choice. As their true cost is closer to 17 OP Heavy Needler and 8 OP railgun, if changed to those values I will still use them.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Odds and ends
« Reply #29 on: January 19, 2020, 10:14:11 AM »

You're not accounting for rarity in you analysis. HAC is very common and needlers are pretty rare. I don't see anything wrong with there being rare stuff that's a bit better than other options.

If any change were to be made, I would say reduce the needlers damage and flux cost proportionally by a bit to maintain efficiency, and then increase HAC damage and flux proportionally a bit to give it more overall damage. HAC does do more damage per OP than heavy needler btw so that could be leaned into a little making it a better choice for overall damage output. I think it's more interesting to make weapons fill different roles than to try and balance OP to reflect the value of stats.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3