Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

Author Topic: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)  (Read 7484 times)

Embolism

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes
« Reply #45 on: March 21, 2020, 07:24:47 AM »

Regarding ships to mount Paladin PD on, I feel like the Apogee thematically is the perfect fit (an exploration cruiser should be more interested in defence), but mechanically is of course limited by its Large Energy being a hardpoint. If it's Large Energy is instead a turret in the centre of its saucer then it can mount a Paladin PD and would also be more similar to Star Trek's Federation vessels (which the Apogee already pays homage to).
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1389
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes
« Reply #46 on: March 21, 2020, 07:37:53 AM »

Yeah, roughly thinking along these lines - a ship that's very powerful, but also slow and fairly vulnerable and requires a lot of forethought in positioning or it gets overwhelmed. I really like the notion of pairing medium universal slots with high energy focus as the system; the tradeoff for using ballistics in those is good stuff. 3 large and 4 medium slots is probably too much, though - that's more primary weapon slots than an Eagle, and all of those are medium!

One of the large slots probably needs to go, and perhaps it could be light on small slots as well, making it tough to get any sort of PD without sacrificing firepower... hmm.

Agreed. The Large Missile was me reaching a little... :D Honestly, I like the idea of two Large Energy because it would give the Paladin more of a chance for use. The opportunity cost is too great for the Paladin to overcome in a single Large Energy setup.

2 Large Energy, 2 Medium Omni, 1 Medium Energy (maybe rear-facing), and a pair of small energy on the side? There's also a conspicuous lack of missiles, unless the player uses them in the Omni slots. But, maybe that's the pros/cons you have to weigh? 

2 Large and two Medium [something] is still pretty strong, and with HEF, you're going to be able to really alpha-strike. If a player could get at/near flux parity with its weapons, this thing would be awesome in a firefight.

@Mondaymonkey

I've been a forum mod for years and I get it, but if the admin of the site is participating, I think we're ok... :D To your point, though, I changed the thread title to accommodate the new direction!

@Embolism

I agree. The Apogee would be a good fit for a Paladin if it was a turret but alas. The Apogee is very good exploration vessel in regards to defending itself but as a warship, it lacks converging fields of fire. I wouldn't change the Apogee one bit at this point, though I like the thought of having another Light Cruiser (and perhaps another hypothetical glass-cannon Cruiser).
« Last Edit: March 21, 2020, 10:53:28 AM by FooF »
Logged

Mondaymonkey

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 777
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #47 on: March 21, 2020, 08:30:39 AM »

Quote
I changed the thread title to accommodate the new direction!
Spoiler
[close]

(added spoiler tags -Alex)
« Last Edit: March 21, 2020, 10:23:46 AM by Alex »
Logged
I dislike human beings... or I just do not know how to cook them well.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12159
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #48 on: March 21, 2020, 09:52:09 AM »

In case of energy, I almost always want large energy weapons over medium for attack because of range (700 vs. 600) and efficiency (autopulse vs. pulse laser, or plasma cannon vs. heavy blaster).  If the ship can use ballistics too, then the unblockable lance-and-kinetics combo becomes a nice option.  In case of ballistics, large is not a pure upgrade, at least for kinetics; it tends to exchange range and DPS for worse efficiency, which can hurt the likes of Onslaught.  I sometimes use heavy needlers instead of Mark IX in large energy ballistic mounts because I need the efficiency, speed, and/or accuracy more than range.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2020, 11:39:00 AM by Megas »
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 24123
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #49 on: March 21, 2020, 10:22:31 AM »

(I'll just say, there's a difference between derailing a thread and it naturally evolving towards a different-but-related topic once the original topic is exhausted. Somewhat ironically: posting large distracting images that are not in spoiler tags is not in keeping with the forum rules, either!)

I appreciate all the discussion here! Lots of good thoughts and I'm keeping up with it.
Logged

Mondaymonkey

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 777
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #50 on: March 21, 2020, 11:01:37 AM »

My bad, guilty. Guilty twice, as it was intended to be against the rules.

I might be too drunk today, but if you need a suggestion on cruiser thread there are idea. I start thinking on what kind of cruiser would be effective against my current fleet. The answer is: small fast light cruiser with strong 360 degree shield and single(!) large 360 degree energy mount in a center and a few small mounts. Off course, that thing would need an another AI pattern, as current will make it stay and die instead of kill while moving. Game is currently lack of a fast ship, that does not care of enemy direction.
Logged
I dislike human beings... or I just do not know how to cook them well.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7220
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #51 on: March 21, 2020, 01:27:05 PM »

Medium Ballstics + Large Energy is probably the best weapon combination, because being able to combine Kinetics (Heavy Needler or HVD) and the High Intensity Laser is just brutal. For me at least the Tachyon Lance can stay home: its outclassed by its cheaper cousin IF there are kinetics to bring shields down.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #52 on: March 21, 2020, 01:59:44 PM »

Yeah, Starlight Odyssey is exactly that - 2 HNeedlers + 2 Large energy slots (HIL + Autopulse).

While Paragon technically has same slots it can't choose engagement range, so it's loadout must be capable of fighting outside HNeedler range. Otherwise Paragon is just food for Conquest.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12159
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #53 on: March 21, 2020, 03:34:43 PM »

its outclassed by its cheaper cousin IF there are kinetics to bring shields down.
When does this happen?  Whenever I try two needlers and four beams on Paragon, the lances win faster or at least as fast as HILs in sim duels.  Both are about equally good against Onslaught, lances are better against Conquest because they tend to disable engines (while HILs don't and enemy Conquest runs away to dissipate or vent flux before reengaging, extending time-to-kill), and lances tend to punish mistakes more easily than HILs against Paragon.

P.S.  I assume enemies have decent shields or better (i.e, major factions or Remnants).  If endgame enemies were Pirates and Pathers like last release, I probably would use HILs more because such enemies do not have good shields, if any.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2020, 03:38:53 PM by Megas »
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1389
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #54 on: March 21, 2020, 06:00:54 PM »

Medium Ballstics + Large Energy is probably the best weapon combination, because being able to combine Kinetics (Heavy Needler or HVD) and the High Intensity Laser is just brutal. For me at least the Tachyon Lance can stay home: its outclassed by its cheaper cousin IF there are kinetics to bring shields down.

If our hypothetical ship had Omni Medium mounts, Heavy Needlers/HVD would be competing against, say, HEF-powered Heavy Blasters. I know the anti-shield is great but if I can get shields down, HEF HIL+Heavy Blasters would murder armor. Even HEF+Phase Lances would be strong. I know the range isn't there but HEF makes Heavy Blasters flux positive (efficiency-wise) against shields. I shudder to think of the damage Plasma Cannon and 2 HBs with HEF going would do!
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7220
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #55 on: March 21, 2020, 08:07:45 PM »

its outclassed by its cheaper cousin IF there are kinetics to bring shields down.
When does this happen?  Whenever I try two needlers and four beams on Paragon, the lances win faster or at least as fast as HILs in sim duels.  Both are about equally good against Onslaught, lances are better against Conquest because they tend to disable engines (while HILs don't and enemy Conquest runs away to dissipate or vent flux before reengaging, extending time-to-kill), and lances tend to punish mistakes more easily than HILs against Paragon.

P.S.  I assume enemies have decent shields or better (i.e, major factions or Remnants).  If endgame enemies were Pirates and Pathers like last release, I probably would use HILs more because such enemies do not have good shields, if any.

I should have said, this experience was on mod ships that have kinetic:HIL ratios more like 2:1, rather than 1:2 like on the Paragon. I agree that on a Paragon it needs the burst that Tach lances give to get through shields. A HIL has better dps, penetration, and efficiency for cutting through armor and hull, but its only about 70% as good vs shields and lacks the burst compared to tachs.

Medium Ballstics + Large Energy is probably the best weapon combination, because being able to combine Kinetics (Heavy Needler or HVD) and the High Intensity Laser is just brutal. For me at least the Tachyon Lance can stay home: its outclassed by its cheaper cousin IF there are kinetics to bring shields down.

If our hypothetical ship had Omni Medium mounts, Heavy Needlers/HVD would be competing against, say, HEF-powered Heavy Blasters. I know the anti-shield is great but if I can get shields down, HEF HIL+Heavy Blasters would murder armor. Even HEF+Phase Lances would be strong. I know the range isn't there but HEF makes Heavy Blasters flux positive (efficiency-wise) against shields. I shudder to think of the damage Plasma Cannon and 2 HBs with HEF going would do!

Thats very true! I think there would be a competition of longer range (HIL/Tach + HVD/Needlers) high efficiency builds and shorter range DPS monster builds (HB + Plasma cannon!) and the ship's speed and flux stats would be a big determiner if one or both builds was better.
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #56 on: March 21, 2020, 08:39:23 PM »

A HIL has better dps, penetration, and efficiency for cutting through armor and hull, but its only about 70% as good vs shields and lacks the burst compared to tachs.
Just as a minor aside, this is not entirely true; the HIL's armor penetration is 500, while the tachyon lance is 750.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7220
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #57 on: March 22, 2020, 08:14:52 AM »

Right you are! I guess all I can say is...

Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #58 on: March 22, 2020, 12:19:45 PM »

The main thing HIL bring is the ability to easily retarget. Tachyon will often slide off of smaller ships that it doesnt kill outright. No such issue with HIlL. But againat a capital TL will generally kill faster just due to the ease of keeping shields down since its extra spike damage
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 24123
    • View Profile
Re: Burst PD Changes (and Cruiser chat)
« Reply #59 on: April 19, 2020, 01:15:43 PM »

Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7