Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: High-tech warships  (Read 8203 times)

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #45 on: April 20, 2020, 04:05:08 AM »

Isn't it also an issue that the Hammerhead is just, too good? And safety override is just space steroids.

Not that the hammerhead is particularly good at anything else mind. Trying to beat it at point blank dakka just seems like trying to pick the worst fight imaginable. That's it's talent, so no wonder no one else matches up to it in it's weight class!
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12155
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #46 on: April 20, 2020, 04:52:06 AM »

Hammerhead seems only great with SO and chainguns.  Conventional Hammerhead without SO is solid, but not overpowering.
Logged

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #47 on: April 20, 2020, 04:56:45 AM »

I never use SO, because I fear losing my ships, but is it just universally better? It feels like people talk about it like it's just better then not having it.

Wouldn't a long range hammerhead just snipe a so hammerhead?
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

Snrasha

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #48 on: April 20, 2020, 05:29:15 AM »

I never use SO, because I fear losing my ships, but is it just universally better? It feels like people talk about it like it's just better then not having it.

Wouldn't a long range hammerhead just snipe a so hammerhead?

A SO hammerhead can easily kill ships which do not have a good mobility + a weak side.  A SO hammerhead is efficient, cheap and i used it for my flagship while my entire fleet are composed of capitals. Just because a SO hammerhead can easily kill type of capitals. The only weakness are fighter. Try on a real battle, a SO hammerhead with 2 chaingun and two kinetic weapon on the front, you will see. You will destroy cruiser like paper.
Logged
I am pretty bad on english. So, sorry in advance.

Gladiator Society
Add battle options on Com Relay/ Framework for modders for add their own bounty.

Sanguinary Autonomist Defectors A fan-mod of Shadowyard.

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #49 on: April 20, 2020, 05:33:07 AM »

I never use SO, because I fear losing my ships, but is it just universally better? It feels like people talk about it like it's just better then not having it.

Wouldn't a long range hammerhead just snipe a so hammerhead?

For 1v1 duels SO variants have higher ceiling of what they can kill under player control. For example, SO skill-less 70% Aurora can kill a sim Paragon, while non-SO builds can't (or at least it's difficult enough that I never succeeded).

Hammerheads: whichever player pilots would completely steamroll the other. AI commits critical, easily exploitable errors with both. AI SO Hammerhead does not stick to target aggressively enough, AI long range Hammerhead doesn't make good enough effort to maintain range.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2991
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #50 on: April 20, 2020, 05:50:48 AM »

God, please don't use 1v1 duels as a metric of how good something is.

Anyways imo, SO is just a different playstyle, it's a sidegrade of your current ship. If you know that a fight will be on the smaller side (which is kinda hard to guess and you can always get ambushed), SO is worth it IF you are quick enough to destroy lots of ships so you can mitigate your short PPT. But in bigger fights I honestly don't see the point as the time required for you to get in weapon range isn't really worth the extra speed. Although this highly depends on battle size. I actually never use SO because it doesn't suit my playstyle, also it's crazy expensive.

Now with the story points granting you free hullmods, this could change things a bit. Free SO is a ridiculously good deal.

@Igncom1
Long range Hammerhead will almost always come on top because of its system, you don't really need that extra dissipation with a non-Chaingun build. Other SO loadouts give you better payoff I think (Aurora, Eagle, Dominator and some others). SO Dominator feels super weird but I was surprised how good it was the first time I tried it.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12155
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #51 on: April 20, 2020, 06:08:36 AM »

God, please don't use 1v1 duels as a metric of how good something is.
It is a useful guide.  If a ship cannot handle itself if it wanders around and gets cut off, it is in trouble.  Not uncommon for a fleet to become isolated duels at times.

Also, small map size might mean player has no choice but to go one, two, or three vs. whatever the enemy throws at the player.  I use big map size so that I do not need to play Mortal Kombat in space.
Logged

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #52 on: April 20, 2020, 06:10:43 AM »

Just to barge in. SO Hammerhead isn't "weak to fighters", it has 4 DLMGs that cover everything and chainguns melt fighters if they get caught too. I've killed full Ordos with nothing but SO Hammerheads before, it takes some micromanagement, but it's reliable.

Also, SO isn't expensive either. You get double flux dissipation, which is almost always much better value per OP than vents.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2020, 06:15:40 AM by Amoebka »
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #53 on: April 20, 2020, 09:15:32 AM »

I still don't understand why people go missile-heavy on the Aurora.  Sure, you can get a few easy kills like that, but getting a few kills isn't an efficient use of your seven minutes of active time.  I guess it might make sense for an SO build?

Anyway - my build for a no-skills Aurora is pretty straightforward, and (while it works better with the player at the helm) is definitely AI-friendly too.  Hardpoints get a heavy blaster and four ion cannons.  Forward turrets get 2x pulse laser and 3x IR pulse laser.  30 vents, ITU, hardened shields, front shield conversion, stabilized shields, flux distributor.  (If you have an officer with defensive systems on it - and you should - it may be worth trading out stabilized shields for something else - efficiency overhaul or insulated engines or just more flux capacitors.)
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #54 on: April 20, 2020, 09:30:36 AM »

I'm pretty sure a ship using missiles to delete it's worth in DP points actually IS worth it's time. More so then using guns or lasers as you guarantee that the ship has earned it's cost to deploy while denying the enemy the chance to do the same.

If you can do that in the first minute or so, then the rest of your deployment time is just adding insult to injury.
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12155
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #55 on: April 20, 2020, 09:42:18 AM »

Aurora stuffed with missiles and Missile Racks have enough to kill several ships.  Without missiles, Aurora needs to pound shields with inefficient weapons and needs to min-max flux stats (dissipation and capacity) and make shields as efficient as possible to have enough flux advantage to pound shields and have some left to attack armor/hull despite inefficiency.  I tried various loadouts, and simply two heavy blasters in the turrets and nothing else (except PD in the smalls) is simple but effective, and player does not need to aim.  (If I use pulse lasers in hardpoints, I need to spend more effort aiming them just to get slightly better performance in best-case.)  It is choice between missiles or better flux and shields.  Normally, I prefer no missiles and better guns, but Aurora is too short-ranged and plays too much like normal Shrike, which NEEDS Sabot pod if I want a hard-flux assault loadout.  At 30 DP, Aurora is too annoying to use and I prefer to use a more powerful ship with less finesse requirements for a little more DP cost (like Doom at 35 DP or Conquest at 40 DP).

I am not fond of AI Aurora.  If I use Steady, it cowers too much and gets picked off by anything that outranges it.  I need either Aggressive officer or Aggressive fleet doctrine, which I generally do not want.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2020, 09:47:16 AM by Megas »
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #56 on: April 20, 2020, 09:49:03 AM »

@Igncom1: Different use of the word 'efficient' - you're looking at deployment cost versus enemy deployment cost and deciding that a missile Aurora is good enough.  I'm looking at "If I'm going to deploy an Aurora, how do I get it to be something that can kill enemy cruisers and keep doing so for as long as it's on the field?"

@Megas: That's what the ion cannons are for.  Get enemy flux levels high once, and then the flux advantage shifts massively in your favor as enemy weapons shut down.  Aggressive officers are a bit better at killing things, as they're more likely to stay in ion cannon range, but steady works okay too.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #57 on: April 20, 2020, 09:50:31 AM »

I'm pretty sure a ship using missiles to delete it's worth in DP points actually IS worth it's time.

In tournament setting, where you fight equal DP - sure. In campaign I want to defeat 2-3 xDP per AI ship with maxed officer and way more than that for player ships.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #58 on: April 20, 2020, 09:57:02 AM »

Missile aurora in player hands will delete many times its DP. Missile aurora can kill ~6-8 cruisers (more if you are conservative with sabots) or 1-2 capitals as well as as many frigates and destroyers as you can get your hands on which is as much or more than any non-missile build I've used. It also kills things faster to swing the fleet battle in your favor, and can play more aggressively since it doesn't need to win the flux battle with conventional weapons. As a player ship, it just has way more impact in my experience.
Logged

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
    • View Profile
Re: High-tech warships
« Reply #59 on: April 20, 2020, 10:02:29 AM »

It does seem interesting to me the divide in the playerbase where a ship may not be worth it if it can't kill several times it's worth.

With an officer or certainly player piloting, that's what I would expect. With a good load-out and fleet tactics, sure that too.

But on it's own that feels like an unfair expectation for a ship to punch way above it's weight against an equal opponent.
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7