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] 4

Author Topic: Balancing Change Ideas  (Read 4689 times)

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #30 on: June 21, 2020, 11:43:47 AM »

@ Grievous69:  "+1 to weaker ADF" could be interpreted to mean, yes, weaken ADF by lowering the bonus from +2 to +1 (and maybe lower OP cost).  At least you clarified you really did not mean that.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #31 on: June 21, 2020, 02:34:51 PM »

I like current UI on frigates/destroyers in the early game, when I'm not using SO (usually AI ships). This is because the enemy I'm most likely fighting are swarming pirates: in that case having extra speed to avoid getting swarmed is a lot more important than stand off range.
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #32 on: June 21, 2020, 08:16:49 PM »

Speed is king in this game, followed by range. Anything that boosts combat speed becomes "must-have" if it doesn't have a downside. Unstable Injector negates some range because the two work hand-in-hand. The only hullmod to improve speed (with no tradeoff) that I could reasonably get behind is extra speed at 0-flux. Once the fighting gets going, it loses its effect but once you're out of harm, you can chase down stuff. That would also keep carriers from abusing it. It would be most helpful on Capitals (where it would contribute a greater % of their top speed).

I would really like a +1 Burn hullmod. +2 Burn is overkill on anything but a Capital but is still necessary for them. +1 Burn at half the OP cost would fit the bill and make a lot of slower ships more manageable.

Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #33 on: June 21, 2020, 08:52:42 PM »

Also, I would say current unstable injector is closer to useless than niche.

It's close to autopick for frigates - most frigates will never outrange anybody in meaningful way, so it's better to stop trying and capitalize on high speed instead.
Same for any size SO loadouts, as long as you can afford OP cost.
I'd also use UI on player-piloted Medusa, or any early DE while I have no ITU yet. Probably larger phase ships too, if I ever used them.

I agree that it's mostly useless for non-SO cruisers and capitals.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #34 on: June 21, 2020, 10:27:33 PM »

Also, I would say current unstable injector is closer to useless than niche.

It's close to autopick for frigates - most frigates will never outrange anybody in meaningful way, so it's better to stop trying and capitalize on high speed instead.
Same for any size SO loadouts, as long as you can afford OP cost.
I'd also use UI on player-piloted Medusa, or any early DE while I have no ITU yet. Probably larger phase ships too, if I ever used them.

I agree that it's mostly useless for non-SO cruisers and capitals.

You don't have to outrange something for range to be useful. Increased range means you take less damage on approach before you can start dealing damage. Range lets you play at safer distances and take less 'standoff' damage which I find to be very helpful for the AI. The AI is pretty terrible at utilizing speed in my experience. For my flagship, I've never felt like a SO ship needed more speed, I'd much rather have more guns and vents, and I pretty much always run out of OP before mounts/dissipation. My SO ships are almost always SO + hardened subsystems + good weapons and vents with no room to spare.

Also, I feel like in the early part of the game where frigates are somewhat relevant, they can still be somewhat competitive in range, even if they aren't explicitly outranging things. Maybe I'm not giving enough credit to UI, and maybe I'm biased by late game, but it just doesn't seem very useful to me.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1889
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #35 on: June 21, 2020, 10:43:05 PM »

AI conquest is very good but not so much better than a Griffin that its terribly worth it. Double MIRV and any long range kinetic is a great combo for the AI
Logged

ubuntufreakdragon

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #36 on: June 22, 2020, 02:42:07 AM »

How about a flux venting penalty for UI e.g. -30/60/90/150 venting (just copied flux distributors values) instead of range.

The range mod dedicated targeting core is obsolete as the integrated targeting unit has the same cost but better buffs.

The Ox Tug could take an additional ordnance point to allow two logistical hull mods.

The defence platforms of star fortresses could rotate closer to the station, to make them less easy to snipe and give defending fleets more maneuver space.

The hardened subsystems mod could be a bit better at reducing the safety overrides PPT penalty, due to stacking you only get 13% base PPT I think it should be at least 25% base PPT.

When setting a weapons group to alternating that contains weapons that fire constantly e.g. Graviton beams and burst weapons e.g. a kinetic gun, the alternating should apply only to those weapons that are affected by it.

The skill that allows for zero flux boost at 1% flux could get lifted to 5% there are many weapons which can cause more than 1% flux in one salvo.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2020, 06:42:35 AM by ubuntufreakdragon »
Logged

DatonKallandor

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #37 on: June 22, 2020, 07:46:57 AM »

Dedicated Targeting Core is accessible to everyone from the start, ITU is loot.
The downside of SO is the PPT penalty, if you could just spend OP to get rid of it that's not a big enough penalty.
The 1% 0-flux speed boost skill is basically for being being able to run shields and still be fast.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #38 on: June 22, 2020, 08:48:11 AM »

The 1% 0-flux speed boost skill is basically for being being able to run shields and still be fast.

It's mostly an AI crutch, AI keeps shield up way more than is anywhere near optimal.
There are also some builds that can at least operate PD and lighter weapons without breaking 1%, with heavy weapons used manually (example - dual plasma Odyssey).
Logged

Morrokain

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2143
  • Megalith Dreadnought - Archean Order
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #39 on: June 23, 2020, 05:11:38 PM »

The 1% 0-flux speed boost skill is basically for being being able to run shields and still be fast.

It's mostly an AI crutch, AI keeps shield up way more than is anywhere near optimal.
There are also some builds that can at least operate PD and lighter weapons without breaking 1%, with heavy weapons used manually (example - dual plasma Odyssey).

It's worth noting that once upon a time (I *think* this changed between 1.9.1 and 1.9.1a?- It could have been earlier though I don't remember) it also allowed carriers to set fighters to engage without losing the speed boost. That was too strong for vanilla balance as it made the skill mandatory for carriers.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #40 on: June 23, 2020, 05:43:57 PM »

Yes... encountering a Heron with that skill was a nightmare just because of how well it could run away.
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2846
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #41 on: July 04, 2020, 04:27:01 PM »

Yes... encountering a Heron with that skill was a nightmare just because of how well it could run away.
Then why not have it not effect carriers when fighters are set to engage? Or full on have a different effect for carriers?
The skill is pretty crap right now because it needs to either be crap to not make carriers more OP or it is useful on other ships but makes carriers even worse
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #42 on: July 05, 2020, 02:38:36 AM »

It could even be interesting for launching/replacing fighters to produce flux on a carrier. Then at least they could have their stats buffed up to that of gunboats due to needing to support the average flux costs of operating wings.
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

ubuntufreakdragon

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #43 on: July 08, 2020, 02:31:48 PM »

Replacing fighters could create hard flux.
I want this 5% to make pursuing carries easier not to make them run away even faster.

How about a Tractor Beam (Geater Brother of Graviton beam) e.g.
Large ~20Op
250 Kinetic dmg/s
200 flux/s
1000 Range
If armor or hull is hit the target will be dragged toward the firing ship based on hull size(main engines can counter it but not basic backwards trust)

How about a Missile based point defence:
Mosquito missile Defence System
Small ~5Op
100frag dmg
Very Fast
Excellent Tracking
1500 Range
limited Charges
rate of fire 1/s(1/3s)

Or a smaller High intensity Laser
Medium ~10Op
200 HE dmg/s
200 flux/s
1000 Range
« Last Edit: July 08, 2020, 02:40:21 PM by ubuntufreakdragon »
Logged

Mondaymonkey

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 777
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Change Ideas
« Reply #44 on: July 08, 2020, 09:28:04 PM »

Quote
Or a smaller High intensity Laser
Medium ~10Op
200 HE dmg/s
200 flux/s
1000 Range

That will ruin all the energy/ballistic mounts balance to the hell. Imagine tempest with graviton beam and that?

I believe, just medium energy beam (similar to tac laser) with energy damage and decent damage to flux stats, wold fit better.

And it would be nice to have real energy artillery thing. Like 1200 range with projectiles bigger, stronger and slower than plasma. Bad flux efficiency as a price for armor cracking capabilities at that range.
Logged
I dislike human beings... or I just do not know how to cook them well.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4