Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?  (Read 6792 times)

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1389
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #60 on: July 16, 2020, 12:14:14 PM »

Not gonna lie, I never thought about trying a Broadside Onslaught but once I did, it's really effective. It's a shame the TPCs kind of get lost in the shuffle, though I do use them, but the ship can mostly handle one all guns blazing and saving the OP from not filling out the other side gives you a ton of hullmods.

Compared to a similarly-equipped Conquest, I feel the Onslaught is vastly tougher. I could make the Conquest hardier by adding Heavy Armor but slowing it down seems counter-intuitive while with the Onslaught, you know it's just going to have to take hits. 2450 armor (the most I could get) is no joke, especially with skills. Hellbores were just scratching the paint.

All that said, I have this nagging feeling that the ship isn't supposed to be played this way. It's disingenuous to its design, though I believe the intended design is counter-intuitive. That all three of its Large Ballistics can't hit the same target, its TPCs have hard time doing the same, and most of its Mediums are unilateral gives it almost no "good" angle to fire. They're all competing against each other for where the ship should be pointed. The Broadside makes sense because it fixes what guns are available on one target. So to take nothing away from the Broadside Onslaught, the standard design should be superior, but isn't. It takes some hyper-specialization to the make the Onslaught an efficient battleship and I've written it off as mediocre for years because I was trying to work within the box. I don't think it should be this way.

To put it into perspective, guns able to focus on one target:

Broadside Onslaught:
2 Large Ballistic
4 Medium Ballistic (3 if the rear Medium is used for PD)
2 Medium Missile
3 Small Ballistic

Standard (Forward-Firing) Onslaught:
2 TPC (only on large targets, though, more likely only 1 will hit)
1 Large Ballistic
3 Medium Ballistic
4 Medium Missile
2 Small Ballistic

I tried a hyper-specialized approach to the Standard (Frontal) Onslaught and dropped the side Large Ballistics and only put PD on the sides, focusing solely on Forward Firepower. I can run roughly the same setup as the Broadside Onslaught with the same OP. However, the TPCs are so much harder to focus fire with. I actually put them on separate weapon groups and just turn the ship slightly to make sure they can each hit (one after the other). It works but I don't know if they're better than having a turreted Large Ballistic. Having the more Missiles available gives me more versatility, or at least more punch when I want it. It's effective, but it feels like it has less punch than the Broadside with the 2x HAG.



Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12159
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #61 on: July 16, 2020, 12:20:29 PM »

Does AI even play broadside Onslaught properly?  Every time I tried, AI insists on pointing directly ahead for TPC use, even if the loadout is more favorable for broadside use.  I have given up and build for mostly forward loadout just so I can freely change ships and let AI pilot my Onslaught while I pilot something else (like Afflictor for cheese kills), without AI self-destructing my Onslaught flagship through sheer incompetence.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2020, 12:22:21 PM by Megas »
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #62 on: July 16, 2020, 12:38:15 PM »

The AI uses the broadside properly yes. Both because it will try to swing to spread armor damage*. And also because it will lots of times have enemies to the side. It definitely wants to use the TPCs more than is efficient but this isn’t a huge deal. Even a slight tilt is enough to get the second HAG to not fire off into the ether** and not trying to get all three on target is pretty valuable. As an example if you run two stock onslaughts against each other in the sim the hellbores on the side will attempt to fire at the enemy and wont quite have the angle to do so.

The main thing about the broadside onslaught is less that it’s a broadside and more AWM/ARU.  I could do almost or just as well with a normal one so long as you have AWM and ARU. The AI onslaughts main problem is that as soon as it’s shield goes down it ends up stopping firing because it’s mounts take damage***. If you remove this issue it can still pretty effectively leverage its armor.

*derp forgot to account for this in my undervaluing. Heavy Armor is probably not undervalued.

**though my AI onslaughts dont have a HaG there. They have a Hellbore on the side instead. This is because they are bad at using missiles (they will dump at the first opportunity) and so still need a way to punch through heavy armor and the Hellbore provides.

***its second main problem is that it inefficiently uses its medium slots for PD; both over-fluxing itself and preventing it from using more efficient/higher ranged medium sized weapons. You could use dual flak in the front mediums and then LNs in the small but you lose 100 range on your needlers, use 6 more OP per battery, increase your PD flux usage by 112 per battery, and reduce single target missile DPS by 1/2. Even if you drop IPDAI from the flaks you’re only saving 2 OP. And god help you to penetrate armor if you’re running anything but HE/Energy in the larges.

Edit: Here is an example I am playing with the second wave mod that changes fits around. Enemies tend to have far more effective fits (particularly pirates, which are all now atropos/assault chaingun'd SO monsters) though i don't like this onslaught

This is its "elite" Onslaught with one exception. Instead of AWM and ARU it has hardened shields

Spoiler
[close]

When you swap to AWM and ARU, with no eliminate command, the elite version wins against the one with hardened shields (like 20% hull left?) and this is a pretty weak showing since once things get low it dinks around at the edge of TPC and gauss range and entirely negates its advantage. (it also vents waaay too much but this is i think a pressure thing. My AI onslaughts don't vent in combat.) The main reason it does win is because in the initial trades its weapons don't turn off from taking damage(and because it doesn't flux up during the initial exchange where it tends to burn in). The non-elite version which has HN's and a hellbore in the front wins with like 60% hull (it still vents for no good goddamn reason and fails to push forward for no good goddamn reason) but it wins much harder. Again, because in the initial engagement its weapons aren't turning off.

In general because of the single target and preservation AI this tends to feel worse than in the campaign where there will be lots of smaller ships and more pressure. Its also a pretty non-ideal situation because you're fighting something with very long range weapons when you're at a flux disadvantage due to the primary type being kinetic and one side having hardened shields.


« Last Edit: July 16, 2020, 01:30:19 PM by Goumindong »
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4143
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #63 on: July 16, 2020, 01:17:48 PM »

To make an "all sides" Onslaught work, it either needs to have infinite flux dissipation it doesn't really matter and it can fire all its weapons all the time, or to have weapons so cheap to mount and fire that there's never a good reason not to fire them. The reason why broadside Onslaught might work better than the regular one is because of its constrained flux pool: it has only 600(+60+600+150) flux dissipation to work with, but if we made a "cheap" loadout with 3 hellbores, 5 heavy autocannons, 4 flak cannons, 6 vulcans and, obviously, 2 TPCs, then it needs 2781 flux dissipation not to gain any soft flux when firing all the guns, but just 1672 when firing only the forward firing weapons.

When working with limited flux, an ideal ship would have a priority list, where it would first fire most efficient guns and the least efficient guns last. Such a ship would not fire weapons past a certain point, because the most efficient guns used all the flux it has. A ship with a limited flux pool shouldn't fire more guns than its flux pool allows, because at some point it starts hurting more than helping. Even then, mounting any weapons uses ordnance points and if it won't (or shouldn't) be fired, those OPs are wasted. This means that you don't want any more guns than what you're going to use, and this number tends to be different to the number of mounts your cruiser or capital ship has at its disposal.

So, since you want to use the most efficient weapons, energy damage type is basically the worst type to use. Kinetic damage can be used against shields to double its efficiency, thus firepower you can put out with your limited flux. The same applies to high-explosive. This means that energy weapons of efficiency worse than 0.5 (which TPC is, at 0.8) are undesirable. Firing 2 TPCs continuously for 500 DPS against shields at 400 FPS gives you less is worse than firing 2 Heavy Autocannons for 800 DPS against shields for the same flux. To make TPCs desirable, their efficiency would have to be boosted enough that they are higher on the flux efficiency list than ballistic kinetics or ballistic high-explosives for anti-shield or anti-armour work respectively. Or give Onslaught enough flux that it just can be wasteful with its weapons. This is exacerbated by Onslaught's low mobility, so it has to be assumed that what weapons it fires, it's going to fire indefinitely, without breaks.

tl;dr: Thermal Pulse Cannons can't compete with ballistics for efficiency and efficiency matters a lot to Onslaught.

As an aside, I hope Heavy Armour's manoeuvrability penalty goes away. It doesn't make it a hard choice, as ships that benefit from it the most, are hurt from the penalty the most as well, hurt too much.

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #64 on: July 16, 2020, 01:40:17 PM »

Its not the flux. When your shields are down "winning the flux war" doesn't matter. Because flux efficiency of kinetic into 2400 armor with -50% kinetic damage done to armor is effectively zero. A heavy needler does 250 DPS for 200 flux/second. That is pretty damned good! .8 flux/damage! .4 vs shields! Have fun winning the flux war against that!   A heavy needler into 2400 skilled armor does 5 DPS for 200 flux a second. For 40 flux/damage. Get dunked shield tankers.


Only two things matter

1) Not getting hit by too many missiles
2) Keeping your firing up.

When that happens and their shields turn off. You're in the exact same game again.. except that their guns will stop firing before yours do because you have AWM and ARU. And once their guns are off it barely matters what you're firing into their hull.

My onslaught and my AI onslaughts routinely out-fire their flux. It doesn't matter. The AI does a pretty decent job or prioritizing things when flux is high. Decent enough that i don't really have to worry much about them. When their flux gets high they shoot their vulcans at missiles first and that is all i care about.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2020, 01:42:13 PM by Goumindong »
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1389
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #65 on: July 16, 2020, 03:07:41 PM »

Goumindong is pretty much on the money in regards to ships primarily face-tanking: since you never have to worry about hard flux, it's all about armor and keeping the guns themselves online. Hence the AWM, HA, and ARU. Personally, I haven't found ARU to be all that necessary (I tend to take Resistant Flux Conduits if I have to make the choice).

That said, there's another flux issue to consider. The Broadside Onslaughts I have recently built are hovering around 1700 flux from primary-facing weapons against 1450 dissipation. That's not quite parity but pretty close and considering the 17,000+ capacity, it will take over a minute of sustained fire to max your flux and even then, most guns will still fire. To put it plainly, flux will rarely be limiting factor. Weapon loadout is still key, though. It has to be efficient in what it does and Energy weapons like the TPC or Mjolnirs are typically less efficient at any given thing vs. straight HE or Kinetic.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #66 on: July 16, 2020, 03:19:02 PM »

The main risk to the AI is that they foolishly put their shields up (they always do) and catch some sabots on them (which causes them to overload and turns off their PD) When that doesn't happen they're amazingly durable
Logged

RustyCabbage

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #67 on: July 16, 2020, 04:39:25 PM »

...

Edit: Here is an example I am playing with the second wave mod that changes fits around. Enemies tend to have far more effective fits (particularly pirates, which are all now atropos/assault chaingun'd SO monsters) though i don't like this onslaught

This is its "elite" Onslaught with one exception. Instead of AWM and ARU it has hardened shields

Spoiler
[close]

When you swap to AWM and ARU, with no eliminate command, the elite version wins against the one with hardened shields (like 20% hull left?) and this is a pretty weak showing since once things get low it dinks around at the edge of TPC and gauss range and entirely negates its advantage. (it also vents waaay too much but this is i think a pressure thing. My AI onslaughts don't vent in combat.) The main reason it does win is because in the initial trades its weapons don't turn off from taking damage(and because it doesn't flux up during the initial exchange where it tends to burn in). The non-elite version which has HN's and a hellbore in the front wins with like 60% hull (it still vents for no good goddamn reason and fails to push forward for no good goddamn reason) but it wins much harder. Again, because in the initial engagement its weapons aren't turning off.

In general because of the single target and preservation AI this tends to feel worse than in the campaign where there will be lots of smaller ships and more pressure. Its also a pretty non-ideal situation because you're fighting something with very long range weapons when you're at a flux disadvantage due to the primary type being kinetic and one side having hardened shields.
Thanks for sharing this. I'll definitely be tinkering around with your Onslaught adjustments - in fact yesterday I did try out some broadside Onslaught builds roughly according to your designs, but I couldn't get them to perform as well as I'd like.


(Also minor aside I don't think I actually made many changes to pirate ships; aside from the Gremlin (P) any Atroposes that show up are purely coincidental. Probably gonna have to take another look and tone it down)

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #68 on: July 16, 2020, 05:54:05 PM »

Was a bit of hyperbole. Pirates have not been an issue for me past early game. The only thing that gave me significant issues was loads of carriers.
Logged

CommandoDude

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #69 on: August 17, 2020, 02:03:38 PM »

The annoying thing about the Onslaught is that even if you design the ship to use low flux weapons, AND max out its vents, it still struggles with potentially overloading itself.

The ship is basically designed to alpha strike whatever it targets, kill it, and then vent. If it doesn't win the fight in the first 30 seconds its usually boned. Not very good for prolonged fleet actions except against missile heavy enemies.

I think its TPC flux gen could stand to be lowered a bit and its vents could be raised a bit.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]