Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5

Author Topic: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?  (Read 3387 times)

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
    • View Profile
What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« on: July 11, 2020, 10:58:36 AM »

I just want to clarify something, I don't think it's bad, I've definitely used it numerous times in my campaigns. But I was thinking, it's classified as a proper battleship, and it's 40 DP, meanwhile battlecruisers usually cost the same, Odyssey is even more expensive. Now I know it's perfectly okay for it to work like that, obviously there's more to factor in that just firepower. So my idea was to make it actually terrifying and up it's DP cost accordingly, 45 or 50 maybe idk. I think it's fair to let its 3 large turrets all converge forwards, it's a ship with a Burn drive after all, not a broadside ship. Perhaps add some more small mounts on it to really match the word Onslaught, and give it some more flux stats because even now you're barely able to fire your low flux guns, let alone something stronger, and I think battleships should be able to do that.

Hopefully it could also help with these ''problems'' a bit. It already has huge crew and fuel costs, this way it'll be worth it at least (it's actually more expensive than the Paragon weirdly). And since capital spam is a thing that's trying to get resolved maybe this would reduce the number of capital ships in some fleets. So it's no more a 5-6 Onslaught fleet but maybe 3 or 4 of them. Finally, this could potentially leave place for a low tech battlecruiser of some sort.

So would this be a good/bad thing and why? Or maybe it won't change much in the grand scheme of things so it's unnecessary?

EDIT: Actually I shouldn't have said ''real battleship'', it would imply it is weak right now. Let's then say a ''proper battleship''.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2020, 11:07:29 AM by Grievous69 »
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1558
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2020, 11:19:22 AM »

I would not mind at all if the onslaught was buffed to be more comparable to the paragon, both in DP and in combat power. I do feel like the paragon is 'the best' capital mostly because nothing else really fills the same role as a true battleship.

Flux stats are definitely the biggest thing holding the onslaught back IMO, but better turret arcs would also help a lot. I don't think it really needs more mounts, although the extra OP might not hurt. Maybe a bit of extra Armor could be another interesting direction, doubling down on the theme of the ship and maybe allowing it to compete with the paragon a bit more in the tanking department.
Logged

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2020, 11:22:08 AM »

Ehh I dunno about needing to 'up' it really. Fixing minor quibbles is fine.

It's a 'low tech' style design and they benefit mainly from being basic and cost efficient equipment rather then flashy bleeding edges of technology. Much like the Dominator and Enforcer before it it suffers in the flux war but wins out at simply being mobile platforms for the efficient ballistic weapon types along with a healthy stock of missile mounts that might otherwise only be seen on more specialised ships.

They are always flux hungry, but I find that basically all of my ships are just as flux hungry but they, like midline, can afford to use the flashier weapons, or in the case of high tech they are forced to use energy weapons. So I'm not as sure it's really as big of a problem, least of all for for onslaught which is unique in that the ship is built around two massive energy blasters. Essentially making all of it's other guns secondary to the fixed forward batteries.

But this, is just me.
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

Mondaymonkey

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 777
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2020, 11:25:24 AM »

I made some experiments recently.

Wider (to front) arcs and more armor does not do much.

To be a proper beast Onslaught need more flux, little wider shields and more charges in his thermal cannons. Even minor buff in thees three makes it almost equal to Paragon.
Logged
I dislike human beings... or I just do not know how to cook them well.

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #4 on: July 11, 2020, 11:28:36 AM »

Oh yeah good point, forgot to mention that one. Most people immediately jump on the ''Paragon broken'' train but in reality there's a difference in 15 DP between it and the next most expensive capital. We really could use something closer to its DP so there's more choice between the heavy hitters.

@Igncom1
Yeah you're right about TPCs, nothing else the Onslaught can mount can compare to them. I disagree on low tech being cost efficient tho, their ships eventually start costing more than other techs in the long run, especially if you tend to take armor or hull damage. The only thing that makes them seem cheaper is the lower credit cost upfront.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #5 on: July 11, 2020, 11:29:22 AM »

It's 'safe' for Paragon to be the most powerful, because ultimately it's slow and easy to play around (just stick 'Avoid' on it, then kill it last). Onslaught isn't same, whatever buffs it gets it would be able to press with Burn Drive. This risks creating a new meta where spamming Onslaughts would be far better option than spamming Paragons currently is.

I'm in for lesser buffs though, like converging 3 large guns (at least barely so at long range) and making Burn Drive cancel-able.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #6 on: July 11, 2020, 11:34:12 AM »

Yeah I understand you, which is why I'm not suggesting any buffs to its defense in any way (apart from flux stats). And in the end it would still remain a sluggish ship with a weak shield and little cover in rear. I also can't see too much harm since AI is notoriously bad at using Burn drive.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Mondaymonkey

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 777
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #7 on: July 11, 2020, 11:39:01 AM »

No buffs to defense? Fine. But more charges to thermal cannon! And rotate them 2.5 degree so they can focus fire...
Logged
I dislike human beings... or I just do not know how to cook them well.

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #8 on: July 11, 2020, 11:50:56 AM »

Sure, AI is bad at deciding when to use Burn Drive. But the stronger the ship is, the easier is the decision (just keep pressing your advantage). I'm also not fond of balancing around AI's inability to properly leverage a ship system, rather than trying to improve it.

The changes would make Onslaught a terrifying sniper platform - with 3 converging Gauss Cannons and flux buffs what would be the point of Conquest? So getting close to enemy with Burn Drive wouldn't even be that much of priority.

There is also capital-dominance angle as whole. Do we really need to make it even more pronounced? Non-carrier DEs already have pretty much no place in end game combat, while frigates are only good as distraction/fodder.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2020, 11:55:28 AM by TaLaR »
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1558
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #9 on: July 11, 2020, 12:13:20 PM »

This feels like it is rapidly devolving into another ship class balance thread :P so I will avoid discussing those implications for now and attempt to keep the thread on topic.

Of course you could buff the onslaught too much for the DP increase, and then it would be too strong, so if you reach that point, then reduce the buffs until its balanced. The idea is just to increase the onslaughts DP to be more representative of a true battleship, and then give it buffs to justify that increase.

The idea is to make the onslaught better than the conquest in a straight fight, but cost more DP right? so that seems reasonable that it would be stronger than conquest in some ways. The conquest would still cost ~10 less DP (could be more if it turned out the buffs were that significant), less supplies and fuel per month, and have much better maneuverability/ kiting capability. It would be a battle cruiser and the onslaught would be a battle ship, I don't think the roles really overlap too much because the onslaught is not fast enough to kite anywhere near like the conquest can.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2020, 12:20:40 PM »

Fair points, but you do realise only one Gauss cannon has currently the same flux/second as the base flux dissipation of Onslaught. What kind of buffs do you think I'm proposing to wield 3 lol? And that's even ignoring all other weapons. I just want to make it a tad bit better all around, with small corrections, and then increase its DP. Capital dominance should be dealt with in the next update I think, so this change wouldn't impact that imo. And yeah improving the Burn drive AI will help, but I don't think that's that easy to do, it'll have to take a thousand of things into account at once.

@intrinsic_parity
Yep that's the general idea.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8556
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #11 on: July 11, 2020, 12:32:25 PM »

Things I want on Onslaught:
* Wider arcs for heavy mounts.  Currently, it works better as a broadside ship like a low-tech Conquest (because ship can aim two instead of one heavies), but AI will not play it that way because of TPCs.
* Better dissipation.
* Ability to (permanently) shut-off TPCs to prevent AI from killing itself by firing TPCs until it flux-locks itself.

As for Onslaught vs. Paragon, I think Paragon is fine since it is worth a cruiser more than Onslaught, and Paragon does not seem to outperform a duo of 40 DP battleship and 20 DP cruiser-sized warship or carrier.

I would not mind if Onslaught was upgraded to 60 DP monster.  Onslaught was fun when it was the most powerful ship during the 0.7.x releases, putting Paragon and all other capitals to shame.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #12 on: July 11, 2020, 12:36:10 PM »

The idea is to make the onslaught better than the conquest in a straight fight, but cost more DP right? so that seems reasonable that it would be stronger than conquest in some ways. The conquest would still cost ~10 less DP (could be more if it turned out the buffs were that significant), less supplies and fuel per month, and have much better maneuverability/ kiting capability. It would be a battle cruiser and the onslaught would be a battle ship, I don't think the roles really overlap too much because the onslaught is not fast enough to kite anywhere near like the conquest can.

Conquest isn't *that* fast compared to Burn Drive using Onslaught. Conquest can keep Onslaught away, but it's mostly done by weapon pressure, not pure speed. Against a stronger Onslaught, Conquest risks becoming simple prey.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8556
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2020, 12:40:52 PM »

Conquest isn't *that* fast compared to Burn Drive using Onslaught. Conquest can keep Onslaught away, but it's mostly done by weapon pressure, not pure speed. Against a stronger Onslaught, Conquest risks becoming simple prey.
Conquest was simple prey before 0.8a.  +200 to hull and armor, and heavy ballistics integration, along with weakened skills that no longer pushed Onslaught over the top made Conquest more like a fast battleship than a battlecruiser that was no match to a real battleship.

Come to think of it, I do not want Onslaught to be stronger if Conquest gets left behind.  If Onslaught gets stronger, but not Conquest, I would want a new proper midline battleship to compete.  Currently, Onslaught, Conquest, and Paragon form a decent triangle of battleships.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1558
    • View Profile
Re: What if the Onslaught was a real battleship?
« Reply #14 on: July 11, 2020, 01:35:13 PM »

The idea is to make the onslaught better than the conquest in a straight fight, but cost more DP right? so that seems reasonable that it would be stronger than conquest in some ways. The conquest would still cost ~10 less DP (could be more if it turned out the buffs were that significant), less supplies and fuel per month, and have much better maneuverability/ kiting capability. It would be a battle cruiser and the onslaught would be a battle ship, I don't think the roles really overlap too much because the onslaught is not fast enough to kite anywhere near like the conquest can.

Conquest isn't *that* fast compared to Burn Drive using Onslaught. Conquest can keep Onslaught away, but it's mostly done by weapon pressure, not pure speed. Against a stronger Onslaught, Conquest risks becoming simple prey.

Are we talking about kiting, or brawling, and are we talking about AI or human controlled?

For kiting, the burn drive does nothing because it only goes forward with direction lock, the conquest will be better at gauss kiting 100%.

For brawling, while the conquest might not be able to straight up run away (I think it's actually pretty close if we uses zero flux boost because that stacks with maneuvering jets while it doesn't stack with burn drive), it can easily outmaneuver an onslaught. Isn't that how the battleship vs battlecruiser match up should be? If the conquest tries to brawl a battleship head to head, it should clearly lose, but it can outmaneuver to win the duel. Of course the AI doesn't know how to outmaneuver a burn driving onslaught, but the onslaught doesn't know how to use burn drive, so it becomes an RNG fest of which AI accidentally does it right in AI 1v1, but the 'theoretically optimal' matchup seems to make sense IMO.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5