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 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 54

Author Topic: Starsector 0.65.2a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 325253 times)

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #150 on: December 06, 2014, 07:28:46 PM »

Network Pesci's experience seems close to mine.

I have not timed mine, but when I use Wolf flagships to solo large fleets led by enemy flagships with some but less than max Combat, it takes two Wolves with Hardened Subsystems (or three without) and 90% CR to solo it.  Wolf with Hardened Subsystems has four and a half minutes before CR decay, and CR decays once every six seconds (due to Hardened Subsystems), for about six more minutes before CR decays too much.

Hyperion with 100% CR and Hardened Subsystems has three minutes of peak performance and up to ten more minutes before 100% CR decays to 0%.  As long as Hyperion can teleport and weapons do not go offline, it can stay without much trouble.  That is enough time for such a Hyperion with the right skills to solo most fleets.  That is probably somewhere between five to fifteen minutes.

When I try to solo ships in the simulator with a Cerberus armed with Railgun and Mauler, I have enough ammo to kill about three or four destroyers before I am out of ammo, well before CR decays to malfunction level.  Obviously, large fleets have more, and bigger, ships.

Take a look at this old thread of mine, Frigate flagships vs. Hegemony defense fleet., and check out my ships' configurations.  Though the enemies have changed, many of the configurations I use remain (mostly) the same, except for Lasher and Cerberus.

As for Medusa vs. enemy flagships with max Combat, here are my experiences.
  • Any destroyer.  Not much of a threat, but still dangerous.
  • Falcon or Eagle.  Pulse laser variant is easy, I outrange them.  If their autocannons are a problem, I shield tank until they run out of ammo, then kite.  Graviton Beam variant is hard because range is a tiny bit less than absolute maximum Heavy Blaster range.  I need to fire the blasters manually at their shields to build up their flux, and vent spam as I fire to prevent my flux from building up (because if I vent much flux, the enemy will vent too).  If successful, they start panicking once their flux goes high, and it becomes easier to finish them off when they cannot aim beams.
  • Dominator or Onslaught.  I wait until they burn drive, then skim to their rear to blast their engines.  In case of elite Onslaught, I shield tank until it runs out of ammo for HVDs and Mjollnir, then blast its engines.  Tedious to win.
  • Odyssey or Paragon.  Unwinnable, they outrange me and I will never exhaust their weapons or break their shields (they dissipate hard flux).

Quote
I don't have much of a problem with larger fleets, but when I run into a captain that has the same unfair BS powers that I do like "zero flux speed bonus at 25% flux" or "reduce flux while shields are up" it feels like a punching bag just reached out and smacked me upside the head.
This is what motivated me to switch from Medusa to Hyperion, and get Missile Specialization 10 so I can kill enemy flagship quickly with Reapers and save a few minutes.  This is what I mean by enemy flagship is harder than everything else combined, and a few Reapers boosted by Missile Specialization 10 will often make it go away, permanently.

Quote
I'm glad someone else feels the same way about those skills... its really clear how powerful the level 10 combat skills are when fighting the AI. Levels 1-9: Not all that noticeable. Level 10: Ridiculous power boost.
This is why Missile Specialization 10 plus Reapers is so useful now.  Four Reapers will kill any non-battleship immediately.  Onslaught and Paragon can survive them if the player lacks Target Analysis 10 or sensor objective boosts.  Killing cruiser flagships immediately is very important because it will stop them from launching their Harpoons or Pilums (boosted by Missile Specialization 10) and kill your AI ships!  Crippling an Onslaught with Reapers will make it flee and prevent it from slaughtering your fleet with a plethora of guns.

EDIT:  Aurora flagship, in player's hands, is very powerful now.  Reapers with Missile Specialization 10 are very fast (as fast is many ballistics) and hit very, VERY hard, one-hit killing destroyers and even some cruisers.  Aurora can carry up to 44 Reapers, and can get the speed and agility to use them with deadly precision.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2014, 07:34:20 PM by Megas »
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #151 on: December 06, 2014, 07:46:22 PM »

Some notes on non-named-bounty fleets and timing: A pirate armada (two eagle-D, an enforcer, a sunder-D, an enforcer-D, a buffalo II, and a smattering of frigates that died) took about two and a half minutes to kill using a single Sunder.  Smaller pirate attack fleet with lots of fighters seem to run about five minutes, because I have to spend a lot of time repeatedly killing fighters while maneuvering to get at the carriers - for a Sunder, allowing Broadswords to close is a death sentence.  Current character level is 45.

An impossible fight (a bounty fleet with an onslaught) takes about six minutes to clear out everything other than the onslaught - if the onslaught is deployed last.  If it's deployed first, you die in about a minute and a half.  Clearly I need something better than a Sunder; haven't gotten any good ships this particular game (no Apogee, no Aurora, not even a Conquest or Paragon.)
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Draken

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #152 on: December 06, 2014, 08:36:02 PM »

Hi Alex,

I wanted to throw my 2 cents into the ring as far as these balance changes go as they are the 1st change you've made to the game that I feel the need to comment on.  I have not had a chance to read every single comment so if im repeating anything, my apologies.

Combat balance pass:
Spoiler
Removed energy weapon bonus damage from high flux level
Increased damage values for non-beam energy weapons by roughly 25% to compensate
[close]

This makes sense to some degree (although i'm sure the numbers for beam weapon damage will need to be tweaked later).  While granting damage bonuses at higher flux was an interesting idea, I don't think the game offers enough control over flux management to make it a major mechanic.  I still like the idea of having some ways to differentiate the weapon types beyond their damage vs shields, hull, armor but this may have not been a great way to do it.

Beam weapons:
Spoiler
Standardized range to 1000 for most non-PD, from Tactical Laser to HIL
Increased range for PD Laser and LR PD Laser
Slightly reduced OP cost for all beam weapons
Tactical Laser, Graviton Beam, and Phase Beam are no longer interrupted by missiles
Greatly reduced fade in/out time for most beams
[close]

This seems primarily like a balance change.  I'm sure it will be tweaked again at some point.

Missiles:
Spoiler
Salamander: both versions have unlimited ammo and require 20 seconds to reload
Hurricane MIRV: regenerates 1 ammo every 20 seconds
Pilum LRM: regenerates 1 ammo every 10 seconds
[close]

This makes a lot less sense to me for a few reasons.  First, a system where missiles have ammo while most other weapons don't already seems arbitrary.  I understand it from a gameplay standpoint (missile spam and all that) but it may not be intuitive for a new player.  Having to keep track of missile ammo only carves out an exception in the combat mechanics that is not obvious.  This is not a major issue but something to consider.  The bigger issue is that some missiles regenerate.  This does not make a ton of sense thematically (why can a ship produce one type of missile in the middle of combat but not another?), nor does it make sense intuitively (a new player who runs out of missiles will likely not know about this mechanic).  Most significantly in my mind however is that this carves out another exception in the combat mechanics.  The way I would have to describe the combat rules to someone would now have to go something like this: "There is no ammo in the game for most weapons except missiles and bomb bays.  With those weapons, once you run out, your out. unless its a particular type of missile.  Then you get more at a set interval or another special missile that has unlimited ammo, but just that one".  This is unnecessarily complicated for a new player, can't be easily explained in a tutorial, and makes it more difficult to understand combat.  New players tend to focus on the minutia of things.  There are a few lets plays on Youtube of StarFarer where the first time someone gets into combat they focus on things like their number of command points or looking for objectives because thats what they remembered from the tutorial, even though those things have a minor impact on the actual gameplay.  If there is a need for this change due to AI then something like a "onboard missile manufacturing" hull mod makes more sense.  It can be added to the stock ai ships and the player will get the necessary information from the hull mod description when they install it (if it is available to them at all).

Ballistic weapons:
Spoiler
Now have unlimited ammo, except for Bomb Bay
Reduced OP cost of Light Dual MG
[close]

This is another change that I struggle to understand.  The reasons given for the removal of ammo seemed to be that A: Ammo didn't matter much except in large battles, and B: the system could be abused.  I have a few thoughts here.  I have never felt like ammo does not matter, and have had several of my engagements (including the afformentioned large ones) affected by a lack of ammo (certainly many more than by a mechanic like command points).  This may be relevant only to my play style but I did feel the need to say that ammo as it exists now is not useless, atleast for some weapons.  

It seems to me that reducing ammo count for most weapon would make ammo more relevant more often, expand choice (by allowing for the creation of specialized ships, skills, and hull mods that address ammo) and generally improve the combat experience.  Additionally, this would help to further differentiate various weapons using non standard methods (such as damage or OP cost).  Making a weapon with say, 8 total ammo, gives you a unique way of balancing that weapon that is different from all others and allows you to maintain greater variety and flavor through-out.  I will add my comments on the abuse point below.

Ships
Spoiler
Destroyers and cruisers now have a peak effectiveness timer like frigates
Roughly 5-7 minutes for destroyers and 7-9 for cruisers
High-tech/faster ships have shorter timers
[close]

These changes don't bother me as I rarely run into these timers, however I don't like the idea of designing systems around folks who choose to min-max.  If someone wishes to kite a fleet for 45 minutes, I think we should let them.  Starsector is a single-player game without any impact on the real world, there are no accounts to sell, no gold to farm for someone else, no rare items to ebay etc.  In such a case, I say let folks play how they want to play.  As long as the min-max approach is not the clearly superior one, and it is not given the fact that it is substantially slower most of the time, I don't mind.  Balancing the game around min-maxing simply adds unnecessary complexity and complicates gameplay.  

On to Peak efficiency timers specifically.  These timers make sense from an intuitive standpoint (crews tire, guns wear down, etc.) but they have no impact on gameplay in a real sense (the reason given for removing ballistic ammo) except in very long battles or when people choose to play the game in a way that does not make sense to you.  The real impact of these timers is that they are too long to matter to most people so they have no effect on gameplay for most people but add another layer of complexity to learning the combat system.  As I mentioned before, if you sat a new player down and asked them to go through a tutorial, they will notice things like peak efficiency timers (as they don't come across such mechanics in other games, and as such will seem important) in a manner that is disproportional to the mechanics actual impact on the game.  I may be wrong but it seems that that is what I would do.  

If you do wish to keep them, then I say lower the timers, create tiers of efficiency and make their effects get progressively stronger.  Keeps us on our toes, makes the mechanic mean something to most of us, and gives you a stick to whack those min-maxers with.

Spoiler
Sunder: increased top speed, acceleration, and flux capacity. Reduced shield efficiency.
Brawler/Shepherd: increased burn level by 1 (to 6)
Condor: reduced supplies/day by 1 (to 4)
[close]

More balance stuff, meh.

TL:DR;

Keep ammo, reduce the quantities.  No regen on missles without a clear communication to the player that such a thing is happening.  Kill peak efficiency timers or make them shorter and tiered.  Make the mechanic mean something to everyone, not just the min-maxers.

Thanks, and apologies if what is written above does not make sense.  I'm very tired.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2014, 09:13:09 PM by Draken »
Logged

goduranus

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 925
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #153 on: December 07, 2014, 12:05:21 AM »

I am for trying out the changes to see how it goes, but not the missile and ballistic ammo though.

For ballistics, it's merely a cosmetic difference, and for most practical purposes ships rarely run out.

But without ammo, ballistics will not "feel" like ballistics. It's like those rear spoliers on the Honda Civic, even though it doesn't make any practical difference, it make the car feel sportier. So, if there's no difference, why not leave them in?

For missiles, running out was a major gameplay element "Do I shoot now? or wait for a better opportunity"

It's seems that the changes are making weapons types more similar, so removes one of the more interesting part of the game that differentiates itself from all those other games.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 12:09:15 AM by goduranus »
Logged

Venatos

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #154 on: December 07, 2014, 12:49:57 AM »


About Venatos' idea: yeah, I saw that. My thought on it is that I actually really *like* how these malfunctions play out, and they also serve as a clear visual indicator that things are going wrong, which is particularly important if this is happening to a ship other than your flagship.

Consider that in a previous version, low-CR ships couldn't be deployed at all. The current system, where things eventually get really, really bad, is meant to provide a range of options there instead of a hard boundary - you can decide how much risk you're willing to take, and when to bail out. It also makes last-stand type fights more dramatic than simple stat changes.

Basically, the idea is that a ship at 0 CR is not something you can rely on for any length of time. You might get one last thing done with it, or you might not. If they're reliable (even if poor) performers, then it undermines the whole CR system. You'd end up encouraging the player to fight "free" battles with swarms of 0-CR ships against weak opponents. (With that in mind, one of the goals of the hull damage from critical malfunctions is to make sure it's very much not free outside of combat.)

I will say that the complexity of the rules around "peak performance" ticking down is bothering me, though.


thnx for taking the time to read that lengthy post and thnx to miljan for bringing it up.

i can see why you like the malfunctions, they are kinda cinematic. and in the end they have a nearly identical effect as statchanges would have(slower, harder to control, less damageoutput, etc.) so im ok with them,
only real thing that bothers me about malfunctions is when they destroy a ship, rather ofthen at the begining of a battle without enemy contact. maybe just a smiget of code so they dont bring the shiphull below 1hp?

about the peak performance: what gets me is the severity of CRloss once the 3min peaktimer runs out. suddenly you have a "30seconds until your ship selfdistructs" timer running in your head.... i realy hate that.
i personaly would be a lot more comfortable with a slow CRloss with a shorter peaktimer or none at all.
the more crew = slower CRloss was just an idea to give additonal meaning to crew and soften up the whole CRloss mechanic even more.(i realy dont like fix timers)

what did you think of the idea that everything thats not a beam, gets ammoreloads? i generaly liked that missiles where 1shot weapons, especialy since they are so powerfull, but their power can theoreticaly be spreadout.... as example: instead of 3 harpoons to fire at once, you get 1 harpoon that gets reloaded every 30seconds. many small rockets could also get reloaded in magazine chunks, like balistics. with reloadtimes of several minutes, you can even make torpedoes reloadable and it would prefent the need for "spezial cases".
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 12:53:52 AM by Venatos »
Logged

Ali

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #155 on: December 07, 2014, 01:56:07 AM »

- On peak performance timers for cruiser & destroyers too
I'm one of those opposed to combat timers ( just to show there's a few of us )

- On removing extra damage at hight flux
I will miss this.. Both from the lore side ( ship being charged with flux = extra damage was kinda cool ) and also when i'm out owning pirate armada's in my 4 x tachyon paragon, getting to 90%+ flux allowed my tachyon's to kick out sm extra dps ( cool ) and look epic at the same time with weapon glow ( also cool )  ;D will miss it  :'(

- No ammo for ballistics
Not too fussed on this change - will be good for my vulcan pd's on the ships that had it.. Very curious as to what the 50% ammo mod will do now instead?? Just extra charges for my beam pd? Also just realised! - i won't be able to slow kill onslaughts by drainin them of ammo ne more!  :-[ lastly infinate balistic ammo is a bit realism breaking even though i prefer fun at the expense of realism!!

- Beam wep op cost lowered
As a beam wep hoar, More power for my paragon / other assorted beam wep ships!!  :) ( This patch hasn't been all bad )

- patch is save compatible
THANKS so much!!! Has taken me a v.v.v long time to collect my 3 conquests, 15+ tempests, 2 hyerion's & other assorted ships so thrilled i won't be back to square 1 next time i get my starsector fix!!  ;D Hope to see some of the other ships be at least available thou or little easier to get.. only managed to find one squad of the elite fighters so far ( am lvl 55ish ) and never seen an astral ever .. to buy or in ai fleet  :-\

Think starsector will be on virtual shelf till next patch thou.. That part of my hdd probs need a few months to cool down anyway!

Just to add as well, this is THE BEST space game ( prob game in general ) i've ever played in 15 years so really, really hope the balance, too much realism ( although some is neccessary ) sticks don't nerf the fun factor too much!!  ;D

Thoughts comments appreciated!

Cheers AL

On a completely unrelented note - any timescale on next blog / info release for officers / industry tree?  :P

« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 02:07:34 AM by Ali »
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #156 on: December 07, 2014, 06:04:16 AM »

Quote
If I understand things right, eventually (not in this next patch) there's going to be NPC captains that have skills and fleets that have a variety of crew quality, so this will smooth out the abrupt jump between regular enemies and Combat 10 skill characters a bit.
As Thaago noted, Combat less than 10 is hardly noticeable.  Perhaps the most noticeable aspect of some Combat are enemy Harpoons are faster, and you need more time and distance to vent safely.  The perks from Combat 10 make Combat 10 much more powerful than Combat 9, and the enemy flagship seems to have every Combat skill, while you probably will not because you need skills from other trees.  For similar reasons, I beeline to Combat 10 as soon as I can for the perks, after I get Technology 7 for Entoptic Rangefinder perk and Augmented Engines and ITU hullmods.
Logged

NashedPotatoes

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #157 on: December 07, 2014, 07:56:23 AM »

I'd like to chime in to say that I really, really liked the flavor of ballistics weapons having limited, non-regenerating ammo.  I'm very fond of the midline ships, and I tend to fly the smaller, faster ones because I'm impatient.  While in most engagements running out of ammunition is not a problem, it had a very satisfying feel that at the end of a long/intense engagement, I might be down to my energy slots on a Hammerhead.  It added to the feel that the ship had just weathered a large battle and now her offensive capacity was mostly spent.  There's something a bit dramatic about that.  Going into a big engagement, I was more conscious about making shots count.  It also made me consider whether I wanted to spend the OP on expanded magazines for greater endurance or if I'd rather be better equipped for shorter fights (I don't tend to swap around hull mods situationally).  Similarly, I had to decide how many of the energy slots should go to PD vs sustained offensive capability.  I don't know, though: maybe I'm just playing sub-optimally.  If limited ammo doesn't affect the gameplay very much (as the argument seems to go), I think it adds value in other ways.

I'll reserve final judgement until I get to play with the new changes, and in any case, it's just my opinion.  In general, I think Alex's insight into what makes good gameplay has been outstanding thus far.
Logged

Himntor

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #158 on: December 07, 2014, 09:04:18 AM »

Interesting changes. I'm not against the ballistics change, it didn't make much sense that you could run out, disengage from battle, go back in, and suddenly it's all there again. The logic of running out and not getting it back didn't make sense. With that said though, it WOULD make sense to have a limited ammo capacity, and then once that runs out, it'd need to take a bit of time (maybe 10~20 seconds like the regenerating missiles?) to refill the ammo capacity. Just have reduced max capacities.
Logged

Blips

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #159 on: December 07, 2014, 11:47:27 AM »

I can't say for sure how it will feel to play with the changes regarding ammo, but I really dislike the initial sound of it. Now some hull mods are rendered obsolete as well.

Perhaps a compromise would be to have ballistic ammo work like missiles in that they have to be generated? That way hull mods and skills could simply influence how quickly munitions are generated.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #160 on: December 07, 2014, 12:06:58 PM »

It would be nice for ballistics to have limited but rechargeable ammo like autopulse laser or thermal pulse cannon (except more than one ammo at a time for weapons that fire in bursts), if only so that the ballistics weapon feels like it uses ammo, and player cannot simply spam HVDs and the like with impunity to crush energy weapon based ships from afar.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #161 on: December 07, 2014, 12:10:18 PM »

(Just a real quick note here, to reemphasize that most missiles have limited ammo. Only a few specific missiles have unlimited ammo, where it makes sense given their role.)
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #162 on: December 07, 2014, 12:51:44 PM »

(And a lore note: We've already got ships with auto factories that can build unlimited ammo - see any carrier with its fighters - so it's just a question of which launchers have the right hook-ups to allow reloading in combat.  ...Speaking of which, why is there only one drone system that can regenerate drones in combat?)
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

TheKillerWolf

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #163 on: December 07, 2014, 01:18:24 PM »

Im a big fan of these changes.  The ammo change is a good one in my mind I understand the removal affecting long battle but im not sure i can wrap my head around the reduced "feel" of it.  Most of the energy weapons and solid weapons are diff enough along with the damage types that i dont think it makes them close at all.  just my 2 cents

on another note does the fast missile racks affect the salamander reload? and have you thought about applying the missile changes to swarmers?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 02:02:33 PM by TheKillerWolf »
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #164 on: December 07, 2014, 02:03:38 PM »

I'm just looking at all the changes and hmm...

>Conquest, smaller saves, new missions, beam buffs, ship changes
Yay!

>Flux bonus removed
Well... That's something I would call "the lore bonus". I mean, it's there, it works, but nobody cares anyway. Though, I liked it and it was my reason to go mid and high-tech (besides mobility), even if it's meaningless! Super cool sounding weapon is cool even if it's not that super as it sounds!

>beam fade out time and beam damage
So... What? They reach something like 1100 but the last 100 units have decreased damage? It doesn't say much. Somebody suggested "beam" damage type, but for me it's rather hard to make it "special"... KI(netics) are for shields, H(igh)E(explosives) are for armor, EN(ergy) is those high fluxey ships and FRAG(mentation) is for PD or nothing :P I don't know how would beams fit... Ignoring armor for very effective suppression? Something rewarding for pinpoint accuracy besides armor system? No friendly fire?

>Ballistical and missiles ammo
Why not make ballistical things reloading ammo in the background (like halved shots/minute, but that gives you essentially >1,5 magazine size...) and missiles either needing some pre-battle preparations (ordering in the dialog to make more missiles for more CR) or just being "buyed" in battle, but for bigger than just CR recovering (proportionally) cost? That would make situations like "you may either live with what you have or go unlimited and make your ship unavaible for couple of extra days". But again, AI need new code to use it and it's not guaranteed to work anyway... (whole reception of that changes is "yes to missiles, no to ballistics")

>peak performance for destroyers and cruisers
To be honest... For my playstyle, it depends only if I not deploy everything at once OR if AI goes like that. Other cases... I suppose I may eventually fall into a battle, which duration would extent to even 7 minutes, but I think it's rather unplausible for not soloing a fleet... Which I don't do often. ;) So, this change will rather slip through unseen. (if it matters, my fleet is a 2x Medusa, a Falcon, a Sunder, an Enforcer (where's my Hammerhead? :O), 1-3 frigates-which-survived-last-engagement (either Wolf, Lasher or Vigilance), an Eagle, a Dominator, a Heron and finally 2x Warthogs, Broadswords, 4x Gladius, Thunder and two Oxes! In the CR order). It's kinda funny that fighters itself don't kill cruisers, but render them practically unable to fight back.
Wait... Isn't it kinda strange, that the ships that can fight alone (and even more, they may be designed to do so) may have lower peak performance time than the grunt

And a question! Are you happy with present set of ships? ;) (obvious fishing info 'bout more ships is obvious)
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 54